Hillary’s Long, Cozy Love Affairs With Racists Promoting racial animosity has been the mainstay of her political strategy for years. John Perazzo

There is something otherworldly about Hillary Clinton accusing her Republican rival of running a presidential campaign steeped in “racial resentment,” “divisive rhetoric,” and “racist comments.” Otherworldly, because these are precisely the elements that have been Hillary’s stock-in-trade since the dawn of her political career.

During her first presidential campaign eight years ago, Mrs. Clinton spoke at an event held by Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, where she crowed about the “long and positive relationship” she had enjoyed with Sharpton and his organization. Noting that “I don’t ever remember saying ‘no’ to them,” Clinton vowed “to remain their partner in civil rights” for as long as there was breath in her body. Sharpton, you may recall, is the vile, foul-mouthed black socialist who has done more to poison race relations in America than virtually anyone other than Barack Obama.

And nothing whatsoever has changed in Mrs. Clinton’s estimation of Sharpton in the years since then. This past April, for instance, Madame Hillary again spoke at a National Action Network event where she lauded Sharpton and his group for steadfastly working “on the frontlines of our nation’s continuing struggle for civil rights,” and “in a million ways lift[ing] up voices that too often go unheard.”

To what voices was Hillary referring, you may ask? Perhaps she meant the voices of people like the family of Yankel Rosenbaum, a Hasidic Jew who was killed in a Brooklyn race riot that Sharpton helped foment; or the voice of a young assistant district attorney in New York whose life Sharpton ruined with what he knew were false accusations of interracial rape and sodomy; or the voices of the white “crackers” whom Sharpton has identified as descendants of early American settlers from Europe; or the voices of the seven people who died in a 1995 Harlem fire set by a lunatic whose rage had been stoked by Sharpton’s relentless anti-Semitic rhetoric; or the voices of the three white members of the Duke University lacrosse team whom Sharpton falsely accused of having raped a black woman in 2006.

Yes, Hillary is deeply moved by all the things Al Sharpton has done to “lift up” so many people in need.

It’s also noteworthy that Mrs. Clinton has never denounced Black Lives Matter (BLM), a racist movement that openly and proudly reveres the former Black Panther, convicted cop-killer, longtime fugitive, and lifelong Marxist, Assata Shakur; a movement that likewise venerates yet another cop-killer, Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin, formerly known as H. Rap Brown, the Sixties radical renowned for urging blacks to murder “honkies” and “burn America down”; a movement whose supporters and foot soldiers have vocally and repeatedly called for the murder of white police officers.

Obama Solves America’s Terrorist Shortage If you are a member of ISIS, you have a better chance of reaching America than your Yazidi sex slave. Daniel Greenfield

America’s terrorist shortage may be reaching an end. If Orlando didn’t satisfy you and San Bernardino left you wanting more. If you thought, why can’t we have more Boston Marathon bombings, Obama has your back, and your front and any other directions that a pressure cooker full of nails can hit you from.

This week the land of Washington, Jefferson and Mohammed Atta will reach a new milestone by taking in Syrian refugee number 10,000. It’s unknown if the TSA will shower him with balloons and confetti once he passes the gate while clutching a Koran and a copy of the Caliphate Cookbook.

Either way we hit the big explosive ten thousand. And the clock is ticking.

Media outlets are puffing out sympathetic portrayals of the oppressed Syrians moving into some neighborhood near you, and far from the bosses behind the major media outlets. All these folks fleeing the violence of their own religion want is a safe place to live. And safe inevitably means non-Islamic.

There’s an obvious lesson here that neither they nor our expertly chattering classes seem able to grasp.

But a few years from now there will be bodies and the killer will have the same last name as one of those oppressed refugees who weren’t looking to be safe, but to make us unsafe.

Indistinguishable from press releases, the stories tell us that the refugees have been thoroughly screened. Or as thoroughly as you can screen people coming from a country that we have no diplomatic relations with and major portions of which are on fire so that even if its government, which also used to sponsor global and regional terrorism as a hobby to pass the time on long summer days, was willing to cooperate with our immigration authorities, the information would be mostly useless.

How are we going to screen a Syrian or Iraqi man who claims to be from a city held by ISIS?

Are we going to phone the local ISIS office and ask the head headchopper to confirm that the fellow smiling for the camera isn’t affiliated with ISIS? Perhaps the local Jihadi Jack or Allah Akbar Abdul will regretfully inform us that they would be happy to help, but the local government office was burned down during a massacre of Christians, Yazidis and American hostages.

But there is really no doubting the fact that Obama has subjected Syrian refugees to the most thorough screening imaginable.

The most persecuted peoples in Syria are Christians and Yazidis. Obama has officially resettled 9,144 Syrians. 9,077 of them are Muslims. A mere 47 Christians and 14 Yazidis managed to slip through the nets of his careful screening process.

Greece: The Freedom-of-Speech Canary Died by Maria Polizoidou

The Minister for Immigration Affairs himself, repeatedly stated that 50% to 70% of migratory flows to Greece were illegal migrants and the rest were refugees. The illegal migrants come from 77 different countries.

If it is a “racist crime” for a citizen to express accurately the percentages of refugees and illegal migrants entering the country, what will come next, the Thought Police?

The real reason for prosecuting Bishop Markos, it seems, is that the government expects that Turkey’s migration deal with the EU will collapse, and that if it does, the migrant flows in the coming months will increase dramatically. The government, according to some members in the opposition, has no friendly way to manage illegal migration and therefore prefers to impose restrictions on freedom of speech and prosecute anyone who objects.

The government might scare the Bishop of Chios Island by pressing charges against him and trying to stigmatize him as a racist. But the government will still not scare the angry majority of Greeks.

In coalmines, from 1911 to 1986, canaries operated as an early warning system for the leakage of hazardous gases. Whenever the birds showed signs of distress, the miners knew trouble was coming.

Greece has deep problems. Greece is presently in the “coalmine” of an endless economic and immigration crisis.

This month, for the first time, there was a request to activate an anti-racist law, passed in September 2014, against a Greek citizen who also has institutional status.

The coalition government of Alexis Tsipras (SYRIZA) and Panos Kammenos (Independent Greeks) asked the district attorney to prosecute the Bishop of Chios Island, Markos Vasilakis, because he dared to say, during a sermon, that the thousands of people who recently arrived from Turkey on the island of Chios are illegal migrants, and not Syrian refugees.

Christians as “Target Practice” Muslim Persecution of Christians: May 2016 by Raymond Ibrahim

“We will show the Armenians and the Christians who we are… We have been ordered not to leave any Armenians in the area.” — Islamic rebels, Aleppo, Syria.

Thousands of Christians are fleeing Eritrea due to extreme persecution. A report describes Eritrea as “one of the world’s fastest emptying nations” and the “North Korea of Africa.” The majority of the 40,000 who fled to Italy last year are Christians.

“The government of Iran continues to engage in systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom, including prolonged detention, torture, and executions based primarily or entirely upon the religion of the accused.” — Report by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom.

A new study claims that as many as 40,000 Christians — including Muslims who wish to convert to Christianity — are being attacked and harassed by Muslims in migrant homes. According to the report, “Now in European asylum homes they are finding more and more that they are in as much danger from radical Muslims in Europe as they were in their home countries.”

More reports of the brutal treatment that Christians and other minorities experienced at the hands of the Islamic State (SIS) emerged during May. One account told of a couple who, after their children were abducted by ISIS militants, answered their door one day to find a plastic bag on their doorstep. It contained the body parts of their daughters and a video of them being brutally tortured and raped.

Another Christian mother from Mosul answered the door to find ISIS jihadis demanding that she leave or pay the jizya (protection money demanded as a tribute by conquered Christians and Jews, according to the Koran 9:29). The woman asked for a few seconds, because her daughter was in the shower, but the jihadis refused to give her the time. They set a fire to the house; her daughter was burned alive. The girl died in her mother’s arms; her last words were “Forgive them.”

The Islamic State reportedly beheaded another Christian leader on February 18. No media reported it, except for one Italian paper in May: “There are reliable reports are that Father Yacob Boulos, was beheaded by the terror group’ militants after he prayed on the altar of his church. He was punished for his faith.”

According to another report,

Epic Fail: Obamacare Enrollment Less than Half of What was Expected By Rick Moran

Enrollment in Obamacare insurance programs on the state exchanges is less than half of what was predicted by the Congressional Budget Office in 2013.

The CBO projected 24 million people would sign up on the exchanges in 2016. The actual number is 11.1 million. In addition to the lax enrollment numbers, it is estimated that 25% of all counties in America will have only one option for insurance on the exchanges next year.

Obamacare advocates continue to insist that the program is still viable even with reduced enrollment. But experts say they’re whistling past the graveyard.

Washington Post:

“Enrollment is key, first and foremost,” said Sara R. Collins, a vice president at the Commonwealth Fund, a nonpartisan foundation that funds health-care research. “They have to have this critical mass of people so that, by the law of averages, you’re going to get a mix of healthy and less healthy people.”

A big reason the CBO projections were so far off is that the agency overestimated how many people would lose insurance through their employers, which would force them into the exchanges. But there have been challenges getting the uninsured to sign up, too.

The law requires every American to get health coverage or pay a penalty, but the penalty hasn’t been high enough to persuade many Americans to buy into the health plans. Even those who qualify for subsidized premiums sometimes balk at the high deductibles on some plans.

And people who do outreach to the uninsured say the enrollment process itself has been more complex and confusing than Obama’s initial comparison to buying a plane ticket.

“This exchange will allow you to one-stop shop for a health-care plan, compare benefits and prices, and choose a plan that’s best for you and your family,” Obama said in a speech in 2009. “You will have your choice of a number of plans that offer a few different packages, but every plan would offer an affordable, basic package.”

In some markets, a shortfall in enrollment is testing insurers’ ability to balance the medical claims they pay out with income from premiums. In an announcement curtailing its involvement in the exchanges this month, Aetna cited financial losses traced to too many sick people signing up for care and not enough healthy ones.

The health-care law has been a political lightning rod from the beginning, and Republican legislators have used insurance companies’ withdrawals from the exchanges to reignite calls for the law’s repeal.

Kaiser tracks public data on insurer participation in the exchanges to project how many options counties will have, but the numbers are not final. This year, exchanges in about 7 percent of counties had just one insurer. Earlier this month, Aetna announced that it will pull out of 11 of the 15 states where it offers coverage on the health-care exchanges. Humana made a similar decision weeks earlier, planning to exit several states. And last spring, UnitedHealth Group said it would remain in three or fewer exchanges next year.

Professor argues university’s sports mascot too angry By Thomas Lifson

The University of Iowa’s team mascot, Herky the Hawkeye may be damagung some of the students there. Or so Professor Resmiye Oral seems to think. In a letter to the Athletic Department she voiced her concerns, as the Iowa City Press-Citizen reported:

“I believe incoming students should be met with welcoming, nurturing, calm, accepting and happy messages,” Resmiye Oral, a clinical professor of pediatrics at UI, wrote recently in an email to UI athletic department officials. “And our campus community is doing a great job in that regard when it comes to words. However, Herky’s angry, to say the least, faces conveying an invitation to aggressivity and even violence are not compatible with the verbal messages that we try to convey to and instill in our students and campus community.”

The email was included in a message Oral sent Tuesday morning to other members of the UI Faculty Senate, where she is one of the representatives from the UI Carver College of Medicine.

In a phone interview Tuesday, Oral said she has been concerned for some time with the lack of emotional variety displayed in the images of the university’s long-standing mascot — specifically the Fighting Herky, the “Old School” Flying Herky and the Tigerhawk logo developed by retired Hawkeye coach Hayden Fry.

These students at the 2016 orientation just held do not look terribly traumatized by the “angry, to say the least” Herky standing behind them:

In fairness, the good professor does not want to enforce a blissed out bird on the students:

Her intention, she said, is to bring diversity to how Herky feels, not to eliminate the ambitious, competitive, go-getter Herky.

But what about aggressive and angry?

Perhaps the professor, who received her medical degree in Turkey, is not fully attuned to the ritual combat Americans relish on the gridiron. After all, even a figure as benign as Methodist Bishop John Wesley has been immortalized by the Ohio Wesleyan University Battling Bishops.

How the Clintons Gave American Foreign Policy its Muslim Tilt By G. Murphy Donovan

The Clinton role in the rise of Islamic irredentism has now come full circle. Bill Clinton might get the credit for the original Muslim tilt. Bosnia (1992-95) set the table for a series of interventions that gave birth to the so-called Arab Spring and any subsequent triumphs of Islamofascism. Ironically, Bill Clinton could be both righteous about civil wars in the Balkans and oblivious to genocide in Rwanda simultaneously.

Muslim lives matter, Black Africans, not so much.

In the past decade, with an assist from an uncritical media, a “long war” chimera has emerged to rationalize indecision and serial failure abroad. After being told that al Qaeda was on the run and the Islamic State was the “junior varsity,” Americans are now told that Muslim wars are so “complicated” that solutions to religious fascism and terror must be deferred to the indefinite future. The “long war” scenarios now being spun by the Pentagon and the Obama/Clinton camp are excuses for inaction, the political equivalent of kick-the-can.

Such apologetics, if not appeasement, is nothing new. America has been risk averse since World War II. Ironically, while eschewing formal war declarations, the cloak and dagger faction of national security community is still populated by the same Cold War cowboys that flourished during the containment years. Anti-Communist rationale has now morphed into a pernicious, if not indiscriminate democratic imperialism, a series of hair-brained regime change operations with no regard for consequence — or the day after.

The instability and chaos that plague the 21st Century are created problems. Policies such as regime change, counter insurgency, nation building, and “humanitarian” intervention are probative. Withal, the US State Department, and the various US national security apparati, has facilitated the spread of terror, the immigrant tsunami, the rise of the Islamic State, the resurgence of jihad (nee Crusades), and the spread of Islamism worldwide.

When Donald Trump claims that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton created ISIS, his rhetoric might be figurative, but the underlying truth is literal. The political vacuums created by toppling secular authoritarian Muslim states have been filled by our worst political nightmare, religious fascism.

Bosnia, like much of the Balkans, is just one of the sectarian fault lines of civilization. Indeed, it was Muslim unrest that precipitated Serb pushback, civil war, and the eventual collapse of Yugoslavia. The so-called “ethnic” cleansing that followed had more to do with religion than race. Bosnians are, for the most part, Muslims with a bloody fascist pedigree.

Comey’s Corrupt and Shameful Conduct Revealed By Jonathan F. Keiler

James Comey’s rationale for not referring Hillary Clinton’s email crimes to the Justice Department rested almost entirely on a single, quite thin, legal and ethical plank, which was that she did not act intentionally when she sent and received classified emails over her home-brew server. Though his argument for deferring prosecution was mostly specious, it did contain at least a shred of credibility in that as Comey described the situation to the American public and Congress, Hillary had no motive to intentionally put American national security at risk. However, the recent evidentiary revelation (many would say confirmation) that Hillary established the server with the deliberate intent of shielding her illicit influence-peddling for her family “Foundation” while secretary of state shows that the issue of her motivation could not be seen by any “reasonable” prosecutor as exculpatory. Comey’s refusal to recommend prosecution, while knowing these facts at the time, proves he was not reasonable, and also that he is incompetent and culpable for not doing so.

At Comey’s July 5 briefing to the nation, he attempted to justify his actions. His first claim in this regard was that the FBI, having uncovered through laborious effort many work-related emails that Clinton did not turn over to State, “found no evidence that any of the work related emails were deleted in an effort to conceal them.” Then Comey noted that Hillary’s attorneys were deliberately overbroad in determining which emails were work-related and “relied on header information” and “search terms” rather than reading them, and that when they finished, the lawyers “cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.” Despite this, Comey then said he had “reasonable confidence there was no intentional misconduct in connection with that sorting effort.” Then, before launching into a description of all the ways Hillary and her minions were “extremely careless,” Comey said, “[W]e did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate the laws governing the handling of classified information[.]”

Comey concluded his statement with several more references to intent, and the lack thereof. He famously said:

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent.

Less famously but just as importantly:

[W]e cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

The first of these to statements is a specious rationalization. The second is a bald-faced lie in support of that rationalization.

Peter Smith The Road to Earthly Perdition

“One of the principal building blocks of our civilisation is the primacy of reason — to think, to understand and form logical judgments on the basis of experience, evidence and facts. Twist experience, evidence and facts to suit a political narrative and reason fails, sophism prevails. We now have many such sophistries plaguing and undermining our values and culture.”

The ‘stolen generations’ myth is a small clue to puzzle, but a vital piece it is. The Left’s game is to erode the foundations of our civilisation until it crumbles, which explains why false and destructive narratives emerge. The bigger question is why we allow them to attain such purchase?

In the minds of most people the story of ‘the stolen generations’ evokes images of large numbers of part-Aboriginal children being systematically and unjustifiably taken from their families and put in institutions or fostered out. At the same time, in a separate and distinct compartment of their minds, these same people will agree that at some extreme point of parental neglect, or abandonment, children, whatever their ethnicity, have to be removed for their safety and wellbeing.

South Australian Bishop Chris McLeod was a visiting preacher at my Anglican church a short time ago. In his sermon he explained that his mother had been part of ‘the stolen generations’. She had been taken from her family and cared for in an Anglican orphanage and, subsequently, in an Anglican household. He did not elaborate further.

I don’t want to comment on the Bishop’s position. I knew nothing about him until hearing his Sunday sermon and know very little now. I know nothing about the feelings of his mother.

What I want to comment on is the likely reception of the Bishop’s remarks by the congregation. I might be wrong but I doubt anybody besides me would have read Keith Windschuttle’s Fabrication of Aboriginal History (Volume III). To a man and woman they would have slotted the Bishop’s remarks into what they ‘know’ to be a cruel and racist part of Australia’s past; ditto for almost any group of Australians.

All Australians are aware of Kevin Rudd’s apology. Why apologise for something that didn’t happen? The story of ‘the stolen generations’ has become an historical fact or, more correctly, a factoid.

Iran Accuses Man Involved in Nuclear Deal Negotiations of Spying Iran doesn’t name the accused or the country he was said to be of working with By Aresu Eqbali and Asa Fitch

Iran said Sunday that it had arrested a person involved in the negotiations of its nuclear deal with six world powers last year and accused him of spying.

An Iranian judiciary spokesman, Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejehi, said the accused was detained and released on bail after a few days, but didn’t identify him by name.

The spokesman also didn’t say when the arrest occurred, which country the person was accused of spying for or what sensitive information he may have disclosed.

“If this charge…is proved or not is another matter, because there is a difference between pursuing someone on a warrant and the charge being proved,” Mr. Ejehi said, according to the official Islamic Republic News Agency.

While details were scarce, the arrest is an unexpected turn of events in the wake of a nuclear deal that was hailed by its proponents as a springboard for friendlier relations between Iran and the world.

Under the deal last July, Iran agreed to scale back its disputed nuclear program in exchange for relief from international sanctions that crippled its economy. The deal formally took effect in January.

Reports by hard-line Iranian news outlets said last week that Abdolrasoul Dori-Esfahani, a financial expert who played a role in the nuclear talks, had been detained on suspicion of espionage. Tehran’s top prosecutor also said this month that an Iranian dual-national had been arrested and accused of having contacts with British intelligence. CONTINUE AT SITE