Steve Sailer: Team Islam Surges Back Into Contention

Steve Sailer writes: Islamic nutjobs in America are relatively few in number, but evidently have an impressive chip on their shoulders.

…inviting in the Muslim world’s violence is a policy decision, a policy decision that could have been avoided, and a policy decision that the ruling class very much doesn’t want to have openly debated.

shootings

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Liberal journalists have become fond of pointing out that ISIS doesn’t want Syrian refugees to come to Europe or the US, so if we stop them from coming we are “helping ISIS.”

But why does ISIS want the refugees to stay in Syria? To recruit them as fighters. Because some of them are sympathetic to ISIS now(about 13% in polls), and even more can be radicalized later.

But the same propensity to radicalization that make them attractive to ISIS make them bad for us. And if they are going to become fighters, it is better to have them in Syria than in Paris or San Bernardino.

Liberals can’t make a good argument that the refugees are good for us, so they obfuscate the issue by bringing up if it is “good for ISIS.”

Ultimately ISIS doesn’t pose an existential threat to our survival. But immigration does.

* At its core, the liberal attitude towards immigration and promotion of multiculturalism is an expression of revulsion at what America is and was, and a refusal to acknowledge that the accomplishments of Western civilization (i.e. white people) dwarf that of everyone else. They think changing the demography of the country will make the country better or less sinful and will not in any way impact our quality of life and/or our cultural and scientific output. That’s not a bet I would place, but it’s one the left and an influential portion of the right is happy to make.

* The problem isn’t that Muslim terrorists are killing people wherever they are foolishly welcomed, but white folks talking about it. That’s the real crime. Which is why Hussein & Lynch aren’t talking about cracking down on Muslim terrorism, but instead about cracking down on Americans’ dangerous right to free speech.

This is the sort of thing the venal small-town sheriff does in the movies. Bruce Dern arresting the hooker for witnessing a gunfight and getting smacked around in Last Man Standing is a great example: “By the time the law showed up, I was long gone…but the sheriff didn’t let me down. He investigated the whole thing…then arrested the hooker.”

Islam is going to decapitate Leftism in the public square. It’s only a matter of time.

* Let’s play juxtapose the headlines:

For Woman in Shooting, Easy Passage Through U.S. Visa Process

ISIS loyalist woman in San Bernardino massacre is linked to Pakistan’s most notorious radical cleric and mosque known as center for fundamentalists

Obama Not Worried About Taking Syrian Refugees

Yeah, we know Hussein’s not worried. He’s got Secret Service protection for life.

The woman who was linked to Pakistan’s most notorious Muslim extremists breezed through US immigration and then helped murder 14 Americans; Hussein says we’re giving a similarly rigorous screening to the tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Islamic State sympathizers he’s decided to allow into our country against popular opinion and without our permission. Oh, and his Attorney General is now declaring that she won’t tolerate any harsh language toward the Muslims. What could possibly go wrong?

* Muslims are just 1-2% of the US population, so per capita they’re way overachieving. They are to terrorism what the Jews are to punditry and Supreme Courtisanism.

Imagine what they could accomplish if they became 10%!

* They waited until Friday night (document dump window) to release the photo and immigration details of Farook’s wife.

Also an insanely corrupt FBI releases the perp apartment (operational headquarters for the cell) back to the landlord in 36 hours! Then the media is allowed entry en masse to utterly render the premises legally inadmissable in court.

The apartment was a bomb factory! The FBI announced the case was in fact terrorism midday and then immediately declared the apartment no longer a crime scene!

* Yes, Muslims are only around one percent of the United States population, and the reason we don’t have quite as much trouble with them as the Europeans do, according to the Fox News pundits, is that we assimilate them better.

So the reason France has so much trouble with Muslims is not that they’re ten percent of their population, but because they haven’t done a good job assimilating them.

I guess we’d have done a better job assimilating blacks too if they were only one percent of the population rather than 13 percent.

* Yeah, the crimes of Thornton, Roof, etc., they’re like somebody in your family getting murdered by somebody else in your family. A horrible thing, but it’s inevitable it’s going to happen now and then in somebody’s family.

In contrast, what are we up to now just from the absolutely tiny number of Chechens let in by the U.S. government either due to commission or omission: seven dead Americans because Uncle Ruslan used to be married to a CIA man’s daughter?

* I have to wonder how the elite media will wind up spinning Tashfeen Malik’s role in this terrorist act. She must put them in a real bind, because they want to defend unrestricted immigration at all costs; they present Islam as “a religion of peace,” despite evidence to the contrary; and they have propagandized us with this nonsense about the benign wonders of “strong women” for decades.

So here we have an immigrant Muslim woman who may have radicalized her American-born Muslim husband and turned him into a violent jihadist. And then she joined him on his shooting rampage knowing full well that they would both die and they never see their anchor baby grow up. When feminists and their enablers invented this “strong woman” fantasy, I don’t think they had women like Tashfeen in mind.

* I have a question for you and your readers. I know a young Muslim man (Pakistani immigrant, not a citizen) that I know to be violent and slightly unhinged. We dated in college a few years back and it ended very badly with death threats and abuse – I moved back to my parents’ house to get away from him. I filed a police report on his behavior but nothing ever came of it. He apparently tried to kill himself and ended up in a mental institution for awhile, but eventually got out, and now he lives and works in a major US city (that I am far away from). He is without a doubt the kind of person I could see becoming radicalized. Should I call the police department of his city and alert them to his presence? Is there any channel through which I could alert Homeland Security? Am I over-reacting? I have no idea what he is up to now, so I don’t know if he is still religious or crazy, but my gut feeling is that he’s still the same guy.

* The MSM are all for women in combat and Jane Jihadi steps up to make their dreams come true.

* We get a better class of Moslems than Europe does. Those that come here have generally been to college, whereas many of the Moslems in Europe came straight from the casbah.

* Immediately pull the tax exempt status of any mosque with a terror-linked attendee. The mosque can then undergo a 5 year surveillance investigation that would make proctologists jealous. After passing the 5 year investigation, the mosque can reapply for tax exempt status, but not a refund on the taxes paid. I mean, I would rather just shut down all mosques and boot out the immigrants but that ain’t going to happen.

* I was out with a friend the other night. He’s a straight, white guy, but politically pretty much the exact opposite of me. He’s one of those lefties who believes in absolute open borders (for us, of course; I presume he thinks colonialism was a horrific evil). When I suggest that will cause hundreds of millions of people to move here, he doesn’t seem to have a problem with it, even though he’s also an environmentalist.

But he seemed almost visibly shaken by the San Bernardino massacre, especially coming as it did just on the heels of the Paris massacre. He said he could imagine it reaching a point where we all decided to stop letting Muslims into the country, and I didn’t sense that he would object to that.

Attitudes are changing, and fast. After the Paris shooting I had this ominous feeling that we would see several attacks in December, because it’s the holiday season. I’m not superstitious, so I’m not talking premonitions or anything – just that the rate of terrorist attacks all over the world seems to have spiked, and, from their perspective, attacks during Christmas and Hanukkah would be especially “victorious.”

* One “tiny group” I could name has faked assimilation in the U.S. and its elite has worked against the interests of the country’s formerly dominant white population.

* Syed was born in the US in 1987. He brought his wife here on a K-1 visa about two years ago. His dad, an immigrant, is or was at some point a truck driver, so he probably didn’t come here on an H-1B visa, though perhaps he did but failed at a STEM career.

Did Papa Farook come via chain migration, through a brother or sister? Did he come here illegally? Was he legalized via the 1986 amnesty? Syed’s parents appear to have both been immigrants, his wife was an immigrant, and his brother-in-law, Farhan Khan, who spoke at the press conference, is clearly an immigrant.

How much chain migration has the Farook family benefited from? They seem to be an example of how Muslims manage to multiply in the West before they ever even start multiplying in the biblical sense – by using and abusing immigration laws to bring more and more fellow Muslims into the country. A decade or so ago I remember reading a report that showed that a huge percentage of Turks in the Netherlands, perhaps an overwhelming majority, import their spouses from Turkey, using Western citizenship as a sort of asset to attract a spouse. Supposedly the Netherlands even enacted a law to slow that process down.

* There are three things which, seen together, pretty much guarantee it’s Muslim terrorists:
1) Multiple perps
2) A more or less random target, rather than a political one (abortion clinic, black church, federal building, etc.)
3) The use of bombs

Bombs require some degree of training to make. Left or right wing political terrorists don’t hate all Americans, just certain institutions. Right wing terrorists don’t plot with other right-wing terrorists because conservatives are overwhelmingly against political violence, so there just aren’t that many around. Most right-wing terrorists are loners. It isn’t just the number of Islamic terrorist attacks that proves how extremist Islam is – it’s the fact they feel so comfortable plotting with each other.

* The Palestinians could have had a deal, in 1999, with Clinton forcing the Israeli government to the table, and Arafat walked away and launched the intifada. The Palestinians don’t want peace. They want and need War with Israel, because otherwise there would be no money flowing in from the Gulf. The Palestinians could have had most though not all of the West Bank, Gaza, and shared sovereignty over parts of Jerusalem but that was not enough. So they chose war and got it, good and hard.

As for the rest, they were both corrupt and incompetent societies that attracted intervention by being both weak and aggressive. The Netherlands, Ireland, and Luxembourg are weak but not aggressive, the most they do is arcane corporate tax breaks for big companies. Libya stirred up African adventurism, and terrorism against the US and Europe, eventually Khadafi found himself without friends and with an incompetent military. Ditto Iraq, and the lunatics who run Iran have at least a competent military but keep picking fights: with the Sunni Gulf, with the US periodically, with Turkey and the neo-Ottoman Erdogan.

The US and the West is the least of the Islamic World’s worries. China is increasingly dependent on ME oil, which means they not us will be intervening to assure supply. The Chinese would happily slaughter most Muslims to get cheap oil and sleep soundly at night. They sold their own people poisoned baby milk after all.

Muslim society has failed, time and time again, to grasp real power: put religion in a box, where it does not interfere with daily business and scientific life; liberate women to be literate and productive inside and outside the home; get rid of polygamy; get rid of sexual segregation; get rid of male violence and tribalism; get rid of clans and castes; create a nation-state of honest, ably administered government and promote private industry and technology. Japan has done this, to some extent China and South Korea. None are particularly Western.

Muslim poverty and violence are not the result of say, America dropping two atomic bombs on them, but their own desire to be Muslim, that is polygamous, tribal, clannish, harshly patriarchal, with all the poverty, misery, and distrust that implies. Eventually some fully industrialized nation will simply annihilate them. Aggression plus weakness spells disaster in the end.

* B. Hussein Obama announced that something must be done about people such as Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik “falling victim” to malicious ideologies. His point is that Muslims are not responsible for their terrorism. They are infected by sometimes fatal ideological viruses over which they have no control.

“It is entirely possible that these two attackers were radicalized to commit this act of terror,” Obama said in his weekly radio address Saturday. “And if so, it would underscore a threat we’ve been focused on for years — the danger of people succumbing to violent extremist ideologies.” He added that the attacks show a need to “prevent people from falling victim to these hateful ideologies.”

As the story developed, the Surgeon General confirmed that becoming a terrorist is similar to catching a cold. As a result, the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department have recommended that Americans wear protective masks to prevent the spread of terrorism. As a preventive measure, DHS was has ordered 300 million masks.

However, as a more lasting measure, the Justice Department has suspended the First Amendment to protect public health. Henceforth, all written copies of the Koran will be confiscated and destroyed and all references to Islam will be censored from the Internet and social media. A Justice Department spokesperson said that they are confident that these measures will quickly get the ideological epidemic of Islamic extremism under control before more people succumb to the virus.

* We don’t have to imagine what will happen when Muslims reach 10% of the population, we just need to look at Europe and we know what will happen – except it will be worse. Unlike many of the commentators above who believe we are getting “better” Muslims than Europe, I do not believe this at all. We have merely gotten less Muslims. In fact, considering the death toll including 9/11, which was perpetrated by legal visitors who undoubtedly would have received green cards had they waited a bit, we have gotten far worse Muslims than Europe. Much worse. Islamic terror is not caused by poverty. In fact it seems to come from the middle and profession classes. Bin Laden was wealthy. The killers in San Bernadino were not poor at all – we are reminded in every article that “they were living the American Dream” (as if the dream is to murder your co-workers). Don’t look to our “exemplary” muslim population to produce Salk and Sabin, or even Bacharach and David. Islam is a horror show and we have brought it here.

Posted in Islam | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: Team Islam Surges Back Into Contention

Steve Sailer: New “New Yorker” Cover Reveals the Real Shooters in San Berdoo

newyorker

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* In a bizarre inversion of the Jew caricatures of previous decades, we now get blood libel aimed at white protestants. What foul people must create this sort of thing.

* Concomitant to that, the NYT had a front page editorial today, the first time it has done that in 95 years. And, back in 1920, the NYT was not a crucial domestic and international media choke point. Add to it that the cross town NYDN has essentially issued a fatwa against Wayne LaPierre.

The media/Democrats/left must really not want us to notice who did Paris and San Berdoo. If only I was more cynical, I would conclude that the doers happen to be faithful Democrat voting constituencies.

* Hey, look, they put Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik on the cover of the New Yorker! Spitting images of them.

* What fabulous cover art! A PR coup! Now I’m completely convinced that Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik DIDN’T DO NUFFIN. Obviously a blonde woman and her side-part-haired male sidekick pulled off the San Bernadino massacre. I don’t need to read a single word, and I won’t believe any evidence presented to me now or in the future that contradicts this Platonically truthful magazine cover.

What visual poetry! Thank you for bringing this cover art to my attention, Steve. It has really opened my eyes.

* Let’s contextualize that cover by looking back on Steve’s 2004 essay on the Baby Gap:

The endless gun-control brouhaha, which on the surface appears to be a bitter battle between liberal and conservative whites, also features a cryptic racial angle. What blue-region white liberals actually want is for the government to disarm the dangerous urban minorities that threaten their children’s safety. Red-region white conservatives, insulated by distance from the Crips and the Bloods, don’t care that white liberals’ kids are in peril. Besides, in sparsely populated Republican areas, where police response times are slow and the chances of drilling an innocent bystander are slim, guns make more sense for self-defense than in the cities and suburbs.

White liberals, angered by white conservatives’ lack of racial solidarity with them, yet bereft of any vocabulary for expressing such a verboten concept, pretend that they need gun control to protect them from gun-crazy rural rednecks, such as the ones Michael Moore demonized in “Bowling for Columbine,” thus further enraging red-region Republicans.

guns

* Here’s a link to the editorial in question:

Comments:

*The editorial is way over-written with “righteous fury”, “slaughter of innocents”, the ability to purchase weapons with “brutal speed” (brutal speed?)

*You will break your CTRL+F buttons looking for “Islam”, “Muslim”, “ISIS”, etc.

*Editorial calls for banning AR-15′s, like that makes a difference. In that sense, no one should have allowed that rifle to be called an “assault weapon”; it’s just a rifle that uses a relatively small round that tumbles. It is not a magic weapon. And, frankly, it’s not in the interests of our national defense to prevent Americans from having one. One can talk about magazine sizes, types of bullets, or full automatic — all three I am sure under some restrictions, but the melodrama about this particular type of rifle is absurd. The terrorists could have done an equal amount of damage with an M-14 or even an M-1.

*As for the New Yorker cover, I note that it is a white couple purchasing the weapons at the grocery store, including grenades, which should not be purchasable in any case. But, yeah, a loving married Muslim couple made a whole lot of pipe bombs. What do we do now? Ban pipe?

* I suppose there is nothing in the story about an immigration moratorium?

We really should have a picture of a gate at Ellis Island with DHS waving through terrorist types armed to the teeth.

It’s generally not considered best practice to pile weapons in a heap in a cart like that. I suppose these literati-types at The New Yorker and their readers don’t know much about such things.

Perhaps it’s best not to trouble their minds, as they seem to be rather limited and require framing the world in old narratives.

I don’t know about you, but I just can’t stand these evil white couples that keep shooting up the place. Let’s not even stop to think of the dead.

* Liberals love to mock us folks who own guns and have trained in how to use them.

Probably not too good an idea to push it beyond mockery, but the liberals just can’t seem to help themselves.

BTW, why should I have to engage in a discussion about gun control when liberals don’t want to engage in a discussion about Muslim control?

* In the early 90s, I think, I saw a guy on TV trying to debate some people calling for a ban on assault weapons. For a demonstration he picked up a 22 caliber rifle with a traditional wooden stock. He then asked if this was OK. The crowd responded “Yes”. He then spent 30 seconds unscrewing the stock from the receiver and then swapped out the wooden stock for a military-looking black one with a pistol grip. He then asked the same question, but the audience was confused. He explained it was the same weapon just with a different stock. It was a pretty good display.

* I think Steve is wrong about the motivations of the anti-gun people. Gun ownership is very important to American-Americans, aka real Americans. It’s a part of their folk tradition, like bull fighting for Spaniards or beer drinking for Germans. It’s something that sets their culture apart from all other European-derived cultures, so they tend to be proud of it. They like thinking of themselves as descendents of frontiersmen, which to a large extent they are.

I think that at the emotional level the attack on gun ownership is an attack against these people’s ethnic pride. And there’s not much more than emotion in this.

As urban crime fell and cities gentrified over the last 25 years, the anti-gun fervor did not decrease.

* White folks stocking up at Walmart for the day in the very near future when The One declares martial law and cancels next year’s election.

As to the hard-hitting speaking truth to power MFM, when do we get that investigative masterpiece about media oligarchs who have made fortunes on the backs of the immigrants in the shadows every time they make remittances, wire transfers and phone card calls. The New York Times can even stop by the corner office for an in depth interview.

* The rest of traditional America has a lot to learn from the gun rights folks.

The media has been trying to stampede the public on guns for years, in the same way they’ve stampeded the public on so many other issues. The gun rights activists have just told them to shove off, got down to organizing votes, and kicked in the prog’s teeth.

The media has never forgiven them for it, which is why we see things like the NYT front page editorial/cri de coeur/foot stamping on guns.

* Though intended to be viewed otherwise, I prefer to see this cover as a depiction of a true American couple preparing to defend themselves against the now-intensifying anti-White, anti-Western, anti-European attack — because their own government refuses to do so.

Because their own government is actually aiding and abetting the attack.

As is the New Yorker.

* It is worth noting that, in recent years, the biggest problem in keeping firearms out of the hands of madmen is not loose gun laws but HIPAA, the medical records secrecy laws. Deranged gunmen like the killers at Virginia Tech, Aurora, Co., the Washington Navy Yard, the Tucson gunman and the college student who shot up a classroom in Oregon all had one thing in common. They had seen mental health professionals shortly before they went on their rampages but that fact was concealed from the data base used to conduct a firearms background check.

Why liberals refuse to see that concealing mental illness from such a data base is the most glaring loophole in our gun laws is perplexing. No one is talking about making psychiatric records public just alerting gun dealers that a person cannot be sold a firearm without some sort of hearing to evaluate their present mental condition.

* The WaPo, in mocking the NYT being so melodramatic in today’s front page editorial, linked to the NYT’s last front page op-ed, back in June 1920. It was about how dangerous and farcical the just-nominated Republican Presidential ticket of Harding-Coolidge was.

Couldn’t have been all bad. Warren Harding might have been corrupt as all hell, but at least he signed a big immigration restriction bill in 1921. His running mate and successor signed further immigration restrictions three years later. And that helped to fuel real assimilation of white ethnic immigrants and a massive rise in the average standard of living for average people for the next half century.

Meaning NYT front page editorials don’t seem to have a good batting average.

Posted in America, Guns, Islam, Journalism | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: New “New Yorker” Cover Reveals the Real Shooters in San Berdoo

How Do We Stop Muslim Terror?

Fred Reed writes:

Terrorism by Moslems in America and Europe cannot be stopped. If attacks do not occur, it will be because nobody tried very hard. Stopping them would require excluding Moslems, deporting them, or controlling them by totalitarian methods. Or, improbably, minding our own business in the Middle East.

What you think of the foregoing approaches doesn’t matter, since none of them will be used. In France the result would be a civil war. America is too divided to do anything about anything.

The notion that the government can prevent terrorism suggests studied inattention to the obvious. To begin, the intelligence agencies have proved useless. NSA did not prevent the first attack on the Twin Towers in 1993, nor the successful one. French intelligence did not prevent the recant attacks in Paris, nor Russian intelligence the downing of the airliner over Syria. On and on.

The idea that terrorism can be prevented must include the idea that a package containing ten pounds of C4 (or Semtex, or RDX, or….) and a blasting cap can be kept out of a country with long and almost open borders. America can exclude neither tons of prohibited substances nor tens of thousands of prohibited people. C4 is not hard to use. I learned in infantry training at Camp Lejeune long ago. Nothing to it.

Exercise for the reader: Think of five ways a terrorist cell with the resources of the Nine-Eleven attackers could get a small suitcase into America. Think how you could do it.

What goes on at airports is not security. It is Security Theater. When the government’s own agents try to smuggle “weapons” aboard airliners to test the system, they succeed ninety-five percent of the time.

Further, a terrorist doesn’t need to get aboard an airliner to blow up spectacularly. At many airports, hundreds of people line up at ticket counters during peak hours. A carry-on bag of explosive would easily create enough slaughter to shut down air travel and to make international headlines for weeks.

The willingness of a suicide bomber to die makes him almost unstoppable. If he has assembled enough explosive for a car bomb, he has only to find a large number of people together, pull up to them, and push the button. An AK, a thirty-round magazine, and a Fourth of July crowd would serve well. Ten pounds of C 4 in a shoulder bag in a crowded movie theater would also work. Suicide would not be necessary: “Would you watch my bag for a minute while I go to the john?”

Warnings at airports that unattended vehicles will be ticketed, towed, and perhaps destroyed are also Security Theater. By the time the vehicle was noticed, and somebody sent to check it out, an easy five minutes would have passed and the driver would be somewhere else. Boom.

Tim McVeigh blew up the federal building in Oklahoma using ammonium-nitrate fertilizer. He didn’t need to smuggle anything into the US. How do you watch fertilizer?

Large numbers of people are easily vulnerable in large numbers of places. Restaurants, kindergartens, churches. It is impossible to secure tens of thousands of soft targets. The only question is whether a terrorist can get his hands on explosives. Or a gun. Or gasoline.

Exercise for the reader: Think of three spectacularly horrible things you could do with five gallons of gasoline and a cigarette lighter. Especially if you were willing to die doing them.

Posted in Islam | Comments Off on How Do We Stop Muslim Terror?

NY Daily News: San Bernardino Victim Was “Hate-filled Bigot” for Liking “Hateful Ann Coulter”

Steve Sailer: From the New York Daily News:

Stasi: San Bernardino killers were radical, ISIS-loving monsters — but one of their victims was just as bigoted
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Saturday, December 5, 2015, 7:57 PM

by Linda Stasi

They were two hate-filled, bigoted municipal employees interacting in one department. Now 13 innocent people are dead in unspeakable carnage.

One man spent his free time writing frightening, NRA-loving, hate-filled screeds on Facebook about the other’s religion.

The other man quietly stewed and brewed his bigotry, collecting the kind of arsenal that the Facebook poster would have envied.

What they didn’t realize is that except for their different religions they were in many ways similar men who even had the same job….

The other man, the victim, Nicholas Thalasinos, was a radical Born Again Christian/Messianic Jew, who also connected with his future wife online and had traveled across the country to meet her.

The killer, however, became half of an Islamic Bonnie & Clyde, while the other died as the male equivalent of Pamela Geller.

The killers deserve every disgusting adjective thrown at them. And more.

But the victim is also inaccurately being eulogized as a kind and loving religious man.

Make no mistake, as disgusting and deservedly dead as the hate-filled fanatical Muslim killers were, Thalasinos was also a hate-filled bigot. Death can’t change that. But in the U.S., we don’t die for speaking our minds. Or we’re not supposed to anyway.

Thalasinos was an anti-government, anti-Islam, pro-NRA, rabidly anti-Planned Parenthood kinda guy, who posted that it would be “Freaking Awesome” if hateful Ann Coulter was named head of Homeland Security.

I’m guessing this isn’t a parody, although it’s possible that it is.

Assuming it’s not, have you ever noticed how often people who accuse other folks of being full of hate are really haters themselves?

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* “Linda Stasi”?

Will there be more articles forthcoming from Jennifer Gestapo, Ashley Komitet, and Sara Mukhabarat?

* So a free and open exchange of ideas and opinions is now not only forbidden but grounds to murder people while shooting up the Christmas party. Ms. Stasi is now saying essentially that Mr. Thalasinos’ views justified his murder. Remarkable for someone who’s employment relies on the 1st Amendment. And if you do not agree with her you’re hateful bigot who deserve getting murdered.

* New York Daily News has been running on high-octane stupid ever since this terrorist attack. WTF is going on?

* Maybe they think that their effort to keep us from noticing things about the perpetrators aren’t working, so now it’s time to get people to think that the victims deserved it.

* They’re riding PR herd for the Democrat strategy that started after Paris and now has kicked into ultra high gear after SB, divert attention away from the Muslim-ness of the doers, and scream loudly about the guns, and on top of that, impugn the victims.

Posted in America | Comments Off on NY Daily News: San Bernardino Victim Was “Hate-filled Bigot” for Liking “Hateful Ann Coulter”

Understanding Stupid Political Activism

Robert Weisberg writes: Any sensible person viewing today’s identity-based, tribe-like political activism (think recent incidents at the University of Missouri and Yale among countless others) would conclude that these antics are stupid, foolish, counter-productive, and otherwise ill-conceived or, as the Marxists would say, infantile leftist. Hard to separate reality from what appears in the satirical Onion. Why, for example, would black Dartmouth students risk a life of Riley to harass white students peacefully studying in the library by shouting “Black Lives Matter” as if their studious classmates could possibly stop police brutality? Surely these protesters must realize that their disruptions will be filmed, possibly bring expulsion and the vulgarity (“filthy white bitch” among others) will alienate potential sympathizers. Going one step further, such hissy fits at Dartmouth and elsewhere may bring the end of already tottering racial preferences in higher education.

Let me try to explain stupid political activism.

First, faced with exceedingly formidable obstacles, it is all too easy to feel exasperated and this unhappiness leads to the belief that any action, no matter how imprudent or inconsequential, outshines apathy. In the case of Dartmouth’s black students, the outburst is therapeutic self-medication whose purpose is to soothe the anxiety that comes from the distress of residing in the small, nearly all-white Hanover (88% white, 1.7% African American), NH town and, most of all, struggling academically. Similar motives no doubt drive blacks at Princeton to exorcise Woodrow Wilson versus buckling down for serious academic work. This momentary but gratifying high is, moreover, totally independent of any rational pay-off. Do protesters honestly believe that sending Wilson down the memory hole will help them pass confronted administrators at Hamilton College with a set of 39 demands, some of which were two-fold, so that actual number was closer to 80.

Third, urgency also means that the skills necessary for success can only be those already possessed–sloth-friendly activism, so to speak. Just march and shout, concoct a jumbled list of incoherent (even illegal) non-negotiable slogan-like demands (“no peace, no justice”), scribble some hand-lettered posters, and voilà, and one becomes an expert social justice warrior. By contrast, an Islamic jihadist might spend months if not years mastering encrypted communications, bomb-making, how to counterfeit documents and similar expertise. But in the world of contemporary college (and black street) activism, why bother researching alleged racism let alone what the First Amendment means? Can you imagine today’s indolent campus protester tediously learning how to launch a cyber attack on the campus e-mail system? Many warriors cannot even pull off a credible hoax. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde’s quip regarding socialism, achieving social justice takes too many evenings.

Fourth, 100% victories, no matter how trivial or fleeting, are always preferable to moving the needle ever so slightly on a much more consequential project. It is as if the pleasure derived from political accomplishment is fungible so any success equals any other. Thus, easily humiliating a Dartmouth Dean into acknowledging the school’s sordid racial history is more gratifying than a partially successful multi-year effort to help African American high-school students achieve minimal literacy.

Fifth, those targeted for attack must be the quickest to surrender since resistance slows down the psychological euphoria that comes from an instant victory. Just pick the most convenient cowardly flack- catcher regardless of his or her importance or even the target’s ability to satisfy the demands. An anxious university president may have zero responsibility for society’s racial climate, let along the tribulations of campus blacks but he is, nevertheless, the perfect mark for activist ire. The upshot is that the greater the availability of high-profile wimps, even if they are ideological sympathizers, the greater the political idiocy.

Posted in Academia, Blacks | Comments Off on Understanding Stupid Political Activism

Linda Stasi: San Bernardino killers were radical, ISIS-loving monsters — but one of their victims was just as bigoted

Chaim Amalek says: The NY Daily News coverage of San Bernardino is astonishingly wrong-headed, even for the DN. But not a surprise. No wonder the NYDN is not long for this world
The narrative must be that right wing anti-immigrant hate groups drove this deluded young Muslim couple into the hands of ISIS. That, and all the white hate groups out there: Klan, skinheads, white nationalists, etc.
In short people like YOU Luke Ford, have blood on your hands every time muslims are driven to kill Americans.
That’s how the elites want it viewed.
Now, to prove that we are not as bad as they, we must admit more Pakis and Saudi brides.

Posted in America, Islam | Comments Off on Linda Stasi: San Bernardino killers were radical, ISIS-loving monsters — but one of their victims was just as bigoted

More white evangelicals than American Jews say God gave Israel to the Jewish people

From 2013:

Israel defines itself as a Jewish state, and most Jews in the United States say that emotionally they are either very attached (30%) or somewhat attached (39%) to Israel. But on some measures, Jews’ feelings for Israel are equaled or even exceeded by those of white evangelical Protestants.

For example, twice as many white evangelical Protestants as Jews say that Israel was given to the Jewish people by God (82% vs. 40%). Some of the discrepancy is attributable to Jews’ lower levels of belief in God overall; virtually all evangelicals say they believe in God, compared with 72% of Jews (23% say they do not believe in God and 5% say they don’t know or decline to answer the question). But even Jews who do believe in God are less likely than evangelicals to believe that God gave the land that is now Israel to the Jewish people (55% vs. 82%).

White evangelical Protestants also are more likely than Jews to favor stronger U.S. support of Israel. Among Jews, 54% say American support of the Jewish state is “about right,” while 31% say the U.S. is not supportive enough. By contrast, more white evangelical Protestants say the U.S. is not supportive enough of Israel (46%) than say support is about right (31%).

White evangelical Protestants are less optimistic than Jews about the prospects for a peaceful two-state solution to conflict in the region. When asked if there is a way for Israel and an independent Palestinian state to coexist peacefully, six-in-ten American Jews (61%) say yes, while one-third say no. Among white evangelical Protestants, 42% say Israel and an independent Palestinian state can coexist peacefully, while 50% say this is not possible.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on More white evangelicals than American Jews say God gave Israel to the Jewish people

Iraq War architect Bill Kristol complains about American “war-weariness”

From Salon: Bill Kristol, son of neoconservative titan Irving Kristol and editor of the Weekly Standard, has a new essay up at the Standard’s website, decrying American war-weariness and chastising politicians who use Americans’ desire to avoid war as “as an excuse to avoid maintaining our defenses or shouldering our responsibilities.”

“Are Americans today war-weary?” Kristol begins. “Sure. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been frustrating and tiring.”

“Are Americans today unusually war-weary?” he continues. “No. They were wearier after the much larger and even more frustrating conflicts in Korea and Vietnam.”

Kristol goes on to claim that the wars in Korea and Vietnam “had more satisfactory outcomes” than those in Iraq and Afghanistan but nevertheless were concluded with “war-weariness,” too. “So American war-weariness isn’t new,” he writes. “Using it as an excuse to avoid maintaining our defenses or shouldering our responsibilities isn’t new, either.”

“But that doesn’t make it admirable,” he adds.

After approvingly quoting a letter to the Wall Street Journal that claimed the only people who could justifiably claim to be war-weary are members of the military, Kristol goes on to argue, “the idol of war-weariness can be challenged” and that “[a]ll that’s needed is the rallying.”

He cites — who else? — Ronald Reagan as proof: “Ronald Reagan ran against both Democratic dovishness and Republican détente. He proposed confronting the Soviet Union and rebuilding our military. It was said that the country was too war-weary, that it was too soon after Vietnam, for Reagan’s stern and challenging message. Yet Reagan won the election in 1980.”

Kristol grants that Reaganesque hawkishness might not be the GOP’s best ticket to victory in 2016, but writes, “[W]hat would such a victory be worth?”

After quoting Shakespeare in service of the argument that war-weariness is shameful, Kristol writes, “Will no brave leader step forward to honorably awaken us from our unworthy sleep?”

Posted in Neoconservatives | Comments Off on Iraq War architect Bill Kristol complains about American “war-weariness”

Black Guy Sets His Two White Coworkers On Fire

I’m sure the ADL is going to be all over this hate crime.

REPORT: Will Obama mention this in his next press conference?

Two men were doused with gasoline and set on fire in Baltimore.

[Black] Bystanders stood around and watched, filmed the attack… and then posted it online!

The Baltimore Sun reported on the attack. Of course, they omitted certain facts about the attack – like the race of the victims.

A man poured gasoline on two co-workers and set them on fire in White Marsh Friday night, Baltimore County police said.

Christopher Harrison Jr., 28, of the 900 block Top View Dr. in Edgewood has been charged with attempted first-degree murder, first- and second-degree assault and reckless endangerment, police spokesman Cpl. Shawn Vinson said.

The victims, two men, were taken to a local hospital with major burn injuries, police said. Both were in critical condition, Vinson said Saturday afternoon.

The incident occurred along Route 40 near Allender Road, Vinson said.

He said he did not know where they worked together.

The cause of the dispute remained unclear, Vinson said.

COMMENTS:

* No mention of race which means Blacks or Muslims. They are the only two protected. It appeared to be Blacks standing around filming this.

Posted in Blacks, Crime | Comments Off on Black Guy Sets His Two White Coworkers On Fire

Aussie Dave: Antisemite Brendon O’Connell Reportedly Charged Again

From the website IsraellyCool, posted by Aussie Dave July 10, 2015:

Remember Brendon O’Connell, the vile Aussie antisemite I have posted about in the past?

After posting an antisemitic video in 2009 and being charged with racial hatred, he decided to leave comments at this blog, leading to much comedy gold involving a lot of soap and Bubba jokes. He was later found guilty and sentenced to three years in jail.

Prison was no picnic for him, and he even reached out to Iran’s Ahmadinejad for help!

He was later released from prison and he picked up from where he left off before his sentence – posting vile antisemitism online.

Well, I have not followed up on him in a while, but just discovered this:

I’m writing on behalf of Brendon who was arrested again on December 23rd 2014. 8 members of the counter terrorist unit of Western Australia raided his living quarters and charged him with three federal charges: USING A CARRIAGE DEVICE to THREATEN, MENACE AND/OR CAUSE OFFENCE and a charge of THREAT TO KILL. The arresting officer made it clear that the second charge was specifically to “cause offence”. Consequently, due to the bail conditions, Brendon is banned from using any technology whatsoever. He is not allowed to touch a computer or even a mobile phone. This is obviously to try to keep him silent. There will be a “committal hearing” on March 13th 2015. This new development is the reason for the recent inactivity on Brendon’s part. I will post updates here as things develop. Tarqwin

And in the most recent update from March 31.

Brendon is at this very moment organising his professional legal representation. His plan initially was to get a “bail variation” in order to be able to communicate himself via all means necessary. Currently he is not allowed to use any communications technology, like for example computers. However, he is not prohibited to get third parties to carry out his various communications and other transactions. So after due consideration he is intending to keep the bail conditions “as is.”

Interestingly enough, this does not seem to have been reported anywhere in the news.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Australia, Censorship, Israel, Jews | Comments Off on Aussie Dave: Antisemite Brendon O’Connell Reportedly Charged Again