Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon
Drawing The Line
January 9, 2015
URL of the Original Posting Site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/01/drawing-line/

It was the French who came to the aid of a young America and it was the French who gave us the gift of Lady Liberty. Sadly, it was the French who found themselves on the 21st century battlefield as liberty was assaulted — our venerable freedom of speech and the press, as well as expression. We have allowed the enemy into our home and refuse to acknowledge it. Our own president, Barack Hussein Obama has said “the future shall not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” and “let me be clear, ISIS is not Islamic.” 
So once again, we are forced to acquiesce to a vile theocratic-political totalitarian ideology that does not conform to the concept of “coexistence.” In the case of this latest attack — the assailants were born in France. Somehow, they never embraced the ideal of liberty and freedom. Somehow, they decided to be parasitic invaders who fed off the host until a time when they deemed it was time to attack. And over time we have allowed the invading parasite to fester in its own communities all to our detriment — under the guise of “multiculturalism.”


Yes, Western civilization is superior, and there’s nothing for which we should be ashamed. We must begin to win the information and propaganda war and stop redefining evil just to make ourselves feel better — actually wishing away the problem because we prefer to dismiss its existence.
The Muslim community must come to realize it has a responsibility and the collective patience of Western civilization grows thinner with each of these incidents — at least from those who love freedom and liberty and refuse to surrender. We must accept the reality of this enemy and make a decision sooner rather than later to vanquish it. And yes, that means developing a strategy for victory. I’m just waiting for those who will say, “this is what can happen and perhaps it was deserved.” Do the Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Copts deserve what they are getting? Are we now accepting crucifixions of Christians and the massacre of children at a school in Pakistan?
It is time we unite and make the stand to say no more. It is time we say we reserve the right to criticize and editorialize against those we wish. We cannot cower in fear because of a cartoon caricature of a 7th century figure. We cannot allow anyone to define the limits and constraints on our freedoms and liberties. If so, then we pass onto our subsequent generations something that shines a lot less bright than the gift which we were given.
Islamic blasphemy laws? Give me a break.
There is a moment in time relating to this Paris Islamic terror attack which we must seize upon — before the news cycle moves on to something else. We are going to have to decide whether our liberties are worth the fight.
According to a report from Politico, which broke the story, the Aderholt bill would also reinstate Secure Communities, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deportation program that relies on partnership among federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. The Secure Communities program was discontinued on November 20, 2014, by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Among other parts of the Aderholt bill, as described by Politco:
In a Fiscal Year 2014 report issued by DHS, Secretary Jeh Johnson offered, as one excuse for declining deportations, “the increasing number of jurisdictions declining to honor ICE detainers, [which] also impacted DHS enforcement operations.”
In our article posted last October 8, we reported on a bill introduced in the New York City Council by Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito that would “significantly restrict the conditions under which the NYPD complies with … ICE detainer requests.” The bill was passed by the city council and signed into law by New York Mayor Bill de Blasio on November 14.
Aderholt’s bill is presently at the House Office of the Legislative Counsel, which provides legislative drafting services to House members.
In the last Congress, Aderholt cosponsored H.R. 5142, the Protection of Children Act of 2014. The bill’s stated purpose was: “To amend the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to provide for the expedited removal of unaccompanied alien children who are not victims of a severe form of trafficking in persons and who do not have a fear of returning to their country of nationality or last habitual residence, and for other purposes.”
The William Wilberforce Act was passed to prevent victims of child trafficking from being automatically sent back to those who had effectively enslaved them. It provides for a hearing before an immigration judge to evaluate youthful illegal immigrants’ situations before possible deportation. However, because of the overwhelming flood of such young illegal aliens last year, the backlog in our immigration courts became enormous, sometimes extending for years.
H.R. 5142 was never brought to the floor for a vote.
Poltico reported, citing an unnamed source familiar with a daily House leadership meeting held this week, that Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), the third-ranking House Republican, discussed Aderholt’s planned legislation during the meeting. At press time, there was still no text available for legislation introduced in the 114th Congress. (Bills are generally sent to the Library of Congress from the Government Printing Office a day or two after they are introduced on the floor of the House or Senate.) However. one piece of legislation introduced in the Senate on January 6, S.11, appears to have been drafted with President Obama’s recent executive actions in mind. Its description reads: “A bill to protect the separation of powers in the Constitution of the United States by ensuring that the President takes care that the laws be faithfully executed, and for other purposes.”
S. 11 is sponsored by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is among its 18 co-sponsors. It has been sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Paul introduced a bill in the last Congress, the Preventing Executive Overreach on Immigration Act, which was companion legislation to Rep. Ted Yoho’s bill of the same name (H.R. 5759) that passed the House of Representatives on December 4, 2014 on a 219-197 vote. Because the bill was introduced shortly before the end of the 113th Congress, when the Senate was still controlled by Democrats, it had no chance of being brought up for a vote and was considered to be a symbolic gesture.
The Preventing Executive Overreach on Immigration Act presented a Constitution-based argument against President Obama’s executive action on immigration, and was written as a direct response to Obama’s nationwide address on November 20 announcing that action. In a release place on his Senate webpage, Paul explained:
This legislation would end President Obama’s executive action on immigration and restore the Congress’ constitutional role as the body to craft legislation. Article I of the Constitution places the legislative powers in Congress. The President does not have the power under the Constitution to rewrite immigration laws to exempt classes of people from a law that was passed by Congress and signed into law.
When the text of S.11 is received from the GPO in a day or two, it will interesting to see if it employs very similar language in making a strong case against Obama’s violation of the separation of powers. We will also be looking for a Senate bill similar to the one Aderholt will soon introduce in the House.
While Obama would undoubtedly veto any of these anti-executive action bills should they arrive on his desk, they would still serve to highlight his actions and make him accountable to the people and to history.
Adina Kutnicki — January 7, 2015MOST civilized folks can agree that pedophilia is a monstrous violation. A vile crime. In this regard, aside from everything else, is there any other “religion” which sanctions, “koshers”, it? DIDN’T think so…

THE normative legal definition of the crime of pedophilia is very clear and without ambiguity. It specifies sexual engagement – direct contact with males or females – who are under the legal age of consent. Child molestation is its cornerstone.
IT matters not a whit that the medical community has labeled it a “disease”, as has been done with addiction, specifically alcoholism. In others words, when material harm is caused to another, it is neither here nor there – to the victim – what labels are used to “explain” away ones actions.
NOW, no one who is honestly familiar with the “Black Heart(s)” of Islam can deny: its underpinnings support the most heinous crimes imaginable. That’s a fact.
When I was in Iraq I had the opportunity to interview several captured Al Qaeda members. I asked them what type of future attacks America would endure. The answer over and over was that the hearts of Americans would be attacked. They explained that this meant the American children would be attacked because they are the hearts of the American people. These terrorists said the attacks would not necessarily be physical attacks, but rather a slow indoctrination in U.S. public schools and universities. The indoctrinating would include the Islamic ideology is peaceful and even as non-Muslims they support Islam and the Muslim people.
I have had several Islamic leaders tell me that Muslims who practice ‘Pure Islam’ have what is called ‘Black Hearts’. These Muslims had no conscience, feelings, emotions, love or caring about anything or anyone aside from Allah. Essentially they have no souls. They have an empty heart. These people have no feelings for even their own children; needless to say they have no feelings for children who are not theirs. It is just as easy for them to behead a neighbor child as it would be to behead even their own children. Children are simply a tool for them to use to achieve their ultimate goal of an Islamic Ummah (nation) under Shariah law.
Based on my experiences and studies, the Islamic ideology itself is a dangerous and violent weapon. The true enemies of the non-Muslim world are the ideology of Islam. We can fight and defeat Hamas, Al Qaeda, ISIS, and the dozens of other Islamic acronyms, but we will lose in the end if at some point we do not target the ideology they teach within most mosques. When someone discusses the Hitler ideology of hate and violence, almost automatically people get a sour feeling in their stomachs. Most people realize the ideology of Hitler was a danger to the whole world. Sadly in order to defeat Islamic based terrorists we must have the same sour feeling in our stomach when Islam itself is discussed. Islam is not loving and peaceful and Mohammed never intended for it to be. AND if more substantive proof is required regrading the way Islam treats women and children, well, slavery and Islam’s “dancing boys” should suffice – or not.
BUT to understand the latest Islamic fatwa…فتاوى…is to internalize what it means, both from an Islamic jurisprudence rendering and a cultural one. INTRINSICALLY, while sex with children has always been an Islamic “norm”, the fact that it is now a MAJOR legal rendering, well…. You should know that the “religion of peace” says it’s perfectly okay for an adult male to “marry,” that is, rape the girl.
F. Michael Maloof reports for WND, Jan. 3, 2015, that none other than Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti, Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh, the country’s top religious authority in the ultra-conservative Wahhabi school of Sunni Islam, has ruled it’s acceptable for men to marry girls so young the West would deem it nothing short of pedophilia and rape. As Grand Mufti, Abdulaziz is president of the Supreme Council of Ulema (Islamic scholars) and chairman of the Standing Committee for Scientific Research and Issuing Fatwas, which means he speaks authoritatively in Islamic teachings. The Saudi justice ministry had tried but failed to set 15 as a minimum age to marry a girl in the kingdom. But Grand Mufti Abdulaziz does it even “better,” declaring there is nothing prohibiting Muslim men from marrying girls even younger.
Grand Mufti Abdulzaiz’s more recent ruling on marrying young girls comes following a similar ruling in 2011 by Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, a prominent cleric and member of the Saudi’s highest religious council, who issued a fatwa, or religious edict, that there is no minimum age to marry girls, “even if they are in the cradle.”
Scholars say the age of marrying young girls and consummating the “marriage” is based on the example set by Muhammad when he married Aisha when she was no more than seven years of age, consummating the marriage when she was nine.
“The grand point of the Saudi fatwa, however, is not that girls as young as nine can be married, based on Muhammad’s example, but rather that there is no age limit whatsoever,” Middle East expert Raymond Ibrahim writes in Middle East Forum. “The only question open to consideration is whether the girl is physically capable of handling her ‘husband.’ The lives of countless young girls are devastated because of this teaching.”
Ibrahim cited the cases of an 8-year-old girl who died on her “wedding” night when her “husband” raped her; and a 10-year-old girl who hid from her 80-year-old “husband.” Grand Mufti Abdulaziz and Fawzan’s fatwas come even as Saudi men have been reportedly purchasing young girls from Syrian refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan. As WND recently reported, rich Saudi Arabian men – some associated with the Saudi royal family – have been purchasing for their sexual pleasure Syrian girls and young women from among the hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing the Syrian civil war conflict to Lebanon and Jordan. Most of these Saudi men are said to be in their 60s and 70s. When they tire of the girls, they often hand them off to other men.
“They come into Lebanon and Jordan and go to the Syrian refugee camps where the Syrian families there have nothing,” one Lebanese source told WND. “The Saudis then offer $200 for girls aged 9 to 14 years and take them from their families. Because the families are so desperate for money, they give in to the temptation.”

MIND you, whenever a truth-teller posits that Islam’s “prophet”, Muhammad, was a pedophile – plus other charges – the fury which hails from Muslims and their apologists rains down like wild fire. Explosive-laden.
GRANTED, pedophilia is rampant throughout the west. And the putrid fact is that its vile grasp reaches into the lowest strata of society to the highest. It is an equal opportunity scourge. GO ask those who hob nob with kingpin Jeffrey Epstein – accused pedophile du jour of the jet set – namely, Billy boy Clinton aka Bubba, global warming huskster Al Gore, Prince Andrew and all the rest of the movers and shakers who either partook, or knew but looked aside. Israel’s ex PM Ehud Barak (when he was Defense Minister) flew on Epstein’s private jet and likely witnessed this and that deviance and criminal behavior, but that didn’t stop him (or other high level politicians et al.) from palling around with a pedophile! Oh my…
MONSTROUS appetites…the whole damnable lot of them. NEVERTHELESS, no religion, other than Islam’s death cult, sanctions it!
IF the argument becomes, well, the above is a distinction without a difference, then there is little left to say, other than that Islam is compatible with “acceptable” western norms (other than those held by deviants who are rich, poor or in between) and we should all just get over it. Go back to sleep.
AS porky pig has been known to say, that’s all folks!
Adina Kutnicki is an investigative journalist and independent op-ed contributor to various Zionist and Conservative media outlets. She contributed to an in-depth investigative series at FrontPage Magazine with Lee Kaplan from 2003-2007. They are still working together. Her op-eds have been featured at American Thinker, Israel National News,Israel Insider, The Jewish Press, MidEast Outpost, The Freeman Center For Strategic Studies, HONENU – Providing Legal Aid To Israeli Soldiers & Civilians In Distress, JEWSNEWS.co.il(http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/11/10/why-is-drunk-driving-treated-more-leniently-than-assault-with-a-deadly-weapon-op-ed-by-adina-kutnicki-featured-at-jewsnews-co-il/) as well as at other sites. Some interviews include: The Inquisitr Interviews Adina Kutnicki: The Reality Of Life For An Israeli Patriot and ‘The Muslim Brotherhood’s Quest For Global Dominance – An Interview With Adina Kutnicki.’ Her recent book review On A Wing From The Holy Land [Review Of An Exciting New Novel About The Spiritual Journey Of An Israeli Woman] was also spotlighted at Inquisitr. In addition, she is the Israel Administrator at Islam Exposed Online Her blog – http://www.adinakutnicki.com – received a ‘Watcher of Weasels’ Award – see within – scroll down to ‘Non-Council’ winners. Her full profile can be found at – http://adinakutnicki.com/about/
Editor, Lewiston Morning Tribune:
If I wish to import a horse into the United States from Liberia or any African country other than Morocco, the horse needs to undergo a 60 day quarantine period at a USDA approved quarantine facility prior to mingling with the general population of horses in this country. Africa has a disease called African Horse Sickness that does not exist in the US; this is the way we have kept it out of this country. African Horse Sickness does not cause disease in people, only horses; our government has determined that it would be devastating to the US horse industry if it were to come here.
The United States (and virtually all other countries) require a myriad of tests and often quarantine prior to bringing in a foreign animal.
I can’t legally cross state lines in the United States with a horse or cow without a health certificate signed by a USDA accredited veterinarian stating that the animal has been inspected and found free of infectious disease. In most cases blood tests are also required. In fact I can’t legally cross the Snake River and ride my horse in Idaho without a health certificate and a negative blood test for Equine Infectious Anemia.
I’m not complaining; the United States of America, the States of Idaho and Washington as well as the other 48 states take the health of our livestock very seriously, and we have a very good record at keeping foreign animal diseases out of our country. I am happy to do my part to maintain biosecurity in our animal population.
If I am a resident of Liberia incubating Ebola, to enter the United States all I need to do is present a valid visa, and lie when asked if I have been exposed to Ebola. Within hours (no quarantine required) I can be walking the streets of any city in the United States.
I feel very fortunate to live in a country that values our animals so highly.
David A. Rustebakke, DVM
A new study shows that the number of immigrants in the United States jumped 3 percent in three years — to a record 41.3 million in 2013 — and that the nearly 300,000 who came from Muslim countries pose a major national security threat, the report’s co-author told Newsmax on Thursday.
“All of that does raise national security concerns, and I don’t think there has been any consideration of that,” said Steven Camarota, research director for the Center for Immigration Studies. The Washington-based nonprofit organization released the study on Thursday. It is based on an analysis of Census data from 2010 to last year. Camarota conducted the study and co-authored it with CIS demographer Karen Zeigler.
“The primary threat from a group like ISIS to the homeland is through our immigration system,” Camarota said, referring to the Islamic State terrorist group that has beheaded three Westerners in recent weeks.
“No one’s suggesting that they’re going to launch a missile and hit New York, but rather they’re going to board an airliner and blow it up,” he added. “They’re going to park a car in a public place, they’re going to go on a shooting spree, or any one of those things. Our immigration system is a vital part of national security. Everybody doesn’t seem to recognize that,” Camarota said. “The question is, what are the implications of our rapidly growing Middle Eastern population? The numbers certainly raise it.”
The CIS report shows that the United States was home to a record 41.3 million legal and illegal immigrants last year. That was up nearly 1.4 million from the 39.9 million in 2010, while the number was 31.1 million in 2000.
By comparison, the U.S. immigrant population stood at 9.6 million in 1970. About 16 percent of the U.S. population last year was foreign-born, whether in the country legally or illegally, according to the data. That’s about one in eight residents, or one of every six adults. “Those numbers reflect two basic facts: an extremely high level of legal immigration, a very permissive legal immigration system — and they also reflect a failure to control illegal immigration,” Camarota said.

“Somewhere between a fourth and a third of those immigrants are here illegally.”
The largest number of immigrants in the United States are Mexicans, with more than 11.5 million living here illegally and legally last year. The number of Mexican immigrants fell by 126,126 — or 1 percent — over the period because of some dying and others leaving the country, Camarota said.
According to the study, the Middle Eastern population grew by 207,758 in the period, or 13 percent, to more than 1.8 million last year. That compared with 1.6 million in 2010 and 1.1 million in 2000. Leading the growth from that region was Saudi Arabia, with 43,878 immigrants — nearly double the number who were in the U.S. in 2010. The analysis shows that 88,894 Saudis lived in this country last year. Iraq was next, with about 41,094 immigrants, for a 26 percent increase to a total of 200, 894. But the total number of immigrants from predominantly Muslim countries totaled 295,743 in the period, according to the CIS study. That was up by 13.5 percent.


The total number of immigrants from primarily Muslim countries in the U.S. was more than 2.4 million last year, compared with 2.1 million in 2010 and 1.5 million in 2000. Camarota attributed the rise in Mideast immigration to myriad U.S. policies, whether they granted asylum or refugee status to people from the region or involved the nation’s defense forces.
“Once there is a presence, the possibility of going to the United States becomes a much more realistic possibility,” he said. “The presence of the United States in a country in a big way, whether it’s Afghanistan or Iraq, tends to spur immigration.” Overall, however, the Middle East is only fourth among regions of the world from where people emigrate to the U.S.
The leader is south Asia, which was up 372,546, or 16 percent, to 2.7 million; east Asia, up 364,909, or 5 percent, to 7.8 million; and the Caribbean, up 223,011, or 6 percent, to more than 3.9 million immigrants. China is No. 1 in east Asia, with 217,305 people coming from that country in the period, or 10 percent, for a total of 2.3 million last year. India is the leader in south Asia, with 254,355, or 14 percent, to more than 2 million. More people came to the U.S. from the Dominican Republic than any other Caribbean country, with 111,859, or 13 percent, to a total of 991,046 last year. From Central America — the nexus of the border crisis that has led to hundreds of thousands of illegals, especially minors traveling alone, crossing the Rio Grande into south Texas in recent months — the number of immigrants jumped by 113,744, or 3.7 percent, over the three years.
The number of immigrants from the region in the U.S. surpassed 3.1 million last year. The biggest number, 71,469, came from Guatemala. That marked an 8.6 percent surge, for a total of 902,293. Next was El Salvador, up 3.1 percent, or 38,018; and then Honduras, up 2.1 percent, or 11,017, to a total of 533,598.
“It just reminds us of how enormous the immigrant population is and what a large share of the population it is,” Camarota told Newsmax.
The data added yet another dimension to the immigration debate as President Barack Obama considers what executive actions he will announce after the November congressional elections.
After a high-profile Rose Garden ceremony in May in which he vowed to act unilaterally on immigration because of the continued stalemate in Congress, Obama did an about-face earlier this month and said he would postpone any action until after the elections out of fears that his moves could cause Democrats to lose the Senate.
“What he is still considering after the election is not just the legalization of illegal immigrants on his own, but substantial increases in legal immigration on his own,” Camarota said. “He’s going to reinterpret the law that, for the last 20 years, everyone has thought imposed some caps on green cards and other measures. He’s going to say those caps don’t exist, which would make those numbers higher. To accelerate these numbers even further, that’s something there should be a long national debate about,” Camarota continued. “It’s something that’s very hard to argue that the president should just be able to do on his own.”
A senior Republican aide also highlighted the national security concerns posed by the CIS study.
“This report confronts Congress with important national security and community safety questions,” the aide told Newsmax. “We can’t let our immigration system, like that of the U.K.’s, be used as a vehicle for jihadism and growing pockets of radicalism spreading in our own towns.” 
Highly Controversial and Provocative!!! French magazine Charlie Hebdo published vulgar caricatures.
The latest controversy affecting the Islamic world, the French journal Charlie Hebdo published cartoons of Mohammed the Prophet of Islam. Here is a sample.
Islam, the religion of peace unless you draw the wrong cartoon) The Liberal media covered up what the Arab Spring really was — a takeover by radical Islam.

Share this with everyone you know… Let the Islamist know that we will not be intimidated!

All due respect to Adam, but his understatement is almost a scandal. We’ve posted a lot of incredibly stupid sound bites from MSNBC and other places around here, but I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a dumber exchange. I don’t know who the guy is making the astoundingly obtuse comparison between Jerry Falwell and a bunch of cold-blooded murderers, but as incandescently stupid as that analogy is it’s eclipsed by Wagner’s smug, knowing nods as he talks.
If I follow her response correctly she is saying that we focus on anti-Muslim blasphemy disproportionately because it is so much more “controversial” and “incendiary.”
Well, uh, yes. I guess that’s true. But the reason mockery of Islam is more controversial is because people get killed over it!
To compare Falwell’s lawsuit to these murderers isn’t just astoundingly, jaw-droppingly, stupid. Doing so misses just about every important moral, legal and factual distinction that one can miss. But Wagner doesn’t think that’s good enough. She had to take it a half-step farther and really emphasize how unfair it is that people make it seem like only Muslims are thin-skinned about such things. 
(I will indulge as a matter of charity, that Wagner merely mispoke as she tried to couch reality in MSNBC-friendly euphemisms. “Controversial” and “incendiary” might be her way of saying “barbaric terrorism.” But even if that’s the case, it doesn’t excuse her from failing to respond to this idiotic comparison with the words: “How dare you sir, that is outrageous.”)
I was never a huge fan of Falwell’s, but I always thought his lawsuit had some merit, and was at least understandable in human terms. Also, for what it’s worth, I don’t think it had much to do with his religion. He filed a personal defamation lawsuit, I’m pretty sure. But here’s the thing: when he lost the lawsuit you know what he did? Nothing. Oh I’m sure he griped about it. Wouldn’t you? What he didn’t do was lead a goon squad to Hustler’s offices and murder Larry Flynt and his staff. That’s a pretty meaningful distinction, I think.
While Americans are lured into a complacent sleep by the constant drum beat of social justice, minority rights, inequality, the need for fairness and tolerance and diversity and to be non-judgmental of others or their views, forces are at work to exploit that sentiment.
While the world is filled with the news of Islamic terror other Islamists are at work to silence the critics by holding informational conferences and conducting public outreach.
One such case is happening in Texas at the Curtis Culwell Center (Garland Independent School District property) which is hosting an Islamic conference titled “Stand with the Prophet in Honor and Respect” that proclaims the need to be “Ready to defeat Islamophobia?” according to the Sound Vision Foundation, “a not for profit organization serving Muslims.” The event is scheduled for Saturday, January 17, at 5:00 pm.
The Sound Vision Foundation’s web site states in part: Ready to defeat Islamophobia? This is not an event. It is the beginning of a movement. A movement to defend Prophet Muhammad, his person, and his message. This benefit will raise funds to establish a Strategic Communication Center for the Muslim community, which will develop effective responses to anti-Islamic attacks, as well as to train young Muslims in media.


And two of the speakers slated for this event are: Imam Siraj Wahhaj and Abdul Malik Mujahid. So just who are these individuals?
Wahhaj was listed as an “unindicted person who may be alleged as co-conspirators” in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Wahhaj supports the implementation of Sharia (Islamic law) governance, including its criminal punishments. “Islam is better than democracy. Allah will cause his deen [Islam as a complete way of life], Islam to prevail over every kind of system, and you know what? It will happen,” he has preached.
In September 2013, the NYPD justified its surveillance of Masjid at-Taqwa by pointing to evidence of terrorist and criminal activity there. The assistant imam is suspected of using the mosque to raise money for terrorist groups.
Wahhaj has been a Vice President of the Islamic Society of North America since 1997 and was a member of the North American Islamic Trust’s Board of Advisors from 1989 to 1993.
Abdul Malik Mujahid (according to the web site CreepingSharia) said “Qital [killing] is an essential element of Islam. And sometimes you don’t like it. Qital is ordained upon you, though it is hateful to you, but it may happen that you hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that you love a thing which is bad for you….And one example is, now we have 60 or so Muslim countries, and not a single one of them wants to go for Qital and Jihad for Bosnia. Qital is ordained upon you though it is hateful to you.”
It is absolutely disappointing that a Garland Independent School District would host an event that is aimed at fighting against honest, God fearing Americans who have legitimate concerns about the Islamist movement in America and around the world.
Would Garland host a Nazi Conference? A KKK conference? An Aryan Nation or skinhead conference? An anti-Semitic conference? Then why this one?
Contact the Curtis Culwell Center in Texas and the Garland Independent School District and let them know you think this is an outrage and should be cancelled.
It’s clear Islamists never rest (they lie in wait) and never should non-Muslim Americans rest in the face of such propaganda! Jefferson said to be ever vigilant and educated to the threats of freedom. These groups, like the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) are attempting to misinform the public about Islam and teach others how to brand anything anti-Islam as Islamophobia.
When one group of Americans is unable to criticize that with which they passionately disagree they are no longer being treated as equals. They don’t see it this way, why, because Islam doesn’t see non-Muslim as equals. Some might say I know a Muslim, I work with a Muslim, I have a Muslim friend or a Muslim neighbor, they treat me well. They just might, good for them, however Islam, their religion, does not. Muhammad didn’t treat his neighbors well – he killed them. And a conference that calls for honoring and respecting Muhammad is an affront to everything American.
I don’t find that worth defending – calling it honorable or respectable is beyond an outrage.
Tolerating evil is evil itself. Islamic law, Sharia, does not recognize let alone respect Democracy, liberty or freedom of speech, so if you do, if you believe in God-given inalienable rights — you had better start using them while you still have them.
Voltaire said, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” When we cannot be critical of an ideology that has been a murdering totalitarian force for 1,400 years something has gone wrong with logic, facts and reason. No matter how many “good” Muslims we might know — Islam is anything but peaceful, it is totalitarian, it is deadly to non-Muslims. Just look around you!
Sharia Law reveals an impassible gulf between Islamic and Western thought and American law. In America, the government derives it’s just powers from the governed and acknowledges the inalienable rights of every individual, of which justice and protection from violence is foremost. Islam’s legal system is radically different: the father is “governor” or “administrator” of the family. That is, he is a sovereign within his domestic realm, with the right to employ violence to control his wife, children, and others. That alone makes Sharia Law incompatible with the Western concept of human rights.
Article 5 – No person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
Most, if not all states have laws that prohibit Domestic Abuse, Battery, Terror Threats, etc. that include fines, community service, and up to three years in prison.
* The most complete and concise source book for Islamic Sharia Law is “Reliance of the Traveller.” It can be accessed on-line free — type “Reliance of the Traveler” in your browser search engine. Reliance of the Traveller is approved by Al Azhar University (Cairo) and the U.S.-based International Institute of Islamic Thought.
David is a deacon at his local church and a perpetual student of religion, politics and American history. Author, speaker, blogger, David lives in Southern California with his wife and their three children. You can follow him on Twitter @cogitarus or online at cogitarus.wordpress.com. He’s available for speaking engagements upon request.
My question to you is does the current political situation we find ourselves in set the stage for a Third Party?
I don’t know what has happened just yet with John Boehner and the Speaker of the House vote, but I do know that Boehner is now the prevailing country-club Republican who stands for nothing. And that’s what conservatives have been getting out of the GOP majority House of Representatives since 2010: Nothing.

I’m disgusted with the fact that Barack Obama was actually elected. Twice?
It wasn’t enough when he told me to my face and the world that he was going to spread the wealth around – we just had to see it for ourselves? Twice? When it comes to 2016 I know what I’m looking for and it’s not necessarity a Third Party.
I’d rather have a conservative Republican nominee like Reagan to just landslide their butts like we did in 2010 and 2014 and my solution is to find a guy and stick with him. What I mean by that is we need to get a candidate who not only reflects our values – but can win. Then no one will need a Third Party.. yet. But how?
What it comes down to is “what do I like about him(of her)?”
Let’s take Mike Huckabee: If he runs, what do I like about him?
There’s some obvious things I don’t like about him – he doesn’t seem to know where he stands on Common Core, for instance.
He keeps changing his mind, he’s for it, he doesn’t like it – change the name – I don’t like it.. But as a whole he might be your guy or my guy because he’s so strongly behind the FAIR Tax
You have to balance out the fact that no candidate is going to be the perfect candidate and what’s most important – we can deal with Common Core at the State level, but how good would it be for America if a FAIR tax was passed?
In other words, the good more than weighs out the unsure. I do know that Mike is a great guy – and yes, I don’t agree with him on everything – but can he win?
Everybody is coming out against Jeb Bush, and rightly so, but if Jeb Bush is the nominee, is he preferable to the Democrat nominee? Hillary Clinton? Elizabeth Warren?

Here’s my advice to everyone: Find out what you cannot agree with about Jeb Bush and ask yourself: Does it outweigh what you like about him?
He’s going to have a lot of money and support – the RNC is going to back him and that means funding – a lot of it.
Maybe.
And that begs the question: Is this the perfect time for a Third Party? We’ll be battling the Republican establishment and the Democrat establishment so it will be twice the war chest we normally go up against. But I can say with a lot of confidence that Speaker Boehner or no Speaker Boehner – we have the momentum.
Now what are we going to do with it? What we did in 2012? We better not..
That’s why we gotta pick our guy and stick with him…
I like Mike Huckabee – he’s a really solid guy, I’ve met him many times – he’s a decent man who loves fishing and as a person, he’s really cool. This isn’t an endorsement, I’m just using Mike as an example because he’s quit his show at Fox, probably to run.

Before you begin accusing me of endorsing anyone – I’m not. Just know we can ask that about all the candidates, Rick Perry, Ted Cruz, Chris Christie, Rand Paul – any of them.
A lot of folks are looking to former Tea Party candidate Ted cruz – but one thing I’ve noticed about Ted Cruz is that he doesn’t invoke the phrase “Tea Party” any longer. Why?
Maybe he’s positioning himself for a national run, maybe he feels the brand is tarnished – I don’t know.

Maybe it’s smart, calculating – but do you still trust him? A lot of things he’s done we all like – but he’s not perfect – no one is.
So here’s what we’re going to do: We’re going to take on the RNC and we’re going to take on the DNC – and we’re gonna find that guy. And if your guy doesn’t make it – you can’t sit home – you have to coalesce behind whoever is running against Elizabeth Warren or Hillary or … Joe Biden?
Let’s say Jeb Bush wins? Are you going to sit home because your guy didn’t make it? That’s why Barak Obama was re-elected. Too many conservatives took their ball and bat and went home because Newt, Santorum, Rick Perry or Herman Cain wasn’t the nominee.
Happy? I’m not. Pick a guy and let’s everybody stick with it. Logic tells you that.
And we have to do it soon. All the badmouthing Republicans do in the primary sets the stage for the well-funded “moderate” like Romney or Jeb Bush to hang back and win it (then get their asses kicked by the Democrat nominee).

I doubt the Republican establishment is going to change the primary season in any way – because it favors their guy, so we have to get behind somebody and we have to do it as quickly as possible. Believe me, the Dems will rally behind whatever Maoist Wannabee they throw out there this time.
And you can bet Democrats will be laughing at us, tearing each other up and ending up with milquetoast. But…
If the establishment candidate prevails – does it set the stage for that Third Party? We better figure that out because it will hurt the GOP in the short run just like it got Bill Clinton elected in the 90’s. But how long are we going to put up with these Republicans rubber-stamping everything Barack Obama or any future president does?
I repeat – you can’t sit home. Do you want Hillary, Warren or Biden?

To answer the question: Have the GOP establishment set the stage for a Third Party? There are a lot of voters out there who want to vote Republican – many of whom are Democrats – who no longer feel connected to an ever-far-left reaching party that looks more and more like the Socialist Party.
They promise the base everything, but go along with Big Government mentality when they legislate. My conservative ideals transcend Party identification and I know for a fact there’s plenty of Democrats and Republicans alike who agree with me. More than a few Democrats share my conservative belief in smaller, honest government. Capitalism, individual Liberty.
When I was running for Congress it was in a Democrat majority District and I spoke to thousands of Democrats who agreed with me way more than disagreed – once we got to talking, that is.
But we’re not going to find the perfect candidate, so find you’re guy and stick to him. Or else a Third Party is in the making… Which wouldn’t be bad in the long run.
At least you could feel good when you pull that lever.

Ah, finally. A gun club President Barack Obama can support.The New Black Panther Party has been suspiciously silent since their unfortunate part in the Ferguson debacle. Thankfully, for those of you following the zany antics of Eric Holder’s favorite group of militants, they’ve popped up again. This time, they’re fronting a paramilitary firearms organization in Texas. The Huey P. Newton Gun Club (really? You couldn’t even use H. Rap Brown or Stokely Carmichael as a namesake?) has been conducting armed drills in Dallas for some time now. The club was founded by Charles Goodson, described as a “31-year-old dreadlocked vegan,” and Darren X, who is the national field marshal for the New Black Panther Party.
“We accept all oppressed people of color with weapons,” Darren X told Vice. “The complete agenda involves going into our communities and educating our people on federal, state and local gun laws. We want to stop fratricide, genocide — all the ‘cides.”
Given its frontier reputation, Texas is surprisingly one of the few states that doesn’t allow concealed carry. However, it does allow the open carry of firearms, which the group uses to an alarming effect.
The group has been conducting armed patrols through Dallas, where they performed a call and response saying things like “This is perfectly legal!” and “Justice for Michael Brown! Justice for Eric Garner!”

Another popular chant for the group is “I used to salute the f****** flag! Now I use it for a rag!”

Of course, said flag represents the Constitution that allows them to demonstrate with weapons to intimidate people, but shh.

The New Black Panther Party, you may remember, is the group involved in a voter intimidation case in Philadelphia, where one leader brandished a nightstick and told a white voter, “You are about to be ruled by a black man, cracker!”
“What you see in the media relates to them on a national level, but their organization is a lot different here on a local level,” Goodson insists. Right.
It’s good to see that while the gun rights of average Americans are under assault from the Obama administration, these guys don’t even get the slightest bit of attention.
Ever since September 2013, the day Secretary of State John Kerry signed the United Nations Small Arms Treaty, I have been bothered by the complete disingenuous concern he presented and outright lies he told to those gathered to witness the signing, and the American people. Here’s the video of the signing and his remarks.
The first thing I thought of was that this is a former senator who is signing a three inch document, which I’m sure he has never read. This is the disingenuous part of what he is doing.
Second, in discussing what the treaty is not, he declares “This treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom. In fact, the treaty recognizes the freedom of both individuals and states to obtain, possess, and use arms for legitimate purposes. Make no mistake, we would never think about supporting a treaty that is inconsistent with the rights of Americans … to be able to exercise their guaranteed rights under our constitution.”
I would have to ask him for the specific citation on the specific page for how he can claim these things. I’m sure he wouldn’t be able to do it.
However, in January, William F. Jasper wrote at The New American:
The UN Arms Trade Treaty was written in secret by the Obama/Hillary Clinton State Department, along with Russia, China, France and Britain. Not exactly a lineup of champions of liberty. What does it actually say?
Article 2 defines the conventional arms covered, which include battle tanks, artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships, missiles — and “small arms and light weapons.”
Article 3 of the treaty places UN prohibitions on “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2.”
Article 4 puts all “parts and components” of weapons within the scheme.
Several places in the treaty text, including Article 5, require all countries to “establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.” Moreover, it declares, “Each State Party is encouraged to apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.”
Article 5, Section 4 says each State Party “shall provide its national control list to the Secretariat, which shall make it available to other States Parties.” Which means our federal government will provide the guns and ammo registration list to the UN, which will provide it to Russia, China, Cuba — any and every State Party that wants it.
Do you get that? There’s a national control list. We might reference it as a national gun registration list. This will not only be provided to the federal government, something they have been given no authority over, but will also be provided to our enemies abroad, including the United Nations (Yes, friends, I do not consider the UN to be the friend of the United States).
Kerry has insisted that this treaty is about “keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists and rogue actors.”
“This is about reducing the risk of international transfers of conventional arms that will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes,” Kerry added. “This is about keeping Americans safe and keeping America strong. And this is about promoting international peace and global security.”
Ask yourself this question, “Do you believe John Kerry?” Furthermore, do you believe Barack Obama after all his lies? How about Hillary Clinton?
For more on what this has looked like in history, I highly recommend Stephen P. Halbrook’s excellent work Gun Control in the Third Reich: Disarming the Jews and “Enemies of the State.”
Imagine yourself steering a three-wheeled luge cart around bends, over bumps and through tunnels with the view of Queenstown and Lake Wakatipu below. Your day will be filled with scenic views and adventure as you take a gondola from Queenstown to the Skyline complex at the top of Bob’s Peak.
Here’s what that ride would look like…
Plainclothes officers Andrew Dossi and Aliro Pellarano had just finished their shift but came back on to respond to a grocery store robbery at 363 E. 180th St. when they came upon two suspects at 184th Street, authorities said.
One of them ducked into a Chinese restaurant on Tiebout Avenue at about 10:35 p.m. while the other stayed outside, according to NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton.
“As two of the officers approached the male on the street, the other suspect inside of the store came out and fired upon the officers,” Bratton said. “The officers returned fire.”
The suspects then fled on foot while exchanging gunfire with cops at 184th Street and Tiebout Avenue.
“We are currently investigating if the suspect who fired upon the officers was also involved in the prior robbery,” Bratton said.

Dossi’s father, Joseph Dossi, holds up photos of his son outside his home in Stony Point, NY. Dossi served 2 tours in Iraq.Photo: Douglas Healey
Investigators have recovered the .44-caliber Ruger used in the attack on the cops.
Witnesses said they heard a series of gunshots near the location.
Pellarano, 38, was struck in the left arm and grazed in the chest, while Dossi, 30, was shot in the left arm and lower back, authorities said.
“I heard six shots,” said Stephen Melowski, 36. “I looked out and I saw the shot cops getting inside a car. Somebody was saying, ‘Oh my God, oh my God!’ ”
The suspects then carjacked a white Camaro and drove a short distance before crashing at 188th Street and Park Avenue. They then got out and started running.
Both officers, from the 46th Precinct, were taken to St. Barnabas Hospital. Dossi was in surgery Tuesday morning. Their injuries did not appear to be life-threatening.
Both officers are expected to survive their wounds.
The suspects are described as Hispanics between 25 and 30, who wore dark clothes Monday night.
The gunman inside the Chinese restaurant appeared to have a close-cropped full beard.
“Thank God these officers are doing well,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said from the hospital Tuesday morning. “These officers did something that was extraordinarily brave. They did it as part of their commitment. These officers had just come off their shift and upon hearing this call, went back out in search of these criminals. The work they do is so profoundly important in this instance where they went above and beyond the call to protect their fellow New Yorkers.”
PBA Bronx Trustee Joe Anthony said the officers had already ended their shift when they responded to the call.
“Instead of going home to their families, they heroically ran out to help the citizens of the Bronx who were in danger, putting their lives on the line,” Anthony said.
One possible suspect was apprehended at New York Presbyterian Hospital when he sought treatment for a gunshot wound. It was not clear how he was shot.
The NYPD was scouring the area to find at least one other suspect who fled after the shootout.

Investigators inspect a carjacked Camaro that crashed on East 188th Street and Park Avenue. Photo: David Torres
Sources said there might be a third suspect involved in the heist.
Cops confiscated a black Nissan Altima that was parked outside New York Presbyterian Hospital. The car was rented from an agency in Mount Kisco.
It was not clear how the Altima was connected with the suspects, but it may have been the vehicle used to take the wounded suspect to the hospital after the shooting, law enforcement sources said.
De Blasio arrived at St. Barnabas early Tuesday to console the families of the injured officers.
COP SHOT posted a $10,000 cash reward for information leading to the arrest of the gunman.
Mayor de Blasio, pleaded with the public to step up, tweeting: “It’s crucial that the people of this city aid in this investigation. If you have information, please call 1-800-577-TIPS right away.”
The shooting comes just 16 days after Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos were shot execution-style while sitting in their squad car in Brooklyn.
Liu and Ramos were gunned down by a deranged man who said he was out for revenge after the grand jury decision not to indict an NYPD officer in the chokehold death of Eric Garner.
Additional reporting by Kenneth Garger, Frank Rosario and Shawn Cohen
This is a rush transcript from “On the Record,” January 5, 2015. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST:
Senator Rand Paul joins us. It is his first interview of 2015, and the first of the new Congress. Welcome back to Washington, sir.
SEN. RAND PAUL, R-KY:
Glad to be with you, Greta.
VAN SUSTEREN:
Will Republicans end gridlock and, if so, how?
PAUL:
Absolutely. We are going to begin voting again. Part of the way it has to work in the Senate is you have to let the other party have votes. What happened the last several years is Harry Reid said no Republican amendments whatsoever. It is my way or the highway. Senator McConnell is saying I am going to let Democrats and Republicans have votes. It will take a while, but we will vote, vote, vote, and then we will pass legislation.
VAN SUSTEREN:
Why is there not gridlock? As a hypothetical, you vote in the House and the Senate, because Republicans own both as of tomorrow. You vote to repeal ObamaCare, something that Republicans want to do. It then goes up to the president and he vetoes it. Now we’re at a standstill again.
PAUL:
Unless we come back say, well, now, we are going to repeal part of ObamaCare, are you going to veto that, too? There will be votes on total repeal that may or may not succeed, and votes on partial repeal, and votes on things we really want and maybe he won’t agree to. But the only way to figure out the compromise, you have to have votes. If one side just puts what they want and nothing else, nothing ever gets accomplished. I think by putting bills forward, you will find out what the president will veto and what he won’t and what the middle ground is.
VAN SUSTEREN:
Suppose you vote to appeal ObamaCare. I don’t think it will happen. But say the president went along with you. What in the world would happen?
(LAUGHTER)
What would happen to the American people? What would we have or not have?
PAUL:
We could try freedom for a while. We had it for a long time. That’s where you sell something and I agree to buy it because I like it. That is how we operate in most of rest of the marketplace other than health care. Now the president has said you can only buy certain types of health care that I approve of, and anything I don’t approve of, you are not allowed to purchase. We could try freedom. I think it might work. It works everywhere else.
VAN SUSTEREN:
When do we go back to the situation where some people simply couldn’t afford health care with that? Right now, we are the healthier, more affluent people subsidizing the less healthy and affluent. They would end up back at the hospitals and the hospitals would be providing free care again and now we’ve got the financial burden back on the hospitals. So we’re back to square one.
PAUL:
The interesting thing is that they still do that. Even under Obamacare, there are people that get subsidized insurance. But that has a $6,000 deductible. What do you think they do with that $6,000 deductible? They are still a nonpayer.
But here’s the thing, is nobody is talking about a time when the government does not participate at all. Even before ObamaCare, the government took care of the bottom 5 or 10 percent of the public who were on Medicaid. And then there is also charity. There are different ways that we take care and help the poor. Nobody is saying we would not still do those things if we didn’t have ObamaCare. What ObamaCare did was take some of the things we did for the poor and expanded the government to basically the whole marketplace. That I think will ultimately bankrupt the country and then nobody will have good health care.
VAN SUSTEREN:
Besides these issues of gridlock and Obamacare, the Palestinians, you intend to introduce a bill tomorrow, which is what?
PAUL:
The Palestinian Authority gets money from the American taxpayer.
VAN SUSTEREN:
And I should tell you in fiscal 2014, we researched it, $440 million.
PAUL:
Yeah. So the Palestinian Authority gets $440 million presumably because they will peacefully interact with Israel, but the Palestinian Authority now has applied to be a part of the International Criminal Court and also said they want to investigate Israel’s soldiers for war crimes. Well, that hardly seems to me a good idea to give American taxpayer money to a country or an entity that is now saying that an ally of ours, that their soldiers need to be investigated for war crimes.
VAN SUSTEREN:
Are you going to win this or not? Will this pass or not in the U.S. Senate?
(CROSSTALK)
PAUL:
I think there is a chance we could pass that. We will see what happens. I’ve introduced it before because I also do not think — or a variation because I don’t think American taxpayer money should go to a unity government that has Hamas and the Palestinian Authority together. It galls me to think that American taxpayer money could actually buy weapons that Hamas would be using against Israel. So I think there is a very good chance this could pass.
VAN SUSTEREN:
Senator, nice to see you. I hope you come back often in the year 2015. Thank you, sir.
PAUL:
Thank you. Thanks for having me.
By WhatDidYouSay.org
A man who worried his girlfriend may be pregnant shot her in the head because she refused to take the morning-after pill, which he believed would either prevent her from becoming pregnant or end the life of her developing unborn child shortly after conception.Breyana Lewis was reportedly shot in the head and local police report that, after answering an emergency call, they found Lewis with bullet fragments in her head. Lewis told officers with Las Vegas police’s Violent Crimes Section that she had been having a sexual relationship with Myrick for two months when the altercation happened.
Gregory Myrick, 21, was taken into custody along with Daquesha Fowler, a 20-year apparently in a love triangle with Myrick, with Fowler allegedly shooting Lewis because she refused to take the pill.
Here’s more on what went down:
Lewis told police that she was having an argument with Myrick, who was angry at her for not taking the morning-after pill and possibly being pregnant. During their exchange, Myrick was texting someone.
Afterward, Lewis drove Myrick to his apartment complex. As soon as he got out of the vehicle, someone shot at her at least twice. Police said Fowler was firing on the car from a second-floor patio in an “ambush style attack,” the report said.
Lewis escaped and drove to another location to call 911. An examination at University Medical Center revealed she had a single gunshot to her upper right forehead. The bullet did not pierce her skull, however, and traveled around the cranium to the top of her head, where it remains.
Police said the injury was not life-threatening, and told the Review Journal on Saturday that Lewis was released later that afternoon.
The article confirms Myrick didn’t shoot Lewis but he reportedly gave Fowler the gun and told her to shoot her.
Because violence is so often perpetrated against pregnant women and their unborn children, many states have adopted laws providing them with justice by charging criminals with two crimes if they kill or injure an unborn baby in such a violent crime. According to the National Right to Life Committee, some 35 states recognize the unlawful killing of an unborn child as homicide in at least some circumstances. The federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act, enacted April 1, 2004, covers unborn victims of federal and military crimes.
Of the 37 states, 29 of them offer justice and protecting for women and unborn children throughout pregnancy while another 8 offer the protection only during the early stages.
Rev. Al Sharpton, just like Rev Jesse Jackson, have a money train. They live the high life and yet they portray themselves as simple “community organizers.” How do they do it?
It’s actually a very simple formula, it’s called “Greenmail.”
The term originated with the hostile takeover boom of corporations back in the 80s. Here’s what Investopedia says about it.
An antitakeover measure that arises when a large block of stock is held by an unfriendly company that is threatening a hostile takeover. Greenmail is a term that applies to mergers and acquisitions, and refers to the money that is paid by the target company to another company, known as a corporate raider, that has purchased a majority of the target company’s stock. The greenmail payment is made in an attempt to stop the takeover bid. The target company is forced to repurchase the stock at a substantial premium (the greenmail payment) to prevent the takeover….
Like blackmail, greenmail is money that is paid to an entity to make it stop an aggressive behavior.
The key is the final sentence, and The Revs have made a fortune doing it.
The scam works like this;
Through his organization, the National Action Network, Sharpton approaches a company like AT&T, McDonald’s, Verizon or Walmart. He finds some “issue” that can generate negative publicity for the target company, for instance, their ratio of black women in management positions. He goes to the senior management of the company and explains how their actions are racist and sexist and that they need to work with NAN (in Jesse Jackson’s case it’s the Rainbow Coalition, but it’s the same scam) to develop policies that will rectify this wrong.
There’s a clear threat involved in the meeting. If the target company doesn’t work with NAN, Sharpton will organize community action against them. There will be demonstrations at company offices and events all over the country. Sharpton will speak out against their racist/sexist policies and a compliant media will have the demonstrations on the front page of every major newspaper in the land as well as gobbling hours and hours of 24×7 cable news time.
The cable outlets – primarily MSNBC and CNN – have hours and hours to fill and not much of substance to fill them with. Stories about how a big, powerful company like Verizon is conspiring to keep qualified minority groups on the plantation are great filler.
The key to Sharpton’s scheme is that the company, to avoid the inevitable bad publicity that will go on until they cave, not only initiates new policies to address the racism/sexism in their organization, they make a donation to the National Action Network, and in many instances they hire NAN, or a NAN affiliate controlled by Sharpton and his friends, as “consultants” to make sure that the new policies are being followed. Those are “no-show” jobs as long as the money keeps flowing into NAN.
Sharpton, through his very high profile connections as an “advisor” to President Obama – he’s visited the White House more than 70 times in the last six years – has honed the art of the con to a fine edge. He doesn’t even have to make the initial contact anymore.
Sony Pictures co-chair Amy Pascal (at left, leaving her meeting with Sharpton) met with the activist preacher after leaked e-mails showed her making racially charged comments about President Obama. Pascal was under siege after a suspected North Korean cyber attack pressured the studio to cancel its release of “The Interview,” which depicts the assassination of dictator Kim Jong-un.
Pascal and her team were said to be “shaking in their boots” and “afraid of the Rev,” The Post reported.
No payments to NAN have been announced, but Sharpton and Pascal agreed to form a “working group” to focus on racial bias in Hollywood.
Sony may be just meal ticket Sharpton needs right now. While President Obama’s IRS were diligently making sure that Tea Party groups didn’t get their 501c organizations approved and groups like True the Vote were being harassed with audits from every governmental agency you could imagine (and a few you probably couldn’t) Rev Al and his National Action Network were busy running a tax bill big enough to choke a horse.
Years of massive corruption by the man known for stirring up race relations and making them worse are finally being exposed. While flying around the country first class, dressed in lavish suits, and most recently stirring the pot in Ferguson, Mo., Al Sharpton has avoided paying millions in taxes – that would have landed the rest of us in prison. The situation is so egregious that even the left-wing New York Times finally wrote a long article last week exposing Sharpton’s tax evasion as well as graft and crime going all the way back to his teenage years.
The Times found there is currently more than $4.5 million in state and federal tax liens against Sharpton and his for-profit businesses. That number apparently doesn’t even include the amount owed by his nonprofit, the National Action Network (NAN). According to the Times, “Mr. Sharpton has regularly sidestepped the sorts of obligations most people see as inevitable, like taxes, rent and other bills.”
Remember, this story broke in the New York Times. Of course, they haven’t followed up on it and Sharpton denies it’s a problem. We would honestly have to agree that it isn’t a problem. At least not for Sharpton. After all, he’s a close and trusted advisor to President Obama.
Will anybody ever stand up to the Rev Al? That’s a question best answered by Amy Pascal. We’re not holding our breath.

These are not just my priorities. These are the priorities that the American people expressed loudly and clearly on November 4th. And these need to be the priorities of the leaders of this next Congress. These are reasonable positions. So when reason is losing the argument, it’s clear that something else is taking its place – personal interests over what’s in the best interest of the country. The American people know they are being shortchanged, and they want action, not talking points.
Our current leadership was recently tested when Mr. Obama attempted to circumvent Congress and the law by unilaterally granting amnesty to illegal immigrants by presidential decree. His decree provides illegal immigrants with work permits, legal status, and free federal entitlements. But on a much more significant front, his action shows a complete disregard for our constitutional system where Congress makes the laws and the president’s duty is to enforce them.
The House leadership and every member of Congress took an oath to defend the Constitution, and we have a duty to stop the president when he ignores it. The most powerful remedy the Congress has in these situations is the power to defund his illegal action. We had an opportunity to do that last month when Representatives Mick Mulvaney, Matt Salmon, and I led in co-sponsoring an amendment to the CRomnibus spending bill that would have stripped it of funding for executive amnesty. We were joined by 64 other House members, but were told that there was no time to amend the bill before the vote. That meant the CRomnibus bill passed and provided the president with the funds for his scheme.
Why was there no time to amend the bill? Because the leadership hid the 1,774-page CRomnibus from members of Congress and the public until the last minute, giving us just 48 hours to try to read through it before voting on it. Further, why did the leadership allow funding for illegal amnesty to be included in the bill in the first place? And why was the leadership willing to whip votes with the president and the House Democrats to pass the bill, but not willing to work with House Republicans to stop the funding of an illegal act?
But the CRomnibus didn’t just fund illegal amnesty. It was a $1.1 trillion spending bill that did nothing to reduce spending or work toward balancing the budget. It also funded Obamacare when the House had pledged to repeal it. And it funded the economy-killing overregulation of agencies like the EPA, which are destroying American jobs when we have millions looking for work.
In recent days and weeks, I have given careful consideration as to how I would cast my vote for Speaker of the House. I do not cast this vote as an individual, but on behalf of the citizens of Virginia’s Seventh District who sent me to Washington to act as their representative. While I like Speaker Boehner personally, he will not have my support for Speaker.
Washington is broken in part because our party’s leadership has strayed from its own principles of free market, limited government, constitutional conservatism. We are at a crucial turning point in our country’s history – do we truly want free markets, or does cronyism remain in place? Do we want the rule of law, or will amnesty for cheap illegal labor win the day?
In my campaign, I heard over and over from my constituents that they don’t feel Washington is working for them. They feel like they are always on the losing end of most every deal struck inside the beltway – that somehow the ordinary working man and woman keep drawing the short straw. And year after year, government gets bigger, the debt swells, and the bureaucracy engulfs the citizen a little bit more. The scope of the problem is in the trillions, but the solutions offered so far have only been in the billions – not even scratching the surface of what needs to be done to get this country back on track. The people hope for a Republican leader to step forward and help fellow members fight on these issues – and for the very future of America.
![]()
Seven-year-old Sailor Gutzler, who was the sole survivor of a plane crash that killed four members of her family, learned survival skills from her father, according to relatives.
After the plane crashed in western Kentucky on Friday, Sailor was able to emerge from the wreckage and walk to safety, authorities say.
Lt. Brent White with the Kentucky State Police said in a press conference, “What she knew … was something to the effect that the plane was upside down, her family onboard was unresponsive. She utilized her non-injured arm and hand to free herself from the aircraft.”
Will Carr reported on “America’s News Headquarters” that authorities are saying it’s a miracle that the little girl walked away from the crash with only a broken arm.
Authorities say that Sailor got out of the plane, which was on fire from the crash, and walked nearly a mile in rough terrain and freezing rain.
Eventually, she ended up outside local resident Larry Wilkins’ house.
“She told me that her parents were dead,” Wilkins said earlier today on “Fox and Friends Weekend.” “I asked her how she knew that and she said, ‘I tried to wake them up and I couldn’t wake them up.'”
Carr reported that authorities have confirmed that both Sailor’s parents died in the crash, along with her 9-year-old sister and 14-year-old cousin.
According to authorities, everyone was still strapped in their seats and appeared to be bracing for impact, except for the father. It’s unclear if he had his seatbelt on or not.
Carr reported that Sailor was taken to a hospital, where a family member eventually picked her up and took her home.
Carr also reported that NTSB investigators are on the scene and said they will release an initial report in the next 10 days.
A Gutzler family spokesperson has issued a statement asking for prayers for the entire family moving forward, especially Sailor.

As the price of oil drops below $50 for the first time since 2009, noted investor Jeffrey Gundlach warns that a fall to $40 dollars a barrel could spark “terrifying” geopolitical consequences.
The February contract for West Texas Intermediate briefly fell to a session low of $49.95 earlier today, while Brent crude also hit a 5-½-year low.
However, according to influential investor Gundlach, founder of Doubleline Capital, a fall to $40 could set in motion devastating global developments.
“Oil is incredibly important right now,” Gundlach said in a recent interview with Fu W. “If oil falls to around $40 a barrel then I think the yield on ten year treasury note is going to 1%. I hope it does not go to $40 because then something is very, very wrong with the world, not just the economy. The geopolitical consequences could be – to put it bluntly – terrifying.”
As Zero Hedge points out, Gundlach is right to draw a correlation between unstable price fluctuations in crude oil and geopolitical turmoil.
“Large and rapid rises and falls in the price of crude oil have correlated oddly strongly with major geopolitical and economic crisis across the globe. Whether driven by problems for oil exporters or oil importers, the ‘difference this time’ is that, thanks to central bank largesse, money flows faster than ever and everything is more tightly coupled with that flow.”
“A junk bond implosion is usually a signal that a major stock market crash is on the way. So if you are looking for a “canary in the coal mine”, keep your eye on the performance of energy junk bonds. If they begin to collapse, that is a sign that all hell is about to break loose on Wall Street,” writes Michael Snyder.
As we have previously documented, the sudden drop in the price of oil has much to do with an engineered attack on the Russian economy and the Ruble which is being led by Saudi Arabia and the Obama White House. The ultimate goal is to destabilize the Russian government and foment a color revolution.
This agenda was summed up by Paul Stevens, a fellow for the secretive Royal Institute of International Affairs based at Chatham House in London.
“If the governments aren’t able to spend to keep the kids off the streets they will go back to the streets, and we could start to see political disruption and upheaval,” wrote Stevens.
The US and the Saudis have resolved to crash the price of oil and with it Russia’s financial system despite the fact that this will also cripple the European economy. Russia has even proposed that the EU dump the TTIP free trade agreement with the United States and instead join the newly established Eurasian Economic Union.
“The U.S. and European sanctions against Russia will become more severe and crippling in the face of drastically falling oil prices – prices which are falling drastically because of the unprecedented boom of shale gas fracking both domestically in the U.S. and abroad in Ukraine and other locales,” writes Mac Slavo. “The oil & gas giants like Chevron and Exxon Mobil have created revolutionary conditions with now direct consequences on U.S. foreign policy and global war for dominance.”
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.
Has Noah’s Ark been found? Is it real? You won’t even see those headlines or questions in the mainstream anytime soon because it just doesn’t fit with their narrative:
In the Book of Genesis, God set about destroying a “corrupt” and “violent” world just as Noah was putting the finishing touches on The Ark – a massive wooden vessel to hold his family and two of “all living creatures, from all flesh.”
The Bible specifies that Noah’s Ark came to rest on “the mountains of Ararat” as the waters reseeded. The modern day
location is in eastern Turkey – a volcanic mountain, having erupted several times since the Flood, the last major eruption being in 1840.
Since then, ancient Roman scholars, medieval travelers, contemporary explorers and Ottoman soldiers all claim to have spotted Noah’s Ark amid the region’s peaks — most recently in 2006, when a Colorado-based archaeologist claimed to have uncovered the ark, petrified within Iran’s Alborz mountain range along the Turkish border.
Why does the major media refuse to even look into this? Why not just refute it? Does the cover-up have something to do with confirming the Bible’s teachings? Methinks so..
The story of the flood is closely connected with the story of the creation, in which the ark plays a pivotal role.
Not exactly in line with evolution. The information would be better off not “discovered”. If Noah’s Ark really existed, we may have to adjust some of our other thinking and that may not be a real pleasant prospect for liberals in the press.
The Gilgamesh Epic (650 BC) gives Mt. Nisir as the landing place of the Ark. The local name for the town where the Ark was found is Nasar.
Theophilus of Antioch (115-185 AD) said the Ark could be seen in his day in the Arabian mountains. Later Church Fathers also mention the Ark as late as the mid 7th century. In the 13th century, Willam, a traveler, stated for the first time that Mt. Masis was the Ark location (present-day Mt. Ararat).
Ptolemy’s Geographia (1548) mentions the mountains of Armenia as the place of landing. So does the traveler Nicolas de Nicolay (1558).
Pilgrims to the site would gather bits and pieces of the petrified wood which would be used as charms to ward off evil. When they encountered the anchors, they had no doubt about their association with the Ark. They often carved one big cross to represent Noah and smaller crosses representing his family.
The huge anchors would have been suspended from the keel of the ship. This was a common practice among ancient mariners to stabilize a heavy ship and ensure that the bow is always facing the on-coming waves.
Members of a Hong Kong expedition conducted several missions to Mount Ararat since 2003 and shot footage of what appears to be a solid wooden wall, entombed within layers of glacial ice and volcanic rock. A gnarled beam runs suspended from one part of the cavern to another. There’s straw and bits of old rope on the ground; a structure is taking shape.
Army Captain Ilhan Durupinar, identified the final resting place of Noah’s Ark in a Turkish Air Force aerial photo taken during a NATO mapping mission in October 1959. Photographs of the site were published in Life magazine in 1960,
The shape looked like hull of a ship. One end was pointed as you would expect from bow and the opposite end was blunt like a stern. The distance from bow to stern was 515 feet, or exactly 300 Egyptian cubits. The average width was 50 cubits. These were the exact measurements mentioned in the Bible.
Geological mapping indicates that there is a fault right along the western edge of the boat-shape and other faults in the valley floor. It is thus significant that this boat-shape first came into view as a result of an earthquake in 1948, and then its relief compared to the surrounding terrain was enhanced as a result of a further earthquake in 1978.
Then there’s the history of the Ark in other forms, languages and passages handed down and across time. Many other cultures also told of a great flood and a ship being built. It is not a story unique to The Bible:
The flood has echoes in legends from Central America to South Asia, and it almost certainly predates Judeo-Christian times. Scholars believe it was most likely transmitted to the Israelites from Mesopotamia: in the far older Epic of Gilgamesh, we encounter Utnapishtim, a man chosen by the gods to live alone in a boat full of animals while the world around him ended in a deluge. Just like Noah, as the rains stopped he sent out both a dove and a raven to gauge whether the waters had receded.
A British scholar around a years ago found that a 4,000-year-old cuneiform tablet from what is now Iraq contains a story similar to the biblical account of Noah’s Ark.
The newly decoded cuneiform tells of a divinely sent flood and a sole survivor on an ark, who takes all the animals on
board to preserve them. It even includes the famous phrase “two by two,” describing how the animals came onto the ark.
Skeptics say differences in the story prove it’s false, but anyone in law enforcement will tell you if the stories are the same, it’s for sure a lie. Different accounts of the same basic theme indicate truth. And yes there are multiple different Mesopotamian versions, and there are multiple different biblical versions of the story of Noah’s Ark.
They share a basic outline, and some central themes. But they each relate the story in their own way.
The human eye needs to see reflected light to recognize an object. To visualize what remains below the earth, scientists use microwaves which can penetrate the ground and bounce back when they hit something solid. This technique is commonly used to locate oil and other minerals. Called Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), the apparatus us made from an antenna that transmits, then listens to receive the “echo” and prints the result on a piece of paper. The delay and strength of this echo tell the geologists how solid and at what depth the objects are under the earth.
The team of geologists didn’t scan the entire object. Instead, they marked out lines that crossed the object with yellow tape. Then they dragged the antenna (about the size of a lawnmower) over the lines and watched the output on the paper recorder. When they got a strong “hit” — meaning there was something solid underneath — they would record the position on the tape [above]. Later, when they made a map of the object, the tape and the location of the “hits” they realized that there was indeed a structure underneath the mud.
“This data does not represent natural geology. These are man made structures. These reflections are appearing too periodic… too periodic to be random in that type of natural pace.” – Ron Wyatt of SIR Imaging team
The radar cans revealed this structure [above] under the mud. The symmetry and logical placement of these objects shows that this is unmistakably a man made structure, most likely the Ark of Noah.
Using the GPR, Ron Wyatt discovered an open cavity on the starboard side. He used an improvised drill to make core sample inside this cavity and retrieved several very interesting objects. Below you can see the artifacts which were sent for laboratory analysis. On the left is the bore hole [see below], followed by what turned out to be petrified animal dung, then a petrified antler and lastly a piece of cat hair.
Perhaps the most significant find from the Ark itself is a piece of petrified wood. When this was first found it appeared to be a large beam. But upon closer examination it is actually three pieces of plank that have been laminated together with some kind of organic glue! This is the same technology used in modern plywood. Lamination makes the total strength of the wood much greater than the combined strength of the pieces. This suggests a knowledge of construction far beyond anything we knew existed in the ancient world.
Tests by Galbraith Labs in Knoxville, Tennessee, showed the sample to contain over 0.7% organic carbon, consistent with fossilized wood. The specimen was once living matter. Photo: http://www.viewzone.com/noahx.html
Examination reveals the glue oozed from the layers. The outside of the wood appears to have been coated with bitumen.
Even more surprising were laboratory analyses which not only revealed that the petrified wood contained carbon (proving it was once wood) but there were iron nails [above right] embedded in the wood!
We like to imagine that humanity evolved in a neat sequence of eras, each named after the technology that was discovered. We have the Stone Age (where man developed arrows and stone tools), the Bronze Age (where metals were combined and heated to make tools and household items) and lastly the Iron Age (where iron and steel objects were made by heating iron ore and adding other material — like charcoal — to strengthen it). The Iron Age is usually placed at 1200-1000 BC, yet we have iron nails being used in this extremely old construction
The audit legislation would grant the Government Accountability Office, which is Congress’s chief investigative arm, the power
to retroactively review — though not actually reverse — the Fed’s decision-making, particularly on monetary policy.
Ms. Yellen already has to testify regularly to Congress about decision-making, and reports of meetings are released years after the fact. But Ms. Yellen and her defenders say giving the GAO audit powers could amount to having their decisions scrutinized almost in real time, which they say could influence the closed-door deliberations by the Fed.
“If board members know that their statements may become public, they may be inhibited from speaking candidly about the economic
trends they are observing or the monetary policies they believe would best respond to current conditions,” Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland Democrat, said in leading the fight against the bill in September.
Mr. Cummings said if the GAO were given power to audit the Fed, members of Congress could use their own ability to request certain audits as a way of influencing the board’s deliberations. Congress has approved several more limited audits of the Fed, including one stemming from the Dodd-Frank legislation written in the wake of the Wall Street collapse. That audit, reported in 2011, found the Fed repeatedly invoked emergency powers to expand its lending in 2008 and 2009, including making major loans
to prop up the housing market.
U.S. Navy veteran and retired police officer Donald Montgomery is suing New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other officials after his firearms were reportedly confiscated by police after he sought treatment for insomnia.
It all started after Montgomery visited his primary care physician on May 6 and complained about trouble sleeping, the Daily Caller reported. He claimed to have been suffering from insomnia since moving from a different state. Montgomery then returned to the hospital again days later for the same problems, except this time he was diagnosed with “Depression; Insomnia” by hospital staff.
On May 23, Montgomery returned to the hospital yet again with the same symptoms. He reportedly stayed at the hospital for 48 hours voluntarily for treatment.
In the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York earlier this month, Montgomery alleges that his visit was wrongly recorded as an involuntary stay.
Under New York’s SAFE Act, mental health professionals are required to report patients who are determined to be threats to themselves or others. Regardless, the lawsuit claims the veteran was cleared.
“Patient has no thoughts of hurting himself. Patient has no thoughts of hurting others. Patient is not having suicidal thoughts. Patient is not having homicidal thoughts,” the hospital notes from the visit allegedly said.
Montgomery was said to be “mildly depressed” by hospital officials, but they found “no evidence of any psychotic processes, mania, or OCD symptoms.” The notes also asserted, “Insight, judgment, and impulse control are good.”
Still, Montgomery’s records were forwarded to Mental Hygiene Legal Service for further review.
The Daily Caller outlines what happened next:
Four days after leaving the hospital, New York State police sent a letter to the Suffolk County clerk’s office stating “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution” and that he was prohibited from possessing any firearms.
The next day, Montgomery received a call from an officer at the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department informing him that his guns would have to be confiscated.
Montgomery says that on May 30, the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department showed up to his house and confiscated his pistol license and four handguns — Colt .38 revolver, Derringer .38, Glock 26 9mm, Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 380.
Montgomery claims in his lawsuit that officials violated his constitutional rights during the ordeal. He also accuses the hospital of violating his privacy by giving his medical records to state police.
Montgomery is seeking monetary damages, legal fees, and the “striking down and rendering void” of New York’s “Mental Hygiene Law” on grounds that it represents an “unconstitutional violation of the Second, Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Read the full lawsuit below:

In 2013, 650 babies died under Holland’s assisted suicide law because their parents or doctors deemed their suffering too difficult to bear.
Thankfully, according to Breitbart News, these statistics have caused some supporters of the legislation to question their reasoning. Dutch Ethicist, Theo Boer, used to believe that “slippery slope” arguments were invalid and argued in support of assisted suicide legislation; but now he has a very different view.
He said, “I used to be a supporter of legislation. But now, with twelve years of experience, I take a different view. At the very least, wait for an honest and intellectually satisfying analysis of the reasons behind the explosive increase in the numbers. Is it because the law should have had better safeguards? Or is it because the mere existence of such a law is an invitation to see assisted suicide and euthanasia as a normality instead of a last resort? Before those questions are answered, don’t go there. Once the genie is out of the bottle, it is not likely to ever go back in again.”
Meanwhile, a recent article in the Daily Mail highlights the problem with our society’s growing acceptance of assisted suicide.
In the article, the author starts by sharing the story of Andre Verhoeven, a man who chose to end his own life through lethal injection in the Netherlands. Andre was a schoolteacher and had plans to retire and travel the world with his wife, Dora. However, at the age of 65, he was diagnosed with acute leukaemia, a cancer of the blood. Currently, there is no cure for this horrific disease and because of the complications, Andre became paralyzed from the neck down.
His daughter, Bregje, said, “His end was so peaceful. Once my father had decided on euthanasia, he was relieved. He was looking forward to the date he would die. In the last few days he was able to say goodbye to his family, his friends, to talk about old times.” This story is definitely heart wrenching but stories like this are fairly commonplace in discussions concerning assisted suicide. When we think of someone who chooses to commit suicide, we think of terminal patients like Andre who simply don’t want to suffer anymore. But what many people are unaware of is that assisted suicide advocates promote the euthanasia and suicide of non-terminal patients.
For example, the author of the Daily Mail article, Sue Reid, also shares the story of a woman whose assisted suicide choice paints a fuller picture of what’s going on in some parts of Europe.
She writes “In Holland I also spoke to the family of a 47-year-old woman with tinnitus, a persistent ringing in the ears, who ended her life last March with the help of an ‘Life End’ clinic. Gaby Olthuis, a divorcee, was a brilliant clarinet player, but said she suffered ‘24-hour noise’ in her head, ‘like a train screeching or someone scratching their nails on a chalk board’. She explained: ‘I look healthy from the outside, but inside I am being tortured.’
To end her suffering, she was given a lethal potion to drink by one of the clinic’s doctors at her home. Shockingly, she left behind two teenagers, a boy of 13 and girl of 15. Her mother Joan explained: ‘Gaby told the children that she was planning to die, she was in pain and there was no cure for her. The euthanasia was agreed by doctors and she said her goodbyes and had time to organize her memorial service. She died a month later. Of course the children miss her badly, but they understand her decision.” So in other words, Gaby legally killed herself because of persistent ringing in her ears. Now, we shouldn’t make light of her suffering, but most people would agree that this is absolutely outrageous.
In Holland, mentally ill patients are dying as well. In 2013, 42 psychiatric patients died through euthanasia, which is three times as many that died in 2012. Some of these patients chose to end their own lives but for others, their family members made the choice.
In the National Review, Wesley J. Smith, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism said we should “stop pretending assisted suicide is about terminal illness and admit it is much more about disability–which is why the disability rights movement remains so opposed as they are the primary targets. It is about allowing killing as an acceptable answer to many causes of suffering, whether terminal or chronic disease, disability, mental illness, or existential despair.”
Here’s the unavoidable problem with assisted suicide legislation: today, we’re legally killing the terminally ill and the sick but assisted suicide laws won’t stop there, instead they will open Pandora’s box to all sorts of “justifiable” killing.

If you’ve seen videos of any of the recent protests in New York City, they probably look familiar. Crowds of young progressives marching through the streets, waving signs, and chanting short repetitive slogans. Some of the signs, like the ones created by the ANSWER Coalition, show the same groups are involved, only the message has changed. They started out protesting the Iraq War, then protested the wealthy, and now they’re protesting police violence. The new marches even reuse some of the old chants: “Whose streets, our streets!” and “This is what democracy looks like!” It’s not Occupy exactly, more like Occupy recycled.
What’s different about the current iteration of New York street theater is the abandonment of some of the previous movement’s costly overhead. It suggests progressives, even the ones who weren’t there, have learned some lessons from Occupy’s downfall. In 2011, the very thing which Occupy considered its chief strength—the refusal to go home, the attempts to claim public space as their own—turned out to be its fatal flaw. It was far easier to critique society-at-large than to run an actual society, even on a very minute scale. Stories of rape, theft, and assault spread from Occupy camps around the country and an earnest attempt to create a fledgling anti-capitalist utopia failed. By contrast, the new protesters seem content to at least live in the real world as they agitate for a new one.
The other thing the new protests have abandoned is the former movement’s foolish insistence on not having a message beyond a vague anti-capitalist stance (“We are the 99 percent!”). Recall that it became a kind of thoughtcrime in Occupy camps to speak to the media on behalf of the movement, at least without hours of dialogue and near-universal agreement on what should be said. In practice, the result was that the movement never said much of anything. There was a message about economic inequality, but it didn’t go anywhere. Some banks were occupied briefly. Some ATM’s were vandalized. A few foreclosed homes were reoccupied. There was talk of a Robin Hood tax or student loan forgiveness, but often the movement seemed to see politics as beneath its ambition to remake everything. And that arrogance hurt them.
Stepping back, there were only a couple of things that really held Occupy together. One was the fawning national media coverage which was blind to the group’s actual flaws. The other was defiance of the police. Occupy proudly kept track of the thousands of arrests of their members. It was practically the only accomplishment they could point to for much of their existence. To be an occupier was to be arrested, or at least be willing to be arrested, for the cause. And gradually, occupiers learned that police overreaction was a way to generate headlines and energy for their movement.
Quick! Think of the iconic moments that defined Occupy. What are they? The image of a man defecating on a police car would certainly be among them for many of us. But if you were sympathetic to Occupy, the viral moments all had something in common. There was the incident when a protester in Oakland was hospitalized with serious injuries after being hit in the head with a police-fired bean bag round. (He eventually won a multi-million dollar settlement.) Or the moment UC Davis occupiers were pepper-sprayed as they linked arms and refused to clear a sidewalk. And a similar incident where an NYPD officer pepper-sprayed several women who were isolated on a sidewalk (a lawsuit was also filed in that incident). All of these became viral images or videos that spread around the world. Notice what they all have in common, even the guy pooping on the cop car? In every case, the hook was anger at police.
Some may have forgotten (and some surely never knew) the hostility of the Occupy movement toward police was always palpable. There were dozens of incidents and videos (which did not become worldwide news) in which it was clear many occupiers were spoiling for a fight. In fact, a division developed in some of the camps over how best to respond to police. A leader of the Occupy Denver camp quit the movement when it appeared the local anarchists were getting the upper hand. One of those anarchists told the Denver Post at the time, “Becca was a part of a contingency that thinks if we completely let them (the police) bash our skulls in, then we’ll win. That kind of ‘militant nonviolence’ won’t work.” When the cops cleared Occupy Denver from a park, one of the occupiers (named John Sexton but no relation) pushed over a police motorcycle and was arrested.
There was another incident involving a police motorcycle which suggests that profiting from perceived victimization was a considered strategy on the part of some occupiers. In mid-October, a lawyer working for the National Lawyer’s Guild claimed he was run over by an NYPD officer on a police scooter. He writhed on the ground in apparent agony and, at one point, appeared to have a seizure. The story initially took off as an instance of police brutality against Occupy, but analysis of several video clips, in addition to eyewitness accounts from other reporters on the scene, indicated the alleged victim was faking. His feet were never run over. In fact, he stuck them under the scooter himself after he was on the ground. He then kicked the bike over at which point he was arrested. Later, his own lawyer would claim his client’s shoelace had been trapped.
Another celebrated conflict with police became a court case in New York earlier this year. (I dubbed it Occupy Wall Street’s last battle.) In this instance, Cecily McMillan, a young woman who had been an Occupy leader once interviewed by Rolling Stone, threw an elbow and hit a cop in the face. She was arrested, and as she waited for a bus to transport her to jail, she (like the lawyer not run over by the scooter) began having a seizure. McMillan later went on a left-wing TV program where she refused to watch or comment on the video of the incident, claiming her therapist had warned her against reliving the experience. She was convicted and served two months in Rikers. Less than two weeks after her release, she was back on the same left-wing TV show, this time talking about her experiences in jail and her plans to reform the prison system.
Just as McMillan was emblematic of the failure of Occupy to overcome its own worst instincts, she may also be emblematic of the recycled Occupy. McMillan already sounds older and wiser than she did a few months ago. She is focused on a specific task, one which she has some hard-earned credibility to discuss. She is not wasting time in a futile effort to occupy property that doesn’t belong to her. In other words, she seems to have learned something, perhaps matured a bit.
Whether others can do the same remains to be seen. The tension that ultimately destroyed the Occupy movement—tension between idealism and the temptation to violence—also exists in the new movement. There is already evidence some protesters are thinking about a more direct confrontation to the system they oppose.
Last week, Joshua Williams, a young protest leader who was once profiled by MSNBC, was arrested for trying to set a fire in a convenience store. The media has been working hard to downplay a group of about 100 protesters who chanted their desire to see “Dead cops!” during a recent march in New York. The same protest led to a real scuffle which sent two cops to the hospital with injuries.
These were isolated incidents, but chants of “NYPD, KKK, How many kids did you kill today?” have been more widespread. And even some of the otherwise peaceful protests seem to be flirting with direct confrontation. Last month there were Occupy-like tactics employed in malls, at the Gateway Arch, in airports, on freeways, and most recently at the Ferguson police department. The recent mall occupation ended with some vandalism. In other cases, protesters are literally shaking gates and pulling on doors being held in place by police on the other side.
And of course, there is the reality that the fringe of any protest movement could opt for more extreme violence. In the case of Occupy, there were isolated incidents of arson and vandalism on shops and banks. None of this helped their cause. But it was the plot to blow up a bridge in Ohio which became the high-water mark for Occupy-connected violence. The arrest of the five men involved stepped on the attempt of occupiers to revive the movement for May Day in 2012.
In some people’s view, a similar extreme response has already happened in connection with the current protests. Last month, two NYPD officers were assassinated by a man who had attended protests and who claimed he was acting in revenge for the deaths of Eric Garner and Mike Brown. Even as many rushed to claim the incident was isolated to one man with a history of violence, it was followed by apparent attempts on the lives of officers in at least two other cities. Those attacks have not been connected to the current protests, but police in LA have said they were unprovoked.
As with Occupy, there is anger bubbling just under the surface of the current protest movement. When kept in check, that anger can keep the protests going. But if Occupy taught us anything, it’s that idealistic protests can devolve into something else when expectations for immediate change aren’t met. Otherwise rational people can decide to throw an elbow or push over a police motorcycle. It wouldn’t take much for some of that underlying anger to be unleashed in less constructive ways.

Malik Zulu Shabazz, the former national leader of the New Black Panther Party, said the radical group will “build up an army” in 2015 to combat police, and he predicted coming events “that are gonna seem tragic to white America and may even shock our own consciences,” including the killing of police officers.
On a recent episode of the New Black Panthers Party’s “Black Power Radio” posted at Breitbart.com, Shabazz, current national president of Black Lawyers for Justice, said:
“Mister Malcolm X, he consistently teaches us self-defense. The most honorable Elijah Muhammad continuously teaches us self-defense. The honorable Marcus Mosiah Garvey teaches us self-defense, and we know, our leader and our teacher, the honorable Khalid Abdul Muhammad, teaches us self-defense.
“What am I saying? Right now it’s time to build up that army. Right now it’s time for us to build up those corps, those troops. It’s time to get strong. It’s time for lifting weights and working out and going to the gun range and all of that.”

Shabazz counseled his followers that some will do things that “shock” their consciences, including killing police officers.
“Sadly because America won’t do justice to black people, more and more people are going to lose balance and go off, and so we’re going to have funerals. Mike Brown gonna have funerals, Eric Garner in New York,” Shabazz said. “All over the country, we’re having our funerals, but now they must put on their dress blues and have their funerals, too. It’s a helluva day in this hour.”

He added that “some people are tired of seeing our people killed and murdered” and that “they are going to be killing some people in 2015. And unfortunately, police officers are going to be killed. As a result of killing us, they have inspired people in the population to go off and retaliate against them.”
After rallying his followers to “build up an army” and “go to gun range,” Shabazz claimed the coming violent actions will have “nothing to do with us.”
Barack Obama with New Black Panther leader Malik Zulu Shabazz and a uniformed member of the New Black Panther Party at a march in Selma, Ala., in 2007 (BigGovernment.com) |
As WND reported in September, Shabazz claimed credit for shutting down traffic, chasing people away and preventing rioting for a single night in Ferguson, Missouri.
It was also the New Black Panthers, during the fight in Florida for justice when armed neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin after being confronted by the teen, who offered $1 million in reward for the “capture” of Zimmerman.
Shabazz’s Black Lawyers website promotes the Black Action Network as well as the Nation of Islam, which was founded in Detroit in the 1930s with the stated goal of improving the spiritual, mental, social and economic conditions of blacks. Its critics say it is a black supremacist organization.
WND also reported that photographs show President Obama appearing and marching with members of the New Black Panther Party as he campaigned for president in Selma, Alabama, in March 2007. Among the people visible in the pictures with Obama is Shabazz.
![]() Barack Obama speaks from same podium as New Black Panther leader Malik Shabazz during campaign event in Selma, Ala., in 2007 (BigGovernment.com) |
Speaking to WND, Shabazz boasted he met Obama when the future president attended the 42nd anniversary of the voting rights marches in Selma in 2007.
“I have nothing but respect for Obama and for his pastor,” said Shabazz, referring to Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s former pastor of nearly 20 years.
The NBPP is a controversial black extremist party whose leaders are notorious for their racist statements and for leading anti-white activism.
Shabazz himself has given scores of speeches condemning “white men” and Jews.
The NBPP’s official platform states “white man has kept us deaf, dumb and blind,” refers to the “white racist government of America,” demands black people be exempt from military service and uses the word Jew repeatedly in quotation marks.
Shabazz has led racially divisive protests and conferences, such as the 1998 Million Youth March in which a few thousand Harlem youths reportedly were called upon to scuffle with police officers and speakers demanded the extermination of whites in South Africa.
The former NBPP chairman was quoted at a May 2007 protest against the 400-year celebration of the settlement of Jamestown, Va., stating, “When the white man came here, you should have left him to die.”
He claimed Jews engaged in an “African holocaust,” and he has promoted the anti-Semitic urban legend that 4,000 Israelis fled the World Trade Center just prior to the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Islamic State (ISIS) militants in Mosul, Iraq, have contracted the deadly Ebola virus, Mashable reports.The Iraqi outlets reportedly claimed that Ebola had started to spread in a Mosul hospital. The city, known as ISIS’s most important strategic stronghold in Iraq, has been under the control of the Islamic State since June.
Christy Feig, the World Health Organization (WHO) director of communications, told Mashable, “We have no official notification from the Iraqi government that it is Ebola.” She said that WHO had reached out to authorities and asked if they needed help investigating the matter.
Kurdish media network Xendan reported that ISIS jihadists’ symptoms were similar to those shown by someone who has contracted Ebola. However, it is highly uncertain whether Mosul health authorities have the means, tools, or skill-set necessary to test for Ebola, given the current hostile environment in the area.
In late December, the Islamic State reportedly executed doctors who refused to treat their militant jihadis. The Washington Post said of the ongoing situation in Mosul, “Services are collapsing, prices are soaring, and medicines are scarce in towns and cities across the ‘caliphate’ proclaimed in Iraq and Syria by ISIS.”
Iraq’s pro-government Al Sabaah (The Morning) daily newspaper reported that Ebola made its way into Mosul through Africa-based Islamist “terrorists” who then linked up with ISIS. Mashable notes, however, that the majority of ISIS recruits in Africa have come from countries that have not reported any Ebola cases, such as Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco, Libya, and others.
Meanwhile, Mosul’s liberation remains a strategic priority for Iraqi forces and the U.S.-led coalition. Mosul has been described as ISIS’s de facto capital in Iraq. While under ISIS control, many of the city’s one million residents have lived under fear of severe punishment or execution should they not comply with the jihadists’ mandates.
Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.org

Al-Shabaab intelligence head Abdishakur Tahliil was killed during a targeted December 29 airstrike conducted by U.S. forces just outside of the Somali city of Saakow. The mission was conducted by unmanned aircraft and used Hellfire missiles to “microtarget” Tahliil’s vehicle.
The U.S. Defense Department in a statement today confirmed that Abdishakur Tahliil was killed Dec. 29 near Somalia’s southern town of Saakow by unmanned aircraft that fired several Hellfire missiles at a vehicle carrying him. Somalia’s National Intelligence and Security Agency, which reported the killing yesterday, said two other senior officials of the group also died in the attack.
Tahliil “was responsible for al-Shabaab’s external operations,” according to the Pentagon statement. “His death will significantly impact al-Shabaab’s ability to conduct attacks against the government of the Federal Republic of Somalia, the Somali people, and U.S. allies and interests in the region.”
One of the most difficult aspects of battling groups like ISIS or al-Shabaab is that they’re hard to root out once they’ve gone to ground; this makes Tahliil’s death even more significant—and strategically beneficial.
Tahliil, as mentioned above, handled all of al-Shabaab’s “external operations.” According to a report by the BBC, Tahliil had just replaced the group’s former intel officer after that man was arrested earlier this week. This strategy—causing chaos within the upper ranks—has been used before. Military and African Union officials knew that when a U.S. drone strike took out former al-Shabaab figurehead and spiritual leader Ahmed Godane back in September, that his death would be the catalyst of yet another internal power struggle.
Somalia’s National Intelligence and Security Agency said on Tuesday that Abdishakur was head of al Shabaab’s Amniyat unit, which was believed to be responsible for several suicide attacks in Mogadishu.
Officials have said Abdishakur and another al Shabaab militant were killed in the attack. They have said there were no civilian casualties in the air strike.
…
A U.S. security official described Abdishakur as a “key operational figure” and a “senior leader” whose death would be a significant blow to the group. But the official said it was difficult to estimate what the long-term impact would be.
Another U.S. official noted that despite several deaths among al Shabaab’s leadership, the group has remained “resilient.”
The same theory rings true here, and if history is any indication, it will work just as well. The unnamed security official in the above quote is correct: Al-Shabaab defines the world “resiliant”—but it has faced setbacks, and the arrest of their former intel head is not insignificant. The group has now lost their second intel head in less than a week, which means that, unless they’re operating under a highly organized and rigid hierarchy, their ground game is going to suffer (or at least pause) until a new leader is chosen.
The African Union’s coalition ground forces aren’t perfect, but they did chase the insurgents out of Mogadishu, putting al-Shabaab on the run. If they can harness control of this brief reprieve, then perhaps they can encourage the devolution of al-Shabaab and at the same time at least hit pause on Somalia’s decades-long death spiral.
Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.org
You must be logged in to post a comment.