Contact Form


Email *

Message *

Saturday, December 3, 2016

The Liberal Feminist Knives Are Coming Out Against Nominee

Here’s how liberals are plotting to sabotage General Mad Dog Mattis



President-Elect Donald Trump’s announcement he’s nominating legendary Marine General James “Mad Dog” Mattis to be his Secretary of Defense sent liberals into a foaming-at-the-mouth rage.
Mattis refuses to back down from anyone, and the enemies of the United States have no more fearsome enemy than he.
So, naturally, liberals are plotting to sabotage his nomination.
Roll Call, a prominent Capitol Hill insider newspaper, reports that left-wing groups are planning to attack Mattis as an enemy of women.
The former head of U.S. Central Command [Mattis] has said in various speeches that women may not be suited for the “intimate killing” of combat, and allowing men and women to work in close quarters would be detrimental to their success in combat zones, according to
In his remarks at the Marines’ Memorial Club in San Francisco in 2014, Mattis tried to explain his line of thinking. “The idea of putting women in there is not setting them up for success,” he said, referring to combat as an “atavistic primate world.”
“It would only be someone who never crossed the line of departure into close encounters fighting that would ever even promote such an idea,” he added, stressing that whether women can handle the physical rigor of combat is beside the point.
Democrats plan to use that to attack Mattis, in the hopes of convincing three Republican senators to oppose his nomination.
Their most likely targets are moderate-to-liberal Republican Senators Lisa Murkowski (Alaska,) Susan Collins (Maine,) and Lindsey Graham (South Carolina.)

Jill Stein's Recount In Michigan May Be Blocked

BREAKING: Michigan Attorney General Makes Recount Announcement


Leftist Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein has seemingly been trying to aid the failed campaign of Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton by pushing for a recount of the votes in three states narrowly won by President-elect Donald Trump: Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
But if Michigan’s Republican Attorney General Bill Schuette has anything to say about it, there will be no recount, according to WZZM.
Schuette filed legal documents with the court Friday asking the Michigan Board of Canvassers and the Supreme Court to put a halt to the recount effort, claiming that Stein didn’t qualify as an “aggrieved” candidate to seek one since she only garnered roughly 1 percent of the vote and that there wasn’t sufficient time for a recount even if she were qualified to demand one.

“Michigan voters rejected Stein’s candidacy by massive margins, but her refusal to accept that state-verified result poses an expensive and risky threat to hardworking taxpayers and abuses the intent of Michigan law,” Schuette said, according to Politico.
“We have asked the court to end the recount which Stein is pursuing in violation of Michigan laws that protect the integrity of our elections,” he added. “It is inexcusable for Stein to put Michigan voters at risk of paying millions and potentially losing their voice in the Electoral College in the process.”
Schuette’s lawsuit also asked that the recount effort be dismissed due to the fact that even Stein herself has acknowledged that there was no evidence of any sort of fraud or widespread errors in favor of any candidate.

As for the cost to Michigan taxpayers for a recount, Schuette was likely referring to report from the Detroit Free Press noting that a statewide recount could cost nearly twice as much as originally thought, nearly $2 million total.
The state has charged Stein $125 per precinct for the recount, or roughly $800,000, but if the actual recount ends up costing more than what Stein paid, the state’s taxpayers will be on the hook for the cost overrun, which could be more than $1 million.
For the record, Michigan certified the results of the election on Monday, declaring Trump the winner by a margin of just 10,704 votes.
Please share this on Facebook and Twitter to spread the word that the Michigan attorney general is trying to put a stop to Jill Stein’s Clinton-helping recount in the state.

What do you think of the Michigan attorney general filing a lawsuit to stop the recount effort pushed by Jill Stein?

When American Awaken From Their Slumber?

Somali refugee Abdul Ali Artan, suspect in the Ohio State University campus stabbing spree on Nov. 28, 2016 (Photo: Twitter/The Lantern)
Somali refugee Abdul Ali Artan, suspect in the Ohio State University campus stabbing spree on Nov. 28, 2016 (Photo: Twitter/The Lantern)
When Abdul Ali Artan tried to run over a crowd of helpless students at Ohio State University, then got out of his car and slashed as many as he could with a butcher knife, media titans CNN, CBS and NBC treated it as an isolated incident.
Law enforcement, from the local level on up to the FBI, said they did not know what could have motivated the young Muslim student to act in such a premeditated, violent way against his fellow students on a chilly Tuesday morning in Columbus.
Artan, an 18-year-old freshman at OSU, had immigrated from his native Somalia through Pakistan, arriving in Columbus at the invitation of the U.S. government, which considered him a “refugee.”
But the media failed to connect any of the dots with a host of similar attacks on U.S. soil, let alone the even larger number of strikingly similar attacks in Europe committed by migrants from Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa.
News outlets also failed to report that Columbus is America’s second-largest distribution point for Somali refugees after Minneapolis.
A simple perusal of some very recent history, roughly the previous 17 or 18 months, would have turned up the following incidents:
1. Chattanooga shooting: 24-year-old Muhammad Abdulaziz offers up mass shooting at Navy recruitment center, leaving five U.S. servicemen dead in July 2015.
2. University of California at Merced knife attack: 18-year-old student Faisal Mohammad slashes students, teacher in November 2015, four wounded.
3. San Bernardino shooting: Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik attack office Christmas party, leaving 14 dead and several wounded in December 2015.
4. Orlando gay nightclub shooting: Omar Mateen on June 12, 2016, left 49 dead, 53 wounded.
5. Nazareth Mediterranean Restaurant knife attack: Mohamed Barry slashes diners in Columbus, Ohio, with machete in February 2016, four wounded.
6. St. Cloud Crossroads mall knife attack: Dahir Ahmad Adan seeks out non-Muslim shoppers with military-style knife on Sept. 17, 2016, 10 wounded.
7. Chelsea Manhattan bombing: Ahmad Rahimi plants pipe bombs that go off on Sept. 17, 29 wounded.
8. Ohio State knife/car attack: Abdul Ali Artan, rams his car into crowd of students, slashes them with butcher knife, 11 wounded, on Nov. 28.
A little further back, in 2013, the Boston Marathon bombing by the Tsarnaev brothers left three dead and more than 300 injured.
The one common denominator of all nine attacks is that each was carried out by Muslim immigrants or sons of Muslim immigrants.
And the last four attacks on the list – the knife attack at the restaurant in Columbus, the knife attack at the mall in St. Cloud, the bombing in Manhattan and the knife attack at OSU – were all carried out by Muslims who came to America through the United Nations refugee resettlement program overseen by the U.S. State Department. Three of the four used knives, a key component of global Islamic terror inspired by multiple verses in the Quran.
One of the primary responsibilities of any reputable journalist is to not only report the news of the day, but to report it in context. It is only through context that the consumers of the journalistic product can receive a full understanding of the events happening in the world around them. There was none of that going on Tuesday when the news broke of a knife attack on the campus of Ohio State. Not even the most-recent Muslim knife attack, carried out two months earlier by another Somali refugee in St. Cloud, was mentioned in connection with the Ohio story.
Why so little context? Why so little information about the refugee program and its recent failures to screen out bad apples?
Why do mainstream media, along with U.S. law enforcement, provide cover for the U.S. immigration system and the refugee program in particular?
The answer is clear, say several experts who follow the refugee program.
Keeping Americans in the dark
“Law enforcement and the media want to keep Americans in the dark about this threat,” says Pamela Geller, president of the American Defense Initiative who blogs at the Geller Report and authored the book “Stop the Islamization of America.”
VIDEOMd. man got thousands from Islamic State: DOJ

Current Time0:02
Duration Time1:13
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
“Law enforcement claims it’s to protect Muslims from a ‘backlash’ that never materializes,” Geller told WND. “The media is committed to dissembling about this threat.”
Geller revealed in an article several years ago that the Society of Professional Journalists has guidelines telling journalists never to associate Muslims or Islam with terrorism.
Activist/author Pamela Geller
Activist/author Pamela Geller
“They’re willfully lying to the public,” she said.
“They seem to be committed to a globalist multiculturalist agenda that involves bringing large numbers of Muslims into the country,” Geller added. “Connecting the dots would wake too many people up to what is happening.”
Perhaps most disappointing is the failure of Christian pastors and teachers to give any concrete, accurate information to their church flocks about what Islam teaches from the Quran and other Islamic texts.
“They have been indoctrinated with the idea that it would be ‘racist’ to do so,” Geller says.
Robert Spencer, who edits the JihadWatch blog for the David Horowitz Freedom Center and has authored several best-selling books, including “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades,” said he believes U.S. law enforcement takes its cue from the Obama administration.
Author Robert Spencer
Author Robert Spencer
“And they are committed as a matter of policy to denying that there is any jihad threat at all,” Spencer said. “With each attack, they explain it away and defend Islam. They claim it will alienate moderate Muslims if we speak about the motivating ideology behind this threat; they never explain why they think moderate Muslims would be offended by discussing understandings of Islam that they ostensibly reject.”
Fitna: The root of modern ‘Islamophobia’
Phil Haney, co-author of “See Something Say Nothing,” tracked the OSU story from the time it started breaking Tuesday morning.
“Underneath all this hand-wringing about why did he do it, he already said why he did it,” Haney told WND. “On his Facebook page he said he’s sick and tired of Muslims being killed in different parts of world, and that is fitna. It always comes back to fitna.”
“Fitna” is an Arabic term used in the Quran to describe a yoke of oppression, a trial or an injustice thrust upon the Muslim believers by the non-believers. The modern word for a fitna would be “Islamophobia.”
By continuing the politically correct policy of avoiding the issue behind each new terror attack, the mainstream media enable the Muslim leaders to further their teaching of young Muslims to feel like they are part of a persecuted minority in America.
“Islamophobia” has become such a prevalent theme, widely taught within the American Muslim community today, that we can expect more backlash from angry Muslims who have had their minds poisoned by this indoctrination, Haney says.
“This stifling emphasis dominates the mindset of American Muslims, and their social-political allies [on the left], and it prevents us from honestly and courageously addressing the true nature of a global ideology that aggressively promotes its agenda of supremacy,” Haney said.
“Anyone who attempts to move beyond the ‘Islamophobia’ mantra is reflexively labeled as a bigoted racist,” he added, “while the Muslim community enjoys immunity from any responsibility for its communal actions.”
Copyright 2016 WND