Published on Jul 6, 2016
Archive for July 2016
We Saved Our Democracy
July 7, 2016We Saved Our Democracy, Pat Condell via YouTube, July 7, 2016
(Perhaps American will vote for her own Brexit on November 8th. — DM)
French Prisons: Universities of Jihad
July 7, 2016French Prisons: Universities of Jihad, Clarion Project, Leslie Shaw, July 7, 2016
Photo: Video screenshot)
Sociologist and author Farhad Khosrokhavar has estimated that Muslims make up between 50 and 80 percent of prison inmates in France. Given that Muslims account for between seven and eight percent of the French population, this means that they are either more prone to crime than the indigenous French population, or that they are victims of discrimination by French law enforcement.
Given that many offenders are not behind bars but out on parole, wearing electronic bracelets, under house arrest or were not jailed on conviction but benefited from the leniency of the criminal courts, the real figure for the share of Islam in French crime is probably much higher than Khosrokhhavar’s estimate.
One of the disadvantages of this high proportion of Muslim inmates is that French prisons have become universities of jihad and incubators of terrorism.
French prison authorities were aware of the problem of radicalization way before the Charlie Hebdo attacks of January 2015. Mohamed Merah, who killed seven people (including three schoolchildren) in Toulouse in 2012 and Mehdi Nemmouche, who killed four people at the Jewish museum in Brussels in 2014, had been radicalized in prison.
The Kouachi brothers who carried out the Charlie Hebdo attack had also rallied to the cause of radical Islam while doing jail time. But when prison governors notified the authorities of the rise in Islamic radicalism, they were not only ignored but accused of Islamophobia.
Official figures indicate that 18,000 Muslim inmates observe Ramadan. There are currently only 182 Muslim prison chaplains, a situation which contributes to the influence of self-styled imams from the Muslim prison constituency.
In that constituency, 1,400 have been identified as radical Islamists of which 300 are linked to terrorism. The extent to which Islamist extremists indulge in and spread their ideology is astonishing.
Calls to prayer are made from prison windows. Inmates who are considered “bad” Muslims — those who watch television, do not rise at dawn to pray or do not wear a jellaba after sunset — are expelled from their cells by their radical co-religionists.
Female Muslim visitors who wear Western-style clothing are insulted and some have resorted to changing into Islamic robes in the parking lot before visits. In 2014, 1,012 cellphones found in prisons were seized, of which 50 percent contained Facebook accounts, some with links to Syria and Yemen.
The most common argument used to entice new recruits is to tell them that they will be absolved of their sins and gain entry to paradise if they commit to waging violent jihad upon release.
In January 2015 Prime Minister Manuel Valls unveiled an $800 million project to combat the spread of radical Islam including the creation of dedicated prison units (U2P or Units for the Prevention of Proselytism) where Islamists would be separated from other prisoners. The project was rolled out in five5 prisons at a cost of $17 million.
One prison governor expressed scepticism at the scheme, saying it would not prevent the recruitment of prisoners to the cause of jihad.
“If we want to separate the radical inmates from the rest of the prison population, we would need to build a French Guantanamo. Is that what we want?” he asked.
A member of the national security intelligence service shares this view. “Our prisons are cauldrons of radicalization. Terrorist inmates are heroes and this facilitates proselytism and recruitment.”
The real question to consider is what restrictions on freedom are acceptable in the interest of national security.
A report published on July 6, 2016 by the inspector general of prisons evaluates the result of this project and the judgement is far from favorable.
Between February and May 2016, three inspectors visited four prisons and interviewed 64 U2P inmates and their handlers. The report concludes that the experimental model is unrealistic given the overpopulation in prisons and presents more disadvantages than advantages.
Moreover, the structures put in place are inappropriate given the scale of the problem and the spectacular increase in people (over 1,000) currently indicted for terrorism. The initial objective of combating proselytism has been supplanted by that of gathering radicalized inmates in single units.
The report echoes the concerns of counter-terrorism magistrates that putting radical Islamists together will facilitate bonding, networking and the intimidation of vulnerable inmates. While radicals in the U2Ps are held in private cells, they are still not completely sealed off from the rest of the inmates and continue to spread their ideology.
The isolation of jihadists in U2Ps is accompanied by deradicalization programs, which consist of lessons in citizenship, lectures and debates on political violence and structured seminars on disengagement from violence for groups of six to eight over a three-month period on a voluntary basis.
Commenting on the report, Guillaume Denoix de Saint-Marc, director of the French Association for Victims of Terrorism, stated that the only way to eliminate prison radicalization is to “make inmates reflect in order to prepare for their release.”
Given the high rate of repeat offending and the crossover from juvenile delinquency to violent crime and ultimately to jihad, such a statement belongs more in the realm of wishful thinking than reality.
Radicalization is also taking place at an alarming rate in prisons in the U.S. Watch a clip from the Clarion film, The Third Jihad:
Why Hillary Clinton Must go to Jail
July 7, 2016Why Hillary Clinton Must go to Jail, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, July 7, 2016
In 1994, Hillary Clinton took questions under a portrait of Abraham Lincoln. Wearing a pink pantsuit, she offered what would become her customary mix of lies and defensiveness, admitting to something and then trying to shift the blame, denying that she had broken the law and then claiming ignorance.
It was an act that we would see over and over again for the next few decades, but back then it was still new when Hillary Clinton claimed that she couldn’t remember anything, that the whole Whitewater affair was an invasion of her privacy and that she had never meant to do anything wrong.
Some twenty years later, we have spent the past few months witnessing the same performance.
She blamed sexism for Whitewater. “It’s a little difficult for us as a country, maybe, to make the transition of having a woman like many of the women in this room, sitting in this house.” Her supporters claim that her email scandal is caused by sexism rather than her blatant violation of the law.
“I do feel like I’ve always been a fairly private person leading a public life,” Hillary Clinton whined about the examination of her shady investments. This time around she claimed that her whole rogue email server filled with classified documents was an attempt at protecting her classified yoga routines.
The truth, then and now, is that Hillary Clinton is a public figure who claims that her private life is being invaded whenever she gets caught violating the law.
Then there are the vague statements that almost sound like apologies, but aren’t. “I’m not in any way excusing any confusion that we have created,” she said of Whitewater. But the only confusion was Hillary’s efforts to make her critics appear to be confused. On her emails, she said that she was “sorry that it has raised all these questions.” Which is another way of saying that she was sorry she got caught.
Finally there is the politician who would be president playing dumb. Hillary Clinton didn’t understand how investments worked back then. She doesn’t understand how emails work now. When all else fails, Hillary Clinton will plead incompetence and then claim that she wants to focus on fixing health care.
Investments are confusing. Email accounts are confusing. Someone please put her in charge of something simple. Like health care for the entire country. Or maybe just the entire country.
No one trusts her and no one believes that she will ever be held accountable.
In 1998, prosecutors had the evidence to bring charges against Hillary Clinton. They chose not to act because they did notbelieve that she would be convicted. If that sounds familiar, it should.
FBI Director James Comey got up in front of the country and laid out a criminal case against Hillary over her email abuses and then announced that no prosecutor would ever take it. The material was there and it still is there. But no one in authority believes that Hillary Clinton will ever be held accountable.
Back then the evidence was too circumstantial. This time around there’s no definitive proof of criminal intent. Each time Hillary Clinton plays dumb, plays the victim and then urges everyone to move on.
Hillary Clinton lied about Whitewater. She lied about her covert email operation. Comey’s exoneration was more like an indictment, sweeping aside her lies about her classified correspondence. But that too is nothing new. Hillary Clinton has always lied and her lies are always exposed. Her fallback position is to argue that no one can prove that she knew she was committing a crime. Out of that mix of denials, partial admissions, non-apologies, misleading lawyerly statements, comes that final defense.
You can’t prove that I knew I was committing a crime.
This time around, the FBI could prove that she broke the law, that she lied about breaking the law and that she knew the law, but not that she intended to break the law. That brand of absurdity has gotten her off before. And it worked once again at the most crucial moment of her career.
Hillary Clinton trails a pattern of crimes and cover-ups dating back decades. And still no one can prove that she knew that was committing the crimes that she committed. Her associates have gone to jail. Her alibis have been shredded. But instead of heading to jail, she is aiming at the White House.
And that’s inevitable.
The Clinton crimes have always come down to politics. From Whitewater onwards, the Clintons got rich and powerful by exploiting their political connections. The Clinton Foundation and its rainbow of cash, from sources foreign and domestic, is just Whitewater writ large. The email scandal is the same old Clinton records game that they have been playing for decades being conducted with more high tech tools.
The Clinton server is more impressive than Sandy Berger burglarizing the National Archives for classified documents about Bill’s failure to fight Islamic terrorism, but it’s not really any different.
Berger’s burglary was dubbed an “honest mistake.” Hillary’s rogue email server? Another mistake, but only because “It’s caused all this uproar and commotion.” After she blatantly lied about landing in Bosnia under sniper fire, she smugly retorted, “So I made a mistake. That happens. It shows I’m human, which for some people is a revelation.”
It’s a revelation only because it’s the one single thing that she never lied about.
A trail of lies and scandals isn’t a mistake. It’s a record. Hillary Clinton has been entirely consistent in her criminal career. And just as consistently, she has never faced any consequences for her crimes.
Every time she might have been held accountable, investigations were written off as partisan witch hunts and prosecutors and law enforcement backed off convinced that trying to prosecute her would be futile. And that’s a mistake. Corruption grows when there is no accountability.
When Bill Clinton meets with the Attorney General, when the FBI Director makes a show of pardoning Hillary right before his boss goes to campaign for her, the message is that those in power can play by a different set of rules than ordinary people. And that is another way of saying that our society is corrupt.
If the Clintons can commit any crime that they like without being held accountable, that sends a message to ordinary people that we are not a nation of laws, but of special interests. It becomes harder to ask the average person to do the right thing when their leaders profit by doing the wrong thing.
The Clintons have amassed fortune, power and fame by being crooked. Holding them accountable is not just about partisan political battles, but about our integrity and our ethics as a nation.
Even many Democrats are disgusted by the Clintons. Comey’s speech was not met with celebrations, but with disgust. Media outlets compiled every example of how the FBI Director had shredded Hillary’s alibi. Everyone understood what had happened here. The only ones celebrating this shameful miscarriage of justice were the Clintons, their corrupt cronies and amoral associates.
During her Whitewater conference, Hillary Clinton claimed, “I don’t want anybody to have the wrong impressions of either of us.” The trouble is that the entire nation has the right impression of her.
America deserves leaders who inspire us to be better people. And we can’t have that until we start holding corrupt politicians accountable. It is time for Americans from all parties and political backgrounds to demand an end to the immunity of the Clinton Crime Family.
Palestinian Authority Pays Terrorists, Families $140M a Year
July 7, 2016Palestinian Authority Pays Terrorists and Their Families $140 Million a Year Palestinians using foreign aid to reward terrorists for acts that kill Israelis
BY: Follow @mchalfant16
July 7, 2016 5:00 am
Source: Palestinian Authority Pays Terrorists, Families $140M a Year
The Palestinian Authority spends roughly 10 percent of its annual budget paying terrorists who attack Israelis and supporting their families, according to expert testimony to congressional lawmakers.
Yigal Carmon, the president and founder of the Middle East Media Research Institute, told the House Foreign Affairs Committee Wednesday that the Palestinian Authority is investing $137.8 million this year in salaries to terrorists jailed in Israel and payments to the families of imprisoned terrorists or suicide bombers, in violated of the Oslo peace accords with Israel.
Wednesday’s hearing took place following a months-long wave of violent attacks waged by Palestinians on Israelis in the West Bank. Last week, a Palestinian attacker broke into a home in the West Bank and stabbed to death a 13-year-old Israeli-American girl in her sleep.
There have been 250 such attacks or attempted attacks by Palestinians on Israelis since October 2015, according to the report of the Middle East Quartet—comprised of the United States, Russia, the European Union, and the United Nations—issued last week. The assaults have killed at least 30 Israelis and resulted in dozens of Palestinians being killed by Israeli police.
Official Palestinian Authority media have glorified perpetrators of these terrorist attacks. Bashar Masalha, a Palestinian who stabbed U.S. Army veteran Taylor Force to death and wounded several others in March, was hailed on official media outlets as a “martyr” at the time of his funeral.
“We welcome every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem. This is pure blood, clean blood, blood on its way to Allah,” Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas stated last September on Palestinian television. “With the help of Allah, every martyr will be in heaven, and every wounded will get his reward.”
The Palestinian Authority has also furnished terrorists and their families with financial support weighted by the severity of the attack, a matter over which congressional lawmakers expressed outrage on Wednesday.
“These terrorists are not, in fact, lone rangers. They are not lone wolves,” said Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), who chairs the committee, in opening remarks during the hearing. “Instead, these terrorists are the product of the programming done by the PA’s perverted culture that glorifies the willingness to die or to spend time in prison in pursuit of killing or maiming Israelis.”
According to Carmon’s testimony, which was informed by an analysis of the Palestinian Authority’s budget and years of research, the Palestinian Authority transfers funds to terrorist prisoners in Israeli or their families using two Palestinian Liberation Organization funds. The financial support of these individuals is mandated by law.
Prisoners must be provided a monthly salary ranging from $364 to over $3,000 during their detention, and salaries or jobs upon their release. Those who commit the most grievous attacks receive the most substantial monthly payments and are also entitled to jobs in the Palestinian Authority institution upon their release.
Carmon said that it is difficult to determine exactly what percentage of the Palestinian Authority’s annual budget is put toward this cause because of a lack of transparency, but estimated that it amounts to about 10 percent.
“It is just outrageous that they pay cold-blooded killers who murder innocent people and call them martyrs,” Rep. Eliot Engel (D., N.Y.), the committee’s ranking member, said during the hearing. “I cannot think of anything more disgusting.”
While Abbas two years ago ordered that these salaries not be paid by the Palestinian Authority’s Ministry of Prisoners’ Affairs but instead by the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Carmon described this as a “deliberately misleading move” to assuage concerns from donor countries worried about their money being funneled to terrorists.
“The source of the money remains the PA, which receives them from donor countries, and the overseeing body remains none other than the PA,” Carmon told lawmakers. He said that countries who provide aid to Palestine, including the United States, are “complicit” in inciting terrorism because the Palestinian Authority uses foreign donations to subsidize terrorists and their families.
“By providing this support, the PA is encouraging terrorism in violation of its Oslo commitment.
Furthermore, the PA has been using money granted by donor countries for this purpose, and by doing so, has made them complicit in encouraging terrorism as well,” Carmon said.
The United States has committed over $5 billion in bilateral economic and non-lethal aid to the Palestinians since the mid-1990s in order to prevent Palestinian terrorist groups from attacking Israel and promote piece in the West Bank, according to a Congressional Research Service report issued in March.
While U.S. law allows the government to cut aid to the Palestinian Authority for paying terrorists and their families, the Palestinian Authority has avoided this by transferring the payments to the Palestinian Liberation Organization, experts said Wednesday.
“The U.S. stipulations have … been evaded by the PA by this deceitful technique of funneling money to terrorists and their families under a different name,” said David Pollock, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
“I think that the United States and other countries should … reduce the amount or condition the amount of assistance that they provide to the PA without threatening to or without actually cutting it off completely,” Pollock, added, cautioning that completely ceasing aid could result in the collapse of the Palestinian Authority.
“I do think that a certain calibrated, limited amount of financial pressure applied, again, by the United States without any loopholes or escape hatches and, if possible, by European and other donors to the PA would be helpful in addressing this immediate issue,” Pollock added.
Members of Congress have pursued legislative action to address this problem. A Senate subcommittee recently approved language inserted into the fiscal year 2017 State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill that would cut U.S. aid to Palestine by an amount equal to that “expended by the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization and any successor or affiliated organizations, as payments for acts of terrorism by individuals who are imprisoned after being fairly tried and convicted for acts of terrorism, and by individuals who died committing acts of terrorism during the previous calendar year.”
The companion bill in the House also includes similar language. The State Department would be responsible for enforcing the law.
Israel has already implemented such action. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Friday that the country would withhold some tax revenues that it sends to the Palestinian Authority. The amount withheld will be equal to what is “being transferred by the Palestinian Authority to terrorists and their families,” though it is unclear how much it will be.
Some members of Congress took a hardline approach toward the issue on Wednesday. Rep. Ted Yoho (R., Fla.) said that the United States should send a clear message to Palestine that “if these policies continue, we’re done.”
“We are funding hatred. We are funding terrorism,” Yoho said, labeling it “unconscionable” to provide aid to Palestine in the name of peace while the Palestinian Authority is subsidizing terrorists.
Royce said that the United States and its European allies must do more to use leverage against Palestinian Authority to halt the practice of rewarding terrorists.
“If the PA’s irresponsible behavior continues, the whole premise for funding the PA needs to be reconsidered. The U.S. needs to do better at bringing the parties together while holding the parties responsible for their actions. This has traditionally been our role,” Royce said. “Unfortunately, in recent years, the Obama administration has been hesitant to hold the PA accountable—yet has consistently pressured Israel.”
Attorney General Lynch accepts FBI recommendation to clear Clinton of wrongdoing
July 7, 2016(Surprise! Who would have expected Lynch to do that?. — DM)
Attorney General Loretta Lynch officially accepted the FBI’s recommendation that neither Hillary Clinton nor any of her aides should face criminal charges Wednesday, effectively ending the year-long investigation into their handling of classified information.
Lynch said in a statement she had met with FBI Director James Comey and career prosecutors earlier Wednesday and accepted their “unanimous” recommendations to close the case without bringing an indictment against anyone involved.
Her ruling came one day after Comey publicly blasted the former secretary of state for her “extremely careless” treatment of sensitive material before suggesting the FBI had not uncovered enough evidence to support a criminal case.
The FBI Recommendation Not to Indict Hillary Will Help Trump
July 6, 2016The FBI Recommendation Not to Indict Hillary Will Help Trump, Dan Miller’s Blog, July 6, 2016
(The views expressed in this post are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)
FBI Director Comey intimidated that anyone except a former high-ranking Democrat government official currently running for high office as a Democrat would have faced serious consequences. The exemption granted to Hillary Clinton does not sit well with many if not most Republican and Independent voters; even the generally supportive lamebrain media are finally attacking Her. Nevertheless, She will get the Democrat presidential nomination and “likable” but befuddled Joe Biden won’t. All of that is good for Trump.
I’m Guilty as Hell and free as a bird. This is for the little people.
Here’s FBI Director Comey’s statement on his decision not to recommend Clinton’s indictment:
The GOP posted this advertisement on July 5th:
Shortly after Comey made his announcement, ABC hailed it as having “lifted a cloud” for Clinton and Obama. [All bold-face type is in the original at News Busters.]
In the moments following FBI Director James Comey’s announcement on Tuesday that Hillary Clinton should not face criminal charges for her private e-mail servers scandal, the cast assembled by ABC News hailed the “extraordinary decision” as “a momentous day” signaling that “a cloud is lifted” for Clinton to continue on with the presidential race and President Obama to give his own thoughts on the matter.
. . . .
Wrapping it all up, Stephanopoulos spun to Karl that “even though this report is kind of damning, the announcement of no indictment before that first joint campaign stop kind of clears the decks for [President Obama] as well.”
Karl gushed that “the timing is so extraordinary….to think you have that Air Force One on the tarmac ready to take them down to this first campaign appearance together, but this whole process has been a cloud hanging over the head of Hillary Clinton and her campaign so that cloud is lifted.”
“But as we pointed out — there’s so much bad here for Hillary Clinton. But ultimately when they get beyond this, they no longer have to have the possibility of an indictment,” he added.
According to a Rasmussen poll taken on the evening of July 5th,
37% of Likely U.S. Voters agree with the FBI’s decision. But 54% disagree and believe the FBI should have sought a criminal indictment of Clinton. Ten percent (10%) are undecided.
. . . .
Sixty-four percent (64%) of Democrats agree with Comey’s decision not to seek an indictment of their party’s presumptive presidential nominee. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of Republicans, 63% of voters not affiliated with either major political party and 25% of Democrats disagree with the decision. [Emphasis added.]
Director Comey has agreed to appear before the House Oversight Committee on July 7th to respond to questions about his decision not to indict Ms. Clinton.
The initial lamebrain media reaction was trumped by its own later reactions. The media picked up on Comey’s shredding of Clinton’s practices, particularly calling her “extremely careless” with classified information and refuting her talking points such as that she didn’t send or receive e-mail marked classified on her unsecured system.
The mainstream press across the dial commented on how this hurt Clinton’s campaign, played into the set narrative that she’s not trustworthy and called into question her judgment on matters of national security.
According to WaPo, a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy sycophantic long time advocate for Hillary,
THE BIG IDEA: Want to know why two-thirds of Americans do not consider Hillary Clinton trustworthy? Re-watch pretty much any public comment she’s made about her email use over the past 16 months and then watch James Comey’s speech yesterday.
The FBI director shredded so many of the talking points that the former Secretary of State and her top aides have used over and over again throughout this scandal, including that she never emailed classified material; that information in the emails was classified retroactively; that none of the emails were marked as containing classified information; that there were definitively no security breaches; that she turned over all work-related emails to the State Department; that the set-up was driven by convenience; and that the government was merely conducting “a security review.”
Rosalind Helderman, who has been covering this saga closely, writes that Comey “systematically dismantled” Clinton’s defenses. She juxtaposes Clinton quotes since last March against Comey quotes from yesterday. (Read her full piece here.)
— While Clinton dodged a legal bullet that could have been catastrophic to her candidacy, yesterday was neither vindication nor exoneration, and it certainly will not put the matter to rest. Instead, Comey’s declaration that she was “extremely careless” in handling classified material and should have known better will dog her through November. Though the FBI director said “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a criminal case against Clinton, his nearly 15-minute speech was tantamount to a political indictment.
Obama still maintains that Hilary is Great. Here’s what He said at a Clinton rally a couple of hours after the FBI decision not to recommend indictment had been announced.
I guess it all depends on what sex most “qualified” in history means. Please see also, Hillary is Best Qualified to Finish Imam Obama’s Work.
As noted by Michael Walsh at PJ Media,
A day after the Fourth of July, we’ve come to a new low in the history of the United States of America and of the criminal organization masquerading as a political party that has seized power . . . .
If on November 8th voters still remember the Clinton non-indictment and Director Comey’s remarks suggesting than anyone else would have been indicted — and it seems likely that Trump, et all will remind them — the impact should be significant.
Even if they don’t remember, at least Hillary will be the Democrat candidate and Joe Malaprop Biden won’t be. On July 5th, Allen West wrote,
Of course, the news cycle is completely dominated by FBI Director James Comey’s announcement yesterday recommending no criminal charges against Hillary Clinton. And my response is GREAT! I can’t thank Director Comey enough for coming to this decision. [Emphasis added.]
My concern has always been that Barack Obama would release the hounds on Mrs. Clinton and then push for his vice president, Joe Biden, to be the Democrat nominee. And then, to placate the far lefty socialists, who own the Democrat party, Obama would position Sen. Elizabeth Warren as Biden’s VP. That would be a really tough ticket to beat, since Joe Biden’s favorables, regardless of gaffes and such, are extremely high.
If the voters do remember or are adequately reminded, some NeverTrumpers may change their minds and vote for Trump; they should. A July 5th article at Maggie’s Farm posited,
Hillary Clinton is corrupt and corrupting of everyone she touches. President Obama has engaged in outrageous executive conduct so often as to be numbing. Those in powerful positions throughout this administration behave like lawless thugs and keep getting away with it. The courts have been packed with judges who find excuses to not enforce the laws or who create ones out of ideology contrary to intent. The major media shamelessly look away or cover up for the lawless and abusers, and seek every opportunity – or blow out of proportion every trivial thing – to damn opponents of the regime. Much of the Republicans in office lack the guts or integrity to fight back, outside of mewing noises.
Where does that leave us now?
The Tea Party movement occurred at a point in time between elections, and succeeded in electing many who promised to be better. Some have been. Many have been useless or become tools. Now, it is election time, and the demonstration we require is at the ballot box.
Donald Trump is far from the perfect leader. But, then it takes someone with gumption and determination who will not be intimidated to take on the rot that permeates our government and self-appointed ruling class. And, Trump is the only revolution we have available. [Emphasis added.]
Anyone deserves the end of our once-renowned Republic who stays home or turns coat or otherwise fails to stand up for recovering an America with basic laws and justice, an America which is not beholden to those who would exploit the government for self-aggrandizement or profits, an America with justice for all which does not favor the wealthy or powerful sycophants of state power. [Emphasis added.]
Donald Trump is not George Washington. But he’s the only revolution we have, and very probably our last chance. I have faith in the American people who will bring us back from tottering over the brink of ruination to make it work when Trump is elected. [Emphasis added.]
Get out and work for local candidates and for Trump. Otherwise, be part of the ruination. It’s that simple and brutal a truth.
Trump now has a very substantial chance of winning the November 8th election and the Hildabeast’s chances have diminished. For the “NeverTrumpers” and others who would otherwise vote for the Republican nominee either to stay home or to vote for the Hildebeast would be unconscionable. The nation might well not survive eight years of the Hildebeast, and the Republican Party almost certainly would not.
Don’t be “a day late and a dollar short.” Please.
YouTube bans video on Muslim Brotherhood, Sharia and Civilization Jihad as “hate speech”
July 6, 2016YouTube bans video on Muslim Brotherhood, Sharia and Civilization Jihad as “hate speech” Jihad Watch,
Here is a full transcript of the video. Where is the “hate speech”? Where is there even any factual inaccuracy?
For the Left, truth is no defense. What they want to do is silence their ideological foes. That’s all. The problem with the increasingly mainstream concept that “hate speech is not free speech” is that what exactly constitutes “hate speech” is a subjective judgment, often based on the political proclivities of the person doing the judging. If a Leftist analyst who subscribes to the fantasy that the Muslim Brotherhood is a “firewall against extremism” is doing the judging, he may think that the information below is “hate speech,” while if someone who is aware of the true nature and magnitude of the jihad threat is the judge, he would more likely consider Hamas-linked CAIR’s “Islamophobia” reports to be genuine “hate speech.”
The concept of “hate speech” is, in reality, a tool of the powerful to silence and demonize their critics. It has no place in a free society. This action by YouTube is ominous in the extreme, and is almost certainly the harbinger of much worse to come.
You can still see the video on Facebook here, and here is the full transcript: “Killing for a Cause: Sharia Law & Civilization Jihad,” Counter Jihad, June 29, 2016:
What is Civilization Jihad? This video explains in three minutes.
We have a new video aimed at non-experts as an introduction to the basic ideas behind the Counterjihad. Please watch it, and share it with those whom you think need to see it. The text of the video is as follows:
Terrorism seems to be everywhere, and it’s getting worse. The bad guys have lots of names—ISIS, al Qaeda, Boko Haram—but they have one thing in common. They are all killing for a cause: Islamic Law known as Sharia.
Sharia is a return to medieval Islam. Sharia demands a Holy War called Jihad. The most widely available book of Islamic Law in English says: “Jihad means to war against non-Muslims.”
There are two kinds of Jihad. Violent Jihad is horribly simple, slaughtering innocents and forcing submission. Violent Jihadists want to conquer land for their Caliphate – essentially an Islamic State where Sharia Law is supreme.
But there is another kind of Jihad. In their Explanatory Memorandum, theMuslim Brotherhood, calls this, “civilization jihad,” saying, “The [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…”
Civilization Jihad has the same goal as the Violent Jihad—to conquer land for their Caliphate—but instead of waging war or staging terror attacks like their brothers in the violent jihad, these Civilization Jihadists wear suits and ties, and their work is much more subtle.
So what do they do? They file lawsuits for Muslim truck drivers who don’t want to drive beer. They convince schools to hold Muslim Day, where the girls wear head scarves and the kids say Muslim prayers. They complain when our government watches to see if their violent buddies are hanging out with them.
They call anyone critical of Islamic Law an “Islamophobe,” a term they invented to make people scared to speak out—like the neighbors of the terrorists in San Bernardino who knew something was wrong, but didn’t want to say anything because they’d be accused of profiling.
These bad guys have lots of names, too: the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR); the Muslim Student Association (MSA); Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). The Justice Department found that these groups were, in fact, started by the Muslim Brotherhood.
These groups like to say that terrorism has no religion, but only Islam has Sharia and Jihad.
Not all Muslims practice Sharia or support it, but an awful lot do. They believe that anyone who insults Islam can be killed; they believe thatwomen are property; that gays should be killed; and that little girls should be mutilated and forced to marry old men they’ve never men. These things are simply not allowed in our free society and are against the Constitution.
There are plenty of Modern Muslims who want to “live and let live,” but unfortunately the groups that speak most often for the Muslim community follow the medieval version based on Sharia.
They are working to make the US more like the Caliphate. They have to go.
FBI director James Comey to testify to Congress on Clinton emails
July 6, 2016FBI director James Comey to testify to Congress on Clinton emails, Washington Times,Stephen Dinan, July 6, 2016
FBI Director James Comey pauses while making a statement at FBI Headquarters in Washington, Tuesday, July 5, 2016. Comey said the FBI will not recommend criminal charges in its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server
FBI Director James Comey will testify to Congress Thursday on his findings about Hillary Clinton’s secret email account, the House Oversight Committee announced.
Mr. Comey said Tuesday that Mrs. Clinton may well have broken laws on handling of classified information, but he said he doubted prosecutors would try to make the case — so he wasn’t recommending charges.
Republicans on Capitol Hill said he should have laid out his findings without making a recommendation, leaving it up to prosecutors to decide what to do.
“The FBI’s recommendation is surprising and confusing,” Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz said. “The fact pattern presented by Director Comey makes clear SecretaryClinton violated the law. Individuals who intentionally skirt the law must be held accountable. Congress and the American people have a right to understand the depth and breadth of the FBI’s investigation.”
Democrats blasted the snap hearing, saying Republicans are fighting a political battle in trying to pressure Mr. Comey.
“The only emergency here is that yet another Republican conspiracy theory is slipping away,” said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the committee.
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments