Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Dawah: The Call Before the Sword

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

Here is a little bit of that article. . . 

From Understanding the Threat:

Dawah: The Call to Islam is Deceptive, Dangerous and Deadly

Dawah in Islam is not "proselytizing" to others. It is the "Call" or "Invitation" to Islam, and is a legal requirement before Muslims wage jihad against non-Muslims.

ISIS publication "Dabiq" articulates authoritative sharia (Islamic Law) for their actions including "The Call to Islam" which is DAWAH

The Koran speaks of Dawah - the Call to Islam. "We do not punish until We send a messenger." (Koran 17:15). Tafsir Ibn Kathir, which legally defines every verse in the Koran, states this verse means Muslims cannot punish non-Muslims until they "give a warning" to them by inviting them to Islam. This is Dawah.

The Um Dat al Salik (Reliance of the Traveller), authoritative Islamic Sacred Law approved by the highest authority in Islamic jurisprudence (Al Azhar in Egypt), reveals " a condition for waging jihad against non-Muslims" can be found in Book O, Justice, o9.8, which reads: "The caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya)...and the war continues until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax in accordance with the word of Allah Most High."

The "most perfect example of a man" in Islam is Mohammad. "When the Muslims commence battle, and they have surrounded a city or a fort, they are to invite the inhabitants to accept Islam, due to what is related by Ibn 'Abbas 'that the Prophet did not commence combat with a people without first inviting them to Islam.'" [Al-Hidayah, A Classical Manual of Hanafi Law, "The Rules of Warfare"]


This was a threat to these State Legislatures and remains in effect today. The perpetrator, Javid Kamal, was arrested in Texas on immigration related charges. He was not arrested because officials there understood the reality nor the magnitude of the threat that was being leveled at the state legislature.

It is worth noting the latest ISIS publication of Dabiq offers "A Final Invitation" to Christians and Jews to accept Islam or face war from the Muslims.

It is also worth noting that ISIS continues to accurately site Islamic Sacred Law - which comes from the Koran and the example of the Prophet Mohammad - for their actions.

ISIS quotes and promotes the same sharia that Muslim leaders in America like those from Hamas (doing business as CAIR) and the US Council of Muslim Organizations work so diligently to impose on non-Muslims.

The Call to Islam - DAWAH - is the warning before the sword.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Democrat Policies Help the Rich, Hurt the Poor

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

We are told the Democrats are for the poor, and the Republicans are for the rich.  The justification for that line of reasoning, according to the Democrats, is because the Republicans always vote in favor of the big corporations, and for tax cuts on the rich, and the Democrats offer programs to help the poor like unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other "safety net" entitlements.  However, the consequences of Democrat and Republican policies paint an entirely different picture.

I used to drive big rigs in the construction industry.  I hauled sand and gravel.  In the industry the kind of truck I drove is called a "transfer".  It's like a dump truck with a box on the trailer that can be transferred into the box on the truck so that you can carry two loads at a time.  We used to get paid by the load, making the industry a performance driven environment.  The Democrats in California disallowed that and now drivers are required by law to be paid by the hour.  Now, under the new system of hourly pay, the slow and lazy drivers get paid the same, even if they don't haul as much material.  As a result, smaller trucking operations, unable to pay the higher wages, went out of business.  The larger companies, with less competition, did better, and lined their pockets with more profit - though they do have to worry about an epidemic of drivers no longer pushing themselves, because even the hardest working drivers are beginning to take their time.  Why work hard?  The pay is the same no matter what.  The employees of the smaller companies who now can no longer work either have to find jobs with the larger corporations, making those corporations bigger, move into a new State where they can make money under rules less influenced by liberal left policies, or change their vocation - which includes retraining, and costs to the government to cover unemployment, and education expenses if they apply for assistance.  For the remainder of drivers, if they are unable to do any of those things, they wind up on the government dole.

Then, the Democrats in California decided to also hit the trucking industry with tougher exhaust standards, calling for big rigs in California to meet clean-air standards similar to what automobiles in the State must meet.  The result is a filtration system not unlike a catalytic converter, with a lighted alarm to advise the driver when the pollutants his truck is putting out is reaching an unsatisfactory limit.  The refitting cost the industry about $25,000 per truck.  Larger corporations made the changes without even a wink of an eye, while the cost to upgrade trucks, especially older trucks, was too high for smaller companies, and owner/operators.  The result either put the smaller companies and owner/operators either out of business, or forced them to only engage in operations outside of the State, again rewarding the big corporations with less competition and a larger pool of drivers to choose from which enabled them to reduce what they were willing to pay per hour.

The pollutants alarm, which was fairly new when I left the industry, often triggered when one was hauling a full load on an incline.  If the alarm reached a certain limit, the trucker was required to shut down, and the alarm could only be reset by a State approved official or mechanic.  Because of the workload, the truck may be off the road for weeks until a State-approved individual could arrive to reset the alarm, setting back the company in costs, and forcing them to fall behind in their workload.

A friend of mine went through one of those situations where on an uphill haul the alarm triggered and he was forced to shut down (or continue driving illegally).  After a couple weeks, the State-worker who was assigned to reset the alarm scolded the driver for running the truck in such a manner that it caused the alarm to light up.  The driver commented that he was just doing his job.  The State official asked if the driver had driven the truck on an incline with a full load.  The driver replied to the affirmative, again expressing that such activity was a necessary part of the job.

"Well," said the government-approved mechanic, "don't do that."

How many Democrat tax policies, or heavy regulatory rules have chased businesses out of the country, or put companies out of business?  Those are lost jobs, jobs their constituents would love to be able to hold on to, if possible.  But, the Democrats drove away their jobs with anti-business policies, and then blamed the Republicans for the fact that the company went overseas seeking cheaper labor, taxation, and production costs.

Higher taxes and heavy regulatory control hurts business, and kills economies. . . hurting the poor because less employment is available, while driving the cost of goods up to a point where only the more wealthy can afford those goods.

Be it higher minimum wages which drives up the cost of doing business, to illegal immigration which increases the number of persons battling for jobs, to toll roads that rewards the wealthy for having the affordability to drive those roads, Democrat Party policies hurt the little guy, are steeped in hypocrisy, and rewards the big corporations, wealthier citizens, and of course the politically well-connected. . . exactly the opposite of what they claim.

So, when the Democrats are claiming they are for the little guy, and the Republicans are for the rich, think about two things.  First of all, has anyone other than a rich person ever given you a job?  Second, at what point does bigger government policies like the ones the Democrats support break the backs of businesses, and the ability for economies to grow?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Careful Planning. . . politically

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

“It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him.” ― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit
THE REALITY OF AMERICAN SOCIETY right now is that the statists have infiltrated our governmental system. We can try and deny the truth, or scream that we refuse to believe that Senator McCarthy was on to something, but that won’t change the fact that we must prepare to do battle against communist socialist progressive statists right here inside our own country.

So far we have strategized, organized, communicated, and studied the tactics available to us. We say that we are ready for the fight, for we have seen the enemy, and we know that the opposition must be removed from our American System.

Action requires planning, and careful planning takes into account the strengths and weaknesses of the organization, unexpected factors, and the capabilities of the enemy. The terrain is marked with landmines and booby traps, which means in addition to the careful planning, we must also be able to adjust and improvise. Sometimes, we have no plan, because no amount of planning can predict some of the idiotic moves we see from the liberal left statists.

Planning to train, be orderly and logical, and fight the good fight with direction and purpose begins with the leadership.

Birds of a feather flock together, so as the fight grows, the numbers will increase naturally. The confrontations will primarily be with political figures, but the uniformed voters and socialist wealthy corporate types may also attempt to engage us in battle. The younger generation, fresh out of their indoctrination camps masked as institutions of learning will play a large part in trying to stop what we are doing.

There is no need to reinvent the wheel. Our path has been taken before, though in most cases a bloody revolution breaks out. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it, but those who study history can take from it the best tactics and plans. Sometimes, however, we must remember that sometimes history, and what really happened, are two different things.

We must realize that we have the true power. More than three-quarters of the nation agree with us either totally, or partially. The silent majority screamed a little bit when the Tea Party movement emerged, but the liberal left statists have successfully stuffed them back into their harmless corners. And, as far as the statists are concerned, silence equals surrender.

In the planning of our revolution against statism, “making lots of noise” must play a part in our plans. We must seek out allies, and funding sources. We need to locate allies on the campuses, and in the hallways of political offices. We need advocates and activists who are willing to rebel against the statist establishment, and attack the power structure with words and protests.

Everyone has their own talent, and we need people to act in a manner consistent with their God-given gifts. Some people are great at making noise, some can knock on doors, and others can call people on the phone, or email lists as necessary. The troops must include old and young, male and female, family and friends. Sometimes the going will be rough and unpopular. We may have to cut certain people out of our lives who will hold us back. We live in an insecure, fast-changing world, and it is a scary thing to take up political arms, bring attention to oneself, and possibly become a target for the government to attack. We will be labeled radicals, extremists, bitter clingers, agitators, troublemakers, and seditionists. We will be accused of things we could never imagine we would be. We will be called evil, phobic, sexist, racist, and anarchists. We will be labeled as hating the poor, wanting to end government aid for folks that can’t fend for themselves, and sufferers of mental illness.

Breaking dependency on government is like trying to get a junkie to stop sticking needles in his arm. People are used to sucking on the government tit, and can’t imagine life without it. They are distracted by television, jobs, their children’s activities, and propaganda. The future is hopeless, they believe, so it is easier to ignore it. To do nothing.

“Government will do what it does, and there is nothing you can do to stop it,” I was once told.

I disagree.

There is no such thing as a no-win scenario.  There is always hope, and there is always a way.  Change, restoration, and resurrection of the republic is on the horizon. I can see us turning this around. We are not outnumbered, and it is not hopeless. All we need is hope, organization, and numbers. If not us, then who?

The general public has been told not to worry, they are numb, bewildered, or frightened. Fear is a great tool for the statists. When people are fearful, they lose the will to fight back.

It is time for the counter-revolution.  Thomas Jefferson believed we would have a bloody revolution about every twenty years. We have forgotten the original intent of the United States Constitution.  We have forgotten the list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence.  We have forgotten the purpose of the creation of the Second Amendment.  We have forgotten that this country was forged with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence. Our way of life requires that we are a virtuous society, and that we fight for liberty. We can’t turn this around, however, if we don’t actually do something.

Power is powerless without action.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Tuesday, August 30, 2016

Cherry Valley Fire Closer Than I Thought

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

After I left the KMET 1490-AM Studio I shot over to Cherry Valley Blvd. to head on out towards Corona where I teach a Constitution Class every Tuesday Night.  We had just finished pre-recording the Conservative Voice Radio program at about 1:30 pm when I noticed a lot of smoke nearby.

The brush fire in Cherry Valley, an unincorporated area near Beaumont and Banning, exploded after I left, expanding to burn more than 1,000 acres, and at this point is still only 10 percent contained.

Evacuations have been issued to nearby residential areas as firefighters worked diligently to protect structures in the area.

At least five water-dropping helicopters and nine air tankers, including a DC-10, have worked the fire, joned by more than 300 firefighters.  The brush fire that has been dubbed the Bogart Fire.

Many homes are in the area, and are threatened.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Susan Rice's Version of Diversity

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

I was talking to Charles Wiley, who was a longtime journalist, and covered 11 wars during his career with the mainstream media.  He told me that Susan Rice, Obama's U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, chose Florida International University as the example of America's most diverse college. . . but it is 60% Hispanic according to Charles Wiley.

The liberal left definition of diversity is not diversity. . . it's the overpowering of whites.  Isn't that what we call "reverse discrimination?"

Can't be, says the Democrats.  Only white Republicans can be racist.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Is it possible to escape liberalism?

Electoral Divide

By Douglas V. Gibbs

In some polls, Donald Trump leads over Hillary Clinton. . . 


The black vote is partially moving over to Donald Trump. . . 

The Democrats are trying to hang on to their base. . .

and are doubling down on their seeking of the Muslim vote. . .

Is Obama helping, or hurting, the democrat cause?

Media as a complicit biased ally. . . 

Is Hillary going to renounce her KKK supporters?

Liberals threaten to leave country if Trump wins. . . do they want me to give them their tickets out of here?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

LA Times: Trump Leading by 3 Percentage Points

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

Ronald Reagan never flirted with the lead until weeks before the election in 1980.  While the Democrats and Never Trump crowd are convinced that Donald J. Trump has no chance of beating Hillary Clinton in November, the Los Angeles Times poll is not so sure.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Are You Fearful?

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

"The passion to be reckoned upon, is fear." -- Hobbes

Looking back into the annals of history what we recognize is that in order for tyranny to rule they must use fear to ensure obedience to the state.  Without fear, their can be no tyrannical rule.

For fear of imprisonment, torture, death, or public ridicule the populace obeys the orders of the ruling class.  Otherwise, they fear they may suffer punishment for disobedience.

To determine if something is tyrannical, then, we could simply gauge what the fear-factor is.

A friend of mine fears putting up a "Trump for President" sign in his yard because the last one he put up was taken.  A woman up the street had hers vandalized.  Another gentleman told me that since he put a Hillary for Prison 2016 sticker on his car, the vehicle has been keyed multiple times.

Do people who put up pro-Hillary signs or stickers fear the same repercussions?

Because of the violence of protesters, are we more fearful to go to a Trump rally?  Or a Clinton rally?

How about an "anti-Islam" sign or sticker?  Are we fearful to take a stand against Islam?

Would you have the same fears of reprisal by a group should you put up pro-Islam materials?

On a college campus are our students more fearful to speak up about conservatism or liberalism?  Which side is more violent against its opposition?  How many conservatives keep their mouths shut in college, or in Hollywood because of the violent or hateful response they will get?

If the fear lies in the hands of liberalism and Islam, doesn't that clearly make them tyrannical?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Monday, August 29, 2016

Hillary the Democratic Socialist

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

When asked what the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist is, Hillary Clinton avoided answering, and instead said, "I am a progressive Democrat."

Let's go back in time for a moment, just to reach a little clarity. . .

The 1936 “Communist Election Platform.”
  • “We demand higher wages and vacations with pay.”
  • “We demand a 30-hour work week without reductions in earnings, at trade union rates and conditions, in private industry and on public works.”
  • “We favor a federal system of maternity and health insurance.”
  • “It is the obligation of the American government to establish an adequate system of social insurance for the unemployed, the aged, the disabled and the sick…”
  • “Free education and financial assistance to the youth and the children must be guaranteed by both federal and state appropriations.”
  • And then there’s: “We demand that social and labor legislation shall be financed and the budget balanced by taxation of the rich.”
Some of those demands have become law, thanks to Democrats.  Those that haven't are on the Democrat Party's wishlist.

Ask the average person on the street what the difference is between Democrats and Republicans, and it will go something like, "The Democrats are for the poor, and the Republicans are for the rich."  Never mind that Democrat policies ultimately benefit larger corporations, and are designed to pay the poor to stay poor.

Conservatives are not against helping the poor; they just don’t want to turn the safety net into a hammock—and liberals do. And, it's about authorities.  A safety net is none of the federal government's business.  There are no constitutional authorities for the federal government to have that kind of influence on society.  The federal government was created to handle the external issues.  Internal issues are the responsibility of the States.

The federal government has imposed so many costs, mandates, and unconstitutional intrusion into our lives, now it's not about which side is better. . . we are in the final throes of liberty.  The destruction of State Sovereignty is the destruction of the recipe for liberty.  The difference between the two ideologies, liberalism versus conservatism, is now not just a difference in opinion, but a fight for the very soul of America.

Which will you choose?  The system that made us the most prosperous country in history?  Or the system that has proven time and time again in history to destroy liberty and slaughter the innocent?

Understand, a refusal to vote at all is a vote for Hillary Clinton.  A no-vote or a Never Trump vote is a vote for the destruction of our system.  It's got to be one, or the other.  Vote logically.  Vote for the one least likely to destroy the original intent of the United States Constitution.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

VIDEO: Constitution Radio and the Enemies Within

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

You can catch past episodes of Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs on my YouTube Page,  For unknown reasons, the August 20, 2016 episode titled "Presidential" did not make it to video, but you can catch the podcast of that episode, and the audio of all of the recent episodes of Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs, at

In the most recent episode on August 27, 2016 we are joined by the author of "The Enemies Within", Trevor Loudon, to discuss the upcoming film due out on September 8 by the same name. The discussion includes some of Hillary Clinton's connections to the Democratic Socialists of America. After my discussion with Mr. Loudon, guest Satya Ath, the daughter of Cambodian refugees who escaped communism and the Khmer Rouge, joins the program to discuss her efforts to host an event in Temecula at her high school to honor the victims of September 11, 2001. We wrap up with two big stories about Brexit's Nigel Farage teaming up with Donald Trump, and the earthquake that hit Italy.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Giving the Internet to Globalists

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

The Internet has been handed this way and that way.  Between the FCC and the United Nations, Obama's treatment of the internet seems to be that he wants it in the hands of those who would control it with an iron fist, while claiming it's for the sake of freedom of the technology.  Now, with the United States planning to give up its stewardship at midnight on September 30, 2016, the United Nations (the same internationalists who have a resolution designed to criminalize free speech . . . especially if it is against Islam) is positioning itself to grab control of the technology.

There is no plan in place to stop globalists from grabbing hold of control of the internet, either.

Antitrust rules don’t apply to governments or organizations operating under government control.

Without the U.S. contract, Icann (the company that runs the domain name biz) would seek to be overseen by another governmental group so as to keep its antitrust exemption. Authoritarian regimes have already proposed Icann become part of the U.N. to make it easier for them to censor the internet globally.

The Obama administration has spent the past two years preparing to give up the contract with Icann, and during that time the Obama regime also stopped actively overseeing the group. That allowed Icann to abuse its monopoly over internet domains, which earns it hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

The only thing worse than a monopoly overseen by the U.S. government is a monopoly overseen by no one—or by a Web-censoring U.N. Congress. . . and that seems to be where things are heading.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

You Can't Keep a Horny Anthony Weiner Down

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The Democrat Pervert better known as Anthony Weiner is at it again.  Huma Abedin's husband who used to be a Congressman and New York candidate for mayor, has been sending nasty pics through his phone again to women other than his Muslim Brotherhood wife.  He sent these photos to a woman multiple times over the past 19 months, and admitted to sexually fantasizing and masturbating about the unidentified woman, calling her "literally a fantasy chick."

At least one of the photos Weiner sent the woman showed his underwear-clad crotch as his son Jordan slept next to him in bed.

Weiner spent 12 years in the House of Representatives before resigning in June 2011 after posting an explicit image of himself on his Twitter account. At the time, he admitted that he had "exchanged messages and photos of an explicit nature with about six women over the last three years."

With Abedin's public support, Weiner entered the New York City mayoral race in 2013. However, his campaign collapsed when a second woman, Sydney Leathers, came forward to claim Weiner had sent her more explicit photos while using the alias "Carlos Danger." Weiner finished fifth in the Democratic primary with just five percent of the vote.

The woman, who described herself to the Washington Post as a supporter of Donald Trump and the National Rifle Association, has two adult children and lives with a boyfriend who routinely travels for work.

The Post reported Sunday that Weiner was concerned that he had repeated his 2011 mistake and posted the photo of his son publicly.

"You do realize you can see you [sic] Weiner in that pic??" the woman messaged.

"Ooooooh ... I was scared. For half a second I thought I posted something," Weiner responded. "Stop looking at my crotch."

"Whatever. You did it on purpose," she replied, adding, "O [sic] I see you thought you posted on your TL [public timeline] not DM [direct messages]. S–t happens be careful."

Well, in the end, we are simply reminded that Weiner is a real wiener.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Hillary's Hijab

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Hillary Clinton's support for the Muslim Brotherhood, and the defense of Islam, goes back quite a ways.  She has been intricately interwoven into a web of Islamic support, and attempts to encourage, and assist, the jihad.

In 2011, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, working with the United Nations, supported the adoption of RESOLUTION 16/18, calling the U.N. attempt to "counter religious intolerance" a "landmark achievement."

She celebrated the UN Human Rights Council to further internationalize the Muslim push to silence all who dare to offend their false prophet Muhammad.  She called the "consensus resolution adopted by the Council... a significant step forward in the global dialogue on countering intolerance, discrimination, and violence against persons based upon religion or belief. We appreciate the leadership shown by the Organization of the Islamic Conference and member states on today’s landmark achievement."

Violence against Christians being committed by Islam was none of her concern.  The attacks against Israel by Islam was none of her concern.  But, if you dare say anything that might offend a Muslim, in her opinion, you must be silenced.

Hillary worked quickly to try to criminalize telling the truth about how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to encourage violence and supremacism by participating in a coordination meeting to discuss with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) how to implement resolution no. 16/18 on combating defamation of religions, and how to prevent stereotypes depicting religions and their followers.

In July of 2012, Secretary of State Clinton revived the issue when she co-chaired an OIC session in Istanbul dealing with “religious intolerance.” Clinton called on countries to “counter offensive expression through education, interfaith dialogue and public debate,” while surprisingly emphasizing that speech restrictions were unacceptable. She invited conference attendees to a follow-up meeting to continue the dialogue.

OIC officials seized on Clinton’s offer by stepping up their campaign for blasphemy laws and speech codes.

Hillary's claim is she is trying to protect freedom of religion. . . by protecting a "religion" that is actually a political ideology who's mission it is to destroy all other religions, and dominate the world.

She applauded the Organization of Islamic Conference and the European Union for helping pass Resolution 1618 at the Human Rights Council.

While Hillary Clinton is a socialist (and in reality, a communist), her connections and defense of radical Islam is also something she will advance and nurture if she becomes the next President of the United States.  That is yet another reason she must be stopped.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Hillary Clinton's Socialist White House Run not a Foregone Conclusion

While the artist singles out the Washington Post,
I would say this represents all of the mainstream media.
By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

Democrats and Never Trump folks of both sides have decided that Hillary Clinton is so far ahead that her election to the presidency is inevitable.  In fact, many of them believe that the candidacy of Donald Trump has solidified her win in November.  According to CNN, she's so far ahead there is no need for an election.

If that is true, it is an amazing thing.  It proves how powerful the spell the Democrats has their followers under is.  The evidence against Hillary Clinton is mounting, and unbelievably massive. . . yet they still want to vote for her.

Some people say that Hillary Clinton in the White House would simply be Obama's third term.  And granted, Obama has his own controversial socialist connections. He is, in fact, an associate of a Chicago-based
Marxist group with access to millions of labor union dollars and connections to expert political consultants, including a convicted swindler.

Obama’s socialist backing goes back at least to 1996, when he received the endorsement of the
Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for an Illinois state senate seat. Later, the Chicago DSA newsletter reported that Obama, as a state senator, showed up to eulogize Saul Mendelson, one of the “champions” of “Chicago’s democratic left” and a long-time socialist activist. Obama’s stint as a “community organizer” in Chicago has gotten some attention, but his relationship with the DSA socialists, who groomed and backed him, has been generally ignored.

DSA describes itself as the largest socialist organization in the United States and the principal
U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. The Socialist International (SI) has what is called “consultative status” with the United Nations.  In other words, it works hand-in-glove with the world body.

Another group associated with the SI is the Party of European Socialists (PES), which heard from Howard
Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, back in 2006.  Dean’s speech is posted on the official Democratic Party website, although the European socialist parties are referred to as “progressive.”
Democrats, Dean said, want to be “good citizens of the world community.”  He spoke at a session on “Global Challenges for Progressive Politics.”
Getting back to Hillary, her platform is right in line with the 1936 Communist Party Platform.  Her socialism is something more than Obama's has been.  Her's is right up there with the policies of the Soviet Union.

In addition to being a socialist, which we'll return to later in this article, her troubles are piling up, as well.  The Hill has reported that a new batch of 14,900 emails found by the FBI is threatening to be released, and will be released in a drip-drip fashion through Election Day.  As Hillary Clinton faces new questions about the Clinton Foundation after separate emails were released that showed a foundation official seeking time with Clinton for a donor, even the Associated Press has been willing to jump on the story.

The Republicans say they also have evidence to hit her with perjury charges.

Clinton's advisers seem not to be worried.  After all, it's hard to take down someone like Hillary when she has so many members of the system on her payroll, or fearful for their lives.

“I still think the email and foundation issues, while they will continue to be something of a distraction, are not fatal, and pale in comparison to the problems Trump faces,” one longtime Clinton adviser said.

“What she needs to do is keep beating up on Trump,” said Brad Bannon, a Democratic strategist. “The more this is about Donald Trump, the more likely it is that she's going to win. She needs to put the onus of the campaign back on him.”

Even though it is becoming more and more clear that Hillary Clinton cannot be trusted?

People are more and more realizing the Hillary Clinton is a pathological liar.  That reality becomes even more evident when those around her confirm it.  The Washington Examiner has reported that a technology company that provided the program Hillary Clinton's team used to scrub her private server of emails bragged on its website that it had prevented the FBI from accessing deleted records.

Rep. Trey Gowdy brought the involvement of the program created by the tech firm to light when he told Fox News that Clinton's emails were so fully deleted that "even God can't read them."

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange on “Fox & Friends” said that the “most interesting and serious” information on Hillary Clinton is yet to come.

“What is the most shocking thing that you have found out about Hillary Clinton,” co-host Ainsley Earhardt asked Assange.

“Well, I think the most interesting and serious,” he said, pausing to choose his words carefully, “relate to upcoming publications we have.

“A variety of different types,” he continued. “But a lot of information that we have already published, I mean it may not be that apparent to most people who are sort of not specializing in your politics and national security,” he said.

The Washington Times claims that Hillary Clinton is more than just a progressive democrat, as she claimed while talking to Chris Mathews.  Mrs. Clinton has adopted democratic-socialist ideals in ways beyond what Bernie Sanders believes in.  In order to win over Sanders' supporters, she has let out more of what she believes, verbalizing (for example) that she backs the creation of the “public option,” within Obamacare, and to allow people to enroll in Medicare at age 55. She accepted Mr. Sanders calls to abolish the death penalty, his team’s cries for a $15 hourly federal minimum wage indexed to inflation, promised to increase spending on community health centers, and has said she’d make public college education free.

While the Washington Times indicates they believe she has sprinted to Sanders' socialist platform, the dirty little secret is Bernie's socialism is nothing compared to Hillary Clinton's communism.

She's also proposed expanding Social Security in terms of adding pre-retirees and giving it to people who took some time off during work, guaranteeing 12 weeks of medical leave, adding $5,000 a year in subsidies for families enrolled in Obamacare to make their co-pays and deductibles more affordable, and has promised universal pre-K.  Her platform also has adopted amendment on criminal justice reform which calls for the Department of Justice to investigate all shootings involving police officers.

Sanders calls it the most progressive platform in the history of the Democrat Party.

While Obama's threat to fundamentally transform the American System was truly believed by the current President, Hillary's promise is much more vicious, and much more to the point.  She doesn't plan to hide or bob and weave.  She's going straight for the jugular, well knowing that with the next nomination for Supreme Court Justice, the sky's the limit for her totalitarian agenda.

According to Dennis Prager in a National Review article he wrote, 
"...if Hillary Clinton wins the presidency, this country will be so far from what the Founders wanted, so different from what the #NeverTrumpers have always fought for, that it is almost impossible to see how America would recover from her — or any Democrat’s — victory. Thanks to the universities’ leftist indoctrination of two generations of Americans, and thanks to Bernie Sanders, the Democratic party is now in all but name a socialist party. In fact, it is actually to the left of many European socialist parties. For example, if Clinton wins, the government will now tell companies how much they must pay employees: “If you believe that companies should share profits with their workers, not paid executive bonuses, join us,” she brazenly announced. And if you think that this is unconstitutional, remember that it won’t matter, because she will appoint left-wing Supreme Court justices and left-wing federal judges who do not view their roles as protectors of the Constitution. They view their roles as promoting “social justice,” which has as much to do with justice as “people’s democracy” has to do with democracy. RELATED: A Woman, Sure, but This Woman? There will still be a country called the United States, a geographic entity situated between Canada and Mexico, but it will not be the America envisioned by the Founders, or by most Americans until the middle of the 20th century. A few days before Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, he promised that if elected, “we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” He has been true to his word. And Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party will continue this fundamental transformation."
"As Bernie Sanders said in his speech to an ecstatic Democratic National Convention, “Together, my friends, we have begun a political revolution to transform America, and that revolution — our revolution — continues.” In other words, the Democratic party now acknowledges that its aim is revolution — a revolution that undoes the American Revolution. She spelled this out very clearly in her acceptance speech. Among its other highlights: “We’ll build a path to citizenship for millions of immigrants.” This means that our borders will mean nothing, that in order to guarantee Democratic-party victories for the foreseeable future, as president she will transform 10 or more million people who are here illegally into citizens. “We have the most tolerant and generous young people we’ve ever had.” She said this in order to pander to young Americans. But, thanks to the Left, it isn’t true. This generation is not only not “the most tolerant and generous we’ve ever had,” it is, in in many ways, the least tolerant and quite possibly the least generous “we’ve ever had.”"
As scandal-ridden as Hillary Clinton seems to be, the Panama Papers show she's connected to more scandals than we are even aware of. A slew of new connections have emerged between the Clintons and companies that used offshore accounts set up by the Panamanian law firm, Mossack Fonseca.

Some of the names found in the Panama Papers, which were reviewed by McClatchy Newspapers, have been tied to the Clintons in other scandals.

They include Canadian mining magnate Frank Giustra, who was a major focus of last year’s expose, “Clinton Cash.” A company started by Marc Rich, the international fugitive who was pardoned by Bill Clinton, is also included among the 11.5 million Panama Papers trove. As are two firms tied to Ng Lap Seng, the Chinese billionaire implicated in a major donor scandal involving the Clintons and the Democratic National Committee.

The ties listed are also a reminder of just how many relationships the Clintons have developed with shady businessmen over the years.

One such link stems all the way back to the Clintons’ Arkansas days. As governor, Bill Clinton met twice with Jean-Raymond Boulle, a diamond miner born in Mauritius. After the meetings Clinton granted Boulle mining rights in a state park near Hope, Ark., Clinton’s hometown.

According to McClatchy, Boulle was listed as director of two firms listed in the Panama Papers: Auk Limited, which was listed in the British Virgin Islands, and Gridco Limited, which was registered to the Bahamas.

According to Peter Schweizer, the author of last year’s “Clinton Cash,” Boulle was invited to Bill Clinton’s 1993 inauguration. At a party after the inauguration, then-First Lady Hillary Clinton donned a 3.5-carat diamond culled from one of Boulle’s mines, according to Schweizer.

Another mining company appears in the Panama Papers.

Giustra’s UrAsia Energy was registered in the British Virgin Island in May 2005, according to McClatchy. That September, Bill Clinton flew with Giustra on his private jet to Kazakhstan, where the Canadian hoped to secure a $500 million deal for uranium mining rights in the Central Asian nation. Clinton and Giustra met with Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan Nazarbayev. Before leaving the country, Clinton publicly praised Nazarbayev, who was up for re-election.

The mining deal was awarded to UrAsia. Months later, Giustra made a $30 million contribution to the Clinton Foundation. The pair later formed the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership.

A Russian businessman who was reportedly involved in setting up Clinton’s trip with Giustra is also linked to companies named in the Mossack Fonseca records.

Sergei Kurzin is tied to several oil companies listed in the papers, according to McClatchy. The mysterious financier — who reportedly pledged $1 million to the Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative and gave at least $50,000 directly to the Clinton Foundation — has several connections to players in the Clinton world. Besides dealings with Giustra, he also helped Marc Rich develop business relationships in Russia.

On his last day in the White House, Bill Clinton pardoned Rich, who had been indicted by the U.S. government in the 1980s for tax evasion. The controversial move came after Rich’s ex-wife, Denise, contributed $1 million to the Democratic party, $100,000 to Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign, and $450,000 to Clinton’s library.

Rich’s Industrial Petrolium Limited appears in the Panama Papers. The company was registered in the Bahamas in 1992.

Ng Lap Seng also used Mossack Fonseca’s services. According to McClatchy, he’s listed as a shareholder of two companies registered in the British Virgin Islands.

Ng is the Chinese billionaire who in 1996 was accused of funneling $1.1 million to the Democratic National Committee through a restaurant owner in Little Rock. The restaurant owner pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations. Ng, who visited the White House nearly a dozen times in the mid-1990s, faced no charges. He was charged last year with bribing a United Nations official.

Hillary Clinton is knee-deep in corruption, and she is a democratic socialist. . . or shall we say "communist."

She is the most radical nominee for President the Democrat Party has every had, and therefore the party's platform is now the most radical it has ever been in the party's history.  She believes there should be no restrictions on abortion, she is calling for a repeal of the Hyde Amendment which prohibits federal funds from paying for abortion, the Democrats are even pushing to allow non-doctors to be able to perform abortions.  On immigration the new platform calls for virtually no borders, and they plan to suspend deportations.  The Democrat Party with Hillary in the lead is also calling for taking in 60 million or so Muslim "refugees".  The party platform document pledges to end even limited raids that the Department of Homeland Security has conducted to locate foreign children who have been ordered to be deported but failed to report. The platform would even take the unprecedented step of guaranteeing a taxpayer-funded lawyer for every unaccompanied minor who shows up at the U.S. border.

Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation of American Immigration Reform, said such a provision would paralyze the immigration system.

“That seems to be a clear objective. The immigration bar and advocates for illegal immigrants have recognized that if you can essentially grind the judicial system to a halt, they win,” he said.

The Democrat Party is also now the pro-drug party, favoring marijuana legalization, and supporting States by helping them from a federal level to decriminalize the drug.  A recently approved amendment to the Democrat Party Platform weekend calls for removing the drug from the Class I schedule of controlled substances, “providing a reasoned pathway for future legalization.”

The platform also calls for requiring that police be outfitted with body cameras and to stop “racial profiling.” It would require the Department of Justice to investigate all “questionable or suspicious police-involved shootings,” and would ban the possession of “weapons of war.”

Worse of all is the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which Hillary Clinton was a part of writing.  The language of the proposed deal is so subjective and open to interpretation that any politician — particularly Hillary Clinton — will be able to work around it … It creates a loophole so big, Hillary Clinton could drive the TPP and all 12 nations of the TPP through it with room to spare.

Ostensibly, Clinton opposes the TPP after earlier praising it.  she will reverse course again, following a pattern established by her husband. When Bill Clinton was running for president in 1992, he voiced opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement. As president, he negotiated side agreements with Mexico and Canada on labor and environmental standards and then signed the pact.

The proposed Republican platform flatly rejects a vote on the TPP during a lame-duck session of Congress after the election.

She has even moved to the left of Barack Obama. . .

While Hillary, at this point, won't call herself a socialist, she is proud when she hears that socialists plan to vote for her.

Hillary's hard left agenda, corruption, and ties to socialism, however, also includes her connection to the notorious George Soros.  He's the money behind the shadow government that works behind governments with the goal of destroying liberty.  He's strong enough that when files were released about him on Twitter, it was suddenly shut down.

The behind the scenes tampering exists within our government at the highest levels.  And, Hillary Clinton is one of the main people who is involved in this intrusion into the American System by a foreign series of concepts largely funded by Nazi Sympathizer, George Soros.  The work is being done through the Government Unions, and the former organization ACORN.  These elitists are associated with a whole slew of people who hate the United States, like, but not limited to, David Brock, Jane Fonda, Terry McAuliffe, John Podesta, Andrew Stern, and Richard Trumka.

The infiltration is closely linked to Communism and Socialism. George Soros came up with the idea, and people like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have brought it to reality.

"Why would the Clintons do these things?" one might ask.

Money.  Power.  They support a sick ideology that they will stop at nothing to get into place.

For example, Bill and Hillary gave $1,042,000 to charity according to their tax return and $1 million of that went to, you guessed it, the Clinton Foundation.  And if Hillary Clinton becomes President, the corruption, the lies, and the deception will kick into high gear. . . and she won't let up until the United States is a socialist country, and when all dissent is silenced, or eliminated.

This is why the Democrats fear Donald Trump.  He's outside the system.  They can't control him.  They can't scare him into compliance.  And as Pamela Geller put it, he's just the kind of brass-knuckle fighter we need to stop her.  Her election to the White House is not set in stone, and in fact, Trump may be the only one that can fight off her corruption and scare-tactics to stop her.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Sunday, August 28, 2016

Progressive Democrat Anti-Semitism

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

Four years ago at the Democrat National Convention the attendees voted on whether or not to keep God on their platform.  The vote was pretty even, but deemed to be a "yes," amidst a massive number of boos that was largely performed by Muslim members of the party, as well as the hard left.  They booed Israel, while they were at it.

According to the Gatestone Institute, God is not the only thing the progressives are trying to get Democrats to renounce.
Hard left activists are trying to exclude Jews who do not renounce Israel from "progressive" organizations.
Last year, Rabbi Susan Talve, a longtime activist on race issues in the St. Louis area was told that her advocacy for Israel was incompatible with the objectives of Black Lives Matter: "Solidarity from Ferguson to Palestine has become a central tenet of the movement" she was informed, because "Israeli and U.S. state oppression are deeply interconnected." Similarly, a student who attended a Black Lives Matter rally at Northwestern University last year was told "you support Israel, so you cannot also support us." 
Recently, that seems to be the response of many of the hard left activists who dominate so-called "progressive" social justice movements.
When Hillary Clinton was asked the difference between socialism and the Democrat Party, she was unable to answer.  Instead, she insisted she's a "progressive Democrat."  Progressive is the term the socialists called themselves until the term fell into ruin because of the failed policies surrounding it.  It was then the leftists stole the term "liberalism" from the limited government supporters.
Over the past several years, progressive Jews, and progressive supporters of Israel have had to come to terms with the reality that those who do not reject Israel and accept Boycott Divestment Sanctions ("BDS") and its unique brand of bigotry are no longer welcome in some progressive circles. And while both Democratic and Republican parties have embraced the importance of the U.S. alliance with Israel, that dynamic is under threat more so than at any point in my lifetime. 
The self-described "progressive wing" of the Democratic Party—represented by radical and often repressive organizations such as MoveOn, CodePink, Occupy Wall Street, and Black Lives Matter—has become openly opposed to the nation state of the Jewish people. Increasingly, these organizations demand that their members and "allies" renounce support for Israel and for Zionism in order to belong. Using the pretext of intersectionality—a pseudo-academic theory which insists that all social justice movements, except those supportive of Jews or Israel, are inexorably linked—anti-Israel activists have successfully made opposition to Israel and support for BDS a litmus test, especially for Jews, to belong to "progressive" movements focused on a wide range of issues.
Israel is the only stability the Middle East knows, and is among the few remaining obstacles against an all out war with Islam as they set their eyes on a worldwide jihad, and a global caliphate.  As Sharren Haskel of the Israeli Knesset said during a speech in Murrieta, California last May 1, "Israel is not the problem in the Middle East, Israel is the solution."  I believe her wholeheartedly.  Also, as a Christian, I also believe we are cursed if we ever turn our back on Israel.
Earlier this year, supporters of the LGBTQ community in Israel learned this lesson the hard way, when BDS activists together with a local Black Lives Matter chapter broke up a gay pride event, because it featured a presentation by an Israeli group. The protestors claimed that the event organizers had engaged in "pinkwashing" the Israeli occupation by showing solidarity with the Israeli LGBTQ community.
It has fascinated me that the gay community remains in the Democrat Party as the leftist ideology embraces Islam as a partner. . . an ideology posing as a religion that not only rejects the gay community, but carries out countless incidents of slaughtering gays.
Members of the National Women's Studies Association ("NWSA") who also support Israel have been similarly excluded. Last year, that organization voted to endorse BDS, and as one pro-BDS activist explained: "What is significant about this particular resolution is the rationale; the fact that the resolution makes it explicit that BDS is a feminist issues... that one cannot call themselves a feminist... without taking a stand on what is happening in Palestine." (Apparently, one can call oneself a feminist without taking a stand on Syria, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and other nations that grossly violate human rights).
As the Gatestone article suggests, how is it that the women's rights crowd stay a part of the Democrat Party as they rub elbows with Islam?  Muslims are the greatest violators of women's rights, and human rights, on this planet.
This type of repressive ideological packaging has left progressive Jews, and liberal supporters of Israel in an increasingly uncomfortable position. On the one hand, they care deeply about causes such as women's rights, criminal justice reform, income inequality, environmental protection and LGBT rights. On the other, they find themselves excluded from the groups that advance those very causes, because—while they are often critical of specific Israeli policies regarding settlements and the occupation—they refuse to renounce Israel as a national liberation movement of the Jewish People.
For hard left activists, this sort of nuanced position is impossible to accept. Their hostility towards Israel does not stem from any particular Israeli actions or policies. Even if Israel were to withdraw from the West Bank, destroy the security barrier, and recognize Hamas as a legitimate political organization, it would still not be enough. For these radicals, it is not what Israel does; it is about what Israel is: the nation state of the Jewish people—or to use hard-left terminology: an imperialistic, apartheid and genocidal, colonialist enterprise. The recently released Black Lives Matter policy platform offers a perfect example of such extreme rhetoric: it states that U.S. military and economic support for Israel makes American citizens complicit in "the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people." 
The fact that the BLM platform reads like it was lifted from a BDS screed is hardly coincidence: the two groups enjoy a longstanding relationship, and a prominent BDS activist apparently helped draft elements of the BLM declaration. But BLM is far from the only hard left organization that has been infected by BDS vitriol. In fact, BDS has pressured a wide range of progressive organizations into assuming an anti-Israel posture. The American Green Party, for example—which has become a haven for disaffected progressive activists this election cycle—recently came out in support of BDS and called for the US to end its support for "the Israeli apartheid regime".
 The reality is that Marxism has infiltrated, and now controls, the Democrat Party and the hard left progressives.  The agenda has become the only thing that matters, and societies who hold on to the ideals of liberty like Israel are the enemy.  The communist nature of the Democrat Party is anti-freedom, and anti-God, therefore all groups that hold on to those two hated concepts are the enemy.  Islam is exempted because theirs is still an authoritarian system the Democrats believe they can use to gain power, and then exert control over once the useful idiots of Islam are no longer needed.
This trend has been particularly pronounced on college campuses, where a host of academic groups—most absurdly the Native American Scholars Association and the Americans Studies Association—have passed resolutions in favor of BDS. Many of these organizations have also endorsed the Palestinian Academic and Cultural Boycott ("PACBI"), which encourages participants to engage in McCarthyite blacklisting of Israeli academic institutions, as well as groups and individuals who promote "Brand Israel." This category apparently includes artists like Matisyahu, and academics like me, as I found out last year when a prominent BDS advocate refused to debate me at the Oxford Student Union.
As Hitler observed, you must get to the younger generation to gain control over a society. "When an opponent declares,'I will not come over to your side.' I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to us already…
What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp.
In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.'" -- Adolf Hitler

Another quote by Adolf Hitler also sounds a lot lie today's Democrats.

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler, Quoted in John Toland, "Adolf Hitler", p224.

We must remember that Hitler's first and primary campaign promise was, by the way, free health care for all.
The PACBI also explicitly denounces "normalization projects"—programs or events aimed at Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation that do not sufficiently emphasize the colonialist nature of the state of Israel. These are exactly the types of initiatives widely supported and promoted by progressives who are critical of settlements, but remain supportive of Israel and of a two state solution. It is no coincidence that BDS has singled them out for special treatment. BDS campaigners want to force any supporters of Israel—no matter their stances on other political issues—outside of the progressive tent.
Progressivism has no room for dissent, and will force those who do not renounce Israel's right to exist.  Now, dissent within their movement is punished and pushed away.  Once they gain control of government with single party rule, which may happen if Hillary wins in November, any dissent of any kind, by anybody, will be punished. . . and silenced.
This effort has proved alarmingly successful thus far, but despite the pressure from the hard left, liberals and progressives who support Israel must continue to carve out a political space for themselves. In doing so, they can follow the example of the Jewish Community Relations Council, which dissociated itself "from the Black Lives Matter platform and those BLM organizations that embrace[d] it" but committed itself "unequivocally to the pursuit of justice for all Americans, and to working together with our friends and neighbors in the African-American community, whose experience of the criminal justice system is, far too often, determined by race." Such efforts are critical to ensure that it is not supporters of Israel but rather those repressive bigots who falsely claim the mantle of progressivism and who subscribe to the identity politics practiced by BDS that are delegitimated by mainstream progressives and liberals.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary