Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Did Pearl Harbor have anything to do with the Japanese Empire? - Islamic terrorism considered

A timely post about from www.jihadwatch.org about Jihad and Japan. This follows this post  about a U.S. pastor's freedom of speech. 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.

“Minnesota man” pleads guilty to aiding the Islamic State

A “Minnesota man,” eh?
Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, December 7, 1941: A group of Japanese men were accused today of bombing the U.S. Navy base here. President Roosevelt took to the airwaves to assure the nation that the attack had nothing whatsoever to do with the Japanese Empire, and to warn against a “backlash” against Japanese people living in America. Stay tuned for an update on Rita Hayworth.
HamzaAhmed
“Another Defendant in Terror-Recruiting Case Pleads Guilty,” by Dave Aeikens and Ellen Galles, KSTP.com, April 25, 2016 (thanks to WL):
A Minnesota man arrested in 2015 on charges he and several others were trying to assist the Islamic State terror group pleaded guilty Monday in federal court.
Hamza Ahmed pleaded guilty to conspiracy and student financial fraud. He could get up to 20 years in prison.
He told the judge today that he originally pleaded ‘not guilty’ to appease his mother. He said she wanted to see his case go to trial and “she was a big influence in that.”
Judge Michael Davis ordered a pre-sentence investigation report, and will schedule a sentencing hearing after it is complete.
Ahmed was stopped at a New York City airport in November as he and three others were attempting to travel to Syria. Ahmed has been indicted on charges of lying to the FBI during a terrorism investigation, conspiring to provide material support to the Islamic State terror group, and attempting to provide material support, according to federal charges….
Bloomberg View: "To Defeat Islamic State, Treat Muslims Better"
This week: Robert Spencer in Western Canada
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Moral Leadership Does It Really Matter?

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about moral leadership. This follows this post about Egypt.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.

Does morality matter? In recent weeks and months, the world has been treated to the spectacle of poll after poll showing that, while most Americans disapprove of revelations about the president's private behavior, they approve of his job performance by a wide margin.
Time after time Americans have seen television commentators, legal analysts and people on the street assure us that it's nobody's business what elected officials do in private; the only thing that matters is how they do their job.
Does moral leadership matter? Can lack of moral values and exemplary leadership coexist? What are the consequences of strong political power without a moral foundation?

Where Have All the Leaders Gone?

Nations everywhere seem to be drifting dangerously out of control. Russia is close to economic collapse, its government perilously unstable. Her neighbors, including many of the former Soviet republics, are understandably anxious and nervous. There is nothing quite like a collapsing superpower armed with thousands of nuclear weapons to give cause for concern.
Many Asian countries that were economic powerhouses in the global economy only a few years ago thrown out of work, plummeting overnight from relative prosperity to poverty.
Some Asian countries face food shortages in the coming months. People naturally look to Japan to pull Asia out of its economic straits, but Japan is crippled by its own governmental stalemate and is hardly in a condition to help others.
Nearby, India and Pakistan rattle their newly developed nuclear sabers at each other while Iraq and Iran quietly pursue the development and acquisition their own nuclear, chemical and biological arsenals. Meanwhile, much of Africa remains mired in perpetual poverty, crippled by corrupt and incompetent leadership.
The list of world problems goes on and on. At a time of many global crises, where have our leaders gone?
The generation of leaders forged in the fires of the Great Depression, World War II and the Cold War has largely passed from the scene. In the last two U.S. presidential election, voters chose telegenic baby boomer Bill Clinton over World War II veterans George Bush, a former U.S. Navy carrier pilot; and Bob Dole, a former infantry officer who lost the use of an arm on a battlefield in Italy.
The Daily Mail of London recently headlined an article, “Where Is the Leader We So Badly Need?” It observed: “It seems hard to believe that only ten years ago we still enjoyed the authoritative certainties of Thatcher and Reagan, and that we could still also believe in Gorbachev. That now seems a vanished world, about as distant from our present discontents as the era of Bismarck and Disraeli.”
Times have changed and not for the better. If this is what we can expect from our current crop of administrators and heads of state, what will be the quality of the next generation to assume the reins of leadership?

Good Intentions Aren't Good Enough

For thousands of years nations and their leaders have wrestled to create a government that would provide the most good for the greatest number of people. The longest-lived governments have been monarchies in which absolute power passed from generation to generation within families. Many such dynasties lasted for centuries. Tragically, these were often long-lived simply because of their absolute control over their subjects.
Administrators and forms of governments rise and fall. This century has seen the spectacular rise of a new form of government—communism—and its equally spectacular collapse. Communism promised equality for all. But it was destined to fail because, in rejecting God, it lacked a moral foundation.
History shows that many forms of government have started with good intentions, only to fail as weaknesses become apparent. In most cases the failure came down to the moral downfall of the leader or the general populace. Often, of course, the leader was a reflection of the people—and vice versa.
This is evident in the present American predicament, with poll after poll showing that most Americans want their president—an admitted liar and adulterer—to remain in office.

Tolerance of Evil

What does this say about the American people? As The Times of London observed: “There are many men who belong to Bill Clinton's generation and identify with him … There are many women who are indulgent towards his sexual escapades. There are many black people who see him as a sympathetic President. These people do not want to believe the evidence; they want to explain it away.”
Economist and writer Thomas Sowell noted remarkable ironies and inconsistencies coming to light in the reactions of the American people to revelations of presidential behavior.
“… The polls of the past several months make it hard to be optimistic about the American public's understanding of the society in which they live or the dangers in that kind of society,” he wrote. “Consider some polls. The public has a far more negative view of Monica Lewinsky than Bill Clinton. Since it takes two to tango, why would you blame one more than the other—and especially the one who is younger and who has no power and no responsibility to the nation at large?
“[Special prosecutor] Kenneth Starr's approval ratings have barely made it out of the single digits. He is far more disliked for bringing out the truth than Bill Clinton is for lying … Susan McDougal's stonewalling on Bill Clinton's part in the Arkansas fraud has been magically transformed into something noble by the media. More important, the public has bought it. Hey, obstruction of justice is not so bad if she's a spunky gal …
“What will matter very much—and perhaps tragically—is if the public has degenerated to the point where it can only react emotionally to what is right under their noses, rather than understand how much this country's freedom and well-being depend on the rule of law.”

Are There Moral Absolutes?

Such findings point not just to a president but a nation dangerously adrift from its moral moorings. The gradual acceptance of moral relativism—that moral absolutes do not exist—shows up in the many comments that it doesn't matter what the president does in his private life, that it's nobody's business, or it's just between him and his wife.
Such sentiments ignore a leader's fundamental responsibility to properly lead his people. What does it say when the nation's highest elected official, the head of the executive branch of the U.S. government, charged with enforcing the laws of the land, is accused of numerous felony offenses? More important, what does it say about a people and other government officials willing to excuse such behavior?
Some 4,500 years ago another nation faced a crisis of government. Shaking off the shackles of slavery, that nation had the opportunity to do things right. Its people were promised peace, stability and prosperity in their homeland if they would build upon a proper moral foundation.
After giving the ancient Israelites His law—the national constitution that would ensure the blessings of peace and prosperity—God exclaimed, “Oh, that they had such a heart in them that they would fear Me and always keep all My commandments, that it might be well with them and with their children forever!” (Deuteronomy 5:29). God knew their adherence to this moral foundation would be key to their success and survival as a nation.
God understood the crucial role of leaders in a nation's success. He literally laid down the law to the Israelites; He gave specific instructions for the nation's head of government was to follow to keep it on the moral path.
“… When he has taken his place on the seat of his kingdom,” God instructed Israel concerning its head of state, “he is to make in a book a copy of this law … And it is to be with him for his reading all the days of his life, so that he may be trained in the fear of the Lord his God to keep and do all the words of this teaching and these laws: so that his heart may not be lifted up over his countrymen, and he may not be turned away from the orders, to one side or the other: but that his life and the lives of his children may be long in his kingdom …” (Deuteronomy 17:18-20, Bible in Basic English).
Adherence to this law, God promised, would result in national leaders who would not exalt themselves—would not be “lifted up”—over their people, men who would fear God and lead their people in righteousness and truth by example.

Influence on a Nation

Speaking through the prophet Isaiah around the time of the downfall of the kingdom of Israel, God noted that evil had spread through all levels of Israelite society. “The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faints. From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness in it, but wounds and bruises and putrefying sores …” (Isaiah 1:5-6).
God identified the nation's leaders as the source of corruption. Rather than providing proper leadership, they were leading the kingdom to destruction. “For the leaders of this people cause them to err, and those who are led by them are destroyed” (Isaiah 9:16).
Through the prophet Jeremiah, God added this sad footnote: “An astonishing and horrible thing has been committed in the land: The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule by their own power; and My people love to have it so …” (Jeremiah 5:30-31).
People had not only come to accept corrupt leadership, but to love it. In God's view, this was “astonishing” and “horrible.”
For their sins, God allowed His people to be taken into captivity. The prophet Hosea condemned the “spirit of harlotry” that turned them from God (Hosea 5:4). Their leaders failed them miserably. Rather than providing moral guidance and proper example, they appealed to people's base instincts and impulses. The result was national disaster.

Danger Signs

Abraham Lincoln recognized that the greatest dangers to a nation often come not from external threats, but from within. “At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected?” he asked. “I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us; it cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher” (emphasis added).
We are witnessing a national debate over right and wrong, whether adultery and lying are serious crimes and sins and whether they can be glossed over because of the popularity of the perpetrator. Where will it lead? If Bible prophecy is an indicator, conditions like those that Isaiah and Jeremiah described are likely to be the outcome.
Paul, describing trends leading up to Jesus Christ's return, wrote: “But be certain of this, that in the last days times of trouble will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, uplifted in pride, given to bitter words, going against the authority of their fathers, never giving praise, having no religion, without natural love, bitter haters, saying evil of others, violent and uncontrolled, hating all good, false to their friends, acting without thought, lifted up in mind, loving pleasure more than God …” (2 Timothy 3:1-4, Bible in Basic English).
Paul describes an utterly self-centered society in which people have no regard or use for moral values. Rejecting God's standards of conduct, they will set their own standards using their own reasoning—reasoning that ultimately leads to suffering and death (Proverbs 14:12; 16:25).
Such a society may not be long in coming when Americans find reasons to excuse adultery and lying and alleged perjury and obstruction of justice in their highest elected official. In fact, we might ask ourselves if it isn't already here.

A Different Kind of Leadership

Regardless of how bleak and uncertain conditions look on the national and world scene, God gives us encouragement. He promises a future government vastly different from any we know today.
Regrettably, although the specific accusations are unprecedented, the leadership crisis affecting the United States is not. All too many leaders succumb to the seduction of power and office. Some use them to enrich themselves and a circle of friends and associates. Some use their authority to oppress others. Some allow prestige and honor to warp their perceptions, leading them to believe they deserve power and rule over others. These are problems typical of powerful leaders.
But it will not always be this way. “You see that the rulers of the Gentiles are lords over them, and their great ones have authority over them,” said Jesus Christ to some who were eager to rule over others. “Let it not be so among you: but if anyone has a desire to become great among you, let him be your servant; and whoever has a desire to be first among you, let him take the lowest place: even as the Son of man did not come to have servants, but to be a servant, and to give his life for the salvation of men” (Matthew 20:25-28, BBE).
Jesus burst the bubble for His disciples. Rather than using power to gain more power and prestige for themselves, to put themselves above other men and women, Christ said that true leadership has one purpose: to serve others. This kind of leadership, He said, differs from the way most humans react when given power over others.
Jesus Christ exemplified that kind of true leadership. He taught people the solid foundation of God's law, which would help them avoid suffering the painful consequences of sin. He encouraged them to surrender to God in heartfelt repentance, no longer to live only for their selfish desires. He exemplified what it means to dedicate one's life to serving others.

Promise of True, Righteous Leadership

He also brought a message of a transformed world to come—an earth extraordinarily changed by the arrival of the Kingdom of God (Mark 1:14-15; Luke 8:1). This kingdom, He said, would come at the climax of a series of earth-shattering events (Luke 21:31) during which all human life would be in peril (Matthew 24:21-22).
This kingdom is destined to replace all human kingdoms, governments and authority (Revelation 11:15; Daniel 7:14). In this kingdom, Jesus Christ will reign forever as “King of Kings and Lord of Lords” (Revelation 19:16).
But He will not rule alone. Others will reign with Him in His kingdom (Revelation 20:4, 6). He will be joined by God's faithful servants (2 Timothy 2:12), men and women who have dedicated themselves to learning and practicing godly rulership as defined and exemplified by Jesus Christ.
Resurrected to eternal life (Revelation 20:6), they will help administer God's righteous government in paradise on earth in service to mankind.
God is fully aware of the weaknesses and peccadilloes of people, regardless of their lot in life. He knows we have all sinned (Romans 3:23), but He extends forgiveness and the power to transform our lives and minds (Romans 12:2). If we are willing to make that commitment, He invites us to share in true leadership in His Kingdom. GN

You might also be interested in...

Are we unified against Hillary?

An interesting article from http://www.vdare.com about Hillary Clinton's open borders. This follows this post about increased LEGAL immigration visas. This follows this post about the cost of immigration. This follows this post about this year's black vote. 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.


Are we unified against Hillary?  





Are you ready to unify with ALIPAC to educate American voters about Hillary Clinton's support for full amnesty and voting rights for tens of millions of illegal aliens that would turn all American states deep Democratic Party blue for the foreseeable future? Please reply to this email or make a post to us to let us know if you are ready! (reply to WilliamG@alipac.us)

Many of the latest polls, including one from the radical far left publication the Washington Post now show Donald Trump competitive with or beating Hillary Clinton by small margins!

These new polls completely dispel the latest false narrative that was launched against Trump claiming he could not beat Hillary.

It appears that Trump has swiftly consolidated support following the exit of Ted Cruz and John Kasich from the race! And the "Never Trump" crowd's plan to recruit a third candidate to enter the race, which would assure Hillary Clinton's victory, is falling apart rapidly now with even Romney bailing out on that awful plan.

Donald Trump has just won the GOP Presidential primary and received more votes than any other Republican candidate for President in history because he has convinced enough Americans that he will build a the wall, deport most of our illegal immigrants as the current laws mandate, and stop the migration of resettled Muslim refugees.

All efforts by the socialist media and Globalist republican rivals to destroy Trump have failed and have only made him stronger.

The only thing that can destroy Trump would be if the American public, including the vast network of watchdogs organized through ALIPAC, ever perceive or believe that Trump has changed or misled us on these key immigration positions.

And if Donald Trump fails to build the wall and puts the illegals and Syrian refugees somewhere beyond our secured borders, he will quickly become more despised and unpopular than Obama and will carve out a place for himself as America's greatest con man. Even now the media is interviewing pro illegal alien amnesty backers like Congresswoman Renee Ellmers and John McCain who say they oppose Trump's deportation plans! (click to read)         (Click to help ALIPAC fight McCain and Ellmers)

So let us all hope, pray, and work hard to see that this does not happen. We want America's borders secured, immigration laws enforced, and American taxpayer resources, jobs, and lives protected!

And on those issues we know that Hillary Clinton will stand with the globalists, Chinese, Mexican, big bank, and Chamber of Commerce influences to support illegal aliens. We know that Hillary supports full amnesty, licenses, in-state tuition, housing assistance, food stamps, and free cell phones for illegals. We know that Hillary Clinton will bring us 4 to 8 more years of the lies and corruption of the Obama administration that has been so horrible for most of us to endure!

Perhaps it is time for Hillary Clinton to learn the hard way what we know about illegal immigration. We know that more than half of America's legal Hispanics favor Trump's immigration promises more than Hillary's pro illegal immigration stances. We know that more than 60% of America's black voters feel the same way and that the black population is taking heavy hits from illegal aliens that undercut inner city jobs. And in Southern California and Chicago, the Mexican mafia groups are opening fire in black neighborhoods about every weekend!

We know that even a large portion of Democrats and people that self identify as "liberals" draw the line at illegal immigration. Especially inside many of the labor unions when you get to the rank and file workers, they see illegal immigration for the true job stealing and wage depreciation threat it is.

So I ask you: are we unified against Hillary? Are you ready to see ALIPAC work to pull everyone back together to focus on important down ballot races like throwing John McCain out of office with Dr. Kelli Ward and removing Speaker Paul Ryan from office with Paul Nehlen while going after Hillary Clinton's horrible immigration stances?

Can we count on your attention, your support, your donations and volunteerism in the coming weeks to lead the way in holding Hillary Clinton accountable for her massive support for amnesty for all illegal aliens?

Please send us your answers, your feedback, and your suggestions to WilliamG@alipac.us or post your responses where we can keep a lasting online accounting of your views at this link...

http://www.alipac.us/f8/we-unified-against-hillary-332797/



PS: Much thanks to everyone that helped fund ALIPAC's warning letters against illegal alien amnesty backers Congresswoman Renee Ellmers, DC Lobbyist Taylor Griffin, and state Rep. Harry Warren in NC!   We now must raise $1,500 to send our first batch of letters into Arizona against John McCain!  If you support these efforts and our plans to take Hillary Clinton to task, please donate right away via...
http://www.alipac.us/donations/

Monday, May 23, 2016

Editorial: Trump Supporters Are Not Supremacists, but Do Want to Defund our Culture

Editorial

Like almost all Trump supporters, I am not the racial supremacist that most of his opponents paint him out to be.
One can stereotypically point out who is better than whom in any activity or talent, and if one does do that, then the conclusion can be reached that no one group is more talented than all others in everything.
However, just because one's own group is not superior to others in everything does not mean that one does not want to defend one's own group, and that is the appeal that Mr. Trump has to his supporters. The more that both he, and his supporters are called racial supremacists, the more his followers know that the charge is false, and the tighter his supporters cling to support of him!

Remember also, that when you rent a house, if someone comes in and assaults you or insults you without your permission that you do have the right to self-defense. When Mr. Trump rents a venue for an assembly, he also has that right and encouraging his supporters to defend themselves when they are assaulted either inside the venue, or on the way TO, the venue of assembly, Mr. Trump RIGHTLY says that his supporters have the right to his legal support. That is not an an incitement to violence, but rather a call for self defence!

No Laughing Matter: Samantha Bee Show Pranks Kids, Tells Them They Were Almost Aborted

An interesting story from www.lifenews.com about Samantha Bee. This follows this post about Christians getting abortions! For two very interesting books click HERE.
Please follow me here.

Samantha Bee isn’t just pushing for abortion on her Full Frontal show. She and husband Jason Jones are shoving the issue into the broader entertainment world now too.
During the latest episode, The Road, the parents, Nate and Robin, revealed to their kids that they were lucky to be alive today.
The story began with a flashback where Robin (Natalie Zea) held a positive pregnancy test while sitting on the toilet.
Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com
“We don’t have to decide right now,” she calmed Nate (Jason Jones). “We’ll weigh the options and I will make the decision.”
Another flashback showed a technician giving Robin an ultrasound. As Nate and Robin watched the ultrasound on a screen revealing twins, Nate and Robin argued back and forth about whether or not to go through with the pregnancy.
Back in present time, their daughter Delilah (Ashley Gerasimovich) interrupted, “I’m really confused right now. You’re pregnant. So what was there to decide?”
Robin searched for a euphemistic term to describe abortion.
“Well, I had to make a choice,” she began. “I had to make a choice, uh… about whether or not I was gonna keep you?”
Confused, the kids asked, “You were thinking about giving us up for adoption? Well, who was gonna be our mom and dad?”
Robin finally found a way to describe abortion: a “trip to Europe.”
“I had to, uh, make a choice a-about whether or not I wanted to take a-a trip to the… um, Europe,” she responded.
She then went into a monologue about the “right to choose”:
“See, the – they’re a lot of women, who, um, find themselves in a position where they feel like they have to choose between being a mom and going to Europe, and – and it’s a – it’s a very, very serious decision and one that should never be taken lightly. And make no mistake, every woman deserves the right to choose… Europe, if she so desires.”
“But just know this,” she admitted, “Every time I look at you, I am so thankful that I decided to stay in Syracuse.”
The story ended with Robin confessing that she had gone to Europe (aka received an abortion) before her pregnancy with the twins.
“Just once,” she said. “Last year of high school.”
The abortion agenda is a favorite of Samantha Bee. Earlier this month, her Full Frontal show called pro-lifers “assholes” and “dickheads.”
LifeNews Note: Katie Yoder writes for Newsbusters, where this originally appeared.
samanthabee4

Wknd Box Office: The Nice Guys, Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising, The Meddler, A Bigger Splash

Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post about some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to choosing good movies to watch yourself!


Wknd Box Office: The Nice Guys, Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising, The Meddler, A Bigger Splash

By Debbie Schlussel

theniceguysneighbors2

themeddlerbiggersplash









Only one good movie new movie in theaters this weekend, and it’s a smaller movie starring the politically-loathsome Susan Saranwrap. I did not see “The Angry Birds Movie” as the screening was on the Jewish Sabbath.
* The Nice Guys – R: Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe (who has savagely attacked Jewish circumcision but refused to do the same on Muslim circumcision) star as two rival private investigators in 1970s Hollywood, who eventually team up to solve a couple of intertwined mysteries. The movie is very high on style and is slightly, occasionally funny. But it’s overall stupid and ridiculous and filled with gratuitous topless shots of women and dumb sexual references. In short, the story is dumb, but I loved the costumes, the cars, and the soundtrack.
Gosling is a investigator who has a 13-year-old daughter that is the typical kid in many of today’s movies: smart and sagacious beyond her years and well beyond her clumsy, screw-up dad. Crowe is a former cop who often gets paid to beat up and threaten people. Gosling is hired to find a woman named Emilia. Crowe is hired by Emilia to beat Gosling up and tell him to stop looking for Emilia. But eventually the two men realize that Emilia is in danger because it is somehow tied to the death of a porn star, Misty Mountains. They never really explain it, and, frankly, I didn’t really care ‘cuz it was stupid.
Eventually, all of this, including Emilia’s disappearance, is somehow later tied to some silly plot by the Justice Department, which is headed by–Heaven help us–Kim Basinger. Basinger is supposed to be investigating the Detroit auto industry, which is covering up something with catalytic converters, but she’s really in cahoots with them. See, I told you it was stupid. But that’s what happens to movies without tight plots or story lines. They have to keep reaching and adding to try to make it interesting.
Most of the movie is spent with the two men looking for Emilia, including extensive scenes where they chase her down at an elaborate party at the uber-modern home of a dead porn movie producer and then at a hotel, where the Mafia has taken over and is somehow involved (again, never explained, but explanations aren’t the hallmark of this shaggy dog tale of a movie). One of the final scenes involves a dramatic action and stunt filled confrontation at an auto show preview at another hotel. And there’s a scene of a Justice Department hit man seeking to kill the two men and Emilia.
It’s a disconnected, high-on-style, low-on-sensical-details “comedy” that is slightly funny, but mostly forgettable. Sometimes remaking the ’70s isn’t enough to carry a movie or entertain. And this is Exhibit A.
TWO MARXES
karlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpg
Watch the trailer . . .

* Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising – R: I hated the original “Neighbors” (read my review), but this makes that look like a masterpiece in comparison. This is essentially a repeat of the original, only raunchier and far more depraved. You gotta wonder what kind of sick minds come up with scenes of sorority girls throwing bloody tampons at the window of a family living next door. Or what kind of sickos and lowlifes think it’s “cute” to make a running “gag” out of kids and babies playing with sex toys, including simulated, synthetic penises. Haha, hilarious. Not. I laughed maybe 5 times, if that, during this dumb, lowlife crap they told me was a movie. Shame on Chloe Grace Moretz, who I thought was better than this (but clearly isn’t). In addition to the stuff I mentioned, there’s also unnecessary nudity and an overall tone that kills your brain cells after torturing them. And they say waterboarding is bad. This is worse.
The story: the highly overrated Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne return as the married couple next door to what was a fraternity. In the first movie, the frat was so unbearable that the couple perpetrated pranks on the frat boys to get them out. This time, same thing, only with a sorority. The couple, with a daughter and expecting a second one soon, has sold their house to another family. But there’s a catch: the house is in escrow for 30 days, and the buyers can cancel at any time. And during those 30 days, a ragtag bunch of loser girls moves in. The loser girls, headed by Moretz, don’t like regular sororities because they are too perky, pretty, and sexual, and because regular sororities aren’t allowed to have parties. Only fraternities can have parties in their houses. So, this is billed as some sort of equal rights or feminism fight, as this new independent sorority will have parties in their house. Uh, sorry, not buyin’ it.
The sorority girls are advised by Zac Efron, who was in the original frat savaged by neighbors Rogen and Byrne, and this is his revenge of sorts. Since the neighbor couple are worried the buyers of their home will see the heavy-partying sorority and pull out of the deal, they plot to play all kinds of pranks on the sorority girls to put them out of business. Yes, again, it’s the same plot at the first movie, only even dumber.
Leaving the screening of this movie, I feared (and still do) for this country. The Millennials (the target audience for this) walking out of the movie raved about it. Congrats, America, we’re no different from Europe, just a few years “behind.” Who needs ISIS, when we’ve got low-life, warped crap like this defining deviance ever downward.
FOUR MARXES
karlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpg
Watch the trailer . . .

* The Meddler – PG-13: Even though I loathe whack job Susan Sarandon and her far-left, off-the-deep-end politics, I would be lying if I trashed this movie. It was very funny and entertaining and slightly endearing, though I definitely could have done without its tad of political correctness (the lesbian wedding – no thanks).
Sarandon is Marnie, a New Jersey Italian woman and widow. She’s followed her daughter (Rose Byrne, who seems to be in every movie these days–see Neighbors 2, above) to Los Angeles, where the daughter is a successful, busy screenwriter. Marnie has plenty of money and time on her hands and seeks to be heavily involved in her daughter’s life. But her daughter is too busy and finds her mom a little overbearing.
But Marnie doesn’t get insulted by this. Instead, she involves herself in her daughter’s friends’ lives and the lives of mere acquaintances whom she barely knows. Marnie invests far too heavily in them and provides them with what seems to be excessive effort and assistance, all in an effort to buy the love she seeks and can’t get from her daughter. Marnie pays for the fancy wedding her daughter’s lesbian friend never had and she participates extensively in the planning. Marnie also volunteers to become the chauffeur for the guy who helps her at the Apple store. But these things don’t really get her the love she seeks, as these people are taking advantage of her.
Ultimately, Marnie finds the love she seeks in the possibility of romance with retired cop J.K. Simmons. But–perhaps because she is obsessed with inserting herself into the lives of others–she can’t see this love, even though it is staring her in the face.
There are lots of things to laugh about in this movie, including the guy who asks Marnie out on a first date to the Holocaust museum (the guy is played by Michael McKean – Lenny from “Laverne and Shirley,” who got really old and looks it). And Marnie’s efforts to hover over her daughter’s life are endlessly laughable. This is a comedy and a cute love story between a needy, lonely mother and her adult daughter who needs her space. But it’s also one of the more bearable chick flicks. Guys, keep that in mind the next time your woman wants to drag you to the movies.
TWO REAGANS
reagancowboyreagancowboy
Watch the trailer . . .

* A Bigger Splash – R: As a general rule, whenever mainstream (liberal) movie critics rave in unison over a movie, it’s absolute trash. That’s the case here . . . in spades. I like weird and different movies. And this is definitely that, but not in a good way. It’s too weird, too different, and just all over the place. It’s also sick and warped and never really admits to anything it implies is going on. On top of that, it seems obsessed with nudity and sex. There are lots of topless scenes for the women here, and both the male leads have frontal nudity scenes, too. Not my cup of tea. Plus, this stars the ever-weird, androgynous oddity of whom I’ve never ever been–and am definitely still not–a fan: actress Tilda Swinton who recently modeled in a Chanel fashion show in Havana (while the Castros are still locking up Cubans for speaking out against the horrors of that country). The scenery and cinematography are beautiful. The plot and story, not so much.
The story: Swinton is an aging rock star with fans worldwide. She’s recently had surgery on her vocal cords and cannot talk until they heal. She and her much younger boyfriend of five years (Matthias Schoenaerts) are staying at her seaside estate on an Italian island while she recuperates. Swinton’s inability to talk (she can whisper, but hides it from all except her boyfriend) is a plot point. Soon, Swinton’s ex-lover, Ralph Fiennes, is on the island, too. He and his newly-discovered, young daughter (the constantly sullen, highly overrated Dakota Johnson) are there for a vacation and find that there are no hotel rooms left. Soon, they are staying with Swinton and her boytoy, and it’s an uncomfortable crowd. Fiennes spends the rest of the movie speaking loudly and flamboyantly and trying to seduce win back his ex, Swinton. His endless braggadocio and bloviating fill the void of Swinton’s silence.
And then there is the issue of Fiennes’ daughter, who is highly “sexual” in her behavior and is often cavorting around in see-through bras. What is her story and is she hitting on Swinton’s boyfriend? What is it between them? I didn’t really care because none of the characters in this movie are likable. Not even close. There are two scenes with whip snakes, who invade the estate. And though you wonder what the relevance is, it seemed to me the snakes were more likable than the rest of the players in this flick. On top of that, this movie tries to be all things: a romantic drama, a thriller complete with a killing, and a relaxing travelogue of an Italian island with a mild plot going on in the midst. It fails at all three. I like ambiguity–of which this is filled–when it’s done well in a movie. Here, it’s underwhelming and overwhelming. And ill-fitted.
I wasn’t sure what the point or purpose was of this pretentious, long, slow, boring, and seemingly endless movie . . . other than the purport to make high art (but fail miserably) and maybe show me Ralph Fiennes’ schlong (which I really didn’t need to see–TMI, TMI, TMI). I just know that I wasted two hours and five minutes of my life on it that I’ll never get back.
The only splash here–bigger or otherwise–is the one you see and hear as you throw your ten-bucks-plus down the toilet.
THREE MARXES
karlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpg
Watch the trailer . . .

You might also like:
L

Friday, May 20, 2016

A Closer Look at Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood. This follows this post about corrupt governments. 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.

“However,” notes Steven Simpson in the Canada Free Press, “if one looks for reality and clarity (unlike the current American administration which foolishly engages the Brotherhood and views it as 'moderate'), it will be seen that the Brotherhood is a violent fascist movement that seeks global Islamic domination. Indeed, it is the phalanx and aegis for all Islamist groups that have emerged throughout the Muslim world. Bluntly put, it is nothing short of an Islamic hydra, and an implacable enemy of the West, Israel, and all non-Muslims” (“Why the Arab Spring Will Descend Into an Islamic Ice Age,” April 16, 2012).
The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928 by a schoolteacher and imam named Hassan al-Banna, who desired the revival of the Islamic caliphate. The caliphate—the international community of Muslim believers led by a caliph, a successor to Muhammad—had fallen with the end of the Ottoman Empire at the conclusion of World War I and the modernizing influence of Kemal Ataturk, who with great difficulty transformed Turkey into a secular state.
Al-Banna was killed in 1949, and the Brotherhood was banned in Egypt just before, but it would continue to operate—soon guided by al-Banna's principal disciple Sayyid Qutb, who had been a bureaucrat in Egypt's education department.
In the words of former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey: “Qutb caused enough trouble in Egypt to get himself awarded a traveling fellowship in 1948 … Regrettably for us, Qutb chose to travel to Greeley, Colorado. And although it would be hard to imagine a more inoffensive place than post–World War II Greeley, Colorado, for a man like Qutb it was Sodom and Gomorrah. He hated everything he saw: American haircuts, enthusiasm for sports, jazz, and what he called the 'animal-like mixing of the sexes,' even in church.
“His conclusion was that Americans were 'numb to faith in art, faith in religion, and faith in spiritual values altogether,' and that Muslims must regard 'the white man, whether European or American … [as] our first enemy' … [He later] continued to write and agitate for Islam and against Western civilization, particularly against Jews, whom he blamed for atheistic materialism and considered the worst enemies of Muslims” (“Executive Power in Wartime,” Imprimis, October 2011).
Qutb later became the leading member of the Muslim Brotherhood and was eventually hanged in Egypt in 1966. But his brother Muhammad Qutb fled with other Brotherhood members to Saudi Arabia and eventually taught Sayyid's ideology to then-obscure figures Osama bin Laden and his eventual right-hand man Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leader of al-Qaeda since Bin Laden's death. These al-Qaeda figures and their followers are sometimes referred to as Qutbists.
Another follower of Sayyid Qutb's writings was Omar Abdel-Rahman, often called “the Blind Sheik,” spiritual advisor to the 1993 World Trade Center bombers who is currently serving a U.S. sentence of life imprisonment. Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri called for his release before the al-Qaeda attack on the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen in 2000. And they relied on Abdel-Rahman's fatwa calling for the mass-murder of Americans in perpetrating the horror of 9/11 the next year.
The Blind Sheikh remains a hero among Islamists, so it should perhaps come as no surprise that the major calls for his release of late have come not from al-Qaeda but from the current Muslim Brotherhood leadership of Egypt—the so-called moderates.

You might also be interested in...