VIDEO: 1st Anniversary of My Debate with Senator Barbara Boxer on the use of Fossil Fuels

“I’ll never forget this hearing.” — Senator Barbara Boxer

One year ago today, I testified in front of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

My five minute presentation was called “the best five minutes of defense of fossil fuels I have ever seen” by prominent meteorologist, Joe Bastardi.

image

But the most memorable part of the day was my interaction with Senator Barbara Boxer.

Senator Boxer is a notorious bully of guests she disagrees with. However, she has never tried to bully anyone who a) knows the moral case for fossil fuels and b) has a robust framework for one-on-one communication. (A reminder to get our free Constructive Communication tool at the end of this email.)

Here’s the video of my appearance. If you want to get to my interaction with Boxer, go right to the 7:20 minute mark.

And if you agree with me that the message of this video is still relevant today, please share this video on Facebook, Twitter, or just forward this column!

advantages of fossil fuelsALSO: Whenever you’re ready, here are 3 ways I can help your organization turn non-supporters into supporters and turn supporters into champions.

1. Fill out the free Constructive Conversation Scorecard to assess where you are and where you want to be in your one-on-one communications.

Email it back to me and I’ll send you my step-by-step Constructive Conversation System that will enable you to talk to anyone about energy.

2. Hire me to speak at your next event.

If you have an upcoming board meeting, employee town hall, or association meeting, I have some new and updated speeches about the moral case for fossil fuels, winning hearts and minds, and communications strategy in the new political climate. If you’d like to consider me for your event, just reply to this message and put “Event” in the subject line.

3. Hold a Constructive Conversation workshop.

For the last two years I have been testing and refining an approach to one-on-one conversations that anybody can use. I call it the Constructive Conversation Formula. If you have between 5-20 people who interact frequently with stakeholders and want custom guidance on how to win hearts and minds, just reply to this article and put “Workshop” in the subject line.

PS: I got this feedback in response to a workshop the other week: “It is very encouraging to receive useful tools to help us deal with all-too-common situations we find ourselves in that make us feel very uncomfortable and that we know are just not right…the Constructive Conversation Formula…is fantastic. Doing the role playing and providing examples was absolutely essential”.

Russian Reactions to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s Visit

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s visit to Moscow on April 11-12, 2017 came against the backdrop of a recent U.S. missile strike on a Syrian airbase that was followed by political tensions between Russia and the U.S.[1] At the G7 meeting in Italy just prior to his trip to Moscow, Tillerson had stated: “I think it’s also worth thinking about Russia has [sic] really aligned itself with the Assad regime, the Iranians, and Hizbullah. Is that a long-term alliance that serves Russia’s interest, or would Russia prefer to realign with the United States, with other Western countries and Middle East countries who are seeking to resolve the Syrian crisis? We want to relieve the suffering of the Syrian people. We want to create a future for Syria that is stable and secure. And so Russia can be a part of that future and play an important role, or Russia can maintain its alliance with this group, which we believe is not going to serve Russia’s interest longer-term. But only Russia can answer that question.”[2]

Commenting on Tillerson’s words, Russia Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said: “It’s useless to come to us with ultimatums, it’s just counterproductive.”[3] However, the meeting between Tillerson and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov changed Russia’s internal mood. Maxim Usim, columnist for the Russian daily Kommersant, noted that Tillerson’s language was not confrontational and that this had enabled him to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin just before his departure from Moscow.

The following are reactions to U.S. Secretary of State Tillerson’s Moscow visit:

tillerson russia

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. (Source: State.gov)

Senator Kosachev: “The American Did Not Come With Absurd Proposals… None Of The Parties… Have A Desire To Further Exacerbate The Situation”

Russian Federation Council International Affairs Committee chairman Konstantin Kosachev wrote on his Facebook page: “The first impression is quite positive. No breakthrough occurred, and no one expected it. However, the two sides were able to avoid the temptation of the overstated expectations, and the modest results of the meeting are still positive.” Kosachev stressed that a meaningful result was the Russian and U.S. commitment to maintaining the dialogue by “institutionalizing it in the format of special representatives.”

He added: “The two sides now have a better understanding of the possible and impossible limits in the prospects for bilateral relations and in the interpretation of international problems. The Americans obviously did not come with some absurd proposals similar to exchanging (Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad) for G7 membership, Ukraine for Syria and so on, and also not only with moralizing and ultimatums.”

He stressed: “Otherwise, the meeting with (Russian President Vladimir Putin) would have not taken place, as wasting time on empty words is not his style.”

Kosachev also said that Russia “unambiguously confirmed its willingness to restore cooperation, provided that the two sides could do without the notorious American mentoring and arrogance. Anyway, none of the parties seems to have a desire to further exacerbate the situation, and everyone believes that it is not hopeless.”

(Tass.com, April 13, 2017)

(Source: Sputniknews.com, April 12, 2017)

Kommersant Columnist: Tillerson’s Moderate Language Enabled Meeting With Putin

Maxim Usim, a columnist for the Russian daily Kommersant, wrote that Tillerson’s meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was not confrontational, but rather business oriented. According to Usim, Tillerson avoided using harsh language regarding Russian policies, while Lavrov was reserved and diplomatic. The impression, wrote Usim, is that both sides want to minimize the damage to bilateral relations by “Trump’s Syrian escapade,” adding that the mere fact that Tillerson avoided “speaking in terms of sanctions and ultimatums” made the meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin possible.

(Kommersant.ru, April 12, 2017)

Izvestia: “The First Attempt To Get Along May Be Considered Productive, Even If Not Fully Successful”

The Russian daily Izvestia summarized Tillerson’s the visit as follows: “The most important thing is that during this very short but very intense visit the sides succeeded in reaching an agreement regarding further steps to be taken in order to get rid of the bilateral crisis. At the same time, the visit’s message to the world was: The first attempt to ‘get along’ may be considered productive, even if not fully successful.”

(Izvestia.ru, April 13, 2017)

Duma International Affairs Committee Chairman: “There Was No Ultimatum”

Duma International Affairs Committee chairman Leonid Slutsky stated: “One of the visit’s results is the failed prognosis regarding some kinds of U.S. ultimatum. There was no ultimatum. On the contrary, the sides agreed on establishing a joint group in order to look into the most complicated questions of the Russia-U.S. agenda.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Tillerson: “We want to relieve the suffering of the Iraq… Ouch… Liby… Ouch… Syrian people.” The cartoon was published prior to Tillerson’s visit. (Ria.ru, April 11, 2017)

Senator Klintzevich: “It Is Now Obvious That Tillerson’s Visit Was Not A Waste Of Time”

Senator Franz Klintsevich, deputy chair of the Federation Council Defense and Security Committee, commented: “It is now obvious that Tillerson’s visit was not a waste of time. Reiterating the mutual commitment to fight international terror is the maximum which could have been achieved, given the recent negative developments. At the moment, it’s quite stupid to discuss who won and who lost as the result of the meeting, who saved face and who lost face… The sides opted for mutual compromise, but as a result they secured the chance to really cooperate against ISIS. That’s what is really important.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Ivan Melnikov, Communist Party, Vice-speaker of Duma: “Given the unpredicted U.S. actions influencing the situation, we may judge only by the deeds rather than by the words and intentions. Mr. Tillerson leaves good impression, and speaks respectfully about Russia as a superpower – but what if the principles of the American imperialism remain in force?”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Ruling Party United Russia MP Sergey Zheleznyak: “The meeting demonstrated that despite the differences, our countries are interested in cooperation concerning various areas – solving burning international crises as well as renewing economic cooperation. We’ll see how Tillerson’s words in Moscow will coincide with the administration’s actions and then we’ll draw our conclusions.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Senator Pushkov: The Meeting Was “The Start Of Dialogue”

Senator Alexey Pushkov tweeted: “Frontal confrontation has been cancelled. Russia and the U.S. proceed from the war of words towards exchanging opinions, controlling the differences and cautious dialogue.”

(Twitter.com/Alexey_Pushkov, April 12, 2017)

Pushkov also tweeted: “The summary of the negotiations in Moscow: Not yet a breakthrough, but the start of dialogue and an attempt to strengthen the mutual trust after serious tensions erupted.”

(Twitter.com/Alexey_Pushkov, April 12, 2017)

According to a Russian Defense Ministry source quoted in the Vedomosti newspaper, Moscow is ready for dialogue and does not consider a dangerous direct confrontation with the U.S. to be inevitable. Simultaneously, Moscow demonstrates its readiness to strengthen its military positions in Syria – this is the message delivered by the deployment of the frigate Admiral Grigorovich to the Mediterranean.

(Vedomosti.ru, April 13, 2017)

REFERENCES:

[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6866, Russia’s Reactions To The U.S. Missile Strike In Syria, April 10, 2017.

[2] State.gov, April 11, 2017.

[3] Ria.ru, April 12, 2017.

VIDEO: Lethal Sanctuary Cities

This special edition of the Glazov Gang presents The Michael Cutler Moment with Michael Cutler, a former Senior INS Special Agent.

Michael discusses Lethal Sanctuary Cities, unveiling how sanctuary cities undermine national security, public safety and the integrity of the immigration system.

RELATED ARTICLES:

16 Years After 9/11, Gaps in Information Sharing Still Plague Law Enforcement

Border authorities’ broad authority: Inside the court cases – The Buffalo News

19,000 teachers sue the School Board of Miami-Dade for $60 million

Why would 19,000 teachers sue the School Board of Miami Dade Public Schools for $60 million in lost salaries?

Because a law passed by the Florida Legislature in 2011 required that as of July 1, 2014, whatever salary schedule was in place would thence forth be frozen in time, or, as the statute phrased it, grandfathered.  But the school district just didn’t do it.

The term grandfathered goes back a long way.  During the Jim Crow era, grandfather clauses were used by seven southern states to exempt those who already possessed the right to vote prior to 1866 (end of the Civil War) from new laws imposing educational, property or tax requirements for voting.  The grandfathered laws had the effect of disenfranchising freed African Americans who did not gain the right to vote until passage of the 15th Amendment in 1870.  But grandfathering allowed impoverished and illiterate whites to continue to vote as before.  They had been grandfathered.

The current law (Fla. Stat. §1012.22) was intended to prevent further annual increases to district salary schedules for teachers hired before July 1, 2014.  Teachers hired after that date would receive performance pay, which would be calculated or derived from the greatest increment between levels of the grandfathered schedule, depending upon a teacher’s effectiveness.  In theory, performance pay would quickly out-pace the frozen schedule forcing veteran teachers to relinquish their tenure to join the new comers.

However, M-DCPS just kept on bargaining new schedules to attack the higher end salary steps for teachers approaching retirement.  It was something like knocking off West Virginia mountain tops for the benefit of coal companies.  And not incidentally, for two years, the District did not award any performance pay whatsoever.   The damage to teacher salaries is estimated at $20 million per year.

“Wait a minute,” you say.  “How did the District get around grandfathering?”  The District’s position was that the grandfathered salary schedule was any schedule they “designated as such.”  Wonder how they interpret a 70-mph speed limit?

Explanation of the Assad Gas Attack: To Prevent Breakdown Of Iranian/Syrian Frontline

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) gives an insight to why the Assad regime used sarin gas. According to MEMRI:

The April 4 Sarin gas attack on Khan Sheikhoun, just one day after the U.S. administration changed its position vis-à-vis Syrian President Al-Assad, declaring that his removal from power was no longer a priority, raised questions regarding the underlying motive for the attack. Indeed, the initial Russian claim that the attack had been fabricated by opponents of the Syrian regime was based on its being so clearly against Syrian interests.

While it is now largely accepted that the Syrian regime carried out the attack, the motivation underlying it remains enigmatic, giving rise to conspiracy theories.

sd6873.jpg

Map legend: Red areas: territory held by Iranian/Syrian-regime forces. Green areas: territory held by the Jabhat Fath Al-Sham (formerly JNS) armed rebels. Red circle: Khan Sheikhoun Red arrows: distance from Khan Sheikhoun to the Iranian-backed forces. Black dotted line: opposition frontline prior to March 21 operations and Iranian forces retreat. Red dotted line: current opposition frontline following the Iranian forces retreat

Iranian Website Specializing In Syrian War Reports Provides The Explanation: To Prevent Breakdown Of Iranian/Syrian Frontline

On April 7, 2017, WarReports, an Iranian research group dedicated to monitoring and covering Iran’s role in the war in Syria and Iraq,[1] published a report on its Facebook page, explaining why the Syrian regime had carried out the gas attack.[2] It claimed that the attack had been “in support of the Iranian-affiliated ground forces, Hizbullah, and the Syrian army, all of which were stationed several kilometers behind the frontline.” According to the report, in the past three weeks there had been 21 casualties from among the IRGC forces and the Fatimiyun Afghani Shi’ite militia located in Hama.[3] The report included a map of the region, showing the retreat southward of the Iranian-backed forces from the Khan Sheikhoun region, a retreat that threatened to turn into a complete breakdown of the front. The attack, therefore, was intended to curb the rebel thrust in Khan Sheikhoun, thus preventing this breakdown.

The report further stated that hitting the civilian population in the rebel-held areas was a known tactic of the Syrian regime, intended to crush the fighting spirit of the forces and to stop their operations. This was the case in the August 2013 gas attack on Ghouta, Damascus, and the October 2015 cluster-bomb attack on the civilization population of eastern Aleppo.

It should be noted that in a recent White House intelligence briefing, officials gave the same rationale for the Syrian regime attack, without providing further details: “They were losing in a particularly important area. That’s what drove [the attack].”[4]


[1] https://warreports.org/about-us/; Twitter: @warreports. Facebook: Persian.war.news.

[3] The website provided a link to the image of one of the IRGC members killed there. https://goo.gl/iunWwn

UN Paris Accord ‘A Dead Deal Walking’ as $100 Billion Climate Fund Disappears

Shocking news—the magic $100 billion climate fund appears not to be taking shape! First world donors have been busily relabeling other foreign aid as contributions to the climate kitty. For developing countries, this is a cheat — they expect $100 billion in new money. Or, to put it more accurately, they are not nearly stupid and naive enough to believe the lies Western diplomats tell when trying to bamboozle naive green voters at home that they are “Doing Something” about climate change. So they don’t really expect all that money, but hope to use these commitments to pry something out of the West. This, one notes, is the house of cards that the last Administration claimed was a big piece of its legacy. —The American Interest, 11 April 2017

China, Brazil, India and South Africa have urged industrialized countries to honor financial commitments made in Paris in 2015 to help developing countries fight against global climate change, they said in a statement on Tuesday. Following a meeting in Beijing, climate change ministers from the “BASIC” bloc of four major emerging economies called on rich countries “to honor their commitments and increase climate finance towards the $100 billion goal”, and said more clarity was needed to “track and account for” those pledges. —Reuters, 11 April 2017

Climate ministers from Europe, India, Brazil and South Africa have gone to Beijing in recent weeks, hoping to sustain momentum from the Paris talks despite the Trump administration’s dismantling of US regulations meant to limit American emissions. But discussions have quickly run up against the issue of financing.  “Developed countries have not met their commitments. In their reports a lot of their commitment is in the form of development aid. That doesn’t meet the commitment to contribute to new funds,” China’s top climate change negotiator, Xie Zhenhua, told a briefing on Tuesday. –Lucy Hornby, Financial Times, 11 April 2017

1) Paris Climate Accord Is A Dead Deal Walking As $100 Billion Climate Fund Disappears
The American Interest, 11 April 2017

2) Emerging Nations Urge Trump Administration To Honour Obama’s $100 Billion Climate Funding Pledge
Reuters, 11 April 2017

3) No Consensus: G7 Energy Ministers Fail To Agree On Climate Change
Daily Mail, 10 April 2017

4) Trump’s Climate Demands Roil U.S. Allies
Politico, 11 April 2017

5) China’s New Coal Boom: China’s Coal-Conversion Plants Surge Back To Life
Financial Times, 12 April 2017

6) British Anti-Fracking Campaigners Lose High Court Battle
ITV News, 12 April 2017

G7 energy ministers have failed to agree a statement on climate change this afternoon because of ‘US reservations’, it has emerged. Top officials from the Group of Seven industrial nations gathered in Rome, Italy today amid growing concerns over the US administration’s moves to unravel policies aimed at stalling global warming. However, the US ‘reserved its position’ on the text about commitments made by G7 countries under the Paris accord, said Carlo Calenda, the Italian minister for economic development, who chaired the meeting in Rome. Lacking unanimity, Italy, which currently presides the Group of Seven, decided against proposing the joint statement, Calenda said. —Daily Mail, 10 April 2017

President Donald Trump’s abrupt turnaround on U.S. climate policy is fueling tension with several of America’s closest allies, which are resisting the administration’s demands that they support a bigger role for nuclear power and fossil fuels in the world’s energy supply. The dispute blew up at this week’s meeting of G-7 energy ministers, at which Trump administration officials pushed to include stronger pro-coal, pro-nuclear language in a proposed joint statement on energy policy. G-7 officials, led by the Europeans, refused to agree to stronger language touting fossil fuels without assurances from the United States that it would stay in the Paris climate change agreement, according to officials briefed on the discussions. –Andrew Restuccia, Politico, 11 April 2017Water-guzzling coal-conversion projects are springing to life in arid western China, setting the stage for the large-scale deployment of what was previously a niche industry. A three-year downturn in coal prices has revived projects that convert coal to motor fuel, petrochemical feedstock or gas, after many were shelved in 2008 because of concerns about water supply and pollution. Successful development in China opens the door to the export of coal-intensive technologies, undercutting international efforts to limit emissions of carbon and other greenhouse gases. –Lucy Hornby, Financial Times, 12 April 2017

Fracking looks set to go ahead on a Lancashire site after campaigners lost a High Court challenge. Opponents urged the court to find a government decision approving planning for the site in Fylde either unfair or unlawful. But following a public inquiry, the planning inspector recommended the scheme. Environmentalists and local campaign groups reacted angrily to the decision, which they said went against the wishes of residents. —ITV News, 12 April 2017

1) Paris Climate Accord Is A Dead Deal Walking As $100 Billion Climate Fund Disappears
The American Interest, 11 April 2017

Shocking news—the magic $100 billion climate fund appears not to be taking shape! Even optimistic estimates sat the fund is $40 billion short, and developing countries say that understates the problem.

The Financial Times:

Climate ministers from Europe, India, Brazil and South Africa have gone to Beijing in recent weeks, hoping to sustain momentum from the Paris talks despite the Trump administration’s dismantling of US regulations meant to limit American emissions.

But discussions have quickly run up against the issue of financing.  “Developed countries have not met their commitments. In their reports a lot of their commitment is in the form of development aid. That doesn’t meet the commitment to contribute to new funds,” China’s top climate change negotiator, Xie Zhenhua, told a briefing on Tuesday. “A lot of countries don’t want to chip in. I said to the European minister: that’s your problem as developed countries. It’s your responsibility to work together and sort it out.”

First world donors have been busily relabeling other foreign aid as contributions to the climate kitty. For developing countries, this is a cheat — they expect $100 billion in new money.

Or, to put it more accurately, they are not nearly stupid and naive enough to believe the lies Western diplomats tell when trying to bamboozle naive green voters at home that they are “Doing Something” about climate change. So they don’t really expect all that money, but hope to use these commitments to pry something out of the West. Also, since the West will certainly default on these bogus commitments, developing countries have all the justification they need to blow off their own commitments when the time comes.

This, one notes, is the house of cards that the last Administration claimed was a big piece of its legacy.

Full post

2) Emerging Nations Urge Trump Administration To Honour Obama’s $100 Billion Climate Funding Pledge
Reuters, 11 April 2017

China, Brazil, India and South Africa have urged industrialized countries to honor financial commitments made in Paris in 2015 to help developing countries fight against global climate change, they said in a statement on Tuesday.

Following a meeting in Beijing, climate change ministers from the “BASIC” bloc of four major emerging economies called on rich countries “to honor their commitments and increase climate finance towards the $100 billion goal”, and said more clarity was needed to “track and account for” those pledges.

Climate financing was a major bone of contention during negotiations to seal a new global deal to curb and reduce climate-warming greenhouse gases in Paris at the end of 2015, with China and other developing nations adamant that the bulk of the burden should fall to advanced industrialized nations like the United States.

As part of the Paris deal, developed countries agreed to make more funding available to a Green Climate Fund (GCF), which is designed to be used by poor and climate-vulnerable countries.

But the agreement has been plunged into uncertainty after U.S. President Donald Trump, who has questioned the scientific basis of global warming, last month proposed an end to payments to the GCF and signed an order to undo climate change regulations introduced by his predecessor.

At a media briefing after the Tuesday meeting, South Africa’s deputy minister of environmental affairs, Barbara Thompson, said recent changes in U.S. policy were “of major concern”.

But “the position of the U.S. is still very unclear to us”, she said, adding “we believe there are different views within the U.S. administration” on this issue.
At the same briefing, China’s chief climate envoy, Xie Zhenhua, insisted China remained willing to work closer with the United States.

Xie told Reuters after the briefing that he expected China and the United States to hold talks on climate issues, and that discussions were going on at multiple levels.

Joint pledges made by China and the United States, the world’s two biggest emitters of climate-warming greenhouse gases, helped bridge the gap between developed and developing countries and provided the momentum to seal the deal in Paris.

Full story

3) No Consensus: G7 Energy Ministers Fail To Agree On Climate Change
Daily Mail, 10 April 2017

G7 energy ministers have failed to agree a statement on climate change this afternoon because of ‘US reservations’, it has emerged.

Top officials from the Group of Seven industrial nations gathered in Rome, Italy today amid growing concerns over the US administration’s moves to unravel policies aimed at stalling global warming.

Environmental activists fear US President Donald Trump is dismantling Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which aimed at reducing carbon pollution from power plants.

Greenpeace was holding a sit-in outside Monday’s meeting, calling on officials to maintain their commitments to reduce greenhouse gases under the 2015 Paris Agreement.

However, the US ‘reserved its position’ on the text about commitments made by G7 countries under the Paris accord, said Carlo Calenda, the Italian minister for economic development, who chaired the meeting in Rome.

The ministers’ agenda had called for discussion of energy security, policies to move away from coal, natural gas routes and supply, sustainable development of electricity sources, alternative fuel scenarios and energy access and investments in Africa.

Lacking unanimity, Italy, which currently presides the Group of Seven, decided against proposing the joint statement, Calenda said.

Full story

4) Trump’s Climate Demands Roil U.S. Allies
Politico, 11 April 2017

Documents show the administration pushed other G-7 countries to embrace larger roles for nuclear power and fossil fuels. They refused.

Andrew Restuccia

Fracking looks set to go ahead at Preston New Road. Credit: ITV News
Shale company Cuadrilla originally made an application to drill up to four wells at Preston New Road.

The plan was supported by Lancashire County Council officials but turned down by the planning committee.

But following a public inquiry, the planning inspector recommended the scheme.

Environmentalists and local campaign groups reacted angrily to the decision, which they said went against the wishes of residents.

Full story

Crack in Democrat Party: ‘Islamic Supremacists’ fighting ‘Union Infidels’

In the Daily Caller article Influential Muslim Group Fights Employees Over Efforts To Unionize by Ted Goodman it appears that two pro-Democrat organizations are fighting one against the other. This is a classic battle between the Muslim lead Islamic supremacist organization Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Both CAIR and SEIU have historically supported the Democrat Party (go here and here).

Is this a crack in the Democrat base – the Muslim versus the non-Muslim (infidel)?

Goodman reports:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an influential Muslim advocacy group, is fighting efforts by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) to unionize its staff.

SEIU Local 500, which represents 20,000 teachers, health care workers and non-profit employees in Washington, D.C. and Maryland, submitted union authorization cards that were filled out by over half of CAIR’s eligible staff, Christopher Honey, communications director for SEIU Local 500 told The Daily Caller News Foundation Tuesday.

CAIR appealed to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), according to the Washington Examiner, arguing that it is a religious organization and therefore exempt from the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Congress passed the NLRA in 1935, which protected the rights of employees to organize under a union but included exemptions, including one for religious organizations.

The NLRB’s Region 05 rejected CAIR’s argument Friday, asserting the the group is primarily a civil rights organization, not a religious one. The NLRB also set April 24 as the date for employees to vote on whether or not to join the SEIU Local 500 chapter.

Read more…

According to Discover the Networks:

CAIR was co-founded in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber, all of whom had close ties to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook and functioned as Hamas’ public relations and recruitment arm in the United States. Awad and Ahmad previously had served, respectively, as IAP’s Public Relations Director and President. Thus it can be said that CAIR was an outgrowth of IAP.

CAIR opened its first office in Washington, DC, with the help of a $5,000 donation from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a self-described charity founded by Mousa Abu Marzook.

CAIR is a Hamas (Muslim Brotherhood) affiliated organization. The United Kingdom designated the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) a terrorist organization in 2015. Lead by Senator Ted Cruz, legislation has been introduced by the U.S. Congress to also designate the MB a terrorist organization, which would in effect designate CAIR because of its ties to Hamas, a terrorist organization.

Discover the Networks reports the following about SEIU:

Designated as a “527 organization,” SEIU in 2003 became a national partner in the America Votes (AV) coalition. AV, in turn, belongs to the so-called Shadow Democratic Party, a nationwide network of leftwing unions, activist groups, and think tanks engaged in supporting the Democrats. To view SEIU’s fellow partners in America Votes, click here.

[ … ]

A noteworthy affiliate of SEIU is its powerful and militant, New York City-based Local 1199, which has more than 300,000 members and is the world’s largest union local. Sixteen years after its 1932 founding, 1199 was investigated by the House Un-American Activities Committee on suspicion of Communist “infiltration.” When the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) split in 1991, several officials of Local 1199 took many comrades with them into the breakaway group, the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. One of those officials, Rafael Pizarro, also went on to help establish the New Party, a socialist organization that Barack Obama would join in 1995. At a March 2007 meeting, 1199’s executive vice president Steve Kramer spoke enthusiastically about the role which CPUSA had played in building up his union.

[ … ]

In November 2003, SEIU dispatched thousands of volunteers to work on the presidential campaign of Howard Dean. After Dean dropped out of the race in early 2004, Andrew Stern played a major role in persuading the Democratic nominee, John Kerry, to select John Edwards as his running mate. By June 2004, SEIU had already committed $65 million to voter-registration, voter-education, and voter-mobilization initiatives on behalf of the Kerry-Edwards campaign. Moreover, the union pledged to assign 50,000 of its members as get-out-the-vote “volunteers” just prior to, and on, election day.

[ … ]

In 2008, SEIU spent approximately $60.7 million to help elect Barack Obama to the White House, deploying some 100,000 pro-Obama campaign volunteers who “knocked on 1.87 million doors, made 4.4 million phone calls … and sent more than 2.5 million pieces of mail in support of Obama.” During his campaign, Obama told an SEIU audience: “Your agenda has been my agenda in the United States Senate…. Just imagine what we could do together…Imagine having a president whose life’s work was your work…” After Obama’s election, the SEIU became an enormously influential force in his administration: and to SEIU.

Read more…

It appears the red (Communist)/green (Islamist) alliance may be splitting on ideological grounds?

Unionizing CAIR would empower its predominantly Muslim employees to dictate working conditions to its Islamic supremacist superiors. We shall see how this turns on on April 24th, 2017 when the employees vote on becoming members of SEIU.

Since legalization export of Colorado marijuana increased by 1,700%

The latest Marijuana Report states:

The Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area just released a supplement to its 2016 report titled The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact, Volume 4, September 2016.

The supplement includes several metrics, including seizures of Colorado marijuana the US Postal Inspection Service has made since 2009, when the state first allowed a commercial medical marijuana industry to emerge.

Then, no marijuana was mailed out of state. But by the time Colorado voters passed full legalization in 2013, almost 500 pounds that people tried to send to other states were seized. Three years after recreational legalization, that number tripled.

The report updates information about impaired driving, youth and adult marijuana use, emergency department and hospital marijuana-related admissions, and marijuana exposures reported to poison control centers.

Click here to read the SUPPLEMENT to: “The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact,Volume 4, September 2016.” 

RELATED ARTICLES:

Study: Women in the U.S. Are Increasingly Using Pot During Pregnancy

Cartels are Growing Marijuana Illegally in California – and There’s a War Brewing

Legalizing Weed is Not the Answer

Is President Trump’s National Security Team Trustworthy?

President Trump’s recent foray into regime change and nation building in Syria has shaken some of his campaign supporters to the core and rattled their broad-based (almost unconditional) confidence. His Tomahawk attack on Syria represents a 180-degree reversal from his campaign rhetoric criticizing Obama era incursions into unilateral regime change across the Middle East over the past eight years.

On 3 April, 2017… President Trump signed an order departing from Obama era regime change policies in Syria and the Middle East. On 4 April, 2017, Syrian President Assad was accused of dropping chemical weapons on the ISIS stronghold town of Khan Sheikhoun, wherein a reported 74 were killed, including 23 children. On 7 April, 2017, President Trump launched a unilateral missile assault on a Syrian air base from which Assad allegedly launched his chemical assault three-days earlier, destroying an estimated 20% of the planes on the ground and none of the runways.

Both Assad and Russia have denied any involvement in the use of chemical weapons – claiming instead, that Assad dropped conventional weapons in Khan Sheikhoun to take out a chemical weapons cache held by ISIS in that town. By hitting the chemical weapons cache, some chemicals were released into the air locally where those weapons were stockpiled, resulting in the death of 74 in the area.

But the U.S. intelligence community was telling President Trump a very different version of events on the ground in Syria. U.S. Intelligence officers and National Security Advisors had very quickly convinced Trump that Assad had “once again used chemical weapons on his own people.” U.S. Intelligence tends to refer to Assad opposition in Syria as “rebels” or “freedom fighters.” Yet, Syrians on the ground have repeatedly accused the U.S. of funding, arming and supporting ISIS and Al Qaeda since 2013.

It’s no secret that Obama, Clinton, Kerry, McCain and Graham have been toppling foreign governments across the Middle East from Libya and Lebanon to Egypt and beyond, installing the Muslim Brotherhood into power in each incident – or that they likewise, set their sights on deposing Assad in Syria long ago.

It’s also no secret that the war-for-profit (Military Industrial Complex) crowd in the U.S. has been involved in numerous “regime change” operations across the Middle East during the Obama administration, or that this is the group that has been “leaking” intel from inside Trump’s White House, and supplying intel to Trump that resulted in his missile attack in Syria. They are also pushing Trump to put boots on the ground in Syria.

Trump’s policy reversal and unilateral attack on Syria resulted in an immediate and somewhat violent backlash from about half of his voters, who found themselves in social media tussles with the other 50% of Trump loyalists who never separated Trump’s well-intended decision from the quality of intel he was acting on, delivered by the likes of McCain and Graham, both of whom have been anti-Trump from the start.

Not only had Trump’s opponents succeeded in getting Trump to reverse his policy and unilaterally attack Syria without provocation, they were succeeding in dividing Trump loyalists in that process.

Clearly, there are two very different conflicting stories regarding chemical attacks in Syria and who may be responsible for the release of chemical or biological gas in Syria. It’s only a little odd that many Trump supporters supported Trump’s decision to strike Syria, even though the attack was unprovoked and without congressional authorization… But it is very odd that those folks would suddenly trust the very swamp creatures Trump was supposed to drain, and the intel they provided to get Trump to take that action…

Half of Trump supporters oppose Trump’s attack on Syria – not because they no longer believe in Trump, but because they still don’t believe in the swamp creatures providing the intel. The other half support Trump without ever considering the possibility that the same people they didn’t trust before, may now be feeding rotten intel to Trump.

Even as they watch the “leaked” internal conflict between Bannon and neocons surrounding Trump, they just can’t do the math…

So, what’s the truth here? Were chemical weapons used in Syria and if so, by whom?

A few basic facts…

  • During the Obama years, the globalist left has affected regime change in numerous Middle Eastern countries, every one of them resulting in the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood and mass terrorism filling the void. Each of those countries is worse off today than before their dictators were toppled.
  • Obama confirmed that Assad had turned over all chemical and biological weapons to the U.S. in 2014. According to Obama, Assad has no chemical weapons since 2014.
  • The U.S., Russia, Iran, ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hamas and Syria all have boots on the ground in Syria and have had since 2013. The U.S., Iran, ISIS and Al Qaeda are on the same side trying to remove Assad from power. Russia is standing in defense of Assad, fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda in Syria.
  • Assad is the one person in Syria with nothing to gain and everything to lose by using chemical weapons in Syria while the U.S., ISIS and Al Qaeda are working to depose his regime. Assad’s opposition had something to gain…
  • Past intelligence confirms that Hillary Clinton approved the transfer of chemical weapons turned over by Assad, to “rebels” or “ISIS and Al Qaeda”
  • The entire globalist left has been pushing for regime change in Syria for years, led by Obama, Clinton, Kerry, McCain and Graham.
  • There is video evidence showing ISIS and Al Qaeda (Syrian rebels) firing chemical weapons in Aleppo. Of course, this footage is nowhere to be found in the U.S.A. news media, which has also favored Islam and regime change across the Middle East – It has only been reported abroad because the “rebels” in Syria are McCain and Graham’s “freedom fighters.” They are better known by the Syrian people as ISIS and Al Qaeda… as exposed by Democrat House member and former U.S. soldier from Hawaii, Tulsi Gabbard.

(The Syrians) asked me, “Why are the United States and its allies supporting these terror groups which are destroying Syria, when it was al Qaeda that attacked the United States on 9/11, not Syria.’ I didn’t have an answer to them.”

The US government claims it does not fund these groups and only provides assistance to so-called moderate rebels. However, Gabbard said the Syrians she met with told her that there are no moderate rebels in the country. “Let the Syrian people themselves determine their future, not the United States, not some foreign country,” Gabbard said.”

It is this public first-hand testimony from Gabbard that has resulted in her fellow democrats calling for her removal from office

Who is Lt. General McMasters?

The adviser, Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, told the staff of the National Security Council on Thursday, in his first “all hands” staff meeting, that the label “radical Islamic terrorism” was not helpful because terrorists are “un-Islamic,” according to people who were in the meeting.

Could Trump’s 180-degree reversal on Syria have anything to do with the pro-Islam advice he is now receiving from McMasters? What is McMasters association with Obama era advisors, or McCain and Graham? Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, why does McMasters defend the brutal nature of Islam taken directly from the Quran?

As reported by Rick Wells, Lou Dobbs is the only newsman in America asking the right questions. PolitiFact points out that Trump’s new policy in Syria is nothing more than Obama’s old policy for the entire Middle East. It should shock no one that the “gang of eight” and the leftist media is finally all behind Trump, as they push him into unilateral military action against a sovereign state, just as Obama had done in several other foreign countries.

Meanwhile, McCain and Co. are busy stripping Trump’s budget of any funds for “the wall” Trump promised to build, as they continue to side with the importing of jihadists via refugee resettlement and open the borders to all comers, including drug cartels and violent gangs like. And… the only man truly loyal to Trump in the White House, Bannon, is on his way out!

Clearly, Trump is losing the battle for leadership in America to his opponents in the ongoing showdown with Soros NGOs and globalists on both sides of the political aisle.

mccain graham

U.S. Senators McCain, Graham and Blumenthal giving an honorary service award to Abdel Hakim Belhadj.

This is a picture of U.S. Senators McCain, Graham and Blumenthal giving an honorary service award to Abdel Hakim Belhadj — the former head of the al Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and a major player in the U.S. – backed overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi, has reportedly joined the Islamic State and is leading its forces there.

On 20 December, 2016 – I asked “Will we really drain the swamp?” and offered three very basic high-priority items Trump would have to address immediately, or he would be consumed by the swamp. Trump did not do any of those three things and today, he finds himself rapidly sinking in the quicksand, surrounded by swamp creatures advising his demise.

Can Trump still clutch victory from the jaws of defeat?

Yes, he can… But will he? Unfortunately, with each passing day, it becomes less and less likely as he grows ever more influenced by and dependent upon the “expert advice” of his adversaries.

Every time you see McCain, Graham or the main stream media backing Trump, you know that Trump is doing something wrong. Sadly, too many Americans exist in an echo chamber void of any facts or truths. Even more unfortunate is the fact that they like it that way…

I have repeatedly warned that “the people” would have to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Trump or Trump would be eaten alive in that swamp. Is Trump failing the people? Or did the people fail Trump?

RELATED ARTICLE: FBI agent “didn’t try to stop” Garland jihad attackers — did FBI want Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer dead?

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer right about Syria, Sarin Gas and the Nazis

Daily we are bombarded with fake news. The latest is about what White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said about the use of sarin gas in Syria and the Nazis. You would think that by now the fakestream media would know about Google search and the internet.

While Hitler did use Zyklon B, a cyanide-based pesticide invented in Germany in the early 1920s, to kill millions of Jews and other enemies of the Nazis, he did not use Sarin gas during the war.

But there is a connection between Assad’s Ba’ath party and the Nazis.

al-AssadGeorge Kerevan in an article titled The Syrian-Iraqi Baath party and its Nazi beginnings reported:

In Arabic, baath means renaissance or resurrection. The Baath Arab Socialist Party, to give the organisation its formal title, is the original secular Arab nationalist movement, founded in Damascus in the 1940s to combat Western colonial rule. But since then, the Baath Party has undergone many chameleon-like twists in belief and purpose. Even the young men in Iraq who today claim its discredited banner might be surprised at the party’s real origins.

[ … ]

But the rise of German fascism also played a role. Many in the Arab world saw Hitler as an ally. In 1941, the Arab world was electrified by a pro-Axis coup in Baghdad. At that time, Iraq was nominally independent but Britain maintained a strong military presence. An Arab nationalist by the name of Rashid Ali al-Kailani organised an army coup against the pro-British Iraqi monarchy and requested help from Nazi Germany. In Damascus, then a Vichy French colony, the Baath Party founders immediately organised public demonstrations in support of Rashid Ali.

[ … ]

Like the Nazi and Communist parties, the Baath is organised through small cells in a rigid hierarchy. [Emphasis added]

Read more…

Like Zyklon B, Sarin gas was created by a German. The Times of Israel reported on April 8th that sarin gas was discovered in Nazi Germany and was the chemical agent was used by Saddam Hussein’s regime to gas thousands of Kurds in 1988.  The Times of Israel stated:

Originally conceived as a pesticide, sarin was used by Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s regime to gas thousands of Kurds in the northern town of Halabja in 1988.

[ … ]

“Sarin is 26 times more deadly than cyanide gas. Just a pinprick-sized droplet will kill a human,” according to the World Health Organization.

[ … ]

The name sarin comes from the [German] chemists who discovered it by chance: Schrader, Ambros, Ruediger et Van der Linde. The scientists had been trying to create stronger pesticides but the formula was then taken up by the Nazi military for chemical weapons.

adolf hitler

Adolf Hitler

In a column titled Hitler refused to use sarin during WWII. The mystery is why. by Washington Post reporter Michael S. Rosenwald notes:

Adolf Hitler gassed and killed 6 million Jews during World War II — a genocide that makes his reluctance to use sarin against his military adversaries an enduring mystery.

[ … ]

White House press secretary Sean Spicer on April 11 said Adolf Hitler didn’t use chemical weapons during World War II. Hitler’s regime exterminated millions of Jews in gas chambers. (Reuters)

And it wasn’t because Hitler didn’t have sarin. A German scientist had stumbled onto sarin while experimenting with compounds in an attempt to kill beetles. The German military built a sarin factory in 1943. Officers pleaded with Hitler to use it.

He didn’t.

Why?

Over the years, historians (armchair and scholarly) and psychologists have speculated that maybe Hitler didn’t use sarin because he was a victim of a mustard gas attack in 1918, during World War I, and knew the misery of such weapons.

“He and several comrades, retreating from their dug-out during a gas attack, were partially blinded by the gas and found their way to safety only by clinging on to each other and following a comrade who was slightly less badly afflicted,” Ian Kershaw wrote in his critically acclaimed Hitler biography.

Read more…

It is also important to note that the United States and Great Britain planned on using mustard gas during WWII. According to Rense.com:

Both the USA and Great Britain planned and meant to use gas during WWII. Germany as a consequence of the Versailles dictate of 1919, was forbidden to produce and import any kind of gas or liquids that could be used to produce such gasses, Article 171.

The Reich kept strictly to the requirement of the Versailles dictate regarding chemical warfare equipment. Even the Weimar Republic kept to the dictate. During the Sea Disarmament Conference, 1921/22, in Washington, the following nations did not agree to gas or any chemical weapons being dangerous weapons: USA, England, France, Japan and Italy. The use of chemical weapons were discussed, but without an agreement being signed.

In June 1925 in Geneva the question was once again discussed, one reached the so-called Geneva Gas-War Protocol. Out of the 44 nations attending the Geneva conference 38 had, by the end of 1935, signed the protocol. 21 nations took reservation, 17 were reluctant. By the end of 1935, 28 nations had ratified the convention. But 10 refused, among those were USA, Japan, Czechoslovakia, Luxemburg, and various nations in South America. The Reich signed without any reservations.

Read more…

RELATED ARTICLE: Nazi poison gas: Gas, Gas, Already yet! FAEM April 1995

A 1,389 Year-Old ‘Phobia’? by Raymond Ibrahim

A direct correlation exists between Western ignorance of history and Western ignorance of Islam’s “troublesome” doctrines. It is this connection that allows Islam’s apologists to get away with so many distortions and outright lies meant to shield Islam.

Take Reza Aslan, CNN’s resident “cannibal”: he recently claimed that “Islamophobia” — defined by CAIR and others as “unfounded fear of and hostility towards Islam” — was created by a few “clowns” in 2014.

To be sure, Western fear of Islam is something of a recent phenomenon in modern times. Because the world was a much bigger place a few decades ago, and Islam was oceans away, the average American hardly knew anything about Muhammad’s creed. However, as the world has become smaller — as Muslims have grown in numbers in Western societies, as modern technology has made it possible for the weaker to terrorize the stronger, and then broadcast it for the world to see (via Internet) — so has the Western world been hearing, seeing, and experiencing more and more of Islam.

But Aslan’s lament is not that people were once ignorant but now are wise to Islam. Rather, he accuses a number of writers and activists — the aforementioned “clowns” — of manufacturing a menacing image of Islam, which, in turn, has prompted Western people to develop an “unfounded fear of and hostility towards Islam” — or, in a word, “Islamophobia.”

Such a claim relies on an obscene amount of historical ignorance. The fact is, Western peoples, including some of their luminaries, have portrayed Islam as a hostile and violent force from the very start — often in terms that would make today’s “Islamophobe” blush. And that wasn’t because Europeans were “recasting the other” to “validate their imperial aspirations” (to use the tired terminology of Edward Said that has long dominated academia’s treatment of Western-Muslim interactions). Rather, it was because, from the very start, Islam treated the “infidel” the same way ISIS treats the infidel: atrociously.

According to Muslim history, in 628, Muhammad summoned the Roman (or “Byzantine”) emperor, Heraclius — the symbolic head of “the West,” then known as “Christendom” — to submit to Islam; when the emperor refused, a virulent jihad was unleashed against the Western world. Less than 100 years later, Islam had conquered more than two-thirds of Christendom, and was raiding deep into France. While these far-reaching conquests are often allotted a sentence, if that, in today’s textbooks, the chroniclers of the time, including Muslim ones, make clear that these were cataclysmic events that had a traumatic effect on, and played no small part in forming, the unconquered portion of Christendom, which became Europe proper. As Ibn Khaldun famously put it after describing incessant Muslim raids for booty and slaves all along Europe’s Mediterranean coasts during the ninth and tenth centuries, “the Christians could no longer float a plank on the sea.” They took to the inlands, and the Dark Ages began.

But it wasn’t just what they personally experienced at the hands of Muslims that developed this ancient “phobia” to Islam. As far back as the eighth century, Islam’s scriptures and histories — the Koran, hadith, sira and maghazi literature — became available to those Christian communities living adjacent to, or even under the authority of, the caliphates. Based solely on these primary sources of Islam, Christians concluded that Muhammad was a (possibly demon possessed) false prophet who had very obviously concocted a creed to justify the worst depravities of man — for dominion, plunder, cruelty and carnality. This view prevailed for well over a millennium all over Europe (and till this day among “Islamophobes”); and it was augmented by the fact that Muslims were still, well over a millennium, invading Christian territories, plundering them, and abducting their women and children. The United States’ first brush with Islam — the early nineteenth century Barbary Wars — came by way of Muslim raids on American ships for booty and slaves in the name of Allah.

Here is a minuscule sampling of what Europeans thought of Islam throughout the centuries:

Theophanes, the Byzantine chronicler (d.818):

He [Muhammad] taught those who gave ear to him that the one slaying the enemy — or being slain by the enemy — entered into paradise [see Koran 9:111]. And he said paradise was carnal and sensual — orgies of eating, drinking, and women. Also, there was a river of wine … and the women were of another sort, and the duration of sex greatly prolonged and its pleasure long-enduring [e.g., Koran 56: 7-40, 78:31, 55:70-77]. And all sorts of other nonsense.

Thomas Aquinas, one of Christendom’s most influential philosophers (d. 1274):

He [Muhammad] seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh urges us …. and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine…. Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms — which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants [i.e., his “proof” that God was with him is that he was able to conquer and plunder others]….  Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms.

Marco Polo, world famous traveler (d. 1324):

According to their [Muslims’] doctrine, whatever is stolen or plundered from others of a different faith, is properly taken, and the theft is no crime; whilst those who suffer death or injury by the hands of Christians, are considered as martyrs. If, therefore, they were not prohibited and restrained by the [Mongol] powers who now govern them, they would commit many outrages. These principles are common to all Saracens.

When the Mongol Khan later discovered the depraved criminality of Achmath (or Ahmed), one of his Muslim governors, Polo writes that that the Khan’s

attention [went] to the doctrines of the Sect of the Saracens [i.e., Islam], which excuse every crime, yea, even murder itself, when committed on such as are not of their religion. And seeing that this doctrine had led the accursed Achmath and his sons to act as they did without any sense of guilt, the Khan was led to entertain the greatest disgust and abomination for it. So he summoned the Saracens and prohibited their doing many things which their religion enjoined.

Alexis de Tocqueville, French political thinker and philosopher, best known for Democracy in America (d. 1859):

I studied the Quran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.

Winston Churchill, a leader of the Allied war effort against Hitler during WWII (d. 1965):

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism [Islam] lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.  The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.  A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.  The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Lest it seem that these and other historic charges against Islam are simply products of Christian/Western xenophobia that cannot tolerate the “other,” it should be noted that many of Islam’s Western critics regularly praised other non-Muslim civilizations, as well as what is called today “moderate Muslims.”   Thus Marco Polo hailed the Brahmins of India as being “most honorable,” possessing a “hatred for cheating or of taking the goods of other persons.” And despite his criticisms of the “sect of the Saracens,” that is, Islam, he referred to one Muslim leader as governing “with justice,” and another who “showed himself [to be] a very good lord, and made himself beloved by everybody.”

Winston Churchill summed up the matter as follows: “Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities — but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

Apologists such as Reza Aslan can say whatever they want; they can claim that Islam is forever and perpetually “misunderstood,” and can bank on Western ignorance of its own history to get away with it. But fear and dislike of Islam has been the mainstream position among Christian/Western people for nearly 1,400 years — ever since Muhammad started raiding, plundering, massacring, and enslaving non-Muslims (“infidels”) in the name of his god; and it is because his followers, Muslims, continue raiding, plundering, massacring, and enslaving “infidels” that fear and dislike of Islam — what is called “Islamophobia” — exists to this day.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Egypt: Muslim man sexually harasses, cuts throat of Christian woman on busy street

Hugh Fitzgerald: Prester John in the Forbidden City?

Mormon Boy Scout troop being used to promote MORE refugees

It is really pretty shameful to use Boy Scouts who couldn’t possibly understand the complexity of the US Refugee Admissions Program to be shilling for a resettlement contractor paid by the head to place refugees in communities like Twin Falls just so local businesses can take advantage of taxpayer-supported cheap/captive labor that refugees represent.

boy scoutsHere is the latest from Leo Hohmann at WND.  Be sure to see previous posts of mine about how the Mormon church is getting in to the refugee seeding process. LOL! I think they are angling to become VOLAG number ten!

One week after three refugee boys from Sudan and Iraq pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 5-year-old girl in Twin Falls, Idaho, the city council has voted unanimously to lay out the welcome mat for more refugees.

The council voted 7-0 to direct the city staff to draft a resolution declaring Twin Falls a “welcoming city” after hearing a pitch from local Boy Scout Troop 4, which is sponsored by the Mormon Church.

The Latter Day Saints Church sponsors a scouting troop that is involved in an Eagle Scout project to help refugees being resettled in the area by the College of Southern Idaho.

About 12 scouts and their parents showed up to promote the CSI Refugee Center and its continued resettlement of refugees from Sudan, Iraq and other parts of the world.

But not all residents were for the idea of making Twin Falls a “welcoming city.”

“By putting people into different categories instead of all residents, we’re setting aside a precedent that we’re all created equal with equal rights,” local property owner Terry Edwards told the council. “It’s surprising to me that we have a Scout troop here that are in favor of the refugee center, and I don’t know that they know a whole lot about it.”

[…..]

On Monday, LDS parents and relatives of the Boy Scout troop filled the council’s meeting chambers, along with a leader of the Idaho Dairymen’s Association, local doctors, teachers and attorneys who all spoke in favor of more refugees. [Big Milk (big yogurt!) wants the cheap labor!—ed]

The LDS community has been supportive of refugee resettlement in Utah and Idaho, offering volunteers and financial donations to the resettlement agencies.

Please read on, there is much more.

Click here for our huge archive on Twin Falls.

Will you share this with just one person?

We are VERY close to reaching the 1.5 million signature goal on the Target boycott. Your help is critical as we approach the one-year anniversary since we launched the boycott.

At the time I send you this email, 1,484,630 people have pledged to boycott Target until it reverses its dangerous policy of allowing men into women’s restrooms and dressing rooms. You can see the very latest count here. Once we reach 1.5 million, I will personally deliver the signatures to Target’s headquarters in Minneapolis, MN.

Just how dangerous is Target’s policy to its customers? Just last month, a man was allowed inside a Tennessee Target store dressing room without any restriction at all.

According to the police report, “the suspect had been in and out of the dressing room for over an hour before he was caught taking photographs of the victim. I [the officer] observed around 5 or 6 other women enter the dressing room during this time, with each time the suspect entering the dressing room and exiting a short time after the females leave.”

Help us reach the 1.5 million signature mark.

Please, please….forward this email to just ONE FRIEND who you think should know that Target allows men in women’s restrooms and dressing rooms. Forwarding it to just one friend will help us reach our goal of 1.5 million pledges.

When you forward it, please consider changing the subject line to a personal note from you. Here are a few samples:

  • Have you heard about what happened at Target?
  • I’m boycotting Target…and you should too!
  • Target is not a safe place for women and children.

Secondly, reach more friends by sharing this on your Facebook page.

Thirdly, if you haven’t signed the boycott pledge, please sign it today!

If our mission resonates with you, please consider supporting our work financially with a tax-deductible donation. The easiest way to do that is through online giving. It is easy to use, and most of all, it is secure.

Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association

RELATED ARTICLE: The Target boycott cost more than anyone expected — and the CEO was blindsided

Poland’s Semi-Authoritarian Slide Is a Wake Up Call for Europe by Katarzyna Szczypska

polandIn the fall of 2015, the Polish political arena was shaken by the overwhelming victory of the socially conservative and nationalist Law and Justice Party (PiS). The party has subsequently embarked on dismantling democracy through media control, limits on civil liberties, and paralyzing judicial independence. Poland, once an unquestionable success story in the former Eastern Bloc, is altering its democratic trajectory and threatening its hard-won achievements. If the situation in Poland continues to be ignored, this dangerous dynamic might soon spread to other European capitals, securing PiS-like parties in mainstream politics.

Started at the Bottom … Now Back at the Bottom

Initially a poor Soviet satellite, Poland became one of Europe’s most dynamic economies. Unlike its formerly communist neighbors, Poland underwent the so-called “shock therapy,” a rapid transition from a centrally planned economy to a market-oriented one. In late 1989, many voiced concerns that the “patient” could “die” as a result of taking such a radical path. But the patient not only survived, it prospered, making Poland the poster child for both adopting democratic norms and embracing capitalism. Formerly an example to follow, Poland is now undergoing another surgery.For almost two decades, Polish political elections looked like a rollercoaster – the government leadership switched party hands after every four-year term. The system finally stabilized with the victory of the classically liberal Civic Platform Party (PO), securing a re-election for a second term of office. Ultimately, however, the party abandoned its initial drive for reforms and embraced an unambitious agenda aimed only at prolonging time in office, which was dubbed “the politics of warm water in the taps.” For years, many predicted that the main PO opponent, PiS, would never rule again. Yet the ongoing sense of PO’s exhaustion and stagnation, with its ministers spending most of their time on crisis management, enabled PiS’s comeback.

Modern Authoritarianism

Since it came to power in 2015, the new Polish government has taken greater control over the state-owned media. Although there was no clear separation between media and the government before PiS’s victory, after they came to power, any previous autonomy the Polish media enjoyed quickly eroded. Besides appointing loyalist media management boards and meddling with free speech protections, the government has increased the scale of censorship in state-owned radio and TV channels.

First, the PiS is using the media to promote its socially conservative, highly religious, and nationalist agenda. Masses from churches are widely broadcast and TV channels refrain from showing movies that could “harm Poland’s reputation,” even if the stories are historically true. This was clear in the authorities’ outrageous attack on the Oscar-winning film Ida for apparently not emphasizing the role of non-Jewish Poles in rescuing Jews from the Nazis. The PiS argued that the movie content might corrupt the minds of those who encounter it. In truth, it is better understood as a suppression of the Poles’ right to think for themselves.

Moreover, the PiS also manipulates the impartiality of the judiciary, leading to the paralysis of the country’s highest court, the Constitutional Court. The Polish Constitutional Court crisis, during which six so-called “repair bills” were passed without providing any tangible relief for the situation, led to wide protests throughout Poland, as well as a condemnation by the European Union and other international institutions.What is currently going on in Poland is something which the country had not seen since the legendary resistance movement Solidarity in the 1980s. The crises over the Constitutional Tribunal led to the establishment of the Committee for the Defense of Democracy (KOD). This grassroots movement organized a great number of protests all over Poland. Right now, protesters regularly occupy every major city in the country. Moreover, the fight against the PiS’s actions escalated inside the parliament itself. In December 2016, a group of opposition representatives occupied the rostrum in the plenary chamber for a month, which PiS leaders later described, quite dramatically, as an “attempted coup.”

What widely escapes the public notice is the fact that the recent Polish case is harmful both for the country itself and for the rest of Europe. This deeply rooted Polish populism is likely to provide momentum for similar tendencies in other European countries. Therefore, as journalist Remi Adekoya indicates, if the Polish case is ignored, this dangerous dynamic might soon wake up in other European capitals, securing PiS-like parties in mainstream positions. The situation in Poland should be closely monitored. As Adekoya argues, ignoring reality has never made it go away, but rather led to a growing number of people that became more willing to tolerate semi-authoritarian tendencies.

Katarzyna Szczypska

Katarzyna Szczypska is originally from Poland. She now works in a think tank in Washington D.C., dealing with the transformation processes in Eastern Europe.

We are deporting Somalis — 4,000 are in the pipeline!

Although, much to my dismay, the Trump Administration is continuing to admit refugees (including hundreds of Somalis), I’m happy to see news like this about illegal alien Somalis being found and deported to Somalia.

For years we didn’t send Somalis back even when they committed one crime after another, but at least this portion of the Trump agenda is being carried out.

(BTW, the theory about not sending illegal migrants, even criminals, back to hellhole countries has been that it is too cruel for them and they will be in danger there.)

From the Voice of America:

Obama with Somali Ambassador to US in June 2016.

Somalia’s U.S. ambassador says his embassy has learned that U.S. immigration agents are planning to deport about 4,000 Somali nationals now living in the United States.

“We learned through immigration sources that the total number of the Somalis that are in the books of [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] to be removed are close to 4,000,” Ahmed Isse Awad told VOA’s Somali service Saturday. “Most of them are not in detention centers.”  [Good luck finding them! They are probably on the way to Canada!—ed]

Since Somalia’s embassy in Washington reopened in November 2015, the ambassador said, about 170 Somali immigrants who either ran afoul of U.S. law or had their asylum applications rejected have been deported to Mogadishu, the Somali capital.

Most of those previously deported had applied for but been denied political asylum in the U.S., he added. Another group of Somali applicants whose requests for asylum have been denied are now in detention centers or prisons, awaiting deportation.

Is Virginia a magnet for criminal aliens?

ICE agents recently arrested 82 people from 26 nations during a five-day operation in and around the U.S. capital.

According to a statement from ICE, 68 of those detained March 26-30 had previous criminal convictions, for crimes including armed robbery, larceny and drug offenses. All but three were arrested in the state of Virginia.

Be sure to see the whole story.  VOA reports on one Somali deported in the past who simply returned with a new name.  He has been here for decades.  How many more like him are out there?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Jeff Sessions Delivers Sweeping Reforms to Protect the Border and U.S. Citizens

Australian Christians told not to wear cross after Muslims attack man wearing crucifix, yelling ‘F*ck Jesus’