RUTHFULLY YOURS

The term “The thin blue line” is associated with law enforcement, especially the police. The phrase is based on the usual color of the police uniform and the fact that the relatively small numbers of sworn police officers is all that stands between the citizenry of towns, cities and states and criminals.

The uniforms that the members of the United States Border Patrol wear is green. Sometimes the Border Patrol has been referred to as the “Green Machine.” The mission of the United States Border Patrol is to secure America’s borders between ports of entry against the illegal entry of aliens whose presence would be harmful or dangerous to America and Americans. The idea is to make certain that aliens seeking entry into the United States are subjected to the inspections process conducted by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) Inspectors.

The guiding principle behind the inspections process is to make certain that aliens who should be excluded from the United States are prevented from entering the United States. One of the sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is Title 8, United States Code, Section 1182, enumerates the categories of aliens who are to be excluded and includes aliens who suffer dangerous contagious diseases, severe mental illness and are violent, aliens who are convicted felons, human and/or narcotics traffickers, human rights violators, war criminals, spies, terrorists and aliens who would likely become public charges or work illegally therefore displacing American workers or driving down the wages and/or working conditions of American workers.

The law, incidentally, is utterly and totally blind as to race, religion and ethnicity.

While the advocates for open borders describe aliens who evade the inspections process as being “Undocumented,” in point of fact, these aliens are Un-Inspected. In fact, my colleagues and I at the former INS referred to the method of entry of aliens who evaded the vital inspections process as being EWI (Entry Without Inspection).

This is hardly inconsequential. To draw a comparison- would you, or any reasonable person be willing to board an airliner if you observed several passengers sneak past the TSA inspectors and get on the airliner you were about to board? I am very confident you would not.

Why then are we being forced, by our own government, to live among unknown millions of foreign nationals (aliens) whose true identities- including their country of citizenship, possible criminal histories and possible affiliation with criminal or terrorist organizations or medical or mental well-being is unknown and unknowable?

In Jerusalem, Israelis pray for the return of three missing boys and in the West Bank, Israeli soldiers hunt for them and for their captors. But in the midst of all this, it is important not to lose sight of the larger conflict.

Israel made one tragic mistake with the Gilad Shalit deal. That deal, aside from already costing the life of one Israeli, is what led to this kidnapping. One kidnapping turned into three. It can easily become many more.

Defeating terrorist tactics can be more important than defeating terrorists. It is not that hard for a modern nation to kill a terrorist. Drones allow us to kill enemies from a distance at the push of a button. But drones cannot protect the morale of a nation.

Conventional armies use tactics to defeat enemy forces and seize territory. Terrorists however use tactics to take over mental territory. A suicide bomber is not out to take over a particular block. He is out to change how people think about that city block and the larger conflict.

Terrorism has succeeded in accomplishing that goal in Israel. The scale of terrorism turned every piece of land into a mathematical equation. How many lives was this village in Gaza worth? How many lives is this West Bank town worth? How many lives is East Jerusalem worth?

However terrorists are not trading an end to violence for a village or a town. They are calculating how many deaths it will take to force Israel to abandon that village or town. And once they have that town, they will use it to inflict more terror on another town or village.

Israelis were convinced that a price in lives had been put on Gaza and that if they withdrew, the killing would end. But Gaza was just the beginning. Not the end.

Terrorists try to create the perception that the winning side is losing. This perception can be so compelling that both sides come to accept it as reality. Terrorists manufacture victories by trapping their enemies in no-win scenarios that wear down their morale.

That is what has been happening to Israel. The entire carrot and stick of the peace process and the suicide bombing, the final agreement that never comes and the final solution that is coming, were designed to wear down Israelis, to make their leaders and people chase down empty hopes.

My dear friend Ali Sina mentioned in his most recent article that a Muslim professor, Hossein Askari, believes that Western nations lead the World in “Islamic values” and that most Muslim nations practice the least Islamic values. I have heard such nonsense before from some Muslims, some of whom were my relatives. I will never forget the strange look on my Christian American husband’s face when an elderly Muslim man visiting from Egypt told him: “You are such a fine young man, you have the character of a true Muslim.”

It is not unusual for Muslims to describe non-Muslims whom they perceive as good as having “Islamic values.” Many Christians in Egypt have to suffer hearing comments by Muslims such as: “You are so good, you must convert to Islam, you have the character of a true Muslim.”

How can educated Muslims professors make ridiculous claims like that Ireland “leads the world in Islamic values as Muslim states lag”? Islamic logic, in that case, says, if Irish people have noses, eyes, arms and legs like Muslims then they must be Muslim. This twisted logic wants to hide the truth: that many Muslims no longer want to live under Islamic values, but since that is considered apostasy in Islam, the only way out is to claim life in the land of the Great Satan is really equal to living the true Islamic life.

Muslims are trained to adjust reality to Islamic propaganda; thus everything good must come from Islam and everything bad comes from the Kafir non-believer. So it is Islamic logic to believe that if Christians are good then they must be Muslim, but they just don’t know it yet.

The Muslim dilemma about the West gets more complicated when over 70% of Muslim youth are desperately trying to leave the Muslim world to immigrate to Western nations. Many Muslims are stunned, disappointing and filled with envy when they compare infidel and Islamic nations and discover that infidels have achieved what Muslims could only dream of. Such an awakening by Muslims flies against the Islamic propaganda that has indoctrinated generations into believing that Islam is the solution.

So if Islam is the solution, how come Muslims are happier in the West? Simple: Muslims discovered what the West failed to understand about their own values; According to Muslims, it is Islamic values — so “Allahu Akbar” anyway.

A devastating oversight report from Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) reveals that the combination of malpractice and bureaucratic ineptitude infesting the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is far deadlier than previously acknowledged. “Over the past decade, more than 1,000 veterans may have died as a result of VA malfeasance, and the VA has paid out nearly $1 billion to veterans and their families for its medical malpractice,” the report states.

The death total dwarfs the 23 fatalities for which the VA has taken responsibility. Coburn, a physician and three-time cancer survivor, notes the problems at VA facilities go “far deeper” than the phony scheduling schemes that brought this scandal to the national stage. “The waiting list cover-ups and uneven care are reflective of a much larger culture within the VA, where administrators manipulate both data and employees to give an appearance that all is well,” the report reveals.

According to Coburn, that culture is one in which veterans “are not always a priority.” Much of that is attributable to the reality that even as the VA suffers from a shortage of healthcare providers, VA nurses are paid to perform union duties and doctors are allowed to leave work early rather than care for patients. The report further explains that good employees who try to bring attention to the Department’s shortcomings “are punished, bullied, put on ‘bad boy’ lists, and transferred to other locations.”

The report also blows away the VA’s fallback excuse, namely that it suffers from a lack of funding. Coburn notes that spending has increased rapidly in recents years, an assertion backed up by federal budget figures. Inflation-adjusted federal spending shows that the VA budget has increased 92.2 percent over the last decade, skyrocketing from $73.3 billion in FY2003 to $140.9 billion last year, measured in constant 2014 dollars. According to Military.com the VA spends more in inflation-adjusted dollars than it did following WWII and the Vietnam war, when millions of troops were returning home from the battlefield.

Coburn reveals that as much as $20 billion of that spending over the last dozen years has been on “junkets, generous salaries, bonuses, and office renovations for its employees,” even as the Department ends every year with billions in unspent funds. He further notes that most of the construction projects undertaken by the VA are over budget and behind schedule. And even when state-of-the-art facilities are finally constructed, the VA is unable to staff them with a sufficient number of doctors. This reality has forced them to spend millions of dollars sending veterans to clinics in other cities and states, wasting veterans’ time and taxpayers’ money.

Some of the details of patient care illuminated by the report are truly disturbing. One Navy veteran, forced to wait months to see a doctor, died of Stage 4 bladder cancer. He had been rushed to the hospital in September 2013, but was sent home despite a medical chart saying his situation was “urgent.” His daughter made effort after effort to get him an appointment but was constantly rebuffed. He finally got an appointment on December 6—one week after he died. Another veteran received a tooth extraction, despite having dangerously low blood pressure. On his way home, he had a stroke that left him paralyzed. In another case, doctors never spotted a growing lesion on a veteran’s lung during an annual chest x-ray. He died as the result of that carelessness.

The warmists have their models, grants and tidings of doom, but the researchers whose tree ring data has best predicted recent temperature trends see the mercury dropping, perhaps by as much as 4 degrees. If they are right, then there is reason to be worried, very worried indeed

There was a time in climate science when tree rings were used for good instead of evil, a time of innocent enquiry, a time that ended in the corruption of science. From that time, one of the best predictions of climate ever made (weighted for distance and accuracy) was by two Californian researchers, Leona Libby and Louis Pandolfi. In 1979, they used tree ring data from redwoods in Kings Canyon to make a remarkably accurate forecast1. From a Los Angeles Times interview of that year,

When she and Pandolfi project their curves into the future, they show lower average temperatures from now through the mid-1980s. “Then,” Dr. Libby added, “we see a warming trend (by about a quarter of 1 degree Fahrenheit) globally to around the year 2000. And then it will get really cold—if we believe our projections. This has to be tested.”

How cold? “Easily one or two degrees,” she replied, “and maybe even three or four degrees.”

Sure, the Prophet’s gun-toting, plane-hijacking, head-lopping adherents represent only a small minority in the ranks of ‘the religion of peace’, but what of the largely mute majority? If silence gives consent it also confirms that Islam is antithetical to the secular values and traditions of the West.

Even on Fox News they still refer to ‘radical Islamists’, presumably to distinguish them from the overwhelmingly vast multitude of moderate Muslims who mind their own business as they go about practicing their religion of peace. They got one thing right. They certainly mind their own business. There is nothing to see here as the hands and heads come off and the bombs go off; nothing to do with us.

What really impresses me is the inoffensive, head-scarfed, top-to-toe covered, Muslim lady who regularly fronts the cameras to explain how moderate and peaceful she and her community are. I assume she is sped from place to place in a very fast jet. Of course, maybe there is more than one of them? I can’t tell. What I suspect is that she (or they) will be beaming and cheering when the Islamic flag is raised aloft over some Western European parliament building.

OK, where is this going? Let me explain by way of analogy.

When Liverpool Football Club brought home the first of its European Cups in 1977 half of the city was out on the streets to welcome the returning heroes. It is likely the overwhelming majority of those cheering and clapping had never been to a match. And of those who attended matches perhaps only a quarter were fanatical.

Half-a-million people were on the streets. Only two per cent were fanatics; the other 98 per cent were moderates. They were all cheering. The representatives of their tribe had tasted victory. It was a heady brew.

Who are these sporting fanatics and what drives them? ‘I don’t know’ is my answer, but what is abundantly clear is that they wear their fanaticism like a badge of honour. It distinguishes them from the crowd. And the crowd acknowledges their commitment. They are congratulated personally by their workmates and friends when their team wins.

They simply couldn’t be fanatics without the tacit approval and acknowledgement of the much greater number of the non-fanatical. The head couldn’t live without the body. How do I know all of this? I was a fanatic in my youthful days, suffering serious funk when Liverpool lost and exhilaration when they won.

A community stops illegal-immigrant kids from being held in its town.

California suburbanites are engaged in a fight with the federal government over its attempt to turn a residential building into a detention center for illegal-immigrant children.

The Department of Health and Human Services submitted an application to the city of Escondido’s Planning Commission to use a 35,200 square-foot facility to house almost 100 children. On Tuesday night in this suburb of San Diego, the city commission held a hearing to review the request and unanimously voted to oppose the application. Several hundred people filled the chamber hall to make their voices heard, and people at the meeting say the overwhelming majority opposed the application. The standing-room-only crowd spilled over into an adjacent room and nearby hallways, and onto the grass outside.

“You couldn’t park within two blocks of city hall,” says Jeff Weber, the chairman of the Escondido City Planning Commission. “One of our commissioners was late because he couldn’t get a parking place.” Weber says the event required a police presence, and one officer coached him on how to respond in case of a disturbance.

If Kitty Demry had missed a notice about the application placed on the building during a walk around the neighborhood with her husband, the application might have received less scrutiny. Demry, a longtime Escondido resident who lives about a third of a mile away from the facility’s proposed location with her young family, says that, at first, she didn’t think anything of it. She says she decided to pursue the matter only after discussing it in greater detail with her husband.

After speaking with a city official to gain more information and discovering that local officials did not know much about the shelter, Demry says she grew concerned. “Really, nobody knew about it,” Demry says. “And that more than anything is what terrified me.” Demry then created a flyer, made 150 copies, and began knocking on doors to spread the word. The information gained traction on social media, and soon public officials began to weigh in.

Mayor Sam Abed says he’s concerned that the children would not receive proper health screening and criminal-background checks before arriving at the proposed facility. “We feel that the federal government should keep housing them in federal facilities and not [be] sending them to the local small communities where land use is very limited,” he says. The Republican mayor emigrated to the U.S. from the suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, and worked as an IBM engineer before entering political life. He’s running for re-election in November.

Cochran won by appealing to Republicans and liberal Democrats.

Just two days before the Mississippi runoff, an African-American state senator from the state’s 13th district, Willie Simmons, sent a letter to his constituents. Simmons himself, according to a report by the Associated Press, had voted in the state’s June 3 Democratic primary and was therefore prohibited from voting in Tuesday’s Republican runoff, but he wrote to urge his constituents to cast their ballots for Republican senator Thad Cochran in Tuesday’s runoff. He touted the “millions of dollars” in appropriations Cochran had secured for Mississippi’s Head Start programs and his support for “Food Stamps programs.”

A mailer distributed in heavily African-American precincts struck similar notes, advertising Cochran’s support for Mississippi’s public schools and his tea-party opponent’s opposition to food-stamps programs. The headline: “The Tea Party intends to prevent blacks from voting.”

“I don’t know who put it out,” former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour says of the fliers. “I can’t imagine the Cochran campaign did that.” Barbour says that support for Cochran among Democrats bubbled up organically and that the six-term senator, who first won a seat in Congress in 1972, has always had bipartisan appeal. “Within a week of the first primary some black churches in Hattiesburg started running ads on the radio in Hattiesburg by raising the money themselves,” he says.

But Cochran’s opponent, state senator Chris McDaniel, and many of his supporters smell a rat. In the midst of the non-concession speech McDaniel delivered Tuesday evening, he argued, “There is something a bit unusual about a Republican primary that’s decided by liberal Democrats.” In Hattiesburg, where a crowd of McDaniel supporters had gathered for what most expected to be his victory party, the candidate was seething, not celebrating: “So much for principle,” he said from the podium.

Less than 24 hours after Cochran seized victory by a little more than one percentage point, his campaign’s decision to woo Democrats is exacerbating the intra-Republican battle between the grassroots and the establishment.

Chris Chocola, the president of the Club for Growth, which spent over $3 million in its attempt to oust Cochran, came out swinging against the powers that be in the GOP. “They say they believe in pro-growth policy,” he says, “but when it comes time to take action, here it’s revealed, probably more powerfully than it’s ever been, that they care more about the preservation of political power and the status quo.”

In Mississippi, Chocola says, the establishment fought for a candidate whose message was “Vote for me and I’ll give you more government.” Throughout the primary and the runoff, Cochran campaigned on his ability to funnel federal dollars to Mississippi, a poor state that has long depended on Washington’s largesse.

Obama brings to mind the supposed Chinese curse: “May you live in exciting times.”

As I was lunching with a few conservative political types earlier this week, the subject turned, as it does, to the 2016 field. When the name of a highly regarded former governor came up, the judgment was unequivocal: “He’s just so . . . boring.” That was not intended as an endorsement.

It should be.

Barack Obama has been anything but boring. “May you live in exciting times” may be a fake Chinese curse, but the wisdom communicated therein is real. Thought experiment: Consider the presidency of Barack Obama from the point of view of the sort of person who is likely to support such men. Having vanquished George W. Bush, he has now given us: a military mess in Iraq complete with the deployment of U.S. troops and a mission that is probably unachievable; the continuing disintegration of Afghanistan and its reversion to a jihadist safe haven; an economy that is shrinking significantly and probably is dipping back into recession; a defense and intelligence apparatus that is abusing its powers and the trust of the American people in ways that are not obviously related to defeating terrorist plots; millions without health insurance; millions out of work; corruption in our public institutions, ranging from the IRS to our universities; a self-aggrandizing political elite that is busy enriching itself through the vulgar exploitation of political connections while incomes for ordinary Americans stagnate or decline; etc. There has been a great deal of excitement, but if you voted for Obama because you were angry about the wars, the surveillance state, and the economy, things aren’t looking any better at all.

The most boring president of the modern era probably was Dwight Eisenhower, whose administration was marked by relative peace, prosperity, and confidence in the effectiveness and integrity of our institutions. The most boring president ever surely was Calvin Coolidge, who pinched pennies and kept at his plow, more or less leaving the country free to go about its own business, which turned out to be an excellent economic program. Our most exciting recent presidents? John Kennedy, who was privately corrupt and publicly inept; Richard Nixon, who was privately corrupt and publicly corrupt; Bill Clinton, who combined the worst features of Kennedy and Nixon, adding a distasteful dose of sanctimony to the mix.

It is part of every election season. You can count on it like the sun coming up in the morning. The Democrats spread anger and fear in the black community over the imaginary Republican desire to “put y’all back in chains”, as Biden put it during the last election season.

“Those racist Republicans want to keep you from voting. They want to turn back the clock on civil rights. Republicans oppose big government because they hate black people. You must vote to stop them.” That’s the story they sell. It is a divisive and socially destructive tactic that does great harm to our country. But what it does to the country is a secondary issue for those who sell the lies. The primary goal is to get an angry, motivated voting block to the polls.

Thad Cochran was defeated by Chris McDaniel in the initial vote for Mississippi Senator but Cochran was not defeated by enough votes to avoid a run-off election. In preparation for the run-off election a decision was made by the Cochran team to tear the ‘race-baiting’ page from the Democrat playbook and to use it against McDaniel.

Large amounts of money were spent in Democrat districts on phone calls, fliers, and door-to-door pleas to encourage a vote against the racist Republican. A Cochran flier sold the lie that “Tea Party” candidate McDaniel “intends to prevent blacks from voting on Tuesday”. “Mississippi cannot and will not return to a bygone era of intimidating black Mississippians from voting. We must rise up on Tuesday to have our voices heard…”

This is classic, despicable race-baiting being used by a six- term Republican against a fellow Republican who had the nerve to challenge him and to challenge the way things are done in Washington.

Robocalls supporting Cochran targeted black districts with a message trashing the Tea Party and supporting President Obama. The message was essentially that the racist Tea Party was making it very difficult for our “African-American” president. Tea partiers want to oppose our wonderful president and so you need to vote against racists like McDaniel.

This was a race-based, pro-Obama, anti-Tea Party message paid for by Republicans. Establishment Republicans worked hard for and funded this dishonest campaign.