Monday, August 31, 2015

Here is what central planned socialism looks like. They'll give you what they want and you'll reject it until they impose it by force.

Study: Many Students Throwing Out Fruits, Vegetables From School Lunches

A thought on gun control

It is acknowledged that the real aim of the gun control freaks is the elimination of private gun ownership. The phrase "sensible gun laws" is an open ended path to confiscation.

But, the anti gun crowd has a real problem. In NYC there was a gun confiscation program undertaken to take illegally owned guns off the streets and out of the hands of thugs and criminals. It was called "stop and frisk". 

But, the leftist government in NYC thinks it's a civil rights violation to stop and frisk. But, mandating the removal of guns from law abiding citizens is not a civil rights violation?

As I have said before the left has a bond with criminals (they're victims you know) and a love for tyrannical power.

Obama: "But you don’t win the debate by suggesting that the other person has bad motives." What a gross liar he is. It's been the Democrat template for 50 years or longer.

Obama: I'm Personally Hurt When People Call Me Anti-Semitic 

President says he's "consistent with the best of the Jewish tradition."

9:32 AM, AUG 31, 2015 • BY DANIEL HALPER
Barack Obama is personally hurt when people call him an anti-Semite, the president said in an interview with the Jewish newspaper the Forward. Obama says "there not a smidgen of evidence for" the accusation.
The editor of the Forward asked the president, "[D]oes it hurt you personally when people say that you’re anti-Semitic?"
"Oh, of course. And there’s not a smidgen of evidence for it, other than the fact that there have been times where I’ve disagreed with a particular Israeli government’s position on a particular issue. And I’ve said before, and I will continue to say, that if you care deeply about Israel, then you have an obligation to be honest about what you think, the same way you would with any friend. And we don’t do anybody, any friend, a service by just rubber-stamping whatever decisions they make, even if we think that they’re damaging in some fashion," the president said.
"And the good news is that the people I’m close to, the people who know me, including people who disagree with me on this issue, would never even think about making those statements. I get probably more offended when I hear members of my administration who themselves are Jewish being attacked. You saw this historically sometimes in the African American community, where there’s a difference on policy and somebody starts talking about, well, you’re not black enough, or you’re selling out. And that, I think, is always a dangerous place to go.
"These are hard issues, and worthy of serious debate. But you don’t win the debate by suggesting that the other person has bad motives. That’s I think not just consistent with fair play; I think it’s consistent with the best of the Jewish tradition."

For those unfamiliar the the Jewish Daily Forward it has always been left leaning and pro socialism.

Where does Obama get the authority to rename Mt. McKinley?

McKinley’s Greatest Monument

Editorial of The New York Sun | August 30, 2015

to rename in Alaska a mountain whose name was ratified by Congress a century ago as McKinley. We can understand the Democratic Party’s interest, in that McKinley, a Republican, was a particularly fine President. He was, moreover, one of four presidents felled by an assassin. We can understand, too, the sentiments of Alaska, whose legislature has wanted to change the name. Where, though, does the president come off doing this by fiat?

MOUNTAIN MAN; William McKinley's name was attached to the highest peak in America by a gold miner and later, in 1917, adopted by the United States Congress. It is being changed by President Obama without so much as a howdy-do to the legislature. The greatest
The question begs for an answer in light of the fact that legislation has been before Congress to change the name, but the Congress has decided not to do so. If the Supreme Court has been clear about anything it has been that the failure of Congress to act doesn’t amount to license for the other branches to act. Congress, the law supposes, had its own good reasons for not acting. One of them no doubt is that McKinley was from Ohio, which, given that Mount McKinley National Park is the locale of said mountain, has its own standing.
Our own interest in the matter lies with McKinley. We have no particular
objection to, per se, Denali. That’s the name for the summit used by Alaskan
Natives and, in recent years, also the federal name for the park. It’s the name the
state’s senior senator, Lisa Murkowski, sought to attach to the mountain via
legislation she earlier this year introduced, to no effect. Legislators from Ohio
understood better, and moved to block the measure. William McKinley may
never have been to the mountain, but he was an important and assassinated
Maybe some day a Republican president will restore to John Fitzgerald Kennedy International Airport the name of Idlewild, which is the name us native New Yorkers use for the airport (Idlewild is still a permitted reference for the airport

monument to the 25th president is the Gold Standard Act of 1900, which ended the contest between silver and gold as the monetary standard of America.

in the “Reporters Handbook and Manual of Style of the New York Sun”). We could see the logic of it in an age of hyper-sensitivity to local sentiments. But we would object were a president to simply rename the airport after Congress had been asked and decided not to act.
In any event, let us raise a salute to Wm. McKinley. From his front porch in 1896, he ran one of the most remarkable campaigns in American history, defeating the Democrat, William
Jennings Bryan, who ran for the free coinage of silver — a campaign of inflation — by attacking the Jews. It was one of the few anti-Semitic campaigns in American history. McKinley defeated it handily and gained passage in 1900 of the Gold Standard Act, which set the stage for the great boom of the 20th century. It’s a monument as majestic as the peak of Denali. 



The Obama administration has proved to be the least transparent in our modern history. To an unprecedented degree, the administration is staffed by scofflaws who flout their legal obligations. When confronted with requests for information, let alone actual investigations, Obama’s habitual response is to stonewall. This strategy has been remarkably successful in avoiding accountability, in part because legal processes are so slow.
We have seen this pattern dozens of times. One instance, which is highlighted by a federal court order issued on Friday, illustrates how the administration has operated from the beginning of Obama’s term in office.
The story, which we have written about several times, begins in August 2010. Austin Goolsbee, who directed Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board and later chaired his Council of Economic Advisers, delivered a press briefing in which he discussed corporate income taxes. He casually asserted that Koch Industries, one of America’s largest privately-owned companies, doesn’t pay any income taxes:
So in this country we have partnerships, we have S corps, we have LLCs, we have a series of entities that do not pay corporate income tax. Some of which are really giant firms, you know Koch Industries is a multibillion dollar businesses. So that creates a narrower base because we’ve literally got something like 50 percent of the business income in the U.S. is going to businesses that don’t pay any corporate income tax.
If Koch Industries is an S corp, then its owners (principally Charles and David Koch) pay individual income taxes on the company’s profits, making them by far the largest individual taxpayers in the United States. Be that as it may, one of two things must be true: either Goolsbee had illegally accessed Koch Industries’ tax returns, or he made it up. So Koch askedthe administration whether someone had been illegally scrutinizing its tax returns. The administration refused to answer.
That led to a Freedom of Information Act request, which was served by a group called Cause of Action on October 9, 2012. The request covered just eight categories of documents, of which these were the key ones:
3) Any communications by or from anyone in the Executive Office of the President constituting requests for taxpayer or “return information” within the meaning of § 6103(a) that were not made pursuant to § 6103(g);
4) All documents, including notes and emails, referring or relating to any communication described in request #3;
Cause of Action wanted to know whether Goolsbee, whose office fell within the Executive Office of the President, or someone working under him, had asked for taxpayer “return information.” The administration eventually produced a handful of irrelevant documents and a comprehensive list of objections. Obama’s key objection was that the IRS is legally prohibited from producing documents responsive to requests 3 and 4 because doing so would violate the taxpayer’s–Koch Industries’–privacy.
The fact that a legal position is ludicrous never prevents the Obama administration from asserting it. Having exhausted its administrative remedies, Cause of Action commenced a FOIA lawsuit against the IRS. Cause of Action and the IRS made cross-motions for summary judgment, briefing on which was completed in August 2014. On Friday, almost exactly one year later, Federal Judge Amy Jackson issued an order in which she overruled the Obama administration’s claim that it couldn’t say whether the White House had broken the law by accessing taxpayer information:
Congress amended section 6103 in 1976 “in the wake of Watergate and White House efforts to harass those on its ‘enemies list,’” in order to “restrict[] government officers and employees from revealing ‘any return’ or ‘return information,’” id. at 611, and its “core purpose” is to “protect[] taxpayer privacy.” Id. at 615. So, this Court questions whether section 6103 should or would shield records that indicate that confidential taxpayer information was misused, or that government officials made an improper attempt to access that information.
The IRS argues that “section 6103’s definition of ‘return information’ . . . makes no distinction based on the purpose for which a person might seek disclosure of the documents.” Def.’s Reply at 15. But accepting this argument would require a finding that even requests for return information that could involve a violation of section 6103 constitute “return information” that is exempt from disclosure under FOIA Exemption 3 and section 6103. The Court is unwilling to stretch the statute so far, and it cannot conclude that section 6103 may be used to shield the very misconduct it was enacted to prohibit.
So someday–not any time soon–the IRS will finally be forced to answer the question that Koch Industries asked it five years ago, in 2010. The Obama administration’s strategy is always the same–stonewall, assert every possible theory, no matter how frivolous, and try to run out the clock. Whether an honest answer to the question will be given, years after the fact, is of course another question. 
The Obama administration’s lawlessness is perhaps its most repellent legacy.

Hat tip: Powerline

We are tired of the media's bold faced lies and distortions.

Posted By Andrew Klavan On August 30, 2015 @ 9:45 am In Uncategorized | 64 Comments

Here is the first rule of “mainstream” news coverage in America: Whenever the prejudices and illusions of left-wingers are confirmed by an individual incident, the incident is treated as representative; when those prejudices and illusions are contradicted, the incident is considered an aberration — and treating it as representative is deemed hateful.
It was by satirizing that rule that Breitbart’s mustache-twirling evil-doer Ben Shapiro once again got himself in hot water this week. The flagrantly brainy provocateur ran a headline [1] describing the heart-shredding murder in Virginia of a local TV reporter and her cameraman: “Black, Gay Reporter Murders Straight, White Journalists — Media Blame the Gun.” The headline violated mainstream media protocol by being completely true while running counter to the leftist narrative. The two straight white people had in fact been killed by a mentally ill black gay Obama supporter who saw micro-aggressions everywhere and played the race card whenever he could.
Now, don’t get me wrong. Not all black gay Obama supporters are homicidal maniacs. Many of them are perfectly nice people who just want to go about their business the same as you and me. It’s totally unfair to judge all of them by the actions of one sick individual. That’s probably why ABC News [2] is withholding portions of the killer’s lengthy manifesto. It is the responsibility of every mainstream news organization to release only that information that is good for people to know and keeps them in line with leftist thinking. Otherwise, each American might run around loose making up his own mind. And we wouldn’t want that.
Shapiro’s point, of course, was simply this:
Had a white straight man killed a black gay man, released first-person tape of the shooting, and then unleashed a manifesto about being victimized by affirmative action and anti-religious bigotry from homosexuals, the media would never stop covering the story. They’d be eager to report that shooter’s motives with all the attendant politically correct hullaballoo about the racism and homophobia of the United States more broadly. We would hear about white supremacy (reprehensible Black Lives Matter leader Deray McKesson actually jumped the gun, thinking the shooter was white, and tweeted, “Whiteness will explain away nearly anything”).
We would hear excoriations of the Republican presidential candidates for their failures to stand with the Black Lives Matter movement–and their opposition to same-sex marriage. In similar circumstances, the entire political and media establishment determined that the Confederate flag was somehow to blame for Dylan Storm Roof’s brutal slaying of nine people at a historically black church; just last week, the media tried to blame Donald Trump’s anti-immigration stance for two thugs beating up a Hispanic homeless man in Boston.
When a police officer is forced to kill a street thug [3], he’s a white officer killing a black teen. When yet another Islamist murders an infidel or a fellow Muslim, he’s just some random [4] guy. When a racist lunatic kills black people, the Confederate flag must come down. I’m still waiting for calls to ban the rainbow flag after the Virginia incident, or for a mainstream discussion on whether the whole idea of micro-aggressions is the chimeric imagining of spoiled, childish, over-indulged brats who wouldn’t know oppression if it beheaded them or…  no, wait, that’s actually the only option.
I’m not a Donald Trump supporter because I don’t think he represents my beliefs, but the success of his loud-mouthery should send a message to the mainstream news media. The message is this: You lie to us every day and we hate you for it. I’d like to add, Your dishonest narrative isn’t fooling anybody, but I’m sure it is. But not all the people, and not all of the time.

When Will ABC News Release the Full Vester Flanagan Manifesto? 

Proof the NYC government is completely unhinged.

City’s female leaders backing bare boobs over de Blasio

Prominent female city leaders — including Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito — praised The Post Sunday for revealing that Mayor Bill de Blasio’s crusade against the half-naked ladies of Times Square is wrong-headed and sexist.
“It’s a real shame that women’s bodies continue to be used as political fodder. As I have said repeatedly, our city has many more pressing things on its plate,” Mark-Viverito said in a statement to The Post.
The speaker, until recently a staunch ally of the mayor, was praising Post reporter Amber Jamieson’s first-hand account of her day spent working as one of the painted ladies.
Jamieson’s Page One story in Sunday’s Post noted that de Blasio’s opposition to the working women is severely misguided considering he still has plenty of other quality-of-life issues to address, such as the city’s homelessness explosion.
It’s the second time in about a month that the speaker and mayor have been at odds.
In July, Mark-Viverito blasted de Blasio for painting the City Council as a political pawn in his failed attempt to limit the number of licenses issued to city cab competitors such as Uber.
Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito said she found it “offensive as a woman” that Mayor Bill de Blasio implied that she would go along with whatever he wanted.Photo: Zumawire
Mark-Viverito said she found it “offensive as a woman” that the mayor implied that she would go along with whatever he wanted and wasn’t able to come to a decision on her own.
She wasn’t the only politician to praise The Post’s Times Square coverage — and, in the process, bash de Blasio.
East Harlem Councilwoman Inez Dickens noted the “double standard” of criticizing the topless women while embracing such Times Square stalwarts as the Naked Cowboy, who performs in his tighty whities.
Dickens added it was foolish to make an issue out of the ladies.
“As far as I’m concerned, I’ve got other issues to deal with,” she said.
Modal Trigger
Helayne Seidman
It wasn’t just women saying the ladies were the least of the city’s problems.
Councilman Rafael Espinal of Bushwick, Brooklyn, said: “We should be more focused on regulating the costumed characters in Times Square, not on the fact that these women are topless. I don’t believe what the topless women are doing is inappropriate.”
Jamieson’s story also got a rise out of everyday New Yorkers and social-media users.
Post reporter Amber Jamieson goes undercover as a “desnuda.”Photo: Helayne Seidman
She gained more than 400 followers on Twitter on Sunday, with many supporting her daring decision to bare it all to call out de Blasio.
“Your determination to give the city the other side of the story was inspiring,” one Post reader wrote in an email. “Your article has the potential to dramatically shift public opinion in this issue and the broader ideal around feminism.”
On Facebook, many echoed the need to focus on the far more serious problems facing the city.
“I personally don’t understand why the politicians are making such a big deal and putting so much resources into this when in the city there are many other issues,” Stu Walerstein wrote.
Another user said, “I think the problem here is not so much the nudity, but the thuggery that goes on down there.”
In Times Square, The Post’s Sunday front page was still turning heads.
“It’s a good cover,” said a 29-year-old tourist named Nolan.
“I don’t think [the topless women are] a problem at all with everything else that is going on here. There are bigger problems than someone painted like the American flag.”
Additional reporting by Khristina Narizhnaya

Sunday, August 30, 2015

You can chant kill cops but the Star Spangled Banner well, that's just too much for the insane left. Is it now a crime to admit being an American?

Man Cited for Playing National Anthem on July Fourth Learns His Fate: ‘The State Attorney’s Office Has Decided To…’

The Florida college student cited for a rousing performance of the Star Spangled Banner on July Fourth learned Friday that the State’s Attorney’s office had dropped all the charges against him.
Lane Pittman was cited for breaching the peace and inciting a riot after a crowd of about 300 individuals gathered on the streets near Neptune Beach to hear him play the national anthem on Independence Day. The college student, who said he was simply celebrating his patriotism within his First Amendment rights, vowed to fight the charges and refused a community service deal. Police had said the crowd was getting out of hand and blocking traffic.
Image source: Screen grab via YouTube
Image source: Screen grab via YouTube
On Friday, he was rewarded.
“ALL. GLORY. TO GOD,” a message Pittman posted on Facebook read, according to Fox News. “The State Attorney’s office has decided to drop all charges!!!! SO pumped!! Thank you for all the prayers, kind words, and thoughts!! It means the world!!”
His attorney Caleb Rowland confirmed the news to website Legal Insurrection.
“Despite the delay, Mr. Pittman is pleased the State’s Attorney’s office declined to prosecute him for expressing his patriotism and exercising his First Amendment right by playing the National Anthem on Independence Day,” he said.
Here’s video of Pittman’s rousing performance:

Comedian Paints ‘Hilariously Scary Picture’ of America in Age of Political Correctness: ‘Nails It’

Comedian Paints ‘Hilariously Scary Picture’ of America in Age of Political Correctness: ‘Nails It’

A short two-minute clip from comedian Colin Quinn’s new Netflix series “Unconstitutional” grabbed attention on the Internet Friday.
The clip focuses on the culture of political correctness and was posted online by the College Fix with Quinn’s permission.
“In less than two minutes, comedian Colin Quinn paints a hilariously scary picture of what it’s like in the United States of Political Correctness, where people walk on eggshells and fear insulting someone or being ‘noninclusive.’ This is the atmosphere most modern college students live under, and they’re sure to get a knowing chuckle at Colin’s all-too-real joke on PC culture run amok,” the YouTube description read.
By Friday afternoon the clip had amassed more than 30,000 views and was one of the top videos trending on Reddit, a sign that it would likely go viral.

Rape as punishment. Now, that's a real war on women. The leftist American women's movement is silent to their shame.

India town council orders two girls raped as punishment for brother's elopement

By Rick Moran

India, the largest democratic country in the world, is on the cusp of becoming a modern economic juggernaut.
But in many ways, it's still mired in the past, as is demonstrated by this outrageous action taken by a town council.
Meenakshi Kuwari, 23, and her 15-year-old sister, have been forced to flee their home after villagers ordered that they should be stripped naked and paraded with their faces blackened before being raped to atone for their brother’s crime.
The case is just the latest high-profile incident of rape being used as a punishment by unelected village leaders or councils in rural India.
Similar cases have shocked the nation and the country’s Supreme Court has ruled the council judgments illegal but the practice persists in remote areas.
The family home was ransacked by furious villagers after her brother fled with a woman from a superior caste.
A hastily-convened assembly of the all-male village council in the district of Baghpat in Uttar Pradesh, north of Delhi, then handed down the rape punishment.
The two sisters and their father have fled to Delhi and appealed to India’s Supreme Court for protection if they return to the village.
The women’s father has also raised their plight with the national commissions for castes and human rights.
Summit Kumar, another brother to the sisters, has told human rights campaigners that he fears for their lives if they return. Local police offer little protection and have reportedly denied that the rape punishment was handed down as the village closed ranks against the family.
“The family wants to go back to the village but they are very concerned about the threats against them. These sort of orders are consistently meted out by so-called higher caste village leaders,” said Gopika Bashi, a women’s rights researcher for Amnesty International India.
“The edicts are not done in a formal space and nothing may be written down but that does not mean they will not be carried out.”
Rights activists are also deeply concerned about the woman who eloped with Meenakshi’s brother. She is now in hiding and believed to be pregnant.
Though her case has received less attention, her affair with a lower caste man places her in equal danger to the two sisters.
India was supposed to have "reformed" this complicated social order by making certain jobs and educational opportunities previously closed off to members of the lower caste available to them. But in truth, the system - closely tied to Hinduism - has resisted most reforms outside of the big cities. People have lived with the system for centuries in rural India and the rhythms and traditions of the several hundred thousand small villages are part of everyday life.
Obviously more must be done. But it seems as long as the caste system is commonplace in India, it's social and

economic development will be stunted. 

The left's war on evil pronouns.

At War with Reality

By Fay Voshell

Characterizing the opposition as insane is a favorite tactic of the Left. To question their latest fatwa is for them an indicator of mental derangement on the part of the inquirer.
But in case you haven’t noticed, within in the halls of academia, which once passed as the place for rational inquiry and analysis, the real crazies are hard at work introducing the equivalent of jabberwocky. Even language is supposed to adjust to the current insanity of those seeking “gender equality.”
No doubt inspired by Lewis Carroll’s nonsense poem, the administrators of the University of Tennessee’s Office for Diversity and Inclusion, a bunch of the slithy toves gyring and gimbling in the wabe if ever there were slithy toves, appear determined to eradicate prejudicial pronouns from the English language. Gender neutral pronouns are to replace traditional terminology. No one is to be referred to as “he” or “she” lest the transgender community be offended. A helpful chart indicates the new, gender free terminology designed to replace the offensive pronouns and all their variants.
Reader, you may laugh, but as for the designers of the new language -- well, xe aren’t even smiling. Xe are perfectly serious.
According to ABC’s site, the aforementioned Office for Diversity and Inclusion -- what else would it be named? -- says it has sound reasoning behind the attempt to make the English language gender neutral, saying it “alleviates a heavy burden for people expressing different genders or identities.”
The office’s Donna Braquet declares:
“We should not assume someone’s gender by their appearance, nor by what is listed on a roster or in student information systems. Transgender people and people who do not identify within the gender binary may use a different name than their legal name and pronouns of their gender identity, rather than the pronouns of the sex they were assigned at birth.”
Braquet adds, “...if students and faculty cannot use ze, hir, hirs, xe, xem or xyr, they can also politely ask. “’Oh, nice to meet you, [insert name]. What pronouns should I use?’ is a perfectly fine question to ask.”
Of course, it would be impolite to ask Braquet if ze is out of hir mind.
But hir latest declamations might give parents who are thinking of sending their children to the University of Tennessee a bit of a pause? Are they prepared for their kids to come home and announce that the terms “mother” and “father” are inherently offensive and that henceforth parents are “Ne” and “Ve?”
It is tempting to laugh at the crazies.
However, the thought pattern behind this newest assault on the English language is distinctly unfunny.

The truth is that the drive to eliminate the distinction between male and female has finally reached the stage at which even language itself is to become anarchical -- destroyed in the name of absolute “equality.” For the crazies, ensuring incomprehensibility ensures confusion. Confusion then ensures the masses are stupefied. Stupefied masses then become completely malleable and subject to whatever definition the powers that be, usually the almighty State, grant them. Apparently, by “de-sexing” language a mere unit, not a human being who is either male or female, is “born.” The complete smashing of individuation of any sort is the result.
We have seen the Left’s attempt to shift the definition of what it means to be human time and again. The twentieth and now the
page1image29784 page1image29944 page1image30104

twenty-first centuries have been rife with imitations and variants of the attempts of the French Revolution to redefine the human being according to the whims of the State, which was to ensure absolute equality. As Robespierre put it, to be a citizen meant that “all privileges, all distinctions, all exceptions must disappear.”
Under communism, equality meant that, so as to create the perfect communist drone, all classes must disappear, all differences among classes must be eradicated. Everyone, without distinction, was to be a “comrade,” equal in all respects. Mao Tse Tung was to imitate the Leninist and Stalinist view of the classless society, enforcing uniformity and regimentation to the point of extinguishing individuality altogether.
But nothing equals the insane attempt by the leftist crazies to completely eliminate the distinction between men and woman. Absolutely nothing.
If they succeed in their attempt to eradicate the concept of male and female by radicalizing language, the result will be not just a loss of communication. It will be the collapse of society as we know it.
In the long run, perhaps that is what the crazies want. The reality of the world as it really is, divided equally between those who are uniquely men and uniquely women, seems to be too much for them. The existing pattern of society as it has been from time immemorial is not one they wish to adjust to. They cannot live in a world defined by the reality of the distinction between the sexes, so they make the insane attempt to destroy reality.
Disastrously, the attempt to re-create reality invites coercion of the masses who live in and with reality and who know the created order of the universe, including the society in which they live, will not really change according to the wishes of crazies, be they Robespierre, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, or Braquet. Men will remain men; and women will remain women despite attempts to use linguistics as both a tool of denial and a useful weapon for enforcing conformity.
If the insanity continues unchecked and unabated, coercion by the crazies is next. And isn’t coercion always the end game of rabid ideologues? Huge chunks of reality are ignored, and when there are questions about the mental stability of the ideologues, the questions are not only unanswered, but they are not even permitted. Not only is there no permission to protest or question -- it follows that force must be applied in order the unreality of the ideologues be maintained.
Alarming? It should be.
After all, it is probably well for all Tennesseans to remember that it wasn’t too long ago the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts made a decision to replace the terms “mother” and “father” with “parent 1” and “parent 2.” The office ultimately reversed its decision after “receiving feedback,” and “reverted to the previous form.”
Parents and others concerned about the annihilation of the distinctions between the sexes should realize what’s at stake and refuse to allow the crazies to define how they, their children and the rest of us talk, write, speak, and act.
A piece of advice on where and how to begin the fight against insanity: Don’t send your children to the crazies’ schools -- including the University of Tennessee.

Terrific! Minnesota Islamist on Terror List Gets Commercial Driver’s License to Drive Semi-Trucks.

Terrific! Minnesota Islamist on Terror List Gets Commercial Driver’s License to Drive Semi-Trucks

What could go wrong?
Islamist Amir Meshal was just given his commercial driver’s license to drive semi-trucks. 

radical islam
Amir Meshal was kicked out his Bloomington mosque after he was caught promoting radical Islam.

Amir Meshal attended a terrorist training camp in Africa.
FOX 9 reported, via IJ Review:
A Minnesota man, who Homeland Security identifies as a terror suspect who is on the “No Fly” list, now has his Class A commercial license, which will allow him to drive semi-trucks.
The FOX 9 Investigators revealed last May that Amir Meshal was attempting to get his Class A license from a Twin Cities truck driving school. The $4,000 tuition was paid for through the state workforce program.
The Minnesota Department of Public Safety confirms he was granted the license after passing a road test on August 8. A spokesperson said Meshal has also applied for a school bus endorsement, pending the outcome of a criminal background check.