Friday, December 23, 2016



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has praised the victories of the populist Five Star Movement in the Italian referendum and the election of Donald Trump in the United States, claiming these developments are just the beginning of the “rebellion”.
Orbán is referring to the taking back of Western countries from Leftist globalists who have flooded Europe with Muslim migrants who are responsible for an unprecedented wave of crime throughout Europe, including widespread sex assaults. In July, Orban stated that migrants were “poison” and “not needed”:
Orban said the migration and foreign policy plans of the US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump were “vital” for Hungary…. the US Democrats supported migration as well as what he described as “democracy export”, while Hungary – like Trump – opposed both, “making it clear where Hungary’s interests lie”….The Democrats’ foreign policy is bad for Europe, and deadly for Hungary,” he said. “The migration and foreign policy advocated by the Republican candidate, Mr Trump, is good for Europe and vital for Hungary.”

“Orbán Declares 2017 the ‘Year of Rebellion’”, by Chris Tomlinson, Breitbart, December 21, 2016:
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has praised the victories of the populist Five Star Movement in the Italian referendum and the election of Donald Trump in the United States, claiming these developments are just the beginning of the “rebellion”.
The Hungarian leader, who is known to be outspoken in expressing his opinions on mass migration and the migrant crisis claims a kinship with rising populist leaders and movements across Europe and the United States.
Mr. Orbán said his party Fidesz was a “self-made story … about ten to twenty, or thirty guys coming from somewhere, rising up, fed up with the world that surrounds them” who wanted to change it.
He claimed to see the same attitude in President-Elect Donald J. Trump, saying in an interview with Hungarian news site that Trump had what he called a “self-made man mentality.” He went on to add, “Self-made figures are people who themselves are successful, who do not begin a sentence with ‘I know people,’ but say, ‘I’ve done that.’ ”
For the Hungarian prime minister, 2016 isn’t the end of the populist rebellion against globalism and the elites. Asked if he thought the anti-globalist sentiment would spread he said, “I am convinced that 2017 will be a year of rebellion. Whether they [the globalists] put down the rebellion or not, that’s another story.”
Orbán cited the victory of the Italian opposition in the recent referendum and said that despite the defeat for anti-mass migration candidate Norbert Hofer in the Austrian presidential elections, the rebellion was growing.
“Next year will be elections in Germany, the Netherlands, France. A lot of things can happen,” he said. Mr. Orbán said there were two rebellions going on, one was a revolt of the working and middle class which led to Brexit and the victory of Donald Trump and the other “…is a kind of national rebellion.
“The ‘United States of Europe’ advocates, by being stealthy, encroachments on the sovereignty of individual nations using the issue of asylum.
“All of this is surrounded by political correctness, containment, intellectual rebellion against stigma. The rebellion started in 2016, will be even more enhanced in the future. Therefore, I say that 2017 will be a year of rebellion,” he said.
When asked if he thought it was contradictory for a ruling government to declare themselves rebels, he said, “The real freedom fighters are the people.”
He went on to add, “If we believe in Hungary, the Hungarian people, one inside the other, then we are facing a bright future,” adding that children should be taught “not to seek the easy way, but go their own way even when it seems difficult, then the country can be great again.
“America, what is your message? Let’s make Hungary great again!”


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
So much for peace on earth and goodwill to all. Who would have thought only two decades ago that a nativity scene would need heavily armed guards? The guards at Canterbury Cathedral situation demonstrates an inherent clash of values.
Christianity is already virtually wiped out in the middle east by jihadist thugs and its well on its way on Western soil, unless Westerners have a change in attitude and wake up.

“So much for peace and goodwill to all men: Machine gun police guard Canterbury cathedral and its nativity scene as security is stepped up across the UK in the wake of attack on Berlin”, by Rebecca Camber, Liz Hull and Andy Dolan, Daily Mail, December 20, 2016:
Within the hallowed grounds of one of the most famous Christian buildings in England, the traditional Christmas nativity scene should have been a place of peace and tranquillity.
But yesterday crowds who gathered to appreciate the sacred scene at Canterbury Cathedral were confronted by the fearful sight of armed police bearing assault rifles patrolling the manger where the figure of Baby Jesus lay.
The extraordinary image offers a chilling glimpse of Britain braced for a possible terrorist attack just days before Christmas in the wake of atrocities in Berlin and Turkey.
Security was stepped up dramatically around the UK yesterday after a total of 12 people were killed and 58 injured when a truck was driven into crowds at a Christmas market in Berlin, hours after a Russian Ambassador was assassinated in Turkey on Monday night.
Within hours of the carnage which Islamic State claimed responsibility for, police in Britain responded by throwing a ring of steel around potential major targets including the Changing of the Guard.
In an unprecedented move, Scotland Yard announced that roads around Buckingham Palace would be closed to vehicles from today and additional barriers placed around the guard movements over the next three months.
The measure was described as a ‘necessary precaution’ to protect the substantial number of military personnel and huge crowds drawn to the spectacle which takes place daily between 10.45am and 12.30pm.
Elsewhere in the country, other forces dispatched scores of officers to Christmas markets in towns and cities to prevent a copycat attack….
Police say there is no intelligence to suggest an attack in Britain is imminent.But there are fears that the call from ISIS could lead to a lone wolf attack from any of the 400 militants who have returned here from fighting in Syria or Iraq……


 Prince Charles warns against Trump and “the dark days of the 30’s” during Holocaust
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
According to Islamic tradition, when Muhammad migrated from Mecca to Medina, he wasn’t just “seeking the freedom for himself and his followers to worship.” He became at that point for the first time a political and military leader as well as a religious one. He began for the first time to get Qur’anic “revelations” exhorting Muslims to wage war against unbelievers.
Just as Charles is ignoring the historical context and circumstances of Muhammad’s hijrah, so now he is also ignoring the manifest fact that all too many Muslim migrants are not “seeking the freedom…to worship,” but are coming to Europe to conquer and Islamize the land, emigrating, after Muhammad’s pattern, “for the sake of Allah” (cf. Qur’an 4:100).
Charles also says: “We are now seeing the rise of many populist groups across the world that are increasingly aggressive towards those who adhere to a minority faith.” This is the familiar “Muslims are the new Jews” theme. This is a common Leftist talking point. Many, many others have made this claim before Chomsky, including Noam Chomsky; Bernie Sanders; the notorious non-Muslim Islamic apologist Karen Armstrong; Jeffrey Goldberg, the journalist at The Atlantic who some time ago interviewed Barack Obama about why he won’t call Islamic terrorism Islamic; liberal media pundit Reza Aslan; Muslim Brotherhood-linked Congressman Keith Ellison; Nicholas Kristof, one of the New York Times’ Mideast pontificators; Canadian Muslim leader Syed Sohawardy; and Philadelphia chapter leader of the Council on American-Islamic Relations Jacob Bender. Many others have repeated it.
The blazingly brilliant Daniel Greenfield takes it apart in this video.
The idea that Muslims are the new Jews is put forward by the Left, but it also has opponents on the Left. In 2014, as part of his ongoing awakening to the nature and reality of the jihad threat, Bill Maher noted:
Jews weren’t oppressing anybody. There weren’t 5,000 militant Jewish groups. They didn’t do a study of treatment of women around the world and find that Jews were at the bottom of it. There weren’t 10 Jewish countries in the world that were putting gay people to death just for being gay.
Indeed. Further, no one is calling for or justifying genocide of Muslims. No individual or group opposed to Islam is remotely comparable to the National Socialists. Not that facts have ever gotten in the way of a good meme.
Maher isn’t alone on the Left in having pointed out the absurdity of likening opposition to jihad to the lead-up to the Holocaust. The late Christopher Hitchens also refuted this idea when writing a few years ago about the notorious Ground Zero Mosque proposal:
“Some of what people are saying in this mosque controversy is very similar to what German media was saying about Jews in the 1920s and 1930s,” Imam Abdullah Antepli, Muslim chaplain at Duke University, told the New York Times. Yes, we all recall the Jewish suicide bombers of that period, as we recall the Jewish yells for holy war, the Jewish demands for the veiling of women and the stoning of homosexuals, and the Jewish burning of newspapers that published cartoons they did not like.

“Prince Charles Urges Brits To Think Of Muhammad This Christmas, Speaks Out Against ‘Aggressive Populism,’” Breitbart London, December 22, 2016:
Britain’s Prince of Wales has spoken out on national radio in an appeal for persecuted Christians and minorities across the world, but the Royal also moved to criticize “populist groups”.
Speaking on Thought for the Day, a short early morning slot on BBC Radio 4 dedicated to faith issues, the son of Britain’s reigning Monarch urged listeners to think of persecuted religious figures — singling out Jesus Christ and Muhammad — this Christmas. He said:
Normally at Christmas we think of the Birth of our Lord Jesus Christ. I wonder though if this year we might remember how the story of the nativity unfolds, with the fleeing of the holy family to escape violent persecution. And we might also remember that when the prophet Muhammad migrated from Mecca to Medina he was seeking the freedom for himself and his followers to worship.
Whichever religious path we follow, the destination is the same – to value and respect the other person, accepting their right to live out their peaceful response to the love of God.
The future King spent much of his short radio appearance discussing the persecution of Christians without going so far as to name the main source of this persecution — radical Islam. Referring to “insidious forms of extremism… which aim to eliminate all types of religious diversity”, the Prince also mentioned the Yazidis who are coming under extreme persecution from Islamic State, Jews who have been leaving Europe in record numbers to escape Islamist persecution, and the Muslim Ahmadis who are treated as apostates by many mainstream Muslims.
Speaking of his recent interactions with persecuted Christians, Prince Charles said:
In London recently I met a Jesuit protest from Syria…. He told me of mass kidnappings in parts of Syria and Iraq and how he feared that Christians would be driven en masse from the lands described in the Bible. He thought it quite possible there would be no Christians in Iraq in five years.
While he was speaking to promote the receiving of asylum seekers into Europe, the Prince also criticized what he called “populist” movements. Britain’s Guardian newspaper claimed of the comments: “His address will be seen by some as a veiled reference to the election of Donald Trump in the US, the rise of the far right in Europe, and increasingly hostile attitudes to refugees in the UK”.
The Prince said, implying a relationship between Europe’s growing pro-borders movement with European Fascism of the last century:
We are now seeing the rise of many populist groups across the world that are increasingly aggressive towards those who adhere to a minority faith. All of this has deeply disturbing echoes of the dark days of the 1930s.
I was born in 1948, just after the end of World War Two, in which my parents’ generation had fought and died in a battle against intolerance, monstrous extremism and an inhuman attempt to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe.
That nearly 70 years later we should still be seeing such evil persecution is, to me, beyond all belief. We owe it to those who suffered and died so horribly not to repeat the horrors of the past….


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
You could not make this up if you tried.

Clueless Angela Merkel tried to TRAIN migrants as LORRY DRIVERS ahead of Berlin attack

ANGELA MERKEL tried to force German trade unions to accept asylum seekers as lorry drivers in a bitter row shortly before the Christmas market tragedy in Berlin.
The Express, December 22, 2016:
Angela Merkel pressured trade unions to take on refugees as lorry drivers before the terror attack
Twelve people were killed and 48 others injured when a man suspected of being an asylum seeker and part of the Islamic State terrorist group drove into a Christmas market in the country’s capital.
Up to £84,000 (100,000€) have been offered to find the 23-year-old Tunisian Anis Amri, who is believed to be armed and dangerous.
But as the country mourns the tragedy ahead of the festive season, it was revealed that Merkel had put massive pressure on unions to speed up the process in which unskilled refugees could be trained as lorry drivers.

The German leader said in September companies should “consider hiring and training refugees as lorry drivers” while they are awaiting their asylum procedure as there is a “big shortage of lorry drivers in the country.”
She said that the plan was to get a change in the rules to make it cheaper for them to apply for a licence, with the plan for them to pay just £420 (500€) to swap a Syrian driving licence for a German one.
Unveiling the plan she said: “We all need to be ready to implement practical solutions. We have only recently discussed in the Cabinet the possibilities of allowing a Syrian driving licence to be converted to a German one for 500€.
Same type of lorry used in the attackCATERS
Merkel wanted Syrian drivers to be able to buy a German licence for £420
“And of course not every refugee will have 500 EUR, so what we want to do is set up a loan program where they can borrow the money. Then when they have been working, they can pay the 500€ back. At the end of the day, lorry drivers are needed all over the place.”
The Organisation of German Professional Lorry Drivers (BDBK) led the opposition to the plan.
At the time, BDBK chairman Wolfgang Westermann said: “We give a definite no to use refugees as lorry drivers. Professional lorry drivers need a thorough and qualified education. You cannot let everyone drive off in a 40-ton lorry.”
The GPS data of the highjacked lorry used in the Christmas market attack allegedly showed the difficulties for an untrained person learning to drive such a lorry.
Police by the Brandenburg gateAFP
The supposed perpetrator of the Berlin attack, Anis Amri, is still at large
The manager of the Polish transport company which owns the lorry, said that the alleged perpetrator most likely did not have experience behind the wheel.
Ariel Zurawski said: “The GPS data suggests that somebody first needed to practice his driving.”
He explained that GPS data show that the lorry was driving in an “uncontrolled manner.”


Published on Dec 22, 2016
Desperation and hubris. It is all the Democratic Party has left after being shown the door by the American people. Not the Russians, not a majority of racist angry white male voters, and not fake news. The Democrats did this to themselves with the sycophantic assistance of the media saddled with firm directives coming from the DNC and the treasonous divide and conquer subversion of George Soros.

Now, in the face of that defeat. The world fully sees the bitter arrogance and cult like focus of the shattered Democratic Party. Powerless yet still attempting to push safety over a cliff.

Donald Trump won 3,084 of the United States 3,141 counties or county equivalents in the American heartland. And it doesn’t matter how arrogantly the Democrats belittle America’s heartland anymore. For eight long years Washington D.C. had disconnected itself from this massive base. And now, it is the Democrats that are paralyzed by their own reckless clawing avarice.


Published on Dec 22, 2016
The evidence is conclusive. Barack Obama's birth certificate is a forged document. Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Cold Case Posse holds an urgent press conference revealing forensic evidence that proves once and for all that Donald Trump was right about Obama's birth certificate. The document is a fraud. Share this video with those who refuse to accept the undeniable evidence that Barack Obama is a Ghost President.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The joint U.S.-Canada statement issued by the White House on Tuesday permanently blocked 115 million acres of the Arctic Ocean — including all of the Chukchi Sea and the vast majority of the Beaufort Sea — from energy development. Said the statement:
Today, President Obama and Prime Minister Trudeau are proud to launch actions ensuring a strong, sustainable and viable Arctic economy and ecosystem … free from the future risks of offshore oil and gas activity….
Today … the United States is designating the vast majority of U.S. waters in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas as indefinitely off limits to offshore oil and gas leasing, and Canada will designate all Arctic Canadian waters as indefinitely off limits to future offshore Arctic oil and gas leasing.
Early reactions to the statement were predictable: This is the pronouncement of a petulant child throwing spikes in front of the Trump administration's bus. As Stephen Moore, one of Trump’s transition team members, laughingly told Lou Dobbs on Fox News Tuesday night: “Trump will repeal this on Day Two!”

Randall Luthi, president of the oil industry group National Ocean Industries Association, said “The arrogance of the decision is unfathomable, but unfortunately not surprising.”
Alaska Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski’s response was slightly more measured: “President Obama has once again treated the Arctic like a snow globe, ignoring the desires of the people who live, work, and raise a family there. I cannot wait to work with the next administration to reverse this decision.”
Erik Milito, of the American Petroleum Institute (API), was equally optimistic about overturning Obama’s pronouncement:
Blocking offshore exploration weakens our national security, destroys good-paying jobs, and could make energy less affordable for consumers.
Fortunately, there is no such thing as a permanent ban, and we look forward to working with the new administration on fulfilling the will of American voters on energy production.
A closer look at the statement, however, reveals a much more dangerous strategy being employed by the White House. It’s not an executive order, but is based instead upon a law passed in 1953 regarding continental shelf development. Called the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, it is an act “to provide for the jurisdictions of the United States over the submerged lands of the outer Continental Shelf, and to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to lease such lands for certain purposes.” Deep within the act is the power granted to the president to unilaterally withdraw any of those lands at any time:
The President of the United States may, from time to time, withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the outer Continental Shelf.
Climate-change lawyers have scoured the act for any provision allowing for the reversal of such action and finding none are celebrating Obama’s statement as permanent and beyond the reach of the incoming president to do anything on Day Two or thereafter. A senior White House official said the Obama administration is “quite confident” that the decision could not be unwound by Trump and that efforts to do so would require congressional action followed by years of litigation.
President Bill Clinton placed a temporary ban on developing certain offshore areas, which was reversed in 2008 by President George W. Bush. But that ban was temporary and this one is permanent.
Obama can be chided for an act that appears infantile, in retaliation for Trump’s victory over Clinton last month. It can be characterized as a last-minute rebuff to the incoming administration’s determination to open presently off-limits areas to energy development. It can be construed as a final bone to be tossed to environmentalists who remain adamant in their belief that all natural resources such as oil, natural gas, and coal must remain in the ground “where they belong.” Some have concluded that this is Obama’s final attempt to secure a permanent and lasting “legacy” for his administration.
What President Obama has likely done, however, is to leave a legacy of obstruction, intending to damage America’s ability to become energy self-sufficient. That’s the legacy that is most likely to endure.


 Congress: Obama Fired Scientist to Advance “Climate” Agenda
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The Obama administration fired a top scientist, intimidated other staff, censored important information from Congress for political reasons, and waged “a reckless and calculated attack on the legislative process itself,” U.S. lawmakers concluded in a blistering new report about Obama's scandal-plagued Department of Energy. All of it was done in order to advance Obama's controversial “climate-change” agenda, according to congressional investigators. It is time for some serious changes in management at the U.S. Department of Energy, members of Congress declared. But even that is not nearly enough to remedy the damage unleashed by Obama via the unconstitutional bureaucracy.
The shocking revelations about the Obama administration's lawless attempts to pursue its “global-warming” regulatory regime at all costs were exposed in a congressional staff report released this week by the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. According to the document, a top Energy Department (DOE) scientist, Dr. Noelle Metting, was fired from her job for providing honest and accurate information to Congress beyond the pre-approved “talking points” provided by Obama's minions at the bureaucracy. The firing had a chilling effect on other scientists and staff, of course. Lawmakers were outraged. 
“The Committee concludes that the DOE placed its own priorities to further the President’s Climate Action Plan before its Constitutional obligations to be candid with Congress,” the lawmakers said in the report's executive summary. “The DOE’s actions constitute a reckless and calculated attack on the legislative process itself, which undermines the power of Congress to legislate. The Committee further concludes that DOE’s disregard for separation of powers is not limited to a small group of employees, but rather is an institutional problem that must be corrected by overhauling its management practices with respect to its relationship with the Congress.”

The latest scandal to rock DOE began with a piece of legislation introduced by liberty-minded Congressman Paul Broun (R-Ga.) to investigate the impact of radiation on human health. The bill, known as the “Low Dose Radiation Act” of 2014 (H.R. 5544), would have required the DOE to use funds it already had to review the science on low-dose radiation and its effects. Among other reasons why such an effort was called for, lawmakers said, was because the out-of-control regulatory bureaucracies were operating on the unproven and likely false assumption that, because high doses of radiation are harmful, low doses must also be.
Rather than working to figure out whether its assumptions on the alleged dangers of low-dose radiation were justified, however, the Obama DOE preferred to waste the tax money appropriated to it by pushing global-warming hysteria. “Instead of working to understand the value of the [Low Dose Radiation Research Program] LDRRP for emergency situations, DoE Management engaged in a campaign to terminate research programs that could divert funds from the president’s Climate Action Plan,” the report explains. Basically, Obama wanted the tax money to promote his increasingly discredited warming alarmism, not to do what the American people wanted as expressed through their elected representatives — and his minions were apparently willing to break the law to do it. 
And so, the Obama administration set out to derail the bill in likely violation of the Anti-Lobbying Act, fire the scientist in question, and intimidate all of the other agency employees into going along with the White House agenda. Indeed, Energy Department e-mails handed over to the House Committee as part of the investigation revealed that the Obama agency was involved in a “premeditated scheme by senior employees” to “squash the prospects of Senate support” for Congressman Broun's legislation and for the Low Dose Radiation Research Program, investigators concluded.  
In a 2014 briefing for lawmakers about the program, Dr. Metting, who led the program, provided information that went beyond what her superiors wanted Congress to know. And so, Obama officials “removed Dr. Metting from federal service for allegedly providing too much information in response to questions posed by” lawmakers, according to the report. Investigators later found that her removal from federal service was “retaliation” by Obama officials because the scientist “refused to conform to the predetermined remarks and talking points designed by Management to undermine the advancement of” Broun's bill.
And it gets even worse. According to the report, the House Committee also discovered that Obama's DOE leaders “failed to exercise even a minimal standard of care to avoid chilling other agency scientists as a result of the retaliation against Dr. Metting for her refusal to censor information from Congress.” In other words, it seems that Obama's minions at the DOE wanted to make sure that everyone else got the message loud and clear: Promote the Obama line and do not give Congress information it seeks, or lose your job. Other members of Obama's cabinet even launched witch hunts against federal scientists who disagreed with the imploding climate alarmism.
Lawmakers expressed outrage about the DOE antics. “Instead of providing the type of scientific information needed by Congress to legislate effectively, senior departmental officials sought to hide information, lobbied against legislation, and retaliated against a scientist for being forthcoming,” Science, Space and Technology committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said in a statement. “In this staff report based on lengthy record before the committee, much has been revealed about how senior level agency officials under the Obama administration retaliated against a scientist who did not follow the party line.”
In the future, though, that has got to stop, Smith continued. “Moving forward, the department needs to overhaul its management practices to ensure that Congress is provided the information it requires to legislate and that federal employees and scientists who provide that information do so without fear of retribution,” explained the committee chief, who has long been critical of the Obama administration's “global-warming” antics (and especially the pseudo-treaty known as the “Paris Agreement” that Trump vowed on the campaign trail to “cancel” upon taking office). Smith and the GOP majority could, of course, defund the department entirely.
The Energy Department has been embroiled in scandal practically for Obama's entire time in office. Perhaps the most well-known scandal involved the Obama administration showering tax funds on its “green” cronies in sham companies such as Solyndra. The “solar panel” company received half of a billion U.S. dollars from taxpayers, then declared bankruptcy. Among the chief beneficiaries of the Obama administration's lawless Solyndra scam were Goldman Sachs, whose executives were Obama's largest campaign donors in 2008, as well as George Kaiser, another leading Obama fundraiser. Taxpayers were left holding the bag.
Similar examples of Obama's “green” cronyism abound, and drew outrage from Congress. “The failure of several companies that received loans under the program, including Solyndra’s August 2011 bankruptcy, led to the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds,” explained a 2012 letter from lawmakers to Obama blasting the schemes. “The newly-obtained documents show that senior members of the administration were aware of substantial risks to taxpayers and objected to the way the funds were being distributed. They were overruled.” 
Most recently, the Obama Energy Department has come under fire for refusing to provide the names of the department's “climate” scientists to President-elect Donald Trump's transition team. Critics of the Obama administration and its long record of manipulating data to promote outlandish global-warming alarmism suggested that DOE leaders fear a widely anticipated “swamp draining” may end up holding fraudsters accountable. Trump vowed to stop the “climate” scam and has long referred to the man-made global-warming theory as a “hoax” and even bovine excrement.  
Former Texas Governor Rick Perry, a Republican who forgot the name of the department when providing a list of agencies he would seek to abolish as president, is set to serve as Energy Secretary in the incoming Trump administration. So it is possible that lawmakers will get their wish on reforming management at the massive bureaucracy, which has close to a $30 billion yearly budget, more than 10,000 employees, and almost 100,000 contractors. But even wholesale management reforms are not nearly enough to deal with the problems caused by Obama's lawlessness and his pursuit of a radical anti-Constitution agenda. More serious efforts are needed.
The U.S. Constitution does not delegate any authority to the federal government to meddle in energy markets, push global-warming alarmism, hand tax money to cronies (“green” or otherwise), or any other such activities. Therefore, the Energy Department and virtually all of its functions are unconstitutional, with the exception of maintaining America's nuclear arsenal, a task that could easily be folded into the Defense Department. Americans should keep pressing Congress to abolish the entire department, and several more along with it, as the damage on America inflicted by Obama is reversed. 

Related articles:
Obama “Green Energy” Scandals Widen as Lawmakers Probe Deeper
Oops! Trump Names Rick Perry as Energy Secretary
As Climate Theories Implode, Obama & Co. Launch Witch Hunt
The Real Green in Fedgov’s “Green Energy”
The Effects of Low-dose Radiation
Fukushima: Just How Dangerous Is Radiation?
EPA Boss Urges School Kids to “Bug” Parents on Green Agenda
With Ice Growing at Both Poles, Global Warming Theories Implode
Obama Seeks to Protect UN Climate Regime From a President Trump
To “Save Our Planet,” Obama Tramples Congress and Constitution
Climate Alarmists Have Been Wrong About Virtually Everything


Published on Dec 22, 2016
The terror group is threatening "bloody celebrations in the Christian New Year"


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Frosty Wooldridge
December 23
, 2016
This week, Muslims killed nine and wounded 48 in a truck attack in Berlin, Germany. Another Muslim executed a Russian diplomat with eight shots to his back at point blank range. German authorities reported they thwarted two planned attacks in the past week.
For the past four decades, Muslims in all Western countries continue their prime directive dictated by the Quran: “Convert or kill all non-believers.”
Their methods: 9/11 mass murder attacks. Also, lone wolf attacks. They infiltrate governments with their operatives, i.e., Barack Obama and his 10 Muslim aides in the White House, hijra or “seeding” host countries with Muslim immigrants to eventually install Sharia Law. They employ beheadings, be-handings and honor killings that terrify women worldwide. Muslims kill gays, and kill anyone who remains an infidel or non-believer. Worse, you never know which Muslim will kill at what time or place.
When confronted with reality, Muslims kill the truth, they kill the truth messenger and they kill anyone who disagrees with them.
Will it take a Paris, France slaughter once a week to help civilized leaders to deport all Muslims? Will it take a Brussels, Belgium airport bombing once a month to convince leaders to rid their countries of Muslims? How about a Nice, France barbaric attack at weekly intervals to finally help all Western countries to come to the simple conclusion: Muslims and Islam—Incompatible with 21st century humanity.
Notice 1.5 billion “moderate” Muslims do nothing to stop the terror. They don’t speak up. They do not condemn. They don’t lead their religion out of the Dark Ages. Muslim mosques all over Europe store weapons while imams instigate terror attacks. Worse, they spew incredible hate toward all other religions.
In the USA, Muslims commit barbaric acts regularly. Whether it’s honor killings of women or female genital mutilation or arranged marriages or threats to gays—the US State Department and FBI counter terrorism agencies remain on full alert to stop Muslims from terrorizing America 24/7.
But they can never stop lone wolf Muslim killers. That’s why we face another Orlando, Florida slaughter or a San Bernardino or more Ohio State University stabbings.
That’s why Muslim Barack Obama jumped the Syrian migrant level into the USA by 339 percent in the month of December. He wants as many violent Muslims to enter America before his time in the power ends. (Source: Fox News, December 21, 2016, Hannity)
Muslims don’t make any bones about it: they expect to conquer America or die trying. Muhammad gave them 72 virgins as a sexual reward in heaven for their jihad.
“When the sacred months have passed, then kill the infidels wherever you find them. Capture them. Besiege them. Lie in wait for them in each and every ambush but if they repent, and perform the prayers, and give zacat then leave their way free.” Quran Chapter 9:5
In 2002, John Muhammad, the Beltway Sniper, lay “in wait” for various infidels and killed 17 of them. Since then, from Boston to San Bernardino—Muslims carried out killing sprees.
“When Allah revealed to the angels, ‘Truly I am with you. So, keep firm those who have believed. I will strike terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved. So, strike them at the necks and cut off their fingers.’” 8:12
Remember the Muslim who beheaded his co-worker Colleen Hufford in Moore, Oklahoma on September 26, 2014? The liberal media claimed Jah’Keem Yisreal committed workplace violence instead of jihad.
Islam’s dictates become painfully real for individuals who suffer death or injury whether the Boston Marathon bombers or
White Cloud, Minnesota mall knife-wielding Muslim or the Fort Hood killer Major Hassan pretending to be a U.S. Army officer.
“Men are the protectors and maintainers of women because Allah has made one superior to the other and because they spend to support them from their means. Therefore, righteous women are obedient and they guard in the husband’s absence what Allah orders them to guard. And, as to those women from whom you fear disobedience, give them a warning, send them to separate beds, and beat them.” 4:34
Why aren’t feminists in all countries demonstrating to stop all Muslim immigration? How do first world women accept Muslim men who force their women into black bags and stone them to death for being raped? How about the 20,000 honor killings annually in Muslim dominated countries? Anyone got a problem with that ritual?
How do you defend from such barbarism in the 21st century?
Since we already suffer 3.3 million Muslims within our country, we must defend against them harshly and effectively.
Solution: we Americans demand all Muslim immigration stopped. We as a people must deport any Muslim or Muslim organization that advocates Sharia Law. Start with C.A.I.R. and the Islamic Society of America, Muslim Brotherhood and others. We must monitor all mosques with mandated video coverage. We must deport anyone who espouses individual or collective violence toward our citizens. Ban the Burka or hijab that destroys a woman’s right to her individuality. Deport or jail any Muslim imam who speaks or organizes anyone toward violence. Do not allow Muslims into the military, period.
Mandate that any Muslim that commits female genital mutilation, an honor killing or arranged marriage to be jailed and deported after time served.
 In other words, make America so harsh against this violent, barbaric and incendiary religion---that they repatriate themselves back into their own countries---where they can practice their barbarism without consequences.

Historian Adnre Servier said, "Islam was not a torch, but an extinguisher. Conceived in a barbarous brain for the use by a barbarous people, it was, and it remains, incapable of adapting itself to civilization. Whatever it has dominated, it has broken the impulse toward progress and checked the evolution of society.”
Final solution: Islam mandates a violent political-economic-religious system diametrically opposed to a free republic and in violation of our U.S. Constitution. Demand the prohibition of Islam in America. Enforce the McCarren-Walter Act of 1952.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 HOUSTON — A megachurch in Texas 
recently turned its annual Christmas production in its worship center 
into a circus—literally, complete with a ringmaster, tricks and 
The Second Baptist Church of Texas, led by Dr. Ed Young, Sr., presented “Christmas Under the Big Top” at its Woodway campus from Friday to Tuesday, with tickets ranging from $10 to $25. The 90-minute drama centered on a storyline about a fictional effort to save a financially-struggling circus by putting on a Christmas show.
In addition to much singing and dancing, the program also featured a Stomp-like trash can drumming peformance, and plenty of circus tricks, from juggling to acrobatics to Cyr wheel spinning. Styles of music varied from traditional to big band, to hip-hop and rock. A segment of the production also included a living nativity, and a brief message about life’s “distractions” from the meaning of Christmas was delivered near the conclusion.
“The days of the traveling, family circus may be long gone, but don’t tell that to the Robichauxs,” a description of the storyline outlined on the Second Baptist website. “For four generations, they have captivated the hearts and minds of young and old alike with their high-flying antics and death-defying stunts. But times are changing, and the patriarch, Arthur Robichaux, must find a way to keep the circus alive in the midst of today’s ever-changing entertainment landscape.”

“At his wit’s end, Arthur considers throwing in the towel when his son, Max, surprises him by coming home for Christmas. Can Arthur and Max save their beloved family circus?” it asks.
Second Baptist also released a video promoting the event, inviting viewers to “[c]elebrate the true meaning of Christmas with us.” The video featured clips from previous performances, including fire-breathing and unicycling.
“For the past five years, Second Baptist Church has shared the story and joy of Christmas with over 100,000 people across Houston, featuring live music, dancing, aerobatics and so much more,” the announcer states. “Come be a part of this Houston holiday tradition as we celebrate the birth of Christ and take you on a new adventure.”

Luke Benward of Disney’s “Good Luck Charlie” and “Girl Meets World” was one of the stars of the show, along with his father Aaron, known for being one-half of the 1990’s CCM duo Aaron Jeoffrey.
Many praised the presentation as being quality entertainment.
“It’s not quite Cirque du Soleil, but it’s way (way, way) bigger than any church show I’ve ever seen,” one blogger commented.
“This was truly a magical celebration with a beautiful message,” another said. “The show was full of non-stop entertainment from the musical numbers to the acrobats. I loved the drumline and the ariel dancers just took my breath away!”
However, others believe that such concepts are a far cry from the Church in Acts, and are a distraction from the core functions of the Church—even if outside of the normal service hours.
“‘Christmas Under the Big Top’ is another example of the Church focusing on entertainment rather than the purposes which our Lord established for His Church,” David Whitney, pastor of Cornerstone Evangelical Free Church in Pasadena, Maryland, told Christian News Network. “When Jesus said, ‘I will build My Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it,’ did He have a circus in mind?”
He said that the Church seems to have “lost its way on the road to the Heavenly City and instead has taken the side road to Hollywood,” noting that the command of Christ was to make disciples through preaching and teaching—not to amuse.
“The commission Christ gave His disciples was to go make disciples of all nations. That disciple-making task involves the preaching of the Word of God, administering the ordinances and conducting public worship,” Whitney explained. “When the Church loses this focus, it becomes simply one more entertainment venue vying for the time and treasure of an audience.”
“In 1 Corinthians 14:23 Paul asks the question regarding speaking in tongues, ‘What will the non-Christian think when he comes in our midst?’ I guess the answer in Houston is, they would think the Church is a circus,” he said.
Second Baptist Church did not respond to a request for comment.
(View the production here.)


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
MONTGOMERY, Ala. — The office of Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley has confirmed that Bentley interviewed suspended state Chief Justice Roy Moore for a potential congressional seat this week.
The seat would replace U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions, who was selected by President-elect Donald Trump to serve in his cabinet as attorney general.
“He would consider it an honor if appointed to the office of U. S. Senate,” Moore’s wife, Kayla Moore, told the Montgomery Advertiser.
Bentley spokesperson Yasamie August told the outlet that Moore was “one of the top picks” from a survey sent to the Alabama Republican Executive Committee, which consists of 400 members. The survey asked members last month to submit a nomination for Sessions’ seat.

“The person who replaces Senator Sessions must uphold the Constitution, value the rights of the Second Amendment, the rights of the states, support pro-life issues, implement a strong national security policy, support domestic job creation and, most importantly, always put Alabama first,” the instructions read.
In addition to Moore, Bentley interviewed seven others, including U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Huntsville; Senate President Pro Tem Del Marsh, R-Anniston; Sen. Arthur Orr, R-Decatur; Sen. Cam Ward, R-Alabaster; Sen. Bill Hightower, R-Mobile, and Sen. Trip Pittman, R-Montrose. House Ways and Means Education Chairman Bill Poole, R-Tuscaloosa, was also interviewed as well.
After Bentley selects a replacement for Sessions, the matter will then go up for a public vote.
 As previously reported, Moore is currently appealing his suspension from the Alabama Supreme Court for allegedly instructing probate judges not to issue same-sex “marriage” licenses months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling of Obergefell v. Hodges.
Moore asserts that his memo was only a status update advising that his colleagues had not yet rescinded an order from March 2015 that prohibited judges from issuing the licenses. He says he specifically noted that his words did not weigh in on Obergefell.
“I am not at liberty to provide any guidance to Alabama probate judges on the effect of Obergefell on the existing orders of the Alabama Supreme Court. That issue remains before the entire court, which continues to deliberate on the matter,” Moore wrote on Jan. 6.
The Alabama Court of the Judiciary (COJ) did not believe Moore and found him guilty of ethics charges, contending that he had told judges to act contrary to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling. But because the COJ did not have the required unanimity to remove Moore from the bench, it therefore voted to suspend Moore for the remainder of his term.
Moore says that the punishment is wrongful as it was a crafty way to get around not having the mandated unanimity for removal.
“It’s a de facto removal,” he stated in October. “To have the Court of the Judiciary say that we can’t remove you because we didn’t have the votes, but we can suspend you for two-and-a-half years nearly (the rest of Moore’s term), that’s completely improper.”
“It has to be reversed for the sake of the judges and justices in our state or we’re going to warp the law and just let them skip over a unanimous vote for removal and say they can remove you for the rest of your term,” Moore opined.
This week, eight judges filed an amicus brief in support of Moore, echoing his sentiments about the suspension.
His case is expected to be heard next year by a special appeals court.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
A new bill introduced in the California Senate promises to guarantee “children’s rights.” But it really amounts to eviscerating parents’ rights and empowering the state — to raise your kids in its own image. And with 38-million-strong California being a trendsetter, the legislation’s success could mean it would soon appear in a government near you.
Dubbed the “Bill of Rights for the Children and Youth of California,” the measure was, InfoWars Jon Rappoport tells us,
Introduced by the notorious [Dr.] Richard Pan, the mover and shaker behind the mandatory vaccination law in CA — [and] this new one, SB18, is a grab-bag of generalities basically giving over care of children to the State.
Catch the flavor of the wording. It emerges like swamp gas: “The Legislature finds and declares that all children and youth, regardless of gender, class, race, ethnicity, national origin, culture, religion, immigration status, sexual orientation, or ability, have inherent rights that entitle them to protection, special care, and assistance, including, but not limited to, the following: The right to parents, guardians, or caregivers who act in their best interest. The right to form healthy attachments with adults responsible for their care and well-being. The right to live in a safe and healthy environment. The right to social and emotional well-being. The right to opportunities to attain optimal cognitive, physical, and social development. The right to appropriate, quality education and life skills leading to self-sufficiency in adulthood. The right to appropriate, quality health care.”
As if all these outcomes could be delivered to children on a silver platter.
And the State would make it so.
The state’s victory is in the vagueness. For example, what constitutes a child’s “best interest”? Will this mean exposing him to explicit sex education, including the “transgender” agenda; to “tolerance training” relating the “all values are equal” notion that “truth” is relative; and to “freedom” from necessary discipline? These things are in fashion, after all.

Second, how can the “right” to “emotional well-being” be guaranteed when even adults often have trouble achieving such? And how can liberals claim to be guarantors of it? Studies have shown they suffer from mental illness (and what is thus labeled) more often than conservatives do, a phenomenon I observed during my many years working with children. I virtually never saw a youngster from a conservative home diagnosed with “ADHD,” for example, and this is no surprise. As family psychologist John Rosemond has pointed out, ADHD behavior is simply typical toddler behavior extended into later childhood by permissive (read: liberal) parenting.
And what is proper “social development” and what would “opportunities” to attain it be? Would this involve encouraging early dating; exposure to (corruptive) popular culture; interaction with a “diverse” set of peers, where one bad apple can spoil the bunch; and inculcation with globalist ideas to create good little “citizens of the world”?
There’s also another agenda here. As the website Modern Alternative Health points out, “Most likely, the state defines ‘optimal cognitive, physical, and social development’ as occurring within the public school system. Pan has not been shy about his opposition to homeschooling, and this point may be used to remove or severely restrict the right to homeschool.”
No doubt. Statists are unanimous in their opposition to homeschooling; the Big Brother governments in Germany and Sweden, which persecute homeschoolers, are good examples. And why is no mystery. Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle stated, “Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man” and Abraham Lincoln observed, “The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next." Of course, the philosophy of the school room today cannot be the philosophy of government tomorrow unless you get students in the schoolroom in the first place.
Yet what’s truly dangerous about SB18 is, again, it’s vagueness, which gives bureaucrats great latitude to interpret its provisions as they see fit. Just consider the following provision:
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to expand and codify the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California created by Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 80 (Res. Ch. 101, Stats. 2009), to establish a comprehensive framework that governs the rights of all children and youth in California, outlines the research-based essential needs of California’s children, and establishes standards relating to the health, safety, well-being, early childhood and educational opportunities, and familial supports necessary for all children to succeed.
Modern Alternative Health analyzes this passage thus:
This point basically sums up what they’ve said so far. This law doesn’t do anything, except give them permission to create standards and programs to enforce those standards. We won’t know exactly what they’re going to come up with or to what extent they’ll enforce them until after this law is passed.
It is not acceptable to pass a law like this that has such vague and sweeping implications with poorly-defined parameters. Especially not in California, where parental rights have been stripped increasingly over the last 5 years.
The bill continues in this open-ended vein, stating in SEC. 2 that it is “the intent of the Legislature … to enact appropriate legislation to accomplish all of the following”: “Develop and put forth research-based policy solutions,” “Determine the amount of revenue and resources,” and “Identify and obtain the revenue and resources … necessary to ensure that the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California, in its totality, is applied evenly, equitably, and appropriately to all children and youth across the state.”
What will these “research-based policy solutions” be? How much will this agenda cost and how will it be paid for? The government doesn’t say, but apparently has carte blanche with the “solutions” and a blank check with the budget. It’s as with Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi infamously saying about ObamaCare, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what's in it.” Except in this case you’ll keep finding out, again and again and again, as the “solutions” continuously change and the price tag ever grows with SB18 measures that can morph like the shape-shifting space alien in The Thing.
And who may cash in on this pot of gold? Most suspicious is that one of the entities behind the bill is The Silicon Valley Community Foundation, Jon Rappoport informs, “a non-profit that has assets of $7.3 BILLION” and “runs 1800 philanthropic funds.” It has a list of big-money corporate partners, too. As he also writes, “For some reason, this huge Foundation is pushing a children’s bill of rights that … will eventually make the State the top-dog controlling force over all children in California. You can bet these corporate partners will reap profits. Beyond that, this is their version of a MASSIVE social engineering program.”
It’s the state’s version, too. The good news is that the bill is still in its early stages and wouldn’t take effect until 2022, so there’s still some chance to scuttle it if people fight hard. And hopefully they will because, with SB18, the red flags are everywhere. The only telling promise we haven’t yet heard is, “If you like your child, you can keep your child.”