What Does the FBI Have on the Obama Gang?

April 8, 2016

From Judicial Watch:

What Does the FBI Have on the Obama Gang?

For several years we have been seeking records of then President-elect Barack Obama’s interview with two FBI agents and two assistant U.S. attorneys regarding former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, who was sentenced to fourteen years in federal prison for attempting to sell Obama’s vacated Senate seat.

Our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests were rejected, and so we have now filed a lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No 1:16-cv-00576)) against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking the FBI interview records of Obama, Rahm Emanuel, and Valerie Jarrett.

The FBI denied our June 1, 2011, FOIA request seeking:

• Records of FBI interviews with Barack Obama concerning or relating to Rod Blagojevich, including but not limited to notes, summaries, and recordings of the interview.
• Records of FBI interviews with Rahm Emanuel concerning or relating to Rod Blagojevich, including but not limited to notes, summaries, and recordings of the interview.
• Records of FBI interviews with Valerie Jarrett concerning or relating to Rod Blagojevich, including but not limited to notes, summaries, and recordings of the interview.
• Records concerning any of the aforementioned interviews with Barack Obama, Rahm Emanuel, or Valerie Jarrett.

The FBI contends the release of these records “could reasonably be expected” to interfere with law enforcement proceedings and withheld them under Exemption 7 (which allows agency to withhold certain law enforcement records).

Here is the background:

On December 18, 2008, about a week after Blagojevich’s arrest, then-President-elect Barack Obama was questioned at his Chicago transition office about the scandal surrounding the alleged sale of the Senate seat he vacated in 2008. We are seeking the FBI summaries from this interview.

In January 2009, we released documents from the office of then-Governor Rod Blagojevich related to Blagojevich’s contacts with President-elect Obama and his transition team. The documents include a December 3, 2008, letter from Barack Obama following his December 2, 2008, meeting with Blagojevich, as well as a November 17, 2008, letter signed by Presidential Transition Team co-chairs Valerie Jarrett and John Podesta, providing Blagojevich with a list of transition team contacts. These documents tend to undermine Obama’s claims that he had no contact with Blagojevich.

Blagojevich was convicted on 17 of the 20 public corruption charges against him, some of which have been vacated. He is not scheduled for release until 2024. The Supreme Court has refused to hear his appeal on the 13 remaining corruption charges. A federal judge has scheduled Blagojevich to be resentenced on June 30, 2016.

Writing in The Washington Examiner, Rudy Takala noted, “There are no enforcement proceedings related to the case known to be pending, leading critics to charge that the agency’s denial is politically motivated.”

Well, yes. This lawsuit highlights the personal corruption issues of Barack Obama. He and his closest aides were interviewed by the FBI in a criminal investigation, and his administration doesn’t want Americans to have the details. The Chicago way shouldn’t trump the American people’s right to know.

It won’t if we have anything to do with it.

The “Migrant” Challenge!

January 24, 2016

From here and here:

Hugh Fitzgerald: Sticking to the Details

cologne-1

Each day brings news of fresh problems — even horrors — that are the result of the Muslim invasion of Europe. Millions of Muslims have been attempting to enter Europe — 1.1 million have managed this year to settle in Germany alone. Many of these migrants are from Syria, and many others pretend to be from Syria. They are all described as “refugees,” a word intended to evoke sympathy and to shut down the critical faculty of those who might dare to question the wisdom of this mass invasion. Most of the migrants are Arabs, but there are also Pakistanis, Afghans, Somalis, that is, assorted Muslims from all over. All of them carry, undeclared in their mental baggage, an ideology that offers a Total Regulation of Life and Compleat Explanation of the Universe. They have been suffused, since childhood, in an ideology that uncompromisingly divides the world into Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb, the Lands of the Muslims and the Lands of the Infidels, and a state of permanent war, if not always open warfare, must exist between the two. They are raised up in an ideology that divides mankind in two: the Believers and the Unbelievers, of all kinds. It is the Believers who have a natural right, as the “best of peoples,” to dominate the world, and the Believers have a duty, too, to participate in the struggle, or Jihad against Unbelievers, so that ultimately Islam will everywhere dominate, and Muslims rule, everywhere.

These Muslim migrants have not made things easy for the Infidels in whose lands they have been settling. They have, for example,very different views from non-Muslims on how women should behave and how they should be treated. They find that Western women, in their hijabless state, are akin to “meat” that is on display, there for the taking, by Muslim men. And take they do — which is why more than 70% of those imprisoned for rape in the Scandinavian countries are Muslims, though they make up 2-3% of the population. In Cologne, nearly 500 German women were assaulted by Muslims in a single night. The other night, in Dortmund, there were similar attacks, with a Muslim man insisting that “German girls are just here for sex.” Muslim predators who took advantage of young girls and turned them into sex slaves to service gangs of Muslim men in a dozen British cities and towns were merely showing their contempt for Infidel women, and this to us monstrous behavior did not violate but rather fit their worldview of how Muslims can treat Infidels. And the attacks on Infidel men — just the other day a 15-year-old Lithuanian boy was stabbed to death in Sweden by an Arab enraged that the boy dared to protect a girl that Arab had been molesting — are also part of this story. The frequent attacks on inoffensive Jews by Muslims in France tell us something about the Muslim version of interfaith outreach, as does the mass murder of Christians by Muslims in the Islamic State. And then there are all the Muslim terrorist attacks all over Europe — from the killings of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam, to the bombs at the Madrid subway station of Atocha, to the bombs on the London Underground and London buses, to the mass murder of innocents at a Parisian newspaper office, and cafes, and restaurants, and dance-halls, and kosher grocery stores. What are we to make of all this? Anything? Nothing?

Muslim migrants have nowhere exhibited an interest in learning about, much less conforming to, Western ideas about the equality of the sexes, about the equal treatment of people of all faiths or none, about freedom of speech and conscience. But they are convinced, and do not hide their conviction, that they are in Europe as by right, and cannot, will not be dislodged. To quote Tariq Ramadan, “We are here. We are here to stay. It’s over.” This is the note of triumphalism, of “just you try to get rid of us. We’re not leaving but are going to take over.” And as the Muslims will continue, by hook or crook, to try to enter Europe, and within Europe will try to make it to the countries that offer the most generous benefits, their presence will inevitably change, by sheer force of numbers, the societies within which they settle, but into which they do not integrate. Rather, it is the non-Muslims who are expected to change in order to fit into this new society.

Yet those who sound the alarm are attacked, declared sweepingly to be “Islamophobes,” a word designed to inhibit not only legitimate criticism, but even any tentative investigation of Islam. What, after all, did Donald Trump do that was so beyond the pale? He merely said that we ought to halt Muslim immigration “while we figure out what’s going on.” Do we all know “what is going on”? Clearly we do not all know “what is going on” — after all, we are allowing into our countries large numbers of people who grew up suffused in a faith that teaches them to despise, and to be hostile to, non-Muslims.

 

The refusal to discuss this matter calmly, and to inform oneself appropriately by studying the texts of Islam, and by reading the non-Muslim scholars who devoted their lives to the disinterested study of Islam (C. Snouck Hurgronje, Joseph Schacht, Antoine Fattal, Henri Lammens, K. S. Lal, Ignaz Goldziher, Sir William Muir, St. Clair Tisdall, Arthur Jeffrey, Samuel Zwemer, Georges Vajda, David Margoliouth), the ignoring of the testimony provided by such defectors from Islam as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish, Ibn Warraq, Wafa Sultan, Magdi Allam — this is a colossal dereliction of duty on the part of those who presume to protect and instruct us. Where in the Western world has the Muslim immigration not led to expenses and insecurities and a general civilisational confusion?

 

Those who claim, and are prepared to discuss in detail the evidence supporting this claim, that the large-scale presence of Muslims has led, in Western Europe, to a situation that is far more unpleasant, expensive, and physically dangerous for both the indigenous non-Muslims and for other, non-Muslim immigrants, cannot simply be waved away with a contemptuous smirk.

 

And sometimes instead of a smirk, or a cry of debate-ending “Islamophobe,” a statement is made of such breathless idiocy that one doesn’t quite know what to say. The recent remark of Germany’s ambassador to the Vatican, Annette Schavan, was such a statement. She asserted that “there are warmongers who embrace religion. But that does not mean that religion promotes war. Religion has the great power to bring peace….Islam must be part of the solution.” Could it be that not all religions are identical, that Islam — Qur’an and Hadith and Sira — is suffused with “warmongering” and cannot possibly be “part of the solution” to the very “problem” its adherents alone have created?

In answering these absurd remarks and tendentious charges, it is always a good idea to quote, to bring to your opponent’s attention, and to force him to recognize and, if possible, answer, the superior detailed knowledge you offer in response to his one-word — “Islamophobia” — dismissal.

 

Don’t simply respond in vague kind, but stick closely to details, quoting chapter and verse from the Qur’an. Bring any of more than 150 Jihad verses into the discussion. For example: 2:190-191, 9:5, 2:191, 3:112, 5:33. Keep repeating them, so that those who think they can get away merely by invoking “Islamophobia” have to respond. Mention little Aisha, the massacre of the prisoners at the Battle of the Trench, the attack on the Jewish farmers of the Khaybar Oasis, the murders of Abu Afak and Asma bint Marwan. Always stick to the same handful of stories. Force your opponent to recognize and admit to these episodes in the life of Muhammad, the Perfect Man (al-insan al-kamil), the Model of Conduct (uswa hasana). And if he fails to do so, point out that failure to others who may be listening and looking for enlightenment. Refer, whenever you can, and quote from, the celebrated Western scholars of Islam, and wonder aloud why some think — like your opponent — that they can speak about Islam without having done the necessary work, without having even recognized the existence of these scholars they ought to, but did not, consult.

 

Hold your opponent’s baseless dismissals up for inspection and ridicule, but on the basis of those details that come from three sources: the texts of Islam, the Western scholars of Islam, and the Defectors from the Army of Islam.

You will be ready with those enlightening eye-opening details about Islam — meant not just for your opponent, but for the broader public that is listening, or eavesdropping. Your opponent — used to relying on smirks and single-word dismissals instead of coherent debate — will not. And that is exactly the result you want.

 

===============MEANWHILE=============

From here:

Locals Fled Pool After Migrants Mohammedans Masturbated Into Jacuzzi, Defecated Into Kid’s Pool, Invaded Girls Changing Rooms

A German swimming bath has banned migrants from entering the premises after a group of men went on an obscene rampage, laughing in the faces of pool staff when challenged about their grotesque behaviour.

A group of migrant men and women were caught on security camera at the Johannisbad baths in Zwickau, Saxony engaging in unacceptable behaviour, including masturbating into the jacuzzi. In separate incidents other groups of migrants were caught “contaminating” the children’t training pool by “emptying their bowels in the water”, and sexually assaulting other bathers, reports Bild.

Zwickau_Johannis_bath

The allegations against the migrant bathers has come to light thanks to a leaked internal letter from the Zwickau Town Hall, between the chief clerk to his department head, reproduced in part by German tabloid Bild. Writing of the historic swimming pool’s decision to close their doors to migrants until further notice, Rainer Kallweit wrote this week of a shocking incident which has left the baths abandoned by local swimmers.

In his report, the authenticity of which has since been confirmed by the city administration Mr. Kallweit wrote the shocking words:

“An asylum seeker has masturbated in the hot tub and ejaculated into the basin. This is also recorded on the surveillance camera”. He wrote that the group desecrating the jacuzzi, having been thrown out by the lifeguards later returned took “selfies” of themselves while they were in the tub, “jeering” the whole time.

Writing of another pool under his jurisdiction in the down of Zwickau, the town employee continued to say a group of “young unaccompanied women and children” used the children’s training pool, as none of the party could swim. He wrote, in classic civil servants language they “contaminated the pool by getting rid of the contents of their intestines. Native people immediately left the pool”.

This was not the only assault on the pool. The day before, wrote Mr. Wallweit “8 foreign men … in the sauna” harassed locals, forcing pool staff to pretend the Sauna was out of action when enquiries were made my migrant men, if there were at that time local women using it. He told his superiors: “furthermore, the lifeguards have to protect women and girls from the asylum seekers. Young men wanted to forcibly penetrate the female changing room”.

Police are now investigating the allegations, and in future will be called immediately in case of such behaviour.

The local radio station reports the actions of the migrants has caused “outrage”, and a number of sexual harassment of women and girls by migrants has been reported. Migrants have now been banned from the pool until they can be educated at the migrant centres about “behaviour towards woman and girls in swimwear” and the “user regulations of our baths”.

This behaviour in Zwickau is not by any means unique in Germany. Breitbart London has reported on a number of sex attacks on children in swimming baths over the past week, with girls as young as 11 and boys as young as three being targeted by migrant gangs. On one occasion in Munich, a pair of young girls enjoying the waterslide at their local pool were groped, “allegedly under their bathing suits”, “and possibly raped” by a gang of “refugees”.

The men believed to be responsible, Syrian and Afghan asylum seekers, were arrested and released by police.

 

 

The U.S. is at the center of the global economic meltdown

January 20, 2016

From HERE:

Wal-Mart ExpressAs the economic implosion progresses, there will be considerable misdirection and disinformation as to the true nature of what is taking place. As I have outlined in the past, the masses were so ill informed by the mainstream media during the Great Depression that most people had no idea they were actually in the midst of an “official” depression until years after it began. The chorus of economic journalists of the day made sure to argue consistently that recovery was “right around the corner.” Our current depression has been no different, but something is about to change.

Unlike the Great Depression, social crisis will eventually eclipse economic crisis in the U.S. That is to say, our society today is so unequipped to deal with a financial collapse that the event will inevitably trigger cultural upheaval and violent internal conflict. In the 1930s, nearly 50 percent of the American population was rural. Farmers made up 21 percent of the labor force. Today, only 20 percent of the population is rural. Less than 2 percent work in farming and agriculture. That’s a rather dramatic shift from a more independent and knowledgeable land-using society to a far more helpless and hapless consumer-based system.

What’s the bottom line? About 80 percent of the current population in the U.S. is more than likely inexperienced in any meaningful form of food production and self-reliance.

The rationale for lying to the public is certainly there. Economic and political officials could argue that to reveal the truth of our fiscal situation would result in utter panic and immediate social breakdown. When 80 percent of the citizenry is completely unprepared for a decline in the mainstream grid, a loss of savings through falling equities and a loss of buying power through currency destruction, their first response to such dangers would be predictably uncivilized.

Of course, the powers that be are not interested in protecting the American people from themselves. They are interested only in positioning their own finances and resources in the most advantageous investments while using our loss and fear to extract more centralization, more control and more consent. Thus, the hiding of economic decline is enacted because the decline itself is useful to the elites.

And just to be clear for those who buy into the propaganda, the U.S. is indeed in a speedy decline.

In “You will hear these lies as the economic collapse progresses,” I predicted that “Chinese contagion” would be used as the scapegoat for the downturn in order to hide the true source: American wealth destruction. Today, as the Dow and other markets plummet and oil markets tank due to falling demand and glut inventories, all we seem to hear from the mainstream talking heads and the people who parrot them in various forums is that the U.S. is the “only stable economy by comparison” and the rest of the world (mainly China) is a poison to our otherwise exemplary financial health. This is delusional fiction.

The U.S. is the No. 1 consumer market in the world with a 29 percent share, despite having only 5 percent of the world’s total population. If there is a global slowdown in consumption, manufacturing, exports and imports, then the first place to look should be America.

Trucking freight in the U.S. is in steep decline, with freight companies pointing to a “glut in inventories” and a fall in demand as the culprit.

Morgan Stanley’s freight transportation update indicates a collapse in freight demand worse than that seen during 2009.

The Baltic Dry Index, a measure of global freight rates and thus a measure of global demand for shipping of raw materials, has collapsed to even more dismal historic lows. Hucksters in the mainstream continue to push the lie that the fall in the BDI is due to an “overabundance of new ships.” However, the CEO of A.P. Moeller-Maersk, the world’s largest shipping line, put that nonsense to rest when he admitted in November that “global growth is slowing down” and “[t]rade is currently significantly weaker than it normally would be under the growth forecasts we see.”

Maersk ties the decline in global shipping to a fall in demand, not an increase in shipping fleets.

This point is driven home when one examines the real-time MarineTraffic map, which tracks all cargo ships around the world. For the past few weeks, the map has remained almost completely inactive with the vast majority of the world’s cargo ships sitting idle in port, not traveling across oceans to deliver goods. The bottom line is that global demand has fallen down a black hole, and the U.S. is at the top of the list in terms of crashing consumer markets.

To drive the point home even further, the U.S. is by far the world’s largest petroleum consumer. Therefore, any sizable collapse in global oil demand would have to be predicated in large part on a fall in American consumption. Oil inventories are now overflowing, indicating an unheard-of crash in energy use and purchasing.

U.S. petroleum consumption was actually lower in 2014 than it was in 1997 and 25 percent lower than earlier projections predicted. A large part of this reduction in gas use has been attributed to fewer vehicle miles traveled. Though oil markets have seen massive price cuts, the lack of demand continued through 2015.

And finally, let’s talk about Wal-Mart. There is a good reason why mainstream pundits are attempting to marginalize Wal-Mart’s sudden announcement of 269 store closures, 154 of them within the U.S. with at least 10,000 employees being laid off. Admitting weakness in Wal-Mart means admitting weakness in the U.S. economy, and they don’t want to do that.

Wal-Mart is America’s largest retailer and largest employer. In 2014, Wal-Mart announced a sweeping plan to essentially crush neighborhood grocery markets with its Wal-Mart Express stores, building hundreds within months. Today, those Wal-Mart Express stores are being shut down in droves, along with some supercenters. Their top business model lasted around a year before it was abandoned.

Some in the mainstream argue that this is not necessarily a sign of economic decline because Wal-Mart claims it will be building 200 to 240 new stores worldwide by 2017. This is interesting to me because Wal-Mart just suffered its steepest stock drop in 27 years on reports that projected sales will fall by 6 percent to 12 percent for the next two years.

It would seem to me highly unlikely that Wal-Mart would close 154 stores in the U.S. and 269 stores worldwide and then open 240 other stores during a projected steep crash in sales that caused the worst stock trend in the company’s history. I think it far more likely that Wal-Mart executives are attempting to appease shareholders with promises of expansion they do not plan to keep.

I am going to call it here and now and predict that most of these store sites will never see construction and that Wal-Mart will continue to make cuts, either with store closings, employee layoffs or both.

As the above data indicates, global demand is disintegrating; and the U.S. is a core driver.

The best way to sweep all these negative indicators under the rug is to fabricate some grand idea of outside threats and fiscal dominoes. It is much easier for Americans to believe our country is being battered from without rather than destroyed from within.

Does China have considerable fiscal issues including debt bubble issues? Absolutely. Is this a catalyst for global collapse? No. China’s problems are many but if there is a first “domino” in the chain, then the U.S. economy claims that distinction.

China is the largest exporter in the world, not the largest consumer. If anything, a crash in China’s economy is only a reflection of an underlying collapse in U.S. demand for Chinese goods (among others). That is to say, the mainstream dullards have it backward; a crash in China is a herald of a larger collapse in U.S. markets. A crash in China is a symptom of the greater fiscal disease in America. The U.S. is the cause; it is not the victim of Chinese contagion. And the crisis in the U.S. will ultimately be far worse by comparison.

I wrote in “What fresh horror awaits the economy after Fed rate hike?”:

[M]arket turmoil is a guarantee given the fact that banks and corporations have been utterly reliant on near-zero interest rates and free overnight lending from the Fed. They have been using these no-cost and low-cost loans primarily for stock buybacks, purchasing back their own stocks and reducing the number of shares on the market, thereby artificially elevating the value of the remaining shares and driving up the market as a whole. Now that near-zero lending is over, these banks and corporations will not be able to afford constant overnight borrowing, and the buybacks will cease. Thus, stock markets will crash in the near term.

This process has already begun with increased volatility leading up to and after the Fed rate hike. Watch for far more erratic stock movements (300 to 500 points or more) up and down taking place more frequently, with the overall trend leading down into the 15,000-point range for the Dow in the first two quarters of 2016. Extraordinary but short lived positive increases in the markets will occur at times (Christmas and New Year’s tend to result in positive rallies), but shock rallies are just as much a sign of volatility and instability as shock crashes.

Markets moved immediately into crash territory after the new year began. This was an easy prediction to make and one that I have been reiterating for months — just as the timing of the Fed rate hike was an easy prediction to make, based on the Fed’s history of deliberately increasing instability through bad policy as the economy moves into deflationary spirals. The Fed did it during the Great Depression and is doing it again today.

I have said it many times and I’ll say it yet again: If you think the Fed’s motivation is to prolong or protect the U.S. economy and currency, then you will never understand why it takes the policy actions it does. If you understand and accept the fact that the Fed is a saboteur working carefully and incrementally toward the destruction of the U.S. to make way for a new globally centralized system, everything falls into place.

To summarize, the U.S. economy as we know it is not slated to survive the next few years. Read “The economic endgame explained” for more in-depth information on why a collapse is being engineered and what the openly admitted goal is. I reference a 1988 article from The Economist titled “Get ready for the phoenix,” which outlines the plan for a reduction of the dollar and the U.S. system in order to make way for a global basket reserve currency (Special Drawing Rights).

It is astonishingly foolish to assume that even though the U.S. holds 29 percent of the global consumption share, that it is somehow not a primary faulty part in the sputtering global economic engine. Americans are not buying because Americans are broke. Americans are broke because central bank policy has created an environment of wealth destruction. When Americans don’t buy, the rest of the world feels the effects. This wealth destruction in the U.S. has been ongoing, but only now is it becoming truly visible. Anyone who attempts to dismiss the dangers of a U.S. breakdown or the threat to the unprepared public is either an idiot or is trying to divert and distract you from reality. The coming months will undoubtedly verify this.

–Brandon Smith

Morning People Vs. Night Owls: 9 Insights Backed By Science

December 29, 2015

By Maha Hamdan, from HERE:

OwlsVsLarks

Chances are you already know whether you’re a morning person or a night person (and if you don’t, just ask your significant other). What you might not know is that social scientists use pretty specific—and, by academic standards, pretty casual—names for these two chronotypes. “Larks” are up and at it early in the morning, and tend to hit the sack at a respectable evening hour; “owls” are most alert at night, and typically turn in long after dark.

These labels are less an either-or than a spectrum; chronotype can shift over a person’s lifetime, and recent work suggests adding two more subsets to the list: early to wake and late to bed, and late to wake but early bed. But generally speaking the larks-or-owls construct has stood the rigors of research, with evidence really growing since the development of a 19-part Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire in the late 1970s that sorts folks into chronotypes based on things like when they’d ideally get up, how alert they feel in the morning, when they normally get tired, and so on. More involved than asking a spouse, but effective.

An exhaustive list of lessons to emerge from this line of study isn’t possible (or, frankly, something that sounds fun). But we gathered some of our favorite lark-versus-owl studies from recent years and identified nine general insights worth passing along—for your late night, or early morning, pleasure.

1. LARKS AREN’T HEALTHIER, WEALTHIER, OR WISER.

Ben Franklin, that jack-of-all-Founding Fathers, once advocated for a lark lifestyle in a famous saying: “early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise.” But a pair of epidemiologists at Southampton University in England—perhaps still bitter over that whole Revolution thing—directly challenged Franklin’s tyranny of the morning people in a 1998 paper for BMJ.

The researchers analyzed a national sample of men and women who’d been surveyed years earlier on sleep patterns as well as measures related to, well, health, wealth, and wisdom. There were 356 larks in the group (in bed before 11 p.m., up before 8 a.m.) and 318 owls (in bed after 11, up after 8). Contrary to Franklin’s decree, night owls had larger incomes and more access to cars than did morning larks; the two chronotypes also scored roughly the same on a cognitive test and showed no self- or doctor-reported health differences.

“We found no evidence … that following Franklin’s advice about going to bed and getting up early was associated with any health, socioeconomic, or cognitive advantage,” the authors concluded. “If anything, owls were wealthier than larks, though there was no difference in their health or wisdom.”

2. IF ANYTHING, OWLS MIGHT BE A BIT SMARTER ON THE WHOLE.

A lark v. owl study published the following year looked more closely at the question of brains. Psychologist Richard D. Roberts of the University of Sydney and Patrick C. Kyllonen of the Air Force Research Lab, measured the chronotype of 420 test participants then gave them two intelligence tests. Together the tasks measured vocational knowledge (e.g. mechanics and engineering), general math and reading comprehension, and working memory and processing speed.

The results, though not overwhelming, did come down slightly on the side of evening types. Night owls outperformed morning larks on most of the intelligence measures—with significant differences on working memory and processing speed. Especially interesting was that the finding seemed to hold up even when the cognitive tests were taken in the morning.

“The results indicate that, contrary to conventional folk wisdom, evening-types are more likely to have higher intelligence scores,” Roberts and Kyllonen reported in a 1999 issue of Personality and Individual Differences. Wise old owl, indeed.

3. NIGHT TYPES HAVE MORE GAME.

Evening types weren’t just good at scoring on intelligence tests. They also proved to be prolific lovers—at least according to a 2012 paper in the same journal.

The study, led by Christoph Randler of University of Education Heidelberg in Germany, tested 284 male participants for their chronotype and their sexual behavior. While both morning and evening types got busy equally often, the night guys reported more total partners. This held true even when Randler and company controlled for age, extraversion, and a tendency to stay out later. Evening types were also more closely linked to infidelity; to take the bird analogy way too far: it seems owls, and not larks, breed cuckolds.

As for why night owls might close more romantic deals, the researchers wonder if “a high activity during evening and night may honestly signal a better performance in sexual activity because most sexual activity in humans takes place around bed time.” That’s a dubious conclusion, though we’d love to see What’s your name, what’s your chronotype? catch on at the bar.

4. NO, LITERALLY, THEY PLAY BASEBALL BETTER.

In a delightful study, a research team that included a representative of the San Francisco Giants issued a morningness-eveningness questionnaire to 16 Major League Baseball players—nine owls, seven larks. The study group then paired this chronotype information with game statistics from nearly 7,500 innings during the 2009 and 2010 seasons. They reported their highly preliminary findings in a 2011 supplemental issue of Sleep.

Baseball players all fared better when game times matched their chronotype—though night owls had better averages than morning larks.
American Academy of Sleep Medicine

When morning types played in early games (with start times before 2 p.m.), they batted a respectable .267. But when evening types played in night games (with first pitch after 8 p.m.), they hit a dazzling .306 as a group—nearly 30 points higher. It’s worth noting owls suffered more than larks when game-time conflicted with chronotype: morning players hit eight points lower in night games (.259), but evening players hit 54 points lower in day games (.252).

5. OWLS ARE PARTIAL TO BAD HABITS—NAMELY, SMOKING AND DRINKING.

Franklin’s adage about morning types being healthy does seem to hold in one regard: larks might be a little less vulnerable than owls to substance abuse.

A number of studies support these connections. One analysis of 676 adults from a Finnish twin cohort found that evening types were much more likely to be current or lifelong smokers, much less likely to stop smoking, and at much higher risk for nicotine dependence as per diagnostic criteria, compared with morning folks. Another study of 537 individuals found that owls consume more alcohol than larks.

That’s not a huge surprise when you consider that nightlife is conducive to drinking and smoking. What’s less clear to researchers is whether evening people are more inclined to partake because they’re already out late, or whether the addictive behaviors—at least in the case of a stimulant like cigarettes—keep them up longer in the first.

6. LARKS ARE PERSISTENT, COOPERATIVE, AGREEABLE, CONSCIENTIOUS, AND PROACTIVE.

The tendency to drink and smoke among evening types is consistent with a broad personality trait that researchers call “novelty-seeking.” Multiple studies have connected owls with that characteristic. In a 2011 paper notable for focusing on adolescents, Randler and a Heidelberg colleague discovered a link between night people and novelty-seeking already present among German teenagers (technically, ages 12 to 18).

The same research—which evaluated 346 test participants on both chronotype and a through character inventory—found that larks scored higher than owls (as well people who didn’t fit in either category) in terms of persistence and cooperation. These positive traits among morning types built on other personality work from Randler showing that larks tended to be more agreeable and conscientious, and that they tend to be more proactive than owls. Showoffs.

7. THEY ALSO PROCRASTINATE LESS.

Given that larks are generally more compliant and conformist than owls, it comes as little shock to learn that evening types seem to be worse procrastinators. A 1997 study led by veteran delay researcher Joseph Ferrari of DePaul found that trait procrastinators called themselves “night” people. Based on six days of daily task records, Ferrari and company linked procrastination behaviors with a general tendency to partake in evening activities.

That study focused on college students: night types and procrastinators almost by definition. But the finding held true in a 2008 study of an adult sample with a mean age of 50. Once again, being a night owl was associated with avoiding a task that needed to be completed, the study team (which included Ferrari) reported in the Journal of General Psychology.

The researchers also suspect that this general preference to delay tasks until night could create problems at jobs with strong daytime work expectations.

8. MORNING TYPES MAY BE HAPPIER.

This disconnect between conventional daytime expectations and nighttime preference might make life harder for owls in general. Social scientists call this outcome “social jetlag”: evening types that force themselves to wake up early and perform at their peak during the day might cause themselves some sleep loss and emotional distress. They might also be less happy as a result.

That’s the argument put forth by two University of Toronto psychologists in a 2012 paper. After assessing a sample of 435 young adults (17 to 38) and 297 older adults (59 to 79) on their chronotypes as well as their current moods, the researchers found that morning people had higher positive affect across the board, compared with night people. Mood isn’t the same as general happiness, but the findings may speak in part to the challenges owls face on a daily basis.

“Waking up early may indeed make one happy as a lark,” the researchers conclude in the journal Emotion.

9. BOTH TYPES MAY BE MORE CREATIVE ON THEIR OFF-HOURS.

So there are clear benefits to matching someone’s chronotype with that person’s lifestyle, but the occasional mismatch isn’t the end of the world. It might even brew some creativity, according to a 2011 study by psychologists Mareike Wieth and Rose Zacks.

Wieth and Zacks determined the chronotype of 428 test participants then randomly assigned them to a morning or late afternoon test session. During the session, the participants had to solve six problems. Some were analytical problem, which can be solved with logical thinking, and some were insight problems, which tend to be figured out via “aha” moments or bursts of creative thought.

(Brief pause for an example insight problem: An antique coin dealer gets an offer to buy a bronze coin with the date 544 B.C. stamped on one side, but instead of buying it he calls the police. Why? We’ll give you a moment. No coin truly made in B.C. would label itself B.C.—that’s an A.D. construct)

 

In the journal Thinking and Reasoning, Wieth and Zacks report that, overall, people were more successful at the analytical problems. But participants had a higher solution rate for insight problems when doing them at their non-optimal time of the day—say, an owl doing the test in morning—than at the time that aligned with their chornotype. The results lend support to the incubation theory of creativity: taking a break from a problem, often out of mental fatigue, can produce unexpected insights.

Maybe even insights about morning and night people.

Saudi millionaire acquitted of rape charge after claiming he tripped and fell on teen

December 16, 2015

ONLY IN FORMERLY GREAT BRITAIN…

From here:

VICTOR FERREIRA  12.15.2015

Saudi millionaire acquitted of rape charge after claiming he tripped and fell on teen
Property developer Ehsan Abdulaziz, 46, was accused of forcing himself on the teenager as she slept off a night of drinking on the sofa of his Maida Vale flat.

SHAREADJUSTCOMMENTPRINT

A Saudi millionaire who claims he accidentally fell on and penetrated an 18-year-old woman in Britain has been cleared of one count of rape.

Ehsan Abdulaziz, 46 was accused of raping the woman as she slept on his sofa after bringing her and her 24-year-old friend home from a London nightclub, the Telegraph reports.

The woman was with her friend, who was known to Abdulaziz, at the Cirque le Soir nightclub on Aug. 7, 2014. After inviting both to join him at his CA$2,000-a-night table, the millionaire brought the two women back to his home.

The court heard Abdulaziz gave the two women vodka to drink before leading the 24-year-old woman to another room to have sex. When the 18-year-old awoke the next morning, she told the court Abdulaziz was on top of her and raping her.

Abdulaziz said he accidentally fell on the 18-year-old woman after she seduced him. He said she pulled him toward her and placed his hand between her legs. He claimed he was only trying to offer her something to wear or a taxi ride home.

“I’m fragile,” he said. “I fell down but nothing ever happened, between me and this girl nothing ever happened.”

His DNA was found inside the 18-year-old girl and he claims he could have had semen on his hands after having sex with her 24-year-old friend.

Prosecutor Jonathan Davies accused Abdulaziz of changing his story after being confronted with the DNA evidence.

“On this occasion he said after he had sex with the complainant’s friend his penis was still erect and he had semen on his hands when he went into the living room,” Davies said.

“He said in the second interview she pushed his hands down on to her vagina. He said that he did fall onto her and his penis may have penetrated her vagina. You may consider, members of the jury, him changing the account he was giving.”

A jury acquitted Abdulaziz after only 30 minutes of deliberations.

BECAUSE HIS EXCUSE MADE SUCH PERFECT SENSE TO THE BRITS!

Obama Set to Sign Deal Allowing Foreign Takeover of America’s Land and Resources

December 16, 2015

From here:

Once shrouded in secrecy, President Barack Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership is now becoming public, and what we’re discovering is absolutely frightening.

Apparently the deal reverses policies in place to protect national security.

Chapter 11 of the deal allows foreign investors the rights to acquire American land, businesses, ports, natural resources, infrastructure and other property.

Chapters 28 and 29 give foreign investors the ability to work around U.S. courts and sue the United States before a dispute tribunal if they feel U.S. law violated their “rights” under the deal.

Additionally, the U.S. government had unfettered power to protect its national security interests as it deemed necessary, but the TPP agreement reverses this power. As a consequence, other countries could maintain that U.S. security interests violate the deal and they could then insist the United States pay billions of dollars in damages.

The TPP is anything but the simple free trade deal Obama wants us to think it is. It is a complex array of rules and regulations intended to control the economic relations between the nations involved in the deal. Furthermore, there is no economic model indicating any benefit to the United States from the agreement.

There is a reason Obama wanted to keep the details of this deal secret. While he wants to tout that it will help workers, the truth is that it does the opposite.

Obama has proven again and again why he cannot be trusted. He goes behind the backs of the American people and institutes legislation whether we like it or not. His actions suggest that he constantly puts Americans at risk.

Even if we didn’t now have the agreement of the text to go by, his track record alone should tell us this is a bad deal and should be stopped.

…….
WND EXCLUSIVE
Obamatrade’s fine print reveals security threat

Would give U.S. protection decisions to international panel

Published: 2 days ago

Curtis Ellis is a political communications consultant and writer.

UNITED NATIONS – The fine print of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, a reading has revealed, reverses policies put in place to prevent the foreign takeover of the United States’ ports and other crucial national infrastructure.

And it appears to undermine U.S. national security.

The release of the long-hidden Obamatrade text reveals it gives foreign interests the power to do an end-run around laws designed to protect crucial American infrastructure from national security threats – and the U.S. would be hard pressed to stop it.

Previous U.S. trade pacts stated in no uncertain terms that the national security interests of the United States are determined solely by the U.S. government and supersede any provisions of the pacts.

The U.S. government had unfettered power to protect its national security interests as it deemed necessary – even if its actions might violate the terms of a trade agreement.

But the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement reverses this precedent. As a result, other countries could claim the U.S. national security interests violate the TPP agreement and they could then demand the U.S. pay billions of dollars in damages.

It’s telling that the Obama administration failed to safeguard the U.S. national security while other nations – Australia, Canada, Mexico and New Zealand – made sure they maintained their sole and sovereign authority to control their national security.

Chapter 11 of the TPP gives foreign investors special rights to acquire American land, natural resources, businesses, ports, infrastructure and other investments in the U.S.

Start with “Basic Economics” by WND columnist Thomas Sowell to understand what’s happening in the economic world today.

Under Chapter 28 and Chapter 29, these foreign investors could do an end-run around U.S. courts and sue the U.S. before an international panel, known as an investor-state dispute tribunal, if they feel American law violates their “rights” under the TPP.

Currently, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, reviews pending foreign investments in the U.S. to determine if they pose a threat to national security and can recommend the president shut down investments deemed a threat. Under previous trade agreements, foreign investors would have no recourse.

But under the TPP, the sultan of Brunei, the billionaire autocrat who rules his TPP country under Shariah law, could sue for billions of dollars if CFIUS denied his bid to buy a company providing security to U.S. ports and airports.

He would bring his case before a foreign tribunal that could force taxpayers to award him compensation for “lost profits,” under the terms of the agreement.

The tribunal, staffed by three unelected lawyers hailing from anywhere in the world, would have the power to second-guess the U.S. government on what constitutes a threat to national security.

This is not an unheard of scenario.

In 2006, Dubai Ports World (DPW), a state owned enterprise of the United Arab Emirates, sought to buy a company that ran six major U.S. ports. Congress intervened to block the sale after Coast Guard officials raised the possibility of significant security risks.

That controversy came in the midst of congressional debate over the U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement. Like the TPP, the Oman pact gave foreign investors expansive rights to acquire and operate U.S. businesses – and to sue if they felt their rights were violated. After a huge public outcry, the sale was blocked.

Following the Dubai Ports World controversy, language was added in a footnote to all U.S. trade agreements to shut down any second-guessing of U.S. security interests by trade tribunals. The footnote makes clear the U.S. has sole discretion in determining its essential national security interests.

The critical footnote to the “Security Exception” Article 22.2 of the Peru Free Trade Agreement, Article 21.2 of the Panama FT, Article 22.2 of the Colombia FTA and Article 23.2 of the Korea-US FT read: ” For greater certainty, if a party invokes [the ‘Security Exception’] Article in an arbitral proceeding initiated under [Investment] Chapter or [Dispute Settlement] Chapter, the tribunal or panel hearing the matter shall find that the exception applies.”

In plain English, it says if the U.S. invokes national security, that’s final – no foreign “trade” tribunal could overrule it.

But this crucial stipulation was eliminated from Article 29.2 of the final TPP text.

As a result, any company operating in a TPP country could drag the U.S. before an extrajudicial foreign tribunal and demand taxpayer compensation if our government prevented it from buying a crucial American asset based on national security grounds.

Without this footnote to Article 29.2, one of the TPP’s trade dispute tribunals could substitute its judgment for that of the U.S. government with respect to what is considered an essential security interest of the U.S.

The TPP also includes an Annex 9-H, which states that a government’s decision on whether to approve a given foreign investment in its territory is not subject to challenges before an investor-state dispute tribunal. While Australia, Canada, Mexico and New Zealand listed their relevant foreign investment review laws, the United States failed to do so.

WND reported only weeks ago when the text of the TPP finally was released so lawmakers and taxpayers could read it.

TPP was envisioned as the largest-ever economic regulatory treaty, encompassing more than 40 percent of the world’s gross domestic product.

Secretary of State John Kerry said the pact will merge the U.S. economy with Mexico and ten others nations, including Canada, Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Islamic Sultanate of Brunei.

And worse: China and India will be invited to sign-on early next year.

Muslim cleric giving Clinton millions

December 16, 2015

From HERE:

The Clinton family and Hillary Clinton’s campaign are being accused of accepting millions of dollars from what at least one U.S. ally is calling a terrorist network.

The U.S.-based Muslim cleric Fethullah Gulen is a longstanding ally of Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, and their cozy relationship has included dinners and speaking arrangements throughout the years.

He is suspected of controlling $25 billion in global assets and his followers have reportedly poured millions into the Clinton Foundation and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

But now Gulen has been accused in a U.S. court of being the ringleader of an international terrorist network, and Turkey is calling on America to extradite Gulen.

A Turkish government-backed lawsuit has been filed against Gulen and alleges that the Muslim cleric orchestrated human rights abuses from his residence in Pennsylvania against three men in Turkey.

A lawyer hired by the Turkish government, Robert Amsterdam, provided a copy of the filing in the U.S. district court in Pennsylvania. The lawsuit labels Gulen’s movement, which many have compared to a cult, as a terrorist organization.

Most recently, the lawsuit alleges, Gulen’s followers participated in a plot that led to the false imprisonment of three men in Turkey.

The controversial Islamic cleric’s cozy relationship doesn’t stop with the Clintons. In October, Gulen’s religious movement was accused of secretly funding up to 200 trips to Turkey for members of Congress and staff since 2008, and according to the USA Today report these trips may have repeatedly violated House rules and possibly federal law.

The lawsuit is part of a broad campaign against Gulen’s movement in Turkey and abroad. The government has carried out a purge of civil servants suspected of ties to the movement, seized businesses and closed some of Gulen’s suspected media organizations.

The suit alleges that Gulen targeted the three men because they were critical of his religious teachings, which critics say are almost cult-like.

Gulen continues to live within the U.S. borders carefree, residing in rural Pennsylvania and in regular contact with his Muslim followers.

The Associated Press contributed to this article

Is the West Indebted to Islam?

December 13, 2015

Hypocrite Liberal “Judge” Profiles Blacks in 911 Call!

December 12, 2015

From HERE:

Federal Judge Who Outlawed Racial Profiling is Victim of Black Mob Violence 

By Colin Flaherty

Federal Judge Susan Dlott wrote the book on racial profiling in 2002.

Last week, she ripped it into one million tiny pieces when three black people broke into her $8 million Cincinnati home and started beating her and her 79-year old husband.

“There’s three black men with guns at our house,” Dlott told a 911 operator after she escaped the home invasion and ran to her neighbor’s house one mile away.

And just in case the operator did not hear her the first time, Dlott said it again: “My husband and the dogs are still there. There are three black men with guns and masks at the house.”

That’s Racial Profiling 101: Identifying the criminals by race, as if that had something to do with it.

You remember, the same thing NBC tried to pin on George Zimmerman when it maliciously (mis)edited his 911 call about Trayvon Martin.

Dlott became a national heroine of the movement to outlaw — and define — racial profiling in 2002, the year after the Cincinnati riots. Another memory refresher: That was when thousands of black people rampaged through Cincinnati for four days, burning, destroying, threatening, vandalizing, beating, defying police — all because a police shooting reminded everyone that black people are relentless victims of relentless white racism.

And cops were always picking on black people for no reason what so ever. Even Bill Cosby cancelled a concert. That’s how bad it was.

That is what the NAACP said when it sued the city in federal court. Once the NAACP lawsuit was assigned to Dlott, they consolidated all their cases in her court. Because everyone knew they had a kindred spirit on the bench in Dlott.

At the time, the Cincinnati Enquirer described her as an “unabashed liberal.” Which to them was a compliment. “Now the future of race relations in the Queen City may be in her hands. She’s overseeing an unprecedented effort to resolve a racial profiling lawsuit that accuses Cincinnati police of detaining African-Americans because of their skin color.

“The outcome of the case could set a new standard for resolving decades-old problems in race relations, not only here but nationwide.”

And it did — maybe not the way they expected. Last year for example, it took local media almost a week to figure out that during the Taste of Cincinnati, large groups of black people were gleefully attacking bus riders, commuters, members of a gay country western dance club, little old ladies and even the children of the local DA during and after then annual downtown celebration.

No one wanted to say it. No one wanted to report it. Because in Cincinnati, Dlott helped reporters and public officials long ago figure out that identifying criminals by race is a very bad thing.

The lawsuit in Dlott’s court quickly became more of an arbitration than a trial, with lots of community meetings and “input from stakeholders.” In theory, that meant finding out what was really happening. In practice, it degenerated into lot of angry black people talking about how cops were always picking on them.

With a lot of white media and public officials cowering in agreement.

The police were part of this process, but were mostly left to mumble they were not racists and they were just doing their job by catching criminals. Which no one seemed to care about — not enough to risk being labeled as racist, at any rate.

For all the talk of how black criminals were being treated unfairly, there was little or no testimony about black on white crime and black mob violence in Cincinnati. And how it was wildly out of proportion. And little from white and Asian victims of that crime and violence — then and now documented with a letter from a Cincinnati cop in that scintillating best seller, Don’t Make the Black Kids Angry.

From the very beginning of the proceedings, everyone pretty much agreed that black people were victims, not the perpetrators. No matter what those racist crime numbers showed.

Writing in a law journal at Duke University, Andrew Taslitz describes the mob atmosphere that permeated Dlott’s federal court. And yeah, he thought it was a good thing: “The 2001 Cincinnati violence and resulting bad press for the police force created an atmosphere conducive to the defendants settling quickly. Plaintiffs took advantage of this situation by offering to submit their complaint to a mediation.”

Dlott and the NAACP made it clear the case was about more than just one cop beating one black person. Said Taslitz:

“But the protests and resulting violence were about far more than the excessive use of force. Protestors were also angered by what they viewed as years of degrading racial profiling by the local police. A teenager interviewed by the Washington Post seemed to capture the sense of the community:

“The riots are not just a reaction to the killing of an African-American male, but to the injustice to our people for so long,” said Christopher Johnson, 16, as he stood on the church steps. “Just walking down the street I get asked [by police], ‘What are you doing?’ I pay taxes like they do. I should be able to walk down a public street.”

It is not known whether the Post actually confirmed the young man in question actually paid taxes.

Whatever: By the time the trial was over, black people in Cincinnati knew they had a new champion, Dlott. And this champion let everyone know that from then on, police would be keeping better statistics of any disparity between white people and black people who are stopped and/or arrested.

Because any disparity between white crime and black crime was the result of one thing and one thing only: White racism manifest in racial profiling.

The mantra of racial injustice has since become gospel for mayors, governors, lawyers, attorneys general, and even the President of the United States. All of whom agree that the only reason there is a racial disparity in law enforcement is because of overpolicing in black neighborhoods.

Just a few months ago, Attorney General Lynch was the featured speaker at a Black Caucus seminar on this topic, where several black police chiefs and lawyers and government officials agreed that if the same amount of police resources were moved to white neighborhoods, police would make the same kind of arrests in the same amount.

So there really is no difference between black and white crime.

That is the essence of racial profiling.

That is how so many people in Cincinnati and in law journals around the country know Susan Dlott.

And that is why so many people in her hometown and around the country were a bit surprised she was so quick to pull the race card in her call to 911: After all, we know far more black people in Cincinnati are arrested for burglary and home invasion. But in her world, white people do it too. In the same amount. They just don’t get caught.

Her friends took to TV and the internet to remind everyone how Dlott has pioneered so many “civil rights” decisions. And how her wealthy trial lawyer husband is a lifetime board member of the NAACP.

“If we lost her, which we would have but for her smart thinking… and a few coincidences, we would’ve lost one of the great civil rights judges of our time,” her neighbor told a local TV news crew. “It’s because of Susan Dlott that we have community policing here and modeled across the nation. She structured that agreement.”

As if somehow excusing black criminality gave her a pass from the consequences of black criminality that is wildly out of proportion.

It did not.

As if somehow everyone should overlook how Judge Dlott was so eager to racially profile the people who threw her husband down a flight of steps. Many did not, and were happy to say so in the various accounts of this crime on the web:

“She didn’t care about their age, height, weight, clothing, facial hair. Nope. They weren’t, “teens”, now but “THREE BLACK MEN!”

“She sounded like she might clutch her purse too if she had one!,” said another.

“She should have to apologize to these children in court for causing them all these problems. They could have been shot and killed by the very Police she ruled were profiling black children.”

“I hope I’m a juror on that case, ‘they’re victims of white racism, NOT GUILTY.’ “

“Because of people like her. Shaming people who have reason to live with a healthy dose of fear by calling them racists. Judge Dlott’s Ivory Tower was invaded and she became one of us for a moment. Oh the shame! Hello pot? This is the kettle. You’re black.”

The three home invaders who just happened to be black were soon caught. And remain in jail awaiting trial with bail of at least $2.5 million.

That did not sit well with the mother of one of the alleged invaders, who told reporters her son was a good boy who did not normally do stuff like that.

You can find more videos of racial violence and denial at Colin Flaherty’s YouTube channel by clicking on this magical link.

Federal Judge Susan Dlott wrote the book on racial profiling in 2002.

Last week, she ripped it into one million tiny pieces when three black people broke into her $8 million Cincinnati home and started beating her and her 79-year old husband.

“There’s three black men with guns at our house,” Dlott told a 911 operator after she escaped the home invasion and ran to her neighbor’s house one mile away.

And just in case the operator did not hear her the first time, Dlott said it again: “My husband and the dogs are still there. There are three black men with guns and masks at the house.”

That’s Racial Profiling 101: Identifying the criminals by race, as if that had something to do with it.

You remember, the same thing NBC tried to pin on George Zimmerman when it maliciously (mis)edited his 911 call about Trayvon Martin.

Dlott became a national heroine of the movement to outlaw — and define — racial profiling in 2002, the year after the Cincinnati riots. Another memory refresher: That was when thousands of black people rampaged through Cincinnati for four days, burning, destroying, threatening, vandalizing, beating, defying police — all because a police shooting reminded everyone that black people are relentless victims of relentless white racism.

And cops were always picking on black people for no reason what so ever. Even Bill Cosby cancelled a concert. That’s how bad it was.

That is what the NAACP said when it sued the city in federal court. Once the NAACP lawsuit was assigned to Dlott, they consolidated all their cases in her court. Because everyone knew they had a kindred spirit on the bench in Dlott.

At the time, the Cincinnati Enquirer described her as an “unabashed liberal.” Which to them was a compliment. “Now the future of race relations in the Queen City may be in her hands. She’s overseeing an unprecedented effort to resolve a racial profiling lawsuit that accuses Cincinnati police of detaining African-Americans because of their skin color.

“The outcome of the case could set a new standard for resolving decades-old problems in race relations, not only here but nationwide.”

And it did — maybe not the way they expected. Last year for example, it took local media almost a week to figure out that during the Taste of Cincinnati, large groups of black people were gleefully attacking bus riders, commuters, members of a gay country western dance club, little old ladies and even the children of the local DA during and after then annual downtown celebration.

No one wanted to say it. No one wanted to report it. Because in Cincinnati, Dlott helped reporters and public officials long ago figure out that identifying criminals by race is a very bad thing.

The lawsuit in Dlott’s court quickly became more of an arbitration than a trial, with lots of community meetings and “input from stakeholders.” In theory, that meant finding out what was really happening. In practice, it degenerated into lot of angry black people talking about how cops were always picking on them.

With a lot of white media and public officials cowering in agreement.

The police were part of this process, but were mostly left to mumble they were not racists and they were just doing their job by catching criminals. Which no one seemed to care about — not enough to risk being labeled as racist, at any rate.

For all the talk of how black criminals were being treated unfairly, there was little or no testimony about black on white crime and black mob violence in Cincinnati. And how it was wildly out of proportion. And little from white and Asian victims of that crime and violence — then and now documented with a letter from a Cincinnati cop in that scintillating best seller, Don’t Make the Black Kids Angry.

From the very beginning of the proceedings, everyone pretty much agreed that black people were victims, not the perpetrators. No matter what those racist crime numbers showed.

Writing in a law journal at Duke University, Andrew Taslitz describes the mob atmosphere that permeated Dlott’s federal court. And yeah, he thought it was a good thing: “The 2001 Cincinnati violence and resulting bad press for the police force created an atmosphere conducive to the defendants settling quickly. Plaintiffs took advantage of this situation by offering to submit their complaint to a mediation.”

Dlott and the NAACP made it clear the case was about more than just one cop beating one black person. Said Taslitz:

“But the protests and resulting violence were about far more than the excessive use of force. Protestors were also angered by what they viewed as years of degrading racial profiling by the local police. A teenager interviewed by the Washington Post seemed to capture the sense of the community:

“The riots are not just a reaction to the killing of an African-American male, but to the injustice to our people for so long,” said Christopher Johnson, 16, as he stood on the church steps. “Just walking down the street I get asked [by police], ‘What are you doing?’ I pay taxes like they do. I should be able to walk down a public street.”

It is not known whether the Post actually confirmed the young man in question actually paid taxes.

Whatever: By the time the trial was over, black people in Cincinnati knew they had a new champion, Dlott. And this champion let everyone know that from then on, police would be keeping better statistics of any disparity between white people and black people who are stopped and/or arrested.

Because any disparity between white crime and black crime was the result of one thing and one thing only: White racism manifest in racial profiling.

The mantra of racial injustice has since become gospel for mayors, governors, lawyers, attorneys general, and even the President of the United States. All of whom agree that the only reason there is a racial disparity in law enforcement is because of overpolicing in black neighborhoods.

 

Just a few months ago, Attorney General Lynch was the featured speaker at a Black Caucus seminar on this topic, where several black police chiefs and lawyers and government officials agreed that if the same amount of police resources were moved to white neighborhoods, police would make the same kind of arrests in the same amount.

So there really is no difference between black and white crime.

That is the essence of racial profiling.

That is how so many people in Cincinnati and in law journals around the country know Susan Dlott.

And that is why so many people in her hometown and around the country were a bit surprised she was so quick to pull the race card in her call to 911: After all, we know far more black people in Cincinnati are arrested for burglary and home invasion. But in her world, white people do it too. In the same amount. They just don’t get caught.

Her friends took to TV and the internet to remind everyone how Dlott has pioneered so many “civil rights” decisions. And how her wealthy trial lawyer husband is a lifetime board member of the NAACP.

“If we lost her, which we would have but for her smart thinking… and a few coincidences, we would’ve lost one of the great civil rights judges of our time,” her neighbor told a local TV news crew. “It’s because of Susan Dlott that we have community policing here and modeled across the nation. She structured that agreement.”

As if somehow excusing black criminality gave her a pass from the consequences of black criminality that is wildly out of proportion.

It did not.

As if somehow everyone should overlook how Judge Dlott was so eager to racially profile the people who threw her husband down a flight of steps. Many did not, and were happy to say so in the various accounts of this crime on the web:

“She didn’t care about their age, height, weight, clothing, facial hair. Nope. They weren’t, “teens”, now but “THREE BLACK MEN!”

“She sounded like she might clutch her purse too if she had one!,” said another.

“She should have to apologize to these children in court for causing them all these problems. They could have been shot and killed by the very Police she ruled were profiling black children.”

“I hope I’m a juror on that case, ‘they’re victims of white racism, NOT GUILTY.’ “

“Because of people like her. Shaming people who have reason to live with a healthy dose of fear by calling them racists. Judge Dlott’s Ivory Tower was invaded and she became one of us for a moment. Oh the shame! Hello pot? This is the kettle. You’re black.”

The three home invaders who just happened to be black were soon caught. And remain in jail awaiting trial with bail of at least $2.5 million.

That did not sit well with the mother of one of the alleged invaders, who told reporters her son was a good boy who did not normally do stuff like that.

You can find more videos of racial violence and denial at Colin Flaherty’s YouTube channel by clicking on this magical link.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/federal_judge_who_outlawed_racial_profiling_is_victim_of_black_mob_violence.html#ixzz3u5CmYxwK
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Obama appoints Hamas-backer his new “ISIS Czar”

December 5, 2015

From HERE:

High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini, right, speaks with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, center, and U.S. Robert Malley, left, Senior Director for Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf States, National Security Council during a break outside the hotel at the Beau Rivage Palace Hotel as the Iran nuclear talks continue, in Lausanne, Switzerland, Wednesday, April 1, 2015. (AP Photo/Keystone,Laurent Gillieron)

President Obama has appointed a foreign policy advisor known to be a friend of the terrorist group Hamas to be the administration’s new czar in charge of countering ISIS. The appointee, Robert Malley, has a history of sympathizing with Islamists, which makes the appointment all the more appalling.

According to the government watchdog group Judicial Watch, the White House downplayed the controversial appointment by “burying it deep in a press briefingdelivered at a Paris hotel during the recent climate summit.”

The President recently elevated Rob Malley, the NSC [National Security Council] Coordinator for the Middle East and North Africa, to serve now as the Senior Advisor to the President for the Counter-ISIL Campaign in Iraq and Syria,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said during the briefing at the Marriott Rive Gauche Hotel and Conference Center. Before moving onto the next topic Earnest said the president has directed Malley to “support our reinvigorated diplomatic track toward a political transition in Syria…

Obama raised eyebrows last year when he made Malley the senior director at theNational Security Council, but according to the Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat, he never really left Obama’s circle.

Al-Hayat reported that Hamas engaged in talks with Obama for months through Malley, which among other things resulted in their receiving almost a billion of your tax dollars from President Obama.Robert Malley comes by this honestly. His father Simon was a veryMarxist journalist who shilled for Algeria’s terrorist FLN, Egyptian dictator Gamel Abdul Nasser, African Marxist dictators like Kwame Nkrumah and Ahmed Sékou Touré, Fidel Castro, and of course, Yasser Arafat, of whom he was especially fond. Needless to say, Simon Malley also had an outspoken hatred towards Israel, and the apple definitely did not fall far from the tree.

Indeed, as Judicial Watch reports, “Malley published a piece in a mainstream newspaper declaring that Israel was responsible for the failure of Bill Clinton’s peace talks with the Palestinians.”

Malley was Obama’s informal foreign policy adviser during the 2008 presidential campaign until his cozy relationship with Hamas, long classified as a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department, came to light.  Israeli security officials had expressed “concern” about Malley for advocating negotiations with Hamas and providing international assistance to the terrorist group. This came amid reportage that Trinity United Church of Christ, Obama’s radical church in Chicago, had  reprinted a manifesto by Hamas in its newsletter. The manifesto defended terrorism as legitimate resistance, refused to recognize the right of Israel to exist, and compared the terror group’s official charter – which calls for the murder of Jews – to America’s Declaration of Independence.

Fearful of losing Jewish voters, Obama severed ties with Malley in May of 2008 when it was disclosed that he had held meetings with Hamas. The campaign had been telling pro-Israel audiences that Obama would not talk with Hamas unless and until it had renounced terror, recognized Israel, and abided by previous agreements the Palestinians had signed with Israel.

One day after the election, it was reported that Malley had been dispatched to the Middle East to work on Obama’s promise to “improve ties with Egypt and Syria.”

That all worked out so well, he’s been promoted to Obama’s ISIS czar.