A Replacement of Population is Taking Place in Europe
First, it was the Hungarian route. Then it was the Balkan route. Now Italy is the epicenter of this demographic earthquake, and it has become Europe's soft underbelly as hundreds of thousands of migrants arrive.
With nearly 10,000 arrivals in one recent three-day period, the number of migrants in 2017 exceeded 60,000 -- 48% more than the same period last year, when they were 40,000. Over Easter weekend a record 8,000 migrants were rescued in the Mediterranean and brought to Italy. And that is just the tip of the iceberg: during the summer, the number of arrivals from Libya will only increase.
A wooden boat carrying migrants waits to be escorted to the Topaz Responder vessel, as members of the Migrant Offshore Aid Station make a rescue at sea on November 21, 2016 in Pozzollo, Italy. (Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)
A replacement of population is under way in Italy. But if you open the mainstream newspapers, you barely find these figures. No television station has dedicated any time to what is happening. No criticism is allowed. The invasion is considered a done deal.
In 2016, 176,554 migrants landed in Italy -- an eight-fold increase since 2014. In 2015, there were 103,792. In 2014, there were 66,066. In 2013, there were just 22,118. In the last four years, 427,000 migrants reached Italy. In only the first five months of this year, 2017, Italy received 10% of the total number of migrants of the last four years.
There are days when the Italian navy and coast guard rescue 1,700 migrants in 24 hours. The country is exhausted. There are Italian villages where one-tenth of the population is already made up of new migrants. We are talking about small towns of 220 residents and 40 migrants.
One of the major aspects of this demographic revolution is that it is taking place in a country which is dramatically aging. According with a new report from the Italian Office of Statistics, Italy's population will fall to 53.7 million in half a century -- a loss of seven million people. Italy, which has one of the world's lowest fertility rates, will lose between 600,000 to 800,000 citizens every year. Immigrants will number more than 14 million, about one-fourth of the total population. But in the most pessimistic scenario, the Italian population could drop to 46 million, a loss of 14 million people.
In 2050, a third of Italy's population will be made up of foreigners, according to a UN report, "Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Decline and Aging Populations", which designs a cultural melting-pot that could explode in cultural and social tensions. The level of arrivals will fall from 300,000 to 270,000 individuals per year by 2065; during the same period, it is expected that 14.4 million people will arrive. Added to the more than five million immigrants currently in Italy, 37% of the population is expected to be foreigners: more than one out of every three inhabitants.
In addition, the humanitarian-aid system has been hit by new scandals. "The investigative hypothesis to be verified is that subjects linked to ISIS act as logistical support to migration flows", was a warning just delivered in front of the Schengen Committee, to the Italian anti-mafia and counterterrorism prosecutor, Franco Roberti. There are now judges investigating the connection between the migrants' smugglers in North Africa and the Italian NGOs rescuing them in the Mediterranean. People-smugglers bring the migrants to the NGOs' ships, which then reach Italian seaports. Another legal enquiry has been opened about the mafia's economic interests in managing the migrants after their arrival.
Only 2.65 percent of those migrants who arrived in Italy were granted asylum as genuine refugees, according to the United Nations. The other people are apparently not fleeing wars and genocide. Yet, despite all this evidence, one cannot compare the migrants to the Jews fleeing Nazism. Pope Francis, for example, recently compared the migrants' centers to Nazi "concentration camps". One wonders where are the gas chambers, medical "experiments," crematoria, slave labor, forced marches and firing squads. Italian newspapers are now running articles about the "Mediterranean Holocaust", comparing the migrants dead by trying to reach the southern of Italy to the Jews gassed in Auschwitz. Another journalist, Gad Lerner, to support the migrants, described their condition with the same word coined by the Nazis against the Jews: untermensch, inferior human beings. These comparisons are spread by the media for a precise reason: shutting down the debate.
To understand how shameful these comparisons are, we have to take a look at the cost of every migrant to Italy's treasury. Immigrants, once registered, receive a monthly income of 900 euros per month (30 euros per day for personal expenses). Another 900 euros go to the Italians who house them. And 600 euros are needed to cover insurance costs. Overall, every immigrant costs to Italy 2,400 euros a month. A policeman earns half of that sum. And a naval volunteer who saves the migrants receives a stipend of 900 euros a month. Were the Nazis so kind with their Jewish untermenschen?
The cost of migrants on Italy's public finances is already immense and it will destroy the possibility of any economic growth. "The overall impact on the Italian budget for migrant spending is currently quantified at 2.6 billion [euros] for 2015, expected to be 3.3 billion for 2016 and 4.2 for 2017, in a constant scenario", explains the Ministry of the Economy. If one wants to put this in proportion, these numbers give a clearer idea of how much Italy is spending in this crisis: in 2017, the government is spending 1.9 billion euros for pensions, but 4.2 billion euros for migrants, and 4.5 billion euros for the national housing plan against 4.2 billion euros for migrants.
The Italian cultural establishment is now totally focused on supporting this mass migration. The Italian film nominated at the Academy Awards last year is Fire at Sea, in which the main character is a doctor treating the migrants upon their arrival. Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi carried with him 27 DVDs of the film to a session of the European Council. Italy's commercial television channels produced many television programs about the migrants, such as "Lampedusa", from the name of the Italian island. 100,000 Italians even took the streets of Milan for a "rally of solidarity" with the migrants. What "solidarity" can there be if half a million people have been rescued by the Italian government and the whole country seems determined to open its doors to all of North Africa?
Winston Churchill was convinced that the Mediterranean was the "soft underbelly" of Hitler's Europe. It has now become the soft underbelly of Europe's transformation into Eurabia.
Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.
There is no moral imperative that this should have ever happened.ReplyDelete
There is no ethical obligation to allow it to continue.
There is no logistical impossibility in reversing it.
Arlanda Airport was used by close to 25 million passengers in 2016, with 19.4 million international passengers and 5.3 million domestic. Stockholm Arlanda Airport is the larger of Stockholm's two airports.ReplyDelete
Logistically, Sweden could reverse the immigration flow in a matter of a few months. France could renew itself in six months.
It is absurd that so many people that should know better accept the defeatism that there is nothing that can be done. It can and it should. It takes the will.ReplyDelete
Quit listening to the geldings around you.ReplyDelete
I freely admit that I am a catholic atheist, a non-apologist for Christianity, a European/American cultural supremacist.ReplyDelete
I welcomed the honor to put on a uniform and the duty to criticize my country when wrongly led by politicians. I can assure you, that there are more of us than there are of them. They are louder. They are wrong and we are right.
Righteous dude, Righteous!Delete
Profound dude, Profound!Delete
You're a Xenophobe.Delete
I'm better than you.
This 'Qoug' character reminds me of someone.Delete
But who ?
Can't quite place it....
But I wish he'd become a regular.
By the way, Happy 4th of July to you Quirk !Delete
I miss you.
And to all.
Canada Rules the World
(Until they are joined by China, Iran, Qatar and the World Court)
Google can be forced to pull results globally, Canada supreme court rules
Decision says country’s courts are able to operate ‘the way Google operates – globally’, but civil liberties advocates warn of censorship online.
Canadian courts can force Google to remove results worldwide, the country’s top court has ruled, in decision criticised by civil liberties groups that argue such a move sets a precedent for censorship on the internet.
In its 7-2 decision, Canada’s supreme court found that a court in the country can grant an injunction preventing conduct anywhere in the world when it is necessary to ensure the injunction’s effectiveness.
“The internet has no borders – its natural habitat is global,” the supreme court wrote in its judgment. “The only way to ensure that the interlocutory injunction attained its objective was to have it apply where Google operates – globally.“
Sharia Law is equivalent to The Bill of Rights.Delete
Ash tells us so.
We don't need no stinking First Amendment!
Google cannot appeal the supreme court ruling. If the company has evidence that complying with the order would force it to violate other countries’ laws, including interfering with freedom of expression, it can apply to the British Columbia court to alter the order, the supreme court said, noting Google had not made such an application.Delete
Google News New Improved Edition no longer scrolls on forever.ReplyDelete
One page only, interspersed with ads.
Find another search engine!
...it used to have scores or hundreds of pages, it didn't "scroll forever."Delete
Any chance Google can appeal to God to reverse a Canadian Supreme Court ruling ?ReplyDelete
If not, can God appeal to the Canadian Supreme Court to reverse its ruling ?
Shifting into reverse via Twitter -ReplyDelete
Vatican: On second thought, we’re backing Charlie Gard’s parents
Ed MorrisseyPosted at 3:31 pm on July 2, 2017
It’s a good second thought, although it comes well after many people wondered why it wasn’t the first thought. After the Pontifical Academy for Life stunned observers by implying that Charlie Gard’s parents should give up the fight to seek private care for a last shot at saving their son’s life, the Vatican released a statement today from Pope Francis that contradicts his own advisory panel. The pontiff stated that authorities should respect their desire to seek treatment, Crux’s Ines San Martin reports:
Wading directly into a charged moral and political debate in the UK, and also appearing to recalibrate an earlier statement from the head of his own Pontifical Academy for Life, Pope Francis on Sunday expressed hope that the desire of 10-month-old Charlie Gard’s parents “to accompany and care for their own child to the end” will be respected.
“The Holy Father follows with affection and commotion the situation of Charlie Gard, and expresses his own closeness to his parents,” reads a statement issued by Greg Burke, the pope’s spokesperson.
“He prays for them, wishing that their desire to accompany and care for their own child to the end will be respected.”
The pope’s message is aligned with his frequent denunciation of what he calls a “throw-away culture,” a term he uses to describe ways in which those society deems to lack value are discarded, such as unborn children, the disabled and the elderly.
Veteran Vatican reporter Francis X. Rocca translates it into a more explicit reference to “treat” the baby from the official Italian-language statement:
According to Collins’ online Italian dictionary, the first definition of curare is “to treat or to cure.” The usage for “care” is listed as curarsi di, a form of curare but a separate use. Given the care (pardon the pun) that the Vatican takes with precision of language, it seems much more likely that Francis intends to offer explicit support for continuing of care.
That creates a real conflict between Francis with the Academy. Three days ago, they issued a statement in which they emphasized that the parents would be well advised to “avoid aggressive medical procedures that are disproportionate to any expected results or excessively burdensome to the patient or the family.” The statement noted that the family’s wishes “must be heard and respected,” but that they needed to “understand the unique difficulty of their situation[.]” They included an implicit criticism of those supporting the family by warning of “accompanying risk of ideological or political manipulation, which is always to be avoided, or of media sensationalism, which can be sadly superficial.”
Sadly superficial sums up the criticisms of the Academy’s statement, and now it appears that the pontiff might agree with those. The first hints that something was afoot came on Friday, when the Pope issued an unusual late-day tweet that seemed to contradict the Vatican statement from the day before. When the director of the Vatican Press Office retweeted it with the hashtag #CharlieGard from both the English and Italian language accounts for Francis, it became clear that a change of direction was coming:.....
A tweet from the Pope 'trumps' a Vatican Statement !Delete
Trump: Greta Van Susteren fired for refusing MSNBC's 'Trump hate'ReplyDelete
BY MAX GREENWOOD - 07/01/17 09:27 AM EDT
President Trump accused MSNBC's parent company on Saturday of firing anchor Greta Van Susteren for refusing to go along with the network's negative coverage of him and his administration.
"Word is that @Greta Van Susteren was let go by her out of control bosses at @NBC & @Comcast because she refused to go along w/ 'Trump hate!'" Trump wrote on Twitter.
Van Susteren abruptly announced that she was "out at MSNBC" on Thursday, less than six months after joining the network. She had previously spent 14 years as a staple of Fox News conservative lineup.
When she moved to MSNBC, it was unclear how she would be received by the network's more liberal audience. But Van Susteren's ratings floundered in her first months on the air there, averaging one million viewers per night in June.
Trump's accusation on Saturday that she declined to comply with MSNBC's alleged trend of "Trump hate" was the second time in recent days that the president attacked the network.
He came under fire on Thursday after leveling a graphic and personal broadside against "Morning Joe" co-hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough, including accusing Brzezinski of having a face lift. Trump sent another tweet about the co-hosts on Saturday, saying they are "not bad people" but "their low rated show is dominated by their NBC bosses."
Van Susteren has used her own Twitter platform since the end of her contract to promote her new book, releasing in November, take suggestions on next steps from her followers, and promote a fund for Liberian children.
"Don't feel sorry for me, I am fine. Feel sorry for someone who loses a job and has no savings and no options," she tweeted Friday. "My contract was terminated and it was within their right to terminate it."
July 2, 2017ReplyDelete
Italy considering denying permission for migrant boats to dock
By Rick Moran
There's been another surge of illegal aliens flooding into Italy and the Italian government simply can't handle any more.
More than 12,000 people from Africa and the Middle East have crossed the Mediterranean to Italy in just the last 4 days and the unseaworthy, overloaded boats that make the journey are taxing the Italian navy and coast guard to the limit.
But Italy risks severe penalties from the EU for turning away the migrants.
“Setting off such high numbers of boats at the same time is extremely worrying,” EU border security official Fabrice Leggeri said in a statement.
“With this frequency and these numbers we can easily tell that, soon enough, we won’t be able to handle it any longer,” an Italian lawmaker told WaPo. “We risk reaching a point when we won’t be able to authorize any landing any longer, a dramatic situation.”
EU officials have pledged nearly 200 million U.S. dollars to Libya’s coastguard in an effort to counter migrant efforts. EU officials also reportedly hope that the Libyan government will be able to stop migrant smuggling networks on the ground in order to curb the flow, but little appears to be working in the near term.
If Italy shuts down its borders to the arrival of sea-borne migrants, it is likely to face heavy pushback from the the broader EU. The bloc sued member states Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic for refusing to accept the allotted number of refugee’s under an EU wide resettlement program. The action was initiated in the European Court of Justice and will likely impose a heavy fine on the three affected countries.
As Soren Kern points out, those Central and Eastern EU countries have stood up to Germany and said they will not abide by the resettlement agreement stuffed down their throats by Berlin. They claim the right to maintain their national character by limiting the number of foreigners who enter their countries.
The so-called infringement procedure, which authorizes the European Commission, the powerful executive arm of the European Union, to sue member states that are considered to be in breach of their obligations under EU law, could lead to massive financial penalties.
The dispute dates back to September 2015, when, at the height of Europe's migration crisis, EU member states narrowly voted to relocate 120,000 "refugees" from Italy and Greece to other parts of the bloc. This number was in addition to a July 2015 plan to redistribute 40,000 migrants from Italy and Greece.Delete
Of the 160,000 migrants to be "shared," nine countries in Central and Eastern Europe were ordered to take in around 15,000 migrants. Although the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia voted against the agreement, they were still required to comply.
Since then, several Central European EU member states have vehemently refused to accept their assigned quotas of migrants. Poland, for example, has a quota of 6,182 migrants, not one of whom has been admitted. The Czech Republic has a quota of 2,691 migrants, of whom only 12 have been taken. Hungary has a quota of 1,294, none of whom have been admitted.
In the EU as a whole, so far only around 20,000 migrants have been relocated (6,896 from Italy and 13,973 from Greece), according to the EU's latest relocation and resettlement report, published on June 13, 2017. Of the 28 EU member states, only Malta has taken in its full quota — 131 migrants.
Many so-called asylum seekers have refused to relocate to Central and Eastern Europe because the financial benefits there are not as generous as in France, Germany or Scandinavia. In addition, hundreds of migrants who have been relocated to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which rank among the poorest countries in the EU, have since fled to Germany and other wealthier countries in the bloc.
Meanwhile, the enforcers of European "unity" have sought to shame the Central European holdouts into compliance by appealing to nebulous concepts such as European "values" and "solidarity."
No wonder the EU is falling apart.
If Italy follows the lead of Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic in halting the flow of refugees, the burden will almost certainly fall on Greece, who already have their hands full with their own refugee crisis. Given the massive problems with the Greek economy, there is no way for them to physically care for and resettle tens of thousands of new migrants.
Elections in Europe have shown that the ordinary voter is fed up with the open door policies of Germany, France, and the Scandanavian countries and fear that the richer, more powerful nations will insist that the rest of the EU solve their migrant problems for them by forcing them to accept foreigners in numbers they simply can't handle. The European press has been fairly successful in demonizing those who wish to keep control of their borders by calling them "nationalists" and "extreme right." But even Chancellor Merkel of Germany has been forced to modify her immigration policies, indicating that hundreds of thousands of refugees will be sent back home. That policy took the wind out of the nationalist's sails and will probable assure her re-election.
But there are still millions of people in Africa and the Middle East waiting to make the dangerous crossing for a chance at a western style life with all the government benefits that entails.
Eventually, even Germany will have to close the door.
‘WITCH HUNT’ TRIED TO TAKE DOWN ANOTHER PRESIDENT IN THE 1950SReplyDelete
July 01, 2017 at 7:10 pm | By FRANK MIELE
What a difference 65 years makes — NOT!
The “witch hunt” under way in Washington, D.C., where every flag-waving liberal in Washington, D.C., is looking for Russian “collusion” throughout the Trump administration, is not exactly new.
In fact, it was another Republican who was the subject of a similar witch hunt in 1952 (and throughout his two terms as president). Dwight D. Eisenhower, the five-star general who was Allied commander in Europe during World War II, was targeted both by Democrats and by fellow Republicans for being too cozy with communists.
I know it’s hard for liberals to see themselves playing the part of red-hunting Sen. Joseph McCarthy, but the facts speak for themselves, and just as McCarthy loved to grab headlines with outrageous allegations he couldn’t always prove, so too do the Democrats in Congress seem to have a penchant for trying to destroy lives with nary a hint of evidence.
It wasn’t just McCarthy who was gunning for Eisenhower though; there was a whole movement of people inside and outside the government who were after him. His Democratic opponents didn’t necessarily repeat the communist smears directly, but they came awfully close.
In 1952, the Democratic candidate, Adlai Stevenson, said of Ike and his allies, “They are apparently willing even today to let Europe collapse. But something more than blustering words is necessary to block the Kremlin plan for world dominion.”
Kind of reminiscent of the attack on Trump for his insistence that our NATO partners carry their own weight (and honor their own commitment!) as we face off against Russia in the 21st century.
Even President Truman, who in 1948 asked Eisenhower to run for president (with Truman demoting himself to vice president), could not tolerate the Republican version of Eisenhower when he ran against Stevenson.
In a visit to Cumberland, Maryland, on Oct. 23, 1952, Truman lashed out at Republicans, including Eisenhower:
“Today, freedom of thought and freedom of speech are under attack in our country. They are being attacked by the planned and deliberate use of lies, slanders and fear. A little group of people are using these weapons, on a wide scale, in an attempt to attain public office. They want to make it dangerous for anyone to express opinions different from theirs. They try to destroy the reputation of any man in public or private life who dares to stand up and oppose them.”
Truman referred to the “despicable ‘back street’ type of campaign, which usually, if exposed in time, backfires.” He said that type of smear campaign was “of a form and pattern designed to undermine and destroy the public faith and confidence in the basic American loyalty of a well-known figure.”Delete
He was referring to the McCarthy-assisted campaign for Senate in Maryland in 1950, in which Democrats were attacked by Republicans for suspicions about their loyalty, but I have read no better assessment of what Democrats have tried to do to President Trump in raising the specter of “Russian collusion.” The goal is to “undermine and destroy the public faith” in the president, is it not?
The fact of the matter is that the campaign of 1952 and the succeeding years of Eisenhower’s two terms as president were replete with many lessons for us that we have failed to learn.
First of all, the vitriol of that campaign far exceeded anything we heard in 2016. And it wasn’t just Truman throwing verbal bombs. Earlier in October 1952, Eisenhower unloaded on both Truman and Stevenson while campaigning in Sacramento, declaring that they were talking “like the unintelligent people they apparently are.” Not surprising he would take that tack since the day before, Truman had told a crowd in Colorado that Eisenhower had “betrayed every principle about our foreign policy and our national defense that I thought he believed in.”
The Oil City (Pennsylvania) Derrick editorialized that Truman’s “whistle-stop smear” campaign is “the cheapest and frowziest act of attempted character assassination in the political history of his country,” bewailing the fact that Truman dared to suggest that Eisenhower had underestimated the post-war threat of communism and the Soviet Union.
As for Stevenson, the professorial Democrat, he questioned whether Eisenhower would be able to find the communists who had infiltrated the federal government.
“I think we are entitled to ask, ‘Is the Republican candidate seriously interested in trying to root communists out of the government or is he only interested in scaring the American people to get the old guard in?”
Obviously, the credibility of the pundits who constantly evoke the supposedly unprecedented brash talk of Donald Trump as a candidate is hovering near zero. The problem is trying to get pundits and reporters to lower their snooty noses out of the air and into a history book — a task that may be well nigh impossible in our pseudo-literate society.
So, besides the fact that one of our nation’s key allies in World War II was Soviet Russia (led by mass murderer Josef Stalin), what exactly led people to think that war hero Eisenhower was soft on communism? Trust me, the evidence was no stronger than what has been trotted out against Trump.Delete
An advertisement in the Walla Walla (Washington) Union-Bulletin two days before the 1952 election conceded (tongue in cheek?) that “Eisenhower is not a communist,” but then excoriated him for cozying up to communists while he was president of Columbia University (yes, Republicans were still allowed to head up Ivy League colleges then!).
Turns out that in 1948, Eisenhower had accepted a $30,000 grant from the communist Polish government to establish a chair of Polish Studies at Columbia. Through 1952, the chair was occupied by Dr. Manfred Kridl, who was identified as a communist.
The ad informed its readers that “The National Council for American Education stated that: ‘In our opinion President Eisenhower performed for Columbia and himself a disservice when he accepted the Communist cash. Only a very naive person could think that Soviet-dominated countries have any purpose in endowing these chairs except to propagandize for their ideologies.’”
Eisenhower’s connection to communists was, if anything, much more direct and obvious than Trump’s connection to Russians, but — let’s face it — both “scandals” are — in the words of CNN’s Van Jones— “just a big nothing burger.”
Frank Miele is managing editor of the Daily Inter Lake in Kalispell, Montana. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The former US president said some countries had adopted “an aggressive kind of nationalism” and “increased resentment of minority groups”, in a speech in Indonesia on Saturday that could be seen as a commentary on the US as well as Indonesia.ReplyDelete
“It’s been clear for a while that the world is at a crossroads. At an inflection point,” Obama said, telling a Jakarta crowd stories of how much the capital had improved since he lived there as a child.
But he said that increased prosperity had been accompanied by new global problems, adding that as the world confronts issues ranging from inequality to terrorism, some countries – both developed and less developed – had adopted a more aggressive and isolationist stance.
“If we don’t stand up for tolerance and moderation and respect for others, if we begin to doubt ourselves and all that we have accomplished, then much of the progress that we have made will not continue,” he said.
“What we will see is more and more people arguing against democracy, we will see more and more people who are looking to restrict freedom of the press, and we’ll see more intolerance, more tribal divisions, more ethnic divisions, and religious divisions and more violence,” Obama asserted.
This place sucks!Delete
Trump is a MegaDick.
How President Trump’s Tweet about Morning Joe Will Destroy CivilizationReplyDelete
Here’s a link to my Periscope video explaining how President Trump’s mean tweets about Morning Joe will destroy everything you love. Wake up, people! It’s common sense! Tweets kill!
On a totally unrelated topic, I have confirmed that 30% of the public can’t identify a joke without the help of a service animal.
You might enjoy reading my book because service animals are furry.
I’m also on…
Twitter (includes Periscope): @scottadamssays
YouTube: At this link.
Facebook Official Page: fb.me/ScottAdamsOfficial
Scott assures me he was not thinking about Ash, Quirk, or anyone in the MSM.Delete
He wants them all to know that The Pellets are Excellent, however.Delete
I've had days like that with my family.
HocusLocus ->Flamingo Phil •Delete
I stole your image and posted it as my own avatar to hundreds of sites and now I have my mother trapped in the basement posting my fake comments!
I make over $860/hr and can now afford another mother!
Team Leader, but nobody follows suggestions, much less orders, Team Leader with no authority....Delete
:) heh makes me chuckle that one
End of Civilization:Delete
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
Trump is a mere sidekick compared to "Give 'em hell, Harry" -Delete
July 2, 2017
If you think Trump’s tweets are ‘unprecedented,’ you don't know about Harry Truman
By Mike Razar
Harry Truman is one of the few modern presidents seemingly liked by both sides. A few months ago, President Trump was excoriated for his "unprecedented" tweet to Nordstrom's concerning their shabby treatment of Ivanka. Now, after a tweet about Mika and Joe of Morning Joe, he is again being attacked by seemingly the whole world.
Recall the following letter from Truman to the music critic of the Washington Post. Maybe President Trump he is just channeling Harry. This famous letter just cannot be reprinted too often.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Dec. 6, 1950
I've just read your lousy review of Margaret's concert. I've come to the conclusion that you are an "eight ulcer man on four ulcer pay."
It seems to me that you are a frustrated old man who wishes he could have been successful. When you write such poppy-cock as was in the back section of the paper you work for it shows conclusively that you're off the beam and at least four of your ulcers are at work.
Some day I hope to meet you. When that happens you'll need a new nose, a lot of beefsteak for black eyes, and perhaps a supporter below!
Pegler, a gutter snipe, is a gentleman alongside you. I hope you'll accept that statement as a worse insult than a reflection on your ancestry.
Imagine if “Give ‘em Hell, Harry” had had a Twitter account! If you don’t know who journalist Westbrook Pegler was, it is worth a Google search or two. He once called Truman a “thin-lipped hater”. Our ancestors seemed more comfortable with the First Amendment than we do today. Not to mention cigars, scotch, and poker in the White House.
I’ll quit before I drown in nostalgia.
July 2, 2017ReplyDelete
How grateful are nations that get U.S. military assistance?
By Armando Simon
American financial, humanitarian and military help began in the second half of the 20th century. Throughout America’s generosity in helping other countries, there has been an underlying, unspoken assumption that there would be gratitude on the part of the recipients. And we do, indeed, see gratitude being expressed -- only to vanish in a very short period of time afterwards, sometimes to the point of hostility replacing the gratitude (this phenomenon is not limited to the United States; we see this occurring time and again between countries).
Let us look at several instances.
The atrocities in the Balkans in the 1990s centered in Bosnia, a Muslim country inside Europe, and they were principally carried out by Croatian and Serbian forces (some of them being paramilitary criminal gangsters). The United States finally intervened with NATO forces and the carnage ended. Now, at this point, one would expect that the Muslims, worldwide, would show an expression of gratitude and thanksgiving towards the United States. It was not forthcoming.
Switch to Iraq, and George W. Bush, who invades that country and deposes the dictator who had oppressed his people and who had poison-gassed many of his citizens; by doing so, he deposed the Sunni regime and liberated the oppressed Shiite population, who then became the rulers of the country, much to the dismay of Sunni Saudi Arabia, our ally in the region. Now, at this point, one would expect gratitude from the population of Iraq, certainly from the Shiite rulers in Iran, who could now go to Iraq on a pilgrimage where they could flog themselves in public. Not so. They continued with “America is the Great Satan” and “Death to America!”
Half a century earlier, the Nazis overran France whose soldiers had barely fired a shot (but who would later form a myth of a grandiose French Resistance -- much to the snickering of every other combatant country), but had been liberated by American, and British forces. They had even gone through the farce of having Charles de Gaulle’s miniscule Free French forces enter Paris as the liberator. After the war, the French, and de Gaulle in particular, were consistently hostile to both Britain and America, with that hostility expressed on numerous occasions (and earning the enduring contempt of both the British and Americans) during the second half of the 20th century.
The moral of these stories is that long-term damage to the United States is not balanced by a very brief, ephemeral, expression of gratitude. Expected gratitude should not enter into the equation when considering international matters by the United States (unfortunately, part of the problem is that Americans have an infantile craving to be liked by foreigners). The throwing away of billions of taxpayer dollars and the spilling of American blood for the sake of other countries should end once and for all.
Armando Simón is a retired college professor and is the author of A Cuban from Kansas, The U, and The Only Red Star I Liked Was a Starfish. They can be obtained at Amazon and Barnes and Noble.
I don't quite agree with all this put posted it anyway.
What won't Erna Solberg do to suck up to Muslims?
July 3, 2017 Bruce Bawer
In recent months, those of us who worry about Europe's ongoing Islamization have been paying more attention than usual to recent elections on the continent. Geert Wilders, in the Netherlands, and Marine le Pen, in France, didn't win, but at least they made some progress. In September, it'll be Norway's turn. Unfortunately, there's not much of a choice. There are several political parties in Norway, but the likelihood is that we'll end up with a Labor or Conservative prime minister. The Labor honcho is Jonas Gahr Støre, a globalist empty suit from Central Casting who's perfectly happy with Islam and high-level immigration. Heading up the Conservatives option is the current Prime Minister, Erna Solberg, whose position on these issues is virtually indistinguishable from Gahr Støre's. When it comes to Islam, she's always been a first-class dhimmi. As my friend Peder “Fjordman” Jensen recalled the other day, Erna, back in 2011, “stated that Muslims in Europe are now harassed just like Jews were in the 1930s, during the rise of the Nazis.”
She's even good at taqiyya: four years ago, she recounted a visit to an Oslo mosque whose members find it “difficult to be accepted in society.” What she failed to mention was that they were Ahmadi Muslims who, as I noted at the time, “are oppressed, persecuted, beaten, and even executed throughout much of the Islamic world, where they're considered infidels.” Far from having problems being accepted by Norwegians, they've found in Norway a refuge from the oppression and violence they endured in their homelands at the hands of mainstream Muslims Islam. But you won't hear that from Erna, for whom Muslims are always the victims and Norwegians the bad guys.....
POSTED ON JULY 1, 2017 BY JOHN HINDERAKER IN MEDIA BIASReplyDelete
ASSOCIATED PRESS: TELLING THE TRUTH IS “MISLEADING”
In Washington-speak, an increase that is less than some hypothetical alternative is a “cut.” Today’s Associated Press “fact check” insists that Washington’s favorite dodge be enthroned as the only way to talk about spending.
The AP criticizes this tweet by President Trump, which it concedes is entirely correct:
Tweet and Graph here.
The Democrats howled that the GOP Senate bill “slashes” Medicaid spending. Trump accurately pointed out that on the contrary, Medicaid spending will grow under the Senate plan. The AP admits this is true. Nevertheless, it headlines: “AP FACT CHECK: When a swoopy line on a chart misleads.”
President Donald Trump has been spread [sic] around a chart purportedly showing Medicaid spending rising under the Republican health legislation. According to the raw numbers, that’s true.
Then why the “purportedly”?
But an AP Fact Check finds that the bill would inflict deep cuts in the program by slowing Medicaid’s projected growth.
If you think that “slowing…projected growth” constitutes “inflict[ing] deep cuts,” you qualify as a D.C. Democrat. But for the AP to claim that it is “misleading” to point out that the “raw numbers” will rise is absurd.
I give the AP four Pinocchios.
Doug, you can bypass the Google newly modulated, pasteurized, homogenized, refined, gluten and information- free "News" page by typing in the subject on the general search and then choose the "news" button.ReplyDelete
Voila, the endless choice!
Sicilian Mafia reportedly declares war on Muslim refugees overrunning its turf - 7/3/17ReplyDelete
Did you know that the very word “Mafia” itself is believed to be derived from the word "Ma'afir," an Arabic word meaning “shelter” or “place of refuge”? More
No, I didn't.
July 3, 2017
Sicilian Mafia reportedly declares war on Muslim refugees overrunning its turf
By Thomas Lifson
Life imitates art, as the underworld rises up against a foreign enemy. That was the plot of Humphrey Bogart’s patriotic 1942 movie, All through the Night, in which, “Runyonesque Broadway gamblers turn patriotic when they stumble onto a cell of Nazi saboteurs,” as IMDB summarizes it. But the motives for the version underway in Sicily may be somewhat less nationalistic, as Jake Wallis Simon reports in the UK Daily Mail:
Mafia bosses have 'declared war' against migrants on the holiday paradise of Sicily as one thousand new arrivals pour on to the island every week.
The feared Cosa Nostra are desperate to maintain supremacy after African crime gangs arrived with the migrants - and they are engaged in a deadly turf war.
An innocent Gambian man was shot through the head by an assassin in broad daylight sparking fears of a wider bloodbath.
Scene of the asssination (credit: Roland Hoskins)
But the background of this turf war suggests larger stakes:
Mayor Leoluca Orlando told MailOnline: 'Palermo is no longer an Italian town. It is no longer European. You can walk in the city and feel like you’re in Istanbul or Beirut.'
Immigration to Italy soared by 90 per cent in the first three months of the year. The migrant population in Ballaró, the part of Palermo where the shooting took place, has risen from approximately five to 25 per cent since the migrant crisis began. (snip)
Mobsters claimed that police were targeting their activities while leaving African gangs alone.
Political correctness? Certainly, there is no shortage of that in EU. But I suspect fear and habit have as much or more to do with it. Police have a lot of information on Mafiosi, and probably little on the immigrants, whose native languages they don’t understand and who can hide within the huge immigrant communities of Palermo or other cities.
Sicily was conquered and ruled by Muslims for 75 years, more than a thousand years ago, and many of the obstacles to peace and prosperity in Sicily have something to do with resistance to that rule, and with the brutality of the re-conquest by Norman Crusaders. The very word “mafia” itself is believed to be derived from the word "Ma'afir" an Arabic word meaning “shelter” or “place of refuge.”
Stay tuned. Everything that is old is new again, as many in Islam continue to try to conquer Europe and further the global caliphate.
Justice Kennedy Tells October 2018 Clerkship Applicants He’s Considering Retirement, Right Before 2018 MidtermsReplyDelete
Posted on July 2, 2017 4:38 pm by Rick Hasen
Big news hiding in Nina Totenberg’s story on Justice Gorsuch voting 100% with Justice Thomas:
But it is unlikely that Kennedy will remain on the court for the full four years of the Trump presidency. While he long ago hired his law clerks for the coming term, he has not done so for the following term (beginning Oct. 2018), and has let applicants for those positions know he is considering retirement.
Kennedy’s position on the court is more than consequential. In the most hotly contested and closely divided cases, his vote often decides the outcome. With every passing day, it has become more clear that President Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, is probably even more conservative than the justice he replaced, Antonin Scalia.
This would put Justice Kennedy’s retirement right before the 2018 midterms, giving the Republican base reasons to turn out and keep the Senate with a Republican majority (already a strong possibility in 2018).
He’ll be able to go out on a high note, deciding the fate of partisan gerrymandering, gay rights, and who knows what else.
UPDATE: Republicans in the Senate would have a strategic decision to make: try to confirm a replacement before the elections, or use it as a tool to boost midterm turnout.