This Really Does Not Seem Right

On Monday, The New York Post reported that former President Obama visited No. 10 Downing Street for a meeting with British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.

President Obama is entitled to visit anyone he wants to, but considering that the current occupant of the White House does not seem to be firing on all cylinders and most of us believe that President Biden is not actually in charge, the visit seems odd.

The article reports:

The 44th president raised eyebrows Monday when he popped by No. 10 Downing Street for a meeting with British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.

Obama, 62, was tight-lipped about the reason for his surprise visit, but the British government said the sitdown had nothing to do with any royal family issues.

“The Prime Minister welcomed Barack Obama to No 10 this afternoon for an informal meeting, as part of the former President’s visit to London with the Obama Foundation,” a Downing Street spokesperson told The Post.

“They discussed a range of issues, including international affairs and AI.”

Obama, who founded his eponymous foundation along with wife Michelle in 2014, was seen entering Sunak’s home office via the back door at around 3 p.m. London time.

The former president remained for roughly one hour before departing alongside US Ambassador to the United Kingdom Jane Hartley, Sky News reported.

Reporters gathered outside No. 10 attempted to coax Obama over to take questions, to which the graying former leader responded, “I’m tempted” before walking back to a waiting motorcade.

Remember that one of the major players in the Russia Hoax used against President Trump was Christopher Steele, a British former intelligence officer with the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) from 1987 until his retirement in 2009, and that foreign intelligence services were used to create the Russia Hoax. As President Trump is currently leading in many of the Presidential polls (yes, I know it is very early), I wonder if another scandal is being planned to interfere with the November election. That is pure speculation, but it is unnerving to me to see former President Obama meeting with mucky-mucks in Britain.

The Real Purpose Of The Raid At Mar-a-Lago?

If you don’t have your conspiracy hat on, you are probably going to need it for this article.

An animal is most dangerous when it is cornered. On Tuesday, The New York Post posted an article about the illegal spying on President Trump during the presidential campaign of 2016 and afterward. Obviously, that was illegal, but it seems as if Democrats are not required to abide by laws.

The article reports:

The US Intelligence Community asked foreign spy agencies to surveil 26 associates of Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2016 election, which triggered the allegations that the former president’s campaign had been colluding with Russia, according to a report. 

Former CIA Director John Brennan identified and presented the targets to the US’s intelligence-sharing partners in the so-called “Five Eyes” agencies – the intelligence-gathering organizations in the US, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – according to a report published Monday on Michael Shellenberger’s Public Substack

The report by independent journalists Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi and Alex Gutentag has not been confirmed by The Post.

They cite multiple unnamed sources, including ones close to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, led by Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio). 

The article concludes:

Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was sentenced to probation in 2021 after admitting that he falsified an e-mail to renew a wiretap against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. 

​​Page had been wiretapped after intelligence sources suspected he might have been targeted by Russian spies. The wiretap, which was approved by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, was renewed several times after it was first granted.

Last March, Special Counsel John Durham concluded that the FBI investigation of Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia was “seriously flawed” and had no basis in evidence, after a four-year review of the probe. 

In response, the FBI said it had “implemented dozens of corrective actions” since the improper Trump probe and that “the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented” had the reforms been in place in 2016. 

In 2022, Taibbi and Shellenberger were involved in the publishing of the Twitter Files expose, which detailed how the social media giant’s previous management team sought to silence controversial voices and suppress news items such as The Post’s reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop.

Do you really believe all necessary corrective actions have been taken? What if there is more to this than meets the eye? What if documents detailing exactly who was involved in this illegal activity exist and the FBI does not know where they are? Would they logically be at Mar-a-Lago or in President Trump’s possession? Is it possible that was what the raid at Mar-a-Lago was really about since other Presidents have never been treated that way?

President Trump is a smart man. I suspect (and I would also suggest that the parties who broke the law spying suspect) that somewhere in a very secret place the documents showing the abuse of our justice system are in President Trump’s possession. I also think that those who engaged in the illegal spying will be brought to justice if President Trump is re-elected. That is why the deep state is working so hard to prevent President Trump from being our next President.

Things Are Heating Up (Unfortunately)

On Monday, The Blaze reported that The USS Mason, a U.S. destroyer, was fired on from Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen after responding to a distress call from a commercial vessel.

The article reports:

The USS Mason – which is an Arleigh-Burke class destroyer that is part of the Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group – responded to a distress call from a commercial vessel. The tanker – M/V Central Park – was 35 miles south of Yemen’s coast in the Gulf of Aden, according to the British military’s United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations.

The M/V Central Park sails under the Liberian flag and is managed by Zodiac Maritime, according to the Associated Press.

Zodiac Maritime said the tanker was carrying phosphoric acid. The crew of 22 sailors hail from Bulgaria, Georgia, India, the Philippines, Russia, Turkey, and Vietnam.

The M/V Central Park was under attack by unknown armed forces. Gunmen successfully boarded the commercial ship.

Once the USS Mason arrived, five gunmen debarked the ship and attempted to escape on a small boat. However, the USS Mason was able to track down the armed pirates and detain them. The crew of the commercial vessel were unharmed.

On Sunday, “two ballistic missiles were fired from Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen toward the general location of the USS Mason and M/V Central Park,” the U.S. military’s Central Command said in a statement.

CENTCOM said the ballistic missiles landed in the Gulf of Aden approximately ten nautical miles from the USS Mason and M/V Central Park.

The article notes:

“The Yemeni government has renewed its denunciation of the acts of maritime piracy carried out by the terrorist Houthi militias with the support of the Iranian regime, the most recent of which was the hijacking of the Central Park,” the statement read.

“Maritime domain security is essential to regional stability,” said Gen. Michael Erik Kurilla – United States CENTCOM commander. “We will continue to work with allies and partners to ensure the safety and security of international shipping lanes.”

Zodiac Maritime said, “We would like to thank the coalition forces who responded quickly, protecting assets in the area and upholding international maritime law.”

According to Aljazeera in 2019,  around one-sixth of the world’s oil moves through the strait – 17.2 million barrels per day.  Pirate activity anywhere in that area could create a major problem for industrial nations.

Avoiding A Possible Solution

When America cut her energy production, the price of oil and gas soared. When the price of oil and gas soared, the amount of money going into Russia increased dramatically. Russian gas and oil money are now being used to fund the invasion of Ukraine. So what is the best way to end that invasion? Cut off the money.

On Friday, One America News reported:

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson urged NATO leaders to take immediate action using the SWIFT international payments system to impact Russia’s President Putin and his regime, his office said following a call with NATO leaders on Friday.

Johnson urged leaders to take immediate action with SWIFT “to inflict maximum pain on President Putin and his regime,” his office said on Friday.

Not allowing Russia to use SWIFT would definitely stop the flow of money into Russia.

On Thursday, The Hill reported:

President Biden on Thursday defended maintaining Russia’s access to an international messaging system for banks despite pressure from Ukrainian leaders.

The U.S., United Kingdom and European Union on Thursday announced strict new penalties on the Russian economy, financial institutions and influential elites close to Russian President Vladimir Putin. But the Western allies did not bar Moscow from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), even after Ukrainian government officials urged them to do so Thursday morning.

“It is always an option, but right now that’s not the position that the rest of Europe wishes to take,” Biden told reporters after announcing new sanctions Thursday.

…The Biden administration also announced plans to impose sanctions on individuals and entities in Belarus, accusing the nation of supporting and facilitating Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Banks across the world use SWIFT to finalize transactions and transfers. Cutting Russia off from SWIFT would make it incredibly difficult for its banks to operate efficiently, but could also wreak economic havoc for European nations who depend on Russian oil and natural gas exports.

I would like to note that the European nations would not be dependent on Russian oil if the Biden administration had continued President Trump’s policy of American energy independence. There were a lot of bad decisions made by the Biden administration that led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Good News For Britain

Breitbart is reporting today:

The government’s bill implementing the withdrawal deal has passed through both Houses of Parliament, meaning the UK will finally be leaving the EU on January 31st, 2020.

On Wednesday evening, MPs in the House of Commons rejected the amendments to the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill proposed by the House of Lords.

…In a brief comment after the bill passed, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said: “Parliament has passed the Withdrawal Agreement Bill, meaning we will leave the EU on 31 January and move forwards as one United Kingdom.

“At times it felt like we would never cross the Brexit finish line, but we’ve done it.

“Now we can put the rancour and division of the past three years behind us and focus on delivering a bright, exciting future — with better hospitals and schools, safer streets and opportunity spread to every corner of our country.”

It has been 1,309 days since Britons voted to leave the European Union.

The article concludes:

Leaked plans for the narrative on Brexit Day seen by the Dail Mail reveal that Cabinet ministers will tell Britons that the nation can finally come together, saying: “We will mobilise the full breadth of our new freedoms – from encouraging technology and innovation, to signing new free trade deals around the world.

“As we maximise all the freedoms the British people voted to grasp, we must also work to heal divisions… and reunite our communities.”

Brexit Day will mark “the start of a new chapter in the history of our country, in which we come together and move forward united, unleashing the enormous potential of the British people”, the document said.

So what will this mean for Britain? I don’t claim to understand the British economy or be able to predict the future. However, a few things are obvious. The farther removed a government is from the people government, the less free the people are. Britain is regaining its national sovereignty and its economic freedom. I suspect there will be a rough patch for a bit, but I see the economy of Britain growing because of this move. One of the first things I believe will happen will be a trade deal with America that is designed to help both countries. Stay tuned.

Quietly Fighting The War On Child Pornography

NBC News is reporting today that federal agents have shut down the world’s “largest dark web child porn marketplace.”

The article reports:

The now-shuttered English-language site, called “Welcome to Video,” contained more than 200,000 unique videos or almost 8 terabytes of data showing sex acts involving children, toddlers and infants, according to the 18-page criminal indictment unsealed here Wednesday, and processed 7,300 Bitcoin transactions worth more than $730,000.

According to prosecutors, the vast online store was run by Jong Woo Son, a South Korean citizen currently serving an 18-month prison sentence in his home country after his conviction on charges related to child pornography. The site operated from June 2015 until it was seized and shut down by U.S. authorities in March 2018.

At a press conference Wednesday morning, U.S. officials said 337 suspected users of the site had been arrested worldwide to date.

…In addition to Son, more than 300 other suspects have been arrested in South Korea as of Wednesday, while still more suspects were identified in other countries, including the United Kingdom and the United States, including a Washington, D.C., man who was caught with the equivalent of 50 years worth of video footage he had downloaded.

The website ran solely on the dark web, a section of the internet that can only be accessed via a Tor browser, which is designed to protect users’ tracks online and obscure digital footprints. Users could purchase videos using cryptocurrency and an annual membership was priced at 0.03 bitcoins (at current exchange rates, around $300).

The article concludes:

When they announced the arrest of “Mr. A” in 2018, the South Korean police also said they had arrested a total of 156 South Koreans for either uploading or downloading child porn materials, which was unusual given that the site operated entirely in English.

“Most of the users were in their 20s, unmarried and white-collar office workers and first-time offenders, although some were ex-convicts of sexual crimes, including juvenile sex offenders. One possessed as many as 48,634 child porn [files],” the KNPA said.

Paul Henkins, head of the Americas region for the U.K.’s National Crime Agency, said at the Wednesday press conference that 18 investigations of alleged site users had yielded seven convictions, with one defendant sentenced to 22 years.

The case, Henkins said, demonstrates the “increase in the scale, severity and complexity of child sexual abuse offending.”

Hopefully the people arrested will spend the rest of their lives in prison.

This Doesn’t Help Our Foreign Relations

Those of us who follow “Q” have known for a while know that a large part the charges against President Trump were helped along with the aid of the intelligence apparatus of some of our international allies. There is a group of countries called “Five Eyes” (Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States) that shares intelligence in an effort to keep the world safe. Part of the understanding is that we are not supposed to spy on each other’s citizens. Unfortunately, information in the Mueller Report indicates that principle was violated in the creation of the Russian collusion hoax.

The Conservative Treehouse posted an article yesterday about the involvement of Australia.

The article reports:

In response to media inquiry and FOIA demands, the government of Australia formally admitted today to the role of High Commissioner Alexander Downer and his engagements with George Papadopoulos in 2016.  The timing coincides with the Mueller Report (released today), which states it was information about this engagement from Alexander Downer that opened the FBI counterintelligence investigation in July 2016.

Please follow the link above and read the entire article. It is complicated, but explains how domestic and foreign intelligence agencies were used in an attempt to influence an election and undermine a duly-elected President.

The article includes some comments made by Devin Nunes last year:

REPRESENTATIVE DEVIN NUNES: “That’s correct. So it took us a long time to actually get this, what’s called the “electronic communication”, as we know it now for your viewers, what it is it’s the original intelligence, original reasons that the counterintelligence was started.

Now this is really important to us because the counterintelligence investigation uses the tools of our intelligence services that are not supposed to be used on American citizens. And we’ve long wanted to know: what intelligence did you have that actually led to this investigation? So what we’ve found now, after the investigators have reviewed it, is that in fact there was no intelligence.

So we have a traditional partnership with what’s called the Five Eyes Agreement. Five Eyes Agreement involves our friends in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canada, and of course, us. So long time processes and procedures in place where we move intelligence across.

We are not supposed to spy on each others’ citizens. And it’s worked well. And it continues to work well. And we know it’s working well because there was no intelligence that passed through the Five Eyes channels to our government.

And that’s why we had to see that original communication. So now we’re trying to figure out, as you know, we are investigating the State Department, we think there’s some major irregularities in the State Department, and we’re trying to figure out how this information about Mr. Papadopoulos of all people who was supposedly meeting with some folks in London, how that made it over across into the FBI’s hands.” (Video Interview Link)

And that explains some of the reluctance to declassify the FISA warrant information–this was an international scheme. Some of our allies were working with the deep state to install Hillary Clinton as President. They should be ashamed.

Is Equal Justice Under The Law Possible?

The Daily Caller is reporting that Attorney General William Barr stated today that an inspector general’s investigation into whether the FBI abused the surveillance court process during the Russia probe will be completed by May or June.

The article states:

Barr also told lawmakers during a House Appropriations Committee hearing that he is reviewing how the FBI handled the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign that began in summer 2016.

…The FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation into Trump campaign advisers on July 31, 2016, purportedly based on information from the Australian government about Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos.

Alexander Downer, who then served as Australia’s top diplomat to the United Kingdom, claimed that Papadopoulos mentioned to him during a meeting in London on May 10, 2016 that Russia might release information on Hillary Clinton later in the campaign.

While the FBI has claimed its investigation did not begin until receiving the tip from Australia in late July 2016, a longtime FBI and CIA informant, Stefan Halper, made contact with Page in England earlier that month.

The entire Russian collusion investigation was a scam set up by the deep state during the Obama administration. The question is whether or not President Obama was in on the scheme.

The article notes that the entire basis for the FISA warrants was the rather questionable Steele Dossier, which was simply a piece of political opposition research:

The FBI relied heavily on the Democrat-funded Steele dossier to obtain four FISA warrants against Page. The dossier, authored by a former British spy, alleged that Page acted as a liaison between the Trump campaign and Kremlin during the 2016 campaign. Republicans have argued that the FBI should not have relied on the dossier since its allegations were unverified and because the document was opposition research funded by the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee.

If this investigation is not handled properly, we can expect political parties in power to use the force of the government against their political opponents in the future. Richard Nixon was impeached for far less. I hope Attorney General Barr has the courage to see this investigation to the end.

Good News From The United Kingdom

The Daily Caller is reporting today that Tommy Robinson has been released on bail. Tommy Robinson is the head of Pegida UK, an organization formed in response to the Islamization of Britain and Europe. He has been accused of hate speak as he has spoken out against what is happening in Britain and Europe. I would describe him as a bit edgy, but what he is saying is basically true. He was arrested in May of this year for filming Muslims who were on trial for ‘grooming’ young women. Subsequently, Robinson was placed in a prison with a large Muslim population. A fatwa was issued for his death, and many people feared for his safety. After his arrest, the British press was barred from reporting on the case. We need to remember that free speech is not protected in Britain.

The article at The Daily Caller reports:

Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett approved Robinson’s appeal “essentially because the process was flawed,” he said. Burnett allowed Robinson to be released on bail on the conditions that he would attend the rehearing and that he would not come within 400 meters (about 1,312 feet) of Leeds Court, where he was initially arrested for contempt of court.

News of Robinson’s release was trending worldwide on Twitter Wednesday, as his arrest sparked outrage from conservatives and free-speech activists across the globe. The day after his arrest on May 25, protests erupted around the world.

…Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon, was arrested for recording outside a court, reporting on a trial involving a gang of four Muslim men accused of grooming and raping a teenaged girl.

He was barred from reporting on the case under his prohibition after a previous contempt of court charge in 2017 and was charge with contempt of court again on May 25. The judge in the most recent contempt of court charge barred British media from reporting on Robinson for five days after his conviction. He was sentenced to 13 months in prison.

While he was serving his first two months in prison, before being released, Robinson’s supporters worried Muslims would hurt or try to kill him, given his strict stance on immigration from Muslim-majority countries.

Britain has had a problem with sexual abuse of teenage girls. The town of Rochdale was rocked by a scandal that sexual abuse by Muslim men had been going on for years, but authorities were reluctant to act out of fear of being called racist. (Story here)

It is good to know that Tommy Robinson is free. Hopefully he will remain free.

Remembering Who Our Friends Are

Yesterday Paul Mirengoff at Power Line posted an article about a recent foreign policy decision by President Trump.

The article reports:

On Wednesday, Josh Rogin of the Washington Post reported that the Trump administration has for the first time approved the commercial sale of Model M107A1 Sniper Systems, ammunition, and associated parts and accessories to Ukraine, a sale valued at $41.5 million. The Obama administration had refused to issue export licenses for lethal weapons.

Initial reports, including the Post’s, were that the sales to Ukraine would not encompass heavier weaponry such as Javelin anti-tank missiles. However, today the Post reports that Javelins will also be sold to Ukraine.

The article continues:

Russia denounced Trump’s decision on sales to Ukraine. Its Deputy Foreign Minister, Sergei Ryabkov, said the decision will only make the conflict more deadly and that Russia might be forced to respond. He also said the U.S. can no longer cast itself as a mediator, and is now “an accomplice in fueling the war.” Putin himself has warned that U.S. assistance would escalate the conflict.

In reality, Russia is behind the war. Moreover, mediation has been futile because, as Jenna Lifhits of the Weekly Standard points out, Russia has failed to implement the 2015 Minsk ceasefire agreement. It requires Russian-backed separatists to withdraw heavy weapons from the conflict’s front line and create a buffer zone.

The sale of weapons to Ukraine is a response to the failure of the 2015 cease-fire and to the fact that, according the Trump administration’s envoy for the Ukraine crisis, 2017 was the most violent year in the four year history of this conflict.

The sniper systems Trump approved for sale are needed to address a specific vulnerability of Ukrainian forces fighting Russian-backed separatists.

This is a really smart move on the part of the Trump administration.

As I reminded everyone in May 2015:

A deal was signed on February 5, 1994, by Bill Clinton, Boris Yeltsin, John Major and Leonid Kuchma—the then-leaders of the United States, Russia, United Kingdom and Ukraine—guaranteeing the security of Ukraine in exchange for the return of its ICBMs to Moscow’s control. The last SS-24 missiles moved from Ukrainian territory in June 1996, leaving Kiev defenseless against its nuclear-armed neighbor.

That deal, known as the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, was not a formal treaty but a diplomatic memorandum of understanding. Still, the terms couldn’t be clearer: Russia, the U.S. and U.K. agreed “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine…reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine.”

That agreement was broken by Russia and ignored by Britain and by the Obama administration. It is nice to see President Trump honoring it at least in part by supplying weapons to Ukraine.

The article at Power Line concludes:

The weapon sales can also plausibly be viewed as a means of gaining leverage if Russia wants seriously to negotiate a settlement in Ukraine. Putin has proposed that peacekeepers be deployed but, not surprisingly, there are major disagreements about how and where the peacekeepers would operate. The U.S. and Ukraine want peacekeepers deployed throughout the separatist-controlled regions stretching to the Ukraine-Russia border. Russia, not so much.

In any event, it’s clear that President Trump has moved boldly to advance Ukraine’s interests at the expense of Russia’s, to the displeasure of Putin. I don’t see how this move can be squared with the extreme anti-Trump rhetoric of the foolish Clapper and others who peddle a similarly hysterical line.

What Will Be The Impact Of This In Twenty Years?

Yesterday The U.K. Daily Mail reported that sixty percent of babies born in London are born to foreign mothers. That means six out of ten will be raised by people who have not been part of British culture. We need to think about what this means to the future of Britain.

The article explains some of the reasons for the high number of babies born to immigrants:

The new statistics on babies born to foreign-born mothers come after earlier figures from the ONS which showed that in some areas of London they account for more than three-quarters of births.

In the East London borough of Newham in 2014 more than three quarters of babies – 77 per cent – were born to mothers who were themselves born outside Britain.

In that year most of the foreign-born mothers who gave birth in the UK were from Poland, followed by Pakistan and India.

The 2014 figures showed immigrant mothers are more likely to be married than those born in Britain. Some 72 per cent of immigrant mothers were married that year, compared with 45 per cent of UK-born mothers. The ONS said this ‘reflects different expectations between cultures’.

The rise in the number of babies with foreign-born mothers has partly come because fertility rates among immigrants are higher than those of British-born women.

Although fertility rates among foreign-born women fell in 2015, an immigrant could expect to have 2.08 children. For UK-born women, the rate was 1.76.

 In the early days of the country of America, the population was made up of people who were not born here. Those immigrants formed the culture that eventually became the American culture. The shared values of those immigrants formed the basis of that culture–many had fled religious persecution–their faith was important to them and their freedom was important to them. They had a pioneering spirit that allowed them to journey through hardships for the chance to be free and reap the rewards of their efforts. America continued to take in immigrants, but screened them at Ellis Island to make sure they were willing to work and contribute to America. Originally there was no welfare system–an immigrant either worked hard and was successful or went home. Things have changed in America and in other places. Now immigrants are not necessarily encouraged to assimilate, learn the language, or work hard. The are not encouraged to become part of the culture or to help preserve the culture. When sixty percent of mothers in London are foreign born and may not be part of western culture, where will the country be in twenty years? Will Britain still be part of western civilization?

You Have To Fight For What You Believe–Even After The Vote

The U.K. Express posted an article today about Britain’s exit from the European Union. To put it mildly, the European Union is dragging its feet in allowing the exit of Britain.

The article reports:

The independent member of the European Parliament (MEP) lashed top EU officials for trying to “deny” Brexit with a vote claiming “no progress” had been made during the negotiations between the UK and Brussels.

During a debate in Strasbourg, Mr Woolfe said: “Abraham Lincoln once famously said ‘You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. But you can never fool all of the people all of the time.’ Well, the British people are no longer fooled that the EU wants to negotiate a fair Brexit agreement or even negotiate at all. 

“From Verhofstadt to Juncker, to Barnier and to Tusk, the message is clear: the EU will delay, damage and deny Brexit. 

“When President Tusk says the UK can’t have its cake and eat it, what he actually means is the EU wants its cake, our cake, the morning croissant, afternoon tea and finishing it with taking a pound of Britain’s economic flesh washed down with a glass of subsidised EU Chianti.”

Mr Woolfe comments came as the European Parliament prepared to vote on whether Brexit negotiations could move forward to discuss the future trade relationship between Britain and the EU27.

The “no progress” motion passed by 557 votes to 92, with 29 MEPs abstaining from the vote.

The former Ukip politician continued: “It’s clear the EU will not change its tune so it’s time for the Uk to walk away and end this charade.”

This should not come as a surprise to anyone. Globalists are not used to losing, and they have had a very bad year. Unfortunately, even though America elected a non-globalist President, he has not been totally sensitive to the cry of other countries wanting to be independent. President Trump has not supported Kurdish independence, saying it would bring instability to the region. Frankly, I think it would bring stability and encourage freedom. At any rate, there is something stirring in the world. Many people are tired of being ruled by a group of elites who want nothing more than to protect their own wealth and power. I wish Britain luck in exiting the European Union, but I don’t think it will be a simple process.

Learning From The Mistakes Of Others

The debate on single-payer healthcare in America has been going on for a while. ObamaCare was designed to fail and be a step in the direction of single payer. So how well does single-payer healthcare work?

On September 8, 2016, Investor’s Business Daily posted an article about nationalized healthcare in Britain. There were some serious warnings in the article about nationalized healthcare.

The article reported:

Before you embrace the idea (single-payer healthcare), you might want to look at what’s happening in Britain right now.

There, some hospitals are moving to ration care for those who are officially deemed obese — that is, anyone who has a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or more. Oh, and while they’re at it, they will also ration care for smokers, too.

Why? “To plug a funding black hole,” as the British Telegraph newspaper put it. Translation: Britain’s National Health Service faces such a serious financial crisis that it now has to deny care to some people, despite its claims of “universal care.” And who better to deny care for than two of the most despised groups in today’s modern society — those who are obese and smokers?

This new plan to bar overweight people and smokers from most surgery for up to a year is getting its first tryout in North Yorkshire. But, as Britain’s Royal College of Surgeons has warned, rationing will soon become the norm across Britain as the health care system deals with soaring costs and failing care delivery for its patients. And the impact will be broad: The Telegraph, working off population data, estimates more than half of Britain’s population will be considered obese in the coming decades.

The nightmare stories of bungled care and needlessly dying patients are already legion for the NHS, which is notorious for delivering substandard service to its patients.

The article explains the impact of ObamaCare on insurance companies:

The problem isn’t ObamaCare per se,” wrote Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor for the Clinton administration, in a blog post. “It lies in the structure of private markets for health insurance — which creates powerful incentives to avoid sick people and attract healthy ones. ObamaCare is just making this structural problem more obvious.”

This is a classic example of blaming the victim for your own crimes. Aetna takes a hit of nearly half a billion dollars from a system Reich’s leftist pals in the Democratic Party created, and then Reich blames insurers for greed.

The Democrats who wrote the ObamaCare law knew they would be destroying the private market for health care. But they don’t care. And they don’t care to learn from others, like Britain’s National Health Service, that have already gone down this dangerous path.

Americans would be very wise to heed Britain’s warning, and just say no to single-payer.

Good advice.

Immigration In Britain

Breitbart is reporting today on the impact immigration policies have had on the population of Britain.

The article reports:

A report by think tank Civitas says that the population of the United Kingdom is growing at a rate of more than 500,000 a year – the equivalent of a new town of about 10,000 people being created every week.

The article further notes that one in three babies born in Britain and Wales had at least one foreign parent.

So what caused this?

The article explains:

Blair (former prime minister Tony Blair) has been accused of presiding over a “silent conspiracy” to flood the UK with migrants whilst he was prime minster, ordering his ministers to not discuss the subject in public, with his government working to force the country to “see the benefit of a multicultural society”.

The Civitas report identifies EU enlargement, “with the admission of the countries of Eastern Europe”, as the second reason for population growth trends to change so rapidly.

Again, the arch-europhile’s New Labour government decided not to implement transitional immigration controls like the majority of other EU countries, with Blair admitting in 2017 that he had no idea how many people would migrate to Britain when the bloc expanded to include former Communist nations such as Poland.

Government policies have consequences. Britain is clearly in danger of losing its identity as a nation.

It All Comes Down To Perspective

Yesterday The U.K. Independent posted a story about some changes to British law that occurred this year.

The headline of the story is, “While you celebrate the third royal baby, remember all of the women in Britain who aren’t allowed a third child.” First of all, the headline is totally misleading–there is no law prohibiting a third child.

The article reports:

In April this year the Government reformed child tax credits, introducing what is commonly referred to as the “rape clause”. From now on, a woman will be unable to claim tax credits for any child after her first two unless she can demonstrate conception occurred “as a result of a sexual act which [she] didn’t or couldn’t consent to” or “at a time when [she was] in an abusive relationship, under ongoing control or coercion by the other parent of the child”. To claim this exemption, she must complete an eight-page “rape assessment” form, countersigned by a third party professional to whom she must disclose her assault. Continuing to live with the father of her child will render her ineligible for support.

So what the law actually does is say that there will be no tax credits for the third child unless extraordinary circumstances are involved–not that a person cannot have a third child. One wonders if the tax credit is significant enough to make a difference. In America, we get a tax deduction for each child, but that deduction in no way even approaches the cost of feeding, clothing, and housing that child for a year.

There is another interesting aspect of this law. In recent years, Britain has taken in a large number of Muslim refugees and immigrants who tend to have large families. One wonders what impact this law will have on the Muslim population. Does the two-child rule apply to each wife or to every wife of a Muslim man? Is polygamy now legal in Britain since they now have Sharia courts? These are also questions that may apply to this law?

In 2015, The Guardian reported:

The Muslim population of England and Wales is growing faster than the overall population, with a higher proportion of children and a lower ratio of elderly people, according to an analysis of official data.

One in three Muslims is under 15, compared with fewer than one in five overall. There are also fewer elderly Muslims, with 4% aged over 65, compared with 16% of the overall population.

In 2011, 2.71 million Muslims lived in England and Wales, compared with 1.55 million in 2001. There were also 77,000 Muslims in Scotland and 3,800 in Northern Ireland.

The Muslim Council of Britain’s (MCB) study of data from the 2011 census found that Muslims are still a small minority of the overall population – one in 20. This contrasts with popular perceptions held by Britons, who overstate the proportion of Muslims in the country by a factor of four, according to a recent survey by Ipsos Mori.

In September 2016, the U.K. Mail reported:

Mohammed is the most popular name for boys in England and Wales- but it doesn’t top the official list because there are so many different ways to spell it.

There were 7,361 children born last year called Mohammed, Muhammed, Mohammad or Mohamed, according to the Office for National Statistics, which would have made it the number one boys name if the variations were taken into account.

Demographics can change very quickly. I wonder if this law is an attempt to slow down that change.

The Consequences Of Uncontrolled Immigration

Immigration can be a very good thing. When people come to a country legally because they want to assimilate and contribute to the welfare of the country, that helps the country grow. However, when people choose not to assimilate, it creates problems in the present and in the future. London is experiencing some present problems that will probably lead to future problems.

The Gatestone Institute posted an article today about some recent statistics from London.

The article reports:

  • British multiculturalists are feeding Islamic fundamentalism. Muslims do not need to become the majority in the UK; they just need gradually to Islamize the most important cities. The change is already taking place.
  • British personalities keep opening the door to introducing Islamic sharia law. One of the leading British judges, Sir James Munby, said that Christianity no longer influences the courts and these must be multicultural, which means more Islamic. Rowan Williams, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, and Chief Justice Lord Phillips, also suggested that the English law should “incorporate” elements of sharia law.
  • British universities are also advancing Islamic law. The academic guidelines, “External speakers in higher education institutions”, provide that “orthodox religious groups” may separate men and women during events. At the Queen Mary University of London, women have had to use a separate entrance and were forced to sit in a room without being able to ask questions or raise their hands, just as in Riyadh or Tehran.

The British are quickly reaching (or may have already reached) a tipping point. I realize that Britain does not have a First Amendment that protects free speech, but do they realize that under Sharia Law the punishment for saying anything even slightly negative about Mohammad is jail or death? Do they understand that Sharia Law totally ends the rights of women? Will liberal women in England put up with this?

The article further reports:

Since 2001, 500 London churches of all denominations have been turned into private homes. During the same period, British mosques have been proliferating. Between 2012 and 2014, the proportion of Britons who identify themselves as Anglicans fell from 21% to 17%, a decrease of 1.7 million people, while, according to a survey conducted by the respected NatCen Social Research Institute, the number of Muslims has grown by almost a million. Churchgoers are declining at a rate that within a generation, their number will be three times lower than that of Muslims who go regularly to mosque on Friday.

Demographically, Britain has been acquiring an increasingly an Islamic face, in places such as Birmingham, Bradford, Derby, Dewsbury, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, Luton, Manchester, Sheffield, Waltham Forest and Tower Hamlets. In 2015, an analysis of the most common name in England showed it was Mohammed, including spelling variations such as Muhammad and Mohammad.

Most important cities have huge Muslim populations: Manchester (15.8%), Birmingham (21.8%) and Bradford (24.7%). In Birmingham, the police just dismantled a terrorist cell; there is also a greater probability that a child will be born into a Muslim family than into a Christian one. In Bradford and Leicester, half the children are Muslim. Muslims do not need to become the majority in the UK; they just need gradually to Islamize the most important cities. The change is already taking place. “Londonistan” is not a Muslim majority nightmare; it is a cultural, demographic and religious hybrid in which Christianity declines and Islam advances.

America, are you listening?

The Global Establishment Will Not Go Gently Into The Night

Breitbart posted an article today about a new wrinkle in Britain‘s attempt to leave the European Union.

The article reports:

The government must consult parliament before invoking Article 50, the High Court has ruled.

The court ruled that Prime Minister Theresa May does not have the authority to use the Royal Prerogative to invoke the EU divorce process.

It is noteworthy that the people of Britain voted to leave the European Union. Has the High Court decided that the vote of the British citizens does not mean anything?

The article further reports:

However, the government has said it will appeal the decision.

A spokesman said: “The Government is disappointed by the decision.

“The country voted to leave the European Union in a referendum approved by Act of Parliament. And the Government is determined to respect the result of the referendum.”

The Supreme Court will likely hear the case on 7 December.

UKIP’s interim leader Nigel Farage said:

“I worry that a betrayal may be near at hand. Last night at the Spectator Parliamentary Awards I had a distinct feeling that our political class, who were out in force, do not accept the 23rd of June Referendum result.

“I now fear that every attempt will be made to block or delay the triggering of Article 50. If this is so, they have no idea of the level of public anger they will provoke.”

Speaking on BBC Radio 5 Live, he added that he feared Britain was heading for a “half Brexit”, and warned he would return to frontline politics if Britain had not left the EU by 2019.

“We are heading for a half Brexit….  I’m becoming increasingly worried.

“I see MPs from all parties saying, oh well, actually we should stay part of the single market, we should continue with our daily financial contributions.

“I think we could be at the beginning, with this ruling, of a process where there is  deliberate, wilful attempt by our political class to betray 17.4 million voters.”

The political elite is entrenched worldwide. They have become a class of people dedicated to increasing their own wealth. In Britain, they have tied their fortunes to staying in the European Union; in America, they have tied their fortunes to the election of Hillary Clinton. The names are different, but the actions and goals are the same. Brexit was one of the few opportunities to put the brakes on their plans, and the British are going to have to fight to have their voices heard. In America, November 8 will determine whether Americans are ready to toss out the political elite.

I wish the Brits (and the Americans) luck.

Why None Of The Normal Rules Apply To The Current Election Cycle

Yesterday Nigel Farage posted an article at the U.K. Telegraph containing his observations on the current American election.

Mr. Farage shares his story and observations:

When I arrived at the Republican Party convention in Cleveland, Ohio, back in July, I was amazed at the reaction to me over the Brexit result. Normally we follow trends in America, not the other way round, but it was clear that many of the delegates saw Brexit as an aspiration for what they see as the Trump “revolution” against the Establishment. I met many others who were not delegates or political anoraks, who were also keen to talk about Brexit. A group of retired US Navy veterans told me we should have done it years ago. Others were less impressed and shouted at me in the streets. Indeed, this weekend while I was in St Louis, I received some proper abuse on the Washington University campus. 

…Like him or loathe him, Trump is not a part of the political elite and he most certainly is not constrained by political correctness. When I spoke at one of his rallies in Jackson, Mississippi, I saw a fanatical gathering of his fans who want to give the Establishment a good hiding. “We want our country back” works as a slogan here, too. The first signs of a political rebellion took the form of the Tea Party. The satirist Ian Hislop once described it as rather like Ukip – but with God and guns. They not only railed against the Washington elites, but made the link between big business, Wall Street banks and Washington politics. The same story is behind the growth of new parties across the whole of the European Union and was an important feature in voters’ minds in the UK this June.

Not only did JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs help to fund the Remain campaign but they increasingly give the appearance of owning a whole section of our political class. When Berlusconi was forced to resign as the Italian prime minister, he was replaced by the unelected Mario Monti, a Goldman Sachs man. 

…I met many people at the rally in Jackson, Mississippi, who had never voted in their lives. They may produce an upset similar to Brexit. It does not matter what the opinion polls, bookmakers or markets say, because these new voters are hard to measure. 

I do not see the Brexit result in isolation. Instead, I believe we are witnessing a popular uprising against failed politics on a global scale. People want to vote for candidates with personality, faults and all. It is the same in the UK, America and much of the rest of Europe. The little people have had enough. They want change.

This is going to be an interesting election. If voter fraud is kept under control, Donald Trump will be our next President. If not, I can’t even imaging the darkness this country will go through–we will no longer be equal under the law–some will permanently be more equal than others. It is not a pretty picture.

 

The Consequences of Brexit

Investor’s Business Daily posted an article yesterday about the results of the Brexit election. Media predictions claimed that if Britain exited the European Union, awful things would happen. Well, they were wrong.

The article reports the facts:

Sovereignty: It’s hard to remember, but in the run-up and immediate aftermath of Britain’s Brexit vote on June 23, the prophets of doom were everywhere. They predicted everything from an end to London as a financial capital to the meltdown of the British economy to a disaster for the U.S. Sorry, didn’t happen.

Yes, here in the U.S. the stock market sold off immediately after Brexit, just as the doom-and-gloomers predicted. But then something funny happened: The markets snapped smartly back, with the benchmark S&P 500 Index up almost 3% since the day of the vote.

As for Britain, the predicted disaster never occurred. As Britain’s Express wrote in a Wednesday headline: “Remainers were WRONG! Wages up and unemployment down as Brexit Britain booms”.

The article continues:

The online Express, citing new government data, reports that unemployment plunged 52,000 between April and June, leaving the unemployment rate at 4.9% — the lowest level since 2005. The total employment rate now stands at 74.5% of the population — the highest ever. Meanwhile, the number of unemployment claims dropped 8,600 in July — the month after the Brexit vote — to 768,600, the first decline since February.

Oh yes, and workers’ average earnings jumped 2.4% in the first six months of the year, showing that if businesses were worried about Brexit, it sure wasn’t showing in how much they were paying workers.

We need to remember that much of the fear was media-driven. We also need to remember that the voters in Great Britain were smart enough to ignore the media–even after the election when the media tried to find ways to invalidate the election results.

The article concludes:

Countries in the EU have lived with a demographic death spiral, out of control spending and debt, absurd regulations that enrich no one and a regional economy that, as hard as it may be to believe, grows even more slowly than ours. From 2008, the peak year of the financial crisis, through 2015, EU GDP grew 2%, according to U.S. government data. No, that’s not 2% a year — 2% total. It’s been an utter disaster, and the EU’s clueless bureaucrats seem helpless to do anything about it other than blaming their own citizens.

Britain saved itself from decades of stagnation and decline by Brexiting the EU. As such, Britain may have given the other troubled members of the EU the greatest gift of all — a way to leave the dysfunctional EU and rediscover their lost sovereignty and growth.

Let’s compare that to the current election cycle in America. The media has already declared Hillary Clinton the winner. She is up by a million points (it makes you wonder who they actually talk to). If the polls are accurate, how come Donald Trump draws overflow crowds and Hillary can’t fill someone’s living room? As we get closer to the election, the pollsters will rediscover some form of honesty and the polls will become more accurate, but right now they are like the Brexit polls–a total joke. Take heart, there are less than three months to go!

Sometimes You Don’t Have To Wait Too Long For The Truth To Come Out

Over the weekend, I  read a couple of news stories about a petition to hold a second vote on Britain’s exit from the European Union (EU). I was somewhat concerned, because I understand that there are some globalists who will do pretty much anything to hold on to their power. I did see a comment on one story from someone who admitted that he had signed the petition illegally, so I wondered. Well, today I have my answer.

Yesterday Townhall posted a story about the petition to hold another Brexit vote. Evidently the person whose comment I read was not the only person who voted illegally.

The story reports:

LONDON, United Kingdom – Pro-European spammers have fooled the British establishment into believing a million people a day have signed a petition to hold a second referendum on Brexit. The petition demands the referendum rules are retrospectively changed forcing a second vote on Britain’s membership of the EU.

But doubts were raised about the authenticity of those signing after evidence that a code was being used emerged.

It shows how the petition website was tricked into registering millions of ‘signatures’ from people who do not exist.

Further questions were raised over the petition after analysis showed that just 353k of the nearly 3 million signatures were from the UK. A total of 3000 were reported to be from Vatican City, a country with a population of just 800.

Most UK national newspapers reported on the petition today, seemingly unaware of the fraud. Both the Sunday Telegraph and Mirror put the story on the frontpage.

The Independent has run multiple stories on the subject, at one stage crowing that the website kept crashing.

Let’s watch and see how long it takes for the British (and American) media to report this.

Britain And The European Union

On June 23, Britain will vote on whether or not to remain in the European Union. Argument can be made for both sides of the issue, but I would like to cite a few in favor of leaving.

A New York Times article on June 2 stated the following:

Jackie O’Neill, a 54-year-old administrative assistant, was explaining the other day why Britain should vote to divorce itself from the European Union in this month’s referendum. As she enumerated her many grievances, I couldn’t help thinking of the scene in Monty Python’s “Life of Brian” in which a bunch of disaffected Judeans sit around, complaining about the Romans.

“They’ve bled us white, the bastards,” says their leader, Reg, played by John Cleese. “And what have they ever given us in return?” His colleagues mention a few things, by way of example.

O.K., Reg says. “But apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the freshwater system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?”

Today Clarice Feldman posted an article at The American Thinker explaining why she thinks Britain should leave the European Union.

Here are some of the highlights from The American Thinker article:

Here and in Britain voters are torn as to whether or not to jump off the globalization, open borders bandwagon and government by unelected bureaucrats or voting to retake sovereignty and re-establish free markets. The polls show the sentiments for retaining the status quo or starting over (Brexit) seem too close to call, I predict Britain will leave. I hope we, too, will choose to return to less intrusive more accountable government, sovereignty and freedom by rejecting  Hillary Clinton ourselves.

Europeans seem to be overly attracted to the notion of government by wiseman elites. British love of independence and freedom is deeper and stronger, although government regulation and control took root during the World War I and that increased even more during World War II — power the government didn’t relinquish when the war was over. This softened their resolve when the notion of the EU was hatched.

The article concludes with a very good description of what is at stake in the Brexit vote:

One thing is clear — both the EU officialdom and ours are wiser than voters only in their ability to feather their own nests, not in making us safer, richer, or happier. Many predict that if the UK exists Brexit, other European countries will follow, Maybe one of the attractions of Trump is that the distaste for the regulatory state run by elites is spreading across the Atlantic.

The British will decide this month whether or not they want to be an independent country. Americans will have a chance in November to decide whether they want more of the government they have now or to vote for someone who at least has a possibility of shrinking government and government regulations. A rich man has no reason to try to use the government as his own blank check–lavish vacations, bending laws to his advantage, government subsidies for business of friends, etc. Unfortunately we have seen in the history of the Clinton family a willingness to do anything to increase their own personal wealth. November will be the time for Americans to choose between these two personal histories.

Overlooking The Obvious

The U.K. Express posted an article yesterday about President Obama’s visit to the United Kingdom. The article included some interesting observations:

The article reports:

But senior Tory Iain Duncan Smith said it was “strange” for the president to advocate a surrender of power to Brussels that Americans would never accept.

The former Cabinet minister said: “I have a huge amount of respect for America’s unrelenting commitment to the patriotic principle of self-governance.

“President Obama and his predecessors have ferociously protected the sovereignty of the USA and I wish we could say the same of our leaders.

“What I do find strange is that he is asking the British people to accept a situation that he patently would not recommend to the American population.”

The former Cabinet minister said: “I have a huge amount of respect for America’s unrelenting commitment to the patriotic principle of self-governance.

“President Obama and his predecessors have ferociously protected the sovereignty of the USA and I wish we could say the same of our leaders.

“What I do find strange is that he is asking the British people to accept a situation that he patently would not recommend to the American population.”

The former Cabinet minister is overlooking one basic fact. Regardless of whether or not President Obama was actually born in America (just for the record, I believe he was), he does not represent the basic values of America. President Obama does not have a lot of respect for American sovereignty. He has allowed the United Nations to dictate American policy regarding refugees from Syria, and he has supported United Nations treaties that would clearly undermine American sovereignty and the U.S. Constitution. I think his stand on the United Kingdom and the European Union is perfectly consistent with his core beliefs. Because of the legacy of his father regarding the British, he sees both Britain and America as imperialistic countries. There is nothing in his background that has taught him to respect or value the sovereignty of western countries.

This is another example of President Obama moving away from the friends of America. He has not treated the British with the respect they deserve since he took office. Hopefully the next American President will repair the damage President Obama has done to our relationships with our allies.

I Wonder If This Will Improve The Vetting Process

Yesterday Breitbart.com reported that the South Carolina Senate had passed a bill that would make the sponsors of foreign refugees liable for damages caused by crimes or terrorism committed by these refugees.

The article reports:

South Carolina’s The State reported that state Sen. Kevin Bryan (R-Anderson) who co-sponsored the bill in South Carolina, said the legislation should slow or halt the resettlement of refugees. “With the danger today of a terrorist infiltrating the refugee program, we have no other option than to enroll this information,” Bryant told the newspaper. “We’ve got to choose our own citizens over those who are not citizens of our country.”

The publication reported that if passed, the legislation would require:

  • Sponsors to enroll refugees with the S.C. Department of Social Services within 30 days of their entering the state.
  • Social Services to forward refugee information to the State Law Enforcement Division.
  • State Law Enforcement Division and local law enforcement agencies to check whether refugees pose a safety risk.

“It’s the first time the Legislature in the state of South Carolina and the Legislature in the state of New York are on the same page,” Bryant said. “New York has seen attacks. They have experienced it first hand. Hopefully, this legislation will prevent an attack here in South Carolina.” The AP has reported that New York is the only other state considering a refugee registry.

..According to The State, the vote in the state senate was 39-6. If passed by the House and signed into law by Governor Nikki Haley, the bill would also provide for keeping a registry of refugees in the state.

 

Unfortunately, this approach is required because of the history of the refugees in Europe and the United Kingdom. The main responsibility of our government is to keep its citizens safe. I do not understand the reason that terrorism seems to be built into the Middle Eastern culture, but I would like some safeguards to prevent it from coming here. The first step might be making the sponsors of refugees liable for any negative behavior. That won’t solve the problem entirely, but it will make us more aware of who we bring in.

 

Coming To America?

The U.K. Daily Mail reported yesterday that under the new British welfare system, men with more than one wife will get extra benefits. My initial reaction to this is, “Are you nuts?”

The article reports:

Under the universal credit welfare system, which is not expected to be fully introduced until 2021, polygamous households will be rewarded with higher benefits, The Sunday Times reports. 

In the UK, it is illegal to marry more than one person.

Polygamous marriages, largely confined to Muslim families, are only recognised in Britain if they took place in countries where they are legal, such as Middle Eastern states, Pakistan and Zambia.

There no official figures but it is estimated that there may be as many as 20,000 polygamous marriages in the British Muslim community. 

Currently, a husband and his first wife are paid up to £114.85 a week. Subsequent spouses living under the same roof receive around £40 each. 

There is a basic premise in taxation and welfare systems–if you tax something, it decreases; if you offer a subsidy for something, it increases.

The article reminds us that in the United Kingdom, it is illegal to marry more than one person. However, polygamous marriages are recognized if they were legal in the country where they were performed. This is a further undercutting of one of the foundations of western civilization. If someone who is involved in a polygamous marriage decides to leave their home country, it should be understood that they would be better off going to another country that practices polygamy. Bringing polygamous families into western countries is simply not a good idea. In a similar vain, Muslims who feel justified by Islam to perform ‘honor killings’ should be told that should they not do that in a country that regards murder as a crime or they will be put in jail. There are many aspects of Islam that are simply not compatible with western civilization. It should be made clear to Muslims wanting to immigrate to western countries that they should be willing to adopt the customs of that country. If they are not willing to assimilate, they should be encouraged to go instead to a Muslim country.

No Wonder They Are Concerned

When something happens once, you can overlook it. When it happens twice, you begin to wonder. There have been some recent events that would cause me to wonder if I lived in Israel. We all know that most of the Middle Eastern countries have at one time or another threatened to wipe Israel off the map. Lately, that has been limited to one or two countries and a few terrorist organizations. Right now one of the real oddities in the Middle East is the alliances in the Middle East that are being formed in light of the possibility of the Iranian treaty being approved. I never thought I would see Israel and Saudi Arabia or Israel and Egypt cooperating, but it is happening.

Now back to wiping Israel off the map. John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article today about a globe being sold in a discount store in the United Kingdom. Palestine is shown on the globe, but Israel is not. Also, last week on Air France, the maps the passengers looked at during the flight showed Cyprus, Lebanon, the West Bank, Gaza–but no Israel. The Air France maps have been corrected. The company that manufactures the globe is looking into the situation to see if a correction is necessary.

I am reminded of the disappearing people in the picture in the movie “Back to the Future.” If I lived in Israel, I would wonder. I can’t imaging how America would react if someone started selling globes showing Texas as part of Mexico. (I can image how Texas would react, I just can’t imagine how America would react!)