All people who shout "Allahu Akbar" while attacking people are mentally ill
That tired old coverup is trotted out yet again below to explain the latest attack. "No, no, it's not terrorism" we are expected to believe. They are probably just Presbyterians having a bad day, I suppose. The fact remains however that they are Islamically-motivated attacks and it is about time these puerile attempts to pretend otherwise were abandoned. There have been three attacks in France this week by men described by police as mentally disturbed
A motorist injured two people when he drove into a crowd shouting “Allahu akbar” in the southern French city of Nîmes in the early hours of this morning.
The man was overpowered by members of the public and arrested after his white Peugeot hit security barriers. He had aimed at a café terrace at 1am.
The barriers were in place to prevent such attacks and prevented greater casualties, local security officers said. The two people injured were not in serious condition.
Local prosecutors said that the man was suffering from “relative mental confusion” and had been taken to hospital. The anti-terrorism police were not involved in the investigation at this stage, they said. The man was not known to police for suspected radicalisation.
SOURCE
*************************************
TVA: Deception, Theft, and the Golden Rule
Oftentimes in life, the values we claim to hold are tested in ways that may not always be apparent. But when those tests come, it may reveal that the values we lay claim to are often not the ones we put into practice. (Sadly, I know this to be true in my life all too often, when I’m honest enough to acknowledge it.)
This truth has been playing out in our community for the last couple weeks in a way that perhaps you’ve never fully considered. The issue at hand is an effort by TVA to “appropriate” private land for its “greater” use. For those who are not familiar, TVA is a nearly 90-year-old federal agency that provides electricity to nine million customers across seven states and operates annually with a multibillion-dollar budget.
The controversy involves TVA seeking to extend an electrical service line across the land of a personal friend and local businessman, Greg Vital. Amongst Greg’s many business holdings is farmland in Georgetown, Tennessee, which is home to his buffalo operation.
What is unknown by many is the fact that TVA purchased a parcel of land over a year ago. TVA’s plan at the time targeted Mr. Vital’s property as the route to extend its power lines to reach its newly purchased parcel. But only in the last couple weeks did TVA finally inform the public, including Mr. Vital, of its plans to appropriate his land for its proposed project.
If ever there was a David vs. Goliath battle, this is it.
At a public meeting this last week, I had the opportunity to meet with several TVA representatives to ask questions as well as express my objections to the manner in which they had contrived their plans. While the TVA reps were pleasant, it was clear that they were less than forthcoming with some of their answers.
The concept of eminent domain is one that most Americans are familiar with, but it’s likely the majority of us have seldom been confronted with such a threat. To have an entity that is all-powerful, both economically and politically, confront the little guy, simply because he owns something it wants, is an intimidating and often overwhelming struggle. But in such battles, Goliath is typically the victor and David more often than not walks away with a few stones in his pocket.
Most of us know the Golden Rule, and we would likely claim it as a guiding force in our lives.
“Treat others the way you’d like to be treated.”
But there is sadly another rule that involves gold as well. It’s this one:
“He who has the gold, rules.”
These two “Golden Rules” are clashing head-to-head in the TVA controversy at hand.
Back to the meeting this last week. As I was pressing the TVA folks about their proposed project, the Golden Rule, as taught by Jesus, popped into my mind. So I asked them a simple question: “Are you a Christian?”
They replied “Yes.”
I then asked them if they believed in the Golden Rule as taught by Jesus, which teaches to treat others the way they wanted to be treated.
“Yes” was again their answer.
So I then asked, “Well, if you believe in the Golden Rule, does it only apply in your personal life? Or do you also believe it is a principle we should practice in our professional lives as well? Would you want someone to treat you the way you are proposing to treat Mr. Vital?”
Silence met my answer. I don’t know if the silence was because they truly did not know the answer, or if it was the reality that the rule they claimed to embrace was being violated by the agency for which they worked.
As I pressed them further, I asked them if they would ever consider going onto their neighbor’s land with the intent of taking a portion of his land for their own personal use, particularly if that neighbor objected. Their answer was an obvious “NO,” and it illustrated how at odds their personal beliefs were with the TVA plan they were supporting and leading.
It would be easy to blame this controversy on a multi-lettered government agency. But the truth is government agencies are made up of individuals. Each individual has his or her own set of values. If our values are deeply rooted, then they should surface in every area of our lives. So when we see the strategy of “appropriating” the property of others via eminent domain (another word for theft), and then that strategy is hidden for over a year (another word for deception), one must wonder what values drive the TVA employees who are overseeing and approving of such strategies. Can they profess their personal dedication to the Golden Rule, integrity, and transparency, while ignoring or contradicting those values professionally?
There’s a story in the Old Testament that deals with eminent domain and it involves King Ahab and Queen Jezebel. This husband and wife pair were two evil peas in a pod and they regularly defied God and His values throughout their lives. One day Ahab wanted to purchase a plot of land from a local farmer. But the man did not want to sell it. So Ahab’s wife used the most extreme kind of eminent domain. Jezebel had the farmer killed and then gave his land to her husband, King Ahab. Ahab got what he wanted while the citizen not only lost his land but also his life. But that very day God pronounced a fateful judgement on both Ahab and Jezebel. (Read I Kings 21.)
Of course, no one is accusing TVA of threatening an American citizen with loss of life. But there is no question that TVA is conniving to take the personal property of an American citizen.
America’s forefathers each pledged their “lives, fortunes and sacred honor” to defend the values of liberty and personal property. When a government agency uses eminent domain, secrecy, and deception to secure private land from an unwilling party, there is no greater threat to the values for which our founding fathers fought.
I’ve often heard it said by critics of biblical conservatives that they should check their values at the doors when they leave their church or personal residence. But this debacle at TVA should teach us otherwise. If we claim certain values are deeply rooted convictions, then they should flow over into every area of our lives. Otherwise these values are merely preferences and have little affect in guiding our behavior in all scenarios.
So time will tell which Golden Rule prevails in the “TVA vs. Vital” matter. Will it be the rule taught by Jesus, or the one too many of the elite of our world love to impose on their neighbors — the power of force and intimidation to gain what the one with the gold desires?
SOURCE
***************************************
‘Socialist’ Ocasio-Cortez Wears $3,500 Outfit For Embarrassing Photo With Construction Workers
Leaders in socialist countries always live high on the hog while everybody else struggles to get by
Socialists claim to want the everybody to get everything, but only after they get what they want first.
New York Democratic candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claims to be “for the people,” yet the 29-year-old socialist recently posed for a photo with construction workers while wearing a $3,500 outfit.
In a photo shoot for Interview Magazine, Ocasio-Cortez was pictured wearing a $1,990 Gabriela Hearst blazer, Gabriela Hearst pants that cost $890, and a pair of fancy Manolo Blahnik shoes that run for $625.
Wow, that’s some expensive taste for a socialist.
The story scorched across Reddit, where a slew of users unloaded on the socialist for being a complete hypocrite. Here are a few responses from Reddit users:
“I’ve never met a socialist who had the faintest idea of redistributing a penny of their own money. They’re all about taking all the time.”
“As a barmaid she took all $500 of the tips after a holiday night at the bar, stiffing the waitresses with only $50. She is only a socialist if she can take as much as she wants and leave the scraps for everyone else.”
“No, she’s a real socialist. This is what socialism is. You tell the people that they deserve more, and those stinky ‘rich’ people aren’t paying their fair share. Then you join the ranks of the elite, bu[y] expensive clothes, lake houses, Audis, etc., and you’re set. This is socialism. This is literally what it is.”
Friday’s catastrophically embarrassing photo and outfit combo is hardly the first time the socialist candidate has come under fire for bizarre comments and controversial actions.
Last month, she was excoriated online for accusing Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro of being sexist and “catcalling” her when he offered to donate $10,000 to her campaign or a charity if she debated him.
Prior to that, she claimed the Democratic Party deserves credit for the 1969 lunar landing. At that time, President Richard Nixon was in office, and he was a Republican.
Before that, she randomly argued that her “Medicare For All” idea — which studies show will cost $218 trillion over 30 years — would be a great idea of America.
Last month, she claimed to be a “girl from the Bronx,” but was exposed for growing up in a wealthy New York City suburb.
In a previous interview, she stuttered herself into embarrassment on ABC’s “The View” when asked to explain the difference between socialism and being a Democrat. She had nothing.
Her inability to answer basic questions about policy warrants scrutiny, as the ideas she wants to implement would literally bankrupt America over time. She shouldn’t make so many embarrassing comments if she doesn’t want to be criticized.
And now, the socialist is wearing $3,500 outfits and smiling for the camera as if she is better than everyone else.
SOURCE
********************************
The Dalai Lama: REFUGEES Should Return ‘To Their Homelands’
During a press conference in Sweden The Dalai Lama said: ““Europe belongs to the Europeans”, maintaining that refugees should be repatriated so they can rebuild their homelands.
“Receive them, help them, educate them… but ultimately they should develop their own country,” said the 83-year-old Tibetan.
“I think Europe belongs to the Europeans,” he added, stressing that countries like Germany and Sweden should make clear that refugees must “return to their homelands and rebuild them”.
He was Visiting the country to celebrate the 80th anniversary of its international anti-poverty efforts just three days after Sweden’s general election in which the Sweden Democrats — a party known for its opposition to mass migration — gained a record share of the vote.
Breitbart Reported:
Speaking in the multicultural city of Malmö, where nearly half of residents are of foreign background, with Iraqis making up the largest single group, the leader of Tibetan Buddhism said Sweden is seen as “a peaceful, generally prosperous country” with a relatively small gap between rich and poor.
“Spontaneously”, reports Norrköpings Tidningar, the Dalai Lama then “moved on to talk about one of the biggest issues in the Swedish election — the reception of refugees”.
Noting that a large number of immigrants have settled in Europe from the Middle East and elsewhere, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning spiritual leader said it was good for nations to help “a refugee really facing danger against their life”.
“Receive them, help them, educate them… but ultimately they should develop their own country,” said the 83-year-old Tibetan.
“I think Europe belongs to the Europeans,” he added, stressing that countries like Germany and Sweden should make clear that refugees must “return to their homelands and rebuild them”.
The Dalai’s comments are not the first time the Buddhist icon has commented on migration politics in Europe, previously emphasising the importance of maintaining the continent as a homeland for its native people’s “from a moral point of view too.”
SOURCE
UPDATE: Some on the Left are now calling the Dalai "Far Right" -- showing how rigid and super-simplistic their minds are. Quite childish, in fact
************************************
A Federal Court Just Limited Your First Amendment Right to Freely Associate
The 9th circus again
Should you be forced to disclose your charitable donations to the government? Is it an invasion of your privacy and a violation of your First Amendment rights if the government requires nonprofit membership organizations that you join and contribute to—such as the NAACP, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the National Right to Life Committee, or Americans for Prosperity—to send your name to the government?
Unfortunately, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals sees nothing wrong with such invasive mandates in a dubious decision that threatens the ability of Americans to support the causes and organizations they believe in that are an integral part of how our democracy works.
On Sept. 11, in Americans for Prosperity v. Becerra, the 9th Circuit threw out an injunction issued by a district court and reinstated a California law that requires nonprofit organizations soliciting donations in the state to disclose to the state attorney general all of their members who have donated more than $5,000—regardless of whether they are even residents of California.
The plaintiffs, Americans for Prosperity Foundation and the Thomas More Law Center, were both found in violation of California’s mandatory disclosure provision.
Many have questioned the right of the IRS to ask for such donor information, since it is not needed for tax purposes. In fact, the Trump administration has recognized that, and in July, the IRS announced that it will no longer require many nonprofits to file Schedule B forms.
Would you donate to a nonprofit whose donors are reviewed by California’s attorney general, especially an extreme partisan such as Harris, now a Democratic senator from California, or current state Attorney General Xavier Becerra?
Would you donate to a nonprofit if your name could potentially be released to the public, making you subject to harassment, intimidation, and potential economic harm through your job or business?
This was a bad decision by the 9th Circuit that hopefully will be appealed and overturned.
More HERE
*******************************
Obama wisdom
*******************************
For more blog postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, and Paralipomena (Occasionally updated), a Coral reef compendium and an IQ compendium. (Both updated as news items come in). GUN WATCH is now mainly put together by Dean Weingarten. I also put up occasional updates on my Personal blog and each day I gather together my most substantial current writings on THE PSYCHOLOGIST.
Email me here (Hotmail address). My Home Pages are here (Academic) or here (Pictorial) or here (Personal)
***************************
