YET ANOTHER person leaving Facebook!

A timely post from www.freedomfeens.com about why someone left Facebook. This follows this post about mysticsim, Dr. Strange, and Star Wars. This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump.
You can follow me here.

Why I Left Facebook, and where to find me online

by MWD

I’ve always thought it was pathetic when people scream “I’m leaving Facebook!”….or MySpace, or however far you want to take it back….I even saw this before the World Wide Web, on newsgroups, in 1990. But it’s only pathetic when people’s reasons for leaving are the usual “No one likes me! And people are mean to me!” Those are not my reasons for leaving Facebook. In fact, a lot of people like me on Facebook. I have 2200 “friends” on there. And a lot of them are people I enjoy talking with.
I find it interesting that you can’t just delete your Facebook account. It takes 14 days. Reminds me of a nanny waiting period to buy a gun. Facebook knows how annoying it is, and like the drug dealer giving out free samples to a junkie who gets off junk, Facebook says “You’ll be back…..” and tries to entice you not to leave. Sort of how some states make you be separated for a while before they’ll “grant” you a divorce. Anyway, if you do want to leave Facebook, here’s how to do it. (Skip step one there, and before you delete your account, delete all your photos. Who knows if Facebook will decide they own those at some point.)
So, if you’d like to know why I’m leaving Facebook, and where you can find me, read on…..

WHY I’M LEAVING FACEBOOK, EFFECTIVE NOON TOMORROW (12/19/2012):
1. Facebook is starting to act like The State. Instagram, which is owned by Facebook, has updated their “user agreement” to say that they can sell any of your photos and not pay you. And they can use photos of your face. They could sell a photo of you smiling with a gun to an anti-gun campaign. If you’re overweight, you could end up in the “before” photo for a weight loss pill. etc. etc.
In saying that they can change their user agreement this drastically, and that you’ve already agreed by being a member, they are acting like The State with its “Social Contract.” That is, Facebook is acting like the government. Even though Facebook has backtracked due to public outrage, that sounds to me like what politicians do right before an election. Do I really wanna trust someone who figuratively says “Well, we were gonna rape you, but you complained and people are watching, so we’ll wait and rape you later”? (It’s ironic that so many statists are among the outraged, because they don’t realize this is EXACTLY how all governments behave.)
2. I waste a lot of time on Facebook. I used to write books that I was paid to write, but I spend so much time on Facebook that I’ve stopped writing books. You could say “Why not just spend less time on there?” but that’s like giving a junkie a brick of drugs and saying “just use this once in a while.” While this is my problem, not Facebook’s problem, my solution is to leave. I’ll probably go through “withdraw” for a little while, but then I’ll go back to actually producing things instead of wasting time on Facebook.
3. Facebook is censoring people. They are suspending accounts of people who do not tow the mainstream media line on current events.
4. Facebook is hypocritical. They are suspending accounts of people who post political ideas that Facebook does not like. Then they tell those people “Facebook is not a place for politics”, when in fact, Facebook was spamming me for Obama right before the election.
5. Facebook is spying on you. Of course these days, you are being spied on everywhere, all the time, by governments and corporations, but Facebook is the worst of the worst. And their privacy settings are useless.
6. I don’t want to talk to a lot of the people on Facebook. But they want to talk to me, and foist their opinions on everything at me, and they’re usually wrong. It’s annoying. But it goes beyond annoying sometimes. I’ve had death threats simply for my political beliefs from strangers who would never have even heard of me if I weren’t on Facebook. Like I said in one of my books ten years ago, “The great thing about the Internet is that everyone in the world can talk to you. The horrible thing about the Internet is that everyone in the world can talk to you.” This is more true on Facebook than anywhere. It’s set up for that. None of those people would bother trying to find my e-mail and bug me, but on Facebook, that’s just part of what people do. It’s part of the business model.
7. FACEBOOK USERS AS A WHOLE SEEM FAR MORE INTERESTED IN SPREADING FEAR THAN DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT. This statement isn’t singling out any individual users, and there are exceptions. But as an entity, the collective mind of Facebook is far more into yelling “THE SKY IS FALLING!” than putting on a hard hat to protect their head from falling sky pieces. The final straw, for me, was when I posted two things on the same day…The first was a link to an article about new ways the government is planning to read your e-mail. The second was a link to an article we wrote on setting up encrypted e-mail so the government can’t read your e-mail. The thing about government reading your e-mail got 170 likes and 76 shares. The piece about actually DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT got ten likes and 3 shares. To me, that says all you need to know about Facebook and why you shouldn’t be on there. Most people on Facebook would rather live in a fear-spiral echo chamber than actually DO ANYTHING to protect themselves. I call it “Fear porn”, and it’s not a type of porn I’m interested in consuming.
8. I’d rather spend my time and effort building my own sites than building someone else’s business model for free. Especially when that “someone else” is a company like Facebook that has no respect, and apparently has absolute contempt, for its “customers.”
WHERE TO FIND ME:
I’m not leaving the Internet. I love the Internet. I’ve been on it since 1990 (before the World Wide Web), and I’m still going to be around. I just hate Facebook. You can find me on Twitter, here. You can find Freedom Feens, my thrice-weekly podcast with Neema Vedadi, here. You can subscribe to that via RSS or iTunes, and post comments on the site, and I sometimes comment back. You can subscribe to the torrent link here. (Please seed Feens episodes for when the Central Scrutinizer declares free speech illegal, deletes our website, and throws us in camps.) You can find my interview podcast, Anarchy Gumbo, here.
You can find my past media here, and my e-mail address here. (Though please submit news items for the Feens here, rather than via e-mail.) You can find my encrypted e-mail and PGP key here. If I know you well and you use private i.m. via Pidgin, you probably already have my Pidgin address. I don’t give it out to many people.
Only about five people have my phone number, and I don’t talk to people much on the phone, but you can call the Feens number during our live shows, info is here. During Feens Live shows, I’m also on the Feens chat page (my user name is MichaelFeen), and I occasionally pop in there at other times. I write for the Freedom Feens blog (the thing you’re reading right now), and you can comment on here, and I sometimes comment back. I’ll also start posting photos of my cats here sometimes, that was always a favorite on Facebook, and I know it helps power the Internet and keeps the tubes from getting slow.
Skype is not a good way to find me except during the Feens live shows. I never turn Skype on unless I’m doing a show, and I never check my Skype messages. I am on YouTube, but that’s a bad way to contact me. I rarely answer on there, but you can enjoy my videos. I have a Google+ account, but I never check it and will probably be deleting that too.
You can listen to us 24/7 (and occasionally live) on Freedom Feens Radio.
Even with all the above, that’s much more manageable than being on Facebook. Facebook is a time suck.
There is a Freedom Feens Facebook page that’s run by fans, but not by me. Apparently there will be some Feens updates there.
So anyway, that about covers it. Enjoy Facebook if you stay. It’s useful for some people. But I’ve got things to do, and roads to build.
–Michael W. Dean

A timely post from www.vdare.com about the SPLC. This follows this post about Keith Ellison. This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump.
You can follow me here.

Until the 9/11 terror attacks, many Americans did not understand that Muslims like Osama bin Laden believe Islam commands its followers to kill unbelievers who refuse to convert.

<

Southern Poverty Law Center Targets Anti-Jihad Crusaders (Ann Corcoran Honored!)

>

---

Brenda Walker

Long-time friends of law and borders remember the unfounded attacks on American sovereignty defenders, in particular the slander of John Tanton (which he refuted at length).
Now the faux-hate-peddling money-grubbers at the SPLC are back, this time bashing scholars and activists who have warned America of the national security threat posed by violent jihadist Muslims. The SPLC follows Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, particularly his principle to “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” The cheap-shot smears against individuals are straight from the Alinsky playbook.
Earlier this week, the SPLC published a new screed, Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists. Its list of 15 subjects was rather distinguished, and Ann Corcoran of Refugee Resettlement Watch characterized her inclusion as A Great Honor!
Another chosen one, Muslim reformer Maajid Nawaz, was less thrilled, writing on his Facebook page, “The non-Muslim led Southern Poverty Law Center placing a jihadi target on my head by listing me (a reforming liberal Muslim) as an ‘anti-Muslim extremist’ on their hit list published today.”
Good work, SPLC, you may get a real scalp from the latest targeting! Sensitive jihadists are easily offended and may murder to protect the strict interpretation of Islam.
The other 13 are: Steven Emerson, Brigitte Gabriel, Frank Gaffney, Pamela Geller, John Guandolo, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, David Horowitz, Ryan Mauro, Robert Muise, Daniel Pipes, Walid Shoebat, and Robert Spencer. These are heroic people who are trying to save America from a determined enemy of 1400 years who want to establish a world Islamic caliphate ruled by totalitarian misogynous sharia. But the SPLC wants to shut them up and thereby endanger America for the organization’s selfish purposes.
The last on the list, Robert Spencer, wrote a response to the SPLC calumny:

The SPLC’s Libelous New Report on ‘Anti-Muslim Extremists’, by Robert Spencer, Frontpagemag.com, October 28, 2016
The objective of this libelous new report from the hard-Left money-making and incitement machine the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is made plain within it: “Before you book a spokesperson from an anti-Muslim extremist group or quote them in a story, research their background — detailed in this in-depth guide to 15 of the most visible anti-Muslim activists— and consider the consequences of giving them a platform.”
They wish to silence those who speak honestly about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, blaming us for a supposed rise in “Islamophobia.” If they really want to stamp out suspicion of Islam, of course, they will move against not us, but the likes of Omar Mateen, Syed Rizwan Farook, Tashfeen Malik, Nidal Malik Hasan, Mohammed Abdulazeez, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and the myriad other Muslims who commit violence in the name of Islam and justify it by reference to Islamic teachings.
The SPLC doesn’t do that because its objective is not really to stop “Islamophobia” at all, but to create the illusion of a powerful and moneyed network of “Islamophobes,” who can only be stopped if you write a check to the SPLC. That’s what this is really all about.
In constructing this illusory edifice, the SPLC labels me and fourteen others “anti-Muslim extremists.” We are, of course, no more “anti-Muslim” than foes of the Nazis were anti-German, but note the word “extremists.” That’s the mainstream media and Obama administration’s term of choice for jihad terrorists. In what way are we “extremists”? Has anyone on the SPLC’s hit list (and given the SPLC’s track record of inciting violence against its targets, that is exactly what it is) ever blown anything or anyone up? Beheaded anyone? Boasted of our imminent conquest of any territory and the massacre of or enslavement of its people? No, all we have done is speak critically about jihad terror and Sharia oppression. The SPLC is trying to further the libel that we are the other side of the coin, the non-Muslim bin Ladens and Awlakis. Until we commit any terror attacks or conspire with others to do so, however, the SPLC’s libel is only that: a libel.
It’s also passingly ironic that the SPLC list includes several people who are doubtless horrified to be in this company, as they have endeavored for years to distinguish their message from that of those whom they themselves would smear as “Islamophobes.” But their temporizing and pandering didn’t work: they ended up on the Index of Prohibited Thinkers anyway, as will, ultimately, anyone who dares to note that Islam just might have something to do with the acts of murder committed in its name and in accord with its teachings.
The “report” as a whole stands as an example of the Left’s strange tendency to present true statements as if they were self-evidently false, without bothering to explain why. Apparently the SPLC knows its supporters and is aware that it doesn’t need to bother with troublesome things like, you know, facts.
The SPLC’s hit list recurrently excoriates people for making true statements that it apparently regards as self-evidently false. For example, it says that Ann Corcoran of Refugee Resettlement Watch “accuses immigrant-run stores of illegally trafficking in food stamps.” This is a case that Corcoran makes with evidence – evidence that the SPLC doesn’t bother to try disproving. It says that Steven Emerson of the Investigative Project on Terrorism “has claimed that the Obama administration ‘extensively collaborates’ with the Muslim Brotherhood.” That he actually has done so doesn’t seem to bother them. As Andrew C. McCarthy has noted, “Barack Obama has spent his presidency cultivating Islamists, particularly from the international Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates in the United States.” The SPLC also hits Emerison for having “asserted that Europe is riddled with ‘no-go zones.’” Regarding “no-go zones,” here are some news articles from just the past few weeks:
Sweden: Police admit losing control of 55 no-go zones
France: Police need extra protection when entering Muslim no-go zones
Germany: Police “sick” of citizens’ no-go zone fears
The SPLC excoriates Brigitte Gabriel of ACT for America for saying that any “practicing Muslim who believes the word of the Koran to be the word of Allah … who goes to mosque and prays every Friday, who prays five times a day — this practicing Muslim, who believes in the teachings of the Koran, cannot be a loyal citizen of the United States.” Yet it says nothing, of course, about the many teachings of the Qur’an that contradict American Constitutional principles: the denial of the freedom of speech, the death penalty for apostasy, the devaluation of women, and more. How to reconcile these teachings with U.S. citizenship, the SPLC did not bother to explain.
The SPLC quotes David Horowitz saying: “There are only a couple of degrees of separation between anybody on the left and the terrorists — and that includes people in the Democratic Party, even those who are anti-terrorist.” Here again, no refutation is offered – yet the Left’s dalliance with Palestinian jihad groups and overall anti-Americanism make it impossible to dismiss Horowitz’s assertion.
Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, we’re told, “is gripped by paranoid fantasies about Muslims destroying the West from within.” The SPLC doesn’t bother to mention the Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America, the captured Muslim Brotherhood internal document that explained that Brotherhood members “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”
In attacking Pamela Geller of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, the SPLC descended to outright fabrications. Notes Geller: “Their claim that I insist that Obama is the ‘love child’ of Malcolm X is patently untrue. The SPLC also states that I ‘have spoken to a neo-fascist group in Germany,’ when in fact I have never even been to Germany.” It characterizes former FBI agent John Guandolo’s claim that CIA director John Brennan was a convert to Islam as an “outlandish accusation,” when in fact “a U.S. asset assigned overseas with Brennan in Saudi Arabia when he was station chief confirmed years ago their firsthand account that Brennan was indeed the target of a Saudi intelligence influence operation that led to his conversion. Brennan has also stated publicly that he visited Mecca, which is impossible for a non-Muslim to do unless he is a special guest of the Saudi King.”
Even more strangely, the SPLC targets Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a woman who grew up as a Muslim in Somalia, suffered genital mutilated at the hands of Muslims, is under death threats from Muslims, and lives in exile from her homeland because of Muslims. Instead of trying to discredit her, the SPLC should be honoring her for her stand for human rights against Sharia oppression. But the SPLC has other priorities.
Of me, the SPLC concedes that I am a “real intellectual” but complains that I am “entirely self-taught in the study of Islam.” An odd objection. One cannot be both “self-taught” and a “real intellectual”? In any case, it’s false: I am indeed mostly self-taught in the study of Islam, and make no secret of or apologies for it; every day’s headlines proves me correct. Nonetheless, the fact is that I did first read the Qur’an and began studying Islam in earnest while at the University of North Carolina. My claims, says the SPLC, are “provably false,” but then only offers a number of them that are demonstrably true, without any attempt to refute them.
It even says that I have “referred to Barack Obama as ‘the first Muslim president.’” This one epitomizes the dishonesty of the SPLC. The quote comes from an article I wrote in 2007 discussing how Obama was not a Muslim, stating that his obvious affinity for Islam and the Muslim world could make him into “our first Muslim president” the way Bill Clinton was called “our first black president.” After eight years of Obama, I’d say I was proven correct in rather spectacular fashion.
The SPLC, finally, hits me for having “even suggested that the media may be getting money to depict Muslims in a positive light.”
The facts are once again deeply unfortunate for the SPLC: George Soros funded a report on “Islamophobia” on Twitter and gave $200,000 to the Center for American Progress for a defamatory report on alleged “Islamophobes.” He also spent $600,000 for favorable coverage of the Muslim migrant inundation, bought favorable coverage of the Iran deal, and bought “Islamophobia” propaganda after the San Bernardino jihad massacre.
But what need does the SPLC have of facts? It knows its readers won’t check up on the veracity of its claims, but will accept them at face value, since the SPLC is of the camp of the saints, the enlightened and tolerant Left. Those who are outside that camp clearly have no rights that the SPLC feels bound to respect.

Report buried Trump-related ‘hate crimes’ against white kids - It's the $PLC, what do you expect

A timely post from http://www.alipac.us about the SPLC. This follows this post about budget funding for Refugees and H-2B visas. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

 Report buried Trump-related ‘hate crimes’ against white kids

By Paul Sperry


At least 2,000 educators around the country reported racist slurs and other derogatory language leveled against white students in the first days after Donald Trump was elected president. But the group that surveyed the teachers didn’t publish the results in its report on Trump-related “hate crimes.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center partnered with the American Federation of Teachers, which formally endorsed Hillary Clinton, to circulate the questionnaire among its 1.6 million mostly Democratic members. The survey was sent out to K-12 teachers and administrators who subscribe to its “Teaching Tolerance” newsletter.

The SPLC’s widely cited report — “The Trump Effect: The Impact of the 2016 Presidential Election on Our Nation’s Schools” — reported that 40 percent of the more than 10,000 educators who responded to the survey “have heard derogatory language directed at students of color, Muslims, immigrants and people based on gender or sexual orientation.”

The takeaway was that Trump-supporting white kids have been harassing minorities at the nation’s schools. And SPLC’s schools report, along with a broader report on alleged Trump-inspired hate crimes — “Ten Days After: Harassment and Intimidation in the Aftermath of the Election” — sparked breathless coverage in the New York Times, Washington Post and other major media.

The reports also triggered a statement Friday from the US Commission on Civil Rights, which expressed “deep concern” that “prejudice has reared its ugly head in public elementary and secondary schools.” The panel called for more federal funding to prosecute “hate crimes.”

But the SPLC didn’t present the whole story. The Montgomery, Ala.-based nonprofit self-censored results from a key question it asked educators — whether they agree or disagree with the following statement: “I have heard derogatory language or slurs about white students.”

Asked last week to provide the data, SPLC initially said it was having a hard time getting the information “from the researchers.” Pressed, SPLC spokeswoman Kirsten Bokenkamp finally revealed that “about 20 percent answered affirmatively to that question.”

Bokenkamp did not provide an explanation for the absence of such a substantial metric — at least 2,000 bias-related incidents against white students — from the report, which focuses instead on “anti-immigrant sentiment,” “anti-Muslim sentiment” and “slurs about students of color” related to the election.

“They left that result out because it would not fit their ideological narrative,” former Education Department civil rights attorney Hans Bader said. “It was deemed an inconvenient truth.”

Suppressing reports of crimes against Trump supporters gives a one-sided and misleading view of post-election discord.

Founded in 1971, SPLC claims to be a nonpartisan civil rights law firm. But it receives funding from leftist groups, including ones controlled by billionaire George Soros. And a review of Federal Election Commission records reveals that its board members have contributed more than $13,400 to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaigns.

Bader says SPLC has an agenda to derail the Trump administration before it starts.

“These flawed SPLC reports will be cited by left-wing special interests to try to block the confirmation of moderate and conservative people to posts such as attorney general by falsely making it look like America’s schools and streets are pervaded by bigotry,” Bader said.

Last week, SPLC held a press conference in Washington to demand Trump “reconsider” his picks for White House advisers and attorney general, and “disavow” his immigration policies.


Richard Cohen, president of the Southern Poverty Law CenterPhoto: Getty Image

s“His own words have sparked the barrage of hate that we are seeing,” SPLC President Richard Cohen maintained. “He has been singing the white supremacist song since he came down the escalator in his tower and announced his candidacy.”

Cohen tied Trump to a number of hate crimes, which he warns will only “spike” once he’s inaugurated. He noted his center recorded 867 alleged anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim and anti-black hate crimes in the 10 days following Trump’s Nov. 8 win.

But the SPLC acknowledges that it has not independently verified any of the claims. It collected most of them on its website, many anonymously.

The group won’t use its $315 million in assets to investigate the “hate crimes,” or at least help alleged victims file police reports or provide them counseling or other assistance, but it has offered “sympathy.”

“We wrote back to every submission that provided an email address to express sympathy and encourage them to report the incident to local authorities,” Bokenkamp said.

Bader pointed out that most of the anti-minority “hate crimes” and “hate incidents” cited by SPLC do not legally constitute hate crimes, and many involve constitutionally protected speech.

“It is simply ridiculous that SPLC treats ‘build the wall’ as hate rhetoric,” he said. The center counted people mentioning “build the wall” as 467 incidents of hate.

“Alas, these days the SPLC is mainly a fundraising machine,” said Gail Heriot, a US Commission on Civil Rights member who voted against Friday’s resolution. “The more it can persuade its donors that hate groups have penetrated every nook and cranny of American society, the more money it can raise. Now it wants us to believe that the election has unleashed unprecedented waves of hatred and violence among schoolchildren. Let’s stop and take a deep breath before we assume that’s true. The SPLC has no credibility with anyone — on the left or the right — who is familiar with its methods.”

While there no doubt are legitimate reports of hate crimes against minorities — and even one is too many — hyping such incidents recklessly fans the flames of anxiety among such communities. And suppressing reports of crimes against Trump supporters gives a one-sided and misleading view of post-election discord.

http://nypost.com/2016/12/05/report-...st-white-kids/

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

 By Robert Spencer 36 Comments

“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, 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"

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




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.
***
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:

FBI Hate Crime Stats: Jews Victims 62.4% of Attacks; ...

HA! College Football Coach Blames Loss on Players’ “Fat ...

Hypocrite of the Day: Congressman Mike Rogers on Terrorism

Weekend Box Office: Hilarious “Extract,” Horrid “Steve”

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about Political Correctness. This follows this post about the Virginia Tech shooting. This follows this post about Iran. This follows this post about Zika. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

How Correct is Political Correctness?

 by Janel Johnson Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

Since political correctness will be part of nearly every college class you take, what should you know about it now?

Sometimes it seems like political correctness (PC) has been around forever. Some commentators peg the beginning of political correctness within the decade of the 1980s.
But the politically correct movement already had a foundation long before that in moral relativism and in situation ethics. Both of these philosophies are based on the idea that there is no such thing as “absolute truth.” Those of us who know and accept the “absolute truth” of the Bible know that such thinking is flawed. We also discover that there is more to the business of PC than “correctness.”
PC is so prevalent and powerful because it is based on our innate desire for love, peace and justice for the underdog. But without the true biblical principles to guide these desires, they can run amok.

What does it sound like?

PC nouns and adjectives include words such as “privileged,” “entitled,” “majority rule,” “diversity” and “individual rights.” While “tolerance” is a favorite buzzword of the politically correct, PC actually creates its own intolerance that often quickly shouts down alternative viewpoints.
You'll hear all about “imperialism” in history, “reason” in English, “exploitation” in economics, “evolution” as fact in biology and “connecting to the greater world” in sociology. And, if you listen very carefully, you'll hear that the words spoken are not really about equal opportunity for all.

How does it look and feel?

PC embraces minorities, but not because it respects everyone like God does or as the Constitution of the United States and its amendments advocate. According to author and radio host Laura Ingraham, political correctness uses polarization to reinforce division and ends up creating classes among our citizens ( Shut Up and Sing , 2003, p. 62).
Your PC classroom will be one with an emphasis on personal right of choice—but, when you stand back and take an overview, this turns out to be a shortsighted approach that is rarely for the collective good of all . The barometer of the politically correct movement tends to be the gratification of one person or one particular group of people.
Your PC classroom will be one in which each student is encouraged to lobby for that right of choice but will rarely follow up on the personal responsibility needed in taking that action.
In the politically correct worldview, abortion is a reproductive right and homosexuality is an alternative lifestyle just as valid as any other. All religions, from animism to Wicca, are equal (except one that would claim to know absolute truth). You'll be made to feel ostracized and intimidated if you hold an alternative opinion.

What difference does it make to you?

While being politically correct will put you in a generally comfortable place with your professors and peers, it will slowly take you away from biblical values.
Our freedoms grant us the ability and the opportunity to contribute to a healthy, functional society through personal choice, personal responsibility and personal accountability. This is obviously a better choice.

How can you be prepared to deal with it?

As your college schedule gets more demanding, be sure to set aside time to continue learning about God's gifts. These precious gifts include having a sound mind, peace, gentleness, kindness, self-control, joy, goodness, love, faithfulness and personal responsibility.
Never close your mind's door to discernment. Be aware of current events. Pick up a couple of books for summer reading that deal with the PC topic (such as Bias by Bernard Goldberg or Shut Up and Sing by Laura Ingraham). Talk with your friends and encourage one another to stand up for the integrity of a giving way of life.
As you enter and progress through your higher education, remember the sounds, sights and feelings of the politically correct movement. Be prepared and ready to understand the difference between the counterfeit and truth. VT

politically correct Youth Fruit of the Spirit

You might also be interested in...

Heading off to College

Before you being college, you will need a few tools in your belt that will aid...

What Do I Need Right Now?

As young people mature, many wonder about their relationship with God and...

• 

  Janel Johnson

  No Bio Info Available
  

Add to my study list

Print this Page

Appeared In...

Vertical Thought: July - September 2004

Join the conversation!

Log in or register to post comments

World News and Trends: Anti-Semitic, anti-Israel riots erupt in California, New Mexico, Chicago

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about riots. This follows this post about proper judgement. This follows this post about Facebook and Transgendered people. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

World News and Trends: Anti-Semitic, anti-Israel riots erupt in Europe

 por Jerold Aust, John Ross Schroeder 

Anti-semitic views spread in Europe, fueled by hatred of the Israeli state.

The Jewish Chronicle called it “The Worst Wave of Hate for Quarter of a Century.” Hatred of Jews suddenly became much more evident in the wake of the air strikes and Israeli incursion into Gaza. One observer said that anti-Semites are “using an overseas conflict as an excuse for their racism” (Leon Symons, Simon Rocker and Jonny Paul, Jan. 16, 2009, p. 1).
A demonstration in London against the Israeli action attracted 12,000 protestors. Over a period of about two weeks more than 150 anti-Semitic incidents were recorded across Britain—including arson, personal attacks on individuals, graffiti and abusive telephone calls (ibid.).
The “State of the Union” column in The Wall Street Journal reported: “A Pew study from September [2008] shows that 25% of Germans and 20% of French are still affected by the [anti-Semitic] virus. In Spain, 46% have unfavourable views of Jews.
“Is there really no connection between this statistic and the fact that the Spanish media and government are among Europe's most hostile toward the Jewish state? Is it just a coincidence that Europe's largest anti-Israeli demonstration took place Sunday in Madrid with more than 100,000 protestors?” (Daniel Schwammenthal, “Europe Reimports Jew Hatred,” Jan. 13, 2009, p. 12).
It is increasingly difficult to conveniently separate anti-Israeli feelings and anti-Semitism, as London's chief rabbi has pointed out for many months. The Wall Street Journal piece plainly concluded that “the rejection of Israel's right to exist is what drives their attacks.”
A Time feature article observed that “the threat posed by Hamas is only the most immediate of the many interlocking challenges facing Israel, some of which cast dark shadows over the long-term viability of a democratic Jewish state” (Tim McGirk, “Can Israel Survive Its Assault on Gaza?” Jan. 19, 2009, pp. 13-16).
For a comprehensive understanding of the immediate dangers and the biblically foretold, positive long-term outcome, please see our May-June 2008 Good News cover article “Can Israel Survive?” Also, to comprehend the historic and prophetic background of Israel's position in the world, request or download our free booklet The Middle East in Bible Prophecy . (Sources: The Jewish Chronicle [London], The Wall Street Journal, Time. )

religious conflict antisemitism Middle East Europe World Regions Governments Conflicts and War News and Prophecy Israel

You might also be interested in...

World News and Trends: Anti-Semitism reasserts itself in Eastern Europe

Extremist politicians in Hungary, Poland and other Eastern European countries...

World News and Trends: Hatred of Israel and the rise of anti-Semitism

The so-called nonaligned nations recently met in Havana, Cuba, and heartily...

• 

  Jerold Aust

  United Church of God Pastor

  Jerold Aust has served in the ministry for 45 years, as a public speaker for 51 years, a published writer for 31 years, and is employed by UCG’s Media and Communications Services. He is a Senior Writer, interviewer, and editor for The Good News Magazine and also teaches Speech Communication for UCG’s ministerial online program.
• 

  John Ross Schroeder

  (1937-2014)

  John died on March 8, 2014, in Oxford, England, four days after suffering cardiac arrest while returning home from a press event in London. John was 77 and still going strong.

Añadir a mi lista de estudio

Imprime esta página

Appeared In...

Good News Magazine: March - April 2009

Join the conversation!