Thursday, March 31, 2016

“Germany Will Never Recover” Trump Rips Merkel’s Muslim Policy, Clinton “Close To Incompetent”

Freedom Outpost ^ | Walid Shoebat 

During an interview with Piers Morgan, Donald Trump opened up about German Chancellor Angela Merkel, where he ripped her for being irresponsible and destroying Germany “in a matter of 2 years” so badly that the country may never be the same again.
In the same interview, he fired shot at Hillary Clinton, calling her “close to incompetent,” weak, and leaving a trail of scandal wherever she goes.
This is the kind of not tough talk, but real talk that America needs to hear because it’s the truth.
From the UK Express:
On Merkel
“What Merkel did to Germany is a shame, it’s a sad, sad shame what’s happened to Germany.
“I have friends in Germany, they want to leave Germany. These are people that two years ago were telling me that it’s the greatest place on Earth and now they want to leave.
“I don’t know what happened to her, I don’t know what her thinking was, but I don’t think they are going to recover from it very easily if at all.”

On Hillary
“Well she’s close to incompetent. Look, every decision she’s made, she’s made such bad decisions, including the emails and including Whitewater [real estate scandal] and including everything.
“So I think she’s close to incompetent as far as decision making is concerned. She’s not a leader and I don’t think she has the strength or the energy to be President, you need tremendous strength and tremendous energy and I don’t see it with Hillary.”

The FBI stalks Hillary while Bill Clinton trolls Obama

The Washington Times ^ | March 31, 2016 | Monica Crowley - 

Do Bill and Hillary Clinton sense a breakdown in whatever deal they may have struck with President Obama to protect her presidential ambitions?

Is whatever negotiation they may have been conducting over her email server problem and any inside information she may have on him now imploding? Or have the Clintons “won” the negotiation with Mr. Obama, freeing them to hit him publicly to get her elected?

Something has happened, which has led Mr. Clinton to openly slam Mr. Obama: ” If you believe we’ve finally come to the point where we can put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us ” he said recently.

A few days later, Chelsea Clinton launched a broadside on Obamacare’s costs. A classic Clintonian one-two punch, coming just days before a report that the FBI is seeking interviews with Mrs. Clinton’s top aides, and likely Mrs. Clinton herself. Most investigations interview the target last.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The State Dept. Has Still Not Answered This Crucial Question About Those 22 ‘Top Secret’ eMails!

The Daily Caller ^ | 3/31/16 | Chucjk Ross 

It has been two months since the State Department announced that it was withholding in full 22 Hillary Clinton emails that contained “Top Secret” information, but one crucial question remains: was the information in those emails classified when they were originally written?
A State Department official tells The Daily Caller that the agency is still not prepared to provide an answer to that question. It’s unclear if the State Department has made the determination and is waiting to announce it or if the mater is still being reviewed.
On Jan. 29, State Department spokesman John Kirby announced the State Department was concurring with the intelligence community’s inspector general that the 22 emails — which spanned 37 pages — contained “Top Secret” information. Some of the information involved extremely sensitive “special access programs.”
The announcement came as a surprise because it was the first time that the State Department had acknowledged that “Top Secret” information was contained on Clinton’s private email server, which is currently at the center of an FBI investigation.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Our Embassy in Israel Belongs in Israel's Capitol ^ | March 30, 2016 | Jeff Jacoby 

Venerable political norms have been upended during this crazy election season, but at least one presidential-campaign tradition remains intact. Every four years, candidates for the White House firmly pledge that, if elected, they will relocate the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. 2016 has been no exception.

At the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee gathering in Washington last week, Republican front-runner Donald Trump was cheered when he declared that as president he would "move the American embassy to the eternal capital of the Jewish people, Jerusalem." A few hours later, Texas Senator Ted Cruz not only made the same promise, but said the process would begin on his "very first day in office." Ohio Governor John Kasich, asked about the embassy issue on CNN, confirmed that he too wants the US embassy moved to Israel's capital.

Jerusalem didn't come up in Hillary Clinton's AIPAC speech; then again, she had come out for moving the embassy long before anyone was even thinking of 2016. In 1999, while still first lady and planning a US Senate race, Clinton vowed to be an "active, committed advocate" for relocating the embassy from Tel Aviv. That was seven years after her husband, campaigning for president in New York, had affirmed his support for Jerusalem "as an undivided city, the eternal capital of Israel, and [for] moving our embassy to Jerusalem."

George W. Bush in 2000, John Kerry in 2004, John McCain in 2008 — though the nominees change, the quadrennial promise to shift the American embassy in Israel to the country's capital has been as consistent as Old Faithful.

But even more consistent is the failure of any president to keep that promise once in office.

Candidates routinely give assurances that they have no intention of keeping. But moving the embassy in Israel to Jerusalem ought to be a no-brainer. The United States maintains nearly 190 embassies, one in virtually every country on earth. In every one the embassy is located in the capital of the host country. Israel is the lone exception.

Washington has never formally recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital. When asked what the country's capital is, administration spokesmen tie themselves in knots to avoid giving an answer. This isn't just an absurdity, it's an insult to an ally. It's also a continuing act of appeasement to rejectionists who oppose Jewish sovereignty over any part of the Jewish homeland. Such discriminatory treatment is obnoxious; that is why presidential hopefuls keep pledging to fix it, and why the House and Senate more than a decade ago, by overwhelming majorities, passed a law — the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 — requiring that the embassy be moved.

Yet nothing changes. A waiver provision in the 1995 law empowers the president to suspend the relocation for six months if necessary "to protect the national security interests of the United States." Every six months, with perfect regularity, each president since Bill Clinton has issued a waiver.

When pressed, the White House or State Department says that relocating the embassy would amount to prejudging an issue that should be settled through negotiation. That might be plausible if the US embassy were to be established in eastern Jerusalem — which was occupied by Jordan from 1948 until Israel liberated it in the Six Day War. But no one has ever suggested that the embassy go anywhere but West Jerusalem, the undisputed seat of Israel's government since 1948.

Israel's enemies don't object to siting foreign embassies in Jerusalem because it would undermine diplomatic negotiations. They object because they deny Israel's claim to any part of Jerusalem, even parts that have always been sovereign Israeli territory. They deny, in other words, that Israel's very existence is a settled issue. Moving the US embassy to Jerusalem would send one message, simple but significant: Americans do not regard the survival of the Jewish state as negotiable.

World’s Biggest Green Energy Company Collapses

.breitbart. ^ | 30 Mar 2016 | by James Delingpole 

Did you short-sell your solar energy shares as I advised last week in my Breitbart piece “The Solar Industry is Dying: Good Riddance?
If you’d picked SunEdison – the world’s largest green energy company – you would have made a killing as its shares plunged further this week, amid rumours that it now faces imminent bankruptcy.
SunEdison, valued at $10 billion in July 2015 is now worth just $400 million today. This represents a catastrophic loss for the investors gulled into this sector in the mistaken belief that “clean” energy is the future and that it’s possible to make lots and lots of money and polish your environmental conscience at the same time.
Well maybe once you could but not any more. And it won’t be the last green venture to turn to ashes either for one very simple reason: renewable energy is almost entirely dependent on taxpayer subsidy. When the money runs out the business dies.
I’m kicking myself that I didn’t follow my own advice and short those SunEdison shares. But I’m guessing there’ll be plenty of similar opportunities in the years to come.
It’s one reason I can’t wait for the anti-green hedge fund – Cool Futures – I wrote about a few months ago to get going. Though it’s not going to make me much money (I bought a share in its management company via Gofundme), there are few things that give me greater pleasure that watching people profit from the collapse of the Green Ponzi Scheme.
These troughers are lower than pond life; they’ve been leeching off us for years and now they’re getting the comeuppance that they deserve.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama: Islam Inherently Violent? Absurd!

Frontpagemagazine ^ | 3-31-16 | Robert Spencer 

That’s something only the “Republican base” believes. Along with all too many Muslims.

Barack Obama is amused.
“I’m amused,” he said in remarks published Tuesday, “when I watch Republicans claim that Trump’s language is unacceptable, and ask, ‘How did we get here?’ We got here in part because the Republican base had been fed this notion that Islam is inherently violent, that this is who these folks are. And if you’ve been hearing that a lot, and then somebody shows up on the scene and says, well, the logical conclusion to civilizational conflict is we try to make sure that we’re not destroyed internally by this foreign civilization, that’s what you get.”
Where would anyone get the crazy idea that Islam was inherently violent? Well, the day’s headlines might give us that very strong impression, but Obama would tell us (and has told us) that those Muslims who are screaming “Allahu akbar” as they murder non-Muslims are, despite appearances, not really Muslims at all, but just people who have twisted, hijacked, misunderstood the Religion of Peace.
It is, true, however, that there are plenty of Muslims who tell us that Islam is inherently violent. Here are a few of them:
“Jihad was a way of life for the Pious Predecessors (Salaf-us-Salih), and the Prophet (SAWS) was a master of the Mujahideen and a model for fortunate inexperienced people. The total number of military excursions which he (SAWS) accompanied was 27. He himself fought in nine of these; namely Badr; Uhud, Al-Muraysi, The Trench, Qurayzah, Khaybar, The Conquest of Makkah, Hunayn and Taif . . . This means that the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) used to go out on military expeditions or send out an army at least every two months.” — Abdullah Azzam, co-founder of al-Qaeda, Join the Caravan, p. 30
“If we follow the rules of interpretation developed from the classical science of Koranic interpretation, it is not possible to condemn terrorism in religious terms. It remains completely true to the classical rules in its evolution of sanctity for its own justification. This is where the secret of its theological strength lies.” — Egyptian scholar Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd
“Many thanks to God, for his kind gesture, and choosing us to perform the act of Jihad for his cause and to defend Islam and Muslims. Therefore, killing you and fighting you, destroying you and terrorizing you, responding back to your attacks, are all considered to be great legitimate duty in our religion.” — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his fellow 9/11 defendants
“Allah on 480 occasions in the Holy Koran extols Muslims to wage jihad. We only fulfill God’s orders. Only jihad can bring peace to the world.” — Taliban terrorist Baitullah Mehsud
“Jihad, holy fighting in Allah’s course, with full force of numbers and weaponry, is given the utmost importance in Islam….By jihad, Islam is established….By abandoning jihad, may Allah protect us from that, Islam is destroyed, and Muslims go into inferior position, their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligation and duty in Islam on every Muslim.” — Times Square car bomb terrorist Faisal Shahzad
“So step by step I became a religiously devout Muslim, Mujahid — meaning one who participates in jihad.” — Little Rock, Arkansas terrorist murderer Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad
“And now, after mastering the English language, learning how to build explosives, and continuous planning to target the infidel Americans, it is time for Jihad.” — Texas terrorist bomber Khalid Aldawsari.
Obama would dismiss all these as “extremists” who are not really Muslim at all and have nothing to do with Islam. Yet one also might get the impression that Islam is inherently violent from the authoritative sources in Sunni Islam, the schools of Sunni jurisprudence (madhahib):
Shafi’i school: A Shafi’i manual of Islamic law that was certified in 1991 by the clerics at Al-Azhar University, one of the leading authorities in the Islamic world, as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy, stipulates about jihad that “the caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…until they become Muslim or pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” It adds a comment by Sheikh Nuh Ali Salman, a Jordanian expert on Islamic jurisprudence: the caliph wages this war only “provided that he has first invited [Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians] to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya)…while remaining in their ancestral religions.” (‘Umdat al-Salik, o9.8).
Of course, there is no caliph today, unless one believes the claims of the Islamic State, and hence the oft-repeated claim that Osama et al are waging jihad illegitimately, as no state authority has authorized their jihad. But they explain their actions in terms of defensive jihad, which needs no state authority to call it, and becomes “obligatory for everyone” (‘Umdat al-Salik, o9.3) if a Muslim land is attacked. The end of the defensive jihad, however, is not peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims as equals: ‘Umdat al-Salik specifies that the warfare against non-Muslims must continue until “the final descent of Jesus.” After that, “nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus’ descent” (o9.8).
Hanafi school: A Hanafi manual of Islamic law repeats the same injunctions. It insists that people must be called to embrace Islam before being fought, “because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith.” It emphasizes that jihad must not be waged for economic gain, but solely for religious reasons: from the call to Islam “the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war.”
However, “if the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax [jizya], it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do.” (Al-Hidayah, II.140)
Maliki school: Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), a pioneering historian and philosopher, was also a Maliki legal theorist. In his renowned Muqaddimah, the first work of historical theory, he notes that “in the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.” In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with “power politics,” because Islam is “under obligation to gain power over other nations.”
Hanbali school: The great medieval theorist of what is commonly known today as radical or fundamentalist Islam, Ibn Taymiyya (Taqi al-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya, 1263-1328), was a Hanbali jurist. He directed that “since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God’s entirely and God’s word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.”
This is also taught by modern-day scholars of Islam. Majid Khadduri was an Iraqi scholar of Islamic law of international renown. In his book War and Peace in the Law of Islam, which was published in 1955 and remains one of the most lucid and illuminating works on the subject, Khadduri says this about jihad:
The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God’s law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world….The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state. (P. 51)
Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee, Assistant Professor on the Faculty of Shari’ah and Law of the International Islamic University in Islamabad. In his 1994 bookThe Methodology of Ijtihad, he quotes the twelfth century Maliki jurist Ibn Rushd: “Muslim jurists agreed that the purpose of fighting with the People of the Book…is one of two things: it is either their conversion to Islam or the payment of jizyah.” Nyazee concludes: “This leaves no doubt that the primary goal of the Muslim community, in the eyes of its jurists, is to spread the word of Allah through jihad, and the option of poll-tax [jizya] is to be exercised only after subjugation” of non-Muslims.
All this makes it clear that there is abundant reason to believe that Islam is indeed inherently violent. It would be illuminating if Obama or someone around him produced some quotations from Muslim authorities he considers “authentic,” and explained why the authorities I’ve quoted above and others like them are inauthentic. While in reality there is no single Muslim authority who can proclaim what is “authentic” Islam, and thus it would be prudent not to make sweeping statements about what “authentic Islam” actually is, clearly there are many Muslim who believe that authentic Islam is inherently violent.
One might also get the impression that Islam is inherently violent from these Qur’an verses:

2:191-193: “And slay them wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution is more grievous than slaying. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, slay them — such is the recompense of unbelievers, but if they give over, surely Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.”
4:34: “Men are the managers of the affairs of women, for Allah has made one superior to the another, and because they have expended of their property. Righteous women are therefore obedient, guarding the secret for Allah’s guarding. And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them. If they then obey you, look not for any way against them; Allah is All-high, All-great.”
4:89: “They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of Allah; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper.”
5:33: “This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement.”
5:38: “And the thief, male and female: cut off the hands of both, as a recompense for what they have earned, and a punishment exemplary from Allah; Allah is All-mighty, All-wise.”
8:12: “When thy Lord was revealing to the angels, ‘I am with you; so confirm the believers. I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them!”
8:39: “Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s entirely; then if they give over, surely Allah sees the things they do.”
8:60: “Make ready for them whatever force and strings of horses you can, to strike terror thereby into the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them that you know not; Allah knows them. And whatsoever you expend in the way of Allah shall be repaid you in full; you will not be wronged.”
9:5: “Then, when the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way; Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.”
9:29: “Fight those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not practice the religion of truth, even if they are of the People of the Book — until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.”
9:111: “Allah has bought from the believers their selves and their possessions against the gift of Paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill, and are killed; that is a promise binding upon Allah in the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Koran; and who fulfils his covenant truer than Allah? So rejoice in the bargain you have made with Him; that is the mighty triumph.”
9:123: “O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you; and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing.”
47:4: “When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads. So it shall be; and if Allah had willed, He would have avenged Himself upon them; but that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will not send their works astray.”
There are some tolerant verses in the Qur’an as well — see, for example, sura 109. But then in Islamic tradition there are authorities who say that violent passages take precedence over these verses. Muhammad’s earliest biographer, an eighth-century Muslim named Ibn Ishaq, explains the progression of Qur’anic revelation about warfare. First, he explains, Allah allowed Muslims to wage defensive warfare. But that was not Allah’s last word on the circumstances in which Muslims should fight. Ibn Ishaq explains offensive jihad by invoking a Qur’anic verse: “Then God sent down to him: ‘Fight them so that there be no more seduction,’ i.e. until no believer is seduced from his religion. ‘And the religion is God’s’, i.e. Until God alone is worshipped.”
The Qur’an verse Ibn Ishaq quotes here (2:193) commands much more than defensive warfare: Muslims must fight until “the religion is God’s” — that is, until Allah alone is worshipped. Ibn Ishaq gives no hint that that command died with the seventh century.
The great medieval scholar Ibn Qayyim (1292-1350) also outlines the stages of the Muhammad’s prophetic career: “For thirteen years after the beginning of his Messengership, he called people to God through preaching, without fighting or Jizyah, and was commanded to restrain himself and to practice patience and forbearance. Then he was commanded to migrate, and later permission was given to fight. Then he was commanded to fight those who fought him, and to restrain himself from those who did not make war with him. Later he was commanded to fight the polytheists until God’s religion was fully established.”
In other words, he initially could fight only defensively — only “those who fought him” — but later he could fight the polytheists until Islam was “fully established.” He could fight them even if they didn’t fight him first, and solely because they were not Muslim.
Nor do all contemporary Islamic thinkers believe that that command is a relic of history.
According to a 20th century Chief Justice of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Humaid, “at first ‘the fighting’ was forbidden, then it was permitted and after that it was made obligatory.” He also distinguishes two groups Muslims must fight: “(1) against them who start ‘the fighting’ against you (Muslims) . . . (2) and against all those who worship others along with Allah . . . as mentioned in Surat Al-Baqarah (II), Al-Imran (III) and At-Taubah (IX) . . . and other Surahs (Chapters of the Qur’an).” (The Roman numerals after the names of the chapters of the Qur’an are the numbers of the suras: Sheikh Abdullah is referring to Qur’anic verses such as 2:216, 3:157-158, 9:5, and 9:29.)
Here again, obviously there is a widespread understanding of the Qur’an within Islamic tradition that sees it, and Islam, as inherently violent. And we see Muslims who clearly understand their religion as being inherently violent acting upon that understanding around the world today, in Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Burma, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Israel, Nigeria and elsewhere. We can hope that those who embody the true, peaceful Islam that Obama assumes to exist come forward and work against the Muslims who believe in violence, instead of just issuing pro-forma condemnations. So far we have not seen that. On the contrary, we see reformers threatened and cowed into silence. The Moroccan activist Ahmed Assid condemned violence in Islam’s name and was immediately declared an apostate and threatened with death by Muslim clerics. If the Ahmed Assids of the world represent the true Islam that is not inherently violent, the message has not gotten through to all too many of their coreligionists.
We may hope it does someday. In the meantime, it is imperative to continue to speak about how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and supremacism, so as to alert all people of good will to the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, and its motives and goals. This is not indulging in hateful generalizations; it is simply to speak honestly and realistically about a threat all free people face. If we cannot speak about it, it will nonetheless keep coming, and catch us unawares.

Hope and Change




Hello Bernie


Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Long term vegetarian diet changes human DNA raising risk of cancer and heart disease

UK Telegraph ^ | Sarah Knapton 

Populations who have had a primarily vegetarian diet for generations carried a genetic mutation which raised risk of cancer and heart disease
Long term vegetarianism can lead to genetic mutations which raise the risk of heart disease and cancer, scientists have found.
Populations who have had a primarily vegetarian diet for generations were found to be far more likely to carry DNA which makes them susceptible to inflammation.
Scientists in the US believe that the mutation occured to make it easier for vegetarians to absorb essential fatty acids from plants.
But it has the knock-on effect of boosting the production of arachidonic acid, which is known to increase inflammatory disease and cancer. When coupled with a diet high in vegetable oils - such as sunflower oil - the mutated gene quickly turns fatty acids into dangerous arachidonic acid.
The finding may help explain previous research which found vegetarian populations are nearly 40 per cent more likely to suffer colorectal cancer than meat eaters, a finding that has puzzled doctors because eating red meat is known to raise the risk.
Researchers from Cornell University in the US compared hundreds of genomes from a primarily vegetarian population in Pune, India to traditional meat-eating people in Kansas and found there was a significant genetic difference.
“Those whose ancestry derives from vegetarians are more likely to carry genetics that more rapidly metabolise plant fatty acids,” said Tom Brenna, Professor of Human Nutrition at Cornell.
“In such individuals, vegetable oils will be converted to the more pro-inflammatory arachidonic acid, increasing the risk for chronic inflammation that is implicated in the development of heart disease, and exacerbates cancer.
“The mutation appeared in the human genome long ago, and has been passed down through the human family.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

US Military Families Ordered to Evacuate Turkey ^ | Mar 29, 2016 | Amy Bushatz and Richard Sisk 

U.S. military families have been ordered to evacuate bases in Turkey to keep to them safe from possible attacks, officials announced Tuesday.

Pentagon Press Secretary Peter Cook said the order to leave Turkey would affect about 670 of the total of 770 dependents in the country.

The 670 dependents are at the main Incirlik airbase and two other smaller bases at Izmir and Mugla, Cook said. The approximately 100 dependents who are being allowed to stay were with spouses assigned to Ankara, the Turkish capital, and Istanbul, which were considered safer postings, Cook said.

Cook did not give a timeline for when the dependents would leave but said "my understanding is that this will move very quickly."

The departures were not a response to the Brussels terror attacks last week in which an Air Force officer and four members of his family were wounded in the explosion at the Zaventem international airport, Cook said. "I don't believe this was specifically triggered by the Brussels attacks," Cook said.

"It's not because of any one action or specific threat," Cook said, but was instead a step taken "out of an abundance of caution."
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Enough With The Teddy Bears And Tears: It’s Time To Take Our Civilization Back

Breitbart ^ | 3/28/16 | Raheem Kassam 

Teddy bears, tears, candles, cartoons, murals, mosaics, flowers, flags, projections, hashtags, balloons, wreaths, lights, vigils, scarves, and more. These are the best solutions the Western world seems to come up with every few months when we are slammed by another Islamist terrorist attack. We are our own sickness.
Since the world learned of the dozens dead, hundreds injured, and hundreds of thousands affected by Monday’s attack on the NATO and European Union capital, we have seen an outpouring of what is commonly known as “solidarity”.
This word – most commonly associated with hard-left politics, trades union activism, socialism, and poseur indie rock bands – has come to mean very little in reality. In effect, “standing in solidarity” with someone now means that you have observed the situation, changed your Facebook profile picture accordingly, and patted yourself on the back.
And if like dead bodies Facebook profile pictures lost heat, it would be accurate to say that the Tricolores that adorned the social media profiles of many had hardly become cold before we were all changing the colours of the bands on the flags. From blue to black. From white to yellow. The blood red remains.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Yup, scenes like this will make muzzie terrorists sh!t in their panties in fear, wont they?

Actually, the ragheads probably derive more sexual gratification from images like these than they do from their goats. 

Frisco hospice owner urged nurses to overdose patients so they would die quicker, FBI says

Dallas Morning News ^ | 03/29/2016 | Jamie Knodel 

The owner of a Frisco medical company regularly directed nurses to overdose hospice patients with drugs such as morphine to speed up their deaths and maximize profits and sent text messages like, “You need to make this patient go bye-bye,” an FBI agent wrote in an affidavit for a search warrant obtained by NBC 5.
The executive, Brad Harris, founded the company, Novus Health Care Services, Inc., in July 2012, according to state records.
Novus’ office is on Dallas Parkway in Frisco.
No charges have been filed against Novus or Harris. Harris, 34, did not return messages left with a receptionist and at his Frisco home.
Harris, an accountant, told a nurse to overdose three patients and directed another employee to increase a patient’s medication to four times the maximum allowed, the FBI said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Stay There!




Terrorism Tango


JV & Varsity








Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Some of my best friends are Trump supporters

American Thinker ^ | March 28, 2016 | Oleg Atbashian 

Trump supporters are, perhaps, the only group of voters in this nation's history who have been so viciously and consistently maligned, and in such a coordinated manner, by both political parties. At the same time, not much is known about them, despite the recent spate of articles attempting to explain the phenomenon. The problem with that is that the authors admittedly don't know any of the Trump supporters themselves. Well, I happen to know quite a few of them personally.
Full disclosure: first, I can't vote because I'm not a U.S. citizen yet, despite my best and decades-long efforts -- but let's leave the immigration system's misplaced priorities for another day.
Second, I like to form my opinions about the candidates and their supporters independently, without taking advice from media pundits or Facebook messages from pro-Cruz acquaintances.
Third, I like both Cruz and Trump. I'm not as passionate about them as some; I'm merely pragmatic: I like anyone who can stop America's descent into socialism or, better yet, reverse the course entirely. I also realize that America has come to a point when having big ideas is no longer enough; in order to shake up the system and get the economy moving the next president must also be a bigger-than-life mover and shaker.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

California's $15/hour wage could help workers, cost jobs!

Associated Press ^ | Mar. 28, 2016 8:56 PM EDT | Don Thompson and Justin Pritchard 

A political deal to raise California’s minimum wage to a nation-leading $15 an hour could help some workers cope with the state’s crushing cost of living but also deprive other low-wage earners of jobs altogether, economists said Monday as Gov. Jerry Brown and other leaders touted what would be a landmark agreement.
California’s economy is larger than that of most countries, with a wide diversity of earners. While newly minted millionaires gentrify neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area, some Central Valley field hands lack access to clean water. A jump from the current $10 an hour spread over six years would affect millions. […]
On Monday, Brown touted the deal his administration struck with legislative and labor leaders as potentially historic, calling it a matter of economic justice. Under the proposal, which the Legislature has yet to approve, the minimum wage would rise gradually, reaching $15 by 2022. After that wages would rise with inflation, though in tough economic times the governor could delay increases. …
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Loretta Lynch presses courts to back off (minority)criminals!

WND ^ | 3/28/16 | Cheryl Chumley 

Attorney General Loretta Lynch issued a nine-page letter through her civil-rights division to municipal and state judges around the United States, warning them to ease off prosecution of criminals, particularly those of minority status, or else face loss of federal funding.
Specifically, she wants the 6,500 municipal level courts in the country to offer community service in lieu of jail time, or provide more “amnesty days” to those with outstanding warrants so they can pay a fee instead of serving behind bars, the New York Post reported.
The ‘Stop Hillary’ campaign is on fire! Join the surging response to this theme: ‘Clinton for prosecution, not president’
And the recommendation comes with a caveat: Those who fail to comply could face the same type of federal scrutiny that Ferguson, Missouri, local police and courts saw after the police shooting of a black teen. The officer was found by local and federal authorities to have acted in self-defense, but the attorney general’s office tasked the locals to change how they conducted some investigations and court hearings.
Lynch said she’s currently “evaluating discrimination complaints against several court systems,” the New York Post reported.
In the letter, Lynch’s civil-rights team also warns locals that policies that mandate arrests for failures to pay court fines and fees have an adverse “disparate impact” on blacks.
Colin Flaherty’s book, “Don’t Make the Black Kids Angry: The Hoax of Black Victimization and Those Who Enable It,” documents black crime in America and exposes how the media and politicians are willing partners in what the author calls “the greatest lie of our generation.”
“In court systems receiving federal funds, these practices may also violate Title VI of the Ci

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Is Trump Wrong About A Border Wall? One Stunning Chart Has The Answer ^ | 03/26/2016 | Jacob Bojesson 

Several European countries have erected fences to keep migrants out, and, according to the numbers, every case appears to have a large impact.
Hungary was a popular pathway for refugees on their way to Germany during the fall. When the daily illegal border crossings were at 7,000 per day, Prime Minister Viktor Orban decided to erect a fence along the border to Serbia and Croatia.
The result speaks for itself:
When the fence went up Oct. 17, the influx went down to 870 from 6,353 only a day earlier. Illegal border crossing were steadily below 40 per day throughout the rest of the month. The number picked up slightly in February, after migrants destroyed part of the fence, but it remains in the low hundreds.

Read more:

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

DeLay: DOJ Will Stall If FBI Recommends Hillary Indictment (The fix is on)

newsmax ^ | 3/28/16 | newsmax 

The Justice Department would stall any prosecution of Hillary Clinton until after the presidential election should the FBI recommend she be indicted for using a private email server as secretary of state, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay tells Newsmax TV.
"If the FBI recommends an indictment, the attorney general will appoint a special prosecutor. That gets this case all the way through the election," DeLay, a Texas Republican, said Monday on "The Steve Malzberg Show."
"That's what I think is going to happen [It would be for] stalling purposes. That's how you get it past the election."
The Los Angeles Times reported that the FBI is planning on interviewing Clinton and several of her aides as it continues its probe into her home server operation and whether using it for government business violated federal laws.
"What it says to me is they are getting very close to the end of their investigation. Usually what goes on is they do their investigation, they're ready to proceed, and then they go after the target and bring the target in and talk to them," DeLay said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Why did Liz Warren pick a fight with Trump now? (Cause her want-um be chief)

Legal Insurrection ^ | March 28, 2016 | William A. Jacobson 
Proving her worthiness for the throne if Hillary taken down by legal troubles.

Elizabeth Warren is on the, er, attack against Donald Trump, who slashed back by mocking Warren's false appropriation of Indian identity to try to advance her career.
The back and forth begs the real question, which is why did Warren decide to launch a tirade now against Trump?
Trump has been being Trump at least since last summer. If Warren wanted to go ballistic on him, there were plenty of earlier opportunities.

Senator Elizabeth Warren's harsh Twitter criticism of Donald Trump

My theory of Warren is that she would have crushed Hillary.
Warren must be kicking herself to see her mini-me, Bernie Sanders, making a good run of it. That could have been her.
People like Bill Maher were ready to kiss her ring.

But Warren didn’t have the guts to go it alone against the Clinton machine. Instead she would wait for Hillary to fall of her own weight from the email scandal, then swoop in to save the Party.
That plan ran afoul because when Hillary falls, Bernie will be there to lay claim to the throne. That’s why he soldiers on, to box out others who surely will try to butt in, such as Joe Biden. And Elizabeth Warren.
Holly Robichaud in The Boston Herald sees Warren’s opportunism perceptive in her attacks on Trump, Elizabeth Warren’s Trump attack hints at Dem Plan B:

… Will the Democratic National Committee run a candidate under indictment? It’s always a possibility, especially with Hillary’s ability to falsely blame the “right wing conspiracy” for the Clintons’ misdeeds.However, there are many who believe the DNC will replace Hillary at the convention if she is indicted.
Obviously, our U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren is hoping so. Why else would she attack Donald Trump last week?
Certainly Warren has seen other attackers, including the pope, lose the debate to Trump…. It took him only a nanosecond to retort that Warren faked Indian heritage to advance her career.
Warren wasn’t tweeting gibes at Trump to stand up for women or anybody else…. We are left to conclude that Warren is starting to position herself. Either she wants the top spot or to be Vice President Joe Biden’s running mate.

Warren had an opportunity to be the Democratic Nominee. Would have been a cakewalk.
Instead, she has to hope for a miracle — Hillary gets indicted or at least and FBI criminal referral.
And Warren’s ability that she is the only one tough enough to confront Republicans.

TOPICS: News/Current EventsPolitics/ElectionsUS: MassachusettsUS: New York
KEYWORDS: 2016electionbillmaherdemocratelection2016fauxahontasindictmentliberalismmassachusettsnewyorktrumpwarren

Me heap tough old battleaxe ... me pick-em fight with Blonde Eagle so me be Chief in White Teepee when Squaw with Cankles go to big house ... me like-em be first Injun president heap much! 

Obama's Unacceptable Love Affair With Communism ^ | March 29, 2016 | David Limbaugh 

Conservatives and other Obama critics are entitled to a big "I told you so," after Obama's stunning admission that he doesn't believe there's that much difference between communism and capitalism.
Actually, it's not that stunning to people paying attention. Many of us warned about Obama's Marxist sympathies before he was first elected president, and we've repeatedly pointed it out during his presidency. Obama was raised and mentored by communists and spent many years engaged in community organizing (radical leftist activism). He established himself as the most liberal member of the Senate. Yet our warnings were met with cries of extremism, irrationality and, of course, racism. I wonder what these scolds would say now.
After playing his fiddle in Cuba and paying homage to the romanticized Marxist Castro regime while Belgium was burning, Obama spoke to a group of young people in Argentina. He told them, essentially, that there isn't much difference between capitalism and socialism and that they "should be practical." He said: "You don't have to worry about whether it neatly fits into socialist theory or capitalist theory. You should just decide what works."
He praised President Raul Castro in Cuba for his country's universal health care and quality education. Please don't tell me you find that hard to believe, either.
Such extreme leftists as Obama are bound to ignore history and the mountains of evidence that render a verdict against socialism as a destroyer of prosperity and an enslaver and slayer of mankind. Their worldview compels them to advocate economic and political control over the masses for the ends they seek, and they shut themselves off from all information indicating that to exercise such control over markets prevents the very results they profess to seek.
Robert Bartley, late Wall Street Journal editor, said, "In general, 'the market' is smarter than the smartest of its individual participants." This was a modern restatement of Adam Smith's theories concerning the invisible hand of the market.
In "The Wealth of Nations," Smith wrote that an individual who "intends only his own gain" is "led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention." He added: "By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good."
The great Milton Friedman explained: "Smith's key insight was that both parties to an exchange can benefit and that, so long as cooperation is strictly voluntary, no exchange will take place unless both parties do benefit. No external force, no coercion, no violation of freedom is necessary to produce cooperation among individuals all of whom can benefit."
Smith, Friedman and Bartley agreed that free market competition benefits individuals and the society as a whole and that there is no way a command economy, even managed by the most brilliant and beneficent of human beings, can possibly bring about comparable results.
Faith in Marxism, communism and socialism is grounded in human pride and promoted by people who believe they can defy the forces of human nature and the way the world works. Despite their hubris, it is impossible for a group of economic planners, no matter how gifted, to assimilate and utilize the infinite data necessary to make an economy run efficiently. In a free market, prices, profits and losses work in ways planners can't.
Thomas Sowell, in "Basic Economics," tells us: "Prices are not just ways of transferring money. Their primary role is to provide financial incentives to affect behavior in the use of resources and their resulting products. Prices not only guide consumers, they guide producers as well. ... Producers cannot possibly know what millions of different consumers want." Sowell adds that losses are equally important to profits for economic efficiency because they "tell producers what to stop doing -- what to stop producing, where to stop putting resources, what to stop investing in. Losses force the producers to stop producing what consumers don't want."
Sowell notes that in allocating resources, command economies stifle the work of free market prices because in a command economy, prices are set not by supply and demand but by central planners. In other words, no matter how noble their goals, the planners lack the omniscience of market forces.
People with a modicum of common sense and basic fairness must acknowledge that among the reasons the United States has been uniquely prosperous is its free market system. They must also concede that socialism results in widespread poverty, misery and death. It has been estimated that in the 20th century, communist regimes in China, the Soviet Union, Cambodia, North Korea, Eastern Europe and elsewhere killed nearly 100 million people.
Yet our president is gallivanting about the globe telling young people and anyone else who'll listen that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between communism and capitalism.
This kind of pernicious thinking is what is leading to the impoverishment and destruction of the United States, and it must be defeated, which is why in November, we must elect a candidate who clearly understands the relationship among limited government, our liberties and prosperity. The one candidate who believes that our unalienable rights come from God and that they are preserved by the scheme of limited government enshrined in the U.S. Constitution is Sen. Ted Cruz.





Not at war?




Success Story


Dating Service




Who Won?


Money Pump


Bend Over


Sunday, March 27, 2016

Why so many voters are drawn to Donald Trump

Los Angeles Times ^ | March 26, 2016 | Steve Lopez 

The way the presidential campaign is shaping up, Ventura musician Jon Gindick may do something he's never done before.
"I've never voted for a Republican," the registered Democrat told me.
"I like Trump."
A waiter told me he thought Trump's trade restrictions would create more jobs at higher wages. A couple wearing matching red, white and blue shirts told me their healthcare costs had tripled under Obamacare — a program Trump says he'll shred.
To Gindick, Trump's remarks about criminals coming across the border were refreshingly honest, and not at all a condemnation of all immigrants or Latinos in general.
He thinks Trump's critics misrepresent him, that they're unfair in calling him a racist.
"I saw it as a huge lie being repeated by the GOP establishment and Democrats," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

13 Examples of Obama’s Jew Hatred ^ | 1/11/ 2016 

For someone whose feelings “are hurt” by charges of anti-Semitism, Barack Obama has sure surrounded himself with Jew-haters, honored anti-Semites, and declared policies that can be seen as anti-Jewish. Dozens of examples exist. For the sake of brevity, 13 are listed below:

1. Hiring anti-Semites like General Merrel McPeak. The 2008 Obama for President Co-Chair has an impressive record of blaming American foreign policy on the “Jewish Lobby.” When asked during an interview why there’s no peace in the Middle East and he said, “New York City. Miami. We have a large vote — vote, here in favor of Israel. And no politician wants to run against it.”
2. Hiring anti-Semite Zbigniew Brzezinski who warned about the power of the pro-Israel lobby buying congress.
3. Appointing anti-Semite Chas Freeman who blamed his resignation on the evil Israel lobby (a nicer way of saying Jewish lobby).
4. First Presidential Medal of Freedom honorees were anti-Semites Bishop Desmond Tutu and Mary Robinson. The nicest thing Bishop Desmond Tutu ever said about Jews was “People are scared in this country [the US], to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful.” Also that, “the Jews thought they had a monopoly on God.”
5. Mary Robinson presided over the “World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,” which turned into a non-stop hate-fest against Jews and Israel. The conference was so anti-Semitic that then Secretary of State Colin Powell walked out.
6. Buddy, tax evader, Al Sharpton led the anti-Semitic pogrom in Crown Heights and incited the anti-Semitic fire bombing of Freddy’s Fashion Mart in Harlem.
7. Advisor Valerie Jarrett gave the keynote address at an anti-Semitic ISNA conference, which included discussions on how key Obama aides are “Israeli,” proving Jews “have control of the world,” or how the Holocaust is punishment of Jews for being “serially disobedient to Allah.”
8. His second Department of Defense appointee Chuck Hagel believes in the nefarious “world wide Jewish conspiracy.” Hagel was once quoted saying, “The political reality is that… the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here.”
9. After Islamists attacked a Kosher supermarket in Paris one year ago, Obama first insisted it was a random act and not an anti-Semitic act.
10. Obama unilaterally broke a preexisting deal with Israel over its housing policy. 11. Last Friday presented another example of this after the U.S. State Department condemned Israel for allowing homes to be built for Jews to live in that were located west of the Jordan River.
12. Obama has repeatedly criticized Israel for allowing Jews to purchase homes (with real money) in East Jerusalem. Yet, Obama have not identified any other location around the world where he believes certain people should not be allowed to legally purchase homes with real money—except for Jews.
13. On a July 31 phone call Obama repeatedly stated that opponents of the Iran deal came from the same “array of forces that got us into the Iraq war,” namely, Jews. Lee Rosenberg of AIPAC questioned Obama’s statement, comparing people who object to the Iran deal to those who supported the invasion of Iraq, that many anti-Semites falsely claim the Jews pushed Bush into invading Iraq. Who can forget former prime minister Ariel Sharon’s strong opposition. Sharon urged Bush not to invade Iraq, arguing correctly that if Saddam were removed, “Iran, a far more dangerous player, will be rid of its principal enemy and free to pursue its ambitions of regional hegemony.”
There may be other reasons why Barack Obama surrounded himself with people who make anti-Semitic statements or lead anti-Semitic pogroms, honor people with a history of anti-Semitism, or make policy decisions that can easily be interpreted as anti-Semitic. Any one or two of the above could reasonably be ignored. Whether one believes Obama is an anti-Semite or not it, what cannot be argued against– is that far more than a “smidgen” of evidence exists revealing that this president has an issue with Jews.

New FBI Filings Reveal ‘Pending Investigation’ Into Clinton’s E-Mails is Far From Over ^ | March 26, 2016 | Chris White 

A pair of declarations submitted to a federal judge by the FBI late Friday in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit brought by Vice News reveal new details about the Bureau’s “pending investigation” into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server (“Clinton Server”) that tend to indicate the matter is far from over.
In December, Vice News filed a FOIA lawsuit against the FBI seeking to obtain information related to the Clinton Server, including:
1. Any and all emails and other records retrieved from the server, thumb drive, and any other electronic equipment obtained either directly or indirectly from Hillary Clinton (collectively and individually the “Clinton Server”) which has not already been made public; and
4. Any and all correspondence between any person within the FBI and any person within the U.S. Department of State regarding, relating to, or referencing the Clinton Server...

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Saturday, March 19, 2016

VIDEO: Vile leftist agitators target Trump

A recently released video documenting protesters that canceled a rally for Donald Trump last Friday is revealing a lot about the kind of folks campaigning against the Republican presidential frontrunner’s alleged message of hate.
The video, titled “Silencing Trump: Bill Ayers & The Fire From Below” starts with a montage of protestors repeatedly dropping the F-bomb against Trump, his supporters, and the camera man, interspersed with comments from a mob of mostly college students.
Radical left-wing domestic terrorist turned Chicago professor and Barack Obama ally Bill Ayers was also in attendance, and spoke about the movement he said is aimed at curbing hatred in America.
“I’ve never seen anything this big at the University of Illinois Chicago,” Ayers told the Rebel Pundit in an interview outside the UIC Pavilion before protests turned violent and organizers canceled the event last Friday.
“It’s huge,” Ayers said. “And it’s galvanized Latino students, black students, Muslim students and white students. And everybody feels like look, this is a university. We don’t need organized hatred to be spilling into our center.”
Scores of students toted Mexican flags and chanted through blow horns, many carrying signs likening Trump to Adolf Hitler.
“When the rich wage war,” one sign with a Hitler/Trump sketch read, “It’s the poor who die.”
The Rebel Pundit questioned several students about why they came out to shout down Trump’s supporters.
“What’s the most racist thing he’s said?” the camera man asked one student.
“Personally the one that hits me harder is the Mexican one – that all Mexicans are racist and that they’re criminals,” one girl told the camera, “because we’re not. We’re really not.”
“For him to generalize people like that, it’s not ok,” she said. “It pisses me the f*** off.”
Ayers said the “answer is to out argue it, to be smarter than it, to win over the people waiting in line to see him in a way that’s reasonable and honest and forceful.”video then cuts to protesters raging against those waiting to get into the rally, with one man pointing and screaming at the crowd: “F*** Trump!”
Trump supporters, meanwhile, stood quietly in line, many taking video of the protestors’ outlandish antics with their cell phones.
“What do you guys think of these protestors?” Rebel pundit asked a group of guys waiting in line.
Several simply shook their heads and laughed.
“It’s something,” one young man said.
The video also featured some characters who found very interesting ways to display their thoughts about Trump. One man was toting a handful of condoms filled with helium and decorated with the slogan “Drumpf 2016” and a slash through it.
“These are stop Drumpf 2016 balloons,” the man explained. “It’s pretty obvious … in the shape of a penis. It’s a 22-inch likeness of him. Notice – no balls. If there was one ball it would be Hitler, but there are no balls on this one, so that way it would be Trump, or Drumpf, excuse me.”
The vast majority of the protestors questioned in the video said they support Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, though one woman said she’s a Hillary Clinton supporter.
“Trump has galvanized a feeling that there’s something loose in the land, and that something is dangerous,” Ayers told the Rebel Pundit. “It’s absolutely anti-American and it has to be opposed.”
The Revolutionary Communist Party USA was also in attendance, as were the Chicago Socialists and other far left fringe groups who chanted relentlessly: “No justice, no peace.”
“He’s in there organizing a fascist mob that’s ready to fight. They’re hungry,” one Communist Party USA member said, pointing to the UIC Pavilion. “We got to deal with that.”
In another exchange, an elderly white woman protestor came to “save” some students who were being interviewed by the Rebel Pundit before proceeding to rail against him for his “white privilege.”
The woman got out her iPhone and put it in the camera man’s face, then questioned him about his name, where he’s from.
“Nobody has to save you because you’re a white man who gets to do whatever he wants to in this space,” the woman lectured. “No, you do not have permission to go around video taping women of color and acting like you can do that and the rest of us can’t.
“Aren’t you quite aware that by holding that video camera on me you are surrounded by your privilege. Take your privilege somewhere else please. Alright? Because your privilege is not welcome here,” she continued.
“So unless you are here to dismantle your privilege, please find somewhere else to go.”
The video cut to a similarly vulgar and profanity filled protest outside of Trump Tower in New York City. Several protestors there acknowledged their language was inappropriate for children passing on the street, but said they don’t really care.
Others chanted and clapped along to revolutionary war songs.
“It’s time for the people to defend themselves,” one woman said.
The video ends with Ayers explaining that the anti-Trump and Black Lives Matter crowds are making history in the “struggle for social justice.”
“I think the important thing to take away is that, you know, you can look back and even a glance at history tells you elections don’t actually change the course of history,” he said. “What changes the course of history is popular movements from below.
“What this represents is fire from below, that’s why it’s important,” Ayers continued. “It’s not resolved by a candidate, it’s resolved through an ongoing, continuing struggle for social justice.”
Sponsored by Revcontent

Friday, March 18, 2016

Will the Military Answer Hillary's Call in 2016?

American Thinker ^ | March 18, 2016 | Chris J. Krisinger 

When Barack Obama kicked off his first presidential campaign in 2008 as a junior first-term senator from Illinois, it became a political imperative for the greenhorn candidate to obtain the endorsements of retired – but still influential – senior military officers to apply a veneer of credibility to his objectively thin national security credentials. Gaining those same endorsements could again be an engaging subplot to this year's election theater, particularly for the 2008 understudy, Hillary Clinton.

At a Chicago news conference in March 2008, then-senator Obama rolled out ten retired admirals and generals to counter claims by his opponent, Senator Hillary Clinton, that he had not "crossed the threshold to serve as commander in chief." During that flag-draped event, several, such as "Tony" McPeak, the former Air Force chief of staff and a four-star general, stepped forward to offer assurances that they were "comfortable with [Obama's] ability to lead the military." The event was to counter Senator Clinton's claim that she could better "answer the 3 a.m. phone call" that had entered the 2008 presidential race lexicon.

Once Obama was the Democrat nominee, with two wars raging and national security a hot-button issue, those endorsements became indispensable for the run against Republican Senator John McCain, the Navy veteran, Vietnam prisoner of war, and defense hawk. The Obama campaign would eventually exploit the names of more than 70 retired generals and admirals from all four services to burnish his national security qualifications in the eyes of American voters.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Chelsea Clinton reveals her mom thinks it is ‘important’ to extend Obamacare to illegal aliens!

American Thinker ^ | March 18, 2016 | Thomas Lifson 

More free stuff for people who violate our immigration laws! 

Hillary Clinton and her daughter have teed up a ball for the Republican nominee, whether Trump or Cruz, to hit 400 yards down the fairway. Just over a week ago, Hillary reversed her former position and declared:

“I will not deport children,” she said after moderator Jorge Ramos pressed her multiple times on the issue. “I would not deport children. I do not want to deport family members either, Jorge.”
So any family that can ante-up plane fare for the kids and one or more parent to JFK, Miami, Los Angeles or any other international terminal, or that can sneak across the border, is here to stay, once Hillary becomes president. And in addition to all the other goodies this country bestows upon people with low incomes, now the $600k a year former NBC correspondent Chelsea Clinton has declared that Obamacare will be extended to illegals.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Anti-Trump movement really ‘professional agitators’ (Communists) ^ | March 18, 2016 | Fossten 

Don’t be fooled” by the numerous supposed grass-roots groups plotting to protest Donald Trump across the nation, declares Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter Aaron Klein in a radio interview on Friday.

Klein says the var­i­ous sup­posed anti-Trump orga­ni­za­tions are really a “witches brew” of radical-left “pro­fes­sional agi­ta­tors” seek­ing the “down­fall of the U.S. cap­i­tal­ist sys­tem” and its replace­ment with a so-called social­ist utopia.

These are all dif­fer­ent arms of the rad­i­cal left octo­pus,” Klein told Bre­it­bart News Daily, the radio pro­gram hosted by Bre­it­bart News Exec­u­tive Chair­man Stephen K. Ban­non. Klein was refer­ring to the anti-Trump protest move­ment. “This is not about race,” added Klein. “This is not about immi­gra­tion reform. This is not even about Trump…these are fronts.”
He con­tin­ued:
It is the who’s who, the witches brew of the same rad­i­cal left groups that have mor­phed into other groups and mor­phed into other groups.  Whether it’s Black Lives Mat­ter, whether it’s, whether it’s…the alpha­bet soup of the rad­i­cal left it’s all the same…. These are pro­fes­sional agi­ta­tors.
Don’t be fooled by the hun­dreds of groups now, over a hun­dred behind this. Because it’s the rad­i­cal left. What they want is not anti-fascist, anti this, anti that. They want the down­fall of the U.S. cap­i­tal­ist sys­tem. That’s what they want. They want to bring it down.  It’s the com­mu­nist rev­o­lu­tion all over again. Except instead of Stu­dents for a Demo­c­ra­tic Soci­ety in the 60’s, it’s a coa­les­cence of the next gen­er­a­tion in Black Lives Mat­ter, Occupy and these other groups.”
On Wednes­day, Klein reported at Bre­it­bart that with lit­tle fan­fare and almost no news media atten­tion, some of the same rad­i­cal groups involved in shut­ting down Don­ald Trump’s Chicago rally last week are plot­ting a mass civil dis­obe­di­ence move­ment to begin next month.
They intend to march across the East Coast in order to spark a “fire that trans­forms the polit­i­cal cli­mate in Amer­ica.”
Con­tinue read­ing…

Bright Side






Thursday, March 17, 2016

GOP leaders meet over possible third party run against Trump

Arutz Sheva ^ | 17/3/16 | David Rosenberg 

After Donald Trump swept four of Tuesday’s five state primaries, party bigwigs are set to meet on Thursday to lay out a plan to derail the frontrunner’s path to the nomination.
According to Politico, the meeting was organized by former Bush administration official Bill Wichterman, conservative activist Erick Erickson, and Bob Fischer, a prominent GOP fundraiser and bundler.
Aside from coordinating efforts to prevent Trump’s nomination, conservative activists and party leaders will also mull an option that was unthinkable just half a year ago: breaking with the Republican Party and launching an independent, third party bid for the White House.
The idea of a third party conservative bid was first seriously broached in February when Republican donors called for research into the feasibility of such a scheme.
A memo produced by the conservative polling firm Data Targeting in late February was publicized by Politico, revealing research results indicating that “it is possible to mount an independent candidacy, but [it] will require immediate action”.
According to exit polls from Tuesday’s vote in critical battleground states, a third party run may enjoy wide backing among Republican voters.
A total of 39% of GOP voters in Florida, Illinoi, Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio said that they would seriously consider backing a third party if Trump became the nominee. And a full 27% told pollsters that they would never vote for Trump under any circumstances, even if he won the nomination.
While the Republican Party is edging closer to a split, Democratic voters are also expressing frustration with frontrunner Hillary Clinton. According to last week’s NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, 33% of Sanders supporters would never vote for Clinton in a general election.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

War Room