Deplorably, Trump is Going to Win : David Goldman

The presidential election was over the moment the word “deplorable” made its run out of Hillary Clinton’s unguarded mouth. As the whole world now knows, Clinton told a Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender fundraiser Sept. 10, “You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the ‘basket of deplorables.’ Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. And unfortunately, there are people like that, and he has lifted them up.”

She apologized, to be sure, but no-one will believe her: she was chilling with her home audience and feeling the warmth, and she said exactly what she thinks. The “Clinton Cash” corruption scandals, the layers of lies about the email server, health problems, and all the other negatives that pile up against the former First Lady are small change compared to this apocalyptic moment of self-revelation.

You can’t win an American presidential election without the deplorables vote. Deplorables are America’s biggest minority. They might even be the American majority. They may or not be racist, homophobic and so forth, but they know they’re deplorable. Deplorable, and proud. They’re the median family whose real income has fallen deplorably by 5% in the past ten years, the 35% of adult males who deplorably have dropped out of the labor force, the 40% of student debtors who deplorably aren’t making payments on their loans, the aging state and local government workers whose pension funds are $4 trillion short. They lead deplorable lives and expect that their kids’ lives will be even more deplorable than theirs.

Americans are by and large forgiving people. They’ll forgive Bill for cavorting with Monica “I did not have sex with that woman” Lewinsky in the Oval Office and imposing himself on any number of unwilling females. They might even forgive Hillary for losing tens of thousands of compromising emails on an illegal private server and then repeatedly lying about it in a way that insults the deplorable intelligence of the average voter. But the one thing you can’t do is spit on them and tell them it’s raining. They’ll never forgive you for that. They’re hurting, and they rankle at candidates who rub their faces in it.

Mitt Romney’s campaign was unsalvageable after the famous 2012 “47% remark,” by which he simply meant that the 47% of American workers whose income falls below the threshold for federal taxes would be indifferent to his tax cut proposals. The trouble is that these workers pay a great deal of taxes–to Social Security, Medicare, and in most cases to local governments through sales taxes and assessments. After a covert video of his remarks at a private fundraiser made the rounds, Romney spent the rest of the campaign with the equivalent of an advertising blimp over his head emblazoned with the words: “I represent the economic elite.” Clinton has done the same thing with the cultural elite.

Syrian Refugee U.S. Arrivals in September To Date: 749 Muslims, 2 Christians By Patrick Poole

On August 1 I reported here at PJ Media about the ongoing Obama administration discrimination against non-Muslim Syrian refugees, noting that at that time, fewer than one percent (43 of 6,877, or 0.7 percent of the total) of refugees admitted to the U.S. as of July 31 were Christians, Yezidis, and other Syrian religious minorities.

For the month of August, 3, 159 Muslim and 30 non-Muslim refugees were admitted to the U.S. – again, fewer than one percent.

And so far for September (as of today, 9/10), the numbers are even more depressing: 749 Muslim and just 2 Christian refugees, with non-Muslim admittance representing just 0.2 percent of the current monthly total.

So year-to-date, of 10,817 Syrian refugees admitted 10,742 were Muslim, and just 75 were non-Muslim (0.7 percent), while non-Muslim minorities in Syria make up at least 12 percent of the population.

During a media conference call just days after my August report, sponsored by the Department of Homeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), both the Obama administration officials and the media were incurious and apparently unconcerned about the ongoing discrimination of non-Muslim minorities.

In fact, only one media outlet asked about the problem.

Coordinator:

Absolutely and as a reminder if you would like to ask a question you can press Star 1 on your phone and record your name when prompted. Our next question comes from Lauren Ashburn with EWTN. Your line is open.

Lauren Ashburn:

Thank you very much and thank you for taking my call. The percentage of those Syrian refugees who have been let into the country – what percent are Muslims? Do you have that breakdown?

Anne Richard:

Yes, most are Muslims over 99% are Muslims.

Lauren Ashburn:

And then what percent are of religious (execution) are fleeing (because they) say religious persecution?

Anne Richard:

I don’t have that breakdown for you.

And that was the entire substance of the discussion about why so few non-Muslim refugees were being admitted.

Obama at Pentagon: Diversity One of America’s ‘Greatest Strengths’ to Defeat Terrorists By Bridget Johnson

ARLINGTON, Va. — President Obama said the U.S. has delivered “devastating blows” to al-Qaeda and stressed that America needs to lean on “our patchwork heritage” to resist terrorists’ attempts make Americans turn on each other.

Delivering remarks at the Pentagon to mark the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, Obama paid tribute to “the nearly 3,000 beautiful lives taken from us so cruelly — including 184 men, women and children here, the youngest just 3 years old.”

“We honor the courage of those who put themselves in harm’s way to save people they never knew. We come together in prayer and in gratitude for the strength that has fortified us across these 15 years. And we renew the love and the faith that binds us together as one American family,” he said.

“…The question before us, as always, is: How do we preserve the legacy of those we lost? How do we live up to their example? And how do we keep their spirit alive in our own hearts?”

Obama said “we have seen the answer in a generation of Americans — our men and women in uniform, diplomats, intelligence, homeland security and law enforcement professionals — all who have stepped forward to serve and who have risked and given their lives to help keep us safe.”

“Thanks to their extraordinary service, we’ve dealt devastating blows to al-Qaeda. We’ve delivered justice to Osama bin Laden. We’ve strengthened our homeland security. We’ve prevented attacks. We’ve saved lives. We resolve to continue doing everything in our power to protect this country that we love,” he said.

The president emphasized a need to “stay true to the spirit of this day by defending not only our country, but also our ideals.”

“Fifteen years into this fight, the threat has evolved. With our stronger defenses, terrorists often attempt attacks on a smaller, but still deadly, scale. Hateful ideologies urge people in their own country to commit unspeakable violence. We’ve mourned the loss of innocents from Boston to San Bernardino to Orlando,” he continued.

“Groups like al-Qaeda, like ISIL, know that we will never be able — they will never be able to defeat a nation as great and as strong as America. So, instead, they’ve tried to terrorize in the hopes that they can stoke enough fear that we turn on each other and that we change who we are or how we live. And that’s why it is so important today that we reaffirm our character as a nation — a people drawn from every corner of the world, every color, every religion, every background — bound by a creed as old as our founding, e pluribus unum. Out of many, we are one. For we know that our diversity — our patchwork heritage — is not a weakness; it is still, and always will be, one of our greatest strengths. This is the America that was attacked that September morning. This is the America that we must remain true to.”

Massachusetts: Churches may be covered by transgender discrimination bans, as to ‘secular events’By Eugene Volokh

From the official Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination’s Gender Identity Guidance, just released last week:

Even a church could be seen as a place of public accommodation if it holds a secular event, such as a spaghetti supper, that is open to the general public.

Now, churches hold events “open to the general public” all the time — it’s often how they seek new converts. And even church “secular events,” which I take it means events that don’t involve overt worship, are generally viewed by the church as part of its ministry, and certainly as a means of the church modeling what it believes to be religiously sound behavior.

My guess is that most churches would not turn someone away from a generally open spaghetti supper. (Though I think churches should be free to exclude transgender attendees — just as they should be free to hold men-only and women-only events or, for that matter, black-only events, white-only events, events only for ethnic Jews, and the like — that is a question for another day.)

But some religious leaders, as well as the church employees and volunteers, may refuse to use pronouns that they believe are inconsistent with God’s plan as revealed by anatomy. To quote one example — whether or not you agree with its logic or theology —

Truth-telling is always necessary for the Christian (Eph. 4:15). We are not allowed speak in ways that are fundamentally dishonest and that undermine the truth of God’s word about how he made us and the world. Transgender ideology is fundamentally a revolt against God’s truth. It encourages people–sometimes very disturbed and hurting people–to deny who God made them to be. It traps them in a way of thinking and living that is harmful to them and that alienates them from God’s truth. We do not serve them or love them well by speaking as if transgender fictions are true. …

The practical upshot of this principle means that I must never encourage or accomodate transgender fictions with my words. In fact, I have an obligation to expose them. For me, that means that I may never refer to a biological male with pronouns that encourage him to think of himself as a female. Likewise, I may never refer to a biological female with pronouns that encourage her to think of herself as a male. In other words, I have to speak truthfully. And that includes the choice of pronouns that I use.

Under Massachusetts law, refusing to use a transgender person’s preferred pronoun would be punishable discrimination. (At least this is true of “he” or “she” — I saw nothing in the document about “ze” and other newly made-up pronouns.) The Massachusetts document I linked to makes that clear in the employment context, and it also makes clear that the antidiscrimination law rules apply to places of public accommodations (including churches, in “secular events” “open to the public”) just as much as to employment.

Indeed, a church might be liable even for statements by its congregants (and not just its volunteers, who are acting as agents) that are critical of transgender people. Tolerating such remarks is generally seen as allowing a “hostile environment,” and therefore “harassment.” Indeed, the statement I linked to specifically encourages people to “prohibit derogatory comments or jokes about transgender persons from employees, clients, vendors and any others, and promptly investigate and discipline persons who engage in discriminatory conduct” (emphasis added). But that’s not just encouragement; it simply reflects hostile work environment harassment law, which has long required employers to restrict derogatory speech by clients, to prevent “hostile environments.” See 29 C.F.R. § 1604.11. The same logic applies for places of public accommodation, which Massachusetts says can include churches.

New Tricks Make ISIS, Once Easily Tracked, a Sophisticated Opponent A mix of encrypted chat apps, face-to-face meetings, written notes and misdirection leaves few electronic clues for Western intelligence agencies By Sam Schechner and Benoit Faucon

Weeks before Islamic State militant Abdelhamid Abaaoud led the Nov. 13 terror attacks in Paris, French authorities thought he was holed up in northern Syria. Western Intelligence agencies pursuing Abaaoud had tracked him there using cell-phone location data and other electronic footprints.

The Paris attacks, which killed 130 people, showed how badly they were fooled. Abaaoud had slipped past the dragnet and entered the city unnoticed.

Drawing from a growing bag of tricks, Islamic State accomplices located in Syria likely used phones and WhatsApp accounts belonging to Abaaoud and other attackers to mask the group’s travel to Europe, said a Western security official: “We relied too much on technology. And we lost track.”

Terror attacks in Europe, which have killed more than 200 people in the past 20 months, reflect new operational discipline and technical savvy by the Islamic State terrorists who carried them out, security officials said.
The extremist group’s communications, once commonly conducted on phones and social media accounts easily tracked by authorities, have evolved into a mix of encrypted chat-app messages over WhatsApp and Telegram, face-to-face meetings, written notes, stretches of silence and misdirection.

These techniques helped protect attackers from Western intelligence agencies by leaving few electronic clues in a sea of intercepted data.

In recent months, Europe has been convulsed by a string of simple yet lethal attacks. Some were committed by people who appear to have received little direct training from Islamic State. The suspects in a failed plot in France last week were “remotely controlled” from Syria by the group, prosecutors said Friday. Officials worry such attacks could be a way to distract intelligence services while militants prepare more complex plots.

The Cowardice of Decent Professors : Fred Baumann

Pro-Israel bloggers like William Jacobson and Caroline Glick have brought much attention to a fiasco at Syracuse University first reported by The Atlantic. The invitation to Shimon Dotan, a leftist Israeli filmmaker, to speak on and show his anti-settler movie “The Settlers” at a Syracuse conference on religion and film, was revoked because of the fear of pressure from campus activists supporting the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel. While Jacobson and Glick wrote mordant commentaries, pointing to the alarming advance of antisemitism on campus, and The Atlantic stressed the role of political correctness, to me the most interesting character in this story is M. Gail Hamner, the tenured professor who disinvited Dotan. Here are extracts of her letter of disinvitation, taken from Jacobson’s blog, with his emphases. The letter is a classic example of shame-filled shamefulness:

I now am embarrassed to share that my SU colleagues, on hearing about my attempt to secure your presentation, have warned me that the BDS faction on campus will make matters very unpleasant for you and for me if you come. In particular my film colleague in English who granted me affiliated faculty in the film and screen studies program and who supported my proposal to the Humanities Council for this conference told me point blank that if I have not myself seen your film and cannot myself vouch for it to the Council, I will lose credibility with a number of film and Women/Gender studies colleagues. Sadly, I have not had the chance to see your film and can only vouch for it through my friend and through published reviews. Clearly I am politically naive. I also feel tremendous shame in reneging on a half-offered invitation….. I feel caught in an ideological matrix and by my own egoic needs to sustain certain institutional affiliations.

After this came out, as the Algemeiner reported, Syracuse University overruled her and promised, in a high-minded statement of its principles, to re-invite Professor Dotan. In itself that was good news, even if, as Jacobson emphasized, it averted its administrative eye from the dirty work that had put those pressures on Professor Hamner in the first place. Professor Hamner then issued another shamefaced apology in which she describes herself as “overly concerned” about “how others would react,” and apologizes for not having viewed the film in advance. Note, however, that confessing to the crime of not seeing the movie in advance amounts to the admission that if only everyone had known it was an anti-settler movie maybe it would have been okay. (Apparently not though, if Syracuse Professor Miriam Elman, the subject of the Algemeiner interview, is to be believed.)

Three Women Killed After Attacking Police Station in Kenyan City of Mombasa Two policemen were wounded in attack by women dressed in niqabs

Three women have been killed after they attacked a police station in the Kenyan coastal city of Mombasa, a police official said Sunday.

One of the women threw a petrol bomb at officers while another pulled out a knife, Mombasa police chief Parterson Maelo said, adding two policemen were wounded in the attack.

The women, who were dressed in niqabs, were then shot by police.

Mr. Maelo said the women arrived at the central police station at about 10:30 a.m. to report a stolen telephone.

“While the officers were questioning them about the particulars of the stolen phone one of them drew a knife and another threw a petrol bomb at the officers of the report office,” he said.
No group has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Kenya faces a constant danger of being attacked by adherents of the Somali militant group al-Shabaab, which has vowed retribution for Kenya’s deployment of troops to Somalia in 2011.

al-Shabaab is al Qaeda’s affiliate in the region. It has recruited hundreds of Kenyans and used them in numerous attacks on the country, including the April 2015 attack at Garissa University which killed more than 148 people.

Recently, al-Shabaab attacks in Kenya have been limited to the border towns of Mandera and Liboi near Somalia.

However, Kenya is also struggling to battle Islamic State’s recruitment of some of the country’s youths. At least 20 young Kenyans have traveled to Libya to join the extremist group, according to police.

The Black Body Count Rises as Chicago Police Step Back In 2016 nearly 3,000 people have been shot in the city, an average of one victim every two hours. By Heather Mac Donald

Ms. Mac Donald is the author of “The War on Cops” (Encounter, 2016) and a contributing editor of City Journal, from whose fall issue this article is adapted.

‘The streets are gone,” Dean Angelo, president of the Chicago police union, told me last month. The night before, Aug. 14, a Chicago police officer’s son had been killed in a shooting while sitting on his family’s porch, one of 92 people killed in Chicago during the worst month for homicides in the Windy City since July 1993. The August victims who survived included 10-year-old Tavon Tanner, shot while playing in front of his house (the bullet ripped through Tavon’s pancreas, intestines, kidney and spleen); an 8-year-old girl shot in the arm while crossing the street; and two 6-year-old girls.

On Sept. 6, a 71-year-old man was accosted by a teen on a bike while watering his lawn. The robber demanded the man’s wallet and when he refused shot him in the abdomen, then grabbed his wallet before pedaling away.

By Sept. 8, nearly 3,000 people had been shot in Chicago in 2016, an average of one shooting victim every two hours. Five hundred and sixteen people had been murdered. Gun homicides and non-fatal shootings were up 47% over the same period of 2015, which had seen a significant rise in crime over 2014.

“There is no way out of this shooting spree,” Mr. Angelo said. His despair is understandable, because Chicago is the country’s most-glaring example of what I have called the “Ferguson effect.” Chicago officers have cut back drastically on proactive policing under the onslaught of criticism from the Black Lives Matter movement and its political and media enablers.

In October 2015, Mayor Rahm Emanuel told U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch during a crime meeting in Washington, D.C., that the Chicago police had gone “fetal,” and were less likely to interdict criminal behavior. That pull-back worsened in 2016, with pedestrian stops dropping 82% from January through July 20, 2016, compared with the same period in 2015, according to the Chicago police department. The cops are just “driving by people on the corners,” Mr. Angelo says, rather than checking out known drug dealers and others who raise suspicions. Criminals are back in control and black lives are being lost at a rate not seen for two decades.

Climate Cargo Cult Circles the Pacific The new Global Warming religion is spreading faster than radical Islam.By Viv Forbes

The World Economic Forum in 2015 had a prophetic vision that unless the world mends its wicked ways “global warming will become catastrophic and irreversible”.

In July 2016 the U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, claimed that global warming was as dangerous to the world as Islamic terrorism.

At the recent G20 summit in China, the world leader of the Global Warming Religion, Ban Ki-moon, canonised two new cardinals — Cardinal Obama (who seeks political sainthood in his afterlife), and Cardinal Xi Jinping (who seeks to crucify western industry on the climate cross). Both signed the Paris Pledge.

Then at the ASEAN Economic Forum, ordained Minister Turnbull of Australia joined worshippers to pray for a saviour from Global Warming.

Global warming to hit Asia hardest — “Hundreds of millions of people are likely to lose their homes as flooding, famine and rising sea levels sweep the region.”

Finally, at the Pacific Island Forum in Vanuatu last week, the Global Warming service commenced with a rousing rendition of the hymn “Repent and Pay, or the Seas will Devour Us”.

As a sign of his devotion, Australia’s Global Warming Minister Turnbull dropped a cool $80M into the Global Warming Collection Plate. Islanders who truly believe will now receive total donations of A$300M from the pious Australian government.

John Kerry was right — this new Global Warming religion is spreading faster than radical Islam. It is the new Cargo Cult.

HILLARY CLINTON IN CRISIS: MICHELLE MALKIN SEPTEMBER 26,2001

Michelle Malkin wrote about Hillary’s behavior during President Bush’s speech to Congress on September 20, 2001

http://townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/2001/09/26/hillary_clinton_in_crisis

— WHAT’S eating Hillary Clinton? Her behavior during President Bush’s address to Congress last week was abominable. At a time when even the most partisan of her Democratic colleagues stood united with the president, NY Sen. Clinton shunned patriotism for petulance. She grimaced. She sighed. She rolled her eyes. She fidgeted like a five-year-old at an opera. And when Mrs. Clinton mustered enough energy to clap, she acted as if there were razor blades strapped to her palms.

Although network talking heads refrained from comment, outraged Americans across the country spoke out. Teacher Kathie Larkin of Atlanta wrote to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: “This is behavior I would not accept from my sixth-graders listening to a speaker, and I expected better of an adult from a state ripped apart by terrorist violence. Hillary needs to grow up.”

James Gale of Silver Spring, Md., wrote to the Washington Post: “She at times seemed bored and uninterested, clapping perfunctorily, and at other times she was talking during the speech. I thought her actions were unbecoming a senator at this difficult time.”

The Boston Herald, one of the few bold newspapers to take note of Clinton’s insolence, editorialized that she “looked like she was sucking on a lemon.”

And Karen Gauvreau of Clearwater, Fla., wrote to the St. Petersburg Times: “She would have been better off had she stayed home.”

Mrs. Clinton’s staff claims she was weary from traveling. What nerve. All she had to do last week was park her taxpayer-funded backside on a plane seat. Meanwhile, her constituents and volunteers from across the country pulled 13-hour shifts, sifting through rubble, sorting body parts, and collapsing on curbsides from exhaustion and grief.

A few nights’ rest didn’t seem to cure Mrs. Clinton’s unsightly condition. During last weekend’s prayer memorial at Yankee Stadium, she remained dour and tight-lipped as the tearful crowd of thousands sang the National Anthem. Hiding behind sunglasses – guess she can’t control the rolling eyeballs any more than Al Gore can control his heaving sighs – Mrs. Clinton posed for photos with a strange sneer frozen on her stony face.

Let there be no doubt about whose interests come first for Mrs. Clinton in times of crisis. While New Yorkers mourned, their junior senator sulked. Then she tried to rip off both President Bush’s and Mayor Giuliani’s coattails by claiming credit for securing federal disaster aid. The damage-control patrol at the New York Times ate up her narcissistic spin. A Sunday puff piece, which was silent on her churlish performances, extolled her “full transition from a former first lady who happened to hold a Senate seat to true federal legislator.”