If you didn’t know any better, you might be under the impression that Planned Parenthood clinics are the only place a woman can go for any variety of health services, including abortions, mammograms, contraceptive services and screenings.
That’s because Planned Parenthood actively fosters this impression to bolster its own necessity, aided by Republicans determined to end federal funding of abortions who have unwittingly helped elevate the organization’s image out of scale with its actual importance.
In reality, however, the 700 Planned Parenthood clinics throughout the country — predominately in urban areas — are dwarfed by the nearly 9,000 community health centers or CHCs around the country, with one in almost every Congressional district. . . .
Though Planned Parenthood routinely insists women need it for mammograms, the clinics don’t actually perform any (they are legally not allowed to). The CHCs, however, do. . . .
Congressional House Republicans passed a measure this month that wouldn’t just defund Planned Parenthood, but redirect its funding to CHCs. Republicans are making the argument for more access to more women’s services, while Democrats are actively trying to limit them.
The Planned Parenthood battle isn’t over, but it has proven one thing: Democrats are not the party of women. They are the party of abortion. There’s a big difference.
Reader Artie Bleppo complains, in all-caps, about the priorities of my week in review:
POPE CAME TO THE USA, O ALMIGHTY GLOBAL CONTENT PROVIDER
So what? His speeches were fatuous and evasive pabulum, and already forgotten. I am not a Catholic but I understand that, unlike the position of Archbishop of Canterbury, where total contempt from the congregants more or less comes with the job, the Bishop of Rome is generally held in some respect by his church. So last week, out of deference to Catholic readers' sensibilities, I confined myself to an aside:
Best to talk about the dangers of "climate change", as the Pope is doing this week, even as in the heart of Christendom the post-Christian future is showing up at the express check-in.
As the years go by, I like to write about what matters. And in this last seven days, the Mohammed cartoons and the "refugee" tide now engulfing Europe both matter more than "POPE CAME TO THE USA". His Holiness in fact has chosen not to matter, even as European politicians take decisions that will guarantee "Christendom" will be non-Christian. There is something shallow and decadent about a pontiff who prioritizes "climate change" even as every last Christian is driven from the Archeparchy of Mosul. What will they say of such a pope? That he fiddled with the thermostat while Rome burned?
And let's not even mention his appalling response to the Charlie Hebdo slaughter. So I wrote nothing about his remarks to Congress - just as he wrote nothing about my remarks in the Danish Parliament. So we're quits.
~Speaking of which, we were a merry band, all things considered, at Christiansborg Castle. I thank my friend Katrine Winkel Holm, of the Danish Free Press Society, and her delightful sister, Marie Krarup, defense spokeslady for the Danish People's Party, for arranging to host us behind the fortress-like walls of Parliament - so nobody could bust in and shoot us, as they didat a similar free-speech event in February. I was heartened to meet fellow free-speechers who had traveled from Sweden, Norway, Germany, Switzerland, Britain and even Canada. My fellow panelists included Henryk Broder, author of The Last Days of Europe; Vebjørn Selbekk, whom the quislings of Norway's government treated disgracefully for publishing the cartoons; and Douglas Murray, who's already written up the event in The Spectator:
My main message for the audience was to keep in mind that freedom has never been particularly popular. Most people prefer their security and comforts to freedom and although history shows that although everyone benefits from being free, it has always been a small minority who actually pursue and protect the cause. I suppose one has to wrestle whatever comfort one can from that. It was a terrible thing to see the security now needed in Denmark, as elsewhere, for people who are simply asserting their right to write and draw what they want, even – shock horror – things that might be mildly critical of the founder of one religion. That a journalist or historian should need bodyguards in 21st century in an indictment on our continent. But still, surveying the room on Saturday I think we've got enough people. A few Danes, a few Swedes and Norwegians. A few Americans and a couple of Brits might be all that is needed. Perhaps by the 15th anniversary things will be better.
Perhaps. On Europe's present course, though, the security we'll need in 2020 doesn't bear thinking about. But I'll be there.
~A transcript of Vebjørn Selbekk's powerful speech can be found here:
We had interviewed leading Norwegian cartoonists. One of them was Finn Graaf. He is maybe the hardest hitting cartoonist in the history of the Norwegian press. One of his specialities is drawing Israeli prime ministers as Holocaust camp guards. He has done that with almost every Israeli prime minister since Menachem Begin in the late Seventies. But Mister Graff told us that he would never draw the prophet Mohammad. Not because he had more respect towards the Muslim faith than other religions or ideologies. No, he bluntly put it this way in the interview: 'I have to draw the line somewhere. I do not want to get my throat cut. Therefore I will refrain from drawing Muhammad.'
One-way "hard-hitting" isn't really hard-hitting at all, is it? As I said ten years ago, it's the easiest thing in the world to be tediously provocative with those who refuse to be provoked.
~My own remarks came last, and can be heard below. I'll post the other speeches, as we get them. But click below to listen:
Steyn gjorde gældende, at problemet er de vestlige samfunds mangel på selvtillid. Vi tror ikke længere på os selv og vores grundlæggende værdier. Vi er villige til at give køb på dem. Terrorismens mål er at kapre debatten og terrorisere os til at undlade visse emner. Og den har succes med det, anførte Steyn.
Which comes out as:
Steyn claimed that the problem is the western world's lack of self-confidence. We no longer believe in ourselves and our basic values. We are willing to trade them away. Terrorism's goal is to hijack the debate and terrorize us to steer clear of certain subjects. And it's had great success with it, argued Steyn.
Därefter slutade konferensen. Några av deltagarna fick splittra upp sig eftersom den förhandsbokade restaurangen blivit rädda för att befatta sig med TFS och de inresta föreläsarna.
Which translates to something like:
After that the conference ended. Some of the participants had to split up because the pre-booked restaurant became afraid to deal with the Free Speech Society and the speakers they'd invited.
That's true. They did. We were escorted by officers from the PET, the Danish Security Service. But the minute the restaurant discovered that, the management - some joint called Fiat - canceled. Compared to what happened to Charlie Hebdo, that's a small price to pay, but it is still a price, and a telling one. Those who defend freedom for all wind up with less than anybody: airlines that won't fly them, theatres that won't book them, and even crappy Italian restaurants that won't serve 'em a few pasta shells at the end of a hard day defending liberty.
One more quote from our Swedish correspondent:
Mark Steyn lovade dock från talarstolen att nästa gång så ska han tala på Det Konglige Teater som en fri människa inför fria människor och inte bakom låsta dörrar med säkerhetskontroller och vakter på det danska riksdagshuset.
Which translates as me getting a bit carried away:
Mark Steyn, however, promised from the podium that next time he'll speak at the Royal Theatre as a free man before free people, and not behind locked doors with security checks and guards from the Danish Parliament.
We'll see how that works out.
~Nobody needs the Pope to hitch up his robes and be the last world leader to jump on the climate bandwagon. But it might be helpful for him to take the lead in saving the heart of Christendom. Indeed, some might think it's part of the job description, no?
Chinagate: The FBI has arrested one of the top Beijing-tied bagmen who funneled funny money to the Clinton administration. He was busted in New York with a suitcase full of cash. Some Chinese money-laundering for Hillary? Stay tuned.
The defendant is a major Clinton fundraiser named Ng Lap Seng, aka "Mr. Wu." He and Clinton pal Charlie Trie visited the White House several times in the 1990s, snapping photos with both Bill and Hillary.
Federal investigators are charging him with lying to agents about why he brought more than $4.5 million into the U.S. over the last two years, including a suitcase full of $400,000 in cash to New York.
Hillary's campaign office is claiming ignorance. But isn't it funny how suddenly the Clintons' old Chinese bagmen are popping up again, lugging around bags full of cash, just as the Clintons make another run at the White House?
Recall that in her 2008 bid for the White House, Hillary had to return hundreds of thousands of dollars raised by another Chinese bagman, Norman Hsu, who happened to be a criminal fugitive. Hsu bundled $1 million for the Clinton campaign through straw donors. He was busted for laundering foreign cash.
The pattern of corruption may be repeating with the re-emergence of Ng.
In 1998, Ng was ID'd in a Senate report as the source of hundreds of thousands of dollars illegally funneled through Little Rock restaurant owner Trie. A top Clinton donor, Trie would later face charges in the Chinagate fundraising scandal for violating campaign finance laws.
Ng has close ties to the Chinese communist government and is listed as a member of a senior advisory group, the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.
Through Trie, Ng bought access to the White House ostensibly on behalf of Beijing, which the FBI said at the time was running an influence operation against the Clinton administration.
At the time, Chinese missiles couldn't hit the side of a barn. But thanks to Clinton missile-technology transfers, Beijing can now hit any city in the U.S. And thanks to his opening up the nuclear weapons labs to Chinese scientists, Beijing "stole" the designs to every nuke in the U.S. arsenal.
The Chicoms also sought a beachhead in our hemisphere and got it, when Clinton in 1997 allowed Chinese front companies to take over the Panama Canal, a strategic waterway linking the Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean. Beijing now effectively controls key naval shipping lanes in our backyard.
Asked by a reporter around the time of the transfer, "You're not worried about the Chinese controlling the canal?" Mr. Clinton replied: "I think the Chinese will, in fact, be bending over backwards to make sure that they run it in a competent and able and fair manner. I would be very surprised if any adverse consequences flowed from the Chinese running the canal."
Beijing got a hell of a lot for their money under the treasonous Clinton administration. Now it seems they're back trying to get even more in a hoped-for second regime.
Too bad the corrupt Clintons aren't joining the mysterious Mr. Wu behind bars.
The markets remain in one of those periods where clarity, confidence and believable don’t exist. Despite that fact many still want to try and pontificate direction, opportunity and trades. I am not one to say you can’t trade or invest money, but I am saying that I don’t find much that is worthy of the risk currently. Simply put.. cash remains my favorite sector. We can talk about theory and analyze what might happen if… but, in the end it comes down to a risk/reward relationship. If the reward doesn’t warrant the risk why invest the money? Yes, I am conservative by nature and thus I am unwilling to invest against my nature.
With that said tonight I am posting a video update that is our trading notes in movie format. While it may not get an Emmy award it does give you plenty to consider, my thoughts, outlook and views of the seven asset classes and the major market sectors. There are some ideas that are setup for trades and I discuss what levels we would need break below to be interested in the short side of the markets. Watch and fell free to send any questions.
Tomorrow ends the trading week… watching to see if the bounce off support finds more buyers, do the sellers step back in to test support again or do we trade sideways and limp into the weekend. Stay focused, patient and disciplined.
The bailed-out Greeks are still broke. Now their islands are flooded with a horde of migrants from the Middle East and Africa.
Spain, Portugal, and Italy are almost in the same boat. Their shared Mediterranean traditions — and vulnerabilities — are far different from those of northern Europe’s more affluent nations.
Given the triad of history, geography and culture, it is no accident that Europe on the Mediterranean is being hit first by Third World immigration heading northward. Southern Europe always seems to owe money to the north.
Eastern Europeans are angry that the EU tries to override their own individual immigration laws. Nearly a million immigrants, most of them young male Muslims, now flock to the borders of Eastern European countries. From the Baltic states to the former Yugoslavia, these nations for 500 years were caught in the meat grinder when East fought West in Eastern Europe, the battered sea wall against which the tsunami of the Islamic Ottoman Empire finally crashed and receded.
The British always counted on the English Channel to separate them from the passions of their mainland European cousins — namely France and Germany. Now, migrants hop bullet trains under the channel to reach the promised land of British entitlements — as the United Kingdom tries to back away from the European Union.
As a result of the continent-wide chaos, millions of Europeans are now furious with the European Union. Its inflexible euro and vast bureaucracy seem not just to override but often destroy local customs and traditions.
In truth, the EU exists in name only. In reality, it is largely run by the German government and its bankers, who decide how a debtor like Greece will or will not stay in the EU, or how many migrants Europe collectively should let in.
Because of Germany’s unique 144-year history — having been at the heart of three wars in Europe — its neighbors have been happy to prosper in its reflected glory of pacifism and prosperity. Germany’s population and economy remain by far the largest in Europe.
It is not the bureaucracy of the European Union that has kept the peace since World War II — the longest war-free period in Europe since the fall of Napoleon. The EU did not exist until 1993, nearly a half-century after the end of World War II. The euro monetary union is not even two decades old.
What, then, has kept Europe quiet?
The answers are three artifacts of World War II that are rarely mentioned, but should be. None have anything to do with the EU.
One reason is American-led NATO. The treaty organization channeled national militaries into a central armed force led by an American policeman that never quite left its beat after the end of World War II.
As originally envisioned, the alliance really did keep the Soviet Union out of Europe, America in it — and the Germans down. Should NATO disband, European nations will be free to arm and sign treaties with any power they choose. We know how that worked out between 1870 and 1945.
The second keeper of peace is the peculiar role of nuclear weapons on the European continent. Only the United Kingdom and France have nuclear missiles. But the strongest and largest nation, Germany, does not — for a variety of reasons dealing with the postwar rehabilitation of the defeated and discredited Nazi state.
Should Britain and France ever give up their nuclear weapons, as the new head of British Labor Party has advocated, or should Germany (or others) go nuclear, then watch tensions and conflicts rise in a manner unseen since the end of World War II.
Third is the war guilt of Germany, a still-powerful force 70 years after the defeat of Hitler.
The destruction of Europe, the Holocaust, and the 60 million dead that followed from Germany’s invasion of Poland in 1939 are the ghosts that still haunt Germans, most of whom were not yet born when the war ended.
Guilt accounts for why Germany lends money that it knows will not be paid back. A desire for atonement (along with labor shortages) explains why it welcomes in thousands of young male Islamic migrants with minimal background checks and with no real idea how to integrate them rapidly into German society.
Amid rising ethnic tensions, hordes of migrants and massive debt, Europeans can keep or junk the mess of the European Union and the inflexible euro as they please, without much worry that they will revert back to their bloody past.
But they should leave the sleeping dogs of Europe alone. They need NATO. They must not tamper with the present nuclear club of Europe. And they should tread lightly around the Germans’ strange and sometimes unpredictable expressions of penance.
Certain terms commonly used in our political and cultural discourse serve only to thwart thinking and halt debate. Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson continues to defend himself against accusations of “Islamophobia,” after recently stating Islam is not compatible with the United States Constitution. But what is “Islamophobia”?
In the above video, Ayn Rand Institute senior fellow Onkar Ghate identifies “Islamophobia” as an “anti-concept.” The term works against proper conceptualization. Ghate explains (at 19:28):
That term [Islamophobia] is an anti-concept that has been deliberately originated to make discussion of the issue impossible. And it’s similar to the term, in another kind of would-be debate that in the mainstream they want to silence… similar to the notion which functions as an anti-concept “climate change denier.” And what that does, it’s a package deal meant to silence… meant to destroy the ability to think, which is part of what makes it an anti-concept.
What “climate change denier” does is it puts into one package irrational objections, people mounting irrational objections to manmade climate change and the possibility of it – so it puts a bible-thumping Christian who says, “No, I don’t believe in the theory of evolution and I don’t believe in [climate change], none of these are part of God’s plan. They’re not happening.” It puts that person into the same category as a rational scientist who has legitimate worries, objections, doubts about the state of [climate change] science, about conclusions being drawn, about supposed lessons to learn from the models and so on. It puts them into the same category…. So why even pay any attention to them? So the debate and the discussion is ended before it can start.
And “Islamophobia” serves in exactly, and functions in exactly the same way. What it puts together is irrational discriminatory behavior, whether towards Islam or towards Muslims, with thoughtful rational criticism…
I think too many people on the political Right [unwittingly aid] this, attempting to dismiss the whole idea of irrational treatment of Muslims as, “This is made up. This is a bogus thing that they’re trotting out to try and silence debate…”
So to get and to start discussing the issue of Islamophobia, you have to get everything that is put into the package, and you need to help people distinguish the elements of the package, that they don’t belong together. One should not have the same view or valuation of these things…
Don’t get tripped up by the example Ghate uses. Whether you think religious objection to climate change is irrational or not, his point remains that certain terms are meant to conflate the rational with the irrational in an effort to shut down debate.
When and Where to Watch This Weekend’s Total Lunar Eclipse
LATE ON SUNDAY evening, September 27, the Earth will slide precisely between the sun and the moon, throwing the satellite into a rusty red shadow. This’ll be the fourth total lunar eclipse in two years, but that doesn’t make it boring. Quite the opposite—this week’s event will be the last in this rare tetrad, and the most dramatic.
That’s because this lunar eclipse coincides with another astronomical event: a supermoon. That’s what it’s called when the moon’s mostly elliptical orbit brings it closest to Earth’s surface—about 220,000 miles away instead of its average 240,000 miles. During this total lunar eclipse, the moon will appear about 14 percent larger and 30 percent brighter than Earthlings are used to seeing it.
And yes, it’ll also change color. The Earth doesn’t totally shade the moon; some sunlight trickles around the edges of the planet and gets filtered through the atmosphere, which only lets through light with longer wavelengths. That’s red. This eclipse also happens to coincide with the harvest moon, the full moon that falls closest to the autumnal equinox.
Taken together, all these astronomical events should make for a pretty special show—and a rare one. The last supermoon eclipse was in 1982, and it won’t happen again until 2033.
Point is, you’re going to want to watch it. Here’s how: Peak eclipse will be at 2:47 am UT on September 28th—so, 10:47 pm ET on Sunday, September 27th. If you’re in the eastern United States, that’s good news! You should be able to see the eclipse just fine. The moon will start darkening at 8:11 pm Eastern time, and it will start to pass through the Earth’s dark umbral shadow at 9:07 pm. It’ll be completely shaded for about an hour starting around 10 pm (the last total eclipse, on April 4, lasted for a mere five minutes). That means the fully eclipsed moon will just be rising as viewers on the west coast tune in. So, you know, squeeze your magickal rites in appropriately.
If you’re not in the right zone to see the eclipse yourself, no worries. Plenty of observatories around the world are lining up to help you out. The Slooh Community Observatory network will be livestreaming views of the eclipse from several continents, including a broadcast from Stonehenge, starting at 8 pm Eastern. (We’ll update with embedded video on Sunday if you’d like to watch here.) And NASA TVwill be covering the event starting at 8 pm, too, broadcasting from Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama with live feeds from the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles, the Adler Planetarium in Chicago, and the Fernbank Observatory in Atlanta. No matter where you are, you’ll be able to take part in this awesome event.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton greenlighted paperwork that changed her top aide Huma Abedin’s job status to “special government employee” — a classification that allowed Abedin to work for an outside consulting firm and the Clinton Foundation at the same time she was advising Clinton at State.
According to documents obtained by conservative group Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, Clinton was the immediate supervisor who approved the title change that came with the new post on March 23, 2012, permitting her then-deputy chief of staff to work several jobs at once.
Story Continued Below
That dual role, which didn’t go into effect until June of that year, is currently under investigation by Senate Judiciary Committee Republican staff. Republicans and outside groups have openly wondered if the post presented a conflict of interest for Abedin, who is now vice chair of Clinton’s presidential campaign, or if Abedin’s outside work influenced actions at State.
The Clinton Campaign argued Thursday that the document wasn’t the actual approval of the SGE status but only approved the title change that came with Abedin’s transition. The document states that the position was “new” and an SGE job: “The incumbent serves as a Senior Adviser, Expert-Special Government Employee.”
Huma Abedin’s lawyers have maintained that she did nothing wrong, noting that government workers have moved to SGE status before.
POLITICO reported Wednesday that the president of the outside company where Abedin ended up working later that year, Doug Band of Teneo, had contacted her in April 2012, asking her for help getting a client appointed to a post on the President’s Global Development Council.
In the email, he made sure Abedin knew that the woman, Judith Rodin, president of The Rockefeller Foundation, was also a big supporter of the Clinton Foundation — another place Abedin would collect a paycheck after her SGE status was approved.
Clinton, in an interview with MSNBC on Sept. 4, said she “was not directly involved” with Abedin’s job arrangement.
“Do you think [Donald Trump] had a point in raising the question of whether it was appropriate for her to be taking a State Department salary and also be paid by an outside company closely associated with your husband, by you?” asked reporter Andrea Mitchell.
“Well, I was not directly involved in that, but everything that she did was approved under the rules as they existed by the State Department,” Clinton said.
The document states the following: “I certify that this is an accurate statement of the major duties and responsibilities of this person… and the position is necessary to carry out government functions for which I am responsible,” the form reads in a box labelled “supervisory certification.”
“Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State,” reads the name in that box.
The signature, however, has been blanked out by the State Department.
Latest (and very revealing) details of Ahmed and his ‘clock’ by Glenn Beck Program Wednesday, Sep 23, 2015 , Glenn shared an update on the situation with the student in Irving, Texas who was arrested for bringing a supposed clock to school. Lawrence Jones of the Dana show on TheBlaze TV, discussed the very latest details, and they were nothing short of shocking. Take a listen below. Also, watch Glenn discuss the situation with the mayor of Irving and a security expert here. Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors. GLENN: So here’s — let me start with the update. We all know the story now of the kid that was here in Las Colinas, Texas, or Irving, Texas, where our studios are located. This is the most diverse ZIP code in America, and they don’t have any problems. We just don’t have any problems. Everyone gets along. It’s a great town. It’s a great down. This school, which is only 6 percent Caucasian, apparently is the most racist place in the world. Because if you’re a Muslim, you’re in trouble. Now, I’ve told you now for the last year, there’s a problem with the Muslim community here in Irving, Texas. There is — and I know this — okay, so be it, if there’s a war, there’s a war over words, so be it. There is a problem here in Irving, Texas, and there is a concerted effort to move to Sharia law or at least Sharia compliant here in Irving, Texas. And the mayor of Irving, Texas, is not for that. The citizens of Irving, Texas, are not for that. The Muslims are. Well, I’m sorry. If you want Sharia law, go live in an Islamic State. You can do that. You don’t live here in the United States. We don’t have any other law besides American law, period. Now, I’ve said this for a while, this mayor is just getting beaten down all the time. She’s a wonderful, wonderful mayor. I saw a — who is the guy who is the TV guy who has been helping us — or we’ve been helping him with the VA PAT: Montel Williams. GLENN: Did you see what Montel Williams just tweeted? PAT: No. GLENN: Yeah, he tweeted yesterday afternoon: Glenn Beck, you know, I know — I love you and we get along and there’s a lot we can work on, but your mayor of Irving is a bigot. PAT: No. GLENN: I want Montel Williams. I want you to schedule Montel Williams on the program. You go ahead. I want to know, has he ever met her? Has he ever talked to her? Has he ever been down here? You go ahead and spend some time in our community and see what’s going on, and then I want you to go talk to the guys that we did at the mosques, where they’re talking about, “Hey, you know, everybody agrees. I mean, it’s not just Islam. Everybody agrees. You steal something, you cut the hand off.” No, I’m sorry, that’s not what we do in the United States, period. Now, let me give you a couple of updates and Lawrence Jones will join us. First, first update, the activist father of this kid who took a clock from Radio Shack, took it out of its casing, then put it in a briefcase, May made it so it counts down, not up, brought it to school. As we told you yesterday, it was not a science fair, it was not a science project. He was not asked to make it. There was no reason to make it. He brought it to one of his teachers. The teacher did not say, “Oh, my gosh, Johnny, that’s such a great clock.” The teacher saw it and he said, “What are you doing, bringing this to school? This is wholly inappropriate. Go put that in your locker and never bring it out again.” He didn’t. He brings it to another class, and it starts to count down. The teacher is freaking out, like, “What is that?” He’s brought into the principal’s office. I can’t tell you the details of the principal’s office because the family will not agree to let the details be released because he’s a minor. Now, let me tell you what I can share with you, this broke yesterday. His activist father, who, by the way, ran for president of the Sudan twice. He is a guy who is in with CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood. He is an activist. His activist father has pulled him and his two siblings out of the school here in Irving, Texas. Then he’s taking his son and his family to meet with dignitaries at the UN as they’re starting to raise the Palestinian flag. You know that’s happening in the next ten days. So this kid who was just an amazing scientist who went to Radio Shack, took a clock apart, put it in a briefcase, he’s now meeting with the dignitaries at the UN. That’s not all. Then he’s going to take his pilgrimage with his family to Mecca in Saudi Arabia. Once they’ve walked around the cube, then they’re getting on a plane and they’re flying directly to the White House where they will sit down and meet with President Obama. Now, you tell me what the hell this story is all about. You know, I saw a great — who was it that just posted — I think it was Mark Levin. I saw a post from him. He said, “You know, the president doesn’t want to — we have a problem figuring out if the president is Christian or not. There’s a really easy way for the president to clear this up. Stop behaving in a non-Christian way. Start behaving like a Christian.” PAT: I think that’s Erick Erickson from Red State. LENN: Erick Erickson. It’s exactly right. Start behaving like a Christian. I don’t understand this president. I’ve talked to the mayor of Irving. We’ve talked to the city council of Irving. We have talked to the police in Irving. We have talked to the school board in Irving. The president has not reached out, not one time, to get the other side of the story. Not once. He has reached out to CAIR and to the Muslim Brotherhood, but not once to the people here in Irving, Texas. So who are you serving, Mr. President? Who is it you are serving? This is a very bad situation. Now, Lawrence, he came into the hallway — and I don’t want to even characterize anything, Lawrence, because I don’t know what you can say or you can’t say because some of this stuff, you know, just can’t be said because of lawsuits. Quite honestly, I’d like somebody to be sued in this. I wish the family would sue the city because then a discovery period would happen and you would have to release all of the details. So what do you have on this story? LAWRENCE: So there are a couple key players in this, and I know Beth really well, the mayor of Irving. I know people in the leadership of the school district, all the way up to the school board. And there’s certain things they can’t say, legally, and then there’s certain things that they want to say and they can say legally, but they’ll be attacked for. GLENN: Yes. LAWRENCE: So some of the information, they’ve known about this kid for a while. They’ve known about his father. As you can see in the photos and some of the photo ops of CAIR being in the photo with them, they’ve been working together for years. GLENN: Well, before the school board had a chance to respond. Think of this. The school board found out about it the very next day they reach out to the family and they’re trying to have a meeting, they want to arrange a meeting. They’re meeting already with CAIR. So if you’re really sincere about something, you will reach out to the school board first and say, “Hey, what is the deal?” They went right directly to CAIR. LAWRENCE: Exactly. Because the city has no authority over the school — in Texas, the school district is the government embodied. They have the authority to make something happen. They were upset with the school district because the school district refused to issue an apology. And the reason why they decided to do this, they believe their law enforcement and their director of security did the right thing. They followed protocol. GLENN: I agree. LAWRENCE: That’s the first thing. The second thing, when Ali, an imam, got up there and they talked about the suitcase. All right, there’s two things that you have to pay attention to. He said that I used wires instead of a lock because I did not want it to be suspicious. This is what the kid is saying. GLENN: So he knew that somebody would — LAWRENCE: Now, why in the world would a child say something is suspicious if it’s totally innocent. GLENN: Well, here’s the thing, and I said this I think yesterday. And I think this is worth repeating. If I’m — if I’m Muslim, I know what’s happening in the world. I know how we’re perceived. LAWRENCE: Not a doubt. GLENN: Okay. I’m not not self-aware. For instance, I’m a recovering alcoholic. When I go to a cocktail party or something and we’re in a room where there’s being liquor served, I never stand with a glass of ice water or anything else. I never ask for a soda. I always ask for a bottle of water. And if there’s not a bottle of water, I don’t drink anything while I’m standing there because I don’t want a picture taken of me with something that could be conceived or perceived as a drink. Okay? So I know people are judging me and everything else. So you’re just uber aware. You can’t tell me that a dad who is an activist has his son and brings — let’s just say he didn’t even know. His son makes a clock, a countdown clock, puts it in with a bunch of wires, brings it to school, gets in trouble. And you can’t tell me that a responsible American doesn’t go — and a responsible Muslim that is not an Islamist, doesn’t go to his son at the police department and say, “What the hell did you just do? What did you just do? Do you know what people say about us? People already think that we’re terrorists and everything else, and you’re just adding to that? You apologize. You apologize.” That’s the conversation I would have with my son. If my son went in — I’m a Mormon. If my son went in and he was just doing stereotypical things that made Mormons look bad. We don’t believe in polygamy. But let’s just say he was handing out polygamies-for-everybody booklets, and he was for some reason arrested. I would go and say, “Do you realize what you’re doing? Do you realize how much you’re hurting our faith? You’ve just played into every stereotype, and you’ve given them reason to suspect. What are you doing, son?” LAWRENCE: The reason is because they wanted reason to suspect. This was all calculated. GLENN: Yes, it was. LAWRENCE: This was all part of the plan, down to CAIR. And this lady, who is the executive director of CAIR is not an innocent body. GLENN: Okay. So how is she involved with this? LAWRENCE: Now, she’s the person that’s handling all the PR. She’s the one who is staging all the media events. Now, we remember. Some of our Dana viewers may remember this lady. Because I did a special report on this. Now, before they attacked the Garland Special Event Center, there was an event there staying with the prophet, right after the attacks happened in France. And then Pamela Geller had this event in response to that event. Now, who was there? Siraj Wahhaj, who was in New York who was an unindicted coconspirator of the trade center bombings. All right. Who was the head of PR doing that event? This lady right here. GLENN: And she’s the one now standing with this family. LAWRENCE: Exactly. So we wanted to go into that event. We put our media credentials in right when they released it. And they were at first going to let us in. We get to the door, she says, “The information that we’re discussing here is too sensitive.” GLENN: And go so you can’t go in. LAWRENCE: So we can’t go in. So I pressed her on it. We want to tell people that if you guys are really peaceful, then let the public see what you guys are about. She said, “Okay, we’ll let you come in for the first 20 minutes.” But she would not let us stay when the speaker, the unindicted coconspirator, Siraj Wahhaj, stood up on the stage. Now, some people may say, “Oh, that doesn’t matter.” No, these people are connected. And if we’re too ignorant to see all the writing on the wall, then we deserve another attack. GLENN: How do you know — I mean, do you have any information on this family being connected to her and to CAIR prior to this? LAWRENCE: Oh, yeah. There are the pictures that we didn’t have enough time to put them on the screen. But there’s pictures of them health care connected. She’s working on the council. GLENN: I’ve seen a picture. Maybe they’re in a car. LAWRENCE: Yeah, they’re in a car. She’s driving the car. GLENN: And the clock builder is in the back? LAWRENCE: With her. She’s driving the car. Her and the dad are friends. Okay. They’ve worked together. You’ve seen them before in press conference together. When different phobias, they say, come up. GLENN: Okay. Lawrence, will you do me a favor, will you continue to follow this story? Because there are a lot of people that have information and want to talk. LAWRENCE: Yeah. They’re afraid. They’re afraid. I’ve talked to leaders in the board. People that are in leadership that say they cannot say this. They just cannot. GLENN: Right. Thank you very much, Lawrence. I appreciate it. I will tell you this, that I — two years ago somebody came to me in my own company, one of the accountants, and said, “You’re going to go broke, and you’re going to go broke because of security.” And I pay seven figures for my security for me and my family, but it is worth it. I would rather have my family living under a bridge and be alive in the end than have something stupid happen. Now, I’m a guy who can afford this, barely. But I can afford this. People on the school board can’t afford this. People in the mayor’s office can’t afford this. The police chief can’t afford this. The average person who stands up in a city council or a board of education hearing can’t afford this. We have to start standing together and standing for common sense because I’m telling you, read it in the book. It Is About Islam. There is a very well coordinated plan with the Muslim Brotherhood. That is the connection to CAIR. And they first anesthetize all of us and get us all to roll over. It is first a cultural jihad, and then it is a violent jihad. In the book, it spells it out, all of their steps, according to the Muslim Brotherhood. All of the things they have to do. We’re down to the last one. And the last one is violent jihad. I’m not saying necessarily this particular. But it fits in to their — their pattern and their MO. This is the last kind of warnings that you will have trying to get you to just roll over, roll over, roll over, before it becomes violent. We must stand together and stand together — not in hatred. Because that’s not who we are. But in common sense and common ground.
The political left has come up with a new buzzword: "micro-aggression."
Professors at the University of California at Berkeley have been officially warned against saying such things as "America is the land of opportunity." Why? Because this is considered to be an act of "micro-aggression" against minorities and women. Supposedly it shows that you don't take their grievances seriously and are therefore guilty of being aggressive toward them, even if only on a micro scale.
You might think that this is just another crazy idea from Berkeley. But the same concept appears in a report from the flagship campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana. If you just sit in a room where all the people are white, you are considered to be guilty of "micro-aggression" against people who are not white, who will supposedly feel uncomfortable when they enter such a room.
At UCLA, a professor who changed the capitalization of the word "indigenous" to lower case in a student's dissertation was accused of "micro-aggression," apparently because he preferred to follow the University of Chicago Manual of Style, rather than the student's attempt to enhance the importance of being indigenous.
When a group of UCLA law students came to class wearing T-shirts with a picture of one of their professors who had organized an intramural softball game, those T-shirts were protested as a manifestation of "white privilege."
Why? Because that professor had written a book critical of affirmative action.
"Micro-aggression" protests have spread to campuses from coast to coast -- that is, from California's Berkeley and UCLA to Harvard and Fordham on the east coast, and including Oberlin and Illinois in the midwest.
Academic administrators have all too often taken the well-worn path of least resistance, by regarding the most trivial, or even silly, claims of victimhood with great seriousness, even when that involved undermining faculty members held in high esteem by most of their students and by their professional colleagues on campus and beyond.
The concept of "micro-aggression" is just one of many tactics used to stifle differences of opinion by declaring some opinions to be "hate speech," instead of debating those differences in a marketplace of ideas. To accuse people of aggression for not marching in lockstep with political correctness is to set the stage for justifying real aggression against them.
This tactic reaches far beyond academia and far beyond the United States. France's Jean-Paul Sartre has been credited -- if that is the word -- with calling social conditions he didn't like "violence," as a prelude to justifying real violence as a response to those conditions. Sartre's American imitators have used the same verbal tactic to justify ghetto riots.
Word games are just one of the ways of silencing politically incorrect ideas, instead of debating them. Demands that various conservative organizations be forced to reveal the names of their donors are another way of silencing ideas by intimidating people who facilitate the spread of those ideas. Whatever the rationale for wanting those names, the implicit threat is retaliation.
This same tactic was used, decades ago, by Southern segregationists who tried to force black civil rights organizations to reveal the names of their donors, in a situation where retaliation might have included violence as well as economic losses.
In a sense, the political left's attempts to silence ideas they cannot, or will not, debate are a confession of intellectual bankruptcy. But this is just one of the left's ever-increasing restrictions on other people's freedom to live their lives as they see fit, rather than as their betters tell them.
Current attempts by the Obama administration to force low-income housing to be built in middle class and upscale communities are on a par with forcing people to buy the kind of health insurance the government wants them to buy -- ObamaCare -- rather than leaving them free to buy whatever suits their own situation and preferences.
The left is not necessarily aiming at totalitarianism. But their know-it-all mindset leads repeatedly and pervasively in that direction, even if by small steps, each of which might be called "micro-totalitarianism.
