I think I see a pattern but we can't profile!

.IT COULDN'T BE SAID BETTER ------- TAKE THE TIME TO READ IT.  I BELIEVE I KNOW MY FRIENDS.
                                        :

                                        Clint Eastwood at 84...Director of "American Sniper"

                                        # 1 War Film of all times, his latest masterpiece is upsetting Hollywood Liberals, as it sets box office records. A true Patriot, he never misses a chance to stand up for America and those who defend her. An outcast In Hollywood, Loved by those who love Freedom, despised by Hollywood and America's liberal Elite. He never stops.

                                        READ HIS MESSAGE AT 84 If you realize each day is a gift, you may be near my age.

                                        My Twilight Years ~ Clint Eastwood

                                        "As I enjoy my twilight years, I am often struck by the inevitability that the party must end. There will be a clear, cold morning when there isn't any "more." No more hugs, no more special moments to celebrate together, no more phone calls just to chat. It seems to me that one of the important things to do before that morning comes, is to let every one of your family and friends know that you care for them by finding simple ways to let them know your heartfelt beliefs and the guiding principles of your life so they can always say, "He was my friend, and I know where he stood."

                                        So, just in case I'm gone tomorrow, please know this: I voted against that incompetent, lying, flip-flopping, insincere, double-talking, radical socialist, terrorist-excusing, bleeding heart, narcissistic, scientific and economic moron currently in the White House!

                                        Participating in a gun buy-back program because you think that criminals have too many guns is like having yourself castrated because you think your neighbors have too many kids."

                                        Regards, Clint "Make my day" Eastwood
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Australian Gun Law Update

Here's a thought to warm some of your hearts....
From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia


Hi Yanks,

I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria.....
lone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent.(Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it's too late!
Will you be one of the sheep to turn yours in?
WHY?

 You will need it.

September 25, 2015

Questions for the pope

By Jack Hellner

I am a Catholic, and I have some questions for the pope and the well-known Christians Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi.

When God created the Heavens and the Earth, were all natural resources in the Earth meant to stay there, or was there another purpose?  Is God more responsible for the climate, or are humans?

Did God give humans brains, which allowed them to discover, mine, and develop fossil fuels and other natural resources?  Didn't those inventions improve the quality and length of life for everyone?

Why was the Earth warmer and sea levels higher at times before humans and fossil fuels if humans are the cause?

Are the poor and middle class better off with lower or higher energy costs?

Are we better off using fossil fuels for heat, or would we be better off burning trees?

Did God create the process where humans breathe out CO2 and plants essentially breathe out oxygen?  Would God have created the CO2, which is said to be harmful to the Earth and climate, or is CO2 essentially a clear, innocuous gas that makes plants thrive?  Would God have wanted to limit the number of humans and animals on the planet?

Is communism or capitalism better for the poor?  Why is there so much condemnation for capitalism and so little of communism?

Is abortion a bigger sin against humanity, or is fossil fuel use?  Why are the priorities backward in public speeches?

Isn't it arrogant for human beings to believe they can establish policies that can control the climate within one degree one hundred to two hundred years out?  Who decided what the proper temperature and sea level should be, and how did they decide?  Why were the experts so wrong in the 1970s when they predicted a coming ice age?  Why should anyone trust computer models to predict the climate when it has been shown that data has been manipulated, and previous predictions have been so wrong?

When scientists intentionally manipulate temperature data because the data doesn’t support their theory, are they committing the grave sin of violating the 9th commandment, which is “Thou shalt not bear false witness”?

ENEMY WITHIN AND WITHOUT

Lar of Galen: I’m a firm believer in religious freedom, but allowing an enemy to build a training camp in your neighborhood is insanity.

BREAKING: On 14th Anniversary Of 9/11 Giant Crane Falls On Mecca’s Grand Mosque, 65 Dead –Update: Video, Pics Added…Update: Heavy Rains, Lightning Strike On The Mosque…Update: Death Toll Rises To 101, At Least 180 Injured, Crane Belonged To Bin Laden Family…

Wow.

Via Newsweek:

A crane crash at the Grand Mosque in Mecca left as many as 65 dead and 80 injured on Friday, according to the Saudi Civil Defense Directorate. Strong winds caused the crash.

Rescue workers from the Civil Defense department and Saudi Red Crescent and Health Affairs are on the scene.

Because of Muslims’ annual pilgrimage to Mecca, which can bring as many as 3 million people to the holy city around this time of year, the mosque was particularly crowded on Friday. It is unknown how many people were inside at the time of the incident.

Update:

Update:

Heavy rains were reported and this picture shows a lightning strike which looks like it hits the base of a crane:

Update:

Death toll is upped to 101, with at least 180 injured. It was during the busiest time of the week, just beforeFriday prayers.

According to the Daily Mail:

The crane belongs to a German crane company operated by the Bin Laden family’s consortium, who are heading the expansion of the Holy Mosque.
Saudi BinLaden Group was founded by Osama’s Bin Laden’s billionaire father Mohammed and the sprawling construction conglomerate runs a large amount of major building contracts in the Sunni kingdom.

Pictures taken before the disaster show the crane being struck by a bolt of lightning and authorities are in little doubt extreme weather was to blame.
The crane fell into the east side of the mosque, with the top section of the structure crashing into the roof.

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here
in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us. He shall
be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage
to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or
origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet
an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided
allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else
also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the
American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the
English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a
loyalty to the American people.'

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

AMATEUR HOUR

Donald Trump: Amateur hour with the Iran nuclear deal

Donald Trump8:25 p.m. EDT September 8, 2015

Politics as usual has failed, that's why I need to step in.

(Photo: Mark Humphrey, AP)

 3021CONNECT 1578TWEET 15LINKEDIN 293COMMENTEMAILMORE

It is hard to believe a president of the United States would actually put his name on an agreement with the terrorist state Iran that is so bad, so poorly constructed and so terribly negotiated that it increases uncertainty and reduces security for America and our allies, including Israel.

It was amateur hour for those charged with striking this deal with Iran, demonstrating to the world, yet again, the total incompetence of our president and politicians. It appears we wanted a deal at any cost rather than following the advice of Ronald Reagan and walking away because "no deal is better than a bad deal."

After the agreement goes into effect: All nuclear-related sanctions will be lifted. Iran receives a windfall of $150 billion, which will no doubt fund terrorism around the world. Iran will receive notice before any inspections take place. Iran can block inspection of certain facilities. Iran will soon be able to continue expanding its conventional arms and guided missile programs without facing snapback sanctions. Iran can keep American prisoners, including one former U.S. Marine and, very sadly, a Christian minister. Iran can continue to operate about 6,000 centrifuges. Other countries will be free to investin Iran.

USA TODAY

Ash Carter: Iran deal features defense backstop

Iran can continue to solidify bonds with Russia, China and North Korea. All these other countries will benefit, and the United States loses on all fronts.

In the end, Iran will be a nuclear state. This will lead to an all-out arms race in the region. All the Middle East, southern Europe and American interests will be within the footprint of Iran's missiles.

Interestingly, Saudi Arabia and others, who were vehemently opposed to the deal on all fronts, are now in favor — Washington has naively provided new weapons deals and security assurances.

The problem is that Iran poses an existential threat to Israel, our Middle Eastern allies and the United States. If we have to wait until the next president is sworn in to revisit this nuclear weapons agreement, then the next president better be someone who knows how to negotiate and who will do what is best for the United States.

When I am elected president, I will renegotiate with Iran — right after I enable the immediate release of our American prisoners and ask Congress to impose new sanctions that stop Iran from having the ability to sponsor terrorism around the world.

In fact, if I am elected, I am sure the prisoners will be released before my taking office.

USA TODAY

Europe's migrant crisis of consequences: Column

USA TODAY

Hillary Clinton borrows Richard Nixon's talking points: Column

We will approach other nations and make it clear that we will not allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons.

We will use all the tools of power available, hopefully avoiding direct action. But make no mistake, a Trump presidency will demonstrate the will to do whatever is necessary to protect the interests of the United States, Israel and its allies.

My opposition to the war in Iraq is well documented. I was against the war from the very beginning, all the way back in 2004. I had the vision and foresight to understand that Iraq and Iran were equal powers, and that our takeover of Iraq, when there was no real evidence of weapons of mass destruction, would be catastrophic for the entire region, enabling Iran and other forces to become a more dangerous threat thanSaddam Hussein ever thought of being.

We now have the Islamic State and the threat of nuclear weapons from Iran, both a direct result of the shortsighted incompetence of those in Washington during the war in Iraq and long before.

Negotiating from a position of strength is important. Having the will to follow through is fundamental. A Trump presidency will force the Iranians back to the bargaining table to make a much better deal. A Trump presidency will make America great again.

Businessman Donald J. Trump is seeking the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns like this, go to theOpinion front page.

DUMBING DOWN AMERICA

SAT Scores Disappoint, Affirming Federal Control Isn't the Answer

By Jordan Candler · Sep. 8, 2015

The College Board says the average student’s SAT score has shown absolutely no improvement, and in fact retrograded, despite revisions that were made a decade ago which failed to improve test results. According to The Washington Post, “The average score for the Class of 2015 was 1490 out of a maximum 2400, the College Board reported Thursday. That was down 7 points from the previous class’s mark and was the lowest composite score of the past decade. There were declines of at least 2 points on all three sections of the test — critical reading, math and writing.” Most notably, “The test results show that gains in reading and math in elementary grades haven’t led to broad improvement in high schools, experts say. That means several hundred thousand teenagers, especially those who grew up poor, are leaving school every year unready for college.” 

Education officials will debate numerous reasons — and some, like poverty, have merit (more on that below) — but you won’t hear much about the abysmal failure of the federal government. Investor’s Business Daily (IBD) notes, “That’s a huge shift, suggesting something profoundly wrong with our nation’s schools. But what? It sure isn’t lack of money. Spending on education has soared in recent decades, the result of a misguided progressive notion that more spending on education equals success.” Taxpayers dole out more than $100 billion a year on education programs. But more money isn’t translating into better education. Rather, poverty — the very thing the government set out to eradicate — is one of the primary catalysts. IBD observes, “After decades of federal intervention in education, inequality hasn’t gone away. Wasn’t the whole reason for the federal government involving itself in public schools supposedly that schools were incapable of educating white kids and minority kids equally?” The sad irony is that we could largely alleviate poverty if the government would get out of the way. After all, school choice and voucher programs have demonstrated great success. At some point minorities have to ask the question: Why is the government blocking the road that leads to progress?

Lar Of Galen says...

We are told that we MUST provide a “path to citizenship” (amnesty) to stop illegal aliens from being taken advantage of, paid “slave wages” and forced to work under horrible conditions.  Yet they send a LOT of money back home.  Rush pointed out yesterday that if things are so horrible for them here, then why do people from all over the world clamor to come here, and if they are being so terribly abused how is that they are able to send all this money back?  Wouldn’t they need every penny to survive if things are so bad?  The useful idiot he was talking to said “But people aren’t coming here.  We have to help the ones that are here because we need them.  Most people can’t qualify for visas.”  Well, if they aren’t qualified, why would we want them here, and why do we have to make them citizens...so they can vote for Demoncrats?

CASTE SYSTEM

September 7, 2015

How Democrats Created America's Social Caste System

By Michael Bargo, Jr.

Hundreds of years from now when academics have the objectivity to see what has been going on in the U.S., researchers may see the past two hundred years as the time when the Democrat Party of the U.S. created a politically convenient social caste system.

The U.S. was established upon the core belief that all persons are equal. That government should be composed of representatives who come from all levels of society, that there should be no elite political class. Nor should there be any permanent underclass.

Historically, nation states have established societies made up of at least three castes. At the bottom, economically and politically speaking, there is the lowest class. In India this has been called the Dalit or untouchable class. They were expected to perform the lowest paid jobs, those that required the least skill and education. The largest class, what we would today call the middle class, is the class that both contains the most persons and performs most of the work in the economy, ranging from skilled labor to skilled professional work. The highest class is always the class of political elites. They seek to preserve the caste system that keeps them in power, and they always endeavor to force the middle class and lower class, or the masses, to support them financially. 

It is interesting, using the language of sociologists and political scientists, to apply these caste concepts to the Democrat Party’s behavior.

For over two hundred years Democrats have worked to create and maintain a low caste based upon race.  For example, it was Democrats who wanted to maintain the South’s system of race-based labor exploitation known as slavery. In the 1820s Democrats who were anxious to maintain the low caste refused to follow federal laws that banned the existence of this caste in new states. America’s Civil War was not started by the North to abolish slavery. Rather, it was started by the South in order to preserve slavery.

American public universities are encouraged to continually create new paradigms of both political control and caste system maintenance. Social constructs, like scientific constructs, change through time and it is necessary to constantly renew the power of government and its authority. One example is the notion of “climate change” which enables universities to receive grant money.  

This “caste creep” has been happening under Democrats since they, like political elites for millennia before them, want to create a low caste that is dependent on them. They do not see an economic underclass as a long-term issue of economic oppression. Rather, they see an underclass as a way of keeping themselves in power. 

It is startling to consider that southern Democrats essentially treated black southerners in a manner similar to the way untouchables are treated in India. They were forced, by law, to attend different schools, to keep away from whites on trains and buses; and to use their own water fountains and bathrooms as if whites would be contaminated by having any contact with them.

A century later, in the early 1900s, Democrats brought former slaves into the Midwestern, eastern, and northeastern cities and placed them into carefully planned, racially segregated communities; a strategy called “apartheid” when it was practiced in South Africa.

Once the civil rights movement mandated that Democrats establish better employment conditions for minority black residents of the U.S., Democrats once again engaged in another startling and shameful effort to maintain their political control by creating another low caste: immigrant Hispanics. Democrats encouraged persons from Mexico and Central America to flee their impoverished nations and move to Democrat-controlled cities. They promised them “sanctuary” from immigration law in their cities, and supported them with benefits such as subsidized housing, education and health care. 

And like the blacks who moved north, these illegal immigrants found themselves forced into racially segregated communities. While housing segregation is technically illegal, Democrats were able to create a legal loophole by saying that these new low caste members were entitled to have representation in Congress.

Today Hispanics in Chicago are concentrated into 14 supermajority Hispanic Wards and their daughters are becoming single mothers at a slightly higher rate than blacks. Furthermore, their employment opportunities are limited to low-paid jobs no one else will do. The schools run by Democrat-controlled unions are so dysfunctional that Hispanics drop out of high school at a rate twice as high as blacks. This high dropout rate among minority blacks and Hispanics may be intentional. Proof of this is that Democrats never provide minority students with other educational choices. If they did have a good education they would move away from the racially segregated barrios and ghettoes and the caste system would gradually disappear.  

Democrats have been able to maintain this caste strategy by manipulating the perceptions and expectations of the masses. Their goal has been, as Orwell wrote in 1984, to convince voters to hold two contradictory concepts in mind at once: that Democrats are the Party that helps the poor and that poverty is not created by government but by capitalism.  

To this day, many blacks and Hispanics do not realize that the poverty and racial segregation they endure has been created by Democrats. Democrats preach equality but seek to make the social castes unequal. This is done to maintain their political power and control over the nation.

For their efforts in maintaining this caste system government workers are rewarded with highly paid jobs. These government jobs serve two important functions: to maintain the teachings of the government, and to provide campaign contributions to the Party. Today four of the top seven contributors to national campaigns are members of the Democrat Party’s government unions.

In Illinois, a Democrat dominated state, by 2020 there will be over 25,000 retired political elites who will collect over $100,000 a year in a pension. This enables them to spend up to half of their adult life forcing lower castes to work for them.

The idea that Democrats have exclusive control over those economically dependent upon government entitlements is widely held. And if one accepted that Democrats want to control these dependents, it is a small step to realize and accept that they have actively created these dependents. The realization among black leaders that black lives don’t matter arises from the caste system created by Democrats and their progressive liberal policies.  

It is unsettling to realize that a political party would create a social caste system. It is particularly disturbing to see how this is done by the Democrat Party that works to maintain the image of promoting social diversity and inclusion. But then this image may be an essential part of the effort. 

THE 51%

51% of immigrant households on welfare, 30% 'native Americans'

By PAUL BEDARD (@SECRETSBEDARD) • 9/2/15 10:51 AM

A comprehensive study of U.S. Census Bureau reports of welfare participation revealed Wednesday that 51 percent of immigrants -- legal and illegal -- access welfare programs, far more than the 30 percent of native-born Americans.

The Center for Immigration Studies analysis of the Census Survey of Income and Program Participation found "significantly higher rates" of immigrants on government programs than other government surveys, showing that Washington has done little to curb access to Medicaid, cash, food, and housing programs.

"If immigration is supposed to benefit the country, then immigrant welfare use should be much lower than native use," said Steven Camarota the Center's director of research and the report's author.

"However, two decades after welfare reform tried to curtail immigrant welfare use, immigrant households are using most programs at higher rates than natives. The low-skill level of many immigrants means that although most work, many also access welfare programs. If we continue to allow large numbers of less-educated immigrants to settle in the country, then immigrant welfare use will remain high," he added in a statement provided to Secrets.

While designed to help poor American families, there are several openings for immigrants -- legal and illegal -- to get welfare, according to the report.

"Limits only apply to some programs; most legal immigrants have been in the country long enough to qualify for welfare; the restrictions often do not apply to children; states often provide welfare to new immigrants on their own; naturalizing makes immigrants eligible for all programs; and, most important, im­migrants (including illegal immigrants) can receive benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth," said CIS.

The 53-page report indicates that most of the households surveyed are headed by a legal immigrant.

It found that Medicaid is the top program accessed by immigrants. But, CIS found, even "if that program is excluded it is still the case that 44 percent of immigrant households use one or more welfare programs compared to 26 percent of native households — a 19 percentage-point difference."

In the report provided to Secrets, CIS listed these key findings:

-- Welfare use is high for both new arrivals and long-time residents. Of households headed by immigrants who have been in the country for more than two decades, 48 percent access welfare.

-- No single program explains immigrants' higher overall welfare use. For example, not counting subsidized school lunch, welfare use is still 46 percent for immigrants and 28 percent for natives.

-- Immigrant households have much higher use of food programs (40 percent vs. 22 percent for natives) and Medicaid (42 percent vs. 23 percent). Immigrant use of cash programs is somewhat higher than natives (12 percent vs. 10 percent) and immigrant use of housing programs is similar to natives.

-- Welfare use varies among immigrant groups. Households headed by immigrants from Central America and Mexico (73 percent), the Caribbean (51 percent), and Africa (48 percent) have the highest overall welfare use. Those from East Asia (32 percent), Europe (26 percent), and South Asia (17 percent) have the lowest.

-- Many immigrants struggle to support their children, and a large share of welfare is received on behalf of U.S.-born children. However, even immigrant households without children have significantly higher welfare use than native households without children — 30 percent vs. 20 percent.

-- In 2012, 76 percent of households headed by an immigrant who had not graduated high school used one or more welfare programs, as did 63 percent of households headed by an immigrant with only a high school education.

-- In the four top immigrant-receiving states, use of welfare by immigrant households is significantly higher than that of native households: California (55 percent vs. 30 percent), New York (59 percent vs. 33 percent), Texas (57 percent vs. 34 percent), and Florida (42 percent vs. 28 percent).

Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com.