Washington Post Totally Knows How To Stop Islamic Terrorism

By William Teach November 25, 2015 – 3:14 pm

No, really, they do. Sarah Lyons-Padilla, a cultural psychologist or something, has the One True Answer, which was staring us in the face the whole time!

Want to stop Islamic terrorism? Be nicer to Muslims.
A warmer embrace could stop homegrown terrorism.

….

Fearful reactions to terrorist violence are nothing new. Incidents of extremist activity are often followed by anti-Islam protests or hate crimes. Reports of the Islamic State luring Western Muslims abroad are followed by a tightening of homeland security policy. Just after the attacks in Paris, presidential hopeful Donald Trump said that he would be willing to close mosques in America.

Such displays of intolerance can make Muslims feel like they don’t belong in Europe or the United States.

So, let me get this straight: by her own writing, the extremists attacked first, which made some people lash out in concern over Muslim violence, so, we’re supposed to be nicer to people who may want to kill us? It’s somehow intolerant to be mean to potential terrorists? I’d suggest Ms. Lyons-Padilla attempt this in an area controlled by ISIS. Or al Qaeda. Boko Horam. The Taliban. Or one of the numerous Islamic extremist groups.

Our research, forthcoming in Behavioral Science and Policy, and in partnership with the World Organization for Resource Development and Education, shows that making Muslims feel this way can fuel support for radical movements. In other words, many Western policies that aim to prevent terrorism may actually be causing it.

It’s all psychological Leftist mumbo jumbo, and a good reason why Liberals are not trusted on national security. They’re unserious, and refuse to acknowledge the reality of the situation, namely that leaders in the Islamic faith are indoctrinating Muslims into the more hardcore version of Islam. It doesn’t make all of them jihadis and terrorists, but more and more are being radicalized into believing in the hardcore version.

Reading the rest, digging into the details, what this is really all about is taking in the refugees from Middle East and other Muslim areas and “making them feel welcome”. It’s about supporting Obama.

If anyone thinks that just being nicer to people who attack us, as well as use or laws, Constitution, and social mores to undermine our society, will work, well, no one should take you seriously. Ever.

Read: Washington Post Totally Knows How To Stop Islamic Terrorism »

Posted in Unhinged Tools, War On Terrorism | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 25, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a turkey which may not be locally raised, which requires a long conversation, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is American Power, with a post on Syria being a nation of terrorist supporters.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Poll: Climate Change Still At Bottome

By William Teach November 25, 2015 – 10:28 am

Warmists can whine all they want that this is a Fox News poll, but it comports with virtually every other poll on the issues that actually matter

The article which has the link to the poll is here. The poll with the full data is here, the info on American concerns is way down.

Read: Poll: Climate Change Still At Bottome »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Thank Goodness: Hillary Vows To Never Use Term “Illegal Immigrant” Again

By William Teach November 25, 2015 – 7:14 am

We’re saved from our long national nightmare of Democratic politicians using proper descriptive terms

(AP) Hillary Rodham Clinton said on Tuesday her use of the term “illegal immigrants” was a “poor choice of words” and she pledged not to use it anymore, responding to criticism from immigration activists.

The Democratic presidential candidate was asked about her use of the term to describe people who are in the U.S. illegally during a question-and-answer session on Facebook held by Telemundo. The question came from Jose Antonio Vargas, a filmmaker and journalist whose organization, Define American, has said the terminology is offensive and asked all presidential candidates to stop using it.

“Yes, I will,” Clinton wrote during a stop in Boulder, Colorado. “That was a poor choice of words. As I’ve said throughout this campaign, the people at the heart of this issue are children, parents, families, DREAMers. They have names and hopes and dreams that deserve to be respected.”

Can you guess who else have names and hopes and dreams? American citizens and those who are in the United States legally, who often see those hopes and dreams dashed by criminal conduct of illegals, as well as seeing wages deflated, hospital ERs closed, oh, and their names stolen by illegals involved in identity theft.

What brought this all on, to have illegal aliens and their supporters have a typical emotional breakdown for a phrase?

During a town-hall meeting in New Hampshire earlier this month, Clinton said she voted “numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And I do think you have to control your borders.”

The horror! One has to wonder, if Hillary can’t say the phrase, and if she has to govelingly apologize, how can she have the strength to be POTUS? This just another piece of politically correct gobbledegook from a pandering and spineless Democrat. Would you trust her on illegal immigration if she can’t even stand strong in the face of upset illegal aliens?

Favorite comment at the story

Dear Hilarity:

Let’s say that you came home and found me in your kitchen. I had washed and dried the breakfast dishes and made the bed. Would you have the Secret Service arrest me? Or would you adopt me?

Of course, we will be told “that’s different”, even though it is an apt allegory. When you enter our country illegally, or you stay in our country after your VISA has expired, you are illegally in the country. If you carry out some action in violation of the law, you are illegal. If you don’t like illegal immigrant, perhaps we should call you alien invaders!

Read: Thank Goodness: Hillary Vows To Never Use Term “Illegal Immigrant” Again »

Posted in Hillary Clinton, Illegal Immigration | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Think Progress Tells Us How To Climate Proof, Ruin Our Thanksgiving

By William Teach November 25, 2015 – 6:53 am

Finally, it’s here. I was despairing, as the Cult of Climastrology typically spends quite a bit of time using every event and holiday to push their unscientific belief in anthropogenic climate change, yet, there wasn’t really anything just a few days before Thanksgiving. Most likely because they’re all attempting to Blame ACC for the Syrian refugee problem and terrorism (despite only Muslims turning to terrorism, and Obama denying Christian refugees entry to the US). Joe Romm’s George Soros funded Climate Progress finally came through!

Figuring out just how to reduce your personal carbon impact can be a daunting, and at times, confusing task (just ask the King of Sweden, who recently decided to give up baths for the environment). (note: he has multiple palatial mansions. What’s the carbon footprint?)

Getting through Thanksgiving, when emissions-heavy activities like airline travel and tables full of food are the norm, can be a especially tricky for a die-hard climate activist. Here are have a few tips for a more climate-friend Thanksgiving. (We can’t help with the food coma, though.)

So, what do they want you to do?

  • Choose your turkey wisely (this is about buying locally. Not a bad idea to support your local economy, of course, how many have local turkey farmers?)
  • Waste not, want not (make only what you will eat, and, if leftovers, pack them up. You know, like freaking everyone does!)
  • Toast these drinks (again, a buy local thing)
  • Take the bus (that should be fun if families are traveling long distances)
  • Efficiency is a huge opportunity (become a nag on Thanksgiving)

Oh, and then we have to have this

Go ahead, talk about it

Even with all these tips, Thanksgiving is hardly a carbon-neutral day for most of us. But there’s one more way you can get bigger climate returns on the day: Talk about it.

Maybe your family or friends don’t believe in climate change. Take a moment before the holiday to brush up on some key messages, and think of it this way: Convincing just one person to reduce her carbon footprint doubles what you can do on your own.

It wouldn’t be a Warmist Thanksgiving without nagging your relatives on the subject of ‘climate change’, would it? Annoying your relatives, insulting them, making them remember why they never call you the other 364 days of the year.

Of course, the Democrats want their little minions to ruin Thanksgiving overall

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/669291835618103296

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Think Progress Tells Us How To Climate Proof, Ruin Our Thanksgiving »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Global Warming, Holidays | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Obama: Climate Change Conference A Rebuke To Murderous Terrorist Scum

By William Teach November 24, 2015 – 1:07 pm

And he surely wonders why his polls on fighting terrorism are dropping like a stone. ISIS is, sadly, laughing their heads off at this man who is divorced from reality

From the link

“Next week, I will be joining President Hollande and world leaders in Paris for the global climate conference. What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children,” he continued.

photo facepalm.gif

Read: Obama: Climate Change Conference A Rebuke To Murderous Terrorist Scum »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Barry Obama | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 24, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible waste of non-renewable water to clean up dishes from a horrible Thanksgiving big carbon footprint meal, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Liberty Zone, with a post on fake clock kid Ahmed suing for $15 million.

BTW, consider all IAYS posts to be open threads to discuss whatever you want.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Say, Can We Avoid Climate Apocalypse?

By William Teach November 24, 2015 – 10:15 am

One would think this kind of outright over the top unhinged climate hysteria (climasteria?) would be someplace like Grist, Climate Progress, etc, not at one of the world’s premiere news organizations, CNN

Can we avoid climate apocalypse?

It’s probably the most important number you’ve never heard of: 2 degrees Celsius.

That’s when climate change starts to get especially dangerous. Nearly every country in the world has agreed that 2 degrees of warming, measured as an increase in global average temperature since the Industrial Revolution, is too much to tolerate. Yet there’s less agreement about how to achieve the ambitious goal of keeping the increase below that threshold, and how economies can switch quickly enough from dirty fuels like coal and oil to cleaner sources of energy like solar and wind.

World leaders will meet in Paris starting on November 30 to discuss all of this at the COP21 meeting of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Before that gets going, we invited authors, experts and activists to weigh in on the 2-degree target. What’s at stake? And how can we actually get there?

Of course, the world has only seen a minuscule .85C since 1850, around 1.5F. During that time period there have been decades with increases, and others with pauses and even reductions. Despite Warmist objections (they’re objecting to actual science and facts, let’s be clear), there has been an 18+ year pause in statistically significant warming. According to their cultish beliefs, the world will suddenly warm 2C (3.6F) in just over 80 years. Science says otherwise. But, they want to push the doom. First up is Mark Lynas

Call it the nightmare scenario. First, world leaders meeting in Paris this December fail to agree on a plan to cut back global greenhouse gas emissions. Renewables like solar power remain too expensive, and people stay irrationally scared of carbon-free nuclear. The world shifts back to burning coal.

Then we find out that the Earth’s “climate sensitivity” — how quickly and drastically the planet responds to carbon emissions — is at the upper end of the range scientists predicted. Tipping points are crossed: Methane starts to belch out of the melting permafrost in huge quantities, and the ice sheets respond with what experts euphemistically call “nonlinear disintegration.” Sea levels begin to shoot up.

In the latter part of this century we find the planet’s temperature rise pushing not 2 degrees, as is the current internationally agreed maximum target, but 4, 5, even 6 degrees Celsius of warming. Large areas of the subtropics become biologically uninhabitable to humans: It’s simply too hot to go outside. Food crops in breadbaskets wither in searing heatwaves, and extreme cyclones pummel coastal cities already under threat from the rising seas.

Could human civilization survive? We don’t know — but this nightmare scenario is surely a risk we should not take. We know how to make the shift away from fossil fuels. The time to act is now.

Stephen King, Mark Tufo, and TW Brown do horror much better. And it’s entertaining.

Of course, then we have someone yammering on about the number being 1.5C. Like Lynas, Kathy Kijiner offers no solutions.

Van Jones supports Obama’s energy killing/cost of living increasing power plant plan. Surprisingly, CNN actually allows a disenting view from Bjorn Lomborg

For 20 years, governments have tried to cut carbon emissions. The result has been two decades of failure with ever-increasing global emissions.

Governments have already revealed the carbon cuts they likely will commit to in Paris. All of these combined will reduce temperatures by a tiny 0.05 degrees Celsius (0.09 degrees Fahrenheit) by 2100. Yet the cost is likely to be more than $1 trillion annually.

He then makes a good point, one I’ve noted numerous times

We should end fossil fuel subsidies and invest much more in green energy research and development. This would be much cheaper and more effective than our current approach. We need to innovate the price of green energy down to where everyone wants to buy it. And we should acknowledge that wasting $1 trillion annually on minuscule temperature reductions is immoral and wasteful when there are major needs today — from malaria to nutrition to family planning — where small investments could achieve a great deal more.

But, Bjorn needs to remember that this is not about science or anything noble, it’s about political control. Progressivism. Nice fascism. His voice, though, is about the only non-Warmist one.

Read: Say, Can We Avoid Climate Apocalypse? »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

We Need To Scare People About ‘Climate Change’ To Make Them Care

By William Teach November 24, 2015 – 7:45 am

Here in the 1st World, most people really do not care about anthropogenic climate change. Heck, they barely care about climate change as a natural phenomenon. While many say the are Very Concerned, almost every single poll shows ‘climate change’ to be last or next to last on a list of concerns. Hence, Toronto Star writer Emma Teital wants to scare people

Canadians need shock tactics in fight against climate change: Teitel
The new Liberal government needs to scare citizens into caring about global warming, and doing something about it.

On Monday Justin Trudeaumet with Canadian premiers to discuss a problem most people (myself included) either ignore completely or lament for 30 seconds before changing the subject to more current, pressing matters.

That problem is climate change, the alleged End of Days brought to you by selfish, insatiable mankind. Trudeau will attend the UN climate change conference in Paris next week, but before he sets off, he’d like to showcase Canada’s new-found environmental fervour to the wider world.

And yet, whether next week’s Paris talks and subsequent meetings with premiers are fruitful — whether in fact, our government changes its policies in any meaningful way regarding the oilsands or any other issue pertaining to the environment — one has to ask: how much does policy matter in combating climate change, if people by and large do not give a damn about it?

Based on the actions of Warmists, their only care is on how to use the topic as a means to push for more Progressive policies, which, strangely, they never seem to understand that those policies will give Government lots and lots more control over their individual lives, as well as increase their cost of living while at the same time reduce the quality of their modern lifestyles.

Which is why I’d wager that the only way world leaders and activists can change human perception of climate change, in addition to public policy, is through a healthy dose of fear mongering. In fact, political fear-mongering, a tactic used in this country to prejudice us against a small minority of niqab-clad women, is actually prudent in the fight against climate change, a material threat that, unlike the others mentioned, will wreak havoc in our land.

The Cult of Climastrology has been “spreading awareness” for 25+ years, and has been using Scary Fables for a goodly chunk of that time. In fact, there were scary stories trotted out in the early 20th Century about the danger of warming from Mankind’s actions. Followed by scary stories of a coming ice age in the 60’s and 70’s. Now we’re back to warming. The common thread is that they all attempt to create more and more government, along with more and more government power. And taxation. Yet, the people who believe in it the most refuse to make more than token changes in their own lives.

Read: We Need To Scare People About ‘Climate Change’ To Make Them Care »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

ACLU Sues Indiana Governor Mike Pence For Refusing Syrian Refugees

By William Teach November 24, 2015 – 6:53 am

The ACLU is very upset over the civil rights violations of people who aren’t Americans and have no Constitutional Rights. But, we should wonder, is this really about civil rights? Or something else?

(USA Today) Gov. Mike Pence is facing a federal lawsuit that challenges his power to block Syrian refugees from resettling in Indiana.

The lawsuit, filed Monday night, accuses Pence of violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution by accepting refugees from other countries but not those from Syria. It comes a week after the Indiana governor — and more than a dozen from other states — suspended the resettlement of Syrian refugees in the state following terrorist attacks in Paris.

The complaint was filed Monday night in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana on behalf of Exodus Refugee Immigration, an Indianapolis non-profit organization that resettles refugees in Indiana. John Wernert, secretary of the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, which oversees refugee settlement in the state, is the other defendant named in the lawsuit.

They aren’t American citizens. They have no rights. There is, though, this pesky thing called the 10th Amendment, which gives all power to the people and states that is not specifically given to the federal government, and the Constitution does not specifically give los Federales the power to force States to take in refugees, particularly those who have the potential to be hardcore Islamists, since these so-called background checks really do not accomplish much. Pence would be happy to take them once “the federal government addresses the security gaps acknowledged by the FBI and Department of Homeland Security with regard to refugees from Syria, and as governor I will continue to put the safety and security of Hoosiers first.”

According to the 13-page complaint, Pence’s decision also caused some financial harm to Exodus, which receives federal money to aid refugees resettling in the state. The funds, which are funneled through state agencies, are spent on employment training, English language education and other services, according to the ACLU of Indiana.

Oh, so it’s really all about the money. Los Federales have approved 19 Syrians for relocation to Indiana, and, Exodus will have to use it’s own money to help out, and there would be no reimbursement. As the old saying goes “if the question is why, the answer is money.”

Meanwhile, super friendly Canada has said it will only accept children, women, and families from Syria, no unaccompanied men. The young fighting age men tend to make up the majority of those who are streaming out of the Middle East and into Europe, as well as attempting to come to Canada and the U.S.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: ACLU Sues Indiana Governor Mike Pence For Refusing Syrian Refugees »

Posted in Current Affairs | 10 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove