CHATHAM REPUBLICANS MEET MONDAY, OCT 3, 5PM, CHATHAM COMMUNITY CENTER

Because of Columbus Day falling on our usual meeting day, the October meeting will be this coming Monday, October 3rd, 5 to 6:30pm at the Chatham Community Center. All those who want Republicans to win on November 8th are welcome to attend.

An agenda will be posted on the website before the meeting.

|

ISRAEL'S PRIME MINISTER'S HISTORIC SPEECH TO THE UNITED NATIONS

Israel is our closest and most valuable ally in the Middle East. It has an extraordinary history of success and a future that will be even brighter.

Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech to the UN Assembly actually drew applause, something unprecedented for Israel and perhaps a precursor of what the Prime Minister predicted in his remarks. What follows is the video and transcript in full of his speech and a link to an analysis of the records of Netanyahu and Obama over these past years.



Remarks by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the 71st sessions of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, September 22, 2016.

Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

What I’m about to say is going to shock you: Israel has a bright future at the UN.
Now I know that hearing that from me must surely come as a surprise, because year after year I’ve stood at this very podium and slammed the UN for its obsessive bias against Israel. And the UN deserved every scathing word – for the disgrace of the General Assembly that last year passed 20 resolutions against the democratic State of Israel and a grand total of three resolutions against all the other countries on the planet.

Israel – twenty; rest of the world – three.

And what about the joke called the UN Human Rights Council, which each year condemns Israel more than all the countries of the world combined. As women are being systematically raped, murdered, sold into slavery across the world, which is the only country that the UN’s Commission on Women chose to condemn this year? Yep, you guessed it – Israel. Israel. Israel where women fly fighter jets, lead major corporations, head universities, preside – twice – over the Supreme Court, and have served as Speaker of the Knesset and Prime Minister.

And this circus continues at UNESCO. UNESCO, the UN body charged with preserving world heritage. Now, this is hard to believe but UNESCO just denied the 4,000-year connection between the Jewish people and its holiest site, the Temple Mount. That’s just as absurd as denying the connection between the Great Wall of China and China.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The UN, begun as a moral force, has become a moral farce. So when it comes to Israel at the UN, you’d probably think nothing will ever change, right? Well think again. You see, everything will change and a lot sooner than you think. The change will happen in this hall, because back home, your governments are rapidly changing their attitudes towards Israel. And sooner or later, that’s going to change the way you vote on Israel at the UN.

The UN, begun as a moral force, has become a moral farce.

More and more nations in Asia, in Africa, in Latin America, more and more nations see Israel as a potent partner – a partner in fighting the terrorism of today, a partner in developing the technology of tomorrow.

Today Israel has diplomatic relations with over 160 countries. That’s nearly double the number that we had when I served here as Israel’s ambassador some 30 years ago. And those ties are getting broader and deeper every day. World leaders increasingly appreciate that Israel is a powerful country with one of the best intelligence services on earth. Because of our unmatched experience and proven capabilities in fighting terrorism, many of your governments seek our help in keeping your countries safe.

Many also seek to benefit from Israel’s ingenuity in agriculture, in health, in water, in cyber and in the fusion of big data, connectivity and artificial intelligence – that fusion that is changing our world in every way.

You might consider this: Israel leads the world in recycling wastewater. We recycle about 90% of our wastewater. Now, how remarkable is that? Well, given that the next country on the list only recycles about 20% of its wastewater, Israel is a global water power. So if you have a thirsty world, and we do, there’s no better ally than Israel.

How about cybersecurity? That’s an issue that affects everyone. Israel accounts for one-tenth of one percent of the world’s population, yet last year we attracted some 20% of the global private investment in cybersecurity. I want you to digest that number. In cyber, Israel is punching a whopping 200 times above its weight. So Israel is also a global cyber power. If hackers are targeting your banks, your planes, your power grids and just about everything else, Israel can offer indispensable help.

Governments are changing their attitudes towards Israel because they know that Israel can help them protect their peoples, can help them feed them, can help them better their lives.

Governments are changing their attitudes towards Israel because they know that Israel can help them protect their peoples, can help them feed them, can help them better their lives.

This summer I had an unbelievable opportunity to see this change so vividly during an unforgettable visit to four African countries. This is the first visit to Africa by an Israeli prime minister in decades. Later today, I’ll be meeting with leaders from 17 African countries. We’ll discuss how Israeli technology can help them in their efforts to transform their countries.

In Africa, things are changing. In China, India, Russia, Japan, attitudes towards Israel have changed as well. These powerful nations know that, despite Israel’s small size, it can make a big difference in many, many areas that are important to them.

But now I’m going to surprise you even more. You see, the biggest change in attitudes towards Israel is taking place elsewhere. It’s taking place in the Arab world. Our peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan continue to be anchors of stability in the volatile Middle East. But I have to tell you this: For the first time in my lifetime, many other states in the region recognize that Israel is not their enemy. They recognize that Israel is their ally. Our common enemies are Iran and ISIS. Our common goals are security, prosperity and peace. I believe that in the years ahead we will work together to achieve these goals, work together openly.

So Israel’s diplomatic relations are undergoing nothing less than a revolution. But in this revolution, we never forget that our most cherished alliance, our deepest friendship is with the United States of America, the most powerful and the most generous nation on earth. Our unbreakable bond with the United States of America transcends parties and politics. It reflects, above all else, the overwhelming support for Israel among the American people, support which is at record highs and for which we are deeply grateful.

I believe the day is not far off when Israel will be able to rely on many, many countries to stand with us at the UN. Slowly but surely, the days when UN ambassadors reflexively condemn Israel, those days are coming to an end.

The United Nations denounces Israel; the United States supports Israel. And a central pillar of that defense has been America’s consistent support for Israel at the UN. I appreciate President Obama’s commitment to that longstanding US policy. In fact, the only time that the United States cast a UN Security Council veto during the Obama presidency was against an anti-Israel resolution in 2011. As President Obama rightly declared at this podium, peace will not come from statements and resolutions at the United Nations.

I believe the day is not far off when Israel will be able to rely on many, many countries to stand with us at the UN. Slowly but surely, the days when UN ambassadors reflexively condemn Israel, those days are coming to an end.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Today’s automatic majority against Israel at the UN reminds me of the story, the incredible story of Hiroo Onada. Hiroo was a Japanese soldier who was sent to the Philippines in 1944. He lived in the jungle. He scavenged for food. He evaded capture. Eventually he surrendered, but that didn’t happen until 1974, some 30 years after World War II ended. For decades, Hiroo refused to believe the war was over. As Hiroo was hiding in the jungle, Japanese tourists were swimming in pools in American luxury hotels in nearby Manila. Finally, mercifully, Hiroo’s former commanding officer was sent to persuade him to come out of hiding. Only then did Hiroo lay down his arms.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
Distinguished delegates from so many lands,

I have one message for you today: Lay down your arms. The war against Israel at the UN is over. Perhaps some of you don’t know it yet, but I am confident that one day in the not too distant future you will also get the message from your president or from your prime minister informing you that the war against Israel at the United Nations has ended. Yes, I know, there might be a storm before the calm. I know there is talk about ganging up on Israel at the UN later this year. Given its history of hostility towards Israel, does anyone really believe that Israel will let the UN determine our security and our vital national interests?

We will not accept any attempt by the UN to dictate terms to Israel. The road to peace runs through Jerusalem and Ramallah, not through New York.

But regardless of what happens in the months ahead, I have total confidence that in the years ahead the revolution in Israel’s standing among the nations will finally penetrate this hall of nations. I have so much confidence, in fact, that I predict that a decade from now an Israeli prime minister will stand right here where I am standing and actually applaud the UN. But I want to ask you: Why do we have to wait a decade? Why keep vilifying Israel? Perhaps because some of you don’t appreciate that the obsessive bias against Israel is not just a problem for my country, it’s a problem for your countries too. Because if the UN spends so much time condemning the only liberal democracy in the Middle East, it has far less time to address war, disease, poverty, climate change and all the other serious problems that plague the planet.

Are the half million slaughtered Syrians helped by your condemnation of Israel? The same Israel that has treated thousands of injured Syrians in our hospitals, including a field hospital that I built right along the Golan Heights border with Syria. Are the gays hanging from cranes in Iran helped by your denigration of Israel? That same Israel where gays march proudly in our streets and serve in our parliament, including I’m proud to say in my own Likud party. Are the starving children in North Korea’s brutal tyranny, are they helped by your demonization of Israel? Israel, whose agricultural knowhow is feeding the hungry throughout the developing world?

The sooner the UN’s obsession with Israel ends, the better. The better for Israel, the better for your countries, the better for the UN itself.

The sooner the UN’s obsession with Israel ends, the better. The better for Israel, the better for your countries, the better for the UN itself.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

If UN habits die hard, Palestinian habits die even harder. President Abbas just attacked from this podium the Balfour Declaration. He’s preparing a lawsuit against Britain for that declaration from 1917. That’s almost 100 years ago – talk about being stuck in the past. The Palestinians may just as well sue Iran for the Cyrus Declaration, which enabled the Jews to rebuild our Temple in Jerusalem 2,500 years ago. Come to think of it, why not a Palestinian class action suit against Abraham for buying that plot of land in Hebron where the fathers and mothers of the Jewish people were buried 4,000 years ago?

You’re not laughing. It’s as absurd as that. To sue the British government for the Balfour Declaration? Is he kidding? And this is taken seriously here?

President Abbas attacked the Balfour Declaration because it recognized the right of the Jewish people to a national home in the land of Israel. When the United Nations supported the establishment of a Jewish state in 1947, it recognized our historical and our moral rights in our homeland and to our homeland. Yet today, nearly 70 years later, the Palestinians still refuse to recognize those rights – not our right to a homeland, not our right to a state, not our right to anything. And this remains the true core of the conflict, the persistent Palestinian refusal to recognize the Jewish state in any boundary. You see, this conflict is not about the settlements. It never was.

The conflict raged for decades before there was a single settlement, when Judea Samaria and Gaza were all in Arab hands. The West Bank and Gaza were in Arab hands and they attacked us again and again and again. And when we uprooted all 21 settlements in Gaza and withdrew from every last inch of Gaza, we didn’t get peace from Gaza – we got thousands of rockets fired at us from Gaza.

This conflict rages because for the Palestinians, the real settlements they’re after are Haifa, Jaffa and Tel Aviv.

The issue of settlements is a real one and it can and must be resolved in final status negotiations.

Now mind you, the issue of settlements is a real one and it can and must be resolved in final status negotiations. But this conflict has never been about the settlements or about establishing a Palestinian state. It’s always been about the existence of a Jewish state, a Jewish state in any boundary.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Israel is ready, I am ready to negotiate all final status issues but one thing I will never negotiate: Our right to the one and only Jewish state.

Wow, sustained applause for the Prime Minister of Israel in the General Assembly? The change may be coming sooner than I thought.

Had the Palestinians said yes to a Jewish state in 1947, there would have been no war, no refugees and no conflict. And when the Palestinians finally say yes to a Jewish state, we will be able to end this conflict once and for all.

Now here’s the tragedy, because, see, the Palestinians are not only trapped in the past, their leaders are poisoning the future.

I want you to imagine a day in the life of a 13-year-old Palestinian boy, I’ll call him Ali. Ali wakes up before school, he goes to practice with a soccer team named after Dalal Mughrabi, a Palestinian terrorist responsible for the murder of a busload of 37 Israelis. At school, Ali attends an event sponsored by the Palestinian Ministry of Education honoring Baha Alyan, who last year murdered three Israeli civilians. On his walk home, Ali looks up at a towering statue erected just a few weeks ago by the Palestinian Authority to honor Abu Sukar, who detonated a bomb in the center of Jerusalem, killing 15 Israelis.

When Ali gets home, he turns on the TV and sees an interview with a senior Palestinian official, Jibril Rajoub, who says that if he had a nuclear bomb, he’d detonate it over Israel that very day. Ali then turns on the radio and he hears President Abbas’s adviser, Sultan Abu al-Einein, urging Palestinians, here’s a quote, “to slit the throats of Israelis wherever you find them.” Ali checks his Facebook and he sees a recent post by President Abbas’s Fatah Party calling the massacre of 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics a “heroic act”. On YouTube, Ali watches a clip of President Abbas himself saying, “We welcome every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem.” Direct quote.

Over dinner, Ali asks his mother what would happen if he killed a Jew and went to an Israeli prison? Here’s what she tells him. She tells him he’d be paid thousands of dollars each month by the Palestinian Authority. In fact, she tells him, the more Jews he would kill, the more money he’d get. Oh, and when he gets out of prison, Ali would be guaranteed a job with the Palestinian Authority.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

All this is real. It happens every day, all the time. Sadly, Ali represents hundreds of thousands of Palestinian children who are indoctrinated with hate every moment, every hour.

This is child abuse.

Imagine your child undergoing this brainwashing. Imagine what it takes for a young boy or girl to break free out of this culture of hate. Some do but far too many don’t. How can any of us expect young Palestinians to support peace when their leaders poison their minds against peace?

How can any of us expect young Palestinians to support peace when their leaders poison their minds against peace?

We in Israel don’t do this. We educate our children for peace. In fact, we recently launched a pilot program, my government did, to make the study of Arabic mandatory for Jewish children so that we can better understand each other, so that we can live together side-by-side in peace.

Of course, like all societies Israel has fringe elements. But it’s our response to those fringe elements, it’s our response to those fringe elements that makes all the difference.

Take the tragic case of Ahmed Dawabsha. I’ll never forget visiting Ahmed in the hospital just hours after he was attacked. A little boy, really a baby, he was badly burned. Ahmed was the victim of a horrible terrorist act perpetrated by Jews. He lay bandaged and unconscious as Israeli doctors worked around the clock to save him.

No words can bring comfort to this boy or to his family. Still, as I stood by his bedside I told his uncle, “This is not our people. This is not our way.” I then ordered extraordinary measures to bring Ahmed’s assailants to justice and today the Jewish citizens of Israel accused of attacking the Dawabsha family are in jail awaiting trial.

Now, for some, this story shows that both sides have their extremists and both sides are equally responsible for this seemingly endless conflict.

But what Ahmed’s story actually proves is the very opposite. It illustrates the profound difference between our two societies, because while Israeli leaders condemn terrorists, all terrorists, Arabs and Jews alike, Palestinian leaders celebrate terrorists. While Israel jails the handful of Jewish terrorists among us, the Palestinians pay thousands of terrorists among them.

So I call on President Abbas: you have a choice to make. You can continue to stoke hatred as you did today or you can finally confront hatred and work with me to establish peace between our two peoples.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I hear the buzz. I know that many of you have given up on peace. But I want you to know – I have not given up on peace. I remain committed to a vision of peace based on two states for two peoples. I believe as never before that changes taking place in the Arab world today offer a unique opportunity to advance that peace.

I commend President el-Sissi of Egypt for his efforts to advance peace and stability in our region. Israel welcomes the spirit of the Arab peace initiative and welcomes a dialogue with Arab states to advance a broader peace. I believe that for that broader peace to be fully achieved the Palestinians have to be part of it. I’m ready to begin negotiations to achieve this today – not tomorrow, not next week, today.

President Abbas spoke here an hour ago. Wouldn’t it be better if instead of speaking past each other we were speaking to one another? President Abbas, instead of railing against Israel at the United Nations in New York, I invite you to speak to the Israeli people at the Knesset in Jerusalem. And I would gladly come to speak to the Palestinian parliament in Ramallah.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

While Israel seeks peace with all our neighbors, we also know that peace has no greater enemy than the forces of militant Islam. The bloody trail of this fanaticism runs through all the continents represented here. It runs through Paris and Nice, Brussels and Baghdad, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, Minnesota and New York, from Sydney to San Bernardino. So many have suffered its savagery: Christian and Jews, women and gays, Yazidis and Kurds and many, many others.

Yet the heaviest price, the heaviest price of all has been paid by innocent Muslims. Hundreds of thousands unmercifully slaughtered. Millions turned into desperate refugees, tens of millions brutally subjugated. The defeat of militant Islam will thus be a victory for all humanity, but it would especially be a victory for those many Muslims who seek a life without fear, a life of peace, a life of hope.

But to defeat the forces of militant Islam, we must fight them relentlessly. We must fight them in the real world. We must fight them in the virtual world. We must dismantle their networks, disrupt their funding, discredit their ideology. We can defeat them and we will defeat them. Medievalism is no match for modernity. Hope is stronger than hate, freedom mightier than fear.

We can do this.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Israel fights this fateful battle against the forces of militant Islam every day. We keep our borders safe from ISIS, we prevent the smuggling of game-changing weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon, we thwart Palestinian terror attacks in Judea and Samaria, the West Bank, and we deter missile attacks from Hamas-controlled Gaza.

That’s the same Hamas terror organization that cruelly, unbelievably cruelly refuses to return three of our citizens and the bodies of our fallen soldiers, Oron Shaul and Hadar Goldin. Hadar Goldin’s parents, Leah and Simcha Goldin, are here with us today. They have one request – to bury their beloved son in Israel. All they ask for is one simple thing – to be able to visit the grave of their fallen son Hadar in Israel. Hamas refuses. They couldn’t care less.

I implore you to stand with them, with us, with all that’s decent in our world against the inhumanity of Hamas – all that is indecent and barbaric. Hamas breaks every humanitarian rule in the book, throw the book at them.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The greatest threat to my country, to our region, and ultimately to our world remains the militant Islamic regime of Iran.

The greatest threat to my country, to our region, and ultimately to our world remains the militant Islamic regime of Iran. Iran openly seeks Israel’s annihilation. It threatens countries across the Middle East, it sponsors terror worldwide.

This year, Iran has fired ballistic missiles in direct defiance of Security Council Resolutions. It has expended its aggression in Iraq, in Syria, in Yemen. Iran, the world’s foremost sponsor of terrorism continued to build its global terror network. That terror network now spans five continents.

So my point to you is this: The threat Iran poses to all of us is not behind us, it’s before us. In the coming years, there must be a sustained and united effort to push back against Iran’s aggression and Iran’s terror. With the nuclear constraints on Iran one year closer to being removed, let me be clear: Israel will not allow the terrorist regime in Iran to develop nuclear weapons – not now, not in a decade, not ever.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I stand before you today at a time when Israel’s former president, Shimon Peres, is fighting for his life. Shimon is one of Israel’s founding fathers, one of its boldest statesmen, one of its most respected leaders. I know you will all join me and join all the people of Israel in wishing him refuah shlemah Shimon, a speedy recovery.

I’ve always admired Shimon’s boundless optimism, and like him, I too am filled with hope. I am filled with hope because Israel is capable of defending itself by itself against any threat. I am filled with hope because the valor of our fighting men and women is second to none. I am filled with hope because I know the forces of civilization will ultimately triumph over the forces of terror. I am filled with hope because in the age of innovation, Israel – the innovation nation – is thriving as never before. I am filled with hope because Israel works tirelessly to advance equality and opportunity for all its citizens: Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze, everyone. And I am filled with hope because despite all the naysayers, I believe that in the years ahead, Israel will forge a lasting peace with all our neighbors.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am hopeful about what Israel can accomplish because I’ve seen what Israel has accomplished. In 1948, the year of Israel’s independence, our population was 800,000. Our main export was oranges. People said then we were too small, too weak, too isolated, too demographically outnumbered to survive, let alone thrive. The skeptics were wrong about Israel then; the skeptics are wrong about Israel now.

Israel’s population has grown tenfold, our economy fortyfold. Today our biggest export is technology – Israeli technology, which powers the world’s computers, cellphones, cars and so much more.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The future belongs to those who innovate and this is why the future belongs to countries like Israel. Israel wants to be your partner in seizing that future, so I call on all of you: Cooperate with Israel, embrace Israel, dream with Israel. Dream of the future that we can build together, a future of breathtaking progress, a future of security, prosperity and peace, a future of hope for all humanity, a future where even at the UN, even in this hall, Israel will finally, inevitably, take its rightful place among the nations.

Thank you.

How do Netanyahu and Obama compare in foreign policy?
Read this.

|

THE LEFT AND BLACK LIVES MATTER SEEK TO DESTROY CHARLOTTE - - AND HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTS THEM

The Marxist left, aided by George Soros, Black Lives Matter and radical Islam are seeking to destroy law and order in America and create chaos, so they can build a new America with social justice for all. What a crock. Read the truth about the rioters in Charlotte and their manufactured false grievances.

If you support their efforts, by all means vote for Hillary Clinton and the rest of the social justice Democrat Party in November.



Protest Thugs and the Real Evil in Charlotte

Nothing says “family man” like assaulting women and children.

9.23.2016

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.

Charlotte riot.jpg

click to enlarge


Keith Lamont Scott was scum.

He had been convicted of assault with a deadly weapon in two different states and convicted of assault in three states. He had been hit with “assault with intent to kill” charges in the 90s. His record of virtue included “assault on a child under 12” and “assault on a female.”

The media spin; “Family and neighbors call Scott a quiet ‘family man.’”

Nothing says “quiet” like “assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill” and nothing says “family man” like assaulting women and children.

Keith Lamont Scott, the latest martyr of Black Lives Matter and its media propaganda corps, was shot while waving a gun around. He had spent 7 years in jail for “aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.”

This vicious monster’s career of crime ended when he was shot by Brentley Vinson, an African-American police officer, protecting himself from the latest rampage by this “quiet family man.”

Brentley Vinson is everything that Scott isn’t. The son of a police officer, Brentley dreamed of following in his father’s footsteps. He used to organize his football team’s bible studies and mentored younger players. Former teammates describe him as a “great guy” with “good morals.” His former coach calls him a “natural leader” and says that, “We need more Brent Vinsons… in our communities.”

Except that Obama, Black Lives Matter, the media, the NAACP and everyone else going after this bright and decent African-American officer has decided that what we really need are more Keith Lamont Scotts. And the streets of Charlotte are full of “Scotts” throwing rocks at police, assaulting reporters and wrecking everything in sight in marches that are as “peaceful” as Scott was a “quiet family man.”

That’s what Hillary Clinton wanted when she tweeted that, “We have two names to add to a long list of African-Americans killed by police officers. It’s unbearable, and it needs to become intolerable.”

What exactly should be intolerable? An African-American police officer defending his life against a violent criminal who happened to be black? Should black criminals enjoy a special immunity? The greatest victims of black criminals are black communities.

Whom does Hillary Clinton imagine she’s helping here? Instead of standing with heroic African-American police officers like Vinson, she’s championing criminal scum like Scott.

Tim Kaine, Hillary’s No. 2, wants us to think about Scott’s family. We should do that. Scott’s brother announced on camera that all “white people” are “devils.” Timmy should check to see if he can get an exemption from white devildom. But if there are any white devils, it’s men like Kaine and women like Hillary who enable the worst behavior in a troubled community while punishing those who try to help.

Every time the lie about “peaceful” protests is repeated, another black community becomes unlivable.

Twenty police officers have been injured and National Guard troops have arrived to deal with all those “peaceful” protests. Protesters chanted, “Black Lives Matter” and “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” before throwing things at police and then peacefully shooting each other. Stores had their windows broken and decorated with Black Lives Matter graffiti. A Walmart was peacefully looted and trucks were torched.

A police officer was peacefully hit by a car. Another was peacefully hit in the face with a rock. Mobs besieged and attempted to break into hotels. Reporters were attacked and a photographer was nearly thrown into a fire. White people were targeted by the racist Black Lives Matter mob and assaulted.

But all these peaceful rioters are probably just quiet family men too.

The peaceful protests are as big a lie as the “bookish” Keith Lamont Scott reading a book in his car. Police had no trouble finding a gun. They couldn’t have found Scott anywhere near a book. The only thing he could have done with a book is try to beat someone to death with it. Maybe a child.

Scott wasn’t a quiet family man; he was a violent criminal with a horrifying vicious streak. He and the rest of the Black Lives Matter rioters remind us of the monsters that we need dedicated police officers to protect us from.

The spin on what happened between a deranged black criminal and a courageous black police officer fell apart as fast as the Freddie Gray case, where black police officers were targeted and a city terrorized over conspiracy theories relating to the accidental death of a drug dealer.

The claims of racism are absurd. Not only was Scott shot by an African-American police officer, but Charlotte Police Chief Kerr Putney, who has taken the lead in defending him, is also African-American.

Are we supposed to believe that an African-American police officer and an African-American police chief are racists or that these two black men took the lead in a genocidal conspiracy to kill black men?

That’s the laughable premise of the racist Black Lives Matter hatefest that alternates between “Stop killing us” street theater and violent assaults on police officers, reporters and anyone in the area.

But the truth doesn’t matter. Black Lives Matter rioters are still chanting, “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” long after the Michael Brown lie fell apart. They’re holding up signs reading, “It Was a Book.” The lie is backed by some of the biggest media corporations in the country, by $130 million from George Soros and the Ford Foundation, by Barack Hussein Obama and by Hillary Clinton.

These are the malign forces destroying Charlotte, as they trashed Baltimore. On the ground there are the vulture community organizers of Black Lives Matter, funded by the left, who parachute in to organize race riots, behind them are the reporters who sell the spin live on the air and the photographers who capture glamor shots of the racist rioters, and after them come the lawyers of the DOJ out to ruin, terrorize and intimidate whatever law enforcement survived the riots.

They did it in Ferguson and a dozen other places. Now they want to do it in Charlotte.

They want to do it because they hate white people and black people. They hate peace and decency. They hate the idea of people getting up in the morning and working for a living. They hate the idea of good officers, white and black men and women, like Brentley Vinson, who genuinely believe in doing the right thing. They want unearned power. They demand unearned wealth. And they thrive on destruction.

This is the real evil in Charlotte. And we need to stand up to it. From the ghetto to the manors of the liberal elite from burning cars to pricey restaurants in exclusive neighborhoods, it plots against us.

It is a lie repeated a million times. Sometimes the lie is simple. Other times it’s sophisticated. But the way to fight it is to begin with the truth.

The truth is that Keith Lamont Scott was a violent criminal who came to a bad end because of his own actions. Just like Michael Brown, Freddie Gray and too many other Black Lives Matter martyrs to count.

The truth is that everything Black Lives Matter does reminds us of why we need police officers.

The truth is that this is not about race, but about those who want to build and those who want to destroy. It’s about the difference between Brentley Vinson and Keith Lamont Scott.

It’s about what kind of country we want to be. Is it a country that celebrates a young black football player who chose to follow in his father’s footsteps, who organized bible study and helped others, who risked his life to keep other people safe. Or is it one that celebrates Keith Lamont Scott, who assaulted a woman, a child and anyone else he could get at, who terrorized three states and died as he lived.

Obama and the left want a nation of Keith Lamont Scotts. But now it’s our turn to choose.

|

A SHORT EXPLANATION OF ISLAM FROM ONE WHO KNOWS

Brigitte Gabriel, a Christian, grew up during the wars in Lebanon fomented by Muslims who wanted to override the Lebanese constitution to get more power. It was a terrible time which led her to emigrate to the United States.

Today she runs an organization -- Act for America -- to get the truth about Islam out to everyone. She has written two books about Islam and its goal of world supremacism and the methods used to achieve that end -- violence and deceit.

In ISIS and Boko Haram we see the violence as they seek to gain territory for Islam and rid the world of non-believers.

What we don't see as readily is the deceit, lying and trickery practiced by Muslims in lands where they don't have the muscle yet to employ violence to advance towards the goal of world dominance. Spokesmen of CAIR (Council for American-Islamic Relations) and the Muslim American Society are just some of those who show a false face and speak with forked tongue.

In the video set forth below an operative for one of such organizations poses a question to the panel which Brigitte Gabriel takes head on.


|

CHATHAM REPUBLICANS MEET MONDAY, SEP 12TH, 5PM, CHATHAM COMMUNITY CENTER


This is an important meeting since it will be the kickoff for the campaign for the final election on November 8th. With the primary having taken place we will have the full line-up of candidates to be on the ballot in November.

All Republicans and other patriots who want Republican victories on Election Day on Tuesday, the 8th of November, are urged to attend this meeting.

This is the meeting at which we intend to finalize our plans for the remaining 56 days of the campaign.

We welcome any and all ideas that will contribute to a winning campaign.

What can the committee do, what can each individual do, to achieve victory in November for our candidates for President, Congress, State Senate, Sheriff and County Commissioner?

The Chatham RTC Planning Committee has been reviewing options and will be prepared to present those and listen to other ideas at the meeting.

Please come to the meeting. It is very important for the nation, the state, the county and Chatham. Somebody is going to be elected to each of these offices and it will be best if a Republican is successful in each of these elections. We need everyone to pitch in.

There will also be four citizen ballot question to vote on at the November 8th election. These will be discussed at the meeting as well if time permits.

Draft Agenda

2016.9.12 CRTC Meeting Agenda.pdf

|

AMERICA STILL ASLEEP, 15 YEARS AFTER 9/11, AS ISLAMIC THREAT GROWS


FIFTEEN YEARS AFTER 9/11, AND AMERICA STILL SLEEPS

How much worse will the destruction and death have to be to wake us up?
September 9, 2016 Bruce Thornton
Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center​.

Fifteen years after the carnage of 9/11, American foreign policy is still mired in its fossilized dogmas and dangerous delusions. The consequences are obvious. Iran, the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism and long an avowed enemy of the United States, has filled the vacuum of our ignominious retreat from the Middle East, even as the mullahs move ever closer to possessing nuclear weapons. Russia, Iran’s improbable ally, bombs civilians in Syria, kills the Syrian fighters we have trained, bullies its neighbor Ukraine, consolidates its take-over of the Crimea, and relentlessly pursues its interests with disregard for international law and contempt for our feeble protests. Iraq, for which thousands of Americans bled and died, is now a puppet state of Iran. Afghanistan is poised to be overrun by the Taliban in a few years, and ISIS, al Qaeda 2.0, continues to inspire franchises throughout the world and to murder European and American citizens.

So much for the belief, frequently heard in the months after the attacks of 9/11, that “this changes everything.” The smoking ruins and 3000 dead surely had awoken us from our delusions that the “end of history” and a “new world order” had followed the collapse of the Soviet Union, “a world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak,” as George H.W. Bush said in 1990. The following decade seemed to confirm this optimism. Didn’t we quickly slap down the brutal Saddam Hussein and stop his aggression against his neighbors? Didn’t we punish the Serbs for their revanchist depredations in the Balkans? With American military power providing the muscle, the institutions of international cooperation like NATO, the International Court of Justice, and the U.N. Security Council would patrol and protect the network of new democracies that were set to evolve into versions of Western nations and enjoy such boons as individual rights, political freedom, leisure and prosperity, tolerance for minorities, equality for women, and a benign secularism.

The gruesome mayhem of 9/11 should have alerted us to the fact many Muslims didn’t get the memo about history’s demise. Indeed, long before that tragic day in September, we had been serially warned that history still had some unpleasant surprises. Theorists of neo-jihadism like Hassan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb for decades had laid out the case for war against the infidel West and its aggression against Islam. “It is the nature of Islam,” al-Banna wrote, “to dominate not to be dominated, to impose its laws on all nations and extend its power to the entire planet.” So too the leader of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the Ayatollah Khomeini: “Those who study jihad will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world,” which is why “Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers.” The kidnapping of U.S. diplomatic personnel in Tehran by a group called “Muslim Students Following the Line of the Imam [Khomeini]” sent us a message that we were engaged in the religious war the jihadists warned would come. But few of those responsible for our security and interests had ears to hear or eyes to see.

Not even when the words became bloody deeds did we listen. The bombing of the Beirut Marine barracks in 1983, which killed 241 servicemen, was supported by Iran and executed by its proxy terrorist group Hezbollah. Our refusal to respond reflected our failure to take seriously Khomeini’s vow to spread his revolution to the whole world. The humiliating televised abuse of our dead soldiers in Mogadishu in 1993, followed by our withdrawal, was exploited by Osama bin Laden in his sermons as signs that America had “foundations of straw.” That same year came the first World Trade Center attack, which killed six and wounded 1,042, an operation inspired by al Qaeda and traditional jihadist doctrine. In 1995 five Americans were killed by al Qaeda operatives at a training facility in Riyadh. In 1996 a truck bomb exploded in front of a residential complex housing Air Force personnel near Dhahran, killing 19 Americans. In 1998 al Qaeda bombed our embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam. Twelve Americans died in Nairobi. And the last warning came in October of 2000, when the destroyer Cole was attacked by a fishing boat loaded with explosive. Seventeen sailors died and 39 were wounded.

Yet during these two decades of attacks that proved the jihadists’ words were not just bluster, we did little in response. We interpreted the attacks as crimes, not battles in a war, and reflections of poverty, autocracy, or vague “evil,” rather than as the fulfillment of Allah’s divine commands. Instead, Clinton launched cruise missiles that made a lot of noise but accomplished nothing, limited as those attacks were by timid rules of engagement. His foreign policy was internationalist and idealist, seeing the spread of democracy and the promotion of human rights as paramount in foreign affairs. America’s presence needed to be reduced in the world, and the use of force should be a last resort, and even then carefully calibrated to avoid international condemnation and American casualties. “Dialogue” and “outreach” were preferable, for the jihadists were just defending “traditional values,” as one State Department official said. The wages of that delusion were the burned and dismembered bodies in Manhattan, the Pentagon, and a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

This history is worth reviewing, for all these mistakes, these failures of imagination, these indulgences of naïve idealism, these sacrifices of our security and interests to political advantage, all comprise the “everything” that 9/11 was supposed to “change.” But here we are, fifteen years later, with a similar history of folly. George W. Bush pursued a delusional program of democracy promotion in Iraq and Afghanistan, with scant appreciation for the profound cultural differences between Islam and the West. But he at least left his successor a stabilized Iraq, which Obama quickly abandoned just to fulfill a campaign promise and assert his progressive bona fides. Then Obama blustered that Syria’s “Assad has to go” and laid down “red lines” that were not to be crossed, only to do nothing when they were serially crossed, and to sacrifice this country’s credibility in his pursuit of the disastrous deal with Iran, our inveterate enemy stained with four decades’ worth of American blood. ISIS was allowed to flourish in the vacuum created by our withdrawal, creating a Hobbesian war of all against all, whose beneficiaries so far have been our rival Russia and our sworn enemy Iran.

Perhaps worst of all, Obama has turned jihad denial into a fatal disease. He is not alone in this delusion, for “religion of peace” and “nothing to do with Islam” have been mantras chanted by our foreign policy savants going back to the Iranian Revolution. No matter that al-Banna, Qutb, Khomeini, bin Laden, Ayman al Zawahiri, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and the mullahs in Iran all have grounded their violence and aggression in Islamic scripture and tradition. Our smug Western analysts and apologists dismiss the jihadists’ exegesis as a “hijacking” or “distortion” of the “true” Islam, presuming to understand the Islamic faith better than pious Muslims do. So we half-heartedly fight an enemy whose name we cannot even say, and whose religion of violence we desperately distort into a religion of peace and tolerance. Meanwhile, like Bill Clinton and now Obama, we use bombs and drones as telegenic marketing tools to hide our failure of nerve and short-sighted political calculations.

So fifteen years later, we still sleep. And don’t expect things to change after November. Neither candidate has shown any indication he or she is willing to make the hard decisions required to destroy ISIS and reaffirm American prestige. Trump issues vague threats about “bombing the shit” out of ISIS, while Hillary chatters about “smart power” and “coalitions,” doubling down on Obama’s failing policy. But no one proposes using the mind-concentrating levels of force, including troops as well as bombs, necessary to repair our broken foreign policy in the Middle East. Too many voters are in an isolationist mood, sick of wars and casualties, and concerned more about jobs and the economy.

The attacks on 9/11 supposedly “changed everything.” When it comes to foreign policy, they didn’t. One shudders to think how much worse the destruction and death will have to be to wake us up.

|

RETIRED U.S. ADMIRAL: ISLAM IS THE ENEMY WAGING WAR AGAINST US

In this three-minute video, retired Admiral James "Ace" Lyons expresses his exasperation about how we let opportunities to defeat Islamic threats go by during Democratic and Republican administrations going back to Carter. As a result, the Islamic threat has mushroomed to what we have today. As far as he's concerned, he accepts what Turkish president Erdogan says is the enemy, not "radical Islam," but Islam itself, no adjectives or modifiers needed. The admiral's judgment is that Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religion whose goal is world domination, plain and simple.

Click on the small box in the lower right corner for a full screen; push the Escape button in the upper right of your keyboard to return to normal viewing.

|

IT'S PROBABLY TOO LATE ALREADY: EUROPE WILL BE A MUSLIM CONTINENT IN 30 YEARS


What with Germany welcoming upwards of 2 million Muslim men into its country, the Muslim takeover may come sooner.

What kind of a place will Europe be then? What will happen to European civilization?

Below is an essay worth reading prepared by an Israeli-American group. It goes into a great deal of detail about what Islam really is. In addition to the short essay below, there is a PDF which lays out the facts about life under Islam. Do read that, too.

We cannot allow this to happen in the United States.


Islam is not a civilization

By Prof. Paul Eidelberg, President, Israel-America Renaissance Institute,
We need a politically incorrect and radically new multi-disciplinary and multinational understanding of Islam.

To speak of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as the “three Abrahamic faiths” or as the “three religions of the Book,” or, more significantly, as the “three monotheisms,” obscures rather than illuminates. These familiar tropes, says theologian George Weigel, ought to be retired.

The eminent French scholar Alain Besançon agrees. He writes,

“The Abraham of Genesis is not the Ibrahim of the Qur’an; Moses is not Moussa. As for Jesus, he appears, as Issa, out of place and out of time, without reference to the landscape of Israel. His mother, Mary, or Mariam, identified as the sister of Aaron, gives birth to him under a palm tree. Then Issa performs several miracles, which seem to have been drawn from the apocryphal gospels, and announces the future coming of Muhammad.”

Alain Besançon takes us deeper into the heart of the matter. He draws this theological distinction between Judaism and Christianity, on the one hand, and Islam, on the other:

Although Muslims like to enumerate the 99 names of God, missing from the list, but central to the Jewish and even more so to the Christian concept of God, is “Father” — i.e., a personal God capable of a reciprocal and loving relationship with men. The one God of the Qur’an, the God who demands submission, is a distant God; to call him “Father” would be an anthropomorphic sacrilege. The Muslim God is utterly impassive; to ascribe loving feeling to Him would be suspect. If God is not “Father,” then it is difficult to imagine the human person as having been made “in the image of God."

Now, let us admit that Islam has, over the centuries, given meaning and purpose to hundreds of millions of lives that have been decently lived. It is also true, however, that today, throughout the world, Islam finds itself in the midst of what Besançon aptly describes as “a long-delayed, wrenching, and still far from an accomplished encounter with modernity.”

Indeed, Islam continues to divide mankind into two groups, the faithful on the one hand, and creatures Islam calls “pigs” and “dogs” on the other, an attitude that fosters Islamic terrorism.

To clarify matters further, in 1985, note well that Iran’s delegate to the United Nations, Said Raja’i-Khorassani, declared that “the very concept of human rights was ‘a Judeo-Christian invention’ and inadmissible in Islam.”

The indiscriminate nature of Islamic terrorism can be explained by these words of Catholic theologian George Weigel: “The notion that there are ‘no innocents,’ that the enemy is ‘guilty’ simply by reason of drawing breath – logically entails a strategy of open-ended mayhem based on the radical dehumanization of the ‘other.’”

Dehumanization describes the terrorist acts of the Palestinian Authority. This consortium of Muslim-led terrorist groups reduces Jewish children to body parts by exploding the busses in which they ride to school. There is no essential difference between these Muslim terrorists and those that perpetrated the bloodbath in Paris, in Nice, and in Orlando.

Alain Besancon, quoted by Dr. Weigel, exposes another obscure aspect of Islam: “Although Muslims like to enumerate the 99 names of God, missing among the list is ‘father’ – i.e., a personal God capable of a reciprocal and loving relationship with men. If God is not our ‘father,’ then it is difficult to imagine the human person as having been made ‘in the image of God.’” Small wonder that Muslims liken “infidels” to “pigs” and “dogs,” and harbor no qualms about using their own children as human bombs to explode Jewish schools busses, thus reducing Jewish children to body parts.

The social philosopher Lou Harris offers a broader assessment of Islam in Civilization and Its Enemies. Contemptuous of the cultural relativism propagated by American colleges and universities, Harris means by civilization a standard of behavior that can be applied across cultures and across history. He sees civilization as having four prerequisites: a stable social order, the co-operation of individuals pursuing their own interests, the ability to tolerate or socialize with one’s neighbors, and a hatred of violence.

Clearly, Islam lacks three of the four prerequisites of Harris’ definition of a civilization. What is remarkable is that Syrian-born psychiatrist Wafa Sultan arrived at the same conclusion. She denied a clash between the West and Islamic civilization because, in her view, Islam is not a civilization!

Egyptian-born scholar Bat Ye’or agrees. She defines Islam as a culture of hate, and one can cite several former Muslims who renounced Islam for this very reason.

That said, I have collected several essays by renowned scholars and statesmen who, even though they represent different nations and even different periods of history, nonetheless agree about the egregious nature of Islam, which justifies the title of Harris’ book Civilization and Its Enemies.
Click on the link below to read the collection:

Islam is not a civilization.pdf

|

BLACK LIVES REALLY DON'T MATTER TO BLACK LIVES MATTER

Bill Whittle is a pioneer in presenting the truth about serious issues using understandable digital graphics to counter the flood of misinformation to which the American public is continually drenched with.

Colin Kaepernick supports the message of Black Lives Matter that police are rampaging out of control killing blacks unjustly. It's a false narrative being used to destroy American society.

What is the true story?

Black Lives Matter is a Marxist-inspired, George Soros financed operation with the aim of destabilizing society, increasing hatred, division and discord, in order to create chaos and to usher in a globalized Soviet-style utopia stripped of American values.

The false stories BLM peddles are clearly shown by Bill Whittle to be nothing but lies (in six minutes):

|

UPCOMING EVENTS FOR CHATHAM REPUBLICANS: PRIMARY ELECTION THURSDAY, SEP 8TH, MEETING, MONDAY, SEP 12TH

State Primary.
There are two important contested elections in the Republican primary on Thursday, September 8th.

Mark Alliegro of Falmouth and Tom O'Malley of Marshfield are competing to be the Republican nominee to oppose Democrat William Keating to represent the Massachusetts 9th Congressional District in Congress.
https://www.facebook.com/AlliegroforCongress/
https://www.facebook.com/tomomalleyforcongress/

The other contest is for the Cape & Islands State Senate seat being vacated by Democrat Daniel Wolf. Competing are Jim Crocker of Osterville (Town of Barnstable) and Tony Schiavi of Harwich. The Democrats also have a primary contest to determine their candidate for the November 8th final.
https://www.facebook.com/jim.crocker.182
https://www.facebook.com/tony.schiavi

Information on all the candidates on the Barnstable County ballot may be found here.

Polls are open at the Chatham Community Center from 7am to 8pm.

The final election will be held on Tuesday, November 8th

The Republican Town Committee has not endorsed any candidate in these two primary contests.


Republicans September Meeting Monday, September 12th, 5pm to 6:30pm, Chatham Community Center.
This is an important meeting since it will be the kickoff for the campaign for the final election on November 8th. With the primary having taken place we will have the full line-up of candidates to be on the ballot in November.

All Republicans and other patriots who want Republican victories on Election Day on Tuesday, the 8th of November, are urged to attend this meeting.

This is the meeting at which we intend to finalize our plans for the remaining 56 days of the campaign.

We welcome any and all ideas that will contribute to a winning campaign.

What can the committee do, what can each individual do, to achieve victory in November for our candidates for President, Congress, State Senate, Sheriff and County Commissioner?

The Chatham RTC Planning Committee has been reviewing options and will be prepared to present those and listen to other ideas at the meeting.

Please come to the meeting. It is very important for the nation, the state, the county and Chatham. Somebody is going to be elected to each of these offices and it will be best if a Republican is successful in each of these elections. We need everyone to pitch in.

There will also be four citizen ballot question to vote on November 8th. These will be discussed at the meeting as well if time permits.

|

2016 MASSACHUSETTS PRIMARY ELECTION DAY, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8TH

On the Republican primary ballot on September 8th, with voting from 7am to 8pm, in Barnstable County towns, will be the following candidates:

Congress Mark Alliegro, Falmouth Tom O'Malley, Marshfield (vote for 1)
https://www.facebook.com/AlliegroforCongress/
https://www.facebook.com/tomomalleyforcongress/
Cape & Islands State Senate (does not include Bourne, Falmouth and Sandwich)
Jim Crocker, Osterville Tony Schiavi, Harwich (vote for 1)
https://www.facebook.com/jim.crocker.182
https://www.facebook.com/tony.schiavi

Barnstable State Representatives (no primary contests)
District One - Tim Whelan, Brewster No Democrat opponent in November final
District Two - Will Crocker Jr, Barnstable
District Three - David Vieira, Falmouth
District Four - No Republican candidate (includes Brewster, Pct 3,Chatham, Harwich up to Provincetown)
District Five - Randy Hunt, Sandwich No Democrat opponent in November final

Barnstable County Sheriff - James M. Cummings, Falmouth (no primary opponent)

Barnstable County Commissioners (can vote for 2, no contest)
Linda A Bond, Yarmouth
Ron Beaty, Barnstable

The final elections will be on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. Deadline for registration for those elections is October 18; Town Clerks' offices remain open until 8pm that day.
To register online, click on the following link:
https://www.sec.state.ma.us/ovr/

On the November 8th ballot there will be four ballot questions:
Question One - Online Gambling
Question Two - Expanding Charter Schools
Question Three - Preventing Cruelty to Farm Animals
Question Four - Recreational Marijuana


|

AT UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, NO "SAFE SPACES," NO "TRIGGER WARNINGS," JUST EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE

Finally, a university, the University of Chicago, speaks up for the role of an academic institution, as a place of inquiry, of questioning, of different ideas, of discomfit sometimes, a place where critical thinking is to be developed.

Below is Professor Thomas Sowell's congratulations to the University of Chicago. Below that is a link to the original op-ed in the Wall Street Journal and the WSJ editorial about it.

A Gem in Chicago
By Dr. Thomas Sowell

August 30, 2016


We have gotten so used to seeing college presidents and other academic "leaders" caving in to so many outrageous demands from little gangs of bullying students that it is a long overdue surprise to see a sign that at least one major university has shown some backbone.

Dr. Robert J. Zimmer, president of the University of Chicago, has spoken out in the plainest language against the stifling of opinions that differ from political correctness, on campuses across the country.

"Free speech is at risk at the very institution where it should be assured: the university," Dr. Zimmer said.

"Invited speakers are disinvited because a segment of a university community deems them offensive, while other orators are shouted down for similar reasons," he said. Demands have been made that assigned readings in some courses be eliminated because they "might make some students uncomfortable."

Worst of all, such demands "have been supported by university administrators," Dr. Zimmer pointed out.

By contrast with many other colleges and universities where speech codes restrict what students can and cannot say, freshmen students entering the University of Chicago have been informed by a letter from the Dean of Students that "freedom of expression" is one of that institution's "defining characteristics."

The Dean of Students spelled it out: "Members of our community are encouraged to speak, write, listen, challenge and learn, without fear of censorship. Civility and mutual respect are vital to all of us, and freedom of expression does not mean the freedom to harass or threaten others."

That such things need to be said is a painful commentary on the academic world in general. It is doubtful if any such declaration or policy could be made at any of the Ivy League universities, which are bastions of political correctness.

At Harvard, not only have invited speakers been shouted down and sometimes assaulted, even a Harvard professor's classroom was invaded by disruptive students who didn't like what he was teaching. Such things have also happened at Berkeley and other elite institutions across the country, as well as at less renowned institutions.

The uniqueness of the University of Chicago is not something new. Back in the 1960s, as campus riots spread across the country, and academic administrators caved in to even the most outrageous demands, dozens of disruptive students were simply expelled from the University of Chicago and dozens more were put on probation. As Professor George J. Stigler, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, said, "our faculty united behind the expulsion of a large number of young barbarians."

But such faculty support required a sense of mission, beyond a quiet life on campus in which to pursue one's own career. Even as grade inflation soared, and failing grades virtually disappeared in some colleges and universities across the country, that was not true among professors of economics who had been trained at the University of Chicago.

A survey in the economics department at Cornell University, during a year in the 1960s when I taught there, showed that the only students who received a failing grade in any economics course that year were students who took courses taught by professors who were trained at the University of Chicago.

In later years, when I gave failing grades to one-fourth of my class at UCLA, I discovered that this was not at all unusual in UCLA's economics department, which had a sizable contingent of economists trained at the University of Chicago. We also opposed many politically correct policies of the UCLA administration.

One of the many name-calling responses to people who do not go along with political correctness is to use the all-purpose smear, "racism." But the first time I saw a white professor at a white university with a black secretary, it was Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago in 1960 — four years before the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Years earlier, the first black tenured professor at an elite white university was Allison Davis at the University of Chicago. But who cares about facts in these politically correct times?

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is www.tsowell.com. To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

President Zimmer's op-ed in the WSJ
http://www.wsj.com/articles/free-speech-is-the-basis-of-a-true-education-1472164801

WSJ editorial praising the U of Chicago's president and Dean
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-chicago-school-of-free-speech-1472168075

|

BLACK LIVES MATTER TO DONALD TRUMP

The Wall Street Journal today (August 30, 2016) has a powerful piece by Heather MacDonald of the Manhattan Institute on the national shame, disgrace and tragedy of so much inner city violence in our largest cities in America. Thousands are being shot and thousands killed. It goes on and on. Obama shrugs it off. Trump raised the issue in speeches and told blacks and other inner city minorities that he wanted to help stop the carnage that Democrats in charge have allowed to go on for years -- and it is getting worse. What happened? Trump was attacked as a bigot for scapegoating minorities! What a travesty.

Heather MacDonald is the author of the new book "The War on Cops" attacking the false narrative of Black Lives Matter -- and of that San Francisco quarterback Colin Kaepernick -- that police killings of blacks are out of control. MacDonald is the nation's leading authority in America on inner city violence.

Her piece "Black Lives Matter to Donald Trump" is a must read, reproduced here in its entirety:


Black Lives Matter to Donald Trump

The Republican says every child—in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore—should be able to walk to school safely. For that, he’s called racist.

Chicago killing.jpg

Raven Roberts hugs Sincere Simmons at an Aug. 28 vigil for Simmons’ mother, Nykea Aldridge, killed by a stray bullet while walking on Chicago’s south side.


By HEATHER MAC DONALD
Aug. 30, 2016

Hillary Clinton tried to tar Donald Trump as a racist last week by associating him with the “alt-right.” Yet it is Mr. Trump who has decried the loss of black life to violent crime—and has promptly been declared biased for doing so. Whether intentionally or not, Mr. Trump has exposed the hypocrisy of the Black Lives Matter movement and its allies.

Speaking in West Bend, Wis., on Aug. 16, only days after the recent riots in Milwaukee, Mr. Trump observed that during “the last 72 hours . . . another nine were killed in Chicago and another 46 were wounded.” The victims, as in other cities with rising crime, were overwhelmingly black.

Bringing safety to inner-city residents should be a top presidential priority, Mr. Trump said: “Our job is to make life more comfortable for the African-American parent who wants their kids to be able to safely walk the streets and walk to school. Or the senior citizen waiting for a bus. Or the young child walking home from school.” Mr. Trump promised to restore law and order “for the sake of all, but most especially for the sake of those living in the affected communities.”

The reaction was swift. The progressive website Crooks and Liars deemed Mr. Trump’s speech a “mashup of Hitler and George Wallace.”On CNN the activist and former Obama adviser Van Jones called it “despicable” and “shocking in its divisiveness.” Historian Josh Zeitz told USA Today that “the term law and order in modern American politics is, ipso facto, a racially tinged term.”

Mr. Trump’s acceptance speech in July at the Republican National Convention provoked similar dismay. “Young Americans in Baltimore, in Chicago, in Detroit, in Ferguson,” he said, have “the same right to live out their dreams as any other child in America.”

This defense of black children was too much for Alicia Garza, a co-founder of the Black Lives Matter movement. “The terrifying vision that Donald J. Trump is putting forward casts him alongside some of the worst fascists in history,” Ms. Garza said. The executive director of the Advancement Project, Judith Browne Dianis, complained that “the speech lends itself to be interpreted as isolating and scapegoating of communities of color.” Political commentator Sally Kohn wrote in Time that Mr. Trump “has basically recycledRichard Nixon’s version of dog whistle racism by insisting he is the ‘law and order candidate’—implicitly protecting White America.”

Why this frenzied effort to demonize Mr. Trump for addressing the heightened violence in inner cities? Because the Republican nominee has also correctly identified its cause: the false “narrative of cops as a racist force in our society,” as he put it in Wisconsin.

Ever since the Black Lives Matter movement burst onto the national scene in 2014, following the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., violent crime has surged in urban areas. In America’s largest 56 cities, homicides rose 17% last year, the largest one-year increase in more than two decades. In Washington, D.C., homicides jumped 54%; in Milwaukee, 73%; in Cleveland, 90%.

The reason is a drop-off in the proactive policing that activists and academics denounce as racist. While cops continue to rush to 911 calls in minority neighborhoods, they are making fewer pedestrian stops and engaging in less public-order enforcement. Backing off such activity is presumably what Black Lives Matter supporters, including President Obama, want.

Yet the victims of the resulting crime surge are almost exclusively black; whites have largely been unaffected. In Baltimore, 45 people were killed in July 2015, 43 of them black. In Chicago, 2,460 blacks were shot last year, lethally or non-lethally, according to the city’s police department. That’s nearly seven a day. Seventy-eight white residents were shot in 2015, though the white share of the Chicago population is about the same as the black share. Blacks in Chicago were 18 times more likely to be killed last year than whites, up from eight times more likely in 2005.

Police shootings are a minute fraction of this carnage. So far this year in Chicago, they account for about 0.5% of all shootings. Four studies published this year alone have further undercut the claim that we are living through an epidemic of racially biased policing shootings. Harvard economist Roland Fryer, for example, examined data from Dallas, Austin, Houston, Los Angeles and six Florida counties. He found no evidence of racial discrimination in police shootings; officers in Houston were nearly 24% less likely to shoot blacks than whites.

When Mr. Trump pledges to restore law and order, he is not promising to “protect White America,” in Sally Kohn’s words. He is addressing a problem that whites could easily ignore, if they were the bigots that the Black Lives Matter movement and nearly the whole of academia make them out to be.

Strangely, it is Mr. Obama and Black Lives Matter sympathizers who have turned their eyes from the rising black victimization. FBI Director James Comey warned last October that the “chill wind blowing through American law enforcement” was leading to a “huge increase” in urban homicides and shootings. Mr. Obama promptly accused him of “cherry-picking data” and having a “political agenda.”

After Mr. Trump drew attention in his convention speech to the rising urban violence, President Obama again dismissed the casualties as merely an “uptick in murders and violent crime in some cities.” It is hard not to translate this is as: white lives matter; black lives, not so much.

Mr. Trump’s call to restore law and order recognizes the right of inner-city residents to enjoy the same freedom from fear that the rest of America now takes for granted, thanks to the 20-year decline in crime brought on by the proactive policing revolution of the 1990s. Mr. Trump has issued a much-needed warning that the antipolice narrative is putting black lives in jeopardy and undercutting the foundation of a civilized society. It is a message he should amplify.

Ms. Mac Donald is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and the author of “The War on Cops.”

|

HOW THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD SUCCESSFULLY CRIPPLED OUR FIGHT AGAINST "CIVILIZATION JIHAD"


ASSISTING OUR OWN SUICIDE

Excerpted from Defeating Terrorism: How We Blinded Ourselves to the Threat of “Civilization Jihad”

“The Holy Land Foundation terror ­funding trial in 2008 should have been a wakeup call to the full scope of the Islamist threat. Through the discovery process associated with that trial, extensive primary source evidence was presented on Islamist front groups operating within the U.S. They were numerous, able to raise significant sums and were ideologically disciplined. One such front group founded by the Muslim Brotherhood, the Muslim Students Association (MSA) had grown from its first chapter in 1964 to about 120 chapters at the time of 9/11/2001. In spite of the 9/11 attack, by 2008 there was a tripling of the number of college and university MSA chapters across North America.

Contained within an internal Brotherhood document that was presented into evidence during the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terror funding trial, was the disclosure that the Muslim Brotherhood understood its main work in the U.S. as “civilization jihad”:

“The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and by the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

What is most astonishing about this ­­ coming as it did in the last year of the Bush Administration ­­ is that it had such little effect on Americans thinking and U.S. public policy. As it turned out, the ongoing disinformation, ideology, and influence of pro-­Islamic individuals and front groups had more sway over changes to U.S. law enforcement, intelligence gathering, and military training and operations than did any of the primary source documents from Islamists that came out in the Holy Land Foundation trial.

While the Bush administration was pursuing the war on terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Muslim Brotherhood was pursuing “civilization jihad” in the United States. The 9/11 Commission Report published in 2004 contained hundreds of instances of
the use of words like “Jihad,” “Muslim,” and “Sharia.” Four years later, by 2008, with input and influence brought to bear from many sympathetic to and associated with Brotherhood affiliate organizations, all those words and terms were entirely eliminated from the FBI’s “Counter-terrorism Lexicon” publication, a key document informing other U.S. government agencies involved with intelligence and defense.

Consider that in the very next year, when self­-described “soldier of Allah” Nidal Hassan killed 13 in the 2009 Fort Hood shooting spree, the Defense Department recorded the incident as “workplace violence”’ not an Islamist terrorist attack. In fact, the DOD bureaucracy had already chosen to purge West Point and the Naval War College training of all “vital references to Islamist ideology driving terrorism or
conflating terrorism with Islam.”

In 2011 the FBI extended its Counter-terrorism Lexicon agenda and systematically purged its counter-terrorism training manuals of some 900 pages that were considered offensive to Muslims. By 2012, the other areas of the Executive Branch, including DHS, DOJ and the State Department had eliminated all instructors and training curriculum that associated Islamic terms, doctrine, law, and Quranic scripture with terrorism. In addition, the NSA’s most sweeping digital communication surveillance program, known as PRISM, was revamped to exclude monitoring communication within and from Islamic mosques, rendering them virtual communication safe ­houses ­­ now numbering over 3,000 in the U.S.

Fast forward to June 2016. Just days before Omar Mateen committed his terrorist slaughter in the name of ISIS at an Orlando nightclub, DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson’s Homeland Security Advisory Council made its “Countering Violent Extremism” recommendations, specifically instructing DHS personnel to once again avoid using any language that might be “disrespectful” to Muslims, including (but not limited to) the words “jihad,” “sharia” and “takfir.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How did all this happen? Were there already Muslims or Muslim sympathizers in key spots in the U.S. government who accepted these "suggestions"? Are they still there?

|

GEORGE SOROS AND BLACK LIVES MATTER ALLY WITH ISLAMISTS TO DESTROY PUBLIC LAW AND ORDER IN U.S.


Leftist organizations and Left ideologues such as George Soros have been working with Islamic interests for decades in seeking to undermine Christianity and Western Civilization. As part of that effort Soros is seeking to deligitimize those who are fighting against the "civilization jihad" being prosecuted in the U.S. by units of the Muslim Brotherhood as well as the influence of the Marxist left. A principal target is David Horowitz of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. Leading the campaign of deligitimization is the Center for American Progress led by John Podesta, a Clinton loyalist.

For a more expansive view of the Soros master plan, read this Caroline Glick report.

Following the Michael Brown riots in Ferguson, MO, the Islamist Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Saudi-funded propaganda group linked to the terrorist organization Hamas as well as Soros-funded groups, pledged its cooperation and solidarity with and support for the Marxist left subversive group Black Lives Matter. The common goal of CAIR and Black Lives Matter is disrupting and destroying the American social construct. (This is the same goal pursued by Saul Alinsky, whose goals, strategy and tactics influenced Chicago community organizer Barack Obama.)

What comes once victory over the Constitution has been achieved, eithe, a Marxist state or Islamic law, Sharia, will be worked or fought out then.

Robert Spencer details the threat to society this combination represents.

|

THE WAR ON COPS BY BLACK LIVES MATTER A DISASTER FOR BLACK COMMUNITIES

What are the facts about cops and the violent deaths of blacks? The last thing the Black Lives Matter rabble rousers want to hear are the facts. In true Alinksy style, what they are trying to do is destabilize society, striking out at those who are charged with upholding law and order. As if there wasn't enough anarchy already in America's largest cities.

Heather MacDonald of the Manhattan Institute lays out the facts, clearly and compellingly in just five minutes. Black lives of course do matter and matter a lot to the cops who protect them.

Heather MacDonald, a diminutive dynamo if ever there was one, is a powerful intellect and a fearless fighter for the truth. Her new book "The War on Cops" deserves a wide reading. Available at Amazon and Where the Sidewalk Ends in Chatham and other fine bookstores. Pick up a copy.

|

VOTER FRAUD PUSHED BY DEMOCRATS THREATENS DEMOCRACY

|

PRIMARY ELECTIONS ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8TH

Primary elections this year are on THURSDAY, September 8, 2016. This is a change from the usual Tuesday election day. (In November the final elections are on TUESDAY, November 6, 2016.) The change in the law was made at the request of the Massachusetts Secretary of State to allow more time for ballots of members of the Armed Forces to be received and counted.

In the Republican primary there are two contested elections for Republican nominations:
Congress, 9th Congressional District:
Mark Alliegro - website http://www.markalliegroforcongress.org/ and
Tom O'Malley - website http://www.omalleyforcongress.com/

State Senate, Cape & Islands District:
Jim Crocker - website http://www.crockerforstatesenate.com/ and
Tony Schiavi - website http://www.votetonyschiavi.com/

|

CHATHAM REPUBLICANS MEET MONDAY, AUGUST 8, 2016 AT 5:30 AT PATE'S RESTAURANT

The regular monthly meeting for August of the Chatham Republican Town Committee will be held on the second Monday of the month as usual, Monday, August 8, 2016. However, this month, instead of meeting at the Chatham Community Center at 5, the meeting will take place at Pate's Restaurant, 1260 Main Street, Chatham, beginning at 5:30. Beverages will be available for purchase during the meeting and attendees are invited to stay for dinner afterwards.

All Republicans, conservatives and patriotic Americans committed to Republican victories in November are welcome to attend.

Acting Chairman Diane Bronsdon will preside. There will be an election for a permanent chairman, so all elected members are urged to attend. All elected members have received a list of all elected members with contact information. Any elected member is eligible for election as chairman. Any elected member can nominate herself or himself with no second required.

The draft agenda may be viewed or printed out by clicking on the link below:

2016.8.8 CRTC Agenda.pdf

|

FIGHT BACK AGAINST ISLAM: DRIVE THE ENABLING POLITICIANS OUT OF OFFICE

Eject Western Traitors, Beat Islamic Terrorists
July 26, 2016 by Raymond Ibrahim

Muslims around the world—especially in Europe where their numbers have burgeoned in recent times—are wreaking havoc.

priest_victim_NORMANDY.jpg

Jacques Hamel: Latest martyr of the Western-empowered jihad

The newest atrocity—assuming another one hasn’t already occurred since this writing—is the barbaric slaughter of an 85-year-old Christian priest in France. Yesterday (7/26) morning, “Allahu Akbar” shouting Muslims stormed his church in Rouen while the octogenarian priest, Jacques Hamel, was conducting morning Mass. They forced him on his knees, slit his throat, and “critically injured” a nun, before being killed by police—the same police who had known that church was being targeted and had been monitoring one of the murderers for at least one-and-a-half years.

Days earlier in France and Germany, Muslims, mostly migrants, committed terrorist acts in Nice (84 dead), Munich (9 dead), attacked people in train stations (one dead, several injured), killed a pregnant Polish woman, and attacked a mother and her three adolescent daughters (puncturing the lungs of an 8-year-old).

Those who seek to reverse this situation must begin by embracing a simple fact: Islam is not terrorizing the West because it can but because it is being allowed to.

To be sure, that was not always the case: for over a millennium, Muslims repeatedly invaded and conquered portions of Europe—terrorizing, massacring, raping and enslaving in the name of Allah—and were only repulsed by great force of arms.

Indeed, invading and destroying churches, slaughtering priests, even raping nuns is as old as Islam’s first entry into Christian territory in the seventh century, and has played out countless times since. (Watch this brief video for an idea of how many jihadi campaigns were undertaken against Europe.)

Today, Muslim terrorists, rapists, and criminals are not entering the West against its will but because of it.

Consider it by analogy. What if zoologists began to maintain that it’s false to say that lions naturally prey on zebras? So zoo directors—most of whom come from the ranks of the zoologists—start introducing lions into zebra enclosures. The inevitable happens: although well fed, lions continue doing what they’ve always done—chase and kill zebras. Yet, because it is a slanderous stereotype to say that lions by nature prey on zebras, the zoologists continue insisting on placing the two together.

Surely only a great fool would blame the slaughter of zebras on lions—who, after all, are merely being lions—while ignoring those who place lions with zebras in the first place?

This is the situation we are in. The powers-that-be maintain that it’s false to say that Muslims prey on non-Muslims, or “infidels.” So the policymakers—most of whom come from the ranks of the powers-that-be—introduced Muslims into Europe. The inevitable happened: although given equal rights, Muslims continued doing what they’ve always done—persecute and kill infidels. Yet, because it is a “slanderous stereotype” to say that Muslims by nature prey on infidels, the powers-that-be continue insisting on placing the two together—in the name of “diversity.”[1]

Nor does it matter that not all Muslims harbor animus for “infidels” or are prone to outbursts of violence. Even if only 1% of a beverage is poisoned and you ingest it, will it matter that 99% of it was clean? No, you will still suffer, possibly die. The only sure way to preserve your health is not to put it into your body in the first place.

Whether they are intentional liars with a nefarious agenda, or whether they are incompetent, indoctrinated fools, no longer matters: Western policymakers who insist that Islam is peaceful (despite all evidence otherwise) and that the West is “obligated” to receive Muslim migrants, are 100% responsible for the daily victims of jihad, most recently an octogenarian priest.

The war begins with them. Kick them and their suicidal policies out, and watch Islamic terror on Western soil fizzle out.

|
WE ARE THE PARTY OF LINCOLN.
WE STAND FOR FREEDOM AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL.


Republican Calendar

Contact:
Diane Bronsdon 508 945 9218
C R Facebook
GREATEST THREATS TO THE U.S.
ISLAMIC SUPREMACISM
ISLAMIC TERRORISM
RADICAL ISLAMIC IMMIGRATION
ISLAMIC HATRED OF CHRISTIANS AND JEWS
Watch
To help us keep hope alive, click below. Donate Now!

News
Syndication
rdf
rss2
atom

Links
Michael O'Keffe District Attorney
Leo Cakounes Barn.Cty Commish
Sheriff Cummings
Hot Air
Legal Insurrection
National Review
Power Line
Pajamas Media

Causes:

Semper Fi Fund
Cape Cod Cares for Our Troops
Wounded Warrior Family Support
New England Center and Home for Veterans
Search
Chatham Info
Archives
Monthly Archive

Category Yearly Archives
Archives

Categories