Why Are CAIR & Comey So Contrite & Forthcoming? Answer: Donald TRUMP

Donald Trump, Government, Homeland Security, Intelligence, Islam, Jihad, Terrorism

Why do you suppose the always arrogant CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) is suddenly so contrite about Islamic terrorism on American soil, issuing a coruscating attack on ISIS and expressing sympathy and solidarity with its victims, down to offers of assistance, following the Orlando shooting this Sunday?

Why do you imagine FBI Director James Comey CAME OUT so publicly, and with such detail and respect for YOUR right to know nothing much at all (“outlining the agency’s previous interactions with the shooter”), only to repeat President Obama’s talking points and the Federal government’s subliminal message of dhimmitude?

My working hypothesis: Donald Trump. The pro-Islam American government (begun by Bush II) and their Muslim supporters are terrified of the Trump holy terror who stands against them with sanity and the force of ordinary sane America behind him.

SAID “Dawud Walid, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, on Sunday, following the shootings at Orlando’s Pulse Nightclub”:

“How would you stand before God and answer to your God?” Walid said, pointing out that ISIS attacks “thousands of innocent people: Muslims, Christians and other minorities.” Further, said Walid, “you do not speak for us, you do not represent us. You are an aberration, an outlaw of outlaws. They do not speak for our faith; they never belong to this beautiful faith they claim to.” Also, he continued, “1.7 billion people are united in rejecting their extremism, and their interpretation and their acts of violence. ….

SAID FBI Director Comey on Monday:

“So far, we see no indication that this was a plot directed from outside the United States and we see no indication that he was part of any kind of network,” Comey told reporters.

The intelligence community, Comey said, is “highly confident that this killer was radicalized at least in part through the Internet.”

The FBI first became aware of the shooter, Omar Mateen, in May 2013 when he was working as a contract security guard and he made statements that were “inflammatory and contradictory,” Comey said. Mateen told his co-workers at the time that he had family connections to al Qaeda and that he was a member of Hezbollah. Comey pointed out that Hezbollah, based in Lebanon, is a “bitter enemy” of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) to which he pledged loyalty in 911 calls as the attack unfolded early Sunday morning.

During the 2013 investigation, the FBI followed Mateen, introduced confidential sources to him and he was interviewed twice, Comey said. Mateen admitted that he made those statements to his co-workers, but he explained that he said them in anger because his co-workers were teasing him. After a 10-month preliminary investigation, the agency closed its probe.

During an off-camera briefing with reporters, Comey said Mateen was on a watch list when he was investigated, but he was removed “quickly” when the investigation was closed.

Two months later, in July 2014, Mateen’s name surfaced again in an indirect way, Comey said, because he knew a Florida man casually who blew himself up in Syria. Comey said they both attended the same mosque in the same area of Florida. Comey said the inquiry eventually continued, focusing on the suicide bomber with no further focus on Mateen.

In the middle of the attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando early Sunday, there were three calls between Mateen and 911 dispatchers, Comey said. First, Mateen called and hung up, then he called again and briefly spoke to a dispatcher and then the dispatcher called again.

“During the calls, he said he was doing this for the leader of [ISIS], who he named and pledged loyalty to,” Comey said.

“We will leave no stone unturned and we will look all day and all night to understand the path to that terrible night,” said Comey, who is refusing to name the shooter because he said he doesn’t want to be part of his “twisted notion of fame and glory.”

Comey said the FBI will review its practices, but said, “I don’t see anything in reviewing our work that our agents should have done differently.”

“We are looking for needles in a nationwide haystack,” Comey added.

Asked if the FBI is looking at the shooter’s father, Comey said, “No comment” and he also wouldn’t comment when asked if Mateen’s family is cooperating.

The attack is being treated as a domestic terror incident and it is the worst mass shooting in U.S. history. Forty-nine people have died and 53 people were injured.

On Trump Tribalism And Clinton’s Sinophobia

Africa, Capitalism, China, Democrats, Donald Trump, Economy, History, The West

“On Trump Tribalism And Clinton’s Sinophobia” is this week’s column, on The Unz Review, America’s smartest webzine. An excerpt:

Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party’s presumptive presidential nominee for 2016, has something in common with Donald Trump: Sinophobia.

During a 2011 visit to Zambia, she warned about “a new colonialism in Africa.” This time, the Chinese were to blame. As Clinton sees it, the Chinese are extracting wealth from the continent by buying its raw materials. “We saw that during colonial times it [was] easy to come in, take out natural resources, pay off leaders and leave,” she griped.

Clinton was adamant. She did not want to see a European-style colonial redux in Africa.

Certainly Chinese state capitalism is not free-market capitalism. But is Chinese mercantilism not preferable to American militarism, an example of which is Libya, a north-African recipient of madam secretary’s largess? Not according to Mrs. Clinton.

As Clinton sees it (as do, no doubt, the Paul-Ryan Republicans and the Bernie Sanders socialists), the “old colonialism” saw underdeveloped nations “bilked by rich capitalist countries,” a phrase used by Lawrence E. Harrison and Samuel P. Huntington in Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress.

According to these highly politicized, socialist, zero-sum formulations regarding colonialism, class warfare and “income inequality,” one person’s plenty is another’s poverty. The corresponding antidote invariably involves taking from one and giving to the other—from rich to poor; from North to South.

The notion, however, of a preexisting income pie from which the greedy appropriate an unfair share is itself pie-in-the-sky. Wealth, earned or “unearned,” as egalitarians term inheritance, doesn’t exist outside the individuals who create it; it is a return for desirable services, skills and resources they render to others. Labor productivity is the main determinant of wages—and wealth. People in the West produce or purchase what they consume—and much more; they don’t remove, or steal it from Third Worlders. Wrote the greatest development economist, Lord Peter Bauer, in Equality, the Third World, and Economic Delusion: “Incomes, including those of the relatively prosperous or the owners of property, are not taken from other people. Normally they are produced by their recipient and the resources they own.”

Not unlike Obama’s Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, who “dramatically increased U.S. foreign aid” (as reported approvingly in Foreign Affairs magazine); Mrs. Clinton also committed more funds to the Agency for International Development during her tenure as secretary of state.

When it comes to Africa, it’s worth noting, however, that four or five decades since decolonization; colonialism, dependency and racism no longer cut it as explanations for Africa’s persistent and pervasive underdevelopment. “Pseudo-scholars such as [the late] Edward Said and legions of liberal intellectuals have made careers out of blaming the West for problems that were endemic to many societies both before and after their experiences as European colonies,” noted Australian historian Keith Windschuttle, in a 2002 issue of American Outlook.

The truth is that colonization constituted the least tumultuous period in African history. This is fact; its enunciation is not to condone colonialism or similar, undeniably coercive, forays, only to venture, as did George Eliot in Daniel Deronda, that “to object to colonization absolutely is to object to history itself. To ask whether colonization in itself is good or bad is the same as asking whether history is a good or bad thing.” …

READ THE REST. “On Trump Tribalism And Clinton’s Sinophobia” is this week’s column, on The Unz Review.

UPDATED (8/16): The World According To ‘Crooked’ Hillary And Her Gyno-Brigade

Capitalism, Debt, Feminism, Gender, Hillary Clinton

“It was only right that Hillary Clinton’s first general election speech was before Planned Parenthood on Friday,” blared the headline on MSNBC.com. Well of course. That’s what’s on my mind. I can’t stop thinking dilation and curettage (D&C), not the $19 trillion debt and the terrifying prospect of negative interest rates, which you know is on Donald Trump’s mind (perhaps someone should tell him to talk about negative interest rates!!!!!!!!!!!!).

What do you think Hillary and her gyno-brigade know about markets, capital formation and the importance of savings to investment—and to civilization? I don’t know about you, but when I see Hillary flanked, backed and surrounded by a kaleidoscope of bossy, angry, teary, aggrieved-looking females, girly men and the likes of Rajiv K. Fernando; I just know that things are going to be alright.

Were the American media not as crooked as Hillary, the headlines, in addition to the jobs report and the prospects for savers, should have been, “Stunning Emails Reveal How Clinton Foundation Donor Bought Seat As Hillary’s Nuclear Weapons Advisor.” The last is a report on Zero Hedge. While CNN TV has reported on the Clinton donor scandal; there is nothing, for now, on the CNN site to that effect.

The Google search engine has “forgotten” to sweep up the story for its search. I tried and came up with Zero Hedge only.

READ the story of Rajiv K. Fernando’s—I think he even made superdelegate—and how he got his seat on the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB).

Yes, what do you suppose “Pocahontas,” aka Elizabeth Warren (touted as Hillary’s VP), knows about capital markets, capital formation, savings, or the impact of negative interest rates on all the above?

UPDATE (8/16): “Look at the lovely faces surrounding Trump on rallies, compared to the malevolent-looking motley crew that goes with Clinton.”

Question The Judiciary Only When Establishment Says So

Donald Trump, Federalism, Justice, Law, The Courts

Didn’t liberals, GOPers included, caution just the other day that our federal system (the holy trinity of colluding branches) rests on the little people not questioning the judiciary out loud, or was that a Trump-specific injunction? A. J. Delgado wants to know: