The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Month: July 2014

Save the Children?

Diana West, author of American
Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character
, delivers a one-two
punch in her July 25th syndicated article, “Israel
and the U.S.: Whose Survival Instinct is Stronger?
The subject is the use of children by
terrorists in Gaza as “human shields,” and the use by President
Barack Obama of children as “invasion shields” at the U.S. and
Mexican border.
Terrorists and Obama lie; children die.
Children have been used as a Trojan Horse
for all sorts of statist and collectivist initiatives: to ban smoking, to ban
guns, to ban obesity, to ban Barbie Dolls and other “dangerous” toys,
and so on. But West discusses the nearly unprecedented use of children as
weapons of war in the Middle East and
in the U.S.  As she describes the
phenomena:
There’s something
darkly coincidental in the fact that the latest weapon to be deployed against
the survival instinct of both Israel and the United States is an alleged “heartlessness”
when it comes to children.
Most stories appearing in the MSM in the
U.S. and overseas are nearly maniacal in their focus on the “civilian
casualties” of “Palestinians” in Gaza as a result of Israel’s
campaign against Hamas, with “personal” stories accompanied by
photographs of devastated streets and homes, sorrowful pictures of Gazan
children sitting in the rubble, and even faked photographs of supposedly dead
children, or second-hand, recycled faked photographs used in Syria.
Is Hamas’s use of children as “human
shields” unprecedented? No. Hitler, when he began to run out of adults to
fight the Allies, filled his shrinking armies with adolescents and boys. Japan
counted on women and children to fight the expected invasion by Americans, with
guns, if available, with bamboo sticks, if necessary. Mao employed uncounted
children to enforce, by violence and force, his “cultural
revolution.” Islamic jihadists have employed children to don suicide vests
and blow themselves up among Jews and American soldiers. So, the “human
shield” tactic isn’t new.
But all that is conveniently forgotten by
the MSM. It’s easy to decide whether that forgetfulness is a symptom of a
short-term memory or deliberate repression. It’s deliberate repression.
Discussing an article in the London
Telegraph about Israel’s alleged war crimes, West writes that the Telegraph
headline is not untypical: “Israel’s offensive in Gaza has ‘killed more
children than fighters,’ say human rights groups. Israel has been accused of
waging ‘war on the children’ of Gaza …”
 No mention in the article, however, of Gaza’s
purposeful, strategic use of “human shields,” which leads to such civilian
casualties. No mention of the directive from the Hamas-controlled Ministry of
the Interior instructing civilians to remain in their homes on receipt of
advance warnings from Israel to vacate before a military attack, as the
Washington Free Beacon first reported. No mention that despite building
networks of military tunnels, Gaza authorities neglected to build any bomb
shelters for civilians! No mention of Gaza’s use of schools and other civilian
sites to store rockets and other military material, and of its use of hospitals
as Hamas command centers, and other civilian sites to store rockets and other
military material, and of its use of hospitals as Hamas command centers.
It’s the children who must be spared injury
or death. That’s the unspoken moral imperative. Never mind that
“Palestinian” children are taught to hate Jews and Israel and are
indoctrinated in Hamas run schools (which succeeded the PLO’s and Fatah’s
schools) from the moment they can read and even tote an AK47. West continues
excoriating the London Telegraph article:
No, the story is
tightly focused on Israel’s supposed “war on children.” This libel is tweeted,
screamed and news-anchor-intoned into poisonous propaganda designed to sap the
life from Israel’s survival instinct, or at least alienate her supporters. In
the stage-managed furor, the pressure on the Jews of Israel builds: Stop defending
your borders, your people and your nation. Stop everything and “save the
children of Gaza.”
Only emotion to the
point of frenzy bursts into such agitprop, but it is vital to note that the
emotion showing through is hatred for Jews, not love for children. If it were
the latter, we would see rage directed at the society that steeps its young in
the Jew-hatred of jihad and then turns them into “martyrs” – not at the Jewish
society seeking to protect its people, young and old, and, at far too much risk,
Gaza’s as well.
The MSM is largely successful in stirring
up demonstrations of hate and even a pogrom in France, comprised of mobs of
Muslims and Leftards. Truth to these people is not “optional” – it is
unwelcome because without Jews to hate, they are purposeless, empty manqués.
The Leftards among the Muslims and who are vehemently anti-Israel protesters,
are basically malign Mortimer
Snerds
. And that’s a “kind” appraisal of their character and
mental equipment.
Hamas, it seems, is such a great valuer of
children that it employs them to build the underground matrix of tunnels Hamas
had planned to use to launch mass
murder
against the men, women, and children in settlements and towns
bordering Gaza come the Jewish holiday in September. On July 25th, Tia
Goldenberg of Business Insider ran a story about the complex, “Hamas’
Massive Network of Underground Tunnels Is a Military Game-Changer
.”
A network of
tunnels Palestinian militants have dug from Gaza to Israel — dubbed “lower
Gaza” by the Israeli military — is taking center stage in the latest war
between Hamas and Israel. Gaza’s Hamas rulers view them as a military game
changer in its conflict with Israel. The Israeli military says the tunnels pose
a serious threat and that destroying the sophisticated underground network is a
key objective of its invasion of Gaza….
Gaza has two sets
of tunnels — those reaching Egypt and those reaching Israel.
The underground
passages to Egypt are meant to bypass a border blockade on Gaza that was
tightened by Israel and Egypt after Hamas seized the territory in 2007. The
tunnels provide an economic lifeline and are used to deliver building supplies,
fuel, consumer goods, and even cattle and cars.
In some of those
tunnels, Gaza militants received weapons and cash from their patrons abroad,
particularly Iran. Egypt has destroyed virtually all of the tunnels over the
past year, driving Hamas — which was taxing the smuggled imports — into a
severe financial crisis.

 The story goes on to describe how the
tunnels are used to stock rockets, anti-tank rockets, and other arms, how they
have their own maintenance shops, and how they are interconnected with
cross-tunnels.
Hamas also moved
many of its rocket launching sites and storage sites underground, making it
more difficult for Israel to target them. Since the current round of
Israel-Hamas fighting began on July 8, Gaza militants have fired more than
2,000 rockets at Israel and repeatedly tried to sneak into Israel through
tunnels.
And just where, geographically, is this
tunnel complex located? In a treeless no-man’s land between Israel and Gaza?
Think again.
Israel says Hamas
has dug dozens of tunnels, linking them to one another as well as to rocket
manufacturing sites, maintenance facilities, launch sites and command and
control centers. It says the tunnels are meant to facilitate mass attacks on
Israelis as well as kidnappings, a tactic that Hamas has used in the past….
Soldiers have
uncovered 31 tunnels in the current round of fighting, the military said
Thursday.
Palestinian
militants trying to sneak into Israel through the tunnels have been found with
tranquilizers and handcuffs, an indication that they “intended to abduct
Israelis,” according to the military.
“Hamas has dug
terrorist tunnels under hospitals, mosques, schools, homes, to penetrate our
territory, to kidnap and kill Israelis. Now, in the face of such wanton
terrorism, no country could sit idly by,” Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu told visiting U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon this week.

So, you would probably conjure up a picture of “resistance fighters
against the occupiers” sweating away carving out tunnels and risking their
lives in possible cave-ins and the like, in the spirit of 1963’s “The Great
Escape
.” Wrong picture.
The tunnels are largely built by…children.
Myer Freimann’s July 25th
article in The Tablet, “Hamas
Killed 160 Palestinian Children to Build Terror Tunnels
,” gives us the
details.
…Israel cites the need to stop Hamas from firing thousands of rockets at
its own children, who are being forced to live in bomb shelters, as well as the
need to eliminate the tunnels that Hamas dug into Israel in order to carry out
terror attacks against Israelis. One tunnel opening was found underneath an
Israeli kindergarten.
But who built those tunnels? The answer is Hamas, of course—using some of
the same children who are now trapped under fire in Gaza.  The Institute for Palestine Studies published a detailed report on Gaza’s Tunnel Phenomenon in
the summer of 2012. It reported that tunnel construction in Gaza has resulted
in a large number of child deaths.
“At least 160 children have been killed in the tunnels, according to
Hamas officials.”
Only 160? Doubtless that figure is vastly
underestimated. Considering that Hamas places absolutely no value on human life
– most particularly not on the lives of the “Palestinians” compelled
to act as “human shields” – and taking into account Hamas’s record of
lying and falsifying data, the number probably runs into more hundreds.
The author, Nicolas
Pelham, explains that Hamas uses child laborers to build their terror tunnels
because, “much as in Victorian coal mines, they are prized for their nimble
bodies”.
President Barack Obama (and please know
that I hate having to extend the courtesy of an official designation to the
nihilist scumbag) has now demanded an “unconditional ceasefire”
between Israel and Hamas – most especially for Israel to stop its
tunnel-eradicating operations – and talk, talk, talk while Hamas resupplies
itself through smuggling and more financial aid sent to it by the U.S. and
Europe. Read the whole sorry, hackles-raising story in Daniel Greenfield’s
FrontPage article of July 27th, “Obama:
“Immediate, Unconditional” Surrender of Israel to Hamas
.” If
you are looking for a model of thuggish, unapologetic truculence, look no
further than Barack Obama.
Speaking of tunnels…..
Diana West next turns to the
“unconditional cessation” of stopping Obama’s “invasion by
invitation” of thousands of Mexican and Central American
“immigrants” across the U.S.-Mexican border.
Admittedly, there
are great differences between Israel’s plight and our own. For one thing, the
Israelis are more fortunate in having a government that actually wants to
protect its people from invaders. Israel enforces its own border, having
fortified it with a fence. Now, it fights for its inviolability. Our
government, meanwhile, has left our border effectively open, even after 9/11,
and has demonstrated no interest in re-establishing national sovereignty.
That said, there
are similarities to note in the political attacks on Americans who hope to
repulse what they see as deathblows to our remnant republic coming out of the
“border crisis.” Anyone worried about the nullification of the southern border;
the accelerating usurpation of dictatorial powers by the president; the perils
to national security and public safety of open borders; the perils, also, to
the survival of our English-speaking culture rooted mainly in Europe, is
excoriated in the public square for having no “humanity.” Just like Israelis,
such “mean-spirited” Americans must hate children, too, because this is all
about “immigrant kids” in need, right? No – but that’s the dominant narrative.
Such a narrative
tells us that the only “humane” solution to the “crisis” is asylum for “the
kids” (and throw in their gang-banger brothers, felon-uncles and whoever else
is leaving those prayer rugs on the border). Talk of “rule of law,” and
“deportation” is “racist.” Talk of already overstretched American towns where
the social fabric has ripped under the stress of refugee resettlement, talk of
local public school systems broken by the extraordinary demands of supporting
impoverished, illiterate alien populations, is the talk of the “xenophobe.”
Again, it’s the children. An altruist code of sacrificing one’s
values for the needy, for the impoverished – for illiterate alien adults and
their children, or even for “unaccompanied” alien children – is what
is fueling the government’s campaign to swamp our culture and population. To oppose
this unconstitutional program is to earn the foul smears of racism and
xenophobia.
I stress altruism here because no one else seems to want to challenge it. It’s
a Christian ethic, and a Jewish one, as well. It has been compartmentalized as
the default morality by countless people who live otherwise rational,
productive lives. And it is killing this country as a tool in the hands of this
country’s enemies – in and out of political office – here and overseas, who
expect Americans to do the “decent” thing and allow themselves and
their values to be sacrificed to the greater good of the Zero. They are
counting on American “decency” to make their plans work. And as their
plans are implemented, our enemies snicker on- and off-mike, because they are
vile, drooling nihilists. “Ozero,” a popular nickname for Obama, fits
his nihilist policies perfectly.
“Humanity,” in the parlance of
the committed altruists, is the will to sacrifice one’s values.
What becomes clear
is that such “humanity” is only for the foreign-born. Such “humanity,” such
concern, is never expressed for our own people – the Americans who, far from TV
news studios and government offices, live with and support the aliens and
refugees, young and old, in many of America’s less affluent cities and
hardscrabble towns.
And perhaps that’s
another difference between the Israeli and the American predicament. Israel
still prizes the lives of its citizens very highly – not above all, as we see
in their all-too-costly efforts to avoid civilian casualties (an effort the
U.S. military also makes at similar high cost). But I can’t say the same for
America.
Obama’s actions are definably treasonous,
and a violation of his oath of office.
Who are the allies of Obama’s invasion by
invitation? Corrupt Central American and South American governments – and the
drug cartels. The drug cartels have burrowed probably hundreds of miles of tunnels
from Mexico into the U.S., chiefly to smuggle drugs into the country.
On April 4th, The London
Telegraph also ran a story on another kind of tunnel, the drug cartel tunnels,
Drug
smuggling tunnels with rail systems discovered under US border with Mexico
.”
 
Tunnels
used for the transportation of drugs, linking warehouses in Tijuana, Mexico,
and the Otay Mesa area of San Diego and including rail systems, the sixth and
seventh found in the area in the last four years….
Two
drug-smuggling tunnels with rail systems stretching hundreds of yards across
the US-Mexico border were discovered by law enforcement officials, and a
73-year-old woman was charged with helping run one operation, federal
authorities said Friday.
No
contraband was found in connection with the tunnels, which linked warehouses in
Tijuana, Mexico, and the Otay Mesa area of San Diego, according to a statement
from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations.
The authorities know only about the tunnels
they’ve discovered, which are also used to smuggle people into the country. To judge
by the pictures in the preceding links, it would be easy to funnel numberless
terrorists into the country in the cartel’s tunnels.  There is a rumor that some cartels have sealed
deals with Hamas and other Islamic terrorist organizations to help them
smuggled jihadists into the U.S. Doubtless many Islamic terrorists have openly
crossed the border posing as Mexicans or other Latino “refugees.”
West ends her column with:
Our government
doesn’t enforce our border – its basic charge – and it is frantically engaged
in a vigorous program of what I can only describe as population replacement. We
seem to be poised before an unprecedented, anarchic demographic shift bringing
large swaths of Central and South Americans into the USA – and the federal
government seems to be doing everything it can to enable the shift and make it
permanent. My late father ruefully predicted the U.S. would one day become the
northern tip of South America. I don’t know if he thought it would happen so
quickly.
Who would have
imagined, though, that the existence of Israel, surrounded by Islamic enemies
sworn to its annihilation, could in some ways seem more assured than our own?
Undoubtedly, most Americans want America’s
sovereignty preserved as a distinct nation, and the border closed to the Obama-instigated
invasion of Third World foreign nationals – most of whom will choose to remain
“foreign nationals” yet expect to be bequeathed the rights and privileges
of certified Americans, as the Muslims have demanded. Most Americans, including
Latinos who underwent an arduous citizenship process (such as the patriotic
Cubans) want America to survive as America.
West’s point is that before we can save any children, America must save itself
from the depredations of our own government.

Safe
the children? Whose?

The Outer Limits of Censorship

We want to control what you read,
see, and hear, so very much.
I couldn’t have asked for a better lead-in
for this column than Hillary “I Wannabe Prez and Order You All About and
Make You Eat Your Veggies” Clinton’s complaints about three anti-Clinton
books that are making her Hard Choices eat their dust in sales. Clearly, the
pseudo-autobiography of all her non-accomplishments is destined overload the
remainder tables of bookstores and the shelves of book warehouses, because its sales
are so dismal
.
I do not know the quality of the three
books critical of the Clanton
Gang
– excuse me, the Clinton Clan – but even a book of Clinton caricatures
or of political cartoons without text would be preferable to reading the
ghost-written mush of Hard Choices. (I
have read excerpts of it – yawners.)
Or perhaps she deserves a book in which
Hillary moderates a panel of would-be mentors in the acquisition of political
power: Darth
Vader
, Josef Stalin, Vladimir Lenin, Pol Pot, FDR, Otto von Bismarck, Adolf
Hitler, and Hubby, with her fielding leading questions from an audience of one.
As for her potential for censorship, see my article, “The
OIC Organizes for Censorship
” from December 2013.
Clinton spared us her spittle and let a
spokesman express his anger over the anti-Clinton books. Alexander Marlow,
writing for Breitbart,
reported on July 25th :
The First Family
Detail
by
Ronald Kessler, set for release next month, will join Clinton, Inc. by
the Weekly Standard’s Daniel Halper and Blood Feud by Ed Klein on
bookshelves. Yesterday we reported that Clinton,
Inc.
has shot up the charts and now both Halper and Klein’s books are outselling
Hillary Clinton’s recent memoir Hard Choices
.
“With Klein, Halper
and Kessler, we now have a Hat Trick of despicable actors concocting trashy
nonsense,” Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said in an interview with
the Washington Examiner
. “Their behavior should neither be
allowed nor enabled, and legitimate media outlets who know with every fiber of
their beings that it is completely made up should not get down in the gutter
with them.”
What does he mean
“not allowed”? The interview doesn’t detail any specific behavior that drew
Team Hillary’s ire beyond the simple act of writing a book. Without the benefit
of full context, it appears as though Hillary’s flack is suggesting the books
be banned. At a minimum he is imploring the overwhelmingly pro-Clinton
mainstream press to freeze out these authors and prevent their ideas and
findings from being discussed on the media stage. 
That’s the lead-in, and an appropriate one,
because if we’re going to discuss censorship, this news is of vastly more importance. It’s news that Hillary the
Harridan would welcome because it would help her books sales.
It’s nothing less than a stealthy move by
the government to regulate book publishing. Thank you, Hillary, for the
overture. Fox News ran a story on July 23rd by Judson Berger, “FEC
Chairman warns book publishers at risk of regulation at heated meeting.

The Republican
chairman of the Federal Election Commission warned Wednesday that his agency
colleagues could try to regulate book publishers, during a heated session over
a forthcoming book by GOP Rep. Paul Ryan. 
During the meeting,
the FEC declined to definitively spare book publishers from the reach of
campaign finance rules. 
This triggered a
clash between Republican and Democratic members, with Chairman Lee Goodman
warning that the deadlock could represent a “chill” for
constitutional free-press rights. 
Paul Ryan’s book, The
Way Forward
, by the way, is not about the virtues of capitalism,
freedom, and freedom of speech. It is about a Republican plan to perpetuate the
welfare state. See The Patriot Post’s revealing review of it here. This makes the proposed
squashing of the book all the more ironic.
Ryan was doing booksignings
in Wisconsin and other states during an election cycle. That’s an FEC
prohibition, because Ryan’s book questions the policies of his opponents.
At issue
during the meeting
was a book by Rep. Ryan, R-Wis., being published by
Grand Central Publishing. Goodman and other GOP members of the commission
wanted the FEC to affirm that the book and its publisher are exempt from FEC
regulation under what’s known as the “media exemption” — the same
exemption that typically lets newspaper editorials, television channels and
other outlets say what they want about political figures without worrying about
campaign finance laws.  Goodman argues that book publishers are entitled
to the same rights. 
The
commission did clear the Ryan book under a separate, more limited exemption.
But they could not
muster the four votes necessary to do what Goodman and other Republican members
wanted. [Italics mine]
“I think
that’s unfortunate,” Goodman said during the meeting, even raising the
specter of book-banning. “We have effectively asserted regulatory
jurisdiction over a book publisher.” 
What were the Democrats’ objections to the
exemption?
Democratic members
of the committee, though, were quick to downplay Goodman’s complaints as a
technical quibble. Commissioner Ellen Weintraub noted that the Ryan book
was still going forward unencumbered by FEC regulations. She said the public
probably doesn’t care “which exemption we use,” and accused Goodman
of using “overheated language.” 
“That doesn’t
mean that we’re banning books, that doesn’t mean that we’re regulating
books,” she said. 
Yes,, darling, it does. If a burglar is
using a lock-pick to break into your home, it means that he intends to rob you
but hasn’t quite jimmied the pins and tumblers. That he hasn’t yet broken in is
irrelevant. The intent is obvious. He’s not there practicing how to break into
his own home should he ever lose his keys. The FEC is in partnership with the
MSM in an unholy alliance.
And no one, neither Republican nor
Democrat, questioned the existence of the FEC, a harpy of the Bipartisan Campaign
Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA)
. Goodman and Weintraub sit on the FEC. Clearly,
they believe that it’s a legitimate vehicle for policing speech.
Remember that the BCRA
is indeed bipartisan, sponsored and lobbied for by Senators
John McCain (R-AZ) and Russell Feingold (D-WI
).  Chairman Goodman of the FEC ought to have
said, “It’s a shame this organization exists at all. It doesn’t and hasn’t
boded well for the First Amendment. We can only go downhill from here” –
to selective censorship of books and ads that may appear during political
campaigns, regardless of the state or other venue, political activism on the
part of individuals donating to candidates’ campaigns, and of spoken speech
itself.
Which, of course, is the slide to
full-scale censorship, whenever the government wishes to impose it and thinks
it can get away with it without anyone noticing.
But the government isn’t the only entity
complicit in the trend to suppressing or regulating information speech in any
form. There is our Left-dominated news media. Scott Whitlock, in his July 24th
Media Research Center article, “Amid
Deluge of Foreign Crises, Network News Shuts Out Obama Critics
.”
Over the last 15
days, the world has been rocked by two troubling and growing international
crises: the shootdown of a civilian airliner over the Ukraine; and the intense
fighting between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. While the three evening
newscasts have offered considerable coverage of the unfolding events, CBS, NBC
and ABC have made almost no attempt to evaluate the performance of Barack
Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry or the administration generally, and
critics of the administration have been ignored….
It’s not as though
Americans were unified in appreciation and approval of Obama’s reaction to the
attack on the Malaysian jet or the violence in Gaza. The President received a
considerable amount of criticism from Republicans and conservatives for attending
Democratic fundraisers just hours after almost 300 airline passengers were
killed in a missile strike. 
Yet, viewers
wouldn’t know it from the July 17 NBC Nightly News, ABC’s World News
or the CBS Evening News. NBC reporter Chris Jansing blandly parroted,
“I asked if there was any consideration of not attending fund-raisers
tonight. A senior White House official said, simply, ‘we are sticking with the
schedule.'” 
No, if Obama broke his schedule of
appearances at fundraisers and golf courses and during a Martha’s Vineyard and
visits to pool halls and burger joints to attend to international crises, never
mind his invasion by invitation by Mexico’s and Central America’s Third World
castoffs, criminals, and illiterates, people might think he’s inconsistent and
unreliable. What would that do to his spotless image of integrity? The MSM must
not contribute to any sullying of his reputation, however disgraceful that
reputation may be. So, we won’t discuss his policy failures at home and abroad.
And when Hillary makes up her mind to run
for the Democratic nomination after her disastrous showing in the book
marketplace, they’ll do her the same favor. After all, documenting her growth
from a skinny, geeky-looking
coed
to a grasping, distaff version of Jabba
the Hutt will only dispel the image of her as a benevolent despot who only
wants to “do good.” Just like her soul-mate, Bill.
Cue “Outer Limits” theme
and narrator:
There is nothing wrong with your newspaper, book,
television set, or news report. Do not question what you see and hear. Do not
attempt to find the truth. We are
controlling the information flow. We
determine the truth.  If we wish to make it louder, we will raise the volume and numb your
brain. If we wish to make it softer,
we will tune it to a whisper, or not
transmit anything at all and you will not know that anything important happened.
We will
regulate the content and when it appears. We
can bias the information, make it flutter, and cause your eyes to cross. We can change the focus to a soft blur,
or sharpen it to crystal clarity, or simply blank out the information if it is
not fit to print or broadcast or otherwise does not comply with our vetted
information standards.
From
now on, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear. We repeat: There is nothing wrong with
the evidence of your senses. You have been inducted into a great social
experiment. Participation is mandatory. Resistance is futile. And punishable.
You
are about to experience the awe and mystery which reaches from our inner minds to the Outer Limits of
veracity and credibility, to your conditioned docility and gullibility.
“Criticisms
of our policy will incur severe
financial and criminal penalties. Financial ruin and ostracism are guaranteed. Furthermore,
criticisms and infractions of our penalty policies, as well, will earn additional
targeting for legal action against any and all perpetrators. We cannot over-emphasize
these dire and punitive consequences.

Let
us be thankful that we have the Internet as an antidote to the government and
the news media – while we still have a relatively free Internet.

Western Death Wishes

It is quite obvious that Islam inculcates a
death wish among Muslims, even in the “pacific” numbers of the
“silent majority” of them. Wishing death on non-Muslims of every
variety and stripe, even at the price of a Muslim’s own life, is the
fundamental fabric of the creed, which lends itself to a life-stifling,
totalitarian politics, an imperative that brooks no question. This is patently
demonstrated, for example, by Hamas’s determined and suicidal attack on Israel.
It’s almost as though Hamas pinned a “Kick Me” sign on its own filthy
derrière.
Hamas wants to be “martyred,” in
the name of killing Jews.
No other religion, to my knowledge, is the
foundation of an existing polity. Christians claim that the U.S. is founded on
Christian principals, and that is clearly
not true
. Nor has it ever been true. The Puritans came to our shores to
establish a communistic religious state. It failed when its crops failed.
Israel is claimed to be founded on
principals founded in the Torah. That is clearly not true. There are no
governments founded on Buddhist tenets, either. The U.S., Israel, and other
Western nations are governed by secular rules and laws, however faulty they
might be, and are called “democracies.” There is nothing
“democratic” in any religion. Christian congregations do not vote on
whether God sports a long beard, wears a nightgown, and traipses around the
universe in sandals, or uses a Gillette razor and Aqua Velva, dons an Armani
suit, and hikes around in L.L. Bean mountain boots. They simply accept the
standard iconography.
To my knowledge, only one of the three main
religions of the world specifically prescribes a nihilistic, totalitarian way
of living – or of dying: Islam. Shintoism,
or emperor worship, was a driving force behind Japanese belligerency in the
last century. Nazism
was a kind of religion, as well.
However, Western philosophy has sired its
own death wishes. Kant, Hegel, Comte, and other thinkers concocted ways for
Western culture to implode and leave bloody messes on floors, ceilings and
windows of history.
Western death wishes, metastasized by such
irrational elements as moral relativism, multiculturalism, diversity,
subjectivism, and so on, all contribute to the overall Western death wish, and
manifest themselves in a number of realms. Such as in the news media.
I left this comment on a Washington Post
article that grieves over Palestinian casualties. The story ran July 21st
with the headline, “More
than 100 Palestinians dead in worst day of Gaza conflict; Israel denies soldier
captured
.”
Why does the Post
and other American newspapers stress, emphasis, and beat us over our heads
about the number of alleged “Palestinians” killed? Why should we
care? The “Palestinians” and Hamas use “civilians” as human
shields. Hide them in ambulances with Hamas “soldiers,” plant rocket
launch sites and arsenals in the midst of civilian neighborhoods, near
hospitals and schools. Aside from these alleged Palestinian casualties, why
don’t the Post and other Leftard newspapers report on the hundreds of Israelis
killed by Hamas, Al Queda, the Al-Asshole Brigades and the like? Is this paper
anti-Semitic, or what? Israel is the only civilized, developed, free country in
the Middle East. Why do you people hate it? Why do you wish to see it
destroyed? Are you people hoping for a massacre of Israelis? Hamas initiated
force against Israel; Israel has retaliated, and it’s hoped Israel levels Gaza
to the ground. I’m getting really tired of the MSM stressing the
“suffering” of the Palestinians. They are not to be pitied, but held
in contempt. They are the true butchers, who kill for the sake of killing. They
have no other reason to live.
The next day the Palestinian toll had risen
to 200, the next day to 300, and so on.  It
will always rise, and the Western MSM will trumpet it, because Hamas wants it
to and the MSM obliges. Rarely headlined are the Israeli casualties, and there
is only an oblique reference to the fact that, first, Hamas initiated force
against Israel with its rockets aimed at Israeli population centers, and then
that Hamas and the Brotherhood employ “human shields” of civilians,
hoping that an Israeli drone or bomb kills dozens or more Palestinians. Hamas
is waging a propaganda war as well as a war of aggression.
Then Hamas and its “journalist”
propagandists can send the MSM gory pictures of Palestinian civilian
casualties, a policy opposite that of Israel’s, which, while it will report
Israeli civilian casualties, doesn’t send gory photographs of them. Not that if
it did, those photographs would ever elicit sympathy in the West.
Had today’s MSM been present during the
sacks of Rome in 410 and 453 A.D., doubtless they would have shed tears over
the Visigoth and Vandal casualties, and few over the murdered, raped, tortured,
and enslaved Romans.
And those photographs of Palestinian
casualties are largely bogus, or borrowed from other wars. To wit, this one,
allegedly of children and their mother killed by Israeli bullets or bombs.
There are two problems with the photograph: the original was taken in Syria.
The second problem is that they may be staged. The special effects may be dirt
scattered on the floor, and perhaps dollops of Heinz-Kerry catsup splashed near
the kids to act as blood. Jihadist photographers are notorious for staging
“massacres” and Israeli brutality. But the MSM eats up these pictures
every time. It wants to. Our MSM is fundamentally anti-Israel, and anti-Semitic.
They don’t know – or care – that those
“graphic” pictures are the result of jihadist casting calls.
Islam is completely incompatible with
western classic liberal Constitutional government and culture. Therefore
Muslims must be denied access to the west and they must be defeated militarily
where they exist as a government. The greatest example of the need to defeat
Muslims militarily is in reference to the Israelis, and what must be dropped as
a “solution” is the illogical, failed, deceptive, destructive, and
dhimmi and Chamberlainesque “Two State Solution.” It is impossible by mere
human persuasion to defeat or thwart the powerful, compelling, motivating and
extremely evil message of Islam. Any attempt to “reconcile” Western
civilization and Islam is like introducing cancer into a healthy body.
By the same token, Progressivism, or
whatever other name one may call incremental socialism or nihilism, or fascism,
is incompatible with western classic liberal constitutional government and
culture. The ideology of fascism must be refuted and its practitioners in
government defeated on intellectual grounds first, then at the ballot box.
Fascism, and any species of statism, is illogical, deceptive, destructive, and
carries the seeds within it of inevitable failure and misery.
It is nearly impossible by rational means
to persuade Progressives, liberals, and statists of every stripe of the
delusionary character of their “ideals.” They hold altruism as their
moral touchstone of “right.” Altruism means sacrifice. Not their sacrifice. But that of their
victims.
But the purveyors of the Western death wish
reject or discard the evidence of the failure of their goals and agendas. They
reject reality. Ostensively, their only reality is a fantasy land where their
policies work. They wish to sacrifice reality – and lives – to their
“ideal” make-believe worlds.
And like Barack Obama, they refuse to
accept responsibility for the failures and destruction. Obama would reply to
criticisms of his policies:
Don’t blame me. I’m
just a vessel of dialectical forces, a mere sock puppet of historical
necessity. Why do you think I play golf or fund-raise during crises? I’m a
figurehead. I just communicate the imperatives. You may as well blame Hell for
being too hot. It’s not my problem. It’s yours. I’m the One, the Messiah. You’re
not. And I’m invoking my executive powers to ensure historical necessity.
The Western death wish is not shared by all
Westerners, only by those who side with and encourage evil under the guise of
“tolerance,” “ethnic and cultural diversity,”
“diversity of opinion for its own sake,” and Marxism masquerading as
benign-sounding “Progressivism,” and who froth at the mouth in a self-righteous
fury directed at anyone or any institution that resists being suffocated by or
cajoled into mind-melding with the collectivist fold.
Another instance of the Western death wish is
visible in popular culture,  in the Planet of the Apes movies, beginning
with the Charlton Heston one decades ago in which he damns man (Heston in his
best “original sin” outburst), all the way up to the current Apes movie, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Investors Business Daily made an
important observation about the current offering in a July 14th
editorial, “Energy-Starved ‘Planet
Of The Apes: What Greens Want
“:
What mankind needs
most to survive and restore a semblance of normal life is electricity — aka
power.  Without it, we have no light, no communications, no way to travel
but on foot, no computer power, no heat, no stoves. The apes want to keep the
humans poor, disoriented and in a hopeless state.
A turning point
arrives with cheers in the theater when the humans return an electric power dam
to operation and the entire city powers up again.

Before you cheer as well (and a cheering theater is at least a sign that
Americans haven’t completely surrendered to the trolls of collectivism), the
editorial makes this prescient reservation:
Which leads us to
wonder if this movie is a metaphor for what we face in our real
future. Not a future of apes, but a future without cheap and abundant
power.
Is this where the
radical green movement is guiding us with rolling brownouts and even complete
blackouts in the years ahead as the Sierra Club, billionaire Tom Steyer and the
Obama administration wage war against coal and other fossil fuel?
The apocalypse
confronting America may not be “climate change,” but the havoc and
slow return to the Stone Age the left envisions for us to fight an alleged
man-made effect on the weather.
Actually, the environmentalists’ secret dream
is the extinction of mankind, not his mere reduction to subsistence level in a
new Stone Age. They would just rather man not be around to despoil the earth
(and probably not Mars, Venus, Titan or even the Moon, either). Discover
the Networks
had this to say about “radical” environmentalism:
According to radical
environmentalists, Nature has an “intrinsic value” and goodness
that is to be revered for its own sake. In this simplistic moral calculus, any
human action that changes the environment is unethical.
“The expressed
goal of environmentalism is to prevent man from changing his environment, from
intruding on nature. That is why environmentalism is fundamentally anti-man.
Intrusion is necessary for human survival. Only by intrusion can man avoid
pestilence and famine. Only by intrusion can man control his life and project
long-range goals. Intrusion improves the environment, if by ‘environment’ one
means the surroundings of man — the external material conditions of human
life.”
The misanthropy at
the heart of radical environmentalism is well  expressed by biologist
David M. Graber, who, in a glowing review of Bill McKibben’s The End of
Nature
, writes: “Human happiness [is] not as important as a wild and
healthy planet…. Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin
nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.”
To “rejoin nature,” as Graber
well knows, means death, for lighting a campfire to keep warm or cook a meal
would be a capital crime. Thus his hope that man is wiped out by a virus.
And you don’t need to much wonder about all
the Apes movies and their companion
disaster movies in which man is responsible for wiping himself out for the sole
reason he exists and must take “unnatural” actions to sustain and
advance his life.
What’s an “extremist”
environmentalist, as opposed to a “moderate” one?  Enza
Ferreri
on her blogsite quotes Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch about what a
terrorist outfit like the Taliban means when it’s against “extremism”:

A Reuters article contains the intriguing phrase, intriguing
because reportedly it’s from the Taliban: “Muslims also should avoid
extremism in religion”.

Jihad Watch remarks:

The Taliban, in
saying this, demonstrate that they don’t consider themselves to be “extremist.”
This word is thrown around everywhere, but like “moderate,” no one bothers to
define it precisely. Everyone assumes that its meaning is obvious, but it
isn’t. It would be useful and illuminating to have a debate between Muslims who
support the Taliban and Muslims who oppose it on what constitutes “extremism.”
But that will never happen, as it would require honest discussion of Islamic
doctrines that Muslim spokesmen in the West are doing a fine job of
obfuscating.
Honest discussions of Islamic doctrine are
impossible to anyone but Muslim spokesmen. Ferreri clarifies Spencer’s remarks:
It’s true: nobody
has defined “moderate” or “extremist” in Islam. That’s how
and why these terms are used to foster the Islamophilic agenda: because they’re
useless. The fact that the Taliban can use the term “extremism” to
dissociate itself from it (and to condemn it), as they don’t consider
themselves extremist, tells you a lot about the vagueness and consequent
inutility of the word.
Similarly, what is the difference between a
“radical” environmentalist and a “moderate” one? A
“radical” one wishes mankind would run off the side of a mile-high
cliff, right now. A
“moderate” will provide picnic tables and box lunches cliffside.
That’s all. But it’s the same end.



What’s the psychology of Muslim
“extremists,” “radical” environmentalists, Progressive
politicians and their supporters, and even many creatures in the MSM? Nicolai
Sennels and Nancy Kobrin, in New
English Review
‘s May 2010 article, maintain:
Sennels adeptly outlines the key problems of why Muslims are not able
to integrate into Western culture. What he doesn’t say, I shall name. We are
dealing with nothing more than paranoia. Sennels stresses that the West must
set boundaries because otherwise they will kill you. This kind of rage is
malignant borderline behavior as in serial killing. We must come to understand
such politically incorrect observations as Sennels does in order to connect the
dots concerning criminal Muslims even though it is brutal.
 
Happy well-adjusted children do not become suicide bombers nor do they
become criminals. Let us choose to know what we are dealing with rather than
bury our heads in sand out of terror. Let us meet the challenge straight on as
Sennels has. …
The paranoia of Muslims, environmentalists,
and Progressives is that they see that most other adults and “happy,
well-adjusted children” may live their lives fully, and because Muslims,
environmentalists and Progressives can’t, they wish to extinguish the lives of
those who can. It’s that simple. If paranoia it truly is, that’s their
motivation. They prefer to live in thrall to an arbitrary, whimsical,
malevolent deity who denies them any personal values or lives. (See my November
2013 column on Sennels’s findings, “The
Psychology of Islamic Culture
.)
How does the Western death wish extend to
foreign policy?
But it also could be said it started with
FDR and his alliance with Soviet Russia during WWII, or with Eisenhower in 1956
when he scuttled the British, French and Israeli military effort to retake the
Suez Canal from Egypt’s dictator Gamal Abdul Nasser, who wished to nationalize
it. Eisenhower pressured
Britain to abandon a
successful initial effort
to reclaim the Canal.
This year our government has signed an $11
billion deal with the government of Qatar, a major funder of Islamic terrorism
and owner of Al Jazeera, Qatar’s propaganda “news” outlet. Defense
News
on July 14th reported that:
Qatar
will buy US Patriot missiles for the first time in a major arms deal worth $11
billion, officials said Monday, as Washington awaits a decision by the Gulf
state on a lucrative fighter jet contract.
The
sale will provide Qatar with roughly 10 batteries for Patriot systems designed
to knock out incoming missiles, as well as 24 Apache helicopters and 500
Javelin anti-tank missiles, the US officials, who spoke on condition of
anonymity, told AFP…..
The
weapons deal was the biggest for the United States in 2014 and came as Qatar
weighs proposals in a fighter jet competition, with US aerospace firm Boeing
vying against British BAE Systems and Dassault Aviation of France.
Breitbart announced the deal on July 17th
with the appropriate headline: “US Signs $11 Billion Weapons Deal with Muslim
Brotherhood-Friendly Qatar
.
The arms deal was
signed at the Pentagon in Virginia by U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and
the Qatari equivalent, Hamad bin Ali al-Attiyah.
A Pentagon
spokesman said of the major arms deal, “Today’s signing ceremony
underscores the strong partnership between the United States and Qatar in the
area of security and defense and will help improve our bilateral cooperation
across a range of military operations.” He continued, “This is a critically
important relationship in the region, and the secretary is pleased to be able
to continue to make it stronger.”
Qatar is a strong
ally and openly supportive of the
Muslim Brotherhood
. Although countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia have
recently designated the organization a terrorist group, Qatar maintains that
its goal is simply to preach the good tenets of Islam.
Billions for the defense of a medieval
monarchy, but not much for this country’s defense. And while Barack Obama
undoubtedly approved of the agreement, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel is
nearly as loony as Vice President Joe Biden. It’s also rumored that he
converted to Islam.
Paul Alster on May 9th, 2013,
for The
Investigative Project on Terrorism
, wrote:
American business
giants such as the Boeing Corporation, Lockheed Martin, Conoco Philips, and
Exxon Mobil all have significant interests and partnerships with Qatar. And the
U.S. government appears willing to overlook Qatar’s failings. But Palmor has no
qualms in spelling out the dangerous game being played on Israel’s doorstep
that Qatar and its Al Jazeera network cannot disguise.
“The Emir of
Qatar has visited the Hamas-controlled Gaza, has embraced Hamas rulers, and has
promised money which in this case he has sent into the hands of Hamas. At the
same time he has never visited the Palestinian Authority (PA) or the government
in Ramallah [even though] he has repeatedly promised to do so. Ignoring Israel
is one thing, but taking sides in Palestinian politics and clearly taking the
side of a terror organization, is another thing. That is clearly taking part in
armed and violent conflict and that is what Qatar is doing. It has always been
on the side of terrorists and on the side of violence.”
The history of the association of American and
Western businesses with tyrannical régimes makes the charge of “crony
capitalism” sound like an illicit office romance. The most notorious
instance was oil man Armand
Hammer
‘s deep connections with the Soviet Union, an unprecedented
relationship emulated by many big corporations in later decades with a variety
of dictatorships, authoritarian régimes, and communist governments. To wit:
Money News on July 22nd
reported:
They left out Turkey.
It is great that more people are coming to this realization and that books are
being written about it, but it doesn’t seem to be significantly changing the
policies of the West (apart from a growing rift between the U.S. and the Sunni
powers in the region over how we’re dealing with Iran). We have yet to
designate the major institutional terror donors in Qatar Saudi Arabia as
terrorist entities. Kuwait was never blacklisted by FATF even though it took it
10 years after 9/11 to outlaw terrorist financing. NATO has retained Turkey as
a member even though it is partnering with Al Qaeda in Syria and helps Iran
evade sanctions. And we mostly ignored attacks by Qatari-backed rebels in Mali
fighting against our oldest ally, France. Instead of doing something
significant, we just nod our heads and say, “yep, the Gulf is where the money
for terrorism comes from,” and then we turn the page of the newspaper to
something else.
And on July 21st:
The jihad in Syria
against the Alawites has been wholeheartedly funded by millionaires in Qatar.
The Qatari ministry of culture oversees some of the volunteer operations to
fund terrorism like this, and counter-terrorism expert Juan Zarate says the
financial support for jihad comes “from the top.” This isn’t new information,
but seeing video of the players involved may help some people to grow up and
out of the old-fashioned 1990s view of Qatar as an ally in the Gulf.
The U.S. government’s relationship with various
dictatorships, beginning most prominently with FDR’s recognition of the Soviet Union
in 1933, has a checkered and disgraceful history, as well. The Soviet Union was
granted the status of a legitimate government in defiance of the knowledge of
Stalin’s campaign of starvation against the Ukraine, known in the Ukraine as
the Holodomor,  in which some nine million people perished. (For
a detailed account of FDR’s role in propping up the Soviet government, see
Diana West’s outstanding book, American
Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character
.)
The pragmatism evident in the relationships
of our government and private citizens with oppressive foreign governments is
also a form of the West’s death wish, as well.
Finally, the Mexican border imbroglio is so
steeped in pragmatism, corruption, and a deliberate Obama policy of swamping
the U.S. with tens of thousands of illegal “immigrants” in order to
“transform” the country to sustain the welfare state and the
Democrats’ grip on the country that it beggars imagination. Mac Slavo on
SHFT.com reported on July 20th about the invasion getting a violent
assist from the drug cartels, “Mexican
Drug Cartels Lay Down High Powered Suppressing Fire For Crossing Immigrants
“:
Shots rang out Friday night in Rincon Peninsula, Texas, forcing U.S.
border patrol agents to take cover. The shots originated from south of the Rio
Grande River and according to Border Patrol sources they came from a
high-powered .50 caliber rifle….
When the shooting
stopped, about 40 to 50 people came out on the U.S. side and turned themselves
in. So clearly the rounds were being fired to suppress every effort to stop
anybody intervening with anyone or anything coming across,” Gohmert added. “We
have no idea what or how many or whom came across with the other illegal
immigrants.” Sources said they believe the gunfire came from members of Mexican
drug cartels, which include former military members trained in shooting that
type of weaponry….
The shooting has
prompted fears that Mexican drug cartels, known to be extremely dangerous and
responsible for over 75,000 deaths in the drug war that has plagued the country
for the last seven years, are now bringing their brand of violence into the United
States via the unsecured 3000-mile southern border.
Obviously with the sanction of the Mexican
government
, which has accelerated the “legal” passage of Central American
dross through Mexico to invade the U.S. by proxy. Is this not a declaration of
war against the U.S.?
The American death wish is spectacularly
enabled by President Barack ObamaCare, who wants to force American cities and
towns to accept them. This is an invasion by invitation, similar to Europe’s
invitation of millions of unassimilatable Muslims, with the same end, to “transform”
Western countries into satrapies of culturally “diverse” malignancies,
erected on the ashes of freedom and the ruins of Western civilization.

Detective Novels on Audio Books

I’m proud to announce that all the Chess
Hanrahan
detective novels,
as well as most of the Cyrus
Skeen
period detective novels are on sale as audio
books
, print books, and on Kindle. Presence
of Mind
, a Hanrahan novel, and The
Black Stone
, have been approved by Amazon ACX and will be on sale soon. A
narrator has been contracted to read The
Head of Athena
and The Daedâlus
Conspiracy
, both of which should be completed by the end of August and by
September respectively.
All the novels are also available in Great
Britain, Canada, and Europe.
The Sparrowhawk
series, republished under the The Patrick Henry Press imprint after the
original publisher, MacAdam/Cage, defaulted on most of its contracts and filed
for bankruptcy last December, is also available on Amazon and Barnes &
Noble. If thinking of purchasing a title from this series, be sure to look for
The Patrick Henry Press edition as print books and on Kindle. 



Pictured above is the cover of the seventh title in the Cyrus Skeen series, The Pickwick Affair. It will probably be made into an audio book late Fall. The book is already on Kindle.


Obama’s Middle Finger to America


From day one in his first term of office,
President Barack Obama has given America his middle finger. I’m surprised so
many people haven’t noticed it. Here’s a State of the Union address he’d never
dare make, but I’m sure he would like to, just to let his hair down. It would
probably be written by his good pal Bill Ayers, or his proxy mom, Valerie
Jarrett. Or by the fired press secretary Jay Carney, on a consultation basis
for a handsome fee.
“Folks of America, my pals in Congress
and the Supreme Court, and my pals overseas and across the border:
“As you all well know, I’m going to
transform this country, whether or not Americans like it. If Congress and the
states won’t help me, I’ll do it myself with my executive powers. Americans are
just going to have to eat it. Do I intend to turn this country into a
third-rate country like Mexico? Yes. It’s about time it was knocked down to
size.
“How am I going to do this? I will
further bankrupt it with more TARP-like financial boondoggles, industry
bailouts, costly subsidies to companies not likely to succeed, increasing the
powers of government surveillance on ordinary Americans, recruiting the EPA to
enforce rules guaranteed to drive coal and oil out of business, imposing a
healthcare insurance scheme on the country that will really hurt Americans in
the pocketbook, and forcing everyone to kowtow to the government and its
programs whether or not they like it. Oh, there are so many ways to screw this
country!
“Don’t like it? Tough.  Eat it. Your senators and representatives –
generations of them – voted government those powers and now we’re going to use
them like there’s no tomorrow. After all, it’s doubtful I’ll have a third term.
It’s our hope that that harridan, Hillary, will pick up where we leave off, if
she’s nominated and runs for election. We can fix that election, too. She’s for
what I’m for, although she’s not as good a dissimulator as I am. Dissimulator? Me??
Using a five-syllable word! Shame on me! Sounds like a thing that processes
nuclear fuel in Iran!
“You know Michelle
and I really hate this country. It isn’t black or brown enough. So I’ve reached
an understanding with Mexico
and several Central American governments to send their diseased and pliable mosquitoes
north across the border. Trainloads
of them
. This is necessary because it’s assumed that these otherwise
useless people will express their gratitude by voting Democrat in every future
election, local, state and national.
“That’s the plan. And they won’t need
Attorney General Holder’s New Black Panthers to make sure they do vote the
right way. They won’t need super-sized, gun-toting Colombian or Mexican drug
cartels (Eric’s special program to discredit private gun ownership)  to ensure it, either, or any of the Central
American criminals
and gang
members
we’re bringing in with their colorfully tattooed faces and chests. Mexico
is being very cooperative – even eager, they’re so envious of the U.S. – in funneling
all these Central American mosquitoes through its country right up to our
borders. A truly “In Your Face” example of international cooperation!
Like crap through a goose, they’ll come, as General Patton once put it,
although I can’t recall the context and I’m not really certain who he was.
“You know, those gang members, they’re
a lot like those Maori morons in New Zealand, who tattooed their faces and
stuck their tongues out when they fought the evil white settlers in their
country. Funny!
“Shssh! Don’t tell anyone, but it’s an
open
secret
that this was all a manufactured
crisis
. Tailor-made by yours truly. A rescue operation for my pals the
Democrats. Even if we must stoop to really dirty tricks to preserve their power
over this country, this is what they’re willing to do. As am I, to use correct English!
Swamp the country with newly baked registered – or unregistered, if you will –
Democrats.
“We’ve also made arrangements to put
the mosquitoes up in fine
quarters
you middle class folks probably can’t afford any more – and you’ll
pay for it, too!
“We’ve also established an
understanding with Islam’s finest representatives in this country to let
Muslims pour in, too, and we’ll be resettling them in the unlikeliest place –
right on your
doorstep
and those of countless other Americans. Don’t like it? Eat it.
“You people are going to have to learn
how to obey my commands and fit into my agenda without protest or criticism. Just
move along, there’s nothing to see here. You’re going to submit, dhimmi-style, as they’d call it in Islam
– or else.  I’m doing good, don’t you see?  It’s the altruistic thing to do. I command, you sacrifice.  It meshes
very nicely with my agenda to transform this country.
“Don’t bother me with Constitutional
issues. I’m not interested. Some people claim I’m tearing up the Constitution.
Wow! They finally noticed! That moldy piece of paper was written by a bunch of
rich white guys (and, by the way, I hate the British, too!). It’s time all
those rights and protections and guarantees were replaced with populist
principles recognized by Progressives as right and true to create a more just
society, a more equitable society, a fairer society.
“And, it’s only fair that these newly
minted citizens have a right to send your hard-earned taxed dollars back
to their home countries
to keep their governments afloat and in power. These
new citizens don’t ever plan to return to their countries of origin, but that’s
your problem, not mine.
“I don’t want to hear any back talk –
in town
hall meetings
, on the sides
of buildings
, or anywhere – about the immigrants or where we settle them or
what damage they do to your communities. One peep out of you racists and we’ll
send SWAT teams after you. Or file a “hate crime” or “hate
speech” suit against you.
“You folks in the news media: Thanks
for all your help! Love you guys! Except when you ask questions I’m not
prepared to answer…truthfully, anyway. Then you’re in hot water, as you already
know. Drone time! (chuckles) Otherwise, keep up the fine job of believing everything
I say and sharing my vision! And stop giving my press secretaries such a hard
time! They become stuttering train wrecks and I might need to hire a fourth
before I boggy out of the White House!
“So what if Somalians and Pakistanis
and Afghanis Iraqis and Mexicans and Hondurans haven’t a clue to why they’re
here. So what if they kill each other and go on crime sprees and play the
“knockdown” game on you whites and Asians who all think you’re so
special because you say ‘you built it’ and those poor losers didn’t. You’ve had
it coming, and I’m the master of ceremonies. And if you protest and call me a
racist or a communist or some other derogatory or libelous name I’m going to
get the IRS and DHS and the DEA and EPA or the HHS to target you for special
attention and work to haul your asses to jail or just make your lives
miserable.  Just like that stupid Copt
was who made that defamatory video about Muslims.
“My staff passed on to me a really
scurrilous comment by some blogger about what I’m doing to his country (pardon the chuckle!), captured by the NSA. Here’s what
it read:
‘No borders, no standards, immigrants going wherever they want, by the
tens of thousands, or where the government sends them – ours  is no longer a country as an identifiable
entity with lines of delineation, but a region open to all comers who have
nothing but ‘squatting rights’ to claim, and in a former country with no law to
back up their claims and no government to defend citizens against the
squatters. Currently, under the pillaging Democrats, this is premeditated, state-managed
anarchy.’
“Now, that’s one bright fellow! Nailed
my method down with six-inch nails! Come the Revolution that’s in process, we’re
going to have to take care of him. You know what I mean. Can’t have him
blabblin’ all over the country! Wrote a lot of novels. My staff tells me
they’re blasphemous against Islam, treasonous in politics, and don’t have very
many minority characters in them, either. You won’t find them in my library!
“I commend all my Jewish friends who
are in lockstep with my agenda: Ben Bernanke, Rahm Emanuel, Dominique
Strauss-Kahn, David Axlerod, Alan Dershowitz, Elena Kagan, Michael Bloomberg,
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, George Soros, and Thomas Friedman – to name but a few. The
rest of you Jews, go suck an egg! Shoe a goose! Wail against your stupid Wall!
“That goes for Israel, too! You go,
Hamas! Kibosh their kippahs! And you
guys are truly altruistic by asking your friends and relatives and children to
act as human shields against Israel’s bombs! You’re to be patted on the back! The
Pope ought to donate some of the Vatican’s treasures just to keep you in cash. I
think he wants to, in the name of democracy! (Faint sound of raspberries off-mike)
 Hope you kill as many of those damned
kikes as you can! And, don’t worry: We’ll keep sending you millions in aid
until you accomplish your end and erase that scabby country from the face of
the earth!
“Folks! Just get used to the idea that
I’m the Boss. Not that cracker Bruce
Springsteen with his twangy music, even though he seems to be on my side. I’m the Boss! The Boss is me!
“You’ll have to excuse me now. I have
a golf date at Boca Pointe Club in
Boca Raton. A really amazing place. It suits my lifestyle, defines my
experience as a lousy golfer, as its ads say. You’re paying for it, folks, as
you’ve paid for all my outings. I have a Secret Service guy following me around
as my caddy. I’d prefer a Marine, but that umbrella stunt in the Rose Garden
was enough of a humiliation for that outfit. 
And those Marines keep saluting me! The joke’s on them!
“All my friends and foolish supporters
out there – Latinos, Muslims, Blacks, Leftards, friendly Jews – Keep on
truckin’! Vote early and often, as a true boss man once said. Obama for America is there to help
you with voter registration and false documents.
“All you others, go fly a kite! Cling
to your guns. Frame your Constitution. Wave your flags! You won’t have them for
long!
“Good night, folks! And, to borrow a
phrase from my lovable former Chicago pastor: God Damn America!”

The “Jewish” Question

These ongoing pogroms, anti-Semitic
attacks
, the noisy and often violent demonstrations, and the individual attacks
on Jews in Europe
and elsewhere
, apparently occur in cycles. But they especially explode when
Jews fight back and take steps to trounce their tormentors. As Israel
is doing now against
Hamas in Gaza. How dare they?
Now, as an atheist, I have no special regard
for any religion. The one I hate – and I hate it because I fear it, and fear
that it is making inroads in my Western culture, because it is a malignant,
death-worshipping, nihilist evil – is Islam. All the others, including Judaism,
don’t worry me, because not a one of them is telling me to defer to it, walk on
the other side of the street, or threatens me with death. All those others
exist on the periphery of my consciousness and of my concerns. I try to imagine
an Amish farmer in a suicide vest. It doesn’t compute. The idea is laughable. Although
I suspect that if Muslims try to collect jizya
from the Amish, I think Amish pacifism will come to an end, and Islam will have
a problem. I especially look forward to the Quakers’ reaction to submission.
But, I am otherwise indifferent to
religion. I was raised in a Catholic household without having become a Catholic.
The contradictions, arbitrary restrictions, hypocrisies, scandals, and
corruption prevalent in that creed alienated me permanently from any species of
mysticism.
Jews? I don’t even regard them,
collectively, as a “race.” In my mind, Judaism is a religion, first
and foremost. Anyone can become or be a Jew: Caucasians, Latinos, Blacks,
Asians. I wouldn’t know a Jew on a street unless he wore his religion on his
sleeve, as Hassidic Jews do.
But it is also true of Islam, that it isn’t
reserved to a specific race. Except the difference is that Judaism isn’t
seeking rabbinical hegemony over the globe. Jews are not telling me that I’d
better convert and wear a kippah, or
lose my head, or see my daughter raped, or my son’s hands chopped off.
Jews just want to be left alone, and,
incidentally, to benefit the rest of the world with their work and humanity.
But no one wants to leave them alone. Jews
are the one-size-fits-all historical scapegoats for whatever miseries or catastrophes
have beset mankind or brought about on himself. History abounds with instances
of how Jews have benefited man, yet were banished or subjected to riotous
murder. They have loaned money to bankrupt princes and spendthrift governments,
yet were snubbed, insulted, or worse. They have excelled in medical and
scientific research and technology, and in business and finance. They are
generous to a perilous fault, such as the foolhardy
supplying of their enemies in Gaza – and that includes all the hapless
shnorers, Hamas’s human shields – with medical supplies, food,
and other necessities.
Jews can also be foolish, such as the American
ones who oppose Israel, and the ones in Israel itself who subscribe to the
fantasy that Hamas and Gazans and Muslims of whatever suasion can be pacified
and made tolerant of Jewish and Israeli existence. I don’t know where their
heads are, and I’m so fastidious in some respects that I don’t even want to explore
their self-evident delusions. They don’t seem to realize that if Israel were
ever destroyed, they, the helping-hand Jews, would be among the first to be
exterminated. Islam does not tolerate “but-you-said” complaints. The
same goes for the leftards in this country who have “allied”
themselves with Islamic supremacists simply because Israel contradicts .
They’ll be among the first to be sent to the wall or over the cliff, come an American
caliphate. Except for the ones who have mastered the art of groveling.
The world owes Jews and Israel an
incalculable debt for everything they’ve done for it, yet our response is to
stab them in the back, betray them, and tell them to parley for peace with
killers who do not want peace, who are certifiable psychotics who want to kill
for the sake of killing, and act and exist for no other reason.
The world owes Jews and Israel that
incalculable debt, and, rather than create a pitifully partial list of their
achievements here – achievements which improve and advance man’s existence – I offer
here links to various sites that itemize everything they’ve done. Readers may
peruse the lists at their leisure:
Inventions:
Nobel Laureates (191, in all categories):
A
collection of achievements:
Israeli
medical achievements:
The
Israeli high-tech industry:
The
Methodist Friends of Israel:
What have been Muslim contributions to
man’s condition, to increase his happiness and well-being,  other than the inculcating a neurosis of
terror, and developing weapons with which to kill Jews, attack Israel, and slaughter
infidels?  For 1,400 years, not much,
except, perhaps, to filch algebra from the Indians and also what are called
“Arabic” numbers. The tally of Muslim Nobel
Laureates
comes to an underwhelming eleven:
Seven Peace Prizes, two in literature,
one in physics, and one in chemistry.
What
can explain this virtual absence of Muslim achievements? Aside from the
mind-numbing nature of Islamic ideology, which I’ve discussed in past columns, one
Muslim
offers this credible and honest explanation for it:
…Today’s common Muslim mind, including the
intellectual Muslim mind, is quite insular, and is focused on protecting an
“Islamic” (and quite closed) mental sphere from influences from the outside
world. The result is a defensive culture that refuses to engage with the ideas
of “the unbelievers,” and therefore only repeats what it has learned from its
own forebears. If we Muslims want more Nobel Prizes – and all
the knowledge, sophistication and success that they imply – we must begin with
challenging this closed-mindedness, and strive to have more open minds. 
I don’t think this fellow is a true,
practicing Muslim. If he were, he wouldn’t have been able to write those words.
Hamas? Hamas is a pint-sized Goliath
challenging a towering David.  What can
explain its determination to engage in combat with Israel, which, if it took
off its humanitarian “what-would-the-world-think-of-us” gloves, would
annihilate it? The answer is simple: A nihilistic death wish. David P. Goldman,
in his July 15th article on PJ Media, “Hamas
Is the Norm, Israel is the Exception
,”    offers this very appropriate explanation:
Hamas wants to die,
obviously and visibly. That thought horrifies Westerners. As a number of
Israeli commentators observe, Hamas doesn’t particularly care about having a
Palestinian State. It wants to destroy
the Jewish State and is willing to die in the process.
It wants to die in
such a way that Israel will die, too. There is something utterly surreal to
Hamas crowding civilians around military targets, and Israeli pilots declining
to attack them. It recalls the joke about the sadist and the masochist. The
masochist says, “Beat me!,” and the sadist says, No…suffer.” [Italics mine.]
Hamas, to be sure,
proposes to die in an accelerated time frame and a particularly disgusting
fashion, but it should be kept in mind that self-willed extinction is the norm.
 
Yes, they want to be “martyrs.”
They wish to die. The
Blaze
in November 2012, reporting during another conflict between Israel
and Hamas, quotes one Islamic terrorist group’s motto:
“From the Al-Qassam
Brigades to the Zionist soldiers: The Al-Qassam Brigades love death more than
you love life.”
That comports precisely with David Goldman’s
explanation of Hamas’s nihilistic death wish: If we can’t live, we don’t want
you to live, either.
I say: Grant them their wish. Extinguish Hamas,
once and for all. Down to the last miserable “martyr.” 
Hamas’s solution to the “Jewish
Question” is the same as was Hitler’s: Kill all the Jews. We envy the Jews, can never hope to match
their achievements and determination to live, and not merely
“survive,” we are but mere manqués pretending to live. We have no purpose
in our existence but to kill, kill, kill. We have no values but the sight of
Jews in pain and writhing in death.
The vicious ideology of Islam gives Hamas a
specious rationale for their chosen psychosis.  Israelis have proven in virtually every realm
of human endeavor that they are pro-life men of reason.  Reason, too, is what Hamas, ruled by an
anti-life philosophy, wishes to extinguish.

The Cujo Meme

Gazan “journalists,” news media,
and random individuals handy with cell phones are so proficient at taking
pictures of the victims of Israeli “aggression” that they ought to be
hired by Hollywood. At the drop of a drone, they’re there to pass off
heartstring-pulling photos of dead Gazan children, who were not yet old enough
to throw rocks at Israeli civilian cars, or don suicide vests, or kidnap
Israeli soldiers or teenagers, or sneak into Israeli settlements to slaughter
whole families with razors and butchers knives, or riot in the West Bank.
Many of the photos they send West and which
are gobbled up by the news media also show weeping fathers cradling dead sons
in their arms, either in the street or in a doctor’s office, or a bunch of guys
carrying a flag-draped casket purportedly holding the body of a dead child,
surrounded by an angry and fist-shaking weeping mob.  
These on-the-spot recorders of Israeli
“atrocities” are the Muslim paparazzi of pity, Islam’s
ambulance-chasing ghouls. The pictures they take are either staged,
filched or recycled
from other
theaters
of Mideast conflicts, or too outrageously phony to be believed –
except by Western “journalists” and news editors, such as the one of
a boy leaping over the body bags of children supposedly and recently killed in
the Syrian Houla massacre by bombs or rubber bands, except that the bags
contain the
bones
of people found in a desert near Bagdad.  Broadcast by the BBC in 2012, the photo dates
to 2003.
The Telegraph story of May 27th,
2012, “Syria
massacre in Houla condemned as outrage grows
,” quoted the photographer,
Marco di Lauro for Getty Images, who took the picture in 2003:
“One of my
pictures from Iraq was used by the BBC web site as a front page illustration
claiming that those were the bodies of yesterday’s massacre in Syria and that
the picture was sent by an activist.  Instead
the picture was taken by me and it’s on my web site, on the feature section regarding a
story I did In Iraq during the war called Iraq, the aftermath of Saddam.
“What I am really
astonished by is that a news organization like the BBC doesn’t check the
sources and it’s willing to publish any picture sent it by anyone: activist,
citizen journalist or whatever. That’s all. “
Well, he shouldn’t be so astonished. The
BBC, which has maintained an anti-Israel grudge for a long time, wouldn’t
really be concerned about the strength of any attribution.  When it comes to pushing propaganda, it has
never been too fastidious in checking sources. Fantasy and bias overrule facts.
We want this to be evidence of
Israeli brutality. The BBC isn’t the only news outlet that’s in a hurry to
condemn or indict Israel or dictators its editors don’t at the moment happen to
like. There is our own CPB or PBS – and MSNBC, and CNN, and ABC and CBS, and
NBC itself.  Anything that will help
convey the idea that Muslims are always the victims of someone’s policies or
Israeli cruelty.
Hamas, Al Queda, Fatah, Hezbollah, the
Muslim Brotherhood, and other blameless, “peace-loving” Islamic
outfits must also retain the services of Photoshopping experts to doctor
pictures for special propaganda purposes. Given half a chance, and if they
thought they could get away with it, their “unverified sources” for
photographs taken by Muslim “journalists,” they would probably stoop
to passing off doctored pictures of the D-Day landings as waves of Muslims wade
ashore, attacking Israel from the Mediterranean, appropriately garbed with
keffiyahs and carrying Palestinian flags.
Muslims, and especially Gazans, after all,
are a peace-loving people more put upon than guilty or complicit in the
atrocities they commit on Jews and infidels. Aren’t they?
Speaking of doctored images, Muslims also claim
to be victims of how they’re portrayed in Western movies.
Even before 9/11, they were muttering to
themselves about the depiction of Muslims as grungy conspirators of mayhem in
the West and even in Islamic countries. They resented the standard portrayal of
dehumanized stereotypes.  The Middle East
Quarterly carried a lengthy article by Daniel Mandel in the Spring 2001 issue,
Muslims
on the Silver Screen
.”
Does Hollywood
dehumanize Muslims and Arabs? Many writers and organizations think so. They
assert that racial and ethnic stereotyping that has been otherwise abandoned by
the cinema continues to apply to these groups. Columnist Jay Stone, for
instance, observes that it “appears we’re down to one group, the Arabs….Hala
Maksoud, president of the Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee, in a
complaint to NBC regarding an episode of the television series, The West
Wing
, asserts that “Arabs remain fair game for the entertainment
industry in this country.”
The result has been
vigorous lobbying and public criticism to sensitize moviemakers to these
distortions, then stop them. Faced with a barrage of criticism, the powers that
be in Hollywood—who do not consider themselves qualified to test the validity
of these complaints—usually concede to their critics. For example, The Sum
of All Fears
, a thriller by Tom Clancy, has as its villains a group of
Muslim terrorists who conspire to detonate a nuclear device at the Super Bowl
in Denver.
However, following
objections from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the director
of the movie derived from the book, Phil Alden Robinson, substituted European
neo-Nazis for Muslims. Robinson explained in a letter addressed to CAIR that he
had “no intention of promoting negative images of Muslims or Arabs”
and went on the wish the group his “best” in its efforts to combat
discrimination. Evidently, the lobbying works.
The main complaints cited by Mandel in the
article are that Islamist violence is distorted,
that Islamist terrorism is invented,
and that Muslims and Arabs never appear in sympathetic
roles.
One question Mandel doesn’t ask is: What
else are Muslims known for? It certainly isn’t for winning Nobel Prizes in
physics or medicine. When was the last time a Muslim-authored novel hit the New
York Times bestseller list – aside from Salman Rushdie’s? Where is the Muslim
counterpart of, say, Jerry Seinfeld or Dean Martin? How many Muslim women have
won the Miss World, Miss America, or Miss Universe beauty contest?
About the only time one hears about Muslims
is when they’ve blown themselves up somewhere, or blew up a lot of people, or
when they’re attacking Israel, or when CAIR or some other Muslim advocacy group
whines about the derogatory, “profiling” image of Muslims in films,
and just general, noisy demonstrations against Israel or the U.S.  If one walks like a duck, sounds like a duck,
and looks like a duck, where’s the distortion?
If you behave like a yahoo, then you must be a yahoo. Ergo, stereotyping is
eminently justified.
The claim that Islamic terrorism carried
out by Muslims is “invented” is fantastically delusional and patently
false, not when the tally of Islamic terrorism since just 9/11 has reached 19,200. That tally doesn’t include the
thousands of acts of terrorism committed by Muslims before 9/11 (plane hijackings, bombs on planes,
massacres of foreigners
such as the one Luxor in 1997, and so on).
What sympathies
do Muslims elicit from non-believers? I can’t think of anything, except for a
vague disgust with them and their “religion,” which is totalitarian
in character, nihilist in its essentials, and pathetic in practice, from the
prayer rituals to the dietary restrictions to the traditional garb.
Mandel also itemizes and discusses what
CAIR and other Muslim “advocacy” groups claim are the possible
motives behind Hollywood’s negative portrayal of Muslims and Arabs: that Hollywood
is in sync with U.S. government policies; and that Hollywood furthers Zionist
policies. The first claim is also fantastic; the U.S. government has been
pro-Islam for decades, and Obama’s blatant patronization of Islam is only the
latest manifestation of that policy. The second claim is linked to the first;
the U.S has for decades pressured Israel to surrender to Palestinian demands to
negotiate, negotiate, negotiate itself into Islam-managed oblivion.
Mandel discusses several movies that CAIR
and other Islamic complainants have focused on over the years: True Lies,
Executive Decision, The Siege, Three Kings, and Rules
of Engagement
, and The Delta Force, and drills holes in each
complaint about those movies. He ends his essay with:
Other…criticisms do
not hold water. The depiction of Muslims and Arabs is variable and not
necessarily insensitive or untruthful. Action films depicting Arab and Islamist
terrorists reflect observed reality that accords with the knowledge and
experience of the viewing public and are not to be condemned on that account.
Accusations of a hidden government orchestration of popular sentiment lack any
proof and stem from a conspiracist agenda. To accept these criticisms would be
to demonize the U.S. government and Jews while valorizing Islamism and
terrorists. Such an agenda is deeply hostile to civilized values.
That’s putting it mildly. Such criticisms
are inimical to civilized values, and intended to obviate those values.
Moving up the calendar, Slate, for once, in
May 2002, ran an interesting article by Reihan Salam, “The
Sum of All PC: Hollywood’s reverse racial profiling
.” It more or less
contradicts the claim that Hollywood goes out of its way to demonize Muslims
and Islam.
The threat of
al-Qaida terrorist attacks is currently scaring America stiff. But you’d be
hard-pressed to find Muslim terrorists in any of today’s blockbuster action
movies, which instead offer such uncontroversial bad guys as killer aliens and
abusive husbands. Why is Hollywood shying away from al-Qaida-like villains?
Movies have always
relied on politically relevant villains, from Russian spies to South African
apartheidniks to Serbian ethnic cleansers. Tom Clancy’s much-loved Jack Ryan
series is the gold standard….
But in the
about-to-be-released film version of The Sum of All Fears, based loosely
on Clancy’s 1991 novel of the same name, Paramount pulled a switcheroo.
Clancy’s original baddies were a motley crew of unreconstructed German
Communists, a Sioux convict, and—the stumbling block—Hamas-like Palestinian
terrorists opposed to the peace process. Long before Sept. 11, these were
replaced with slickly dressed, easy-to-hate European neo-Nazis.
Though a staple of
political thrillers since the days of the Ayatollah Khomeini, Muslim terrorists
on-screen have been dwindling in numbers since the mid-1990s. Since then,
groups like the American-Arab
Anti-Discrimination Committee
and the Council on American-Islamic Relations  have condemned
movies like 1994’s True Lies and 2000’s Rules of Engagement, both
of which featured violent, fanatical Muslims….
Salam reports that CAIR was demanding that
the producers excise villainous Muslims
from the script of The Sum of All Fears even
before the script had been completed, and substitute more acceptable villains.
Which the director, Phil Alden Robinson, did, settling on – wait for it – neo-Nazis!
Robinson bowed and scraped and displayed his best face of dhimmitude in a
letter to CAIR:
“I hope you
will be reassured that I have no intention of promoting negative images of
Muslims or Arabs, and I wish you the best in your continuing efforts to combat
discrimination.” Ben Affleck, the new Jack Ryan, has applauded the
decision, arguing that “the Arab terrorist thing has been done a million
times in the movies.” (As opposed to the neo-Nazi thing?)
And remember, Nazis are never brown, black,
or yellow. There are always white. Except, perhaps, for President Barack Obama.
If Bill Clinton was the “first Negro president,” then Obama is a
fascist – and a racist – looking for a devoted, no-questions-asked-or-permitted
following.
Salam ends his short piece with a
flip-floppy advisory:
But Americans have
demonstrated that they can separate a small, violent minority from the vast
majority of peace-loving Arabs and Muslims, and a little realism in the movies
wouldn’t change that….
Salam misses the point that Muslims aren’t
necessarily Arabs (or he doesn’t stress it enough), and that Islam can’t be
divorced from being a Muslim. Sooner or later, Muslims must all wage violent
jihad, or adopt a stealth policy of getting directors like Robinson to help sabotage
our “miserable house” with our own hands. Even if they’re just
blocking traffic while they pray or demand halal
meals for their kids in school or in prison.
Further on in time is a Guardian article of
January 25th, 2007, “From
Aladdin to Lost Ark, Muslims get angry at ‘bad guy’ film images
;
Crude
and exaggerated stereotypes are fuelling Islamophobia, says study.”
Popular films
ranging from Hollywood blockbusters to children’s cartoons are depicting
“crude and exaggerated” stereotypes of Muslims and perpetuating
Islamophobia, according to a study published today. A report by the Islamic
Human Rights Commission argues that films as diverse as The Siege, a portrayal of a terrorist attack on New York starring
Denzel Washington and Bruce Willis, the Disney film Aladdin and the British comedy East is East have helped demonize
Muslims as violent, dangerous and threatening, and reinforce prejudices.
The study, titled
The British media and Muslim representation: the ideology of demonization,
argues that Hollywood has a crucial role in influencing how the public views
Muslims.
A survey conducted
as part of the research revealed that Muslims in Britain felt negative images
of their faith on the big and small screen had consequences in their daily
lives. Those interviewed “found a direct correlation between media
portrayal and their social experiences of exclusion, hatred, discrimination and
violence”.
Apparently all the efforts of Hollywood to
present sympathetic and undistorted and un-invented aspects of Muslim existence
since the Middle East Quarterly article in 2001, have been for naught. Muslims
are still dissatisfied.
As well as deep
unease with big screen portrayals, the research also found a perception of
“unashamed bias” in the media against Muslims, with 62% believing the
media to be Islamophobic and 16% describing it as racist. Only 4% considered
its representation “fair”. The authors call for more power for cinema
censors to be able to curtail or even decline certification of
“objectionable material”, as well as more effective media watchdogs
and increased responsibility in coverage of issues involving Muslims on the
part of newspapers and television. The report, part of a series produced by the
commission – a research and campaigning body – with the backing of the Joseph
Rowntree charitable trust, is significant in that it seeks to provide a direct
voice for the Muslim community in Britain.
Well, if you ask a Muslim if he’s unhappy
with how he’s treated and perceived in a country he wants to adopt Sharia law,
in which all non-Muslims must defer to Muslim law and
“sensibilities,” and to sanction all the brutal, primitive
“traditions” of Islam, he’s likely to join the majority and answer,
Yes, British (or American) culture is Islamophobic and I’m demonized.
The Guardian article also discusses Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Siege, East is East (a British television series), Executive Decision, and House
of Sand and Fog
. One film that exercised Muslims’ sensitivities in Britain
and in the U.S. over negative portrayals of Muslims was Disney’s Aladdin.
The cartoon Aladdin
faced protests on release in 1993 because its opening song referred to a place
where “they cut off your ear if they
don’t like your face
“, forcing Disney executives to edit out the
lines. Today’s report says: “Rather than portray the Arab culture and
Islamic religion in a positive or neutral light, the producers associate it
with harsh punishments and oppressive practices.
The report queries
why a children’s cartoon describes Aladdin’s homeland as “barbaric”,
and notes that “good Arabs” including Aladdin are given American
accents while the rest of the cast have “exaggerated and ridiculous Arab
accents”.
Not barbaric? Nothing is cut off one’s face
if it isn’t liked in an Islamic culture? Why, that’s so Islamophobic, it’s a
tissue of lies! Really? Here’s
evidence to the contrary – and this is aside from the countless instances of
whipping, sentences of death for adultery, female genital mutilation, and being
treated like chattel, in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and even in
Britain and the U.S.  Don’t judge: It’s
not your culture. But Western culture
is evil, and must be destroyed, or made to submit to Islam. Only we Muslims (and
other Third Worlders) have a right to judge.
Finally, in the Daily Mail report, there is
this odd statement that goes against everything we know about British and
American Muslims:
There was
widespread agreement among more than 1,100 Muslims questioned by researchers
that media reports involving Muslims in Britain are “selective, biased,
stereotypical and inaccurate”, with Muslims generally considered as
“others” and outsiders.
But that’s
the way they want it. They want to be “separate from but equal to”
the host country – until they completely vanquish it and call it a part of the
global caliphate. This is the general Muslim attitude in Britain, Europe, and
the U.S.
We come to the most recent article about
Hollywood and Islam, Oliver Williams’s Gatestone piece of July 10th,
Hollywood,
Islam, and Political Correctness
.”
Williams discusses many of the same movies
as Mandel and Salam. One deserves special attention, Roland Emmerich’s 2112, another disaster film.
Similarly, during
production of the film 2012 the director Roland Emmerich had considered demolishing
the Grand Mosque in Mecca
on screen but was persuaded not to. In the film,
which depicted a global apocalypse, the obliteration of the Sistine
chapel and St Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican and the Christ the Redeemer
statue in Rio de Janeiro is vividly rendered while Middle Eastern landmarks are
spared. Emmerich stated, “We have to all, in the western world, think
about this. You can actually let Christian symbols fall apart, but if you would
do this with [an] Arab symbol, you would have … a fatwa… so I kind of left
it out.”
Emmerich, the newly inducted dhimmi, slinks
away, afraid to face Islam.
Emmerich went on to
direct White House Down. The
New Republic
was accurate in saying it resembled 24 re-written
by Noam Chomsky. Jamie Foxx played a souped-up action-man Obama about to bring
peace to the world by pulling American troops out of the Middle East. Evil
American patriots violently take over the White House in order to launch a
nuclear strike against Iran.
Well, who else but “evil American patriots”
would commit such a dastardly crime? Muslims? Nawh! Besides, that would be
“racial profiling,” even though Islam is not a “race.” But
it’s de rigueur to profile whites, as
racists, as gun-clingers, as Tea Party patriots. For the Left, whites are the
default perpetrators.
And here is the Cujo Meme:  It is a cinematic
analogy of how our State Department and Hollywood perceive Islam and Muslims,
perceptions mirrored in their treatment of Muslims and Islam (and also of
illegal immigrants), in film and at the negotiation tables.  
Muslims are just like friendly, docile St.
Bernard dogs. But, bitten by the rabid bats of Islamophobic distortions, persecution,
isolation, lies, discrimination, and attitudes of moral superiority by
Westerners, the lovable dog goes mad and occasionally goes on a rampage against
its tormentors.   
It’s a tragedy that some people lose their
lives in such incidents, but, who can blame the killers? They have legitimate
grievances that have not been addressed with any sincere understanding or
compassion. The hegemony of Western “civilization” must be challenged
and dissolved if there is to be “peace.” If there’s violence, it’s
all our fault, not that of those going on rampages. Can one really morally
judge dogs infected with rabies?
But Islam is basically a good dog. See?
It’s that simple. This has been the contextual premise of our foreign policy
for a long time, and Hollywood’s, as well. Muslims and Islam are not to be
toyed with or bothered. The Cujo Meme
won’t be challenged by those infected by it. They’re Lost Boys (and Girls). The
only reward for engaging these people in argumentation is the venomous spittle
of their replies splattering in one’s face.
The Cujo
Meme carries the death-guarantors of multiculturalism, subjectivism, political
correctness, and critical theory boiled down to an operative ideology designed
to combat independent minds and individualism and reason. The Cujo Meme is based on altruism:
Surrender your values in the name of peace; if you refuse, you are a heartless
warmonger. Or a racist.  Man bites dog,
gets infected. Or, dog bites man, infecting the man.
If anyone in the State Department had any
movie-making skills, they’d produce movies that would be in sync with what Hollywood’s
put out for years.
And if anyone in Hollywood had diplomatic
skills (not that the actual practitioners have many), our foreign policy is
exactly what we see today.
Gazan “photo journalists” are
adept at faking reality, just as Hollywood is when it comes to politics, and
just as our foreign policy is when dealing with reality. After all, as they say
in Hollywood and Foggy Bottom, mind creates reality, and if there’s to be
“peace” in the world, our minds must be in sync.

The Jihadist in the White House

Unknown to each other, President Barack
Obama and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas walk into a bar, and meet, well, at
the bar. Obama is there for a secret Marlboro and his favorite martini. Abbas
is there to escape Hamas gunmen after his head and maybe order a beer with
lemonade. After sitting on adjoining stools and exchanging “high fives”
“fist-bumps,” and playing a half-round of scissors-paper-rock, they
notice each other’s lapel pins.
Abbas is wearing one of the Palestinian flag.
Obama is wearing a “Hope
and Change
” pin, which he alternates with an alleged American flag pin
with diagonal red and white stripes. Or
no pin at all
.
Abbas cheerfully offers to trade pins with
Obama. Obama says that’s a great idea. Abbas fixes the Hope and Change pin to
his lapel, and Obama fixes the Palestinian one to his lapel. Then they laugh
and exclaim together, “Now we are truly on the same side!”
And together they retort, “Haven’t we always been?” They laugh again in
the knowledge that they’re in such perfect sync.
That’s the punch line. Something of a
downer, isn’t it? Not funny at all?
Nevertheless, it’s true.
Now, Barack Obama is a jihadist on many fronts: In his domestic policies, and in his
foreign policies. For example, he is now proposing that Congress appropriate
$3.7 billion in “humanitarian” aid for sub rosa amnesty to thousands of illegal immigrants who have been
bussed up to the U.S./Mexican border. About 95% of this aid will not go
directly to the illegals, but to federal agencies. The Washington Post’s David
Nakamura and Wesley Lowery, in their July 8th article, “White
House requests $3.7 billion in emergency funds for border crisis
,”
noted that this exorbitant amount won’t benefit the illegals, but bureaucracies,
foreign and domestic:
Under the White
House proposal, most of the emergency funds would be split between the
Department of Health and Human Services — which would receive $1.8 billion to
provide shelter and care to the immigrants — and the Justice and Homeland
Security departments, which would get a combined $1.6 billion to handle
enforcement.
The State
Department would receive $300 million to help the Central American countries
repatriate their citizens and create advertising campaigns about the dangers of
placing children in the hands of smuggling cartels. The White House request
also includes money to help the federal government fight wildfires.
Write off the $300 million that would go
the Central American governments; much of it would be “repatriated”
into the pockets and bank accounts of dictators and bureaucrats. That’s as
natural a law as water flowing downhill. You can bet that any illegal sent back
to his home country will get perhaps a free box of Corn Flakes and a dollar a
month financial assistance guarantee. And maybe a “free” Obama cell
phone thrown in for good measure. But no chickens in every pot.
Why the nearly $4 billion figure proposed
by Obama?  It’s a purely arbitrary figure
partly intended to justify the existence of the DHS and HHS and emasculated
Border Patrol units charged with protecting our southern border. There are,
however, alternatives to sending illegals back where they came from. On July 8th,
Ernest Istook in his Washington Times article, “Flying
illegals home would be 99.5 percent cheaper than Obama’s plan
,”
reveals
just how cheaply they can be sent packing:
We taxpayers are
expected to house, feed, clothe and care for almost 30,000 illegal aliens for a
full year, according to the White House’s official request.
That’s a small
city. Instead, we could fly all of them home for one-half of 1 percent of the
$3.8 billion that President Obama proposes
we spend. That’s a savings of 99.5 percent!

At the unofficial reported cost of $250 per person per day, President Barack Obama is
proposing we spend $1.8 billion “to provide appropriate care for unaccompanied
children.” That works out to 19,726 minors for a year. The $250 a day figure
compares with the $667 one-way cost of an airline ticket from McAllen, Texas,
to Guatemala City, Guatemala, according to both Orbitz and
Priceline. The
combined airfare for 29,358 passengers would be $19.6 million. That is one-half
of 1 percent of President Obama’s overall
$3.8 billion request.
The border “crisis” – one of
Obama’s custom-designed making and one he is happy with – is about more than
tens of thousands of illegals, freeloaders, and other parasites becoming
permanent charges to the American taxpayer. It is also a matter of national
security and the peril in which Obama has placed the country.
Drew Zahn, in his June 6th WND
article, “General:
Border crisis threatens U.S. existence
,” features
Marine Corps
General John Kelly, who warns that:
America’s porous
southern border and the recent surge in illegal immigration is more than just a
“humanitarian crisis,” claims the top U.S. general in charge of Central and
South America, it’s a threat to the United States’ very existence.
Marine Corps Gen.
John Kelly is commander of the U.S. Southern Command, or SOUTHCOM, charged with
responsibility for the Caribbean Sea and all lands south of Mexico.
Particularly in
regards to the drug trade, murder rates and terrorist activity brewing in
Central America, Kelly says, the waves of Latin Americans sweeping through
Mexico and illegally into Texas presents a threat to the U.S. every bit as
serious as Iran or North Korea. “In comparison to other global threats, the
near collapse of societies in [this] hemisphere with the associated drug and
[illegal immigrant] flow are frequently viewed to be of low importance,” Kelly
said in an interview with Defense One. “Many argue these threats are not
existential and do not challenge our national security. I disagree.”

Tell that to the Marines? Obama’s attitude is that Marines are only good for
holding umbrellas over him in the Rose Garden and dying for no good reason in Islamic
pest holes and on VA hospital death lists. Obama hates the military. Have you
ever observed Obama saluting a Marine as he gets off Air Force One or a
helicopter? It’s a comical Alan Alda “MASH” or Three Stooges salute
that mocks the Marine. 
Kelly testified before Congress on the
nature of the threat on our southern border:
“Clearly, criminal
networks can move just about anything on these smuggling pipelines,” Kelly said
in testimony
before the House Armed Services Committee
in February. “Terrorist
organizations could seek to leverage those same smuggling routes to move
operatives with intent to cause grave harm to our citizens or even quite easily
bring weapons of mass destruction into the United States.”
SOUTHCOM’s
intelligence assets reveal the possibility is far more than just crying wolf.
“Supporters and
sympathizers of Lebanese Hezbollah are involved in both licit and illicit
activities in the region,” Kelly told Congress. “Members, supporters, and
adherents of Islamic extremist groups are present in Latin America. Islamic
extremists visit the region to proselytize, recruit, establish business venues
to generate funds, and expand their radical networks. Some Muslim communities
in the Caribbean and South America are exhibiting increasingly extremist
ideology and activities, mostly as a result from ideologues’ activities and
external influence from the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia. Mr. Chairman,
we take all these activities seriously.”
One supposes that Obama would welcome a
Kenyan-style raid by Somalian or other Islamic terrorists on an American mall or
other public venue. It would be another wound he could boast of inflicting on
the country, and provide him with an excuse to assume full authoritarian powers.
Because that is what will happen if the terrorists who have already slipped
over the border, in the persona of
Mexican or South American illegals, go into action.
Is that such an unlikely prediction? Well, who
could have predicted that Obama would, on one hand, call Israel “one”
of America’s best allies in the Middle East (in fact, it is the only ally of ours in that region; Saudi
Arabia is not an ally, it is filching parasite), and on the other, fund
Israel’s enemies, enemies determined to erase Israel from the Middle East map.



If U.S. courts and authorities can indict
individuals for supporting jihad
against this country, Israel, and other
countries, why can’t Obama be charged with the same crime? Is there a difference,
except in scale?  In 2013, for example, Money
Jihad
reported that:
U.S. federal
prosecutors have charged two men with attempting to provide support for
al-Qaida and two affiliated militant groups. Gufran Ahmed Kauser Mohammed, 30,
and Mohamed Hussein Said, 25, made their initial appearance in a federal court
in Miami, Florida on Thursday.
The two men are
accused of conspiring to provide and attempting to provide material support to
al-Qaida, al-Qaida in Iraq and the Somali militant group al-Shabab.
Prosecutors say
they conspired to raise money and recruits for the groups.  They say
Mohammed wired money to Said for the purpose of supporting al-Shabab, and to
another person whom he believed was a fundraiser and recruiter for al-Qaida and
al-Qaida in Iraq. They say the men also agreed to support al-Qaida by moving
experienced al-Shabab fighters to the conflict in Syria.
Shariah
Finance Watch
lists a number of terrorist funding operations, some
squashed, others not.
The Wall Street Journal on June 6th,
in its article, “State
winks at the Palestinian merger with terror group
,” questioned the
policy of supporting Israel’s (and our) enemies in the form of “aid”
to the so-called Palestinian State, which dominates that fictive entity and
which is currently firing rockets at Israel, our erstwhile “ally.”
The 1988 Hamas
Charter explicitly commits the Palestinian terror group to murdering Jews. Thanks
to the formation this week of an interim government uniting Hamas and the
Palestinian Authority, which the U.S. supports to the tune of more than $400
million a year, the American taxpayer may soon become an indirect party to that
enterprise.
The Wall Street Journal is somewhat
clueless about the “merger,” later in the article implying that it is
somehow feasible and workable, if only Hamas would stop attacking Israel with
rockets and guns. Then Congress could pass the appropriations with a good
conscience. Congress has a long wait ahead of it.
On July 9th, Daniel Greenfield in
his FrontPage article made some pertinent observations about the PA/Hamas merger:
Obama’s
people have insisted that the PLO-Hamas unity government now running the
Palestinian Authority has nothing to do with Hamas and the current attacks on
Israeli towns and cities.

Meanwhile Fatah, presided over by PA President Abbas, who according to Obama is
Israel’s peace partner, declared that
Fatah and Hamas and Islamic
Jihad had a whole lot in common
.

Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah announced
this morning in a Facebook post that the military wings of Hamas, Fatah and
Palestinian Islamic Jihad are “brothers-in-arms,” united by “one God, one
homeland, one enemy, one goal.”
Does this mean that Obama will
finally stop funding the Hamas/PLO unity government? About as likely as Hamas
giving up violence and moving to Brussels to bake croissants.
Of course, subsidizing the
“Palestinian” state predates Obama. But Obama has made clear in no
uncertain terms his root hostility to Israel, and would like to see it agree to
reduce itself to its fictive and suicidal pre-1967 borders. He knows full well
that such an event would trigger the wholesale onslaught of Hamas, Al Queda,
and every other Islamic terror organization on Israel.
Before Obama makes any policy suggestions,
or even abuses his executive powers by implementing policies without Congress’s
leave, he cannot help but know the deleterious consequences of those policies
beforehand. His policies, from his anti-Israel one, to his pro-Islam one, to
his pro-DREAM ACT one (see my article, “Invasion
by Invitation
“), to his refusal to okay the Keystone Pipeline one
until he’s good and ready, to his anti-military one (except when he wants to
make unauthorized war on other countries), are all instances of crimes
committed with malice aforethought.
There is no other credible explanation for
his actions. He is not naïve, ignorant, “wrong,” or incompetent as
even super-critical conservatives insist on accusing him of being. He knows
exactly what he is doing. He is a master of the Saul Alinsky/Cloward-Piven
strategies to convert the U.S. from a country pock-marked with a
strength-sapping welfare state into a full-scale fascist one.
Obama is a multi-talented jihadist (and
nihilist).
And that is no laughing matter.

Invasion by Invitation

Altruism, or the sacrifice of values for
lesser ones, or for none at all, has sired many of the most horrendous,
treacherous crimes in history, committed in the name of a “greater”
good. But, that is the nature of altruism: If values exist, altruism requires
that they be sacrificed, destroyed, or discarded. Altruism, practiced
consistently, is essentially nihilistic in nature.
I grew tired very early on listening to the
repeated, self-righteous nonsense that Americans have sacrificed their lives to
fight for their country or to advance democracy in the world. Frankly, I am not
interested in advancing “democracy” anywhere, in any country, not if
it means the literal sacrifice of American lives and treasure. But if by chance
Americans have lost their lives in such a “moral adventure” (a Progressive/Wilsonian
term, and Woodrow Wilson was nothing if not a willing sacrificer), and if such
a project were then abandoned (as Obama has abandoned Iraq), then, indeed those
lives were sacrificed. An American fighting
for his own country is not “sacrificing” anything. He is fighting to
preserve a value, and putting his life at risk doing so.
President Barack Obama is in competition
with himself to see how malicious and destructive he can be. One is hard
pressed to fashion a chart of every evil, consciously malign, deliberately pernicious
action he has taken since assuming office six grueling years ago. The chart and
accompanying list would be revealing and several pages long without annotations.
Readers of my columns know that list all too well.
However, if one wanted evidence of just how
racist Obama is, all one need to is examine his policy of encouraging tens of
thousands of Mexicans to enter the country illegally, and add to that violation
of his oath of office  his ancillary
policy of encouraging the bussing of thousands of ignorant, disease-ridden
Hondurans and other  Central Americans
into the country, with plans to resettle them in selected towns and cities
across the country.
The shocking revelation – a revelation made
under duress and in the face of threats of arrest of journalists and medical
staff by the federal government – that the overwhelming number of Central
Americans carry communicable diseases, diseases once eradicated or in decline
this in this country, but now reappearing or on the rise again, should be
enough to raise the hackles of anyone who values this country’s future.  Todd
Starnes
of Fox News reported on July 2nd on the conditions
inside a “camp” at Lackland Air Force Base near San Antonio.  A nurse said:
… children
in the camp had measles, scabies, chicken pox and strep throat as well as
mental and emotional issues.
“It was not
a good atmosphere in terms of health,” she said. “I would be talking to
children and lice would just be climbing down their hair.”
A former
nurse at the camp told me she was horrified by what she saw.
“We have so
many kids coming in that there was no way to control all of the sickness – all
this stuff coming into the country,” she said. “We were very concerned at one
point about strep going around the base.”
Both the
counselor and the nurse said their superiors tried to cover up the extent of
the illnesses.
“When they
found out the kids had scabies, the charge nurse was adamant – ‘Don’t mention
that. Don’t say scabies,’” the nurse recounted. “But everybody knew they had
scabies. Some of the workers were very concerned about touching things and
picking things up. They asked if they should be concerned, but they were told
don’t worry about it.”
On July 7th, Starnes
further
reported that the government is claiming that pandemic illnesses
and the medical conditions of especially the children are exaggerated. However:
However, at least a
half dozen anonymous sources, including nurses and health care providers who
worked at Lackland, allege that the government is covering up what they believe
to be a very serious health threat. Several of my sources tell me that
tuberculosis has become a dangerous issue at both the border and the camps.
“The amount of
tuberculosis is astonishing,” one health care provider told me. “The
nurses are telling us the kids are really sick. The tuberculosis is definitely
there.”
Texas Department of
State Health Services Commissioner David
Lakey, M.D
. says state health officials have seen only three cases of
tuberculosis, the Associated Press reports. One of my sources with close ties to the Texas HHS
tells me all three cases were reported in Austin. However, nurses at Lackland
in San Antonio, said they know of at least four teenagers in their camp who
have tuberculosis.
But…but…they’re CHILDREN!  Still, anyone reporting the truth about the
conditions of the detention centers and the health of their occupants, has been
threatened with arrest if the news is broadcast to the American public. Kit
Daniels of InfoWars
reported on June 27th:
The Department of Defense has threatened me with imprisonment in response
to our report on the illegal alien shelter at Lackland Air Force Base in San
Antonio, Texas.
In a certified
letter sent to Infowars, the Defense Department claims that I engaged in
“unauthorized photography and broadcast” which were somehow “detrimental” to
the “safety and security of the installation” even though the photos of Lackland’s illegal alien shelter, which is
housing nearly 2,000 illegals at a cost to taxpayers of around $250 per immigrant per day,
were taken outside the shelter and are clearly in the public’s best interest.
“You are hereby put
on notice that should you make unauthorized entry into any of the Joint Base
San Antonio (JBSA) installations in the future, a debarment order will be
issued,” stated the letter, which added that further action could lead to
imprisonment.
So, whose country is the Department of
Defense “defending”? Our country? Or Mexico? Or the Country of the
Blind, where the one-eyed policymaker is king?  The Tea
Party
would also seem to question the propriety of threatening to punish
Kit Daniel exercising his First Amendment rights:
It would appear
that DoD officials are somehow more threatened by a journalist reporting on
illegal immigration than they are with illegal aliens using military
accommodations at taxpayers’ expense while homeless vets wander the streets.
For one, it’s
extremely unlikely that Lackland’s illegals have been fully screened for the
“safety and security of the installation” since the Department of Health and
Human Services, which is operating the shelter, admitted it does not
bother to thoroughly check the backgrounds of immigrants.
And what about the
safety and security of America? Multiple cases of swine flu (H1N1) have
already been confirmed among illegal immigrants being detained in South
Texas.
On July 7th CNS
News
reported on the DHS’s official policy:
Department of
Homeland Security head Jeh Johnson answered some questions on NBC’s Meet the
Press about the condition and future of especially the unaccompanied illegal
immigrants. Or rather did not answer some questions:
Speaking to NBC’s
“Meet the Press” on Sunday, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson
carefully avoided answering multiple questions about the deportation of some
50,000 children who have come to this country illegally from Central America so
far this year.
“We have to do
right by the children,” Johnson said. “I have personally encountered
enough of them to know that we have to do right by the children, but at the end
of the day, in the final analysis, our border is not open to illegal migration,
and we will stem the tide.”
No, we don’t
need to “do right by the children.” That is the typical altruist, Trojan
Horse of most government policies that seek to enforce statist legislation. It was
used to control smoking, obesity, guns, and even education. Anyone who opposes
our plans to “protect” children must be a heartless beast and should
be beaten with a truncheon and exiled to non-personhood.
No, we don’t
need to “do right by the children.” Who knows their origin? Were they
sold by their parents to smugglers? Kidnapped? Rounded up by scores and loaded
onto buses? Tragic as those scenarios might be, the United States is under no
obligation to allow them into this country, whether or not they carry
communicable diseases. Jeh Johnson “promised” that the tide of
illegals from Central America will be “stemmed.” He blamed Central American
poverty and violence on the influx of immigrants. Believe that if you wish.
He’s an Obama appointee.
CNS
also reported that U.S. Representative from Idaho Raul Labrador contradicted Johnson’s
assertions.
Also appearing on
“Meet the Press,” Rep. Raul Labrador, an Idaho Republican, disputed
Johnson’s statement that children are coming here mainly to flee violence back
home. “The reality is that the violence has existed in these Central
American countries for a long period of time,” Labrador said. “The
level of poverty has existed in these countries for a long period of
time.”
Labrador said the
reason for the influx is President Obama’s decision to implement a policy that
defers deportation for certain people who were brought to the United States
illegally as children. “And as soon as the administration in 2012 decided
to do DACA, which is the deferred action program, that’s when the number of
children started moving up, and that’s because these criminal cartels in
…Central and South America decided to start advertising that there was a free
pass.”
Labrador called for
the immediate deportation of the families and children who are arriving here.
He said the frustration people are seeing in places like Murrieta, California
stems from the perception that the Obama administration is “doing nothing
about border security.”
Cartels? Oh, yes. Those cartels. The Fast and Furious pets
of Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice, not to mention the
“rules of engagement” for Border Patrol agents, guaranteed to let the
cartels pass unmolested into this country, and also, to punish those agents for
doing their job.  Let’s not only sell
guns to these killing machines, but let them form rackets to further infest America
with helpless children and semi-literate, ignorant adults who haven’t a clue to
what is being done to and with them.
Daniel Greenfield, in his FrontPage article
of July 3rd, ICE
Open About Helping Illegal Aliens Infiltrate US
,” suggests a more
sinister motive behind Obama’s “open borders” policy.
After residents of Murietta,
California, stood up to Obama and his illegal alien
voter dumping strategy,
a town meeting was held in which an
unapologetic ICE official made it
clear that
dumping illegal aliens on America
was now policy….
It’s not humane to
dump mass amounts of illegal alien invaders on already overburdened Americans,
but it is the politically correct thing to do on an administration that is
determined to crush political opposition by importing a new electorate.
And where are these illegals being settled?
Here is an interactive Google
map
of their final destinations. It isn’t just in Texas. It’s all over the
country. Obama’s policies also encourage the influx of Muslims from all over Islam:
Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and so on. :
The residents of Lawrenceville, Virginia told
off federal officials during a meeting to discuss settling illegals in their
small town. Kerry Picket of Breitbart
News
on June 20th reported:
Over 1,000 angry residents of the small, rural town here gathered at
Brunswick High School on Thursday and reamed out local, state, and federal
government officials for offering the St. Paul’s College building as temporary
emergency shelter for 500 unaccompanied alien children (UACs) coming from
Texas. St. Paul’s, a historically black college, shut down five years ago after
losing its accreditation….
Lawrenceville resident Arron Smith said firmly, “The people here don’t
want to ask you any questions. We really don’t want to hear your selling
points. We don’t want to hear your politically correct terms. We talk slow
around here. We got a little twang, but talk direct. Let me say this to you as
I look square in your eyes. We do not want you here.”
Obama’s project seems to have three basic
purposes: to overload the welfare system – because that’s where all these
illegals will wind up, and taxpayers are already footing the bill for their
housing, feeding, and medical care – to cause it to crash, giving him and the
Democrats an excuse to completely nationalize the healthcare system; to  provide a “grateful” and greater
voting bloc which will help to perpetuate the Progressive/Democratic grip on
the country; and to transform the country into one whose population is
basically brown and black, and not “white.” Mexicans, Muslims, and
others.
“Let’s swamp America with
‘minorities,’ including Muslims, and put an end to this ‘white’ hegemony. Let’s
show ‘whitey’ that ‘clinging to their guns’ isn’t going to do them any good. We
have more guns. We’ll have more votes. We’re going to ‘transform’ America even
if it means starting a race war.” (By “white,” Obama also
includes Asians of Japanese, Chinese or Korean descent.)
The last charge I make is one that can be
made by anyone with 20/20 cognitive skills, so I don’t think it’s that radical.
Obama’s racist premises often come through in spite of his and his advisers’
best efforts to suppress them.  Speaking
of buses, Obama didn’t hesitate throwing his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright,
under one when that minister’s thundering Black Liberation Theology became
known to the country. But Wright’s rant has become an integral part of his
former parishioner’s domestic and foreign policies. Obama, too,
“God-damns-America.”
When immigrants came to this country early
in the 20th century, they did not arrive in search of , or  to be instantly enrolled in, or to take
advantage of a welfare state, nor could the federal government want them to.
There was no welfare state. Immigrants came here to escape being controlled,
oppressed and manipulated by the statist governments they left behind. Ones suspected
of carrying communicable diseases were quarantined until they got a clean bill
of health. Those not passing medical scrutiny were deported.
In the meantime, here are some questions
journalists with more resources than I have might want to investigate:
ü 
Has
the Mexican government been paid to allow buses originating in Central America and
carrying illegals to pass through Mexico on their way to the U.S. border?
ü 
Which
bus lines, airlines, and other transportation carriers have been
“hired” to bring illegals from Central America to U.S. borders? Have they
been paid for the service? And, if so, by whom?
ü 
What
is the extent of Mexican and Central American drug and other criminal gangs’ involvement
in the disaster?
A Breitbart article of July 6th,
What
a Difference a Century Makes: The U.S. Was Firm with Mexico in 1914—but in
2014, Not So Much
,” details past U.S. policy in dealing with
Mexico, one even Progressive President Woodrow Wilson thought wise to adhere
to: retaliatory force.
That’s always been US policy. Yet today, the Obama administration seems
content to abandon two centuries of policy continuity. The chaos along the
US-Mexican border is a clear threat to American well-being, and yet the Obamans
seem to be oblivious to the danger—or maybe even happy about it. And, of
course, the Obamans show no interest whatsoever in the possible threats 
from around the world that could be coming to the US through Mexico.
  
Just on Sunday, the Obama administration’s Customs and Border
Protection chief assured us that the massive recent influx is “not dangerous.” Yet common sense tells us that we
aren’t safe if we can’t identify all those streaming across our border. Could
they be criminals? Terrorists? Unless and until we are closely scrutinizing the
identity of every border-crosser, we simply don’t know.  
But we do know this: in 2011, some 7518 individuals from countries that the US lists as
“state sponsors of terrorism,”
 or from countries listed as complicit
in terror, were apprehended by US authorities. And how many were not apprehended?
Once again, we have no idea. And since 2011, of course, we have seen the rise
of ISIS in the Middle East, indicating that the terror threat has grown worse.   
Ayn Rand, the
novelist/philosopher called racism “the lowest, most crudely primitive
form of collectivism.”
It is the notion of
ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man’s genetic
lineage—the notion that a man’s intellectual and characterological traits are
produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry. Which means, in
practice, that a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but
by the characters and actions of a collective of ancestors….
Racism is a doctrine
of, by and for brutes. It is a barnyard or stock-farm version of collectivism,
appropriate to a mentality that differentiates between various breeds of
animals, but not between animals and men.
Like every form of
determinism, racism invalidates the specific attribute which distinguishes man
from all other living species: his rational faculty. Racism negates two aspects
of man’s life: reason and choice, or mind and morality, replacing them with
chemical predestination.

Barack
Obama is not only a racist,
but a collectivist and a self- empowered altruist willing to destroy a country because
its founders were “dead white males.” 
He hates the ideas that brought this country into existence, and the
holders of those ideas.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén