Sunday, July 31, 2016

Germany should dump Merkel

Shameless Merkel DEFENDS open-door asylum policy despite deadly attacks by refugees

ANGELA Merkel has claimed she “did the right thing” by allowing hundreds of thousands of refugees enter Germany last year. By Fraser Moore, 7/30/16

This is despite three horrific attacks in the country having been committed by asylum seekers this month alone. The German chancellor declared this week she “stands by” the decision to take in thousands since last summer. She said: “I stand by the political decisions we’ve made. “As chancellor, I am responsible for, by far, most decisions. “I always have to weigh up if a decision meets our values — which does not mean that there are no risks.”

But the comments come despite a host of high-profile attacks in Germany this month – with the majority perpetrated by migrants.

A teenage asylum seeker injured 19 people when he went on a rampage with an axe on a train on July 18. A week later, a Syrian asylum seeker allegedly hacked a pregnant woman to death with a machete in the town of Reutlingen, near Stuttgart. And the same day, a failed Syrian asylum seeker blew himself up outside a music festival in Ansbach, injuring 15 people.

Mrs Merkel said taking in the vast number of migrants “would not be easy” but Germany would manage. She said: “I said back then, and I’ll say it again, Germany is a strong country. “I called it a task for the whole nation. But just as we’ve managed so much already, we’ll manage this.”

The 62-year-old added: “The basic principle that Germany stands by its humanitarian responsibility is the right thing.” “I believe that if we had refused to fulfil our humanitarian responsibility, there would have been just as many – or maybe very different — very bad consequences for us.”

Her comments come as German activists plan today to stage a “huge” protest against the chancellor’s open-door policy. Thousands are expected to gather in Berlin using the hashtag #MerkelMussWeg – meaning Merkel must go – where they will be addressed by right-wing politicians.

 

Related articles



http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/694879/angela-merkel-defend-open-door-asylum-policy-deadly-attacks-migrants-ansbach-reutlingen

Stop Refugee Resettlement

Guest comment: Hannity interview explains why refugee flow so dangerous to us, by Ann Corcoran 7/30/16

Editor:  From time to time I post guest columns from readers.  Although a few days late, this is a very welcome piece.  I heard the interview live driving through South Dakota the other day and thought—you must all hear this!  Thanks to reader Julia for being on the same wavelength and sending me her comments. (Emphasis is mine)

Rich Higgins and Raheem Kassam Warn Against the Inflow of Refugees. Sean Hannity questioned Rich Higgins and Raheem Kassam on his radio show about “why President Obama is insisting 10,000 ‘refugees’ from the Middle East [be] brought immediately to America, and why Democratic nominee Hilary[sic] Clinton advocates increasing numbers by ‘500 per cent'” in light of the non-stop killing, raping, and groping by refugees and migrants in France, Germany, and Belgium and when Obama’s advisers say that terrorists may infiltrate the refugee population.

Higgins is a former official with the Department of Defense’s Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office & Irregular Warfare Support Program. Kassam is Editor-in-Chief at the Breitbart London bureau.

Behind bars in France, Marxist, Carlos-the-Jackel married his French lawyer in a Muslim ceremony. As to Hannity’s question, Higgins answered, “I think that they’re so keen to have them coming in here because their Muslim Brotherhood advisers are telling them that is best for the West.”

Kassam added that “powerful liberal open borders activists such as George Soros” were responsible as well. His message to them: “it’s very hard to fight for social justice if you’re dead.”

“‘And the most galling element of it,’ Kassam continued, ‘is that we have the BBC, and the New York Times, and Sky News (editor note – Rupert Murdoch), and all of these other guys who are basically saying: ‘well, a backpack killed these people, a machete killed them.’ No. These are Syrian migrants who have faked being refugees. Some of them have been turned down in terms of asylum status, and they happen to have bomb making knowledge and explosives at the same time?”

Higgins emphasized that the “outcome of this enemy isn’t just the killing, it is the political [expansion] of the shariah law, of Islamic law, in the west and we see our media compliant with Islamic law already – they won’t tell us the truth about it.” Higgins continued his warning: “[and] to build on [Kassam’s] comments on the Socialist-Islamist nexus, in 2003, Carlos the Jackal, the Terrorist, in his book Revolutionary Islam said that only a coalition of Marxists and Islamists can destroy the United States and what we see happening right now is that de facto alliance – both in the tactical sense – in the neighborhoods where these NGOs are working with these refugee groups – they’re not actually refugees, they’re immigrants or Muhajirun is the more appropriate technical term for them and this is all part of the Hijra . . Hijra is a term from Islam   this is a Hijra – it is an act of moving here – they call it the process of settlement – they are not coming to immigrate and to actually become Americans or to subscribe to the Constitution – they’re coming here as a process of settlement.”

When the Obama administration says ISIS is on the run because it may have lost some “occupied territory” or lost “some leaders to drone strikes”, read what “Carlos the Jackal” surmised below and realize that ISIS is adaptive and “the only destination to which it is on the run is the next step in its strategy or the next attack and we have to stop falling into the ‘lone wolf’ trap, the insistence that if [ISIS] leaders aren’t texting instructions to [its] operatives, an attack somehow has less strategic importance or is not directly connected to its plan.”

“Carlos the Jackal” a/k/a Ilich Ramírez Sánchez, is “a Venezuelan now serving a life sentence for murder in France,” He “saw that only revolutionary Islam could recruit the large numbers of killers and martyrs necessary to destroy the United States.”

“Carlos had also concluded that the United States could not be destroyed by any military rival. What was needed was a campaign of terror and that terrorism is ‘the cleanest and most efficient form of warfare.’ By killing civilians, he argued, the terrorist saps the morale of the enemy and forces its leadership to submit to the demands of the revolution or surrender.”

“Carlos] dwelled on the necessity for all Muslim men to grow beards and all Muslim women to wear the “revolutionary” head-cover (the hijab) invented in Lebanon in the 1970s. He said that beards and the hijab can be used as tools of terror, to dishearten the Americans by reminding them that “their enemy Islam” is in their midst.” See. See also.

Editor: So the question we (who understand this) have is this:  They are telling us that they are coming for us, so why don’t more people believe them?



A Victim-full Crime

Democrats spend most of their time pandering to victims who will vote for them.  Democrats are power-motivated, so they really don’t care about accomplishing much. They just want to be in charge because they are Liberals and like to tell other people what to do. 

The 1950s were marked by a growing economy and much-reduced government.  They 1960s brought out the victim parade starting with Communists and ended in a government-led spending spree.  Lyndon Johnson’s “war on poverty” designed to pander to Blacks, ended up destroying Black families.  This was a victim-full crime.  Blacks are now a stable source of victims Democrats continue to pander to.

The next pandered group the Democrats chose were “Seniors” age 50+, who were nervous about their growing healthcare costs.  Their employers were much more insistent that the government bail them out of providing healthcare to retirees because they could do math. Malpractice Lawyers were excited.  Congress passed Medicare because they don’t know how to do math. Anti-discrimination laws were passed and “protected groups” became the next victim group.  Lawyers were ecstatic.

The Women’s Movement of the 1960s was the PR campaign to prepare women to go to work.  Government debt was converted into inflation and by the 1970s all the moms went to work and prices of everything doubled.  Unions ruined productivity and were certainly pandered to by Democrats. The quality of American products was poor and foreign car sales went up in the US. The 1970s ended with “stagflation”; economic stagnation plus inflation.

Pandering to environmental activists and animals were added to the list of “victims”.

Democrat pandering and sabotage took a break in the 1980s. Ronald Reagan began as President in 1980. He cut taxes and allowed the economy to recover. Illegal migrants from Mexico were streaming into the US and the Democrats were there to pander to them.  Advances in electronics and the invention of the personal computer made the Reagan years profitable for everybody and victims became passé. They were all working and Democrats begin losing elections. Reagan fired the striking air traffic controllers and thumped the unions on the head.  Corporations had been working on making unions unnecessary and were succeeding.  After Reagan, union organizing in the private sector plummeted.

The Ted Kennedy list of Liberal sabotage bills had to wait until their man RINO George HW Bush took office in 1988, then all hell broke loose, but it broke loose very quietly.  All of Kennedy’s liberal legislation was passed and signed by Bush and excessive immigration began.  Corporations turned on their own workforces and broke their “social contracts”.  Bush also committed treason by signing UN Agenda 21 based on the global warming hoax. 

In 1993, Bill Clinton took office and signed NAFTA and issued an executive order for all federal agencies to begin to implement UN Agenda 21.  Excessive government subsidies for healthcare made costs skyrocket, giving Clinton an excuse to attempt to pass government-controlled healthcare. It failed, but these Marxists never give up.  Clinton also signed the Community Reinvestment Act of 1993 and HUD anti-discrimination rules that required lenders to give mortgages to unqualified buyers.  That caused the 2008 Meltdown as those mortgages predictably went into foreclosure. Pandering remained with Women, Blacks and illegal Mexican migrants.

In 2000, George W Bush took office, but did nothing to repeal the bad laws and executive orders that were sure to cause problems. After the World Trade Center attack on 9/11/2001 Bush became the ‘war president’ and spent little time on anything else.  Bush II doubled the National Debt, taking it from $5 trillion to $10 trillion due to poor handling of the Middle East wars.  Here the pandering was aimed at “patriotic citizens” by RINOs.

In 2008, Obama took office and spent all of 2009 passing Obamacare and pushing UN Agenda 21 implementation.  Obama’s election was a high point for the American Communist Party and the Muslims.  Obama doubled the National Debt, taking it from $10 trillion to $20 trillion. His pandering continued with Women, Blacks, Illegal Mexican migrants and added Muslims.

Now in 2016, we will go to the polls to elect either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.  Trump is a “free marketer” who wants to restore the US economy.  Hillary Clinton would continue all Obama policies and would take our National Debt to $30 trillion.

Our National Debt is unsustainable and we are headed off the fiscal cliff unless we balance the federal budget and begin paying off the National Debt.  Liberals will say this is impossible, but I suspect they want to destroy the US and allow the formation of a one-world Communist government as outlined in UN Agenda 21.  We should not let this happen.


Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader

US intelligence has been sabotaged.

We are on our own

DHS ordered me to scrub records of Muslims with terror ties, By Philip Haney, 2/5/16

Amid the chaos of the 2009 holiday travel season, jihadists planned to slaughter 290 innocent travelers on a Christmas Day flight from the Netherlands to Detroit, Michigan. Twenty-three-year old Nigerian Muslim Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab intended to detonate Northwest Airlines Flight 253, but the explosives in his underwear malfunctioned and brave passengers subdued him until he could be arrested. The graphic and traumatic defeat they planned for the United States failed, that time.

Following the attempted attack, President Obama threw the intelligence community under the bus for its failure to “connect the dots.” He said, “this was not a failure to collect intelligence, it was a failure to integrate and understand the intelligence that we already had.”

Most Americans were unaware of the enormous damage to morale at the Department of Homeland Security, where I worked, his condemnation caused. His words infuriated many of us because we knew his administration had been engaged in a bureaucratic effort to destroy the raw material—the actual intelligence we had collected for years, and erase those dots. The dots constitute the intelligence needed to keep Americans safe, and the Obama administration was ordering they be wiped away.

After leaving my 15 year career at DHS, I can no longer be silent about the dangerous state of America’s counter-terror strategy, our leaders’ willingness to compromise the security of citizens for the ideological rigidity of political correctness—and, consequently, our vulnerability to devastating, mass-casualty attack.

Just before that Christmas Day attack, in early November 2009, I was ordered by my superiors at the Department of Homeland Security to delete or modify several hundred records of individuals tied to designated Islamist terror groups like Hamas from the important federal database, the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS). These types of records are the basis for any ability to “connect dots.”  Every day, DHS Customs and Border Protection officers watch entering and exiting many individuals associated with known terrorist affiliations, then look for patterns. Enforcing a political scrubbing of records of Muslims greatly affected our ability to do that. Even worse, going forward, my colleagues and I were prohibited from entering pertinent information into the database.

A few weeks later, in my office at the Port of Atlanta, the television hummed with the inevitable Congressional hearings that follow any terrorist attack. While members of Congress grilled Obama administration officials, demanding why their subordinates were still failing to understand the intelligence they had gathered, I was being forced to delete and scrub the records. And I was well aware that, as a result, it was going to be vastly more difficult to “connect the dots” in the future—especially before an attack occurs.

As the number of successful and attempted Islamic terrorist attacks on America increased, the type of information that the Obama administration ordered removed from travel and national security databases was the kind of information that, if properly assessed, could have prevented subsequent domestic Islamist attacks like the ones committed by Faisal Shahzad (May 2010), Detroit “honor killing” perpetrator Rahim A. Alfetlawi (2011); Amine El Khalifi, who plotted to blow up the U.S. Capitol (2012); Dzhokhar or Tamerlan Tsarnaev who conducted the Boston Marathon bombing (2013); Oklahoma beheading suspect Alton Nolen (2014); or Muhammed Yusuf Abdulazeez, who opened fire on two military installations in Chattanooga, Tennessee (2015).  

It is very plausible that one or more of the subsequent terror attacks on the homeland could have been prevented if more subject matter experts in the Department of Homeland Security had been allowed to do our jobs back in late 2009.

It is demoralizing—and infuriating—that today, those elusive dots are even harder to find, and harder to connect, than they were during the winter of 2009. Haney worked at the Department of Homeland Security for 15 years.


http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/268282-dhs-ordered-me-to-scrub-records-of-muslims-with-terror

Hillary got $48.5 million from Wall Street

Hillary’s Gotten $48.5 Million from Wall Street …Guess How Much Trump’s Gotten?

What’s more surprising than Hillary posturing herself as “anti-Wall Street” is that people actually believe her. Of course, that’s not surprising either. Her supporters will believe anything. Or, they just won’t care.

Hillary Clinton has the backing of hedge fund owners and employees. So far, she’s received about $48.5 million in financial support from them. According to the Wall Street Journal, “The top five contributors to pro-Clinton groups are employees or owners of private investment funds.”

That’s a lot of support coming from a group of people that Hillary claims to hate. The entire time she’s been campaigning, she’s railed against hedge fund managers and how unfair it is that they make so much money, but pay less in taxes than kindergarten teachers or bus drivers. “Hillary Clinton has the toughest plan to reform Wall Street, clean up the abuses…and close the carried-interest [tax] loophole that benefits hedge funds,” a Hillary campaign spokesman said.

Ironically, her own son-in-law – seen standing next to Bill Clinton at the DNC during Hillary’s speech – is a hedge fund manager. He and the other founders of the hedge fund are also former Goldman Sachs employees.

Speaking of Goldman Sachs, Fox News pointed out that “in recent years [Hillary] has received $21 million in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street firms.”

Want to know how much Donald Trump’s gotten from Wall Street? A measly $19,000.

Wall Street doesn’t like Donald Trump, mainly because they view him as volatile and unpredictable – two things they also despise about the stock market. If only they could accurately predict what was going to happen, they could make untold amounts of money in no time. They like predictability. And my guess is that they’re not worried that Hillary will change the laws all that much or remove any “loopholes.” They know she’s not going to follow up on those promises. They’ve got her right where they want her. Deep in their pocket.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com


http://eaglerising.com/35519/hillarys-gotten-48-5-million-from-wall-street-guess-how-much-trumps-gotten/

Hillary’s 30,000 Missing Emails

Won’t stay under the rug

WATCH: Krauthammer Reveals The Brilliant “Trap” Trump Set For Hillary

Conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer pointed out what many have called a brilliant trap GOP presidential Donald Trump set for Democrat rival Hillary Clinton earlier this week when he called on the Russian government to find the 30,000 emails missing from the former secretary of state’s personal email server.

Trump gave a press conference Wednesday in which he made the joking remarks about the emails. He also pointed out that Clinton hasn’t held her own press conference since December 2015.

Krauthammer told Fox News’ “Special Report” host Bret Baier that people remembered what Trump said about Russia because that remark was his “parting shot,” adding that “it was a clever thing to plant, because it is an issue.”
The Clinton campaign responded to Trump’s remark, saying, “This has gone from being a curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.”

So it would appear that Clinton’s campaign just admitted that at least some of the emails housed on her e-mail server were indeed a national security issue.

The Pulitzer Prize winner pointed out that if the emails Clinton deleted were actually about yoga lessons and wedding planning, there’s no national security involved at all. So why mention national security at all when criticizing Trump?

“So the Clinton campaign ends up admitting that perhaps there really is work-related, if not classified stuff, on the emails which she deleted, which I think would be the grounds for a charge of obstruction,” he said.

Krauthammer also added the whether Trump’s remark was serious or not, “it leaves the Clinton campaign in a complete contradiction. If these are just private emails, then there is nothing to be concerned about. There’s no espionage. There is no danger to national security.”

Sounds like The Donald’s trap worked — and you can bet it has Hillary fuming. - H/T The Daily Caller


http://conservativetribune.com/krauthammer-trap-trump-hilllary/

Dunwoody Developer Update

Dunwoody Development Authority approves $780 million in tax abatement resolutions by Dyana Bagby, 7/29/16, Reporter Newspapers

The Dunwoody Development Authority voted July 28 to approve $780 million in “inducement resolutions” for two separate development projects in the Perimeter Center, including two additional buildings as part of the State Farm hub and a new office building to be located in a corner of the parking lot of Perimeter Mall.

The Development Authority approved the resolutions to issue revenue bonds totaling $650 million for the State Farm project that will include two new office buildings that will also include restaurant and retail space built on the current Hammond Exchange building site. Construction on Phase 2 of the State Farm hub – the first phase is the building currently under construction on Hammond Drive – could start as soon as next year, according to KDC, developers for the project.

State Farm is expected to save some $48 million in property taxes from the city, DeKalb County and the DeKalb County School District over 17 years of the tax abatement, according to a financial analysis by Georgia Tech’s Enterprise Innovation Institute. The project is expected to bring in 2,200 new jobs to Dunwoody.

The authority also voted to approve the resolution to issue $130 million in revenue bonds for developer Transwestern to build a 16-story office building nearly directly across the street from the State Farm complex on a corner of the Perimeter Mall parking lot and adjacent to the Dunwoody MARTA station.

Transwestern will save approximately $14.5 million in property taxes over 12 years, according to Georgia Tech. The project is a speculative project — meaning no tenants are signed on to locate there — so how many jobs the project will bring to Dunwoody is uncertain. Transwestern estimates the project will bring nearly 2,500 jobs to the city.
The resolutions are not the final approval of the projects, said Michael Starling, director of Economic Development for Dunwoody and also the executive director of the Development Authority.

“Inducements resolutions are fairly broad and say we agree to talk and move forward on the project,” Starling said.

The corporations and development authority will eventually have to sign a formal “memorandum of understanding” that will outline the specifics of the tax abatements, he said. The Development Authority will likely meet again in October to go over the final MOUs, he said.

While the Dunwoody Development Authority has a close relationship with the city, it is its own separate entity and City Council approval is not needed to approve the tax abatements, Starling said.

Taxpayers are also not at risk with the issuance of revenue bonds, explained Carlianne Patrick, economics professor at Georgia State University’s Andrew Young School of Policy Studies. “The public is not on the hook,” she said.


Comments

The AJC article indicated that the city of Dunwoody would be the landlord and lease the space.  It sure sounds like the city is “on the hook”.  It also quoted 7500 jobs, not 4700 jobs.

Several cities in California have gone bankrupt backing “economic development” projects that failed and the cities got stuck with the bill.

If this is just a “pea and shell game” to get a “tax holiday”, then Dunwoody voters need a full disclosure explaining the deal.  It could mean that the city buys the land and a property company owns and pays for the building, so we need to know how the city pays for the land in order to give the property tax abatement and for how long.

Einstein said: ‘If you can’t explain it clearly, you don’t understand it well enough’.


Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader

Dunwoody Developer’s Dream

The AJC, July 28, 2016, page B7 reported that the Dunwoody Development Authority was considering a deal with Atlanta Office Investment LLC and Transwestern Development Co. LLC to issue revenue bonds totaling $780 million to build two additional office complexes at Perimeter Mall. 

The article indicates that the City of Dunwoody would buy these office buildings from the developers and become the landlord. The Dunwoody Development Authority held a meeting on July 28 at City Hall to discuss these projects.  The Development Authority is a board of 7 citizens, appointed by the Dunwoody City Council to make development decisions. The City Council does not have veto authority over this volunteer board.

If this is all true, it removes voter oversight from financial dealings that would affect their taxes and the Georgia Legislature is responsible for this “taxation without representation” law we saw operate in the Braves’ stadium move to Cobb.  I’m sure the Georgia Legislature believes that voters would not approve these deals, so they wrote the law to circumvent voter interference.

Dunwoody is a tiny city occupying 13 square miles.  Roswell and Sandy Springs occupies over 40 square miles. The City of Dunwoody was formed to control zoning and Dunwoody voters should have limited their charter to zoning like Tucker did.  Dunwoody is “built out” and has very little undeveloped land, so “in-fill” development is the norm.  But high density in-fill development causes problems, like traffic and the loss of neighboring property values.

I am no fan of corporate welfare of any kind, so I wonder why State government has allowed Private Public Partnerships, outsourcing government duties to corporations, corporate subsidies and corporate bail-outs. These ventures tend to fail because they are ill-conceived.

I want to see government put back in its box to maintain roads and provide sanitation, sewage treatment and clean water distribution.

Providing office space for an additional 7500 employees at Perimeter Center Improvement District (PCID) has its risks. We have just experienced the conversion of office space to town home development in Dunwoody.  The “global economy” is contracting, unsustainable government debt is growing and US laws continue to encourage moving operations overseas. It’s not hard to imagine that these office buildings could become empty as soon as the music stops.

It appears that investors are playing “musical chairs” with their investments; waiting to the last minute to pull out of their investments and avoid ‘holding the bag’.  We see this version of ‘hot potato’ in the markets and the worst place to be is as the landlord of an empty building.

But if developers have State laws that allow them to cut and run and voters who are naïve enough to allow their cities to have “Development Authority’, they will try to get Development Authorities to help them do that.

Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader



Big Business in Inscrutable

Winston Churchill said that Russian’s behavior was like “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”.  That’s exactly what I think about Big Business behavior since 1989.

I can’t figure out if they are just short-sighted or actually have an evil end-game in mind.  Big lenders and Democrats in Congress created the 2008 Meltdown and gave the excuse that it was shortsightedness that caused the problem, but this is not believable.  Nobody is that stupid

UN agenda 21 requires the end of nation-states and the formation of a one-world Communist government fronted by the UN and controlled by an oligarchy of billionaires and our global corporations appear to support this plan and that would make them evil.

Big Banks wanted to end Glass-Steagall that required banks to avoid risky investments and more importantly required them to keep adequate liquidity.  The cash in their systems is now so low that US citizens are exposed to having their cash cut off if there is a crisis.  They are overleveraged and have $700 trillion in hedge-fund bets.  This is nuts.

Big businesses put up with union abuse and allowed productivity and quality to suffer in the 1960s and 1970s.  Was this short-sighted or was it done on purpose ?

Big businesses overspend.  Their policies are unsustainable.  Their relocation policies are so expensive that their locations don’t offer transfers.  They didn’t oppose government subsidies that made healthcare and education unaffordable.  Was this just short-sighted or was it on purpose ?

Having successfully implemented Lean Process Controls, big business solved the quality problems with Lean Processes and Automation.  Then rather than implementing Lean high-speed manufacturing in the US, their biggest market, they moved all manufacturing overseas to save on touch labor that has now lowered the quality. Was this just short-sighted or was it on purpose ?

Big Business seems to support excessive immigration in the US, open borders and Muslim invasion in the US and Europe.  They had no objection to destabilizing the Middle East or increasing the money supply by 450%. Now Big Business wants to offer paternity leave and daycare. Was this just short-sighted or was it on purpose ?

I must conclude that Big Business has become the enemy of democracy, freedom, free market principles, sustainable economics and is complicit with the destruction of their own consumer base globally.

Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader


Crony Corporations in Trouble

Of their own making

The “global economy” is contracting because global consumers are cutting back purchases to include only what they absolutely need, like food and shelter. Consumers are not purchasing everything they want because they lack the cash.  Many are spending their savings to buy necessities. 

In the US, those who need cars to get to work are paying car payments and shelter costs are high. Cell phone plan, cable TV, electricity and gas and water prices are too high.  Our economy continues to weaken and workers are more subject to layoffs. Most US consumers are limiting their use of all utilities.

The rest of the developed world is in worse shape than the US.  Europe has high unemployment and growing refugee costs. Developing countries like China and India are faltering. Third-world countries are broken and sending refugees to whoever will take them.

Government debt is unsustainable and global credit limits are beyond sustainable.  There is ample evidence of government corruption and stupidity across the globe. Real democracy, the rule of law and free market rules have been abandoned.  Every government laws and regulations are riddled with trickery that allows government to do whatever it wants without voter approval.  This comes after decades of obfuscation and secrecy, because special interests own the legislatures.

Global corporations control government and have been infiltrated by criminals who have dismantled the rule of law. They have lots of co-conspirators including our courts, elected officials and global Marxists in the UN who are embedded in all governments, All industries have been short-sighted and now find themselves in crisis.

Our experience has taught us that the unconstitutional collusion of government and industry can ruin entire economies.  There are a limited number of things we should trust to government.  There are industries that operate better as small family businesses that shouldn’t be allowed entry by big business.

Big business has cash it has amassed over the decades, but its future becomes more limited as consumers spend less on what they have to offer.


Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader

Saturday, July 30, 2016

Creeping Sharia in Health Care

By Carol Brown, 7/28/16

Islamic supremacy is arriving in medical settings using stealth means, or what is often referred to as creeping sharia. Common themes include Muslim health care workers refusing to uphold infection control protocols, Muslim medical students refusing to study topics they deem forbidden according to Islamic law, Muslim visitors in hospitals ignoring hygiene guidelines to protect patients, and hospitals bending over backwards (or is it forwards?) to accommodate Muslim demands above and beyond anything done for members of any other religious or demographic group. Also covered are outright acts of violence perpetrated by Muslim men who attack hospital personnel.

Islamic supremacy + dhimmitude = the end of civilized societies. Before I begin the (by no means exhaustive) list of how this equation is playing out in health care settings throughout the West, I’d like to share a personal story.

Shortly after the 9/11 Islamic terror attacks I had occasion to speak with a Muslim doctor who lived down the street from me. At that point in time I was completely ignorant about Islam and was, in fact, still a leftist (though wouldn’t be for much longer).

The doctor, a meticulously groomed, soft-spoken, modern-appearing man made it clear that, among other things, he believed that Muslim females become “mature” when they turned nine and therefore can be married at that age. I ignored the alarm bell that went off in my head when he made that statement. Of course I’ve long since realized that this highly educated doctor who worked at a prestigious hospital had sanctioned, at the very least, child rape (in keeping with the teachings of his prophet, the king of all pedophiles, Mohammed).

And therein lies the rub with Muslim doctors, as with all Muslims. If they are good Muslims and follow the teachings of the Quran, their values will necessarily be in direct conflict with our own. So with that in mind, let me begin our tour through Islamic supremacy in medical settings right here in the United States.

An Islamic medical association operating in this country was identified by the Muslim Brotherhood as one among several “organizations of our friends” -- friends that could help the MB advance their goal of destroying America from within. Part of the association’s oath includes: “We serve no other God besides [Allah] and regard idolatry as an abominable injustice.”

Islamic supremacy also asserts itself through lawfare as when a Muslim medical student who was dismissed due to poor academic performance sued the medical school on grounds of discrimination. Another case involved a Muslim health care worker who was fired because she refused to get a flu vaccine (required in hospital settings to protect patients) claiming the vaccine violated her Islamic faith because it contained a pork by product and that the entire affair violated her civil rights.

In addition to lawfare there are many other ways Muslims push for special accommodations such as Muslim doctors and advocacy organizations calling on health care personnel to be more knowledgeable about Muslim traditions so they can better meet the needs of their Muslim patients.

And so hospitals across the country are implementing an array of services for Muslim patients,  including halal meals, alternatives to medications that contain alcohol and/or pork derivatives, gowns for women designed to protect their modesty, early morning and late night appointments during the month of Ramadan, hiring more Muslim chaplains, handing out Qurans to the parents of Muslim children after they’re born, providing prayer rugs, hosting Iftar events, and setting up prayers rooms exclusively for Muslims who often find existing multi-faith prayers rooms offensive and/or inconvenient.

One town in Illinois proposed a “Muslim-centric” medical facility replete with many of the features noted above as well as Arabic-speaking staff, private rooms to ensure a Muslim standard of modesty, and space for ritual foot baths. The state rejected the plan but it was resubmitted without any references to sharia law.

There has also been a proliferation of medical outreach programs for the Muslim community along with “sensitivity training” for medical staff who are expected to become so well versed in the array of Muslim patients’ needs that they can discern differences between the needs of a Muslim from Pakistan compared to a Muslim from Saudi Arabia.

The Muslim-as-victim meme rears its head as well, such as the idea that Muslims “don’t have access” to healthcare, as was recently asserted by the vice president of cultural competence at a medical center in Brooklyn, NY.  

And when Muslims do access health care, special demands may be made as when a Muslima in New Jersey went to an emergency room complaining of chest pain and insisted on a female (corrected) technician after she was told she’d need an electrocardiogram. No male technician was available and she was informed of her options. She decided to sit and wait. After several hours her husband requested she be transferred to a different hospital. The couple then sued, claiming the Patient’s Bill of Rights entitled the Muslima to her demands.

The issue of Muslima patients demanding same-sex health care professionals in emergency situations is one I expect to escalate, as is happening in Europe. But first, let’s take a quick detour to Canada where medical professionals banned virginity tests and the issuance of “chastity certificates” (popular in the Muslim culture) after the discovery of four dead Afghan women who were victims of “honor killings.” Elsewhere in Canada on a maternity ward where shared rooms arranged four beds with privacy curtains in between, a Muslim couple received greater levels of privacy than were afforded to others when their demands ejected at least one non-Muslim couple out of the ward and into a much more costly private room that the couple had to pay for.

In Europe the situation is even more dire. And pervasive. In the UK, an 87-year-old Alzheimer’s patient was forced to wait for care after she fell because the Muslim charge nurse withheld assistance until he finished his prayers. This delay in care lasted five to ten minutes. The patient died shortly thereafter. Meanwhile, in at least one British hospital, staff were turning the beds of Muslim patients up to five times a day so patients could face Mecca while they pray. Then staff turned them back when the patients were finished. Staff were also expected to provide Muslim patients with running water so they can wash their feet before prayer.

And then there is the issue of traditional Muslim attire, much of which doesn’t meet standards for infection control. The National Health Service requires staff providing direct care to patients to be in short sleeves to reduce the risk of transmitting increasingly deadly pathogens from one patient to another. Since many Muslim women consider it immodest to expose their forearms, some have refused to do so for proper hand-washing or scrubbing in prior to surgery. So the NHS developed disposable sleeves for Muslim health care workers who have direct patient contact.

Naturally the tale above would not be complete without the Muslim-claiming-discrimination story as when a British radiographer who was faced with having to choose between losing her job or complying with the dress code, chose Islam over her job, then complained about having to make the choice. Meanwhile, the Islamic Medical Association in the UK upheld the Islamic tenet that Muslim women out in public must be covered, stating: “No practicing Muslim woman -- doctor, medical student, nurse, or patient -- should be forced to bare her arms below the elbow.”

But it doesn’t stop there. (It never stops when it comes to Islamic supremacism.) Some Muslimas working in hospitals in the UK also want sterile hijabs to wear in the operating room and a private place to scrub in so their modesty can be protected. Some Muslim health care workers also refuse to use alcohol-based hand sanitizer because they claim it is forbidden according to Islamic law.

And what of British Muslims studying to work in health care? Well, some have refused to attend classes or learn about anything that conflicts with the teachings of the Quran, such as material on evolution and health issues related sexual promiscuity and/or alcohol consumption. The commitment to avoid all things alcohol-related also impacts patient safety when Muslim visitors to hospitals refuse to use anti-bacterial gel before entering patient wards, ignoring signs posted throughout British hospitals asking visitors to use the gel in order to reduce the spread of infection. (Of note, there is nothing in Islamic law that would suggest Muslims cannot use alcohol-based sanitary gels and it appears that some Muslims are using this as a point of leverage to assert supremacy. See here, here, and here.)
The final exhibit of the UK tour is a Muslim dentist who insisted his female patients wear hijabs, keeping a stash of head scarves in his office to give them. He abandoned at least two patients in acute pain who refused to don the hijab and on at least one occasion provided lesser quality care to a patient’s son when the mother agreed to wear the hijab but apparently didn’t answer a question about her son’s prayer habits in a way that pleased the dentist. Of note, the dentist’s younger brother is an Islamic extremist who stated that the 9/11 terror attack served “the pleasure of Allah.”

Throughout Europe it has also become increasingly common for Muslim men to physically attack male doctors. In some cases, women are denied urgently needed medical care because their spouses are adamant that they be attended to by a female, or not be attended to at all.

In France, a newborn’s father called the midwife a “rapist” then broke into the locked delivery room after seeing a nurse remove his wife’s burqa so she could give birth, hit the nurse in the face, and demanded she put the burqa back on his wife. In another case a Muslim male physically attacked a gynecologist who stepped in to assist with his wife’s complicated delivery. A few months prior to that, another doctor was attacked by a knife-wielding Islamist.

In Belgium, when a Muslim woman needed an emergency c-section, her husband blocked the door to the operating room because the anesthesiologist was a male. After being told no female anesthesiologists were available a two-hour stand-off ensued after which time an imam was called upon who allowed the doctor to administer an epidural through a tiny opening in the woman’s burqa. A female nurse performed the surgery while the anesthesiologist remained outside the room shouting instructions to another nurse who was monitoring the anesthesia. An organization of anesthesiologists stated there have been other such incidents involving Muslim patients and their families.

In Sweden, it’s more of the same. When a male doctor answered an urgent call to assist with a mother who was bleeding heavily after giving birth, the woman’s husband screamed at him to leave the room immediately. When the doctor refused, the husband and the brother-in-law physically attacked him.

In addition to Muslim males becoming enraged if a male health care provider attends to their wife, there other things that may set them off. (Like just about everything.) And so a Turkish Muslim went on a violent rampage in a Catholic hospital in Germany because there were too many crosses on the walls.

Barbarism meets the West. (And I haven’t even touched upon the abject madness that has unfolded in hospitals across Europe as invaders invade en masse, here, here, and here.)
As the Muslim population in a society increases, expressions of Islamic supremacy become more and more aggressive. How it manifests in health care settings is just one of many ways in which the West is slowly and steadily being taken down by those who embrace an ideology that mandates nothing less than world domination.

Hat tips: Atlas Shrugs, Jihad Watch, Islam in Europe, Fox News, NY Times, Washington Post, Fox News, Boston Herald, Front Page Magazine, Discover the Networks, BBC, Daily Mail, Metro UK, Telegraph, The Guardian, Nursing Times, Modern Health Care, Middle East Forum, Islam in Europe, Islamist Watch, The Whig, The Age, Religion News, Europe1, Lancet, Society for Human Resource Management, Wikipedia, and Daniel Pipes whose 2007 comprehensive overview of the subject matter provided a wealth of material
Islamic supremacy is arriving in medical settings using stealth means, or what is often referred to as creeping sharia. Common themes include Muslim health care workers refusing to uphold infection control protocols, Muslim medical students refusing to study topics they deem forbidden according to Islamic law, Muslim visitors in hospitals ignoring hygiene guidelines to protect patients, and hospitals bending over backwards (or is it forwards?) to accommodate Muslim demands above and beyond anything done for members of any other religious or demographic group. Also covered are outright acts of violence perpetrated by Muslim men who attack hospital personnel.

Islamic supremacy + dhimmitude = the end of civilized societies. Before I begin the (by no means exhaustive) list of how this equation is playing out in health care settings throughout the West, I’d like to share a personal story.

Shortly after the 9/11 Islamic terror attacks I had occasion to speak with a Muslim doctor who lived down the street from me. At that point in time I was completely ignorant about Islam and was, in fact, still a leftist (though wouldn’t be for much longer).

The doctor, a meticulously groomed, soft-spoken, modern-appearing man made it clear that, among other things, he believed that Muslim females become “mature” when they turned nine and therefore can be married at that age. I ignored the alarm bell that went off in my head when he made that statement. Of course I’ve long since realized that this highly educated doctor who worked at a prestigious hospital had sanctioned, at the very least, child rape (in keeping with the teachings of his prophet, the king of all pedophiles, Mohammed).

And therein lies the rub with Muslim doctors, as with all Muslims. If they are good Muslims and follow the teachings of the Quran, their values will necessarily be in direct conflict with our own. So with that in mind, let me begin our tour through Islamic supremacy in medical settings right here in the United States.

An Islamic medical association operating in this country was identified by the Muslim Brotherhood as one among several “organizations of our friends” -- friends that could help the MB advance their goal of destroying America from within. Part of the association’s oath includes: “We serve no other God besides [Allah] and regard idolatry as an abominable injustice.”

Islamic supremacy also asserts itself through lawfare as when a Muslim medical student who was dismissed due to poor academic performance sued the medical school on grounds of discrimination. Another case involved a Muslim health care worker who was fired because she refused to get a flu vaccine (required in hospital settings to protect patients) claiming the vaccine violated her Islamic faith because it contained a pork by product and that the entire affair violated her civil rights.

In addition to lawfare there are many other ways Muslims push for special accommodations such as Muslim doctors and advocacy organizations calling on health care personnel to be more knowledgeable about Muslim traditions so they can better meet the needs of their Muslim patients.

And so hospitals across the country are implementing an array of services for Muslim patients,  including halal meals, alternatives to medications that contain alcohol and/or pork derivatives, gowns for women designed to protect their modesty, early morning and late night appointments during the month of Ramadan, hiring more Muslim chaplains, handing out Qurans to the parents of Muslim children after they’re born, providing prayer rugs, hosting Iftar events, and setting up prayers rooms exclusively for Muslims who often find existing multi-faith prayers rooms offensive and/or inconvenient.

One town in Illinois proposed a “Muslim-centric” medical facility replete with many of the features noted above as well as Arabic-speaking staff, private rooms to ensure a Muslim standard of modesty, and space for ritual foot baths. The state rejected the plan but it was resubmitted without any references to sharia law.

There has also been a proliferation of medical outreach programs for the Muslim community along with “sensitivity training” for medical staff who are expected to become so well versed in the array of Muslim patients’ needs that they can discern differences between the needs of a Muslim from Pakistan compared to a Muslim from Saudi Arabia.

The Muslim-as-victim meme rears its head as well, such as the idea that Muslims “don’t have access” to healthcare, as was recently asserted by the vice president of cultural competence at a medical center in Brooklyn, NY.  

And when Muslims do access health care, special demands may be made as when a Muslima in New Jersey went to an emergency room complaining of chest pain and insisted on a female (corrected) technician after she was told she’d need an electrocardiogram. No male technician was available and she was informed of her options. She decided to sit and wait. After several hours her husband requested she be transferred to a different hospital. The couple then sued, claiming the Patient’s Bill of Rights entitled the Muslima to her demands.

The issue of Muslima patients demanding same-sex health care professionals in emergency situations is one I expect to escalate, as is happening in Europe. But first, let’s take a quick detour to Canada where medical professionals banned virginity tests and the issuance of “chastity certificates” (popular in the Muslim culture) after the discovery of four dead Afghan women who were victims of “honor killings.” Elsewhere in Canada on a maternity ward where shared rooms arranged four beds with privacy curtains in between, a Muslim couple received greater levels of privacy than were afforded to others when their demands ejected at least one non-Muslim couple out of the ward and into a much more costly private room that the couple had to pay for.

In Europe the situation is even more dire. And pervasive. In the UK, an 87-year-old Alzheimer’s patient was forced to wait for care after she fell because the Muslim charge nurse withheld assistance until he finished his prayers. This delay in care lasted five to ten minutes. The patient died shortly thereafter.

Meanwhile, in at least one British hospital, staff were turning the beds of Muslim patients up to five times a day so patients could face Mecca while they pray. Then staff turned them back when the patients were finished. Staff were also expected to provide Muslim patients with running water so they can wash their feet before prayer.

And then there is the issue of traditional Muslim attire, much of which doesn’t meet standards for infection control. The National Health Service requires staff providing direct care to patients to be in short sleeves to reduce the risk of transmitting increasingly deadly pathogens from one patient to another. Since many Muslim women consider it immodest to expose their forearms, some have refused to do so for proper hand-washing or scrubbing in prior to surgery. So the NHS developed disposable sleeves for Muslim health care workers who have direct patient contact.

Naturally the tale above would not be complete without the Muslim-claiming-discrimination story as when a British radiographer who was faced with having to choose between losing her job or complying with the dress code, chose Islam over her job, then complained about having to make the choice. Meanwhile, the Islamic Medical Association in the UK upheld the Islamic tenet that Muslim women out in public must be covered, stating: “No practicing Muslim woman -- doctor, medical student, nurse, or patient -- should be forced to bare her arms below the elbow.”

But it doesn’t stop there. (It never stops when it comes to Islamic supremacism.) Some Muslimas working in hospitals in the UK also want sterile hijabs to wear in the operating room and a private place to scrub in so their modesty can be protected. Some Muslim health care workers also refuse to use alcohol-based hand sanitizer because they claim it is forbidden according to Islamic law.

And what of British Muslims studying to work in health care? Well, some have refused to attend classes or learn about anything that conflicts with the teachings of the Quran, such as material on evolution and health issues related sexual promiscuity and/or alcohol consumption. The commitment to avoid all things alcohol-related also impacts patient safety when Muslim visitors to hospitals refuse to use anti-bacterial gel before entering patient wards, ignoring signs posted throughout British hospitals asking visitors to use the gel in order to reduce the spread of infection. (Of note, there is nothing in Islamic law that would suggest Muslims cannot use alcohol-based sanitary gels and it appears that some Muslims are using this as a point of leverage to assert supremacy. See here, here, and here.)
The final exhibit of the UK tour is a Muslim dentist who insisted his female patients wear hijabs, keeping a stash of head scarves in his office to give them. He abandoned at least two patients in acute pain who refused to don the hijab and on at least one occasion provided lesser quality care to a patient’s son when the mother agreed to wear the hijab but apparently didn’t answer a question about her son’s prayer habits in a way that pleased the dentist. Of note, the dentist’s younger brother is an Islamic extremist who stated that the 9/11 terror attack served “the pleasure of Allah.”

Throughout Europe it has also become increasingly common for Muslim men to physically attack male doctors. In some cases, women are denied urgently needed medical care because their spouses are adamant that they be attended to by a female, or not be attended to at all.

In France, a newborn’s father called the midwife a “rapist” then broke into the locked delivery room after seeing a nurse remove his wife’s burqa so she could give birth, hit the nurse in the face, and demanded she put the burqa back on his wife. In another case a Muslim male physically attacked a gynecologist who stepped in to assist with his wife’s complicated delivery. A few months prior to that, another doctor was attacked by a knife-wielding Islamist.

In Belgium, when a Muslim woman needed an emergency c-section, her husband blocked the door to the operating room because the anesthesiologist was a male. After being told no female anesthesiologists were available a two-hour stand-off ensued after which time an imam was called upon who allowed the doctor to administer an epidural through a tiny opening in the woman’s burqa. A female nurse performed the surgery while the anesthesiologist remained outside the room shouting instructions to another nurse who was monitoring the anesthesia. An organization of anesthesiologists stated there have been other such incidents involving Muslim patients and their families.

In Sweden, it’s more of the same. When a male doctor answered an urgent call to assist with a mother who was bleeding heavily after giving birth, the woman’s husband screamed at him to leave the room immediately. When the doctor refused, the husband and the brother-in-law physically attacked him.

In addition to Muslim males becoming enraged if a male health care provider attends to their wife, there other things that may set them off. (Like just about everything.) And so a Turkish Muslim went on a violent rampage in a Catholic hospital in Germany because there were too many crosses on the walls.

Barbarism meets the West. (And I haven’t even touched upon the abject madness that has unfolded in hospitals across Europe as invaders invade en masse, here, here, and here.)
As the Muslim population in a society increases, expressions of Islamic supremacy become more and more aggressive. How it manifests in health care settings is just one of many ways in which the West is slowly and steadily being taken down by those who embrace an ideology that mandates nothing less than world domination.

Hat tips: Atlas Shrugs, Jihad Watch, Islam in Europe, Fox News, NY Times, Washington Post, Fox News, Boston Herald, Front Page Magazine, Discover the Networks, BBC, Daily Mail, Metro UK, Telegraph, The Guardian, Nursing Times, Modern Health Care, Middle East Forum, Islam in Europe, Islamist Watch, The Whig, The Age, Religion News, Europe1, Lancet, Society for Human Resource Management, Wikipedia, and Daniel Pipes whose 2007 comprehensive overview of the subject matter provided a wealth of material


http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/07/creeping_sharia_in_health_care_.html