Jihadist terrorism: The “new normal” is unacceptable

June 4, 2017

Justice Dept. asks SCOTUS to let temporary travel ban take effect

The UK’s Daily Mail reports another deadly attack by radical Islamic terrorists has hit London, less than two weeks after jihadist murderers targeted their blood lust on a crowd of mostly young girls and women following a concert in the Manchester arena. The 22-year-old terrorist made numerous trips to Libya, his parent’s homeland, where he learned the cowardly techniques of mass slaughter of innocents.

The latest — dual London Bridge area attacks — in which a van plowed through a crowd of pedestrians, followed by gruesome knifings with 12-inch blades —are the third jihadist deadly assaults on British soil in just 10 weeks. This rampage resulted in 7 dead and over 45 wounded.

The Islamic-based contagion is spreading and taking lives in Western Europe and the United States. But wanting to protect ourselves from what Daniel Greenfield descries as the “new normal,” brands us as Islamophobes. Greenfield, a journalist and scholar who focuses on the radical left and Islamic terrorism, rightly identifies Islamic terrorism as a war. In his latest column,Europe’s next big war,“ he unequivocally states, “The only way to stop that war is to stop migration from terror states today.”

During his campaign, President Donald Trump sensibly advocated banning travel from terror sponsoring nations. In view of the ongoing violence we have been exposed to since Sept. 11, 2001, it was a compelling reason many Americans supported his candidacy. After election, on Jan. 27 he attempted to implement restrictions involving 7 terror sponsoring nations: Voices on the left accused him of  anti-Muslim discrimination. A revised list of 6 counties, Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Syria and Yemen, omitting Iraq — noted that they were either state sponsors of terrorism or their territories were so compromised that they were effectively havens for terrorist groups. On March 6 it too, was shot down by federal judges, who declared it violated the First Amendment religious protections of Muslims.

“This executive order responsibly provides a needed pause so we can carefully review how we scrutinize people coming here from these countries of concern,” U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said.  Included is the ability of specific individuals to be able to request waivers, which will be given on a case-by-case basis.

The Justice Department announced it is “confident that President Trump’s executive order is well within his lawful authority to keep the nation safe and protect our communities from terrorism. The president is not required to admit people from countries that sponsor or shelter terrorism, until he determines that they can be properly vetted and do not pose a security risk to the United States.”

On Thursday, the Trump administration requested the U.S. Supreme Court allow the temporary ban to take effect.

Stay tuned.


Pope “slapped in the face” by Trump’s climate change exit

June 2, 2017

So let’s get this straight. The man who is the spiritual leader of the Catholic Church’s estimated 1.2 billion adherents, doesn’t have enough to keep him busy.  Meddling in American politics takes up time. He also dabbles in science. Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, head of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which has hosted numerous international conferences on climate change, is not a fan of President Donald Trump. Previously discussing the Climate Change accord entered into unilaterally by Barack Obama without seeking senate authorization — and the likelihood that Trump would withdraw from the pact — Sanchez Sorondo said,  “If he really does withdraw, it would be a huge slap in the face for us.”

On Wednesday acting in the best interests of Americans, Trump did exactly that.

The Rome-based,  liberal, pseudo-scientific chorus has grown. This past March, Cardinal Peter Turkson, the pope’s point man for the environment, immigration and development, urged Trump to listen to “dissenting voices,” and reconsider his position on climate change.

Now that the U.S. has officially exited the Climate Change accords, Sanchez Sorondo said he believed the U.S. oil lobby was behind the decision and that the industry had “maneuvered” Trump. A withdrawal, said the Bishop “would not only be a disaster but completely unscientific.“ With sarcasm dripping from every word,  he asserted that “saying we need to rely on coal and oil is like saying that the earth is not round. It is an absurdity dictated by the need to make money.”

Vatican Inc. is a massive, wealthy business with astronomical assets, treasures, and its own political agenda.

The relationship between the pope, his minions and Donald Trump has been contentious since the conservative businessman first entered the presidential race. Pope Francis tried to bully Trump into submission on his campaign pledge to build a wall to secure our southern border, which the globalist pope claims to abhor — though he lives within the confines of Vatican City guarded by its own army of Swiss Guards, behind massive 50-foot-tall, ten-feet thick walls surrounding the impenetrable Vatican fortress.

In Feb. 2016, the pope went so far as to claim the Republican front-runner, “Was not a Christian.” On a return flight to Rome from a trip to Mexico, the pope said: “A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.”

Trump, at a campaign event, responded swiftly, saying, “For a religious leader to question a person’s faith is disgraceful. No leader, especially a religious leader, has the right to question another man’s religion or faith,” Trump said.

Once again Donald Trump was right. He appears to be on a roll. His obligation to is America. The pope should stick to matters involving his own church.


Janet Napolitano: She’s only gotten worse

May 1, 2017

Right thinking Arizonans dealt as best they could under the oppressive, radically left-wing Gov. Janet Napolitano. It wasn’t easy as she repeatedly slashed her veto pen over excellent bills — earning her the moniker J-No,  unwaveringly appointed partisans to the state courts, and declared her bonding to open borders with her notorious statement, “You show me a 50-foot wall and I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder at the border. That’s the way the border works.”

We all knew Janet Napolitano never had a commitment to securing America against invasion.

Who knew she was also a crook?

Breitbart features a revealing article by Chriss W. Street that reminds us of how fortunate we are to be rid of this wretched liberal who abandoned her gubernatorial post to join the Obama administration as the ineffectual Secretary of Homeland Security. Now as the coarse and boorish president of the University of California system, Napolitano is accused in this recently released 167 page report by the California State Auditor Elaine Howle of hiding $175 million in budget surpluses while continuing to raise student tuition.

The audit found that the UC spent $32.5 billion on expenses during the 2015-16 school year to fund 10 campuses, five medical centers, and its Office of the President headquarters. Although the UC states that its “fundamental missions are teaching, research and public service,” the UC only spent “$6.7 billion (21 percent) on teaching, “$4.6 billion (14 percent) on research” and “$630 million (2 percent) on public service.” The other $20.6 billion (63 percent) was spent on non-fundamental activities.

This Los Angeles Times editorial tries its damndest, wildly contorting language using “might not” twice in the single headline, to give cover to Napolitano as it questions the audit. This is an example:

“The audit puzzlingly implies that non-restricted funds are either being hoarded or misspent on illegitimate uses instead of direct student services. One of the supposedly problematic projects it names is UC’s Washington Center in the District of Columbia, where students from all campuses are eligible to live in a dorm and take courses. If this isn’t a direct student service, it’s hard to imagine what is. Other uses of the money include helping undocumented students who fear deportation and reducing UC’s carbon footprint.”

Could the newspaper’s agenda be any more clear?

This may, might, could convince the equally far leftist California Gov. Jerry Brown (brief video), but not many others. Janet Napolitano needs to be replaced.


AG Sessions visits AZ, announces new border security measures

April 12, 2017

U.S.A.G. Jeff Sessions gives the speech we’ve been waiting years to hear

 U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions visited Arizona on Tuesday and outlined President Trump’s bold new plan to secure our southern border.  Unequivocally stating, “This is the Trump era,” the attorney general announced new crackdowns on illegal immigration.

Read the full text of Attorney General Sessions’s speech as he addressed the uniformed men and women who serve in Customs and Border Protection  — providing the front line of border security.

Sessions stated that federal prosecutors are now required to consider for prosecution a broadened list of offenses, which he clearly outlines with bullet points in the text.

For those who didn’t get a chance to hear his long-awaited message, enjoy it here.


Bill Clinton rates standing ovation for sounding like Pres. Trump

February 8, 2017

Democrats only decide remarks are “racist” when uttered by Republican

 On January 24, 1995 when President Bill Clinton gave his State of the Union address to a joint session of the 104th United States Congress he received a standing ovation.

Democrats listening to Clinton’s rousing speech found these words inspiring:

“All Americans, not only in the states most heavily affected but in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That’s why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens. In the budget I will present to you, we will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes, to better identify illegal aliens in the workplace as recommended by the commission headed by former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan. We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it.”

Fast forward 22 years and the same issues addressed by President Donald Trump are labeled racist and reeking of self-serving protectionism.

But U.S. Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR) and David Perdue (GA) agree with Trump. Declaring “It’s time our immigration system started working for American workers,” on Tuesday the duo unveiled the Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment (RAISE) Act, legislation that will help raise American workers’ wages by restoring legal immigration levels to their historical norms and rebalancing the system toward employment-based visas and immediate-family household members. The RAISE Act would lower overall immigration to 637,960 in its first year and to 539,958 by its tenth year-a 50 percent reduction from the 1,051,031 immigrants who arrived in 2015.

According to Sen. Cotton, “The RAISE Act would promote higher wages on which all working Americans can build a future-whether your family came over here on the Mayflower or you just took the oath of citizenship.”

“We are taking action to fix some of the shortcomings in our legal immigration system,” said Sen. Perdue. “Returning to our historically normal levels of legal immigration will help improve the quality of American jobs and wages.”

Watch the senator’s video here.

H/T Clinton Video PenguinProseMedia. Unfortunately it includes a momentary comic insert of dozing audience members.


John McCain’s latest border security deceit

January 14, 2017

McCain’s entire career has been marked by partnering with the most liberal Democrats — along with Jon Kyl and now Jeff Flake — to promote amnesty for illegals. The most recent charade was the infamous Gang of Eight, orchestrated by the AZ duo and their leftist Senate cohorts Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Robert Menendez and Michael Bennet. They were joined by by Republicrats Lindsey Grahamnesty and double talker Marco Rubio.

A recent press release from John McCain’s senate office contains a joint self-congratulatory I’ll-slap-your-back-if-you-slap-mine routine with AZ CD 2 Rep. Martha McSally.

Since the issue is about the duo’s Border Security Technology Accountability Act, conservative’s antenna should be rising, since we know McCain has long been in the forefront of amnesty proposals  — not implementing security to stop illegal invaders. The deceptive press release is up on his website, which we have no reason to link to. The bill can be read here.

John McCain is working to deflect his now admitted involvement in the effort to dismantle President-elect Donald Trump before he is even inaugurated, by delivering vile and unverified allegations with shady origins against Trump to FBI director James Comey.  McCain still hasn’t gotten over his colossal loss to Barack Obama and his visceral hatred/jealousy of Donald Trump capturing the American imagination has consumed him. McCain withdrew his iffy endorsement of the Republican nominee. Jeff Flake appeared wherever a camera would train on him, to declare he wasn’t voting for Trump. That means both of Arizona’s marginal senators, either by acts of omission or commission,  voted for Hillary Clinton.

Returning to the Border Security Technology Accountability Act, we’ve been down this path before. McSally introduced a bill with the same title July 27, 2015. And technology has been tried and failed since the days of the first Homeland Security chief, Judge Michael Chertoff’s efforts to get a 28-mile  “virtual fence” that pledged to use radar and surveillance cameras. That was during  the George W. Bush administration, which also gave a wink and a nod to illegals crossing into the U.S.

It was a costly farce then and it will be a costly farce now.  Donald Trump is committed to a border wall and so are most Americans who were moved to support him on that compelling issue. SRAZ wrote,” Virtual fence is a virtual flop,” in April 2008. Earlier, in Feb. 2008, we covered,Virtual fence “looks good” to Homeland Insecurity Chief Chertoff,” regarding the technical malfunctions, glitches and postponements carrying $ multimillion price tags. This postand we’ve got a bridge to sell you,” which includes a list of just some of the terror sponsoring nations breaching our border plainly illustrates nothing has changed.

Believe these practiced liars at your own peril.


Yes, we can pay for the wall

January 8, 2017

WaPO refuses to allow the word “Obamacare” to appear in print, but calls national border security, “Trump’s wall”

The double standard is laughable. The Washington Post insists on calling problem plagued Obamacare the “Affordable Care Act,” to remove the onus from Barack Obama. Yet here in Arizona the costs have risen an astronomical 116%, taking it far from the realm of “affordable.’

So it is when you buy ink by the barrel, as a wise observer once noted.

The newspaper, which might as well declare itself an arm of the DNC for its blatant liberal bias, tries to configure the Republican majority House and Senate at odds with itself over “the party’s deeply held desire to rein in government spending in conflict with its long-standing goal of cracking down on illegal immigration and toughening border security.”

The WaPo oddly refers to the construction project that resonated with voters as “Trump’s wall” and disingenuously ponders how the project will be funded.  The newspaper echoes the words of Vicente Fox, Mexico’s former president, who insultingly questions the authenticity of Trump’s election, and then calls “Trump’s wall” a “racist monument.”

On the campaign trail, President-elect Trump said he would get Mexico to pay for the construction. There are many ways of accomplishing that fiscal feat. We offer a simple one. Warn the recipients that the gravy train is screeching to a halt for those aiding in the invasion of the United States.

FY 2017 U.S. foreign aid committed to Mexico $134,664,000.

The seven countries of Central America: Belize: $1,250,000; Guatemala: $145,105,000; El Salvador: $87,982,000; Honduras: $105,655,000; Nicaragua: $14,800,000; Costa Rica: $1,825,000; and Panama: $3,200,000

Then add in: Dominican Republic: $22,481,000 and Haiti: $218,050,000. And would you believe? American taxpayers even pony up for the Communist dictatorship of Cuba to the tune of $15,000,000

We have not even checked out the vast amounts of foreign aid directed to South American countries in 2017 which also funnel their citizens to the U.S. Withholding or drastically curtailing it will go a long way toward loosening up money to pay for the wall.

Of major importance are the $ billions in “remittance funds” sent back to their homeland by foreign nationals illegally living in the U.S., according to this 2016 General Accounting Office study to congress, which says “remittances have become an important and stable source of funds that exceeds revenues from exports of goods.” The transfer of our cash “can also be used to launder proceeds from different types of criminal activities, including drug trafficking and human smuggling, through methods such as structuring.” The high reporting threshold of $3,000 lets individuals send broken-up payments without raising questions. This transfer of our wealth needs to be heavily taxed or stopped.

Breitbart reports remittances to Mexico rose 25% after Trump’s election.

It’s past time to rein in this sapping of our resources. In these perilous times, we need to rebuild our military, invest in our infrastructure and secure our border.