St. Louis Police Arrest 9 During Protest Of Police Killing Criminal

Welcome to the crazy world of #BlackLivesMatter, where a stone cold criminal is held up as some sort of paragon

(AP) At least nine people were arrested Wednesday and St. Louis police used tear gas to clear a street of protesters after an armed man fleeing from officers was shot and killed when he pointed a gun at them.

St. Louis Police Chief Sam Dotson said at a press conference late Wednesday night that a group of protesters who had blocked an intersection threw glass bottles and bricks at officers and refused orders to clear the roadway. Inert gas was used and when that didn’t have any effect on the crowd, police turned to tear gas to clear the intersection, Dotson said. Those arrested face charges of impeding the flow of traffic and resisting arrest, he said.

In addition to the arrests, officers responded to reports of burglaries in the area and the fire department was called after a car was set ablaze, according to Dotson.

What was the protest over?

Dotson said two police officers serving a search warrant Wednesday afternoon at a home in a crime-troubled section of the city’s north side encountered two suspects, one of which was 18-year-old Mansur Ball-Bey. The suspects were fleeing the home as Ball-Bey, who was black, turned and pointed a handgun at the officers, who shot him, the chief said. Ball-Bey died at the scene.

Both officers, who are white, were unharmed, according to a police report.

Dotson said four guns, including the handgun wielded by Ball-Bey, and crack cocaine were recovered at or near the home, which last year yielded illegal guns during a police search. Police are searching for the second suspect, who they said is believed to be in his mid-to-late teens.

So, the police were legally clearing a crackhouse. Ball-Bey ran. During the chase he stopped, turned, and pointed a gun at the officers. One officer shot once, the other three times. Ball-Bey then ran a bit more before collapsing and dying. The gun found on him was stolen from Rolla, Missouri. Two others were arrested at the house, where they also found several other stolen guns.

And then the “protesters” became violent, and caused mayhem and crime in their own neighborhood. KSDK has more in depth coverage of how the “protests” went down.

“Another youth down by the hands of police,” Dex Dockett, 42, who lives nearby, told a reporter. “What could have been done different to de-escalate rather than escalate? They (police) come in with an us-against-them mentality. You’ve got to have the right kind of cops to engage in these types of neighborhoods.”

I don’t know, how about telling us what could have been done different? One would think a citizen would be at least somewhat concerned about people who deal crack, and surely in the same neighborhood. Please explain what police are too do when the perp runs, then points a gun at them.

Another neighborhood resident, Fred Price, said he was skeptical about Dotson’s account that the suspect pointed a gun at officers before being mortally wounded.

“They provoked the situation,” Price, 33, said. “Situations like this make us want to keep the police out of the neighborhood. They’re shooting first, then asking questions.”

Yeah, they apparently provoked it by going to a house with a legal warrant. Couldn’t have anything to do with Ball-Bey being at a crack-house and in possession of a stolen weapon, could it?

Say, where was the protest over Silver Franklin, a black man, killing Donte Woodson, another black man? How about the 4 murdered a week ago? Or the 9 year old Black girl killed and mother wounded in a drive-by Tuesday in Ferguson, part of St. Louis county? How about the 119 Blacks killed this year in St. Louis, solely by other Blacks? Where’s the outrage? Where’s the protest?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: St. Louis Police Arrest 9 During Protest Of Police Killing Criminal »

Side Deal Allows Iran To, Get This, Inspect Their Own Military Nuclear Site

Is it any wonder that Obama and Kerry wanted nothing to do with telling Congress, nor the American People, about the side deals?

(Associated Press)  Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of using to develop nuclear arms, operating under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press.

The revelation on Wednesday newly riled Republican lawmakers in the U.S. who have been severely critical of a broader agreement to limit Iran’s future nuclear programs, signed by the Obama administration, Iran and five world powers in July. Those critics have complained that the wider deal is unwisely built on trust of the Iranians, while the administration has insisted it depends on reliable inspections.

“International inspections should be done by international inspectors. Period. The standard of ‘anywhere, anytime’ inspections – so critical to a viable agreement – has dropped to ‘when Iran wants, where Iran wants, on Iran’s terms,'” said U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce in a reaction typical of opponents of the broader deal.

The newly disclosed side agreement, for an investigation of the Parchin nuclear site by the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency, is linked to persistent allegations that Iran has worked on atomic weapons. That investigation is part of the overarching nuclear-limits deal.

Next up, Obama will claim he read about this in the newspapers

The Parchin agreement was worked out between the IAEA and Iran. The United States and the five other world powers were not party to it but were briefed by the IAEA and endorsed it as part of the larger package.

Oops.

Amy Miller at Legal Insurrection

What does this mean for the future of the Iran deal in Congress? I have no idea—but there’s no ignoring the fact that Democrats who have come out in support of this deal have either been totally snookered, or are (however unlikely) somehow in the know and thus complicit in this blatant precursor to a war crime.

Any elected official who votes for this deal, meaning only Democrats, because no Republicans plan to vote for it, have the consequences squarely on their heads. And here comes the Obama spin

Read: Side Deal Allows Iran To, Get This, Inspect Their Own Military Nuclear Site »

If All You See…

…is an evil fossil fueled machine, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is American Power, with a post noting Trump is now competitive with Hillary.

Read: If All You See… »

Latest Prognistication: Not Acting On Hotcoldwetdry To Cost $44 Trillion

Prognostication or scary fable?

(CNBC) Up to $44 trillion could be going up in smoke if the world does not act on climate change, according to the latest piece of research from U.S. banking giant Citigroup.

The report – Energy Darwinism II: Why a Low Carbon Future Doesn’t Have to Cost the Earth — has forecast that spending on energy will hit around $200 trillion in the next 25 years.

The study then examines two scenarios: one that Citi describe as an “‘inaction’ on climate change scenario”, and another that looks at what could happen if a low carbon, “different energy mix” is pursued.

“What we’re trying to do is to take an objective view at the economics of this situation and actually look at what the costs of not acting are, if the scientists are right,” Jason Channell, Global Head of Alternative Energy and Cleantech Research at Citi, told CNBC Tuesday.

“And those are rather alarming numbers in themselves,” he added. “I mean, the central case we have in the report is that the costs in terms of lost (gross domestic product) GDP from not acting on climate change can be $44 trillion dollars by the time we get to 2060.”

So if we don’t do something, economic doom by 2060? Riiiiiight. This couldn’t possibly have anything to do with Citi wanting to make some cash off pushing “climate change” policies, especially with the big Paris IPCC meeting, could it?

The Citi report comes a few months before December’s crucial United Nations COP21 meeting in Paris. The meeting is seen as hugely significant, with the aim of reaching an agreement to keep global warming below two degrees centigrade.

Channell said he had high hopes for the summit. “What’s so exciting about Paris this year is that it’s the first time that all of the players are arriving with positively aligned intentions, including the big emitters: the US and China, who’ve obviously got their own accord between the two of them.”

Na, couldn’t be about money and control.

Read: Latest Prognistication: Not Acting On Hotcoldwetdry To Cost $44 Trillion »

USA Today: Iranian Chants Of “Death To America” Really Don’t Mean “Death To America” Or Something

Nothing like covering for a hardcore regime which despises America, and imbues that sentiment in its citizens. Here’s Reese Erlich’s atrocious take (it should be noted that the article originally appeared at The Global Post)

In Iran, ‘death to America’ doesn’t mean what you think

Hardline Iranians continue to shout “death to America” at Friday prayers and political rallies as they have for decades. That chant is cited by conservative U.S. politicians as proof that Iran remains hostile and can’t be trusted to implement nuclear accords. (snip)

But Iranians have a different interpretation of the slogan.

“Death to America” expresses the anger many Iranians feel about U.S. policy toward Iran, said Foad Izadi, an assistant professor of world studies at the University of Tehran. Iranians remember that the U.S. overthrew the legitimate government of Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953 and supported the dictatorial Shah who followed.

The slogan “means death to American foreign policy,” said Izadi. Iranians “have problems with the American government, not the American people.” In fact, he said, Iranians are friendly to Americans. “When you walk around town, and people see you’re an American, everyone wants to take care of you.”

Oh, good, Reese takes the word of one assistant professor, one who has been a big supporter of the regime. After this, the article completely moves on from the chants and meaning of “death to America”, except for one tiny bit at the end which notes that Iranians won’t stop chanting “death to America” anytime soon.

This is an insane hot take on what Iranians actually mean. When they’re chanting “death to Israel”, then mean they want to wipe Israel off the map. When they chant “death to America”, they mean death to America, not its foreign policy. But, leftist supporters of the Iran Deal will stop at nothing to get it passed. They’re even calling Senator Menendez a “warmonger” after he said he won’t support the deal.

Read: USA Today: Iranian Chants Of “Death To America” Really Don’t Mean “Death To America” Or Something »

Coulter Has Complete Meltdown Aimed At Carly Fiorina

She hates Carly with the “hot hate of a 1,000 suns”

(The Blaze) Ann Coulter really doesn’t like Carly Fiorina. In fact, the conservative commentator said Tuesday that she “hates” the former Hewlett-Packard CEO-turned Republican presidential candidate.

Coulter, appearing on the “Mike Gallagher Show,” was taking a question from a caller who asked why America doesn’t join “the rest of the world” and end birthright citizenship.

“You’re absolutely right,” Coulter responded to the caller. “And this is why I’ve said I now hate Carly Fiorina with a hot hot hate of 1,000 suns.”

Coulter held nothing back earlier in the radio program by going after Fiorina on gender, as Mediaite reported.

What Coulter is having a bit of apoplexy over is Carly! noting that Trump wanting to end birthright citizenship is idiotic. And, it is. Not because it doesn’t make sense to end the ability of people from around the world, most notably illegal aliens and Chinese (who fly into the West Coast and have babies, giving them dual citizenship), to have their babies here, making them citizens, which immediately means pro-illegal activists immediately want to all the parents to stay. It’s foolish because there is little, very little, chance that the 14th Amendment will ever be repealed.

But, hey, Coulter is a big big big Trump supporter. She has long been against illegal immigration, and has taken on this issue many times, especially in her books. Speaking of her books, in Godless she completely demolished the abortion on demand supporters. Say, does she know that Trump is a big abortion on demand supporter? Or that he has changed his opinion very recently on giving illegals amnesty?

But, then, remember, Coulter was also a massive Chris Christie supporter. When it comes to big GOP squishes, few are squishier than Christie. Trump certainly has a few problematic positions, but, he’d be better than Christie, Kasich, Graham, and Jeb Bush.

Looking through Ann’s Twitter feed, she’s slamming Rick Perry and Ted Cruz on immigration, especially on Visas. Interesting, since The Donald is all for work visas, too. But, Trump is avoiding his previous position of completely securing the border, then giving amnesty.

Personally, Coulter’s schtick has worn bare, at least to me. I used to love her books and listening to her positions, but, over the last few years, I just don’t get her and why she supports squishes.

Let’s note that Carly! was for the Dream Act, but is on record as stating that it should end there, no more legalization. Carly’s positions are actually pretty darned good. Even on “climate change”. I don’t care if one believes that mankind is mostly/solely responsible: I care if they plan to Do Something about it, and Carly! has said she won’t. There’s also a bit of unknown in terms of how much she thinks man is responsible for.

Meanwhile, Carly! slams the TSA with this tweet, via the Blaze

Yes, you can now review the TSA and other federal agencies on Yelp (insert evil laugh here).

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Coulter Has Complete Meltdown Aimed At Carly Fiorina »

Muslim Scholars Declare War On Hotcoldwetdry

But, hey, we all have to remember that “climate change” is not linked to religion in the least

Islamic leaders launch climate change declaration

Islamic leaders from countries around the world have launched a declaration urging governments to deliver strong international action to tackle climate change.

The climate change declaration calls on wealthy and oil producing countries to phase out fossil fuels by 2050, and urges a switch to 100% renewable energy and help for vulnerable communities already suffering from rising global temperatures.

The declaration, launched at an International Islamic Climate Change Symposium in Istanbul, Turkey, presents the moral case based on Islamic teaching for action on climate change and aims to engage the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims on the issue.

If only they’d care as much about a real issue, Islamic extremists, as the fake issue of “climate change”.

BTW, how did all the Muslims get to the symposium?

Read: Muslim Scholars Declare War On Hotcoldwetdry »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful bicycle, that Everyone Else should be forced to use instead of fossil fueled vehicles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on Hillary bringing back the “war on women”.

Read: If All You See… »

Climate Change Totally Threatens To Wipe Out Red Pandas!

Another day, another scary story. Will this catch on, replacing the polar bear, a giant carnivore which kills in a bloody frenzy?

(Grist) Internet dwellers, unite! The red panda, lord of all things cute, is in danger, and only we can help it.

That’s right — the smiling, red-faced stuffed animal that puts your most adorable kids and kittens to shame — is not doing so great these days, thanks to an expanding human population and all the deforestation, disease, and testy domestic dogs that come with it, The New York Times reports. Oh, and SPOILER ALERT — climate change, too.

Look at them! Look!


GIFSoup

Seriously, take a peek. Total cuteness!

Here’s how Elizabeth Freeman, a conservation biologist at George Mason University, explained it to The Times:

“I think down the road what may actually do them in is climate change,” Dr. Freeman said. “Because they are in such a small niche in the Himalayas, and as climate change warms that area and moves that population higher in elevation, they’re going to lose habitat probably faster than they can accommodate to climate change.”

She added, “I see them as being a critical indicator species for the health of the Himalayan ecosystem, probably more so than giant pandas.”

This is exactly one of the main reasons I despise the whole Cult Of Climastrology: they have to not only make everything about “climate change”, but make it the main focal point. Refer back to the first excerpt: “…thanks to an expanding human population and all the deforestation, disease, and testy domestic dogs…” So, Red Pandas face real issues, but, hey, climate change!!!!! Red Pandas have seen lots of higher and lower temps during their time on earth. They’ve dealt with multiple Holocene warm periods that were warmer than today, and, guess what? They survived. But, they might not survive the real issues, which have been pushed aside in favor of a stupid political issue.

Read: Climate Change Totally Threatens To Wipe Out Red Pandas! »

Suddenly, Salon Is Very Concerned With An Authoritarian President

For years, Mr. Obama has been more than willing to use his pen and phone, well, really, just his pen, to enact his personal agenda via executive authority, particularly since Republicans took the House in 2010. Salon, like most Leftists, has been cheerleading this push. But, what about a potential Donald Trump presidency?

The dark side of Donald Trump: How gridlock leads to dangerous populism & authoritarian zeal

Of the many ways Donald Trump has distinguished himself from his fellow Republican presidential candidates, his flamboyant xenophobia and protectionism have garnered the most attention. And that was still the case this past weekend, when the billionaire real estate mogul, reality television star and “cherisher” of women went on “Meet the Press” to tell host Chuck Todd that a President Trump would work hard to deport more than 11 million people. “We’re going to keep the families together,” Trump promised. But only so long as they understood that regardless of what the 14th Amendment might say, these American-born children of immigrations would “have to go,” too.

As my colleague Joan Walsh has pointed out already, this is a prescription for turning the entire country into a charnel house for civil rights that would make today’s Arizona seem comparatively benign. If the policy were truly enforced with the kind of rigor that Trump promises and his supporters crave, the result would be “a massive police state,” as Walsh puts it. The number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents would increase three-fold under Trump; and anyone who still failed to understand President Trump’s message would be encouraged to look no further than the southern border, where a giant wall would stand and carry on the Berlin and West Bank tradition.

A police state!!!!!!!!!

The racial hue of Trump’s vision is obvious, and it’s understandable that commentators are inclined to see Trumpism through that lens. But there was another important Trump-related media development over the weekend. It was a stellar piece by the Washington Post’s Dave Weigel, who recently spent some time in Flint, Michigan, talking to some of “the Donald’s” biggest fans. And while nostalgia for an era when whiteness meant more than it does today was common, Weigel’s piece suggests that racial anxiety isn’t the main reason these folks are embracing Trump. What they like about him, it appears, is that he is a more convincing authoritarian.

“I don’t think he’d go to Congress and ask,” one supporter said to Weigel about a hypothetical President Trump. “I think he’d just do it.” A dutiful student of high school civics knows that the framers of the Constitution took great pains to keep such a sentiment from governing the country. But for the voters Weigel spoke to, such a display of presidential “strength” (a favored word of Trump and his believers) is badly needed. “He lets people know what he’s going to do, not what to ask for,” a 51-year-old named Bob Parsons said of Trump, approvingly. He then compared the former host of “The Apprentice” to Ronald Reagan.

Suddenly, the President making things happen would be a Bad Thing. No such complaints have ever been leveled on the pages of Salon. But, hey, because Trump would, according mostly to supporters, not Trump himself, mind you, make things happen

The authoritarian mind-set doesn’t have much patience for nuance or complication, however. It prefers to see the world as comprehensible, bordering on self-evident. And whenever it is confronted with a reality too opaque and intricate to be easily simplified, that’s when a kind of flattening mysticism — or “romance,” as Weigel calls it — steps in to abolish complexity and sand away rough edges. Channeled as it currently is in Trump’s direction, this free-floating rage at the status quo and this authoritarian desire for a great leader to enact justice through force of will is relatively harmless. What should worry the rest of us, though, is the prospect that Trump isn’t a one-off but rather a sign of things to come.

Was that about Trump, or Obama? This is a typical unhinged rant about the super duper concern over a Republican being the next Hitler, with no self-reflection that Lefties have actually been supporting the guy who meets the description for years.

Read: Suddenly, Salon Is Very Concerned With An Authoritarian President »

Pirate's Cove