Monday, November 30, 2015
Its people are not the victims of American foreign policy, Islamic militancy or any of the other fashionable excuses. They supported Islamic terrorism. Millions of them still do.
They are not the Jews fleeing a Nazi Holocaust. They are the Nazis trying to relocate from a bombed out Berlin.
These are the cold hard facts.
ISIS took over parts of Syria because its government willingly allied with it to help its terrorists kill Americans in Iraq. That support for Al Qaeda helped lead to the civil war tearing the country apart.
The Syrians were not helpless, apathetic pawns in this fight. They supported Islamic terrorism.
A 2007 poll showed that 77% of Syrians supported financing Islamic terrorists including Hamas and the Iraqi fighters who evolved into ISIS. Less than 10% of Syrians opposed their terrorism.
Why did Syrians support Islamic terrorism? Because they hated America.
Sixty-three percent wanted to refuse medical and humanitarian assistance from the United States. An equal number didn’t want any American help caring for Iraqi refugees in Syria.
The vast majority of Syrians turned down any form of assistance from the United States because they hated us. They still do. Just because they’re willing to accept it now, doesn’t mean they like us.
If we bring Syrian Muslims to America, we will be importing a population that hates us.
The terrorism poll numbers are still ugly. A poll this summer found that 1 in 5 Syrians supports ISIS. A third of Syrians support the Al Nusra Front, which is affiliated with Al Qaeda. Since Sunnis are 3/4rs of the population and Shiites and Christians aren’t likely to support either group, this really means that Sunni Muslim support for both terror groups is even higher than these numbers make it seem.
And even though Christians and Yazidis are the ones who actually face ISIS genocide, Obama has chosen to take in few Christians and Yazidis. Instead 98.6% of Obama’s Syrian refugees are Sunni Muslims.
This is also the population most likely to support ISIS and Al Qaeda.
But these numbers are even worse than they look. Syrian men are more likely to view ISIS positively than women. This isn’t surprising as the Islamic State not only practices sex slavery, but has some ruthless restrictions for women that exceed even those of Saudi Arabia. (Al Qaeda’s Al Nusra Front, however, mostly closes the gender gap getting equal support from Syrian men and women.)
ISIS, however, gets its highest level of support from young men. This is the Syrian refugee demographic.
In the places where the Syrian refugees come from, support for Al Qaeda groups climbs as high as 70% in Idlib, 66% in Quneitra, 66% in Raqqa, 47% in Derzor, 47% in Hasakeh, 41% in Daraa and 41% in Aleppo.
Seventy percent support for ISIS in Raqqa has been dismissed as the result of fear. But if Syrians in the ISIS capital were just afraid of the Islamic State, why would the Al Nusra Front, which ISIS is fighting, get nearly as high a score from the people in Raqqa? The answer is that their support for Al Qaeda is real.
Apologists will claim that these numbers don’t apply to the Syrian refugees. It’s hard to say how true that is. Only 13% of Syrian refugees will admit to supporting ISIS, though that number still means that of Obama’s first 10,000 refugees, 1,300 will support ISIS. But the poll doesn’t delve into their views of other Al Qaeda groups, such as the Al Nusra Front, which usually gets more Sunni Muslim support.
And there’s no sign that they have learned to reject Islamic terrorism and their hatred for America.
When Syrian refugees were asked to list the greatest threat, 29 percent picked Iran, 22 percent picked Israel and 19 percent picked America. Only 10 percent viewed Islamic terrorism as a great threat.
By way of comparison, twice as many Iraqis see Islamic terrorism as a threat than Syrians do and slightly more Palestinian Arabs view Islamic terrorism as a threat than Syrians do. These are terrible numbers.
Thirty-seven percent of Syrian refugees oppose US airstrikes on ISIS. 33% oppose the objective of destroying ISIS.
And these are the people whom our politicians would have us believe are “fleeing an ISIS Holocaust.”
Seventy-three percent of Syrian refugees view US foreign policy negatively. That’s a higher number than Iraqis. It’s about equal to that of Palestinian Arabs.
They don’t like us. They really don’t like us.
Obama’s first shipment of Syrians will include 1,300 ISIS supporters and most of the rest will hate this country. But unless they’re stupid enough to announce that during their interviews, the multi-layered vetting that Obama and other politicians boast about will be useless.
It only took 2 Muslim refugees to carry out the Boston Marathon massacre. It only took 19 Muslim terrorists to carry out 9/11.
If only 1 percent of those 1,300 Syrian ISIS supporters put their beliefs into practice, they can still kill thousands of Americans.
And that’s a best case scenario. Because it doesn’t account for how many thousands of them support Al Qaeda. It doesn’t account for how many of them back other Islamic terrorist groups such as Hamas that had widespread support in Syria.
While the media has shamelessly attempted to exploit the Holocaust to rally support for Syrian migrants, the majority of Syrians supported Hamas whose mandate is finishing Hitler’s work. The Hamas charter describes a “struggle against the Jews” that culminates in another Holocaust. Bringing Hamas supporters to America will lead to more Muslim Supremacist violence against Jews in this country.
But all of this can be avoided by taking in genuine Syrian refugees.
While Obama insists on taking in fake Syrian refugees, mainly Sunni Muslims from UN camps who support terrorism and are not endangered in Jordan or Turkey, both Sunni countries, he is neglecting the real refugees, Christians and Yazidis, who are stateless and persecuted in the Muslim world.
Instead of taking in fake refugees who hate us, we should be taking in real refugees who need us.
Obama and Paul Ryan have claimed that a “religious test” for refugees is wrong, but religious tests are how we determine whether a refugee is really fleeing persecution or is just an economic migrant.
The Sunni Muslims that Obama is taking in do not face persecution. They are the majority. They are the persecutors. It’s the Yazidis and the Christians who need our help. And these real refugees, unlike the fake Sunni Muslim refugees, are not coming here to kill us. They truly have nowhere else to go.
Syria is a disaster because its rival Muslim religious groups are unable to get along with each other. Bringing them to this country will only spread the violence from their land to ours. Instead of taking in the religious majority that caused this mess through its intolerance, we should take in their victims; the Christians and Yazidis who are being slaughtered and enslaved by ISIS.
During the entire Syrian Civil War, Obama has only taken in 1 Syrian Yazidi and 53 Christians.
It’s time that we had a refugee policy that protected the persecuted, instead of their Muslim persecutors. It’s time that we listened to Syrian Christians in this country who oppose bringing tens of thousands of Syrian Muslims to terrorize their neighborhoods the way that they are already terrorizing Syrian Christians in Germany.
Syrian Muslims are a nation of terrorist supporters. They destroyed their own country. Let’s not let them destroy ours.
It’s time that we kept our nation safe by doing the right thing. Let’s take in the real Christian and Yazidi refugees and let the fake Sunni Muslim refugees and terrorist supporters stay in their own countries.
Among psychologists, the most interesting answer to the above question is that given by John Hibbing. He might be called the "rockstar" of the debate. He attracts attention because he goes down to the physiological and brain-science level for his evidence and conclusions. He says that what you believe is a product of what you are. He does not stress it but "what you are" is genetically determined. So he is looking for inherited physiological differences between Leftists and conservatives.
And he has made some progress. He has put people through a number of experimental tasks and found that the reactions he observes to the tasks do indeed differ as between the two ideological groups. He describes his findings as showing that "disgust sensitivity" is the key variable. Conservatives are more easily disgusted. Most generally, they have a "negativity bias", according to Hibbing. And last year he put up a big paper summarizing the evidence for his view. It is "Differences in negativity bias underlie variations in political ideology"
I have long argued that Left/Right differences are largely inborn so my critique of Hibbing is not to contest his findings but to question the "spin" he puts on them. You can find a pretty good summary of his experiments here and I think it is easy to see that what Hibbing calls "negativity bias" could just as well be described as caution -- and caution has long been said to be the essence of conservatism. So Hibbing has confirmed some old wisdom rather than telling us anything new.
Hibbing's big article was published in an open review journal so critiques of it keep multiplying. One such critique that I have noted recently was "Not so simple: The multidimensional nature and diverse origins of political ideology" by Stanley Feldman and Leonie Huddy. They make two points that I think are pretty right:
They say that "negativity bias" is characteristic of neurotics and that all the studies show that conservatives are not particularly neurotic. I observed that in my research too. So that is a bit of a stake in the heart for Hibbing. His "spin" on his results has undone him. If he had simply described conservatives as cautious, that criticism could not so easily be levelled at him.
Their second point is that there is no single Left-Right dimension. Economic conservatism and social conservatism are quite different. So Feldman & Huddy conclude that Hibbing's work is pretty useless because he has mixed up two different things. And it is indeed true that those two types of attitudes are very distinct factorially. I noted that in one of my papers long ago.
So they are right but I am prepared to defend Hibbing on that one. Although there are two distinctly different types of conservative attitude, they are not totally different. As I found, they do correlate, albeit weakly. And that is why the "big tent" of the GOP succeeds. The two types of conservative do find some things in common, a respect for the individual, mainly.
And as we see in "Political Attitudes Vary with Physiological Traits", Hibbing uses the Wilson scale in his research, which is primarily a measure of social conservatism. And I have shown elsewhere that social conservatism is the big one for separating people. Economic conservatism is arguably more important to our future but it doesn't get the blood boiling like social issues do: Abortion, homosexuality, religion, tradition etc.
So Hibbing may not be measuring overall conservatism but he is measuring social conservatism and that is the most central sort of conservatism. So I would summarize his findings as showing that social conservatives are instinctively more cautious than others. And I see no problem with that.
Hibbing uses "Negativity" rather than "caution" to describe conservatives because he wants to rubbish conservatives (though he says he does not). "Negative" sounds a lot sadder than "cautious". But in so doing he lands himself in trouble. I have noted the Feldman & Huddy comment on that but there is in fact a bigger vat of boiling oil he falls into:
As is noted here, who are the "negative" people when it comes to global warming? Warmists are almost entirely Leftists but it is they who are vastly negative about the climate and our future. They predict imminent catastrophe -- while conservatives are mostly just amused by the scare. Conservatives say in summary that: "global warming is not a crisis, the likely benefits of man-made global warming exceed the likely costs, and mankind is not the scourge on Earth that liberals make us out to be"
And again, referring to conservatives simply as cautious would not enable that criticism. Warmists do say that they are the cautious ones but to swallow the arrant nonsense that is global warming would have to be a height of incautiousness. Conservatives just look at the evidence and see that there is no need for caution in the matter. Here's a graph of the amount of global warming we have had in the last 18 years -- none:
So two cheers for Hibbing. He has drawn attention to the biological basis of ideology but he should stop stretching the implications of his findings in a Leftist direction. He just makes a fool of himself with that stretch. He was pretty reasonable -- even humble -- in a 2012 paper. He should try more of that.
Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne is a hyperfeminist, a lesbian activist. She hates patriarchies, especially old white men who tell women what to do. But see a photo that she herself published, wearing a hijab [in white scarf] and sitting in the women's only section of an Ottawa mosque, like a good little subservient, submissive woman, obedient to sharia law!
Of course, if sharia law were really in effect, she’d be thrown off the top of an apartment block, or hanged from a crane, which is the usual death sentence for homosexuality under radical Islam. This isn’t just a case of, anything for a vote. It’s an insight into her mind. She despises our western, Judeo-Christian culture. But she’s an obedient little girl when it comes to the most reactionary patriarchy in the world — radical Islam.
But watch and I'll show you a photo that she herself published, wearing a hijab and sitting in the women's only section of an Ottawa mosque, like a good little subservient, submissive woman, obedient to sharia law!
Nazi Germany and the ideology which inspired it was so evil that when we won the Second World War, "de-Nazification" was the remedy. The Nazis had murdered millions of innocent people, conspired to begin an aggressive world war that plunged most of mankind into bloodshed and destruction, and preached a gospel of hate and lies and infected millions. De-Nazification was the right thing to do.
When the Soviet Union imploded twenty-five years ago, there was a compelling case to be made for de-Bolshevization. Communists had murdered many more innocent people than the Nazis – 100,000,000 is the conservative number French leftists calculated in The Black Book of Communism – the first mass genocide in modern Europe was not the Holocaust but the Holodomor, a term virtually unknown to most Americans.
The Second World War was begun not by Hitler, but by Hitler and Stalin. Nazi Germany, until June 1941, had no more slavish lackey and no more devoted helper than Soviet Union and no greater "Fifth Column" in the democracies than communists in those nations......What could be worse than those party functionaries who presided over this wretched empire, which had been the loyal ally of Nazism? How about those fortunate enough to live safely in America, living in relative comfort and ease because of America, serving a foreign monstrosity like Communism while they sneer hatefully and mockingly toward the land that blessed them? How about some hideous creature like Dalton Trumbo?......Men like Dalton Trumbo and women like Betty Friedan, however, stayed slavishly devoted to this modern-day Beelzebub. .....To Read More....
Eastern Europe is leading the way to protect the continent against colonizers from Islamic lands. Hungary is in the forefront, having erected a fence that is patrolled around the clock by Hungarian police and military. There is also support along the border from Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Slovakia as these nations partner together to protect themselves. In this video, the mayor of Assothalom (a rural town in Hungary situated along the southern border shared with Serbia) speaks about border security. And he does not mince his words. He acknowledges that all of Europe must be protected and defended or everyone will perish.....To Read More.....
Secondly, Islamophobia is an oxymoron. A phobia is is a mental disorder caused by an irrational fear of something. Does anyone really think fearing Islamists is irrational? As for the rest of the Muslims - they may be non-violent, but they support Sharia and those who are violent and the Islamization of the world, that's a center most teaching in the Koran. Fearing them in general isn't irrational.
Xenophobia is defined as " an intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries". These people are feared and disliked because they're barbarians with a moral code that belongs in a sewer. Fearing and disliking them is not a mental issue - it's a reality issue. Then we have racism. Islam isn't a race - it's a political criminal organization masquerading as a religion.
Let's try and get this once and for all. Fearing Islam isn't a mental disorder. It's clear thinking based on history and reality. And we have to stop listening to these insane leftists who attempt to obfuscate realty with insane rhetoric filled with logical fallacies. They've lost their minds - it's time for the sane to step up and say so.
Did you ever wonder why a screwball like Trump is so popular? He has the guts to say what most people in this country are thinking and doesn't care what the world thinks. Especially the cloistered world of the leftist media, unlike so many politicians.
Austrian Muslim fighter: “Hamburg and Berlin are our cities!” - It’s not as if they haven’t been telling us, in no uncertain terms, their intentions, goals and objectives. Western leaders’ response is to go after …. the islamophobes. That’s worked out just splendidly, hasn’t it?
Swedish village descends into open warfare as citizens fight back against Muslim invaders - America, take heed (and take notes): “Community torn apart as arrival of migrants prompts running battles in streets,”....A SMALL Swedish village has descended into open warfare after furious locals clashed with migrants in a chilling warning of the dangers associated with mass migration.
Italy: Headmaster scraps Christmas carol concert following Paris attacks so as not to offend Muslims - Did anyone really believe it was just “Muhammad art exhibits” that upset followers of a savage ideology? Did anyone think it would end with killing Charlie Hebdo journalists and cartoonists or attempting to shoot up our free speech event in Texas?
University of Missouri professor beat teenage relative for not wearing hijab: cops #Mizzou - Where does this fit into the Mizzou race narrative? Will the Huffington Post do a piece on this? Mizzou professor Youssif Z. Omar, 53, was at Hickman High School in Columbia, Missouri, on Tuesday when he spotted that the girl did not have the traditional Muslim headscarf. Officer Latisha Stroer told the Columbia Tribune in an email that Omar grabbed the girl “very violently by the hair.” He slapped her across the face, and pulled her by the hair down and flight of stairs and into his car. Where are the riots? Where are the firings? Where are the demands for expunging Islamic texts and teachings of misogyny and supremacism? Youssif Zaghwani Omar, 53, was arrested....
300 riot in the Berlin airport refugee center - This could have been predicted. Walls have been torn down, and refugees knocked over tables and chairs.
TERROR ALERT: Islamic Graffiti Found on Four Budget Airline Plane's Fuel Tanks - This is all a form of warfare — instilling terror and fear. This is a threat. If they could access the fuel tank so easily, why not place a bomb? As jihadis did on the Russian passenger jet that they blew out of the sky.
Dozens of Paris airport workers on terror watch list: report -
The question is, how many airport workers on terror watch lists are working at American airports?.....The security passes of 86,000 workers at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris will be reviewed after it was found that 57 employees with access to airliners were on a terror watch list, according to a report.
Denmark: Syrian refugee breaks into house, tries to rape 8-year-old - Obama wants to bring this here: Denmark: Syrian refugee breaks into house, tries to rape 8-year-old. A 40 year old male asylum seeker from Syria have been sentenced to nine months in prison after he was convicted of an attempted rape of an 8-year-old girl in December 2014. The then 39-year-old man suddenly stood in the girl's room in the middle of the night. The girl screamed in horror, and it woke her parents who came to her rescue. After a fight between the offender and the girl's father, the now 40-year-old asylum seeker was arrested by the police.
India: Wife gangraped, husband divorces her through SMS (Short Message Service, This is a mechanism of delivery of short messages over the mobile networks) - In Islamic law, this misogyny is institutional and legal: “According to Sharia Law, a man can divorce his wife if he says 'talaq’ to her three times.” This treatment of women like commodities is a central element of the law and culture that Obama and other Western authorities demand that we respect.
Sunday, November 29, 2015
But I’ve also written about the grotesque inefficiency and bloat at the Department of Transportation and urged that the building be razed to the ground.
Today, I can’t resist turning my attention to the Department of Agriculture. This is another part of the federal behemoth that specializes in taking money from productive taxpayers and dispensing it to well-connected agri-businesses to maintain a system of subsidies and central planning so Byzantine that it would probably make a North Korean Commissar shake his head with bemusement.
If you want to share my anger, read this column by Victor David Hanson. Here’s an excerpt to get your blood boiling........To Read More.....
Sharia in the UK: Girl not allowed extra math classes because she didn’t wear hijab - Authorities are investigating this school, while bringing in thousands more Muslims, who will set up more schools like this (or take over other schools and transform them the way they did this one). Do they really think that other Muslim schools will readily teach British values and not act in the way Park View School officials acted? Are UK authorities really unaware that this mistreatment of female students and banning of representational art and instrumental music is in accord with sharia, and thus they will inevitably have many, many more “Trojan Horse” schools?
The internet has changed everything, so much so that even I, a man who has been online for 19 years, am constantly amazed at the pace of accelerated change. The printing press changed the world in a few decades in the 16th century. The internet is even more revolutionary. Even more so than the press, the internet has evaporated prior means of didactic instruction. The printing press created change, but only the rich could afford to buy one. For less than $100 today, one can get a domain and start a media empire on the web.
The standing joke about a liberal is…“A liberal is somebody who is so open-minded that he won’t take his own side in a fight.” And so it is proving. The only problem with Obama being unable to take his own side in a fight is that it is our side as well. And the rest of us are not ready to go gentle – and take our families – into that beheading good night. What’s going on? Liberalism is the philosophy of giving away that which has been built by its forebears. To liberals, defending themselves, their society, their institutions, their customs, their culture is anathema because that would offend the attacker! And they can’t have that! Not giving offense is liberalism’s highest value. The people who built and/or are a part of what is being attacked don’t count. Their sacrifice, their achievement in having created what is being attacked make them privileged in the liberal mind and therefore their opinion, their very existence, is invalid…… Liberalism cannot defend itself, or us, because doing so would invalidate, would evaporate, the mirage that is the world that it has constructed for itself. Since liberalism regards all other cultures as superior to its own, if one of those cultures is a ruthless, relentless warrior culture that cares only for victory and dominance, liberalism has no vocabulary, no thought process, no sense of self-preservation with which to arm itself against it. It cannot defend itself against barbarism because it believes that the barbarians are right……To Read More……
1) a non-electric infrastructure already existed;
2) people had the skills, knowledge and tools to make do;
3) our population levels were far lower; 4
) most people lived rurally and raised a significant portion of their own food; and
5) there were relatively few people who didn’t earn their way….. …..
Indeed, these giveaways are so disgusting and corrupt that not only should the department be abolished, but the headquarters should be razed and then the ground should be covered by a foot of salt to make sure nothing ever springs back to life.
That’s a bit of hyperbole, I realize, but you’ll hopefully feel the same way after today. That’s because we’re going to look at a few examples of the bad results caused by government intervention. To get an idea of the Soviet-style nonsense of American agricultural programs, a Reuters report on the peanut programs reveals how subsidies and intervention are bad news for taxpayers and consumers. Here’s the big picture.....To Read More......
Saturday, November 28, 2015
Add what India, Africa, Poland, Southeast Asia, Indonesia and other countries plan to use in the next 30 years, and U.S. coal consumption and CO2 emissions are almost undetectable globally. In Asia alone this year, power companies are building more than 500 coal-fired plants, with 1,000 more on planning boards.
Of course, none of that is relevant to climate ideologues in and out of the Obama Administration. Nor are the CPP’s adverse impacts on jobs, families, businesses, communities, or people’s health and welfare. But when the states drag the CPP turkey into court, the EPA might stop its strutting. Obama mentor and legal scholar Lawrence Tribe says the CPP likely violates the Constitution, by illegally commandeering state government functions and “treating states more like marionettes, dancing to the tune of the federal puppeteer,” in violation of the Tenth Amendment, which reserves important powers to the states.
Emasculated - (e-mas-cu-late, adj.1. to castrate, 2. to deprive of strength or vigor; to weaken; render effeminate.
The following article (The Emasculated Military) was just sent to me by a respected friend, colleague and WWII/Korea Marine Veteran. He served Gov. Reagan as Director of California Dept. of F&G and Pres. Reagan as Asst. Secretary for Fish & Wildlife and Parks, US Department of the Interior.
While “emasculated” is a perfectly fine and accurate word to describe the US Military today; I believe there is rather an even broader infection causing the decay OF American society on many fronts as the author details about the US Military. Therefore I prefer to describe this as a “Feminized” military, not due necessarily or even simply to the pervasive presence of females and government discrimination on behalf of females in all aspects of society, but rather to the overall shift we see in the federal bureaucracy, courts and political life from self-reliance; individual freedoms; protected rights; families; and churches and communities wherein fathers and husbands are present and provide sustenance and protection to their families as countless generations have done before them.
That we are being “changed” to a mother-like society run by an unlimited and all-powerful government ruling by guile and lawless deceit is a fact. That this is being done in total disregard of our Constitution that created our government whose charge and authority was and is essentially national defense and protecting our “unalienable rights” is reminiscent of remembering that Hitler was elected and Nero and Caligula were confirmed by the Roman Senate.
A few examples of this national descent into feminized anarchy are:
- “No one needs a gun”;
- “criminals need understanding not punishment”
- “killing animals for any reason is wrong”
- “vegetarian diets are best for you according to me”;
- “government should provide us everything it can and we should obey our leaders in all things”;
- “ranching, hunting, fishing, trapping, forest management for human benefit, livestock grazing, wearing furs and animal ownership of everything from dogs to sheep is all wrong and should be eliminated”;
- “all animals should be treated as humans”;
- “private property is wrong, the village (i.e. government), should control all property just like it should raise (i.e. indoctrinate) children”;
- “children” (i.e. boys) that use their fingers to simulate a gun on playgrounds or that eat their pop-tart into the form of a gun should be treated like Michael Vick, scarred for life and publicly humiliated; just as no children should be allowed to ‘win’ games”;
- Churches that teach “there is no sin or punishment and if there is a God he will be waiting for us with our golf clubs and golden retriever somewhere in the clouds” (“now go to sleep, child”);
- “animals (especially large predators) are, like criminals, only dangerous because of how they have been treated and must, again like criminals, be given preferences and avoided by others or their crimes are the fault of their victims”;
- “catastrophic fires due to overgrown national lands and ‘Wilderness’ that cause billions of dollars of property loss and many deaths only prove that people living or recreating in such areas, like hunters, dog owners and ranchers in wolf ‘country”, do so at their own risk”;
- Old people losing their property and civil rights and even the lives of their loved ones for contrived “charges” resulting from unwarranted searches by rogue police out of some cheap, violent movie for accusations of “mistreated” or “hoarded” animals experience incarceration and treatment far worse than what drug traffickers and urban thugs (whose crimes affect human life as compared with animals) receive for their incredibly more serious crimes are a heinous scar on the nation;
These lawyers, veterinarians and scientists’ et al are like court-appointed foster parents and “guardians’ that are only in it for the money without even a modicum of concern for the child in their “care”. Like modern politicians and bureaucrats they have forsaken their humanity and moral responsibility.
As Sir Thomas More observed in the play A Man for All Seasons set in 1535 England; while before the English Parliament instructed by the King to find him guilty and execute him: when they brought a “witness” [a lying former servant] to testify how Thomas had spoken treason against the King [something he had never done], Thomas was asked what he had to say about these charges.
He looked at the exquisitely dressed liar that wore a gold chain and large medallion about his neck and asked quietly if the liar could come closer, whereupon he examined the medallion hanging about his neck. He asked, again quietly, what this fine medallion signified. The liar answered with a smile that he had just been appointed Lord High Whatever of Wales. Again quietly, Sir Thomas asked if the former servant knew the biblical passage that it gained a man nothing if he obtained the whole world but lost his immortal soul? And then Sir Thomas erupted and bellowed “But for ‘WALES?!’” at which point he explained simply and forthrightly to the Parliament how he was and always would remain “the King’s good servant” but why he would always answer first to God and then to the King.
Today, more and more Americans answer only to “the King” [i.e. government] and fewer and fewer each day answer to or even give a thought to the common morality we once understood and shared that bound us together to build this nation.
That this feminizing of society from the military to the schools spawns these harridans (i.e. violent women, vicious old hags) with their demands for animal “rights” while justifying harvesting and selling the parts of children they kill in the womb of consenting females is utterly beyond belief.
What a paradox; that as the nation worships animals, coddles criminality, and “emasculates the military as Islamic Terror once again raises its ugly head with dreams of world conquest: Americans rail against ranching, hunting, trapping, meat, fishing, animal ownership, Constitutional rights, rural communities, families and ruthlessly destroys the elderly while seizing their property using unjust fiats from Rump Judges in league with Rump federal politicians creating Constitution-destroying laws for their own self-interest with a patina of “environmental” and animal “rights” justification.
There is no better display of this insanity than the bizarre blather of our President recently telling the French Prime Minister requesting combat support to destroy Islamic Terrorists after the Paris massacre, that the USA would merely offer our participation in the upcoming “climate change” Conference as a way to show the Islamic murderers that they cannot conquer us!
Whether you believe all this is the result of aggressive women or the result of timid men raised with dolls by smothering teachers, unmarried moms or helicopter parents is your decision. That we are being feminized throughout society is undeniable. First however, like Islamic terror, you have to be able to say and describe the problem before you can apply the solution. American men have been warriors and heroes to their families, churches, communities and their country as the last 245 years attest. Creating a society that marginalizes men, boys and the historic male role is a self-fulfilling prophecy that leads to doom as anyone looking about cannot deny.
Today; too many women, politicians, and non-government organization/lobby groups for everything from “the environment” and “animal welfare” to federal funding of everything, national “non”-defense policies and “race” relations are treating the men of America like alcoholic wife beaters and inferiors instead of the leaders and providers that they are. Denigrate, berate and “emasculate” the fathers, husbands and boys of America and you create today’s non-existent and broken families and the chaos that increasingly surrounds us as I write. Unless and until this societal travesty of feminization by government is reversed, America will continue its’ decline into ignominy and infamy even quicker and in far more ways than the following article describes about the state of the US Military, one of many wake-up calls we ignore at our own peril.
If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks. Jim Beers is a retired US Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades. Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Friday, November 27, 2015
It is because conservatives are basically hopeful and confident that we are also prone to extremes of despair. Too many us were shocked at the decline of our society because of our great confidence in it. The faith that conservatives have in America makes them vulnerable to being crushed by the latest victory of the left. I have seen far too much despair and defeatism, too many comments that suggest there is no hope for America and the only thing left to do is pour a glass of wine and watch the sun go down. But those comments testify to how sheltered Americans are from the struggles against tyranny around the world.
Daniel Greenfield is a New York City based writer and blogger and a Shillman Journalism Fellow of the David Horowitz Freedom Center.