Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 28, 2016, 06:55:15 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
97482 Posts in 2328 Topics by 1082 Members
Latest Member: James
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 21
101  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Jeanine Pirro Defends Trump Against Blame for Chicago Protests... on: March 14, 2016, 08:09:35 AM
Frankly, though I prefer Ted Cruz over Donald Trump, I was disgusted over the weekend with BOTH Rubio and Cruz - not to mention the media - for blaming Trump for the violence at the rally in Chicago, which Trump wisely - in my opinion - cancelled.  Free speech is the bedrock of this republic.  The First Amendment is first for a reason - the Founders understood its importance.  Both Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio know better - but they are choosing to leverage this to their own political advantage by blaming Trump and his supporters.  MANY of those protesters who participated in the altercations at the Chicago event were holding Bernie Sanders signs and chanting "Bernie! Bernie!"  Yet no one in the media or anywhere else is placing blame on Bernie Sanders - and rightly so.  So reverse the situation for a moment - what if TRUMP supporters were filmed physically assaulting others in the crowd at a Bernie Sanders rally.  Do you think we would hear condemnation of Trump for "inciting" this violence?  You damn well better believe we would.  There is a clear double-standard here, and Trump-haters - including other candidates and the media - are doing their best to promote the absurd idea that Trump is to blame for this situation by "inciting" his supporters.  This was CLEARLY an organized protest designed to garner exactly the type of media attention and condemnation of Trump that it did.

Judge Jeanine Pirro did a SUPERB job of exposing this in her opening statement this past Saturday night:  http://video.foxnews.com/v/4799320342001/judge-jeanine-words-are-not-an-excuse-to-become-violent/?playlist_id=937116552001#sp=show-clips
102  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Disturbing Movement Targets U.S. Evangelical Christians... on: March 09, 2016, 05:29:38 PM
Evidently George Soros and the heir to the Hobby Lobby fortune are behind this propaganda campaign.  I can't imagine that many U.S. Christians believe this garbage.  Today was literally the first I'd ever heard of this "replacement theology" crap.  How ignorant/stupid and/or evil does one have to be to be taken in by this blatant distortion of Scripture?  Sounds like a new variation on "Liberation Theology" (Jeremiah Wright's twisted brand of Christianity.)


The Subversion of American Evangelicals

March 9, 2016 - Caroline Glick - frontpagemag.com

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post.

Monday the Bethlehem Bible College, an Evangelical Christian college in Jesus’s hometown, opened its fourth biennial Christ at the Checkpoint conference. The conference, which is directed specifically toward US Evangelicals, will run through the week.

Today, Evangelical communities in the US number anywhere between 60 and 150 million people, depending on who is counting. They form the backbone of American support for the Jewish state. It is the support of the Evangelical community, rather than the Jewish community in the US that ensures that come hell or high water, no matter how Israel is demonized in the media and in academia, the majority of Americans continue to support Israel.

But will this support last? One of the more surprising aspects of the 2016 elections is Evangelical support for businessman Donald Trump. Trump in many ways personifies everything that people who take the Bible seriously are supposed to oppose. He owns casinos. He curses and uses profanity in his public appearances. He has donated to Planned Parenthood and forcefully supported abortions on demand.

Trump has also insisted repeatedly that he will be neutral toward Israel.

Perhaps the most extraordinary aspect of Evangelical support for Trump is that he takes these positions as he runs against primary opponents who all wear their faith on their sleeves. All of his opponents have records of standing with the Evangelicals on social and other salient issues – including support for Israel.

What are we to make of this seemingly inexplicable phenomenon? At least as far as Israel is concerned, the readiness of Evangelicals to support the most anti-Israel candidate running for the Republican presidential nomination is no surprise.

To understand why this is the case, the Christ at the Checkpoint conference taking place this week in Bethlehem is a good place to look.

According to its website, the mission of the biennial conference “is to challenge Evangelicals to take responsibility to help resolve the conflicts in Israel/ Palestine by engaging with the teaching of Jesus on the Kingdom of God.”

The problem begins with the organizers’ interpretation of those teachings. College officials, among them keynote speakers at the conference, embrace and teach replacement theology. That theology maintains that God’s covenant with the Jews ended with Christianity.

In recent years, replacement theology has extended its biblical revisionism from Jews as people reviled for their rejection of Jesus and their supersession by Christians to Israel. The Jewish state is reviled as a religiously prohibited entity whose very existence is a sin against God.

According to current replacement theology, Jesus was not a Jew. He was a Palestinian. The Jews are not a people. They have no rights to the land of Israel.

Israel, it is asserted, has no historical or theological right to exist. Rather, according to the rewritten scriptures, the Palestinians are the chosen people.

Jews are colonialist invaders who have taken the land of Israel away from their rightful, biblically sanctioned owners.

This basic view is encapsulated in the very name “Christ at the Checkpoint.”

Today a Jewish Jesus would be prohibited from entering Bethlehem. Jews are barred from entering Palestinian population centers because Palestinians have a habit of murdering them. Indeed, just last week two IDF soldiers who accidentally entered a Palestinian village north of Jerusalem escaped a lynch mob by the skin of their teeth.

On the other hand, a Palestinian Jesus can be in Bethlehem. But to leave he has to go through an Israeli checkpoint (to ensure that he isn’t a terrorist, to be sure, but whatever).

So the image evoked by the name “Christ at the Checkpoint” ignores the reality of Palestinian terrorism.

And it leaves us with an image of the repression of a Palestinian Jesus at the hands of the Jews.

The replacement theology at the heart of the conference was made explicit by Rev. Jack Sara, president of the Bethlehem Bible Conference, at the 2012 conference. In his speech Sara edited Chapter 37 of the book of Ezekiel to transform the dry bones prophecy. That prophecy, of course, is one of the most Zionist passages in the Bible. God speaks to Ezekiel and tells him that the people of Israel will be reborn. They will be gathered from the four corners of the earth, return to Israel and restore the Davidic kingdom.

Yet in Sara’s revised version, the people of Israel, the descendants of Jacob, are replaced by the Palestinians.

Sara preached, “The hand of the Lord was on me and He brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and sent me in the middle of the West Bank – Bethlehem, Jenin and Salvit and Nablus and Ramallah.

It was full of bones.... He asked me, ‘Son of Man, can these bones live? Can the Palestinian people live?’ Then He said to me ‘prophesy to these bones and same to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord.’” Sara then said, “You see, the Palestinian people were and are a lot like this valley of dry bones that is in need of the Church to come and prophesy life on them.”

Last March the Bethlehem Bible College posted a promotional video ahead of a summer Christ at the Checkpoint conference directed toward young adults.

As Tricia Miller, who works as a senior research analyst for CAMERA noted, Christ at the Checkpoint director Munther Issac billed the conference as a means to empower Palestinian Christians.

The conference website said that the conference’s aim was “to motivate Palestinian Christian youth to take an active role as followers of Christ in spreading justice and peace, through discussing the challenges of our societies from a biblical perspective.”

Yet, as Miller noted in an article in The Times of Israel, the promotional video for the conference made clear that the conference had no intention of “spreading justice and peace.”

The video interlaced footage of Palestinians walking in heavy traffic and waiting to cross into sovereign Israel with footage from Islamic State (ISIS) videos showing hostages about to be beheaded and burned alive. Israeli flags flapping in the wind were juxtaposed with the ISIS flag.

And then, apropos of nothing, the video showed the cellular structure of the H1N1 swine flu virus.

The implied message was clear. Just as Nazi propaganda depicted Jews as viruses, so the Christ at the Checkpoint video depicted Israel as the moral equivalent of ISIS and the medical equivalent of swine flu.

In 2014, David Brog published in article in Middle East Quarterly detailing the key role the Bethlehem Bible College plays in a wider campaign directed toward American Evangelicals whose goal is to undermine and eventually end their support for Israel.

Key figures in this undertaking bring American church leaders and academics to Bethlehem and feed them a diet of anti-Israel propaganda and outright lies masquerading as biblical teaching and objective assessments of reality. These American Christian leaders have taken up the cause of ending support for Israel among Evangelicals upon their return home.

Key financiers, like Mart Green, the heir of the Hobby Lobby fortune and the chairman of the board of trustees of Oral Roberts University, and financier George Soros have been instrumental in disseminating these positions to all levels of the Evangelical community in the US.

In September 2014, Senator Ted Cruz spoke before Middle Eastern Christians, who convened in Washington ostensibly to discuss the genocide of Christians in the Middle East. Cruz was booed off the stage after telling the audience, “Today Christians have no greater ally than the Jewish state.”

Cruz added, “The very same people who persecute and murder Christians right now, who crucify Christians, who behead children, are the very same people who target and murder Jews for the very same reason.”

Cruz’s statement marked the first time a major US political leader stood up to the Jew hatred of Middle Eastern Christians and pointed out its irrationality and self-defeating core.

It could have been a seminal moment in the discourse on Islamic persecution of Christians. But rather than be embraced for his willingness to speak the truth to those who reject it even in the face of genocide, Cruz was assaulted as undiplomatic by Washington Post writer Jennifer Rubin. His message was largely ignored outside of policy circles.

To be sure, the largest Evangelical communities remain solidly supportive of Israel, and their size dwarfs that of the rising forces of replacement theology and its concomitant hatred of Israel. Yet, as Brog noted, the long-term trends are discouraging.

Moreover, the readiness of Evangelical voters to support the only Republican candidate who says he will be neutral in his handling of the Palestinian conflict with Israel indicates that anti-Israel Christians may already be having a profound impact on their communities.

This trend represents a strategic threat to US-Israel relations. Those who wish to maintain those relations in the long term must fight this trend head on, beginning with this week’s Christ at the Checkpoint conference.
103  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Islamic "radicalization"... on: March 07, 2016, 05:48:53 PM
The reason, GM, is that the whole notion of "radicalization" is nonsense to begin with.  The violent elements of Islam are explicitly taught in the Koran and Hadith.  They are integral to the faith.  To the extent that there are Muslims who do not believe in, or act upon these violent precepts of the religion, those Muslims are either ignorant of them, or are choosing to ignore them.  Authentic, orthodox Islam is inherently violent, repressive, and expansionistic.  It tolerates no other belief system.  It recognizes no inherent human rights.  It is a comprehensive totalitarian world-view and political system.  Therefore - whenever anyone chooses to study Islam and follow its teachings more closely, i.e., become "more devout,"  by definition they adopt this predator mindset toward all non-Muslims.  No other "religion" incorporates these totalitarian fundamentals.

To phrase it more simply - while there are certainly peaceful people who call themselves Muslim, there IS NO PEACEFUL ISLAM.
104  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Walter Williams on Taxes... on: March 03, 2016, 03:30:20 PM
What Is the Fair Share of Taxes?

Why voters fall victim to political charlatans

March 3, 2016    Walter Williams


Presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders, along with President Obama, say they want high-income earners, otherwise known as the rich, to pay their fair share of income taxes. None of these people, as well as the uninformed in the media and our campus intellectual elites, will say precisely what is the "fair share" of taxes. That is because they would look ignorant and silly, so they stick with simply saying that the rich should pay more. Let's you and I take a peek at who pays what in federal income taxes.

The following represents 2012 income tax data recently released by the Internal Revenue Service, compiled by the Tax Foundation (http://tinyurl.com/j5yr8cd). The top 1 percent, 1.37 million taxpayers earning $434,682 and more, paid 38 percent of all federal income taxes. The top 5 percent, those earning $175,817 and more, paid 59 percent. The top 10 percent of income earners, those earning $125,195 and up, paid 70 percent of all federal income taxes. The top 25 percent, those earning $73,354 and up, paid 86 percent. The bottom 50 percent, people earning $36,055 and less, paid a little less than 3 percent of federal income taxes. According to estimates by the Tax Policy Center, slightly over 45 percent of American households have no federal income tax liability.

With this information in hand, you might ask the next person who says the rich do not pay their fair share of taxes: Exactly what percentage of total federal income taxes should the 1-percenters pay? I seriously doubt whether you will get any kind of coherent answer. By the way, since 1-percenter income starts at $435,000, it might be pointed out that $400,000 or $500,000 a year is not even yacht or Learjet money. Plus, if one has two kids in college, a big mortgage and car payments, I doubt he would declare himself rich.

Our demagogues also claim that corporations do not pay their fair share of taxes. The fact of the matter, which even leftist economists understand but might not publicly admit, is corporations do not pay taxes. An important subject area in economics, called tax incidence, says the entity upon whom a tax is levied does not necessarily bear the full burden of the tax. Some of the tax burden can be shifted to another party. If a tax is levied on a corporation, and if the corporation hopes to survive, it will have one of three responses to that tax or some combination thereof. It will raise the price of its product, lower dividends or lay off workers. In each case a flesh-and-blood person is made worse off. The important point is that a corporation is a legal fiction and as such does not pay taxes. As it turns out, corporations are merely tax collectors for the government.

Politicians love to trick people by suggesting that they will not impose taxes on them but on some other entity instead. To demonstrate the trick, suppose you are a homeowner and a politician tells you that he is not going to tax you, he is just going to tax your land. You would easily see the political chicanery. Land cannot and does not pay taxes. Again, only people pay taxes.

Leftist politicians often call for raising the death tax, euphemistically called inheritance tax. The inheritance tax brings in less than 1 percent of federal revenue. It is on the books because it serves the interests of jealousy, envy and our collective desire to tax the so-called rich. The effects of inheritance taxes are economically damaging. It has this impact because in order for people to pay the death tax, they often must sell producing assets, such as farms, factories, stocks and bonds. These are high-powered dollars that are shifted from productive activity to government consumptive activity.

Too many Americans are ignorant of tax issues and thus fall easy prey to the nation's charlatans and quacks.
105  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Why Sensible People Are Bothered When Women Wear Hijabs... on: February 18, 2016, 10:28:26 AM
Why Sensible People Are Bothered When Women Wear Hijabs

Thursday - www.citizenwarrior.com


There are Muslim women all over the world who don't wear a hijab, yet consider themselves Muslim. But the doctrine says a believing woman should cover herself.

So when Muslim women begin to cover themselves, it is a visible signal of increasing orthodoxy. In other words, if there are Muslims in your area, and the women start covering themselves, it is an indication that the Muslims in your area are beginning to take the written doctrine more seriously.

And it is never just that particular written doctrine only — it is all the written doctrine, which includes hatred toward non-Muslims, political action to put the reins of power in Muslim hands, increasing demands for Islamic standards of dress, behavior, Islamic limits on free speech, etc. Because of the political nature of Islamic doctrine, these Islamic standards are not to be only applied to Muslims; as Muslims gain political power, those standards are to be applied to everyone.

Already in some parts of European countries where there is a high Muslim percentage, non-Muslim women are harassed (or worse) if they don't cover themselves.

Many of the signs of increasing devotion to Islamic ideals cannot be seen by non-Muslims. But the hijab can be seen by everyone.
106  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Will Market Selloff Turn Into Worldwide Recession? on: February 09, 2016, 07:54:05 AM
Will A Market Selloff Turn Into Worldwide Recession?

Tuesday, 09 February 2016 Bob Adelmann

EDITOR'S NOTE: It's nice that the mainstream academic economists are finally getting with the program in terms of collapsing demand across the financial spectrum.  Of course, it's too little too late.  By the time this information is digested by the general public, it will be far too late for any of them to properly prepare for what's in store.  Hopefully, the efforts  of alternative economic analysts have educated enough people to make a difference when global fiscal mechanics grind to a halt.  After all is said and done, it has been the mainstream financial media that has played a considerable role in the misdirection of the American public in particular, and such people deserve to be punished for it.

Regards,

Brandon Smith, Founder Of Alt-Market.com

 

This article was written by Bob Adelmann and originally published at The New American

Olivier Blanchard, the former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund (IMF), said back in October that his biggest fear is the “herd” mentality of investors who sell even if they don’t have any news to back up their decision: "Investors worry that other investors know something bad, and so they just sell, although they themselves have no new information."

At bottom, it is said, markets are driven by expectations and not by numbers. When the numbers get bad enough, the “herd” mentality takes over, and investors who have been holding losing positions, finally cave, and liquidate, taking their losses.

The numbers are bad enough. Thomas Thygesen, the head of economics at the Swedish banking conglomerate SEB, told 200 commodity brokers and analysts last month that a global recession is on the way. He then recounted signals of recession:

• Commodity prices — not just oil — have dropped by two-thirds since the summer of 2014;

• Oil has suffered the worst price decline in recent history;

• Crude fell to $10 a barrel in the late 1990s in the wake of the Asian financial crisis, suggesting that the same could happen again;

• The impact of the collapse in crude should have a positive impact as industry relies heavily on energy to drive itself, but it’s not;

• The “tail” of the oil price decline is causing bankruptcies that are negatively impacting banks and forcing them to recast their balance sheets, cut back on loans to the oil industry, and, in some cases, cut their dividends;

• The decline is “imperiling the finances of producer nations from Nigeria to Azerbaijan”; and

• China’s reports of 6 percent growth are increasingly being written off as unrealistic, perhaps even fraudulent.

Blanchard added to this litany, that the world economy may have reached a “tipping point,” noting, “This would be a serious shock. My biggest fear is precisely that the dramatic shift in mood becomes self-fulfilling.”

First, the average business cycle is five years. The start of the Great Recession was seven years ago. Second, the wave of bankruptcies in the oil sector will gain in number and ferocity, according to Blanchard. Third, the high-yield bond index “is now vulnerable” thanks to oil prices that are low and likely to remain low or even fall further.

In addition, the amount of debt that the oil and gas industry has accumulated worldwide is staggering: The industry has issued $1.4 trillion of bonds and borrowed another $1.6 trillion from banks for a total of $3 trillion. With net free cash flows declining and in some cases disappearing altogether, the industry is increasingly threatened by its inability to service that debt. The ripple effect would reach far beyond the industry itself.

Bronka Rzepkowski of Oxford Economics is equally concerned: "Conditions that usually pave the way for mounting defaults — such as growing debt, tightening monetary conditions, tightening of corporate credit standards and volatility spikes — are currently [being] met in the U.S."

And then there’s history itself. Over the last 45 years the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (SPX) has suffered a loss of more than 12 percent on 13 occasions. Six of these have led to a recession in the United States, nearly half the time.

The same goes for Europe, according to Dennis Jose at Barclays Bank: “Of the 14 previous occasions [when] equities have had a similar decline, seven have been associated with recession.”

Michael Pento of Pento Portfolio Strategies and author of The Coming Bond Market Collapse points out that the average drop in stock prices — peak to trough — during the last six recessions has been 37 percent. That would take the SPX, currently trading at 1835, all the way down to 1300.

But, says Pento, “This one will be worse.” China, considered the driver of global economic growth for decades, has multiplied its debt by an astonishing 28 times since 2000. As that massive buildup is unwinding, the Shanghai stock market has declined 40 percent since June 2014, and the rout isn’t yet complete. The problem, says Pento, is that China “has accounted for 34 percent of global growth” but without that, the global economy is in trouble.

There’s the U.S. housing market, where the home price to income ratio is currently 4.1, way above the average of 2.6. This not only makes it increasingly difficult for first-time home buyers, it also means that existing home owners looking to move up can’t find buyers.

There’s the stock market in the United States, which, despite the recent selloff, has a “market capitalization to GDP” ratio of 110, compared to its long-term average of 75.

There’s the debt taken on since 2007: Household debt is back to its former record of $14 trillion; business debt has grown from $10.2 trillion to $12.6 trillion during that period; the national debt has ballooned from $9.2 trillion to $19 trillion; and the Fed’s balance sheet is off the charts, moving from $880 billion to $4.5 trillion.

As the recession becomes more obvious, the Fed is left with few options. If it begins another program of monetary expansion — QE 4 — it “would cause an interest rate spike that would turn the recession into a devastating depression,” said Pento, adding, “Faith in the ability of central banks to provide sustainable GDP growth [has] already been destroyed, given their failed eight-year [previous] experiments in QE.”

Even economists at Citigroup, the third largest bank holding company in the country, are getting nervous. Jonathan Stubbs reported for the bank on Thursday, “The world appears to be trapped in a … death spiral,” adding,

[A] stronger U.S. dollar, weaker oil/commodity prices, weaker world trade/petrodollar liquidity, weaker [emerging markets and global growth] and repeat, ad infinitum. This would lead to Oilmageddon, a “significant and synchronized” global recession and a proper modern-day equity bear market.
107  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Economics, the stock market , and other investment/savings strategies on: February 08, 2016, 10:23:07 AM
Rush Limbaugh talked about this on Friday.  "First-time unemployment numbers" is what Obama quoted.  Translation:  "Not counting the 94 million plus workers who have stopped looking for work."  Complete fraud.

108  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: February 07, 2016, 11:14:11 PM
I missed the first 30 minutes of the debate.  Overall, I thought the moderators did a surprisingly fair job, considering we are talking about ABC.  For the most part it was substantive, but very little new information was presented by any of the candidates.  Crafty's observations about Cruz are on the money.  His personal disclosure about his sister's heroin addiction was welcome and moving.  

As for his analysis of the North Korea situation and waterboarding likely going over most viewers' heads, that's possible, but methinks we here on this forum tend to underestimate the intelligence and common sense of much of the voter base - at least those who take an interest in these Republican debates.  

It's very easy to be influenced by the narrative that media spin and selective reporting creates.  For example, though I'm not a big fan of Rubio, and don't trust him after his "gang of eight" betrayal despite his protestations that he's rethought his position on amnesty - I thought the Fox News media piled on a bit much over his exchange with Christie and the fact that he repeated his line about Obama being very deliberate in his destruction of the economy and diminishing the U.S. on the world stage.  The pundits insisted that this made Rubio look weak and as though he were simply reciting memorized talking points. They said Christie landed a decisive blow and diminished Rubio in that exchange.  What crap. To the contrary, I think that point needed to be made and deserved emphasis.  

Finally, yes - Trump's evasive non-answer to the eminent domain challenge issued by Bush was frustrating and cause for concern.  

Can't see this debate making any difference whatsoever in the voting results on Tuesday.  All this media hype and minute-by-minute analysis strikes me as nothing more than B.S. designed to fill air time and convince viewers they're getting deep insights where none exist.  Not unlike stock analysts with horribly wrong predictions' Monday morning quarterbacking explaining why the market moved up or down in retrospect.  How convenient for a gullible audience.  What these pundits say prior to the vote is often diametrically opposed to the explanations they offer after the results have come in, yet they never seem to be held to account for this.
109  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Last Night's Democrat Debate... on: February 05, 2016, 03:05:36 PM
Bernie Sanders Beats Hillary in a Lying Contest

The angry old leftist future of the Democrats.

February 5, 2016


Daniel Greenfield - frontpagemag.com


The future of the Democratic Party was two angry old leftists screaming at each other for two hours to decide who hates capitalism more.


With the MSNBC and the Democratic Party's logos on a red background, the stage was set for a redder than red debate. Red was everywhere, reflected in the thick glasses of Bernie Sanders and in the garish red lipstick around Hillary Clinton's orifice of lies, and in their clamorous rants about Wall Street and the evils of capitalism that could have come from a back alley Communist pamphleteer in the 50s.


Bernie Sanders promised to end “a rigged economy” with Socialism, which is the very definition of a rigged economy. Both candidates showed their Socialist bona fides by rattling off the names of the corporations they hated the most. Bernie Sanders cheered normalizing relations with Cuba, ridiculing the idea that being Communist is objectionable. But he did express some concerns about the nuclear weapons being held by his fellow Socialists in the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea.


NBC’s Chuck Todd, who was born for Archie Bunker to call him “Meathead”, and MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, whose giant fake eyelashes made it impossible for her to wear her trademark glasses, moderated a debate that had no reason for existing because none of the participants had developed a new idea since the 1970s (and in Bernie Sander’ case, possibly even the 1870s) and were just yelling the same things that they had yelled at all the previous debates, only louder, as if we hadn’t heard them the first time. The MSNBC audience applauded every line as if it were the only job they were qualified for.


Except maybe teaching gender justice or reviewing organic cruelty-free smoothie places on Yelp.


Meanwhile Bernie Sanders picked his ear and Hillary Clinton nodded frantically during every question as if she were a bobblehead doll that had come to life and wanted to go right from plastic to president.


Anyone who had the misfortune to sit, stand or sleep through the previous Democratic debates kept hearing the same tired lines both candidates have been repeating for months; rigged economy, Donald Trump's kids, the middle class bailed out Wall Street, a progressive is someone who gets thing done, political revolution, not radical ideas, not only did I vote against the bill and “Moozlimb” countries.


Maybe it’s too much to expect two career leftists with a combined total age of 142 to come up with any new ideas, but would it really have killed Bernie and Hillary to come up with some new lines?


Instead the future of the Democratic Party recited their memorized lines and rants from the previous debates. It got so bad that in response to a question about Afghanistan, Bernie Sanders reeled off the same exact rant about ISIS, Muslim souls and the King of Jordan that he had recited in the last debate until Chuck Todd gave up on the senile Socialist as a hopeless case and switched to Hillary Clinton.


The only thing that Bernie Sanders appeared to know about foreign policy was that Hillary Clinton had voted for the Iraq War twelve years ago and he hadn’t. That is the only thing he will ever know.


Don’t ask Bernie Sanders to find Afghanistan, Iran or Ukraine on a map. But wake him up in the middle of the night and he’ll tell you that he voted against the Iraq War and that we need to raise taxes.


But what Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders lacked in the way of ideas, they more than made up for in volume. Hillary Clinton screamed, "I can get things done" as if she were pitching a product on an infomercial. Bernie Sanders ran his own telethon, stumbling over words as he boasted how much moolah he had taken in, “a million people” and “27 bucks a piece”.


Eat your heart out, Wall Street. Bernie is better at suckering small-time investors than you are.


Hillary Clinton compensated for her complete lack of likability by falling back on playing the victim. She accused Bernie Sanders of ignoring feminism, black people and gay rights. She sputtered that, “Senator Sanders is the only one who would describe me, a woman running to be president, as exemplifying the establishment.” Somehow a fabulously wealthy woman who is backed by the entire Democratic political establishment isn’t the “establishment” because of her gender.

Hillary Clinton had tried to use 9/11 as a shield for her Wall Street donations and now she switched to using Obama's Wall Street donations as her human shield. Accusing her of being bought by special interests was engaging in an “artful smear”, she indignantly insisted. Like Picasso or Jackson Pollock.


It was neither artful, nor a smear though. It was just common sense that no one was giving Hillary Clinton money because of 9/11. And a genuinely honest opponent would have made that case.


But when Hillary Clinton dared Bernie Sanders to accuse her of being bought off by special interests, the courageous political revolutionary turned tail and fled. Instead of confronting her with the facts, he began mewling something about Republicans and the Koch Brothers. Just as with the emails, Bernie Sanders backed off his criticism and showed that he didn’t have the spine to stand up to Hillary Clinton.


Under all the “authenticity”, Bernie Sanders is just as fake as Hillary. He paradoxically insists that he wants a political revolution, but that his ideas are not radical. After all his rants about the SuperPAC devil, he admitted that he had contemplated setting up his own SuperPAC.


Between Hillary Clinton’s painfully tight smiles and Bernie Sanders checking his watch, this debate was just another infomercial for a fake election between two candidates who voted the same way 93 percent of the time. All that was left was the inane rhetoric and memorized applause lines.


“A progressive is someone who makes progress,” Hillary Clinton blathered. No one asked her what progress she had ever made. Besides the progress from defending a 12-year-old girl’s rapist in Arkansas to defending her rapist husband in the White House.


“I want to see major changes in the Democratic Party,” Bernie Sanders demanded. He could just rename it the Communist Party.


“I have a record,” Hillary Clinton boasted. But that’s really up to the FBI. She promised the country half-a-billion solar panels, which it needs about as much as it needs another Clinton in the White House.


There was no truth in the New Hampshire Democratic debate, but it was child’s play to spot the three biggest lies.

“I say what I believe,” Hillary Clinton said. And somehow, no one laughed.


“I have been moved by my heart,” Hillary Clinton said in her closing statement. “I will bring my heart with me.” Medical records have already revealed that Hillary Clinton has no heart.


“I love this country,” Bernie Sanders said. And for once, someone else beat Hillary in a lying contest.

110  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Obama's Latest Disastrous Program... on: January 22, 2016, 01:00:08 PM
Obamanomics in Catastrophic Action

How Obama's new mortgage program is steering America toward another housing-market collapse.

January 22, 2016 - John Perazzo - Frontpagemag.com


Remember a few years ago, when the American housing market collapsed as a direct result of government policies that—in the name of racial justice—pressured banks to approve mortgage loans for massive numbers of underqualified nonwhite applicants? Remember how that collapse set in motion the financial crisis that then-presidential candidate Barack Obama repeatedly called “the worst economy since the Great Depression”? And remember how Obama—who had long been a leading proponent of precisely the policies that had triggered the crisis—cast himself as the savior who was going to restore fiscal sanity and untangle the whole big mess?

Well, now Savior Obama and his White House are excitedly introducing Americans to their latest brainchild, the “HomeReady” mortgage program—offered through Fannie Mae and designed to help borrowers in “low-income” and “high-minority” census tracts. “For the first time,” boasts Fannie Mae, “income from a non-borrower household member [e.g., a roommate or family member] can be considered to determine an applicable debt-to-income ratio for the loan.” And if those combined incomes aren't enough to qualify an applicant for a mortgage loan, HomeReady comes with additional built-in “flexibilities” like “allowing income from non-occupant borrowers, such as parents.” In other words, just keep rounding up everyone you know, until you can scrape together a 3% down payment and show a combined income that's high enough to qualify for an individual loan. This makes the slipshod lending standards that caused the crisis of 2008 look exacting by comparison.

What about minority applicants with bad credit? No problem there, either! As Investor's Business Daily notes, “You can qualify with a FICO credit score as low as 620, which is subprime.” In fact, even the term “subprime loan”—meaning a loan that has a high interest rate and less favorable terms in order to compensate the lender for the high credit risk incurred—has received a thorough makeover from Obama & Company. From now on, such transactions are going to be called “alternative loans.” See? No more “subprime” crises—ever again! Ain't it grand?

The government policies that led to the housing market collapse of 2008 initially emerged in the mid-1970s, when Democrats in Congress began a campaign to help low-income minorities become homeowners. This led to the passage, in 1977, of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), a mandate for banks to make special efforts to seek out and lend to borrowers of meager means. Founded on the premise that government intervention is necessary to counteract the fundamentally racist and inequitable nature of American society and the free market, the CRA was eventually transformed from an outreach effort into a strict quota system by the Clinton administration. Under the new arrangement, if a bank failed to meet its quota for loans to low-income minorities, it ran the risk of getting a low CRA rating from the FDIC. This, in turn, could derail the bank's efforts to expand, relocate, merge, etc.  From a practical standpoint, then, banks had no recourse but to drastically lower their standards on down-payments and underwriting, and to approve many loans even to borrowers with weak credit credentials. As Hoover Institution Fellow Thomas Sowell explains, this led to “skyrocketing rates of mortgage delinquencies and defaults,” and the rest is history.

The CRA was by no means the only mechanism designed by government to impose race-based lending quotas on financial institutions. For instance, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) instituted rules encouraging lenders to dramatically hike their loan-approval rates for minority applicants and began bringing legal actions against mortgage bankers who failed to do so, regardless of the reason. Moreover, HUD pressured Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two largest sources of housing finance in the United States, to earmark a steeply rising number of their own loans for low-income borrowers. Many of these were subprime mortgages.

Additional pressure was applied by community organizations like ACORN, which routinely and frivolously accused banks of engaging in racially discriminatory lending practices that violated the mandates of the CRA. These groups often sued banks to prevent them from expanding or merging as they wished. Barack Obama, ACORN's committed ally, was strongly in favor of this practice. In a 1994 class-action lawsuit against Citibank, Obama represented ACORN in demanding more favorable terms for subprime homebuyer mortgages. After four years of being dragged through the mud, a beleaguered Citibank—anxious to put an end to the incessant smears (charging racism) that Obama and his fellow litigators were hurling in its direction (to say nothing of its mounting legal bills)—agreed to settle the case.

Forbes magazine puts it bluntly: “Obama has been a staunch supporter of the CRA throughout his public life.” In other words, he has long advocated the very policies that reduced the real-estate market to rubble. And now, because he is a socialist ideologue who reveres big-government interventionism and deplores the free market, he is actively pushing those very same practices again.

Obama claims, of course, to be motivated only by a desire to help downtrodden minorities get a fair shake. But in practice, his approach has served only to devastate those purported “beneficiaries.” For example, by 2009, as a result of the government policies that had brought about the housing crisis, the median net worth of black and Hispanic households nationwide had declined by 53% and 66%, respectively—whereas white net worth had fallen by a mere 16%. These disparities, explains the Federal Reserve, were largely due to the fact that African Americans and Hispanics—“because of their comparatively poor credit ratings”—were disproportionately represented among those who had fallen into the financial trap of the subprime mortgages encouraged by the CRA and similar government policies.

It's a story we've seen many times: Leftist masterminds come up with a scheme to bring “justice” to the downtrodden. But when the dust eventually settles, there is only misery all around.

111  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / A Christian Argument Against Trump... on: January 22, 2016, 10:47:02 AM
For your consideration.  I'm not saying I necessarily agree with this analysis:

Trump’s Essence Is Winning, Christ’s Is Sacrifice, Now Choose

By Steve Berman  |  January 21, 2016


I daresay more words have been spilled on the topic of Donald Trump in the past six months than on any candidate in any race since Ronald Reagan, but it’s been difficult to get to what Aristotle called the “teleology” of Trump. Teleology: It’s the reason for his existence.

Aristotle asked “what causes something to be what it is, to have the characteristics that it has, or to change in the way that it does?” And from that question, he developed his philosophical concepts of substance and form.

We know a table is a table when we look at it because of its form, but the substance is wood, glue and nails.

The substance of Trump is a man obsessed with success. It doesn’t matter what endeavor he’s in, he wants to win. He discards whatever is not advancing him toward a win, and acquires what does advance him. He wakes up every morning with that same belief and goes to bed knowing he’s done all he can do achieve it that day.

And now the form: a man shaped by the power of positive thought. Trump’s religion is the Christianity of Norman Vincent Peale, author of “The Power of Positive Thinking.”

    “The great Norman Vincent Peale was my minister for years,” Trump told CNN last July, a sentiment he repeated in Atlanta and in Iowa during stops in Ames and Dubuque.

    Peale, for his part, described Trump as “kindly and courteous” with “a streak of honest humility,” and touted him as “one of America’s top positive thinkers and doers.” The minister also called Trump “ingenious” and predicted that he would be “the greatest builder of our time.”

Peale preached a Christianity styled on what today is called “Word of Faith.” I’ve been to some churches where Jesus is the name, but the game is “name it, claim it.” This brand of faith relies on verses like John 14:13-14 “And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.”

Oh, and do they ask.

For Trump, who answered “I try not make mistakes where I have to ask forgiveness” when asked for his views on asking for God’s forgiveness by CNN’s Anderson Cooper, it’s all about living for the purpose for which he believes God placed him here. And to Trump, that purpose is to succeed in everything he does.

To win.

He doesn’t drink. He doesn’t smoke. He doesn’t do drugs. And he doesn’t believe that his relationships are as important as the service he can give to his country by succeeding. For that, Trump feels he owes no apology to man or to God. Psychologists might call this a narcissistic personality disorder, but it’s really not. It’s his personal brand of faith, based not so much in the Bible as it is in his own ability to picture his success, and then attain it.

Trump has been planning this run for president for a very long time. He’s kicked it around since he was in his late 20’s. It’s never been far from his peripheral gaze: A prize of all prizes, and the success of all successes. That’s his essence. That’s the reason Trump believes God made him for such a time as this.

Substance, form, purpose were Aristotle’s tools. The substance of Trump running for president versus him being president are two different things. But the form and the essence are the same: Trump wants to win, and that’s problematic.

Jesus cautioned against too much success in this life. Matthew 19:23-24:

    Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

1 Timothy 6:9-10, the Apostle Paul wrote:

    Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

Making the deal, building the wall, whatever it is that Trump wants to do is not what God’s Word recommends. Should he become president, Trump will stay true to form, in the Aristotelian sense. Bible-believing Christians must be careful about supporting Trump. It brings to mind the story of the scorpion and frog, which I’ve used before as an illustration.

    One day, a scorpion decided he wanted to leave his desert home and live in a forest, so he set out on a journey.  Reaching a river he could not cross, he came across a frog, and asked for help.  Here’s how their conversation went.

    “Hellooo Mr. Frog!” called the scorpion across the water, “Would you be so kind as to give me a ride on your back across the river?”

    “Well now, Mr. Scorpion! How do I know that if I try to help you, you wont try to kill me?” asked the frog hesitantly.

    “Because,” the scorpion replied, “If I try to kill you, then I would die too, for you see I cannot swim!”

    Now this seemed to make sense to the frog. But he asked. “What about when I get close to the bank? You could still try to kill me and get back to the shore!”

    “This is true,” agreed the scorpion, “But then I wouldn’t be able to get to the other side of the river!”

    “Alright then…how do I know you wont just wait till we get to the other side and THEN kill me?” said the frog.

    “Ahh…,” crooned the scorpion, “Because you see, once you’ve taken me to the other side of this river, I will be so grateful for your help, that it would hardly be fair to reward you with death, now would it?!”

You can guess what happened.  Halfway across the river, the scorpion stung the frog.

    “You fool!” croaked the frog, “Now we shall both die! Why on earth did you do that?”

    The scorpion shrugged, and did a little jig on the drowning frog’s back.

    “I could not help myself. It is my nature.”

    Then they both sank into the muddy waters of the swiftly flowing river.

We cannot expect Trump to suddenly change his nature or his faith. We can pray for him (we should pray for him, and for President Obama also and a number of leaders who need Jesus), but we should not base our assumptions on what the man says, but on who he really is.

Trump will do what he needs to do to succeed. I don’t believe those who say he’ll trash the Constitution, or go for an authoritarian style. That’s not his nature. He wants his opponents to agree with him and to make the deal. He’ll stake a position, summon supporters, build consensus, fight off attacks, and move forward until the deal is done. That’s what he’s always done, and that’s what he will continue to do.

But for Christians, be careful what you ask for, because it might not be what you’re really getting. To “make America great,” Trump will sacrifice Biblical values, sink the country to a moral low point (defining success as winning in monetary, military, and nationalistic terms), and attack anyone who opposes him.

As one pastor (who I will leave unnamed) put it, “if we elect this man to the White House, the first time Christians disagree with him, we will get everything that’s coming to us.”

Scary words. Now choose.


112  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / David Gordon? on: January 22, 2016, 01:56:24 AM
I'd like to see his rationale as well.  There is overwhelming evidence (see Brandon Smith article in my earlier post) that this is shaping up to be WORSE than 2008.
Where is his evidence to the contrary?
113  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Economic Meltdown Being Led By U.S., Not China... on: January 21, 2016, 01:28:51 AM
The U.S. Is At The Center Of The Global Economic Meltdown

January 20, 2016   Brandon Smith


While the economic implosion progresses this year, there will be considerable misdirection and disinformation as to the true nature of what is taking place. As I have outlined in the past, the masses were so ill informed by the mainstream media during the Great Depression that most people had no idea they were actually in the midst of an “official” depression until years after it began. The chorus of economic journalists of the day made sure to argue consistently that recovery was “right around the corner.” Our current depression has been no different, but something is about to change.

Unlike the Great Depression, social crisis will eventually eclipse economic crisis in the U.S. That is to say, our society today is so unequipped to deal with a financial collapse that the event will inevitably trigger cultural upheaval and violent internal conflict. In the 1930s, nearly 50% of the American population was rural. Farmers made up 21% of the labor force. Today, only 20% of the population is rural. Less than 2% work in farming and agriculture. That’s a rather dramatic shift from a more independent and knowledgeable land-utilizing society to a far more helpless and hapless consumer-based system.

What’s the bottom line? About 80% of the current population in the U.S. is more than likely inexperienced in any meaningful form of food production and self-reliance.

The rationale for lying to the public is certainly there. Economic and political officials could argue that to reveal the truth of our fiscal situation would result in utter panic and immediate social breakdown. When 80% of the citizenry is completely unprepared for a decline in the mainstream grid, a loss of savings through falling equities and a loss of buying power through currency destruction, their first response to such dangers would be predictably uncivilized.

Of course, the powers-that-be are not really interested in protecting the American people from themselves. They are interested only in positioning their own finances and resources in the most advantageous investments while using our loss and fear to extract more centralization, more control and more consent. Thus, the hiding of economic decline is enacted because the decline itself is useful to the elites.

And just to be clear for those who buy into the propaganda, the U.S. is indeed in a speedy decline.

In 'Lies You Will Hear As The Economic Collapse Progresses', published in summer of last year, I predicted that “Chinese contagion” would be used as the scapegoat for the downturn in order to hide the true source: American wealth destruction. Today, as the Dow and other markets plummet and oil markets tank due to falling demand and glut inventories, all we seem to hear from the mainstream talking heads and the people who parrot them in various forums is that the U.S. is the “only stable economy by comparison” and the rest of the world (mainly China) is a poison to our otherwise exemplary financial health. This is delusional fiction.

The U.S. is the No. 1 consumer market in the world with a 29% overall share and a 21% share in energy usage, despite having only 5 percent of the world’s total population. If there is a global slowdown in consumption, manufacturing, exports and imports, then the first place to look should be America.

Trucking freight in the U.S. is in steep decline, with freight companies pointing to a “glut in inventories” and a fall in demand as the culprit.

Morgan Stanley’s freight transportation update indicates a collapse in freight demand worse than that seen during 2009.

The Baltic Dry Index, a measure of global freight rates and thus a measure of global demand for shipping of raw materials, has collapsed to even more dismal historic lows. Hucksters in the mainstream continue to push the lie that the fall in the BDI is due to an “overabundance of new ships.” However, the CEO of A.P. Moeller-Maersk, the world’s largest shipping line, put that nonsense to rest when he admitted in November that “global growth is slowing down” and “[t]rade is currently significantly weaker than it normally would be under the growth forecasts we see.”

Maersk ties the decline in global shipping to a FALL IN DEMAND, not an increase in shipping fleets.

This point is driven home when one examines the real-time MarineTraffic map, which tracks all cargo ships around the world. For the past few weeks, the map has remained almost completely inactive with the vast majority of the world’s cargo ships sitting idle in port, not traveling across oceans to deliver goods. The reality is, global demand has fallen down a black hole, and the U.S. is at the top of the list in terms of crashing consumer markets.

To drive the point home even further, the U.S. is by far the world’s largest petroleum consumer. Therefore, any sizable collapse in global oil demand would have to be predicated in large part on a fall in American consumption. Oil inventories are now overflowing, indicating an unheard-of crash in energy use and purchasing.

U.S. petroleum consumption was actually lower in 2014 than it was in 1997 and 25% lower than earlier projections predicted. A large part of this reduction in gas use has been attributed to fewer vehicle miles traveled. Though oil markets have seen massive price cuts, the lack of demand continued through 2015.

This collapse in consumption is reflected partially in newly adjusted 4th quarter GDP forecasts by the Federal Reserve, which are now slashed down to 0.7%.  And remember, Fed and government calculate GDP stats by counting government spending of taxpayer money as "production" or "commerce".  They also count parasitic programs like Obamacare towards GDP as well.  If one were to remove government spending of taxpayer funds from the equation, real GDP would be far in the negative.  That is to say, if the fake numbers are this bad, then the real numbers must be horrendous.

And finally, let’s talk about Wal-Mart. There is a good reason why mainstream pundits are attempting to marginalize Wal-Mart’s sudden announcement of 269 store closures, 154 of them within the U.S. with at least 10,000 employees being laid off. Admitting weakness in Wal-Mart means admitting weakness in the U.S. economy, and they don’t want to do that.

Wal-Mart is America’s largest retailer and largest employer. In 2014, Wal-Mart announced a sweeping plan to essentially crush neighborhood grocery markets with its Wal-Mart Express stores, building hundreds within months. Today, those Wal-Mart Express stores are being shut down in droves, along with some supercenters. Their top business model lasted around a year before it was abandoned.

Some in the mainstream argue that this is not necessarily a sign of economic decline because Wal-Mart claims it will be building 200 to 240 new stores worldwide by 2017. This is interesting to me because Wal-Mart just suffered its steepest stock drop in 27 years on reports that projected sales will fall by 6% to 12% for the next two years.

It would seem to me highly unlikely that Wal-Mart would close 154 stores in the U.S. (269 stores worldwide) and then open 240 other stores during a projected steep crash in sales that caused the worst stock trend in the company’s history. I think it far more likely that Wal-Mart executives are attempting to appease shareholders with expansion promises they do not plan to keep.

I am going to call it here and now and predict that most of these store sites will never see construction and that Wal-Mart will continue to make cuts, either with store closings, employee layoffs or both.

As the above data indicates, global demand is disintegrating; and the U.S. is a core driver.

The best way to sweep all these negative indicators under the rug is to fabricate some grand idea of outside threats and fiscal dominoes. It is much easier for Americans to believe our country is being battered from without rather than destroyed from within.

Does China have considerable fiscal issues including debt bubble issues? Absolutely. Is this a catalyst for global collapse? No. China’s problems are many but if there is a first “domino” in the chain, then the U.S. economy claims that distinction.

China is the largest exporter in the world, not the largest consumer. If anything, a crash in China’s economy is only a REFLECTION of an underlying collapse in U.S. demand for Chinese goods (among others). That is to say, the mainstream dullards have it backward; a crash in China is a herald of a larger collapse in U.S. markets. A crash in China is a symptom of the greater fiscal disease in America. The U.S. is the primary cause; it is not the victim of Chinese contagion. And the crisis in the U.S. will ultimately be far worse by comparison.

I wrote in 'What Fresh Horror Awaits The Economy After Fed Rate Hike?', published before Christmas:

"Market turmoil is a guarantee given the fact that banks and corporations have been utterly reliant on near-zero interest rates and free overnight lending from the Fed. They have been using these no-cost and low-cost loans primarily for stock buybacks, purchasing back their own stocks and reducing the number of shares on the market, thereby artificially elevating the value of the remaining shares and driving up the market as a whole. Now that near-zero lending is over, these banks and corporations will not be able to afford constant overnight borrowing, and the buybacks will cease. Thus, stock markets will crash in the near term.

This process has already begun with increased volatility leading up to and after the Fed rate hike. Watch for far more erratic stock movements (300 to 500 points or more) up and down taking place more frequently, with the overall trend leading down into the 15,000-point range for the Dow in the first two quarters of 2016. Extraordinary but short lived positive increases in the markets will occur at times (Christmas and New Year’s tend to result in positive rallies), but shock rallies are just as much a sign of volatility and instability as shock crashes."

Markets moved immediately into crash territory after the new year began. This was an easy prediction to make and one that I have been reiterating for months — just as the timing of the Fed rate hike was an easy prediction to make, based on the Fed’s history of deliberately increasing instability through bad policy as the economy moves into deflationary spirals. The Fed did it during the Great Depression and is doing it again today.

It is no coincidence that global markets began to tank after the first Fed rate hike; no-cost overnight lending to banks and corporations was the key to maintaining equities in a relatively static position.  As the U.S. loses momentum, the world loses momentum.  As the Fed ends outright stimulation and manipulation, the house of cards falls.

I have said it many times and I’ll say it yet again: If you think the Fed’s motivation is to prolong or protect the U.S. economy and currency, then you will never understand why it takes the policy actions it does. If you understand and accept the fact that the Fed is a saboteur working carefully and incrementally toward the destruction of the U.S. to make way for a new globally centralized system, everything falls into place.

To summarize, the U.S. economy as we know it is not slated to survive the next few years. Read my article 'The Economic Endgame Explained' for more in-depth information on why a collapse is being engineered and what the openly admitted goal is, including the referenced 1988 article from The Economist titled “Get Ready A World Currency In 2018,” which outlines the plan for a reduction of the dollar and the U.S. system in order to make way for a global basket reserve currency (Special Drawing Rights).

It is astonishingly foolish to assume that even though the U.S. has held the title of king of global consumption share for decades, that our economy is somehow not a primary faulty part in the sputtering global economic engine.  Economies are falling because demand is falling.   Demand is falling because Americans are not buying.  Americans are not buying because Americans are broke. Americans are broke because central bank policy has created an environment of wealth destruction. This wealth destruction in the U.S. has been ongoing, but only now is it becoming truly visible.  The volatility we see in developing nations is paltry compared to the financial chaos we now face.  Anyone who attempts to dismiss the dangers of a U.S. breakdown or the threat to the unprepared public is either an idiot, or they are trying to divert and distract you from reality. The coming months will undoubtedly verify this.
114  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Nation That Gave Us The Magna Carta Is Dead... on: January 20, 2016, 07:30:38 AM
Geller: The Nation That Gave the World the Magna Carta Is Dead

by PAMELA GELLER January 18, 2016

The British Parliament on Monday debated whether or not to ban Donald Trump from the country for the crime of saying that in light of jihad terrorist attacks, there should be a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration into the U.S.

I did not expect for one moment that the Brits would ban the U.S. presidential candidate who may very well be the next President of the United States. A nation whose national self-esteem (or what’s left of it) is rooted deeply in its place in history would be infamous for having banned the leader of its closest ally, the one that saved her from the Nazi onslaught.

On the other hand, maybe they will ban Trump. After all, the British government banned me from entering the country for standing up against jihad terror. To ban Trump for calling for a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration would just be more of the same. The British government, egged on by the left, seems determined to silence any and every voice against jihad terror and Islamization. The consequences for Britain will be catastrophic.

According to documents released in our lawsuit against the British government under the Duty of Candor, my support for Israel was also cited as grounds for the ban. An official in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office wrote that the dossier that the government had assembled as the case for banning me was “particularly citing pro-Israeli views.” If supporting Israel can get you banned from Britain, opposing the unrestricted entry of Muslims (including jihad terrorists) into the U.S. certainly can.

In not allowing me into the country solely because of our true and accurate statements about Islam and support of Israel, the British government was behaving like a de facto Islamic state.

By the time my ban was officially announced, however, the Home Office had scrubbed the material about it being because I was pro-Israel. The British government explicitly stated that I was banned because my presence was “not conducive to the public good” and that I represented a “threat to security of our society.” What were the criteria? CNN “journalist” Mona Eltahawy was soon afterward scheduled to speak in the UK at a women’s conference sponsored by two sharia-compliant media orgs, Reuters and the New York Times. Yet Mona Eltahawy was arrested after attacking a complete stranger in the New York subway and defacing our American Freedom Defense Initiative pro-Israel ad. Is that acceptable behavior and conducive to the public good? The British government apparently thinks so. They also let a notorious Muslim Brotherhood leader take refuge in London, and readily admit preachers of jihad terror.

The Home Office also cited security concerns – that is, if I were admitted, Muslims might riot, and rather than keep the Muslims rioting, they banned me. As Laura Rosen Cohen says, “security concerns” are the new “shut up.” My real crime was my principled dedication to freedom. I am a human rights activist dedicated to freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and individual rights for all before the law. I fiercely oppose violence and the persecution and oppression of minorities under supremacist law. I deplore violence and work for the preservation of freedom of speech to avoid violent conflict. I have never been convicted of any crime. I have never been arrested. I became a writer and activist in the wake of 9/11. For this, I am banned from Britain. I shed no tears. I am banned from Mecca, too.

Things have not improved in the two and a half years since I was banned. Monday’s Parliamentary “debate” was more like a clown contest, with Islamic apologists competing to see which one could out-bootlick Britain’s Islamic supremacists.

Why did this once great country agree to hold such a debate in the first place? Now in the birthplace of the principle of the freedom of speech, holding opinions that are unpopular with the elites can get you banned from the country. Apparently over 500,000 people signed a petition demanding that Trump be banned. Mind you, another petition calling for a halt to the massive Muslim migration into the United Kingdom gained a similar number of signers, but there was no Parliamentary debate, or any significant political discussion, of that one.

Where also is the Parliamentary debate about the hundreds of thousands, possibly as many as a million, young British girls who were brutalized by Muslim rape gangs? These girls were sacrificed on the altar of Islamic supremacism. For years these little British girls went to the authorities about these Muslim child sex trafficking gangs and the authorities did nothing for fear of appearing “Islamophobic” or racist. But they sprang into action and banned me when they heard I would be laying a wreath at the site of the Lee Rigby beheading on Armed Services Day.

What’s bitterly ironic is that Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron, a lapdog of Islamic supremacists, has just called on immigrants to learn English within two-and-a-half years of arriving in Britain, or face deportation. If Trump had said that, the British left would be working up another petition denouncing him. Will Cameron be banned from the country?

The nation that gave the world the Magna Carta is dead.

115  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / A Recession Worse Than 2008 Is Imminent... on: January 15, 2016, 01:46:08 PM
A recession worse than 2008 is coming

Michael Pento   

The S&P 500 has begun 2016 with its worst performance ever. This has prompted Wall Street apologists to come out in full force and try to explain why the chaos in global currencies and equities will not be a repeat of 2008. Nor do they want investors to believe this environment is commensurate with the dot-com bubble bursting. They claim the current turmoil in China is not even comparable to the 1997 Asian debt crisis.

Indeed, the unscrupulous individuals that dominate financial institutions and governments seldom predict a down-tick on Wall Street, so don't expect them to warn of the impending global recession and market mayhem.

But a recession has occurred in the U.S. about every five years, on average, since the end of WWII; and it has been seven years since the last one — we are overdue.

Most importantly, the average market drop during the peak to trough of the last 6 recessions has been 37 percent. That would take the S&P 500 down to 1,300; if this next recession were to be just of the average variety.

But this one will be worse.

A major contributor for this imminent recession is the fallout from a faltering Chinese economy. The megalomaniac communist government has increased debt 28 times since the year 2000. Taking that total north of 300 percent of GDP in a very short period of time for the primary purpose of building a massive unproductive fixed asset bubble that adds little to GDP.

Now that this debt bubble is unwinding, growth in China is going offline. The renminbi's falling value, cascading Shanghai equity prices (down 40 percent since June 2014) and plummeting rail freight volumes (down 10.5 percent year over year), all clearly illustrate that China is not growing at the promulgated 7 percent, but rather isn't growing at all. The problem is that China accounted for 34 percent of global growth, and the nation's multiplier effect on emerging markets takes that number to over 50 percent.

Therefore, expect more stress on multinational corporate earnings as global growth continues to slow. But the debt debacle in China is not the primary catalyst for the next recession in the United States. It is the fact that equity prices and real estate values can no longer be supported by incomes and GDP. And now that the Federal Reserve's quantitative easing and zero interest-rate policy have ended, these asset prices are succumbing to the gravitational forces of deflation. The median home price to income ratio is currently 4.1; whereas the average ratio is just 2.6.

Therefore, despite record low mortgage rates, first-time homebuyers can no longer afford to make the down payment. And without first-time home buyers, existing home owners can't move up.

Likewise, the total value of stocks has now become dangerously detached from the anemic state of the underlying economy. The long-term average of the market cap-to-GDP ratio is around 75, but it is currently 110. The rebound in GDP coming out of the Great Recession was artificially engendered by the Fed's wealth effect. Now, the re-engineered bubble in stocks and real estate is reversing and should cause a severe contraction in consumer spending.

Nevertheless, the solace offered by Wall Street is that another 2008-style deflation and depression is impossible because banks are now better capitalized. However, banks may find they are less capitalized than regulators now believe because much of their assets are in Treasury debt and consumer loans that should be significantly underwater after the next recession brings unprecedented fiscal strain to both the public and private sectors.

But most importantly, even if one were to concede financial institutions are less leveraged; the startling truth is that businesses, the federal government and the Federal Reserve have taken on a humongous amount of additional debt since 2007. Even household debt has increased back to its 2007 record of $14.1 trillion. Specifically, business debt during that time frame has grown from $10.1 trillion, to $12.6 trillion; the total national debt boomed from $9.2 trillion, to $18.9 trillion; and the Fed's balance sheet has exploded from $880 billion to $4.5 trillion.

Banks may be better off today than they were leading up to the Great Recession but the government and Fed's balance sheets have become insolvent in the wake of their inane effort to borrow and print the economy back to health. As a result, the federal government's debt has now soared to nearly 600 percent of total revenue. And the Fed has spent the last eight years leveraging up its balance sheet 77-to-1 in its goal to peg short-term interest rates at zero percent.

Therefore, this inevitable, and by all accounts brutal upcoming recession, will coincide with two unprecedented and extremely dangerous conditions that should make the next downturn worse than 2008.

First, the Fed will not be able to lower interest rates and provide any debt-service relief for the economy. In the wake of the Great Recession, former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke took the overnight interbank lending rate down to zero percent from 5.25 percent and printed $3.7 trillion. The Fed bought longer-term debt in order to push mortgages and nearly every other form of debt to record lows.

The best the Fed can do now is to take away its 0.25 percent rate hike made in December.

Second, the federal government increased the amount of publicly-traded debt by $8.5 trillion (an increase of 170 percent), and ran $1.5 trillion deficits to try to boost consumption through transfer payments. Another such ramp up in deficits and debt, which are a normal function of recessions after revenue collapses, would cause an interest-rate spike that would turn this next recession into a devastating depression.

It is my belief that, in order to avoid the surging cost of debt-service payments on both the public and private-sector level, the Fed will feel compelled to launch a massive and unlimited round of bond purchases. However, not only are interest rates already at historic lows, but faith in the ability of central banks to provide sustainable GDP growth will have already been destroyed, given their failed eight-year experiment in QE.

Therefore, the ability of government to save the markets and the economy this time around will be extremely difficult, if not impossible. Look for chaos in currency, bond and equity markets on an international scale throughout 2016. Indeed, it already has begun.

Michael Pento produces the weekly podcast "The Mid-week Reality Check,"is the president and founder of Pento Portfolio Strategies and author of thebook "The Coming Bond Market Collapse."

116  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Phyllis Schlafly: "Trump Is America's Last Hope" on: December 20, 2015, 06:58:52 PM

PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY: TRUMP IS 'LAST HOPE FOR AMERICA'

'I don't see anyone else who's eager to fight'

World Net Daily - December 20, 2015


Phyllis Schlafly, an icon of the conservative movement who has been active for half a century, is warning the nation: Donald Trump is the last hope for America.

Schlafly unloaded on Republicans in Congress for passing the $1.1 trillion omnibus bill last week, a move she called a “betrayal.”

“This is a betrayal of the grassroots and of the Republican Party,” Schlafly said in an exclusive interview with WND. “We thought we were electing a different crowd to stand up for America, and they didn’t. We’re extremely outraged by what Congress has done. Nancy Pelosi couldn’t have engineered it any better. I think the people are going to react by electing Donald Trump.”

Trump put out a statement Friday to ABC News saying, “If anyone needs more evidence of why the American people are suffering at the hands of their own government, look no further than the budget deal announced by Speaker Ryan. In order to avoid a government shutdown, a cowardly threat from an incompetent president, the elected Republicans in Congress threw in the towel and showed absolutely no budget discipline.”

Trump continued, “Congress cannot seem to help itself in bending to every whim of special interests. How can they face their constituents when they continue to burden our children and grandchildren with debts they will never be able to repay? Our government is failing us, so we must do something about it. Who knows how bad things will be when the next administration comes in and has to pick up the pieces?”

Schlafly applauded the GOP front-runner’s fighting spirit.

“It sounds like Donald Trump is the only one who has any fight in him,” she said. “He will fight for the issues that we really care about and are very hot at the present time, such as the immigration issue. I don’t see anyone else who’s eager to fight.”

The Republican-controlled Congress just sold America down in river in the “worst kind of betrayal,” Schlafly told WND.

“It’s the worst kind of a betrayal because we thought we elected a bunch of good guys who would shape up the party,” she said. “We had a lot of fancy promises that the Republicans were going to shape up and change course. And they disappointed us. Betrayal is an appropriate word to describe it.”

WND asked Schlafly if she believes Donald Trump is the last hope for America.

“He does look like he’s the last hope [for America],” Schlafly said. “We don’t hear anybody saying what he’s saying. In fact, most of the people who ought to be lining up with him are attacking him. They’re probably jealous of the amount of press coverage he gets. But the reason he gets so much press coverage is the grassroots are fed up with people who are running things, and they do want a change. They do want people to stand up for America. It really resonates when he says he wants to ‘Make America Great Again.’”

Schlafly said it’s not only Republicans who feel betrayed, but Democrats, too.

“They are betrayed,” she said. “There’s no doubt about it. The working man and woman have been betrayed by both parties. They’re ready for a change … anything they think would be better.”

The conservative superstar also blasted leaders of both parties who advocate lax immigration policies while American workers continue to struggle in a tepid economy.

“The rich guys are putting the money in. They want to bring in the low-wage people. That’s the way they think they’ll make money,” she said. “But that’s not the way America will prosper. America was built because we had a great growing and prosperous middle class. We need to rebuild that again. I’m willing to give a new try to somebody else.”


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/12/top-conservative-trump-is-last-hope-for-america/#aEW0gY9owK0jpyyd.99
117  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Raymond Ibrahim: The Root Cause of Islamic Terrorism in the West... on: December 18, 2015, 10:14:47 PM
Islamic Jihad: Symptom of a Western Cause

By Raymond Ibrahim - December 18, 2015


As someone specializing in Islamic jihadism, one would expect I’d have much to say immediately after jihadi attacks of the sort that recently occurred in San Bernardino, or Paris, or Mali, where a total of about 180 dead.  Ironically, I don’t: such attacks are ultimately symptoms of what I do deem worthy of talk, namely, root causes.  (What can one add when a symptom of the root cause he has long warned against occurs other than “told you so”?)



So what is the root cause of jihadi attacks?  Many think that the ultimate source of the ongoing terrorization of the West is Islam.  Yet this notion has one problem: the Muslim world is immensely weak and intrinsically incapable of being a threat.  That every Islamic assault on the West is a terrorist attack—and terrorism, as is known, is the weapon of the weak—speaks for itself.

This was not always the case.  For approximately one thousand years, the Islamic world was the scourge of the West.  Today’s history books may refer to those who terrorized Christian Europe as Arabs, Saracens, Moors, Ottomans, Turks, Mongols, or Tatars[1]—but all were operating under the same banner of jihad that the Islamic State is operating under.

No, today, the ultimate enemy is within.  The root cause behind the nonstop Muslim terrorization of the West is found in those who stifle or whitewash all talk and examination of Muslim doctrine and history; who welcome hundreds of thousands of Muslim migrants while knowing that some are jihadi operatives and many are simply “radical”; who work to overthrow secular Arab dictators in the name of “democracy” and “freedom,” only to uncork the jihad suppressed by the autocrats (the Islamic State’s territory consists of lands that were “liberated” in Iraq, Libya, and Syria by the U.S. and its allies).

So are Western leaders and politicians the root cause behind the Islamic terrorization of the West?

Close—but still not there yet.

Far from being limited to a number of elitist leaders and institutions, the Western empowerment of the jihad is the natural outcome of postmodern thinking—the real reason an innately weak Islam can be a source of repeated woes for a militarily and economically superior West.

Remember, the reason people like French President Francois Hollande, U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel are in power—three prominent Western leaders who insist that Islam is innocent of violence and who push for Muslim immigration—is because they embody a worldview that is normative in the West.

In this context, the facilitation of jihadi terror is less a top down imposition and more a grass root product of decades of erroneous, but unquestioned, thinking.  (Those who believe America’s problems begin and end with Obama would do well to remember that he did not come to power through a coup but that he was voted in—twice.  This indicates that Obama and the majority of voting Americans have a shared, and erroneous, worldview.  He may be cynically exploiting this worldview, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s because this warped worldview is mainstream that he can exploit it in the first place.)

Western empowerment of the jihad is rooted in a number of philosophies that have metastasized into every corner of social life, becoming cornerstones of postmodern epistemology.  These include the doctrines of relativism and multiculturalism on the one hand, and anti-Western, anti-Christian sentiment on the other.

Taken together, these cornerstones of postmodern, post-Christian thinking hold that there are no absolute truths and thus all cultures are fundamentally equal and deserving of respect.  If any Western person wants to criticize a civilization or religion, then let them look “inwardly” and acknowledge their European Christian heritage as the epitome of intolerance and imperialism.

Add to these a number of sappy and silly ideals—truth can never be uttered because it might “hurt the feelings” of some (excluding white Christians who are free game), and if anything, the West should go out of its way to make up for its supposedly historic “sins” by appeasing Muslims until they “like us”—and you have a sure recipe for disaster, that is, the current state of affairs.

Western people are bombarded with these aforementioned “truths” from the cradle to the grave—from kindergarten to university, from Hollywood to the news rooms, and now even in churches—so that they are unable to accept and act on a simple truism that their ancestors well knew: Islam is an inherently violent and intolerant creed that cannot coexist with non-Islam (except insincerely, in times of weakness).

The essence of all this came out clearly when Obama, in order to rationalize away the inhuman atrocities of the Islamic State, counseled Americans to get off their “high horse” and remember that their Christian ancestors have been guilty of similar if not worse atrocities.  That he had to go back almost a thousand years for examples by referencing the crusades and inquisition—both of which have been completely distorted by the warped postmodern worldview, including by portraying imperialist Muslims as victims—did not matter to America’s leader.

Worse, it did not matter to most Americans.  The greater lesson was not that Obama whitewashed modern Islamic atrocities by misrepresenting and demonizing Christian history, but that he was merely reaffirming the mainstream narrative that Americans have been indoctrinated into believing.  And thus, aside from the usual ephemeral and meaningless grumblings, his words—as with many of his pro-Islamic, anti-Christian comments and policies—passed along without consequence.

—–

Once upon a time, the Islamic world was a super power and its jihad an irresistible force to be reckoned with.   Over two centuries ago, however, a rising Europe—which had experienced over one millennium of jihadi conquests and atrocities—defeated and defanged Islam.

As Islam retreated into obscurity, the post-Christian West slowly came into being.  Islam didn’t change, but the West did: Muslims still venerate their heritage and religion—which impels them to jihad against the Western “infidel”—whereas the West learned to despise its heritage and religion, causing it to be an unwitting ally of the jihad.

Hence the current situation: the jihad is back in full vigor, while the West—not just its leaders, but much of the populace—facilitates it in varying degrees.  Nor is this situation easily remedied.  For to accept that Islam is inherently violent and intolerant is to reject a number of cornerstones of postmodern Western thinking that far transcend the question of Islam. In this context, nothing short of an intellectual/cultural revolution—where rational thinking becomes mainstream—will allow the West to confront Islam head on.

But there is some good news.  With every Islamic attack, the eyes of more and more Western people are opened to the true nature of Muhammad’s religion.  That this is happening despite generations of pro-Islamic indoctrination in the West is a testimony to the growing brazenness of the jihad.

Yet it still remains unclear whether objective thinking will eventually overthrow the current narrative of relativism, anti-Westernism, and asinine emotionalism.

Simply put, celebrating multiculturalism and defeating the jihad is impossible.

However, if such a revolution ever does take place, the Islamic jihad will be easily swept back into the dustbin of history.  For the fact remains: Islam is terrorizing the world, not because it can, but because the West allows it to.

118  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The Myth of Christian Pacifism... on: December 10, 2015, 11:08:56 AM
This is an excellent book explaining the Biblical rationale for self-defense, and putting to rest the idea that Christians should be pacifists.  Extensive scriptural references are provided.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0982215150?keywords=a%20time%20to%20kill%20book&qid=1449767016&ref_=sr_1_3&sr=8-3

119  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Dubious Value of College To Many Workers... on: December 09, 2015, 01:39:28 PM
SQUANDERED RESOURCES ON COLLEGE EDUCATION

The dubious benefit of college degrees to workers over the next decade.

December 9, 2015  Walter Williams

Most college students do not belong in college. I am not by myself in this assessment. Washington Post columnist Robert Samuelson said, "It's time to drop the college-for-all crusade," adding that "the college-for-all crusade has outlived its usefulness." Richard Vedder, professor emeritus of economics at Ohio University, reports that "the U.S. Labor Department says the majority of new American jobs over the next decade do not need a college degree. We have a six-digit number of college-educated janitors in the U.S." Vedder adds that there are "one-third of a million waiters and waitresses with college degrees." More than one-third of currently working college graduates are in jobs that do not require a degree, such as flight attendants, taxi drivers and salesmen. College was not a wise use of these students', their parents' and taxpayer resources.

What goes on at many colleges adds to the argument that college for many is a waste of resources. Some Framingham State University students were upset by an image of a Confederate flag sticker on another student's laptop. They were offered counseling services by the university's chief diversity and inclusion officer.

Campus Reform reports that because of controversial newspaper op-eds, five Brown University students are claiming that freedom of speech does not confer the right to express opinions they find distasteful.

A Harvard University student organization representing women's interests now routinely advises students that they should not feel pressured to attend or participate in class sessions that focus on the law of sexual violence and that might therefore be traumatic. Such students will be useless to rape victims and don't belong in law school.

And some college professors are not fit for college, as suggested by the courses they teach. Here's a short list, and you decide: "Interrogating Gender: Centuries of Dramatic Cross-Dressing," Swarthmore College; "GaGa for Gaga: Sex, Gender, and Identity," University of Virginia; "Oh, Look, a Chicken!" Belmont University; "Getting Dressed," Princeton University; "Philosophy and Star Trek," Georgetown University; "What if Harry Potter Is Real?" Appalachian State University; and "God, Sex, Chocolate: Desire and the Spiritual Path," University of California, San Diego.

The fact that such courses are part of the curricula also says something about administrators who allow such nonsense.

Then there is professorial "wisdom." Professor Mary Margaret Penrose, of the Texas A&M University School of Law, asked, during a panel discussion on gun control, "Why do we keep such an allegiance to a Constitution that was driven by 18th-century concerns?"

Perhaps the newest "intellectual" fad is white privilege. Portland State University professor Rachel Sanders' "White Privilege" course says "whiteness" must be dismantled if racial justice is ever to be achieved. Campus Reform reports on other whiteness issues (http://tinyurl.com/oof9wu3). Harvard's classes on critical race theory combine "progressive political struggles for racial justice with critiques of the conventional legal and scholarly norms which are themselves viewed as part of the illegitimate hierarchies that need to be changed."

Back to those college administrators. Dartmouth College's vice provost for student affairs, Inge-Lise Ameer, said, "There's a whole conservative world out there that's not being very nice." She did, however, issue "an unequivocal apology" for stoking tensions with such a disparaging comment about conservatives to Black Lives Matter protesters.

After a standoff with other Black Lives Matter protesters, Princeton University President Christopher L. Eisgruber acceded to demands that former Princeton President Woodrow Wilson's name be removed from the campus because of his behavior as U.S. president. President Wilson was a progressive and an avowed racist who racially segregated the civil service and delighted in showing D.W. Griffith's racist "The Birth of a Nation" to his White House guests. Professor Thomas DiLorenzo's recent column suggests that a worthier target for Black Lives Matter protesters would be Abraham Lincoln, who he says was "the most publicly outspoken racist and white supremacist of all American presidents" (http://tinyurl.com/jza7ntf).

The bottom line is that George Orwell was absolutely right when he said, "There are notions so foolish that only an intellectual will believe them."
120  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Trump's statement re: Muslims... on: December 09, 2015, 09:32:57 AM
I might add that for all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over Trump's "ban Muslims" comment, FDR (the Left's HERO)  did this with other groups, and we ended immigration ENTIRELY from 1929 - 1965.  So as usual, Trump is using his finely-honed negotiation skills to lead with the most outrageous proposal which he KNOWS will get massive airtime, and will flesh it out with details as time goes on.  What he is saying is essentially true.  Most of the media - including Fox News - is clueless, and screaming "unconstitutional," when Trump's proposal absolutely is NOT.

Funny how they only seem to be interested in issues of constitutionality when a presidential CANDIDATE is talking about an issue, but couldn't care less when a SITTING PRESIDENT violates the document on an almost daily basis.
121  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The Farooks - The Modern Jihad Family... on: December 09, 2015, 08:17:42 AM
MEET THE FAROOKS: THE MODERN JIHAD FAMILY

How did this anything-but-moderate family not attract any law enforcement attention?

December 9, 2015  Robert Spencer

When Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik murdered fourteen people and wounded twenty-one at a holiday party in San Bernardino, California, Farook’s family, having lawyered up, instructed its legal representatives to tell the world how shocked – shocked! – they were by the massacre. However, just as Captain Renault is handed his winnings immediately after telling Rick Blaine of his shock that gambling was going on in Rick’s Café Americain, so also in this case did the family’s shock seem increasingly less genuine the more that became known about them.

Initially, however, the lie was fed easily to a credulous mainstream media. One of the Farook family lawyers, David Chesley, immediately found the nearest microphone and declared: “None of the family members had any idea that this was going to take place. They were totally shocked.”

Even in stories that reported this, however, the story started to unravel. No sooner had the Associated Press quoted Chesley that it noted that he and another Farook family lawyer, Mohammad Abuershaid, said that “Farook’s mother lived with the couple but she stayed upstairs and didn’t notice they had stockpiled 12 pipe bombs and well over 4,500 rounds of ammunition.”

Farook’s mother didn’t notice the twelve pipe bombs and well over 4,500 rounds of ammunition because she “stayed upstairs”? Was she an invalid, then, who never ventured downstairs at all? If so, why did the couple leave their six-month-old daughter in her care when they went off to shoot Infidels for Allah?

And now it has come out that Mom did venture downstairs now and again after all, and that her eye may indeed have caught the site of a stray pipe bomb or two. According to the Daily Mail, “FBI agents found an empty GoPro package, shooting targets and tools inside a car belonging to” Rafia Farook, Syed’s mother. Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik mounted GoPro cameras on their body armor before they began their jihad massacre; apparently, like other jihad killers before them, they hoped to cheer and encourage the faithful with scenes of the bloodbath. Authorities are investigating the possibility that Rafia Farook aided in the planning and preparation of the San Bernardino jihad massacre.

Rafia might have taken this car to meetings of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), of which she was an active member. ICNA openly supports Sharia and the caliphate, and has links to the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as to the Pakistani jihad group Jamaat-e-Islami.

The family’s shock at the murders appears even more feigned in light of revelations from Syed Rizwan Farook’s father, who is also named Syed Farook. The elder Syed has characterized his ex-wife Rafia as “very religious,” like the killer, to whom he referred as Rizwan. “Rizwan was the mama’s boy,” he recounted, “and she is very religious like him. Once we had a dispute about the historical figure of Jesus, my son yelled that I was an unbeliever and decided that marriage with my wife had to end.” The son insisted on the divorce because he considered the father an “unbeliever.”

What’s more, old man Farook said that his son was an open supporter of the Islamic State, and, of course, hated Israel: “He said he shared the ideology of al-Baghdadi to create an Islamic state, and he was obsessed with Israel.” Moderate “unbeliever” Papa then told his son to bide his time since, in the immortal words of Tom Lehrer, everybody hated the Jews: “I kept telling him always: stay calm, be patient, in two years Israel will no longer exist. Geopolitics is changing: Russia, China, America too, nobody wants the Jews there.” Moderate!

So right in the heart of sunny Redlands, California, where Syed Rizwan and Tashfeen lived with their baby and Rafia (however safely ensconced upstairs, away from the pipe bombs, Grandma may have been), there was an open supporter of the Islamic State and an open supporter of the concept of the caliphate. Then we must not forget the winsome Tashfeen, who pledged allegiance to the Islamic State during the attack, was linked to a jihadi mosque in Pakistan, and who had become, in one of her teacher’s words, “a religious person” who often told people “to live according to the teachings of Islam.”

Despite all that and more, Tashfeen passed FBI and DHS background checks and was allowed to enter the United States. And as she and her loving hubby amassed pipe bombs and thousands of rounds of ammunition, authorities didn’t bat an eye. No report has indicated that they were ever questioned, or were under any kind of surveillance, or were on any watch list.

After all, they were just pious Muslims – and anyone who believes that pious Muslims who are assembling pipe bombs might be up to no good is a racist, bigoted Islamophobe, right? But now the Farooks, the modern jihad family, and the fourteen dead left in their wake, stand as a lesson as to how urgently our law enforcement and intelligence operations need to adopt a realistic approach to the jihad threat, and to discard today’s prevailing politically correct fantasies. But the dead bodies are going to have to be piled up much higher for that reform even to become a possibility.
122  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Economics, the stock market , and other investment/savings strategies on: December 09, 2015, 08:13:22 AM
In-Store Sales Collapse 10% Over Black Friday Weekend

Tuesday, 01 December 2015   Brandon Smith  Alt-Market.com

There are dozens of excuses and rationalizations for why this has happened, including the nonsensical lie that it has been caused by stores "spreading sales out over the entire Christmas season".  I'm sorry, but retail outlets plugged Black Friday just as hard this year, from my observations, as any other year.  And, Americans for some insane reason still treat Black Friday as a kind of "tradition".  People were out in force on Black Friday weekend, but they are BUYING LESS.  Once this Christmas shopping season is over, it will likely be rated as one of the worst in years.  Online sales are also well below predictions for this year and have not nearly filled the hole that has been left by brick and mortar stores.  I predicted this development in my article 'Economic Crisis Goes Mainstream - What Happens Next?', based on the fact that global shipping rates and numbers have plunged, signalling crumbling demand.  Where demand falls, so falls the economy...

 

Sales at brick-and-mortar stores between Nov. 26 and Nov. 29 totaled an estimated $20.43 billion, 10.4% lower than 2014, according to ShopperTrak, a consumer research and analytics company. "There are several contributing factors, including fewer available store hours on Thanksgiving Day and a later Hanukkah that is anticipated to push sales into December," said ShopperTrak founder Bill Martin in a statement. Sales on Thanksgiving day were an estimated $1.76 billion, a 12.5% decrease from last year. Sales on Black Friday were about $10.21 billion, about 12% down from last year. With seven key shopping days left in the year, ShopperTrak said it maintains its 2.4% brick-and-mortar sales growth forecast for the holiday season.
123  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Daniel Greenfield: Obama's ISIS Cover-up Speech... on: December 07, 2015, 11:20:22 AM
OBAMA’S ISIS COVER-UP GETS ITS OWN SPEECH

Instead of fighting ISIS, Obama wants to fight the Bill of Rights.

December 7, 2015  Daniel Greenfield


Obama began his speech with a cover-up, suggesting that Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik’s bloody San Bernardino massacre was not the work of ISIS.

Whatever dignity his Oval Office speech was meant to convey was lost in his opening sentences as his speech became yet another effort to claim that he hadn’t made a mistake by assuring Americans they had nothing to worry about from ISIS right before its latest terror attack.

Farook and Malik were “self-radicalized”. Their attack was not part of a “broader conspiracy”. But ISIS and Al Qaeda have both embraced a strategy of empowering local supporters to carry out their own attacks by giving them the tools and strategies to do so. Malik pledged allegiance to ISIS. Farook, according to his father, was a supporter of the Islamic State. The worst terror attacks in America in recent years were carried out by these independent Islamic terror cells in support of the Jihad.

These so-called “lone wolf” attacks are part of the broader ISIS and Al Qaeda conspiracy.

Instead of leading the fight against ISIS, Obama is making excuses for his latest failures while trying to once again minimize the threat of the global terror group that he had once described as a JV team.

Back in September, Obama’s strategy for defeating ISIS was, and I quote, "We don't have a strategy yet."

For months we have been hearing that the dog had eaten Obama’s ISIS strategy. It was coming. It was in the mail. It was going to be here soon. It was going to arrive one of these days.

Now, after the latest ISIS terror attack, Obama has finally unveiled his strategy. It consists of doing the same things he’s been doing all along while claiming that he was right all along.

For Obama, success means doubling down on failure.

His plan for defeating ISIS is more fake air strikes, more weapons for terrorists, more empty talk of coalitions and a plea for Putin to bail him out. That last part is somewhat new. That’s about it.

American soldiers will go on fighting ISIS on the ground, but according to Obama it’s not a violation of his pledge that there will be no “boots on the ground” unless it’s a brigade. Weapons will go on being passed out to terrorists even though they’ve found their way to Al Qaeda and ISIS before.

At home, he’ll be relying on the same old Muslim Brotherhood community policing policies that have crippled law enforcement’s ability to intercept plots by Islamic terrorists using informants.

Obama concedes that, “an extremist ideology has spread within some Muslim communities”, but claims that Farook and Malik were only “embracing a perverted interpretation of Islam that calls for war against America and the West.” As opposed to the regular form of Islam which calls for the same thing.

ISIS, he tells Americans, is a “cult of death” that does not speak for Islam and “millions of patriotic Muslim-Americans… reject their hateful ideology”. Would these be the Muslims who allow Muslim Brotherhood front groups like CAIR and ISNA with terrorist ties, to speak for them?

But did anyone really expect anything different from Obama?

The media was hoping for an inspirational speech, but Obama ran out of inspiration about the same time that Americans ran out of jobs and hope for the future. All that’s left is narcissistic preening.

We’ve been getting variations of this passive aggressive speech for years now in which Obama condescendingly informs the nation that he knows what he’s doing and isn’t about to change a thing, and then issues some random demands to Congress to try and pass the responsibility to someone else.

All the tired old clichés are here. Anyone who wants to take on ISIS is just “giving it what it wants”. Because apparently what the Islamic State really, really wants is for us to crack down on terrorists.

Anyone who disagrees with Obama is “giving into fear” or “abandoning our values”. And yet it’s Obama who demands that we give in to fear by compromising the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

Obama insists that any profiling of Muslims would be “abandoning our values”, but that rolling back the Second Amendment for the entire country somehow isn’t a fearful abandonment of our values.

He claims that a crackdown on terrorists would be “giving into fear”, but creating a class of people who are denied their Second Amendment rights because their names appear on a no-fly list wouldn’t be.

Obama’s solution to ISIS terror at home isn’t to target Islamic terrorists, but to roll back the Bill of Rights for the entire country or select sections of it who, like Ted Kennedy, wind up on the no-fly list.

But would Obama be open to deporting non-citizens who appear on the no-fly list? Don’t bet on it. The people on it are too dangerous to be allowed to buy guns, but not too dangerous to stay in America.

The former isn’t “giving into fear” or “abandoning our values”. Only the latter is.

Instead of fighting ISIS, Obama wants to fight the Bill of Rights. Instead of targeting Islamic terrorists, he’s still going after Americans who cling to their guns and bibles. When he says, “freedom is more powerful than fear”, his own words and actions show that he does not mean it. He’s just selling fear of the NRA, instead of fear of Islamic terrorists.

Obama triples down on bringing tens of thousands of Syrian Muslim migrants, 13% of whom poll as supporting ISIS, to America. He insists once again, falsely, that “It is our responsibility to reject religious tests on who we admit into this country.” We actually have religious tests to determine who is being persecuted and who isn’t a genuine refugee. In Syria, that’s Christians and Yazidis.

But Obama instead took in 98% Sunni Muslims, 53 Christians and 1 single Yazidi. That’s a “religious test” too. He just refuses to admit it.

Obama continues to troll Congress with demands for a new AUMF against ISIS. Secretary of State Kerry had already told the Senate, “The President already has statuary authority to act against ISIL.” The original 9/11 authorization for the use of military force still holds. Obama doesn’t need a new AUMF. For that matter he fought a war in Libya without the faintest shred of Congressional authorization.

So why does he keep mentioning a new AUMF? To shift responsibility for his inaction to Congress.

Obama is so “confident” in his ISIS strategy that he keeps trying to blame it on Congress. Even when Congress has nothing to do with it.

There is no plan here for beating ISIS. No plan for stopping the next ISIS terror attack.

Instead all Obama has to offer are false claims of success, a strategy that is more of the same, attempts to shift the blame for his “successful” strategy and a carefully curated selection of the same old lies.

ISIS has new tactics on tap. Obama doesn’t. All he has is the same old claim that he is on the “right side of history.” What is the “right side of history”? It’s the side that refuses to learn anything from history because it is convinced that the past is irrelevant and its success is inevitable.

ISIS thinks the same way.

The tragedy is that both the Islamic State and the United States are led by narrow-minded fanatics who are leading their peoples to disaster in an attempt to create a utopia through abuse of power and lies.

If Obama ever wants to figure out how to really defeat ISIS, he can start by trying to figure out how he would defeat himself.
124  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Caroline Glick: "America's Pathological Reality-Denial" on: December 04, 2015, 05:17:24 PM
AMERICA’S PATHOLOGICAL DENIAL OF REALITY

In America of 2015, natural conclusions about the San Bernardino jihadists are considered irresponsible, at best.

December 4, 2015  Caroline Glick

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post.

How much lower will America sink before it regains its senses? Wednesday, two Muslims walked into a Christmas party at a community service center in San Bernardino, California where one worked. They were wearing body armor and video cameras and carrying automatic rifles, pipe bombs and pistols. They opened fire, killed 14, and wounded 17.

The murderers, Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik were killed by police.

Speaking to the Daily News, Farook’s father said his son, “was very religious. He would go to work, come back, go to pray, come back. He’s Muslim.”

Farook’s neighbor told the paper that over the past two years, Farook exchanged his Western dress for Islamic gowns and grew a beard.

These data points lead naturally to the conclusion that Farook and his wife were jihadists who killed in order to kill in the name of Islam.

But in America of December 2015, natural conclusions are considered irresponsible, at best.

In an interview with CNN following the shooting, US President Barack Obama said the massacre demonstrates that the US needs stricter gun laws. As for the motives of the shooters, Obama shrugged. “We don’t yet know the motives of the shooters,” he insisted.

In other words, while ignoring what in all likelihood drove Farooq and his wife to murder innocent people, Obama laid responsibility for the carnage at the feet of his political opponents who reject his demands for stricter limitations on gun ownership.

Here is the place to note that California has some of the most stringent gun control laws in the US.

According to the victims, Farook and his partners were able to reload their weapons and shoot without interruption for several minutes until the police arrived because there was no one to stop them.

Obama wasn’t alone in deflecting attention away from the likely motivations of the murderers.

Wednesday evening, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), held a press conference at the Islamic Center of Orange County. Farook’s brother in law, Farhan Khan was carted out before the cameras to tell the world that he for one had no idea why his brother in law opened fire.

Two other speakers at the event were Hussam Auyloush, CAIR’s regional executive director and Muzammil Siddiqi, the director of the Islamic Society of Orange County.

Auyloush insisted that he had no idea would could have possibly prompted Farook and his wife to murder those gathered at the center. Auyloush raised the prospect that they could have been mentally ill, or perhaps they just didn’t like the victims, or maybe they were garden-variety extremists.

For his part, Siddiqi insisted that Islam had nothing to do with the shooters’ decision to murder innocent people, (how he could be so certain, is unknown).

Siddiqi added that he hopes law enforcement bodies will conduct a full investigation into the “people and motives,” behind the attack.

To a degree, the very fact that Siddiqi had no compunction about stepping in front of the cameras just hours after the attack is proof that the US has lost its way.

If American elites were even semi-competent, Siddiqi would have faded into the shadows, never to emerge again 15 years ago.

Siddiqi is a known jihadist sympathizer. His close ties to jihadists have been a matter of public record since 2000.

In October 2000, Siddiqi spoke at an anti-Israel rally in Lafayette Park in Washington, DC. There he warned the American people that they must abandon their support for Israel lest “the wrath of God” be unleashed against them.

According to a profile of Siddiqi compiled by the Investigative Project on Terrorism, (IPT) in the late 1990s Siddiqi gave a speech extolling jihad and foreseeing Israel’s replacement with an Islamic state.

Among other things, Siddiqi said, “In order to gain the honor, jihad is the path, jihad is the way to receive the honor.”

Siddiqi converted Osama bin Laden’s senior aide, American jihadist Adam Gadahn. Gadahn converted to Islam at the Islamic Center of Orange County in 1995. According to a 2007 New Yorker profile, Siddiqi employed Gadahn at the Center in the years following his conversion. It was during this period that Gadahn was radicalized. He then went to Pakistan and joined al Qaida.

In 1992 Siddiqi hosted a blind sheikh named Omar Abdel Rahman at the Islamic Center. He stood beside Rahman and simultaneously translated his lecture about jihad to the audience of worshipers.

The next year, Rahman masterminded the first jihadist attack on the World Trade Center.

During the 1990s, Siddiqi served as the president of the Islamic Society of North America, a known Muslim Brotherhood front group. In 2007, ISNA was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holyland terror financing trial.

Despite all of his connections to jihadists, US authorities insist that Siddiqi is a legitimate voice. In 2007 Stephen Tidwell, then assistant director of the FBI division in Los Angeles upheld Siddiqi as a moderate.

Speaking to the IPT, Tidwell said, “We have a very strong relationship with Dr. Siddiqi.”

Hours before Obama responded to the San Bernadino massacre by lashing out at gun control opponents, Col. Steve Warren, spokesman for US Operation Inherent Resolve – the US campaign against Islamic State – rejected Russian claims that the Turkish government is collaborating with the terror state.

Warren praised the Turks as “great partners to us.”

“We flatly reject any notion that the Turks are somehow working with Islamic State. That is preposterous,” he insisted, adding, “Any thought” the Turkish government would deal or collaborate with Islamic State is “completely untrue.”

Unfortunately, a wealth of evidence indicates that it is Warren’s statement that is preposterous and completely untrue.

For nearly five years, it has been an open secret that Turkey serves as Islamic State’s logistical base. Almost all the foreigners traveling to Syria to join IS transit through Turkey.

For nearly two years, we have known that Turkey is Islamic State’s major arms supplier. And for six months we have known that they are their partners in oil exports.

In an article published this past summer in Middle East Quarterly, Burak Bekdil reported in January 2014, Turkish prosecutors acting independently from the government, dispatched forces to a border province with Syria to intercept a convoy of trucks laden with missiles, rockets and ammunition making its way to Syria. One of the truck drivers testified at the time that he and his colleagues had “carried similar loads several times before.”

The forces charged with seizing the cargo were shocked to discover the trucks were being escorted by Turkish intelligence officers.

According to Bekdil, “all hell broke loose,” after the prosecutors ordered the men arrested and the cargo seized.

The provincial governor swooped in and insisted that the convoy was traveling on direct orders from Turkish leader Recep Tayip Erdogan. Months later, the military took over the case. And today, the men who executed the arrests and cargo seizure are on trial for “international espionage.”

Bekdil reported that two months after the cargo was intercepted, a meeting took place between then foreign minister and current Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, his deputy, Feridun Sinirlioglu, the head of Turkish intelligence, Hakan Fidan and deputy chief of the Turkish general staff, Gen. Yasar Guler.

A recording of the meeting was leaked to social media. In the recording, Fidan is heard saying that “he had successfully sent two thousand trucks into Syria before.”

As to Islamic State oil sales to Turkey, this past May, US special forces executed their first known raid inside Syria. The commandos descended on the home of Islamic State’s financial chief Abu Sayyaf. US forces killed Sayyaf and seized his computers and hard drives.

Sayyaf directed Islamic State’s oil, gas and financial operations.

Last July the Guardian reported that the computer data revealed close, direct dealings between Turkish officials and Islamic State members. According to one senior Western official familiar with the contents of the documents, just from what had been uncovered in the initial study of the material, “the links [between Islamic State and the Turkish government] are already so clear that they could end up having profound policy implications for the relationship between us and Ankara.”

Yet Wednesday, in the face of an overwhelming mountain of evidence, the Americans rejected out-of-hand Russians allegations that Turkey is the main consumer of oil exports from Islamic State.

This past July, two senior Defense Intelligence Agency analysts assigned to US Central Command submitted a formal complaint to the Defense Department’s inspector general. The two claimed that their intelligence reports on Islamic State were doctored and distorted as they made their way up the feeding chain to Obama. Fifty intelligence analysts have stated their agreement with the allegations in the complaint.

The doctored reports systematically rendered portraits of the US campaign against Islamic State as successful and Islamic State as a nearly spent force, along the lines of the narrative presented by Obama and his advisors. According to the analysts, the picture painted by the doctored reports bore little resemblance to their far more negative conclusions.

According to the Daily Beast’s report, intelligence analysts began complaining to their superiors about the distortion of their reports in October 2014. Some of those analysts were urged to retire early, and some did.

According to the publication, “one person who knows the contents of the written complaint… said it used the word ‘Stalinist’ to describe the tone set by officials overseeing CENTCOM analysis.”

Following the jihadist attacks on Paris on November 13, Obama maintained his insistence that climate change is a graver threat to US national security than terrorism. It could be that this prioritization of concerns is playing a role in the administration’s apparent determination not to seriously fight Islamic State.

In an interview with Charlie Rose last month, former CIA director Michael Morell explained that the administration decided not to bomb Islamic State’s oil infrastructure “because we didn’t want to do environmental damage.”

According to the Guardian, Islamic State makes between one to four million dollars per day from oil sales.

Perhaps the shooters in San Bernadino were just mad at their boss. Maybe Farooq suffered from clinical depression or ADD, or PTSD, or something.

And maybe Islamic State, with its new colony Sirte in “liberated” Libya, just 400 miles from Italy, is on the run. Maybe as well, Turkey is just a patsy and Russia is really Islamic State’s largest trading partner, or maybe Israel is, or Ireland.

But if facts are to be taken seriously, then the fact is that in December 2015, the US is acting with pathological devotion to ideological narratives that bear no relationship to reality.
125  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Obama's statement... on: December 03, 2015, 04:05:42 PM
Translation:  "I'm steadily implementing Cloward-Piven to collapse the present system, but that takes a little time.  The actual collapse may not occur until I'm out of office, and then we (the Democrats) will blame it on the next President, and call for a complete government takeover as a solution."
126  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / What Will A Dollar Collapse Look Like? on: December 03, 2015, 07:02:56 AM
Re-posting this here from the Economic thread:


What Will Happen When the Dollar Collapses?
Dave Hodges
June 2nd, 2014

 
This article has been generously contributed by Dave Hodges and was originally published at The Common Sense Show.

currency-collapse1 (1)Will It Be a False Flag Attack Or a Currency Collapse?

Hitler initiated a false flag event and burned down the Reichstag to gain control over the German government. Could the same happen here in the United States? My initial response to that question is, does it really matter? The pattern of societal collapse and subsequent governmental enslavement of the American people will be largely the same whether the precipitating incident is a false flag attack or a currency collapse. For the purpose of simplicity, let us call the precursor event to all-out martial law, a currency collapse.

The Federal Reserve Is the Enemy of Humanity

The Federal Reserve has been bleeding this country to death for a century. What the dollar bought 100 years ago, can only buy three cents of product today. This means that 97% of the value of our currency has gone into the pockets of the Federal Reserve investors for the past 100 years.

I am amazed at the abject ignorance of the American people and that they think the Federal Reserve is actually part of the federal government. As we like to stay in the alternative media, the Federal Reserve is no more federal than Federal Express. For the record, the Federal Reserve is a privately held corporation which sells stock to preferred insiders. In 1913, a small majority of Congress commissioned the Federal Reserve to control banking in the United States. Without a doubt, this was the worst decision ever made by an act of Congress.

The Dollar Is Diving

The world is running from the dollar, or should I more accurately state the Petrodollar. Until recently, our dollar was used as the currency of international trading. Further, the dollar was also the reserve currency for oil. All foreign countries wishing to purchase oil from the Middle East, first had to purchase dollars from the Federal Reserve. After FDR took us off the gold standard during the Great Depression and Richard Nixon finished the task of providing America with a totally Fiat currency, the only backing that our dollar enjoys is that of being the reserve currency for both trading and for oil (i.e. the Petrodollar scam).

The major cause of the present  economic calamity is fractional reserve banking. When the government goes to the private Federal Reserve and asks for one trillion dollars, the federal reserve gets to print one trillion for the government, at interest, and $10 trillion dollars for themselves and to lend out at high interest rates. This inflationary practice erodes the value of your dollar while enriching our Federal Reserve investors. Ultimately, the currency upon which we depend on will be destroyed and life as we know it will be changed forever.

The practice of fractional reserve banking should be wholly illegal because it creates a state of permanent inflation for the benefit of a few and sets up economic demise for the many.

A Changing of the Financial Guard

The nations presently running from our petrodollar are India, China, Iran, Japan, South Africa and Australia have signed their own trade agreements and their currency of choice is no longer the dollar!

When the collapse of the dollar occurs, it will literally and figuratively come like a thief in the night, and I do mean overnight!

We are all familiar with the concept of inflation, which is the intentional byproduct of the Federal Reserve.  But I am not just talking inflation, I’m speaking about hyperinflation which is caused by the collapse of the value of the currency resulting in runaway prices. Here are three examples of how quickly a currency collapse can occur when a nation’s money when its money no longer holds it value:

1. In Weimar Germany, from 1922 – 1923, prices  doubled  every three days.

2. In the modern era, in Yugoslavia from 1992-94, witnessed prices doubling every 34 hours.

3. In Zimbabwe, in the two year period from 2007 – 2008, prices doubled  every 25 hours.

History is replete with examples of currency collapses and they typically follow very predictable patterns in which a nation unravels and social chaos, and many times, widespread violence and even genocide becomes part of the national landscape.

What Does a Currency Collapse Look Like?

It can accurately be stated that a lot has been written and rehearsed by the federal government on the topic of the effects of a currency collapse and its subsequent impact on society. NORTHCOM, DHS and FEMA as well as other federal entities have practiced for this eventuality. In each and every scenario, the facts remain the same, human beings and society follows a very predictable pattern of decline when the currency of the day collapses. And normally, the currency collapse comes without any warning to the general public.

When George Soros recently pulled his money from the S&P 500 and from Bank of America, Citibank and JP Morgan, all Americans should have sat up and taken notice. Generally, when the currency collapses, a stock market crash is right on its heels. Because of the repeal of Glass-Steagall, a banking meltdown will immediately occur following the collapse of the stock market because since Clinton’s presidency, banks are now allowed to loan money for investment in the stock market and for down payments for homes. It was irresponsible of Congress to repeal Glass-Steagall, because it made surviving an economic Armageddon a near impossibility just as it did during the 1929 crash.

In a currency collapse, your life savings will be wiped out. From this point on, the effect cascades like a roaring tsunami racing across the open ocean.

Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy demonstrated that gas stations will be bone dry within two days following a complete collapse. Subsequently, commerce will not move. If you are on vacation, you may not make it home. On the second day following a currency collapse, being on the road will be a risky endeavor because of other desperate motorists who will lie in wait to rob other motorists of essential supplies and resources.

With no available fuel, the grocery and drug stores will be empty within one to three days. There will be no food to be had except for that which is decaying in your refrigerator and that in which you can beg, borrow and steal from your neighbors who will also be begging, borrowing and stealing. from your other neighbors. If you have an adequate food and water supply, you better have an adequate gun and ammo supply in order to defend your assets. And when will you sleep? The protection of your critical assets is a 24/7 proposition. Therefore, having a cooperative survival plan is critical.

Without gas, people will stop going to work. Corporations will disappear overnight. Hurricane Katrina showed America that the police cannot be expected to stay on the job more than 48-72 hours as they will be home protecting their families and foraging for food and water like everyone else. The emergence of former police, now operating as gangs, will become common in an effort to secure the products which will ensure survival. Therefore, when your home is under attack, there will nobody to call. Everyone will be on their own.

The elderly and the chronically ill will be the first to die. Too old to defend their assets, the elderly will find themselves overpowered as they will make easy preys of opportunity for the roving gangs. The chronically ill will have no way to procure their medication and even if they survive the looting rampage which will follow a currency collapse, these poor souls will perish without access to their life-sustaining prescriptions.

The money in your wallet will be useless. Cell phones will not work. Heating and air conditioning will not work either and depending on the time of year, the environment could prove deadly to untold numbers of people.

Water treatment plants will stop operating for the same reasons that you will not be able to find a cop during this crisis nobody will be manning the water treatment plants. Toilets will back up and diseases will spread like wildfire. Cholera will become the leading cause of death even surpassing homicide. Something as simple as toilet paper will become a prized commodity. There will be no trash pickup and more disease will result due to the increased rodent population.

Clean drinking water and hunger will become the dominant motivator in society. Roving bands of looters, turned murderers, will sweep through neighborhoods seeking to obtain these critical elements of survival. Young women will sell themselves for a can of food for their children. Society will see the widespread loss of human dignity and self-respect.

Infanticide and euthanasia of the weak will become common events because there will be decided efforts to reduce the amount of mouths to feed. There will be the stark realization that the lights are not coming back on and the ensuing sense of hopelessness will lead to murder-suicides within families and simple incidences of suicide will be used as a means to escape the horrendous circumstances.

Humanity’s Darkest Hour

There will come a time when all the available animals will be devoured and then there will be only one place to turn to for food. History shows thatcannibalism will set in by the beginning of the third week. Extreme hunger will lead to humans hunting humans as an available food supply. There is a real possibility that this could begin to occur within 15-20 days following the currency collapse.

The Government’s Version of the Final Solution

If the establishment military has properly planned, they will move into take control but they will not move quickly. The more death there is, the fewer people there will be to control. Government will typically move in with their solutions towards the end of the second week as has been the case in past economic collapses. The earliest the military could be deployed on the streets would be about four days from the event. Even then, the military cannot be everywhere. Christians should pay particular attention for when the Roman currency was debased in the third century, there was a revolving door for Roman emperors and Christians became the scapegoats for the economic issues.

To fully understand the relationship that will exist between yourself and the government, Google “Executive Order 13603″. The reasons behind the creation of Executive Order 13603 will soon become readily apparent. You will retain ownership over nothing including food, water, guns, ammunition, your house, your car and even yourself. If you survive, you will be conscripted to work in some capacity in a specialty and location not of your choosing. The provisions for dealing with potential dissidents will go into motion under the NDAA which allows for mass arrest and secret incarcerations without due process. There is one ironclad thing that you can count on, food and water will be used to control the people following the collapse of the dollar

Who Will Help Us?

When past currency collapses occur, organizations such as the World Bank, the IMF, the UN and the US have appeared to render their predatory version of help in exchange for control of critical infrastructure and other capital considerations. Because of this aid, more people survived in the impacted areas. However, what happens when the top dog collapses? Who would be able to come and render aid in America? Even in a world disgusted by our imperialistic ways would  offer help, could they? Not under the coming circumstances could anyone offer help because they will be in a worse situation.

In short, there will be nobody riding in to rescue the United States. Despite some rebelling against the dollar, the world is still dependent upon our currency. When the currency collapses it will pull the rest of world down with us. The subsequent collapse of global currencies will indeed constitute a major depopulation event and all the elite have to do is wait it out in places like the tunnels under Denver International Airport.

During this time, Americans will truly discover if there really are FEMA camps and what they will be used for. If people want to eat, they will be enticed to go where food is promised. Although you can count on the above mentioned events transpiring in the event of a currency collapse, what lies ahead is unknown to a large extent because the top dog will not have been economically obliterated in modern history.

Conclusion

In addition to what has previously been written, in an economic collapse, we can expect the government to impose travel restrictions and martial law. Life, as we know it will not be recognizable.

Obama is willing to talk about the $17 trillion dollar deficit. However, you never hear the government nor the media discuss the real debt? Our real financial obligations total $240 trillion dollars through programs like social security, Medicare, public pensions and welfare. Subsequently, I want to make one thing abundantly clear; It is not a matter if we are going to have a currency collapse, it is when.  And the when is much sooner than later.  It could happen tomorrow, next month and even next year. We do not have two years left in the American economic engine. A currency collapse is nothing to look forward to, and people who intend on surviving the event should be in the midst of their preparations.


Dave Hodges is an award winning psychology, statistics and research professor, a college basketball coach, a mental health counselor, a political activist and writer who has published dozens of editorials and articles in several publications such as Freedom Phoenix, News With Views, and The Arizona Republic.

127  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Fractional Reserve Banking... on: December 02, 2015, 03:32:11 PM
Crafty,

I think this is a necessary part of the solution - I agree with Murray Rothbard that fractional-reserve banking constitutes fraud/embezzlement.  Full-reserve banking ought to be mandated by the U.S. government, and the Federal Reserve abolished in the best-case scenario.  Yes, there will always be loan-shark-type unregulated activity, but this will not be enough as a percentage of the total economy to destabilize the financial system.  In this area, Ron Paul is 100% correct - despite his loony isolationist beliefs.

Below is an excerpt from a Wikipedia entry on full-reserve banking:

In the post-World War II era, economists have shown little interest in 100%-reserve banking, although some have examined the issue and concluded that the costs and inconvenience of a full-reserve banking system would outweigh any benefits.[4][5] However, economist Milton Friedman at one time advocated a 100% reserve requirement for checking accounts[6] and economist Laurence Kotlikoff has also called for an end to fractional-reserve banking.[7] According to Austrian economist Murray Rothbard, reserves of less than 100% constitute fraud on the part of banks, and full-reserve banking would eliminate the risk of bank runs.[8][9] Austrian economist Jesús Huerta de Soto also vehemently advocates full-reserve banking.

Some economists have noted that because banks would not earn revenue from lending against demand deposits, depositors would have to pay fees for the services associated with checking accounts. This, it is felt, would probably be rejected by the public.[5][10] Economists Diamond and Dybvig have warned that under full-reserve banking, since banks would not be permitted to lend out funds deposited in demand accounts, this function could be expected to be taken over by unregulated institutions. Unregulated institutions (such as high-yield debt issuers) would take over the economically necessary role of financial intermediation and maturity transformation, therefore destabilizing the financial system and leading to more frequent financial crises.[4][11]

In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, Martin Wolf endorsed full reserve banking, saying "it would bring huge advantages".[3] John H. Cochrane also has come out in favor of full reserve banking.[12] In a response in the New York Times, Paul Krugman stated that the idea was "certainly worth talking about", but worries that it would drive financial activity outside the banking system, into the less regulated shadow banking system.[13]

Currently, no country in the world requires its banks to keep 100% reserves, although a 2015 government study commissioned by Iceland recommended its implementation.[14]
128  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Caroline Glick: America's War Against the Jews on Campus... on: December 02, 2015, 01:33:24 PM
THE AMERICAN WAR AGAINST THE JEWS

Anti-Semitic forces on campus have only gotten worse -- and don't plan on backing down.

December 2, 2015  Caroline Glick

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post.

The foundations of American Jewish life are under assault today in ways that were unimaginable a generation ago. Academia is ground zero of the onslaught. The protest movements on campuses are first and foremost anti-Jewish movements.

For the past decade or so, Jewish communal leaders and activists have focused on just one aspect of this anti-Jewish campaign. Jewish leaders have devoted themselves to helping Jewish students combat the direct anti-Semitism inherent to the anti-Israel student movements.

Despite the substantial funds that have been devoted to fighting anti-Israel forces on campuses, they have not been diminished. To the contrary, with each passing year they have grown more powerful and menacing.

Consider a sampling of the anti-Jewish incidents that took place over the past two weeks.

Two weeks ago, Daniel Bernstein, a Jewish student at University of California Santa Cruz and a member of the university’s student government was ordered not to vote on a resolution calling for the university to divest from four companies which do business with Israel.

Bernstein represents UCSC’s Stevenson College at the university student government. He is also vice president of his college’s Jewish Student Union. Ahead of the anti-Israel vote, Bernstein received a message from a member of his college’s student council ordering him to abstain from the vote on Israel divestment.

The student council, Bernstein was informed, had determined that he was motivated by “a Jewish agenda,” and therefore couldn’t be trusted to view the resolution fairly.

In the same message, Bernstein’s correspondent gave him a friendly “heads up” that his fellow students are considering removing him from office because he is a Jew supported by the Jewish community.

To his credit, Bernstein ignored his orders. He voted to oppose the anti-Israel resolution.

Following the incident Bernstein published a statement decrying the anti-Jewish discrimination and hatred now rampant on his campus.

Among other things, he wrote, “I wish that [my] being subjected to anti-Semitism was a shocking new occurrence. But the truth is that I’m not shocked. I’m not shocked because this hatred and ignorance has followed me everywhere. I’m not shocked because Jewish students have been targeted with this vile racism all over the [University of California] UC system for years, and especially since BDS became a major issue of discussion. Anti-Semitism ... has ... become an inseparable part of campus politics right here at UC Santa Cruz and across the UC system.”

Then there is the growing movement of professional associations that boycott Israel.

Last week the National Women’s Studies Association passed a resolution to join the BDS movement. The resolution, written in turgid, incomprehensible prose, proclaimed that the only state in the Middle East that provides full and equal rights to women is so evil that it must be singled out and boycotted, sanctioned and divested from.

Whereas Bernstein was personally targeted, and the NWSA criminalizes Israel, at CUNY, on November 12, a group of protesters targeted the Jewish community as a whole.

That day, as part of a national “million student march,” where students demanded free tuition, anti-Jewish students at CUNY rallied at Hunter college and introduced a new demand: the expulsion of all Israel supporters from campus.

Congregating in the center of the campus, some 50 students chanted in unison, “Zionists out of CUNY!”

Aside from an anodyne statement in favor of “freedom of expression,” CUNY administrators had nothing to say about the affair.

For their part, Hunter’s administrators issued a statement “condemning the anti-Semitic comments,” made by the rally participants.

But no disciplinary measures were taken against any of them.

Speaking to the Algemeiner, StandWithUs’s northeast regional director Shahar Azani said that the Hunter incident “is another example of the hijacking of various social causes by the anti-Israel movement.”

In making this claim, Azani was merely repeating the position taken by Jewish communal leaders and activists involved in the fight to defend Jews and Israel on university campuses. Unfortunately, this position is incorrect.

According to the prevailing wisdom guiding Jewish communal responses to the onslaught against Jewish students on campuses, the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish movements are distinct from the wider anti-liberal forces now disrupting campus life throughout the US. As Jewish leaders see things, there is no inherent connection between the protesters embracing victimhood and demanding constraints on freedom of expression, inquiry and assembly (and free tuition), and those who seek to drive Jews out of the public sphere on college campuses.

In other words, they believe that Zionists can be crybullies too.

But they can’t.

The crybully movement, which demands that universities constrain freedom to cater to victim groups, is necessarily hostile to Jews. This is the reason that at the same time that “victims” from blacks to transgenders are coddled and caressed, Jews have emerged as the only group that is not protected. Indeed, the BDS movement requires universities to discriminate against Jewish students.

The inherent conflict between the tenets of the “progressive” movement and Jewish rights is exposed in a guide to racial “microaggressions” published earlier this year by the University of California. Students and faculty must avoid committing these “microagressions” if they want to stay on the right side of campus authorities and the law.

The UC defines “microagressions” as, “brief, subtle verbal or non-verbal exchanges that send denigrating messages to the recipient because of his or her group membership (such as race, gender, age or socio-economic status).”

Transgressors can expect to be accused of engendering a “hostile learning environment,” an act that can get you expelled, fired and subjected to criminal probes.

As law professor Eugene Voloch reported in The Washington Post last June, among other things, the list of offenses includes embracing merit as a means of advancing in society. A statement along the lines of “I believe the most qualified person should get the job” can destroy a person’s academic career.

So too, statements rejecting race as a significant factor in judging a person’s competence are now deemed racist. For instance statements to the effect of, “There is only one race, the human race,” “America is a melting pot” or “I don’t believe in race” can land a student or instructor in hot water.

In a column last week, Dennis Prager noted that the list castigates as racism all the pillars of liberal society in America. The list, he wrote, shows that “the American university is now closer to fascism than to traditional liberty.”

Prager is right, of course. But the fascist takeover of American academia will not affect all Americans equally.

Jews are the greatest victims of this state of affairs.

For the better part of the past hundred years, the upward mobility of American Jewry has been directly correlated with America’s embrace of meritocratic values. The more Americans have looked past race and ethnicity and judged people by their talents, characters and professional competence, the higher Jews have risen. Conversely, where qualities other than competence, talent and professionalism have determined social and professional status, Jews have suffered. They have faced discrimination and their opportunities to advance have been limited.

Academia is but a small component of American society. But to earn a place in America’s middle, upper-middle and upper classes, you need at least an undergraduate degree. Moreover, university graduates go on to populate and head the state and federal governing bureaucracies, the business world, the entertainment sector and every other major area of human endeavor in American society.

Academia’s simultaneous rejection of core liberal principles and legitimization of anti-Semitic forces is not a coincidence. Jews are a constant reminder that human agency – rather than race and other group identities – has everything to do with a person’s ability to excel in academics and beyond. For fascist principles to hold, Jews must be demonized and hated.The intrinsic link between anti-Semitism and fascism and their simultaneous embrace by a key American institution means that the equal rights and freedoms of Jews are far more threatened in America today than most Jewish leaders and activists have realized. The Jewish community’s failure to date to successfully defeat the anti-Semitic forces on campuses owes at least in part to its failure to recognize or contend with the dual nature of the problem.
129  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: December 02, 2015, 10:29:48 AM
I don't for a moment believe these polls.  Something is amiss here.  I simply do not believe that a majority of voters would choose Hillary over Trump or Cruz or Rubio, not even over Carson.  The organization(s) doing these polls are either being lied to, or have serious flaws in their methodology.

Rubio is an establishment Republican and will not change much.  There is a good reason the lobbyists are overwhelmingly supporting Hillary and Rubio.  That is NOT a good thing for the future of the country.  Further - I don't trust Rubio on immigration.  He is for sale to the highest bidding donors and lobbyists.  We have seen his naivite and willingess to go along with the establishment Gang of Eight.  Not a good choice.
130  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / What Will A Dollar Collapse Look Like? on: December 02, 2015, 08:14:07 AM
VERY ugly - that's how it will look - much worse than most can even imagine:

What Will Happen When the Dollar Collapses?
Dave Hodges
June 2nd, 2014

 
This article has been generously contributed by Dave Hodges and was originally published at The Common Sense Show.

currency-collapse1 (1)Will It Be a False Flag Attack Or a Currency Collapse?

Hitler initiated a false flag event and burned down the Reichstag to gain control over the German government. Could the same happen here in the United States? My initial response to that question is, does it really matter? The pattern of societal collapse and subsequent governmental enslavement of the American people will be largely the same whether the precipitating incident is a false flag attack or a currency collapse. For the purpose of simplicity, let us call the precursor event to all-out martial law, a currency collapse.

The Federal Reserve Is the Enemy of Humanity

The Federal Reserve has been bleeding this country to death for a century. What the dollar bought 100 years ago, can only buy three cents of product today. This means that 97% of the value of our currency has gone into the pockets of the Federal Reserve investors for the past 100 years.

I am amazed at the abject ignorance of the American people and that they think the Federal Reserve is actually part of the federal government. As we like to stay in the alternative media, the Federal Reserve is no more federal than Federal Express. For the record, the Federal Reserve is a privately held corporation which sells stock to preferred insiders. In 1913, a small majority of Congress commissioned the Federal Reserve to control banking in the United States. Without a doubt, this was the worst decision ever made by an act of Congress.

The Dollar Is Diving

The world is running from the dollar, or should I more accurately state the Petrodollar. Until recently, our dollar was used as the currency of international trading. Further, the dollar was also the reserve currency for oil. All foreign countries wishing to purchase oil from the Middle East, first had to purchase dollars from the Federal Reserve. After FDR took us off the gold standard during the Great Depression and Richard Nixon finished the task of providing America with a totally Fiat currency, the only backing that our dollar enjoys is that of being the reserve currency for both trading and for oil (i.e. the Petrodollar scam).

The major cause of the present  economic calamity is fractional reserve banking. When the government goes to the private Federal Reserve and asks for one trillion dollars, the federal reserve gets to print one trillion for the government, at interest, and $10 trillion dollars for themselves and to lend out at high interest rates. This inflationary practice erodes the value of your dollar while enriching our Federal Reserve investors. Ultimately, the currency upon which we depend on will be destroyed and life as we know it will be changed forever.

The practice of fractional reserve banking should be wholly illegal because it creates a state of permanent inflation for the benefit of a few and sets up economic demise for the many.

A Changing of the Financial Guard

The nations presently running from our petrodollar are India, China, Iran, Japan, South Africa and Australia have signed their own trade agreements and their currency of choice is no longer the dollar!

When the collapse of the dollar occurs, it will literally and figuratively come like a thief in the night, and I do mean overnight!

We are all familiar with the concept of inflation, which is the intentional byproduct of the Federal Reserve.  But I am not just talking inflation, I’m speaking about hyperinflation which is caused by the collapse of the value of the currency resulting in runaway prices. Here are three examples of how quickly a currency collapse can occur when a nation’s money when its money no longer holds it value:

1. In Weimar Germany, from 1922 – 1923, prices  doubled  every three days.

2. In the modern era, in Yugoslavia from 1992-94, witnessed prices doubling every 34 hours.

3. In Zimbabwe, in the two year period from 2007 – 2008, prices doubled  every 25 hours.

History is replete with examples of currency collapses and they typically follow very predictable patterns in which a nation unravels and social chaos, and many times, widespread violence and even genocide becomes part of the national landscape.

What Does a Currency Collapse Look Like?

It can accurately be stated that a lot has been written and rehearsed by the federal government on the topic of the effects of a currency collapse and its subsequent impact on society. NORTHCOM, DHS and FEMA as well as other federal entities have practiced for this eventuality. In each and every scenario, the facts remain the same, human beings and society follows a very predictable pattern of decline when the currency of the day collapses. And normally, the currency collapse comes without any warning to the general public.

When George Soros recently pulled his money from the S&P 500 and from Bank of America, Citibank and JP Morgan, all Americans should have sat up and taken notice. Generally, when the currency collapses, a stock market crash is right on its heels. Because of the repeal of Glass-Steagall, a banking meltdown will immediately occur following the collapse of the stock market because since Clinton’s presidency, banks are now allowed to loan money for investment in the stock market and for down payments for homes. It was irresponsible of Congress to repeal Glass-Steagall, because it made surviving an economic Armageddon a near impossibility just as it did during the 1929 crash.

In a currency collapse, your life savings will be wiped out. From this point on, the effect cascades like a roaring tsunami racing across the open ocean.

Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy demonstrated that gas stations will be bone dry within two days following a complete collapse. Subsequently, commerce will not move. If you are on vacation, you may not make it home. On the second day following a currency collapse, being on the road will be a risky endeavor because of other desperate motorists who will lie in wait to rob other motorists of essential supplies and resources.

With no available fuel, the grocery and drug stores will be empty within one to three days. There will be no food to be had except for that which is decaying in your refrigerator and that in which you can beg, borrow and steal from your neighbors who will also be begging, borrowing and stealing. from your other neighbors. If you have an adequate food and water supply, you better have an adequate gun and ammo supply in order to defend your assets. And when will you sleep? The protection of your critical assets is a 24/7 proposition. Therefore, having a cooperative survival plan is critical.

Without gas, people will stop going to work. Corporations will disappear overnight. Hurricane Katrina showed America that the police cannot be expected to stay on the job more than 48-72 hours as they will be home protecting their families and foraging for food and water like everyone else. The emergence of former police, now operating as gangs, will become common in an effort to secure the products which will ensure survival. Therefore, when your home is under attack, there will nobody to call. Everyone will be on their own.

The elderly and the chronically ill will be the first to die. Too old to defend their assets, the elderly will find themselves overpowered as they will make easy preys of opportunity for the roving gangs. The chronically ill will have no way to procure their medication and even if they survive the looting rampage which will follow a currency collapse, these poor souls will perish without access to their life-sustaining prescriptions.

The money in your wallet will be useless. Cell phones will not work. Heating and air conditioning will not work either and depending on the time of year, the environment could prove deadly to untold numbers of people.

Water treatment plants will stop operating for the same reasons that you will not be able to find a cop during this crisis nobody will be manning the water treatment plants. Toilets will back up and diseases will spread like wildfire. Cholera will become the leading cause of death even surpassing homicide. Something as simple as toilet paper will become a prized commodity. There will be no trash pickup and more disease will result due to the increased rodent population.

Clean drinking water and hunger will become the dominant motivator in society. Roving bands of looters, turned murderers, will sweep through neighborhoods seeking to obtain these critical elements of survival. Young women will sell themselves for a can of food for their children. Society will see the widespread loss of human dignity and self-respect.

Infanticide and euthanasia of the weak will become common events because there will be decided efforts to reduce the amount of mouths to feed. There will be the stark realization that the lights are not coming back on and the ensuing sense of hopelessness will lead to murder-suicides within families and simple incidences of suicide will be used as a means to escape the horrendous circumstances.

Humanity’s Darkest Hour

There will come a time when all the available animals will be devoured and then there will be only one place to turn to for food. History shows thatcannibalism will set in by the beginning of the third week. Extreme hunger will lead to humans hunting humans as an available food supply. There is a real possibility that this could begin to occur within 15-20 days following the currency collapse.

The Government’s Version of the Final Solution

If the establishment military has properly planned, they will move into take control but they will not move quickly. The more death there is, the fewer people there will be to control. Government will typically move in with their solutions towards the end of the second week as has been the case in past economic collapses. The earliest the military could be deployed on the streets would be about four days from the event. Even then, the military cannot be everywhere. Christians should pay particular attention for when the Roman currency was debased in the third century, there was a revolving door for Roman emperors and Christians became the scapegoats for the economic issues.

To fully understand the relationship that will exist between yourself and the government, Google “Executive Order 13603″. The reasons behind the creation of Executive Order 13603 will soon become readily apparent. You will retain ownership over nothing including food, water, guns, ammunition, your house, your car and even yourself. If you survive, you will be conscripted to work in some capacity in a specialty and location not of your choosing. The provisions for dealing with potential dissidents will go into motion under the NDAA which allows for mass arrest and secret incarcerations without due process. There is one ironclad thing that you can count on, food and water will be used to control the people following the collapse of the dollar

Who Will Help Us?

When past currency collapses occur, organizations such as the World Bank, the IMF, the UN and the US have appeared to render their predatory version of help in exchange for control of critical infrastructure and other capital considerations. Because of this aid, more people survived in the impacted areas. However, what happens when the top dog collapses? Who would be able to come and render aid in America? Even in a world disgusted by our imperialistic ways would  offer help, could they? Not under the coming circumstances could anyone offer help because they will be in a worse situation.

In short, there will be nobody riding in to rescue the United States. Despite some rebelling against the dollar, the world is still dependent upon our currency. When the currency collapses it will pull the rest of world down with us. The subsequent collapse of global currencies will indeed constitute a major depopulation event and all the elite have to do is wait it out in places like the tunnels under Denver International Airport.

During this time, Americans will truly discover if there really are FEMA camps and what they will be used for. If people want to eat, they will be enticed to go where food is promised. Although you can count on the above mentioned events transpiring in the event of a currency collapse, what lies ahead is unknown to a large extent because the top dog will not have been economically obliterated in modern history.

Conclusion

In addition to what has previously been written, in an economic collapse, we can expect the government to impose travel restrictions and martial law. Life, as we know it will not be recognizable.

Obama is willing to talk about the $17 trillion dollar deficit. However, you never hear the government nor the media discuss the real debt? Our real financial obligations total $240 trillion dollars through programs like social security, Medicare, public pensions and welfare. Subsequently, I want to make one thing abundantly clear; It is not a matter if we are going to have a currency collapse, it is when.  And the when is much sooner than later.  It could happen tomorrow, next month and even next year. We do not have two years left in the American economic engine. A currency collapse is nothing to look forward to, and people who intend on surviving the event should be in the midst of their preparations.


Dave Hodges is an award winning psychology, statistics and research professor, a college basketball coach, a mental health counselor, a political activist and writer who has published dozens of editorials and articles in several publications such as Freedom Phoenix, News With Views, and The Arizona Republic.


131  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Herman Cain Slams Jeb Bush, Defends Trump... on: December 01, 2015, 08:23:12 AM

Published by: Herman Cain on Monday November 30th, 2015
Herman Cain

Big talk from Mr. 5.5 percent.

Someone should tell Jeb Bush that I’ve accepted an invitation to speak at Donald Trump’s rally this coming Monday in Georgia. I accepted for a simple reason: He asked. But Gov. Bush seems weirdly interested these days in the connection – if only in his own mind – between what he thinks happened to me and what he thinks is going to happen to Trump.

I’ve heard this one before, of course. Herman Cain was leading the 2012 primary race only to “flame out,” and the same thing is going to happen to Trump. This is how Bush tried to reassure disappointed supporters this past Monday, invoking “the fall of Herman Cain”:

Jeb Bush cited the rise and fall of 2012 GOP presidential hopeful Herman Cain as he sought to reassure supporters at a Longboat Key fundraiser Monday that their faith in him is well placed.

By noting that Cain led in the polls at this point in 2012 only to flame out, Bush implied that current GOP front-runners Donald Trump and Ben Carson could follow the same path.

I’m sure his supporters were really reassured by this. Hey, don’t worry that I’m way behind and gaining no ground whatsoever, but there was once this one guy who led and didn’t win.

So let’s talk about this. In late October 2011, the polls had me leading the Republican race for president with 24 percent. After that, of course, I was the target of accusations that I’ve already explained were complete B.S., and you can read about that if you want to here. This precipitated my fall in the polls to the point where, by late November, I was in third place and polling at 14 percent. This is when I decided to leave the race because the turn it had taken was imposing too much hardship on my family.

But there’s a reason I bring up these numbers. At the height of my campaign I was in first place at 24 percent. Even when I left the race I was in third place at 14 place. Who am I? A guy who ran a pizza company and had a successful corporate career before hosting a talk show in Atlanta. I was not anonymous but I was hardly famous.

Who is Jeb Bush? He is the former governor of Florida and he has one of the most famous political last names in America. He has more political money behind him than any candidate in this race with the possible exception of Hillary Clinton. And how is he doing in the polls? The current Real Clear Politics average shows him in fifth place at 5.5 percent.

If you want to say I had a “fall,” go ahead, I guess. You can’t fall when you’ve never gotten any higher than the floor in the first place, and that’s the state of the Jeb Bush campaign. A guy with his name, his money and the team behind him should be one of the top-tier contenders, and he should certainly not be letting Donald Trump wipe the floor with him if Trump is as unserious and unqualified as Bush would have you believe.


And yet, Jeb Bush can’t break out of the middle single-digits.

As for the suggestion that Donald Trump and Ben Carson will surely flame out because Herman Cain did, you’ll probably not be surprised that I’m getting a little tired of that one. But I would tell you two things.

First, I was and remain proud of what my campaign accomplished. No, we didn’t get to the finish line, but most of the people who run me down have never gotten anywhere near as far as we did – and as I mentioned above, that certainly includes Jeb Bush.

Second, it’s a different year, and Donald Trump is a different guy. I realize that the Bush political cabal may see all icky outsiders as the same, and thus assume that all will have the same fate. I wouldn’t bet on that. Trump is very smart, has done his homework and has learned a lot from what happened in many previous campaigns – including mine. He’s stayed atop the polls a lot longer than I did, and his rivals haven’t accomplished much by sitting around invoking whatever it is that they think happened to me.

But if I were to give Jeb Bush a piece of advice – not that he probably thinks he needs any from me – it would be to focus on coming up with a rationale for a Jeb Bush presidency. To date, I haven’t heard one that’s got many people very excited. And to judge from the polls, 94.5 percent of Republican primary voters agree with me.

Even if Trump does come back to the pack at some point, there are other candidates much better positioned to pick up support because they’re much more appealing than Mr. Famous Political Name. And really, when you haven’t come anywhere close to what some pizza guy once did, you sound pretty desperate trying to use the pizza guy as your defense.

At least I was once winning. Jeb Bush has been doing nothing but losing throughout this entire campaign. His problem is him.
132  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The Truth About the Muslim 9-11 Celebrations in New Jersey... on: November 30, 2015, 08:14:08 PM
DID NEW JERSEY MUSLIMS CELEBRATE ON 9/11?

The facts and the eyewitnesses.  Donald Trump's statement has been corroborated.

November 30, 2015  Danusha V. Goska

On November 21st, 2015, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said to supporters in Birmingham, Alabama, "Hey, I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down."

Trump's assertion sparked a national verbal wrestling match. Mainstream media and cultural leaders rushed to insist that no American Muslims celebrated 9-11. George Stephanopoulos dismissed accounts as mere "internet rumor." Snopes' Kim LaCapria argued that Muslims celebration of 9-11 is a "claim [that] was long since debunked." LaCapria, quoting an American Psychological Association article, theorized that those who report seeing Muslims celebrate 9-11 suffer from false memory syndrome. The page LaCapria linked to makes no mention of the 9-11 terror attacks and LaCapria cites no research by any scholar who studied self-identified witnesses of Muslim celebrations in NJ. The New York Times wrote that "a persistent Internet rumor of Muslims celebrating in Paterson, N.J., was discounted by police officials at the time.

A search of news accounts from that period shows no reports of mass cheering in Jersey City." Reuters claimed that "Paterson officials promptly issued a statement denying the report." National Public Radio's crack investigators "could not turn up any news accounts of American Muslims cheering or celebrating in the wake of Sept. 11." A Slate headline insisted that Muslims celebrating 9-11 is "one of the oldest 9/11 urban legends." Buzzfeed quoted, with approval, CAIR's Ibrahim Hooper, "This has been one of these vile memes on the anti-Islam hate sites for some time, but there's actually no evidence to support it whatsoever." Buzzfeed also quoted the Anti-Defamation League, "It is unfortunate that Donald Trump is giving new life to long-debunked conspiracy theories about 9/11."

Benjamin Wittes, a senior fellow in governance studies at The Brookings Institution, blogging at Lawfare, is among the most self-righteous, highhanded, and inflammatory in his condemnation of Trump and also Ben Carson. These people, Wittes insisted, are spreading the equivalent of "blood libel … being used … to whip up the ignorant into murderous mobs … They are either lying or they are delusional. And assuming they are not suffering both from the same hallucination, they are lying in a fashion calculated to instill anger and hatred against a minority population at a time when nerves are raw, fears are high, and tempers are short. There are a lot of names for this. None of them is nice."

Wittes' charge of blood libel raises the stakes. Blood libel was used as an excuse to murder Jews in pogroms and it can be associated with tens of thousands of deaths. Wittes identifies blood libel as "medieval" and Christian – his meaning is plain. Christians are bad people who are bigoted against others; bigotry is a relic of the past.

In fact blood libel is neither exclusively Christian nor is it medieval. Blood libel goes back at least to Pagan, Classical Rome. In 1910, in Shiraz, Iran, a Jew was accused of murdering a Muslim girl. Muslims injured and killed Jews, and 6,000 Jews were dispossessed. Blood libel is so popular in the modern Muslim world that a 2001 TV series, "Horseman without a Horse," featured it. But to address actual facts, Wittes writes, would be beneath him. "I'm disinclined to rehash the tawdry history of this episode in any detail. To engage the substance of it feels a little to me like arguing with Holocaust deniers."

Even the Facebook page for Weird NJ insisted that no Muslims celebrated 9-11. Weird NJ is a publication usually dedicated to describing phenomena like the Ghost Boy haunting of Clinton Road. When people who promote belief in the Jersey Devil start insisting that an event never happened, you know something is up.

Prof. Irfan Khawaja of Felician College and Al Quds University acknowledges that some Muslims did celebrate 9-11. The group was much smaller than Trump mentioned, so the entire story can and must be labeled a "lie" rather than "an exaggeration." Khawaja writes, "He said that 'thousands and thousands' of people were cheering in Jersey City. That's a blatant lie."

The intense effort by empowered voices to erase an event matters. It is more than a footnote in the 2016 presidential race. Several factors are at play here. They include censorship of truth in order to meet the demands of political correctness, an utterly wrongheaded attempt to protect Muslims, an attempt that will only harm Muslims, and profound racism – the racism of an empowered elite who are convinced that average Americans are nothing but "ignorant murderous mobs."

In a May 5, 1920 photograph of Lenin delivering a speech, Trotsky is clearly visible. After Trotsky fell out of favor, he was airbrushed out of the photo. The Soviets were also good at smearing any speaker of inconvenient truths as too insane to be heard. We must reject the Soviet concept of truth. Truth is truth, even if it is politically incorrect. And truth is our friend. Truth is the friend of non-Muslims and Muslims alike.

I lived in and worked in Paterson, NJ, in the 1980s to 1990. I loved my Arab and Muslim friends then, and I love them now. In our many hours-long debates, many of my Arab and Muslim friends expressed enthusiastic and unshakeable support for terrorism. Not all did so; my Muslim friend Emmie's utter rejection of terrorism is described here. I wasn't surprised when 9-11 happened. As horrible as that day was, in one small sense, I experienced a pinprick of relief. Finally, I thought, we can start having an honest conversation about the support that even otherwise good but profoundly misguided people can voice for terrorism.

That conversation has yet fully to emerge. We are still too afraid of saying politically incorrect things. This censorship isn't just a bad thing for non-Muslims. It's a bad thing for Muslims as well. Those who witnessed the 9-11 celebrations, their friends and loved ones see much effort being exerted to smear and silence them, and to negate the historically important truth they speak. This silencing will only increase resentment against Muslims. An open and free public conversation will serve everyone's best interests.

People whom I trust told me that they witnessed the celebrations. None agreed to be named here. They know that speaking this truth in public sets them up for attack. One witness is my former student. He is an Italian-American, an A student who attended class regularly and handed in assignments on time. He is a responsible adult who worked during the day and took courses at night. Almost a decade ago, during a long conversation that touched on many topics, he told me of the celebration he witnessed. He named the location, the public library on Main Avenue.

Another witness was a prominent figure in Democratic politics, in which I used to participate. His account was similar to my student's account. The two men don't know each other. A third witness permits me to quote her here. "I stopped for gas in Belleville immediately after the second fall and there were two men in the station cheering at the TV coverage as if they were watching the Super Bowl and their team was winning." I have known this woman for years. I have to rely on her in financial and other matters. She has never lied to me.

There are tried-and-true methods to assess truth. These include Occam's Razor, multiple accounts, cui bono, and consistency with otherwise verified data. All of these can be applied in the accounts of Muslims celebrating 9-11.

Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanation is best. Numerous New York and New Jersey residents insist that they or those close to them saw New Jersey Muslims celebrate 9-11. New Jersey radio station 101.5 quotes some of these accounts here. A sampling:

Tom Penicaro: "I worked for PSEG in Clifton on the Paterson boarder and I witnessed it firsthand. They were celebrating in the streets cheering and stomping on the flag. I am a Marine and I remember very very clearly because I was so pissed I wanted to engage them with a bat I had in my van."

William Hugelmeyer: "I was working in the jail when the attacks occurred. Once it was clear it was a terrorist attack, we had inmates celebrating. This instantly caused a lockdown. As you could imagine, many other inmates and officers didn't share their jubilation."

John Pezzino: "They were in the streets banging on the cars trying to drive through the crowd in the street. The Muslims were shouting death to Americans and Allah is great other crap I didn't understand. We were amused until a car with 3 young women mistakenly turned on to main st. The muslims were banging on their windows and screaming, thats when we came out of our car and pushed the muslims off their car helped them back out and get back to the Parkway."

Walter Emiliantsev: "I lived in NJ at the time on Demott Ave., Clifton! When I tried to go to Paterson to my brother in laws shop, I usually took Main Ave. There were so many people dancing on Main, I couldn't get through! I KNOW what I saw!"

Occam's Razor suggests that when numerous people, using their first and last names in a public forum, and providing concrete details that can be checked, all provide similar accounts of public behavior, chances are they are telling the truth. It is possible that all of these people, as Kim LaCapria suggests, are suffering from false memory syndrome, or are all attempting to whip up murderous hatred against Muslims, as Benjamin Wittes accuses, but neither LaCapria nor Wittes provides any support for their smears.

Cui bono directs us to consider "who benefits" from a statement. New Jersey has one of the largest Muslim populations in the US, after Michigan. New Jersey's Muslim population constitutes the second highest, by percent, in the US, after Illinois and above Michigan. New Jersey Muslims wield political clout. Note Republican Governor Chris Christie's nomination of Sohail Mohammed for the New Jersey Superior Court in spite of intense pressure, and Christie's dismissal as "crap" any concerns that New Jerseyans might have about sharia law. Note also that a New Jersey judge ruled that a Muslim man had the basis to beat, torture, and rape his 17-year-old wife because he believed that Islam granted him this right. Muslim political clout may explain why so many empowered voices insist that the 9-11 celebrations never happened.

Too, no decent New Jerseyan wanted to see retaliatory attacks against Muslims in our state. Many speculate, and some report as fact, that police, journalists and local officials downplayed or denied Muslim celebrations to protect Muslims from retaliatory attacks.

In contrast, those who insist that they witnessed Muslim celebrations have nothing to gain by making these statements publicly, and everything to lose. First, many of those speaking out now have no public record of making these statements previous to this controversy. They saw what they saw and they kept it to themselves, or told only those closest to them, for the past fourteen years. It is only the attempt to expunge this historical fact from public memory, and to smear and disgrace anyone who speaks this truth, that caused witnesses to come forward. They are average New Jerseyans simply telling the truth in the face of a wave of censorship and demonization that could cost them their friends or their jobs.

Are accounts of Muslims in New Jersey celebrating 9-11 consistent with other verified data? Indeed they are.

Palestinians make up a large percentage of Paterson's Muslim population, so much so that the neighborhood where the 9-11 celebration is alleged to have taken place is sometimes nicknamed "Little Ramallah." Local businesses are often named for Palestinian landmarks, for example the Al-Quds restaurant, Al-Quds Halal meat and the Al-Quds bakery. Paterson has a large Hispanic population; there are businesses with the provocative and irredentist name of El Andalus Discount Store and Andalus Islamic Fashion. Paterson Palestinians are not shy about expressing their opposition to Israel, see here. Indeed, Paterson's City Hall famously flew the Palestinian flag. One Paterson resident, Moneer Simreen, is quoted referring to Palestine, not the US, as "our country." Americans, Tariq Elsamma said, "need to obey our needs because we are a large community." Paterson's mayor, Jose Torres, wore a kaffiyeh and supported making Ramallah Paterson's sister city.

Even those who deny that any American Muslims celebrated 9-11 acknowledge that Palestinians overseas did celebrate the attacks. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are familially related to Palestinians in Paterson.

Further, polling data indicate that there is not inconsiderable support for terror among some Muslims, with support varying by group. In a 2005 FAFO Foundation poll, a significant percentage of Palestinian respondents supported "Al Qaeda's actions like bombings in USA and Europe." A 2013 Pew Poll found that 40% of Palestinians support suicide bombing in defense of Islam. In the same poll, only one percent of Muslims in Azerbaijan voiced support for suicide bombing.

Finally, we know that six of the 9-11 hijackers lived in Paterson, NJ, and they used the computers of a nearby campus in planning their attacks.

There are all too many non-Muslims who voice support for terror as well. One notorious example: Ward Churchill, a white American university professor of European, Christian descent called the 9-11 victims "little Eichmanns." Other non-Muslims say that poverty or injustice justifies terrorism.

Good people of all beliefs need to say, without ambiguity or apology, that Western Civilization is worth maintaining, and that terrorism is both immoral and a tactical dead-end. If Muslims don't like an aspect of public life, they can change it through organizing and hard work. But we aren't having that conversation to the extent that we should. Instead too many of our cultural elites are apologetic about Western Civilization, and too eager to make excuses for terrorism.

No, Ms. LaCapria, there is no evidence that the people who witnessed New Jersey Muslims celebrating 9-11 suffer from false memory syndrome. No, Benjamin Wittes, those who witnessed the celebrations are not "lying delusional murderous mobs." Rather, the real bigots and racists are those who demonize the honest New Jerseyans who risk censure by simply stating what they saw. From universities, newspaper suites and think tanks, the erasers of history look down on average Americans and sneer. They believe the worst of the American people. They are convinced that if Americans know one small fact – that some New Jersey Muslims celebrated on 9-11 – we will rise up with our pitchforks and torches and erupt into slaughter. They are the delusional ones.

Americans are nice people. We are not especially bigoted. We know that 9-11 happened. Most Americans probably suspect that some minority of Muslims celebrated, openly or in secret. It's been fourteen years, and the pogrom that some have been perversely hoping for and trying to foment never happened.

What we need is frank speech. We need to talk to our Muslim fellow citizens about why some of them celebrated on 9-11. And we need to – through speech – convince those who celebrated 9-11 that they are mistaken. The day that we do so will be a good day. We delay that day by denying that these celebrations ever happened.
133  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Geller: "I Warned About European Demise Six Years Ago" on: November 23, 2015, 07:03:31 AM
I warned about demise of Europe 6 years ago

Posted By Pamela Geller On 11/22/2015


The mainstream media and Barack Obama may be surprised by what happened in Paris on Nov. 13. I was not. I have seen this coming, and warned about it, for years now.

On Dec. 31, 2009, I wrote an article for the Washington Times, “Europe’s looming demise,” on the disastrous Euro-Med agreement. In it, I predicted that the freedom of movement between European Union nations and their Muslim Mediterranean partners would be disastrous: Open borders would unleash a hijrah, a mass migration of Muslims into Europe, resulting in jihad violence and, ultimately, the end of Europe as a home of free societies.

The pioneering historian Bat Ye’or warned of all this in her groundbreaking book, “Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis.” She exposed the initial Euro-Med plan, showing conclusively that what is happening now is not by accident or chance. This was a deliberate scheme to outmaneuver America and make Europe into a rival superpower – a scheme that started with de Gaulle. Instead, the Europeans outmaneuvered themselves.

Breaking the story of the unthinkable immigration policies of the Euro-Med partnership which would lead to the demise of Europe, in that 2009 article I quoted the human rights group, Stop Islamization of Europe, part of our umbrella organization, Stop Islamization of Nations, explaining that in the Euro-Med plan, “Europe is to be Islamized. Democracy, Christianity, European culture and Europeans are to be driven out of Europe. Fifty million North Africans from Muslim countries are to be imported into the EU.”

In another article in Newsmax in January 2010, I wrote: “Because of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership between the European Union and Islamic states in the Middle East, by the year 2050 the Islamic population of Europe will be 25 percent to 30 percent of the total population. There will be perhaps over 100 million Muslims in Europe. The effects on European civilization, and on Europe’s relationship with the United States, are all too easy to imagine.”

In that piece, I asked: “Why would Europe get involved again with such evil, and simultaneously take in such a diabolical and disastrous immigration bomb? And that’s what this is.” Around the same time, I titled another Newsmax article, “Euro-Mediterranean Plan Will Make Jihad Attacks Easier.”

Now it is all taking place just as I had warned. My predictions became reality on Nov. 13, 2015. The jihadists identified as perpetrating the Islamic slaughter of 132 people (most under the age of 30) in Paris were from an astonishing number of European and Middle Eastern countries.

The ease of movement across Europe without papers, etc., has made the tracking of jihadists across the continent almost impossible. Currently, E.U. passport holders only undergo a cursory visual passport inspection, to respect their “freedom of movement.”

At this point, emergency measures are mere Band-Aids that won’t fix years of infiltration.

Breitbart reported, “Europe’s home and interior ministers are expected to agree tightened security measures at the external borders of the Schengen zone, at a summit in Brussels today. Emergency plans have been drawn up to ensure that everyone travelling into the Schengen Zone will have their details checked against the Schengen System Watchlist, a database used to flag criminals.” Too little, too late.

Security officials in Europe have admitted that borders in Europe are “like a sieve.” The French didn’t even know that Paris jihad murderer Abdelhamid Abbaoud was in the country until after the mass slaughter. Abbaoud was able to move between the Middle East and Europe with relative ease.

And now it has been established that some of the Paris jihad attackers came into Europe as part of the migrant influx. French Prime Minister Manuel Valls has said that Europe’s passport-free Schengen zone may be ended if Europe is unable to “take responsibility” over its borders.

When I wrote these articles, I was widely ridiculed and derided, even by some who were concerned about the Muslim influx into Europe. But had my warnings been heeded, Paris and the world might not be embroiled in this crisis now.

I wrote in that 2009 Washington Times article: “Been to Europe lately? Thought it was bad? You ain’t seen nothing yet. The passage of the Lisbon Treaty, hailed by Barack Obama, nailed the coffin shut on national sovereignty in Europe.” Then I concluded the article with this: “This internationalism is already destroying what has made Europe free and great. And now Mr. Obama seems to want to do the same to America.”

It’s happening now. It’s happening now with a swiftness and decisiveness that makes it clear that European and American elites saw all this coming as well as I did, and actively worked to bring it all about, rather than to prevent it. “The people of Europe,” I wrote back in 2009, “fought it, but were overwhelmed by their political elites and the lack of American leadership in this age of our Marxist, collectivist U.S. president.”

Will Americans allow the same thing to happen here, or will we fight to protect and defend our nation before it is too late?


134  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Muslim "Hero" in Paris Bombings a Myth... on: November 21, 2015, 08:45:55 AM
As I suspected all along - now we get the real story regarding Crafty's earlier posts about this Muslim security guard.  But hey!  Why should the establishment media correct their story? It's useful to advance their narrative - even if it is a lie.  Correcting it will only invite "backlash against Muslims.":


The Muslim Security Guard Who Saved Paris and Other Progressive Myths


by JAMES DELINGPOLE18 Nov 2015  for Breitbart News.

Did you hear about the Muslim security guard called Zouheir at the Stade de France in Paris who, like, singlehandedly foiled what would have been the worst terrorist incident of Friday night?

Of course you did!

Perhaps you even felt as strongly as the Tweeter below did that it was so important the story deserved to go viral. As indeed it duly did. Among those who eagerly repeated it was that much-loved disseminator of truth, Piers Morgan, in a Mail on Sunday piece which since mysteriously appears to have been taken down.

Why did it go viral? Because, as we know, quite the most important thing after any new terrorist atrocity committed by the Religion of Peace is for all right thinking people — renowned anti-gun campaigner and human rights crusader Piers Morgan, for example — to demonstrate how totally and utterly “nothing to do with Islam” they know the incident to have been.

Hence, for example, the #illridewithyou hashtag which emerged in 2014 when a deranged Islamist murdered two hostages in a Sydney cafe. Never mind the dead (cafe manager Tori Johnson and barrister and mother of three Katrina Dawson): the real victims of the incident, as all sensitive people understood, were all those Muslims in Australia who might now feel they were being given funny looks and somehow held responsible for this inexplicable act by one of their co-religionists which, of course, had “nothing to do with Islam”­™.

So an enterprising girl called Tessa Kum hit on the bright idea of turning it into a heartwarming internet meme about how someone had spotted a girl in a hijab looking uncomfortable and got-at on a train and had cheerfully volunteered, “I’ll ride with you.”

Everyone loved this story — especially the Guardian, obviously — because it showed a) how totally delightful, shy but quietly appreciative, and totally unthreatening most Muslims are and b) how incredibly sensitive, non-judgemental, caring, tolerant, non-racist, enlightened and un-Islamophobic all the people who retweeted the hashtag were. (Plus, you never know, if there were any Islamists going through people’s Twitter feeds and deciding who to kill next, then maybe this hashtag might act as a kind of defence against the dark arts spell. Not that they were thinking about that when they did it. Well, only a bit…)

The only problem with this too-good-to-be-true story is that it wasn’t actually true. Not only was the inspiring incident either exaggerated or made up, but worse, the woman who made it go viral — that’s Tessa Kum — turned out to be the author of several mildly unhinged, anti-white, racist blog posts.

Still, it didn’t diminish the public’s appetite for delightful stories about white people interacting with Muslims on public transport. Here’s another one which was on Buzzfeed just last month. This time the hero was a man called Dante who spotted a woman wearing a niqab on a train. He sat next to her. So pleased was he with his own reckless decency and courage that he then posted a story about his magnificence on his Facebook page, urging people not to be “judgemental.” They weren’t. They loved it so much that this story too went viral.

It makes you wonder, given the massive appetite for this sort of thing, whether Buzzfeed oughtn’t to open a new vertical consisting entirely of stories like this. Perhaps it called be called “Religion of Peace, Fun and Friendship.” Possibly, it could be run by the Telegraph’s Radhika Sanghani.

But enough great new vertical ideas, already. We must return to that heartwarming tale of the Muslim security guard who allegedly foiled the plot to blow up the Stade de Paris. This, it turns out, wasn’t true either…

…as the French newspaper Liberation was the first to reveal in this investigative piece.

“Every tragedy needs its heroes…” it begins. Then it goes on to explain how the story appears to have begun with a perfectly accurate story in the Wall Street Journal, which quoted a guy called Zouheir describing how another security guard had foiled the plot of a terrorist to blow himself up on the terraces in front of the France/Germany match. This then mutated into a series of stories and tweets about how it was Zouheir himself who had saved the day. Which he didn’t. (And which, even if he had, he’d probably wish to keep very quiet right now, what with the need to avoid possible retribution from fellow adherents to his peace loving religion).

“Every tragedy needs its heroes…” Yeah, sure, but do you realise how tough it is on these occasions to find ones that fit the right religious profile?
135  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Obama Actions Shield Most Illegals From Deportation... on: November 20, 2015, 07:34:35 AM
Obama actions shield most illegals from deportation even as courts stall amnesty

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Thursday, November 19, 2015

President Obama's marquee deportation amnesty has been stalled by the courts, but the rest of his executive actions on immigration, announced exactly a year ago, are moving forward — including his move protecting more than 80 percent of illegal immigrants from any danger of deportation.

The amnesty, dubbed Deferred Action for Parental Accountability was supposed to grant full tentative legal status — including work permits, Social Security numbers and driver's licenses — to more than 4 million illegal immigrants. It has been halted by a federal appeals court, and its fate will soon rest with the Supreme Court.

But the rest of the dozen actions Mr. Obama announced on Nov. 20, 2014, are still advancing, including a far-reaching set of priorities that effectively orders agents not to bother deporting nearly all illegal immigrants.

"There are 7 or 8 or 9 million people who are now safe under the current policy. That is a victory to celebrate while we wait for the Supreme Court," said Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, an Illinois Democrat who was among the chief cheerleaders pushing Mr. Obama to go around Congress and take unilateral steps last year.

The actions — often mislabeled by the press as executive orders — also included changes to the legal immigration system, such as making it easier for spouses of guest workers to also find jobs; allowing foreigners who study science and technology at U.S. universities to remain and work in the country longer; pushing legal immigrants to apply for citizenship; and waiving the penalty on illegal immigrant spouses or children of legal permanent residents so they no longer have to go to their home countries to await legal status.

On enforcement, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, called for a more coordinated approach to border security, and that paid off with a major drop in arrests of illegal immigrants in the Southwest. Apprehensions were at their lowest levels since the 1970s.

At Mr. Obama's direction, Mr. Johnson announced changes that would let most rank-and-file illegal immigrants off the hook and instead focus deportation efforts on serious criminals, gang members and other security threats, and only the most recent of illegal border crossers.

"Immigration and Customs Enforcement is doing what I told them to do — to reprioritize and focus on convicted criminals," Mr. Johnson said this month as he took stock of the changes. "This is the general direction that the president and I want to go when it comes to how we enforce immigration law — focusing on threats to public safety and border security for the American public."

The changes are already having a major effect. Deportations, which peaked at nearly 410,000 in fiscal year 2012, dropped to about 230,000 in fiscal year 2015, which ended Sept. 30. But Mr. Johnson said more of those being deported are the serious criminals and safety threats he wants his agents to worry about.

Indeed, if agents adhere strictly to his priorities, some 9.6 million of the estimated 11.5 million illegal immigrants in the country have no real danger of being deported, according to an estimate this year by the Migration Policy Institute.

"The enforcement priorities announced last year, if strictly enforced, do protect the vast majority of unauthorized immigrants from being deported, because most immigrants have been here a long time and haven't committed a serious crime," said Marc Rosenblum, deputy director of the institute's U.S. immigration policy program.

The number could go even higher, depending on how agents follow some of Mr. Johnson's other instructions. The secretary had said even some illegal immigrants with serious criminal offenses on their records should be allowed to stay if they had mitigating factors, such as deep family or community ties.

Immigrant rights activists said they are still waiting for those special circumstances to be applied more broadly.

Mr. Johnson also has been pushing, with some success, to try to get sanctuary cities to buy into limited cooperation with his deportation agents. He scrapped the Secure Communities program that trolled state and local prisons and jails for illegal immigrants and replaced it with the Priorities Enforcement Program, which targets only serious criminals.

"It is tremendously harder now to deport even criminals, much less garden-variety illegal aliens. They have truly dismembered the immigration enforcement system, from the Border Patrol to the immigration courts," said Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for stricter immigration controls.

But the jewel of the executive actions was the deportation amnesty, which was delayed first by a federal district court in Texas and last week by an appeals court.

All sides in the debate agree that was a huge blow to Mr. Obama.

"Without being able to give away a benefit, like a work permit, these changes are less permanent, and easier to undo in some ways, than would have been the case had the president been able to implement DAPA," Ms. Vaughan said.

Mr. Obama said he took the series of steps in response to inaction from Congress, where his push for a broad bill granting illegal immigrants a path to citizenship stalled in 2013. Frustrated by Republicans, Mr. Obama waited until after the 2014 elections, then announced his go-it-alone approach.

Many of the steps are works in progress.

Homeland Security has issued proposals to carry out the leniency program for illegal immigrant spouses and children of green-card holders and to allow foreign students in science and technology to stay longer. Both of those still need to be finalized, as does a proposal expanding hardship waivers.

Other moves were easier to accomplish: Homeland Security now accepts credit card payments for citizenship fees.

© Copyright 2015 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
136  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / ISIS an Engineered "False Flag" Threat? on: November 19, 2015, 07:07:25 AM
I'm not necessarily endorsing this theory.  Brandon Smith obviously considers it to be fact, not speculation - but I tend to think there are some rather large holes in his argument.  Nevertheless, I'm interested in the opinion of the folks here on the forum about this.  It's a rather long piece, with some good suggestions for self-protection, but my primary interest is in his thesis that ISIS has been created by globalists to provide an opportunity for imposing martial law:


ISIS Is Being Aimed At The West By Globalists - Here’s What We Can Do About It

Wednesday, 18 November 2015    Brandon Smith


Over the past year and a half, I have been writing on the engineered nature of ISIS, delving deeply into its history and its backing by Western intelligence agencies in articles such as “Is Martial Law Justified If ISIS Attacks?” as well as “What Will You Do When Tyranny And Terrorism Work Hand In Hand?” and “The Time Is Ripe For A False Flag Attack On American Soil.”

Specifically, I compared the ISIS phenomenon to another establishment-backed terrorist program that began at the onset of the Cold War in Europe and was publicly exposed in the 1990s. That program was called Operation Gladio.

Gladio involved the manipulation of existing extremist groups as well as the complete fabrication of terrorist cells within Europe claiming to be “left-wing.” The reality was that these terrorist cells were made up of intelligence agency operatives (including CIA operatives) acting as handlers often for duped scapegoats and patsies. These proxy terrorists initiated decades of attacks in Europe, which focused on shootings and bombings in public areas with full media saturation. Gladio-influenced cells, such as Action Directe, carried out at least 50 different violent attacks in France in the 1970s and 1980s, along with groups like Red Army Faction, Black September and the PLFP.

Governments across Europe began using the attacks as a rallying cry for a centralized one-European nation; that cry culminated in the formation of the EU.

Operation Gladio began in France in 1947, when French Interior Minister Edouard Depreux revealed the existence of a secret stay-behind army codenamed “Plan Bleu.”

In France in 1948, the Western Union Clandestine Committee (WUCC) was created to coordinate secret unorthodox warfare. After the creation of NATO a year later, the WUCC was integrated into the military alliance under the name Clandestine Planning Committee (CPC).

The former director of the French intelligence service DGSE, Adm. Pierre Lacoste, said in a 1992 interview with The Nation, that France’s “secret army” was involved in terrorist activities against Charles de Gaulle, whom the CIA wanted to assassinate.

De Gaulle was apparently not entirely innocent in the Gladio affair, either. De Gaulle was very familiar with a secret organization called Service d’ Action Civique. It ended up being exposed as a training ground for Gladio Agents under Jaques Foccart, a government “adviser” who would go on to mastermind multiple military coups in Africa. Whether de Gaulle was fully aware of this problem is not known. It was discovered, though, that SAC had infiltrated communist student groups in the late 1960s through the 1970s and attempted to provoke violent actions.

De Gaulle was eventually driven out of office after the 1969 failure of the Referendum of Regionalisation. He was replaced by Georges Pompidou, who (what a surprise) was an avid promoter of European unification (centralization). Pompidou founded the French arm of the Pan-European Union Movement. And immediately after he took de Gaulle’s position, he helped initiate the European Communities Summit, which led directly to the formation of the European Union structure.

Gladio was not fully exposed to the wider public until 1990 when Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti came forward to the senate with detailed information.  After the information hit the mainstream, the European Parliament was forced to write a resolution against any future false flag projects.  Clearly, they have since ignored these promises.

For more information on Gladio, I highly recommend the intensively researched book “NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation GLADIO and Terrorism in Western Europe” by Daniele Ganser, as well as the 1992 BBC documentary “Operation Gladio.”

As I have stated time and time again, government engineered crisis is designed to do one thing: drive the fearful public toward more centralization and less freedom. Although Operation Gladio was later exposed, it was too late; Gladio (along with other clandestine economic measures) had achieved the goal of a malleable citizenry desperate for more centralized governance; a social attitude which led to a transnational union in Europe with a single currency mechanism.

What does this have to do with ISIS? In order to defeat an enemy, you have to know where he comes from, what his motivations are, and who pulls his strings if he has any.  As I predicted in the pieces linked at the beginning of this article, ISIS has now been exposed as being supported if not entirely funded and managed by Western covert intelligence through documents obtained from the Department of Defense by Judicial Watch, making ISIS very similar to Gladio in its origins and tactics.

This DoD paper should not have been at all surprising to most of us in the liberty movement. The West had been shifting militants from Libya into Syria just before protests suddenly erupted into all-out war. Instructors from the U.K. and France, under U.S. advisement, had been training militants in Jordan specifically for the purpose of invading and disrupting Syria and overthrowing president Bashar Assad. This training continued well after it became clear that the same militants had formed under the banner of ISIS.

Establishment elites have openly applauded the radicalization of insurgents in Syria. The Council on Foreign Relations argued that the inclusion of what they called “extremist al-Qaida elements” in the Syrian insurgency “improved the moral” of the movement, stating that the “Free Syrian Army needs al-Qaida now.” The CFR acknowledges that the goal of al-Qaida operatives in Syria is not necessarily to overthrow Assad, but to establish an Islamic state. Despite this, the CFR continued to support the same strategy of militant training to overthrow Assad.

The facts are this:

- ISIS was created by covert intelligence and continues to be trained and supplied by Western governments.

- The tactics ISIS uses, including monstrous acts of genocide, were clearly taught to them by covert intelligence interests (look into the School of the Americas for similar programs), considering ISIS insurgents continue to receive aid from Western intelligence despite their behavior.

- Western governments are well aware that ISIS agents have been inserted into refugee camps and are being imported into Europe and the U.S.

- ISIS smugglers have openly admitted to this infiltration plan, yet the U.S. and EU governments continued the immigration surge.

- Lower echelon ISIS fighters that have actually been captured and interviewed apparently have wide-ranging views on Islam and are not the staunchly unified theocratic zealots the Western public has been led to believe. This is a considerable departure from groups like al-Qaida (also Western funded and trained), which required complete theological conformity.

In truth, the only unifying drive of many captured ISIS fighters has been a concerted hatred of the West and the U.S. in particular due to our government’s complete destabilization of the Middle East. Meaning, the establishment (globalists) brought chaos to the Middle East, then conjured the rise of ISIS out of that despair, then used ISIS to recruit young men with a hatred for the West, and has now led those fighters right to our doorstep.

The escalation of force in Syria by both Russia and the West is likely now useless, as thousands of ISIS insurgents have been removed from the combat zone and transported exactly where they prefer to be — right next door to us. But defeating ISIS has never been the goal.

One must conclude given these facts that the plan by the establishment to force public acceptance of Syrian mass immigration was a Trojan horse strategy to plant ISIS extremists within deadly proximity to western civilians. But why?

Again, this is yet another Gladio-style program designed to strike terror in the hearts of the public and condition them into accepting even greater centralization and less freedom. A European superstate with common border security and a single government authority will certainly be on the table soon. Not to mention, martial law is essentially in place in France today and will be expanded to other EU members as the attacks continue. As with Gladio, Europeans should expect many more events like the Paris attacks in the months to come.

The U.S. is set to receive over 10,000 Syrian refugees in the next couple months. Unlike in Europe, where numerous activist groups have been able to partially track numbers and types of people within refugee groups, Americans have little access to information surrounding Syrian immigration to the U.S. I suspect that, as in Europe, the claims that the refugees are only “single mothers, children and religious minorities” is mostly false, and many of them are actually single military-age males.

In the U.S., the federal government has been legally positioning for martial law for years, from the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and its indefinite-detention-without-trial provisions that apply to citizens, to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and mass surveillance measures without warrant, to resource confiscation provisions through executive order that apply during any event the White House labels an “emergency,” to elitist insiders like Wesley Clark planting the concept on national television of World War II-style internment camps for citizens deemed hostile to the status quo.

I would also point out that the U.S., and the global economy in general, is currently witnessing a massive slowdown rivaling the credit collapse of 2008. Widespread terrorist attacks are a perfect rationalization for a complete lockdown of Western peoples, as well as a perfect distraction from the banker-generated economic implosion that is progressing in exponentially harsher stages as we head into 2016.

Another major advantage to consider to the Paris attacks is that now, with a Syrian passport being conveniently found on one of the terrorists (possibly fake), the war in Syria is given greater rationale while the immigration plan continues unabated. NATO countries are gearing up for a large-scale assault in the region, while Russia is already entrenched. Imagine the potential for an “accidental” trigger event between the East and West as Russian troops and planes come within spitting distance of NATO troops and planes.

Americans should see a Paris-level attack as inevitable in the near term. They should expect similar events in unusual areas of the country, including more suburban and rural areas to ensure that no one feels safe anywhere. They should expect that said attacks will be high frequency and that they will occur in a coordinated manner. This is how Gladio operated, and this is undoubtedly how ISIS will operate.

The question is: What can be done about it?

We must first recognize that ISIS is only a surface problem; the deeper problem is corrupt governments across the globe creating dangerous terrorist groups out of thin air.  That said, ISIS is still a threat, and must be dealt with along with globalists.

If the government insists upon financing and training dangerous militant groups and directly immigrating them along with Syrian refugees without any vetting whatsoever, if they insist on wide open borders, then there is not much we can do to prevent ISIS from slipping into the U.S. We also cannot go the fascist route and round up every Muslim in the name of security as some neocons are suggesting; this is exactly what the elites want, public support for liberty destroying measures against one group that can then be applied to ALL groups.

We can, though, take some measures that we should have been instituting all along.

Higher pressure on prime immigration centers: Legal immigration should not be an issue normally, but it has been made an issue due to deliberately lax security measures by the federal government. If the government is not going to take action, then the American people must. There are a limited number of these relocation centers in the U.S.; and activist pressure could be applied, along with pressure on local and state officials. Michigan, Texas  and Alabama among other states have publicly announced that they will not be taking any more refugees until the government revises its vetting standards. That is a perfectly rational approach. Although I suspect the hour may be too late to disrupt the flow of ISIS sleeper cells into our country, we should do what we can to end the current insane immigration policies.

Locally managed border security: The federal border patrol simply is not getting the job done right now. And the great threat is that once an attack does occur within the U.S., the federal government will suggest a militarization of the border (or the entire nation) rather than taking simple measures they should have taken long ago. You see, the goal of false-flag terror is to motivate the public to demand more government power. This is why followers of the neoconservative mindset are idiotic. The establishment CREATED the problem of ISIS and potential ISIS immigration. And when it all goes sour, neocons cry out that the same government needs expanded militarized authority to do its job. I say, “No more.”

Border security should be handled at the local level rather than the federal level, meaning the people of the vulnerable states should be organizing their own security measure, patrols, alarms, response teams, etc. I am so tired of hearing that we should “let the professionals do the job.” Frankly, there are no “professionals” in the area of border security seeing as we now have wide-open borders. The locals have every right to secure their own states and will probably do a better job that the federal government ever has.

Your tactical response kit: Build an active-shooter kit for your vehicle and ALWAYS carry a sidearm, either open carry or concealed if you have a CCW. I open carry at all times as a matter of principle and have never been asked to leave an establishment as a result. But if you are worried about confrontation with people or businesses, then simply carry concealed. Open-carry citizens could dissuade attackers from striking a particular place altogether through blatant show of force, while CCW holders are less visible. There are advantages to both.

An active-shooter kit would require a lightweight folding-stock rifle or a short-barrel AR-style pistol with an arm brace, a lightweight tactical vest with mags and ammo, ballistic plates, smoke, a rifle light (for dark indoor spaces in particular; night vision with limited depth perception is far less effective than a simple light), a trauma kit with pressure bandages, celox gauze, tourniquets, chest seals, decompression needles, etc., as well as a radio communications kit.  All gear should be tailored to the individual's expertise and needs.  This kit should be placed in a nondescript backpack or carrying case for easy transport. Obviously, train with all of your gear extensively before using it in the field.

Personal and team training for active shooters: The only way Americans can guarantee any measure of safety from a Paris-style attack is for as many citizens as possible to be armed and trained. This means mentally training to go TOWARD the sound of the shooting, rather than to run away from it, as well as tactical methods to marginalize a shooter’s ability to move and project violence. Team training is a must, and you should already be working within a group to learn how to function in combat without danger of friendly fire or misdirected fire that might put innocent bystanders at risk.

The common argument against citizens defending themselves is that they are untrained and are “likely to do more harm than good.” This is nonsense. One armed person in Paris could have made all the difference, as this man armed with a .38 revolver did when his church in South Africa came under attack by terrorists. Another argument is that when armed citizens respond aggressively to an attack, they risk being mistaken as terrorists by authorities. I have to point out that the authorities rarely arrive in time to accomplish anything, let alone mistake you on the scene as a terrorist while defending yourself.

Military-grade training far superior to the training mandated by law enforcement is widely available to U.S. citizens. It is time to accept that this is the world we live in now. Are you going to put blind faith in a corrupt government system that has deliberately put you in harm’s way, or are you going to take proactive measures to protect yourself and those around you? Make no mistake; your safety is in your hands whether you like it or not.

137  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 17, 2015, 11:09:31 AM
Or dropping his pants and hoping to attract some hot young college women infidels... tongue
138  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Lennon's "Imagine"... on: November 16, 2015, 06:29:00 PM
Fox News' "Special Report with Bret Baier" actually featured this obscenity as its final clip of the show.  As if this were some great display of courage and compassion.
Lennon's song has always sickened me - paean to communism that it is.  Infantile and pretentious at the same time.  The French should have run this guy out of there with pitchforks.
139  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / LA Times: Muslims Fear "Backlash" in France... on: November 16, 2015, 06:07:14 AM
LA Times: Muslims in France fear reprisals after Paris jihad massacre

NOVEMBER 15, 2015 10:27 PM BY ROBERT SPENCER

This is always the mainstream media preoccupation after a jihad attack: portraying Muslims as victims of a generally nonexistent “backlash.” There is always a steady stream of articles like this one after every fresh jihad murder, and never, ever any articles about Muslim communities redoubling their efforts to show themselves to be loyal citizens and rooting out the jihadis.


“French Muslims fear reprisals in wake of Paris terrorist attacks,” by Christina Boyle, Los Angeles Times, November 15, 2015 (thanks to Darcy):

In this heavily Muslim suburb of Paris, there was a nagging fear in the back of many minds on Sunday: Would the latest spasm of violence in the name of Islam bring retaliation against their community?

“Of course we are scared,” said one worshiper at the Evry-Courcouronnes mosque, an ethnically diverse community full of low-rise public housing about 20 miles south of the center of Paris.

“We didn’t choose for this to happen. The people who carried out the murders were not Muslim, they were not fanatics, they were assassins. But not everyone sees that.”

Maybe that’s because it’s so hard to see when the assassins explain themselves in terms that are so very Muslim.

In the wake of Friday’s terrorism strikes in Paris, some residents of this suburb – built in the 1970s to offer a cheaper, more spacious alternative to city living, but now mostly home to poorer immigrants – faced the possibility that some might view them as the enemy.

Already, French officials have warned of the possibility of cracking down on mosques deemed as harboring Muslim radicals.

The French interior minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, said Sunday that the state of emergency declared Friday gives the government the means to act more quickly against those “who preach hatred in France,” including through expulsions and the “dissolution” of radical mosques.

“I didn’t wait for the state of emergency to track down radical imams who preach hatred and to address places of worship where they preach that hatred,” Cazeneuve said in an interview with France 2 TV. He said the expansion of government powers will allow the authorities to be “much quicker in the expression of the republic’s resolve … in the face of terrorism.”

No public mention has been made of targeting mosques in Courcouronnes, but that hasn’t stopped residents here from worrying about the general atmosphere across Europe.

It didn’t help that far-right National Front leader Marine Le Pen quickly called on fellow citizens to “annihilate Islamist fundamentalism” and to “take back control” of their borders….

Muslims in France are upset about this? Yet we’re constantly told that the Muslims in the West are moderates who abhor “Islamist fundamentalism.” So why would they not want it annihilated?
140  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Grand Lesson Of Paris Attacks... on: November 15, 2015, 10:14:37 AM
Raymond Ibrahim: The Grand Lesson of the Paris Jihad

NOVEMBER 15, 2015 1:08 AM BY RAYMOND IBRAHIM

What is the grand, take away lesson from yesterday’s jihadi/terrorist attack in Paris, that left 129 dead and hundreds injured?

Is it a result of the mass influx of Muslim migrants into Europe—including Islamic State operatives?

Is it yet another reflection of Islam’s unwavering Rule of Numbers, which holds that, wherever and whenever Muslims grow in numbers—and they make for a large minority in France—the same acts of “anti-infidel” violence that are endemic to the Islamic world grow with them?

For all who are uninformed, the above are certainly lessons associated with the Paris attack.  But they are not the grand lesson.

The grand lesson is that such attacks must and will continue to multiply in severity.  Why?  Because Western nations, their leaders and media talking heads continue to be shocked and dismayed.  As Judith Berman writes for the Gatestone Institute today:

One of the most surprising aspects of the terrorist attacks in Paris on Friday night is how “deeply shocked” members of the European political establishment appeared to be.

Angela Merkel, David Cameron and the Pope all expressed their condolences — and “deep shock” — at the well-coordinated, citywide terror attacks in six different places across Paris…

Even “NBA players express shock, sympathy over Paris terrorist tragedy.”

What is truly shocking is that so many are still shocked.  When someone is shocked, they are essentially saying they have no idea how a specific event, in this case yesterday’s Paris attack, came to pass.

In turn, this means that all the factors that led up to such terrorist attacks—from an already large Muslim presence further engorged with more Muslim migraters, to an inability to speak honestly about Islam’s supremacist and violent teachings—will continue unabated.

And that means many more such attacks and worse will continue.  Count on it.


141  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Fighting Back Against Tyranny... on: November 13, 2015, 07:39:13 AM
Methods For Fighting Back Against Collectivist Tyranny

Wednesday, 11 November 2015   Brandon Smith


In any examination of historical precedence, it is easy to see that the sheer number of collectivist and tyrannical systems have far outweighed any experiments in individual liberty. I have explored the reasons for this in numerous articles, including recent pieces such as “How To Stamp Out Cultural Marxism In A Single Generation” and “The Tools Collectivists Use To Gain Power.” To summarize, there is a driving desire among weaker-minded people to seek control over other people in the name of arbitrary standards of safety as well as arbitrary standards of “civil” conformity. While such people proclaim publicly that they do what they do for the “greater good,” in reality they seek only to satiate a private lust for power.

In the darkest corners of their souls, many people have personal aspirations to attain godhood in their own little worlds. And if they cannot achieve such godhood outright on their own, then they will join a mob with similar aspirations so that they can at least feel omnipotent through vicarious tyranny.

This is why collectivism and individualism are mutually exclusive. A collectivist uses force or manipulation to compel the masses to accept a society that follows his personal ideology. An individualist adheres only to the tenets of natural law and the non-aggression principle. He believes force is justified only when the personal liberties of an individual are threatened by others. And he demands that if he participates in any society, it be voluntary. Collectivism is society through coercion. Individualism promotes society through voluntary cooperation. The two philosophies cannot coexist.

I'll say it again because there are some people out there with severe reading comprehension issues; the definition of collectivism requires the prioritization of the group over the rights of the individual.  Collectivism by its very nature denies or destroys individualism and individual choice in this prioritization.  Collectivism therefore requires the engineered organization of individuals predicated by COERCION, or force.  Period.  If a group organizes voluntarily, then it is NOT collectivist.  If a group is organized through force and manipulation, then it IS collectivist. Period.  Bananas are yellow.  Oranges are orange.  The sky is blue.  Two plus two equals four.  And, collectivism compels participation by force, while voluntary community does not.

There is no rational debate to be made against this clear dichotomy.  It is truly amazing how some folks cannot seem to grasp the very obvious difference between collectivism and voluntary community; the same people that will likely still attempt to argue that collectivism and individualism are "not mutually exclusive" after reading this very article.

I certainly would never make the claim that most collectivists are intelligent...

The collectivist threat is not merely due to environmental factors alone. As the psychologist Carl Jung outlined in his collected papers titled “The Undiscovered Self,” at any given point in history at least 10% of the human population has inherent (but often latent) psychopathic tendencies. Less than 1% of these people will actually act out their full psychopathy under stable social conditions. However, in times of great distress or political and economic upheaval, the psychopathic 10% are given a kind of playground in which to let the devil out; Jung called this the “collective shadow.”

As I have explained in the past, these are the “useful idiots” within any society. They are the reason why there will never be a time now or in the future in which collectivist oppression will not be a potential threat, and why individualists will have to remain forever on guard. That said, they are only a part of the bigger problem. In almost every instance of mass tragedy or despotic government, an elitist minority pulls the strings of the useful idiots, aiming them like a shotgun at individualists in order to clear a path for total centralization. The elites are another horror altogether.

These are the men and women who EMBRACE their psychopathy. It is not latent or subconscious; it is a fully integrated and accepted part of their psychological life. They have found that psychopathy can be an effective tool for gaining power and influence when average people around them are less vigilant or less confrontational due to fear or apathy. And contrary to popular belief, psychopaths CONSTANTLY organize into effective working groups, some of them vast and global in scope, as long as there is the promise of mutual benefit involved.

This is not to say that they organize around “gain” alone. Elitists have their own pervasive ideology and their own rationalizations for seeking control of others.

They see themselves as “philosopher kings” as described in Plato’s 'Republic,' exemplary and “special” people who are born with the inherent genetic capacity to rule over the masses with the utmost clarity. They believe they know what is best not only for you, but for the human experiment in total. Their goal is to construct a sociopolitical apparatus that will allow them to have complete overreaching influence over every aspect of every individual life, up to and including the erasure of that life if they think it serves their ends.

"...You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you like it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner…” — George Bernard Shaw, Fabian socialist, from 'The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism'

"My conclusion is that a scientific society can be stable given certain conditions. The first of these is a single government of the whole world, possessing a monopoly of armed force and therefore able to enforce peace. The second condition is a general diffusion of prosperity, so that there is no occasion for envy of one part of the world by another. The third condition (which supposes the second fulfilled) is a low birth rate everywhere, so that the population of the world becomes stationary, or nearly so. The fourth condition is the provision for individual initiative both in work and in play, and the greatest diffusion of power compatible with maintaining the necessary political and economic framework.” — Bertrand Russell, member of the Fabian Society, from 'The Impact Of Science On Society'(Note: Russell believed that individuals should be given at least the illusion of choice within minor aspects of society in order to maintain their willing participation.)

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. … t remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons… It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world.” — Edward Bernays, father of modern propaganda, from 'Propaganda'

Elitists are rarely as open about their true intentions as the men quoted above. They often entice the public with fantastical promises if collectivist systems are supported, including: equality of wealth and prosperity; reduction of labor and increases in leisure time; incredible technological advances; universal education; universal healthcare; the end of nationalism, resulting in the end of war, resulting in infinite global peace; etc.

When they are not able to sell the public on a particular aspect of collectivism, they will create artificial divisions and artificial crises in order to engineer chaos. As per the Hegelian dialectic, when we are thoroughly tenderized by fear and disaster, the elites return to the scene with a “solution” to their original crime, a solution that usually involves more collectivism.

So how do individualists fight back against collectivism, elitists and the useful idiots they exploit? Here are some practical strategies that anyone can employ in his daily life.

Stop Participating In False Paradigms

Yes, in the everyday world there are leftists and right wingers, liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats. People subscribe to particular ideologies and philosophies backed by fundamental differences in belief. These divisions between regular people are indeed real. However, it is important to realize that at the gatekeeper level in these systems, the leadership in both parties subscribe to the same goals. They are not divided. They are part of the elitist structure. And while their rhetoric differs cosmetically, in policy and in action they will always work to destroy individual liberty and promote collectivism, whether they claim to be on the right or the left.

This reality also applies to supposed conflicts between nations. If two nations appear to be at odds with each other, yet the leadership of each nation remains in league with the same international elitists (bankers, Fabians, globalists, etc.), then their conflict is a sham designed as theater for the masses.

Refuse to participate in false paradigms. Point out the inconsistencies of BOTH parties or sides and identify how each works against individualism and toward collectivism. Do not affiliate with any group or institution that has a demonstrated history of antagonism towards individual freedom or that partners with known collectivist (globalist) organizations and frontmen. If you are going to fight for any side, make sure it truly represents liberty through its actions and associations.  Rhetoric is meaningless.

Decouple From Dependency On Corrupt Systems

As our economic situation becomes more and more dire, people are much more apt to become dependent on the system for survival, and this is an intentional result. I would not expect, for example, that the 94 million people in the U.S. who have been unemployed for so long they are no longer counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics should refrain from government aid or cut themselves off from welfare measures and become immediately self-reliant. They should, however, consider working toward that goal over time; and so should everyone else.

This is not quite as impossible as it seems. Can you produce or repair items that act as survival necessities? Can you teach a necessary skill? If so, then you are already well on your way to independence. Once you have a necessary skill, trade is possible outside the controlled economic framework. The more individuals involved in an alternative economy, the more diversity of skill sets will be available and the more prosperous that voluntary community will become.

The ultimate achievement in my view would be similar in aspects to the American agrarian models of the past with the integration of helpful technology: completely voluntary communities in which free trade is the foundation; the existence of grid water and grid power is unnecessary; food production is local and ample rather than reliant on national or international freight systems and the artificial scarcity of corporate farming models; and security is provided by each individual for himself, as well as for the community, through voluntary neighborhood watches or militias.

All of this starts with each individual taking action to become a producer, rather than a wage slave or welfare slave.

Organize Locally With People Of Like Mind

Again, organizing voluntarily is counter to collectivism.  Collectivist systems cannot be defeated unless you are willing to establish a competing model that works better while maintaining freedom. This is not hard to do, considering collectivist models are failure-driven machines that devour people and use them as fuel to move society as a whole towards a “greater good” which is neither great nor good.

As outlined above, independent localism is the answer. It is a voluntary structure that encourages self-reliance and preparedness, while making production and innovation the mainstays of a healthy society. It rewards personal success and achievement, rather than punishing it. And, it helps a larger percentage of wealth to keep cycling locally, rather than being siphoned out of communities by governments or government-chartered and protected corporations.

Localism always starts small, with families, friends and neighbors. But as your organization continues to make life better for those involved, it will inevitably attract more participants.  The redundancy of localized economies would also protect people from economic collapse.  In fact, without the forced interdependency of centralized collectivist economic models, large scale financial crises would probably become a thing of the past.

Educate Children Privately

I’ve been saying it a lot lately, and I’ll say it again: Public schooling as it stands today is an apparatus for brainwashing, nothing more. With the dismal world ranking of U.S. students in math, science and reading, I hardly see what service public education is actually performing in America. The only service public schools do seem to excel at is indoctrination, with children now being immersed in collectivist lessons through Common Core and being conditioned into pacifism and fear through insane zero-tolerance policies.

The only working solutions available for parents today are to decouple from the federally dominated public school system and place their children in a well-vetted private school or to home-school. Any sacrifice, financial or otherwise, is worth it to save American children from a vicious system of propaganda and conditioning that could conceivably suppress their individualism and warp them into collectivist monsters.

Arm And Train For Self-Defense

I think it should be pretty obvious that there is a simple reason behind the collectivist habit of attempting to disarm common people: Armed people are harder to manage or control.  If an armed population was not a threat to collectivists then they would not keep trying to disarm everyone. Therefore, if you are not armed and trained in self-defense, then you are not a threat to collectivists.

You can be the most brilliant of thinkers with pristine logic and truth on your side; but without the means and ability to destroy an attacker or tyrant, you are nothing in the grand scheme. Intellectual warriors are not really warriors. And as a writer, I will say in all honesty that the threat of the pen is not mightier than the threat of the sword.

Keep in mind, though, that it is not enough to merely purchase a firearm or shoot at the range. Team tactics and training are essential for free people, which is why they are so admonished by collectivist elements in our society. Train with friends and family or with your Community Preparedness Team, as I do through Oath Keepers; but learn tactical methodologies and how to fight with others. Present a viable danger to collectivists, or be subsumed by them.

Remove The Elitist Hierarchy

Eventually, the fight between individualism and collectivism will become physical rather than informational. There is no way around it. The more individuals begin to decouple from the corrupt system and construct their own alternative framework, the more violent collectivists will turn in response. The virtue of self-defense requires that tyrants be cut off from their means to project violence onto others.

While it is impossible to stop the inherent nature of psychopathy other than to participate in communities where psychopaths are not welcome or encouraged, there is the matter of organized elitism to deal with.

Any fight for freedom from collectivists will require the removal of command and control. This is the only way that humanity can be given breathing room to rebuild without remaining under constant preplanned threat. There are, in fact, many organizations that openly work toward collectivist oligarchy, from central banks (this means central bankers in ALL nations, not just in the West), to the Council On Foreign Relations, to Tavistock, to the Rand Corporation, to the International Monetary Fund or the Bank for International Settlements, to Bilderberg, to the Fabian Society, etc. These institutions need to be dismantled by any means necessary and the participants removed from positions of control. Make no mistake; it will take a war before such people give up the reins of power. This is the inevitable cost of individualism and the inevitable cost of freedom.



142  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Israeli Soldiers Disguised as Muslims Raid Hospital, Kill Terrorists... on: November 12, 2015, 12:52:20 PM
This is REALLY rich.  Predictably, the establishment media is outraged.  How dare the Israelis kill these Palestinian terrorists!?

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/260762/israeli-soldiers-disguised-muslims-raid-hospital-daniel-greenfield

143  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 12, 2015, 11:05:26 AM
Crafty:

Uh - YES - we want to say that - the polls show most Americans will be sympathetic to that position - certainly more so that the Democrat "amnesty for everyone" position.  The reality is that we must at least threaten to do this - as Trump understands and is doing forcefully right now - doubling-down and saying he will have "deportation squads."  This is how you negotiate and get what you want. Simply saying this is going to scare the crap out of many illegals and cause them to self-deport if Trump or Cruz wins.

While ultimately we may well settle for something less than this extreme - it needs to be stated just the way Trump and Cruz are stating it.  These people and their children are here illegally.  PERIOD.  Send them back - and until the question of birthright citizenship is settled (which I believe it will be correctly if Trump or Cruz is elected - such that no such right exists) the children can choose to either stay here or go back with their parents.  This is not an ethical or compassion issue.  It is a legal issue.  Taking the left's bait and accepting their premise that it is "mean" to send these people back is unilaterally surrendering - which Republican have raised to an art until recently when people such as Cruz came along.
144  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Tonight's Debate... on: November 10, 2015, 11:02:52 AM
Doug:

If you have Internet access, you can go to the Fox Business Network site, and watch the debate live online.  Also - many local Fox affiliates are carrying the debate on their channel tonight.
145  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 09, 2015, 06:24:29 PM
No sh*t Sherlock.  That's not what I'm arguing and you know it.  A wise man considers the evidence before believing a claim.  You can't PROVE I didn't fly to Mars yesterday and have sex with an alien, so that claim deserves equal weight to the evidence that Hillary lied under oath, I suppose???  Let's not play childish games here on a serious forum.
146  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 09, 2015, 04:59:31 PM
ppulatie,

One cannot compare documented evidence with "what IF the other side does this too?" and then say that there is equivalence.  There is a HUGE difference between documented evidence of lying and criminal activity, and rumor and innuendo without any proof.  The former generally applies to Hillary Clinton and her husband, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, Valerie Jarrett, Lois Lerner, et. al.  Accusations without evidence form the bulk of the "argument" the Democrats present against going to war in Iraq.  Yes - there is corruption in both parties - but it cannot be said that it is unknowable which side is more credible in a particular circumstance.  Horowitz's book presents mountains of documented evidence.  One needn't "take his word" for anything.  Show me the evidence that Bush and Cheney were plotting to go to war with Iraq before 9-11, and I will take that assertion seriously.  Certainly the liberal press would love to prove this.  Yet they haven't been able to.  Yet we have mountains of evidence of Bill and Hillary's wrongdoings.  Show me the equivalence.
147  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Iraq and WMD... on: November 09, 2015, 03:03:40 PM
ppulatie is accepting the Left's false premise that the primary reason the Bush administration decided to go into Iraq was that they were presumed to have had WMD.  By the way - it has now been established that they DID IN FACT have WMD - as demonstrated by the stockpiles of chemical weapons later uncovered.

That aside - the PRIMARY reason we went into Iraq is that Saddam Hussein had defied multiple U.N. resolutions mandating inspections.  The Bush administration decided this could not be tolerated any longer.  I suggest you read David Horowitz's superb book "Party of Defeat," which sets the record straight in excruciating, precise detail.  The Left has re-written history regarding the reasons for going to war in Iraq with the willing participation of the establishment media and the Democrat Party.

There simply is no parallel whatsoever with Hillary Clinton's career-long record of virtually non-stop lies going back at least as far as the Watergate committee, where she was fired by a Democrat, who explicitly stated that she was dishonest and had deliberately tampered with evidence.  This was the reason for her termination.  But once again - the establishment media - a virtually fully-owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party, has chosen to downplay and/or not report this and any of countless other instances of dishonesty by Mrs. Clinton and her husband.
148  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Judge Andrew Napolitano: Hillary Clinton Unfit for Public Office... on: November 09, 2015, 01:54:07 PM
We cannot allow Hillary Clinton, 'midwife to chaos' and a public liar, to be our next president

By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
Published October 29, 2015
FoxNews.com

The New York Times’ Maureen Dowd captured the moment last weekend when she referred to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as “the midwife to chaos” in Libya. Dowd apparently came to that conclusion after watching Clinton bobbing and weaving and admitting and denying as she was confronted with the partial record of her failures and obfuscations as secretary of state, particularly with respect to Libya.

The public record is fairly well-known. In March 2011, President Barack Obama declared war on Libya. He did this at the urging of Clinton, who wanted to overthrow Libyan strongman Col. Moammar Gadhafi so she could boast of having brought “democracy” to the region.

She and Obama conspired to do this even though former President George W. Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair had publicly praised Gadhafi as an ally in the war against terrorist groups and even though the U.S. was giving the Qaddafi government more than $100 million a year in foreign aid.

Obama did his best to avoid constitutional norms. He deployed American intelligence agents on the ground, not troops, so he could plausibly deny he had put “boots” on the ground. He did not seek an American national consensus for war because Libya presented no threat whatsoever to the U.S. He did not obtain a congressional declaration of war as the Constitution requires because he couldn’t get one. And he did not seek United Nations permission, which is required to attack a fellow U.N. member.

Every four years, we entrust awesome power to a person who swears to protect the Constitution. How could we give that power to a consistent public liar?

He did obtain a U.N. embargo of the shipment of weapons into Libya, and he secured a NATO-enforced no-fly zone over portions of Libya. In order to enforce the no-fly zone, NATO sent jet fighters over the skies of Libya. The jets were guided and directed by American intelligence agents on the ground to bomb Libyan planes on the ground, which had been paid for by American taxpayers.

To pursue her goal of a “democratic” government there, Clinton, along with Obama and a dozen or so members of Congress from both houses and both political parties, decided she should break the law by permitting U.S. arms dealers to violate the U.N. arms embargo and arm Libyan rebels whom she hoped would one day run the new government. So she exercised her authority as secretary of state to authorize the shipment of American-made arms to Qatar, a country beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood and friendly to the Libyan rebels and a country the U.S. had no business arming -- unless the purpose of doing so was for the arms to be transferred to the rebels.

Once this plot was hatched, Clinton and her fellow conspirators realized that some of these rebel groups were manned by al-Qaida operatives; and selling or providing arms to them is a felony -- hence the reason for months' worth of missing and destroyed Clinton emails. How could someone running for president possibly justify providing material assistance to terrorist organizations in the present international climate?

Flash-forward to Clinton’s public testimony before the House Benghazi Committee last week. Clinton had three audiences to address. Her immediate audience was the committee, whose members generally did not know how to ask questions of a witness trying to hide the truth. Her second audience was the American people, who will recall little more than 15-second sound bites and general impressions of her testimony. Her third (unseen) audience consisted of the FBI agents and federal prosecutors who are investigating her.

That audience was looking for perjury, misleading statements and what federal law calls “bad acts.” Perjury is lying under oath. Misleading Congress is criminal and consists of testimony that employs deceptive language so as to create an untruthful impression. Bad acts constitute repeated behavior demonstrating moral turpitude -- usually a pattern of deception.

The FBI agents surely heard Clinton mislead Congress when she answered a hard question about arms going to rebels by saying “I think the answer is no” and again when she answered a question about arming private militias by saying it may have been considered but wasn't “seriously” considered. And they heard her directly commit perjury when she was asked whether she knew about our country's supplying arms to Libyan rebels directly or indirectly and she answered, “No.”

How could she answer "no"? She not only knew about the sending of arms to rebels but also personally authored and authorized it. How could she answer "no"? The FBI and CIA advised her -- in documents that are now public -- that U.S. arms were making their way to known al-Qaida operatives. How could she answer "no"? This reached a crisis point when some of those operatives used their American-made weapons to murder U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.

Then the cover-up began. At the same time Clinton was telling her daughter and the Egyptian prime minister within hours of Stevens’ death that al-Qaida killed him and after the CIA told her the plot to kill Stevens had been hatched 12 days earlier, she told the public that Stevens was killed by spontaneous demonstrators angered about a cheap anti-Islam video, the producer of which she vowed to “get.” She later angrily dismissed questions over this cover-up by arguing, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

The difference it makes goes to the heart of the American electoral process. Every four years, we entrust awesome power to a person who swears to protect the Constitution. How could we give that power to a consistent public liar who, for personal political gain, midwifed terror and chaos in a country that was our ally and whose words and behavior have continually demonstrated that she is utterly unworthy of belief?

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel.
149  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The Atlantic: Freedom of Speech Victimizes Muslims... on: November 09, 2015, 01:41:48 PM
THE ATLANTIC: FREEDOM OF SPEECH VICTIMIZES MUSLIMS

November 9, 2015  Daniel Greenfield

There was yet another decision in the Bible Believers case.

The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday found that Wayne County violated the constitutional rights of a group of religious proselytizers who were kicked out of an Arab-American cultural festival in 2012.

In a rare reversal of a previous decision from three-judge appeals court panel, an en banc review by 15 judges yielded a majority ruling that Wayne County is civilly liable to the group of evangelical Christians who sued after being ordered to leave the festival by sheriff's deputies.

The court found that even though the group attended the festival with the intention of offending Muslims using "loathsome" messages of "gross intolerance," their speech is protected by the First Amendment, and should have protected by the sheriff's office.

This is a thoroughly predictable outcome. It used to be the standard liberal position. "Used to" being the key words. The Atlantic's Garrett Epps claims that the First Amendment victimizes Muslims.

Bible Believers displays vividly the underlying strength of the American commitment to free speech—and the troubling shadow that commitment inevitably casts.

The troubling shadow being... freedom.

But we pay a price for this freedom, and not everyone pays the price equally. The First Amendment imposes on us all the duty to maintain the peace even when our deepest beliefs are denounced. But that duty is doubly onerous for minorities, because they must endure such abuse more often and longer.

In a country that is 70 percent Christian, Muslims account for less than one percent of the population. Since 9/11, powerful religious and political figures have been openly campaigning to strip this tiny population of the protections of the Constitution.


It's a typical leftist tactic to flip a freedom around into a burden. Look who suffers under freedom of speech. Minorities. To protect them, we might maybe sorta have to get rid of it.

Isn't freedom just privilege? What about voting? It rewards the majority. Think of the heavy burden of democracy on the minority? Wouldn't they be better off under an enlightened dictator?

In that context, the Bible Believers’ speech, though protected, was far from harmless... I wish I could talk to Irv Feiner about Bible Believers. He was a better lawyer than many who took the bar, and a better American than those who tried to ruin his life. His imagination, I think, would have room for concern about both the Muslim people of Dearborn and the aggressive bigots who destroyed their peaceful fair.

As opposed to the aggressive Muslim bigots who violently attacked them while shouting Allah Akbar?

Epps assumes that freedom of speech just empowers majorities to attack minorities. But Muslims are a global majority compared to Americans and the internet makes few distinctions between global Muslim hatred and local Muslim hatred. That's what enabled Anwar Al-Awlaki to do what he did. Muslim terrorists in the US are often the products of international Muslim hate speech.

When it comes to inciting hatred that leads to violence, the disproportionate share of it remains on the Muslim side. Despite the constant chatter about Islamophobia and blowback, thousands of Americans have been killed by Muslim hatred. The number of Muslims killed by Americans out of bigotry is so small that it has to be padded out by non-bigoted violence like the Chapel Hill shootings or hoax cases like Shaima Alawadi.

If freedom of speech empowers majorities at the expense of minorities, consider the Islamic alternative found throughout the Muslim world, in which speech critical of Islam is a crime while Islamic attacks on others cannot be challenged by non-Muslims.

Furthermore, the heckler's veto in the West has been exercised far more frequently by Muslims. Just ask a cartoonist.

The attacks on the First Amendment on behalf of Muslims attempt to impose a heckler's veto in the name of political correctness that is often indistinguishable from the one which Muslims impose by violence. If Epps thinks the First Amendment is such a burden, he should living without it in Pakistan or Iran.

What happened in Dearborn showed the danger of that kind of thinking. We've let Nazis march through Skokie and allowed Westboro's protesters to scream hate at the funerals of soldiers. Yet somehow Muslims are special. They deserve an exemption from American freedoms when no one else does. That's not protection. That's privilege.


150  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / How Collectivism Gains Ground... on: November 07, 2015, 10:24:54 AM
The Tools Collectivists Use To Gain Power

Wednesday, 04 November 2015    Brandon Smith


While many divisions within our society are arbitrary or engineered, there is one division that represents perhaps the most pervasive and important conflict of our time; the division between collectivists and individualists.

Now, people who do not understand the nature of collectivism will often argue that individualism and collectivism are not mutually exclusive because individuals require groups in order to survive and thrive. However, a “group” is not necessarily a collective.

For some reason the core fundamental of collectivism – the use of psychological coercion or physical force to compel participation – goes right over the heads of many skeptics. A group does not have to be collectivist. Any group can and should be voluntary. Collectivism is NOT voluntary. Therefore, collectivism and individualism are indeed mutually exclusive. Collectivists and individualists cannot exist in the same space at the same time without eventually coming into conflict. There is simply no way around it.

From the position of the liberty minded (or the average Libertarian), collectivism is by far the inferior of the two philosophies. Collectivists often boast of the social and economic “harmonization” collectivism creates, as well as the mobilization of labor to “streamline progress.” The reality is that artificially rigged harmony is no harmony at all. If people are forced to homogenize and get along through fear, then peace has not truly been accomplished.

Human beings must come to their own conclusions on cooperation and tolerance in their own time. They cannot be manipulated and shoehorned into a “utopian” framework. Problems will result, like genocide, which tends to erupt during almost every attempt at collectivist utopianism.

Economic harmonization is even less practical, with government force inevitably used to confiscate resources from one group to give to another group, essentially punishing success or frugality. This creates an environment in which achievement becomes less desirable. When people do not have individual incentive to pursue achievement, they see personal effort as wasted. Innovation and entrepreneurship fall by the wayside, and society as a whole begins to diminish in prosperity. Without individual accomplishments and ingenuity, the group is nothing but a hollow mindless ant hill.

Another argument which usually arises is that individualism leads to “selfishness” and the dominance of wealth devouring machines like corporations. I would remind collectivists that corporations exist only through the legal framework and protections of corporate personhood created by governments, and without government protections and favor, corporations could not exist. It is by collectivism, not individualism, that corporatocracy thrives.

At the same time, collectivists consistently blame individualist "free markets" for the numerous ailments of nations.  Yet another misrepresentation considering America has not had true free markets in well over a century, and most other nations have never had true free markets in their history.  Feudalism and its child Socialism have always been present to plague mankind.

There are no merits to collectivism that are not accomplished with greater success by individualism and voluntary community. In fact, collectivism only serves to enrich and empower a select few elites while destroying the future potential of all other individuals.

Given the disturbing nature of collectivism, one would think that attempts at collectivist societies would be a rarity, shunned by most people as akin to inviting cancer into the body. Unfortunately, cultures based on individualism are the minority in history.

The average collectivist is not usually much of a beneficiary of collectivism. We call these people “useful idiots” or “sheeple” who unknowingly serve the darker machinations of elitists while under the delusion that they are changing society for the better. The reason useful idiots participate in collectivism are many, but I have found that across the spectrum these people tend to be weak willed, weak minded, and by extension, possess a rabid desire for control over others.

It is perhaps no coincidence that “intellectuals” (self proclaimed) tend to end up at the forefront of modern efforts for collectivism. While the poor and destitute are often exploited by collectivism as a mob to be wielded like a battering ram, it is the soft noodle-bodied and fearful academia that acts as middle management in the collectivist franchise. It is they that desire the power to impose their “superior” ideologies on others, and since they are too weak to accomplish anything on their own, they require the cover and momentum of collectivist movements to give them the totalitarian fix they so crave. In other words, they believe in humanitarianism by totalitarianism.

Individualism is under constant and imminent threat as the collectivist obsession with control grows. The ultimate end game of collectivists is to derive submission from individuals, to corner people into handing over their individualism willingly.  It is not enough for them to merely apply force, the greatest power is in the power of consent.  Here are the most common tools used by collectivists to obtain power and manufacture consent from the masses.

The Illusion Of Consensus

Collectivists rely greatly on the force of a well-aimed mob to convince the general public they have the consensus position; that they are in the majority. Appearing to be in the majority is the single most important goal of a collectivist movement, even if they are in reality a small minority. The anonymity of web activism gives the force of the mob a new potency. No more than a dozen collectivists working in tandem can wreak havoc in multiple web forums or harass numerous individualist publications while giving casual readers the impression that their ideology is “everywhere.”

The key here is that collectivists understand that the average person does not want to be seen as too contrary to the majority. They understand that the majority view matters to the public, even if the majority view is utterly wrong. If collectivists can convince enough people that their ideology is the majority view, they know that many people will blindly adopt that ideology as their own in order to fit in. The lie of consensus then becomes a self perpetuating prophecy. This problem will remain forever a danger as long as people continue to care at all about the majority view.

The Destruction Of Core Institutions

Those institutions people consider “core institutions” are sometimes vital, and sometimes not. That said, it is the openly admitted objective of collectivists through socialist-style movements to destroy core institutions so that there is no competition to their new system. A collectivist society cannot allow citizens to have any loyalties beyond their loyalty to the group or the state.

So, individual liberties must be degraded or removed, as per the constant reinterpretation of the Constitution as a “living document.”  Religious institutions must be painted as shameful affairs for stupid barbaric cave-people. And, the family unit must be broken apart. This is done through economic depravity so pronounced that families never see each other, through state influence over children through public schooling, and through identity politics and propaganda which create sexual and racial conflicts out of thin air.

Dominating Discussion

This coincides with the idea of artificial consensus, but it goes beyond the use of the mob. In our daily lives we are now bombarded with collectivist messages — in mainstream news, in television shows, in movies, through web media and print media. The money behind these outlets belongs to a very small and select group of people, but through them the collectivist worldview is injected into every corner of our society. I would call this propaganda by attrition; an indirect but steady insertion of collectivism creating an atmosphere in which the ideology becomes commonplace even though it is being promoted by a limited number of people.

Exploiting The Youth

When we are young, most of us spend a great deal of time and energy working to be taken seriously. The question is, should we be taken seriously?

In my view and the view of the liberty minded, it really depends on the person’s actions, experience, efforts and accomplishments. Most younger people have little to no experience in life and haven’t had the time to accomplish much. They are still learning how to function in the world, and what kind of goals they want to pursue (if they ever pursue any goals). Because of this, it is hard for those of us who have gone through considerable struggles in life and reached a certain level of achievement to take them seriously when they decide to stroll into a room and pontificate on their moral and philosophical superiority. It makes me want to ask; what the hell have you ever accomplished?

This is not to say that there are not ingenious young people out there, or ignorant and lazy older folks. There are. But collectivist movements seek to exploit younger generations exactly because of their general lack of experience and naivety, as well as their feelings of entitlement when it comes to respect.

Collectivism almost always utilizes a theory called “futurism” in order to appeal to the young. The theory, which was a leading philosophy behind the rise of fascism, proclaims that all new ideas are superior in their social usefulness and all old ideas and beliefs should be abandoned like so much dead skin. According to futurism, those who cling to old ideas and principles are an obstacle to the progress of society as a whole.

The funny thing is, the ideas usually expounded by collectivists are as old as time — elitism, feudalism, totalitarianism, etc. None of these methodologies are “new” by any stretch of the imagination, but collectivists repackage them as if they are some grand new secret to Shangri-La. Younger adherents of collectivism latch onto futurism almost immediately. For, if all new ideas are superior, and all old ideas are barbaric, and younger people are the purveyors and consumers of everything new, then this means that it is the youngest generations that are the wisest, and the village elders that are naïve. By default, the young become the village elders without them ever having to struggle, make sacrifices, learn hard lessons, suffer loss, rise to challenges, or accomplish anything.

The enticing nature of this sudden groundswell of cultural respect is simply far too much for the average person college age or younger to ignore. Collectivism gives the young what they think they want, then uses them as tools for greater conquests.

Forcing Society To Accept The Lowest Common Denominator

Collectivism requires the homogenization of society, to the point that individualism is frowned upon and success is treated as negligible. Whether it is public schools lowering standards to the point that students with little or no reading comprehension graduate, or businesses being forced to lower standards in the name of “diversity” while rejecting employees with superior skill sets because they do not belong to a designated victim group, or government institutions like the military lowering physical standards to accommodate far weaker candidates in the name of “gender parity” while putting every soldier’s life at risk in the process, we are constantly being asked to accommodate the lowest common denominator instead of reaching for the highest level of excellence.

This makes the concept of success a bit of a joke. For “success” within such a system is easy as long as one follows the rules; excelling as an individual is not a factor. And by success I mean being allowed to survive, because that is the best you are going to get in a collectivist structure. The only way to fail is to not follow the rules, rules which may be arbitrary or idiotic at their core. Individualists are immediately punished for thinking or acting outside the box, when this is exactly the kind of behavior that should be encouraged. A society built on the lowest common denominator is a society destined for collapse. Individuals are systematically weeded out in the name of homogenization and all of their potential achievements and innovations disappear with them.

The nightmare of collectivism is the defining battle of our age. It is in this era that we will decide whether or not individual liberty and freedom of thought are more important than the illusory security and “harmony” of the collective.

I, for one, long to see a future in which individual enterprise is allowed to thrive and voluntary participation is the root principle on which our culture functions; a future in which state power is reduced to zero, or near zero, and government force is no longer an acceptable means by which one group can seek to control another group. I may not see this world in my lifetime, but the liberty-minded can make it possible for newer generations by avidly defending ourselves against collectivism today. As pointed out in the beginning, collectivism and individualism cannot coexist; confrontation is inevitable. Recognizing this, and preparing for it, is our duty as free human beings.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 21
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!