"And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart." Jeremiah 29:13

Search My Blog Using Key Words, Phrases, Names, Etc.

Thursday, November 16, 2017

Concern-Agat | Russian 3M-54 Club-K Container Missile System | Simulatio...

Frightening thought when these freight containers are on every freight train, and hauled on tractor trailers everywhere across the U.S. This weaponry could be moving through your back yard by the Russians or Muslims without us having a clue.

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Conservatives Have to Become the Resistance


Despite the election of President Trump, which seemed to momentarily disrupt Democratic Party plans for total control, conservatives are losing politically. Trump’s basic failure was the inability to seize control of the Pentagon and intelligence agencies away from Obama and his holdovers. Conservatives that Trump tried to put in were systematically purged. He’s the ultimate target. It’s unclear whether he can save himself.
We see the results in the failure by Trump and his top officials to name radical Islamists as the enemy in his 9/11 speech. Homeland security analyst Ryan Mauro says, “By omitting any mention of Islamism or jihad, the Trump Administration’s language is even closer to that of the Obama Administration than Hillary Clinton, who defined the enemy as ‘jihadists.’ President Obama refused to use any terminology associated with Islam at all.” Obama did say, however, that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
Trump is making deals with Democrats, ranging from debt to taxes and spending, as the national debt surpasses $20 trillion. He seems to be leaning toward some form of amnesty for DACA “dreamers” and maybe other illegal aliens. The Democrats, meanwhile, are embracing a total federal takeover of the health care system, as represented by Senator Bernie Sanders’ unveiling of a “single-payer” plan to replace Obamacare. This is what happens when federal programs fail. The Marxists call for more government to “fix” the problem they created.
Image result for Conservatives Have to Become the ResistanceOf course, this is happening because the Republican Congress failed to repeal and replace Obamacare, and is now moving on to something else.
What’s happening is a phenomenon that writer Vic Biorseth calls “Obamunism,” the “American” brand of communism that marches on. Obama is out of office, but not out of power.
Considering the failures of the Trump Administration and the Republican Congress, conservatives are the ones who should be leading the resistance. They did so, at one time, and it was called the Tea Party movement. It helped elect a Republican Congress, despite the efforts of the Obama IRS to stifle and strangle this grass-roots movement of conservatives dedicated to individual freedom, private property rights, and small government.
But now we learn that the Trump Justice Department has abandoned any effort to hold the IRS accountable for its political persecution of the Tea Party movement. Lois Lerner, the IRS official at the center of the scandal over targeting of Tea Party groups, will not be prosecuted.
Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said, “I have the utmost respect for Attorney General Sessions, but I’m troubled by his Department’s lack of action to fully respond to our request and deliver accountability. Today’s decision does not mean Lois Lerner is innocent. It means the justice system in Washington is deeply flawed.”
Yet the Department of Justice describes itself as leading the nation “in ensuring the protection of all Americans while preserving their constitutional freedoms.”
Republicans say Obama’s guy, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, was “repeatedly uncooperative and misled congressional investigators” during the scandal. But’s he’s still there.
Some conservatives are so troubled by what’s going on that they are circulating information from marijuana enthusiast Roger Stone that Trump has been drugged by a globalist satanic cabal. Someone wrote to me, “Trump is incrementally being poisoned through his ice tea or other foods and needs an independent third party doctor to examine him.”
What we are witnessing does not require a sinister conspiracy theory. This is the growth of government, including the swamp that Trump said he would drain. But what is the swamp?
The decision to keep Koskinen and protect Lerner demonstrates the corruption that characterizes the nature of the swamp. But the Justice Department appointment of former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Russia-gate Special Counsel is another example.
Nobody likes to talk about it, but Mueller covered-up the nature of the real perpetrators of the post-9/11 anthrax attacks. The evidence indicates that the anthrax was stolen from a U.S. lab by an al Qaeda operative. Instead, Mueller led an investigation that blamed a series of innocent American scientists, eventually forcing one to take his own life. He followed up by ordering FBI training materials to ignore the role of the Islamist ideology that inspires the enemy. Judicial Watch said Mueller thus became an agent of a broader Islamist “influence operation” aimed at “our government and Constitution.” These forces still exist, as evidenced by Trump’s failure to name the enemy on 9/11.
The corruption is so deep that even one of Mueller’s own FBI investigators, Kenneth Lambert, sued him for the job he did. Now, a former State Department analyst who has followed the case is suing the DOJ and the FBI for documents that are still being improperly withheld.
The FBI seems hopelessly corrupt. But despite all the talk about Mueller’s successor, James Comey, failing to properly investigate Hillary Clinton, it is President Obama who should have been investigated. In a dump of documents (189 pages of “investigative notes”) from the FBI on a Friday last September, it was noticed by a few journalists that Obama, like Clinton, was described as using a non-secure private email address. They communicated through these accounts. What’s more, Obama used a pseudonym. What was he hiding? Who else was he communicating with?
If the FBI suddenly investigated Obama because he and Hillary were guilty of the same crimes, that would have not only derailed Hillary’s campaign but raised questions about why the FBI did not conduct a CARL test (Character, Associates, Reputation, and the Loyalty) of Obama when he ran for office. The FBI had to know of Obama’s communist connections because the bureau had monitored his communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, for 19 years.
It is fascinating that federal employees have to fill out a background investigation form (Standard Form 86) for national security positions, but Obama and members of his Congressional Progressive Caucus do not.  Meanwhile, Special Counsel Mueller and his FBI agents are going through every nook and cranny of President Trump’s personal, political, and financial life, in order to make a case against him and force his resignation from office.
It’s important to remember that Trump’s election was a major setback for the identity politics of the left, as white people finally reacted to the “Brown is the New White” electoral strategy that Obama and Hillary were depending on to win. The author of a book by the same name, Steve Phillips, has a history of involvement in Marxist politics, just like his friend, Barack Obama.  They had counted on the workers to carry the Obama revolution forward. The white working class deserted the Democrats.
As Obama emerges again on the national and global scene, the Trump victory gives conservatives the opportunity to understand what happened under our first Marxist President and how it can be reversed. The lesson, eight months into the Trump presidency, is that conservatives have to become the resistance. They have to revolt against the Republican establishment while continuing to pressure the Trump Administration to fulfill its campaign promises.
Until and unless Obama is investigated by the Trump Department of Justice (with a new FBI Director by the name of Christopher Wray), there is no hope for our country.
The problem is that, according to his bio, Wray in 2003 served as assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and that, in addition to overseeing criminal matters, he “played a key role in the evolving national security mission of the Department.” That means he had to know that Mueller’s probe of the post-9/11 anthrax attacks was badly mishandled and that the real culprits got away. Wray has to know that Mueller’s objective is to take down Trump.
A full-scale probe of the former president and his involvement in a communist network that stretches from Havana to Moscow and even to the Vatican in Rome may be the only way for Trump to truly save his presidency. It would fulfill his central campaign promise to “drain the swamp.” He must fire Mueller and then urge his supporters to be the “resistance” to Marxist identity politics and government corruption.   
For those who question the inclusion of the Vatican in this list, consider that George Neumayr’s new book, The Political Pope, identifies a communist mentor for Francis as well and argues the case that the Marxist-oriented pope is “abandoning conservatives” so Rome can be included in a post-Christian New World Order.
The corruption in the U.S. intelligence community threatens our national survival. It explains not only the timid treatment of radical Islam, but why the Obama Administration failed to stop North Korea’s acquisition of nuclear weapons, why it made a deal to virtually assure that Iran would get them as well, and why the U.S. is still bogged down in a no-win war in Afghanistan. National survival requires a winning strategy that identifies our enemies.    
An investigation of Obama is absolutely critical to safeguarding the national security of the United States and evicting traitors from the swamp. What the Justice Department and the FBI should be doing is probing Obama’s operations as a foreign agent for anti-American interests ranging from the Muslim Brotherhood to the Russians and the international communist movement. That’s is the case we make in our two recent books, Comrade Obama Unmasked and Red Star Rising.
However, on his way out of office, in a clever dialectical maneuver, Obama launched Russia-gate to divert attention from his own background and curious and controversial foreign connections.
It was a classic communist propaganda technique. As the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security explained in a 1967 study on The Techniques of Soviet Propaganda, “Soviet propaganda uses as a fundamental psychological stratagem the ancient and familiar ruse of crying ‘thief’ to divert attention from its own thievery.”
By design, Russia-gate is missing the real Russian agent – Obama himself. This is the worst cover-up of all time, concealing from the American people that their first Marxist President was a security risk possibly being blackmailed by Russia.
Our upcoming November 10 conference, “How the Russia-gate Conspiracy Theory Has Set the Stage for Obama’s Return to Power,” will take place from Noon to 5:00 pm, Zenger Room, National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor, Washington, DC 20045. Please go to www.usasurvival.orgfor more information.

Is Writing for Jihad Watch Now a Fireable Offense?

I am writing in support of Christine Douglass-Williams, a member of the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, who I understand has come under scrutiny for writing for my web publication, Jihad Watch.

The freedom of speech is under severe attack all over the world, and the controversy that has erupted in Canada over Christine Douglass-Williams, a board member with the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, writing for Jihad Watch, is ongoing. The Canadian Press reported: “With concerns about the post circulating among her fellow board members, it came to the attention of Heritage Minister Melanie Joly, whose department is responsible for the foundation.” So I sent this letter to Joly (you will not be at all surprised to learn that I have not received any reply):
Honorable Minister Joly:
Image result for Robert spencer jihad watchThe Canadian Press has identified as questionable one specific piece that Ms. Douglass-Williams published at Jihad Watch (among other places), in which she refers to deceptive Islamic supremacists. However, neither the Canadian Press nor anyone else has offered any evidence for why what Ms. Douglass-Williams wrote was wrong or hateful.
In the piece, she referred to Muslims who posture as moderate when they actually aren’t. Do such people actually exist? Consider the imam Fawaz Damra, who according to contemporary media reports was known in the Cleveland area “as a voice of moderate, mainstream Islam.” He “was often seen at public events with politicians and leaders of other faiths, including several prayer services after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.” Meanwhile, he was “disparaging Jews in Arabic as ‘pigs and monkeys’ and raising money for the killing of Jews by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.”
This is just one example of many that confirm the correctness of Ms. Douglass-Williams’ observations. Yet despite the reasonableness of her statement, the Canadian Press reports that “there are concerns that Douglass-Williams’s views are a hindrance to her work with the foundation and an affront to its legally defined mandate, which is to help eliminate racism and racial discrimination in Canada.”
There is in reality no racial issue involved here. Jihad terror and the deceptions of some terror-aligned leaders is not race. Islamic jihadists are people of all races. Ms. Douglass-Williams, in standing against jihad terror and Sharia oppression, is not only not jeopardizing the work of the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, but enhancing it, but standing against the spread of an ideology that is frankly and unapologetically supremacist and violent, and set against the survival of Canadian pluralist principles.
Meanwhile, I am deeply concerned that Ms. Douglass-Williams is being smeared by association with me and Jihad Watch. I have been writing against jihad terror and Sharia-justified denial of human rights for many years, and I’ve found over the years that one tactic that the allies of jihad terror and Sharia supremacist groups frequently resort to in Canada, the U.S., and Western Europe is to smear those who expose their activities as “hatemongers,” “racists,” and “bigots.” But a false charge does not become true for being often repeated. I invite you to read any of my 17 published books (which I am happy to send you free of charge), thousands of articles, and 45,000+ posts at Jihad Watch, and am confident that you find not a trace of “hatred,” “racism,” or “bigotry” in them. All my work has been and is in defense of the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law. More to the point, I invite you to read all of Ms. Douglass-Williams’ published writings at Jihad Watch, and you will see that there is no reason for anyone who is concerned about racism and about preserving pluralistic societies to be concerned.
If I can answer any questions or be of any possible service to you in your further consideration of this or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Kindest regards
Robert Spencer
director, Jihad Watch
Topic Tags: 

Sunday, August 6, 2017

Google bows to Muslim pressure, changes search results to conceal criticism of Islam and jihad

“Google’s first page results for searches of terms such as ‘jihad’, ‘shariah’ and ‘taqiyya’ now return mostly reputable explanations of the Islamic concepts. Taqiyya, which describes the circumstances under which a Muslim can conceal their belief in the face of persecution, is the sole term to feature a questionable website on the first page of results.”
“Reputable” according to whom? “Questionable” according to whom? Google is bowing to pressure from Muslim such as Omar Suleiman without considering whether those who are demanding that the search results be skewed in a particular direction might have an ulterior motive. Could it be that those who are pressuring Google want to conceal certain truths about Islam that they would prefer that non-Muslims not know?
This is a real possibility, but of course Google executives would have to study Islam themselves in order to determine whether or not these Muslims who are pressuring them are misleading them, and that’s not going to happen. Still, they could have done a bit more due diligence, and made some efforts to determine whether those being tarred as “hate groups” really deserved the label, whether the Southern Poverty Law Center was really a reliable and objective arbiter of which groups were and weren’t “hate groups,” and whether the information that Google was suppressing was really inaccurate. Instead, Google seems to have swallowed uncritically everything Omar Suleiman and the others said.
Suleiman, however, still isn’t satisfied: “One leading activist in favor of Google modifying its results told Anadolu Agency he noticed the updated search results and thanked the company for its efforts but said ‘much still needs to be done.'” He claimed that Google has a responsibility to “combat ‘hate-filled Islamophobia’ similar to how they work to suppress extremist propaganda from groups like Daesh and al-Qaeda.”
This should have made Google executives stop and think. The Islamic State (Daesh) and al-Qaeda slaughter people gleefully and call openly for more mass murders. There is no firm evidence that anyone has ever been killed by a “hate-filled Islamophobe,” and the claim that Hamas-linked CAIR and the SPLC make in this article, that this supposed “Islamophobic” rhetoric has led to a rise in hate crimes against Muslims, is supported by not a scintilla of evidence. Suleiman is equating critical words with murderous deeds, and Google should have realized at that point that he had an agenda and wasn’t being honest.
“Suleiman said Google should differentiate between ‘criticism of Islam and hate-filled Islamophobia’, emphasizing the religion should not be infringed upon.”
That’s not clear. He apparently is saying that there is acceptable criticism of Islam that is not “hate-filled Islamophobia,” but if that is so, then the religion can be “infringed upon,” at least by this legitimate criticism, no? Or if the claim that Islam must not be “infringed upon” means that it cannot be criticized, why is that so of Islam but not any other religion?
Suleiman says: “I don’t think Google has a responsibility to portray Muslims positively. I think Google has a responsibility to weed out fear-mongering and hate groups but I don’t want Google to silence critique of Islam, or critique of Muslims.”
The problem with this is that neither Suleiman, nor Hamas-linked CAIR, nor anyone else who has ever said that there was a distinction between legitimate criticism of Islam and “hate-filled Islamophobia” has ever identified anyone he thinks is a legitimate critic of Islam who is not “Islamophobic.” Over 16 books now, as well as thousands of articles and over 45,000 blog posts, I have attempted to present a reasonable, documented, fair and accurate criticism of Islam and explanation of the jihad doctrine. Nevertheless, I’ve been tarred as a purveyor of “hate-filled Islamophobia” by groups and individuals that have never given my work a fair hearing, but have read it only to search of gotcha!-quotes they could wrench away from their obvious benign meaning in order to claim I was saying something hateful. And this isn’t just me — this happens to anyone and everyone who dares to utter a critical word about Islam or jihad, wherever they are on the political spectrum.
This experience, reinforced countless times over a decade and a half, makes me extremely skeptical when Omar Suleiman says that he doesn’t want Google to silence critique of Islam. If he could produce some critique of Islam that he approved of, my skepticism might lessen. But he won’t, and can’t. It seems much more likely that he pressured Google to skew its results so as to deep-six criticism of Islam, but knowing that he couldn’t tell them that he was trying to bring Google into line with Sharia blasphemy laws forbidding criticism of Islam, he told them instead that he wasn’t against criticism of Islam as such, but only against “hate-filled Islamophobia.”
Mr. Suleiman, if you and your colleagues hadn’t spent years tarring rational criticism of Islam that was accurate and presented in good faith as “hate-filled Islamophobia,” I might have believed you. But as one of your primary victims, I don’t.
I discuss the Islamic supremacist initiative to compel the West to accept Sharia blasphemy laws under the guise of stamping out “hate speech,” an initiative that is now galloping forward and achieving immense success, in my new book The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies).
“US Muslim groups welcome changes to Google results,” by Michael Hernandez, Anadolu Agency, July 26, 2017:
Queries about Islam and Muslims on the world’s largest search engine have been updated amid public pressure to tamp down alleged disinformation from hate groups.
However, activists who have worked to bring about the changes say more work remains.
In the past, users on Google seeking information about the religion or its adherents would be presented prominently with what many criticized as propaganda from hate groups.
That has recently changed.
Google’s first page results for searches of terms such as “jihad”, “shariah” and “taqiyya” now return mostly reputable explanations of the Islamic concepts. Taqiyya, which describes the circumstances under which a Muslim can conceal their belief in the face of persecution, is the sole term to feature a questionable website on the first page of results.
Google did not confirm to Anadolu Agency the changes but said it is constantly updating its algorithms.
The search giant referred the agency to a recent blog post in which it said it was working to push back on what it called “offensive or clearly misleading content”.
“To help prevent the spread of such content for this subset of queries, we’ve improved our evaluation methods and made algorithmic updates to surface more authoritative content,” it said.
Combatting Islamophobia
One leading activist in favor of Google modifying its results told Anadolu Agency he noticed the updated search results and thanked the company for its efforts but said “much still needs to be done”.
Imam Omar Suleiman, who has been at the forefront of efforts to combat misleading information about his faith on the web, argued that Google and companies like it have a responsibility to combat “hate-filled Islamophobia” similar to how they work to suppress extremist propaganda from groups like Daesh and al-Qaeda.
Suleiman said Google should differentiate between “criticism of Islam and hate-filled Islamophobia”, emphasizing the religion should not be infringed upon.
“Google does not need to silence criticism of Islam and honest discussions about Islam, but heavily funded hate groups that are able to work the SEOs to get their websites showing up on the first, second page – I think that’s deeply problematic,” the popular imam said, referring to search engine optimization — the way in which websites are able to improve their placement in search engine results.
The task of sorting out legitimate criticism or debate about Islam from misleading information will not be easy, particularly in societies that value freedom of speech — a fact Suleiman, who is the founder and president of the Yaqeen Institute for Islamic Research, acknowledged.
Google told Anadolu Agency it does not seek to remove content from its platform simply because it is unsavory or unpopular, but does its best to prevent hate speech from appearing.
One way it is working to improve on the effort is by providing users with a mechanism in autofill suggestions that would allow users to alert the company when an offensive term appears.
Amid a nationwide increase in hate crimes targeting Muslims, the effort to combat misinformation is more imperative than ever, Muslim group said.
Hate crimes against Muslims
The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the U.S.’s largest Muslim advocacy group, said it tracked a 584 percent increase in anti-Muslim hate crimes from 2014 to 2016.
The group is not the only one to find such numbers. The Southern Poverty Law Center tracks hate incidents and groups in the U.S. and said it found hate groups increasing in number for the second consecutive year in 2016, fueled largely by a near-tripling of anti-Muslim groups.
“The growth has been accompanied by a rash of crimes targeting Muslims,” the center said in its annual report.
Information people receive from a variety of sources — television, radio and the Internet — no doubt plays a role in fomenting hatred among some of those who perpetrate attacks but could also be used to stop them.
“We are seeing a rise in hate crimes towards Muslims, and there is a direct connection between this demonization of Islam and Muslims and the hate crimes that are being perpetuated against Muslims in the United States,” Suleiman said.
Still, he maintained that such voices should not be censored but “should not be featured prominently as authoritative voices.”
Suleiman added: “I don’t think Google has a responsibility to portray Muslims positively. I think Google has a responsibility to weed out fear-mongering and hate groups but I don’t want Google to silence critique of Islam, or critique of Muslims…
Yes, you do.