Luke Ford | No sacred cows.

LAT: Her pink Taser, poisoned hamburger patties and an iPhone: the story of a wife who lured an Orange County fugitive out of Iran

Posted on January 31, 2016 by Luke Ford

How is this woman allowed to practice law in California?

When three men escaped from the Orange County jail, officials quickly decided only one of the escapees possessed the cunning and resourcefulness to mastermind it: Hossein Nayeri, a 37-year-old ex-Marine who faced charges in a grisly kidnapping and torture plot.
Around Nayeri’s former wife, 29-year-old Cortney Shegerian, the anxiety was extreme. She was rushed into hiding. She assumed a fake name. During the eight days Nayeri was on the run — from his escape on Jan. 22 to his capture Saturday morning — the people around her feared for her life.
As the manhunt dragged on, authorities were convinced that if Nayeri remained in California, it was to stalk and kill her. Her lawyers, and the district attorney’s office, implored the media not to mention her name, for fear of inflaming him.
The source of Nayeri’s rage? Shegerian had played a central role in putting him behind bars in the first place, participating in an elaborate law-enforcement scheme to lure him out of Iran — and into an extradition-friendly country — in November 2013.
Shegerian, now an employment-rights attorney at a prominent Santa Monica firm, had admitted to detectives that she helped her husband conduct surveillance on a Newport Beach pot-dispensary owner, who was later abducted and tortured, his penis severed. Facing the possibility of criminal charges, she agreed to cooperate against her husband…
At her husband’s behest, she said, she made hamburger patties laced with an unknown poison intended for the parents’ dog, because it was too loud, according to Peters’ testimony. “She stated she assumed they were given to (the victim’s) parents’ dog,” Peters said. It wasn’t clear if that part of the plan was carried out.
Before the kidnapping, she heard Handley and her husband in her garage experimenting with a butane torch, according to Peters’ testimony. Further, Peters said, “Mr. Nayeri borrowed her pink Taser.”
…In 2005, Nayeri was arrested in connection with a drunk-driving crash in Madera County that killed his best friend, a 26-year-old aspiring sports broadcaster. He pleaded guilty to drunk driving and causing great bodily injury, which resulted in a year in prison and probation, according to the victim’s lawyer.
In 2009, when she was 22, Shegerian wrote a letter to a Madera County judge in support of Nayeri, describing herself as a pre-law student who had known him for nearly seven years.
…hey married in 2010 and lived together in Irvine, but had been married only seven months when she filed a domestic violence restraining order against him. She claimed he had pinned her to the floor with his foot on her chest, and put her in a chokehold. She said he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety, and had been drinking heavily. She said he threatened to kill her with a box cutter.
“He could definitely come and try to hurt or kill me,” she wrote in court documents.
A Los Angeles judge annulled their marriage in 2015 on the basis of bigamy, ruling that he had not legally ended a previous marriage to a woman in Iran, where he had lived…
The California State Bar would not comment on whether it was aware of her connection to the kidnapping case when it admitted her in May 2014.
Weinberg — who represents Handley, one of Nayeri’s co-defendants in the kidnapping and torture case — said Shegerian was the only witness against his client and questioned whether her account can be believed.
“How can she say she was unaware there was a criminal enterprise?” Weinberg said. “Imagine someone inquisitive enough to go to law school not asking her husband, ‘Why do you want me to poison a dog?'”

Here’s another story on this case:

ESL teacher may have played a ‘significant role’ in helping 3 O.C. inmates escape
Hossein Nayeri graduated from high school near Fresno and served in the U.S. Marine Corps.
Despite this American upbringing, though, the inmate managed to enroll in an English-as-a-second-language class at Men’s Central Jail in Orange County.
There, he befriended his teacher, Nooshafarin Ravaghi. She was 44 and the author of several children’s books. He was 37 and awaiting trial in a torture and kidnapping case. Both had family roots in Iran.
The two began a written correspondence that a Sheriff’s Department spokesman said was “far closer than appropriate.”
Now, Ravaghi is suspected of helping her student and two other inmates escape. She has admitted to giving Nayeri a Google Maps printout showing the roof of the jail, but has denied providing him with the cutting tools the trio used to break out of the high-security lockup, authorities said.

Posted in California, Immigration, Iran | Comments Off

National Review, Donald Trump and Moral Bank Accounts

Posted on January 31, 2016 by Luke Ford

Dennis Prager writes Jan. 26, 2015:

National Review’s special issue, “Against Trump” was courageous and important.

There is no way to do good in this world without risking making enemies. That National Review was prepared to do that — among its own readers, no less — in this day of great financial challenges to newspapers, magazines, and news and opinion websites, was an act of courage.

In opposing Donald Trump for president — which, it happens, I did in a column I wrote four years ago — I face the same issue among some in my radio audience. I receive emails from listeners who say they can longer to listen my show because of my opposition to Trump (though I do regularly distinguish between Trump and his supporters).

Interestingly, the two issues — one being the listeners and readers who will no longer listen to or read anti-Trump Republicans whom they have admired for decades and the other being an important reason Trump is unfit to be president — are the same.

It is something vitally significant in life — the concept of the moral bank account.

Every human being has one. The moral bank account is identical to a monetary bank account with the obvious exception that one measures moral activity while the other measures financial activity. We make deposits and withdrawals in each account…

In fact, conservatives who support Trump should do something else — ask themselves why nearly every conservative they have admired for so long is opposed to Trump.

Finally, the moral bank account concept should also apply to the candidate himself. In terms of conservative values, the man either has no moral bank account or it is in the red. He has made very few conservative deposits, but has made a fair number of significant withdrawals (support for nationalized health care, support for the Clintons, support for partial birth abortion, opposition to free trade, personal defamation and mockery of political opponents, among others). For a Republican candidate, that is saying something.

Nor do I have confidence that he would nominate conservatives to the Supreme Court — perhaps the most important thing the next president will do. Nevertheless, I will vote for Trump if he is nominated — because I do not believe he will do nearly as much damage as another Democratic president. But he must not be nominated. Moral bank accounts matter.

Posted in Dennis Prager, Donald Trump, National Review | Comments Off

Israeli Tourism Minister Blasts U.S. Reform Jews, Says Chelsea Clinton’s Wedding Shows Extent of Assimilation

Posted on January 31, 2016 by Luke Ford

Non-Orthodox Jews, including Reform Jews, will still be around in significant numbers in 200 years, but as each year goes past, Orthodox Judaism plays a bigger role in Jewish life. This has been a steady trend from the 1960s and there is no reason to expect it to stop. Orthodox Judaism is the only form of Jewish organization shown to perpetuate itself.

From Haaretz:

During government hearing on non-Orthodox prayer space at the Western Wall, Yariv Levin slams the U.S. largest Jewish movement, saying prayer space unnecessary since Reform Jews will be all but gone in three generations.

Tourism Minister Yariv Levin sharply attacked the American Jewish Reform movement during Sunday’s government hearing on the compromise regarding a non-Orthodox prayer space at the Western Wall, saying that Chelsea Clinton’s wedding to her Jewish partner, officiated by a Reform rabbi and a priest, shows the extent of assimilation among Reform Jews in the United States.
“The Reform Jews in the U.S. are a waning world,” Levin said during the meeting, targeting the largest religious movement among U.S. Jews, estimated at over a million and a half people. “The assimilation there is of enormous extent. They don’t even properly track [the assimilation] inside their communities. The evidence is that a man who calls himself a reform rabbi is standing there with a priest and weds Hillary Clinton’s daughter, and no one condemns it, thereby legitimizing it.”
Levin said that with this reality among members of the Reform movement in the United States, the controversy over non-Orthodox prayer at the Western Wall will become irrelevant within two or three generations because, he claimed, all of the Reform Jews will have assimilated.
Ultimately, however, Levin supported the compromise plan for the non-Orthodox prayer plaza at the Western Wall, explaining that he was concerned that the High Court of Justice would issue a ruling on the matter that would provide even more favorable terms to the Reform movement, and therefore he saw the plan as the better of two bad alternatives.

Posted in Israel, Reform Judaism | Comments Off

NAACP leader uses F-word to apologize for using T-word after N-word meeting

Posted on January 31, 2016 by Luke Ford

Report:

But after the meeting, while participants were speaking with the media, he was caught on camera saying Channel 12 reporter Monique Griego had “nice tits.”

“I can’t believe that someone in his position would not understand how inappropriate that comment was at the time that he made it,” says Ray Stern, a reporter for the Phoenix New Times, who was talking to Griego at the time.

“Here’s the leader of the NAACP talking about the N-word and then making this comment, that was more inappropriate than I could even believe,” he tells ABC 15.

The news station reports Harris doesn’t believe Griego heard him at the time and says he feels like he let down the NAACP. He calls his comment “ugly” and says it just slipped out “guy to guy.”

After the reaction, Harris now says he feels “down in the dumps.”

The New Times contacted Harris after that incident and reports the NAACP leader said, “I apologize if anyone was offended. I could have said nothing . . . I’m really f*cking sorry.”

He argued that the meeting was over when he complimented the reporter’s rack and then really blew a gasket (edited for a family audience):

“I’m going to slash my wrists,” he spews. “Better yet, I’m going to throw myself out of a f*cking window, except I’m on the first floor . . . I’m one of the best g*dd*mned people in the state.”

People criticized him when he first took over the NAACP chief post from the Reverend Oscar Tillman, who retired in 2014 after 22 years in the position, he says, because “I was the wrong flavor.

“They’ve seen me now, they’ve seen what I’ve done. I’ve given up my law practice. I’m down here six, seven days a week. That’s what my commitment is. I support NOW, the women’s organization — g*dd*mn! — are you sh*tting me? Are you going to write this up?”

Griego didn’t comment on the situation but Harris insists he wants to apologize face-to-face. (Of course he does.)

Last June, when white NAACP leader Rachel Dolezal was exposed for pretending to be black, Harris appeared on CNN and claimed “credibility” is one of the most important assets the organization has.

“This is a race-based organization — the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. And being a race-based organization, when you have a leader in any capacity, you’ve got to have credibility.

“Once you lose that credibility, the efficacy of your leadership fails,” Harris said.

Posted in Blacks, PC | Comments Off

Another Anti-Fascist Play

Posted on January 30, 2016 by Luke Ford

A friend says: Alone in the bathroom, I just snapped some Roman salutes, ironically of course. It made me feel amazing.
Try it when the door is locked.
Do it looking in the mirror.
Wow.
What a flood of power.
All part of my research for an anti-fascism play.
It will all be so exquisitely problematic. This will really unsettle audiences before I reassure them that democracy is the best form of government.

Posted in Fascism | Comments Off

Black Violence & White Guilt

Posted on January 30, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* PC has filled whites with compulsive-obsessive disorder of having to cleanse themselves incessantly and forever because the blood of ‘white guilt’ can never be washed away.

Whites are like Lady MacBeth who can never wash away the blood.

Ironically, by trying to cleanse the world of imaginary everlasting ‘white guilt’, PC is only making the world a more dangerous place with REAL dangers…

‘White guilt’ means whites better shut up about bad black behavior.
So, blacks get more out of control and kill each other and others.

‘White guilt’ means whites better shut up about non-white invaders.
So, Europe turns crazier with all those migrants and US is becoming more divided with diversity.

PC makes whites obsess about imaginary guilt while the real world is made all the worse by PC policies.

Posted in America | Comments Off

I Hope Obama Comes Out As A Muslim On This Visit!

Posted on January 30, 2016 by Luke Ford

Jewish Press:

In First Public Visit to US Mosque, Obama’s Choice Hosted Global Jihadist Leaders

Barack Obama is in the final stretch of his time as President of the United States. It was announced on Sunday that Obama will make his first public appearance at a U.S. mosque to show solidarity with Muslims, whom many blame for all those terrorist attacks they commit.

The White House announced that Obama would be visiting the Islamic Society of Baltimore, which is located in Woodlawn, Maryland, just west of Baltimore. The ISB started in 1969 as a prayer group at Johns Hopkins University, which is located in Baltimore, according to the mosque’s website. A little more than a decade later, the community purchased an eight acre plot of land where the mosque is now located, as well as a school and a multi-purpose hall.

The vision of the ISB is “to be the anchor of a growing Muslim community with diverse backgrounds, democratically governed, relating to one another with inclusiveness and tolerance, and interacting with neighbors in an Islamic exemplary manner.”

Background information about the ISB uncovered a singularly alarming fact: two of the greatest supporters and promoters of a global Islamic caliphate spoke at ISB at least once, according to a “former regular.” This person commented that because it is located near Washington, D.C., “often celebrity guest speakers show up out of the blue. Like Dr. Israr Ahmed, Anwar al-Awlaki and many others.”

So who are those two celebrity guest speakers mentioned by the commenter on Salatomatic, which describes itself as “the most comprehensive guide to mosques and Islamic schools?

None other than two of the most influential jihadists this planet has ever seen.

ANWAR AL-AWLAKI

Most Americans will recognize the name Anwar al-Awlaki, the recruiter for al Qaeda who was responsible for so much terrorism that he was the first American the U.S. has ever put on the CIA’s “kill or capture list.”

Al-Awlaki preached to several of the 9/11 bombers; was in contact with the Fort Hood military psychiatrist, Nidal Malik Hasan, just before the shootings; and was believed to be involved in the planning of the attempted bombing by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the “underwear bomber,” as well as having numerous other terrorist credentials.

At various times al-Awlaki was believed to be working with Hamas. He also stated online, just after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, that Israeli intelligence agents may have been responsible for the attacks.

Al-Awlaki “is a magnetic character,” said Philip Mudd, a veteran of the C.I.A.’s Counterterrorism Center who spent nearly five years as a top F.B.I. intelligence adviser. “He’s a powerful orator in a revolutionary movement,” Mudd said in 2010.

This charismatic jihadist was also the one who, in 2010, put a fatwa on the life of a Seattle, Washington cartoonist who dared to launch “Everybody Draw Muhammed Day.” That reporter, Molly Norris, was forced to change her name, move and go into hiding.

Numerous terrorists said their inspiration came from al-Awlaki, and many incidents of terrorism were traced to al-Awlaki whose charisma and ability to use the internet to influence followers around the world was unequaled. This terrorist was killed in a U.S. drone attack in late Sept., 2011.

ISRAR AHMED

The second “celebrity guest speaker” mentioned by the ISB commenter was Israr Ahmed. Who was Ahmed? A Pakistani with ties to two of the major Pakistani Islamic jihadist groups, Tanzeem-e-Islami and Jamaat-e-Islami.

Israr Ahmed believed in the use of revolution to bring about the caliphate, and withdrew from Jamaat-e-Islami when it chose to engage in “electoral activities,” which was fundamentally contrary to his own revolutionary views.

Tanzeem-e-Islami seeks to establish a global caliphate, is anti-modernity and wants Sharia to control all spheres of life.

Posted in Barack Obama, Islam | Comments Off

If Israel can defend its culture, why can’t WASPs?

Posted on January 30, 2016 by Luke Ford

When Jews defend their group interests, it’s beautiful. When WASPs do it, it’s bigotry.

Chaim Amalek: “A nation ruled by a WASP elite that keeps Jews in their proper place is apt to do better than one that is not/does not. Unless of course that nation is Germany, and it is ruled by a WASP like Angela Merkel. Or Norway. Or Sweden. etc.”

I begin Friday reading this New York Times article:

Israel, Mired in Ideological Battles, Fights on Cultural Fronts
JERUSALEM — There have been fights over books, music, plays, funding for the arts and academic awards. This being Israel, they have been underpinned by fierce rhetorical exchanges about democracy, fascism and zealotry, identity, the future of the state and the fate of Jews.
A new front in the culture wars opens nearly every week, ripple effects of shifts in Israeli demographics, attitudes and politics that are shaking the society.
The latest was an attack on Wednesday by a far-right group on beloved leftist literary icons including Amos Oz, A. B. Yehoshua and David Grossman, writers who have been considered the voice — and conscience — of the state for years. The group, Im Tirtzu, began a poster campaign calling the writers “moles in culture,” which prompted accusations of McCarthyism and worse, even from many on the right.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and several members of his conservative coalition joined the chorus of condemnation over the vilification of such Israeli cultural pillars. But some of those same ministers have been behind many of the other battles. The previous round was the brainchild of Miri Regev, the divisive and conservative minister of culture and sport, who wants to deny state money to institutions that do not express “loyalty” to the state, including those that show disrespect for the flag, incite racism or violence, or subvert Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.

Irwin M. Stelzer writes in the Weekly Standard:

A sign of what might be called “progress” jogged some memories of battles fought. In reporting Governor Andrew Cuomo’s nomination of a new chief to a state regulatory agency, the New York Times identified the appointee as being a litigator in “the white-shoe law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind,” et al. The reporter seemingly did not know that the designation “white-shoe law firm” was invented to describe firms at the pinnacle of the WASP establishment, no Jews allowed, named apparently for the shoes these WASPs favored in the summer at their restricted country clubs.
In the 1960s, my partners and I were attempting to establish an economic consulting firm that marketed its services to law firms and public utilities. The “white-shoe” firms were off-limits. We identified them by adding up the Roman numerals after partners’ names—I, II, III, etc.—adding to that partners with first and last names that were interchangeable, and dividing by the total number of partners. A high result meant we had no chance.
Then there were cases in which no such arithmetic was needed. A partner in one firm told me at a cocktail party, after his usual consumption of truth-producing alcohol, that he was happy to be living in a New York suburb that did not allow Jews. That firm later merged with another; both went bust. Another pointed out that the new civil rights legislation wasn’t a problem for him because it did not protect Jews, whose upward drive would threaten him and his executives. The general counsel of a public utility invited me to lunch to congratulate me on starting the firm and added what he thought was encouraging news: “If we ever hire a firm with Jews, your firm will be the first.”
We were not the only disadvantaged group. One company CEO told me that he was certain new legislation did not force him to change a company rule that permitted men, but not women, to smoke at their desks. In the early 1960s, women were finding it difficult to procure professional positions, both in law firms and in the consulting field. Our firm took advantage of that market imperfection by hiring the best and the brightest women economics graduates, with emphasis on my mentor’s and my own former students at Cornell. When I was due to testify at an administrative proceeding at a Washington regulatory agency, I brought my assistant along to help check data, refresh my recollection during recesses, find sources, and perform other chores. The hearing officer quietly suggested to me that it was inappropriate to have a woman in the hearing room; I argued that she was entitled to see the fruits of her research and prevailed. It wasn’t easy.
With time and hard work, we managed to build a successful consulting practice. Time, because gradually the law business changed, with the bright young Jewish graduates joining predominantly Jewish firms that prospered, in many instances by accepting cases that the white-shoe firms would not take—contingency fee arrangements, lawsuits against establishment corporations—and prevailing over rivals that had denied themselves access to this portion of the most talented law school output. One WASPy partner in a Pittsburgh firm told me one evening, “We made a mistake discriminating against you guys. We should have hired you instead of giving you an added incentive to beat us.” Discrimination, especially against a group with no recourse to the law and therefore reliant only on its efforts, can be costly.

Of course Jews never discriminate against gentiles. Never even dislike them.

And to think that these WASP firms suspected that Jews would be more likely than WASPs to act dishonestly. Honestly, can you even think of a Jew on Wall Street prosecuted for fraud? I’ve never heard of such things.

According to Torah, and to the Rambam in particular, a Jewish state should not allow a non-Jew to be in charge of anything, not even water carriers. Torah contains no provision for non-Jewish citizenship in Israel.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Israel | Comments Off

The Corrupt Bargain

Posted on January 30, 2016 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer writes: Another one of those ideas looming just outside the realm of the thinkable is that for the Democrats to import ringers from abroad to win elections, which Democrats have boasted about throughout this century, is a shameless example of political corruption. This is especially true when the Democrats are more or less explicitly making a deal with the Republican donor class: You Republican plutocrats immediately reap the economic advantages of immigration to your net worths, we Democratic politicians later reap the political advantages of their children’s votes.

Talk about a Corrupt Bargain!

But almost nobody quite has the conceptual vocabulary to think about this yet.

COMMENTS:

* As for Trump popularity, he’s the people’s middle-finger aimed at the pasty faced white elite on Wall Street and the Beltway that have ruined the country over the last 30+ years. He’s also done a great job exposing the phony distinctions between left and right in the political arena – there isn’t any. Both support race replacement, eradication of the middle-class, perpetuation of a a permanent political ruling class, etc.

His best work so far is to show how much the GOP establishment hates the guts of ordinary white Americans and what they consider important. I knew since GHW Bush the buggers running the party were a mean and rotten lot always promoting agendas that hammered the working class like a steam hammer on a anvil, then running and wrapping themselves in BS social issues to hide their contempt for the base. With Trump they couldn’t do that since he doesn’t play their game, it forced them out in the open to show their contempt for America and it’ s people. Now a lot of people want them do drop dead.

* Trump’s ground game is holding mass rallies at least three nights a week. This way he is in effect shaking hands with thousands each night he speaks. He provides visible moments, connection and engagement to a mass of people. At 69 Trump is too rich and too old to go begging door to door and to suck up to farmers and other people at coffee klatschs and luncheonettes.
Trump likes protesters to come so he can mock them as they are ejected. Shows he is the Big Man.

* What is the deal with RedState? Almost every other article over there is a bash of Trump. One contributor went as far as to say he’d vote for Hillary if Trump was the candidate. Even the comment section is anti-Trump. All I can think of is that this site is owned lock stock & barrel by the donor wing of the Republican Party.

* In the unlikely event that both men [Trump and Sanders] win their respective nominations I think everyone will be surprised at how similar their views are on foreign policy and economics. They are both mildly isolationist, both for “fair trade” tariffs, and both are immigration restrictionists.

* White Left wants to live in a nation where whites are the minority. White Right wants to live in a nation where whites are the majority.

Okay, then how about this? All white leftists move out of UK and go live in Africa, Asia, or Arabia. They will become instant minorities of blacks, browns, yellows, etc. The will get what they want right away. As for white rightists who stay in UK, they will have their white majority nation. They will get what they want.

So, both sides wins.

If white leftists want to become a racial minority, they don’t have to try to make it a reality in the UK. They can have it instantly by moving to non-white nations. There’s no need for immigration of non-whites into the UK. All that is necessary is white British emigration to non-white nations.

With immigration, it will take decades before UK is majority non-white. But if whites move to Africa, Asia, or Arabia, they will become minorities instantly. So much easier!

So, how about the white-right-stay and white-left-leave policy for the UK and other European nations.

* Since at least the 1980s the political class has told us that feeling squeezed by immigration is an embarrassing character flaw typical of unsuccessful Whites. These low-status Whites can atone for their sin by cheering on the big banks. Feeling squeezed by the big banks is another character flaw typical of unsuccessful Whites. It, in turn, can be forgiven as long as the White in question does lots of cheering for mass immigration.
Feeling squeezed by big banks or mass immigration is forgivable, feeling squeezed by both is anti-Semitism.

* I see a big difference between Sanders and Trump, which is the difference between the honest Left and the honest Right. Sanders is going to be soft on crime, because he (and generally the Left) thinks it is only a matter of leveling the inequalities, which he is certain he will achieve. Trump on the other hand will not be soft on crime, because, while he (at least in discourse) also believes in leveling the inequalities (perhaps not as much as Sanders though), he is not foolish enough to think this will solve the short term crime problem (and perhaps not even the long term one). So, the question every voter has to ponder is: after the mess that Obama has made when he publicly demoralized the police, is it possible for a newly elected president to revert the situation or will any attempt to do so cause a civil war?

Posted in America | Comments Off

Donald Trump Game

Posted on January 30, 2016 by Luke Ford

From the Chateau:

Check out this video of O’Cuckly interviewing Trump yesterday about Trump’s wise decision to forego the FoxNews GOP debate moderated by the extremely biased and unprofessional shit stirrer Megyn Kelly, (skip to 14:25).

TRUMP: Don’t ask me that question because it’s an embarrassing question…… for you.

That quip was deadly. It’s what I call a micro-reframe. In a pickup situation, one would use this on a girl who asked a personal question (say, about how many girls you’ve been with) that you didn’t want to answer. The pause before unloading the “for you” coda builds a smug anticipation in the girl that her qualification attempt will soon be validated. But, like what Trump did to O’Cuckly, you unleash this explosive little reframe and she will be left speechless, wondering where you’ve been all her life.

It takes balls to pull off stuff like what Trump does on a regular basis, but if you want to date young, cute, thin girls who have lots of options, you’ll need to find your balls.

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off