Tag Archives: Baltimore riots

Left Fixated on Mythical, White, Right-Wing Extremists!

The Left has gone bonkers again, this time over the Oregon rancher standoff.

Mythical

As reported by Infowars (emphasis added):

“Numerous voices are calling for a literal bloodbath in Oregon – and the exercise of unilateral government power to kill the individuals involved, including supporters. It is an armed and highly-charged, but so far peaceful situation that is, nonetheless, rooted firmly in civil disobedience and principle. But that hasn’t stopped opponents from calling for them to be treated like domestic terrorists.”

The Left is incoherently outraged, making spurious racial charges and demonizing whites, conservatives, law enforcement, and the media over alleged racial and political bias in favor of whites and conservatives. (What world do they live in?)

In the Age of Islamic Terrorists, the Left continues to be obsessed with alleged white, right-wing extremists! Why this obsession? Two reasons. One – they are white.[1] Two – they are conservative. But are they extremists? In the mind of the Left, yes. To more rational human beings, no.

Salon Leads the Charge!

Headline: “No happy ending in Oregon: We can’t reward white, right-wing extremists every time they pull a gun and threaten violence”

How is not wantonly killing protesters engaged in legitimate, peaceful, civil disobedience rewarding them? They have a right to protest! (First Amendment: “the right to peaceably assemble.”)

How often do “white, right-wing extremists” “pull a gun and threaten violence?”

The writers at Salon apparently think it is very often.

But, are these justice-seeking ranchers really extremists? And, are they threatening violence? No and no. They are engaged in a peaceful protest, an act of civil disobedience which, if conducted by liberals, would be treated as a noble act of social justice.

Salon’s lead paragraph claimed that the ranchers “are protesting perceived overreach from the federal government.”

Except, of course, the federal overreach is far more than perceived. It is very, very real. The convicted ranchers have already served time for trumped-up charges.

Salon graciously declined to call them “terrorists,” preferring the term “separatists,” because of “the group’s refusal to acknowledge the federal government”

Except, of course, the so-called “separatists” want neither separation nor an emasculated federal government. They want a federal government which operates within the framework of the Constitution.

Salon then compared these white “separatists” “with black protesters and Occupy Wall Street.” Salon claimed that the encampments of “peaceful, unarmed [Occupy Wall Street] protesters” “were brutally dismantled by law enforcement. Police didn’t hesitate to use tear gas, rubber bullets and batons to clear them out.”

Except, of course, Occupy Wall Street activists were far from peaceful and it often took weeks for the government to respond. Indeed, OWS encampments occupied entire parks in the nation’s capital, and other U.S. cities, for months!

Salon also claimed, “Nor was there any hesitation to call in the National Guard on Black Lives Matter protesters in Baltimore. So far, the Malheur occupiers are meeting no such resistance.”

Except, of course, the Baltimore “protesters” were violent rioters and looters committing mayhem while Baltimore authorities actually dillydallied in seeking assistance, choosing instead to give them “space to destroy.” The rioters wanted to purge the city.[2] In contrast, the so-called “separatists” have harmed and threatened no one.

Having made a false equivalence while distorting the facts, Salon then pitched its message:

“This discrepancy is important. Peaceful, left-wing protesters are fair game for state violence. But when armed anti-government zealots seize federal property and promise to defend themselves, law enforcement takes time for tact, maybe even negotiation.”

Salon fabricated so-called “state violence” against allegedly “Peaceful, left-wing protesters.” The actual violence of Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter is uncontestable. Moreover, their violent rhetoric encourages more violence as they call for the assassination of their foes and the burning of cities. Their nihilistic sense of “justice” is the killing of those they hate.

In contrast, the “separatists,” as Salon calls them, are defending themselves from government overreach.

Salon concluded, “more important, we cannot reward white, right-wing extremists every time they pull a gun and threaten violence. And if there is bloodshed, there is real danger it will spread like the Hammonds’ own fire.”

If only Salon had the courage to challenge left-wing movements which really are violent! And what do we make of Leftists who want these “separatists” to be killed? Are Leftists really peaceful and supportive of the rule of law? Or are they selective in the law’s application?

Protester, Separatist, or Terrorist?

At least Salon did not call the ranchers “terrorists!” Others on the Left were not so sanguine.

As pointed out by Tammy Bruce, “No one’s at risk. There’s no one in the vicinity. They happen to have their firearms. That’s their lifestyle.” In contrast, “the 2011 takeover of Wisconsin’s capitol building by union activists resulted in millions of dollars in damages, yet no one considered referring to them as terrorists.” (Did you see the video at the time? Anarchy and wanton destruction!)

Alan Colmes, on the other hand, focused on race and ethnicity, claiming, “If you had Muslims here it would be called domestic terrorism,” apparently believing the white “separatists” should be called “terrorists.” In fact, Islamic terrorism is the terrorism threat endangering Americans today.[3]

The Left continues to be obsessed with the race of individuals,[4] rather than the nature of their actions. If whites or conservatives do it, it must be bad; if minorities or liberals do it, it must be good.

Justified Civil Disobedience

David French made some salient observations. Having analyzed the original court case, French observed, “What emerges is a picture of a federal agency that will use any means necessary, including abusing federal anti-terrorism statutes, to increase government landholdings.” It’s all about a land-grab by the government.

According to the ranchers, in the 1990s, “the government then began a campaign of harassment designed to force the family to sell its land, beginning with barricaded roads and arbitrarily revoked grazing permits and culminating in an absurd anti-terrorism prosecution based largely on two ‘arsons’ that began on private land but spread to the Refuge.”

French added, “There’s a clear argument that the government engaged in an overzealous, vindictive prosecution here. … To the outside observer, it appears the government has attempted to crush private homeowners and destroy their livelihood in a quest for even more land.”

Unlike Leftist protests this decade (think Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, various college campus protests), these ranchers are occupying “a vacant federal building in the middle of nowhere, and there is no reported threat to innocent bystanders.”

Yet, some on the Left want the federal government to crack down on the ranchers with “shoot to kill” orders because they are white conservatives who do not fit the liberal narrative for social justice activists.

French concluded: “Yet now they’re off to prison once again – not because they had to go or because they harmed any other person but because the federal government has pursued them like a pack of wolves. They are victims of an all-too-common injustice. Ranchers and other landowners across the country find themselves chafing under the thumb of an indifferent and even oppressive federal government. Now is the time for peaceful protest. If it gets the public to pay attention, it won’t have been in vain.”

Are these ranchers “right-wing extremists” and “terrorists” as the Left would have you believe? Or are they simply American citizens seeking justice from a tyrannical government through peaceful civil disobedience?

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Guilty of Being White” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-17.

[2]               See “Baltimore ‘Purged’” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8S.

[3]               See “Willful Blindness to Reality” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-c9.

[4]               See “Identity Politics Is the Problem” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1l.

Commonsense Guns Laws

President Obama and the Left have recently called for “commonsense gun control laws.” They are right about the need for “commonsense” but wrong about the laws to be enacted.

The operative words in their mantra – “gun control” – reveal their intent and the heart of the problem: they reject “criminal control” laws (which would curb most gun violence) and they refuse to address the mental illness (which animates mass shootings).

GunLaws

What would Commonsense Gun Laws (not “gun control”) look like? Well, the exact opposite of what Barack Obama wants.

Here are a few areas where legislation and implementation of policies would immediately make America safer:

Eliminate gun-free zones. Virtually every mass shooting has taken place in a gun-free zone precisely because the killers knew they could maximize damage while minimizing risk. Federal buildings, banks, convention centers, and other venues have armed security forces which deter crime and prevent mass shootings. Why are politicians and the wealthy protected by armed security forces, but most Americans (even our children) unprotected and told to run for their lives if a madman targets them?

Expand private ownership of guns by law-abiding citizens. Make it easier for citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights and to thereby protect themselves, their families, and their local communities. Expanding the pool of law-abiding citizens who own guns makes it harder for criminals to do their own thing. As noted by National Review, “The number of guns in the United States has increased by 62% since 1994 but gun violence has decreased by 49% since 1993.”

Increase concealed-carry permits for law-abiding citizens. An armed populace is a deterrent to crime. When criminals don’t know who might be armed, they exercise far greater restraint in their criminal activities.

Stop coddling criminals. Giving criminals and rioters “space” to commit violence is lunacy. Providing politically correct rationalizations for criminal behavior encourages more criminal behavior. Releasing violent criminals in the interests of “fairness” endangers the American people. Get back to basics: If you do the crime, then you do the time.

Robustly address mental illness in America. Mental illness (not guns) is the root cause of most mass shootings.

Deport violent immigrants and illegal aliens. Violent crime by immigrants and illegal aliens is escalating. If they are unwilling to abide by our laws, then they should not enjoy the benefits of living in America. The first duty of government is to protect its citizens.

Reclaim the culture. This will be the hardest task of all. It requires restoring God and America to their proper places in the public school system and higher education, returning to traditional values and respect for our Judeo-Christian, Western Civilization heritage, and championing adherence to the Constitution. (Much of this is cultural, not legislative.)

The Great Society, victim culture (grievance culture), and growing sense of entitlement in primarily urban communities has engendered a culture of violence. Moreover, a culture which reveres cop-killers and promotes killing cops is dysfunctional to its core.

A culture which claims only black lives (and only those killed by white cops) matter, while all others do not, is a thoroughly bankrupt culture.

A culture which defends Planned Parenthood’s grotesque butchery while equating Southerners with Nazis – and gun owners as evil incarnate – needs rescuing.

A culture which tramples on the American flag and finds fault with everything American is suicidal.

The Left would have us do more of the same – extend the ever-expanding welfare state, subordinate local and state control to an all-powerful federal government, and escalate the demise of our American culture begun by the Countercultural Revolution of the Sixties.

Commonsense Gun Laws are indeed commonsense, but they are in opposition to the Left’s agenda of fundamentally transforming America. Most Americans want to restore American greatness and preserve (and expand) liberty, including adherence to the letter and the spirit of the Second Amendment.

Will the Constitution survive? Not if the Left succeeds in stripping it of its power.

Update: Like Socialism, gun control never works (unless, by “works,” one means limiting liberty and growing government). The following four charts demonstrate the fallacy of gun control logic.

imageedit_1447_2367824908

newgunchart.jpg

12079155_10156233379385093_7673665897653919283_n

fbicrime

Reclaiming America!

(every day of the year)

Dateline: May 5, 2015, Everywhere, USA

“God Bless America!”

America-bashers have long abused her flag, the symbol of the object of their hatred. Flag-burning, not surprisingly, is almost exclusively a left-wing thing.

“Protestors” burn, mutilate, and step on the American flag with impunity and with neither regard nor respect for that symbol of American freedom. We have reached a tipping point where the flag can be desecrated in the most despicable manner but it cannot be displayed in a respectful manner.

ReclaimUSA

Such is the state of America today.

American Flag is “Disruptive” and “Offensive”

The Supreme Court recently refused to review a case in which a California school banned “students from wearing American flag t-shirts for fear of the garments being ‘disruptive.’”

Critics contend that the “Ninth Circuit court ruling restricting free speech in this case affirms a troubling precedent that displays of patriotism in America can be prohibited.”

John W. Whitehead, President of the Rutherford Institute laments, “When public school students can’t wear an American flag on a t-shirt because it might be disruptive, then free speech as we’ve known it is dead.”

In contrast to prohibiting patriotic students from expressing American patriotism, the court permitted “students wearing Mexican flag colors and symbols.”

So, it’s OK for the Left to use the flag to denigrate America, but verboten for the Right to celebrate America with the flag?

Additional anecdotal evidence abounds.

A U.S. Marine combat veteran had been told to take down the American flag he flies outside his condominium in McLean.”

Marine veteran Paolo Advincula was denied permission to fly the flag “because it’s a community filled with international residents and it might offend the residents that can’t fly their own flag.” As Advincula expressed it, “To me being a veteran, every day is a holiday in this country, that’s why I choose to fly my flag every day.”

Julia Lease has flown an American flag outside her Ohio residence for the past 36 years, but now she’s being told to take down Old Glory.” No reasons were given by the apartment complex.

In Santee, California, Steve Roberts was denied permission to “display the American flag inside his apartment window.” Roberts explains, “t’s just wrong; you can’t tell someone what they can and cannot have displayed inside their own place and it’s the American flag in America.”

In Virginia, Sheriff Bill Watson was instructed “by a group of judges to remove an American flag from the lobby of a courthouse that was donated by the Portsmouth Fire Department.” Watson said, “I just can’t believe that they don’t want to display the American flag in a courthouse, I mean that’s the most asinine thing I’ve ever heard in my life.”

Sheriff Watson continues to defend the flag, saying, “You can quote me on this, ‘God bless America. Let the flags fly!’”

Vietnamese-American Duy Tran was instructed by his apartment manager to remove the flag from his balcony because it posed a “threat to the Muslim community.” Tran was apoplectic, saying, “I have friends that died for this country.”

At San Diego State University, Brad Smith was instructed to remove his flag from his balcony. According to Smith, “We were then told that it was for political reasons and that the flag could offend foreign people that live here, foreign exchange students.” Smith also “had friends and family fight to defend that flag.”

Rioters in Baltimore tried to burn the American flag and succeeded in replacing it with a black-and-white flag at City Hall.[1]

University of California Irvine

In March, “the University of California Irvine student government voted” to ban the American flag from the campus lobby. Why? In the name of “cultural inclusivity.”

This is reminiscent of multiculturalism, which celebrates every culture except Western Civilization and exalts every nation but America.[2]

Their rationale: “The American flag has been flown in instances of colonialism and imperialism. There were people who were like, ‘the flag triggers me’ – that was their exact wording, too.”

These students also assert that the American flag is “offensive to illegal aliens.”[3]

If so, then why are they here? And, if they are illegal aliens, why are they still here?[4]

Valdosta State University

Real Americans take the American flag seriously. We all need to be vigilant.

Air Force veteran Michelle Manhart defended the flag from protestors at Valdosta State University in Georgia. Manhart explained, “I did not want anything like this, but I got a call from a student who told me that the flag was on the ground, and they were walking on it. I was just going over there to pick up the flag off the ground. I don’t know what their cause is, but I went to pick it up because it doesn’t deserve to be on the ground.”

She added, “I saw what was happening, and I couldn’t believe nothing was being done about it. In my head I kept seeing all the caskets of our service members. It was like they were walking on their caskets. It hurt me so much. I couldn’t let it go on.”

A pro-American flag rally in April shutdown the campus. Hundreds of protestors demonstrated “their support for the American flag”

Flying the American Flag

Please spread the word. The Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005 “makes it illegal for an HOA [Home Owners’ Association] to restrict owners from displaying a U.S. flag.”

It clearly states: “A condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association may not adopt or enforce any policy, or enter into any agreement, that would restrict or prevent an association member from displaying the U.S. flag on residential property.”

In other positive news, Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI) has introduced legislation to “amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prohibit an institution from receiving federal funds if it bans the display of a flag on campus.”

America is under assault in many arenas, from terrorists within[5] and without,[6] to ideological battles among Americans. The American flag – above all other issues – represents a demarcation line between differing worldviews, perspectives, and goals.

The American flag is a symbol of all that is right (or wrong) with America, depending on one’s perspective.

Let us be victorious in keeping our flag held high.

Remember the words of the Star Spangled Banner: “O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave o’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?”

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Baltimore ‘Purged’” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8S.

[2]               See “Obama’s America – Fundamentally Flawed” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1h.

[3]               See “American Exceptionalism is in the Eye of the Beholder” at http://t.co/UDFIbFm5hr.

[4]               See “Word Police Targets Illegal Immigration” at http://t.co/cOxvPGoWKR.

[5]               See “Terror Strikes America – Again!” at http://t.co/nurkdy0GI6.

[6]               See “CVE: How to Submit to Jihad” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-7x.

Race Myths Exposed!

Ben Shapiro provided an excellent analysis of the Baltimore riots and debunked five liberal race myths. Shapiro writes, “But the riots should also demonstrate conclusively that leftist myths about what drives race riots are just that: myths.”

Myths

They are:

  • The “White Police” Myth.
  • The “Evil Police Chief” Myth.
  • The “Evil Mayor” Myth.
  • The “Disproportionate White Power Structure” Myth.
  • The “Not Enough Government” Myth.

Shapiro concludes:

“Modern race riots do not occur because of the supposed white superstructure or a legacy of governmental underservice. They occur because valueless rioters act in valueless ways. Baltimore is evidence that glossing over lack of values with leftist pabulum about social justice doesn’t stop cities from burning.”

Baltimore ‘Purged’

Yesterday, Baltimore epitomized a divided America. On Monday, we saw a tale of two cities evoking the worst and the best of times.

Baltimore was in “total chaos, total anarchy,” experiencing “madness,” “mayhem” and “pandemonium” while “citizens [were] under siege.” “Baltimore is now a war zone.”

Purged

Yet, everyday citizens within their besieged communities risked danger to combat the unfolding evil. Some members of the community acted as human shields to protect the police from the mob, while many marched in unity to qualm fears and elicit peace. One mother publicly berated her son who had joined the rioters.

Baltimore Is Not Ferguson

Many politicians and pundits have conflated the tragic death of Freddie Gray while in police custody with the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, using the false narrative of endemic white racism[1] as a starting point for discussion. The racial grievance industry has a vested interest in perpetuating racial hoaxes for fun and profit.[2]

Baltimore is not Ferguson. John Schindler tweeted: “Baltimore has a black mayor, a black police chief & almost half the cops are black. This ain’t Ferguson, folks.”

As we await the conclusions of the various investigations into Gray’s death, let us remember that every investigation into Brown’s death absolved the police.[3]

We don’t know, yet, exactly how Gray died, but we should know soon. When we do know, we can take appropriate action.

Another difference: the Brown family called for Ferguson to be burned, while the Gray family petitions for peace.

baltimore_riots_building_fire_042715_1430185960305_17432345_ver1.0_640_480

Baltimore Is Ferguson

In some ways, though, Baltimore is like Ferguson. Like so many great American cities, decades of Democrat rule have taken their toll upon a people governed by various liberal policies.[4] (Take Detroit, for example.)

The racial grievance industry continually promotes its propaganda which, most often, finds fertile ground in the inner cities. As a direct consequence of their false racial narratives, many turn to violence, as we saw in riots stretching from Ferguson to, now, Baltimore.

Apparently the residents of Baltimore have a long history of tension with the police. But, more crucially, there is a generational, not just racial, divide in that city. Teenagers, raised in the petri dish of the welfare state and multiculturalism, have been indoctrinated into believing that America owes them for slavery, which has been abolished for more than one-and-half centuries. Taught that they are victims, they feel entitled to redress. For them, the welfare state is just the beginning.

(What about reparations? Been there, done that: remember the Civil War and the War on Poverty? Time now to stop identity politics.)[5]

Baltimore, like so many urban communities, is beset by competing worldviews, ambitions, and goals. Some are firmly fixed in that distant past of racial grievances and the so-called legacy of slavery. They have adopted a victim mentality and inculcated a sense of entitlement. A feeling that America owes them.[6]

Democrat-controlled cities, failed liberal polices, dysfunctional families and subculture – these are the root causes of the violence we have seen erupt in cities across America.[7]  As a direct result of these policies, the black nuclear family has been decimated and black criminality is entrenched in many communities.

In contrast, others are rooted in a more traditional past, filled with faith and values, optimistic for the future, embracing freedom and personal responsibility. For them, doing the right thing is always the right thing to do, even when it hurts. They value the goodness and greatness of America.[8]

Then there are the anarchists and professional activists who simply seek to destroy or to profit from that destruction.

Balancing Chaos

Baltimore – despite ample warning – was unprepared for the riots. Charles Krauthammer called it “a total failure of leadership” at the local and state levels.

The Mayor of Baltimore followed the leadership style of President Obama[9] and treated the rioters as if they had a right to riot. Stephanie Rawlings-Blake acquiesced to rioters when she said, “We also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well. We worked very hard to keep that balance.”

She wanted to balance free speech rights and anarchy?

baltimore-burning-nypost

As Ian Tuttle at National Review observes, “The reaction of the head of the government of Baltimore to the subversion of that government by wanton lawbreaking was to say that citizens were free to violently subvert that government – just as long as they did it in approved areas.”

It was, as one commentator observed, a “complete capitulation” to the rioters and anarchists.

When will the Left learn that coddling criminals invites crime and that appeasement never works?[10] Ask Obama. (Oh, that’s right, he still hasn’t learned that lesson.)

Later, Mayor Rawlings-Blake spoke the obvious: “It’s idiotic to think that by destroying your city, you’re going to make life better for anybody.” But “making life better” isn’t the purpose of riots. Anarchy and destruction are its own rewards.

A “Protestor” by Any Other Name

But how can you solve the problem when you can’t even identify it? It was jarring to hear rioters referred to as “protestors,” even on Fox News.

CNN’s Marc Lamont Hill actually regards these violent thugs as “resisters.” His rationale, which blamed the police and not the rioters, is as follows:

“We also, I think, have to be very careful about the language that we use to talk about this. I’m not calling these people rioters. I’m calling these uprisings, and I think it’s an important distinction to make. This is not a riot, there have been uprisings in major cities and smaller cities around this country for the last year because of the state violence that’s been waged against black female and male bodies forever.”

Hill continued:

“… we do have to understand that resistance looks different ways to different people. And part of what it means to say ‘black lives matter,’ is to assert our right to have rage, and righteous rage, and righteous indignation in the face of state violence and extrajudicial killing. Freddie Gray is dead. That’s why the city is burning, and let’s make that clear, the city is not burning because of protesters. The city is burning because the police killed Freddie Gray.”

The old Leftist argument that one person’s terrorist is another person’s patriot continues to fly in the face of reality and moral truth. Although the Sixties’ counterculturalists and their ideological progeny deny the existence of absolute truth and moral absolutes, their denial fails to change the reality in which we all live.

Haven’t we learned anything from Obama? The President cannot even call Islamic terrorism what it is – terrorism motivated by Islam.[11]

No Justice! No Peace!

Pastor Jamal Bryant concluded his eulogy for Freddie Gray by leading the congregation is a chant: “No justice! No peace!”

That popular slogan, in fact, is flawed and often used to incite violence.[12]

And that violence has been racially tinged. CNN correspondent Miguel Marquez described the mob as “Very, very angry to see anybody driving in a rental car who was not African-American” and said that they were “very, very threatening to us.”

Marquez also observed the generational aspect of the mob: “It was a frightening scene. Young people, male and female, holding rocks, bricks, bottles, sticks.” Most rioters were local youth, not outside agitators

Taking Back the City

The words and actions of people on the ground, politicians, pundits, the clergy, and ordinary citizens inspire hope and confidence.

150427172444-07-baltimore-protests-0427-exlarge-169

Largely ignored by the mainstream media, “Over 100 clergy marched through the streets of Baltimore last night in an effort to end the violence, and they did it without riot shields and military vehicles.”

Clergy, community leaders, and neighbors sought to bring peace back to the community. A group of mature men marched through the desolated city landscape singing the gospel song, I Will Trust in the Lord, which contains the lyrics, “I’m Gonna Treat Everybody Right.”

Prospective GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson, a former Baltimore resident, urged, “parents, grandparents and guardians to please take control of your children and do not allow them to be exposed to the dangers of uncontrolled agitators on the streets.”

One commentator urged, “Adults need to step up and be adults.”

Let’s be adults. Let’s “purge” immaturity from our lives and our communities.

Update: “Total Cost of Baltimore Riots: $9 Million in Property Damage, Over 284 Businesses Harmed.”

Endnotes:

[1]               See “I’m Black: Truth Does Not Matter” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-5t.

[2]               See “Ann Coulter Takes on the Racial Grievance Industry” at http://t.co/YgG2rpgZIc.

[3]               See “Ferguson: Justice, Race, and Reason” at http://t.co/ksowFPCx62.

[4]               See “Ferguson in Flames” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-5I.

[5]               See “Identity Politics Is the Problem” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1l.

[6]               See “Obama’s America – Fundamentally Flawed” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1h.

[7]               See “Ferguson in Flames” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-5I.

[8]               See “American Exceptionalism is in the Eye of the Beholder” at http://t.co/UDFIbFm5hr.

[9]               See “Is Baghdad Burning? Obama’s Leadership Vacuum” at http://t.co/anrh8hfqtC.

[10]             See “CVE: How to Submit to Jihad” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-7x.

[11]             This ultimately leads to Obama’s ludicrous proposition that poverty, not religious fanaticism, is the real reason jihadists behead infidels. See “Root of Evil: Let’s Put ISIS on Welfare” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-7s.

[12]             See “Propaganda Kills” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-6n.