SNAKE HUNTERS

An Informative Weblog

Name:
Location: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, United States

NINETY Year Old fledgling Editor of Snake Hunters. Combat Veteran of WWII, 10th Mountain Division, Italy. AAU Swim Coach, 29 Palms, Yucca Valley, Calif. Mobile Park, Retail Furniture, Indian Gaming Casinos in San Diego County,Concessionaire/ CO + State Fair. This Editor is.Never "too busy" to confront enemies here at home, , or foreign enemies that hate our 1st Amendment Freedoms. IF YOU WOULD CHANGE THE WORLD... START BY READING THE VIOLENT HISTORY OF ISLAM... Read > Continuum Of Wars < in the Archives, dated March 25, 2010 - Then Print It, and pass along to folks you care about. Read great articles by Marshall Frank & Andrew C. McCarthy. Vigilance Is The PrIce We Must Pay To Save This Republic. Learn more about 'The Enemy Within'; Research 'StealthJihad' - - - > - PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH - YOUR UNWAVERING VIGILANCE WILL PROTECT THIS REPUBLIC - ' *** SUPPORT THE D.A.V. And SUPPORT WOUNDED WARRIORS PROJECT ***

Thursday, August 20, 2015

A Question of Patriotism

By Tabitha Korol

The more we Americans began hearing about the possible nuclear pact with the Islamic Republic of Iran, aka “the Iran deal,” and the more President Obama saw that Americans of all faiths and political opinions realized that the pact was not in our best interest, and the more we heard the old anti-Semitic canards from the White House and the media. Things soured for Obama when Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cautioned against this arrangement, clarifying that the funding of $150 billion for Iran, with cash assets, sanctions relief, and all strings severed could serve to fund its global terrorism operation and defense. In essence, we would be subsidizing Iran’s undertakings and boost its efforts to eradicate Israel. Obama is also setting the stage to turn U.S. citizens against American Jews, a tactic that Jews have experienced through the centuries.

To simplify, America was in a position to be the victor with an agreement to prevent Iran’s becoming a nuclear power, force it to dismantle much of its nuclear infrastructure, prevent it from enriching uranium, close the Fordo enrichment facility, demand that Iran expose all past nuclear activities, close its Inter-continental Ballistic Missile Program (ICBMs aimed at our continent), allow round-the-clock inspections, and continue sanctions until all conditions were met.

Rather, the deal has been called “utterly disastrous.” Kerry agreed to lifting sanctions so that Iran could join the global market and sell oil, all the while increasing our own debt and weakening our own economy by gifting our closet collaborator with $150 billion – he’s bonding with the Islamic entity. By lifting the conventional arms embargo and allowing Iranians to flout the travel ban, Iran could secure more weapons and imperil Israel, “the Little Satan.” It wouldn’t even take much to have their brainwashed, suicidal adults and children detonate themselves in a crowd of Israeli children, shoppers, and general work force. The contract would also allow the lifting of sanctions over Iranian ICBMs after eight years, thereby providing Iran with the means to target the United States, the “Great Satan,” although ineffective provisos would actually free Iran from obligations far sooner – a matter of months.

Instead of the 24/7 inspection America originally stipulated, Iran gets a 24-days’ notice, during which they may move or conceal their activities. Even now, UN inspectors (not to include Americans and Canadians) may not speak with key scientists and military officers about concealed operations. Submission to these stipulations reveals America’s cooperation in the face of Islamic tyranny.

As more Americans voiced their opposition to the pact, the more often we heard snide statements, such as AP’s references to “the money,” and “the lobbyists,” deviously implying that Jews were the only ones to differ with our US government. One of the oldest lies in the world is again in use, as in the past, to provoke pogroms against Jews by classifying them as unfaithful citizens. We hear nefarious references to the “Jewish lobby,” but never the “Arab lobby,” which brings in the unvetted, possibly jihadist, immigrants, the gradual changes in our schools to install Sharia, the 102 million working-age Americans unemployed, the $818 billion taken from Medicare to fund Obamacare, the refusal to submit a budget to prevent the collapse of Social Security, the blatant disregard for our Constitution, and the growing evidence of treason in the White House.

People of all faiths and convictions weighed in against the pact with the terrorist nation. Christians United for Israel (CUFI) stands firmly against making a deal with an entity whose citizens are hair-trigger ready to re-enact another 9/11 or Benghazi, or any of the numerous attacks on Israeli citizens, with cries of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.” Our nation’s veterans have come out against the deal as well. In fact, an overwhelming majority of Americans do not want to sign a pact with the Islamic Republic, and our administration is betraying the will of the majority of the people. But armed with pen and phone, the undeterred Obama warned that he would implement the deal regardless of Congress, and that he would make life miserable for those who oppose him.

When non-Jewish democrats, Juan Vargas (CA), Albio Sires (NJ) and Grace Meng (NY), voiced their opposition, Obama could not lash out at an ethnicity. But once the anti-Semitic hate speech was unleashed, an administration’s pro-deal twitter account began using more blatant Jew-hatred attacks, which was soon to be followed by the New York Times, with its roughly half-dozen “Jewish” references and a smear against Senator Chuck Schumer. Obama provoked a bigoted campaign, calling Schumer a traitor, warmonger, and Israeli agent. Unaccountably, the majority of Jewish voters have blindly and deafly supported Obama in all his problematic demands, and polls show that twice as many Americans, including the Jews, are against the deal, believing it will lead to a more dangerous world.

Yet it is times like these that the President resorts to blatant bigotry and accusations that Jews have dual loyalty, a tactic designed to discourage, silence, and intimidate Jews from acting in their own behalf, lest they be seen as unpatriotic – an efficient, centuries-old technique. Obama has gone so far as to accuse Israel, and Netanyahu specifically, for meddling in America’s business, although it wasn’t so long ago that Obama meddled in Israel’s elections and threatened to tie Israel’s hands. He is determined to continue his modus operandi, “divide and conquer,” to defy and coerce those who work against his “diplomatic triumph.” This will undoubtedly be extended to demonize the Tea Party, AIPAC and other Jewish groups, and go so far as to vandalize, audit and sue them. The threats have been issued – capitulate or be destroyed.

The word is out: President Obama sent then-Senate Foreign Affairs Committee chairman John Kerry to Iran four years ago, and he promised them the bomb. The Washington Free Beacon reported, “President Barack Obama approved of Iran’s right to operate a nuclear program in 2011 during secret meetings with Iranian officials, according to new disclosures by Iran’s Supreme Leader.” Khamenei also revealed in a recent speech that talks began in secret with the anti-Semitic, Holocaust-denying former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

It is not the Jews who are unpatriotic.

Tuesday, August 11, 2015

HILLARY:
THE SERIAL LIAR

by Marshall Frank

It is stunning to me, that a confirmed serial liar could be the recipient of even one vote for elective office. What does that say about our electorate?

This is not a party matter. It’s an integrity matter. Gross dishonesty in public office is a sign that the person cannot be trusted with what they say. We had a president who, in 1974, resigned from the presidency in disgrace for being a serial liar. Yet, there are millions of people who are willing to wear blinders and cast a vote for the most despicable liar in the current political arena, Hillary Clinton.

Imagine for one second, you are the father of a fallen son who was killed in a terror attack while trying to save the lives of others. Within hours, the source of that attack in Benghazi was confirmed as terrorism, though the Obama administration was still spinning a deflective line about an anti-Muslim video, which had nothing to do with the attack.

Four days later you – the dad – are at the receiving ceremony where the bodies lay in coffins. As Mrs. Clinton performs her perfunctory duties extending condolences to the families, she says to you, the father of Tyrone Woods, “We’re going to have that person arrested who did that video.”

How comforting.

Never mind that it was the Secretary of State and her department hierarchy who declined numerous pleas over a period of six months from the Benghazi compound for heightened security. Instead, not only were the requests denied, security was diminished, gutted, almost as though it was timed perfectly so that the attackers were provided an open door.

Never mind that military and intel personnel in Washington and overseas, had established the attack was not because of any video. Never mind that the Clinton and Obama cartel continued to spin the “video” propaganda for three weeks, knowing it was a lie. Never mind that the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, refused to appear on television news programs to answer questions, rather, she cowardly dispatched Susan Rice to appear in her stead on five Sunday network interviews to blather the same lie about the video.

Never mind that Hillary – the head of the state department – took charge of nothing, rather, she disappeared on a three-month tour of planet earth to do nothing more than hide behind the diplomatic mask, flying, shaking hands, photo-ops and no questions.

I cannot imagine any American voter who would think this person would make a trusted president.

In 1974, Nixon’s lies were about a bungled burglary. Hillary’s lies were about the killings of four distinguished American heroes.

I am highlighting this incident because it was a whopper. It pertained to murder. Hillary’s lies are so common, they are laughable. Maybe that’s why no one takes them seriously.

Try this: Click here: Hillary Clinton dodges sniper fire in Bosnia – raw footage – YouTube

Yes, that’s a video from 2008 when Hillary told an audience how she had landed in Bosnia under sniper fire, and had to duck while running from the plane. When on-site people challenged her story as being false, she dismissed saying, “Well, I misspoke.”

She made it up! It was not exaggerations, or a half truth. It was a total lie! And people amazingly continue to give her credibility?

News anchor Brian Williams lost his job at NBC for making up a similar story. Well, maybe he should run for president.

Here’s a few more…cherry-picked because this is only a blog, not a book.

Hillary said that her daughter, Chelsea, was jogging around the World Trade Center during 9/11. Not true. Later, Hillary admitted that Chelsea was safely in her apartment when the attack occurred.

She claimed she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary because he was a hero who climbed Mt. Everest. One problem: Hillary climbed the mountain six years after Clinton was born.

Her family was dead broke when they left the White House in 2001. Boo hoo. That won’t sent well with truly poor people, to know that she was worth about $12 million, not to mention the litany of high-priced speeches she and Bill embarked on.

She claimed to be instrumental in the Northern Ireland peace process. However, the people who were there negotiating the peace say Hillary was never there.

Here’s a few more:

Click here: List of 10 Verified Hillary Clinton Lies | The North Coast Curmudgeon

Now of course, we have all the lies about her government e-mails on her private account and server, not to mention the dishonest act of deleting e-mails before any sub-committee personnel could see them.

Some folks will say this is a political witch hunt. Was the Nixon scandal a political witch hunt, or a disclosure of dishonesty by a government servant? When politicians lie and commit crimes, it is the duty of congress, and the executive department, to investigate and take action. They are not witch hunts. And those who would knowingly protect serial liars like Hillary Clinton ought to think twice, if they are not aiding and abetting a criminal.

I’m hoping Joe Biden enters the race for the Democrats. If the presidency should be retained by the Democrats, at least he’s likeable and far more credible than this woman, who has spent her adult life looking the other way (from philandering Bill) so she could ride on his power train to acquire her lifelong obsession: The Presidency.

God forbid.

Click here: PICKET: (AUDIO) Father of killed Navy SEAL – Hillary told me she would have filmmaker ‘arrested and prosecuted’ –

Click here: Clinton says she ‘misspoke’ about sniper fire – CNN.com

Click here: The Top 7 Hillary Clinton Lies That The Liberal Media’s Trying To Hide…

Click here: Hillary Clinton: We Were Dead Broke – YouTube

Click here: Clinton Aide Cheryl Mills Told to Destroy Emails: Report

Click here: Hillary Clinton deleted all email from personal server – CNNPolitics.com

Tuesday, August 04, 2015

Dawa* at Chautauqua
(*proselytizing of Islam)

By Tabitha Korol

The Chautauqua Institution, deemed an adult education center, is less education than it is indoctrination to the world of The Left. In the month of July, in an idyllic setting, the Institution invited Islamists who speak of “Love and Justice in a World of Suffering,” hiding the truths about the suffering caused by Islam – both the harsh Sharia law already in effect for its adherents and to establish it in Dar Al-Harb (House of War), the countries not yet under Sharia – until the entire world will writhe under Islamic oppression.

Omid Safi, appointed director of Duke University’s Islamic Studies Center in July, 2015, spoke in terms to please the underinformed. He and they would prefer that hideous acts of violence, such as perpetrated by ISIS, ISIL, Boko Haram, Hamas, and countless others with like purpose, be removed from the news media and replaced with stories of compassion. In so doing, of course, he would silence the reporters and critics and destroy our freedom to speak, report, and inform the masses about the evils perpetrated by Muslims, so that we would remain oblivious to Islam’s stealth control over our media and our minds. He would then pursue and obtain legal accommodations without obstacle, force Sharia law over our Constitutional laws without hindrance, and threaten all our freedoms through influence, treachery, and force.

The “pain and suffering” he referenced in Ferguson, Baltimore, and Staten Island, have been shown to be largely incitement encouraged by outsiders who represent Islam and the Left; conquest is best accomplished during turmoil and disorder. The mayhem forces the unprepared, unarmed victims into appeasement mode, to cede their rights and ability to speak and defend in favor of assuaging the unmanageable horde that cries “victimhood.” Peace at any cost. The chaos allows the aggressive to dominate and, under the guise of “love and justice,” impose its law on all nations – thus implementing the laws of Allah through jihad.

Safi was also sure to remind that there was insufficient money for social issues but a glut for our military – an absolute inverted fabrication to which the unaware nod in assent because Chautauqua provides no discussions, no debates, no visitors to provide an opposing view. The rhetoric that passes for intellect remains unchallenged; the audience is never encouraged to analyze and grasp that the narrative undermines their very survival.

In fact, the growth in national health spending and welfare programs have accelerated to levels that, unchecked, will bring our country to bankruptcy. The federal government’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have expanded to cover additional and improved services for 200 million people; and an average of 46+ million people received food stamps on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program during 2012, with more illegal aliens and “new Americans” still coming to our shores – unvetted for physical and mental illnesses, crime, or productivity. The programs thwart incentive to strive, inhibit growth and achievements, and cut back funds for investments, new jobs and opportunities for the many – a future of prosperity.

He advocates cuts to our military budget, already at a pre-World War II low, when the threat to our national security is at an all-time high. Severe cuts in defense spending have already subjected our nation to accumulating strategic risks to such as crisis-readiness, sustaining pilot skills with sufficient flying hours, and maintaining a Naval presence in key regions. Our military must continue diplomatic, economic and intelligence elements for preserving trade routes and stability in vital regions, and serving global interests. Financial support is crucial for military infrastructure and civilian and contractor defense workforce. Safi instigates his audience to desire further increases in social expenditures (higher taxation and prices, shrinking wealth, increased poverty, and compounded national debt) and to diminish our self-defense and military superiority against Islamic or any tyrannical expansionism. Disarmed, submissive subjects are easier to rule and more likely to provide the revenue and manpower needed for further conquest.

Safi reminded his audience of the human condition, always to plead for Muslim suffering, as though they are the eternal victim rather than the perpetual offender. As I mentioned in my previous essay, Mosquitoes in the Mosque, Islam is guilty of jihadi expansionism and the slaughter of hundreds of millions of victims since its inception in 624 A.D., unparalleled by any other people, and ongoing. The FBI has reported that ISIS exists in “every single state,” and Chautauqua has its numerous visitors from the Muslim Brotherhood, including the notorious Imam Rauf, who failed to develop his Cordoba Mosque on Ground Zero but is planning one for this vacation spot in southwestern New York state.

While Safi urged his audience to love and empathize with “the human condition everywhere,” he fails to address those who have fallen prey to Islam. An ardent champion for the end of a Jewish Israel, this corrupt jihadist has written fallacious articles that blamed Israel of atrocities against Arabs, using Holocaust-era photos of bodies from Buchenwald concentration camp! Who invites these speakers to so misinform those who presumably come to learn? How are they vetted and allowed these opportunities to propagandize against our liberties, our nation, and against Israel?

The Chautauqua Institution, originally designed to bring culture, hope, and promise during the Great Depression, now presents a façade of scholarship, intellect, and critical thinking, its attendees duped at a critical time in American history. Alas, idealism does not protect one from ignorance, dogmatism, and foolishness.

Monday, August 03, 2015

Money Jihad

Sharia banks that fund terrorism
The relationship is simple. Jihadists know they can trust sharia-compliant banks to maintain their anonymity, not ask too many questions, and facilitate high-dollar transactions on behalf of their terrorist groups. Some Islamic financial institutions, such as National Commercial Bank and Islami Bank Bangladesh, have taken the relationship a step farther by donating a portion of their bank profits in the form of zakat as an act of corporate “charity” to terrorist organizations, or in the case of Al Rajhi, through private zakat donations of leading bankers. Saudi Arabia and Iran are key bases for these activities, but this is a global phenomenon. Here’s Money Jihad’s short list of the worst offenders:

Al Rajhi Bank: The Saudi financial institution has served as the sharia bank of choice for the world’s jihadists, including East Africa embassy bomber Mamduh Mahmud Salim, Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, and organizations like Indonesian Kompak and Al-Haramain. Bank co-founder Sulaiman Al-Rajhi appeared on the infamous Golden Chain document of Al Qaeda financiers. These allegations were reinforced by the recent U.S. Senate investigation into HSBC’s correspondent relationships.

Al Shamal Islamic Bank: Osama Bin Laden co-founded the Al Shamal in Sudan and invested $50 million there. During the 1990s and early 2000s, Al Qaeda distributed money to its cells through Al Shamal. Funds passed through Al Shamal were used in preparation for terrorist attacks.
National Commercial Bank: Offering conventional and sharia banking services, Saudi Arabia’s self-described first, largest, and most prominent bank is NCB. Among other misdeeds, a Saudi audit revealed that NCB transferred $74 million in the 1990s as zakat through its charitable front organizations to Al Qaeda (see here, here, and here). Khalid bin Mahfouz, the head of the bank, exploited libel laws to sue author Rachel Ehrenfeld in an effort to silence accusations about his role in financing terrorism.

Arab Bank: This conventional bank in Jordan maintains a wholly-owned subsidiary (Islamic International Arab Bank PLC) that offers full-range sharia services. Arab Bank has transferred money on behalf of Comité de Bienfaisance et de Secours aux Palestiniens (CBSP), a notorious French charity, to a known financial subunit of Hamas. The Jordanian bank has paid out insurance benefits to families of suicide bombers for the Saudi Committee—another charity that funds Hamas. Arab Bank has handled transactions for the Holy Land Foundation, whose leaders now sit behind bars for financing terrorism. It has been the subject of American investigations, but the bank has consistently refused to turn over related documents to the U.S.

Islami Bank Bangladesh Limited: IBBL, Bangladesh’s biggest sharia bank, has handled Wahhabi accounts to propagate radical Islam since its inception. In 2011, the Bangladeshi home ministry intelligence revealed that 8 percent of the bank’s profits were diverted as corporate zakat to support jihad in Bangladesh. One of the men on IBBL’s board of sharia advisors was arrested in connection with a terrorist attack against Bangladeshi police officers. The U.S. Senate slammed British bank giant HSBC for maintaining relationships with IBBL despite evidence that it served terrorists like Shaikh Abdur Rahman of Jamatul Mujahideen Bangladesh and terror-funding Islamic charities like IIRO. The Senate’s report also implicated HSBC for disregarding evidence of terror financing at another Bangladeshi sharia bank with whom it worked: Social Islami Bank.

Bank Melli: The Iranian Islamic bank sent “at least $100 million to an Iranian Revolutionary Guard branch that supports Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist groups, the Quds Force” between 2002-06.

Bank Saderat: Another major Iranian sharia finance house, the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned the rocket-funding Bank Saderat, stating that “The bank is used by the Government of Iran to transfer money to terrorist organizations, including Hizballah, Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. A notable example of this is a Hizballah-controlled organization that has received $50 million directly from Iran through Bank Saderat since 2001.”

Other culprits include Dubai Islamic Bank, which is active in both the U.A.E. and Pakistan, and Tadamon Islamic Bank.
So much for “ethical finance.” For further developments, please continue reading Money Jihad, Shariah Finance Watch, and @moneyjihad on Twitter.

Saturday, August 01, 2015

Mosquitoes in the Mosques

By Tabitha Korol

The guidelines for Letters to the Editor of The Chautauquan Daily include warnings that libelous, demeaning or accusatory statements are unacceptable. This also means that the truth must be curtailed, for it is the truth that supremacist Muslims find inappropriate and offensive, even by those who perpetrate the acts.

Nevertheless, I refer to guest speaker Hussein Rashid, who denied the intensity and frequency of religious violence, citing that Muslims kill a mere 17 Americans per year (surely, not in the year 2001), while mosquitoes kill an average of 750,000. This is the new Moral Inversion, that Sharia law is now moral and mosquitoes immoral. Are we to flick a wrist at jihadists and the growing body count? (According to Muslim historian Firistha, Muslims killed ~400 million Indian people during invasions and occupation of the Indian continent alone, bringing the worldwide total to more than 890 million victims since the birth of Mohammed.)

Are we to disregard the religious bigotry? sadistic cruelty? kidnappings? rapes? lifelong captivity? persecution of women? and worldwide terrorism? and arm ourselves with cans of repellant and netting? This may well be the Enlightenment that Rashid attempted to explain – that we misinterpreted the Middle East, that the wretched mosquito kidnaps young girls for sexual slavery, burns churches, and espouses destructive propaganda in America’s universities.

Rashid did eventually declare religions to be violent, but I submit that all religions cannot be so classified. Religions are not equal; their doctrines differ greatly. Buddhism promotes peacefulness, loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity. Hinduism’s many philosophies prescribe honesty, patience, self-restraint, and refraining from injuring living beings. Judaism and Christianity are commonly guided by the Torah and Ten Commandments. Islam’s guide is the Trilogy: Quran, Hadith and Sira.

Compare one Commandment, “Thou shalt not kill/murder,” with the Qur’an’s 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers, to kill infidels wherever they hide, to chop off heads and fingers, threatening Hell if they do not slaughter.

Unlike the Old Testament’s verses of violence that are explained in context of history, those in the Qur’an are open-ended, as relevant today as in the past. Islam’s ideology promotes violence until the nonbelievers accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed – a history of bloodshed and suffering.


Tuesday, July 28, 2015

RATTLESNAKE LOGIC


A Great Rattlesnake Story!!
As long as we insist on maintaining the "moral high ground" we will NEVER win the war on terrorism! We're in a conflict in which we absolutely INSIST in playing by the rules against a maniacal group who have NO rules!
Rattlesnake Logic....

After the Boston bombing the news media spent days and weeks trying to determine why these men did what they did. They want to know what America did(!) to make these brothers so angry with us. They want to know why these men were not arrested before they did something so terrible. The media is in a tizzy about this new era of homegrown radicals and about why and how they can live among us and still hate us.

A friend of mine from Texas explained it all to me: “Here in west Texas , I have rattlesnakes on my place, living among us. I have killed a rattlesnake on the front porch. I have killed a rattlesnake on the back porch. I have killed rattlesnakes in the barn, in the shop and on the driveway. In fact, I kill every rattlesnake I encounter.

I kill rattlesnakes because I know a rattlesnake will bite me and inject me with poison. I don’t stop to wonder WHY a rattlesnake will bite me; I know it WILL bite me because it's a rattlesnake and that's what rattlesnakes do. I don’t try to reason with a rattlesnake or have a "meaningful dialogue" with it…I just kill it. I don’t try to get to know the rattlesnake better so I can find a way to live with the rattlesnakes and convince them not to bite me. I just kill them. I don’t quiz a rattlesnake to see if I can find out where the other snakes are, because (a) it won’t tell me and (b) I already know they live on my place. So, I just kill the rattlesnake and move on to the next one.

I don’t look for ways I might be able to change the rattlesnake to a non-poisonous rat snake...I just kill it. Oh, and on occasion, I accidentally kill a rat snake because I thought it was a rattlesnake at the time. Also, I know for every rattlesnake I kill, two more are lurking out there in the brush. In my lifetime I will never be able to rid my place of rattlesnakes.

Do I fear them? Not really. Do I respect what they can do to me and my family? Yes!! And because of that respect, I give them the fair justice they deserve....I kill them... As a country, we should start giving more thought to the fact that these jihadists' are telling the world their goal is to kill Americans and destroy our way of life. They have just posted two graphic videos on the internet showing them beheading Americans. They are serious. They are exactly like rattlesnakes. It is high time for us to start acting accordingly!

I love this country . It's the government I'm afraid of!

Look who's new in the White House!

Arif Alikhan, Assistant Secretary for Policy Development for the U.S.Department of Homeland Security.
Mohammed Elibiary, Homeland Security Adviser.

Rashad Hussain, Special Envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference(OIC).
Salam al-Marayati, Obama Adviser and founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council and is its current executive director.
Imam Mohamed Magid, Obama's Sharia Czar from the Islamic Society of North America Eboo Patel, Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships. Not new, but the most influential Muslim in the White House: Valerie Jarrett….has more power over Barack than Michelle!

This is flat-out scary!
The foxes are now officially living in the hen house... Now ask me why I am very concerned!
Do you feel OK with this? How can this happen, and when will we wake up? We are quiet while our Country is being drastically changed!

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

A HISTORIC CATASTROPHE

BY THOMAS SOWELL

Distinguished scientist Freeman Dyson has called the 1433 decision of the emperor of China to discontinue his country’s exploration of the outside world the “worst political blunder in the history of civilization.”

The United States seems at this moment about to break the record for the worst political blunder of all time, with its Obama administration deal that will make a nuclear Iran virtually inevitable.

Already the years-long negotiations, with their numerous “deadlines” that have been extended again and again, have reduced the chances that Israel can destroy the Iranian nuclear facilities, which have been multiplied and placed in scattered underground sites during the years when all this was going on.

Israel is the only country even likely to try to destroy those facilities, since Iran has explicitly and repeatedly declared its intention to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.

How did we get to this point — and what, if anything, can we do now? Tragically, these are questions that few Americans seem to be asking. We are too preoccupied with our electronic devices, the antics of celebrities and politics as usual.

During the years when we confronted a nuclear-armed Soviet Union, we at least realized that we had to “think the unthinkable,” as intellectual giant Herman Kahn put it. Today it seems almost as if we don’t want to think about it at all.

Our politicians have kicked the can down the road — and it is the biggest, most annihilating explosive can of all, that will be left for our children and grandchildren to try to cope with.

Back in the days of our nuclear standoff with the Soviet Union, some of the more weak-kneed intelligentsia posed the choice as whether we wanted to be “red or dead.” Fortunately, there were others, especially President Ronald Reagan, who saw it differently. He persevered in a course that critics said would lead to nuclear war. But instead it led to the peaceful conclusion of the Cold War.
President Barack Obama has been following opposite policies, and they are likely to lead to opposite results. The choices left after Iran gets nuclear bombs — and intercontinental missiles that can deliver them far beyond Israel — may be worse than being red or dead.

Bad as life was under the communists, it can be worse under nuclear-armed fanatics, who have already demonstrated their willingness to die — and their utter barbarism toward those who fall under their power.

Americans today who say that the only alternative to the Obama administration’s pretense of controlling Iran’s continued movement toward nuclear bombs is war ignore the fact that Israel bombed Saddam Hussein’s nuclear facilities, and Iraq did not declare war. To do so would have risked annihilation.

Early on, that same situation would have faced Iran. But Obama’s years-long negotiations with Iran allowed the Iranian leaders time to multiply, disperse and fortify their nuclear facilities.

The Obama administration’s leaking of Israel’s secret agreement with Azerbaijan to allow Israeli warplanes to refuel there, during attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, was a painfully clear sabotage of any Israeli attempt to destroy those Iranian facilities.
But the media’s usual practice to hear no evil, see no evil and speak no evil in the Obama administration buried this news, and allowed Obama to continue to pose as Israel’s friend, just as he continued to assure Americans that, if they liked their doctor they could keep their doctor.

Some commentators have attributed Barack Obama’s many foreign policy disasters to incompetence. But he has been politically savvy enough to repeatedly outmaneuver his opponents in America. For example, the Constitution makes it necessary for the President to get a two-thirds majority in the Senate to make any treaty valid. Yet he has maneuvered the Republican-controlled Congress into a position where they will need a two-thirds majority in both Houses to prevent his unilaterally negotiated agreement from going into effect — just by not calling it a treaty.

If he is that savvy at home, why is he so apparently incompetent abroad? Answering that question may indeed require us to “think the unthinkable,” that we have elected a man for whom America’s best interests are not his top priority.




Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Nations Drunk On Hope,
Led By Fools

By: Bret Stephens

The Best Arguments for an Iran Deal The Heroic Assumptions, and False Premises, of our Diplomacy

“Or maybe we won’t be lucky. Maybe there’s no special providence for nations drunk on hope, led by fools.”

In formal rhetoric, prolepsis means the anticipation of possible objections to an argument for the sake of answering them. So let’s be proleptic about the Iranian nuclear deal, whose apologists are already trotting out excuses for this historic diplomatic debacle.

The heroic case. Sure, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is an irascible and violent revolutionary bent on imposing a dark ideology on his people and his neighborhood. Much the same could be said of Mao Zedong when Henry Kissinger paid him a visit in 1971—a diplomatic gamble that paid spectacular dividends as China became a de facto U.S. ally in the Cold War and opened up to the world under Deng Xiaoping.

But the hope that Iran is the new China fails a few tests. Mao faced an overwhelming external threat from the Soviet Union. Iran faces no such threat and is winning most of its foreign proxy wars. Beijing ratcheted down tensions with Washington with friendly table-tennis matches. Tehran ratchets them up by locking up American citizens and seizing cargo ships in the Strait of Hormuz. Deng Xiaoping believed that to get rich is glorious. Iranian President Hasan Rouhani, a supposed reformer, spent last Friday marching prominently in the regime’s yearly “Death to America, Death to Israel” parade.

If there is evidence of an Iranian trend toward moderation it behooves proponents of a deal to show it.

The transactional case. OK, so Iran hasn’t really moderated its belligerent behavior, much less its antediluvian worldview. And a deal won’t mean we won’t still have to oppose Iran on other battlefields, whether it’s Yemen or Syria or Gaza. But that doesn’t matter, because a nuclear deal is nothing more than a calculated swap. Iran puts its nuclear ambitions into cold storage for a decade. In exchange, it comes in from the cold economically and diplomatically. Within circumscribed parameters, everyone can be a winner.

But a transaction requires some degree of trust. Since we can’t trust Iran we need an airtight system of monitoring and verification. Will the nuclear deal provide that? John Kerry will swear that it will, but as recently as January Czech officials blocked a covert $61 million purchase by Iran of “dual-use” nuclear technologies. A month before that, the U.S. found evidence that Iran had gone on an illicit “shopping spree” for its plutonium plant in Arak. That’s what we know. What do we not know?

Also, how does a nuclear deal not wind up being Iran’s ultimate hostage in dictating terms for America’s broader Mideast policy? Will the administration risk its precious nuclear deal if Iran threatens to break it every time the two countries are at loggerheads over regional crises in Yemen or Syria? The North Koreans already mastered the art of selling their nuclear compliance for one concession after another—and they still got the bomb.

The defeatist case. All right: So the Iran deal is full of holes. Maybe it won’t work. Got any better ideas? Sanctions weren’t about to stop a determined regime, and we couldn’t have enforced them for much longer. Nobody wants to go to war to stop an Iranian bomb, not the American public and not even the Israelis. And conservatives, of all people, should know that foreign policy often amounts to a choice between evils. The best case for a nuclear deal is that it is the lesser evil.

Then again, serious sanctions were only imposed on Iran in November 2011. They cut the country’s oil exports by half, shut off its banking system from the rest of the world, sent the rial into free fall and caused the inflation rate to soar to 60%. By October 2013 Iran was six months away from a severe balance-of-payments crisis, according to estimates by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. And that was only the first turn of the economic screw: Iran’s permitted oil exports could have been cut further; additional sanctions could have been imposed on the “charitable” foundations controlled by Iran’s political, military and clerical elite. Instead of turning the screw, Mr. Obama relieved the pressure the next month by signing on to the interim agreement now in force.

It’s true that nobody wants war. But a deal that gives Iran the right to enrich unlimited quantities of uranium after a decade or so would leave a future president no option other than war to stop Iran from building dozens of bombs. And a deal that does nothing to stop Iran’s development of ballistic missiles would allow them to put one of those bombs atop one of those missiles.

Good luck. Americans are a lucky people—lucky in our geography, our founders and the immigrants we attract to our shores. So lucky that Bismarck supposedly once said “there is a special providence for drunkards, fools, and the United States of America.”

Maybe we’ll get lucky again. Maybe Iran will change for the better after Mr. Khamenei passes from the scene. Maybe international monitors will succeed with Iran where they failed with North Korea. Maybe John Kerry is the world’s best negotiator, and this deal was the best we could do.

Or maybe we won’t be lucky. Maybe there’s no special providence for nations drunk on hope, led by fools.

Sunday, July 12, 2015

Republicans Have Needlessly Undermined their Ability to Resist

By Andrew C. McCarthy

No American concession ever empties President Obama’s appeasement reservoir or satisfies Iran’s appetite. So on drone the negotiations toward a disastrous deal that would end sanctions against the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism while paving its way to a nuclear-weapons arsenal. In that connection, as Patrick Brennan noted on the Corner Friday, Senator Ben Sasse has penned a letter to the president that makes a compelling case against a key aspect of the contemplated Iran deal. Specifically, on the critical matter of establishing violations by Iran that would theoretically trigger reinstatement of the sanctions, Senator Sasse objects that Obama is foolishly shifting the burden of persuasion. The deal, he argues, would require the United States to prove Iranian violations rather than forcing Iran to prove it is in compliance. So here’s my problem: Since the obviously perspicacious senator grasps how critical the burden of persuasion is, why did he support the Corker bill?

That legislation, co-sponsored by Sasse and enacted as the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, shifts the burden of persuasion away from President Obama and onto opponents of the Iran deal, thus making the deal virtually impossible to stop or undo. Sasse could not be more right that, in a dispute, the question of who carries the burden of proof can be just as significant as the question of what must be proved. This is best illustrated by our criminal-justice system. How do we put into action the proud boast that we’d rather see the guilty go free than the innocent wrongly convicted? By imposing the burden of persuasion on the state, not the accused. This establishes apresumption of innocence that often makes all the difference: Even if jurors believe the accused has probably committed the charged crime, they must acquit him if the state fails to carry its burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Iran, of course, is not just an accused party; it is an incorrigible recidivist. In overt contempt for our nation and president, Tehran is already in flagrant violation of the “Joint Plan of Action” it agreed to with the administration. The mullahs see that, even as they systematically flout this interim deal, Obama is hell-bent on looking the other way.

It is therefore certain that they will violate the final deal — which will be so frontloaded with carrots (e.g., a $150 billion signing bonus in the form of immediate sanctions relief) that the sticks can be laughed off. So Senator Sasse is right: In the final deal, the burden of persuasion is key. If Iran must prove its compliance to earn concessions, that is one thing; but if the United States must prove violations — not to an impartial jury but to hostile players such as Russia and China, and to Europeans as anxious as Obama to capitulate — then the sanctions are dead and buried.

In light of how crucial the burden of persuasion is, however, would it not have been better to leave in place the one the Constitution imposes on the president? The one that could have prevented Obama from making a legally enforceable deal in the first place? Under the Constitution, the president must persuade a two-thirds supermajority of senators to approve an agreement with a foreign power. That is, as I’ve repeatedly contended in connection with the Iran negotiations, the Constitution’s presumption is against legally binding international pacts. Of course, a president may make a legally non-binding agreement with a foreign sovereign, and he may act on it to the extent allowed by his broad constitutional power to conduct foreign affairs. This, however, does not enable him to ignore valid laws, such as international sanctions, that Congress properly enacts pursuant to its constitutional powers. To undo those, a president must either persuade the Senate to ratify a treaty or persuade the full Congress to repeal the sanctions by ordinary legislation — bills passed by a majority of both houses and signed by the president. Under the Constitution’s burden of persuasion, then, the Iran deal did not have a prayer of becoming law. Senator Sasse is right: In the final Iran deal, the burden of persuasion is key.

Enter the Corker legislation. It undermined the Constitution’s presumption against international agreements by shifting the burden of persuasion: Rather than forcing the president to persuade two-thirds of the Senate to approve the deal, it imposes on opponents the burden of persuading two-thirds of the full Congress to reject it. Even worse, this scheme also undermines the Constitution’s legislative process. The Corker legislation authorizes the president to waive sanctions against Iran even if Congress fails to pass, or to get the president to sign, a resolution approving the waiver. In fact, even if Congress passes a resolution disapproving Obama’s Iran deal, the Corker legislation allows Obama to veto the resolution and waive the sanctions anyway. (See “(c) EFFECT OF CONGRESSIONAL ACTION WITH RESPECT TO NUCLEAR AGREEMENTS WITH IRAN,” subsection (2) describing “statutory sanctions relief” procedure.) Sasse’s letter observes that Obama “administration officials have all but admitted that the sanctions relief will be used by Iran at some level to support terrorism.”

Yup. Sasse warns that “the message [Obama is] sending to other countries is that they can cheat and defy the international community and get away with it.” Indeed. The senator forcefully adds that in the absence of “anywhere-anytime inspections and verification measures, full disclosure of previous weaponization efforts, gradual and conditional sanctions relief, and automatic snap-back of sanctions” — all of which Iran has rejected with the Obama administration’s apparent acquiescence — “Congress should reject the deal and ensure that both sanctions and military action remain on the table.”

Exactly. So, with Republicans in control of both houses of Congress and seemingly unified against Obama’s awful Iran deal, what was the point of supporting and enacting legislation that has made it exponentially harder for Congress to reject the deal, preserve the sanctions, and keep the military option on the table? It is good that Senator Sasse recognizes the importance of the burden of persuasion.

The problem is that President Obama recognized it back when the Corker bill was being considered. That’s why he signed it. — Andrew C. McCarthy is a policy fellow at the National Review Institute. His latest book is Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421047/iran-deal-ben-sasse-letter

Saturday, July 11, 2015

OFFENDED by the OFFENDED


by Marshall Frank

I’m offended.

I’m a straight white male born of east European ancestry, a taxpaying American citizen now retired after gainful employment for 40 years with no handicaps or religious affiliation. I have no standing to be offended.

But I am. I’m offended by people constantly being offended. Seems that every conceivable minority group who is “offended” gets just what they are looking for: attention from news media and politicians. News organizations cash in with stories while politicians wave their wet fingers in the air to cash in voting blocs.

I don’t care if Donald Trump ever becomes president, but I will defend his right to freely express viewpoints as a public figure just as I would Sen. Bernie Sanders who openly espouses his politics as socialist. “Socialism” was once a dirty word in American politics, as was “communism,” and for good reason. No more.

Times have changed. Socialists are often applauded today in liberal circles, but anyone who exclaims being offended over illegal aliens committing crimes in our country is branded a “racist.” Donald Trump became an overnight threat to his opposition within Democratic and Republican circles when he quickly rose to No. 2 in the polls. When making general statements about the flow of undocumented immigrants from Mexico, everyone — including his enemies — knew exactly that his message concerned out-of-control illegal immigrants committing violent crimes in America. That’s telling the truth, nothing else. Plenty of statistical data supports that assertion. But in today’s America, criminal supporters get offended while the truth tellers are rebuked.

Thousands of horror stories exist to support Trump’s assertion, like illegal alien Francisco Sanchez, recently arrested for randomly shooting and killing an innocent woman in San Francisco. Sanchez had seven felonies on record, plus five deportations, all of which achieved nada for law-abiding citizens. Statistics are alarming. According to the FBI:

•83 and 86 percent of warrants for murder in Phoenix and Albuquerque are for illegals, respectively
•75 percent on the Most Wanted lists in these cities, and L.A., are illegal aliens.
•Illegals account for 25 percent of the federal prison population, plus 48.2 percent in New Mexico.
•630,000 illegal alien felons fill state and federal prisons daily, costing $1.6 billion annually
•Per Huffington Post, 80 percent of women coming across the border are raped in the process.

As the saying goes, never pass up a good crisis. This crisis has been manufactured against Mr. Trump, much like black conservative Herman Cain experienced in 2008 when he rose near the top in the polls. A pair of females suddenly emerged to “expose” Mr. Cain as a notorious flirt/sexist. Score one for the offended.

Now, the Hispanic anti-conservative sector has flexed its offended muscles, because being offended has rewards. Being offended is in vogue, particularly for gays and lesbians, illegal aliens, Muslims, blacks, Asians, women, Native Americans and others. Purveyors have even formed an agenda against a professional football team for a nickname it’s had for 80 years.

It’s impossible for Anglo white males to be offended — they have no political niche. Evangelical Christians are mostly conservative, so when they’re offended, who will listen? Then there are Jews. More than 60 percent of religion-based hate crimes are directed toward Jews, while 13.7 percent target Muslims (FBI; 2013). Yet, we hear little blustering about “offensiveness” from the Jewish community, but offending Muslims draws headlines.

While politicians mutter the same old mantra about needing immigration reform, Trump came out more forceful than others. Fact: All the blah blah from both sides of the aisle about immigration for the past 20 years has accomplished zero. So, maybe Trump’s approach should be commended, not condemned.

The wall is still unfinished, the border remains porous, border officers are hamstrung, illegals find open arms in sanctuary cities and a good percentage of them commit crimes. The president’s executive orders allowing de facto amnesty to illegals has exacerbated, rather than improved, an on-going criminal dilemma.

All of that offends me. But…who am I?

Pluto And Us

By Charles Krauthammer

WASHINGTON — We need a pick me up. Amid the vandalizing of Palmyra, the imminent extinction of the northern white rhino, the disarray threatening Europe’s most ambitious attempt ever at peaceful unification — amid plague and pestilence and, by God, in the middle of Shark Week — where can humanity turn for uplift?

Meet New Horizons, arriving at Pluto on July 14. Small and light, the fastest spacecraft ever launched, it left Earth with such velocity that it shot past our moon in nine hours. A speeding bullet the size of a Steinway, it has flown 9 1/2 years to the outer edges of the solar system.

To Pluto, the now-demoted “dwarf planet” that lives beyond the Original Eight in the far distant “third zone” of the solar system — the Kuiper Belt, an unimaginably huge ring of rocks and ice and sundry debris where the dwarf is king.

After 3 billion miles, New Horizons will on Tuesday shoot right through Pluto’s mini-planetary system of five moons, the magnificently named Charon, Styx, Nix, Hydra and Kerberos.

Why through? Because, while the other planets lie on roughly the same plane, Pluto and its moon system stick up at an angle to that plane like a giant archery target. New Horizons gets one pass, going straight by the bull’s-eye. No orbiting around, no lingering for months or even years to photograph and study.

No mulligans. And no navigating. Can’t do that when it takes 4 1/2 hours for a message from Earth to arrive. This is a preprogrammed, single-take, nine-day deal.

For what? First, for the science, the coming avalanche of new knowledge. Remember: We didn’t even know there was a Pluto until 85 years ago when astronomer Clyde Tombaugh found a strange tiny dot moving across the star field.

Today, we still know practically nothing. In fact, two of the five moons were not discovered until after New Horizons was launched. And yet next week we will see an entirely new world come to life. “We’re not planning to rewrite any textbooks,” said principal investigator Alan Stern in a splendid New York Times documentary on the mission. “We’re planning to write them from scratch.”

Then there’s the romance. The Pluto fly-by caps a half-century of solar system exploration that has yielded staggering new wonders. Such as Europa, one of Jupiter’s moons, with its vast subterranean ocean under a crust of surface ice, the most inviting potential habitat for extraterrestrial life that human beings will ever reach.

Yes, ever. Promising exoplanets — the ones circling distant stars that we deduce might offer a Goldilocks zone suitable for water-based life — are being discovered by the week. But they are unreachable. The journey to even the nearest would, at New Horizons speed, take 280,000 years. Even mere communication would be absurdly difficult. A single exchange of greetings — “Hi there,” followed by “Back at you, brother” — would take a generation.

It’s the galactic version of the old Trappist monastery joke where every seven years one monk at one meal is allowed one remark. A young novice arrives and after seven years a monk stands up at dinner and says: “The soup is cold.” Seven years of silence. Then another monk stands and says: “The bread is stale.” Seven years later, the now-aging novice rises and says: “If you don’t stop this bickering, I’m outta here.”

Which is what a conversation with Klingons would be like, except with longer intervals. Which is why we prefer to scour our own solar system. And for more than just the science, more than just the romance. Here we are, upright bipeds with opposable thumbs, barely down from the trees, until yesterday unable to fly, to communicate at a distance, to reproduce a sound or motion or even an image — and even today barely able to manage the elementary decencies of civilization — taking close-up pictures and chemical readings of a mysterious world 9 1/2 years away.

One final touch. Every ounce of superfluous weight has been stripped from New Horizons to give it more speed and pack more instruments. Yet there was one concession to poetry. New Horizons is carrying some of Clyde Tombaugh’s ashes. After all, he found the dot. Not only will he fly by his netherworldly discovery, notes Carter Emmart of the American Museum of Natural History, he will become the first human being to have his remains carried beyond the solar system.

For the wretched race of beings we surely are, we do, on occasion, manage to soar.


Thursday, July 09, 2015

Is Your Church Abetting Sanctuary Nation?


By Michelle Malkin

The random, heartless murder of a young tourist on San Francisco’s Pier 14 by a five-time illegal alien deportee who benefited from the “progressive” city’s sanctuary policy has law-abiding Americans, law enforcement officials and political opportunists of all stripes up in arms.

But for decades, feckless government leaders ignored the pleas of families who suffered the bloody consequences of open borders.

For every Kate Steinle who died at the hands of an illegal alien sanctuary beneficiary, there is a Tony, Michael and Matthew Bologna in San Francisco.

A Jamiel Shaw (age 17) or Xinran Ji (age 24) in Los Angeles.
A Martin Kudlis (age 3) in Denver.

An Iofemi Hightower, Dashon Harvey, Terrance Aeriel, or Natasha Aeriel in Newark.
A Zina Linnik (age 12) in Tacoma.

A Vanessa Pham (age 19) in Fairfax County, Va.
As I’ve reported time and again, liberal “sanctuary” programs in these metropolitan areas have protected, harbored and enabled criminal illegal aliens who disappeared into the deportation abyss. Both Democrats and Republicans, goaded by Big Government and Big Business interests, collaborated to turn America into a collective sanctuary nation. Non-enforcement is the rule, deportation evasion is the game, and the country is a safe haven — for law-breakers from around the world.

Yet, even as born-again tough-on-borders grandstanders now race in front of cameras to condemn these dangerous policies, churches across the country are brazenly thumbing their noses at our immigration laws. And political phonies are doing nothing to stop them.

In Northeast Portland, Ore., the Augustana Lutheran Church is shielding illegal alien Francisco Aguirre-Velasquez after he committed drunk driving and drug crimes and violated deportation rules.

In Tucson, Ariz., illegal alien Daniel Neyoy Ruiz took open, public refuge at Southside Presbyterian Church and then First Christian Church to avoid deportation. Fellow illegal alien Rosa Robles Loreto has been living at First Christian for nearly a year.

In Austin, Texas, First Unitarian Universalist church is harboring illegal alien Sulma Franco after the feds denied her deportation appeal.
In Denver, illegal alien Arturo Armando Hernandez Garcia has taken up long-term residence at First Unitarian Society of Denver church.
In Chicago, illegal alien Elvira Arellano settled at the United Methodist Church of Adalberto for a year before finally being ejected back to Mexico. Last year, the serial law-breaker somehow returned to the Windy City to protest her status “in the shadows.”

The Catholic Church has been at the forefront of the 1960s-era sanctuary movement, with top officials openly promoting immigration anarchy and lawlessness among their flock in the name of “humanity” and “compassion.”

As I’ve long noted, it’s one thing to show compassion to legal immigrants, legitimate refugees and asylees, and those abused and mistreated by smugglers. It’s quite another to conspire against an orderly immigration and entrance system that imposes common-sense limits, eligibility requirements, criminal background checks, medical screening and a commitment to assimilation. Catholic groups have contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to building shelters for illegal aliens from Central America and way stations in southern Mexico.

The unholy alliance between church leaders and the open-borders lobby extends from the Vatican to Rev. Jim Wallis’ Faith in Public Life (FPL) network, the Los Angeles-based Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice (CLUE) and the George Soros-tied Interfaith Worker Justice (IWJ). It’s a web of nearly 100 interfaith committees, campus agitators and “workers centers” steeped in the organizing tactics of Saul Alinsky on behalf of millions of illegal aliens filling the pews and coffers of their abettors.

Capitol Hill’s abdication of its duties to protect and defend our borders is bad enough. But if people of faith choose to sit silently as a “new sanctuary movement” of tax-exempt houses of worship defiantly and recklessly undermines our immigration laws, our national sovereignty doesn’t have a prayer.

Friday, July 03, 2015

THE WORST AGREEMENT IN U.S. DIPLOMATIC HISTORY

By Charles Krauthammer

WASHINGTON -- The devil is not in the details. It's in the entire conception of the Iran deal, animated by President Obama's fantastical belief that he, uniquely, could achieve detente with a fanatical Islamist regime whose foundational purpose is to cleanse the Middle East of the poisonous corruption of American power and influence.

In pursuit of his desire to make the Islamic Republic into an accepted, normalized “successful regional power,” Obama decided to take over the nuclear negotiations. At the time, Tehran was reeling—the rial plunging, inflation skyrocketing, the economy contracting—under a regime of international sanctions painstakingly constructed over a decade.

Then, instead of welcoming Congress' attempt to tighten sanctions to increase the pressure on the mullahs, Obama began the negotiations by loosening sanctions, injecting billions into the Iranian economy (which began growing again in 2014) and conceding in advance an Iranian right to enrich uranium.

It has been downhill ever since. Desperate for a legacy deal, Obama has played the supplicant, abandoning every red line his administration had declared essential to any acceptable deal.

Inspections

They were to be anywhere, anytime, unimpeded. Now? Total cave. Unfettered access has become “managed access.” Nuclear inspectors will have to negotiate and receive Iranian approval for inspections. Which allows them denial and/or crucial delay for concealing any clandestine activities.

To give a flavor of the degree of our capitulation, the administration played Iran's lawyer on this one, explaining that, after all, “the United States of America wouldn't allow anybody to get into every military site, so that's not appropriate.” Apart from the absurdity of morally equating America with the world's foremost state sponsor of terrorism, if we were going to parrot the Iranian position, why wait 19 months to do so—after repeatedly insisting on free access as essential to any inspection regime?

Coming clean on past nuclear activity

The current interim agreement that governed the last 19 months of negotiation required Iran to do exactly that. Tehran has offered nothing. The administration had insisted that this accounting was essential because how can you verify future illegal advances in Iran's nuclear program if you have no baseline?

After continually demanding access to their scientists, plans and weaponization facilities, Secretary of State John Kerry two weeks ago airily dismissed the need, saying he is focused on the future, “not fixated” on the past. And that we have “absolute knowledge” of the Iranian program anyway—a whopper that his staffers had to spend days walking back.

Not to worry, we are told. The accounting will be done after the final deal is signed. Which is ridiculous. If the Iranians haven't budged on disclosing previous work under the current sanctions regime, by what logic will they comply after sanctions are lifted?

Sanctions relief

These were to be gradual and staged as the International Atomic Energy Agency certified Iranian compliance over time. Now we're going to be releasing up to $150 billion as an upfront signing bonus. That's 25 times the annual budget of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Enough to fuel a generation of intensified Iranian aggression from Yemen to Lebanon to Bahrain.

Yet three months ago, Obama expressed nonchalance about immediate sanctions relief. It's not the issue, he said. The real issue is “snap-back” sanctions to be reimposed if Iran is found in violation.

Good grief. Iran won't be found in violation. The inspection regime is laughable and the bureaucratic procedures endless. Moreover, does anyone imagine that Russia and China will reimpose sanctions? Or that the myriad European businesses preparing to join the Iranian gold rush the day the deal is signed will simply turn around and go home?

Non-nuclear-related sanctions

The administration insisted that the nuclear talks would not affect separate sanctions imposed because of Iranian aggression and terrorism. That was then. The administration is now leaking that everything will be lifted.

Taken together, the catalog of capitulations is breathtaking: spot inspections, disclosure of previous nuclear activity, gradual sanctions relief, retention of non-nuclear sanctions.

What's left? A surrender document of the kind offered by defeated nations suing for peace. Consider: The strongest military and economic power on Earth, backed by the five other major powers, armed with what had been a crushing sanctions regime, is about to sign the worst international agreement in American diplomatic history.

How did it come to this? With every concession, Obama and Kerry made clear they were desperate for a deal.

And they will get it. Obama will get his “legacy.” Kerry will get his Nobel. And Iran will get the bomb.

Thursday, July 02, 2015

Agreement?

By Adam Kredo

VIENNA—Iranian officials said Monday that the Islamic Republic’s Central Bank has successfully repatriated 13 tons of gold as part of a package of sanctions relief provided to Iran by U.S. and Western powers.

The gold was transferred to Iran by the government of South Africa, which had been holding onto the assets due to harsh sanctions meant to pressure Tehran to reign in its rogue nuclear program.

The gold appears to have been released as part of a sanctions relief package that will have awarded Iran nearly $12 billion in unfrozen cash assets by the time negotiations wrap up next week.

Iran received $4.2 billion in unfrozen assets under the 2013 interim agreement with the United States and was then given another $2.8 billion by the Obama administration last year in a bid to keep Tehran committed to the talks.

The State Department calculates that Iran will have received a total of $11.9 billion in cash assets.

The governor of Iran’s Central Bank announced to the country’s state-controlled media that the South Africans have finally returned the 13 tons of gold.

“A sum of 13 tons of gold that had been purchased before and was deposited in South Africa in the past two years and could not be transferred to Iran due to the sanctions… was delivered to the Central Bank of Iran’s treasury last night,” Central Bank Governor Valiollah Seif was quoted as saying by the Fars News Agency.

Seif said Iranian officials had been working for some time to secure the gold’s release, but that the country was prevented from doing so as a result of the “illogical problems that were created under the pretext of the sanctions.”

“The removal of Iran’s sanctions and gaining access to the country’s financial and gold resources abroad is one of the main objectives of Iran’s negotiating team in the ongoing nuclear talks,” Fars reported.

Meanwhile, Iran’s ambassador to Paris this weekend stressed that his country’s main objective in the talks is to end international sanctions, which had nearly crippled Iran’s economy at their peak.

“Fortunately, the West has come to realize that the weapon of sanctions has not been effective and has been forced to change its approach and recognize Iran’s legitimate rights,” the official was quoted as saying on Tuesday.

Iran’s GDP has grown 3 percent in the last year, prompting experts to warn that ongoing sanctions still imposed on Tehran are not working.

“The report represents the latest sign of improvement in Iran’s economy in part as a result of the partial sanctions relief it received after signing an interim nuclear agreement in November 2013,” according to Iranian expert Saeed Ghasseminejad, an associate fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD).

This rate of growth has enabled Iran to grow its oil sector and halve its rate of inflation.

“The erosion of the sanctions regime raise serious questions over Western countries’ leverage over Tehran in nuclear negotiations, and whether reaching an acceptable nuclear deal is even possible,” Ghasseminejad said.

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Supreme Court Disasters

BY THOMAS SOWELL

Many people are looking at the recent Supreme Court decisions about ObamaCare and same-sex marriage in terms of whether they think these are good or bad policies. That is certainly a legitimate concern, for both those who favor those policies and those who oppose them.

But there is a deeper and more long-lasting impact of these decisions that raise the question whether we are still living in America, where “we the people” are supposed to decide what kind of society we want, not have our betters impose their notions on us.

The Constitution of the United States says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted to it by the Constitution — and that all other powers belong either to the states or to the people themselves.

That is the foundation of our freedom, and that is what is being dismantled by both this year’s Obamacare decision and last year’s ObamaCare decision, as well as by the Supreme Court’s decision imposing a redefinition of marriage.

Last year’s Supreme Court decision declaring ObamaCare constitutional says that the federal government can order individual citizens to buy the kind of insurance the government wants them to buy, regardless of what the citizens themselves prefer.

The Constitution gave the federal government no such power, but the Supreme Court did. It did so by citing the government’s power to tax, even though the ObamaCare law did not claim to be taxing.

This year’s ObamaCare decision likewise ignored the actual words of the law, and decided that the decisions of 34 states not to participate in ObamaCare Exchanges, even to get federal subsidies, would not prevent those federal subsidies to be paid anyway, to Exchanges up by the federal government itself.

When any branch of government can exercise powers not authorized by either statutes or the Constitution, “we the people” are no longer free citizens but subjects, and our “public servants” are really our public masters. And America is no longer America. The freedom for which whole generations of Americans have fought and died is gradually but increasingly being taken away from us with smooth and slippery words.

This decision makes next year’s choice of the next President of the United States more crucial than ever, because with that office goes the power to nominate justices of the Supreme Court. Democrats have consistently nominated people who shared their social vision and imposed their policy preferences, too often in disregard of the Constitution.

Republicans have complained about it but, when the power of judicial appointment was in the hands of Republican presidents, they have too often appointed justices who participated in the dismantling of the Constitution — and usually for the kinds of social policies preferred by Democrats.

Chief Justices appointed by Republican presidents have made landmark decisions for which there was neither Constitutional authority nor either evidence or logic. The first was Earl Warren.

When Chief Justice Warren said that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal,” he was within walking distance of an all-black public high school that sent a higher percentage of its graduates on to college than any white public high school in Washington. As far back as 1899, that school’s students scored higher on tests than two of the city’s three white academic public high schools.

Nevertheless, Chief Justice Warren’s unsubstantiated assumption led to years of school busing across the country that was as racially divisive as it was educationally futile.

Chief Justice Warren Burger, also appointed by a Republican president, gave us the “disparate impact” notion that statistical disparities imply discrimination. That notion has created a whole statistical shakedown racket, practiced by government itself and by private race hustlers alike.

And now Chief Justice John Roberts, appointed by George W. Bush, gives the federal government the power to order us to buy whatever insurance they want us to buy. With that entering wedge, is there anything they cannot force us to do, regardless of the Constitution?
Can the Republicans — or the country — afford to put another mushy moderate in the White House, who can appoint more mushy moderates to the Supreme Court?

Saturday, June 27, 2015

A Prediction You Should Hope is Wrong


by Dan Friedman
In the coming years, it will be harder and harder for Americans to remain indifferent to Islamic terrorism, because so much of it will be close to home disrupting our daily lives and dividing the nation along a deep ideological fault line. We’ve already seen the split that followed in the aftermath of the Texas cartoon contest - as many condemned Pamela Geller as praised her.

That’s only a sample of things to come. As terrorist attacks in our nation become more frequent and more deadly, American thinking will become more sharply divided, pitting one side blaming the victims for being “provocative” against the other side blaming the Islamists for being terrorists. Depending on which worldview prevails, an oppressive atmosphere could settle over the USA – and for all and intents and purposes that would mean the terrorists have won a decisive battle in their Jihad to destroy our society and way of life.
The wild card in all this is the outcome of the 2016 election. It is probably our best (or last) hope.

Americans are not quick studies and are easily distracted. 9/11 was a warning most of us have already forgotten. If we don’t elect a president who loves our Constitution, shares our values, and is willing to do the hard work to reverse Obama’s damage, we will suffer a slow death like the frog in the kettle. What happens after that is anyone’s guess.

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

BHO Creating Nazi Germany With A-Bombs


“You Were Given The Choice Between War And Dishonor. You Chose Dishonor And You Will Have War.”

-- Winston Churchill

[We are on the verge of one of history’s costliest mistakes. A blunder that will make the aftermath of Munich seem like a scraped knee after a trip on the sidewalk. Tragically, the horrible consequences will affect us for generations, compounded by the fact we let this happen in broad daylight right under our noses. In spite of the many warnings, we’ve allowed Obama to risk the destruction of everything civilization has built over the centuries - all in exchange for a few years of “quiet.” What makes this a great sin is that Heaven knows full well Obama did this with little or no resistance from we the people who could have stopped it. Be patient. We will not be disappointed - all Hell will break loose in due course. - D/F Top Copy, NYC]

Jun. 24, 2015


Click here>AP Exclusive: Document outlines big-power nuke help to Iran


By GEORGE JAHN

VIENNA (AP) — The United States and other nations negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran are ready to offer high-tech reactors and other state-of-the-art equipment to Tehran if it agrees to crimp programs that can make atomic arms, according to a confidential document obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press.

The draft document — one of several technical appendices meant to accompany the main text of any deal — has dozens of bracketed text where disagreements remain. Technical cooperation is the least controversial issue at the talks, and the number of brackets suggest the sides have a ways to go not only on that topic but also more contentious disputes with little more than a week until the June 30 deadline for a deal.

With that deadline looming, Iran's top leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on Tuesday rejected a long-term freeze on nuclear research and supported banning international inspectors from accessing military sites. Khamenei, in comments broadcast on Iranian state television, also said Iran will sign a final deal provided all economic sanctions now on Iran are first lifted — in a sign the Islamic Republic may be toughening its stance ahead of the deadline.

The West has always held out the prospect of providing Iran peaceful nuclear technology in the nearly decade-long international diplomatic effort designed to reduce Tehran's potential ability to make nuclear weapons. But the scope of the help now being offered in the draft may displease U.S. congressional critics who already argue that Washington has offered too many concessions at the negotiations.

Iran denies any interest in nuclear weapons but is prepared to make concessions in exchange for relief from billions of dollars in economic penalties. Beyond a pact limiting Iran's ability to make a nuclear weapon for at least 10 years, the U.S. and its negotiating partners hope to eliminate any grounds for Iran to argue that it needs to expand programs that could be used to make such arms once an agreement expires.

To that end, the draft, entitled "Civil Nuclear Cooperation," promises to supply Iran with light-water nuclear reactors instead of its nearly completed heavy-water facility at Arak, which would produce enough plutonium for several bombs a year if completed as planned.

Reducing the Arak reactor's plutonium output was one of the main aims of the U.S. and its negotiating partners, along with paring down Iran's ability to produce enriched uranium — like plutonium, a potential pathway to nuclear arms.

Outlining plans to modify that heavy-water reactor, the draft, dated June 19, offers to "establish an international partnership" to rebuild it into a less proliferation-prone facility while leaving Iran in "the leadership role as the project owner and manager."

The eight-page draft also promises "arrangements for the assured supply and removal of nuclear fuel for each reactor provided," and offers help in the "construction and effective operation" of the reactors and related hardware. It also offers to cooperate with Iran in the fields of nuclear safety, nuclear medicine, research, nuclear waste removal and other peaceful applications.

As well, it firms up earlier tentative agreement on what to do with the underground site of Fordo, saying it will be used for isotope production instead of uranium enrichment.

Washington and its allies had long insisted that the facility be repurposed away from enrichment because Fordo is dug deep into a mountain and thought resistant to air strikes — an option neither the U.S. nor Israel has ruled out should talks fail.

But because isotope production uses the same technology as enrichment and can be quickly re-engineered to enriching uranium, the compromise has been criticized by congressional opponents of the deal.

A diplomat familiar with the negotiations said China was ready to help in re-engineering the heavy water reactor at Arak; France in reprocessing nuclear waste, and Britain in the field of nuclear safety and security.

He spoke on the eve of Wednesday's new round of nuclear talks in Vienna and demanded anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the confidential talks.

Diplomats say the other appendices include ways of dealing with enrichment; limits on Iran's research and development of advanced uranium-enriching centrifuges and ways of making sure Tehran is keeping its commitment to the deal.

Iran has most publicly pushed back on how much leeway the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency would have in monitoring Tehran's nuclear activities. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is rebuffing U.S. demands that the IAEA have access to military sites and nuclear scientists as they keep an eye on Iran's present activities and try to follow up suspicions that the country worked in the past on a nuclear weapon.

But a senior U.S. official who demanded anonymity in exchange for commenting on the talks said Tuesday that the sides are still apart not only on how transparent Iran must be but all other ancillary issues as well. Separately, White House spokesman Josh Earnest suggested the talks could go past June 30.

If a deal "requires us to take a couple of extra days ... then we'll do that," he said.

A delay up to July 9 is not a deal-breaker. If Congress receives a deal by then, it has 30 days to review it before President Barack Obama could suspend congressional sanctions.

But postponement beyond that would double the congressional review period to 60 days, giving both Iranian and U.S. opponents more time to work on undermining an agreement.

Earnest indicated that negotiations may continue even if the sides declare they have reached a final deal, in comments that may further embolden congressional critics who say the talks already have gone on too long.

He said that even past that point, ongoing "differences of opinion ... may require additional negotiations."



Tuesday, June 23, 2015

a la Fiorina

by Tabitha Korol

"There was once a civilization that was the greatest in the world"

And so began a mythical, deceptive tale by Carly Fiorina, when she spoke in praise of Islam within a mere two weeks of their bombing of the World Trade Center. The concern is not that she was attempting to deceive others, but that she, a person who aspires to the presidency of the United States, was herself deceived regarding the true nature of Islam, and that she has never retracted her statements.

"{Islam's} armies were made up of many nationalities...{Islam} was able to create a continental super-state...within its dominion lived hundreds of millions of people, of different creeds and ethnic origins," and "the reach of this civilization's commerce..."*

As a religious leader, Mohammed converted few followers. As political and military leader, he was far more successful – torturing and beheading 700 stalwart Medinan Jews, raping and enslaving women, and conscripting the survivors for jihad (holy war). Thus he dominated different creeds and ethnic origins, replenishing his army with many nationalities, and increasing his wealth with booty.

“Within its dominion” is Fiorina’s euphemism for “living under domination.” All non-Muslims, slaves and women were treated with contempt, unequal under law but economically necessary. Although specific enmity was directed against Jews and Christians, the severe “jizya” tax was imposed on “infidels” as humiliation and punishment for rejecting Mohammed. This tax and many other discriminatory laws extended through the centuries to Nestorians, Syrians, and Romans of newly conquered empires, and further to animists, Buddhists, Hindus, Mongols, Greeks, and Armenians (the Armenian Genocide), who suffered torture and death.

Jews held trades and occupations that Muslims judged inferior - including “this civilization’s commerce,” diplomacy, banking, brokerage, espionage, working in gold and silver, and cleaning cesspools. The inevitable deterioration of relations between Muslims and the outside world meant more restrictions and social segregation for non-Muslims (dhimmis), but the subservient and useful survived.

"...It's military protection allowed a degree of peace and prosperity that had never been known."

“Peace,” as the absence of discord, existed, depending on the beneficence of the ruling caliphate and internal/external changes, but from the twelfth to thirteenth centuries onward, tolerance decreased; intellectual, social and commercial life depreciated, and ever-increasing restrictions and deprivation for dhimmis were imposed.

"And this civilization was driven more than anything, by invention. It's architects designed buildings that defied gravity."

The inventions and contributions were made by victims of the Muslim jihadists who invaded the “infidel” world over 1400 years, enslaving, slaughtering, and plundering. Islam is antithetical to creativity, but based on envious resentment of the accomplishments of others. Their greatest achievement was their ability to expropriate every creative, innovative groundbreaking device of Islam’s victims and to fraudulently claim each as their own.

Fiorina’s reference to “buildings that defied gravity,” as in “air-borne,” surely defies logic, but she doubtless refers to the arches, which were already in use in prehistoric times by ancient Egyptians, Babylonians and Greeks. With the help of concrete made from lime and volcanic sand, Roman arches could support huge weight, and were soon adopted by Byzantine and Romanesque architects, evolving into the groundbreaking inventions of the Gothic arch and flying buttress in northern (Christian) Europe. Meanwhile, the Muslims also adopted the Syrian styles, followed with Greek, Byzantine and Persian, and later Chinese and Indian, architecture, to develop pointed, scalloped and horseshoe arches for mosques and palaces. Even the vaulted and hemispherical (domed) ceilings were invented by the non-Muslim Romans.

It's mathematicians created the algebra and algorithms that would enable the building of computers and the creation of encryption."

The first positional numerical system was developed in 2nd millennium BCE Babylon, over 800 years before Islam; the first true “zero” was developed by mathematicians in the Indian Subcontinent. Persian and Arab mathematicians are believed to have adopted the Hindu-Arabic numerical system in India. The work of Italian scholar, Fibonacci, was crucial in bringing them to Europe and the world. Francois Viete, French lawyer, mathematician and privy councilor to Henry III and Henry IV, provided the step from “new algebra” to modern algebra.

Only an Islamist steeplechaser could leap from working with numbers to creating computers and encryptions centuries later. English polymath Charles Babbage, mathematician, philosopher, inventor, and mechanical engineer, conceived the first programmable computer (1830). Alan Turing laid the groundwork for computational science; Korad Zuse is credited as “the first freely programmable computer."

The earliest form of cryptography is on stone in Egypt (190 BCE), long before Islam. Ciphers were used by the Spartan military and in the 2000-year-old Kamasutra of India. It wasn't until the 9th century that Arab mathematicians and polymath Al-Kindi worked with cryptography.

"Its doctors examined the human body and found new cures for diseases."

Arabs had no scientific traditions; their scientists were largely Jews who were forcibly converted as a result of Islam's rampaging throughout the Near East, Egypt, and Libya. As a typical example, Jews and Berbers, who lived together harmoniously in North Africa, were overcome by 60,000 Islamic troops in 694, and the descendants of those who survived the massacre became “Arabic” philosophers and scientists.

A great physician, Egyptian Jew, Isaac Israel of Kairouan, immigrated to West Africa. His surviving works on logic, Aristotelian physics, and pharmacology became the standard for medical history, and it was from him that the greatest of “Arab” scientists, Avicenna (980-1037), drew inspiration. Known as the Aristotle of the East, Avicenna wrote in Arabic and became a vizier in Persia, but he was born near Bokhara, then heavily populated by Jews, and was probably of Jewish origin. Even so, physicians who attended lords and kings of Islam and Christendom were largely Jews.

Its astronomers looked into the heavens, named the stars, and paved the way for space travel and exploration."

Jewish savants were largely responsible for the invention and development of instruments and astronomical tables that facilitated world-girdling sea voyages. The Jerusalem Talmud (tractate Avodah Zarah, Ch.3, fol.,42c) strongly implies the spherical nature of the earth. The astrolabe, used by Islamic astronomers as a guide to the sky and to tell time by the position of heavenly bodies, was introduced into the Arab-speaking world by a “remarkable Jewish genius, Mashala of Mosul, the phoenix of his age.” Astronomical tables, compiled by the Jew, Joseph ben Wallar at Toledo (1396), and in Aragon by Judaic specialists, including Emanuel ben Jacob (aka Bonfils de Tarascon), were used with the astrolabe.

The Jews were among the most notable cartographers, the most advanced being a Jew forcibly converted to Christianity. Christopher Columbus’s cartographers and other companions may have been conversos. The most reputable astronomer of the day, Abraham Zacuto (1452-1515), instructed Columbus on using the perfected astrolabe, also used by Vasco de Gama and Amerigo Vespucci.

In all these areas, Fiorina makes the absurd leap from recognizing Muslims as merely a people who used a product to being an innovative people who "paved the way" for the future. She made a similar leap of dissonance when she made corrupt trade agreements with Iran in violation of US trade sanctions, resulting in 30,000 workers laid off at Hewlett-Packard, and jobs shipped to China. We could remark in passing that, at the same time, her salary and perks also leaped – they more than tripled.

"When censors threatened to wipe out knowledge from past civilizations, this civilization kept the knowledge alive and passed it on to others."

How much creativity, ingenuity and innovation might we have had from those 400 million people slaughtered by jihadists over 1400 years? What greatness is Islam passing on to civilization now, beyond a high illiteracy rate, great intolerance and aggression? Their history is one of perpetual massacre, encouraged in their Qur’an and taught from early childhood. Their culture is one of unrest, riots and wars; and women’s fears of female genital mutilation, forced marriages, rape, and death for male honor. Their homes are microcosms of the greater tyrannical regimes.

Had Muslims the knowledge to be kept alive, how might it have been done? Of the 1.4 billion Muslims, 800 million are illiterate (60 percent cannot read). In Christendom, the adult literacy rate stands at 78 percent. Of the ten most literate countries, not one is Islamic. Muslims are the world’s poorest, weakest and illiterate. The combined annual GDP of 75 Muslim countries is under $2 trillion; America’s is worth $10.4 trillion. Muslims are 22 percent of the world population, yet produce less than five percent of global GDP, and diminishing all the time.

Over the past 105 years, 1.3 billion Muslims produced eight Nobel Laureates (only two won for physics and chemistry); compare this with a mere 14 million Jews (0.23% of the world population) who produced 170 Nobel Laureates.

Islam’s militaristic, supersessionist ideology that began 1400 years ago has remained unchanged. We know of no event that sparked the glory they claim, and no catastrophic event that might have forced a decline. Carly Fiorina is severely misinformed about the civilization that embraces our death and destruction and she confuses politically-correct theories for hard facts – no point from which to hold the highest-ranking position in the United States of America.