Ferguson jihadists

What do Islamic jihadists and Ferguson demonstrators and their fellow instigators have in common?  Oh, and include Obama in that mix, too.

What did Obama offer to the demonstrators, ignoring any potential legal verdict to the contrary?

“Stay on course”

Yes, ignore the rule of law.  Screw “whitey.”  That’s the message.

He and the rest of the leftist racists are above the law and fully justified in their tactics to make their “point” however un-justified their point may be.  And what is their point?  That their uncivilized culture, their habits, their traditions, their tribes, their ‘hoods demand to be treated differently than the greater civil society they are a part of.  They demand special consideration to practice their drug use, their intimidation, their petty thefts, their lying and deceit and most of all, their intolerant lynch mob mentality.  Leftist demonstrators and Islamic jihadists have much in common.  Their sense of “justice” is not the same as our nation’s sense of justice.  Islamists and leftist-inspired demonstrators have very similar value systems.  Case in point:  Remember Bill Ayers, the bomber cum Chicago college professor friend of Obama.

And what are their “tactics?”  Not just non-violent demonstrations.  Not just “civil disobedience.”  Not just the style of Martin Luther King.  They are way beyond that.  They are promoting violent confrontation “to get the attention of the power structure.”  HERE and HERE are links to a few examples.  The Business Insider reports:

"We are in a rebellion at the moment," said Reverend Osagyego Sekou, an activist from Boston. "That means breaking police lines, non-compliance with police orders. It is confrontational but not violent."

How, exactly, do you break police lines without being violent?  And that’s “the Reverend” speaking.  How far will the numerous Bill Ayers-types go, the agitators, the Muslims sensing a crack in our civilized armor?

In fact, CAIR, a prominent Muslim front group in the US, desires to co-opt the “non-violent” Ferguson  demonstrations.  More HERE.

The FBI is warning that infiltrators will incite violence in otherwise “peaceful” demonstrations.

There will be those who want law enforcement to compromise, to “back off”, to allow a few windows to be smashed, a few businesses to be looted, a few cars to be destroyed, a few cops to be bloodied.  God forbid.  That gives special privilege to jackasses.  It mocks the rule of law.  It’s like creating a special “no-go” zone in our cities for hooligans, just like the Muslim ghettos in Dearborn and many European cities where Islamic law is given the green light to fester and terrorize.

Will our rule of law and civilizational ethics be intimidated into submission by activists motivated by leftist radicals and racists, just as the world is intimidated by Muslim activists motivated by Islamic doctrine?  Unfortunately, our national psyche is of mixed mind which does not bode well for our future.

Why I am not ecstatic about election results…

Being the eternal realist, and not quite the eternal pessimist, I do not have high hopes (no high apple pie in the sky hopes) for this election turning our drift toward bigger government, more regulations, and less personal responsibility around.  Go ahead, listen to the YouTube below as you read the rest of this blog…

 

Aside from the decades-old inertia of the liberal/progressive/socialist/communist alliance agenda, here are current examples of why election results enthusiasm is misplaced:

In Florida, Amendment 1 won by a large margin.  This amendment authorized Florida government to spend $1.27 billion dollars over the next 20 years to buy up land north of Lake Okeechobee “to protect the aquifer.”  Protecting the aquifer could have been accomplished via any number of land use management methods besides the government owning 100’s of square miles of land – land removed from the tax roll, removed from agricultural production, and other productive uses.  There are likely dozens of similar liberal conservationist-driven initiatives all over the nation that accomplished similar expansions of governmental land holdings.

Across the nation so-called “conservative” victors are calling for cooperation with democrats to promote more “early childhood education” which is high up on the liberal agenda.  This will just indoctrinate more young kids earlier in life in the liberal public school agenda as well as facilitate reducing parental responsibility to raise and train their own kids.  This furthers the concept of “let government do for us what we are too (pick one) lazy, busy, incapable, inept, disinterested in doing ourselves.”

In spite of clear and substantial majorities in both the House and Senate, Republicans may not be able to overcome presidential vetoes in any legislation Republicans claim they plan to adopt, whether it be repealing Obamacare, getting the oil pipeline pushed through, or recognizing Islam as an evil ideology incompatible with our culture and government.  It just won’t happen.  Obama’s promises to pursue his draconian agenda – including executive decrees to import millions of immigrants from who knows where – cannot be stopped by playing nice with legislation.  And if impeachment or similar draconian measure is tried, there will be many who will say those measures will backfire and help the democrats in 2016.  So, more likely, these Republicans will do nothing – hoping the electorate will suddenly become wise and vote for Republicans in 2016.  High hopes.

There are too many Republicans who are big government socialists at heart – even among those newly elected – to feel a sense of comfort that the conservative agenda will be very long-lived.  Their constituents will demand that they cave to government largess.  That is what the electorate has come to expect, and by golly, that is what they will demand and receive.

This is a lesson in the inertia of public greed 101.

This will make great fodder for an entertaining media over the next couple of years.  We are, after all, all about being entertained.

Phases of trust in society. Where do you stand?

With the advent of multi-culturalism, broken borders, and progressive politics that has little resemblance to our founding principles, many of us are in the process of disengagement from our society as we knew it.

Trust and identity with our society go hand and hand.  We are less likely to trust that which we cannot identify with.  Do you trust government economics?  Do you trust the homosexual agenda?  The “Islam is a religion of peace” crowd, or the “we need to wreck our economy to reverse global warming” academicians?

Here is  a theoretical hierarchy of feelings toward our society as they deteriorate from gung ho patriotism (enthusiasm) down to separation and autonomy.

• Enthusiasm/patriotism
• Contentment
• Concern
• Activism
• Indifference
• Dismay/suspicion
• Alarm/Fear
• Separation/autonomy (retreat, bug out or mutual defense group)
    

Each of these phases contain varying degrees of of other phases.  But the name depicts the predominant feeling – either within an individual or the society at large.

Here is a detailed description of the characteristics of each phase of disengagement from our society:

Enthusiasm/patriotism: 

This phase was most prominent from our nation’s founding through the early sixties (pre-Vietnam).  Flag waving, partiotic parades, frequent patriotic  public service announcements on TV and radio promoting pride in America (Bugs Bunny:  “Any bonds today.”)  American civics was taught in our public schools and Christian prayer was encouraged.  We were a united Christian nation proud of our heritage.  There were elements of passive contentment, indifference, and concern, but those were minority sentiments.

Contentment: 

This is a phase of passive contentment – all is (mostly) well in the world - without being overtly patriotic and while avoiding negative feelings of concern or dismay.  Contentment is a close but more positive cousin of indifference.  US societal contentment was a brief majority view leading to the Vietnam War.  Little activism was in vogue during this phase other than abortion rights and early phases of the civil rights movement.

Concern: 

The concern phase begins with our first notice of events or societal behaviors that we feel may disrupt our sense of contentment.  Concerns arose about the Vietnam war and have grown today over a number of social, moral, and economic issues.

Activism: 

Activism is a phase that we find useful when our concerns become strong enough to motivate us to do something to reverse the threat to our contentment.  This was born during the civil rights movement of the sixties and extends to many disparate activist movements today.  There were and still are segments of minorities within the society who are content or indifferent but activism is the dominant phase of the society.

Indifference: 

This phase occurs among those who sense that activism has become futile.    The things that have become consciously bothersome seem to overwhelm any amount of activism we have the motivation to muster.   A “why bother” attitude begins to take over.  There is a growing sense of concern and dismay that neutralizes positive thoughts about our society.  Today these concerns are the direction of society’s moral or fiscal attributes.

Dismay/suspicion:

Dismay and suspicion begin to occur upon the realization that mega-forces have turned our sense of good and evil, right and wrong on its head and there is little we can do about it.  Things are not the way they were and should be and are not at all likely to change for the better.  Homosexuality used to be wrong. Now it is celebrated.  Even the sanctity of marriage, formally associated with Biblical morality, has been destroyed.  A day after the worst attack since Pearl Harbor (9-11) by Muslims we refuse to identify the ideology behind the attack.   A day later our president declares Islam “a religion of peace.  Three years later we elect a Muslim president.  All the while our nation’s indebtedness goes through the roof.  Politicians and academicians ridicule our heritage and our constitution.  Our trust in government, especially the federal government, plummets. 

There are rare examples of politicians doing the right thing in the world today.  One example is Geert Wilders.  He remains an activist in spite of his dismay with the direction his country has gone regarding Islam (see his recent speech HERE.)

Alarm/fear:  Those who go through the dismay/suspicion phase will develop a healthy dose of alarm and fear.  This may motivate a degree of renewed activism in some.  In others it will motivate a desire for separation and autonomy from the society.  In either case, whether they become a dismayed activist or a separatist off-the grid prepper, they will be seen by the establishment (mainline churches, mainstream media, academia, and government officials) as “radicals.”  Some may remain in the “alarm/fear” phase without taking any action.  As their defense they ignore or bury their fear in a see/hear/speak no evil state of indifference and succumb to mind-numbing, don’t give-a-sh—activities like perpetual golf, drinking, or entertainment.

Fortunately, brave activists willing to be slandered by the ignorant or self-serving majority still abound:  Pamella Geller, Diana West, Allen West, Robert Spencer, Bill Warner and innumerable bloggers.  We need many more.

Separation/autonomy (prepper, retreat, bug out or mutual defense group): 

Those who become alarmed, even fearful of where we are going and what might happen will go in one of three directions:  Born-again activist, mind-numbing defensive indifference and inaction, or active separation/autonomy.  This latter phase is reached when we know we have to do something.  We can either change the “system” (society, culture, politics, government, morality, religion, etc.) or we can protect ourselves from all of those things.  We realize we cannot change those things outside of ourselves because the inertia behind these threats are too great.  Many of us have already tried and felt like we were knocking our heads against the Rock of Gibraltar. 

Once we determine that the only rational course is to do what is best for ourselves and our families, we have several choices of how to proceed.  The Boy Scout motto comes to mind for most:  Be Prepared.   A Mormon Church motto becomes relevant:  “… for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do."  2 Nephi 25:23

“After all we can do” is the money quote.  It is different than the typical orthodox Christian “do nothing” belief that we can do nothing apart from God’s grace.  Do nothing is a recipe for disaster in the temporal realm.  The temporal application of that admonition is this:  Doing nothing is not an option.  Too many Christians doing nothing - expecting God and others to do it for them – is an un-Biblical approach and misapplied doctrine.  We are to do “all we can do” to save ourselves before we rely on government (the “god” of many) to save us. 

Some choose establishing a year’s supply of food and other essentials as their measure of prudence.  Others may seek those of like mind to form a “prepper group.”  Others who expect the worst may join a “bug out” group and head for the hills, the farm, the swamps, or nearest national park.

I find myself in a combination of “Dismay” and semi-“Autonomy.”  I am beyond the traditional “activist” stage.  That, to me, is futile and a waste of time and resources at this point in my life.  I need to focus on what I can influence and control:  Myself.   That is enough of a challenge.  This includes preparing for events I see unfolding, especially potential civil unrest and cessation of essential services from an economic meltdown, cultural clashes or other significant event.  While I remain attached to the grid, my objective is to create a mindset and eventual capacity of self-sufficiency in anticipation of events born of a society gone awry.

Refreshing speech about Islam from a politician…

The following is a blog from Geert Wilders,  courtesy of Diana West.  Mr. Wilders is the founder and leader of the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid – PVV) which currently is the fourth-largest party in the Dutch parliament.  He is outspoken about the truth of what Islam really is.

Anyone who wants a sampling of what an honest, forthright politician should sound like concerning Islam should read the following speech by Geert Wilders.  This is a 5 star speech – the kind that gives us hope for civilization…

*****

Wilders: Ten Years Ago Today, My Fellow Countryman Van Gogh Fell as a Martyr of Free Speech

Sunday, November 02, 2014 7:25 AM

Theo van Gogh (1957-2004)

[Introduction by Diana West]

The following is a speech Geert Wilders delivered in Copenhagen today, the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Theo van Gogh on the streets of Amsterdam for criticizing Islam.

Dear friends,

I am happy to be in Copenhagen again.

It is always a pleasure to return to this wonderful city – the home of my good friend and fellow freedom fighter, the Danish hero Lars Hedegaard.

It is always a privilege to be in the capital of the brave Danish people.

And it is always an honor to be a guest of your great organization.

The Danish Free Press Society is a beacon of light. For Denmark, for Scandinavia, for the whole of Europe, and for the entire West. Your staunch defense of civil liberties, such as freedom of speech, serves as an inspiration for many, including myself and my party.

On a moment like this, when the free world is in mortal danger, an organization such as the Danish Free Press Society is needed more than ever.

Exactly ten years ago, today, my fellow countryman Van Gogh fell as a martyr of free speech.

I remember that morning very well. The press came to my office to ask for a reaction, but hardly anyone could believe that what had happened was really true. We all realized that the Netherlands would never be the same again. Unfortunately few lessons have been learned since that horrible day in 2004.

Islam claims that Muhammad was a prophet. But Muhammad was not a prophet; Theo van Gogh was a prophet.

Van Gogh saw what was coming. He spoke out forcefully against the danger of Islamization.

He had also just made a short movie, together with my then colleague Ayaan Hirsi Ali, about the plight of women in Islamic society. The movie was called “Submission.”

That is why he was murdered. His assassination should have been an alarm bell.

Van Gogh warned us in a strong language, as clear as the colors that his great-granduncle Vincent used when painting his landscapes.

He was a brave man. When he realized the danger of Islam, he did not run like a coward.

He would have hated to see how our freedom of speech has been restricted in the ten years since his death.

Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, the more Islam we get, the less free our societies become. Not only because of the islamization but also because of the weak appeasers who call themselves politicians.

We are no longer allowed to crack jokes or draw cartoons if Islam feels insulted by it.

If you do so, your life is in danger, as Kurt Westergaard and Lars Vilks can testify. You might even get arrested, as happened a few years ago with the Dutch cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot.

Sure, the charges against Nekschot were later dropped. But if you value your life and if you prefer to avoid trouble, it is better not to do anything that might remotely insult Islam.

We are no longer allowed to tell statistical truths, as Lars Hedegaard experienced, when he referred to rape figures in Islamic families.

A murderer came to Lars’s door and the state authorities persecuted him for so-called hate speech. Sure, the Supreme Court eventually acquitted Lars. But if you value your life and if you prefer to avoid trouble, it is better to keep quiet.

We are no longer allowed to refer to scientific and historical research, as my friend, the brave Austrian human rights activist Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, experienced.

In a seminar on the historical figure of Muhammad, she mentioned that he had a crush on little girls and had sex with a 9-year old. That is the truth.

But Elisabeth was convicted, and her conviction was even upheld by the Appeals court. Once again, it is better to remain silent if you want to avoid trouble.

But Theo van Gogh did not remain silent. And neither did Kurt and Lars and Elisabeth and Robert and the Danish Free Press Society, and my party, the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, and so many other freedom fighters in the West.

We speak out. We will never be silent. Because we love our country. Because we love our freedom. Because we refuse to live in slavery.

Because we believe that without liberty, life is not worth living.

Liberty and human dignity, that is what we stand for.

We are the torchbearers for freedom. We are the torchbearers for democracy.

We are the torchbearers for a civilization that is far superior than any other civilization on earth.

Last Summer, my home town, The Hague, witnessed scenes which brought back memories of the darkest period in our history, the Nazi era.

Sympathizers of the Islamic State paraded in our streets. They carried swastikas, they carried the black flags of ISIS. They shouted “Death to the Jews.”

Instead of rounding up these hatemongers, the authorities did nothing.

When we warn against Islam, the authorities call it hate speech and bring us to court. But when the grim forces of hatred march down our streets, the police look on and do not interfere. It is a disgrace. It is a scandal. It is intolerable.

Islam is waging a war against the free West.

Indeed, we are at war. Only fools can deny it. Islam has declared war on us.

America and its allies are currently bombing the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.

Excellent.

My party supports this offensive. I am glad that Dutch and Danish F16s participate in it and that our two nations stand shoulder to shoulder in this endeavor. We should liquidate Abu Bakr Al-Bagdadi and the other criminals who are leading the Islamic State.

But we have to do more than that.

Far more important than fighting Islamic State abroad, is the fight to preserve our own security in our own countries, in the Netherlands, in Denmark, in all the other European and Western countries. It is our homes that we must defend.

It is just to bomb the Islamic State in the Middle East. But our first priority must be to protect our own nations, our own freedoms, our own people, our own children, here, at home.

Recently, the Dutch authorities prevented some forty jihadis to leave our country, when they attempted to go to Syria to fight in the ranks of ISIS. Their passports were seized and they were sent home instead of jailed. These criminals now walk our streets and make them unsafe.

You may have heard that the jihadis who recently murdered  soldiers in Canada were also people whom the authorities had previously prevented to leave for Syria and who were not arrested but allowed to go free on the street.

Blocking the exodus of those who want to wage Jihad elsewhere and not detain them is sheer stupidity.

Keeping them here as free people means that they will hit us here.

We must hasten their exit instead of preventing it. But we must never allow them to return. Therefore, we must reinstate national border controls.

Nothing is more important than first protect our own countries from the Jihadis.

Let us restore our liberties, such as freedom of speech.

Let us defend our culture. Let us protect our people.

Let us make our nations free and safe again.

Let us be brave.

That is what we must do; that is our duty.

Let me ask you: Do our authorities actually do this?

Unfortunately not.

They fail to do their duty.

They fail to act accordingly.

They even lie to us.

Everyday, we hear Western leaders repeat the sickening mantra that Islam is a religion of peace.

Whenever an atrocity is committed in the name of Islam, whenever someone is beheaded in Syria or Iraq, Barack Obama, David Cameron, my own Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and many of their colleagues rush to the television cameras to tell the world that it has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam. How stupid can you be.

Fortunately, the eyes of ever more people are opening to this reality.

In my country, a poll last June, showed that 65% of the Dutch are convinced that the Islamic culture does not belong to the Netherlands.

In France, 74% find Islam incompatible with French society.

In Britain, fewer than one in four think that following Islam is compatible with a British way of life. In Germany, over two thirds of the population think negatively about Islam.

Even in the Czech Republic, a country with hardly any Islamic population, almost two-thirds consider Islam a threat to society and 90% are afraid of it. And in Denmark 92% of your citizens believe Muslim immigrants should adopt Danish customs.

With every new terrorist crime, with every new attack, with every new beheading, it becomes clear to ever more people what the true nature of Islam is.

With every Islamic assault on our values, more and more people realize that Islam wants to conquer the world, that it is prepared to kill or enslave anyone who refuses to submit. And that it is ready to commit the biggest atrocities to achieve this goal.

My friends, we are gathered here today, because we are neither prepared to collaborate with evil, nor to appease it.

We say No to Islamic censorship. And No to the politicians who fail us.

During the past ten years, I have been living under constant police protection.

As you know, I am not the only one who has to live through this ordeal. Several people in this room are in the same situation. Our friends Lars and Kurt even came to stand eye to eye with fanatics who tried to slaughter them.

Of course – I repeat it wherever I go – of course, there are many moderate Muslims. I believe in moderate people, but I do not believe in a moderate Islam. There is only one Islam – the Islam of the Koran, the Hadith and the life of Muhammad, who was a terrorist and a warlord.

But even though there are many moderate Muslims, it is wrong to think that the moderates are a majority. They are not. A poll in the Netherlands gave shocking results. It is hard to believe, but almost three quarters of the Muslims in my country say that Dutch Muslims who go and fight in Syria are heroes. Can you believe it? Heroes!

And over two thirds of the Islamic population in the Netherlands consider the religious rules of Islam to be more important than our own democratic laws.

Equally terrifying was an article yesterday in the Dutch press stating that Mohammed Bouyeri, the murderer of Theo van Gogh, is still considered a hero today by hundreds of Dutch Muslims.

A few years ago, I called on Muslims to liberate themselves from the yoke of Islam, to choose for freedom. I wholeheartedly support Muslims who love freedom. So, I told them “Free yourselves. Leave Islam.” I still stand by this appeal. But this does not blind me to the present reality.

You may have heard that I will probably be brought to court again soon.

Three years ago, I was taken to court on hate crime charges. The court case lasted almost two years. Fortunately, I was acquitted.

But now, the Dutch judiciary is going after me again because I asked Dutch voters whether they want more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands.

Moroccans are the largest Islamic population group in the Netherlands. In The Netherlands the Moroccan problem is the problem of Islam.

I referred to Moroccans, not because I have anything against Moroccans but because they are overrepresented in the Dutch crime and welfare statistics. They also account for three quarters of all Dutch Muslims who leave for Syria to wage jihad. No-one in the Netherlands wants more Moroccans.

As I said, our leaders still refuse to defend our freedoms because they are either cowards or appeasers. This is why the task of defending freedom has now fallen on us. On you, on me, on ordinary citizens.

To this end, I have established the International Freedom Alliance IFA.

We want IFA to be the shield of all those who refuse to submit to Islamic tyranny.

The mission of IFA is to stop the Islamization of non-Islamic countries and to fight for the preservation of our freedom and democracy.

We want to stand firm. We want to preserve our civilization for our children and grandchildren. Because there is nothing more precious than liberty and freedom. But it has a price. And the price can be high. Sometimes a man must give all he can.

Our political leaders may fail us. But we, my friends, we will not fail.

There is a path we shall never choose, and that is the path of submission.

This is why we say: Yes to freedom! No to tyranny!

IFA aims to be a network of resistance fighters in all the countries threatened by Islam.

Friends,  I have good news from the Netherlands.

Today, the popularity of my party, the Party for Freedom, is at a high. An opinion poll published this morning shows that we have by far become the largest party in the Netherlands, with almost 20 per cent of the vote. 1 out of 5 Dutchmen would vote PVV today.

The policies that we stand for are also getting more popular than ever.

We want to stop all immigration from Islamic countries.

We want to stimulate voluntary re-emigration to Islamic countries.

We want to expel all criminals with dual citizenship and deprive them of their Dutch nationality.

We want to de-islamize our nation.

Dear Friends, there is a lot of work to do. We, the defenders of freedom and security, have an historic duty.

Our generation has been entrusted with a huge task: To oppose Islam and keep the flame of liberty burning.

I say it without exaggeration: the future of human civilization depends on us. Now is a time when everyone in the West must do his duty. We are writing history here.

So, let us do our duty.

Let us stand with a happy heart and a strong spirit.

Let us go forth with courage and save freedom!

Thank you.

Will the real chicken shit please sit down…

I came across this photo of Benjamin Netenyahu (left) and Barack Obama (right) in their younger years.

This is particularly striking since the Obama administration called Netanyahu a “chicken shit” for not having the courage to fight.

The photo shows Netanyahu as Sayeret Matkal commando and a military Colonel while Obama was a …  pothead.

Which one is the genuine chicken shit?

Kaci Hickox: Leftist CDC selfish whiner…

“We’re confident that selfless health workers who were brave enough to care for Ebola patients in a foreign country will be willing to take reasonable steps to protect residents of their own country”

Main Department of Health and Human Services Commissioner Mary Mayhew

Well, it looks like Kaci Hickox is not a selfless health worker.

What is my opinion of the likes of Kaci Hickox?

She is a caring but dangerously and insensitively naïve woman.  Caring – mostly about her own selfish interests.  Insensitive in that she is far from selfless.  Oh, she believes she is so cool and hip, making her big splash in Africa.  She not only walks the CDC line, but is in full agreement with our president in this:  Protecting other countries is more important than protecting our own.

Here she is, apparently enjoying herself in her chosen location, somewhere in the jungle.

She knows, or should know, that she was involved with a deadly disease.  She has , after all, voluntarily agreed to involve herself with those who are infected.

And still, she comes back home to the US with a fever and expects to immediately mix in with our general population.  Insane!  She doesn’t give a crap about the other people around her over here.  She believes she is above us all.

Then she has the audacity to sue the State of New Jersey over her mandatory quarantine for a few days – a quarantine that makes infinite sense to a large majority of US citizens.

Her balls are bigger than the mega-sunspots.  She is one hell of a self-centered selfish chick.  Oh, she’s giving of herself in Africa.  That is her choice and apparently she grooves on that choice.  That does not relieve her of her idiocy once she is back “home”, a place she apparently respects less than Africa.

This is a picture of her temporary quarantine quarters.  It appears larger than my living room, dining room, and den combined.  It is likely significantly better than the conditions she chose to live in in her beloved Africa.

Her whining prevailed.  She is now back home.  She is fortunate that her fever subsided and she has tested negative for Ebola – so far.

But her arrogance doesn’t stop there.  This uppity nurse refuses voluntary quarantine in Maine, too. And she is frightening her hometown folks there.  From CBS Connecticut:

The news of Hickox’s return to Maine swept across the town of Fort Kent and the university campus, which has 1,400 students.

Faith Morneault, a 19-year-old behavioral science student, said news that Hickox may be headed to Fort Kent had caused “a lot of panic” among students. But she said she understands her desire to go home.

“You can’t freak out in this situation. You have to understand it,” she said.

Another student, 20-year-old behavioral science major Kayla Michaud, said students also are worried because of the potential presence of Hickox’s boyfriend in the school community.

“If she’s in quarantine, is he going to be quarantined, because we don’t all want to be contaminated with the Ebola virus,” she said.

Department of Health and Human Services Commissioner Mary Mayhew had these words of wisdom, the significance of which escape nurse Kratchet:

“We’re confident that selfless health workers who were brave enough to care for Ebola patients in a foreign country will be willing to take reasonable steps to protect residents of their own country. However we are willing to pursue legal authority if necessary to ensure risk is minimized for Mainers.”

The arrogance of Ms. Hickox is attributable to the ideological predisposition of this self-centered Ebola-don’t-give-a-damner.  This from Gotnews.com: 

“The nurse…is an employee for the Centers for Disease Control and a registered Democrat with a history of left-wing advocacy, Gotnews.com has learned.

Kaci Hickox’s ties to the CDC were not disclosed in a controversial anti-quarantine column she wrote for the Dallas Morning News. The CDC opposes quarantines or travel bans from Ebola infected countries.

Initially turned down for Doctors Without Borders, Hickox applied for a position with the Centers for Disease Control’s infectious disease unit. She received that position and began a two-year fellowship in Las Vegas, NV where she currently still works.”

More about this poor excuse for a caring human being HERE.  By the way, miss arrogant priss, Ebola virus can survive up to several weeks on various surfaces.

But that doesn’t matter.  She has the always vigilant bureaucracy of the CDC behind her – as inept as the State Department that hopes to bring Ebola-infected foreigners into the US for treatment.  But that is a story for later.

HERE is another pointed article about sweet, caring Kaci titled “Liberalism Manifested” and subtitled “Me Me Me.”

Treacherous White House Ebola Policy

 

Take a look at these Obama Administration policies in juxtaposition:

October 7th:  If US troops in Africa get Ebola, they’ll get treatment in the US.  (Sounds an awful lot like “if you like your current health insurance, you can keep your current health insurance.)

October 17th:  Obama to Bring Non-American Ebola Victims to US for Treatment (especially since Ebola-stricken countries are mostly Muslim)

And now this one:

October 18th:  US Troops that Contract Ebola Will be Quarantined in Liberia  (really?)

If this isn’t “kick-the-bastard-out-of-the-White House” worthy, nothing is.

He is a damned traitor.  And I don’t usually cuss much on this blog, but this is a special occasion.

This is just another stark example of how the Obama administration is misusing and abusing our military.  More HERE.

Ebola reveals how we turn off our brains and rely on others for common sense…

Ebola, if not good for anything else, is good for demonstrating how our brains and common sense are turned off when faced with a new and stressful situation.

This self-neutering mental capacity is caused by two things:

1. Predisposition toward the “normalcy bias”:  The automatic assumption that Ebola is nothing new and precautions should be just like for any other transmissible illness.  The thinking:  “We’ve done this before; what can possibly go wrong?”
2. Predisposition to believe that our personal decisions of “what to do” in particular situations should be deferred to others at a higher or “more informed level” and therefore we are relieved from applying our own common sense.

This mindlessness has been the reason for a number of failures in the diagnosis and precautions involving Ebola in the US:

• The turning away and sending home the first Ebola victim in the US at the Dallas hospital by nursing staff.
• Belief that “standard” personal protection items used by hospital staff is adequate to protect from Ebola.
• The second nurse relying on CDC personnel for their opinion on her proposed trip to Ohio while she had a low grade fever instead of using her own training and common sense.
• The CDC’s response to the second nurse in using their standard protocol for determining what level of fever allowed then to ignore the travel threat instead of considering all new data associated with Ebola.
• NBC’s medical “expert” Dr. Nancy Snyderman ignoring a voluntary quarantine order and running out to get fast food despite the fact that she accompanied the camera man who has Ebola.
• CDC’s belief that all hospitals can somehow know and effectively practice appropriate Ebola protocol by osmosis rather than through weeks of rigorous hands-on training.
• The off-handed determination by CDC that the man from Nigeria who vomited and died on the flight into JFK did not have Ebola.  See CDC declares dead, vomiting man on plane at JFK from Nigeria “Ebola Free”
• Soldiers Get Just 4 Hours of Virus Training...
• UN admits botching response to Ebola outbreak…
• Our government refusing to close our borders and flights to those coming in from Ebola-stricken nations because we might harm the economies of those nations or retard effective aid to those nations when we have a potential breakout in our own nation.

Here is a relevant comment by someone worth listening to:

Marine Corps Gen. John Kelly, commander of the U.S. Southern Command, predicted last week that the Ebola virus will not be contained in West Africa, and if infected people flee those countries and spread the disease to Central and South America, it could cause “mass migration into the United States” of those seeking treatment.

“If it breaks out, it’s literally, ‘Katie bar the door,’ and there will be mass migration into the United States,” Kelly said in remarks to the National Defense University on Tuesday. “They will run away from Ebola, or if they suspect they are infected, they will try to get to the United States for treatment.

This is a real possibility ignored by the CDC and the Obama administration.

Will we invoke our normalcy bias to ignore or mock these types of real possibilities? 

Bloomberg posted an article that mocked Ebola’s “worst case scenario” and sugar-coated the outcome in the United States.  I posted the following comment.

Wow! I'd get really FAT from that sugar-coating. Given the facts, the spread, and human nature to date, here is what to expect by January:

* Spread to several additional countries in Africa
* Close to 100,000 total cases and over 50,000 total deaths and accelerating
* Cases in several countries in Europe and the Middle East
* Outbreak in Mexico, Central and South America
* Increased influx, aka "torrent" of scared and potentially infected refugees crossing our border from Mexico
* Over 100 cases in the US and growing

Within a few months we will see reductions in travel, forced and voluntary, people avoiding events and activities involving large groups of people, some sectors of the economy heavily impacted: air travel, theaters, sports venues. School attendance will decline.

Until our population sees credible signs of rhetoric matching reality, fears and concerns will outpace what we are being told, whether what we are told is true or not. Circular reasoning, yes. But that is the way it works.

While most comments basically agreed with my assessment, one did not and questioned why I would comment if I was not an epidemiologist. 

Here is my reply:

My basis for these opinions are as follows: 

Just processing recent trends and behaviors, and using common sense and logic - such as is currently absent from the CDC, some hospitals, our president, and others that look to 'big daddy' for direction rather than using their head as if we are mindless minions. It appears that common sense may be more valuable than an epidemiology degree at the moment. Given the errors to date and the unbridled arrogance of our government and many professionals, we have a poor start in the fight and not likely to learn much going forward.

And your basis for criticism is what?

Both the normalcy bias and deferring our use of common sense to those who should know better but don’t is the root of our Ebola angst in the US.

Hospitals and the CDC

These are just a few examples of how “big government” has discouraged us from thinking for ourselves and using common sense.

Related:  “If You Want to Live, Ignore the CDC”  Article by a renowned doctor.

Why Ebola may be worse than AIDS: AIDS was a moral degenerate-spread disease; Ebola cares not about morality…

We have begun to hear comparisons of the Ebola outbreak with the spread of AIDS 30+ years ago.  Many suggest that Ebola may turn out to have an impact just as bad as AIDS turned out to be.  Others suggest Ebola will not be as bad because of one critical difference:

“There is one crucial difference with Aids however. Ebola has only been passed on by an infected person demonstrating symptoms of disease, while HIV can be transmitted by people who for years show no signs of carrying the virus that causes Aids.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/ebola/11152727/Ebola-compared-to-Aids-epidemic-by-top-American-health-official.html

The initial spread of AIDS was propelled through homosexual sex, a conscious, deliberate act.  During the early years of the spread of AIDS, the great majority of AIDS cases were transmitted that way.  Even today, the website that describes how people contract AIDS http://www.aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/hiv-aids-101/how-you-get-hiv-aids/ implies that homosexual sexual activity is a major means of transmission.  Most other causes of transmission are by other deliberate acts of immorality such as having multiple sex partners or use of AIDS-tainted drug needles.

So with AIDS, the majority of ways it can be acquired is through deliberate acts of immorality.

Not so with Ebola.

Even though the presumed window for transmitting Ebola is when the carrier shows symptoms, the path of contamination is invisible, long lasting, and deadly.  Here is a report from The Public Health Agency of Canada:

SURVIVAL OUTSIDE HOST: Filoviruses have been reported capable to survive for weeks in blood and can also survive on contaminated surfaces, particularly at low temperatures (4°C) ^{Footnote 52 Footnote 61}. One study could not recover any Ebolavirus from experimentally contaminated surfaces (plastic, metal or glass) at room temperature ^{Footnote 61}.  In another study, Ebolavirus dried onto glass, polymeric silicone rubber, or painted aluminum alloy is able to survive in the dark for several hours under ambient conditions (between 20 and 250C and 30–40% relative humidity) (amount of virus reduced to 37% after 15.4 hours), but is less stable than some other viral hemorrhagic fevers (Lassa) ^{Footnote 53}. When dried in tissue culture media onto glass and stored at 4 °C, Zaire ebolavirus survived for over 50 days ^{Footnote 61}.

New information reveals that Ebola may be spread BEFORE full-bore symptoms are obvious in the carrier.  This from World Net Daily:

NEW YORK – A group of German medical doctors in a peer-reviewed medical journal article published by Oxford University Press have challenged a key assumption regarding the Ebola virus repeatedly asserted by Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

The researchers found that a patient showing no symptoms of the disease can still transmit a virus like Ebola by air if droplets containing the virus are transmitted to another person by a sneeze or cough.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/10/ebola-victims-without-symptoms-could-still-be-contagious/#JewjvlSoDkBRrI7i.99

With AIDS, those who stayed on the straight and narrow moral path were unlikely to get that disease.  On the other hand, with Ebola, moral indiscretion plays no role.  All it takes with Ebola is for the unfortunate soul to be in the wrong place at the wrong time where the infected individual is or has been within the last several hours.

Based on the above known information, what will be worse:  AIDS or Ebola?

It is obvious after 30+ years of combatting AIDS, we know a lot more about that disease than we know about Ebola.  The jury is still out on Ebola.  We can be sure that the impact of Ebola will get much worse over the next several months before we even begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

The misleading use of the term “radical” in the context of Islam…

Most media, both liberal and conservative, modify the word “Islam” with “radical” every time they make reference to some violent, heinous act of terror committed by Muslims.  Even when Sean Hannity reveals the connection between the Muslim who beheaded an Oklahoma woman and his mosque, the caption reads “RISE OF RADICAL ISLAM.” No, Sean, it is the rise of the original, orthodox Islam – exactly the way Muhammad intended.

“The Five” on FOX News Channel fall all over themselves when Bob Beckel mentions just the word “Islam” when referring to jihadists.  The others quickly pounce and say “…you mean ‘radical Islam, Bob…”, fearful that Muslims might take offense.  I think Bob, bless his liberal heart, is the only one of The Five who is not afraid to assert that Islam itself promotes jihad, terror, and hate as opposed to the others who insist on the obfuscationist term “radical” Islam.

Is the modifier “radical” being used to describe a form of Islam relative to “non-radical” or “normal” Islam?  Or is it being used to describe the teaching of Islam and actions of Muslims relative to accepted normal behavior in society at large?  Its meaning is certainly not clear.  It could be taken either way.

Let’s see if we can clarify the meaning and appropriate usage of the term “radical” by exploring dictionary definitions:

From Merriam Webster:

¹rad·i·cal

adjective \ˈra-di-kəl\

: very new and different from what is traditional or ordinary

: very basic and important

: having extreme political or social views that are not shared by most people

Full Definition of RADICAL

1.  :  of, relating to, or proceeding from a root: as

a (1) :  of or growing from the root of a plant <radical tubers> (2) :  growing from the base of a stem, from a rootlike stem, or from a stem that does not rise above the ground <radical leaves>

b :  of, relating to, or constituting a linguistic root

c :  of or relating to a mathematical root

d :  designed to remove the root of a disease or all diseased and potentially diseased tissue <radical surgery> <radical mastectomy>

2.  :  of or relating to the origin : fundamental

3.  a :  very different from the usual or traditional : extreme

b :  favoring extreme changes in existing views, habits, conditions, or institutions

c :  associated with political views, practices, and policies of extreme change

d :  advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs <the radical right>

In definition 1., radical can mean “root” or the very essence or basis for something; or the source.  In religious terms, radical Islam would refer to the root or source of Islam.  A synonym would be “orthodox” Islam.

In definition 2., radical can mean “origin” – what Islam was in its beginning.  Again, a synonym might be “orthodox” or “fundamentalist” Islam.

In definition 3., radical means “different” or “unusual.”  The problem with this definition is “different” or “unusual” are relative terms.  Different or unusual compared to what?  Compared to “normal” Islam or compared to the rest of (non-Islamic) humanity or human behavior?  This vagueness creates a problem in conveying the reality of “radical” Islamic teaching and behavior.

Let’s look at The Free Dictionary definitions:

rad·i·cal (rd-kl)

adj.

1. Arising from or going to a root or source; basic: proposed a radical solution to the problem.

2. Departing markedly from the usual or customary; extreme: radical opinions on education.

3. Favoring or effecting fundamental or revolutionary changes in current practices, conditions, or institutions: radical political views.

In definition 1, once again radical can mean “basic” or the root form of Islam:  How Islam was in its beginning.

In definition 2, radical can mean unusual or extreme.  Here again this usage is relative.  Unusual or extreme compared to what?  Compared to other usual or non-extreme versions of Islamic behaviors and values?  Or compared to usual or non-extreme general (non-Islamic) human behaviors or values?  Again, this vagueness creates a problem in conveying the reality of “radical Islamic teaching and behavior.

In definition 3, radical can mean great differences from current practice, conditions or institutions or revolutionary views compared to non-revolutionary views.  This definition is less relative because the objects of the differences are identified:  Current practice compared to the different or revolutionary practices.  If this definition is used with regard to Islam, however, vagueness still exists.  What is “radical” Islam being compared to?  The current or common beliefs and practices of other Muslims or the current or common beliefs and practices of non-Islamic society? 

Complicating this question is the truth about the nature of doctrinal beliefs and practices of Muslims.  If we mistakenly believe that the beliefs and practices of Muslims are peaceful and non-threatening, then radical Islam is the right term for those who wage jihad terror.  However, if we correctly believe that the fundamental, orthodox, root beliefs promoted by today’s Islam promotes deception, terror, and violent jihad, then the term “radical Islam” becomes very misleading – vague at best.

To recap:

• Islam is radical compared to every other religious teaching and practice. 
• Jihad, terror, deception, sharia, misogyny, anti-Semitism, intolerance, and efforts toward world domination by any means necessary are basic components of orthodox Islam.
• It is foolish to focus on ISIS, ISIL, IS, Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, or any one of the hundreds of immoral, blood thirsty, intolerant Islamic groups as being “the problem.”  Islam is “the problem.”  These are only the most current Islamic “flavors of the week”, each informed and motivated by historic, orthodox, Muhammadan Islam.
• Islam is undergoing a reformation; a return to its historic essence.  The only “radical Islam” is the sleeping or apostate Islam:  The sleeping Islam of the fairly recent past (the century prior to its recent resurgence) that ignored its jihadist roots; and the apostates from orthodox Islam who for whatever perverse reason – culture, fear, ignorance, bad habit – insist on calling themselves “Muslim.”
• “Radical Islam” is a misleading phrase that avoids the truth about Islam and should be avoided in the interest of truth and accuracy in the media.

3,500 entered US from African Ebola hotspots since January 2014

Most entered through New York airports.  Of special interest to Floridians, several entered through Miami and Fort Lauderdale.  There was and continues to be NO screening – and our leaders have shown no sign of really caring.

God help our ignorant leaders.

This exclusive from Breitbart:

DALLAS, Texas — Over 3,500 passengers from Ebola affected nations have been allowed to enter the U.S. without any special screening since January 1, 2014, according to a leaked internal intelligence report from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Office of Intelligence and Liaison exclusively obtained by Breitbart Texas. In addition, the individuals entered into at least 18 heavily populated U.S. cities across the nation.

The leaked report specifically reads, “According to CBP [Customs and Border Protection] data, since January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014, a total of 3,566 passengers with a nexus to Guinea transited through or arrived at U.S. airports.” The term “nexus” refers to passengers who flew from the Ebola stricken nation to a second nation, and then from the second nation into the United States. Guinea is attributed as the nation of origin for the current Ebola outbreak.

The lack of any special processes or testing for individuals with a nexus to Ebola affected nations is illumined in the leaked internal report as well. It reads, “The Level 3 travel alert issued by the CDC on July 31st remains in effect as of August 13, 2014. The travel alert urges all US residents to avoid nonessential travel to Guinea. Although CBP is not doing any additional screening of passengers from the affected countries, CBP has enhanced their screening routine processes through guidance and training. Additionally, CDC is providing assistance with exit screening and communication efforts in West Africa to prevent sick travelers from boarding planes.”

The report indicates that the vast majority of the 3,566 of passengers with a nexus to the nation of origin for the current Ebola outbreak either deplaned in or traveled through New York City. Other cities include Atlanta, Chicago, Minneapolis, Seattle, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Dallas, Miami, Cincinnati, Columbus, Pittsburg, St. Louis, Indianapolis, Baltimore, Washington, D.C., Fort Lauderdale, and Cleveland.

The U.S. federal agent who leaked the report to Breitbart Texas did so and spoke on the condition of anonymity. The agent said, “This internal report, coupled with the current Ebola case in Dallas, reveals that our government is not only allowing individuals from Ebola-stricken nations to enter the U.S. with only the basic screening they give to passengers from any foreign nation, but the claims of the issue being properly addressed in the West African countries are untrue.”

“The CBP is taking no action to screen individuals entering the U.S. from Ebola-stricken nations. We are doing nothing. All we are doing is asking authorities in nations with Ebola to stick a thermometer in the mouths of people boarding planes. That does nothing to keep Americans safe from Ebola,” the agent said.

The leaked report is provided in its unaltered state for our readers. There are nine pages in total and no redactions have been made. The report is labeled “UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY//LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE” and contains a warning stating that the document is not to be made available to the media, the general public, or nonsecure internet servers. It further states that some of this information may not be available through the Freedom of Information Act.

Follow Breitbart Texas Managing Director on Twitter @brandondarby.

Some questions about how we are responding to Ebola…

The “experts” claim how difficult catching the Ebola virus is – that we practically have to exchange sweat to catch it.  Dr. Siegel on FOX even claimed that kissing won’t spread it.

This photo represents how difficult it is to catch Ebola…if you have a suit like these…

Why do doctors who treat Ebola patients have to wear suits like these?  Do they know something about Ebola that the likes of Dr. Siegel are not telling us?

If Ebola is so difficult to transmit, how come well-trained US doctors treating Ebola in Africa contracted the disease?

If Ebola is so difficult to transmit, how come these infected missionary doctors were transported in aircraft insulted with three layers of protection?

I suspect the motives of people whose highest priority is to protect people in other nations.  During his congressional hearing, one of the cured missionary doctors insisted  the United States government send troops and millions of dollars to Africa to build infrastructure in hot zones where the natives are suspicious of and resent outside influences.  He held no concern or regard for safeguards in the United States.  His priorities were for his favorite missionary activity.  To hell with us over here.  He couldn’t care less.  And our government salivated all over his suggestion.  Two days later, 3,000 US soldiers were on their way.

In the meantime, we have not restricted incoming flights from infected African nations. Why not?  Because, as the CDC spokesman said, “It is not my call.”  Here is more of the illogic of what’s happening as reported by Breitbart:

CDC Spokesman Dave Daigle stated that the US would not be preventing flights from countries with massive outbreaks of the Ebola virus from coming in to the United States, despite seemingly admitting that the case of Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan showed that airport screening cannot catch every case of Ebola…

When asked whether he would recommend the US simply not allow flights from countries like Sierra Leone and Liberia, Daigle responded, “I don't think so, and that’s certainly not, I'm not even sure if that’s a CDC call.”

And our borders remain as porous as ever, despite the likelihood that a polio-like respiratory disease that is spreading like wildfire among our children is suspected of being spread by illegals.

We are reminded that all staff of US hospitals have been trained in how to identify and isolate those who are suspected of symptoms of Ebola.  Then why did Presbyterian Hospital in Texas send the infected man home from the emergency room after he told her that he recently arrived from Liberia?  He then had three more days to spread the disease.  Here’s an example of CYA for the textbooks:

Hospital officials defended the initial handling of Duncan, issuing a statement describing his fever as "low-grade," and insisting "his condition did not warrant admission." They added that they are still investigating why Duncan's travel history was not conveyed to the doctors who sent him home. Hospital epidemiologist Dr. Edward Goodman told the Associated Press that the patient did not show the riskier symptoms of vomiting and diarrhea.

If several school children in Texas are suspected of coming in contact with one or more Ebola carriers, why aren’t classes in those schools suspended for the requisite 21 days instead of leaving it up to panicked parents to do the smart thing and pull their kids from class?

The most effective way to destroy the public trust in the medical community and our government is to over promise and under deliver.  And that is exactly what they are doing.  If I can spend a few minutes a day over several weeks to come up with a significant list of inconsistencies between medical rhetoric and observable reality, then I suspect most of the rest of our population is noticing the same inconsistencies.  And that is a trigger for failing trust and potential panic.