Monday, April 30, 2012

American "Terrorists" Subject of Russian Troops Drilling in US?

A contingent of Russian Troops will be training in anti-terrorism drills in Fort Carson towards the end of May.

I will freely admit that this could be perfectly innocent, but I am concerned. I have always held that, out of all of GW Bush's decisions, his alienation of Russia was by far his worst and most short-sighted move. The Russian State, having stabilized after eight years of post-Soviet Union rebuilding, would have been the perfect partner in business and security. Our oil, gas, and mineral extraction interests, for one example, could have undertaken projects with Russian companies that would have benefited both nations. Instead of basing our military in Kyrgyzstan and other nations of dubious loyalty, we could have had the chance of operating in conjunction with Russian forces. What Russian got was an enlarged NATO that recruited former Warsaw Pact nations and brought a potential threat right to their doorstep. As Charles XII of Sweden, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Hitler learned, the Russians do not look favorably on invaders (or potential ones) from their Western borders.

Russia’s concerns having been largely ignored by the Bush administration, that nation turned to China for much of her business projects. My understanding is that they have also begun conducting joint Naval Drills with China.

This drill  in and of itself should not be cause for major alarm, but, it could be a problem if taken in context with the fact that, historically, the 'Bad guys" who have been targeted in these drills, will not be Islamic or other non-American terrorists or even powerful and violent urban-based gangs, but those whom have been classified by Homeland Security Director Janet Napolitano as major threats to American Security.

These include "right-wing" groups" (Which, according to Leftists, could be any group for which American Freedom and Sovereignty in a founding principle) and disaffected American War veterans. If the US at any point ratifies the UN Small Arms Treaty and/or seeks to fully implement UN Agenda 21, this could include any person who refuses to turn in his or her firearms and be moved from a now-banned single-family home to an approved urban zone. In other words, anyone who resists the plan for the New Order can be lumped in with neo-Nazis and others whose doctrine is one of hate.

From the article at top:

"Back in July 2010, our reporters covered the Operation Vigilant Guard exercises in Chicagowhich involved Polish troops training alongside U.S. National Guard troops in drills focused around raiding terrorists and drug dealers."

The raid on 'drug dealers", as you will see from the article link for Operation Vigilant, consisted of raiding a Methamphetamine lab, something for which the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 effectively forbids. That act, interestingly, was passed as a political deal to help sort out a Presidential Election in which insufficient Electoral Votes were cast for any one candidate. The South got rid of US Reconstruction troops in former Confederate States, Federal Troops were generally prohibited from being employed to enforce civilian law in the US, and Rutherford B. Hayes became President instead of Samuel Tilden. Since US troops cannot enforce civilian/ criminal laws in the United States, the act of raiding a Meth lab was a drill that portrayed an act that would be illegal if done in a real event. Posse Comitatus essentially requires that Congress and the President only employ Federal troops to enforce civil law and restore order in national emergencies.

"Alex Jones has documented foreign troops being trained on U.S. soil to deal with “insurgents” since the late 1990′s as part of “urban warfare drills”.

Russian airborne troops are set to train how to target terrorists in America as part of a joint anti-terror drill with the United States which will take place in Fort Carson, Colorado at the end of next month.

Airborne troops from Russia and the United States would hold joint anti-terror drills in the U.S. state of Colorado between May 24 and 31,”reports the Xinhua news agency, citing Russian Defense Ministry Col. Alexander Kucherenko. The story was also reported by Russian news outletRIA Novosti.

"The exercises, which will mark the first time the respective country’s two airborne forces have held joint drills on U.S. territory, will revolve around the the “reconnaissance of imaginary terrorists’ camp and a raid,” and will also involve evacuations of the troops by helicopter.

Alex Jones has documented foreign troops being trained on U.S. soil to deal with “insurgents” since the late 1990′s as part of “urban warfare drills”."

The spectre of foreign troops being brought into the US to suppress any resistance to a Leftist-type takeover of the government has been looming over our heads since the early 90's*, when drills such as this began to occur more frequently. I was never one to give this much thought; I generally considered the continual hosting/training of foreign troops to be something that would contribute to increased cooperation in the event that our forces were paired with contingents from other nations in other parts of the world where violence was endemic. 

With the effective hostility of the Obama Administration towards its own citizens, the strong possibility of runaway inflation as a result of the massive debt we have incurred since 2009, the purposeful increasing of fuel prices and stymieing of any development of our own petroleum, natural gas, and coal sources (Including Canada's Keystone pipeline oil), coupled with the Administration's repeated demonizing of privately-owned firearms, I have come to regard the training of foreign troops on American soil, especially with the types of "targets" of these operations, with increasing suspicion. 

Events such as that which is quoted below do nothing to assuage my suspicions:
(Emphasis Mine)
"According to SFC Mark Ballard of the Illinois National Guard, the Polish forces were “integrating into some of the civil military units that are participating in this exercise” as part of Illinois’ partnership with the Republic of Poland, a relationship based around “integrative training” and blending military and civilian forces in the event of a national emergency, as well as making this process of integration with foreign troops more “visible”."
The "Boy Scouts" (Below) actually are from the Police Explorers Program, which is overseen by the Boy Scouts of America:

"The exercises also involved volunteers from Boy Scouts of America, which was telling in light of a 2009 New York Times report which detailed how Homeland Security is training boy scouts to take on and disarm “disgruntled veterans” who are described as “terrorists”."
For those who are not aware, Henry Kissinger (Below) is every bit the internationalist, and along with others such as Zbigniew Brzezinski. who have held high level posts in the US government, has no intention of preserving American National Sovereignty.**

Fears that foreign troops would be used to carry out gun confiscations and incarcerate American citizens during a time of martial law have circulated for decades, concerns stoked by remarks such as the following quote from Henry Kissinger reportedly made at the 1991 Bilderberg conference in Evian, France.
“Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful,” Kissinger stated.

My hope is that, if any of this actually turns out in the manner that it is beginning to appear, appreciable numbers of the Poles and Russians, for example, decide that they would rather be free and join in on the American side. At least half of those troops must have closely-related cousins who already live here. 

The below link (*) will show that the targets of the operations can easily be any group of Americans that stands together in a refusal to relinquish our freedoms and national Sovereignty.



Sunday, April 29, 2012

"Did Mohammed Exist?" - Book by Robert Spencer

Robert Spencer is a prolific writer who has a lot on his plate. He has spent years and exerted massive efforts to inform people about the truths of Islam in spite of the powerful media, Islamic, and Leftist campaigns to paint Islam as a religion of peace and tolerance. He has written several books, operates the website JihadWatch (Above), and often, along with Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs (Also above), goes on speaking tours. In doing so, he and others, who have labored so that we can know what Islam is as opposed to what many Muslims and Leftists want us to think it is, have come under continual fire from both camps.

Spencer's newest book is titled "Did Mohammed Exist?" (Link at top). In his book, he apparently (I have not read it yet) displays incredibly thorough and detailed research of the Koran, the Haddiths, early Islamic historical sources, etc. The author finds that there is a real dearth of mention, quotes, attributions, etc. to a person named Mohammed or the term Islam in the early Islamic world.

Again, I have not yet purchased the book, so I obviously cannot offer any critique of his actual conclusions. Below are links to several reviews of the book from those who have read it. (Quoted below)

From what I have gathered from the reviews, Spencer concludes that the men of of the Arab armies that swept north, West, and East from the Arabian peninsula were motivated by a monotheistic faith, but that they did not utilize the term Islam, practice or preach much of what we know to be particular to Islam,  nor did they referred to Mohamed as being their prophet. It appears to Spencer that much of Mohamed was invented by later "Islamic" rulers and notables to provide a more authoritative historical foundation for their beliefs.

I plan to purchase the book. I am not certain that I will fully agree with Spencer's conclusions, but I have no doubt that his research will be a valuable tool. From reading the Koran and the Haddiths, we find so much about Mohamed (or the prophet if he in fact went by another name at the time) that was so plainly awful that I have a hard time believing that his actual supporters would make them up.

The Koran too is treated in the book. There the reader will learn that quite a bit of the Koran was not originally written in Arabic but clearly was taken from Syro-Aramaic Christian texts.(A true Koran can only be written in Arabic according to Islamic thought). Many of the words did not exist in the Arabic language at the time, and the translators seemed to have to rely on guesswork when choosing what Arabic word to employ. This resulted in the extreme difficulty one has in reading a book in which very fifth line or so makes no sense whatsoever. It also explains, among other things, how the 72 virgins came into Islamic thought - the original text almost certainly referred to grapes.

The following is a quote from the below link. This article covers both Spencer's book and treats the book The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran by Christoph Luxenberg. (A pseudonym - the author is, understandably, a marked man)

"… [A] closer philological analysis indicates that the Qur'an does not offer such a…promise. After examining the rasm, the other contexts in which hur appears in the Qur'an, and the contemporary usage of the word houris, Luxenberg concludes that the famous passages refer not to virgins but instead to white raisins, or grapes.

Yes, fruit. Strange as that may seem, given all the attention paid to the Qur'an's supposed promises of virgins in Paradise, white raisins were a prized delicacy in that region. As such, Luxenberg suggests, they actually make a more fitting symbol of the reward of Paradise than the promise of sexual favors from virgins. Luxenberg shows that the Arabic word for "Paradise" can be traced to the Syriac word for "garden," which stands to reason, given the common identification of the garden of Adam and Eve with Paradise. Luxenberg further demonstrates that metaphorical references to bunches of grapes are consonant with Christian homiletics expatiating on the refreshments that greeted the blessed in Heaven. The fact that the Syriac word Ephraem used for "grapevine" was feminine, Luxenberg explains, "led the Arabic exegetes of the Koran to this fateful assumption" that the Qur'an text referred to sexual playthings in Paradise. [p. 169]"
-Google books link below:
Pages 263-265

Saturday, April 28, 2012

Revised-Necrophilia Prohibition to be Lifted in Egypt?

Added 5/1/2012-
When I wrote this post, I could not be sure if the  Al Arabia article was real or if it was just a hoax.
Raymond Ibrahim to the rescue!
Not only is it true, but Raymond provides the background for this is the Haddiths, which are the sayings and accounts of Mohamed.
With Mohammed having sex (raping) his nine year-old bride, telling men that they have to go through some sort of breastfeeding motion with an adult woman in order to be allowed to be in her presence without her husband being present, and having sex with corpses, no wonder the Left extols the virtues of Islam - it's a huge sex-fest of all varieties.

Read it all here:

Original post below:

This Arab Spring just gets better every day.

To be honest, I don't even know if this article is true or a hoax.

From an Al Arabia article. (Link above):

"Egypt’s National Council for Women (NCW) has appealed to the Islamist-dominated parliament not to approve two controversial laws on the minimum age of marriage and allowing a husband to have sex with his dead wife within six hours of her death according to a report in an Egyptian newspaper.

She was referring to two laws: one that would legalize the marriage of girls starting from the age of 14 and the other that permits a husband to have sex with his dead wife within the six hours following her death."

OK, the latter is beyond bizarre. Ironically, according to the ancient Historian Herodotus, the ancient (Pre-Muslim) Egyptians specifically required that a dead woman's body be held by the family prior to embalming for (I think it was) three days after her death. The Greek Father of history states that the reason for this was to avoid this type of thing occurring in the first place. Of course, the ancient Egyptian prohibition was put into place to prevent the embalmers themselves from engaging in this sick act, but Herodotus does not mention if the husbands too were to concentrate on grieving and not perverse acts.  If this story is accurate, we find yet another instance of what Islam must consider to be an improvement of the culture of a conquered nation.  

As far as the former goes, why 14? Mohamed, who is considered to be, of all men, the supreme example of good conduct, married Aisha when she was six and consummated the marriage when the victim was nine. That story, from the Haddiths (Sayings and accounts of the prophet), is itself only one example of why I hold that Mohammad was a cult leader. Her father, Abu-Bakr, was a close friend of Mohamed and his right hand man in warfare. Their relationship, in Islamic culture, was supposed to like that of brothers. Upon being asked for the hand of his six-year old daughter in marriage, Abu-Bakr tries to dissuade Mohamed by stating that they are brothers. Mohammad answers in manner that is consistent with that of a cult leader to a follower:

"Sahih Bukhari 7.18
Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.' "

I hold that the very fact that Abu-Bakr not only acquiesced to this but also did not physically attack Mohamed is the clearest example we have that Mohamed had an incredible amount of psychological control over his followers.

"The controversy about a husband having sex with his dead wife came about after a Moroccan cleric spoke about the issue in May 2011.

Zamzami Abdul Bari said that marriage remains valid even after death adding that a woman also too had the same right to engage in sex with her dead husband. " [Italics mine]

At the risk of having the pervert label thrown at me, I would still have to state that the converse would be a very rare thing indeed.

"But it seems his view on partners having sex with their deceased partners has found its way to Egypt one year on.

Egyptian prominent journalist and TV anchor Jaber al-Qarmouty on Tuesday referred to Abdul Samea’s article in his daily show on Egyptian ON TV and criticized the whole notion of “permitting a husband to have sex with his wife after her death under a so-called ‘Farewell Intercourse’ draft law.”

“This is very serious. Could the panel that will draft the Egyptian constitution possibly discuss such issues? Did Abdul Samea see by his own eyes the text of the message sent by Talawi to Katatni? This is unbelievable. It is a catastrophe to give the husband such a right! Has the Islamic trend reached that far? Is there really a draft law in this regard? Are there people thinking in this manner?' "

Unfortunately, I think that the voices of reason in Egypt will be either silenced or beaten down. Our Leftist media could not get enough of swooning over the protests that brought down Mubarak's regime. Those who saw an Islamic State in the works were ignored. Expect more lunacy down the road.

Friday, April 27, 2012

Follow Up: Mohammed - Abraham's Lapse of Faith and its Consequence

When this blog was still new, I had posted on something that had been on my mind for several years. It had to do with the biblical account of Abraham and his descendants. The events that led up to his fathering of Ishmael and Isaac and the later banishment of Ishmael (And the deprivation of Abraham's inheritance) brought me to the main point of the post; Ishmael's birth was the result of a lapse of faith on Abraham's part, and Ishmael became the ancestor (Of course I am not talking about hard DNA evidence here) of Mohammed. This man is the founder of a religion that has, from its beginning until today, gone after Jews and Christians with a real vengeance. 

Abraham appears to have doubted God's promise that Sarai (Sarah) would give birth to a son and agreed to Sarai's suggestion that he father a child with her servant Hagar. The post (Link at bottom) contains the summarized account of Abraham and my thoughts. 

At the end of the post, I noted that I would not be surprised if, since many Arabs believed that they were descendants of Abraham's firstborn son (The fact that Isaac was born of Abraham's wife does not matter in Islamic thought); they would hold a grudge against the Jews for being deprived of Abraham's inheritance. The Old Testament notes that the actual father of the Hebrew Tribes (Not to be called Jews until later), Abraham’s grandson Jacob, even went farther by employing trickery to obtain Isaac's inheritance and blessing at the expense of his (Just slightly) older brother, Esau. This almost resulted in a clan war between the two brothers and their families. Later, the Edomite Kingdom, descended from Esau, remembered this slight all too well when the Hebrews wanted to cross through Edom into Canaan. The Edomites refused them passage. Like the culture of blood-feuds that some peoples in the West took a long time to excise, such as the Hatfields and the McCoys and the feuds that plagued Southern Italy and Sicily, the peoples of the Middle Eastern world had very long memories.

A few weeks ago, I was looking up accounts of  encounters between Jews and Alexander the Great prior to the Macedonian King's departure from the coast to attack Darius II. Alexander had spent an appreciable amount of time in the region while subduing the Phoenician city of Tyre. He had needed to get their fleet under his control. While he was away from Macedon and Greece, Alexander could not leave the Tyrian fleet free to operate in the Mediterranean as they had been employed as allies of the Persians. He also successfully laid siege to Gaza.

Well, while doing so, I came across this account summarized from the Talmud:
Emphasis is mine.

"(Sanh. 91a, Gen. R. l.c.).
"The Arabs accuse the Jews of illegally withholding the heritage of their ancestor Ishmael; the Canaanites complain of having been wrongly deprived of their territory; and the Egyptians claim indemnity for the vessels that the Israelites had taken from them on leaving their country. Gebi'ah meets all these charges with great success: against the Egyptians he proves that it is they that are indebted to the Jews, whom they had exploited without paying them for their work, and Alexander was fully satisfied with the refutation"

This is the full citation. It is a lot to digest:
"On another occasion the Ishmaelites and the Ketureans23 came for a lawsuit against the Jews before Alexander of Macedon. They pleaded thus: 'Canaan belongs jointly to all of us, for it is written, Now these are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham's son;24 and it is [further] written, And these are the generations of Isaac,' Abraham's son.'25 Thereupon Gebiha b. Pesisa said to the Sages: 'Give me permission to go and plead against them before Alexander of Macedon. Should they defeat me then say, "Ye have defeated one of our ignorant men;" whilst if I defeat them, say, "The Law of Moses has defeated you."' So they gave him permission, and he went and pleaded against them. 'Whence do ye adduce your proof?' asked he. 'From the Torah,' they replied. 'Then I too,' said he, 'will bring you proof only from the Torah, for it is written, And Abraham gave all that he had unto Isaac. But unto the sons of the concubines which Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts:26 if a father made a bequest to his children in his lifetime and sent them away from each other, has one any claim upon the other?"

I certainly would not cite the Talmud as proof positive that Arabs, or at least those Arabs who held that they were descended from Ishmael, not only did in fact hold a grudge but felt so strong about it to appeal to the Macedonian King. I will though, assert that there is a very good chance that there were some hard feelings in the collective memory of some Arabs and that Jewish people were fully aware of this animosity. If the Ishmaelites (My personal belief is that these were specifically northern Arabs such as the Nabataeans) did approach Alexander seeking relief and were rebuffed, that would likely add to their grudge against the Jews.

The existence of the incredible amount of anti-Semitic (And anti-Christian) references in the Koran* and the Haddiths** (Saying and accounts of Mohammed) make even more sense when one takes into account the possibility that, under the exterior of the Ishmael-descended Arab, there seethed an envy that could only be satisfied by the eventual subjugation of the Jews and Christians (Who also seemed to have gotten a better deal from of the Ishmael/Isaac saga) and the subjection of these peoples into the second-class citizen Dhimmi status.

Original post here:

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Muslim and Leftist Falsification of European History

Most by now have read or heard about the comments made in 2010 by EPA official Al Armendariz in which he described how he believed the EPA should go about making examples to oil and gas companies that did not toe the line to his satisfaction. As of today, he reportedly issued an apology for the use of the work "crucify".

I will not go on about the Obama Administration’s continued war on the organizations that provide so much of our energy. What I saw in his statements that bothered me even more was his bizarre falsification of history and yet another dig at Western Culture.

"I was in a meeting once and I gave an analogy to my staff…the Romans used to conquer little villages in the Mediterranean. They’d go into a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw and they would crucify them. And then you know that town was really easy to manage for the next few years.

And so you make examples out of people who are in this case not compliant with the law. Find people who are not compliant with the law, and you hit them as hard as you can and you make examples out of them, and there is a deterrent effect there."

Our educational system is so far gone that the patently false picture Armendariz paints will be lost on too many people.

Firstly, to pretend to be under the impression that Rome spent her time going into "villages" in a piecemeal fashion insults the intelligence of everyone. The Mediterranean world of that time was a million miles away from being a community of villages. Much of Greece was ruled by Macedon. Egypt was under the Ptolemies (Another Macedonian dynasty). The Seleucids (Macedonian rule again) ruled much of modern-day Israel, Syria, Lebanon and modern-day Turkey. Carthage, Numidia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, Pontus, Pergamum, Epirus Rhodes, and others were all kingdoms or states. There were no independent villages at that time in that region. 

Secondly, Roman cruelty, while it pales in comparison to that of the Mongols and the Turks, and though well known itself, was in no way what he pretends to believe that it was. Rome utilized crucifixion for criminals, not to make examples of people to terrorize them. We can look at Caesar’s treatment of the Veneti after their revolt, where he had the hands of the males of that group cut off and compare that to the work of the Persian King Darius II, who did the same thing to Alexander the Great's soldiers whom he came upon in them in hospitals behind the Macedonian King's lines. The flogging of the British Queen of the Iceni, Boudicca, and the rape of here daughters was an isolated act by a greedy and cruel local commander. Note that Rome paid dearly for that outrage as Boudicca’s revolt caused tremendous losses to Rome. Although Rome expanded her Empire to include many peoples and nations, they did it by warfare, not sending in a few guys to isolated villages (That were not on their own but parts of major Kingdoms). This is just another example of making a Western power look as badly as possible

Thirdly, the worst claim of them all is the mention of "Turkish" Villages. No such thing. The people of Anatolia(Asia Minor), which comprise most of modern-day Turkey, was peopled by Indo-European peoples such as Greeks, Phrygians, Cappadocians, Iranics, Armenians, those of Luvian and Lydian descent, etc. No Turks existed in that region at the time. In fact, and I am not employing hyperbole, there wasn't a single Turk within a thousands miles of that region at the time that Rome was expanding. When Rome did encounter Turks in that region, it was almost six hundred years after the Empire in the West had fallen. The Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire did in fact fight Turks - when the Turks began to invade in the 11th century AD. The Byzantine defeat at the battle of Manzikert in 1071 was a watershed moment for the Christian world (And the rest of the world also) and was the catalyst for the call for the Byzantine Emperor to the Medieval West for help. This resulted in the Crusades. The Empire regained some of the land lost after 1071, but was again defeated by the Turks in another major battle at Myriocephalum in 1176AD. The Empire was so weakened by that battle, and the loss of tax revenues from the Venetian - extorted treaties favorable to Venice so damaged the imperial exchequer that Constantinople fell to Western crusaders in 1204AD. The Byzantines rulers-in-exile in Anatolia continued to hold the Seljuk Turks in check and also retook their city from the Western forces,  but, with the disruptions caused by the Mongols, more Turks came. These pushed the Byzantines out of Anatolia. The most successful of these tribes were the Ottomans. They gained control of the other Turkish tribes and eventually conquered (In Europe) Greece, the rest of the Balkan states, Bulgaria, and Hungary. Constantinople, the city built by Constantine and the last city with an unbroken connection to classical times, fell to the Ottoman Sultan Mohamet II in 1453AD. Turks were conquering nomads who moved in to stay.

Leftist-minded people actually relish painting over history and giving us pictures that are completely different from what actually happened. The Turks are portrayed as a sort of indigenous Anatolian people. Left-leaning individuals like to sign on to the claims by Turks that St. Nicholas of Myra (Santa Claus) was a Turk. Again, Nicholas lived in Myra in the 4th century AD, when Turks were still running around the region from the Steppes eastward to the borders of China and would not show up in Anatolia until seven hundred more years later.

The Left has a fondness for the Ottoman Empire as it was pan-national (Leftists detest free peoples and nation). The extol the virtues of the "Tolerant” rule of the Ottomans, who enslaved tens of thousands of Christian boys to be raised as Muslim soldiers for the Sultan , and did the same with Christian girls for sex-slaves in Harems.

It is of course OK to the Left that they attacked Vienna three times, the last major siege of that city being 1683 – a scant one hundred years prior to the recognition of the independence of the American Republic by Britain.

The infatuation that the Left has for Islamic rule extends to Spain, where people of Spanish descent who happen to convert to Islam are celebrated for getting back to their "Islamic roots". Again, no such thing. Muslim armies conquered, at first, almost the whole of the Iberian Peninsula in the 8th century AD, but the Christian Kingdoms, in the Reconquista, regained their lands. The last Islamic-ruled region of Spain was Granada, which fell in 1492. Granada had remained as an Islamic frontier state, and a very small one at that, since 1250AD, the rest of Spain and Portugal having been steadily returned to its rightful owners. Thus, the claim of 800 years of Islamic rule in Iberian Peninsula is terribly deceiving as Muslims never held the entire region, and the last 200+ years of Islamic rule, consisted of Granada alone, a tiny piece of the region.

If one does not read the history of Western Civilization on his own or study it as a Major in a good college, I am afraid that he is likely to believe whatever the Left tells him it is.

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

California Exodus-Agenda 21 in Action

California seems to be taking the lead in implementing Agenda 21. The above opinion piece concerns the current housing climate in that State. As noted in the post (Link following this one*), from a few weeks ago, laws and other regulations are resulting in ever-rising prices for homes and properties in which homes can be built. Single-family homes are the main target. While the elite will of course be allowed to maintain their residences, one of the key goals of Agenda 21 is to get everyone else into high-rise apartments and condominiums. These will be concentrated along "commuter corridors" which, as expected, fall within the areas slotted for the bullet trains that the Obama administration desires to shove down our throats.

The regular people, not likely to agree to being forcibly removed from their single-family homes, will be simply priced out of them. It is a basic and effective means of ending the suburban lifestyle by attrition; taxes will be raised and few lots will be approved for development, thus making young people incapable of scraping together enough money to buy even a starter home.

As the middle class flees California en masse, what will be left over are the Elite and the lower middle classes, along with those on welfare. The state that became synonymous with prosperity will turn into an oligarchic version of a Socialist paradise, with the common people massed together in apartments like ants. The rich have little to fear as they have plenty of money and the probably future demolition of the evil former middle class single-family homes will eventually result in lower property values. I have no doubt that the elite will take full advantage of this as they increase their land holdings, turning California into a collection of Latifundias with the grimy urban masses neatly tucked away and out of sight.

 -From an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal by Allysia Finley:
Italics and bolding are mine

'California is God's best moment," says Joel Kotkin. "It's the best place in the world to live." Or at least it used to be.

Nearly four million more people have left the Golden State in the last two decades than have come from other states. This is a sharp reversal from the 1980s, when 100,000 more Americans were settling in California each year than were leaving. According to Mr.
Kotkin, most of those leaving are between the ages of 5 and 14 or 34 to 45. In other words, young families.

The scruffy-looking urban studies professor at Chapman University in Orange, Calif., has been studying and writing on demographic and geographic trends for 30 years. Part of California's dysfunction, he says, stems from state and local government restrictions on development. These policies have artificially limited housing supply and put a premium on real estate in coastal regions.

And things will only get worse in the coming years as Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown and his green cadre implement their "smart growth" [key Agenda 21 term] plans to cram the proletariat into high-density housing. "What I find reprehensible beyond belief is that the people pushing [high-density housing] themselves live in single-family homes and often drive very fancy cars, but want everyone else to live like my grandmother did in Brownsville in Brooklyn in the 1920s," Mr. Kotkin declares.

"The new regime"—his name for progressive apparatchiks who run California's government—"wants to destroy the essential reason why people move to California in order to protect their own lifestyles."

Housing is merely one front of what he calls the "progressive war on the middle class." Another is the cap-and-trade law AB32, which will raise the cost of energy and drive out manufacturing jobs without making even a dent in global carbon emissions. Then there are the renewable portfolio standards, which mandate that a third of the state's energy come from renewable sources like wind and the sun by 2020. California's electricity prices are already 50% higher than the national average.

Oh, and don't forget the $100 billion bullet train. Mr. Kotkin calls the runaway-cost train "classic California." "Where [Brown] with the state going bankrupt is even thinking about an expenditure like this is beyond comprehension. When the schools are falling apart, when the roads are falling apart, the bridges are unsafe, the state economy is in free fall. We're still doing much worse than the rest of the country, we've got this growing permanent welfare class, and high-speed rail is going to solve this?"

Of course, there are plenty of jobs to be had in energy, just not the type the new California regime wants. An estimated 25 billion barrels of oil are sitting untapped in the vast Monterey and Bakersfield shale deposits. "You see the great tragedy of California is that we have all this oil and gas, we won't use it," Mr. Kotkin says. "We have the richest farm land in the world, and we're trying to strangle it." He's referring to how water restrictions aimed at protecting the delta smelt fish are endangering Central Valley farmers. [These free farmers are being bankrupted by the prohibitions on irrigation and otherwise watering their crops in this fertile region}

Meanwhile, taxes are harming the private economy. According to the Tax Foundation, California has the 48th-worst business tax climate. Its income tax is steeply progressive. Millionaires pay a top rate of 10.3%, the third-highest in the country. But middle-class workers—those who earn more than $48,000—pay a top rate of 9.3%, which is higher than what millionaires pay in 47 states.

And Democrats want to raise taxes even more. Mind you, the November ballot initiative that Mr. Brown is spearheading would primarily hit those whom Democrats call "millionaires" (i.e., people who make more than $250,000 a year). [Hardly a princely sum for a middle class family in California]

That said, "It's really going to hit the small business owners and the young family that's trying to accumulate enough to raise a family, maybe send their kids to private school. It'll kick them in the teeth."

A worker in Wichita might not consider those earning $250,000 a year middle class, but "if you're a guy working for a Silicon Valley company and you're married and you're thinking about having your first kid, and your family makes 250-k a year, you can't buy a closet in the Bay Area," Mr. Kotkin says. "But for 250-k a year, you can live pretty damn well in Salt Lake City. And you might be able to send your kids to public schools and own a three-bedroom, four-bath house."

According to Mr. Kotkin, these upwardly mobile families are fleeing in droves. As a result, California is turning into a two-and-a-half-class society. On top are the "entrenched incumbents" who inherited their wealth or came to California early and made their money. Then there's a shrunken middle class of public employees and, miles below, a permanent welfare class. As it stands today, about 40% of Californians don't pay any income tax and a quarter are on Medicaid.

And the welfare recipients, he emphasizes, "aren't leaving. Why would they? They get much better benefits in California or New York than if they go to Texas. In Texas the expectation is that people work."

Kotkin also notes that demographic changes are playing a role. As progressive policies drive out moderate and conservative members of the middle class, California's politics become even more left-wing. It's a classic case of natural selection, and increasingly the only ones fit to survive in California are the very rich and those who rely on government spending. In a nutshell, "the state is run for the very rich, the very poor, and the public employees."

Take Salt Lake City. "Almost all of the major tech companies have moved stuff to Salt Lake City." That includes Twitter, Adobe, eBay and Oracle.

Then there's Texas, which is on a mission to steal California's tech hegemony. Apple just announced that it's building a $304 million campus and adding 3,600 jobs in Austin. Facebook established operations there last year, and eBay plans to add 1,000 new jobs there too."

-From the above:
On previous posts concerning Agenda 21 and the ICLEI, I have asserted that a big part of the plans for implementing the UN agenda is to steadily take measures that will either create regulations that make a relocation to urban areas a financial necessity or to, at some point, just require in an outright fashion the movement of the people to those regions. I have also noted that the concept of single-family dwellings are a chief target of Agenda 21 advocates. With this comes attacks on personal modes of transportation (family-size vehicles). Personal vehicles are detested for more than one reason, they consume quite a bit of petroleum relative to the amount of people they pull around, they emit the now-notorious CO2, and possibly most dangerously of all, they allow for the movement of people from place to place without the knowledge of those who prefer that we be watched continuously (Unless of course you use credit/debit cards for fuel purchases or EZ-Pass for tolls).

Plans call for the concentration of people along densely-populated corridors, putting them squarely along either existing or planned mass-transportation routes. An example of planned routes are the High-Speed railways that the Obama administration so enthusiastically pushed on State governments. To this we must add the admission by Obama's Energy Secretary Stephen Chu* that, far from having any intention of taking measures to reduce the price of fuel, the administration likes things the way they are as they encourage people to use less fuel (And thus see living in urban areas a more tempting thought). Let's get Americans to dump their cars and get on the buses and trains. 

For those new to Agenda 21, it is a cooperative program in which Environmentalists and Marxists have coalesced to bring about the elimination of national sovereignty and to restrict people to approved urban regions in which the will be allowed to live. Independent farmers will be forced out, and the farms will be taken over by cooperate interests. Those who are allowed to remain in rural regions will be hired farmhands, not property owners. Private property as we know it will be gone. Those regions not approved for corporate-owned farms will be designated as wildlife areas, and huge ones at that. Populations controls and other totalitarian concepts are also in the works.

You can learn more on the following posts:
Find out if your State or local governments are involved with the ICLEI.

What you can do:

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Communist Party USA Chairman Speaks and Universal Suffrage in the US

Communist Pary USa Chairman Sam Webb, who has run the show since the resignation of long-time Chairman Gus Hall, outlined the Party's intention at a recent confernce:

From TheBlaze:

"In what constituted a clear step-by-step stratagem, Sam Webb, the party’s chair, opened his remarks by saying that the upcoming elections are only be part of “a grander design [that] will connect the dots between our immediate and longer-range political task.”

“To put it differently,” he elaborated, “we hope to connect the struggle at the ballot box today with the struggle for socialism tomorrow.”

Webb continued to discuss the “catastrophe” that would befall humanity if we did not begin living in a more environmentally friendly manner, before declaring socialism to be “imperative…to preserve peace and our planet, expand democracy, eliminate gross racial, gender, and other forms of inequality, and to provide a secure life for the billions living on this earth.”

One such Republican to defeat is likely Rep. Allen West of Florida, who has been criticized for noting that there are likely 80 members of Congress who may be Communists.

Rather than deny the charge, Communist Party Vice-Chairman Libero Della Piana remarked: “Is he saying that he would not support the democratic right of the people to elect communists to Congress if that was, in fact, what they wanted to do at some point in the future?”

My opinion is that we may very well have to consider changes that would do just that. We are no longer facing Gus Hall's moribund party, one that never had near the level of support that Marxists have in the US today. The trend does not appear to have any likelihood of abating:

"According to a new study conducted by the Pew Research Center, 49 percent of millennials (age 18-29) view socialism in a favorable light, compared to 43 percent who view it unfavorably.

Moreover, millennials like the sound of socialism better than capitalism. 46 percent of millennials have positive views of capitalism, and 47 percent have negative views.

This is different from the country’s population overall: 60 percent say they have a negative view of socialism, versus 31 percent who say they have a positive view. Young people are the only age group whose support for socialism outweighs that of capitalism."

We all have been long aware aware that the Halls of Academia (Sort of a dysfunctional reverse-image of The Halls of Valhalla) were forums for Leftist thought. For the most part, we blew these professors off; they were losers, anti-religion, anti US, and anti-family, as well as holding bizarre views of private property and the right to enjoy the fruits of one's labor. When I, at age 22, became aware of just how pervasive Marxist thought was in colleges, I was convinced that few would sign on to such drivel. This was 1989; East Germany was being cashiered as a nation, the Soviet Union was on its last legs, China was enjoying the benefits of privatization, and Communism as a system had lost so much credibility that no sane individual would sign on to such drivel.

As I have noted earlier, I was wrong - big time. Marxism has gained a tremendous amount of support as a concept. I of course am aware that the 18-29 age group is an impressionable one and that many drop deluded political ideas once they realize that they cannot work, but if even 10% of college students from the watershed year of 1989 never gave up on Marxism, along with the same rough amount for each year between then and now, we now have on our hands a whole lot of Marxists. Note also that those students from 1989 are themselves more than old enough to have taken the places of some of their old professors and can bring new vitality to Marxist studies. Colonialism, Whiteness studies, and other classes designed to discredit Western Societies and their accomplishments while putting their wrongs (often grossly exaggerated) under the microscope have taken their toll.

For those accustomed to Universal Suffrage as an institution, and we have taken it as a given for a long time, it is a difficult thing to give any thought to the possibility that there may be certain individuals who cannot be considered part of the Body Politic. We have not given any thought to whether or not a person who reaches his majority (Archaic term), upon reaching the age of 18, should automatically be allowed to exercise the same political power as does an individual who pays income and/or property tax, receives no government benefits such as welfare, has served in the military or other institution that would constitute a sacrifice of one's liberties for service to the nation, or taken any step that would recognize that he or she has entered into the Social Compact as described by John Locke. Note that voter requirements were a part of our nation from the beginning and that these do not need to single out anyone due to race, religion, etc.

Most are aware that Locke, particularly in his First and Second Treatises on Government, was a tremendous influence on the thought processes of our Founding Fathers. Our Declaration of Independence could not have been written in the form that we know had ideas promulgated by Locke not been around. I will not go into detail but on Locke's ideas but stick to his idea of the Social Contract. Note that his Treatises can be purchased for around $3.99 on E-readers.

Locke described the manner in which a person leaves the sphere of parental authority and joins society. I doing so, he, by choosing to in fact remain in the nation of his birth, accepts and engages in the Social Compact. This entails, among other things, an acceptance of the basic framework of that society. It does not mean that he cannot work to excise natural wrongs such as slavery, but it does mean that he should refrain from working to remove things that are part of the basic framework of that society. In the case of the US, one would, upon leaving the authority of one's parents and entering society, implicitly have to accept rights such as private property, the right to be free of oppressive taxation, to live where one chooses and can afford to live, to be free of governmental regulation that reaches into the minutiae of one's life, the right of that Nation itself to remain free and sovereign, etc.

To keep this short, a person who enters society while subscribing to Marxist principles or who does so at later in his life cannot be considered to be in agreement with the Social Compact as it pertains to the US. That may work in Cuba or another nation, but not here. One who seeks to overturn our social order and change the US into a Marxist/Socialist/Fascist (Which is Leftist also) should not be allowed to vote, hold office, or disrupt legitimate business.

Senator Joseph McCarthy, while painted as an individual who brought us into a dark period, was right in doing all that he could to expose those who adhered to Marxist principles. Such individuals have no desire to leave the US and move to a Marxist nation - they want you live in a Marxist society. They fully intend to continue to utilize their political power to bring about a Marxist Sate and, eventually, do away with our national sovereignty. Independent nation-states are anathema to Marxists.

We are fast approaching the day in which 51% of Americans will either identity themselves as or sympathize with Marxist principles. Once that occurs, there may very well be enough votes dispersed throughout the nation (On National and State levels) for a Constitutional Convention. Once that occurs, what is produced by that meeting of the minds may become the new Law of the Land.

I for one will not remain under such a State if that occurs. I do, however, want to remain a citizen and resident off the US. My position is this - we must move sooner than later for an amendment that changes voter qualifications. As long as those who do not pay taxes or serve in the military or other substantive service, remain on welfare, or acknowledge by their political affiliations and labors that they do not embrace the Social Compact of the US, can still wield the power of the vote, we will continue to inch closer to the End of America.

Back to TheBlaze
"Once Republicans are successfully subdued, Webb believes that communists will join with workers in an “anti-corporate” struggle.

“[But] this stage of struggle doesn’t supplant capitalism,” he explained. Rather, it “brings the socialist stage closer as tens of millions become convinced in the course of the struggle that capitalism doesn’t work for them” [Emphasis added].

Finally, after a shift among the “core forces” for social change, the Communist Party and other leftist organizations will finally succeed in becoming “the people’s government.”

In this stage, Webb explained, it is important to “control the movement of capital, [institute] a tax policy that weighs heavily on the wealthy, and [place] under democratic control sectors of the economy, such as finance, that are a threat to the peoples’ government and a socialist revolution” [Emphasis added].

While many have long-dismissed the Communist Party and other leftist organizations as fringe political movements, their influence among vocal groups like Occupy Wall Street has granted them more consideration in recent months.

“We are still too small,” Webb said, “but the good news is that we’re growing.' "

Also,  former USSR premier Mikhael Gorbachev is supporting Obama:

"Two young men were being “particularly persistent” on that day in seeking advice on how Gorbachev believed they should vote.

“When they asked this question, I said, ‘I don’t want to teach you because, often, America teaches others how they should live.’ If I give you advice, I said, that would be a risk,’” Gorbachev recalled Monday, speaking through an interpreter.

“But nevertheless, I did say, ‘I think you Americans need your own Perestroika.’ And 12,000 people rose from their seats and gave me an ovation. "

Perestroika means "restructuring. That is what the former Soviet Premier thinks we should have.

Monday, April 23, 2012

Female Genital Mutilation Rampant in Britain

To English readers, I apologize in advance for posting this on St. George's Day. I for one am very happy that my four grandparents (Two of whom were from Ireland) immigrated to a nation founded on Anglo-Saxon/British principles and freedoms. Even in the current state of the US, this Yank feels that appreciation deeply every day. I would not want it any other way of life for myself or my grandchildren.

Be proud of your nation, its history, and its culture. Don't give up the fight.

England, and Saint George!

Though most of my posts concerning British female victims of violence concentrate on the indigenous/ethnic British, this post will cover females who, regardless of their actual citizenship status or ethnicity, suffer from an altogether different sick and gruesome element of Islamic culture - Female Genital Mutilation.

Often euphemistically referred to as Female circumcision, (Which it is not - no such practice exists since there are no health benefits that result from it), Female Genital Mutilation is practiced to decrease the sensitivity of that area of a girl's anatomy. When one adds this to the unbelievably young ages at which Muslims serve up their daughters for marriage (Mohammed conned his friend into giving him Aisha in marriage when she was six and the prophet consummated the marriage when she was nine), the Dads and future Grooms feel as if they get a lock on maintaining their girls' virginities prior to their wedding days.

I am not going to go into detail on this since nothing that I have done in my life (Including gutting/field dressing numerous deer) could inure me to doing so without feeling sick. Suffice to say that it is done on young girls (Age ten seems to be the youngest in the UK but I have read of age five or six being fine in African and some Middle Eastern Muslim families), often in the dead of night and without their consent, without anesthesia, sometimes in the presence of their smiling and proud Moms, and, in the undeveloped world, without even basic disinfectants (Sterilization is Right out) for the implements used for the "cutting".

While Western Feminists continue on their crusade against men and any shreds of parental authority they still have left, and to support taxpayer-funder unprotected sex for all, they remain silent, maybe uttering an occasional, albeit obligatory peep, on this issue. It is true that the West cannot send troops everywhere to put a stop to such barbarism, but, as the articles linked at top indicate, it is going on big time in jolly old England, (And presumably the rest of the UK) to the tune of up to 100,000 victims. There the crime is within reach of Law Enforcement, but the Police too are fettered by the desire to avoid appearing to target a single group, the omerta-like secrecy of Muslim family culture in Britain, and the expected lack of willingness of victims to come forward.

For details on the subject, you will need to read the articles linked at top.

While many Western fathers have reached the point where they feel that tossing their daughters boxes of condoms and telling them to be careful constitutes sufficient and admirable paternal protection, Islam provides us with examples of the opposite end of the extreme spectrum. Western fathers are told that they should not and can not exercise any authority, nor lay down any prohibitions on their children. Muslims fathers subject their daughters to unspeakable treatment and, that failing, may resort to Honor Killings for the high crime of using nail polish.

So, while the Left whittles down the image and authority of Western Fathers into abject insignificance, Muslims Fathers enforce barbaric practices on their girls. This is probably the one area in which the Left and Islam differ; both desire to dismantle all aspects of Western Civilization, both have every intention of eliminating national borders, and of course both want to reduce Christianity and Judaism to impotence (If they are allowed to continue at all).

As I have noted earlier, in Islam the very basic concepts such as actual love, affection, and concern for one’s daughters are eliminated*. For the ancient Hebrews, although Jacob was willing to arrange a marriage between his daughter Dinah and her rapist (apparently not a forced marriage), two of  Dinah's brothers at least took care of business and killed the men of Shechem, not their sister.

Muslim girls, being treated as they do by their Dads, can later be forced into marrying a guy who is even worse. If she leaves him, well, Dear old Dad will always be there for her.
The excerpt below is from an article on Afghan prisons for rape victims and other criminals, such as those who flee after being forced into prostitution by their husbands:
(Bolding mine)

"Once leaving prison, women and girls face strong social stigma in the conservative country and may be killed in so-called "honour killings".

"I just want a divorce. I can't go back to my father because he will kill me. All my family has left me behind," 20-year-old Aisha, who was sentenced to three years for fleeing an abusive husband she was forced to marry, told researchers.

You know, I used to wonder why Jay Leno's wife was so adamant that Islam and the Koran teach more respect for women than does the Bible. Now I get what she meant.

-On Muslim fathers and their failure to protect their daughters:

An excerpt from this post is below:

"As I had written earlier, most of the people of Afghanistan are descended from proud peoples, mainly Indo-European Iranians ( Not Persian of modern Iran, which is a subgroup of Iranian) and Turkics (Not Ottomans and others of Modern Turkey, also subgroups of the widespread ethnic Turks). All of these peoples had a sense of their identity prior to the arrival of Islam into that region. Indeed, related tribes such as the Scythians refused to surrender to the Achaemenid Persian King Darius I during his campaign prior to the main Greco-Persian wars. Other Iranian tribes fiercely resisted Alexander the Great's invasion over 150 years later. Those who did make peace with the Macedonian King did so only under the most honorable of terms.

One point that is not addressed very often is the Arabization of regions once Islam is entrenched. No matter what the culture of a particular group, Islam turns each one into a more severe mirror-image of a pagan Arab society. The Koran, if it indeed going to be a Koran, must be written in Arabic or it can only be considered a commentary of that book of tolerance.This and other Arab-superiority factors tend to cause converted societies to try their best to prove that they are not second-class Muslims. Not only does the society become Arab-like, it generally has a tendency to become as severe as possible in its quest to become purely Islamic. Those of these cultures seem to seek to be "more Arab than the Arabs themselves".

What is left of those once-proud peoples are the tattered and stagnated remains. Where daughters were once held in esteem, they now are cast off to be horrifically abused by their new families. Most are not aware that Alexander the Great's first wife, Roxanne (Or Roxana) was the daughter of a Iranian noble named Oxyartes. This man was a proud warrior and leader. Even though he had been defeated by Alexander's capture of the Sogdian fortress, Oxyartes would never have allowed the Macedonian King to get away with treating his daughter with anything less than the utmost of respect.

If Roxana had been raped or beaten by Alexander, the Macedonians would have been slaughtered along their route of retreat back to Macedon.

Sunday, April 22, 2012

Van Jones - Marxist Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

Obama's former Green Jobs Czar Van Jones seems to aspire to be the prime mover to convert the US into a Marxist society. The man who was tossed from his job by the Obama administration (Wow, what kind of lunatic does one need to be to get fired by Obama?) has moved himself on to center stage of the Occupy movement and the Regressive (Progressive, strangely to them) agenda. Aside from his vicious, anti-white, anti-US, anti-middle class, anti-property, etc. positions to which he clings, he does have one very special and effective skill; he can make himself appear to be almost anything depending on what he perceives his current audience to be.

Jones has demonstrated his ability to engage people from all walks of life, pointing out issues with which they, rightfully, (Such as looted and neglected pension funds) have reason to protest. The problem is that Jones has no intention to work for needed reforms, but seeks to overturn the entire cart and bring about a totalitarian society in which property, no matter how much or how little, will become an historical footnote, right along with Western freedom. A big part of Jones' plan is to encourage racial tensions. Chaos that will occur as a result of race-based conflict will go a long way towards the justification of governmental takeovers of our liberties and property.
"Jones, who reportedly studied Ronald Reagan in detail, is a “chameleon” who will engage the public on a faith-based level, offering those who “need help” a peace-loving narrative."

The following are excerpts from the TheBlaze article linked below. Jones makes no bones about making just about anyone who does not conform to his ideas out to be accomplices with the evil, polluting, child-labor using, Capitalists. Conservatives are substituted for Democrats as the people who desired to maintain slavery (and by extension Jim Crow, segregation etc.) since, well, the Left  can't allow their Party to be seen as the bad guys on this issue.

"In discussing his vision of a utopian economy, Jones made sure to note that anyone who works in factories, fast food industry or Walmart were essentially as bad as drug dealers.

“I started to figure out where are the jobs I can respect, because if you’re out in the neighborhood, and you’re causing problems, and then you know we get you a job and you‘re working for a factory that’s polluting everybody, you’re still causing problems! Just cause you’re doing it on thelegitimate side doesn’t mean that those kids getting cancer and asthma cause of you are any less sick or dead than the ones you were selling drugs to on the illegitimate side. So, we gotta be consistent.”

“Green jobs [where we're putting our people to work] in healthy industries- organic foods, solar panels, weatherizing homes, helping people be healthy. I said I want more work, more wealth, and better health in our communities. The way you get that is not with pollution-based jobs, not having people working at McDonald‘s or Wendy’s selling food that’s not good, not working at Walmart where the people who made those products overseas are being oppressed, but having something that you can say 360 degrees is healthy and positive.” 

On the topic of his political theory, Jones took no time blaming conservatives for many immense wrongs in Americas past

“You always have some Americans that, they don’t want to go forward. ‘We like slavery,‘ or ’we like segregation,‘ or ’we like women not voting,‘ or ’we like the environment being destroyed, we like workers having no rights, we like children in factories…’And they want to conserve, ahem, conserve, ahem, conserve the old ways.

Jones then vaulted the role of progressives and their inevitable victories.

“And then you have people who say ‘no, we can be a better country than this,‘ let’s progress, ahem, let’s progress beyond those old hateful ways. And so that’s always been a debate and a divide, but you know the people who are trying to make America progress always win in the end.”

Jones also claimed that the Occupy movement, itself a force of destruction, was what saved the nation from being destroyed:

“[The] Occupy movement pretty much saved the entire country from destruction,” Jones said in aninterview posted online. “Both political parties were barreling toward more austerity, more cutbacks, more pain for the people and more — basically both political parties had managed to converge on this idea of basically no rules for the rich, no rights for the poor, no middle class to speak of. That was basically the agenda, the question was just how much pain how fast.”

Van Jones can not be ignored. As with most if not all Marxists, he is not only terribly ambitious and power-hungry, he has very intention of prohibiting you from having what you want and that for which you have worked. This is the essence of Western Marxists. They are truly more concerned with ensuring, not that they get to live in a Marxist state, but that you do not get to live in a free nation. It is you with whom he is concerned, not himself or other Marxists. It is noteworthy that people such as he do not call for Western nations to finance the emigration of people who adhere to Marxist principles to nations that actually are Marxist. They detest the very existence of free nations that protect the worker from seizures of the fruits of his labor. Jones and Company will gift-wrap their hatred in language carefully scripted to appear geared towards the richest of our citizens while intending to take you down with them. A 21st century Joseph Goebbels, he will accuse the Tea Party, Libertarians, and others who hold what makes America great dearly  as being exactly what he is, a divider, a "hater", a racsist, etc.

The following link has a number of articles and posts concerning Jones, his rants, and his intentions:

Here is another one of Van's rants:

"There are two American dreams. There’s one I call the "American Fantasy". Everybody's going to be rich, and we are all going to ride out on our credit cards to the GREAT WHITE SUBURBS, get a McMansion, and buy flat screen TVs to cover up the holes in our lives... that is the American fantasy which is turning into the American nightmare. That is dying out on its own accord, it deserves no defense and it gets no defense and I’m glad it’s going away"

Van has every intention of eliminating suburban communities. Note how he is growing ever-less concerned about veiling his racist beliefs. Those who can afford to purchase homes and live in lower-crime areas that have relatively quiet neighborhoods are the problem. In these locales, people like the convenience of being close to their kid's Little League and other recreational sports fields and enjoy being able to posses a few hundred square feet of grass in which their children can play outside (Or ride bicycles around the block). The facts that these people often sacrificed quite a bit of their lives and fortunes for their education (In Majors that are desired by employers, not, for example Latin-American or whiteness studies, or Critical Race Theory) and often spend much time away from their families at the jobs that pay for these houses has no meaning to Mr. Jones.

- from a previous post on Van Jones:

Saturday, April 21, 2012

More on Muslims Raping Indigenous British Girls

The Eid celebrations referred to in the Daily Mall article appear to me to be from August 2011. Eid marks the end of Ramadan, the month of fasting for Muslims. Since the end of Ramadan typically is celebrated with feasting, these individuals apparently felt that, in addition to enjoying full bellies, an addition of native British girls would provide that extra something for the vent. Of course, the fact that the girls were not willing participants in the modified Eid party did not hold the gentlemen back from getting what they wanted.

Excerpts for the Daily Mall artcile (Link at top) follow: (With a few comments from me)

"A group of Muslim men who abducted and raped two teenage girls as part of their Eid celebrations laughed in court yesterday as they were jailed for a total of 38 years.
The girls, aged 15 and 16, were lured miles from their home to a dingy hostel.
In a horrifying weekend-long ordeal, they were plied with alcohol and repeatedly raped by two men, Shamrez Rashid and Amar Hussain, before being offered to a number of others who also ‘used them for sex’.
The 16-year old was forced to have sex six times with four different men.
The younger victim was raped by one man and then sexually assaulted by another.
One defendant, Rashid, 20, was said to have claimed the girls had enjoyed the sex, which he said had taken place as they celebrated the Muslim festival of Eid.
‘It was Eid,’ he said. ‘We treated them as our guests. OK, so they gave us [sex] but we were buying them food and drink.

It wasn't so bad, we fed them, and they were sluts anyway-

They could have anything they wanted. They enjoyed it.’
His accomplice Amar Hussain, 22, claimed the girls were ‘slags’.

After raping the girls, they ‘in effect offered them up to their friends, introducing a string of young men into the house’.
Over the following 36 hours, the girls were subjected to almost constant abuse, despite begging their attackers to stop.
The 16-year-old was left with bruising all over her face and neck after she was forced to perform a sex act on Hussain.
She was then forced to have sex with Rashid and a third man, Adil Saleem, while others watched.
The court heard how she held on to a doorframe to try to stop her attacker dragging her into a bedroom, but was pushed inside and the door locked behind her.

The assailants found the whole thing quite amusing-

The five defendants laughed and smirked as the horrifying details of their offences were described in court yesterday.
Rashid – who had already been found guilty of two rapes, an attempted rape, child abduction and an attempted sexual assault – grinned, laughed and made gun gestures in the dock."

... Islamic mob actions in the court-

"His supporters in the public gallery hurled abuse at the judge as he passed sentence later."

The political pressure to remain politically correct is tremendous; Western men are to refrain from acting manly enough to cause invaders to think twice before attacking native women, the police are to avoid appearing as if they are unfairly targeting Muslims for prosecutions, British groups who desire to protect their native identity (in the face of unchecked Islamic immigration) are labeled as Fascists, and the same label goes to those who express concern about flagrant and terribly expensive abuses of the British welfare system. In addition to the above, the authority of Western parents (That of Muslim fathers is OK as far as the Left in concerned) has been undermined to the point that they have difficulty exercising any control over their children, thus leading to instances in which young girls wind up hanging out with men who turn out to be violent criminals. These come together to create a climate in which aggressive, criminal, and very violent individuals from a faith that encourages abusive behavior feel as if the have free reign over the place. It’s a party as far as these guys are concerned, and they don't want to miss out on the fun.

As I have noted in previous posts, too many Muslims in Europe appear to have taken to treating their new host nations as battlefields in which the  Muslim tradition of three days of pillage can be extended until their religion/socioeconomic system is firmly established as the dominant political power. This three-day period of being cut loose to steal, rape, enslave, etc, is normally intended for the successful end of a siege. The current state of Europe, though, where a substantial subset of Muslim community leaders/organizers have proclaimed their intent to establish full control of Europe by Democratic means (Once there are enough of them in any nation they can call for a new Constitution and make this occur), seems to be the perfect breeding ground for an extended state of pillage while the electoral siege is ongoing.

This has to be stopped now.

Excerpts on a post from a week ago concerning the above paragraph can be read below:
Note that the bottom of the below-linked post has more links to posts in which some of the more brutal attacks on indigenous Europeans are covered.
This system makes the taking of sex slaves and the use of females from conquered peoples (in this case, ethnic Europeans) for sex a perfectly acceptable thing.

"And all married women are forbidden unto you save those captives whom your right hand possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. (Muhammad Pickthall's English translation of the Quran)."

Note that the fact that these women may be married has no bearing on the Muslims. If they are taken in war then they are fair game. The link has many more quotes, by the way.

Leftist apologists for Islam will be quick to point out that other cultures did the same thing. Well, that was a long time ago for other cultures. The last time that slavery in Western Culture existed was before 1865 (Brazil - 1888), Europe having abolished it earlier. The closest parallel to a European people taking slaves of their nearby enemies as the Koran, written in the 7th century AD and still in force today, directs and allows for Muslims, can be found in the Iliad, which records events before 1200BC. Note also that slavery, although finally officially dropped by the last nation to allow it, Mauritania (Muslim nation ), is still practiced in this and other nations. They just call it different things.

One thing, among many, that Western students have had withheld from them, is the Islamic custom of three days of pillage following the successful conquest of a city. Islam provides this tradition for the weary and exhausted fighters in the service of Allah. Not that the Islamic conquests or their rule is presented in schools in anything other than good terms in the first place, indeed, the Christian Kingdoms of Spain are depicted in a bad light for daring to retake their land in the Reconquista. The customary three days of pillage, though, is a really juicy detail about which our children are not told. They may learn about the Ottoman Empire, and in doing so the fall of Constantinople must be briefly covered, but the atrocities suffered by its inhabitants in 1453 AD* will never be made known. Leftists, despising free nations or peoples, go to great lengths to extol the virtues of the Ottomans and their Empire. It is held up as a shining example of tolerant rule of many different peoples. They ignore the systematic taking of Christian boys to be raised as Muslim slave-soldiers (Janissaries) and Christian girls for the harems. They also ignore what happened once the defense of the city collapsed and Muslim soldiers burst into the city founded by Constantine over a thousand years earlier:

(*That's what happens when no proofreader is around. I never caught my typo. 1053, which was first typed into that spot, also happens to be a year that had importance for both the Eastern and Western Churches- the excommunicated each other. I was re-reading the post and realized that typed in a year for the Fall of Constantinople was 400 years off.)
"Commencing the last assault Sultan Mehmed II promised his troops three days of unbridled pillage of the city. Having stormed into Constantinople the Osmanli Turks used every moment to satisfy their instincts. In the rage of the battle with taking no notice of people they slaughtered everyone they met, and blood ran in torrents in the streets. The sackage broke out: the Turks rushed to the Palace of Blachernae and hastily took all the valuable assets out. Someone ran to Chora Churches and brought the precious shrine – the icon of Virgin Hodegetria, it was said to have been painted by Luke the Evangelist. The Turks ripped the riza off and cut the icon into four pieces[1]. They dragged praying women and children by hair out of the churches and beslaved them. They raped nuns and murdered men on the spot. "
"As soon as the Turks broke into the city they began to seize and enslave anyone who came their way. Anyone who resisted was slaughtered by the edge of the sword, and heaps of bodies covered the ground. “There were unprecedented events: all sorts of lamentations, countless rows of slaves consisting of noble ladies, virgins and nuns, who were being dragged by the Turks.46 In his zeal for Allah, Mehmet had ordered that the city, since it had resisted, be looted for the traditional three days according to Islamic law. But before the first day was up the Sultan brought in his police and put an end to the looting. The loss of the city for the Greeks meant not only an end of empire, but it also marked the start of almost four hundred years of captivity. For Mehmet it was the beginning of Ottoman rule, which would last until the 19th century. Under the rule of future Sultans the Ottoman Empire would continue conquering Christian lands, right up to the gates of Vienna in Austria. "

Note that is this case the three days were changed to one.

The opportunity for booty in the conquest conquest of non-Muslim nations has been an integral part of Islamic warfare since its inception.Below is a quote that illustrates that this was no distortion of Islamic though but was encouraged by Mohamed himself:

"Amr's great distinction is that he was made military commander direct by the Prophet. In appointing him Mohammed said, "I am sending you forth as commander of a troop. May God keep you safe and give you much booty." When Amr answered, "I did not become a Muslim for the sake of wealth, but for the sake of submission to God," the Prophet rejoined, "Honest wealth is good for an honest man"-- a maxim which Amr doubtless remembered.... (page 202)" (Sources below)