Lancaster, PA ‘Welcomes’ 500 Refugees a Year as More Family Members Arrive

Lancaster Co CoalitionThis is a news story from over a week ago that I’ve been meaning to post because it makes one important point among many points about when a town has become a preferred resettlement site.

The point I want to highlight is that, once a “seed” community is established the resettlement contractors, in this case Church World Service and Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, will be busy bringing in the family members of the first group and ethnic enclaves will be established!

That is why as I intimated in my previous post that it is very important to learn if your town is being targeted in advance  because once your city or town is an established site it is virtually impossible to stop the growth or even control it.

Here is the gushing news account about Lancaster at Pennlive which early in the story tells us this:

Jessica Knapp

Jessica Knapp, colonizing Lancaster as director of the Lutheran Refugee Services program there.

Refugee resettlement in Pennsylvania is among the most robust in the nation with Lancaster second to only Philadelphia in resettlement numbers, said Jessica Knapp, interim coalition facilitator at the Lancaster County Refugee Coalition. More than 500 refugees resettle in Lancaster annually, she said.

Then this is what I want you to focus on (wherever you live):

Lancaster is appealing as a resettlement area for its low cost of living, employment possibilities and the city’s walkability, she added. Over time, as refugees sponsor family members over and the population grows, others may also be drawn to the area for its sizable community.

This is why we now have Minneapolis, MN and Columbus, OH as Somali enclaves, or likewise Ft. Wayne, IN for Burmese and so on. This is what the refugee industry calls ‘secondary migration.’

By the way, it was in Lancaster, PA where I first heard about ‘Pockets of Resistance’ and the Office of Refugee Resettlement hiring “Welcoming America” to head off more.

Here we have many other posts on Lancaster.

RELATED ARTICLE: Is there a plan to resettle Somali refugees in St. Maries, Idaho? How does one find out?

TEXAS JIHAD – “We Were There!”

We were there! We were in the middle of the first Islamic State jihad attack on U.S. soil that targeted innocent American citizens.

I do not mean we were some of the news media “talking heads,” I mean we were part of the American Citizens who were the targets of the two jihadis, hoping to kill us.

In this show I and the United West team sit back on site in Garland Texas and share their personal reflections on their harrowing experience.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

What to Make of ISIS Claim of Responsibility for Texas Shootings

Egypt: Five Christian children held for blasphemy – for insulting the Islamic State

What Constitutes an ‘Insult’ to Mohammed


 

garlandteam

The United West Garland Texas Team.

Pamela Gellar reports:

The FBI has confirmed Phoenix native Elton Simpson, a Muslim convert from Phoenix, Arizona, as one of the shooters responsible for attacking a Draw Muhammad Contest in Garland, Texas on Sunday. Simpson had been previously convicted of lying to the FBI about his jihadist intentions in 2010. Simpson made multiple pro-Sharia statements then that led the FBI to request, unsuccessfully, that he be placed on a no-fly list.

Simpson had been indicted in January 2010 on charges of lying to the FBI. He was subsequently convicted of lying to law enforcement, but not of planning to engage in violent terrorist activity abroad.

The indictment chronicles recorded conversations from 2005-2010 with an FBI informant named Dabla Deng, who introduced himself to Simpson as someone looking to learn more about Islam. Simpson was not shy about his beliefs, praising those who “fight” for Islam and encouraging Deng to renounce the West.

“They trying to bring democracy over there man, they’re trying to make them live by man-made laws, not by Allah’s laws. That’s why they get fought. You try to make us become slaves to man? No we slave to Allah [sic], we going to fight you to the death,” Simpson told Deng on one of the tapes.

575x369xgeller-summit-575x369.png.pagespeed.ic.goBZxwjPr90mfB7VdWUnSimpson spoke often of Somalia, and a desire to go there. He told Deng in recorded audio that he was considering traveling to a madrassa in South Africa and making his way up to Somalia to join the terrorist group Al Shabaab. While Al Shabaab has been an Islamist threat for many years, they are most popularly known today for an attack that killed 147 Christian students at Garissa University, Kenya in April, and a 2013 attack on Westgate Mall in the same nation, which brought them to international prominence. Experts warned in April that Al Shabaab is evolving from a local to a “transnational” jihadist threat.

The Court document notes that his repeated references to getting ready to “bounce” to Africa and join the “brothers” prompted FBI officials to attempt to place Simpson on a no-fly list. They failed: “Because the Defendant was being deceptive about the possibility of traveling to Somalia, however, the FBI became concerned that Mr. Simpson in fact did intend to go Somalia to engage in violent jihad. As a result, the agents attempted to prevent or disrupt the Defendant’s travels. The FBI tried, unsuccessfully,to place Mr. Simpson on the no-fly list.”

It is not clear why the application to place Simpson on the no-fly list was rejected. Concerns about Muslims traveling out of the West and into Islamist war zones were lower in 2010, however, at a time when the Islamic State was still an off-shoot of Al Qaeda (they split in 2014).

Simpson was eventually arrested and plainly claimed to have never discussed this issue, the crime for which he was convicted. The court found him guilty of lying about discussing support of jihad, but not of plotting to join or aid a terrorist organization.

The Court writes that “the Government did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant’s discussions about traveling to Somalia were related to the political situation Agent Hebert described.” Agent Herbert explained previously in the document how Al Shabaab had developed into a militarized terrorist force in the chaotic Somalian political landscape.

The Court also argues that Simpson’s statements were ambiguous:

It is true that the Defendant had expressed sympathy and admiration for individuals who “fight” non-Muslims as well as his belief in the establishment of Shariah law, all over the world including in Somalia. What precisely was meant by “fighting” whenever he discussed it, however, was not clear. Neither was what the Defendant meant when he stated he wanted to get to the “battlefield” in Somalia.

The official number of Americans who have joined jihadist groups are believed to be in the dozens, particularly the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.

Read the full Court case against Simpson here:

Intolerance is a Virtue

Tolerance is a virtue and intolerance is hate, or so we are told. This ideology has led to the toleration of evil. After all, who wants to be a hater? Those who condemn the evil caused by the doctrine of political Islam are called intolerant and haters.

But we must realize that intolerance of evil is a virtue.

Things to be intolerant of: killing Christians and Yazidis in the Middle East and Africa; jihad of rape, inbreeding, child marriage and female genital mutilation.

To reduce human suffering, we must all become intolerant of evil.

VIDEO: The Islamic Destruction of Heritage and Culture

The Islamic destruction of Iraq’s and the world’s heritage by burning ancient manuscripts, stealing art and demolishing Assyrian architecture is ongoing. These acts are not criminal violence, but acts of jihad that were first demonstrated by Mohammed. Earlier they broke into museums and sold valuable treasures for the money and then burned manuscripts. Why? It’s Islamic. When we invaded Iraq and Saddam Hussein fell, the same thing happened. When the Muslim Brotherhood took over Egypt they soon broke into museums, stole treasures and destroyed artifacts. The Taliban brought in artillery guns to blow up the Bamiyan Buddhas, huge statues, that were thousands of years old. Pure Islam. When the Muslims invaded India they came upon the largest wooden temple in the world.  The commanders said burn it. Pure Islam. Islam invaded the Buddhist area of India and burned the world’s largest library. Islamic destruction of heritage has been going on for 1400 years.

Allah hates the Kafir and all Kafir civilizations which are  jahiliyyah (ignorance). This is not the last destruction we will see. As Islam enters every new territory, its purpose is not just take over the government, but to annihilate the civilization. Destroying the heritage of the culture helps to destroy the civilization. That is what is going on under Islamic state now.

RELATED VIDEO: National Geographic Archaeology Fellow Fred Hiebert puts into perspective the Islamic State’s recent, widely publicized destruction of artifacts and archaeological sites in Iraq and Syria.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of AFP.

Happy New Year!

From the publisher and over 80 contributors to the DrRichSwier.com e-Magazine a very happy, healthy and prosperous New Year to you and yours.

Rubio Tears Into Charlie Crist Over His “Failed Leadership”

Rubio always loves to rip into Crist over his political flip flops and “failed leadership”.

U.S. Officials in meltdown over Obama’s Ebola mission

In the Middle East, for the past 3 years, Obama has avoided exercising traditional U.S. leadership in the world community to mobilize support for the prevention of the continued slaughter of Christians (by his inaction, by taking no action), he has signaled ISIL that it is safe to continue slaughtering Christians.  Obama continues to state almost daily, that there will be no boots on the ground in the Middle East; ISIL has become emboldened by his telling them what he will not do..

Instead of inserting boots on the ground with small Special Operations units in the Levant of what used to be Iraq, to coordinate command & control, U.S. air operations & strikes, and gathering of actionable intelligence, and instead of putting 3000 military boots on the ground along the southern border to stem the massive influx of Illegal Immigrants, drug smugglers, human smugglers, and terrorist flooding across the southern border, Obama is executing a very dangerous plan to deploy 3,000 US military personnel to the Ebola infected jungles of Liberia.  Obama has placed the 3,000 military personnel under the command of the State Department not the Defense Department.

Helping contain Ebola is not the duty for the U.S. Armed Forces to perform, the US Military is not an organization that contain contagious and infectious diseases that have no cure.  It is something the UN Health Organization together with the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Disease at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention should be doing, it is not a military mission the military was properly trained to execute.  U.S. Armed Forces personnel should be employed in combat operations; this is just another abuse of U.S. Military personnel by Obama. (please read the below listed article).

The Obama administration representatives could not answer some very basic questions: was there adequate protective and preventive medical equipment and health training procedures that they would provide to the 3000 military personnel, to make sure military personnel would not get infected with Ebola.  The Obama administration had no answers to those question posed by the press. In recent days, health officials around the world have become alarmed by the prospect that the Ebola virus could mutate and go airborne, then the spread of infection would be virtually be impossible to contain.

Obama’s order to deploy 3,000 boots on the ground in West Africa to help contain Ebola is risking infecting the nation with a  killer plague that has no medical cure.  This latest unsound and flawed initiative by the occupant of the Oval Office, hazarding the lives of 3000 US military personnel with the possibility of being infected with Ebola, further displays a lack of cautious and intelligent leadership.    The Speaker of the House endorsed Obama’s perilous policy, that risks the security of the nation and hazards the lives of children and the elderly in America.

Obama’s initiatives will be praised and celebrated by the left of center liberal media establishment. Obama’s very dangerous decision will be hazarding the entire nation, especially when the 3000 military personnel return—they should all be quarantined, off shore, for at least 2 months before they are allowed to set foot back on CONUS.  This risky initiative, will result in more of the American people not trusting the judgment of the President or the Speaker of the House, since they are both supporting a policy, that is endangering the safety and security of the American people.

U.S. OFFICIALS IN MELTDOWN ON OBAMA’S EBOLA MISSION

Can’t answer questions posed at congressional hearing on crisis

By JEROME R. CORSI

WASHINGTON, D.C. – At a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing Wednesday on Ebola, government health workers were unable to answer specific questions posed by Republicans skeptical of President Obama’s decision to deploy 3,000 U.S. troops to Liberia to combat the disease.

None of the government health witnesses testifying were able to answer basic questions, including how many physicians and nurses would be among the 3,000 troops allocated or what type of protective equipment and training would be employed to prevent infection.

The witnesses explained the State Department was in charge of the military mission, not the Pentagon.

“Who do we call when there is a problem with the troops in Liberia?” asked Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, a physician and a guest on the committee.

“You call USAID,” replied Nancy Lindborg, assistant administrator for the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID.

She explained the situation in Liberia is a medical emergency, and USAID is directing the Obama administration’s response in West Africa.

USAID reports to the State Department, not to the Department of Defense.

As WND reported, retired Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin has charged that sending American troops to combat Ebola in Liberia is “an absolute misuse of the U.S. military.”

Rep. Christopher Smith, R-N.J., began the questioning by asking the government health witnesses whether or not the Obama administration has allocated sufficient funding to support the military mission in Liberia. Smith also asked what steps the administration plans to take to protect the health of the troops deployed there.

Unable to directly answer Smith’s questions, Lindborg stressed the U.S. wants to provide “command and control” in Liberia, coordinating international efforts to provide physicians and nurses.

Lindborg promised to deliver after the hearing a breakdown of the roles the 3,000 U.S. troops would play.

She explained the goal of the military mission is to establish a Joint Force Command headquartered in Liberia to serve as a regional command for U.S. military activities in the region. The plan is also to establish an Ebola “training boot camp” to train up to 500 local health care workers weekly and to set up a 25-bed hospital in Liberia open to all health care aid workers in West Africa who contract the disease.

“When will the 3,000 military be in theater?” Smith asked. “Can you also reassure the American people that the military deployed to Liberia will have adequate protective medical equipment and training to make sure our troops do not get infected with Ebola while in the region”

Lindborg was unable to provide Smith precise timelines for the arrival of U.S. troops nor was she able to detail the protective medical equipment and training the troops will be provided prior to arrival.

Coming to Limburg’s defense, Dr. Beth Bell, director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Disease at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, explained the CDC has prepared material regarding what medical personnel dispatched to West Africa to combat Ebola need to know before they arrive in the disease hot zone.

In her prepared opening statement, Bell appeared to minimize the risk presented by the current outbreak, stressing Ebola is “not a significant health threat to the United States.”

She argued Ebola is not easily transmitted and does not spread from people who are not ill She also noted cultural norms that contribute to the spread of the disease in Africa, such as burial customs, are not a factor in the U.S.

“There is a window of opportunity to tamp down the spread of this disease, but that window is closing,” Bell testified. “The best way to prevent the Ebola virus from reaching the United States is to contain the virus outbreak in West Africa now.”

She told the committee that the $600 million the United Nations believes will be needed to get supplies to West African countries to get the virus under control is “an underestimate.”

Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, explained the NAAID has begun active human testing of various alternative therapies and experimental drugs to combat Ebola. The effort includes working with Mapp Biopharmaceutical, Inc. to develop MB-003, a combination of three antibodies that has successfully prevented Ebola from developing in monkeys when administered as late as 48 hours after exposure.

In combination with the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, NIAID is testing an experimental vaccine that uses a chimpanzee virus similar to the common cold virus, Chimp Adenovirus 3 (Cad3), as a carrier, or vector, to introduce the Ebola virus genes into the body, with the goal of stimulating an immune response.

Fauci, under questioning from the committee, argued that while it is possible the Ebola virus could mutate in Liberia to become airborne, it is unlikely.

“The American public should not lose sleep over the possibility Ebola will go airborne,” he said. “But we have to contain the virus right now, because the more the virus escalating, infecting additional people, the greater the chance the virus will mutate.”

ABOUT JEROME R. CORSI

Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., is a WND senior staff reporter. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers “The Obama Nation” and “Unfit for Command.” Corsi’s latest book is “Who Really Killed Kennedy?”

Jimmy Carter’s Love for Terrorists

Jimmy Carter was elected President for one reason—Richard M. Nixon. The feeling in the nation was that the born-again Sunday school teacher and Georgia Governor was the perfect antithesis of the President who was forced to resign over the Watergate scandal. He defeated Gerald Ford, Nixon’s Vice President who was largely punished for the 1974 pardon he gave the disgraced Nixon.

In a similar fashion Ronald Reagan was elected President to replace Carter who was widely seen as a failure for both his domestic and foreign policies. For the years since, Carter was understood to have been the worst President, but a recent Quinnipiac University poll of 1,446 registered voters ranked Obama as the worst since the end of World War II, granting Carter an approval rating four times higher than Obama.

I never liked Carter and Reagan’s election in 1980 marked the beginning of my transition from liberal to conservative; one that I suspect occurred for many others as well. Larry Bell, a NewsMax contributor, commenting on the Quinnipiac poll, noted that “Just as with Obama, the Carter administration had inherited a recession and did little to improve a weak economy.”

After Carter took office Bell noted that “unemployment continued to rise, inflation reached 13 percent, and interest rates approached 20 percent.” Reagan set about improving the economy, rebuilt our military strength, confronted the Soviet Union, and the 1980s are remembered fondly by those who lived through his two terms.

Carter faced problems with Iran that had seized twenty U.S. diplomats in 1979 and held them for 444 days, unresponsive to his efforts to free them. A military attempt failed, killing thirty soldiers when our helicopters crashed. I have always thought that the Iranians took Reagan’s measure and feared what he would do. They released the hostages the same day he was first sworn into office.

On August 5, USA Today reported that Carter had “called upon the West to recognize the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas as a legitimate ‘political actor’ that represents the bulk of the Palestine population.”

Extremely critical of Israel’s military operation to protect its citizens against the deluge of rockets coming out of Gaza, Carter and former Irish president Mary Robinson had their views published in a Foreign Policy article, saying “There is no humane or legal justification for the way the Israeli Defense Forces are conducting this war.”

ap_mashaal_carter2_080421_main

Hamas leader Khaled Meshal and Jimmy Carter. Photo by ABC News.

Carter has never met a despot, from Soviet premier Leonid Brezhnev to Bashar Assad and his father, Hafez, to the gang that runs Hamas that he didn’t like. That is the quintessential trait of liberals who have always been attracted to despots. They’re the ones who wear Che Guevara t-shirts.

Carter, different from most evangelicals, has never given any evidence of respecting Jews or Israel. The high point of his presidency was the Egypt-Israel peace treaty known as the 1978 Camp David accords, but both parties had their own reasons for agreeing to its terms.

In his twenty-first book, “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid”, published in November 2006, Carter sided totally with the so-called Palestinians. Writing in the Middle East Quarterly’s spring 2007 edition, a longtime advisor to Carter, Kenneth W. Stein, criticized it at length, noting “egregious errors of both commission and omission. To suit his desired ends, he manipulates information, redefines facts, and exaggerates conclusions.” That’s a nice way of saying he lied a lot.

Stein pointed out that Carter’s book “omits mention that Hamas denies the right of a Jewish state to exist in the Middle East and the group’s belief that historical Palestine belongs in its entirety to Muslims.”

The book’s title reflected the libel against Israel when it used the word “apartheid”, likening Israel to South Africa’s racial oppression of blacks until it was forced to rescind it. It is comparable to the lies that Israel is the “occupier” of lands won in the wars waged against it. It’s like saying the U.S. is the occupier of land formerly owned by Mexico.

Compounding Carter’s slur is the fact that Arab citizens of Israel have always had the same rights as Jews and others who emigrated there. At present there are eleven Arabs in Israel’s Knesset (parliament). In only one respect do they differ; Israel does not require Arab citizens to serve in its Defense Force, but they may volunteer to serve if they wish.

Recognizing a terrorist group like Hamas, as Carter calls for, is not that different from saying the same of Hezbollah or the newly-arisen Islamic State that has seized land from Syria and Iraq. It’s beyond stupid. It betrays a deeply held anti-Semitism. In 2009, that was so evident Carter apologized with an open letter to the Jewish community in America.

Hamas has not disavowed its stated intention to destroy Israel and kill all of its Jewish citizens.

That Americans are comparing Obama unfavorably to Carter, lifting Carter from the basement of presidential approval, tells us a lot about his performance in office since his 2008 election and 2012 reelection.

At least Americans had the good sense to end Carter’s presidency in one term, but it virtually assures that Obama will replace Carter as the worst U.S. President ever.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Judge Upholds Tennessee Marriage Amendment by Bethany Monk

A state judge in Tennessee ruled in favor of the voter-approved constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. This is the first time a judge has upheld such an amendment since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June 2013.

The Tennessee case involves two men who obtained a marriage license in Iowa four years ago. The couple is now seeking a divorce in Tennessee.

simmons_russell_e

Roane County Circuit Judge Russell E. Simmons

In the decision, Roane County Circuit Judge Russell E. Simmons “rejected the idea that the Windsor decision undercut state authority,” Supreme Court reporter Lyle Dennison wrote on ScotusBlog.com.

Though the ruling applies only to this couple, it’s still notable.

“The value of this decision is in being able to counter the Left’s boasting that same-sex marriage is a ‘done deal’ in the courts. It’s not,” said Focus on the Family Judicial Analyst Bruce Hausknecht. “And if the recent oral arguments in the 6th Circuit cases involving marriage amendments — of Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio and Michigan — provide any clues as to that court’s upcoming decision, it looks like those states’ right to define marriage as one-man, one-woman could receive a huge judicial boost as well.”

A similar case has been heard at the Texas Supreme Court. A decision has not been issued. Jonathan Saenz, president of Texas Values, applauds Simmons for respecting marriage.

“The federal government and activist judges have no authority to redefine marriage in Tennessee, Texas, or any other state,” he explained. “It should continue to be a state’s right to recognize the ‘best definition of marriage’ and affirm the unique good that a mom and dad play in a child’s life. We will continue to proudly stand for what’s right, no matter how hard the federal government and the out-of-control judiciary tries to redefine marriage against the will of the people and states.”

Hausknecht agrees.

“The definition of marriage is a state issue, as Justice Kennedy told us in last summer’sWindsor decision,” he said. “It’s time that the courts took him at his word.”

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Read the decision in Borman v. Borman.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Citizen Link.

Kurds Stand with Israel Against HAMAS at the White House!

On Saturday August 9, 2014, J. Mark Campbell, investigative reporter with The United West, captured a wonderful moment on tape in Lafayette Square across from the White House in Washington DC. As a Pro-Israel group was standing against a HAMAS rally, a group of Kurdistan supporters came over to the Pro-Israel group and stood in solidarity with them against the HAMAS terrorist group. Enjoy the moment!

Learn more at The United West website.

Proof that the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is HAMAS

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) describes itself as a “non-profit, grassroots membership organization…established to promote a positive image of Islam and Muslims in America,” and to protect Muslims from hate crimes and discrimination. According to the council’s spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, “We are similar to a Muslim NAACP.” CAIR has further explained that it is “dedicated to presenting an Islamic perspective on issues of importance to the American public.”

There is one problem, this non-profit is supporting the blockade of ships coming to the Port of Oakland. The poster below was found by Ken, one of our readers, on the CAIR Facebook members page. Is this promoting a “positive image of Islam and Muslims in America”? Is this the role of a non-profit? Should not this clear political action against a U.S. ally not cause the IRS to review and potentially withdraw CAIR’s non-profit status?

cair poster

Poster on the CAIR Facebook members page. For a larger view click on the poster.

According to Discover the Networks, CAIR has strong ties to the terrorist group Hamas:

  • “[CAIR] was formed not by Muslim religious leaders throughout the country, but as an offshoot of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP). Incorporated in Texas, the IAP has close ties to Hamas and has trumpeted its support for terrorist activities.” Former chief of the FBI’s counter terrorism section, Oliver Revell, called the IAP “a front organization for Hamas that engages in propaganda for Islamic militants.”
  • CAIR’s head, Nihad Awad asserted at a 1994 meeting at Barry University, “I am a supporter of the Hamas movement.”
  • Former FBI counter terrorism chief, Steven Pomerantz, stated publicly that, “CAIR, its leaders and its activities effectively give aid to international terrorist groups.”

CAIR promotes extremist views and a radical Islamic vision:

  • At a speech in Fremont, California, Omar M. Ahmad of CAIR proclaimed that, “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran…should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper equates Christian leaders such as Rev. Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Rev. Jimmy Swaggart with Osama bin Laden because he claims that given the chance, they would commit mass murder against Muslims. “They’re the equivalent of our Osama bin Laden,” Hooper told WABC Radio’s Steve Malzberg. When asked to clarify if Osama bin Laden’s goal was to kill Christians, Jews and Westerners, Hooper responded, “Yes, that’s one of his goals. And I’m sure that, given the right circumstance, [Falwell, Robertson and Swaggart] would do the same in the opposite direction.”

  • CAIR is an apologist for convicted Islamic terrorists:
  • CAIR’s founder, Nihad Awad, wrote in the Muslim World Monitor that the 1994 World Trade Center trial, which ended in the conviction of four Islamic fundamentalist terrorists, was “a travesty of justice.” According to Awad — and despite the confessions of the terrorists from the 1993 attack — “there is ample evidence indicating that both the Mossad and the Egyptian Intelligence played a role in the explosion.”
  • On Feb. 2, 1995, U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White named Siraj Wahhaj as one of the “unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators” in the attempt to blow up New York City monuments. Yet CAIR deems him “one of the most respected Muslim leaders in America” and includes him on its advisory board.

CAIR is reluctant to condemn terrorists and terrorism:

  • In October 1998, the group demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as “the sworn enemy,” finding this depiction “offensive to Muslims.”
  • In 1998, CAIR denied bin Laden’s responsibility for the two Al Queda African embassy bombings. According to CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, the bombings resulted from a “misunderstandings of both sides.”

CAIR supports organizations that fund terrorism:

  • When President Bush closed the Holy Land Foundation in December 2001 for collecting money that intelligence found was “used to support the Hamas terror organization,” CAIR decried his action as “unjust” and “disturbing.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hamas top dog: We cannot coexist with “occupiers”
Hamas negotiating arms deal with North Korea
Kerry “completely capitulated” to Hamas in ceasefire proposal
Gaza streets and homes rigged with explosives

Common Core: “Effing the Ineffable”

“’One size fits all’ may be a term of mockery used by people who disdain the top-down solutions of centralized power; in the technocratic vision, ‘one size fits all’ describes the ideal.” – Andrew Ferguson

In his column “The Common Core Commotion: Haven’t we seen this movie before?” Andrew Ferguson gives both an historical and technocratic analysis of Common Core State Standards. Common Core is the end game of a process that began under President Ronald Reagan and is now in full force under President Barack Obama.

Ferguson writes, “The logic of education reform always points to more education reform. With experts having shown they didn’t really know how to improve education on a broad scale, and with state school officials having proved themselves in many cases to be cheats and bunco artists, the solution was clear to every educationist: State school officials should get together with experts to come up with a new reform. Except this time it would work.”

Ferguson describes the “world view” on education by technocrats like Bill Gates and those within government run education from the U.S. Department of Education to the local School Board. Ferguson describes Bill Gates thusly:

His faith is technocratic and materialist: In the end he believes the ability of highly credentialed observers to identify and solve problems through the social sciences is theoretically limitless. ‘Studies’ and ‘research’ unlock the human secret. This is the animating faith of most educationists, too. All human interactions can be dispassionately observed and their separate parts identified, isolated, analyzed, and quantified according to some version of the scientific method. The resulting data will yield reliable information about how and why we behave as we do, and from this process can be derived formulas that will be universally applicable and repeatable.

Ferguson concludes with, “The delays and distancing suggest a cloudy future for the Common Core. Even its advocates say that the best possible outcome for now involves a great deal more unpleasantness: The tests will be given to many students beginning next spring, and the results will demonstrate the catastrophic state of learning in American schools. Of course, we knew that, but still. ‘Maybe this will be a reality check,’ one booster told me the other day. ‘People will take a look at the results and say, ‘Aha! So this is what they’ve been talking about!’ It will send a very strong signal.’”

Ferguson notes, ” “Eff the Ineffable” is the technocrat’s motto.” Common Core is the technocrats way of Effing the Ineffable.

The following chart is courtesy of Education News and compares the traditional and Common Core education models:

Description

Type #1

Traditional

Classical Learning

Type #2

CSCOPE and

Common Core Standards

 

Progressive,

Radical Social Justice Agenda

     
Instruction Direct instruction by teacher Self-directed learning, group-think Emphasis on:Subjectivity, feelings, emotions, beliefs, multiculturalism, political correctness, social engineering, globalism, evolution, sexual freedom, contraceptives, environmental extremism, global warming and climate change, victimization, diversity, acceptance of homosexuality as normal, redistribution of wealth

 

 

De-emphasis on:

Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, Constitution, national sovereignty, Founding Fathers, American exceptionalism

 

     
Curriculum Academic, fact-based, skills, research Social concerns, project-based, constructivism, subjective, uses unproven fads and theories
     
Teacher’s Role Authority figure; sets the plan for the class; academic instruction Facilitator
     
Student’s Role Learn from teacher; focus on factual learning, develop foundation skills for logical and analytical reasoning, independent thinking Students teach each other; focus on feelings, emotions, opinions; group-think
     
English, Language Arts, Reading (ELAR) Phonics; classical literature; cursive handwriting; grammar; usage; correct spelling; expository, persuasive, research writing Whole language, balanced literacy,Guided Reading; no cursive writing instruction so cannot read primary documents of Founding Fathers
     
Mathematics “Drill and Skill,” four math functions learned to automaticity Fuzzy math, rejects drill and memorization of math facts, dependent on calculators
     
Social Studies Focus on American heritage and exceptionalism, national sovereignty, Founding documents Diversity, multiculturalism, globalization, revisionist history, political correctness
     
Character Development Pro-faith, self-control, personal responsibility, self-discipline, solid work ethic Secular, moral relativism, anti-faith, victimization
     
Equality Equal opportunities Equal outcomes
     
Assessment Students evaluated by earned grades, objective tests Inflated grades, subjective assessments evaluated based upon value system of grader, group grades
     
Outcomes Objective tests (right-or-wrong answers), emphasis on academic skills and knowledge Subjective assessments; emphasis on holistic, “feel good” scoring

Original chart produced by Carole H. Haynes, Ph.D. – chaynes777@gmail.comRevised chart produced 11.04.13.

How “Normal” is Bowe Bergdahl?

Twitter picture of Bowe Bergdahl and a Taliban friend.

There are few military crimes worse than desertion to the enemy short of outright treason by giving them aid and comfort.

So why is the U.S. Army declaring Sgt. Berghdal (he received a promotion from private first class while being either a Taliban captive or guest) a “normal soldier now”? When one’s entire unit declares him a deserter for leaving their Afghanistan based on June 30, 2009—as they did on a show with Fox’s Megyn Kelly—by what stretch of the imagination is he just a normal soldier stationed at the headquarters of Joint Base San Antonio-Fort Sam Houston?

Fox News reported that former Army Sgt. Evan Buetow who served with Bergdahl as saying “I think it’s very clear he deserted his post. He thought about what he was doing, he mailed some things home, he walked away and we have witnesses who saw him walking away. And if you’re walking away in one of the worst, most dangerous areas of Afghanistan without your weapon and gear, I don’t believe you’re planning on coming back.”

AA - Taliban Released

The five Taliban commanders released in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl.

If he is found to be a deserter, the release of five high level Taliban generals to get him back is one more Obama obscenity since it is well known that he has wanted to shut down the Guantanamo Bay detention center for enemy combatants captured on the field. Having already investigated the circumstances surrounding his having left his unit, the U.S. Army surely knew whether Bergdahl was a deserter at the time the decision was made to swap for him. I suspect, too, that a major ransom was paid the Taliban for his release.

This is, however, a different Army than the past. It, like the other elements of our military has become highly politicized by the Obama administration; one that continues to reduce its size under the cover of sequestration. Many of the military’s top officers have been relieved of command or pushed into retirement. Even officers in the field in Afghanistan are being fired. The effect on the troop’s morale is incalculable.

Fox News reported on July 14 that “Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl could have a tax-free $350,000 dropped into his bank account if the current investigation into his disappearance from his base in Afghanistan was not desertion, and if he is deemed to have been a prisoner of war for the five years he was held by Islamic militants.”

Given the circumstances of his decision to leave his unit, immediately becoming liable to capture, and the reported statements, letters, and other views he held about his deployment and about the U.S. Army, Berghdal is most certainly not “a normal soldier.”

AA - Bergdahl Parents

President Obama with Bowe Bergdahl’s parents in Rose Garden.

One must ask why Obama thought the announcement of his release merited a White House presentation that included his parents; his father uttered an Islamic phrase that drew a presidential smile. The phrase “bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim” is a common Arabic phrase, considered by some to be a major pillar of Islam and featured prominently in the Koran.

To date, however, Bergdahl has reportedly not spoken to his parents. Why? And how “normal” is that?

If Bergdahl went AWOL in Afghanistan, why are we being told he is free to move around at will? One has to wonder if he doesn’t have some military “minders” with him at all times to avoid a problem that would cause a big scandal. What we do know is that this Army sergeant has hired a Yale University legal scholar to represent him.

I suspect that a major cover-up is going on and that the official Army decision will be that he was a prisoner of war after leaving his unit. A soldier whose return was celebrated in the White House rose garden by the President is not likely to see a day in the brig. At most he might receive a dishonorable discharge for going AWOL. After that both the White House and the Army will hope he sinks into anonymity.

Everything surrounding Bergdahl’s “disappearance” from his unit and his return shouts cover-up. One element is likely to be a very lengthy “investigation”, one that surely will not come to a conclusion before the forthcoming November midterm elections.

Given the honor, loyalty and sacrifice of thousands of U.S. soldiers on duty today, as veterans and as fallen heroes, the Bergdahl story is an offence to them and to all Americans. It is one more chapter in the legacy of a President who has been far more sympathetic to our nation’s enemies than our military.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

EDITORS NOTE: The featured Twitter photo is courtesy of the UK Daily Mail.

The IRS Is Not Out Of Control

Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, provided an interesting perspective on last week’s House Oversight hearing on the IRS targeting scandal.

During the hearing, emails were presented showing that after seeing a draft copy of an IRS Inspector General report on the political targeting of non-profits, Lois Lerner told her co-workers to be “cautious” in their email communications because “Congress might be watching.” She also asked the IRS IT department if the department’s internal chat system was searchable.

Lerner’s IT colleague, Maria Hooke, responded, “No, the IRS does not routinely save chat communications – unless employees intentionally take steps to preserve their conversations.  These chat communications are not saved – and this is critical – despite the fact that “the functionality exists within the software.”

And how did Lerner respond?  “Perfect.”

I am reminded of something Lord Acton once said, “Everything secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity.”

Or, as Jay Sekulow opined, “Some have said the IRS was out of control.  I’d say the opposite.  It was very much in control – doing exactly what it was intended to do with relative impunity, including setting up its own IT resources not to preserve records but to cover its tracks.”

The online dictionary defines conspiracy as “an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot, a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose, an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.”

American citizens live in constant fear of the IRS wrecking havoc on their lives, seizing their assets and throwing them in prison – and all with impunity. Yet evidence now shows that Lois Lerner and certain colleagues at the IRS clearly conspired to punish select politically conservative individuals and non-profits; actions that are a clear violation of federal law.

If this were an isolated incident one could make the case that Lerner and her cohorts could have been given appropriate reprimands and the IRS resumed normal business operations. But this is not an isolated case. Political targeting and retaliation by the IRS has been standard operating procedure since the agency’s inception. It is part of the organizational and operational DNA.

The Lerner case demands a special prosecutor. And America demands that the IRS be given a national pink slip.

The FairTax® stands ready to fully replace the current income tax code. And it is the only tax replacement plan before Congress that gives the IRS their walking papers.

If you agree, please send a note to your local newspaper and ask the editor to endorse the FairTax.

If you are on Facebook, share this picture and tell your friends why you support the FairTax Plan.

My name is FairTax

Tell them that under the FairTax they will never have to dreadApril 15 again, because their days of filing tax returns will be over. Most importantly, be sure and let them know the FairTax disbands, defunds and eliminates the IRS.

To learn more take a quick look at the FairTax, flat tax and income tax comparison chart. Share this chart with your family and friends.

Root Cause of the “Income Equality” Crisis — The Federal Reserve’s Monetary Policy

The latest political slogan is “income equality.” Various news outlets report that the rich are getting richer and poor getting poorer. Various politicians cry out for more government intervention, more government programs and expanded government funding to address this national crisis. Cries are heard daily from politicians to raise the minimum wage.

But who is really behind this growing income inequality crisis? According to one monetary policy expert it is the U.S. Federal Reserve.

James Rickards in his book “The Death of Money: The Coming Collapse of the International Monetary System” explains how this has happened in America and will happen again. Rickards writes, “Critics from Richard Cantillon in the early eighteenth century to V.I. Lenin and John Maynard Keynes in the twentieth have been unanimous in their view that inflation is the stealth destroyer of savings, capital, and economic growth.”

Rickards warns, “Inflation often begins imperceptibly and gains a foothold before it is recognized. This lag in comprehension, important to central banks, is called money illusion, a phrase that refers to a perception that real wealth is being created, so that Keynesian ‘animal spirits’ are aroused. Only later is it discovered that bankers and astute investors captured the wealth, and everyday citizens are left with devalued savings, pensions and life insurance.” [Emphasis mine]

Rickards finds that the 1960s and 1970s are “a good case study in money illusion.” “Two lessons from the 1960s and 1970s are highly pertinent today. The first is that inflation can gain substantial momentum before the general public notices it… Second, once inflation perceptions shift, they are extremely difficult to reset,” states Rickards.

Is the Federal Reserve contributing to a money illusion?

According to Rickards, “[S]ince 2008 the Federal Reserve has printed over $3 trillion of new money, but without stoking much inflation in the United States. Still, the Fed has set an inflation target of at least 2.5 percent, possibly higher, and will not relent in printing money until that target is achieved. The Fed sees inflation as a way to dilute the real value of U.S. debt and avoid the specter of deflation. There in lies a major risk.” [Emphasis mine]

Rickards notes history tells is, “[A] feedback loop will emerge in which higher inflation leads to higher inflation expectations, to even higher inflation, and so on. The Fed will not be able to arrest this feedback loop because its dynamic is a function not of monetary policy but of human behavior.”

Rickards predicts:

  1. Skyrocketing gold prices and a crashing dollar;
  2. Russian, China and the International Monetary Fund will stand ready with gold and SDRs, not dollars, to provide a new reserve asset; and
  3. When the dollar next falls from the high wire, there will be no safety net.

Richards in his book notes, “The coming collapse of the dollar and the international monetary system is entirely foreseeable… The international monetary system has collapsed three times in the past century – in 1914, 1939 and 1971. Each collapse was followed by a tumultuous period.”

Santelli-Rick-rant-chart-July-2014-300x157Rick Santelli explains what he believes is happening in the U.S. today. Brian Maloney from MediaEqualizer.com writes: “So what exactly are his [Santelli’s] points? It’s actually simple.” (see chart right):

  1. By keeping interest rates artificially low, the Janet Yellen led Federal Reserve has encouraged reckless government borrowing and spending while crushing savers, especially America’s retirees.
  2. The Fed has focused all its efforts on making the rich even richer through Quantitative Easing while working people suffer and are ignored by Washington’s elite.

Who wins and who loses when there is another financial crisis like the DOT.com bust in 2000 and the housing crisis of 2008? The winners are the bankers and savey investors (the 1%) and their political allies. The losers left holding the bag are citizens living on Main Street U.S.A.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Billionaire Warns: Yellen Collapse ‘Will Be Unlike Any Other’
Bubble Paranoia Setting In as S&P 500 Surge Stirs Angst – Bloomberg
Bank for International Settlements fears fresh Lehman crisis from worldwide debt surge – Telegraph
Deficit To Soon Skyrocket To Historic World War II Heights
OECD Fears Middle Class Civil Unrest Is Coming | Zero Hedge