Tuesday, August 23, 2016

August 21, 2016


By Stephen Moore 
I asked a successful businessman the other day what he thought about Donald Trump. He turned his thumb down. Wow. Are you going to vote for Hillary? I asked with trepidation. "Of course not," he replied almost insulted by the question. "I understand the concept of a binary decision."
I got a similar response when I asked oil magnate T. Boone Pickens whether he would vote for Mr. Trump. He looked at me with a quizzical look on his face and replied: "Well, who else is there to vote for?"
Right. Who else is there? Yet amazingly a caucus of lifelong Republican politicos in Washington are announcing to the world with defiance and self-righteousness that they will vote for Hillary Clinton.
They are mostly former Romney and Bush operatives. They lost and now they want people to believe that their anti-Trumpism is an act of heroism and principle. They ingratiate themselves to The New York Times, The Washington Post and Team Clinton - the sworn enemies of free markets and conservative values.
Somehow this doesn't offend their moral compass.
I certainly don't mean to disparage conservatives who say they won't vote for Mr. Trump. One's vote is a matter of personal conscience. But to actively support Hillary is to put the other team's jersey on and then run a lap around the stadium.
It's worth examining the case of the Republicans for Hillary, because none of the arguments make much sense.
First, many say that Trump can't win - it's hopeless. These are the same political geniuses who a year ago assured us that Mr. Trump could never win a primary (he won most of them), then that he couldn't win 50 percent of the vote (he did), then that he couldn't win 50 percent outside of New York (he did), then they said he couldn't win a majority of the delegates (he did) ... On every occasion the Trump haters were wrong. How about a little humility since they are batting 0.00.
The "Trump can't win" mantra isn't just wrong, it's subversive. Of course, he can win. He is running against Hillary Clinton for goodness sakes. So why do they say this? Because the never Trumpers want Trump to lose because he is to the political class (Republicans and Democrats) the disruptor that Uber is to taxicab drivers.
Second is the complaint by some economists that Mr. Trump can't be supported because he is not for free trade. Longtime Washington insider Vin Weber reportedly recently said: "The world economic order and the Republican Party" would be "all in shambles" if Mr. Trump wins. "I think markets would collapse."
Really? Hillary Clinton flip flops every day on free trade, so why is it that only Mr. Trump would cause a recession? He doesn't get that the Trump movement is a revolt against the world order.
Mr. Trump is calling for the biggest tax cut since Ronald Reagan. He is for regulatory relief and school choice. Mr. Trump wants to kill Obamacare. Mr. Trump wants a pro-America drilling policy on energy. Hillary wants to soak the rich, increase the debt, stop energy development, expand entitlements and double down on Obamacare. How is this a difficult choice for a free marketeer?
Third, the Trump haters say we must throw Mr. Trump over the bus in order to save the Senate and House majorities.
This is a foolhardy strategy because one can't win without the other. As economist Donald Luskin puts it in his historical analysis of presidential races and Senate gains: "It is clear from history that the House and the Senate always move in the same party direction as the White House, and with the same magnitude. That means the presidential candidate is like a boat that congressional candidates are riding on. It's really stupid to torpedo that boat. "
Finally, there is the view expressed by Bret Stephens, my former colleague at The Wall Street Journal, who wants to "make sure Trump is the biggest loser in presidential history" so that we can "rebuild the conservative movement."
Bret, if Obama/Hillary win a third straight presidential race, there won't be a conservative movement left to rebuild. The Republicans will move to the left. Worse, for President Obama to win effectively a third term will be a voter validation of all of the destructive policies of the last eight years.
Do the "never Trumpers" want to facilitate that? Do they want to hand the left its greatest victory for liberal governance of all time? If they do, they, not Trump, are the unforgivable betrayers of conservative principles.
• Stephen Moore is an economic consultant with Freedom Works and a senior economic adviser to the Trump campaign

Thursday, August 04, 2016


By Michael W. Chapman | March 2, 2015 | 6:18 PM EST.        
Admiral James “Ace” Lyons, Jr. (Ret.), the former commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, said that President Barack Obama does have a strategy for dealing with Islamic radicals in the Middle East and it is an “anti-American” and “pro-Islamic” strategy,” as well as “pro-Iranian” and “pro-Muslim Brotherhood” strategy.

In his remarks at a recent Defeat Jihad Summit sponsored by the Center for Security Policy, Admiral Lyons spoke of a number of failed opportunities the United States had, since the late 1970s, to deal a crippling blow to Islamic jihadism and “change the course of history.”
Towards the end of his comments, Admiral Lyons, who commanded the U.S. Pacific Fleet under President Ronald Reagan in 1985-87, said, “You know, we all say we have to identify the threat. Well, I think the one who identified it the best was [President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan from Turkey when he said, ‘Islam is Islam. There are no modifiers [e.g., Islamic extremism]. Democracy is the train we ride to our ultimate objective.’”

“He couldn’t have said it any plainer,” said Lyons. “And until you recognize that Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religion, you’re never going to come to grips with it. And as far as a strategy – let me just conclude one thing, as I just had in my latest op-ed -- the Obama Administration has a strategy.”
“It’s very simple, any thinking American should be able to grasp,” said the admiral.  “It’s anti-American, anti-Western, it’s pro-Islamic, it’s pro-Iranian, and pro-Muslim Brotherhood!”

Lyons, a Naval Academy graduate who served 36 years in the U.S. Navy,  currently is the president and CEO of Lion Associates, an international consulting firm that specializes in anti-terrorist security services. Further commenting on the threat posed by Islamists, Admiral Lyons said, “We’ve had many opportunities to change the course of history. And it hasn’t mattered whether it’s been a Republican or a Democratic or a administration, we failed every one of them, starting with Carter and the takeover of our embassy [in Iran in 1979].”

“We could have cut off [Ayatollah Ruhollah] Khomeni and Islamic fundamentalism at the knees,” said the admiral.  “We were going to take Kharg Island [in the Persian Gulf], and he [Carter] rejected it.   We could have walked in. The next time was the Marine barracks bombing [in Beiruit, Lebanon, 1983], and you all probably wonder why we never responded.”

“I won’t go into the long detail but the guy that sabotaged the strike – and I’m glad you’re all sitting down – was the Secretary of Defense [Caspar Weinberger],” said Lyons. “Not once, but twice. Reagan approved -- the French wanted to do a combined strike and Reagan approved it, and Weinberger wouldn’t issue the order.”

 “I have personally talked to [former Secretary of State] George Schultz and [former National Security Adviser] Bud McFarlane,” said Lyons. “They told me they pleaded with him and he wouldn’t do it. You have to say, who the Hell got to him or what got to him? I’ve never been able to get an answer on that.”

Lyons continued, “In the Gulf tanker war, in ’87, we were going to bring down the Khomeini regime. … The one who undercut us the most was our own chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, [Admiral James] Crowe at the time. Crowe at the time.
“If you go forward, you know we shot down [on July 3, 1988] by accident that Iranian civilian airliner [Iran Air Flight 655], a few months later,” he said. “And what did Khomeini do? He said, ‘I’m drinking from the chalice of poison.’ And he said I have to make a truce with Saddam Hussein because the Americans have shown they’re coming in on Iraq’s side.  Well, think of what the Hell we could have done had we executed the strike we wanted to do in August of ‘87.”

Speaking at the National Press Club back in January, Admiral Lyons said that “the fundamental transformation of America,” espoused by Obama, “has been in full swing ever since 2008.”

“President Obama’s no-show in Paris,” after the Islamist attack on the Charlie Hebdo office and personnel, “was an embarrassment for all Americans,” said Admiral Lyons. “But it also was a signal to the Islamic jihadis. It’s one of many signals he’s sent over the years while he’s in office.”

(Michael W. Chapman)

Thursday, July 28, 2016




The Wall Street Journal just published a shocking article revealing what Patrick Calvar, France’s director general of intelligence, has in mind.
“The confrontation is inevitable,” said Mr. Calvar. There are an estimated 15,000 Salafists among France’s seven million Muslims, “whose radical-fundamentalist creed dominates many of the predominantly Muslim housing projects at the edges of cities such as Paris, Nice or Lyon. Their preachers call for a civil war, with all Muslims tasked to wipe out the miscreants down the street”.
Yes, France is heading toward the “inevitable confrontation”. 84 adults and children have just been tortured to death in Nice by a truck whose driver told a guard he was bringing ice creams to celebrants of the French holiday of egalitarian values. An apparent gesture of mortuary hysteria, but in fact a spectacular horrendous massacre celebrated by the international Jihad and by many European Muslims.

Meanwhile, in response, Europe just renewed its show of shallow rhetoric. Take the declarations of the French leaders after the attack at Charlie Hebdo, Paris’ theatre and restaurants and now in Nice. These are always identical.
Nobody is really fighting this war. Europe just wants to be left in peace.
On the ashes of the World Trade Center, George W. Bush rose to the fight. In those years, the United States and its European allies proved themselves “the stronger horse” and the forces of the “weaker horse” of Al Qaeda began to lose heart. When Islamists were thrown on the defensive, recruits dropped off. Attacks on Western cities diminished.
After eight years of Barack Hussein Obama and Europe’s retreat from the war on terror, the West appears to be the weaker horse and the Islamists the stronger one.
A few days ago, I asked Professor Bruce Thornton of California State University what Europe should do to reverse this horrible trend. His answer was revealing:
“There is no political will for waging total war against ISIS. It would require 100,000 troops and massive bombing to eliminate as many jihadists as possible. We would have to abandon rules of engagement that privilege the enemy’s people over our own. At home, we would have to increase deportations and publicly demand that Muslim communities in the West disavow Jihadism and Sharia law”.
Of course, Europe and the West are not adopting any of these important and clearly articulated measures.
-Radical Islamists have already infiltrated Europe’s universities, mosques and cities’ outskirts.
-Institutional Islam has been able to convince Europeans that terror “has nothing to do with Islam”.
-Mainstream media is refusing even to spell the name of the enemy and it is just preparing new articles about the next victims of Jihad.
-Pope Francis is busy in preaching clemency to everybody.
-The remnant of European Jewry is fleeing the old continent.
-Europe’s armies are getting smaller by the day.
Abandon any hope: Without a major cultural revolution and shock, Europe is lost, Islamists will win! And as it goes along, we will cede more and more of our freedom and civilization to the Grand Jihad.
Giulio Meotti
The writer, a gentile Italian journalist with Il Foglio, writes a twice-weekly column for Arutz Sheva. He is the author of the book "A New Shoah", that researched the personal stories of Israel's terror victims, published by Encounter and of "J'Accuse: the Vatican Against Israel" published by Mantua Books.. His writing has appeared in publications, such as the Wall Street Journal, Frontpage and Commentary.

Sunday, July 03, 2016


     Okay, all you old-time cops…what are the biggest changes in law enforcement that have taken place in the last 30,40, 50 years?  My rookie season was 1960 in the Dade County Sheriff’s Office, which later morphed into the Public Safety Department, now known as Miami-Dade P.D. Here’s some of my observations, from the top of my head:
  • The police academy was eight weeks, followed by four months of riding with a trainer. Then you were on your own. (Today, academies are more like 9 months)
  • Minimum standards to be a police officer: 1) male gender, 2) Age 21-35, 3) Height 5’9” to 6’ 4”, weight proportional. Physical fitness also included ability to swim. Nearly all new hires were white and Anglo, though not a requirement. (The Cuban migration situation had not yet begun until 1961.)
  • “Policewoman” was a separate county classification which did not allow promotions for females. Women were hired to handle juvenile matters and female prisoner searches.
  • Cops never routinely wore bullet proof vests
  • Officers used .38 revolvers, 4” to 6” barrel, purchased privately.  We also had to buy our own handcuffs. Motormen wore clam shell holsters that flipped open with a push of the button.
  • We patrolled in one-man cars, even in high-crime area. One two-man unit was sent out per shift, they were primarily used for prisoner transport, violent calls and back-ups.
  • No computers, they were not yet developed for the marketplace. We used radios, wired to the vehicle. All calls and notes were hand written on clipboards.
  • No cameras on the dash, or anywhere.
  • Uniformed cars had domed red light flashers, no visibars.
  • No air conditioning in police cars. Officers patrolled with windows open which enabled them to hear everything outside.
  • Drug arrests were relatively uncommon
  • Alcohol arrests were very common
  • Public Drunk and Vagrancy were common catch-all charges when making minor arrests.
  • Dade County was strictly segregated, including residences, schools and the County Jail. If a black person was found after dark, walking or driving on the beach side of the county…without a work permit, they could be arrested for Vagrancy.
  • Yes, racial discrimination existed. New officers were taught that their statistical records would improve if they looked for blacks driving jalopies, because they usually hadn’t paid a prior ticket, or had failed to show up in court, thus the open arrest warrant.
  • Minority hiring, including females and Hispanics, accelerated starting in the late 1960’s through the ’70’s.
  • The breathalyzer reading for legal drunkenness was .150
  • No overtime pay. When officers worked 40 hours or 80, same pay. (until 1973) Night shift officers attended court on their own time.
  • PBA (Police Benevolent Association) emerged as a significant bargaining entity in the early 1970s, and later evolved into a full-fledged union.
  • Restaurants usually accommodated on-duty officers with half-price meals, and in some cases, free. Drive-in movies, off-duty: Free
  • Salary scale in 1960 was $312 monthly (gross) payable twice a month on the 1stand 15th.  My first take-home paycheck for two-weeks, in 1960:  $110.
  • Most cops smoked cigarettes.  (Most people smoked cigarettes)
  • There was no tolerance for officer incompetence or laziness. Officers whose morality, energy or courage were in question often found themselves out of a job.  Rookies who performed poorly did not pass probation.
  • Officers had enormous discretion in making arrests…particularly lesser offenses like first-time DWI and Disorderly.  Persons with no prior police record, and a good attitude, could be taxied home. Cops cared about attaching police records to young people.
  • Police officers were shown respect by 98 percent of the people, including teens.
  • To young ladies, uniformed officers were like a flame to the moth.
  • Not uncommon for officers, on midnight shifts, to sneak up on parked lovers. People could not afford motel rooms.
  • Alcoholism prevailed with too many officers whose private lives were wrecked.
  • Suicide rates were unusually high among police officers. In my 30 year career, I knew a dozen officers that committed suicide, many of them in the 1960’s and 70’s.
These are thirty items comparing the police job (in Miami) of 50 years ago. Let’s hear from some other old timers.

Tuesday, March 29, 2016


by Marshall Frank
Iraq and Syrian refugees are swarming into Europe, and eventually into North America by the millions. It’s good to be humanitarian, but not when it comes to setting the stage for the future dissolution of established cultures. If the growing Islamic settlements in France, England and Sweden are any examples, the people herding into the European stage have no interest in assimilating. According to a Washington Post article in November, 2015, we will see over 3 million displaced middle-east refugees migrating to western nations before the end of 2016. And the forthcoming generations, who knows?

According to Secretary of State John Kerry, the United States will be receiving 85,000 refugees in 2016, and another 100,000 in 2017. It is almost impossible to vet these people who have no valid papers or references, as emphasized by FBI Director, James Comey. Further verification of refugees in Iraq and Syrian war zones would be impossible. The bottom line is that many who intend on doing harm to America could easily be imbedded within the populations, a virtual Trojan Horse scenario. And for certain, if it’s that inviting, it will surely happen. Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson recently told a committee on Capitol Hill, “I do agree that the refugee flow coming out of Syria and Iraq represents a potential opportunity for terrorist organizations.”

It would seem that by inviting all these migrants, European and American nations are basically committing cultural suicide. These trends give cause to reflect on the Muslim Brotherhood’s written decree of 1991, that the long range goal of Jihad is conquest of the west, and to destroy western civilization – From Within. I didn’t write that, they did. See link below re: Explanatory Memorandum of the Muslim Brotherhood, which was vetted and admitted into a federal court trial in 2007.

Why is not anyone asking the big question: Why Europe? Why America?

Saudi Arabia is awash with money, land and resources. The refugees also share the Arab culture and language. Why do we not partner with our so-called Arab ally in alleviating the suffering of middle-east refugees by giving them refuge in lands compatible with their way of life? The United States provides foreign aid by the billions to other middle east countries, including (2013) Yemen $1.3 billion, Lebanon $626 million, Jordan $1.4 billion, Egypt $550 million, and so on, which has been going on for decades. When is it their turn to step up to the proverbial plate and help provide accommodations for their fellow brethren? It is time some of the other Arab-based nations do their share in alleviating the crisis.

But that’s not happening. Why do they get away with it? Because they can. And, because we are stupid.

The concerns should not be limited only to terrorism, although we are seeing spikes of murderous terror raising their ugly heads in recent months. I’m sure there will be much more, because the killers are blending among us. The concerns should also be about preserving our cultures, and our political systems of democracy and civil rights. For, the more we accept the radical Islamic mentality within our borders, and the borders of Europe, the more we will see power capitulate to those who would conquer, and one day, our entire political arena will be dominated and controlled by insurgents…many of whom will be elected into office to manage our cities, towns and states. It’s only a matter of time.

Fanatical Islamic extremists are taking over the streets of Brussels, one of the most liberal and moderate communities in the western world. They are controlling cities in Sweden, such as Malmo. There are hundreds of Islamic no-go zones in France which the authorities avoid. England has capitulated to allow Muslims their Sharia Zones. Greece and Germany are overrun with millions of Islamic refugees.

The National Organization of Women (NOW) better wake up. There are far worse dangers looming for the female gender down the road, than issues like birth control.

When the recent terror attacks killed 35 and injured hundreds more in Europe, the face of America – The President of the United States – appeared to care less, as he missed not a step of his journey, joining joyful waves at a Cuban baseball game and dancing the tango in Argentina, face beaming, while Americans and Europeans suffered from radical Islamic attacks. In a recent speech following Brussels, he said:

“We must reject any attempt to stigmatize Muslim-Americans, and their enormous contributions to our country and our way of life.”

Just what we wanted to hear.

Sometimes I wonder if this mass migration to the free world, is not part of the long range plan. After all, there were alternatives.

Monday, February 22, 2016

Muhammad’s Own Words – Women

Muhammad’s Own Words – Women
1 Comment Posted by angelforisrael on 2013-03-25
Prophet of Doom

Prophet of Doom was written to expose what Islam’s founder had to say about himself, his ambition, religion, and god. Before you use or criticize these quotes, please read this overview from the author. For those who are serious about the study of Islam, be sure to read the source material appendix, entitled Islam’s Dark Past.


Tabari IX:113 “Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur’an.”

Tabari I:280 “Allah said, ‘It is My obligation to make Eve bleed once every month as she made this tree bleed. I must also make Eve stupid, although I created her intelligent.’ Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of this world menstruate and are stupid.”

Qur’an 4:3 “If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with orphans, marry women of your choice who seem good to you, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to do justice (to so many), then only one, or (a slave) that you possess, that will be more suitable. And give the women their dower as a free gift; but if they, of their own good pleasure, remit any part of it to you, eat it with enjoyment, take it with right good cheer and absorb it (in your wealth).”

Qur’an 4:11 “Allah directs you in regard of your Children’s (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females…. These are settled portions ordained by Allah.”

Bukhari:V1B22N28 “The Prophet said: ‘I was shown the Hell Fire and the majority of its dwellers were women who are disbelievers or ungrateful.’ When asked what they were ungrateful for, the Prophet answered, ‘All the favors done for them by their husbands.'”

Muslim:B1N142 “‘O womenfolk, you should ask for forgiveness for I saw you in bulk amongst the dwellers of Hell.’ A wise lady said: Why is it, Allah’s Apostle, that women comprise the bulk of the inhabitants of Hell? The Prophet observed: ‘You curse too much and are ungrateful to your spouses. You lack common sense, fail in religion and rob the wisdom of the wise.’ Upon this the woman remarked: What is wrong with our common sense? The Prophet replied, ‘Your lack of common sense can be determined from the fact that the evidence of two women is equal to one man. That is a proof.'”

Qur’an 2:282 “And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women [a man is worth two women, and one man is always needed], such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her.”

Qur’an 4:43 “Believers, approach not prayers with a mind befogged or intoxicated until you understand what you utter. Nor when you are polluted, until after you have bathed. If you are ill, or on a journey, or come from answering the call of nature, or you have touched a woman, and you find no water, then take for yourselves clean dirt, and rub your faces and hands. Lo! Allah is Benign, Forgiving.” [The Qur’an claims women are unclean and polluted – worse than dirt.]

Bukhara:V4B55N547 “The Prophet said, ‘But for the Israelis, meat would not decay, and if it were not for Eve, wives would never betray their husbands.'”

Qur’an 33:59 “Prophet! Tell your wives and daughters and all Muslim women to draw cloaks and veils all over their bodies (screening themselves completely except for one or two eyes to see the way). That will be better.”

Qur’an 4:15 “If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death [by starvation] claims them.”

“When we reached Khaybar, Muhammad said that Allah had enabled him to conquer them. It was then that the beauty of Safiyah was described to him. Her husband had been killed, so Allah’s Apostle selected her for himself. He took her along with him till we reached a place called Sad where her menses were over and he took her for his wife, consummating his marriage to her, and forcing her to wear the veil.'”

Bukhari:V5B59N524 “The Muslims said among themselves, ‘Will Safiyah be one of the Prophet’s wives or just a lady captive and one of his possessions?'”

Ishaq:593 “From the captives of Hunayn, Allah’s Messenger gave [his son-in-law] Ali a slave girl called Baytab and he gave [future Caliph] Uthman a slave girl called Zaynab and [future Caliph] Umar another.”

“The Prophet said, ‘Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.'”

Ishaq:584 “Tell the men with you who have wives: never trust a woman.”

Ishaq:185 “In hell I saw women hanging by their breasts. They had fathered bastards.”

Qur’an 24:31 “Say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty except what (must) appear; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display them except to their husbands…”

Qur’an 24:34 “Force not your slave-girls to whoredom (prostitution) if they desire chastity, that you may seek enjoyment of this life. [And here’s the freedom-to-pimp card:] But if anyone forces them, then after such compulsion, Allah is oft-forgiving.”

Ishaq:469 “The Apostle said, ‘Every wailing woman lies except those who wept for Sa’d.'”
Tabari VIII:62

Ishaq:496 “Ali [Muhammad’s adopted son, son-in-law, and future Caliph] said, ‘Prophet, women are plentiful. You can get a replacement, easily changing one for another.'”

Ishaq:496 “Ask the slave girl; she will tell you the truth.’ So the Apostle called Burayra to ask her. Ali got up and gave her a violent beating first, saying, ‘Tell the Apostle the truth.'”

Qur’an 24:1 “(This is) a surah which We have revealed and made obligatory and in which We have revealed clear communications that you may be mindful. For the woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes.

Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah. And let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.”

Qur’an 24:6 “And for those who launch a charge against their wives, accusing them, but have no witnesses or evidence, except themselves; let the testimony of one of them be four testimonies, (swearing four times) by Allah that he is the one speaking the truth.”

Saturday, February 20, 2016

The Destroyer Cometh

By Rich Lowry
Donald Trump is running riot in the GOP china shop and gleefully tearing the place up.
Consider the strength of Trump’s position: If he wins South Carolina by a big margin, he goes into Nevada with momentum, and the latest poll there has him leading by 26 points. If he enters Super Tuesday a week later having won three out of the past three states – and with Ted Cruz diminished by a South Carolina loss and Marco Rubio having won nowhere – he could easily win, say, 10 contests that day.

It might still be possible to beat Trump at that point if the field is narrowed (states don’t become winner-take-all until March 15), but doing so would involve wrestling to the ground a candidate who will have cut a formidable swath through the first month of the nomination battle.

Even now, it’s hard to imagine a happy outcome for the party from the three likeliest scenarios:
– If Trump wins the nomination outright, many Republican voters may stay home, and senators and members of the House up for re-election will scurry for cover.

It is certainly possible that Trump will prove a better general-election candidate than expected, just as he has proved a much more potent candidate in the primaries than nearly anyone thought. But it also is likely that the general public will be less enamored or forgiving of those qualities in Trump that have charmed or at least not bothered a plurality of the Republican electorate – the lack of political experience, the foul mouth, the constant psychodrama, the spotty business record.

– If Trump is dragged to an open convention and leads in delegates, but falls short of a majority and is denied the nomination, there will be a bloodbath. Trump will make Andrew Jackson’s angry cry of a “corrupt bargain” after Old Hickory lost the presidency in the House of Representatives in 1824 – despite leading in popular and electoral votes – look like a measured, coolheaded response. Trump will stomp off, and no doubt take a lot of his supporters with him.

– If Trump is beaten prior to a convention, it will presumably require an all-out war against the mogul. Well-heeled Republican donors will have to pour money into a thermonuclear advertising campaign to destroy his image. The party will have to do everything in its power to bolster a Trump alternative. Such an effort will no doubt strike Trump as “unfair,” and he will do all he can to delegitimize it and find targets to sue over it. Needless to say, none of this would be conducive to keeping Trump voters inside the Republican tent.

Has any political party ever had a candidate who is such a wrecking ball, and who isn’t a fringe candidate, but a dominant one?
The Republican front-runner is threatening to sue one of his challengers. The Republican front-runner thinks the last Republican president was guilty of impeachable offenses and lied the country into war. The Republican front-runner routinely attacks his own party for its perfidy – he claims the Iowa caucuses were stolen from him and the debate audiences are stacked against him – and insults his competitors in the harshest, most personal terms.

We’ve grown used to how Trump has treated Jeb Bush in the debates, but that doesn’t make it any less appalling a breach of basic decency. The faces he makes while Bush talks, the constant interrupting, the petty put-downs – all of this would have been thought unworthy of the lowest political guttersnipe but have become an accepted part of the landscape thanks to Donald J. Trump.

The key to Trump’s strength, which buttresses all his outrageousness, is that his supporters want someone to blow up the system. So there’s almost nothing he can say or do that will discredit him in their eyes, and the least destructive scenario for his defeat – Trump blows himself up – will take some doing on his part.

It’s all very entertaining – but so are demolition derbies.

Friday, February 12, 2016

Muslim Americans Keep Us Safe

When Barack Obama visited the Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islamic Society of Baltimore on Wednesday, he said: “The first thing I want to say is two words that Muslim Americans don’t hear often enough: Thank you.”

While Obama has been President, Muslims have murdered non-Muslims, avowedly in the cause of Islam, at Fort Hood, Boston, Chattanooga, and San Bernardino, and attempted to do so in many, many other places. Imagine if armed Baptists screaming “Jesus is Lord” had committed murder, and explained that they were doing so in order to advance Christianity, in four American cities, and had attempted to do so in many others.

Imagine that those killers were supporters of a global Christian movement that had repeatedly called for attacks on U.S. civilians and declared its determination to destroy the United States.

Imagine how incongruous it would be in that case for the President of the United States to visit a church and say: “The first thing I want to say is two words that Christian Americans don’t hear often enough: Thank you.” And imagine how unlikely it would be that Barack Obama would ever have done that.

But his visit to the Islamic Society of Baltimore was the apotheosis of the Muslim victimhood myth, as he signaled yet again to the world (and worldwide jihadis) that in the U.S., Muslims are victims, victims of unwarranted concern over jihad terror, and thus that concern is likely to lessen even more, as Obama dismantles still more of our counter-terror apparatus.

“We’ve seen children bullied, we’ve seen mosques vandalized,” Obama claimed. “It’s not who we are. We’re one American family. And when any part of our family begins to feel separate or second class, it tears at the heart of our nation” – he said to his gender-segregated Muslim audience, with the womensitting in the back.

In reality, Muslims are not victimized in American society: FBI hate crime statistics show that the hysteria over “Islamophobia” is unfounded, but that matters not at all to Barack Obama. At the mosque, he said: “If we’re serious about freedom of religion — and I’m talking to my fellow Christians who are the majority in this country — we have to understand that an attack on one faith is an attack on all faiths.”

Once again Obama felt free to scold and admonish Christians, but said nothing about Muslims in the U.S. needing to clean house and work for real reform that would mitigate jihad terror. And his premise was false: there is no attempt to restrict Muslims’ freedom of religion. Donald Trump hasn’t called for that; nor has Ben Carson or any serious analyst.

But the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) (a representative of which accompanied Obama to the mosque Wednesday) and other Islamic advocacy groups have consistently charged that counter-terror efforts and attempts to restrict the political, supremacist and authoritarian aspects of Sharia that are at variance with Constitutional principles were tantamount to restricting Muslims’ religious freedom.

Now the President of the United States has endorsed their false narrative, which will only further stigmatize initiatives to understand the jihadis’ ideology and counter it effectively. He further criticized those who dare to suggest that Islam might have something to do with Islamic terrorism by criticizing those who say that the U.S. is at war with Islam: “That kind of mind-set helps our enemies,” he intoned. “It helps our enemies recruit. It makes us all less safe.”

The U.S. certainly isn’t at war with Islam, but segments of the Islamic world are at war with the U.S., and Obama did not explain what might be done to counter the beliefs that have given rise to that idea. He is, of course, against studying the beliefs of the enemy.

Yet he said proudly: “Jefferson and John Adams had their own copies of the Qur’an,” without bothering to mention that they had them in order to understand the ideology of the enemy the new nation faced in the Barbary Pirates. They held, of course, the same ideology he ignores and denies today, the one he ordered all traces of removed from counterterror training.

“Islam,” Obama declared, “has always been part of America.” Really? There were Muslims at Jamestown? In the Massachusetts Bay Colony? At Roanoke? Obama’s statement is so wildly ridiculous that it doesn’t just invite parody; it pleads for it. Remember the Muslims among the Founding Fathers, Yahya al-Adams and Iskandar Hamilton? Remember the Muslims who told James Madison about Muhammad’s Constitution of Medina so that he could lay out the foundations of a republic in the U.S. Constitution? Remember the Muslims who fought so valiantly in the Revolutionary Jihad, and the Jihad of 1812, and the Mexican Jihad, and the Civil War, aka the Jihad Between the Caliphates?

Remember all the controversies about whether Muslim soldiers in the Civil War could make sex slaves out of the wives and daughters of Confederate commanders? The jihad suicide attacks that broke the Germans’ will to fight on during World War I?

Burrowing deeper into fantasy, Obama proclaimed: “Generations of Muslim Americans helped to build our nation.” He didn’t mention the real contributions Muslims have made to our nation: you know, like rearranging the New York skyline, transforming government buildings into grim, nervous fortresses, making air travel into exercise in annoyance and humiliation that it is today, and draining the American economy with two futile wars and hundreds of billions spent on security and counterterror initiatives.

In detailing the contributions that Muslims have made to the U.S., Obama said: “Muslim Americans keep up safe. They are our police. They are our fire fighters. They’re in (the Department of) Homeland Security.” And remember: none of them were screened for jihadi sympathies. To have done so would have been “Islamophobic,” and transgressed against the prevailing dogma that Islam is a Religion of Peace that non-Muslims are wrong and bigoted to be concerned about.

The most ominous thing Obama said in this speech full of treacle and humbug was this: “We’re not going to strengthen our leadership around the world by allowing politicians to insult Muslims or pit groups of Americans against each other. That’s not who we are. That’s not keeping America safe.” So what is he going to do? Destroy the First Amendment and disallow politicians to insult Muslims?

Obama decried “phony tough talk and bluster and over-the-top claims.” Yet in the final analysis, that was all he offered.

Monday, February 01, 2016

The Culture Behind
The Yogurt

Is There A Bug In This Yogurt?

By Tabitha Korol
Yogurt is “probiotic,” meaning “for life.” The “good” bacteria help the digestive tract and, because yogurt is made from milk, it’s a good source of calcium. The founder of Chobani yogurt is Hamdi Ulukaya, a Turkish Muslim whose net worth exceeds five billion dollars. He was named “one of the forty most successful entrepreneurs under 40” in 2009, and “Ernst & Young World Entrepreneur of the Year” in 2013. Unfortunately, the Chobani brand is not without serious side effects.

Hamdi Ukukaya is a member of the Turkish Confederation of Businessmen and Industrials (TUSKON), an organization of 40,000 employers (which also includes Godiva Chocolate) with strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. So in addition to his dairy product activities, he is deeply committed to civilizational jihad, a “pre-violent” form of jihad, through the Gulen Movement, a transnational religious and social effort led by the somewhat reclusive Turkish Islamic scholar and preacher, Fethullah Gulan, who currently resides in Pennsylvania.

Gulen has been depicted as a Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr., but he runs a $25 billion international network and was furtively responsible for changing Turkey from a secular to a strongly Islamized state, now governed by Erdogan. Along with the AKP party that turned Turkey away from the West toward Russia, Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria, Gulen’s sect portrays itself as a supporter of tolerance and education, although it actually works to slowly and methodically guide, control, and ultimately become the Islamic regime.

Gulen helps to set Turkey’s political agenda, financial institutions, banks, industry, associations, and foundations, and an international network of thousands of schools, universities, and student residences, with the intent of total transformation. His imams have fired or pensioned off original officials and his graduates are deeply entrenched in Turkish government posts and in the 200,000-man police force, including the supervisory level and the director of intelligence at the Turkish Directorate of Security.

Having no more than a fifth grade education, Gulen developed the persona of an intellect and prophet, meeting with representatives of many faiths, including Pope John Paul II, and holding conferences in the US and Europe. Under his leadership, Turkey now has 85,000 active mosques (highest per capita in the world) and 90,000 imams (more than doctors or teachers). He concentrates his indoctrination on students in eighth through twelfth grades, and controls 75 percent of Turkey’s preparatory schools, thousands of secondary schools, colleges and dormitories, and private universities in 110 countries. Aware of Gulen’s radicalization activities, Russia and Uzbekistan have banned his schools and the Netherlands has cut funding, pending further investigation.

Gulen hires Turkish immigrants without education or leadership background to teach mostly underprivileged students in US charter schools at a cost of $150 million per year to taxpayers. Notwithstanding claims of a non-sectarian education that stresses math and science and boasts high achievement, reports indicate that there is no mission statement, curriculum, standards or library, and the students are supervised according to strict Islamic law, with an emphasis on jihad.

How does Hamdi Ulukaya fit into all of this? He brings in Muslim migrants (aka civilizational jihadists), many from Syria, as despairing refugees from the Middle East and North Africa who need unconditional acceptance in America. Idaho has received more than 11,000 migrants since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and they continue to come despite protests from local residents. The world’s largest yogurt factory now employs 600 people, 30 percent of them refugees from the United Nations camps in the Middle East and Africa, and pressures corporate America to also provide jobs, services, and cash. Willing respondents included Google, Goldman Sachs, MasterCard, Ikea, UPS, LinkedIn, and Western Union. He has also taken his case to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, international leaders who believe they know what is best for the rest of us.

Ulukaya recently began a new project, The Tent, which he describes as being “more important than aid.” He explained, “This is a global commitment to invest in building our global capacity for meaningful, humanitarian change?” What is the underlying meaning of the words, "global," and "meaningful humanitarian change?" That they will Islamize the globe to capacity? That they intend to change humanity worldwide, and enforce Sharia law on all infidels?

Ann Corcoran, author of the blog Refugee Resettlement Watch, says The Tent initiative will funnel money and technology into refugee work, leaving Americans and veterans jobless, and that many of the UPS jobs could well be filled by American workers. WND’s Leo Hohmann reported that the Obama administration is increasing our acceptance of the number of Muslim migrants, from 70,000 annually over the past ten years to 85,000 in 2016 and 100,000 in 2017, which includes the 10,000 Syrians in 2016 and “many more” in 2017. And if that were not enough, Obama has also lowered the screening standards, allowing more than 1,500 jihadists who participated in terrorist activity to enter the US.

As a reminder, milk must first be denatured when a culture of bacteria is introduced, and the ensuing process, fermentation, results in permanent change: yogurt. And so it is with America. Our country is currently being denatured with the culture of Islam, through the incoming hordes, and the ensuing process, Islamization, also results in permanent change – the deadly disintegration of our civilization.

Now is the time to contact and enlighten the na├»ve, altruistic corporations as well as the supermarkets that sell Chobani, It is up to all of us to inform them that the Muslim Brotherhood reinforces 40,000 corporations that are importing jihadists who will bring us the same fears, riots, rapes, deadly attacks and Sharia law now experienced in Europe. Another such group is Global Impact, an alliance of more than 130 international relief and development “non-profit” organizations, including HIAS and Catholic Charities.

Shouldn't we stop supporting the businesses that seek our destruction?

Saturday, January 23, 2016

National Review Goes After Trump, Trump Swings Back

National Review, the bulwark of conservative journalism and opinion for 50 years, has, after months of jabs, finally taken off the gloves in its fight against the candidacy of GOP frontrunner Donald Trump.

With a cover reading simply “Against Trump” and listing well-known conservative contributors like Glenn Beck, William Kristol and Edwin Meese III, the journal founded by William F. Buckley pulled no punches in its attempt to stop the billionaire’s populist campaign.

Led by an editorial, NR warns, “Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones.”

Calling Trump “a huckster,” they nevertheless cede some credit to him for exposing the disconnect between the Washington GOP and the grassroots. In a warning to conservatives, the editors write, “If they cannot advance a compelling working-class agenda, the legitimate anxieties and discontents of blue-collar voters will be exploited by demagogues.

We sympathize with many of the complaints of Trump supporters about the GOP, but that doesn’t make the mogul any less flawed a vessel for them.”

The editorial’s conclusion is unambiguous is its condemnation of both Trump and those conservatives who’ve expressed support or even embraced him:

Some conservatives have made it their business to make excuses for Trump and duly get pats on the head from him. Count us out. Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself.

In a separate piece in the magazine’s February 15th issue, NR has compiled short essays from 22 commentators, many of whom are conservative leaders.

Radio host Glenn Beck called Trump’s ascension “a crisis for conservatism,” while Weekly Standard editor William Kristol asks, “Isn’t Trumpism a two-bit Caesarism of a kind that American conservatives have always disdained? Isn’t the task of conservatives today to stand athwart Trumpism, yelling Stop?”

Ed Meese, former attorney general under President Ronald Reagan, laments that in a field of strong candidates with solid credentials of leadership, the rise of Trump meant “the political atmosphere is polluted by the vicious personal attacks” rather than a debate of ideas.

Meese concluded, “At a time when the nation is suffering under one of the most divisive and incompetent presidents in history, our people need positive, unifying leadership, not negative, destructive political rhetoric.”

Nationally syndicated columnist Cal Thomas sees the anger of Trump supporters, admitting much of it is justified. However, he concludes, “Anger is not policy. Trump channels a lot of the righteous (and some of the unrighteous) anger of voters and sees the solution as himself. Isn’t a narcissist what we currently have in the White House?”

For his part, Trump responded how he has throughout so much of this campaign — via Twitter.

National Review responded by reminding Trump of what he’d said about the magazine only last April.
As a result of so forcefully speaking out against one candidate, NR publisher Jack Fowler reported they’ve been “disinvited” from co-hosting the February 25 GOP debate in Houston. Fowler wrote, “We expected this was coming. Small price to pay for speaking the truth about The Donald.”

"Lights Out"
on America's Power Grid

ISIS attacks in California and Paris may be just the beginning of an unprecedented plot to bring America to its knees by targeting our nation's scandalously vulnerable electric grid, warn officials at the Pentagon and FBI.

Why? Because terrorist groups like ISIS realize they can't beat us with brute military force on the conventional battlefield. We're way too strong for that.

But when the electric grid fails, it will be like watching America have a heart attack right before your eyes.

It's like when the heart stops pumping... everything shuts down and the patient flat lines.

Our great country would be crippled in a matter of minutes, without our enemies having to fire a single bullet.

It's a frightening idea... and worst of all, it may already have begun to unfold:

ISIS terrorists are already inside our country. Former CIA official Dr. Peter Pry warns, "There is an imminent threat from ISIS to the national electric grid and not just to a single U.S. city." Dr. Pry says that attacks on just 9 of the nation's 55,000 electrical substations could result in nationwide blackouts for up to 18 months.

The government is woefully unprepared. It seems like the government has been fixated on taking more & more away from people who worked hard to earn it, while doing virtually nothing to secure our nation's infrastructure. They've ignored dire warnings from experts about the grid's vulnerability to physical, electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and cyber-attack by ISIS and other terrorist groups.

"Our death toll would be staggering" reports FOXNews. We've all been fine when the power goes out for a few hours and even days, but an extended blackout would be devastating. Frank Gaffney, founder of the Center for Security Policy predicts that "... should the power go out and stay out for over a year, 9 out of 10 Americans would likely perish."

Imagine a blackout lasting not days, but weeks or months. Your life would be frozen in time right at the moment the power fails. Lights all over the country would go out, throwing people into total darkness.

Without access to a generator, your fridge, electric range and microwave would be dead. All the food in your fridge and freezer would spoil.

Your well couldn't pump any fresh water into your house. And even if you don't have a well, a total grid failure means no fresh water to drink, cook, or clean with.

You wouldn't be able to operate your radio or TV, or charge your cell phone, so you'd feel isolated and cut off from your friends and family.

Sadly, this is NOT science fiction or some crazy doomsday theory...

Veteran news anchor Ted Koppel just wrote a book called Lights Out that details this exact scenario. And CENTCOM General Lloyd Austin says, "It's not a question of if, it's a question of when."

That's why many Americans are taking matters into their own hands and are securing their own solar powered generator.

Solar generators are a smart choice because they produce an endless supply of life-saving electricity when you need it most - and without gas, fumes or noise.

Our top recommendation in portable solar generators is the new Patriot Power Generator 1500.

The Patriot Power Generator 1500 is a breakthrough device that generates up to 1,500 continuous watts of clean, quiet, and free renewable power.

That's enough to power lights for safety and comfort, your computer, TV, cell phone, and even small appliances like a small freezer or critical medical device that will sustain your family during a power outage.

You can see a live demo of it in action here

Imagine how much peace of mind you'll have right away when you get your own generator. Because if a crisis hits and your family asks, "When will the power come back on?" you'll calmly reassure them that they're safe and they will have plenty of electricity to power the critical items.

You'll be able to power lights... preserve food... recharge cell phones and computers... and keep critical medical devices going. Your home will be a little island of light and warmth, even if it is dark everywhere else.

Listen, nobody can predict the future. None of us know exactly when or how an attack on our electrical grid will hit.

But from everything we see, it could be soon and it could be devastating.

Watch this video and find out for yourself...