Thursday, December 31, 2015

Faked Hate in Houston: Man charged with setting Christmas Day mosque fire was DEVOUT MUSLIM regular attendee

The Liberal Media pumped this up as a conservative tea party nut job that did this. Then when they find out who it was they are silent..........

For the past few days we have been clubbed like baby seals about the “hate crime” mosque fire in Texas. Terror-tied groups howled like wolves, rubbing their hooves in glee that they could hang their false narrative of “anti-Muslim” hate crimes on the Houston mosque fire.
Not so fast, jihad Johnny.
As I predicted, the perp was …… a devout Muslim.
At the time the fire was set, it garnered much attention as a “hate crime”: “The Houston chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations called on authorities to investigate a possible bias motive in the case, citing what it called a ‘recent spike in hate incidents targeting mosques nationwide.’” But it turns out to have been yet another fake hate crime. Islamic supremacist groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) want and need hate crimes against Muslims, because they’re the currency they use to buy power and influence in our victimhood-oriented society, and to deflect attention away from jihad terror and onto Muslims as putative victims. Hamas-linked CAIR, designated a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates, and other Muslims have onmany occasions not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating “hate crimes,” including attacks on mosques. Most notably, in February, a New Jersey Muslim was found guilty of murder that he tried to portray as an “Islamophobic” attack, and in 2014 in California, a Muslim was found guilty of killing his wife, after first blaming her murder on “Islamophobia.”

Gary Nathaniel Moore“Man charged with setting Houston mosque fire was a devout attendee,” by Carol Christian and Leah Binkowitz, Houston Chronicle, December 30, 2015 (thanks to Steve):

A Houston man has been arrested in connection with a suspected arson at a mosque on Christmas Day.
A spokeswoman for the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives confirmed that the man was arrested early Wednesday, sometime after midnight, and appeared in court 7 a.m. Wednesday.
The suspect, Gary Nathaniel Moore, 37, of Houston, appeared in court at 7 a.m., spokeswoman Nicole Strong said.
According to a charging instrument released by the Harris County District Clerk, Moore told investigators at the scene that he has attended the mosque for five years, coming five times per day to pray seven days per week.
Moore told investigators he had been at the mosque earlier on Dec. 25 to pray, and had left at about 2 p.m. to go home. Moore told investigators he was the last person to leave the mosque and saw no smoke or other signs of fire when he left. He had returned to the scene after hearing about the fire from a friend.
Though the suspect said he was a regular at the mosque, MJ Khan, president of the Islamic Society of Greater Houston, which operates the mosque, said he was unfamiliar with Moore.
Typical. These imams always say they know their parishioners intimately, but they never seem to know the jihadis that attend their mosque regularly.
“We are just looking into it ourselves,” he said Wednesday morning after learning of the arrest.
“We are really very surprised and saddened by this whole thing,” said Khan.
Using surveillance video from multiple businesses nearby, investigators were able to identify Moore, according to records. A search warrant of his home was conducted, in which investigators recovered a backpack and clothing that seemingly matched that which was seen in surveillance footage, as well as one half of a two-pack of charcoal lighter fluid bottles that seemed to match another lighter fluid bottle found inside the mosque….


A guide to the allegations of Bill Clinton’s womanizing

Its amazing the Scumbags in the Media think the Clinton Rape allegations are nothing and they are Demonizing Bill Cosby which was also wrong.

On Twitter, Donald Trump, the GOP presidential front-runner, lashed out at Hillary Clinton, directly attacking her husband, the former president, for what Trump called “his terrible record of women abuse.”

Trump is obviously referring to the sexual allegations that have long swirled around Clinton, even before he became president. We’d earlier explored this question in 2014 when Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) wrongly claimed that a half dozen women had called Clinton a “sexual predator.” But for younger voters who may be wondering what the fuss is about, here again is a guide to the various claims made about Clinton’s sex life.
We will divide the stories into two parts: consensual liaisons admitted by the women in question and allegations of an unwanted sexual encounter.

Donald Trump takes on Bill Clinton

Play Video1:39
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump promised that "nobody respects women more than Donald Trump," as he slammed former President Bill Clinton's "situation." Trump has been attacking the Clintons for the allegations of sexual misconduct in Bill Clinton's past. (Reuters)

Consensual affairs

Gennifer Flowers — a model and actress whose claims of a long-term affair nearly wrecked Clinton’s first run for the presidency in 1992. (Clinton denied her claims at the time, but under oath in 1998 he acknowledged a sexual encounter with her.)
Monica Lewinsky — intern at the White House, whose affair with Clinton fueled impeachment charges. This was a consensual affair, in which Lewinsky was an eager participant; she was 22 when the affair started and Clinton was her boss.
Dolly Kyle Browning — A high school friend who said in a sworn declaration that she had had a 22-year off-and-on sexual relationship with Clinton.
Elizabeth Ward Gracen — a former Miss America who said she had a one-night stand with Clinton while he was governor — and she was married. She went public to specifically deny reports he had forced himself on her.
Myra Belle “Sally” Miller — the 1958 Miss Arkansas who said in 1992 that she had had an affair with Clinton in 1983. She claimed that she had beenwarned not to go public by a Democratic Party official: “They knew that I went jogging by myself and he couldn’t guarantee what would happen to my pretty little legs.”

Some might argue that because Lewinsky and Gracen had relations when Clinton was in a position of executive authority, Clinton engaged in sexual harassment. 

Allegations of an unwanted sexual encounter

Paula Jones — A former Arkansas state employee who alleged that in 1991 Clinton, while governor, propositioned her and exposed himself. She later filed a sexual harassment suit, and it was during a deposition in that suit that Clinton initially denied having sexual relations with Lewinsky. Clinton in 1998 settled the suit for $850,000, with no apology or admission of guilt. All but $200,000 was directed to pay legal fees.
Juanita Broaddrick — The nursing home administrator emerged after the impeachment trial to allege that 21 years earlier Clinton had raped her. Clinton flatly denied the claim, and there were inconsistencies in her story. No charges were ever brought.
Kathleen Willey — The former White House aide claimed Clinton groped her in his office in 1993, on the same day when her husband, facing embezzlement charges, died in an apparent suicide. (Her story changed over time. During a deposition in the Paula Jones matter, she initially said she had no recollection about whether Clinton kissed her and insisted he did not fondle her.) Clinton denied her account, and the independent prosecutor concluded “there is insufficient evidence to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that President Clinton’s testimony regarding Kathleen Willey was false.” Willey later began to claim Clinton had a hand in her husband’s death, even though her husband left behind a suicide note.
Note that no court of law ever found Clinton guilty of the accusations.   
Peter Baker, in “The Breach,” the definitive account of the impeachment saga, reported that House investigators later found in the files of the independent prosecutor that Jones’s lawyers had collected the names of 21 different women they suspected had had a sexual relationship with Clinton. Baker described the files as “wild allegations, sometimes based on nothing more than hearsay claims of third-party witnesses.” But there were some allegations (page 138) that suggested unwelcome advances:
“One woman was alleged to have been asked by Clinton to give him oral sex in a car while he was the state attorney general (a claim she denied). A former Arkansas state employee said that during a presentation, then-Governor Clinton walked behind her and rubbed his pelvis up against her repeatedly. A woman identified as a third cousin of Clinton’s supposedly told her drug counselor during treatment in Arkansas that she was abused by Clinton when she was baby-sitting at the Governor’s Mansion in Little Rock.” 
Update: We were focused on stories that emerged during Clinton’s presidency. But many readers have also urged us to include a reference to Clinton’s post-presidential travels on aircraft owned by convicted pedophile Jeffery Epstein. Gawker reported that flight logs show that Clinton, among others, traveled through Africa in 2002 on a jet with “an actress in softcore porn movies whose name appears in Epstein’s address book under an entry for ‘massages.’”  Chauntae Davies, the actress, declined to discuss why she was on the flight. Clinton has not commented.

The Bottom Line

Trump’s claim is a bit too vague for a fact check. In any case, we imagine readers will have widely divergent reactions to this list of admitted affairs and unproven allegations of unwanted sexual encounters. But at least you now know the specific cases that Trump is referencing.



A tale of two Bills: Cosby and Clinton

The story of Bill Cosby’s arraignment yesterday on charges of rape got headline treatment across the nation and signals very bad news for the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.  Legal experts say the case against Cosby is weak, unless the testimony of some of the 52 women who have complained of sexual predation by Cosby can be admitted as testimony, establishing a pattern of behavior, or modus operandi, as the lawyers like to say.
The legal proceedings against Cosby are certain to be a major topic of discussion in the months ahead.  Much of that discussion will center on the proposition that if so many women are making similar complaints, that adds believability.  And the question then becomes: “Why weren’t they believed or even listened to before?”
In Cosby’s case, the answer has to do with the lovable image he projected and the powerful financial interests in keeping him in the public’s fond regard.
The very same analysis applies directly to Bill Clinton.  The list of women believed to have been his sexual prey may not run to 52, but it includes:
Paula Jones
Monica Lewinsky (his subordinate)
Elizabeth Ward Gracen
Gennifer Flowers
Kathleen Willey
Juanita Broaddrick
Dolly Kyle Browning
And who knows how many underage girl on Orgy Island.
Making certain these women were not believed was Hillary Clinton’s job, and she did a capable job of it.
If legal matters move forward quickly, we could see another “trial of the century” raising the issue of a powerful man with a friendly image accused of taking advantage sexually of a string of women and then shutting them up with money and threats.
With then name and initial Bill C.
It can’t help Hillary.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/12/a_tale_of_two_bills_cosby_and_clinton.html#ixzz3vx1NUIMf
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Hillary Blames ObamaCare for Lost Jobs

Wow, A Master of the Obvious or an Obama Ass Kissing dumb ass. This hs been known for a while and she is just getting the Memo.

Napoleon Bonaparte said that one should never interrupt an enemy who is making a mistake. The political corollary is that one should never interrupt political opponents who are relieving themselves on each other's shoes and their own, as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are now doing. Here is what Hillary Clinton's own Website says about the so-called Affordable Care Act.
Defend the Affordable Care Act. Hillary will continue to defend the Affordable Care Act (ACA) against Republican efforts to repeal it. She'll build on it to expand affordable coverage, slow the growth of overall health care costs (including prescription drugs), and make it possible for providers to deliver the very best care to patients.
Clinton, however, told the truth (it must have been an accident) to a questioner during a political rally.
QUESTIONER: “Hi, I just want to know why there is discrimination against the part-time workers when so many companies are going to part-time when it comes to FMLA?”
HILLARY CLINTON: “Well, that’s why they are going to part-time. That, and also, the Affordable Care Act. You know, we got to change that because we have built in some unfortunate incentives that discourage full-time employment.
The Democratic front-runner therefore said openly that legislation she supported, and still supports, resulted in loss of full-time employment for the working people whom the Democrats claim to represent.
All of these consequences were easily foreseeable back in 2010 when Nancy Pelosi told Congress that it had to vote for the bill to see what was in it, and added that she was willing to sacrifice House seats (other than her own, of course) to pass it. Bart Stupak (D-MI) and my own representative Paul Kanjorski (D-PA) were among those who destroyed their political careers along with, as it turns out, millions of full-time jobs and health insurance policies. Kanjorski, a conservative pro-Second Amendment Democrat, could have probably stayed in office for life had he not forgotten that his district's voters, and not Obama or Pelosi, decided every two years whether to keep him. He forgot, as country & western singer Shania Twain put it, to "dance with the one that brought you."
Exploit the Opportunity
Hillary Clinton's open admission that the ACA destroys full-time employment, with the result that people may have to get two jobs (without benefits) to make ends meet, should deliver a Republican landslide in the House, Senate, and White House next year.
(1)   The ACA was the crown jewel of Barack Obama's administration, and hundreds of Democrats boasted of their roles in helping to pass it. Now the Democratic front-runner has blurted out that the crown jewel in question was nothing more than a counterfeit piece of glass all along, and that the Emperor's invisible clothes are really not there at all.
(2)   The Democrats can no longer argue that opposition to the ACA is Republican obstructionism. Hillary Clinton could not have said more plainly that the ACA destroys full-time employment for the workers whom the Democrats claim to represent.
Impartial and nonpartisan objective evidence also shows that the ACA is anything but affordable. As demonstrated by Chris Conover, "In 2014, premiums in the non-group market grew by 24.4% compared to what they would have been without Obamacare." My personal experience is that Aetna just cancelled my grandfathered $232/month high-deductible policy, and the cheapest ACA-compliant policy would have cost me $448/month had I not been able to get into Altrua's medical cost sharing program for $250/month. Alternatives include Liberty HealthShare and, for Christians only, Medishare and Samaritan. These are the facts, political rhetoric from neither party can do to nothing to change them, and this is exactly what will appeal to independent voters who hold the balance of power in most national elections.
The issue can therefore be turned not only against Clinton but also against every single member of Congress who voted for the ACA or even supported it verbally. These include Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) and Senate candidate Joe Sestak (D-PA), who calls ObamaCare a "proven success." Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA) needs to challenge Sestak openly to tell the voters yet again that ObamaCare is a "proven success" when the would-be head of his own party admitted it was a failure.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/hillary_blames_obamacare_for_lost_jobs.html#ixzz3vx0Mifsj
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Report: Obama’s NSA Spied on Congress & American Jewish Organizations

When Congress gets back they should be furious over this.  Our anti American Dictator spying on his own people; oh wait, if they are GOP they are his enemy too. Screw Him! Its time something is done with this Traitor. But knowing our Chickenshits they probably will do nothing!

In the midst of its espionage operations against the State of Israel, the Obama administration’s National Security Agency (NSA) listened in on private conversations conducted with members of the U.S. Congress and American-Jewish groups, a late Tuesday report in the Wall Street Journal reveals.

The NSA operations revealed to President Obama that Israeli officials had coordinated on messaging with U.S. Jewish groups that had come out against the Iran nuclear deal, the report says, citing unnamed officials familiar with the espionage operations.
At the time, President Obama was facing a wave of criticism from European leaders–such as French President Francois Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel–regarding allegations of NSA spying operations against their respective countries. This, however, did not stop him from ordering spy agencies to continue their operations against Israel, claiming they served a “compelling national security purpose,” according to the WSJ report.
Thereafter, the President successfully wired the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as the two leaders fell on opposite sides of the Iran nuclear deal. Netanyahu, a fierce critic of the deal, warned it would empower Iran as the world’s largest state-sponsor of terror. President Obama, on the other hand, was convinced that negotiating with Iran, and funneling tens of billions of dollars into their coffers, would allow for the regime to open up to the world and give power to more ‘moderate’ voices from within.
The NSA would routinely intercept Netanyahu’s communications and send them to White House officials for dissections, the report says, citing a former official.
When Israel continued to lobby against the deal, the NSA picked up on Israeli officials’ conversations with American members of Congress. The people interviewed for the Wall Street Journal piece claim that these communications were mistakenly obtained, but nonetheless, still amount to a Nixonian endeavor.
The Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C. responded to allegations they were “coaching” American Jewish groups on anti- Iran deal talking points, describing them as “total nonsense.”
The Obama Administration would ultimately agree to the Iran nuclear deal without the support of the American public or the U.S. Congress. When polled, a majority of the American people consistently rejected the iran deal.
Iran has already tested the limits of the nuclear deal, firing off two ballistic missile tests in clear violation of UN sanctions. The regime in Tehran has sent Shiite mercenaries to fight the civil war in Syria, and continues to overtly support terror groups Hamas and Hezbollah.


Wednesday, December 30, 2015

TRUMP Destroys NBC Anchor On Clinton/Lewinsky Scandal: It was Not ‘Alleged’… You Don’t have to Use the Word ‘Alleged’ [Video]


Houston Muslim Charged With Lighting His Own Mosque On Fire

Using surveillance video from other area businesses to identify the arsonist, Gary Nathaniel Moore, 37, was arrested and charged with starting the Christmas Day fire that devastated a Houston, Texas mosque. Moore is a devout Muslim who attended this same mosque for years, praying up to five times a day every day of the week.
Also up in smoke is the DC Media’s hoped-for anti-GOP Narrative. Before any facts were known, numerous DC Media outlets immediately exploited the tragedy to place the blame for the fire on Donald Trump.
Advocacy groups believe there has been a spike in anti-Muslim incidents across the United States in recent weeks that can be linked to the mass shooting in California and the inflammatory rhetoric of Donald Trump and other Republican presidential candidates. And they say that Muslims are fearful the backlash could lead to further harassment and violence.
The Houston chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations called on authorities to investigate the fire for an anti-Muslim motive.
“Because of the recent spike in hate incidents targeting mosques nationwide, we urge law enforcement authorities to investigate a possible bias motive for this fire,” Mustafaa Carroll, the chapter’s executive director, said in a statement.
The Houston chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations called on authorities to investigate a possible bias motive in the case, citing what it called a “recent spike in hate incidents targeting mosques nationwide.
Now that a devout Muslim has been charged, the DC Media will forget all about the incident.
The media’s playbook is always to immediately use any disaster or crime as a means to make the GOP answer for it. Then, once the facts come out and point to a member of the Protected Class, the story is memory-holed and the accusation against the Republican lingers.


Liberal professor: All white people are racist no matter what

Its scumbags like this that shouldn't be teaching our kids. Its Race Baiting Idiots like this that keeps racism alive. What a sad excuse for a Professor!

Hard left professor who believes love is “partly a function of denying whiteness” pens “gift” to all white people

YouTube/LaSalleTV Philly

(INTELLIHUB) — In yet another “Dear White People” article from a hard left extremist, Emory University professor George Yancy published a Christmas Eve message in the New York Times aimed at all white people – you are racist no matter what.
Yancy starts out his article by cleverly claiming that he wants readers to listen to his full on 100% anti-white screed with “love” before going on to explain that his letter is a gift to allwhite people who need to silence themselves and just listen, despite their actual lived experiences.
Tellingly, Yancy has in the past described love as “partly a function of denying whiteness” so when the NYT’s allows him to provide white America with a gift the day before Christmas we should all understand what that actually means.
The professor then attempts to calm down any immediate angry reaction to being labeled a racist no matter what by telling readers that he is a sexist for existing in a male dominated world. And if a hard left academic can admit in the New York Times that he is sexist then surely all white people can accept the claim that they are automatically racist simply for being alive!
Moving forward Yancy gets to the meat of his holiday message which is one infused by extreme critical race theory brainwashing that attempts to shame and guilt (while directly claiming they are doing no such thing) all white people simply for being alive and not living their lives full of self hate because of the horrible actions of other white people they never knew.
“If you are white, and you are reading this letter, I ask that you don’t run to seek shelter from your own racism. Don’t hide from your responsibility. Rather, begin, right now, to practice being vulnerable. Being neither a “good” white person nor a liberal white person will get you off the proverbial hook,” Yancy writes.
Not to have his message misconstrued as anything else but a full on attack on the existence of white people, Yancy continues, “After all, it is painful to let go of your “white innocence,” to use this letter as a mirror, one that refuses to show you what you want to see, one that demands that you look at the lies that you tell yourself so that you don’t feel the weight of responsibility for those who live under the yoke of whiteness, your whiteness.”
There you have it white people. Trayvon Martin killed by an overzealous vigilante? Your fault. Michael Brown struggling with a police officer leading to his death. Your fault. Black on Black crime. Your fault. War on drugs. Your fault. Just shut up and accept your role in the actions of other white people you never met.
After again acknowledging that readers by now are most likely fuming, Yancy further reveals the mindset of hard left identify politics obsessed liberals (both black and white) by directly writing that a white persons actual lived experiences with those of different races doesn’t matter whatsoever. Again, simply existing as white is racist.
Again, take a deep breath. Don’t tell me about how many black friends you have. Don’t tell me that you are married to someone of color. Don’t tell me that you voted for Obama. Don’t tell me that I’m the racist. Don’t tell me that you don’t see color. Don’t tell me that I’m blaming whites for everything.
To do so is to hide yet again. You may have never used the N-word in your life, you may hate the K.K.K., but that does not mean that you don’t harbor racism and benefit from racism.
After all, you are part of a system that allows you to walk into stores where you are not followed, where you get to go for a bank loan and your skin does not count against you, where you don’t need to engage in “the talk” that black people and people of color must tell their children when they are confronted by white police officers.
The worldview expressed here by Yancy and held by many on the new left is important to understand, especially in the context of the recent campus “uprisings” across the country.
When authoritarian “activists” issue demands that include punishing anyone who says things like all lives matter we must remember that they already hold beliefs that say all white people are racist regardless of their own actions so are therefore almost guaranteed to not be happy with any reforms short of some sort of reparations for past crimes committed.  (This is particularly apparent in the writings of Nehisi Coates)
An article in the Daily Caller about Yancy’s letter detailed this key fact and its importance when attempting to understand the outcry on college campus.
The new outcry on college campuses is not over merely being offended — it’s against “systematic racism.” This notion says that institutions like universities are full of unintentional discrimination against people of color, and it makes college life unbearable for non-whites.
With allusions to violence which seemed ripped straight from Coates himself, protesters claim that minority students are brutalized on a daily basis and they can no longer take the pain of living under systematic oppression.
The agony they supposedly live with is how they get away with shutting down opposing viewpoints and forcing out administrators on dubiously-thin charges. The argument also allows them to demand benefits that have little to do with restoring harmony to campus and are all about expanding the power of a specific racial group.
Basically, if all whites are automatically racists then activists of color can and should demand anything they so choose while shutting down all dissenting speech as again a form of racism. If existing while white is racist then surely speaking as a Caucasian is even worse.
Moving back to the holiday gift for white people, Yancy further expounds on the belief that white peoples simple existence is directly related to the pain experienced by blacks in the same way that extremist feminists claim being male automatically makes you sexist. In other words, flat-out cultural Marxist bullshit.
As you reap comfort from being white, we suffer for being black and people of color. But your comfort is linked to our pain and suffering. Just as my comfort in being male is linked to the suffering of women, which makes me sexist, so, too, you are racist.
That is the gift that I want you to accept, to embrace. It is a form of knowledge that is taboo. Imagine the impact that the acceptance of this gift might have on you and the world.
The arrogance of penning a letter in the New York Times that labels all whites racists no matter what and then continually calling it a “gift” that comes from a place of love when you have publicly called love denying the act of whiteness is simply astonishing.
Yancy finishes up the article praising a few white liberals who have publicly declared themselves bad no matter what before closing with a rallying cry for whites to “go to war” with themselves and their white identity.
You truly couldn’t make this stuff up.
In the Daily Caller report quoted above, Scott Greer finishes his article with perhaps the most important message that one can take away after reading something as divisive as the anti white screed professor Yancy somehow got published by the New York Times.
To say this kind of rhetoric is divisive is an understatement. It stirs up racial animosity against one group of people and places all of the woes of the country upon their shoulders. It removes any degree of responsibility for the actions of minorities from themselves and allows them to blame all their problems on whites.
Most troubling of all, it’s an insidious way to demand more power for people of a certain skin color — making racialism all the more attractive in our society.
While white liberals may go hogwild at being lectured on how racist they are, the rest of society will be repulsed by the idea. Contrary to Yancy’s wishes, the majority of Americans don’t want to live in a society where people are deemed racist solely due to their skin color.
And remember, having the different races at each others throats while ignoring the criminal elite is exactly what the globalist power structure wants which is why billionaire scum such as George Soros fund groups like Black Lives Matter.
The best thing we can do is to denounce and expose the race baiters on both sides of the aisle why attempting to wake up as many people of all races as possible. Instead of a race war we need to continue this so-called info war against the global elite and their corrupt plans for world domination.