Tag Archive for: Donald Trump

By the Numbers: Its a Two Man Race for the GOP Nomination

I have said that Americans will know who will win the Republican nomination for President by March 15th. It now appears that the race is down to two men: Donald J. Trump and Senator Ted Cruz. Neither of these candidates is favored by the GOP establishment (GOPe). Both  are considered outsiders and outliers.

Trump and Cruz are men fundamentally detached from the main body of the GOPe.

delegate count march 6th

RELATED VIDEO: 5 Secret Conspiracies to Stop Donald Trump. Video created by DARK 5:

Here is the delegate count to date courtesy of the Associated Press:

Mar 1

Alabama · 50 delegates: Trump won and has 36 delegates, Cruz has 13, Rubio has 1
Alaska · 28 delegates: Cruz won and has 12 delegates, Trump has 11, Rubio has 5
Arkansas · 40 delegates: Trump won and has 16 delegates, Cruz has 14, Rubio has 9
Georgia · 76 delegates: Trump won and has 40 delegates, Rubio has 14, Cruz has 18
Massachusetts · 42 delegates: Trump won and has 22 delegates, Kasich has 8, Rubio has 8, Cruz has 4
Minnesota · 38 delegates: Rubio won and has 17 delegates, Cruz has 13, Trump has 8
Oklahoma · 43 delegates: Cruz won and has 15 delegates, Trump has 13, Rubio has 12
Tennessee · 58 delegates: Trump won and has 31 delegates, Cruz has 15, Rubio has 9
Texas · 155 delegates: Cruz won and has 102 delegates, Trump has 47, Rubio has 3
Vermont · 16 delegates: Trump won and has 6 delegates, Kasich has 6
Virginia · 49 delegates: Trump won and has 17 delegates, Rubio has 16, Cruz has 8, Kasich has 5, Carson has 3

Mar 5

Kansas · 40 delegates: Cruz won and has 24 delegates, Trump has 9, Rubio has 6, Kasich has 1
Kentucky · 46 delegates: Trump won and has 16 delegates, Cruz has 14, Rubio has 7, Kasich has 6
Louisiana · 46 delegates: Trump won and has 15 delegates, Cruz has 14
Maine · 23 delegates: Cruz won and has 12 delegates, Trump has 9, Kasich has 2

Mar 8

Hawaii · 19 delegates
Idaho · 32 delegates
Michigan · 59 delegates
Mississippi · 40 delegates

Mar 12

Washington, D.C. · 19 delegates

Mar 15

Florida · 99 delegates
Illinois · 69 delegates
Missouri · 52 delegates
North Carolina · 72 delegates
Ohio · 66 delegates

Mar 22

Arizona · 58 delegates
Utah · 40 delegates

Source: AP

RELATED ARTICLES:

Video: Questions about Marco Rubio’s arrest and gay foam party could end his campaign – USA Politics Today

South Dakota’s Republican Governor Has No Problem With Boys in Girls’ Locker Rooms

House GOP Leaders Argue Against Scrapping Budget Deal

Colleges Use Tax-Exempt Status to Excuse Restricting Free Speech

VIDEO: Trump on national security 25 years ago — worth a watch

No matter what your current opinion of Donald Trump is, it is my best guess that you will find this video fascinating!

Maybe Donald Trump should be taken more seriously? Interesting that this interview with Oprah was done 25 years ago. Has he changed his views?

Watch the video and you decide.

Muslim facing deportation after threating to execute Donald Trump

Now he is playing the victim: “It’s just a stupid post. You can find thousands of these every hour on Facebook and the media. I don’t know why would they think I am a threat to the national security of the United States just because of a stupid post.”

The thing is, a death threat is serious business. Or it ought to be.

Anyone, Muslim or non-Muslim, who utters such a specific threat to kill anyone should be prosecuted. There shouldn’t be any leeway on this because Elsayed wrote the threat on Facebook, or because such threats are common.

Incidentally, in pilot class did he express any interest in learning how to take off and to land, or just in learning how to fly the plane? Just wondering.

“A flight student from Egypt is facing deportation from the United States after being investigated by federal agents for posting on his Facebook page that he was willing to serve a life sentence for killing Donald Trump and that the world would thank him,” by Amy Taxin and Brian Rohan, Associated Press, March 3, 2016:

Ohoud Ali Mohamed Nasr El Sayed

Ohoud Ali Mohamed Nasr El Sayed

ORANGE, Calif. (AP) — A flight student from Egypt is facing deportation from the United States after being investigated by federal agents for posting on his Facebook page that he was willing to kill Donald Trump and the world would thank him.

While U.S. prosecutors have not charged 23-year-old Emadeldin Elsayed with a crime, immigration authorities arrested him last month at the Los Angeles-area flight school he attended and now are trying to deport him, attorney Hani Bushra said Wednesday.

Elsayed, who is being held in a jail in Orange, California, is devastated at seeing his dreams of becoming a pilot dashed over what Bushra acknowledged was a foolish social media post. An immigration court hearing will determine whether Elsayed will be deported.

“It seems like the government was not able to get a criminal charge to stick on him, so they used the immigration process to have him leave the country,” Bushra said. “The rhetoric is particularly high in this election, and I just feel he got caught up in the middle.”

Trump is leading the Republican presidential contenders and has used especially tough talk on immigration to win over many voters. He has vowed to build a wall along the entire Mexican border and has called for temporarily banning Muslims from entering the country.

U.S. Secret Service agents interviewed Elsayed in early February after he posted a photo of Trump on Facebook and wrote he was willing to serve a life sentence for killing the billionaire and the world would thank him, Bushra said. The agents returned eight days later and told him federal prosecutors had declined to charge him but said his visa to attend flight school had been revoked. He was arrested by immigration authorities.

Elsayed said he wrote the message because he was angered by Trump’s comments about Muslims. He said he immediately regretted it, and he never intended to harm anyone.

“It’s just a stupid post. You can find thousands of these every hour on Facebook and the media,” he told The Associated Press in a phone interview from jail. “I don’t know why would they think I am a threat to the national security of the United States just because of a stupid post.”

Elsayed said the agent who interviewed him mentioned last year’s shooting rampage by a Muslim husband-and-wife couple in San Bernardino and the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, which were carried out by Muslims who had sought flight training in the United States.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement said in a statement that Elsayed was arrested because he violated “the terms of his admission to the United States.” The agency did not provide further details.

The State Department and Secret Service declined to discuss the case. A Trump campaign spokeswoman also declined to comment.

Elsayed is from Cairo, but he said he spent much of his life in Saudi Arabia, where his father worked as a civil engineer. He came to the United States for the first time last September to attend Universal Air Academy with the hope of returning to Egypt and getting a job at an airline, he said….

RELATED ARTICLE: “Robert spencer will be DEAD before August 2016 it will be brutal”

VIDEO: Trump’s Great Wall of America

It is time to build “The Wall” as a symbol to the world that the United States of America is still run by free men and women!

eu pessimists by country chart

RELATED ARTICLES:

Swiss Vote on Expelling Foreigners for Petty Crimes

23 Years Ago the World Trade Center was Bombed Because of Illegal Alien Amnesty | Daniel Greenfield

The Next Syrian Refugee Crisis: Child Brides

European ship headed to Asia to help rescue Rohingya (why you should care)

GOP Baffled as Voters Rally to Popular Candidate

Ann Coulter writes:

Donald Trump’s latest bombshell, claiming the Bush administration lied about weapons of mass destruction to get us into the Iraq War, is just him doing wheelies on the way to the nomination. He’s apparently decided it would be fun to taunt the entire GOP by demonstrating that he can say anything and his voters won’t care.

I wish he’d stop showing off, the little scamp, but maybe the GOP establishment will finally get the message that voters have been waiting a really long time for a candidate who would put Americans first. Not donors, not plutocrats, not foreigners, and certainly not foreign plutocrats (i.e., Fox News).

Trump is the first presidential candidate in 50 years who might conceivably: (1) deport illegal aliens, (2) build a wall, (3) block Muslim immigration, (4) flout political correctness, (5) bring manufacturing home, and (6) end the GOP’s neurotic compulsion to start wars in some godforsaken part of the world.

That’s all that matters! Are you listening yet, RNC?

Read more.

people who hate trump cartoonIn my column “The Trump Insurgency” I noted:

If you Google the words “Trump” and “insurgency” you will get over 650,000 links to articles and commentary. I recently said to a friend that Donald Trump has gone from being a candidate for the Republican Party nomination for President to the leader of a movement.

Can this movement be called an insurgency?

The definition of an insurgency is a “rebellion against an existing government by a group not recognized as a belligerent.”

Is it Trump who created an insurgency or is Trump following the lead of a growing insurgency that was already taking place? I have written that Trump leads his followers by following their lead. The movement began during the Presidency of Bill Clinton and continues today. It is a struggle between the individualist and the collectivist.

Ayn Rand wrote a short nineteen page paper asking: What is the basic issue facing the world today? Rand, in her paper makes the case that, “The basic issue in the world today is between two principles: Individualism and Collectivism.” Rand defines these two principles as follows:

  • Individualism – Each man exists by his own right and for his own sake, not for the sake of the group.
  • Collectivism – Each man exists only by the permission of the group and for the sake of the group.

Donald Trump has tapped into the “Individualism Movement.” Trump’s life is the embodiment of the individualist. Trump has been rich, then poor and then rich again. He has done this not with government handouts, but rather despite the government.

It appears Ann and I agree. The GOPe is baffled, the people are not.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Donald Trump has America’s pulse: Rick Scott

Swiss Vote on Expelling Foreigners for Petty Crimes

Geert Wilders — The Next Prime Minister of the Netherlands?

Dutch Television interviewed Geert Wilders, leader of the  Freedom Party (PVV),  in the Hague Parliament on the 10th anniversary of its founding.  Wilders had been voted the top politician of the year in 2015. The PVV’s towering standings in Dutch political polls vaulted it over the ruling VVD-led  coalition of Prime Minister Mark Rutte. The irony is that Wilders left the VVD with predictions that he would never make junior minister. Ten years hence, both he and the PVV appears as serious contenders in the 2017 general parliamentary election.

The interview comes at a time when the events of the past year confirm Wilders’ and the PVV’s concerns over the flooding of Europe and the Netherlands with Muslim migrants from the hot spots in the Ummah seeking asylum. This has resulted in an enormous economic and social burden on the Netherlands.

Wilders noted the enormous progress the PVV has made in a decade in this press statement:

Ten years ago today, the Party for Freedom (PVV) was officially registered. We began in an attic room with a few people. Today, we are by far the largest party in the Dutch polls. We have more than one hundred representatives in the Senate, the House, the European Parliament, the provincial and the municipal councils. Together with all our collaborators, volunteers and voters, we are the PVV: the pride of the Netherlands.

People are sick and tired of all the lies. They want less Islam, to stop mass immigration, better care, direct democracy, and lower taxes.

No other party is loved so much by the people as our party. We are hated, however, by the elite and the enemies of freedom. I am on the death list of Al-Qaeda, Islamic State, the Taliban, and other terror organizations. I live under 24/7 police protection. But the PVV will not be intimidated.

We defend freedom of speech like no-one else. Islam will never be able to silence us! Who showed Muhammad cartoons on Dutch national television? The PVV!

The PVV is a party of patriots. We believe in our nation. We believe in national policies. That makes us unique. We are the voice of millions of Dutch who will otherwise not be heard. We are the only party that does not beat around the bush and dares to say it like it is.

A bigger PVV means more sovereignty, less Europe, being masters again of our own country and our own money. A larger PVV means a stronger Netherlands. A better Netherlands.

Evidence of what Wilders spoke of in the  Dutch Television interview  is reflected in Dutch protests at migrant reception centers and concerns over predatory behavior by Muslim men towards women in the EU, notably Germany, Sweden  and the Netherlands.  We wrote of his protest rally on January 22, 2016 in the Dutch community of Spijkenisse handing out cans of pepper spray. That was a send up on the Muslim male migrant misogyny in Cologne Germany and other German and European cities by what he calls: “Islamic testosterone bombs.” Wilders is concerned about assertion of Dutch national sovereignty and foundational Western Judeo-Christian values for current and future generations of Dutch children and grandchildren.

The broad ranging interview on February 20th, occurred  less than a month before a scheduled trial to begin on March 18, 2016 brought by Hague public prosecutors. The trial is occurring because of alleged violation of Dutch race hatred laws given Wilders comments at a PVV election campaign rally on March 12th and 19th, 2015. His remarks suggested  that the country needed : “fewer Moroccans,” a reference to  absorption problems and disproportionate representation in Dutch prisons for criminal convictions.

Watch the Vladtepesblog YouTube video  of the Dutch Television interview with Wilders with English translation subtitles:

The topics covered in the Dutch Television interview with Wilders focused on his leaving the VVD party, his clarion call against Islamization of the Netherlands and objections to political Islam. He expressed the need to preserve sovereign control over the country’s borders, the channeling of funding from absorption of Muslim migrants to Dutch senior pensions and health benefits. He also expressed  an  objection to the overarching control exerted by the EU bureaucracy in Brussels. That is an implied reference to Wilders’ espousal of a NExit plan launched in 2014 to leave the EU. A UK referendum on the issue, negotiated in Brussels with the European Commission by British PM David Cameron, is scheduled for a June 23, 2016 vote.  We note the recent call by Conservative London Mayor Boris Johnson for a BRExit.

The issue of whether a future  PVV-led Dutch government is possible came up in the Wilders interview. That reflects Wilders’ and the PVV’s significant standing in weekly political polls taken in the Netherlands. The line of questioning focused on whether Wilders’ could compromise to form a ruling coalition in the Hague parliament if given the nod by King Willem-Alexander in a 2017 general election. Wilders made it plain that the fewer parties in a PVV-led coalition the easier it would be to form a coalition and achieve the party’s objectives.  Asked, when the PVV would cease as a party given the alleged single issue of ending Mass Muslim immigration, Wilders indicated, perhaps it would take more than a generation. 35 years or so achieve the objective of preserving Dutch liberty and freedom for future generations of its citizens. Towards the end of the Dutch Television interview he noted, “Perhaps it is possible that next  year we will sit here again talking to the Prime Minister.”

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

Trump and the realities of WMD in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq

GOP Presidential front runner Donald Trump, following his South Carolina victory, was on Fox News Sunday, February 21, 2016 with Chris Wallace when the subject of the War in Iraq came up.  Trump contended it was a disaster.  He asserted that Jeb Bush finally admitted he never supported it and pointed towards the result, Iran taking over there.  Something he alleges he would stop if elected President.  Trump was on record in an interview with Howard Stern in September 2002 supporting the Iraq war, later questioning its cost. Wallace’s question was triggered by an exchange with Anderson Cooper of CNN during the South Carolina town hall on February 19th. His comment about WMD in Iraq caught a wave of attention. In the exchange with Cooper he said:

“There are a lot of people that think that – look, bottom line, there were no weapons of mass destruction, and there were none, and they knew there were none,” he added. “There were no weapons of mass destruction.”

Watch Trump’s interview with FoxNews’ Chris Wallace on this YouTube Video:

The Lisa Benson Show contested Trump’s assertion in posts on social media.  Host Benson pointed out the views of noted BioWarfare expert, Dr. Jill Bellamy in our first NER interview with her in December 2007 when we raised this issue. Here was our exchange with Bellamy:

GordonWe heard that some of the late Saddam Hussein’s Bio-warfare research and pathogens may have been transferred to Syria during Operation Enduring Freedom.  Is that accurate to your knowledge, and who facilitated the transfer? What types of bio-warfare agents and materials might have been transferred?

Bellamy: Yes. It is important to remember that the Iraqi programs were far more advanced at the time than what the Syrians had, and were developing.  The delivery of certain pathogens in a ‘weaponized’ form taught the Syrians new techniques they previously had not mastered. This is very problematic. I am less concerned about the types of pathogens or specific pathogens as these were available to Syria from other sources.  What Hussein’s transfer taught the Syrians was more sophisticated ways of weaponization and dispersal. I believe Russian special ops- their Spetsnaz teams – transported sections of the programs. Remember these are not MIRVed ICBM’s we are talking about – you don’t need to stockpile biological weapons. It is the quality of the pathogen and ‘weaponization’ or aerosolization, milling processes that count, not the quantity.  I don’t believe they moved some biological arsenals into the Baqaa Valley in Lebanon, perhaps sections of their chemical and nuclear weapons, but not the biological programs.  Those are much too sensitive to dump in the desert. They must be carefully maintained in a defense laboratory. If you take something like Botulism – one gram of crystalline Botulinium is estimated to kill about a million people if it were evenly dispersed – you don’t want to bury it out in the desert.

This writer and host Lisa Benson of the eponymous Radio Show on National Security later on Sunday, February 21, 2016 interviewed Ken Timmerman,  investigative journalist, President of  the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, author of New York Times best seller, Countdown to Crisis , Shadow Warriors and Dark Forces: The Truth About What Happened at Benghazi.  We brought up Trump’s assertions about Saddam Hussein’s WMD.

Timmerman said that Trump had erred by repeating “a massive media lie.” As evidence to support this he pointed out that evidence of WMD, especially chemical weapons had been uncovered in the opening stages of Operations Enduring Freedom.  Moreover, months before the March 2003 conflict with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq began; convoys of trucks were seen on satellite imagery crossing the frontier into Syria.  “We knew,” Timmerman said,” because none other than current Director of National Intelligence James Clapper,  formerly the director of the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, said in 2003 that he believed materials had been moved out of Iraq in the months before the war and cited satellite imagery.” Further in 2008, NBC reported secret U.S. operation transferred to Canada more than  550 metric tons of “yellow cake” uranium discovered in Iraq that was to be used for higher grade  enrichment .  Good thing, because  if not transferred it might have ended up in the hands of ISIS courtesy of those former Ba’athist officers.  There was further corroboration of Timmerman’s rebuttal in a 2012 Daily Beast article on this question:

Former Iraqi General Sada asserted that Saddam’s chemical stockpile was lifted, in his book “Saddam’s Secrets” and summarized by Investor’s Business Daily:

As Sada told the New York Sun, two Iraqi Airways Boeings were converted to cargo planes by removing the seats, and special Republican Guard units loaded the planes with chemical weapons materials.

There were 56 flights disguised as a relief effort after a 2002 Syrian dam collapse.

The IBD article also mentions then Israeli General, now Defense Minister Yaalon’s assertions, and those of John Shaw regarding Russian assistance in the form of former KGB General Primakov:

There were also truck convoys into Syria. Sada’s comments came more than a month after Israel’s top general during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Moshe Ya’alon, told the Sun that Saddam “transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria.”

According to Shaw, ex-Russian intelligence chief Yevgeni Primakov, a KGB general with long-standing ties to Saddam, went to Iraq in December 2002 and stayed until just before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.

Anticipating the invasion, his job was to supervise the removal of such weapons and erase as much evidence of Russian involvement as possible.

Timmerman also drew attention to Saddam Hussein era connections to ISIS’ use of chemical weapons in both Iraq and Syria against Kurdish Peshmerga and Syrian Kurdish YPG forces. Our colleague Ilana Freedman asserted that ISIS may have perpetrated the 2013 Sarin gas attack in a Damascus suburb killing over a thousand Syrian civilians.   Timmerman said that ISIS is a “blend of former Iraqi Ba’athist officers and Al Qaeda in Iraq Jihadists.” ‘Those former Ba’athist officers knew where those WMD caches were located in both Iraq and Syria”.

As to who may have perpetrated the media lie about there was no WMD in Iraq, Timmerman’s 2007 book, Shadow Warriors  (see pp. 285-286) suggests that it was the late Tyler Drumheller, former European division chief of the CIA’s Director of Operations, who went on 60 Minutes with the late Ed Bradley and lied about information obtained from a Saddam Hussein era, Foreign Minister, Naji Sabri.  Timmerman reported this exchange between Bradley and Drumheller:

Tyler Drumheller, a twenty-six year veteran of the Agency, has decided to do something CIA officials at his level almost never do: speak out,” intoned, Ed Bradley

And what did this high-level source tell them? Bradley wanted to know. “He told us that they had no active weapons of mass destruction program, “Drumheller said. Bush Lied, people died  [noted Timmerman].

Bradley wondered. “It directly contradicts what the president and his staff were telling us.”

No one cared about the facts, Drumheller said. “The policy was set. The War in Iraq was coming. And they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy.”

What might Trump say in response to GOP debate moderators on this assertion? Timmerman suggested that Trump might simply brush the controversy off by saying “I relied on what the media was saying at the time”.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of Donald Trump with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, South Carolina Town hall, February 18, 2016.

Open Letter to Pope Francis

Dear Pope Francis,

Fanciscus, Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of Apostles, Pontifex Maximus of the Church, Primate of Italy, Archbishop of the Dioceses of Rome, Sovereign of the Vatican State, Servant of the Servants of God.

You called out Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump for his views on U.S. immigration policy as “not Christian.”

Are you really wanting to take on this political battle?

Would you be referring to all the Muslim men between the age of 18 and 45 trying to get into our nation, as they have in Europe, to rape and slaughter Christians and Jews? Do you think we, the U.S. tax payers of the United States, should be a dumping ground for Muslim migrants who have no intention of assimilating into our Judeo/Christian culture?

Muslims who want to take our Churches land to build mosques. Muslims who think its permissible, according to the Qur’an, to marry 9-year old children and stone women to death? Are these the people you speak of while bashing Mr. Trump?

Hmm, perhaps maybe you are referring to the Mexican criminal gangs, like MS 13, and other miscreants that sneak across our borders to rape our women, sell drugs and kill and maim Americans. We pick up the tab for that too.

The sovereignty of the United States has been pillaged since Jimmy Carter opened up the flood gates with his Refugee Act of 1980. We have had enough.

The question to ask is how many Muslim refugees has the Vatican taken in? Lets hazard a guess at ZERO.

You also stated on your flight home from your visit to Mexico:

“A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.”

The Vatican is a walled in city. Its the most protected city in Italy. You are inside a fortress, a compound. No bridges. No Muslim or South American refugees. I have been there. I met with Pope John Paul II in Saint Peters Basilica in 1990 right before Desert Storm started.

So before you start criticizing others, first take the plank out of your own eye so you can see clearly to remove the speck of dust from ours. Matthew 7:3-5 (NIV):

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

vatican wall

Aerial view of the wall surrounding the Vatican (white line).

Bryan Fischer in his article “Trump, the Pope, and the wall” notes:

The Pope created a firestorm of controversy by going to our southern border and making the building of a border wall the litmus test of Christian faith. “A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not the gospel.”

Setting aside the plain truth that the litmus test of Christian faith is what a man does with Christ, not what he thinks about a wall, the Pope has hoisted himself on his own petard here. The Vatican is surrounded by the mother of all walls, and has the stingiest citizenship and immigration policy of any sovereign state in the world.

The low-information media and the Vatican itself have scrambled to the Pope’s defense. The Vatican reminds us that the Pope did not build the Vatican wall. True. But he’s making no effort to take it down either.

Read more…

Mr. Trump does not take any false criticism lying down. Not from you Holy Father, not from the Democrats, not from the “establishment” Republicans, the Chinese, the Russians or the North Koreans. NO ONE!

So, if you wish to debate on the issue of building walls perhaps you should first check the Holy Bible. Do  you recall Zechariah 2:5 which says:

And I myself will be a wall of fire around it,’ declares the LORD, ‘and I will be its glory within’

We don’t need any distractions during this critical election year.

Now Mr. Trump was prompted by your little outburst to respond in kind. He said you sir are “disgraceful” for questioning his faith. I and many others agree.

You want to stick your nose into the sovereignty of the United States be careful. We will challenge you. We are done with the political correctness. It is time to confront the real evils in the world, those who slaughter Christians and Jews. This is our nation and Mr. Trump is going to protect our borders, our culture, our Judeo/Christian heritage and our language to paraphrase radio talk show host Mr. Michael Savage.

Remove your blindfold and understand that you should spend more time protecting your flock against Islam, Communists and atheists.

I beseech you, Pope Francis take down your walls.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Vatican walls built by Pope, designed to repel Muslims

Trump, the Pope, and the wall

U.S. Sin Cities And Saintly Sanctuaries

Pope SLAMS Trump. Trump BLASTS Pope. (Sigh) Trump Is Right.

Why a Rock-Ribbed Conservative Like Me Supports Donald Trump 100%

I’m watching the fierce South Carolina primary contest among the six remaining candidates for POTUS and a few things strike me as astounding.

The first is that all the seasoned politicians on stage––Governors Bush and Kasich, Senators Cruz and Rubio––have been relegated to straggler status by the non-politician in the race, billionaire businessman Donald Trump. (Dr. Ben Carson, the other non-politician, is hanging in there but not lighting any fires).

Second is that only Mr. Trump is raising the biggest issues facing our country, among them:

  • Closing our borders, which are being flooded with un-vetted illegal aliens who number, by now, into the millions
  • Bringing both corporations and jobs back to America
  • Fixing our Mt. Kilimanjaro of debt and Mt. Everest of unemployment
  • Strengthening our military

Third is that he is challenging our longtime and ridiculous policy of military intervention for the purpose of nation-building in exchange for…nothing! Why haven’t we taken our enemy’s oil or exacted other prices for the blood we’ve spilled and the honor we’ve spent?

Fourth is that he is saying out loud what most Americans have been thinking and feeling for almost eight years, specifically that as a result of our thunderously ineffective “leadership,” we have utterly failed to destroy ISIS and the other Islamic terrorists who spend every waking hour figuring out how to obliterate America, which they call “the great Satan,” and our staunchest ally, Israel, “the little Satan.”

ISIS has about 50,000 adherents, maybe even 75,000. In one week, the American military could obliterate this murderous sect from the face of the earth. But Barack Obama seems to have a peculiar aversion to fighting the enemies of America, hence the rise of this homicidal cult and the escalating threat it poses to our country.

And fifth is the degree to which Mr. Trump is already negotiating with both domestic and foreign leaders. He is letting American politicians know that deals can and will be made but that all of them must benefit America! And he is telling the entire world that the vacation that overseas leaders have had from true American leadership will be over the very second he enters the Oval Office.

All the while, Mr. Trump’s competitors and critics carp and whine about his “bluster,” “naiveté,” and “crudeness.” Wasn’t President Teddy Roosevelt accused of bluster? Wasn’t President Ronald Reagan accused of being naive? Wasn’t the liberals’ hero LBJ accused of crudeness? These are trifling criticisms, as are the accusations that Mr. Trump is “not a true conservative” and that in the past he was, gasp, a liberal. Well, we’ve given the self-described conservatives the entire House and Senate and they’ve failed us, so it’s time to give a born-again conservative a chance!

Once in office, I have full confidence, Mr. Trump would glassify ISIS into oblivion, take the oil they’ve stolen and give it to the families who have been destroyed by these psychotics. He would overturn and replace Obamacare in record time, build an impenetrable wall in record time to keep out the swarms of illegals who, again, Mr. Obama seems fatally attracted to. He would get rid of a half-dozen or more bloated government departments, reduce the tax code to less than 25 pages, and overturn all the Executive Orders Mr. Obama has inflicted on the nation in his eagerness to bypass the U.S. Congress and spit on the U.S. Constitution. Most important, Mr. Trump would immediately build up our military and promptly reverse the preposterous, Obama-dictated Rules of Engagement (i.e., don’t shoot unless the other guy shoots first).

How do I know this? Because I come from a business background where people actually get things done! Where executive decisions are made decisively, political correctness is considered the silly indulgence of people with too much time on their hands, accountability is the order of the day, and outcomes are regularly measured to gauge success––all of which is the polar opposite of how our government works, which is why both Mr. Trump and the American people hold our government and its current leadership in such contempt.

Those who point to Mr. Trump’s business failures purposely fail to mention the personal courage and financial risks it takes to pursue new, bold, entrepreneurial ventures, or the resilience it takes to weather failure, to rebound, and to go on to even greater heights. They also forget that a man who heads an incredibly successful organization with over 20,000 employees, who surrounds himself with talented experts, and who does business in dozens of countries (including Mexico, Canada, Mumbai, Philippines, Dubai, Turkey, Panama, et al) knows better than any of his rivals––in fact, better than any politician––how to run a complex bureaucracy, and a tight ship!

The political criticisms Mr. Trump has been receiving from the establishment wonks at National Review, Rupert-Murdoch’s puppets at Fox News, the hysterical and frenzied Republican National Committee, and leftists all over the place, are from people who operate in the rarefied and self-congratulatory realms of academia, the media, and of course Washington, D.C.–– including the politicians who go out for drinks every night with the lobbyists they depend on to support their reelection campaigns and pay them enough to live quite richly in retirement. In common parlance, they’re known as whores!

That same American public, through their earnest efforts, managed to elect a Republican-controlled Senate and House in the 2014 midterms, only to realize that the people they elected have caved in to every Marxist initiative of the Saul-Alinsky-driven regime in power. We’ll never know to what degree threats, intimidation, and bribes played in this craven capitulation, but Americans finally understand they’ve been betrayed––hence the overwhelming support for a candidate who is absolutely impervious to bribes, threats, and intimidation.

TRAITS

There are certain qualities I’m looking for in the next president of the United States, which I can sum up in the acronym TRAITS.

Track Record

I want the next POTUS to have an impressive track record of accomplishment, not simply a laundry list of rosy promises. Now that Mr. Trump has effectively quashed the rest of the competition and is ahead by double digits in the South Carolina primary contest to be held on Saturday, February 20th, he may just run the table. Unlike everyone else in the race, he has run a gigantic corporation with immense success, a business that has required him to deal with titanic problems.

As Steve Cuozzo has written in the New York Post, long before The Donald considered running for president, he had already helped save New York City by being “New York’s most important and bravest real-estate developer.”

And Mr. Trump’s daughter Ivanka remarked recently to Breitbart, “From day one, my father set the agenda for what the whole party is talking about.”

That is called Leadership!

I trust that Mr. Trump will come into office on Day One with the world’s biggest broom!

Appearance

I remember watching the JFK-Nixon debates in the presidential contest of 1960. It was the first presidential debate of the fledgling TV era and it had a profound effect on the entire country.

Previous televised hearings about organized crime were held by Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN) in 1950 (the year my family actually bought our first TV), and about the infiltration of Communists into our government and military (sound familiar?) held by Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-WI) in 1954.

JFK was a dashing and articulate Harvard graduate, and Nixon a sort of awkward, looking-for-the-right-word graduate of Whittier College, whose wife Pat was slim, blond and beautiful, as were his two young daughters. But who on earth could compete with Jackie, the breathy, willowy, gorgeous 30-year-old who had graduated from the tony Miss Porter’s School, Vassar College, and the Sorbonne, and had two adorable babies?

All the glamour of the Kennedys was featured in print by besotted newspaper editors across the country, and blared on TV by leftist anchors at the three networks that existed at the time: CBS, NBC, ABC. All of them, of course objectively, touted the always-intriguing ingredients of youth, glamour, sexiness, romance, scandal, and wealth of the “Camelot” couple. And guess who won the presidency?

However, it turned out that Kennedy, who had been in the Senate for seven years––longer than Obama, Cruz, or Rubio––was not as equipped as his rival Nixon would have been to deal with the Bay of Pigs invasion in April, 1961, which strengthened the position of the Communist Fidel Castro’s leadership and his relationship with USSR, and the disastrous Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, which was the closest the Cold War between the U.S. and Russia came to escalating into a full-scale nuclear war.

In that era, Kennedy’s appearance proved to be just that, appearance.

Appearances still matter and certainly Mr. Trump and his family are amazingly glamorous, appealing, photogenic and wealthy. And his worldly business experience supersedes and eclipses that of his rivals by light years. Also, the billionaire mogul looks presidential! He’s big, like America. He’s bold, like our Founders. And he’s masculine, not one of the sissified, metro-sexual men of today who have been cowed into tiptoeing through the tulips of political correctness, too afraid to say what they think for fear of offending the perpetually aggrieved, oh-so-sensitive, hothouse-flower special-interest groups among us.

Who can forget when right out of the gate, Mr. Trump said he would close the borders and ship all the illegal aliens back to where they came from, including anchor babies? When a self-important reporter told him that the “anchor baby” term was offensive, Mr. Trump said, “That’s what I say, anchor babies.” Slam dunk.

That is called Leadership!

Ideas

Barack Obama came into office intent on turning our country into his childlike utopian version of social-justice paradise, the better to cut down to size what he and his far-left cronies believe is the big, bad colonialist power known as the United States of America.

Using the Cloward-Piven strategy, outlined in 1966, to bankrupt the country through gargantuan expenditures, Obama increased welfare costs (through the importation of millions of illegal aliens), increased our debt to $19-going-on-$20-trillion, and financed a great number of phony-baloney schemes like Solyndra, which received a $536 million U.S. Energy Department loan guarantee in 2009 and then went broke in 2011. Ever wonder into whose now-bulging pockets all those millions went?

In contrast, Mr. Trump came on the scene and immediately said he would stop the tsunami of illegal aliens crossing our border by building a fence that Mexico would pay for! He then cited the Muslim jihadists and their carnage in San Bernardino and said he would immediately suspend all Muslims coming into this country until the U.S. Congress figured out what was going on.

That is called Leadership!

True Patriot

A Gallup poll of February 7th indicates quite persuasively that America is overwhelmingly conservative. The poll, wrote Bruce Walker in the American Thinker, reported that the number of states “in which conservatives outnumber liberals has been as low as 47 states and as high as 50 states. This ought to be a very big story, but Gallup, like nearly every other polling organization, tilts left ideologically.”

That’s exactly what people and pundits say about Mr. Trump, that he tilts left ideologically. So how can a rock-ribbed conservative like me possibly support him?

Simple! I gave birth to my first child when I was 18. Right there and then, practically when I was still lying on the delivery room table, I knew what my job was. It was not to give my beautiful little boy the most nutritious meals or the best education or a fancy home or the shiniest tricycle. It was to keep him safe! Without safety, everything else is moot. In fact, more than moot, non-existent! If you’re not safe, nothing else matters.

And here comes Mr. Trump, a non-politician, who gets it, who deeply understands that if we don’t close our borders and continue to let un-vetted aliens into our country, we are de facto not safe!

And how is the safety of our country secured? Only through the overwhelming strength of our military and local and national law enforcement agencies, which the current occupant of the Oval Office has systematically tried to decimate, right up to this month, when he issued an order––in keeping with his fetish about the hoax of global warming––that no military action can be taken without first assuring that no harm comes to the environment. Hard to believe, but true.

To compound the stupidity of this policy, consider that former CIA director, Michael Morrell recently admitted that concerns about contaminating the environment have prevented the White House from bombing oil wells that finance the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which Barack Obama calls ISIL, the “L” standing for Levant, an area that includes Israel. Translated: Obama––as we know by now–– considers Israel the enemy!

Can you imagine a President Trump not bombing our enemies because of a few trees? As my fellow New Yorkers would say, gimme a break!

STRENGTH

Before he formally announced his candidacy in June 2015, Mr. Trump attended the Iowa Freedom Summit the previous January, where he received a standing ovation when he said that he could “make this country great again.”

He said he believed that “any credible American foreign policy doctrine should be defined by at least seven core principles”:

  1. American interests come first. Always. No apologies.
  2. Maximum firepower and military preparedness.
  3. Only go to war to win.
  4. Stay loyal to your friends and suspicious of your enemies.
  5. Keep the technological sword razor sharp.
  6. See the unseen. Prepare for threats before they materialize.
  7. Respect and support our present and past warriors.

That is strength…that is Leadership!

Don Fredrick, the creator of The Complete Obama Timeline, says that “the establishment is frightened to death that Trump will win…you can be certain that if an establishment candidate wins in November 2016, America loses.”

Former Navy SEAL and writer Jim O’Neill says that “Trump is a true-blue patriot…” He cites Harlem Pastor James Manning who says that Trump speaks truth to power.  Trump “knows full well that Big Business, Big Media, Big Banking, and Big Government are all in bed together,” O’Neill adds, “and like no other major political figure that I can recall from my lifetime, he calls them on it. His love for the United States is obvious, deep-seated, and true.”

As for me, I’m as conservative as it gets, but Conservatives have failed me and our country. I’m counting on Mr. Trump to fix what’s been broken, to keep our country safe and employed and on the road back to a spectacular recovery!

Trump: Yes, I could look Syrian kids in the face and say they can’t come here!

A bearded man at a town-hall meeting in NH asked Donald Trump if he could look Syrian kids in the face and tell them they can’t come to America. Trump said, yes, he absolutely could do that.

Trump then went on to say, we don’t know who they are.  He said that the Gulf States should help build safe zones in Syria where refugees could be cared for until the conflict is over.  He also said that most of them want to go home anyway.  All of that is true.

He also predicted a coming revolution in Germany and said, “Wait until you see what they do to Merkel!”

The bearded man was obviously a plant.  He said he came from Greenwich, CT and that Greenwich was going to get Syrian refugees. Trump quipped that he must be rich to live in Greenwich.

Can you identify the bearded man?  We know that one of the driving forces behind more resettlement of Muslims to Connecticut is CAIR Connecticut (being helped by Senator Richard Blumenthal).

Who is the bearded man? Can you help identify him?

Watch the clip here (hat tip Walid Shoebat):

By the way, of the 841 Syrians admitted to the U.S. in FY 2016, 833 are Muslims.  We are not saving Syrian Christians.

Update!  Thanks to readers who found that the bearded man is Darren Ornitz who lives in Brooklyn, NY. He may have earlier lived in Greenwich, CT.  He is a Reuters freelance photographer and is “leaning toward” supporting Bernie Sanders.  Once you know his name the rest falls into place. Here is one report on him.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Pittsburgh: Jewish agency and Islamic Center working together to bring more Syrians to the city

Angry Turkish Prez: We will open our gates and let them go through to Europe

Greenwich, CT not getting refugees anytime soon (so they think!)

DNI Clapper on Hill today: ISIS will attack US;refugee flow infiltrated

Lutheran refugee contractor convinces SD legislator to withdraw bill

Two-Thirds of Americans Believe Money Buys Elections by Daniel Bier

Everybody knows that money buys elections. That’s what opponents of theCitizens United decision have been ominously warning us for six years, and their message resonates. A CNN poll found that 67 percent of Americans think that “elections are generally for sale to the candidate who can raise the most money.”

The trouble is that there is very little evidence for this. Even though the candidate with the most money usually wins, the general rule is that moneychases winners rather than creates winners. People give to candidates they think are likely to win, and incumbents (who almost always win) and candidates in safe districts still raise money, even if they’re not challenged. On the flip side, donors and parties don’t waste support on long-shot races.

More importantly, money never guarantees any election. For instance, billionaire Meg Whitman spent $144 million of her own money on the California governor’s race; Jerry Brown spent just $36 million but crushed Whitman, 53 percent to 40 percent.

Mitt Romney, the GOP, and their PACs outspent Barack Obama and friends by over $120 million, and we know what came of that. Anthony Brown (D) outspent Larry Hogan (R) almost five to one in the 2014 Maryland governor’s race and lost, in a state that is two to one Democrat.

We can likely add Jeb Bush’s candidacy to this list. The Jeb! campaign and pro-Jeb groups have collectively raised $155 million. Only Hillary Clinton has raised more. According to the New York Times, he’s dominating “the money race” among Republicans.

But in the actual race, he got a dismal sixth place in Iowa, with 2.8 percent of the vote. Polls put Jeb fifth in New Hampshire and fifth nationally. Currently, Betfair places his odds of winning the nomination at 5.2 percent.

In fact, the whole Republican race shows that money can’t simply buy votes. Scott Walker raised $34 million in three months, spent all of it — and then dropped out, five months before Iowa. Meanwhile, Donald Trump has dominated news coverage and polls for months with only $19 million.

When you plot money vs. poll numbers, what jumps out is how little correlation there is:

… And money vs. Iowa caucus votes:

… And money vs. odds of winning the nomination:

Jeb and Jeb-PACs have spent $89.1 million so far and received 5,238 votes — over $17,000 per vote received. Trump has spent just $300 per vote.

This is not to say that money doesn’t matter — you can’t run a campaign without it, and campaign finance laws are designed to make it difficult for upstart challengers to become competitive. But after a certain amount (about $500,000 for a typical congressional race), there are rapidly diminishing returns, and dumping more money on a failing campaign will not save it.

There’s a lot of baseless fears about free speech, but the idea that the people with the most expensive microphone will always get their way is one of the easiest to disprove. More speech, more discussion, and more competition in the field of ideas is not what’s wrong with American politics — but they might be part of the solution to it.

Daniel Bier

Daniel Bier

Daniel Bier is the editor of Anything Peaceful. He writes on issues relating to science, civil liberties, and economic freedom.

Trump And The Burning Of The Boats by Gary Berntsen, former CIA Operations Officer

The current presidential campaign in the U.S. reminds us that politics is civilized conflict, but conflict none the less.

In 1518 The Conquistador Hernan Cortes, not a man known to seek votes, departed Cuba with six ships and 600 men. He landed at Vera Cruz, Mexico, refused orders to return to Cuba and burned his ships just prior to marching inland toward a bloody confrontation and victory over an Aztec civilization of several hundred thousand. En route to his battle with the Aztecs, Cortes defeated smaller vassal states, built a coalition, then marched on the Aztecs. This act of risk and defiance changed the course of history. The burning of his ships brought many of his men to tears. The act defined the reality that there would be no turning back. It would be victory or death.

Fast forward to the 2016 presidential campaign and political observers understand that a different type of coalition building is going on. On the right and in the center the electorate is horrified by a president that campaigned on “Hope and Change” but has wrought enmity domestically and chaos on the international stage. Despite a national news media establishment heavily vested in President Barack Obama, the internet, talk radio and other outlets have provided channels of news independent of the President’s media team. Enter billionaire builder, entrepreneur and media sensation Donald Trump into the political arena. Trump, having honed his branding skills in the market place and media skills on a lengthy and successful reality show “The Apprentice,” has demonstrated mastery in terms of communication with the masses. Trump has been a dominant factor in the Republican Presidential primary race.

A fair person must admit, the Republicans have a strong cadre of seasoned candidates. A number of the candidates have had long distinguished careers in public service. However, none of these candidates have been able to match Donald Trump’s ability to communicate and connect with the masses. I have spoken with a large number of blue-collar Democrats who have told me that they are voting for Trump! Again and again, their explanation, “he says what I am thinking.”

I am 58 years of age, served in the Air Force, the CIA, participated in campaigns, and even ran for the U.S. Senate. I have never seen anything like this. Trump is a non-traditional candidate with an uncanny ability to reach a significant portion of the population on both sides of the political spectrum.    

Read more.

gary berntsenABOUT GARY BERNTSEN

Gary Berntsen is a retired Senior CIA Operations Officer and Chief of Station.  Mr. Berntsen is the President of The Berntsen Group and bestselling Author of Jawbreaker, The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda where he recounts his leadership role in the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan in response to the 11 September 2001 attacks.  Mr. Berntsen is the recipient of CIA’s Distinguished Intelligence Medal and Intelligence Star.

Mr. Berntsen regularly appears as a counterterrorism and national security guest commentator on Fox News, CNN, CNBC and Newsmax.

Obama Addresses Terror Linked Baltimore Mosque which Practices ‘Gender Apartheid’

President  Obama went to Baltimore for a friendly gathering at the Islamic Center of Baltimore Mosque in Catonsville, Maryland. He was there  to convey a message that Muslims are as American as apple pie. Problem is that he chose a Mosque deep into political Islam, affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood affiliate, the Islamic Society of North America , supporting suicide bombers  and professing  hate  for U.S. ally Israel.  All despite the FBI file sent to the White House confirming this information. No matter. It was a photo op moment to show support for embattled American Muslims  given statements from Republican  hopeful, Donald Trump that he would stop immigration of Muslims.

The scene was replete with introduction by a hijab swathed college student on track for a medical career. The President in his remarks pointed out another  hijab wearing  fencing marvel that may be carrying the U.S. flag at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janiero this summer. The President spoke of the kind comments of  founding Fathers John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson who purportedly included Mohammedans in the ambit of freedom of worship in America guaranteed by our First Amendment.

Problem is that he forgot to mention the real reason Thomas Jefferson had a copy of a Qur’an in his library at Monticello. A Qur’an, upon which , the first elected U.S. Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) swore a private oath of office on January 4, 2007. I know I passed by his office with a clutch of TV cameramen recording this for posterity. Ellison was at the ISB gathering,  as was the second elected Muslim Congressmen, Rep. Andre Carson (D-IN).  Doubtless, as this was the President’s alleged first visit to an American Mosque, there may have been notables at the Mosque in Catonsville from CAIR and ISNA.  But not too worry this was kumbaya day at the ISB.

Watch the You Tube video of the President’s expansive, yet, cautionary message of support for American Muslims:

American Muslims  that he pointed out  in his remarks  assembled Ford automobiles in Michigan, built the first  continuous Mosque in  Cedar Rapids,, Iowa, served  honorably in the US military and some were buried in the hallowed ground of Arlington National Cemetery. Yes, there were those small pockets of extremists in the Muslim Ummah like ISIS or ISIL as he likes to call it with its self-declared Caliphate in Syria and Iraq. Barbarically beheading Christians, enslaving minority Yazidi women and children, destroying ancient cultures in the name of Allah, their God.  Then there are the extremist Taliban in both Afghanistan and Pakistan killing women, homosexuals and Christian infidels. Oh, we forgot the Mahdist Shia in Tehran who the President makes deals with to prevent a nuclear war, he thinks. Last year, they only executed 1,000 for crimes of gender, homosexuality and heterodox beliefs.

As to the reason why Jefferson had a Qur’an in his library, just recall their encounter in London with the Tripolitanian Ambassador in their roles as US Commissioners trying to understand why the Bey of Tripoli enslaved American sailors he seized along with their ships in the Mediterranean. Note this  Notable and Quotable in the Wall Street Journal:

From a March 28, 1786, letter written by John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, who were American diplomats at the time, to U.S. Secretary of Foreign Affairs John Jay reporting on their conversation in London with the ambassador from Tripoli regarding piracy by the Barbary States:

We took the liberty to make some enquiries concerning the ground of their pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation.

The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the laws of their Prophet; that it was written in their Koran; that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners; that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners; and that every Mussulman [Muslim] who was slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.

Clearly, Adams and Jefferson knew something that President Obama doesn’t choose to admit in public.  That Islam is not the religion of peace and tolerance that its religious theocrats make it out to be.  Subsequently, as the Third President of the US, Jefferson would conduct a covert war that freed American hostages with a few Marines at the fabled ‘walls of Tripoli’ from the likes of the Sharia-mad Bey.

Leo Hohmann at WND, cited an Investigative Project Report by Steve Emerson giving details on why the FBI thought the ISB was a poor choice for the President for this encounter, “Obama.” Hohman cites Emerson  saying:

IPT founder and executive director  Steve Emerson told WND his organization was told by FBI sources that Obama was presented the evidence against the Islamic Society of Baltimore.

According to Emerson’s investigation, federal law enforcement officials told him they were asked about whether the Baltimore mosque had engaged in radical politics or was connected in any way to terrorism in the past.

“They prepared memos for the president’s aides that specifically laid out the sordid history and nexus to terrorism of the Islamic Society of Baltimore,” Emerson told WND.

So what did the president do?

“As he has done so many times in the past, he decided to ignore this evidence and still continue his plans to confer legitimacy on a mosque that has a history of having officials connected to Islamic terrorism and to this day still has officials making outrageously pro-terrorist statements that would seem to conflict with the president’s policies,” Emerson said.

The mosque is affiliated with the Islamic Society of North America or ISNA, which has its own sordid history.

ISNA was started by members of the international Muslim Brotherhood in the 1980s. The Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928, is banned in many countries as an extremist organization.

“One can only conclude that the selection of this mosque by the president was made as part of his consistent policy to not even utter the term ‘radical Islam’ and the simultaneous policy of inviting only radical Islamist groups and leaders to the White House that FBI documents clearly show were derived from the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas,” Emerson told WND.

But there was another problem with the  choice of the ISB, the occurrence of gender apartheid prior to this auspicious occasion.

The media was  atwitter about the President’s  presentation at the Islamic Society of Baltimore. All of those media pundits should read this New York Times op ed by a leader of the Muslim Reform Movement (MRM), Asra Nomani and Ify Okoye, a disaffected member of the Mosque, about the gender apartheid practiced at the ISB, “Obama’s mosque visit demonstrates tacit acceptance of a form of gender apartheid.”

We have interviewed colleagues of Asra Nomani, Dr. M. Zhudi Jasser and Canadian leader of MRM, Raheel Raza who recently returned from a successful trip to Israel on The Lisa Benson Show. We hope to bring back Raza and introduce Ms. Nomani to discuss what the MRM is advocating and doing. Note what Nomani and Okoye wrote:

At the Islamic Society of Baltimore this past Sunday, the air was filled with the scent of Sherwin-Williams paint that workers were rolling onto the walls of the run-down balcony section where women and girls are usually segregated, unable to see the imam unless they peek over the balcony’s edge. A sign outside the door to the balcony said, “STOP Please. No Shoes. No Strollers. No Diaper Change. Beyond this point.”

Asra slipped into the mosque’s main hall to join the “halaqa,” or study circle. There, the study circle leader, teaching a half dozen men gathered around him, talked about the virtues of the first Muslim community in Medina, saying that a society isn’t “civilized” just because it’s technological.

Then, a young man, wearing a T-shirt emblazoned “Who Do You Love?” piped up, “So that means the West isn’t civilized.”

“That’s right,” the study circle leader said.

Another man railed against the West and its “atheists.”

Asra took a deep breath, listening to the sound of the crew white-washing the mosque for the president’s visit. “That’s a very unfair conclusion,” she said. “You are sitting in the West and railing against the West as not being civilized? It is not fair to make the assumption that the West ‘isn’t civilized.’”

The men tried to backtrack. They spoke with more nuance, before the study leader digressed again into the idea that those who aren’t Muslim act out of “self-interest,” while Muslims act out of an “order from God to do righteousness,” a point that Asra also politely refuted as motivated by “self-interest” and as an unfair representation of the many good people who aren’t Muslim.

As women and girls, we should be supported by policies that allow us to be part of such conversations. The president can support this urgent cause by speaking out against gender segregation in American mosques. In the spirit of the civil rights moment when whites stood with blacks, we hope men and women will refuse the privilege that “interfaith” events give them, and, in act of solidarity, stand outside with us on Johnnycake Road and the other pathways leading to the mosques in our world, advocating for equal rights for all.

So,  the President did what he wanted to do  with the ISB visit; show solidarity with the plight of American Muslims, sidelined by GOP hopeful Donald Trump.  He chose to avoid the advice of the FBI busily tracking down and arresting ISIS inspired lone wolves out to kill Americans on the streets here in the US that he Mosque leaders consorted with terrorist networks. That would upset  the President’s  alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood seeking their active participation in countering violent extremism and conducted a less than strenuous war against the Islamic State inspiring  tens of thousands from across the Ummah to join and practice the pure Islam in the self declared Caliphate.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of President Obama at the Islamic Center of Baltimore in Catonsville, Maryland, February 3, 2016 – Source: Reuters.

GOP Debate: Trump Was the Winner

Perhaps it was a first: a man winning a debate by not showing up. That’s my take, anyway, that Donald Trump prevailed at Thursday night’s GOP debate. Although, something curious did happen after the event that gives me pause for thought, but more on that later.

The debate served to draw a significant and sharp contrast on today’s top (or almost so) issue, immigration — between Trump and the rest of the field. When the Fox News moderators showed Marco Rubio on video repeatedly saying he wouldn’t support amnesty, even by another name, and then Megyn Kelly pointed out that he went on to be part of scamnesty group the Gang of Eight, it was a stake-through-the-heart moment. Even more amusingly, Jeb Bush chimed in and tag-teamed with Kelly; he emphasized that not only did Machiavellian Marco support the amnesty, but repeated at least twice that Rubio asked him to support it as well. Bush said that he did so and that what Rubio did was the right thing, but then castigated the Florida senator for cowardly retreating from his position. So there you had one guy trying to wriggle out of supporting stupidly disastrous policy being cornered by another guy who was proud of his stupidity. I guess it’s what happens when a wholly resistible force meets a thoroughly movable object. But three things occur to me:

  1. I now completely believe the reports about large non-indigenous snakes invading Florida.
  2. Oranges aren’t the only mandarins in the state.
  3. Trump should send Bush a check (if I didn’t know better, I’d think Bush signed on with the Trump campaign).

Video of Senator Ted Cruz supposedly supporting the Gang of Eight bill also was played, and, even though Cruz said he was manipulating the Democrats at the time, I suspect it didn’t help him with the voters. Cruz explained his position better in an interview with Kelly after the debate than he did during it, pointing out that he was exposing liberal hypocrisy. To wit: the Democrats claimed they just wanted to “bring people [illegals] out of the shadows,” so Cruz introduced an amendment that would remove the promise of citizenship from the bill but allow for “legalization.” The idea was, “Okay, if emigration from Shadowville is all you want, legalization will do it.” But the Democrats balked, said Cruz, saying they’d kill the bill if it had such an amendment. This put the lie to their claims, proving (again) that what they’re interested in is importing undocumented Democrats, as 70 to 90 percent of the illegals will vote Democrat upon being naturalized.

Nonetheless, understanding that kind of political maneuvering takes attentiveness and sophistication, so it’s hard to imagine the video of Cruz helping his cause.

Most striking, though, was the complete dislocation from reality exhibited by all the candidates on terrorism. The night was heavy with talk about building up the military and fighting Da’esh (ISIS), and securing our open back door to Mexico was mentioned. And rightly so. Yet not one candidate would second Trump’s call to suspend Muslim immigration, and some, such as Bush, criticized the idea. Of course, the phenomenon is understandable. Westerners are awash in immigrationism, multiculturalism, religious-equivalence doctrine and stupidity (but I repeat myself), and a fault common to man is that a building has to fall on him before he’s able to break free from established thinking patterns. But here’s the reality:

We suffer from a collective delusion.

FACT: Terrorism today is a Muslim phenomenon, meaning, virtually all the terrorists now bedeviling the West are Islamic jihadists. And it’s just a numbers game: if over time we admit one million Muslims and just one-tenth of one percent are terrorist-minded or will become so, that’s 1000 dangerous jihadists.

My figure is likely conservative. But the point is that if this were the 1970s, when the Weathermen were planting bombs, and we knew that a certain class of prospective immigrants shared their ideology, would we admit them? Look, here’s the reality:

We’re under no obligation to accept any class of immigrants — or any immigrants at all. Where is it written that the U.S. must be the flophouse, soup kitchen and doormat for the world? If immigration doesn’t benefit the host country, guess what?

It doesn’t happen.

Period. Full stop. We don’t have to explain it. We don’t have to apologize for it. We don’t have to feel bad about it. And if it’s questioned, our only response should be, “So when did you become a traitor?”

The issue of Muslim immigration came up when the debate moderators played a video from the YouTube audience, from a “Muslim” young lady who lamented the rise in anti-Islamic feeling in America. I have her descriptive in quotation marks because she was quite Western, exhibiting a sartorial splendor that would inspire a beating by Da’esh and speaking perfect English. She said that the anti-Islamic sentiment would only encourage Muslims to become terrorists, and Bush chimed in and agreed.

This is lunacy. It’s this inane, projection-inspired idea that unless we’re truly, amazingly, unbelievably nice — bend over backwards and prove to the world what lovable, harmless little fuzz balls we are — well, these jihadists are really, really gonna’ get mean.

The truth is quite the opposite. Bush et al. should watch this interview with Dr. Nicolai Sennels on the “psychology of Islam and Muslims.” Dr. Sennels is a Danish psychologist who for years worked in prison with Muslim youth. Among other things, he points out that Islamic culture is radically different from what you’re used to: Muslims view displays of anger and violence as synonymous with manliness, and they respect shows of force.

And if you react to aggression with passivity and kindness, they view it as weakness and hold you in contempt. They not only will think you can be vanquished — but that you deserve to be.

One might also want to ponder this German study involving 45,000 young people; it found that while increasing religiosity among Christian youths made them less violent, increasing religiosity among Muslim youths actually made them more violent.

Wake up, you people in the Bushes; it’s later than you think.

Now we come to the curious post-debate happening. Pollster Frank Luntz conducted a focus group, and one question concerned their feelings on Rubio; you know, the guy not only proven via video to be completely dishonest, but who supported a culture-rending scamnesty bill. When Luntz asked how many in the group had planned on voting for Machiavellian Marco coming into the debate, about three people raised their hands. And after the debate?

Forty to fifty percent of those present did.

Beam me up, Scotty. It just renews my faith in my lack of faith in the average voter. But the explanation probably lies with a study some years back showing that if a person is articulate and eloquent, he’ll sway people regardless of what he actually says. It’s style over substance, and the slick-talking, eye-candy Florida python has the former in abundance.

Having said this, my guess is that Rubio only swayed some undecided low-info voters, and it certainly won’t be enough to change his fortunes. As for the biggest presence on stage Thursday night, it was a man who wasn’t even there.

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

RELATED ARTICLES:

Conservatism Isn’t Dead

Writing on the Wall for the GOP? Part II: A Post-GOP Future?

Progressivism Throws Money at Problems. Conservatism Solves Them.

PODCAST: Why I am voting Donald Trump for President

Wayne Dupree™ posted a video and the following commentary on why he is voting for Donald Trump.

I got a chance to talk to my big brother Sean Hannity on his radio show and I thought it was time for me to make my decision on who I was going to endorse for POTUS.

I cover news on a daily basis and I’ve talked to Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, Dr. Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Gov Mike Huckabee during my show interviews.

To me the clear choice is Trump for this time in history. He’s not beholden to the D.C. establishment or political donors. He’s not perfect but he connects with the people.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Professors claim Trump could be 1st to win all 50 states

Donald Trump throws a grand old party