Wednesday, December 23, 2015



Rather than the fact that extremists are murdering people

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

In an NPR interview yesterday, the president claimed that the overriding factor contributing to increased fear of terrorism among Americans is ‘media saturation’.
Asking about Obama’s strategy to combat ISIS, NPR host Steve Inskeep asked “What is the public missing?” adding “And I say that simply because, according to polls, you don’t have very much approval for it.”
“Well, I think what’s fair is, post-Paris, you had a saturation of news about the horrible attack there, and ISIL combines viciousness with very savvy media operations,” Obama replied.
“And as a consequence, if you’ve been watching television for the last month, all you’ve been seeing, all you’ve been hearing about is these guys with masks or black flags who are potentially coming to get you, so I understand why people are concerned about it.” the president added.
In several recent polls, increased numbers of Americans have said they now fear the threat of terrorist attacks.
Obama added that while the attacks constituted a “legitimate” story the media coverage was all about getting ratings.
“Look, the media is pursuing ratings,” he said. “This is a legitimate news story. I think that, you know, it’s up to the media to make a determination about how they want to cover things.” he said.
Last week, the president admitted to a closed meeting of journalists that he did not fully understand the reaction to the Paris and San Bernardino terror attacks, saying that he didn’t watch enough TV news to take it in.
Obama has used this line consistently, saying he only learns of events from TV news, often as a way of pleading ignorance on negative revelations.
The admission, reported by the New York Times, was later pulled altogether and memory holed.
In the NPR interview Obama also blamed woeful approval ratings on his ISIS strategy on a lack of communication.
“On our side, I think that there is a legitimate criticism of what I’ve been doing and our administration’s been doing in the sense that we haven’t, on a regular basis, described all the work that we’ve been doing for more than a year now to defeat ISIL,” Obama said.
“So if people haven’t seen the fact that 9,000 strikes have been carried out against ISIL, if they don’t know that towns like Sinjar that were controlled by ISIL have been taken back, or that a town like Tikrit that was controlled by ISIL now has been repopulated by previous residents, then they might feel as if there’s not enough of a response.” he added.
“So part of our goal here is to make sure that people are informed about all the actions that we’re taking.” the president said.


Shock Report: Pentagon Defies Obama's Policy of Arming ISIS Jihadists



Top military brass in secret revolt against White House

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Remember in the summer of 2013 when the Obama administration was on the precipice of attacking Syria and toppling Bashar Al-Assad?
Twitter was flooded with images of US service members expressing their staunch opposition to being forced to act as Al-Qaeda’s air force.
Reports at the time also confirmed that top military officials were dead against air strikes.
Now an explosive investigation by Seymour Hersh has revealed that the Pentagon was engaged in a secret revolt against the Obama White House.
A highly classified DIA and Joint Chiefs of Staff report predicted that arming the rebels and toppling Assad would lead to the rise of ISIS.
The Pentagon knew that Obama was arming Islamic extremists and that the so-called moderate Free Syrian Army had evaporated.
But the Obama administration didn’t want to hear the truth and deliberately buried the report.
So the Pentagon bypassed the White House entirely and handed intelligence on the same jihadists who Obama was arming to Germany, Israel and Russia.
This intel was then passed directly to Assad, who used it to turn the tide against the jihadists, almost certainly saving Syria from being completely taken over by the Islamic State.
The bottom line is that many of the top brass in the Pentagon knew Obama’s policy would lead to an even bigger disaster than we have now, and they took decisive action to derail it.
The secret measure was also partly a payback after Assad had helped fight Al-Qaeda after 9/11 and Syrian intelligence had stopped an Al-Qaeda attack on the headquarters of the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet in Bahrain.
The US military also defied Obama by deliberately providing the rebels with outdated weapons, according to Seymour Hersh’s Pentagon source.
But this was derailed by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, who gave ISIS jihadists modern weaponry in order to help them overthrow Assad.
In his report, Hersh also drops the bombshell that Turkey’s support for ISIS is because Erdogan wants to restore the Ottoman Empire.
He shares virtually the same goal as ISIS, who want to establish an Islamic Caliphate, or empire, stretching into Europe, just as Muslim crusaders did before the Christian crusades.
This report is stunning because it confirms why the Obama White House refused to properly target ISIS for 15 months.
In his obsession with isolating Assad, Obama knowingly armed ISIS and, along with Turkey, allowed the terror organization to build its Caliphate.
Now elements of the Pentagon are in open revolt against this insanity, and will continue to be should Hillary Clinton capture the White House.
In so many ways, 2016 is shaping up to be a pivotal year for the future of the Middle East, the future of radical Islam, and the future of the free world.
Everything is at stake.

Stunner: Pentagon in Secret Revolt Against Obama;
Passes Intelligence to Other Countries Because Obama Refused To Listen



"Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act"

“In the United States, we do not have a king, but we do have a Constitution. We also have the Second Amendment, and I will fight tooth and nail to protect it,” Sen. Paul said.

Rand Paul Introduces Bill To Kill Obama Gun Control


Would render executive action “advisory only”

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

GOP presidential hopeful Rand Paul has introduced legislation intended to block any effort by the incumbent president to enforce gun control by executive action.
Paul’s legislation, named the Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act, would render any action on gun legislation by the president which circumvents Congress as “advisory only” in nature.
Paul’s bill would apply to “any execution action on gun control that either infringes upon congressional authority or potentially violates the Second Amendment.”
The bill then mandates that once an executive action has been classified as “advisory only,” it would require Congress to pass it in order for it to take effect.
The bill also outlines that it is within their power for a “state official, member of Congress or person affected by an executive action on gun control to launch a civil lawsuit.”
The legislation will be fast-tracked through the Senate and is expected to be made a priority after the Christmas recess.
In a statement released Monday, Paul said, “In the United States, we do not have a king, but we do have a Constitution. We also have the Second Amendment, and I will fight tooth and nail to protect it.”
Here is the full bill: (SEE ORIGINAL ARTICLE)
Obama has not tried to hide the fact that he intends to introduce gun control legislation via executive fiat.
Last week, White House communications director Jen Psaki toldBloomberg that within a matter of “weeks, not months” Obama will review recommendations for executive orders provide to him at request by the Department of Justice.
The DOJ continues to work on options to allow Obama skirt around Congress on the issue and effectively counter lawsuits that pro-Second Amendment rights groups have prepared.
According to Psaki, Obama is planning a “range of steps that can be taken as it relates to the people who have access to guns [and] how people gain access to guns,” and that he “will not be satisfied” unless some kind of action is taken on firearms before the end of his term.






Mark Herring



Virginia Attorney General Unilaterally Eliminates Concealed Carry Reciprocity

Republicans, gun rights activists question legality 
of voiding 25 state agreements
in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The Virginia attorney general announced on Tuesday that he would unilaterally eliminate gun carry reciprocity agreements with 25 other states on Feb. 1, a move that will affect millions of Americans.
Attorney General Mark R. Herring, a Democrat, released a statement with the details of the action he is taking.
“To ensure Virginia’s law and safety standards for concealed handgun permits are applied evenly, consistently, and fairly, I have recommended the State Police terminate the reciprocity agreements with 25 states whose laws are not adequate to prevent issuance of a concealed handgun permit to individuals that Virginia would disqualify,” Herring said. “The State Police has accepted that recommendation and has begun sending letters to the 25 states informing them that as of February 1, their permits will no longer be recognized by Virginia.”
He called the move a “commonsense step” and said it would make Virginia police safer. “To me, this is a commonsense step that can help make Virginians and our law enforcement officers safer by ensuring that our concealed carry laws and safety standards apply to everyone in Virginia, whether they are a resident or a visitor,” he said. “Strong, consistent enforcement of Virginia’s laws and safety standards can prevent disqualified people who may be dangerous or irresponsible from utilizing a concealed handgun permit, and it’s what the law requires.”
The attorney general did not provide examples of those with out of state gun carry permits who have committed gun crimes in the Commonwealth.
Virginia State Police spokesperson Corinne Geller said the department doesn’t have any statistics on such crimes.
“That’s not something we readily track,” she said.
Herring said a large number of states with which Virginia has reciprocity agreements do not employ the same standards for issuing permits as Virginia does.
He said his office determined 25 of the 30 reciprocity agreements would need to be vacated. Those states are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
Once Herring’s order goes into effect on Feb. 1, 2016, Virginians will not be able to carry in many of those states and gun carry permit holders from those states will not be able to carry in Virginia.
The only state permits Virginia will continue to honor are those from West Virginia, Michigan, Oklahoma, Texas, and Utah.
Open carry without a permit by anyone who can legally possess a firearm will continue to be legal for both residents and non-residents.
Some states whose permits will no longer be honored in Virginia may still honor Virginia permits depending on their state gun laws. The attorney general identified Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee as states which would continue to recognize Virginia’s permit.
Florida, Louisiana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Wyoming will no longer honor Virginia’s permits due to the attorney general’s actions.
The Virginia State Police said the change was a normal part of a continual process of review that involves both the agency and the attorney general.
“This is a consistent process for the State Police and the list consistently changes,” spokeswoman Geller said, “because, obviously, the laws change. … So we’re consistently reviewing [the agreements] with states all across the nation. We’ve been doing it ever since the reciprocity agreements came into effect back in the mid to late 90s.”
Geller could not remember the last time a state reciprocity agreement was canceled. “I’d have to check with our legal office to see if we’ve got that on file,” Geller said. “I’m not sure.”
Geller said the State Police had no specific plan beyond information posted on their website and media reports to inform Virginia residents or the residents of the 25 states in question about the change.
When asked again about the scale of the change to reciprocity agreements, Geller said, “It’s significant.”
Virginia Republicans and gun rights activists were caught off guard by the holiday announcement and are still deciding what to do in response. They expressed skepticism that the attorney general’s move is legally permissible and harshly criticized the move.
“I had no hint,” said Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League. “No hint anywhere that there was a review anywhere or that anything was going to change.”
“We’re going to want to look at the criteria that they used [to review the agreements] and I bet you we find criteria in there that doesn’t apply.”
“We were surprised to see that,” Bill Howell (R.), Virginia speaker of the house, told the Washington Free Beacon. “I find it interesting that the attorney general said he was going to take the politics out of the attorney generals when he’s really injected them in an even greater way than we’ve seen in recent time.”
The speaker went on to say he is not convinced the attorney general has the power to void all of the 25 reciprocity agreements he is targeting. “We’re doing research on this right now but there’s probably about half the states, maybe more than that, we have written agreements with and I don’t think the attorney general or anybody can just go in and abdicate a written agreement,” Howell said. “So the number of states it impacts may be a lot less than what we’re seeing right now.”
Howell also indicated that the Republican majorities in the Virginia House of Delegates and Senate are looking at legislative action to reverse Herring’s order. He said that any legislative option would likely have to overcome or outmaneuver a veto by Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D.), who recently enacted a number of gun control measures through executive action.
Both Herring and McAuliffe’s moves came after their party failed to recapture a majority in the Virginia House and Senate despite millions of dollars in donations from gun control activists.
Gun rights activists warned that the attorney general’s move puts millions of Americans in greater danger.
“Some woman with a child who’s under a death threat by an ex-spouse from Tennessee who comes into Virginia is effectively disarmed so that some politician can look like he’s done something,” Van Cleave said.
The National Rifle Association called the attorney general’s action “dangerous and shameful” in a statement.
“Plain and simple, this is putting politics above public safety,” said Chris Cox, head of the 5 million member gun rights organization’s lobbying arm.

Virginia Refuses to Honor Concealed Carry Permits From 25 States

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Virginia's Democrat Attorney General Mark Herring announced Tuesday that the Old Dominion State will no longer recognize concealed carry permits from 25 states that had previously been recognized. The move has angered many who feel it is an end-run around the right to keep and bear arms. There may be political fallout for Herring, as well.
Many states honor other states' concealed carry permits. Sometimes reciprocity is required (state A will honor state B's permits only if state B will honor state A's permits). Some states will honor other states' permits regardless of whether the other states honor theirs. This allows a concealed carry permit holder from one state to carry his weapon concealed when traveling to other states.
Virginia currently recognizes concealed carry permits from 30 states, allowing those visitors the same level of personal protection they enjoy in their own states. It is good for tourism and other business; those who take seriously their ability and responsibility to defend themselves and their families take that into consideration when planning family vacations and other trips. Now, all of that is changing.
Herring said Tuesday that Virginia will no longer recognize permits from 25 of those 30 states, effective February 1, 2016. His "logic" — if this writer can stretch the word that far without it breaking — is that those 25 states have low standards for those who obtain permits leading to them issuing permits to "fugitives, convicted stalkers and drug dealers," according to a report by the Associated Press.
That is a strange claim considering that one of those states, Kentucky, performs monthly background checks on permit holders to ensure they are still qualified to hold the permit. As Concealed Nation reported, "Their rationale is simple: if a person commits a felony after getting his or her concealed carry handgun, how else will the Kentucky State Police know about it and be able to revoke his or her permit?" So if a permit holder in Kentucky fails to come up clean on the background check each month, his permit is suspended. According to Concealed Nation, any of the following is cause for immediate suspension:
• Felony conviction and/or imprisonment • Indictment for any charge that carries with it imprisonment of up to a year's time • Subject to a restraining order • Renouncing U.S. citizenship • Dishonorable discharge from the armed forces • Documented mental illness • Drug abuse or treatment for drug abuse • Misdemeanor or felony charges of domestic assault
Herring said his office sent letters to the 25 states on Tuesday making them formally aware of his decision. The states are:
Alaska Arizona Arkansas Delaware Florida Idaho Indiana Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Minnesota Mississippi Montana Nebraska New Mexico North Dakota North Carolina Ohio Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Washington Wisconsin Wyoming
Because of reciprocity agreements requiring Virginia to recognize their permits in order for Virginia permit holders to conceal carry in their states, Virginians who previously enjoyed the unhindered right of self-defense in six of those states, will no longer be able to do so. Those states are:
Florida Louisiana North Dakota Pennsylvania South Carolina Idaho
The other states (other than Delaware, Minnesota, Washington and Wisconsin — which already do not honor permits from Virginia) will presumably continue to allow Virginians who hold a permit to conceal carry in their states.
Herring referred to his decision as "a common sense step that can help make Virginians and our law enforcement officers safer by ensuring that our concealed carry laws and safety standards apply to everyone in Virginia, whether they are a resident or a visitor." He did not cite even one case in which a concealed carry permit holder from another state had made "Virginians and our law enforcement officers" unsafe.
According to a report by The Virginian-Pilot, the Virginia Citizen's Defense League has accused Herring of making his decision as a payoff for political contributions:
The Virginia Citizens Defense League, a gun-rights group, sent an email to its list Tuesday morning saying the announcement was done to pay back former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg for his campaign donations in Virginia legislative races this fall.
Bloomberg's Everytown For Gun Safety group spent $2.2 million for two Democrats in state Senate races.
"I've never heard of a single case of an out-of-state permit holder causing problems in Virginia," said Philip Van Cleave, president of the gun-rights group.
Whatever Herring's financial or party considerations, it is clear that this should not be viewed as an isolated incident, but instead as a "first step" in the plan to further roll back the God-given right of self-defense guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Josh Horwitz, executive director of the anti-gun organization Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV), said, "Virginia's lack of enforcement of its own standards has been irresponsible and dangerous." He added, "While the Commonwealth has plenty of room to improve their own standards for issuing concealed carry permits, the actions taken today by the Attorney General are a good first step toward making Virginia a safer place for its citizens and visitors alike."
As if disarming law-abiding citizens has ever made them safer. If that tired old theory bore any good fruit, the recent San Bernardino shooting, which claimed the lives of 14 and left another 22 seriously injured, could not have happened. California has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. Quite the contrary is true. If Californians were afforded the opportunity to defend themselves and a few concealed carry permit holders had been there to act, it is likely that the ISIS-inspired radical Islamists would have been stopped before so many lives were lost.
Certain Virginia lawmakers are ready to act to correct Herring's assault on the Second Amendment. Republican state Delegate Rob Bell — who is running for Herring's office — said the decision was just more "Washington-style overreach from a nakedly partisan attorney general." Another Republican delegate, Lee Ware, has introduced legislation to take away the power of the state police to conduct surveys, such as the one on which Herring leaned for this draconian exercise.
Herring was narrowly elected to his office in November 2013, when he managed to squeak past the Republican candidate, Mark Obenshain. He ran on a platform that included taking politics out of the office. Virginia House Speaker Bill Howell is not impressed. In a statement he released after Herring's announcement, he said, "Despite promising to take politics out of the Attorney General's office, Mark Herring consistently seeks to interpret and apply the law of the Commonwealth through the lens of his own personal, political opinions." Howell added, "He is damaging the integrity of the office he holds."
Not only is he " damaging the integrity of the office he holds," he is endangering lives to do it. As Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizen's Defense League said, "People that have concealed handgun permits are trying to protect their lives, some of them are under threat. Maybe an ex spouse is threatening their lives and they are carrying a gun because they could be murdered the next time they come across that spouse. This is disarming the very people that could use a gun the most."

“Red” Herring: Virginia AG Revokes Concealed Carry Recognition for 25 States
Published on Dec 23, 2015
Virginia’s Attorney General Herring has declared he will not honor concealed carry permits from 25 states beginning this new year. Using the threat of terrorism, he would target the most investigated and vetted individuals and revoke their license, while the Federal government brings in people from areas at war with the USA without ANY investigation of their background.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

(NaturalNews) In recent days the House, thanks to House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, adopted a $1 trillion-plus budget bill that adds hundreds of billions to the federal debt and decreases further the opportunity for our progeny to have a good life.
With its passage, this latest budget represents the complete political sell-out of the American people.
Prior to this budget, there were still vestiges of policy difference between Democrats and Republicans.
Democrats have historically been known as the party of Big Government, favoring high-dollar welfare programs and expansion of the federal bureaucracy at every turn.
On the other hand, Republicans were historically the party of smaller government, fiscal and personal responsibility and maximum liberty. The election of George W. Bush signaled a dramatic change in Republican orthodoxy, however, with Big Government programs like the major expansion of Medicare (Part D) and the No Child Left Behind law. The only president to have expanded the federal budget more than Bush has been Obama.
But as we can see with this latest budget, Obama is getting plenty of helpfrom the “opposition party,” which not only provided full funding for Obamacare and the president’s refugee resettlement plans, but appreciably increased spending on virtually all of Obama’s priorities, budget deficit be damned.

One party rule

As former GOP presidential contender and U.S. representative from Colorado, Tom Tancredo notes – as reported by – the end result represents the complete merger of the Democratic and Republican establishments.
Congress has adopted a 2016 federal budget that makes it official: The Republican Party and the Democrat Party have merged.
In the name of stability and progress, Republican leaders have agreed with Democrats to put big government on autopilot — with no change in the programmed destination, full-blown socialism. On December 18, at Speaker Rep. Paul Ryan’s urging, 150 House Republicans voted to double down on the politics of surrender.
Yesterday, we thought we had two parties, Republicans and Democrats, but now we see that we have only one, the Repubocrat Party, the party of No Shame.
Tancredo, like most conservatives, feels betrayed after helping elect the largest number of Republicans to Congress – as well as state legislatures and governorships – since the Civil War; they were sent there to opposeDemocrats and the Obama agenda, not support and even expand it. Yet that’s what they’ve done, at virtually every turn.
Tancredo notes specifically:
— In 2016 it likely won’t matter who you vote for because “government growth is on autopilot, and the expansion of imperial government will continue, whether we elect Democrats or Republicans;”
— Republicans talk about ending “sanctuary cities” whose local governments harbor illegal aliens (against federal law), and 5 million visa overstays, but do nothing to actually end the practices;
— Republicans talk about reigning in the out-of-control federal bureaucracy, but continue to fund every agency without making any effort at all to use their power of the purse to defund – and hence reign in – the various agencies.
Tancredo goes on to make this admission as well: He “left the GOP” two months ago, and is now a political Independent. He says that’s what the conservative and constitutionalist base that is continually lied to and abused by the GOP leadership need to do – bail, and let the party earn back their trust (if that’s possible).

‘We deserve better’

In the meantime, he says, voters can exact some revenge during the primary season by supporting candidates who are committed to busting up the D.C. establishment cabal currently occupied by both men and women who are loyal to everyone and everything but voters.
Tancredo paraphrased the Republican leadership’s excuse for selling out their supporters:
Fulfilling commitments to K-street lobbyists is more important than keeping promises to the voters who elected us. Voters have preferences, but lobbyists have checkbooks. If you expect us to repeal slush funds and illegal regulatory mandates for the sake of principle, you’re living in a different world.
As a former member of Congress, he knows exactly how “the system” works.
“We can do better; we must do better. Living on hypocrisy is not a healthy diet for patriots,” he concluded.


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

They used to call it “cultural imperialism.” Now they call it tolerance. The Barack Obama administration has spent $700 million since 2012 promoting the homosexuality agenda overseas — with more than half of that sum being spent in sub-Saharan Africa — and has nothing to show for it except more anti-homosexuality laws and ill will. Ah, tax money at work. Writes the New York Times:
Suspicious neighbors and landlords pry into their private lives. Blackmailers hunt for victims on the social media sites they use to meet others of the same sex. Police officers routinely stop them to search for incriminating images and chats on their cellphones.
Since an anti-gay law went into effect last year, many gay Nigerians say they have been subjected to new levels of harassment, even violence.
They blame the law, the authorities and broad social intolerance for their troubles. But they also blame an unwavering supporter whose commitment to their cause has been unquestioned and conspicuous across Africa: the United States government.
“The U.S. support is making matters worse,” said Mike, 24, a university student studying biology in Minna, a town in central Nigeria who asked that his full name not be used for his safety. “There’s more resistance now. It’s triggered people’s defense mechanism.”
… In Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation, the final passage of the 2014 law against homosexuality — which makes same-sex relationships punishable by 14 years in prison and makes it a crime to organize or participate in any type of gay meeting — is widely regarded by both supporters and opponents of gay rights as a reaction to American pressure on Nigeria and other African nations to embrace gay rights.
One African activist describes this as “blowback.” And Obama’s effort has been very aggressive, with the administration making the homosexuality agenda “an integral part of American foreign policy,” as the Times puts it, and tying development aid to acceptance of it.
For example, after Uganda enacted its tough 2014 anti-homosexuality law, Obama punished the nation by cutting or redirecting certain development funds. Yet homosexual behavior remains illegal in most African countries. Moreover, Russia also has also responded to Western efforts — by deciding in 2013 to ban pro-homosexuality propaganda.
The irony of this won’t be lost on students of history. In the days of the Soviet Union, the Marxists would seek to undermine target nations (e.g., the United States) via a process of “demoralization.” And part of this was, as Florida Democrat Representative A. S. Herlong, Jr. read into the congressional record in 1963, to “Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as ‘normal, natural, healthy’” (taken from ex-F.B.I. agent Cleon Skousen’s book The Naked Communist). Yet now the United States advances this goal while Russia resists it.
Of course, Obama’s homosexuality scheme isn’t without American critics. FrontPage Mag’s Daniel Greenfieldwrote, wryly, that “apparently sub-Saharan Africa is in desperate need of Gay Pride Day. And somehow, Obama managed to blow through $350 million on gay rights groups in sub-Saharan Africa in two years. I don't even understand how he managed that.” Yet it’s no mystery. It’s man’s nature to be even more willing to accept other people’s money than statists are to be generous with other people’s money. And much, if not most, of it likely disappeared into the pockets of corrupt African officials.
From wry to downright sarcastic brings us to American Thinker’s Ed Straker. He presented some discussion questions:
1) We have an enormous national debt of nearly 19 trillion dollars, such that it seems excessive to spend 700 million dollars on this subject. With such tremendous debt, do you think we can really justify spending more than 300 or 400 million dollars to promote gay sex in other countries?
2) Do you think this program was flawed to begin with, because there were no metrics taken — e.g., comparing the number of gay sex acts before and after the program began to measure its success?
3) Do you think there should be a greater focus on gay sex in Islamic countries?
Speaking of which, Nigeria, the focus of the Times piece, is bedeviled by a jihadist group — Islamic State in West Africa (ISWA) — that seeks to make it a completely Islamic country. Previously (and still more commonly) known as Boko Haram and labeled the “world’s deadliest terror group” by The New American, the jihadists now have formal ties to Da’esh (ISIS) and commit unspeakable atrocities. Yet the Obama administration not only prioritizes fighting for homosexuality over fighting against ISWA, but is also accused of refusing to help defeat the group until Nigeria accepts the homosexuality agenda.
And the irony of this won’t be lost on students of current events. Hillary Clinton recently claimed that Donald Trump’s anti-jihadist rhetoric is being used by Da’esh in promotional videos. While her claim has been proven false, a different American political figure does make an appearance in the group’s propaganda. In the slickly made video found here, Da’esh encourages Western Muslims not to do the bidding of, among other sinners, “fornicators” — as it shows Bill Clinton’s picture.
This illustrates not just the Clintons’ hypocrisy and destructiveness to America’s image, but an even larger issue. Jihadists don’t hate our legitimate “liberty” but our licentiousness; they consider us ripe for the taking not because of a dearth of tolerance but our descent into turpitude. They’ve called us and would cast us as “the great Satan” — and our Great Sexual Heresy plays right into their hands.
As an example, consider author Justin Raimondo’s observation after the Supreme Court’s faux-marriage ruling in June: “The effect on our eternal ‘war on terrorism’ may be bigger than anyone now realizes. Obergefell v. Hodgeshands ISIS a propaganda victory on a silver platter: they can now point to the ‘decadent’ West and raise the specter of America’s gay hordes descending on the Middle East to sodomize the pious into submission.” Note that Da’esh marked the court’s marriage ruling by throwing four homosexual men off a high-rise building’s roof, an incident reported by a Syrian Twitter user on the pro-faux-marriage hashtag #LoveWins.
While jihadist groups may demonize any non-Muslim leader, Trumpian tough talk will never earn the disdain engendered by Clintonian corruption. Just consider, for instance, that the name Boko Haram translates into “Western education is a sin.” And what about modern Western education, do you suppose, most inspires pious Muslims to rally to the jihadist cause?