In November, when the debate about the U.S. taking in 10,000 Syrian Refugees heated up, 29 Republican Governors (including Florida Governor Rick Scott), the Republican Presidential Candidates, U.S. Congressman Vern Buchanan, and even I took a lot of heat for being opposed to President Obama on this issue.
Conservative opposition focused on the belief that, due to the FBI’s warning that the Federal Government lacked the ability to properly vet refugees, this was simply too much of a national security risk to the United States.
At the time, the left (and the media) directly attacked Conservatives for being “insensitive”. Well….just minutes ago, CNN reported some very concerning news about two Middle East “refugee” terrorists. This story, posted below, validates the concern about the Federal Government’s inability to properly screen Middle East refugees.
Please take a moment to read the article (below) and then reply back to this email to share if you support or oppose allowing refugees from the Middle East into the United States.
*Kudos to Governor Rick Scott (& the other 28 Republican Governors), U.S. Congressman Vern Buchanan, and every other Republican Elected Official who opposed Obama’s push to allow 10,000+ Syrian refugees into the U.S.
Feds arrest two Middle East refugees on terror-related charges
U.S. federal authorities arrested two refugees on terror-related charges Thursday.
The arrests in Sacramento and Houston did not appear to be directly related, but the cases had several similarities.
Both men were Palestinians born in Iraq and living as refugees in the United States, according to the U.S. Justice Department. And both of them are accused of lying to immigration officials about their alleged ties to terrorist organizations.
Omar Faraj Saeed Al Hardan, 24, of Houston, ischarged with attempting to provide material support to ISIS.
Aws Mohammed Younis Al-Jayab, 23, of Sacramento, California, is charged with making a false statement involving international terrorism.
It was not immediately clear whether Hardan or Jayab had retained legal representation. They are both scheduled to appear in courts on Friday.
Reports of sexual assaults and robberies of women gathered for celebrations in Cologne, Germany on New Year’s Eve have created a firestorm of concern in Germany, but also in neighboring Holland. Geert Wilders, leader of the Freedom Party (PVV) raised questions in the Hague Parliament of the ruling coalition cabinet members on January 5th. Today, Wilders sent a letter to Prime Minister Rutte leader of the VVD party ruling coalition requesting preventive actions to foil such possible attacks by migrants and refugees in Dutch reception centers and communities.
Reports of 90 incidents by women victims in Cologne of such sexual attacks and robberies indicated that the perpetrators were “Arabic or North Africa looking” males. It heightened concerns in this most culturally and ethnically diverse German city and among opposition political leaders who have questioned the wisdom of allowing in more than 1 million predominately Muslim migrants and refugees from the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia. That prompted Chancellor Merkel ,who has welcomed the mass immigration wave of Muslims, as a means of dealing with Germany’s acute labor shortage to have the ruling CD government Justice Minister investigate these charges and determine if any arrests can be made by local law enforcement. However, reports of riots at reception centers by migrants and refugees have aroused protests in a number of German communities.
A spate of alleged sexual assaults and robberies at New Year’s Eve festivities in the German city of Cologne has fueled a political firestorm over immigration in Germany.
Ninety criminal incidents, a quarter of which were sexual assaults, were reported following New Year’s Eve celebrations in the city, Cologne police told CNN.
Police said victims described the perpetrators as gangs of Arab or North African men. Many of the assaults were likely intended to distract, allowing attackers to steal mobile phones and other devices, police said.
Authorities said the crimes, including a rape, occurred around the train station, next to the western German city’s landmark cathedral.
Video footage of the celebrations in the area show riotous scenes, with revelers shooting fireworks into crowds.
In a phone call with Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker Tuesday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel expressed outrage over the attacks, labeling them “disgusting” and calling for the culprits to be identified and punished as soon as possible, CNN affiliate ARD reported.
Cologne police Chief Wolfgang Albers said at a press conference Monday that the incidents were “intolerable,” describing them as “crimes of a totally new dimension.”
The episode raised questions about the viability of Cologne’s famous Carnival next month when hundreds of thousands are expected to join celebrations on city streets, he said.
A smaller number of similar assaults also were reported in the German city of Hamburg on New Year’s Eve, Hamburg police told CNN.
The women involved in the Cologne sexual attacks gave evidence of what occurred:
One of the Cologne victims said she was too scared to go out alone following the ordeal.
“The men surrounded us and started to grab our behinds and touch our crotches,” she said.
“They touched us everywhere. I wanted to take my friend and leave. I turned around and in that moment someone grabbed my bag.”
She said she feared she could be killed or raped by the attackers.
“Nobody noticed and nobody helped us. I just wanted to get out.”
Another victim said she had unsuccessfully tried to fight off her assailant.
“But there were so many people around me that there was no control. There was no way out. There was no way to protect yourself,” she said.
“We ran to the police. But we saw the police were so understaffed. They couldn’t take care of us and we as women suffered the price.”
Watch this UK Telegraph video of protests in Cologne against these sexual attacks and robberies of young women allegedly by Arab/North African young men:
Geert Wilders in Hague Parliament. Source: AP.
In view of these attacks by Arab attackers in several German cities lead by Cologne, Geert Wilders and fellow PVV MP Sietse Fritsma, presented the Dutch Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Security and Justice in the Hague parliament on January 5, 2016 the following questions:
1.) Are you aware of reports that on New Year’s Eve groups of mostly Arab men assaulted, robbed and raped dozens of young women in several German cities?
2.) Are you also aware also of the statements by female victims who said “They surrounded us and began to grope us? Their hands were everywhere. I had fingers in every bodily orifice”?
3.) Do you agree with Wolfgang Albers, the Cologne Police Chief that we are dealing here with “a whole new dimension of violence”? If not, why not?
4.)Do you agree with us that this new dimension of violence is the result of the import of migrants with a violent, Islamic culture that often regards women and young girls as inferior? If not, why not?
5.)Are you still of the opinion that the word testosterone bomb is a terrible word, as you told the first signatory of these questions during the parliamentary debate on September 17th last year, or do you now finally realize that allowing tens of thousands of Arab men in Netherlands jeopardizes the safety of our citizens?
6.)Do you remember the parliamentary debate on asylum seekers of October 14th, 2015, during which the first signatory of these questions read several reports of women who had been harassed by asylum seekers in the Netherlands? If so, why do you continue to endanger Dutch women by allowing the massive admission of asylum seekers?
7.) Do you realize that, if you continue to leave our borders wide open, it is only a matter of time before mass robberies and assaults such as those in Germany, will also happen on the same large scale in the Netherlands? Do you want to have this on your conscience or are you finally ready to close the Dutch borders to Islamic testosterone bombs?
If we continue to allow asylum-seekers and immigrants from Islamic countries to settle in our country en masse, then what has happened on New Year’s Eve in Germany will soon happen on the same large scale in the Netherlands, too. The first signs are already there.
During the parliamentary debate on October 14, 2015, I quoted from emails of ordinary Dutch citizens suffering from the behavior of asylum seekers and immigrants. These mails referred to young girls being “immorally touched”, daughters being “harassed,” women who are told “I want to f___k you.”
The events in Cologne are the signs of a future which lies before us if the government and the majority of the parliamentarians refuse to face the truth.
Cologne is nearby. Our wives and daughters must be protected. The government needs to wake up. Mark Rutte must do his duty. Our borders must be closed. We must de-Islamize the Netherlands.
Today, Wilders issued a follow up letter to Dutch PM Rutte saying:
Dear Mr. Prime Minister,
Yesterday and today, I received hundreds of emails. Hundreds of emails full of fear and indignation. About the horrific events on New Year’s Eve in Cologne.
I have not heard you about those events. I find that very strange. After Paris last November, we now have Cologne. After the Islamic terror, the sexual jihad. But we do not hear you. Hello, Mr. Prime Minister? Are you still there?
What happened in Cologne is repulsive. Fear reigns in Germany, but also in the Netherlands. Don’t you notice it? Thousands of Dutch women worry about their safety. Thousands of Dutch men fear for the safety of their wives. And thousands of Dutch parents are afraid of what might happen to their daughters.
All these people realize that it will not be long before large group attacks on women will also take place in the Netherlands. Testosterone bombs I have called them, but it is far worse. This is sexual terrorism, this is sexual jihad.
On a smaller scale, it is already happening in the Netherlands today. Ever more women are being harassed. Yesterday, the media reported about a girl in the province of Zeeland which had been assaulted by an Arab man. For years already, there is a plague of assault rapes by non-Western men in Sweden and Norway. It is coming our way.
You do not like to hear this, Mr. Rutte. And that is undoubtedly the reason why you are so quiet now. But you are responsible for this situation. Because, despite all the warnings, you have opened our country’s borders to tens of thousands of people – mostly young men – from an Islamic culture.
I hope that your eyes will finally open and that you will close our borders at once and start to de-Islamize the Netherlands. So that our country may once again be the safe country the Dutch people are entitled to.
Geert Wilders
Geert Wilders MP is leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV) in the Netherlands
The plague of sexual assaults, robberies and rapes of young women by Muslim migrant young men in Sweden has made it what some allege has become the rape capital of Europe. Then we have the sexual grooming practices of young British girls by South Asia Muslim émigrés in the UK. With a million Muslim refugees and migrants who broke the borderless Schengen system, they are seeking more than sanctuary and possible economic employment, opportunities. Rather it may result in establishing virtual no go areas emboldened by sexual terrorism ruled under Sharia Islamic law condoned by EU countries under the guise of myopic politically correct multi-culturalism policies. What they do not comprehend to their undoing is that the great wave of Muslim immigration is a furtherance of the Dar al Hijrah immigration strategy to spread Islamization to Europe and the West. That is what concerns Wilders and others in the broken borders of the EU with thousands of refugees arriving daily from conflicts in the Muslim Ummah exemplified by the Jihad of the self-declared Caliphate, the Islamic State.
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Protest-Sign-in-Cologne-Germany-AP-e1452163003982.jpg419640Jerry Gordonhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJerry Gordon2016-01-07 05:37:092016-01-07 05:39:24Dutch MP Geert Wilders speaks out against Rapes and Sexual Assaults in Germany by Muslims
How could an organization that claims to speak for God and to be led by the Holy Spirit be so indefatigably committed to a lie? For it isn’t only Bruno Forte: the Pope has said the same thing, and it’s the official policy of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which winks at dissent on any number of actual Church teachings, but moves ruthlessly to suppress voices that dare to suggest that maybe Islam is not a Religion of Peace. It appears as if protecting the image of Islam is more important to Church leaders today than teaching the contents of their own faith.
Here are some salient quotations from the Qur’an:
2:191-193: “And slay them wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution is more grievous than slaying. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, slay them — such is the recompense of unbelievers, but if they give over, surely Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.”
4:89: “They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of Allah; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper.”
5:33: “This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement.”
8:12: “When thy Lord was revealing to the angels, ‘I am with you; so confirm the believers. I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them!’”
8:39: “Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s entirely; then if they give over, surely Allah sees the things they do.”
8:60: “Make ready for them whatever force and strings of horses you can, to terrify thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them that you know not; Allah knows them. And whatsoever you expend in the way of Allah shall be repaid you in full; you will not be wronged.”
9:5: “Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way; Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.”
9:29: “Fight those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden — such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book — until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.”
9:111: “Allah has bought from the believers their selves and their possessions against the gift of Paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill, and are killed; that is a promise binding upon Allah in the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Koran; and who fulfils his covenant truer than Allah? So rejoice in the bargain you have made with Him; that is the mighty triumph.”
9:123: “O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you; and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing.”
47:4: “When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads. So it shall be; and if Allah had willed, He would have avenged Himself upon them; but that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will not send their works astray.”
Think these are just a bunch of verses taken “out of context” and that they’re interpreted in a benign manner by Islamic authorities? Think again. The authoritative sources in Sunni Islam, the schools of Sunni jurisprudence (madhahib), all teach warfare against unbelievers:
Shafi’i school: A Shafi’i manual of Islamic law that was certified in 1991 by the clerics at Al-Azhar University, one of the leading authorities in the Islamic world, as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy, stipulates about jihad that “the caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians … until they become Muslim or pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” It adds a comment by Sheikh Nuh Ali Salman, a Jordanian expert on Islamic jurisprudence: the caliph wages this war only “provided that he has first invited [Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians] to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya) … while remaining in their ancestral religions.” (‘Umdat al-Salik, o9.8).
Hanafi school: A Hanafi manual of Islamic law repeats the same injunctions. It insists that people must be called to embrace Islam before being fought, “because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith.” It emphasizes that jihad must not be waged for economic gain, but solely for religious reasons: from the call to Islam “the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war.”
However, “if the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax [jizya], it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do.” (Al-Hidayah, II.140)
Maliki school: Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), a pioneering historian and philosopher, was also a Maliki legal theorist. In his renowned Muqaddimah, the first work of historical theory, he notes that “in the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.” In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with “power politics,” because Islam is “under obligation to gain power over other nations.”
Hanbali school: The great medieval theorist of what is commonly known today as radical or fundamentalist Islam, Ibn Taymiyya (Taqi al-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya, 1263-1328), was a Hanbali jurist. He directed that “since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God’s entirely and God’s word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.”
This is also taught by modern-day scholars of Islam.
Majid Khadduri was an Iraqi scholar of Islamic law of international renown. In his book War and Peace in the Law of Islam, which was published in 1955 and remains one of the most lucid and illuminating works on the subject, Khadduri says this about jihad:
The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God’s law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world. … The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state. (P. 51)
Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee, Assistant Professor on the Faculty of Shari’ah and Law of the International Islamic University in Islamabad. In his 1994 book The Methodology of Ijtihad, he quotes the twelfth century Maliki jurist Ibn Rushd:
Muslim jurists agreed that the purpose of fighting with the People of the Book … is one of two things: it is either their conversion to Islam or the payment of jizyah.
Nyazee concludes:
This leaves no doubt that the primary goal of the Muslim community, in the eyes of its jurists, is to spread the word of Allah through jihad, and the option of poll-tax [jizya] is to be exercised only after subjugation [of non-Muslims].
Mgr. Bruno Forte
“L’Osservatore Romano accuses Charlie Hebdo of ‘distorting faith,’” by Domenico Agasso, Jr., La Stampa, January 5, 2016 (thanks to David):
…Speaking to news agency AdnKronos, the theologian and secretary general of the Synod of Bishops, Mgr. Bruno Forte, described the French weekly’s choice as “distressing, as well as unfounded” . “The potential for violence can, if anything, become detached from an authentic religious experience, certainly not encouraged or incited by it. As Pope Francis has said, killing in the name of God is to act against God’s will.”
“It offends the sensitivity of all people, not only Christians, Jews or Muslims. It also offends those who despite not being believers sense how important it is to respect the religious conscience and dimension in life. Hence this act is strongly condemned,” he added.
Forte added that the French newspaper’s insinuations “are far from the truth, because all religions, not just Christianity, but also the Jewish and Muslim faiths, preach non violence in the name of God. If anything, one shows violence by adopting an ideological stance, claiming to possess the truth, judging and excluding others. Religions are faced with the mystery of God and therefore have a strong antidote against such attempts: the supremacy of the Lord whose will we must all obey”.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Islam-a-religion-of-peace.jpg368640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2016-01-07 04:37:292016-01-07 04:37:29Vatican: Islam teaches ‘non-violence in the name of God’ — Really?
2016 will be a perilous year for the U.S. and the World primarily because no leadership will be forthcoming from the U.S. during the remainder to the term of President Obama.
Iran is currently building and testing new ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads in violation of U.N. resolutions. The Obama administration promised to deliver to Congress a list of sanctions against Iran. Even though the sanctions were rather mild Iran objected and Obama postponed the sanctions indefinitely. These sanctions may be characterized as a new ‘Obama Red Line’ which he has breached. It is notice to Iran–Iran is no longer constrained by the nuclear agreement which in effect is only binding on Obama and has no legal force against Iran. Further it is notice to Iran that it can continue as the leading state sponsor of terrorism without fear of any action by the U.S.
It is no coincidence that Saudi Arabia, Bahrain (home to the U.S. fleet), Sudan The United Arab Eremites and Kuwait have broken relations with Iran following Obama’s feckless withdrawal of sanctions against Iran. Undoubtedly this was the last straw for Saudi Arabia and other Sunnis. They realize Obama has become the defender and supporter of Iran against U.S.’s former allies.
In effect Obama is trying to create Iran (a Shiite Persian country) as the strong horse in the region against the Arab Sunnis. Obama has picked the wrong horse as there are about one and a half billion Muslims 87% of which are Sunni and 13% Shiites. Added to this mix they see Obama favors Iran over Israel America’s only reliable ally in the region.
It is no wonder that Obama’s favored treatment of Iran over Saudi Arabia and the other Sunni nations has prevented Obama from creating an Arab Sunni coalition to fight ISIS. An effective coalition of Arabs to defeat ISIS must be postponed until Obama is no longer in office and a president that does not follow in Obama’s footsteps is elected.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/perilous-times-e1452080000393.jpg347640Robert Hellerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRobert Heller2016-01-06 06:34:362016-01-06 06:52:152016 — A ‘Perilous Year’ for the U.S. and the World
In FrontPage today, I explain why Trump is so appealing to so many Americans — which is the same reason why the mainstream media hates him so passionately:
Donald Trump has just released his first television ad, and the predictable Leftist firestorm has ensued. Instead of being embarrassed by his proposal for a moratorium on Muslim immigration in the face of the ongoing jihad threat, Trump has featured it front and center. And it turns out that his talk about securing the Southern border is accompanied by footage not of Mexicans, but of…Moroccans! The hard-Left self-proclaimed “fact checker” PolitiFact has given the ad a “Pants on Fire” rating, and pundits everywhere are tut-tutting about how the shoot-from-the-hip blowhard has done it again, and surely, surely this time, surely, he has finally torpedoed his own campaign.
Responding to the nontroversy, NBC News stated that “Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski told NBC News, ‘No sh—it’s not the Mexican border, but that’s what our country is going to look like. This was 1,000 percent on purpose.’” PolitiFact declared itself unsatisfied by this explanation – but its attention to this issue epitomizes how desperate the mainstream media is to derail Trump’s campaign, and how it keeps on trying to do it in a way that is certain to be ineffective.
Consider, after all, who will care that Trump’s campaign used footage of Moroccans when talking about Mexicans: Leftists who will crow about how Trump can’t tell his Brown-People-Whose-Names-Start-with-M apart, and who were never going to vote for him anyway. No one else. Back in the United States of America, no one cares. Trump will probably pick up some supporters from among those who know that border security and illegal immigration are major problems, and remain major problems even if Trump’s commercial uses video from some other place with border security and illegal immigration problems.
I am no fan of Trump. After he denounced our free-speech event in Garland, Texas, last May, which was attacked by Islamic jihadists, it is not at all clear that Donald Trump understands the jihad imperative or the war against free speech, or is at all equipped to counter them. When violent jihadis commit murder to prevent people from drawing Muhammad, to desist voluntarily from drawing Muhammad is to reward violent intimidation, and encourage more. When Trump said, “They can’t do something else? They have to be in the middle of Texas doing something on Muhammad and insulting everybody?,” he was revealing that he did not grasp that essential point, and was willing to acquiesce to Sharia restrictions on the freedom of speech.
It was an odd moment in a campaign that has been remarkable for Trump’s willingness to take on the Left’s sacred cows. He infuriates the mainstream media because he, unlike any other major candidate in recent memory, won’t dance to their tune: when Leftist journalists confront him about some supposedly egregious thing he has said, he doesn’t apologize, he doesn’t explain, he doesn’t back down – generally he doubles down, and with a cheerful defiance that has lifted the heart of everyone who has seen the arena of free discourse inexorably narrowed over the last few decades by the authoritarian enforcers of political correctness.
Many Americans love Trump because he says what they have been thinking, and have been thinking for a long time, even as they have been browbeaten into silence by a media culture that has been working for years to transform genuine and reasoned opposition to its political line into a faux pas, a “gaffe,” a step outside the realm of acceptable political discourse. Not content with electoral victories and effective control of the media, the educational system, and the entertainment industry, the Left has been pressing for total victory: the moment when anyone who dares to utter a commonsensical conservative view, such as “We need to take steps to stop Islamic jihad terrorism,” or “We need to secure our Southern border and end this massive illegal immigration,” will immediately stop, apologize, and correct himself. Trump will have none of it, and that is why he is so widely beloved.
The rot, however, is already very severely advanced. A few years back, Muslims who plotted a jihad mass murder attack at Fort Dix approached a young man in a video store, asking him to transfer their VHS tapes to DVD. In the course of doing this job, the young man discovered that the tapes were gory jihad videos of beheadings and shootings and other bloodshed, and he surmised that these men might be up to no good. But before he called police (which, to his credit, he ultimately did, and the plot was foiled), he stopped to ask his boss whether his concern about the jihad material was “racist.”
That young man’s hesitation was a testament to the effectiveness of the Left’s war on common sense and reason. Now Trump is fighting back – and horror of horrors! He featured Moroccans in his commercial when speaking about Mexicans! That the media is now grasping at such straws as these, and expecting anyone, much less Donald Trump, to care, reveals how avid the Leftist establishment is to stop this man who threatens their hegemony.
Whatever happens to the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump, his challenge to that hegemony has been and is refreshing. If his insouciance in the face of those who set themselves up as our moral and intellectual superiors, and refusal to toe their line, survives his candidacy and spreads to others, he will have done the country an unparalleled service, no matter who is elected in November.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/trump-ad-Muslim-ban-e1452078180466.jpg345640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2016-01-06 06:04:312016-01-06 06:04:31Trump Keeps On Being Trump In First Campaign Ad — Media Outraged
In PJ Media today I discuss more foolish wrongheadedness and disastrously suicidal naivete from today’s Catholic Church:
The contemporary Catholic Church has wholeheartedly endorsed the ideas that Islam is a religion of peace and that Muslims are the first victims of jihad terrorism.
This proposition is enforced as an iron dogma, the one non-negotiable point in today’s comfortable suburban Church: anything goes, everything is winked at, moral teaching is discarded or ignored left and right — but whisper that Islamic jihadists point to the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and supremacism, and you’ll be the new Jan Hus.
A recent piece in the Los Angeles archdiocesan newspaper entitled “Our Muslim Brothers and Sisters” is just one example of the endless barrage of nonsense that comes from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on this issue — but this example is noteworthy in being particularly counterfactual. It spends a great deal of time admonishing us that the first victims of Islamic jihad terror groups are other Muslims. Its author, Fr. Ronald Rolheiser, apparently believes — along with Barack Obama and numerous other Western leaders — that this proves that the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and the rest are un-Islamic.
In fact, this point only establishes that they believe their Muslim opponents to be un-Islamic — and because Islam mandates death for heresy and apostasy, they kill those opponents.
Rolheiser also says:
But the Muslim religion is not to blame here. There is nothing inherent in either the Koran or in Islam itself that morally or religiously undergirds this kind of violence.
Apparently Rolheiser has overlooked many passages from the Qur’an, including:
2:191-193: “And slay them wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution is more grievous than slaying. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, slay them — such is the recompense of unbelievers, but if they give over, surely Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.”4:89: “They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of Allah; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper.”
5:33: “This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement.”
8:12: “When thy Lord was revealing to the angels, ‘I am with you; so confirm the believers. I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them!’”
8:39: “Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s entirely; then if they give over, surely Allah sees the things they do.”
8:60: “Make ready for them whatever force and strings of horses you can, to terrify thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them that you know not; Allah knows them. And whatsoever you expend in the way of Allah shall be repaid you in full; you will not be wronged.”
9:5: “Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way; Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.”
9:29: “Fight those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden — such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book — until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.”
9:111: “Allah has bought from the believers their selves and their possessions against the gift of Paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill, and are killed; that is a promise binding upon Allah in the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Koran; and who fulfils his covenant truer than Allah? So rejoice in the bargain you have made with Him; that is the mighty triumph.”
9:123: “O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you; and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing.”
47:4: “When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads. So it shall be; and if Allah had willed, He would have avenged Himself upon them; but that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will not send their works astray.”
Think the Bible is full of violence, too? Sure, but there is actually nothing in the Bible remotely equivalent to the Qur’an’s open-ended and universal commands to wage war against and subjugate unbelievers. Nor will you find calls to violence being taught from authoritative sources of Judeo-Christian religion.
But you will find them coming from the authoritative sources in Sunni Islam, the schools of Sunni jurisprudence (madhahib):
Shafi’i school: A Shafi’i manual of Islamic law that was certified in 1991 by the clerics at Al-Azhar University, one of the leading authorities in the Islamic world, as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy, stipulates about jihad that “the caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians … until they become Muslim or pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” It adds a comment by Sheikh Nuh Ali Salman, a Jordanian expert on Islamic jurisprudence: the caliph wages this war only “provided that he has first invited [Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians] to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya) … while remaining in their ancestral religions.” (‘Umdat al-Salik, o9.8).Hanafi school: A Hanafi manual of Islamic law repeats the same injunctions. It insists that people must be called to embrace Islam before being fought, “because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith.” It emphasizes that jihad must not be waged for economic gain, but solely for religious reasons: from the call to Islam “the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war.”
However, “if the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax [jizya], it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do.” (Al-Hidayah, II.140)
Maliki school: Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), a pioneering historian and philosopher, was also a Maliki legal theorist. In his renowned Muqaddimah, the first work of historical theory, he notes that “in the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.” In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with “power politics,” because Islam is “under obligation to gain power over other nations.”
Hanbali school: The great medieval theorist of what is commonly known today as radical or fundamentalist Islam, Ibn Taymiyya (Taqi al-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya, 1263-1328), was a Hanbali jurist. He directed that “since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God’s entirely and God’s word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.”
This is also taught by modern-day scholars of Islam.
Majid Khadduri was an Iraqi scholar of Islamic law of international renown. In his bookWar and Peace in the Law of Islam, which was published in 1955 and remains one of the most lucid and illuminating works on the subject, Khadduri says this about jihad:
The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God’s law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world. … The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state. (P. 51)
Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee, Assistant Professor on the Faculty of Shari’ah and Law of the International Islamic University in Islamabad. In his 1994 book The Methodology of Ijtihad, he quotes the twelfth century Maliki jurist Ibn Rushd:
Muslim jurists agreed that the purpose of fighting with the People of the Book … is one of two things: it is either their conversion to Islam or the payment of jizyah.
Nyazee concludes:
This leaves no doubt that the primary goal of the Muslim community, in the eyes of its jurists, is to spread the word of Allah through jihad, and the option of poll-tax [jizya] is to be exercised only after subjugation [of non-Muslims].
Blissfully or willfully ignorant of all this and much more, Rolheiser says:
It’s time to establish a greater solidarity with Islam.
With Islam, mind you — not with Muslims who genuinely reject all this and want to live in peace with non-Muslims as equals in a secular society without trying to gain hegemony over them….
Why not ban Trump? After all, I was banned from entering Britain for saying that Islam “is a religion and is a belief system that mandates warfare against unbelievers for the purpose for establishing a societal model that is absolutely incompatible with Western society.”
If I can get banned for that manifestly true observation, then Trump can certainly be banned for calling for a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration in view of jihad terror. One thing British authorities are sure of: it is wrong, wrong, wrong to want to take any action against jihad terror.
“If the United Kingdom is to continue applying the ‘unacceptable behaviour’ criteria to those who wish to enter its borders, it must be fairly applied to the rich as well as poor, and the weak as well as powerful.” That’s a lot of hooey. The “unacceptable behavior” criteria is already applied unfairly. Just days before Pamela Geller and I were banned, the British government admitted Saudi Sheikh Mohammed al-Arefe. Al-Arefe has said:
“Devotion to jihad for the sake of Allah, and the desire to shed blood, to smash skulls, and to sever limbs for the sake of Allah and in defense of His religion, is, undoubtedly, an honor for the believer. Allah said that if a man fights the infidels, the infidels will be unable to prepare to fight.”
That was acceptable in Britain. My work, which has consistently denounced violence and been in defense of the equality of rights of all before the law, was not. That’s a fair application of the “unacceptable behaviors” criteria?
“UK Parliament Will Debate Barring Trump from Country,” by Carrie Dann, NBC News, January 5, 2016
The British parliament will formally debate a petition later this month from backers wishing to prevent Donald Trump from entering the United Kingdom.
The debate is set for January 18, according to a government announcement Tuesday. The petition, launched after Trump announced his proposal to bar Muslims from entering the United States, has garnered over 568,000 signatures to date.
Online petitions like the one targeting Trump are automatically considered for debate by a Petitions Committee if they garner more than 100,000 signatures.
The petition reads: “The signatories believe Donald J Trump should be banned from UK entry. The UK has banned entry to many individuals for hate speech. The same principles should apply to everyone who wishes to enter the UK. If the United Kingdom is to continue applying the ‘unacceptable behaviour’ criteria to those who wish to enter its borders, it must be fairly applied to the rich as well as poor, and the weak as well as powerful.”…
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/David-Cameron-and-Donald-Trump-627247.jpg350590Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2016-01-06 04:51:142016-01-06 04:51:52UK Parliament will debate barring Trump from country
I discussed: House Democrats Go to War Against Free Speech, unveiling why H. Res. 569 is so dangerous.
And make sure to watch the very special Robert Spencer Moment: The Criminalization of Dissent, in which Robert reveals how those who reject establishment views are coming under increased law enforcement scrutiny: Click Here.
Oregon Live has produced this very cool map. Please read the story to learn more.
For all of our new readers,go here, to see the federal list of refugee contractors working near you. You should also see our Frequently Asked Questions.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Statue-of-Liberty-e1451904331963.jpg364640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2016-01-04 05:46:532016-01-04 11:19:50What is the Predominant Refugee Group in your State?
Okay, I will say it out loud. Far too many Hollywood celebs are self-aggrandizing idiots when it comes to politics and culture. Their worldview makes them feel superior to the rest us. Neither facts nor common sense will change their minds. Ronald Reagan nailed it when he said, “It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so.”
Here’s a prime example of a liberal making void-of-reality statements while thinking himself superior. Black superstar actor Samuel L. Jackson said he wished the San Bernardino shooters “was another crazy white dude” rather than Muslims. Jackson said such attacks gives people “legitimate reason” to look at their Muslim neighbors and friends the way they look at young black men.
Mr Jackson, I am black. I resent your assumption that Americans are racists looking for reasons to look cross-eyed at Muslims and young black men. Frankly, members of both groups (Muslims and blacks) have declared war on Americans.
So tell me Mr Jackson. How are we suppose to deal with the fact that practically every terrorist attack resulting in the maiming and murder of Americans has been by Muslims? Also, though under reported, black youth flash mob attacks, the knock-out game and polar bear hunting attacks on innocent whites are frequent.
The Black Lives Matter hate group which Mr Jackson and his Hollywood homeys hold in high regard have declared it open season on killing cops and “crackas” (white people). How are Americans suppose to process that?
A white friend was mugged on a Baltimore street. My friend admitted he was preoccupied. Had he been paying attention, upon seeing the group of thuggish young black males approaching, his street-smarts would have kicked in causing him to cross over to the opposite side of the street. Mr Jackson would deem my friend a racist guilty of profiling. In the minds of liberals, politically correctness trumps everything; even self-preservation instincts and life-experiences.
What I find so scary about the Muslim thing is we have no way of knowing who is for us or “a-gin” us. All the successful terrorist attacks maiming and murdering Americans were by Muslims who presented themselves as harmless neighbors, friends and co-workers.
The Boston Marathon was bombed by the seemingly Americanized Tsarnaev brothers. They killed 3 and wounded over 260, many maimed for life.
For crying out loud, the Muslim terrorist at Ft Hood was a major in the U.S. Army. Major Nidal Hasan, shot and killed 13 and injured over 30 while yelling, “Allahu akbar! (God is great)”
The San Bernardino shooters were undercover Muslim terrorists. They left their company’s Christmas party, returned later wearing combat gear and killed 14 co-workers.
Again I ask Mr Jackson, how should we as responsible reasonable Americans respond?
And another thing. What is up with Jackson and other mega-rich black celebs constantly trashing white Americans whose patronage made them ga-zillionaires.
While promoting her movie, “Selma”, Oprah made the absurd claim that the 1950s persecution of blacks featured in her film still happens daily in America. With all due respect Oprah, your accusation is irresponsible, divisive and insulting.
Oprah Winfrey and I were co-workers at WJZ-TV in Baltimore before she became nationally renowned “Oprah.” Oprah co-hosted our local morning talk show. Blacks were a bit suspicious of her for being comfortable with whites. Black viewers did not make Oprah a mega star. White viewers made Oprah.
Sameul L. Jackson, Oprah and other black celebs relentlessly bashing America is a huge disservice to all Americans, particularly black youths. Rather than saying their success is “because” of America, most black celebs promote the liberal spin; saying their success is “in spite of” America. The truth is America is the greatest land of opportunity on the planet for all who choose to go for it. The Left is relentless in its efforts to insidiously hide the blessing of America from minorities.
Proverbs says, “As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.” In other words, belief is a powerful thing. So when black superstars tell black youths that America is forever racist and white cops shoot them on sight, they believe it. The lies become truth in their minds. Angry young blacks respond accordingly. WARNING: Video has explicit language:
Mr Jackson and other black celebs, your insistence on portraying America as a hellhole of racism towards minorities is irresponsible, divisive and hate-generating. Your supportive public deserves much, much better.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of Samuel L. Jackson is courtesy of Marvel Studios.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/nick-fury-marvel-cinematic-universe-e1451903662230.jpeg360640Lloyd Marcushttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLloyd Marcus2016-01-04 05:36:502016-01-04 05:36:50Samuel L. Jackson’s America-Bashing, a Huge Disservice
This establishes once again that the jihad is not provoked by what we say and do — because if anyone has indefatigably pursued a course of not saying or doing anything that could possibly anger Islamic jihadis or Muslims in general, it’s Hillary Clinton.
“Media gleefully reporting al-Shabab video with Trump, IGNORES Hillary and ‘Black Lives Matter’ are in it TOO!!,” Right Scoop, January 2, 2016:
El Trumpo is finally being used in a terrorist training video and the media couldn’t be more happy.
An al-Qaeda affiliate released a recruitment video Friday that includes an excerpt of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump announcing his call to temporarily ban all Muslims from entering the U.S.
AND:
The video, apparently the first to include footage of Trump, juxtaposed clips of the presidential candidate and al-Awlaki saying “the West will eventually turn against its Muslims citizens,” according to the Times, while also including footage of al-Awlaki calling for attacks similar to that of the Fort Hood shooting in 2009, in which Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan killed 13 people and injured more than 30 in Killeen, Texas.
But, as NRO columnist Stephen Miller points out, they’re completely ignoring some details:
Image from Twitter.
Here’s how TIME is vaguely reporting the Black Lives Matter appearance:
According to the New York Times, al-Shabab—the Islamic militant branch of al-Qaeda in Somalia—included the clip of Trump along with footage of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American imam and recruiter for al-Qaeda who was killed in 2011, as well as clips of white supremacists and protests over police use of force in the U.S.
Funny how they don’t mention their name, isn’t it?…
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/alShababVideo.png300533Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2016-01-03 05:57:202016-01-03 15:04:05New Al-Qaeda recruitment video features Hillary, Black Lives Matter… and BTW Trump
CNN’s The Hunting Ground has won critical acclaim from filmmakers, winning the Stanley Kramer award from the Producers Guild of America while garnering criticism from Ivy League elites who worry that their reputations are being sullied by the depiction of a “rape culture” on their campuses (Harvard Crimson). That, in turn, has prompted a response from students in the form of a discrimination complaint under the Federal anti-discrimination law known as Title IX.
The attention that The Hunting Ground has attracted raises the question, “has it always been so on college campuses?”
Even radical sexologists such as Prof. Ira Reiss have to admit that it has not. Reiss reports that unmarried WWII 18-22 year-old Army lads were largely “still virgins.” Even Hugh Hefner was a college virgin at age 22. Dutch “sexperts” Drs. Kronhausens’ 1960 survey revealed, “The average modern college man is apt to say that he considers intercourse “too precious” to have with anyone except the girl he expects to marry and may actually abstain from all intercourse for that reason.” (p. 219). However, by the 1970s youth were generally sexually radicalized–once normalized, most thought unwed sex was “natural.”
How did this transformation occur? A brief chronology shows the historical context:
1950: “Age Disparity (Relations Involving One Adult) …. [P]ersons under the age of 7 are legally regarded as not responsible….but many are by endowment and training fully capable of….responsibility for sexual behavior.”
1953: “The cultural tendency to overprotect women and children [is] often…more detrimental to the…victim than the offense itself….Kinsey’s findings…permeate all present thinking on this subject.” The Illinois Commission on Sex Offenders
Fast forward from a Hugh Hefner as a 22 year old virgin to today, where high-profile college and professional athletes like Tim Tebow and Russell Wilson are ridiculed for announcing they will abstain from sex until they are married. Does this contempt for virginity reflect somehow a kind of “sexual exploitation pedagogy” of esteemed professors and administrators? And how have these prestigious graduates of a sexploitive pedagogy affected society? Have elitist sex abuse fantasies evolved into ideology, seeping into leading minds of the legal, political, educational, legislative, religious, scientific, medical, justice, law enforcement, entertainment, etc. worlds? And is pornography in university offices and dorms seeding its widespread sexual ideology?
Statistics tell the story. Roughly 80% of college men and 34% of co-eds use porn on campus or off, sanctioned by “free speech” Harvard professors and administrators—that’s campus sex culture! And, ominously, Data4Justice documents many “professors and staff…arrested for trading in brutal child sex abuse, including of infants.”
From University of Virginia’s Assistant Dean, Michael Morris downloading infant anal rape to Kirk Nesset, creative writing professor at Allegheny College with over 500,000 videos/images including” rape of infants. Professors and staff are involved in child sex trafficking….Since 2015 August, at least two professors per week have been arrested, arraigned or sentenced.”
Moreover, FBI’s Joseph Campbell says “the level of pedophilia is unprecedented right now.” A “survey of high school graduates” found 13.5% had sex with a teacher. If some administrators and professors are viewing child rape on campus computers does this become an intellectualization of a “rape culture”? A 2014 op-ed by Yale Professor Jed Rubenfeld, drew heated objections from Yale Law Students. He reminds our largely historically ignorant populace of the fallout following the nostalgic 1969 “Woodstock” “sexual revolution”.
It’s part of the revolution in sexual attitudes and college sex codes that has taken place over the last 50 years. Not long ago, nonmarital sex on college campuses was flatly suppressed. Sex could be punished with suspension or expulsion….Rape was a matter for the police, not the university. Beginning in the late 1960s however, sex on campus increasingly came to be permitted….The problem then became how to define consent.[Emphasis added]
So almost three generations ago, youth were lied to (read Dr. Reisman’s books for details) and persuaded that the WWII generation were closet sexual adventurers. This belief in their parental hypocrisy (see, The Graduate, 1967) helped youth reject the American legacy of sex restrictions in exchange for “sex drugs ‘n rock-n-roll.” Since then, each subsequent generation has been increasingly sexually permissive. Sexpert ideologues now teach sex to children in school, videos, social media, film, novels, text books, even pulpits while “every five days, a police officer in America is caught engaging in sexual abuse or misconduct.” And sexual victimization of males occurs in the military today, not just in prisons. Well over 14,000 in 2012, “[a]ccording to the Pentagon, thirty-eight military men are sexually assaulted every single day.So, it’s not just more reporting. Is it possible pornography is training a rape culture?
Meanwhile, back at Harvard, nineteen Law Professors posted an irate protest of CNN’s portrayal of the sexualized campuses as a “rape culture.” Their most illustrious professorial signatory is Prof. Laurence Tribe, an admitted plagiarizer, who taught American Legal History to Obama and two Supreme Court Justices. Tribe apparently is inexcusably ignorant of, or deliberately hiding, the worst child sex crimes and frauds in American Legal History—of pedophile Prof. Alfred Kinsey of Indiana University, the “father of the sexual revolution.” American past and present sexual law was revolutionized based upon experiments on up to 2,035 children raped and tortured for alleged “orgasms” published in Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) Kinsey, a sadistic obsessive masturbating pedophile and pornography addict was the scientific authority for these disastrous changes. His Tables 30-34 record the worst, unprosecuted, infant andchild sexual experimentation ever conducted in American Legal History, (Reisman, 2013)
By 1952 Herbert Wechsler’s Harvard Law Reviewarticle relied on Kinsey’s sex tome to justify liberalizing all sex laws. By 1955 Wechsler, chief author of the first-ever American Law Institute Model Penal Code (MPC), reported that sex protections for females were onerous for men. The new, innovative MPC argued that reduction of sex crime required more sexual freedom, lighter penalties, parole, and tax paid therapy for all sex criminals. Under Wechsler the neoteric MPC proposed age ten for consent as her “seductive” conduct might push men to rape. Kinsey claimed of 4,441 female interviewees none was really injured by a sexual assault, hence the Kinsey-MPC plan was to eliminate “unrealistic” rape and statutory rape laws. No rape harm, no need for rape laws! With this “cultural” pedagogy promoted by our prestigious legal lights and backed by Kinseyan “sex science” our legacy would inevitably be a “rape culture”—rape on college campuses, middle schools, libraries, bedrooms, barrooms, church pews, court rooms, etc. Be careful what you ask for. After the MPC advised a lowered age of consent (to allow “peer” sex), as Reisman documents, America’s legislatures and courts loosened state laws that had favored women (harsh laws against rape, adultery, child sex abuse, incest) and eased criminal penalties for sex offenders in more than two-thirds of U.S. states.
Wechsler and others used Kinsey’s alleged “sex science” to justify these actions and claims such as “[t]he cultural tendency to overprotect women and children [is] often…more detrimental to the…victim than the offense itself… Kinsey’s findings … permeate all present thinking on this subject.” Recall, until Kinsey, society allowed “the marital act” only in the “institution” of marriage, severely limiting even “fun consensual” fornication.Morris Ploscowe wrote, in the 1948 “Pre-Kinsey era” three states gave mandatory death sentences for rape—nineteen states provided the death penalty, life, or very long terms. Twenty-eight states gave the rapist 20 years or more, and one 15 years or more. Post-Kinsey’s “data” stated that 95 percent of men were already sex offenders and most women were promiscuous, or wanted to be. According to Ploscowe, justification for strict rape, child abuse or obscenity law was largely old fashioned.
How many millions of college lassies were spared disease, pregnancy, heartbreak, rape, suicide even homicide by such “old fashioned” ideas?
Now, trained by these elite academics and since “tween-age” by media such as Cosmopolitan magazine (be a “fun, fearless female”– booze up and hook-up), millions of Cosmo followers reveal how well they have learned by accepting or appearing in student pornography magazines such as Harvard’s “Diamond” launched in 2004. At least 10 American universities followed suit, featuring nude photo-spreads of ordinary students. Dozens more host “sex events,” such as naked parties at Yale, “sex week” at Tufts or “Outdoor Intercourse Day” at Western Washington University. Other examples include photographs of half-naked gay couples at the University of Chicago, Squirm at Vassar and, arguably, the most explicit, Boink….College Guide to Carnal Knowledge at Boston University.
Elitist administrators, perhaps some of those who complained about The Hunting Ground, award free speech funds and/or advocate for abusive porn events. Yale graduate Nathan Harden reports on “Sex Week” at Yale, recruiting naïve students into today’s vicious sexploitation. Here “porn stars and sex industry CEOs are invited on campus for a marathon of sex-related film screenings, seminars, and product demonstrations — all sanctioned by the university as ‘sex education.’” Harden notes that the university polity (steeped in the sex-saturated, rape culture they deplore yet breed) no longer understand the reason for education.
This is an unanticipated cost of the ‘60’s sexual revolution along with an explosion of inventive, barbaric sex crimes against women, children, even infants, and increased recidivism.
Some academic elites are waking up. Feminist lawyer and former Democratic presidential Campaign Manager for Michael Dukakis (1988), Susan Estrich was perplexed by the MPC influence on rape laws. She wondered at the “fresh complaint” clause that said, “a complaint must be filed within three months,” if the crime were sexual. This clause had not been part of America’s Common Law. Moreover, now that liberal lawyers were in charge, only “if serious bodily injury is inflicted” would rape be a “first degree felony.”
Moreover, noted Estrich, the lawyerly libidos had new rules for rape. If the victim had a “racy” past she might be classed as a “prostitute.” Therefore, even when she was the victim of a “gang” or fraternity “group” rape, the guilty predator might be cleared of the crime. These and other new laws followed on Kinsey’s claims that rape was a harmless, natural and normal reaction to seductive females (by age 10). Also, the New York Times reported, March 8, 1949, Kinsey had proven that not more than 5 percent of arrestees cause any real damage and thus sex offense laws had no function other than to preserve custom.
Today—60 years later, the same Ivy League Schools are embroiled in controversy regarding the “rape culture” they helped create through training students, lawyers, judges, politicians and legislators in Kinseyan pansexuality and the MPC. Many of these 2nd generation learned professors are now signatories on letters protesting claims that there is a rape culture caused by the very sexual revolution they helped institute on campus.
For a truly touching video on the reality of the damage done to all by the elites’ promotion of the sexual revolution, do take time to view former porn “star” Shelley Lubben’s reverential video, Dead Porn Stars Memorial.
Judith Gelernter Reisman, PhD
Research Professor, Director Liberty Child Protection Center, Liberty University School of Law
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Breitbart.com.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/rape-e1451763036553.jpg402640Dr. Judith Reismanhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Judith Reisman2016-01-02 14:31:112020-04-07 07:50:00‘The Sexual Revolution’ Gave Us ‘the Rape Culture’
It is inconceivable that any Western leader would favorably cite Hitler in any context, but in Turkey, citing Hitler doesn’t bring instant opprobrium. Mein Kampfbecame a bestseller when it was published there in 2005, and Hitler remains popular. Also, a former classmate says Erdogan used to carry a copy around when he was a young man. Hitler’s antisemitism resonates with Islamic Jew-hatred.
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, who is pushing for executive powers, cites Hitler’s Germany as an example of an effective presidential system, in comments broadcast by Turkish media on Friday.
Erdogan wants to change the Turkish constitution to turn the ceremonial role of president into that of a chief executive, a Turkish version of the system in the United States, France or Russia.
Asked on his return from a visit to Saudi Arabia late on Thursday whether an executive presidential system was possible while maintaining the unitary structure of the state, he said: “There are already examples in the world. You can see it when you look at Hitler’s Germany.
“There are later examples in various other countries,” he told reporters, according to a recording broadcast by the Dogan news agency.
The ruling AK Party, founded by Erdogan, has put a new constitution at the heart of its agenda after winning back a majority in a November parliamentary election.
It agreed with the main opposition CHP on Wednesday to revive efforts to forge a new constitution….
What is noteworthy about this story is not — horror of horrors! — the bacon at the mosque. That is obnoxious and stupid, but that’s all it is: no one was hurt, no one was intimidated, no one was threatened.
What is noteworthy here is the furious dhimmi overreaction of the FBI. $5,000? For some bacon?
Watch for Obama get involved in this. He could intone, “The future must not belong to those who leave bacon at mosques.” He could appoint a bacon-protection task force. They could be outfitted in grand uniforms featuring brown-and-beige stripes, to resemble a slice of bacon. Obama could name them The National Bacon Mosque Guards and commission them in an elaborate ceremony at the White House, after which they would march in formation to the nation’s mosques and take up watch against the greasy Islamophobic bacon bearers.
This story shows the lengths to which authorities in the U.S. will go to perpetuate their victimhood myth. Instead of just throwing the bacon away and dismissing it as a silly prank, it becomes part of the “climate of hate” against Muslims. You want a real “climate of hate,” check out the Christians who have been driven from their homes, exiled, killed, etc. in Iraq and Syria. No one is putting up $5,000 rewards for those who are persecuting them.
Bacon on door of the Masjid-e-Tawheed mosque in Las Vegas.
“FBI offers $5,000 reward after bacon found at Vegas mosque,” by Sally Ho, Associated Press, December 31, 2015:
LAS VEGAS (AP) — The FBI is offering a $5,000 reward for information that helps them find the person who put raw bacon on the door handles of a Las Vegas mosque.
The FBI said in a statement Wednesday that agents are trying to find the man seen in a surveillance video putting the meat on the entrances of the Masjid-e-Tawheed mosque. Authorities call it a desecration of the Islamic worship center.
The Quran, the holy book of Islam, prohibits Muslims from eating pork, and pigs have been used to taunt or offend Muslims.
Both the FBI and Las Vegas police say they’re investigating the case as a possible hate crime.
Las Vegas police spokesman Larry Hadfield said the bacon was wrapped on the door knobs, and was also found on the ground and fences.
Officials at the mosque couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.
The FBI said the incident happened about 3:15 a.m. Dec. 27. The culprit is described as a white man wearing a dark blue hat, jacket and black-framed glasses. He had black or dark brown hair with long, thin sideburns.
The site west of the Las Vegas Strip wasn’t damaged, and no one was hurt. The mosque was empty at the time, and the case was reported by members who came to worship later that morning….
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Aabsurd-e1451735491274.jpg346640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2016-01-02 06:53:212016-01-03 11:59:44FBI offers $5,000 reward after bacon found on mosque door
Promises, promises! The do-gooder (paternalistic!) Liberals run into a bit of a problem. 70% of Syrian refugees don’t want to go to Canada.
The new Canadian prime minister, boy Trudeau, had campaigned on the promise to bring in 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada by December 31, 2015. They fell short by about 19,000! Here is one important reason why (you won’t see this mentioned by the NO borders agitators in the U.S. resettlement industry!).
Canadian PM Justin Trudeau
They want to stay in the Middle East!
Can you believe it! They like their culture and they hope to go home!
Omayma al-Kasem is bold, forthright and speaks clearly and with confidence. She has completed four years of law school and volunteers as a mental-health worker with a Jordanian charity, and as such, is exactly the kind of Syrian refugee Canada wants to welcome. The trouble is, Ms. al-Kasem isn’t interested in coming.
The 26-year-old from Daraa, Syria, is one of a sizable number of Syrians turning down the chance to become permanent residents of Canada. According to UN figures, just three out of every 10 households contacted about resettlement in Canada go on to relocate.
“Some families are still hoping to return home, others are concerned about their ability to integrate into another country – including learn the language,” said Aoife McDonnell, an external relations officer at the UNHCR refugee agency in Jordan.
One of the unspoken truths that the resettlement industry is loathe to admit is that many refugees who do reach the West are unhappy and want to go home, but they are trapped in a land where they have discovered (to their great disappointment) that no streets are paved with gold.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/refugees-muslim-e1451733996883.jpg426640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2016-01-02 06:26:462016-01-02 08:04:58Only 3 in 10 Syrian families even want to be resettled in the West
