Testifying today before the House Judiciary Committee, Rodney Monroe, Chief of Police of the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department, warned members of Congress that, “Terrorism is a real threat that we face every day – both the Sheriff and I face threats of attack at public shopping malls in our communities. Domestic terrorism is prevalent. It’s not something that is simply going to disappear… As the number and variety of terrorism incidents and cases shows, violent extremism can be found everywhere.”
Is Rodney Monroe right?
Is domestic terrorism prevalent?
Prevalent is a word with specific meaning. When something is prevalent, that means it prevails. Something prevalent is not present absolutely everywhere, but the chances are that, if you look for it in a place, you’ll find it easily. The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word “prevalent” as something “widely or commonly occurring, existing, accepted, or practiced.”
In the first ten years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, only 30 people were killed inside the United States as a part of what might broadly be called domestic terrorism. That’s a rate of death from domestic terrorism of less than one millionth of one percent of the population per decade.
Among these incidents of domestic terrorism were attacks from right wing Americans. These include two people murdered by right wing Minutemen militias along the U.S. border, two people killed when when a man upset with the IRS purposefully crashed his small airplane into a government office building, and an abortion provider murdered in Wichita, Kansas.
Does Rodney Monroe face threats of attack at public shopping malls in Charlotte, North Carolina? Perhaps there may be some threats, but probably not. Last autumn, there were reports that someone who liked the Islamic State had a Twitter conversation in which he talked about wanting to die some day in the way Islamic State fighters do. During that Twitter conversation, the person with that Twitter account also mentioned that he knows of a mall in Charlotte. Though the conversation never actually threatened an attack against the shopping mall in Charlotte, rumors began to spread that such a threat existed.
The FBI statement about this case was as follows: “The FBI is unaware of any specific, credible threats to the U.S. or the Charlotte area at this time. The FBI works around the clock with our partners in the law enforcement community to share and assess information. As always, we encourage the public to remain vigilant and to report any suspicious activities to your local police or the FBI.”
Likewise, this week, it was reported that someone had issued a threat of a terrorist attack against a shopping mall in the United States. Later, it was revealed that no specific, credible threat actually existed.
So, what it looks like is that Rodney Moore faces rumors of threats of terrorist attacks at shopping malls in Charlotte, North Carolina. Does the Charlotte Mecklenberg Police Department actually need help from the Department of Homeland Security just to deal with false rumors?
What about Rodney Monroe’s contention that “violent extremism can be found everywhere”? What he says is true, if we consider that every human being entertains thoughts of violent extremism every now and then. People who think about violent extremism are, indeed, everywhere. However, it’s not the job of the police to punish people for thinking bad thoughts. If we consider violent extremism in terms of people actually committing criminal acts of terrorism, then it’s clear that violent extremism is almost nowhere at all in the United States of America.
Rodney Monroe says he deals with threats of terrorist attack in Charlotte, North Carolina every day, but the fact is that there has not been a single terrorist attack in Charlotte in this century. The closest thing to a real threat of a terrorist attack in Charlotte was a right wing conspiracy theory spread last year by someone using the pseudonym Truther, claiming that Barack Obama was going to bomb the Bank of America headquarters there. “It appears that an Oklahoma City-like bombing is planned for the Bank of America Corporate Center in Charlotte, North Carolina. Although the attack could transpire at any time, one potential date is Father’s Day, June 15, 2014,” Truther said. Like everything that Truther predicts, the false flag terrorist attack in Charlotte never actually took place.
Another day, another crazy right wing conspiracy theory. This one comes from the National Draft Ben Carson For President Committee, which seems to be a magnet for mentally unbalanced extremists. An article posted by the committee starts with the old assertion that Barack Obama is secretly Muslim: “I think last week in Paris was Obama’s figurative ‘come to Jesus moment’ — but whom did he stand with; Jesus or Mohammad, I ask you?”
But enough of that. The people at Run Ben Run aren’t going to allow their campaign for Ben Carson to rest idly on such familiar ground. They quickly go off to explore new territory with the idea that Barack Obama is planning to prevent the presidential election of 2016 from ever taking place.
The article from the National Draft Ben Carson For President Committee proposes that, “the more important question is where may this all lead to in the final two years of this President’s second term. Like Dr. Ben Carson, I’m truly beginning to wonder what this man might be capable of setting into place to stop or forestall the 2016 elections. It certainly isn’t far-fetched… The goal of the Obama/Soros duo seems to point towards the complete and thorough economic collapse of the United States by following the Cloward and Piven Strategy…look it up… I would guess by this March, April the latest we’ll see the true cards laid out — right now they seem focused on crashing the dollar.”
Let’s unpack this: The Cloward and Piven strategy is an old idea proposed by a couple of professors in the 1960s – half a century ago. They were reacting to the problem of large numbers of Americans trapped in poverty, without any access to government assistance. They speculated that if the social welfare system could be overwhelmed by their demands for help, then a national system of guaranteed income could be established, and poverty would be eliminated.
So, the National Draft Ben Carson For President Committee is asserting that Barack Obama is trying to use this strategy of provoking poor people to rise up en masse, by lowering the value of the U.S. dollar, in order to prevent the 2016 presidential election. It certainly is a curious conspiracy theory, but I’m not sure how it could actually work.
Well, we should find out soon if the people over at the National Draft Ben Carson For President Committee are right. They say that Barack Obama will openly propose his plan for calamity and canceled elections by March, or April at the latest. There are only a few days until March arrives, so sometime in the next month or two, we’ll find out whether the National Draft Ben Carson For President Committee is really on to something, or Run Ben Run is as full of nuts as a Snickers Bar.
I am apparently the first person in the world to notice the fallopian and uterine nature of this bottlecap from Seagram’s. My momma always told me I’d be first in something.
Today is National Adjunct Walkout Day, a day during which educators, students, parents, and other concerned citizens are joining together to protest against the abusive treatment of adjunct professors at colleges and universities across the United States. The promise of higher education is enlightenment and greater potential for employment, but an alarming number of college courses are being taught by adjunct professors who do not receive a living wage and have next to no benefits or job security. Over half of instructors at American universities are adjuncts, and 76 percent of teaching positions in higher education offer no route to tenure.
Last year, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce received a report on the condition of adjunct professors. Adjuncts responding to the research behind the report earned an average of just $24,926 – and had to try to pay off the substantial debts they had amassed during their long years of education. Many supposedly part-time faculty actually end up teaching a full load of courses, but don’t get paid fairly for their work, and remain stifled in their attempts to develop professionally.
If adjunct professors were to abandon their posts, the university system would quickly fall apart. Yet, even as college students are paying record-high tuition, being racked with debt, universities refuse to give adjunct professors even a basic level of respect and support. PhD programs keep on admitting high numbers of students in academic degrees that do not lead to employment outside of academia, while the number of PhD graduates in these programs is far more than could ever be employed in academia. It’s a system designed to create economic ruin for large numbers of people who successfully complete graduate degree programs.
What’s at risk is not just the economic condition of adjunct professors, but trust in the value of education itself. If colleges and universities, who claim to offer us paths to self-improvement, continue to provide exploitation instead, an advanced degree may soon come to be regarded as the mark of a fool rather than as a sign of wisdom.
The Shahadah conspiracy is back! Back in 2012, Jerome Corsi claimed that Barack Obama was wearing a Shahadah ring. Using nothing but a fuzzy, “digitally enhanced” photograph taken of a ring on Barack Obama’s finger, Corsi said that he could see clear Islamic symbols on the ring, proving that Barack Obama is a secretly a Muslim – a secret Muslim who wears a sign of his secret religion everywhere he goes.
Now, right wing writer F.W. Burleigh is following in Jerome Corsi’s footsteps, claiming that Barack Obama is showing the Shahadah with his finger again. This time, it’s not his ring that’s supposed to be Shahadah, but Barack Obama’s finger itself.
Burleigh writes, “Is President Obama a Muslim? A lot has been written about this, but if photographs speak louder than words, then a photo taken at last August’s U.S. – African Leaders’ Summit in Washington D.C. might shed considerable light. It shows Barack Hussein Obama flashing the one-finger affirmation of Islamic faith to dozens of African delegates.”
Here, you can see the photograph Burleigh claims shows Barack Obama flashing a Muslim gang symbol, the Shahadah. Secret Muslims tip each other off with the Shahadah, according to Burleigh, every time someone points their index finger up into the air.
If Burleigh is right, then we have the following additional revelations to share:
Katy Perry is secretly a Muslim.
Jan Brewer shares Barack Obama’s secret Islamic identity.
Donald Trump flashes the Shahada.
Scott Walker is a secret Muslim.
Chris Christie is an angry Muslim.
Nicolas Sarkozy has been secretly one of those Muslim immigrants in France many times.
George Clooney is ten Muslims.
What kind of person does it take to work with Jeb Bush? Let’s not speculate. Let’s get the word straight from the horse’s mouth.
Ieva Smidt has been working as a coordinator for Jeb Bush’s political action committee, the unfortunately titled Right To Rise PAC, helping Republicans who want to give money with the PAC through a fundraiser held last night in Tampa. Ieva Smidt is apparently fed up working with big Republican donors. She’s posted an image on her Pinterest site declaring, “I’ve decided to add ‘extensive experience in dealing with stupid people’ to my resume. That has got to be a marketable skill!”
Among the stupid people that Ieva Smidt is peeved about having to work with is Kathleen Shanahan, a former lobbyist for the New York Stock Exchange through Public Strategies, Incorporated. Shanahan is one of many who paid for the privilege of access to Jeb Bush last night.
Why does Jeb Bush need this money? He was born rich and remains a millionaire. His wife Columba flies to Paris just to spend lots of money shopping.
Jeb is the ultimate in big spenders. He wants to buy himself the White House. He regards it as a traditional family home.
Is Hillary Clinton really the inevitable Democratic Party nominee for President in 2016? Only if Democrats are willing to ignore the environmentalist passions of many of their voters.
Jill Stein, a candidate for the Green Party’s presidential nomination, sent out a message to her supporters yesterday declaring of Clinton, “She just declared she’s pro-fracking. Ready for Hillary?”
Is it true? Did Hillary Clinton just declare that she is in favor of hydrofracturing, the controversial practice of injecting a mix of fluids deep into shale formations in order to provoke the release of the greenhouse gas methane?
It’s almost true.
It’s true that Hillary Clinton is in favor of fracking. What’s not true is that she only just now declared her support for the expansion of the practice.
Five years ago, Hillary Clinton began to travel around the world to promote fracking operations by fossil fuels corporations. These activities provoked opposition from environmentalists, but did not end Democrats’ enthusiasm for a potential 2016 Clinton for President campaign.
A year and a half ago, New Yorkers Against Fracking sent a letter to Hillary Clinton complaining of her support for fracking. The group wrote, “In upstate New York, residents have been on the receiving end of an onslaught of oil and gas industry propaganda for more than five years. We’ve broken through their slick ads and lies, looked to the science, and as such overwhelmingly reject fracking. Just as we’re not buying it from the oil and gas industry, we won’t buy it from you.”
Grist noted Hillary Clinton’s support for fracking back in September of last year. Mother Jones profiled Clinton’s fracking track record around the same time. Clinton’s continuing support for fracking was noted again in December.
Will her support for an environmentally unsound method of energy extraction stop Hillary Clinton from becoming the Democratic Party nominee for President in 2016? Probably not. Democrats have a long history of ignoring the anti-environmental policies of their party’s leaders. Barack Obama campaigned for President with the promise that he would expand offshore drilling for oil and invest in the hoax of “clean coal”. If throwing environmentalists under the bus worked for Obama, why won’t it work for Clinton?
Christian writer Carl Armstrong has read the book of Job in the Bible, and has concluded that whoever wrote the book of Job had somehow obtained scientifically accurate information about planet Earth. Citing the 26th chapter of the ancient book, Armstrong writes, “The world has many skeptics about the Scriptures—but it totally confounds them to try to explain how Job could have precisely described an earth hanging from nothing in space, circular in nature and having a visible dividing line between day and night.”
Here’s what the 26th chapter of the book of Job says, in the King James translation:
“Dead things are formed from under the waters, and the inhabitants thereof.
Hell is naked before him, and destruction hath no covering.
He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds; and the cloud is not rent under them.
He holdeth back the face of his throne, and spreadeth his cloud upon it.
He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end.
The pillars of heaven tremble and are astonished at his reproof.
He divideth the sea with his power, and by his understanding he smiteth through the proud.
By his spirit he hath garnished the heavens; his hand hath formed the crooked serpent.”
Does the text say that Earth is hanging from nothing? Yes, but it doesn’t say that Earth is hanging in space. The writer of the book of Job appears to have had no conception of space as we think of it. Also, the writer of the book of Job says that Earth was put in place by a divine being. Astronomers have never observed any divine being hanging planets anywhere.
Does chapter 26 of the book of Job say that Earth is circular? No. Neither does it say that Earth is a sphere, which would be more accurate. The Bible doesn’t confront the full three dimensionality of the Earth.
Does the 26th chapter of the book of Job talk about the Earth having a visible dividing line between day and night that could only be visible from outer space? No. It just doesn’t.
What the 26th chapter of the book of Job does describe are these:
– Dead things creeping out of water.
– A world of destruction without covering.
– An empty place that is underneath north.
– All the waters of the earth bound up in clouds.
– A cloud on top of a faceless throne.
– The waters, which are supposed to be in all in clouds, given bounds.
– Pillars that hold up heaven, but are shaky.
– The seas, which were supposed to be held in the clouds, and then given bounds, are out on the Earth again, but then they’re split.
– Proud people get hit around.
– The heavens are garnished. With what, the author of Job doesn’t say. Perhaps parsley? A nice twist of citrus?
– There’s a snake, but it’s bent. How could anyone tell if a snake is bent? They’re very bendy things, inherently, aren’t they?
Look at the 26th chapter of the book of Job, and you won’t see is a description of Earth as it appears to astronauts in outer space. What you will see is the kind of confusion that is suspiciously similar to what happens when you read an email that a coworker sent out after a long “business meeting” at a bar.
I thought the Republican Party was supposed to be the party of small government.
Why, then, would Republican Representative Steve King of Iowa introduce H.R. 997?
H.R. 997 is a bill that imposes big government requirements on millions of people who work for the United States Goverment.
H.R. 997 is the Nanny State bill to top all Nanny State bills, creating a list of millions of words that United States government workers are forbidden from law from using when they are engaged in official actions on the job.
Why? Because Big Government Steve King has decided these words are not politically correct.
If H.R. 997 is passed, only English words will be permitted.
That would be the most politically-correct big government action taken in decades, yet on February 13 2015, the very same day that Steve King introduced his Whopping Big Government Mandate Act, he declared without irony that “we must ensure that we take to heart an important lesson from this crisis: big government is not the answer.”
Does Rep. Steve King not recognize the irony in his synchronicity? Or does he think that you won’t recognize it?
“I go forward as a Presidential-Vice Presidential Candidate as a Matter of National Security to save and empower the White Christian European Descent Race from Race Extinction”. These are the words of Republican presidential candidate Silvia Stagg.
Stagg claims that there is a secret health care program that “the US Government has failed to use for the betterment, defense and posterity of the US Born White Christian European Descent Race”. She proposes that the President of the United States offer the program to Christians of European descent – in order to preserve “genetic integrity”.
However, Stagg accuses Barack Obama of using a “Microwave Brain Alteration Device” to control Republicans in Congress, including John Thune, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan and John Boehner. These Republicans, according to Stagg, are implementing a program of torture and mass murder against white Christians in the United States on behalf of Barack Obama, their microwave mind master.
If Irregular Times readers witnessed any instances of torture or mass murder against white Christians in the United States, please let us know.
When two “journalists” from the Washington Post asked Governor Scott Walker, commonly presumed to be planning a campaign for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, if he thought that Barack Obama was a Christian, Walker responded. “I don’t know.”
Writers at publications such as the Huffington Post have made a big tizzy about the response, saying that it indicates that Scott Walker is trying to insinuate that Barack Obama is not a Christian, and that this statement is thus a grave insult to the President.
Scott Walker often does and says outrageous things. He has an ugly right wing political agenda. However, in this case, Scott Walker said the right thing.
How Scott Walker explained his statement to the reporters from the Washington Post places his comment in context: “I’ve actually never talked about it or I haven’t read about that… I’ve never asked him that. You’ve asked me to make statements about people that I haven’t had a conversation with about that. How [could] I say if I know either of you are a Christian?”
Essentially, Scott Walker was saying that he doesn’t know if Barack Obama is Christian or not because it’s not relevant whether he is. It’s not the job of the President of the United States to be a Christian. It’s not the job of the Governor of Wisconsin to interrogate the President of the United States about his religion.
It doesn’t matter whether Barack Obama is a Christian or not – except to Barack Obama.
So, why were the reporters from the Washington Post asking Scott Walker if he thought Barack Obama was a Christian? Why did it matter to the Washington Post what one politician guesses about another politician’s personal choices about religion?
The Washington Post reporters might as well have asked Scott Walker: Is President Obama a vegetarian? Does President Obama like to play poker? Is President Obama arachnophobic? Has President Obama ever been to South Dakota? Does President Obama prefer fluffy tissue paper? Does President Obama get itchy skin in the winter time? What TV shows does President Obama like to watch? Is President Obama a good swimmer?
Religion is of no relevance to the job of the President of the United States of America. The Constitution clearly states this when it declares, “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
We’ve all seen how different presidents make astoundingly different policy decisions, based on different moral values. Yet, every single President of the United States has been a Christian. So, knowing that a president, or a presidential candidate tells us almost nothing about what that politician actually stands for, or with how much skill that politician would serve in the Oval Office.
The Washington Post reporters were in the wrong in even asking the question of Scott Walker. It was an unprofessional attempt to replace intelligent political journalism with an irrelevant culture war sideshow. These reporters deserve to be re-assigned to make coffee for the genuine journalists at the Washington Post.