Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Jesus Christ, Ronald Reagan and Fidel Castro

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about Fidel Castro and others. This follows this post about family estrangement. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

The fact that mainstream media and entertainment commonly portray all three with great dishonesty.
Jesus Christ is continually the target of those with an antibiblical bias. Ronald Reagan is belittled. Fidel Castro is whitewashed. The main problem? An overwhelming lack of truth .
Jesus Christ
Consider this outright blasphemy: the silly fiction that Jesus Christ was married to Mary Magdalene, a devout follower during His earthly ministry, and fathered a child by her. Not only is there no evidence of such events, there are clear biblical proofs against them. To entertain such a preposterous notion is a denial of the authenticity of the Bible as the Word of God. It is also a denial of Jesus Christ as mankind's Savior who is betrothed to His bride, the Church.
The current version of this accusation was launched by a novel, The Da Vinci Code , by Dan Brown. The novel's speculation about Jesus Christ is pure fiction. But what is much more disgusting is that ABC News on Nov. 3 devoted an hour-long TV program to this subject. Isn't “news” supposed to be non-fiction?
As with ABC's “Search for Jesus” a few years ago, the network seems determined to sell wild stories and conjectures about Jesus Christ.
Why is it that insulting biblical Christianity is in , but any realistic critique of Islam or other religions is out as politically incorrect?
In a culture infatuated with “reality shows,” there is no room for the ultimate reality of God and Jesus Christ. Consider the malicious attacks on Mel Gibson's upcoming film “The Passion.” It is too real for comfort for those who don't want any divine restrictions on their personal lifestyles.
The acceleration of this trend in our culture and media is sobering. The obsession with discrediting the Bible is so powerful that humanistic journalists and other elitists are willing to sacrifice professionalism and erode their credibility.
Ronald Reagan
CBS last week pulled the plug on “The Reagans,” a dishonest miniseries of “researched” character assassination. What was publicized to be an accurate biography of former U.S. President Ronald Reagan and his wife turned out to be largely demeaning and slanderous fiction. Massive protests erupted after the film's true nature was exposed by leaks of the manuscript.
Enemies of Reagan have always tried to portray him as a shallow-minded dolt. But he had an in-depth grasp of countless complex issues and was quite articulate and persuasive in explaining them. I personally used to listen to the many radio broadcasts that he made during the years between his being governor of California and being elected president of the United States. All who knew him testify that he wrote all those in-depth addresses himself from his own knowledge.
The show's producers did not even have the decency to wait for Ronald Reagan's death to try to rewrite his history. Suffering from Alzheimer's disease, he lies bedridden, unable to defend himself, and his grieving wife must feel immense pain at the smearing of their reputations.
Compare this with the CBS miniseries earlier this year on the German tyrant Adolph Hitler. Hitler, being portrayed sympathetically as having “humanity,” received more favorable treatment than America's much-loved former president!
The biggest problem with “The Reagans” is that apparently much of the film is absolutely untrue. Mrs. Reagan emphatically claims this. Family, friends and colleagues say there is no evidence for many of the statements, attitudes and actions portrayed in the film—and that they are completely contradictory to the character and record of his life. What justification could there be for such revisionist “history”?
Fidel Castro
Do our media portray every famous person in a negative light? Not at all. An example of the opposite extreme is reporting on Fidel Castro, a hero of the Hollywood elite. He is most often deferentially referred to as the “leader” or “president” of Cuba rather than the brutal Communist dictator he is.
U.S. media generally gloss over the harsh realities of life in Cuba. The many Cuban exiles in the U.S. are dismayed at the sympathetic and flattering treatment shown to that oppressive regime. They bring up the interviews with Castro by former CNN president Ted Turner and by CBS news anchor Dan Rather, in which normally hard-hitting news executives treated Castro as if they were talking to the Queen of England. El Jefe —“the Boss”—often gets a free pass in the U.S. press and is hailed as a hero in Hollywood.
More and more voices of alarm are being raised over the mainstream media and cultural bias. For example, a newly released book is titled Arrogance: Rescuing America From the Media Elite , by Bernard Goldberg. It is a sequel to his previous bestseller, Bias .
Jesus Christ, Ronald Reagan and Fidel Castro are only three examples of subjects that are commonly misrepresented by the media and entertainment industries. Many more could be cited. Much of the reporting and portrayals are not only inaccurate, they show of pattern of bias and personal agendas designed to influence your thinking.
A commitment to honesty and truthfulness is sorely lacking in the world today. The world needs seekers of truth—people who “test all things [and] hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
Jesus Christ, who died for our sins and who now lives to save us, said “you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). He will one day return to set the world free from ignorance and deception.

You might also be interested in...

Where will you spend eternity? Floating idly on clouds in heaven or as part...
 

FBI can’t confirm that hate letters sent to mosques actually came from outside Muslim community

A timely post about from www.jihadwatch.org about "hate crimes" against Muslims. This follows this post about Steve Bannon and Keith Ellison. This follows this post about Hillary Clinton's loss.This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries. For more, you can read two very interesting books HERE.You can follow me here.

FBI can’t confirm that hate letters sent to mosques actually came from outside Muslim community

“The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) could not, however, confirm that the letters actually came from outside the community, or that they were not a prank.”
As I explained here, there is plenty of reason to doubt that these letters are genuine. They are much more likely to be part of Muslim groups’ in the U.S. never-ending quest for protected victim status.
fbi-hate-letter-press-conf
“FBI, LAPD Cannot Confirm Anti-Muslim Letters as ‘Hate Crime,’” by Joel B. Pollak, Breitbart, November 28, 2016:
LOS ANGELES — Law enforcement officials gathered with local Muslim leaders at the Islamic Center of Southern California to respond to threatening letters that had been sent to several mosques in the state.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) could not, however, confirm that the letters actually came from outside the community, or that they were not a prank. And the Los Angeles Police Department said that the letters were being investigated as a “hate incident,” not a “hate crime,” because there was no specific, immediate threat.
Stephen Woolery, FBI Special Agent in Charge of the Counterterrorism Division in Los Angeles, said that at least five letters were received by Islamic institutions in California. Letters were received in San Jose, Northridge, Claremont, Signal Hill, and Los Angeles. He added that there was possibly one more letter that had been received outside the state, possibly in Georgia.
One letter, widely circulated in the media, read, in part: “You Muslims are a vile and filthy people … There’s a new sheriff in town — President Donald Trump. He’s going to cleanse America … He’s going to do to you Muslims what Hitler did to the Jews.”
The language of each of the letters was similar, officials said. They did not contain a specific threat of violence….
Local Muslim leaders at the press conference, which involved both local and international media, invited the author or authors of the letter to have a frank discussion about faith. “We want this to be out in the open, in broad daylight. Bullies feel emboldened in dark alleys.
Dr. Sayed Moustafa al-Qazwini, the president of the Shia Muslim Council of Southern California, said: “We stand against hate crime and against terrorism.” He advised members of the community to go about their normal activities.
Another Muslim leader responded to a suspected terror attack earlier in the day at Ohio State, where several people were injured in an attack, apparently carried out by a Muslim immigrant from Somalia, involving a car and knives.
“The problem comes when we politicize one incident over others … when the reality is, it’s just violence,” he said….
In other words, ignore the motivating ideology behind jihad terror attacks.
[Woolery] said that the FBI had wanted to participate in the press conference, despite the lack of an investigation, “to be visible, strong partners with our community. Our role is to monitor the situation … making sure there is no threat.”
“It was important for us to be here to demonstrate that partnership, because I think that’s important to the community.”
White House warns against blaming Islam for OSU jihad attack
Columbus Somali Muslim leader on OSU jihad attack: "The timing is not good"

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Editorial: Mexico STILL Meddling in the U.S.

Editorial

One of the reasons that Donald Trump won the presidency was to put America First and to stop foreign domination of the U.S. in trade policies and immigration policies. Among the nations that had been "beating" the U.S. in both of these was Mexico.

Former president of Mexico, Vicente Fox, has been one of the biggest advocates of Mexican meddling.

A recent example of this can be seen here:  http://www.vdare.com/posts/unhinged-vicente-fox-rants-again-about-donald-trump-calls-trump-illegitimate-president-who-didnt-won-sic-the-general-election

Among Victims Left Behind On Trump’s Bloody Path To The Presidency—GOP Hispanic Consultants. They Deserve It.

A timely post from www.vdare.com about GOP Hispanic lobbyists. This follows this post about criminal mayors in the U.S. This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump.
You can follow me here.


A WSJ story from 1999--but it's "The Current Year"A WSJ story from 1999--but it's "The Current Year"

Among Victims Left Behind On Trump’s Bloody Path To The Presidency—GOP Hispanic Consultants. They Deserve It.


Prior to the Trump Triumph, we were constantly told by the so-called experts that a successful Republican candidate needed a big portion of the Hispanic vote, which could only be obtained by surrendering on illegal immigration and campaigning in Spanish. The “experts” included the Main Stream Media (always eager to “help” the GOP), the Republican leadership, and well-paid political consultants, especially Hispanic political consultants.
Trump ignored all of this. He didn’t even have a Spanish language section on his website. As Trump declared during the GOP primaries, standing next to Jeb Bush: “This is a country where we speak English, not Spanish.”[RCP, September 16, 2015]
And not only did Trump win, he apparently got a few more percentage points of the Hispanic vote than Mitt Romney: 29% vs 27% according to CNN.
This is disputed by Gary Segura and Matt Barreto, who run the Latino Decisions website—and who, coincidentally, worked for Hillary. They claim Hillary Clinton garnered 79% of the Latino vote, which would be better than Obama did four years ago.  [Lies, Damn Lies, and Exit Polls, Latino Decisions, November 10, 2016] They also assert that Trump only got 18% of the Latino vote: In record numbers, Latinos voted overwhelmingly against Trump. We did the research, by Gabriel Sanchez and Matt Barreto, Washington Post, November 11, 2016]. But others on the Left disagree: Harry Enten disputes Latino Decision’s figures—Trump Probably Did Better With Latino Voters Than Romney Did  FiveThirtyEight, November 18, 2016.
But the bottom line: there was not some overwhelming African American-style Latino vote that prevented Trump’s victory.
In other words, among the many victims left behind on Trump’s bloody path to the Presidency was the entire industry of GOP Hispanic consultants.
What about Trump’s own Hispanic advisers? They fared little better.
The “National Hispanic Advisory Council for Trump” was a joint creation of the campaign and the political geniuses at the Republican National Committee. It was “a diverse group of national Hispanic leaders who are advising the campaign and sharing Mr. Trump’s proposals with the Hispanic community” .[RNC And Trump Campaign Meet With National Hispanic Advisory Council For Trump, GOP, August 20, 2016]
Trump, interestingly, assigned them the task of finding “humane, efficient” ways of dealing with illegal immigration [Trump to Hispanic Advisors: Find ‘Humane, Efficient’ Ways to Address Illegal Immigration, by Todd Beamon, Newsmax, August 20, 2016]. But why would Hispanic advisers necessarily be experts on that question?
It didn’t really matter. Within two weeks, after Trump’s speech on immigration policy in Phoenix, members of this group were publicly bailing out and condemning Trump.
Needless to say, the result was an MSM frenzy, with members of the group lovingly quoted.
jacobmonty
Jacob Monty [Email him] an immigration lawyer (!) from Houston who had acted as spokesman, gave several more interviews, with lots of quotes bashing Trump.
  • “I couldn’t be part of the charade.  I didn’t want to be responsible of leading people astray” [Donald Trump’s Immigration Speech Backfires Among Hispanic Republicans by Priscilla Alvarez, Atlantic, September 1, 2016].
  • (On Facebook) “I gave Donald TRUMP a Plan that would improve border security, remove hardened criminal aliens and most importantly give work authority to the millions of honest, hardworking immigrants in the US. He rejected that tonight and so I must reject him… Tonight he was not a Republican but a populist, modern day Father Coughlin who demonized immigrants . He must want to lose…. “Trump’s Hispanic Advisers Ditch Him Over Hard-Right Immigration Plan (Subtitle: “One suggested that Trump might not even want to win”) by Elise Foley, Huffington Post, September 2, 2016
  • “There was hope yesterday when he went to Mexico. He looked like a president. He looked like somebody who was trying to solve the problem. For him to turn and just disregard everything we talked about a week-a-half ago and just recite the talking points from FAIR and Numbers USA [two organizations that favor restrictive immigration policies], that was disappointing.” [Trump speech costs him backing of Texas Hispanic advisers by Jonathan Tilove, Austin American-Statesman, September 1, 2016]
  • [Several Hispanic Trump surrogates reconsider support Katie Glueck and Kyle Cheney, Politico, September 1, 2016]
One Ramiro Pena, a pastor in Waco, dropped off the group and said, “I am so sorry but I believe Mr. Trump lost the election tonight”. [Some members of Trump’s Hispanic advisory board consider pulling support  by Reena Flores, CBS, September 1, 2016]
Grace Flores Hughes [Email her] a former Bush I official (and the woman who invented the term “Hispanic”) stated: “As long as he continues with this sort of rhetoric, no, none of us are going to support him. He’s too right-wing. The majority of people who are here illegally are here to seek a better life. The majority of them are good, hardworking, honest people. I think we need to concentrate on that and talk about that”. [Donald Trump’s ‘Hispanic Advisory Council’ is falling apart after his brutal immigration speech by Casey Tolan, Fusion, September 1, 2016]
Massey Villarreal, [Email him] former president of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and national Republican Hispanic Assembly, called the Trump speech “awful” and said: “As a compassionate conservative, I am disappointed with the immigration speech. I am no longer supporting Trump for president…” .[Austin American-Statesman]
And Rick Figueroa, [Email him] an investment executive also quoted in the Statesman piece, complained Trump had ignored “wise counsel” and stated: “I am very disappointed in Mr. Trump’s immigration mistake. It was a leadership mistake. It was a political mistake. It was a moral mistake.”
What no one explained, and apparently were not asked: why these Hispanic “conservative” advisers went along with Trump until this speech, only to showily betray him afterward. Do they not want Americans to have a sane immigration policy? Or do they simply identify more with the Latino movement than the historic American nation?
Either way, they didn’t do much for Trump except bring bad press.
04spanish-master768Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, Latinos were supposed to save the election for Clinton/Kaine. And the ticket flagrantly appealed to them on the basis of ethnic solidarity. On November 3rd, just days before the election, Tim Kaine gave a “historic” speech in Phoenix—‘historic” because it was entirely in Spanish. The New York Times crowed Well, Señor Kaine, Hablaste Español Muy Bien (“Well, Mr. Kaine, You Spoke Spanish Very Well”) [by Fernanda Santos, New York Times, November 3, 2016].
Still, the audience was only 150 people. The New York Times said it was:
 “…a mix of elected officials, community activists, immigration advocates, union leaders and teachers wearing T-shirts that read “Educators for Hillary” and “Families Fighting Back.”
perez-labor-secretaryHardly a mass movement. All the speakers at the rally spoke in Spanish, including a candidate for the state legislature, and Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez. (Pictured right.)
The Times didn’t report, but Breitbart did: in his speech
Sen. Tim Kaine cheered the demographic transformation of the United States caused by the nation’s federal immigration policies, telling his Latino audience on Thursday, “You are the future of America.” “By 2050, communities of color will represent the majority of our population,” Kaine said.
“So, of course, Latinos will help shape the future of America because you are the future of America.”
[Tim Kaine Cheers End of White Majority in Spanish Address, By Julia Hahn, Breitbart, November 5, 2016]
So in a foreign tongue, an American senator essentially mocked the American people being driven into minority status by its own government.
Significantly, this treasonous pandering seems to have backfired:
On Monday, Clinton and Trump were in a virtual tie when the Clinton campaign announced that Democratic Presidential nominee Tim Kaine would be giving the first ever presidential campaign speech in Spanish. Clinton actually held a 0.6 percentage point lead, according to an average of state polls compiled by Real Clear Politics. But by Friday, a day after Kaine’s speech in Phoenix, Trump had overtaken her and extended his lead to a more established 4 percentage points.
Tim Kaine’s Spanish rally in Phoenix didn’t help Clinton’s numbers in Arizona, [by  Franco Ordoñez, Sun Herald, November 4, 2016.]
And, on November 8th, Trump carried Arizona with its 11 electoral votes, by a margin of 3 and a half points.
What this shows: as I have repeatedly said on VDARE.com, pandering to Latinos as Latinos will not help the GOP win votes. Trump’s appeal to civic nationalism shows the correct approach.
Note that Trump’s relative success with Latinos came despite a massive propaganda campaign labeling Trump and his supporters as enemies of all Hispanics.
So why did these Hispanics vote for Trump? Is it because they think he can improve the economy? Do they admire Trump’s leadership qualities? Do they explicitly vote based on conservative principles? Do they identify with the historic American nation? Or all of the above and more?
It doesn’t matter. It’s because Hispanic-Americans who think of themselves as Americans first will respond if they are approached as Americans.
But that means cutting out the “GOP Hispanic political consultants” who have long claimed that recycled progressivism and Open Borders will somehow win over La Raza supporters back from the Democrats, and that appealing to American patriotism would somehow alienate Hispanics even further.
The results are now in. The “GOP Hispanic political consultants” were utterly, totally and completely wrong.
American citizen Allan Wall (email him) moved back to the U.S.A. in 2008 after many years residing in Mexico. Allan`s wife is Mexican, and their two sons are bilingual. In 2005, Allan served a tour of duty in Iraq with the Texas Army National Guard. His VDARE.COM articles are archived here; his Mexidata.info articles are archived here ; his News With Views columns are archived here; and his website is here.

Black Lives Matter? 35% of Aborted Babies are Black Even Though Blacks are 13% of the Population

An interesting story from www.lifenews.com about Black abortions. This follows this post about Senate appointment procedures. This follows this post about Planned Parenthood's current plans. For two very interesting books click HERE.
Please follow me here.

As LifeNews.com reported last week, a new Centers for Disease Control report shows good news across the country as abortions and abortion rates continue to drop to historic levels.
The CDC released its 2013 abortion surveillance report on Wednesday, showing a 5 percent drop in abortions from 2012 and a 20 percent drop since 2004. The CDC data, which is incomplete because the government does not require states to report abortion numbers, reported 664,435 abortions in 47 states in 2013. The abortion rate was 12.5 abortions per 1,000 women ages 15-44.
In comparison to 2012, the new data indicates that about 34,500 fewer babies lost their lives to abortion in 2013.
But the good news does not extend to the African-American Community. That’s because the percentage of abortions done on black babies continues to be at alarming levels. The new CDC report makes it clear that even though black Americans constitute just 13% of the US population 35% of the babies killed in abortions are black babies.
CNS News has more on the shocking percentages from the latest CDC report:
Although black Americans make up 13.3% of the U.S. population, they comprised 35% of the total abortions “reported” – 128,682 babies killed — in 2013, according to the latest Abortion Surveillance report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
That number, 128,682 black abortions, comes from only 29 reporting areas, according to the CDC. It does not include black abortions from the following states: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
According to the CDC, there were 664,435 abortions total – white, black, Hispanic, other — reported in 2013 from 49 reporting areas. But that number does not include abortions from California, Maryland and New Hampshire.
Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter.
For those abortions known by race, in addition to the 128,682 black babies killed, there were 134,814 white babies, or 37.3% of the total reporting. Whites make up 77.1% of the population, according to the Census Bureau.
For Hispanics, who comprise 17.6% of the U.S. population, there were 68,761 abortions reported, which was 19% of the total.
The Associated Press reports the CDC has not recorded a lower abortion rate since 1971, two years before the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Roe v. Wade and its companion case Doe v. Bolton, which allowed for legalized abortion on demand through all nine months of pregnancy. In 1971, several states had legalized abortion; but it was not legal throughout the U.S.
Abortion rates have been dropping steadily in the past several years as pro-lifers worked to pass a historic number of pro-life laws in states across the country. Pregnancy resource centers and sidewalk counselors also have been playing an integral role, offering pregnant and parenting families resources and information to empower them to choose life for their unborn babies.
blackbaby5

Monday, November 21, 2016

Editorial: Is it #FakeNews, or is it #Censorship?

Editorial

Recently, there has been an attempt by Facebook, Twitter, Google, and others to censor out what they consider "Fake News." Of course, there can occassionaly be some of that, but it seems more like they are censoring out viewpoints that the MSM disagrees with.

These sources ALREADY have a demonstrated Leftist bias. Notice that most of the "Fake News" is that which comes from non-MSN sources, the VERY ones the MSN is already censoring!

 From http://www.alipac.us/ :

Google and Facebook recently announced an effort to crack down on "Fake News" but their targets appear to be the conservative publications that helped elect Donald Trump such as InfoWars, Breitbart, Daily Caller, and World Net Daily. (View Source) Facebook and Google have not mentioned any efforts to silence the fake news coming out of Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, and CBS all of which claimed it was statistically impossible for Donald Trump to win the Presidency!

From http://www.vdare.com about President-Elect nominee Jeff Sessions:

Making things easier for the character assassins, Senator Jeff is a white guy from Alabama, which is practically a hate crime all by itself. And making things even easier will be the willingness of the anti-Trump Main Stream Media to believe any kind of story about something the Senator was overheard saying back in 1976, however unsubstantiated.

http://www.vdare.com/articles/dawn-of-the-trumpening-jeff-sessions-for-attorney-general-steve-bannon-for-pope 


From  www.ucg.org :

The Media's Alternative Gospel

The major media news organizations and outlets, says journalist William Proctor, have their own lists of rights and wrongs that they support or condemn through their editorials and reporting. Most follow the lead of the media heavyweight The New York Times , which, he says, has its own list of “sins” that the paper regularly criticizes and attacks. Detailed in his 2000 book The Gospel According to The New York Times , these include, but are not limited to:
  • Religious certainty-especially that rooted in Christianity.
  • Political conservatism in any form.
  • Capital punishment for any reason.
  • Placing any restrictions on freedom of the press, speech or expression.
  • Limiting abortion rights. Conversely, the newspaper's “gospel” is essentially the opposite of these-that is, it continually pushes the viewpoint that:
  • There are no absolutes, particularly when it comes to religious beliefs. We must be tolerant of all other beliefs and behavior (except those based on biblical standards or conservative beliefs).
  • Liberalism is enlightened; conservatism and conservatives are selfish, bigoted and uncaring.
  • Society as a whole is at fault for criminal behavior; therefore the death penalty is inherently unjust.
  • Freedom of the press, expression and speech is virtually absolute and trumps virtually all other rights and restrictions
  • Sexual freedom, including freedom from unwanted consequences such as pregnancy, is an absolute right for everyone.
Lest you think Mr. Proctor's assertions are overstated, carefully examine the news coverage, editorial positions and even the political cartoons in your local newspaper. Odds are you'll find them advocating, subtly or not so subtly, the same editorial and social positions.
You'll see reporting that favors positions such as homosexual rights, diminution of parental discipline and authority, lack of personal responsibility and greater government growth and social spending-all designed to shift your thinking from the standards found in the Bible and toward the alternative gospel such sources want you to believe.
Collectively, today's mass media have become one of the most committed instruments of antibiblical bias that can be found in our world. Their influence in that direction is enormous.

https://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/the-medias-alternative-gospel 

https://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/should-you-believe-all-the-news-you-hear 







The FBI Hate Crimes Stats They’re NOT Telling You About – NOT the Muslims

A timely post from http://www.debbieschlussel.com about true "hate crimes." This follows this post about criminal mayors in the U.S. This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump.
You can follow me here.


EXCLUSIVE: The FBI Hate Crimes Stats They’re NOT Telling You About – NOT the Muslims

By Debbie Schlussel
islamiccrescent.jpgcolclink.jpg

fbihatecrimesstats


Don’t believe the hype about FBI hate crimes stats. Despite what the media and Muslims whines tell you, the real numbers aren’t about an increase in hate crimes against Muslims. On the contrary, it’s more about how much alleged hate crimes against Muslims pale in comparison to other hate crimes. Here are the real FBI hate crimes statistics they’re not telling you about. Hint: the real victims are NOT Muslims, though they may be the real perpetrators.
Earlier this week, the FBI released its compilation of 2015 hate crimes statistics. And, over the last two days, the media’s echo chamber narrative is that FBI Hate Crime stats are all about Muslims–that Muslims are the real and (if the liberal media emphasis on this is to be believed) the only victims of hate crimes. Nope. Not true.
Most years since the beginning of this site, I’ve looked at and analyzed the statistics released by the FBI. And every single year, it’s been clear: most religious-based hate crimes–by far–are perpetrated against Jews in America, NOT Muslims. The same is true this year. And there are some other key findings in my analysis of these numbers that you should know:
* Hate crimes against Jews are MORE THAN DOUBLE the number of alleged hate crimes against Muslims.
In 2015, there were 664 incidents, 695 offenses, and 731 victims of anti-Jewish hate crimes. This is up from 2014, when there were 609 incidents, 635 offenses, and 648 victims of anti-Jewish hate crimes. That’s an increase of 9% in anti-Jewish hate crimes. Compare that to Muslims, whom the FBI reports had 257 incidents 301 offenses, and 307 victims in 2015. In 2014, these numbers were 154 incidents, 178 offenses, and 184 victims. Yes, there was a marked increase, but still the numbers are relatively very small. With all of the hatred and jihadist attacks perpetrated by Muslims against America and Americans, including on our own soil, it shows that Americans are very nice to Muslims and very forgiving–maybe too much so (which is why we keep getting attacked). The way Muslims portray it, there are constant wildings against them on the streets all over America. Nuh-uh.
In 2015, hate crimes against Jews comprised 53% of all of the 1,244 incidents of hate crimes based on the victim’s religion. In 2014, hate crimes against Jews were 60% of all the 1,014 hate crimes committed based on the victim’s religion. This is the only figure that went down for Jews, but it’s really meaningless. The vast majority of hate crimes in America based on the victim’s religion are still against Jews, NOT Muslims. The media won’t lift a finger to point that out, though. (Which is why I have to.)
This is even more significant when you consider that Muslims claim (though it’s a lie) that they have eight-to-nine-million of their fellow pro-jihadists in the U.S., whereas as there are only 5.2 million Jews in America, if that. Muslims who claim there is rampant “Islamophobia” in America (and–remember!–a phobia is an irrational or unreasonable fear–we have a lot of reasons and rational explanations to fear Islam) are acting as if we Americans are running down every street in America terrorizing Muslims. If you accept their claim that they number nine million in America, then the number of alleged hate crimes against them was just .000285 percent in 2015–a very, very minute and incredibly insignificant number.
Plus Muslims constantly organize and cajole their communities to report even the smallest paper cut or dirty look as a hate crime. They’ve reported my writing as a “hate crime” because I speak truth the power in exposing them. That’s not supposed to be considered a hate crime (especially in a society in which we’re supposed to value free speech and sunlight to expose cockroaches). And, as we know, Muslim-reported “hate crimes” are often hate crime hoaxes, like the Muslim woman who recently admitted she lied when she claimed a Donald Trump supporter pulled off her hijab. Lying . . . it’s what Muslims do. Part of their religion (look up taqiyyah and kitman).
* The FBI refuses to identify hate crime perpetrators by religion or by Arab and/or Middle-Eastern ethnicity, allowing Muslims and Arabs to get away with their many anti-Semitic hate crimes.
This is something I’ve decried on this site each time I’ve analyzed the FBI’s annual release of hate crimes stats. The FBI in recent years began identifying the race, gender, and “ethnicity” of hate crimes perpetrators, but not the religion. Why? I believe it’s done this way to shield Muslims–who I believe would constitute a statistically significant number of perpetrators of anti-Jewish and racist anti-Black (and probably also anti-White) hate crimes. Ditto for anti-LGBT crimes. I believe the numbers would show that they perpetrate a much larger percentage of such hate crimes than their percentage of the population. And, therefore, while the FBI even has a separate “Anti-Arab” ethnic hate crime category outside of the religious “anti-Muslim” category, it refuses to have a separate “Arab” and/or “Muslim” category of hate crimes perpetrators. Instead, the FBI only has categories like “White” and “non-Hispanic” and “other ethnic group” in which the agency lumps (and thus shields from scrutiny and legitimate criticism) Arabs and Muslims. It’s not politically correct to tell us the truth about them and how they behave.
* The number and percentage of anti-Protestant hate crimes went up far more than that for Muslims.
But the media doesn’t lament that . . . or even bother to mention it. In 2014, there were 25 incidents, 25 offenses, and 28 victims of anti-Protestant hate crimes. In 2015, there were 37 offenses, 47 victims, and 48 victims of anti-Protestant hate crimes. Yes, I know the numbers are small either way. But I can use the same magic tricks with numbers as the media and Muslim press releases do and tell you this: that’s a 48% increase in anti-Protestant hate crimes form the previous year. Where’s the media whining and indignation over this like there is for Muslims? (In case you were wondering, the numbers of hate crimes against Catholics are almost double the number of such incidents for Protestants, but the numbers went down–year-to-year–from 2014 to 2015.)
* The number and percentage of race-based hate crimes against Whites are growing. The number of hate crimes against Whites is once again more than double the number of hate crimes alleged against Muslims. It was more than double in in 2014, when anti-White hate crimes comprised 593 incidents, 701 offenses, and 734 victims. And it was the case again in 2015, when there were 613 incidents, 734 offenses, and 789 victims in anti-White hate crimes. Anti-White hate crimes have gone up nearly every year since I’ve been keeping track and between 2014 and 2015, they went up 3.4 percent (as measured by incidents).
You might argue that this it’s logical that anti-White hate crimes should outnumber those allegedly against Muslims, since Whites outnumber Muslims by tens of millions in America. Well, yes. But if you read the media coverage of the FBI hate crimes, it is as if Muslims are the only victims. They aren’t. Not even close. And there is never any media coverage of the growing hate against White people, which I think can be attributed in large part to media glorification of Black Lives Matter, as well as Barack Obama’s refusal to condemn the group. There is also a growing celebration by the media of the ever-decreasing population and percentage of Whites in America. This is “acceptable” racism, and it makes racists know that attacks on Whites are okay.
* The number and percentage of anti-LGBT hate crimes is much higher than that against Muslims. In 2014, there were 1,097 anti-LGBT hate crimes, 1,269 such offenses, and 1,338 victims. In 2015, the numbers went up to 1,148 such incidents, 1,314 offenses, and 1,361 victims.
Again, you might argue that there are far fewer Muslims in this country than those who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. True, but, again, my point here is that there are groups that are victims of hate crimes in America far more than Muslims are. And yet the media hyper-focuses on–and only on–Muslims as alleged victims.
And, since we know Islam is VERY anti-gay (and anti-LGB and T), it’s safe to say that Muslims play a role in the rise of anti-gay hate crimes on American soil. We know gays are executed with government and mosque sanction all over the Islamic world. We’ve all seen the pics and videos of HAMASniks and ISIS members throwing gays off buildings and otherwise torturing them to death. And gays in Muslim-domated places in America like Dearbornistan have to live in the shadows, lest they face incredible ostracism and discrimination, some of it violent.
* There are hate crimes against heterosexuals and males (for just being male), but you don’t hear about those either. The numbers are very low, but they are steady from year-to-year and slowly rising.
These hate crimes–which are never documented by the media–exist.
Another important point: were the Muslim attacks on San Bernardino (perpetrated by Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik) and other similar incidents of Muslim hate crimes against non-Muslims counted in the FBI hate crimes stats? Answer: NO, they were not. And that skews all the numbers the wrong way away from the truth.
Next year, the FBI won’t include the Pulse night club jihadist attack against gays and non-Muslims in its 2016 stats. Nor will it include Ahmad Khan Rahami’s attacks on a military marathon in New Jersey and the bombs he set off in New York, even though these were clearly Muslim-perpetrated hate crimes against non-Muslims.
Then, there are hate crimes like the ones I’ve reported regularly to the FBI. I’ve repeatedly gotten Muslim death, rape, and torture threats, but the FBI rarely does anything about it (they take it very seriously when the roles are reversed and Muslims are the alleged victims of threats). I highly doubt my reports have been included in the hate crimes stats. In fact, I’d bet on it.
And that’s, again, why you cannot take these numbers the FBI serves up as the truth or the whole picture. It’s just not the case. Not even close. The only thing the numbers really show are that Americans are not a violent or hateful people, despite what Islamo-race merchants from HAMAS CAIR and others have the media shrieking about. The numbers against every single group in the reports are statistically very low and insignificant compared to the fact that we had a population of 318.9 million as of 2014.
The bottom line is this: the FBI hate crimes show several things that the media refuses to tell us. Specifically, Muslims are NOT the victims here in America. In fact, they make up a very small percentage of the victims. The real victims of hate crimes in America are Jews, Christians, Blacks, Whites, and the LGBT folks. And, if the FBI gave us the full picture, we’d probably know what we already do from media reports and police reports: Muslims are often the perpetrators of hate crimes.
Jihad remains free and clear of FBI and media scrutiny through a careful massaging and BS reporting of the numbers.
The ghost of Osama Bin Laden is laughing all the way to the 72 Helen Thomases.
Read my previous analyses of FBI hate crimes statistics and how they relate to Muslim BS here, here, here, and here.
jamescomeylaughingseenoevil
***
I know I haven’t posted a lot on this site lately, but I pledge to do better. My site is expensive to host because of security measures I’ve had to undertake to keep Muslim hackers from taking it down. If you like this exclusive analysis of FBI hate crimes stats–and other stuff like this you won’t read anywhere else–please do not hesitate to support this site and my work by donating through Paypal via the Paypal button on on the upper left-hand side of this site (or there are other ways to donate if you do not like Paypal–please contact me for those).
You might also like:

GOP Warns Democrats: You Used the Nuclear Option to Approves Judges and We Will Too

An interesting story from www.lifenews.com about Senate appointment procedures. This follows this post about Planned Parenthood's current plans. For two very interesting books click HERE.
Please follow me here.

What goes around comes around.
Senate Republicans warned Harry Reid of that very thing when he pushed the plunger down on the dynamite blowing up the judicial nomination process in 2013. Three years ago, the outgoing Senate leader blew up the 225-year-old process and cleared the way for a simple majority to rubber stamp the President’s outrageous nominees.
Instead of requiring 60 votes to end debate on a nomination, liberals lowered the threshold to 51. They call it the “nuclear option,” and rightly so, since it had the potential to explode in the Democrats’ face.
At the time, Senate Republicans like Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) warned the president’s party not to go through with it. By opening this door, Reid was almost guaranteeing that under a GOP president and Senate, the Democrats would suddenly be on the wrong side of the same rules they manipulated.
“Democrats set the standard,” Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) reminded everyone this week. “They really screwed up the rules. Frankly, they did it for pure political purposes. Republicans are not limited now.”
Incoming Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) may be on the verge of learning that lesson the hard way. With at least one Supreme Court vacancy to fill, the GOP is warning Democrats to avoid the temptation to obstruct.
Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com
“We’re going to confirm the president’s nominee one way or the other. And there’s an easy way, and there’s a hard way,” Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) said this week. “They just need to accept that reality.”
Fellow Texas Senator Ted Cruz (R) echoed that message pointing out that the Democrats would never succeed in filibustering Donald Trump’s nominees. Not to mention that blocking the president-elect’s court picks — especially when so many Americans listed SCOTUS as one of their primary concerns — would put the Democrats on the wrong side of voters again.
As Leonard Leo, the Executive Vice President of the Federalist Society (which help Trump craft his Supreme Court list) pointed out, “Mr. Trump has a plane and double-digit victories where Senate Democrats are up for re-election, obstructing his nominees will be a political loser.” And while incoming Minority Leader Schumer has another six years before facing voters again, 25 of his colleagues won’t be so lucky. Playing nice on Trump’s nominees isn’t just the best decision for the country — but for a struggling Democratic Party.
LifeNews Note: Tony Perkins is the president of the Family Research Council.
supremecourt17



Friday, November 18, 2016

Keeping Family When You Don't Keep Christmas

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about family estrangement. This follows this post about Thanksgiving. This follows this post about movies. This follows this post about music.  For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

MP3 Audio (5.14 MB)
What do you do when your relationship with God seems to collide with your relationship with your family? Tell your family you’re giving up Christmas, and you’ll find out rather quickly.
Four years ago this Thanksgiving, I decided to stop keeping Christmas. I’d bought airline tickets months before to go home for the holidays, so I went. As best as I could, I tried not to acknowledge Christmas while still honoring everyone around me who was celebrating it. No one knew how to act, including me. It was awkward for all of us. When I was told that I didn’t have to come home for Christmas the following year, it was both a relief and a punch in the gut.
Why does it sometimes feel wrong to say no to Christmas, even though you know you should? For many people, Christmas traditions are wrapped up in family. It’s often the family’s largest and most-anticipated gathering. Let’s be honest—saying no to Christmas feels like saying no to family, right? All of the intellectual knowledge about the true origins of Christmas doesn’t keep your heart from breaking when someone asks, “Don’t you want to be with your family?”
Learn more about the Feast days, and you’ll see how very much family is on God’s mind.
I couldn’t put it into words at the time, but the root of my struggle was, “How do I maintain relationship with my family and be true to my beliefs?” It is possible, and it doesn’t involve Christmas.
There are two points to consider. One, family relationships are about more than just a single day. And two, God has a bigger plan for family than you may realize.
How do you build a relationship with your family outside of trees, tinsel, and presents? Some people join their extended family for lunch or dinner and leave before gifts and other Christmas traditions, and that works well for them. I live many hours away from my family, so dropping in for dinner is not really practical. Since long-distance visits are usually for a few days at a time, I don’t spend Christmas with my family. It’s more respectful to them, so that they can observe the practices they enjoy without awkwardness, and I’m not caught in the middle of practices that I don’t want to keep. Instead, I spend that time with my Church family, because, frankly, it can be very lonely to un-keep Christmas all by yourself.
Throughout the year, I make a point to spend time with my family at other opportunities that are meaningful to all of us: Thanksgiving, birthdays, a summer family gathering, and other special events such as graduations and weddings. I make an effort to see them more often than before so they don’t feel I’m pulling away from them. It’s Christmas I’ve rejected, not them. You can keep the commandment to honor your parents and not keep their desire for Christmas.
You should be able to answer why you are choosing not to keep Christmas. My answer is, “God has spelled out His holidays in the Bible and how to keep them, so now I keep those instead.”
God’s holidays, His holy festivals as described in Leviticus 23, illustrate the greatest story ever told—a story that features Jesus in the starring role. But His birth is only a small part of that story. Christmas misses most of the action and the dramatic conclusion. God has created special opportunities for you and your family to celebrate together throughout the year and remember the incredible story He is telling.
Learn more about the Feast days, and you’ll see how very much family is on God’s mind. God is all about family, and His days reveal more about the plan of salvation for all mankind than Christmas traditions ever could. Man’s holidays are a poor substitute for what God has in mind for you and your family: to be part of His family, together.
The first year is the hardest, but you’ll find a groove that works. You are not alone. While your journey is uniquely yours, there are many people who walk with you, all sorting out how to keep family without keeping Christmas.

You might also be interested in...