Now the faux-hate-peddling money-grubbers at the SPLC are back, this time bashing scholars and activists who have warned America of the national security threat posed by violent jihadist Muslims. The SPLC follows Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, particularly his principle to “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” The cheap-shot smears against individuals are straight from the Alinsky playbook.
Another chosen one, Muslim reformer Maajid Nawaz, was less thrilled, writing on his Facebook page, “The non-Muslim led Southern Poverty Law Center placing a jihadi target on my head by listing me (a reforming liberal Muslim) as an ‘anti-Muslim extremist’ on their hit list published today.”
Good work, SPLC, you may get a real scalp from the latest targeting! Sensitive jihadists are easily offended and may murder to protect the strict interpretation of Islam.
The other 13 are: Steven Emerson, Brigitte Gabriel, Frank Gaffney, Pamela Geller, John Guandolo, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, David Horowitz, Ryan Mauro, Robert Muise, Daniel Pipes, Walid Shoebat, and Robert Spencer. These are heroic people who are trying to save America from a determined enemy of 1400 years who want to establish a world Islamic caliphate ruled by totalitarian misogynous sharia. But the SPLC wants to shut them up and thereby endanger America for the organization’s selfish purposes.
The last on the list, Robert Spencer, wrote a response to the SPLC calumny:
The objective of this libelous new report from the hard-Left money-making and incitement machine the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is made plain within it: “Before you book a spokesperson from an anti-Muslim extremist group or quote them in a story, research their background — detailed in this in-depth guide to 15 of the most visible anti-Muslim activists— and consider the consequences of giving them a platform.”
They wish to silence those who speak honestly about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, blaming us for a supposed rise in “Islamophobia.” If they really want to stamp out suspicion of Islam, of course, they will move against not us, but the likes of Omar Mateen, Syed Rizwan Farook, Tashfeen Malik, Nidal Malik Hasan, Mohammed Abdulazeez, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and the myriad other Muslims who commit violence in the name of Islam and justify it by reference to Islamic teachings.
The SPLC doesn’t do that because its objective is not really to stop “Islamophobia” at all, but to create the illusion of a powerful and moneyed network of “Islamophobes,” who can only be stopped if you write a check to the SPLC. That’s what this is really all about.
In constructing this illusory edifice, the SPLC labels me and fourteen others “anti-Muslim extremists.” We are, of course, no more “anti-Muslim” than foes of the Nazis were anti-German, but note the word “extremists.” That’s the mainstream media and Obama administration’s term of choice for jihad terrorists. In what way are we “extremists”? Has anyone on the SPLC’s hit list (and given the SPLC’s track record of inciting violence against its targets, that is exactly what it is) ever blown anything or anyone up? Beheaded anyone? Boasted of our imminent conquest of any territory and the massacre of or enslavement of its people? No, all we have done is speak critically about jihad terror and Sharia oppression. The SPLC is trying to further the libel that we are the other side of the coin, the non-Muslim bin Ladens and Awlakis. Until we commit any terror attacks or conspire with others to do so, however, the SPLC’s libel is only that: a libel. Continue reading this article
It’s rare to see a politician who understands the threat to jobs from technology and who will also name the problem. There is a fair amount reporting in the mainstream media about how automation and advanced software are increasingly replacing human workers, but this subject has been largely missing from the political sphere. Remarkably, the volumes of political chatter about the upcoming election have been pretty much devoid of the topic of mass technological unemployment.
The remarks of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg are therefore a welcome acknowledgement of reality, particularly when he observed, “The greatest conundrum facing the next administration, and all of us, is how you create jobs when technology is destroying jobs at an alarming rate.”
Mayor Bloomberg should express those thoughts in Washington to the clueless elected representatives of the citizens — not that there are any easy solutions to the unemployment crisis galloping our way. The government could at least end immigration, which should now be placed on the junk heap of history’s outmoded institutions along with the buggy whip and homesteading.
Billionaire Michael Bloomberg spoke candidly about Wall Street and the US presidential election at his company’s 2017 Year Ahead conference on Tuesday.
In a conversation with Bloomberg News Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait and Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman, he started by describing what he would do if he were running for president.
“I’d have to defend the banks, which is not a particularly good strategy to get elected in this country today,” the business magnate said. “But we desperately need a good group of banks that are willing to take risks and make money so they can finance our growth. … The healthier the banks are, the healthier our economy will be.”
Bloomberg, who was mayor of New York City from 2002 to 2013, earlier this year chose not to enter the race for the White House. On Tuesday, he said he chose not to make a bid because of the way the two-party system is structured in the US. Those two parties control the legislature and would not let a third party into the fray if they could help it, he said.
“The main reason I didn’t run is if I ran, I would have been an incredible candidate, would have gotten a third of the electoral votes, nobody would have a majority, it would have gone to the House of Representatives, and they would have picked Donald Trump — and you just can’t do that to this country,” Bloomberg said to applause.
He then described why he thinks Trump appeals to a large swath of American voters.
Trump supporters are “petrified of their future,” Bloomberg said, and concerned that their social security will not be enough to provide for them in retirement. They’re losing jobs to technology, and their children are behaving differently than they’re used to. Continue reading this article
JihadWatch researcher Robert Spencer has sorted through Hillary Clinton’s pronouncements about Muslims — saying they’re all peaceful to one audience vs. they cannot be vetted to another. And the immigration question — just how dangerous is it to admit the West’s historic enemy of 1400 years standing into American neighborhoods? Hillary has been flip-floppy.
What could possibly go wrong? Let’s let Hillary tell us.
The Washington Examiner reported last week that “at 42.4 million, there are now more immigrants, legal and illegal, in America than ever before, fueled by a massive flood from Muslim nations….And while the doors remain open on the U.S.-Mexico border, the biggest percentage increases in immigration are all from largely Muslim nations.” What could possibly go wrong? Hillary Clinton knows, as she revealed in a 2013 email that makes her current public position on immigration absolutely inexplicable.
The Examiner added that according to Steven A. Camarota and Karen Zeigler of the Center for Immigration Studies: “The sending countries with the largest percentage increases in immigrants living in the United States from 2010 to 2014 were Saudi Arabia (up 93 percent), Bangladesh (up 37 percent), Iraq (up 36 percent), Egypt (up 25 percent), and Pakistan, India, and Ethiopia (each up 24 percent).”
Robot design and engineering is a growing business because companies want to reduce their labor costs and smart technology increasingly accomplishes that goal. And now, with robots becoming less expensive, machines will replace human workers in even the cheapest low-wage havens of Asia.
The PBS Newshour has done good reporting on the automation revolution, and the latest is a thorough overview of the tech developments and the rapidly shifting labor situation, starting in Korea with a visit to the Hyundai robot research institute where its machines are becoming more precise, faster and cheaper.
Below, Hyundai welding robots are showcased at a trade show.
Like American workers, Koreans are concerned about job loss to smart machines, and with good reason. Technological unemployment threatens millions in the coming years, but governments — or the American government, at least — has not begun to discuss how to deal with an economy where a substantial minority or eventually even the majority of adult citizens do not have jobs because of automation.
Automation expert Erik Brynjolfsson remarked [Automation] is “the most important single thing that our country can focus on.” But Washington remains in the pre-investigation stage of coping with the challenge of replacing the present economic system of markets with something fundamentally different.
Of course, given such profound and systemic job loss, immigration is no longer an appropriate government policy.
Automation makes immigration obsolete.
It’s time for Washington to wake up about this issue.
South Korea is among the countries working to increase automation in the manufacturing sector, with some large companies seeing robots as a cost-effective way to replace expensive human labor. But how will the expansion of this technology affect American workers? NewsHour Weekend Special Correspondent Karla Murthy reports.
By Mori Rothman and Karla Murthy
KARLA MURTHY: Hyundai means “modernity,” and it’s is a big name in the South Korean economic landscape – and not only for cars.
Headquartered in the industrialized port city of Ulsan, Hyundai Heavy Industries, or HHI, is the world’s largest shipbuilder. It produces engines and construction equipment.
HHI is also a leader in making industrial robots.
Hyun-kyu Lim is a head researcher at HHI’s robot research institute. This is where they test robots used to assemble cars. He showed me an example of what robot technology looked like ten years ago:
HYUN-KYU LIM: It shakes a lot.
KARLA MURTHY: That shake when the robot stops slowed down productivity and accuracy.
HYUN-KYU LIM: Now I’ll switch to the robot controller that is used these days. There’s no vibration.
KARLA MURTHY: Lim says today’s robots are much more precise and 40 percent faster. He says spot welding, which is a common process in car factories, takes just under one second with a robot.
Clinton biographer/whistle-blower Ed Klein, author of the new book about them Guilty As Sin, has another report about candidate Hillary Clinton’s poor health — an issue that should concern all Americans because the presidency is a hugely stressful job that requires top strength and stamina. The latest item is Hillary’s lengthy coughing attack during her visit to the White House to strategize with the Obamas, where a doctor was called because of the severity.
Below, Hillary’s sketchy health has been revealed in her falling, coughing, needing to be held up and requiring special glasses following her concussion as the result of a fall. The latter condition took six months to get over according to husband Bill.
Writer Ed Klein appeared on Fox News Tuesday for a disturbing discussion of Hillary’s lack of health. Clearly she is quite unwell, but her protective friends in the liberal media won’t report anything negative about her.
A spare audio file of the interview is included below in case the video disappears:
ED KLEIN: Yes Hillary came to the White House to try to coordinate the Obamas’ campaign appearances with Robbie Mook, who’s the campaign manager of Hillary’s campaign. So Hillary went to the White House and while she was there she started to cough, and she started to cough and cough and cough and finally the President had to call in one of his doctors who is on 27 in the White House in case of the Presidents. . .
STEVE DOOCY: You always have somebody on call.
KLEIN: And she couldn’t stop coughing, so afterward the President and the First Lady and a guest started to discuss Hillary’s health and they decided there was no way that the Hillary that they saw that day was the same Hillary that the public is seeing in the debates and in her rallies. There’s clearly a difference: she was not a well woman in front of them and suddenly she looks like she’s fit as a fiddle when she’s in public and they decided she must be on some sort of booster drug. . .
That night in the family quarters, Barack, Michelle and Valerie Jarrett with a guest who was staying overnight at the Lincoln Bedroom discussed her health, and Michelle said she was convinced that Hillary had to be on some sort of stimulant drug in order to make it through this campaign. . .
That’s the gossip but now we have the Oval Office — the President and the First Lady saying they’re convinced that she’s on something. Now what that is we don’t know, but they’re saying there’s no way she can get through these performances in public given what they know about her health in private, which is somebody who has these terrible headaches, she has a trembling of her hands, she has trouble even climbing steps when she’s in private in her home.
Why would anyone that ill want the toughest job in the world? She can’t be right in the head to hunger so zealously for a position that she cannot possibly perform adequately.
Interestingly, Ed Klein also wrote an article about this Hillary episode, only with more details. Apparently the coughing followed a verbal disagreement with the Obamas where Hillary was insulted. Does extra stress cause her coughing fits? How helpful will coughing fits be during high-level negotiations with unfriendly heads of state like Putin who will look for every weakness? Such frailty is a threat to our national security.
Michelle Obama, widely acknowledged as Hillary Clinton’s most effective campaign surrogate, is concerned that the Democrat presidential nominee’s health is so fragile that she depends on stimulant drugs to get her through the grueling race for the White House.
Both Michelle and Barack Obama have been concerned with the state of Hillary’s health since her presidential campaign began. The Obamas know that Hillary suffers from a slew of severe and debilitating health issues, all of which I have exposed in my latest New York Times bestseller Guilty as Sin.
According to a guest who stayed overnight in the White House and was present in the Family Residence during a discussion of Hillary’s health, Barack Obama and Valerie Jarrett, the president’s chief adviser, agreed with the first lady that Hillary has relied on booster drugs during her campaign rallies and three debates with Donald Trump.
They came to that conclusion after a recent meeting with Hillary in the White House, where Hillary made an effort to persuade the president and first lady to coordinate their public appearances with Robby Mook, the Clinton campaign manager.
When Hillary suggested that the president and the first lady submit their speeches in advance to Mook in order to make sure they were on the same page as Hillary’s campaign, Michelle Obama broke out in derisive laughter.
“Michelle made it plain that she and Barack knew how campaigns work better than Hillary or Mook,” said the source who participated in the discussion. “After all, Barack cleaned Hillary’s clock during the 2008 Democratic Party primaries.
“During the heated discussion over campaign coordination,” the source continued, “Hillary suddenly broke out in a coughing fit. The president offered Hillary a glass of water, but Hillary’s coughing only grew worse. Continue reading this article
The San Jose event was violent and police protection was minimal.
But the Times article was not curious whether the man accused of vandalism, battery and the attempted theft of a Trump supporter’s sign was a paid agitator or was inspired to physical confrontation by provocateurs around him.
Instead, the Times is sad about how unkind we Americans have become in our politics.
SAN JOSE, Calif. — It was a fleeting confrontation between two strangers that might have otherwise been forgotten.
But the tussle over a Donald Trump campaign sign after a June rally in San Jose, California, has sent one man, Anthony McBride, to jail for six days, and left another, Steven Tong, lamenting the loss of civility in our democracy.
The rally where these two lives collided by happenstance erupted into one of the most violent episodes of this contentious presidential election. Video footage of protesters punching, egging and tackling Trump supporters went viral, sparking outrage among Republicans and soul-searching among Democrats.
Today, the clashes between ordinary people like McBride and Tong are playing out in the California courts, in a series of criminal prosecutions brought about as Republican officials accused a city led by Democrats of failing to protect Trump supporters at the rally. Continue reading this article
Apparently the liberal urge to civilization suicide via immigration remains strong in Britain. A recent kerfuffle has been over the “children” who are being shipped from the Calais “refugee” camp who are obviously adult men.
Today’s horror story concerns a foster family who thought they were getting a 12-year-old orphan boy from Afghanistan but ended up with an eventual death threat from an adult jihad after he had lived with the welcoming parents and their children.
Refugee Resettlement Watch noted another batch of targets a couple days ago including one unlucky city: New refugee seeding site: Youngstown, Ohio. That community is particularly unsuitable to be burdened by needy and/or hostile foreigners: it was plunged into a local depression by the closing of the major steel mill in 1977 and never recovered.
Because of its persistent economic misery, Youngstown was a major subject of the Atlantic magazine cover story of July/August 2015 about automation: A World without Work. The beginning of the lengthy, far-ranging piece was memorable for its description of how the once prosperous city was plunged into poverty:
1. Youngstown, U.S.A.
The end of work is still just a futuristic concept for most of the United States, but it is something like a moment in history for Youngstown, Ohio, one its residents can cite with precision: September 19, 1977.
For much of the 20th century, Youngstown’s steel mills delivered such great prosperity that the city was a model of the American dream, boasting a median income and a homeownership rate that were among the nation’s highest. But as manufacturing shifted abroad after World War II, Youngstown steel suffered, and on that gray September afternoon in 1977, Youngstown Sheet and Tube announced the shuttering of its Campbell Works mill. Within five years, the city lost 50,000 jobs and $1.3 billion in manufacturing wages. The effect was so severe that a term was coined to describe the fallout: regional depression.
￼Youngstown was transformed not only by an economic disruption but also by a psychological and cultural breakdown. Depression, spousal abuse, and suicide all became much more prevalent; the caseload of the area’s mental-health center tripled within a decade. The city built four prisons in the mid-1990s—a rare growth industry. One of the few downtown construction projects of that period was a museum dedicated to the defunct steel industry.
This winter, I traveled to Ohio to consider what would happen if technology permanently replaced a great deal of human work. I wasn’t seeking a tour of our automated future. I went because Youngstown has become a national metaphor for the decline of labor, a place where the middle class of the 20th century has become a museum exhibit.
“Youngstown’s story is America’s story, because it shows that when jobs go away, the cultural cohesion of a place is destroyed,” says John Russo, a professor of labor studies at Youngstown State University. “The cultural breakdown matters even more than the economic breakdown.”
But despite so much suffering and economic damage, the diversifier bunch has decided that Youngstown should take some refugees to do its part. The Catholic diocese is advocating the idea as a fine do-gooder project despite the added stress on the local community.
For diversity-promoting elites, Americans always come last.
Friday’s San Jose Mercury News featured a front-page story informing readers that illegal aliens living amongst us wish that they could be a part of the political process.
As we have noticed, illegal aliens are always complaining about the nation they invaded, despite the fact that they are enriched by the liberal government arguably more than the citizens. The illegal moochers receive an array of benefits funded by the unwilling taxpayer, including free-to-them healthcare, food stamps, subsidized housing, education for the kiddies, etc.
But that’s not enough — it’s never enough. They want to vote.
Illegal alien Mayela Razo, pictured below, complains that she cannot vote in the upcoming election, but hopes that the “Latino community” will “incite change” — or something like that. Readers see an English translation of her remarks in Spanish.
The Murky News apparently believes that illegal aliens participation in voter registration drives and get out the vote activities is a fine expression of civic engagement. Presumably the diverse persons being targeted will mostly vote against Donald Trump, who believes immigration anarchy must stop.
Mayela Razo can’t vote in the presidential election come November. But she’s making sure those who can cast a ballot do, even offering to drive friends and family members to the polls on election night.
It’s a privilege that Razo, who is undocumented, wishes she had.
“Although I can’t vote, I’m aware of what’s going on in the election season,” said the 54-year-old San Jose resident in Spanish, who participates in voter registration drives with the immigrant rights organization, SIREN.
“It’s of concern to me because I, too, live in this country,” she said. “I want the Latino community to vote and be conscious of the fact that they can incite change.”
This political season has unleashed an unprecedented level of activism among many undocumented residents, who say fear and uncertainty have spurred them to act. People like Razo are canvassing streets, championing social media campaigns and manning phone banks to mobilize voters ahead of the election.
Undocumented residents have become a potent weapon in a polarizing election where immigration has been a focal point. Nonprofits and activist groups are using their voices in voter registration drives to remind people about the importance of voting. Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and fellow Democrat Sen. Bernie Sanders incorporated undocumented residents in their campaigns to get out the Latino vote. And for undocumented residents, getting others to vote presents a unique opportunity to be part of a political process that could determine their future in the United States. As the election nears, their desire to act grows.
It’s a phenomenon that’s largely driven by “Dreamers,” young adults brought to the U.S. illegally as children but raised as Americans. Continue reading this article
There is general alarm today from the mainstream press about the topic of voter fraud. The left media (which is to say most of it) doesn’t want voters to think the system is “rigged” as Donald Trump has charged, nor does the press want to be recognized for its supporting role of perpetrating fraud and thereby undermining representative government.
On Thursday, former Congressman and 2008 Presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo sounded off with a pretty good rant with his agreement that Democrat voter fraud is indeed widespread and common.
TOM TANCREDO: “In fact, talking about the possibility of widespread voter fraud — it is a distinct possibility. It happens everywhere. It happened in my own election, it’s happened in Colorado over and over again. We have counties here that turned in more votes, Democrat counties that turned in more votes than there were people living in those counties. It’s happened on numerous occasions. We’ve had illegal aliens voting, and when a Republican poll watcher tried to challenge that, they were thrown out of the of the voting office.
And that’s just here: its massive, it’s all over the country. Well you know, there’s very few prosecutions — well right, yeah, that’s true. It’s because they don’t prosecute. It’s like how many people in New York get a ticket for jaywalking? Well not many probably, but how many jaywalk? Thousands, right, it’s because nobody does prosecute that you’ve got massive voter fraud. The reason why they fight like crazy to stop the voter ID requirement of a driver’s license is because they want voter fraud. There is no other reason. You and I both know it’s BS to say, well those people — it’s racist and they’d be upset. Oh my god, they’d have to go to their safe place and their quiet place, and we’d have to get them counseling because they were asked for a voter ID. Hogwash.”
The current practice of networks holding their debate coverage outdoors may not continue in the next cycle because unplanned things can happen. On Wednesday, CNN talking heads were inundated by Trump supporters chanting “Lock her up!” — a popular cheer in Republican rallies over the last few months.
The Trump candidacy has uncorked voter dissatisfaction growing over decades of economic globalization for which there was no voice. Now that Donald Trump is expressing the popular rage, voters feel unleashed and vindicated.
Below, CNN’s elite political interpreters Dan Balz, Maeve Reston and John King tried to talk over Trump supporters behind them who suggested Clinton imprisonment.
An on-site CNN panel had difficulty on Wednesday discussing the 2016 electoral map and what both presidential candidates should do in their third debate later that night when a crowd in Las Vegas began relentlessly chanting “lock her up” for at least a minute straight.
In his convention acceptance speech, Trump remarked, “Of all my travels in this country, nothing has affected me more deeply than the time I have spent with the mothers and fathers who have lost their children to violence spilling across our border.”
On Wednesday, two moms, Agnes Gibboney and Laura Wilkerson, whose sons were murdered by illegal aliens appeared on Fox News to remind citizens of the importance of law and borders.
Ronald Da Silva (left, son of Agnes Gibboney) and Joshua Wilkerson (right) were both murdered by illegal aliens.
Laura Wilkerson’s case is particularly disturbing because when she says her son Joshua was tortured, that’s a shorthand way of saying how brutally he was beaten to death by a fellow high school student, an illegal alien from Belize. The young killer, Hermilo Moralez, would be a perfect Obama DREAMer if he hadn’t savagely murdered his classmate and been locked up since 2010.
BRIAN KILMEADE: A critical topic during tonight’s final debate will be illegal immigration, an issue that’s important to all Americans, has not come up yet by the way in a debate, but for our next guests it’s literally life-and-death. I’m talking about Laura Wilkerson and Agnes Gibboney; both had sons killed by illegal immigrants, and have taken action in their honor. They now advocate for the families of other victims through this organization, it’s called the Remembrance Project, and they join us right now.
Laura, Agnes, thanks so much. I want to find out about your sons, but I also want to find out why you see Donald Trump is a great hope for you. Agnes?
AGNES GIBBONEY: Because he was the only one that pointed out the big issues in this country the illegal immigration which is a tremendous problem in this country. A lot of our children or family members are being slaughtered by the illegal aliens who should never be in this country.
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.