Abdallah Bulgasem Zehaf-Bibeau, the crackhead turned Jihadist spawned by the mating of a Canadian immigration official and a Libyan Muslim Jihadist, just wanted peace.

He told a co-worker, “There can’t be world peace until there’s only Muslims.” Then he tried to usher in peace, the Islamic way, by opening fire near the Canadian parliament.

Meanwhile in Israel a reporter interviewing Arab Muslim settlers in Jerusalem found that they too wanted peace. On their terms. “Yes we want peace,” one of them said, “but peace means no Jews.”

When negotiating peace with other cultures it’s a good idea to make sure that the words you are using mean the same thing. Most Muslims and Westerners want peace. But to Westerners peace means co-existence. To Muslims, peace means the end of your existence.

Ideas carry heavy cultural baggage. Peace in the West summons up images of Armistice Day, of the Christmas Truce of WW1 in which French, German and English soldiers could share meals and play soccer together. It carries with it the subversive idea that both sides realize the war isn’t worth fighting.

Such a subversive idea has no place in Islam. The Jihad is at the heart of Islam. To question the holy war is to also question the faith. When war is religion then peace through setting aside war is heresy.

The Western idea of peace is a wholly alien one to Islam. In Islam, peace does not come from men transcending their differences, but from destroying men who think and live differently. That is the function of the religious police of our allied “moderate Muslim” countries who seek out the practice of other religions and other ways of living in places like Saudi Arabia and suppress their practitioners.

Islamic peace does not come from diversity, from accepting the existence of other nations, religions and peoples, but from unity through Islam and eliminating as many differences as possible. If Islam is the source of peace, then all that which is “not Islam” is the cause of war.

Kill the Jews. Kill the Christians. Then there will be peace.

The Islamic idea of peace was aptly expressed by Zehaf-Bibeau and our anonymous Jerusalem Jihadist. It is not based on a recognition of the humanity of one’s fellow man, but on a rejection of their humanity.

As Mohammed curtly put it in missives to the leaders of non-Muslim countries in the region, “Aslim, Taslam.” Convert to Islam and you’ll have peace. The same message has been dispatched by Muslim leaders today to popes and presidents. It’s a message of peace on the only terms that Islam allows.

Islam is the religion of peace. For there to be peace, Islam must be supreme. Within the Islamic worldview, conflict is caused by the existence of dissent. The only way to achieve peace is by forcing the submission of every human being to the correct strain of Islam. “Moderates” may agree to let Jews and Christians live as inferior second-class citizens if they submit to Muslims. “Extremists” will skip straight to raping and beheading them. And once that ugly business is done, there will be peace.

Or there will be peace once the “moderates” and “extremists” have finished killing each other, once the Sunnis and Shiites have finished beheading each other, and once every single Muslim has finished slaughtering every other Muslim who in any way dissents from his understanding of Islam.

That’s the brand of peace we’re seeing in Iraq and Syria today. Or the peace process between Israel and the Arab Muslims who were rebranded as “Palestinians” because it made them seem like a local flavor.

Islam rejects the idea that mutual empathy should transcend conflict. Instead it believes that war should transcend humanity. Or as the Koran puts it, “Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not.”

The Western tradition is biased toward the peace of co-existence. It applies the logic of armistice toward all areas of life leading to the championing of multiculturalism and immigration. Its siren song is John Lennon’s Imagine with its call for an end to borders, nations, religions and property. Its ideal of peace comes from the end of structure and separation between people.

The Islamic idea of peace however affirms a structure and separation based on the Koran. It believes that there will be peace when everyone is forced to live within the strictures of Islam. And therefore there can be no genuine peace with non-Muslims who do not submit to Islam.

These two incompatible notions of peace continue to collide. Imagine if French soldiers had clambered out to sing and play soccer only to be gunned down by German soldiers who had a fundamentally different idea of peace. This was actually how WW2 was shaped as the victorious side played by outdated rules while Nazi Germany, Japan and the USSR shifted to a thoroughly totalitarian mentality.

Munich was a disaster because Hitler was not the Kaiser. The other side was no longer willing to play by any rules, even in diplomatic negotiations, or to accept anything short of total victory. The Allies were forced to match their enemies in a ruthless war that saw entire cities destroyed.

The Nazis and Communists were the products of years of indoctrination that taught them to see opponents as less than human and peace as being obtainable only through their destruction. Japan, which had a longer history of dehumanizing outsiders, proved to be an even tougher nut to crack.

Islam has a history of over a thousand years of continuously dehumanizing non-Muslims and identifying peace and their enslavement as one and the same. It is impossible to live in peace with Muslims who think that there can be no peace as long as non-Muslims continue to live independent lives.

In the Muslim worldview, war happens because non-Muslims exist. War is caused by the infidel, the disbeliever and the Muslim hypocrite who does not truly commit to the practice of Islam. The Jihad purifies the world of non-Muslims; it eradicates the “moderate” Muslims who have been compromised by Western culture. It is a war of extermination against the un-Islamic.

When Westerners propose peace, Muslims reject them as hypocrites for speaking of peace, but refusing to accept the only religion that can bring peace. They feel no obligation to honor any peace agreements since peace can only come from Islam and the Western rejection of Islam proves our deceitfulness and bad intentions. This dynamic is inherent in the Koran and the entire history of Islam.

Islam does not obtain peace through peace, but through war. It seeks a world without conflict by killing anyone who might disagree with its totalitarian ideology.

Proposing the peace of co-existence to an ideology to which peace means its own supremacy is a foolish and deranged act. Our outreach to the Muslim world does not lack for a common language, but for common ideas. Both sides may speak of peace, but for one side peace really means war.

Languages are not only made up of words, but of values. It is not enough to bring a dictionary to a negotiation if the two parties are reading from different moral and ethical traditions. Just because we translate “Salaam” as peace and agree that we both want peace does not mean that we have the same idea of what peace is.

The West sees peace as living side by side with Muslims. Muslims see peace as the end of the West.

I recently appeared on Jamie Glazov's show to discuss some recent events involving Islamic terrorism.



NO ONE'S FAULT

A diplomatic mission was slapped down in the middle of a city controlled by terrorists. The diplomatic mission was left mostly undefended, despite multiple requests by everyone in Libya right up to the deceased ambassador, except by a militia gang linked to Al Qaeda which wasn’t getting paid.

At a time when the State Department was spending fortunes on bad art, on Kindles at the bargain price of $6,000 a reader, not to mention renovating the mansion residence of a political donor/ambassador in Europe who would be the subject of yet another cover-up after being accused of pedophilia (but not before causing a public scandal by blaming anti-Semitism on the Jews) there was no money for securing a diplomatic mission that was so far behind enemy lines it might as well have been in the middle of Iran.

And again it was no one’s fault. Despite multiple whistleblowers from the State Department coming forward, most of them left of center types who wouldn’t spit on a Koch Brother, the panels and committees wrote the establishment a blank check.

 The Benghazi Cover-Up Continues



Muslim ISIS Preacher Occupying Jewish Temple Mount Calls for Destruction of America, Mass Murder of Jews



RACISM

On the one side you have a black cop who actually grew up experiencing racism. On the other you have a bunch of idiots in Anonymous masks and a community organizer/UCLA student who knows all about racism because she studied intersectionality.

The black police office argues for helping people regardless of their race while she tells him that he should only be helping black people.

You can hardly find a better example of liberal racism out there than this strange surreal exchange by the type of people who use “white people” as a punchline when they should be using it as a self-descriptor.

White UCLA Student to Black Cop: “You Are Kept Down by Your Race”




If You Want Hillary Clinton, You’re Going to Need Crudite, Humus and $300,000




THE GHOSTS OF KANDAHAR

Obama signed on to a troop surge in Afghanistan to cover for his disastrous move in Iraq. Now the troops are staying on to avoid the spectacle of the Taliban overrunning the country ISIS style. Afghanistan has never been an actual priority for Obama. It has always been a way for him to deal with the political consequences of his decisions in Iraq.

Now the war has ground down to its predictable final stage in which the American presence is renamed as advisory even while combat operations continue.

Obama can’t leave Afghanistan because of the political consequences. But he still has no plan for Afghanistan and it’s the generals who are once again pushing him to have a strategic plan that protects American lives and accomplishes something useful instead of a political agenda that protects his own approval rating.

Trapped in Afghanistan Between Obama and the Taliban



UK Muslim Sex Groomer Says Raping Little Girls is a “Religious Requirement”



BABY IT'S COLD OUTSIDE

The rest are there to get some attention while providing them with protective coloration. 9 out of 10 people screaming frenziedly while holding up “Black Lives Matter” signs would eagerly scream and hold up “Justin Bieber 4 President” or “Ferguson Loves the KKK” signs if it got them positive attention and a shot at being on television.

Everything you need to do know about why the riots fizzled out can be read on a thermometer. On Monday, when the grand jury failed to indict Officer Wilson, the temperature hit a high of 57 degrees. The next day it was still in the forties. Now that the temperature is in the twenties, the riots have fizzled out.

Weather breaks up a riot faster than appeasement. It’s hard to riot when your teeth are chattering.

3 Myths About the Rioters and Looters of Ferguson



SOCIAL INSECURITY

And the party is just getting started because we’ll be paying them retroactive welfare benefits.

On June 9, 2000, a “Chief Counsel Advice” was published in the name of “Mary Oppenheimer, Acting Assistant Chief Counsel (Employee Benefits)”, though it was signed by “Mark Schwimmer, Senior Technician Reviewer”. This document advises IRS employees that illegal aliens who are disqualified from receiving the EITC can retroactively receive EITC benefits for years worked without a valid Social Security number if, after receiving a valid Social Security number, they file an amended return for the previous years worked.

Will Obama’s Illegal Alien Amnesty Wreck Social Security and Medicare?



STOP SNOOPY

Having burned down every grocery store around Ferguson, the great civil rights movement formed to protest a guy getting shot after a violent robbery and an assault on a police officer has picked a truly worthwhile target; Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade.

Why Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade? Is Snoopy racist? Probably, but that’s not the point. If you’ve learned anything by watching their tantrums by now it’s that they love attention and will explode into self-righteous vandalism at the least provocation.

Expect them to start stealing phones and then screaming, “I’m sorry you’re so upset about your corporate product going missing, but Black Lives Matter, hashtag.” And it’ll be mainly white hipsters and Muslim agent provocateurs doing it.

Ferguson Protesters Try to Stop Macy’s Parade Because Snoopy is Racist



RAISING THE ROOF

Gerard of American Digest has just moved and is running a blog fundraiser. He accepts Paypal and mail donations.

Ted Belman of Israpundit has been having some problems. He was fundraising, then he got hacked, and he could use some help.

And as always, Zilla could use some help.

Part of being thankful is helping others in our blogging community have something to be thankful for.


Finally, in this abridged roundup, an essay part of which seems quite relevant in light of the Ferguson hipster protests.

Meinhof believed in collective guilt. She believed particularly in the collective guilt of the German middle classes for the crimes of the Third Reich: but she held that she and her co-terrorists were exempt from both national and class guilt, not on the grounds that they had been infants or as yet unborn at the time of the Holocaust, but because they were communist revolutionaries; as such they “belonged to the working class”‘, and the working class in Germany had “never supported Hitler”, had “not voted him into power”, and were therefore “not guilty”.

Her passionate, confused statements made only one thing clear: she and her like-thinkers hoped that by identifying themselves with victims – of the Nazis, of the present social order in the First World, of “colonialism” and “imperialism” in the Third World – they could free themselves from guilt; or, more accurately, protect and preserve themselves from accusation. It was a way of asserting a moral superiority over their own nation and their own class. None of them really wanted to be poor, or oppressed, or hurt, or deprived of liberty, or killed, or compelled to do manual labor. What they wanted, what they envied, was not what victims had to endure, but the supposed esteem in which victims are held, their freedom from culpability, their high moral status. To be a victim – they seemed to believe – was to be innocent. And to be innocent was almost the same as being heroic.

When we celebrate Thanksgiving, after being thankful for family and friends, for health and comfort, for food and shelter; we shouldn't forget to be thankful for the left.

There is no light without darkness and without evil, the good often fails to find their own voice. It is in the presence of slavery that we remember the worth of freedom. Men and nations are forged in war; not only the war of shell and shot, but the war of ideas. War teaches us to fight for what we have. Wars of ideas teach us to stand up for what we believe.

It is because conservatives are basically hopeful and confident that we are also prone to extremes of despair. Too many us were shocked at the decline of our society because of our great confidence in it. The faith that conservatives have in America makes them vulnerable to being crushed by the latest victory of the left.

I have seen far too much despair and defeatism, too many comments that suggest there is no hope for America and the only thing left to do is pour a glass of wine and watch the sun go down. But those comments testify to how sheltered Americans are from the struggles against tyranny around the world.

Eight years of Obama is bad, but try sixty-nine years of Communism on for size. That's what generations of Russians had to live through. Ask some of the conservative activists in Europe who have never had any of the freedoms that we still take for granted whether they've given up hope. Ask people from countries where criticism of Islam can mean death, whether they've given up hope.

There are countless tales of courage over the last century of men and women who did not stop fighting, who did not stop teaching their children so that they would not stop resisting. And those stories have not ended. They continue today in Europe, Asia and South America. And those people would envy the conditions under which we fight, where we can protest without being shot or sent to prison, where we can have a shot at winning elections if we try hard enough.

Where we are, compared to 100 percent of the rest of the world, still free.

We face a hard fight, not only for our freedom, but the freedom of the world. The international left has made America its special project. It knows that if it can extinguish the hope of liberty in this land then it will drive the rest of those who hope for freedom across the ocean deeper into despair. And it wants your despair. It wants you to give up so that the rest of the world gives up too and bows under its chains.

And yet this fight is a glorious one. This fight is our birthright. And we should be thankful for the fight.

It would be more pleasant if there were no Obama or Hillary. If Alinsky had never been born and Marx had never been whelped. It would be nice if we lived in a world where red was just a color and the Democratic Party was a rural movement suspicious of the Federal government and dreaming of an agrarian utopia. But then so would never having to work for a living or getting up out of bed.

Life is challenge and we face all kinds of different challenges. We get up early out of bed in the morning and drive to work. We rise in the middle of the night when the baby cries and we go to the hospital when our loved ones need us there. We do dreary things and terrible things that seem so different from the life we imagined as children. And we do them not only because they are duty, but because these challenges, the daily ones and the once in a lifetime ones, make us who we are.

Besides these prosaic challenges, the daily routines and the occasional tragedies, there are uncommon challenges that we face when the foe comes to our gate and demands that we bow and become slaves. This is the challenge that we face as a society, a nation and a people. It demands more of us and it ennobles us. It makes us a great people and a great nation, rather than only another people who seek to live in comfort with no thought for anything else.

Good emerges in response to evil. We need our enemies to remind us of who we are and what we can do when our backs are against the wall. We need evil to remind us of the good that we are capable of. As a whetstone sharpens a sword, so evil sharpens us into a weapon against it. It makes us morally stronger and teaches us the stark truths that we cannot take refuge from evil; we must confront it.

If there were no left, would there be nearly as much patriotism among true Americans as there is now? And if there were no left, how many of us would really contemplate the core principles of freedom and free enterprise? If there were no left, how many of us would ponder what we truly believe and what compromises we are willing and unwilling to make? If there were no left, would we be the same people that we are today?

For those of us who believe in the Bible, the Lord created both darkness and light. And if it were not for the darkness, would the light be nearly as precious to us? Imagine a world without sunrise or sunset, where the sight of rays of light clearing away the darkness would have no meaning? And then remember that things are treasured to the extent that they can be taken away from us.

Would we value freedom as much if we did not have to defend it? Would we hold it as dear if we did not fear that it would be taken away? Would we even be aware of what freedom is and what a free people must be if not for the dark hand of those who wish to strip us of those freedoms?

It is the left's opposition that has added urgency to a hundred issues, from the national debt to the War on Terror to freedom of speech and of religion. It has made us think about those issues, to take them out of the back of our minds and hold them up to the light as a reminder of how important they are and what must be done about them.

The left's corruptions remind us of the need for purification. As it gathers the worst of all around it, we find ourselves called to be better than we are. As the left works to doom our country, and as we suffer defeat after defeat, these defeats only serve to remind us that we must be better, that we must do more, learn more and become more in order to save our country.

War is the great teacher and this is a political war, short on bodies and heavy on minds, it is a war in which casualties are not taken in the chest or the arm, but in the mind, in reason and emotion, and against these weaknesses, we can and will prevail.

As we fight the left, we become stronger, more dedicated and more purposeful. We become the men and women that we were meant to be.

As you sit around your tables, thinking of all that you have gained and lost this year, remember and be thankful for the left, for though the winter ice gives way to the summer sun and bitter defeat gives way to sweet victory, it is defeat and hardship that teaches better than comfort and ease. We can learn more from our defeats than we ever could from our victories. Our defeats teach us endurance and fortitude, they teach us that defeat can be borne and that its sting can be turned into the weapon that unseats the foe. And our foes make us who we are.

Their evil teaches us to find the good within ourselves. Their strength teaches us to find our own strength. And their plots against what we have teach us how many treasures we have, not least of these being the full value of our freedom and our happiness that they wish to take from us.

Their war on America is teaching us to be better Americans. It may not feel that way right now, but we are privileged to have this opportunity and this fight. 

We should be thankful for the left, its assaults on us are teaching us how to fight and its plots against our freedom are teaching us how to be free.

There are no Palestinians. There are no moderate Syrian rebels. There is only Islam.

The axe that fell on the head of a Rabbi in Jerusalem was held by the same hand that beheaded Yazidi men in the new Islamic State. It is the same hand that held the steering wheel of the car that ran over two Canadian soldiers in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Quebec and the same hand that smashed a hatchet down on the skull of a rookie New York City cop in Queens all in a matter of months.

Their victims were of different races and spoke different languages. They had nothing in common except that they were non-Muslims. This is the terrible commonality that unites the victims of Islamic terror.

Either they are not Muslim. Or they are not Muslim enough for their killers.

The media shows us the trees. It does not show us the forest. It fragments every story into a thousand local narratives. In Jerusalem the killers were angry because of Jews praying on the Temple Mount. In Queens and Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, they were outraged because we were bombing the Islamic State.

And in the Islamic State they were killing Christians and Yazidis because America hadn’t bombed them yet.

Our leaders and our experts, the wise men of our multicultural tribes, who huddle in their shiny suits around heavy tables, believe in the good Muslim terrorist the way that the Muslim believes in Allah. The good Muslim terrorist who is willing to make peace for the right price is their only hope of salvation. The good Muslim terrorist willing to settle for Palestine or Syria at 50 percent off is their way out of a war.

And so like Chamberlain at Munich and FDR at Yalta, like a thousand tawdry betrayals before, they make themselves believe it. And then they make us believe it.

A thousand foreign policy experts are dug out, suited up and marched into studios to explain what specific set of un-Islamic Muslim grievances caused this latest beheading and how the surviving non-Muslims need to appease their future killers. And then another tree falls. And another head rolls.

The appeasement never works. No non-Muslim country has ever reliably made peace with Muslim terrorists inside its own borders. Even the Muslim countries have a shaky track record. Most have settled for either massacring them, like Algeria and Jordan, or secretly allying with them, like just about every Muslim country from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia.

And yet Nigeria is expected to cut a deal with the Boko Haram rapists of its little girls, Israel is expected to negotiate with the mass murderers of its Rabbis, Hindus in India are expected to negotiate with the Jihadists who burn them alive and somehow arrive at a peaceful settlement. And if the peace doesn’t come, then it won’t be the fault of the rapists, the axe-wielders and arsonists, but of their victims.

It is never the Muslim terrorists who are at fault for not being appeased by any compromise and any concession. It is the fault of their victims for not appeasing them hard enough.

Compromise with Muslim terrorists is impossible because the issue is not really about Jerusalem, oil revenues in Nigeria, Kashmir or Syria. It’s always about Islam. The territorial claims are unlimited and uncompromisable because they are backed by Islam. No concession can ever suffice because Islam promises its followers not merely some land in Syria, Israel or India… but the entire world.

The forest is Islam. The trees are theirs because the forest belongs to them. Jerusalem and Kashmir are not any different than New York or Sydney. Muslim historical claims are mythologies invented to give weight to their religious violence.

After losing a few wars the Arab Muslims who had been fighting for a Greater Syria decided that they would fall back to claiming to be “Palestinians” while demanding a state on the territories that the Jordanians and Egyptians had ethnically cleansed Jews from in 1948 before losing a war to those same Jews in 1967. But that was never anything other than a down payment on the rest of Israel.

Meanwhile the Islamic State is recreating Greater Syria under a Caliphate.

Turkey’s president, who sponsors the Islamic State and dreams of reviving the Ottoman Empire, recently announced that America was originally Muslim. It’s absurd, but so is claiming that Israel never existed and that its Arab Muslim conquerors are really some sort of ancient “Palestinian” people who were there first. When even the most ridiculous lie is told often enough, it becomes mistaken for a fact.

The good Muslim terrorist is born out of this false history. Unlike the bad Muslim terrorist who wants Caliphates and harems of frightened little girls, who wants Islamic law and beheadings on every corner, the good Muslim terrorist is misunderstood, lacks economic opportunities, is traumatized by war and unaware of the benefits of peace. What he really wants is his own McDonald’s franchise in Jerusalem. He wants microfinance in Kashmir. He wants to build solar panels with 3D printers to fight climate change in Nigeria.

These are the lies that the modern Chamberlains tell themselves and then us. These are the lullabies that the newscasters hum audiences to sleep with just before the bombs go off and the heads roll.

There are no good Muslim terrorists. There are no moderate Jihadists. There is only Islam.

There were no friendly Islamic militias in Benghazi. There are no moderate Taliban. No one is looking to cut a deal for peaceful nuclear energy in Tehran. They are looking to cut our throats.

The moderate and the extremist, the good and bad Muslim terrorists, are no different than our own police game of good cop and bad cop. President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority said that his policies are no different than those of Hamas. The Free Syrian Army and the Al Qaeda aligned militias in Syria fight together. They are both out to create an Islamic state. The only difference is that the FSA and the Palestinian Authority get their money and weapons from us. Hamas and Al Qaeda get them from our allies in Turkey and Qatar. And they often get them from us.

Behind every bad scowling Muslim terrorist whom we hunt with drones is one of our good Muslim terrorists or one of our good Muslim allies. There would be no Taliban or Bin Laden without Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

There would be no ISIS without Qatar. And there would be no Qatar without our protection. Even while we bomb ISIS with our planes, our air power protects Qatar. Even while we condemn the latest Muslim terrorist attack in Jerusalem, we fund the payments that will be given as a reward to the families of the killers.

There are no good Muslim terrorists. There is no territorial compromise that will sweep away a thousand years of brutal ideology and replace it with our idea of the good life. Moderates who just want an extra mile on a map don’t chop down old men at prayer, don’t rape little girls or burn families to death.

Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the good Muslim terrorist are all stories that we tell ourselves. It’s time to start telling ourselves the truth.

Obama’s excuse for his illegal amnesty will be that the immigration system is “broken” forcing him to act. But when Obama says that the system is broken, he means that some parts of it still work and so he intends to break immigration all the way through to benefit his own corrupt political allies.

That will hurt his own voters the most, but the Democratic Party has a notoriously masochistic relationship with its voting base. It beats them up and then it gaslights them by hugging them and telling them that it was really the mean Republicans who punched them in the face.

When African-American unemployment rates rise, the workers who can’t find jobs because of all the brand new DREAMERs won’t blame the White House, they’ll blame the evil Republicans for income inequality, assuming Sharpton manages to read the term correctly from his MSNBC teleprompter.

According to Obama our immigration system is broken because it doesn’t allow illegal aliens who illegally crossed the border to take American jobs. That’s not a broken system, that’s what the system is supposed to do.

When illegal aliens aren’t allowed to legally take American jobs, that’s how you know the immigration system is working. In the language of progressivism, helping means ruining and fixing means breaking. A system that fulfills any useful purpose must be reformed out of all usefulness. If the tattered shreds of the immigration system still keep a single Democratic voter from legally cashing a welfare check and casting a vote, then immigration must be reformed and helped and fixed until it is completely destroyed.

The immigration system is broken because it was reformed so many times that it makes as much sense as an outhouse on a space shuttle. Its main function now is to bring millions of people without jobs to a country where millions are out of work. Obama wants to fix that by adding millions more people.

Our system of immigration is a perfectly good system for importing lots of low wage workers. The only problem is they’re being imported into a country where there are a lot more low wage workers than there are jobs. The cost of providing food stamps and social services for the immigrants and the Americans they put out of work is passed on to the shrinking middle class which kills more jobs.

Some Republicans would like to modify it to help Mark Zuckerberg bring cheaper third world programmers and engineers to replace the Americans over at Facebook. Why settle for just wiping out the working class, when you can also take out chunks of the middle class?

Our immigration system made perfect sense back when we were opening factories everywhere. It made sense when new ranches needed hands and land needed working. It makes a lot less sense when the government is fighting a war on carbon, when ranches have to get out of the way of the spotted red toad and farms are starved of water in the name of the environment.

The million immigrants a year are not entering booming industries, but serving as cheap labor in declining ones. And they’re doing it in a country where declining industries and poor workers are already being subsidized by taxpayers in a dozen different ways. Why then should taxpayers also be subsidizing the replacement of American workers with Somali and Honduran workers?

Who benefits from that except the Democratic Party which not only killed the industries, but is now managing to kill the American workforce? The glorious future of the new economy is a government subsidized Chinese factory using foreign workers to make subsidized solar panels in Oklahoma while taxpayers remain on the hook for the subsidies which used bonds sold to Chinese investors.

Declining industries tighten their belts by cutting costs. They find the cheapest employees they can. Those cheapest employees become a constituency for the nanny state. The nanny state makes it even more expensive to operate. The cycle spins on until the only industries left are state subsidized and everyone directly or indirectly works for the state. And the only items of collateral with which to borrow more money to subsidize them with are the land and the people. That’s not America. That’s Africa.

The Obama economy has created mostly low wage jobs. Those jobs continue to be filled by immigrants. There still aren’t enough jobs so Obama is proposing to create even less jobs by adding more immigrants by legalizing more illegal aliens.

There is something broken here, but it’s not so much immigration as Obama and his party.

Last week I spoke to a British immigration lawyer who described how difficult it was for seniors in the United Kingdom to retire in the United States. While most countries welcome wealthy retirees, our system makes it difficult for them to move and bring their money over here.

Meanwhile in his 2013 State of the Union address, Obama had praised Desiline Victor, a 102-year-old Haitian woman who had moved to the United States at around 80 and never learned to speak English, but did spend hours waiting in line in Florida to vote for Obama. There are plenty of senior immigrants coming through family reunification for a big bite of a social welfare system they never paid into.

But the Democratic Party would rather have a voter than a worker. And so what we have is not an immigration system, but a migration system.

That’s why Obama and his people fought so hard against an Ebola travel ban. It’s why the New York Times editorialized against allowing Cuban doctors to defect because of the “brain drain” but instead urged that “American immigration policy should give priority to the world’s neediest refugees.”

America certainly takes in plenty of needy people, but what the New York Times is emphasizing is that we should be taking in people with nothing to contribute and keeping out those who do. Its ideal immigrant will at best be a low wage worker and at worst a permanent welfare case. We don’t want Cuban doctors. We want Somali muggers and Liberian Ebola cases and Pakistani terrorists.

Immigration is not meant to serve American interests. America is meant to serve immigration. The end result of this immigration policy will be a stratified society with a permanent lower class and a thin upper class whose leftists can always start a riot by shouting about income equality without ever being able to offer it. Without social mobility what we will have left is social instability. There will be lots of young men with time on their hands to build bombs or throw stones.

If the left doesn’t win through the system, they’ll have their revolutionary constituency standing by. The only way we can afford the immigration policy that we have now is with a lot more industry and a lot less welfare. Instead our immigration rates were widened and rerouted to the Third World even as our actual industries declined. We kept on taking workers we didn’t have jobs for. We built ghettoes and rust belts and our politicians kept on reciting robotic speeches about being a nation of immigrants.

Immigration requires opportunity. We still have it, but less of it than we used to. Our immigration system is not based on opportunity. It’s based on a migratory flow of Democratic Party voters.

What broke the system was making it as open as possible to those who had the least to offer while closing it tightly to those who had the most to offer. Now Obama wants to import illegal aliens while deporting American jobs. He wants to trade American jobs to illegal aliens for Democratic votes.

If the immigration system is to work again, it should work for America… not for Obama.

SLAVE

 Peter Kassig was a ex-Ranger who, like so many of the other hostages, was betrayed by Muslims he trusted into ISIS custody. He converted to Islam as a hostage and his parents have continued the farce of calling him Abdul Rahman.

Now one of America’s enemies has been invited to pray over his funeral.

The sermon built to an impassioned, rapid-fire crescendo, in which, almost shouting, al-Yaqoubi seemed to divide jihad into foreign and domestic spheres, with appropriate action for each. “Wherever the American troops are — wherever they are, they are going to be defeated,” he yelped. 

Sheikh Who Cheered Killing US Soldiers to Pray Over Ex-Soldier Beheaded by ISIS




“Palestinian” Terrorists Killed More Americans in 2014 Than ISIS




A NATION OF OBAMAS

2. We are a nation of laws

“Even as we are a nation of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws. Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable… “

The least appropriate time to namecheck America as a nation of laws is when you have to decided to…

A. Illegally usurp Congress

B. Provide sanction to lawbreakers

C. Disregard the very immigration laws you’re mentioning

The 5 Dumbest Lies in Obama’s Amnesty Speech




OBAMNESTY

Obama Whines TV Won’t Preempt “The Biggest Loser” for his Sore Loser Speech

Illegal Alien: Obama’s Amnesty Inspired Us to Cross Border - Who says Obama doesn’t inspire anyone anymore?




IF ONLY MOHAMMED KNEW

Under Stalin there were two Communisms. One was the real Communism practiced in Moscow in which a slave empire sought to expand its territory and power. The other was a set of ideas by their useful idiots in the West. Those Western Communists who moved to the Soviet Union eventually wound up in a Gulag whether or not they could name Lenin’s mother or recite chapter and verse from Das Kapital.

Western sympathizers of Communism or Islam did not understand that the actual implementation of the system was a machine of terror with no off switch. Stalin’s USSR and the Caliph’s Islamic State depended on grand promises and mass murder.

The African-Americans who moved to the USSR believing that it was a truly non-racist society ended up dead. Westerners who think that reciting the Koran can save them from the sword have discovered that the Koran can turn on the machinery of terror, but there is no off switch for the swinging sword.

Converting to Islam Won’t Save Your Head




Jordanian Parliament Prays for “Spirits of Heroes” Who Murdered 4 Rabbis




HASTA LA VISTA

The latest Pew poll shows that 74 percent of Democrats support ObamaCare, but only 29 percent of white respondents do. The Democratic Party is becoming a party without white people. Under Obama, the Democratic disadvantage among white voters doubled without any corresponding gains among minority voters.

Republican congressional candidates won 64 percent of white working class voters. Landrieu won just 18 percent of the white vote; 22 percent among white women and 15 percent among white men. That’s less than the amount taken by a second Republican candidate in the race, Rob Maness.

Those numbers alone indicate why the Democrats won’t put any real money behind her. If Landrieu can’t even compete for the white vote, then there’s no reason to waste good money on her.

The Vanishing White Democrat




We’ve Got to Legalize Illegal Aliens So They Can Receive Our Taxes



DRAFT

Conscription of Wealth Possible

Chicago Oct 22, 1917

Declaring that the Liberty loan affords a splendid opportunity for the removal of the family savings from the stocking to a safer place, Secretary Daniels made a stirring appeal for the success of the second offering.

“Money is plentiful in America,” declared the secretary. “The banks are overflowing with it; the stockings are bulging out with it.”

“I wish that every dollar in America was on legs so that it had to march up the street and ride on the street cars to get home. Then we could see the dollars and enlist them in the selective draft. Under the law we have the right to do so, but the first Liberty loan was fully responded to so cheerfully and so fully that there was no necessity and there will be no necessity now.

“Just as truly as a republic can lay its hands on a young man and send him to France in the trenches so it can and will, if necessary, lay its hands on every dollar in America.”

“Lay its Hands on Every Dollar in America”



TIMING

Obama is tripping over his own feet here. He’s sabotaging his own rationale for amnesty by not even pretending to work with a Republican Senate, many of whose members are quite amnesty friendly, but that’s nothing new for him.

1. That boy needs attention – Obama simply can’t reconcile himself to being a lame duck and with Valerie Jarrett’s prompting, no doubt stung by the Politico story and pressure from the Dems to fire her, convinced him that he can establish a domineering role by shooting first.

Did Gruber Videos Force Obama to Speed Up Amnesty?




Hillary Clinton Might Be Only Dem Under 70 Running for President



CONTESTED

Nora O’Donnell is of course correct. Har Nof is contested. Certainly the synagogue is.

Muslims murdered four Jews there. How can it then not be contested? The very definition of contested is a place that Muslims kill people in.

Now that Muslims have killed people in that synagogue, it is now contested. It must be negotiated for. Obama and Kerry must demand that Israel cede it. Peres, assorted leftists and sellout security chiefs with villas in Paris and Los Angeles must insist that Israel has no use for the synagogue and would be better off without it.

And the one after that. And the one after that.

What is a “Contested Religious Site” Anyway?




“Rioting and Looting are Tools of Those Without a Voice,” Says Idiot in Spider-Man Mask




FORWARD

The most powerful man in the world is making the same excuse as a little boy losing at Monopoly. But he has a point. There was no way to win on his terms by maximizing the turnout of the base with ugly polarizing identity politics. The closest thing to that effort came from “Senator Uterus” and his off-putting “War on Women” rhetoric and it failed. If Obama can’t win with identity politics, then the election is unfair… and the only way to fix it is with illegal alien amnesty for demographic change.

Illegal alien amnesty is the adult political equivalent of overturning the board of the United States, tossing all the American voters on the floor, and remaking the country with new majorities.

That way identity politics will always be a winning move.

The Dems Lost and It’s Not Their Fault




Millionaire Congresswoman Says Income Inequality is America’s Biggest Problem




THE COLOR OF MONEY

For a lawmaker hoping to land a top party seat on a key congressional committee, which matters the most? Seniority? Policy expertise? Legislative skill?

Or is it the ability to raise staggering sums of money—including from interests and industries they hope to oversee—that can be funneled to their colleagues?

The latest campaign finance filings from Reps. Anna Eshoo and Frank Pallone—veteran lawmakers vying to succeed retiring Rep. Henry Waxman as the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee—show that since last year and through Oct. 15, they have combined to distribute more than $1.2 million in direct contributions to the campaign coffers of House Democratic incumbents and challengers across the country.

Pelosi Abused Pregnant, Wounded Vet for Green Energy Cash




EURABIA

Swedish Ambulance Workers Want Body Armor Against Machete Attacks


Muslims Robbing European Churches to Finance Terrorism

After serving a few years in prison for his role in the Munich Massacre, Willi Pohl moved to Beirut. The brief sentence was a slap in the wrist, but Pohl had still served more time in prison than the Muslim gunmen who had murdered eleven Israeli athletes and coaches during the 1972 Summer Olympics. Mohammed Safady and the Al-Gashey cousins were released after a few months by the German authorities.

They went back to Lebanon and so did he.

A decade after the attack, Willi Pohl had begun making a name for himself as a crime novelist. His first novel was Tränen Schützen Nicht vor Mord or Tears Do Not Protect Against Murder.

While Pohl was penning crime novels, Israeli operatives had already absorbed the lessons of his first title. Tears, whether in 1939 or 1972, had not done anything to prevent the murder of Jews. Bullets were another matter.  

The head of Black September in Rome was the first to die, followed by a string of PLO leaders across Europe. Those attacks were followed by raids on the mansions and apartments of top Fatah officials in the same city where Pohl had found temporary refuge. By the time his first book was published, hundreds of PLO terrorists and officials were dead.

European law enforcement had failed to hold even the actual perpetrators of the Munich Massacre responsible, never mind the representatives of the PLO who openly mingled with red radicals in its capitals. Israeli operatives did what the German judicial system had failed to do, putting down Safady and one of the Al-Gasheys, while the other one hid out with Colonel Gaddafi in Libya.

The Israeli raid on the PLO terrorists in Beirut's Muslim Quarter missed one important target. Arafat. And so, on another September day, some  later, September 13, 1993, Israeli Prime Minister Rabin shook hands with Arafat and proclaimed, "Enough of blood and tears! Enough!"

But the blood and tears had only begun, as a PLO on its last legs was revived and built its terrorist infrastructure inside Israel's borders.

By 1993, the year of the infamous Rose Garden handshake, 45 Israelis had been killed and 34 injured in Muslim terrorist attacks. A year after the handshake, the toll stood at 109 Israelis dead and 456 wounded. By 2002, the year that Israel's patience finally broke and Sharon sent forces storming into Arafat's compound, the numbers for that year were a horrifying 451 dead and 2,348 wounded.

Today, some 40 years after that September in Munich and two decades after the even worse tragedy of that September in Washington D.C., with over 1,500 dead since that fatal handshake, there have been rivers of blood and tears. And a shortage of bullets.

PLO officials these days are more likely to die of morbid obesity or, like Arafat, of AIDS, than of Israeli raids. They are nearly as likely to kill each other, like Arafat's cousin, Moussa Arafat, the former head of the Palestinian Authority's terrorist forces, who was dragged out of his home and shot by his own people.

The murder of Mohammed Abu Shaaban, killed a week after the handshake, by his own people, was the first of a long string of Fatah on Fatah violence that is a far more likely cause of death for top terrorists than the jet planes and tanks of the hated Zionist regime.

The rivers of tears keep flowing, but tears don't protect against murder. Neither do peace treaties. No amount of tears from the tens of thousands mutilated, tortured, crippled, wounded, orphaned and widowed by the PLO in all its front groups, splinter groups and incarnations, including its current incarnation as a phony government, has been enough to stop Western governments from supporting, arming and funding the terrorists.  

Tears don't protect against murder. They don't stop killers from killing. They don't prevent the authorities from looking the other way when the killings happen because there is something in it for them. They don't bring the terrorists to justice. They don't even ensure that the truth will be told, rather than the lie that rationalizes the terror.

Tears did not stop the operation of a single gas chamber. They did not save the life of a single Jewish refugee. They did not stop a single dollar from going to the PLO or Fatah or Black September or the Palestinian Authority or any of the other masks that the gang of Soviet-trained killers wore. They will not stop Iran from developing and detonating a nuclear weapon over Tel Aviv. They will not stop Israel from being carved up by terrorists whose demands are backed up by the diplomatic capital of every nation that bows its head in the direction of Mecca, Medina and Riyadh, and the old men who control the oil wells and the mosques.

In 1988, Willi Pohl published another book, Das Gesetz des Dschungels or The Law of the Jungle. That same year, PLO terrorists carried out the "Mother's Bus Attack" taking the passengers of a bus, filled with women on board, hostage and demanding the release of all imprisoned terrorists. The terrorists killed two hostages and Israeli Special Forces moved in killing the terrorists and saving the lives of all but one hostage.

In response, Israeli commandos stormed Tunis, killing Abu Jihad, a former Muslim Brotherhood member and the number two Fatah leader after Arafat . The United Nations Security Council met and passed Resolution 611, noting with concern the "loss of human life", particularly that of Abu Jihad, and vigorously condemned the "act of aggression".

Not a single member of the Security Council voted against it. The United States abstained.

Not one single resolution was passed that year or the year afterward or the year after that condemning a terrorist attack against Israel or criticizing any of the countries that trained, armed and harbored the terrorists. Instead there were numerous resolutions condemning Israel for expelling and deporting terrorists.

The closest thing to a resolution critical of terrorism was Resolution 579 in response to the Achille Lauro hijacking, carried out by men loyal to Mahmoud Abbas, the current President of the Palestinian Authority, who also provided the funding for the Munich Massacre. Resolution 579 did not mention the Achille Lauro, Leon Klinghoffer or Palestinian Arab terrorists. Instead it condemned "hostage-taking" in general.

In 1972, the year of the Munich Massacre, there were three Security Council resolutions condemning Israel. Not a single one condemning the massacre of Olympic athletes at an international event. Not a single one condemning the countries which armed, trained, harbored and controlled the terrorists. The countries that had refused that their flags be lowered in response to the massacre.

This was the law of the jungle disguised as international law. Against the law of the jungle, tears are futile. Jungle law cannot be debated away or subdued with the speechifying of an Abba Eban or a Benjamin Netanyahu. It cannot be moralized into decency or signed away with peace treaties.

It can only be met with resistance.

Tears don't protect against murder. Bullets do.

In America there are two types of people; the oppressed and the oppressors.

 The oppressed oppress the oppressors. And everyone including the oppressors agrees that this is only fair because the oppressors deserve to be oppressed. After all they are the oppressors.

They deserve to have the money they earn taken away. They deserve to be sent to the back of the line when applying to a college or looking for a job. They deserve to be beaten, robbed, raped, and taunted with slurs that would lead to national outrage if it were directed at the oppressed.

But they’re the oppressors. They deserve it.

If they complain, they deserve to have their speech censored. They are the oppressors. There’s no telling how much oppression they might dish out if the oppressed don’t keep them down.

That’s just life in the Victimocracy.

With one sob story too many, one whine too great, one more PBS special, special report about the plight of the oppressed and episode of Donahue, the country changed. The oppressors still had the democratic refuge of elections where they could by sheer numbers vote to retain their civil rights, but most of the other mechanisms of governance had ceased to be democratic and instead became victimocratic.

To have real power you had to be a victim or one of their protectors.

The Victimocracy is a lot like any other tyranny. In an aristocracy, power belongs to the nobles, in a theocracy, power belongs to the clergy, in a meritocracy, to anyone with skill and a work ethic.

But in a Victimocracy the biggest and angriest whiner wins.

In a Victimocracy, suffering is the exclusive privilege of the elites. No one else is allowed to suffer except them. No one else has ever been oppressed, has felt pain, been insulted, abused, degraded, enslaved and ground down into the dirt except the very people who are grinding you into the dirt now.

Victimhood is what entitles them to special privileges, it’s what ennobles them as a superior class of people and gives them the right to rule over you. They are the victims. What they say goes.

Victimization is the currency of their power. They have 1/16 Cherokee blood and high cheekbones. They are ‘triggered’ by loud noises and differing opinions. They spent their twenties “coming to terms” with something because of the lack of sitcom role models for their favorite sexual preferences or skin color. They are all survivors of something or other. They were activists and someone once said mean things to them. And if all else fails, they are deeply passionate about the plight of the oppressed. Like, seriously.

Now stop oppressing them and educate yourself by recognizing their right to oppress you.

The Victimocracy is based around the superior moral power of their suffering. That is why no one else is allowed to suffer except them. Their convoluted theories of social justice eliminate the very possibility that the source of their exclusive moral power can be experienced by anyone else. They have strived to warp language around their political narcissism to define suffering as an experience unique to them.

They will assert, for example, that anti-white racism cannot exist because racism is not interpersonal but a structural product of power relations. Since everyone knows that America is a white male patriarchy, white people cannot be oppressed. They can only be the oppressors. Because of the patriarchy, men cannot be sexually assaulted. Christians cannot be religiously discriminated against. Americans can’t be blown up by Muslims. Any claim otherwise is a lie intended to oppress our oppressed oppressors.

Victimocrats are narcissistically infuriated by the suffering of others. Many tyrannies applied the whip and the lash, the prison cell and the gulag, but they at least left those they abused in possession of their suffering. The Victimocracy denies its victims even their suffering. Victimocrats reject the humanity of their victims as thinking and feeling beings with the same needs and boundaries as themselves.

The Victimocracy rations empathy. Empathy is the election of its system. The biggest victim wins and his suffering licenses his abuses. The bigger the victim, the bigger the abuses he is entitled to commit. If the empathy flows the wrong way, then power shifts and the entire system collapses. To take over a society, the Victimocrats must control its education and entertainment to structure its empathy flow their way.

Victimocrats must appear weak to gain power. They must always seem beleaguered, under siege, abused and threatened from a thousand different directions. They must be made to seem underdogs. Even if a Victimocrat sits in the White House, unilaterally dispensing with the lives and fortunes of a nation with phone and pen, he must remain a vulnerable victim of a terrible history of racism.

The Victimocrat must always be seen as a weak victim in need of rescue from those he oppresses.

Never able to argue a thing on its merits, the Victimocrats shift the debate to the moral high ground of their own oppression. It is impossible to disagree with them without somehow invoking stereotypes, flashbacks and the return of the white male patriarchy riding back into town on the last thing you said.

The Victimocrats are always in need of rescuing. No matter how much power they have, someone is always abusing them. And once that happens people of good will are called upon to condemn the abuse and to reinforce their power structure of the oppressed oppressor and the oppressive oppressed.

Victimocrats don’t win arguments. They convince others that they are entitled to avoid the argument. In the Victimocracy the illusion of weakness is power. The weak are entitled to disproportionate power to protect themselves from the rest of us. The weaker they are, the more power they need. And the more power they get, the weaker they grow until we live under a tyranny of the absolutely powerless who wield absolute power.

Sometimes the oppressors wonder where their incredible power is supposed to be. They don’t have all that much money and no one seems to have taught them the secret handshake that will unlock the heavy iron doors of the heteronormative patriarchy where the patriarchal plutocrats sit around the table drinking the tears of Obama, Oprah and various Hollywood celebrities from human skulls.

Their oppressors tell them about their privilege, an invisible power to oppress others that they never even knew they had, but the privilege never really explains why they have to work harder, die sooner and be berated constantly for even existing. And they die and their oppressors take what they have.

There is no end to the oppression because the Victimocracy has to grow. America is always more bigoted than it was last year because the Victimocrats need more power this year. The more oppressed Americans become, the more they must be denounced for victimizing all the nice people running their lives and robbing them blind.

The Victimocracy rules by manufacturing an urgent crisis of oppression. It demands special measures to deal with the crisis. The temporary measures become permanent. Rolling them back would be an act of oppression. The permanent measures turn out to be insufficient. They must be redoubled.

Each Victimocrat victory is “a significant step forward” but there is always “more work to be done.” And like all lust for power, the work never ends.

The oppressed want more. The oppressors make do with less. The protectors of the oppressed, who actually run the Victimocracy, announce that more speech must be censored, more wealth redistributed and more must be made unequal to achieve equality. A better world is around the corner, but first the one we have must be destroyed.

Only when the balance shifts permanently and the new world is born, will the oppressors be allowed to see for the first time that they had been the oppressed all along.

And then it will be too late.

After another bloody weekend in Chicago, Mayor Rahm Emanuel branded the shootings unacceptable and the city’s top cop demanded more gun control laws. Chicago’s murder rate has actually dropped since concealed carry became legal. Emanuel’s lawsuits over his illegal gun control laws have left the already struggling city deep in the hole and forced to cover the NRA’s million dollars in legal bills.

Concealed carry paid off over that bloody weekend when a vet carrying a gun returned fire stopping a massacre before it happened. The original shooter ended up in the hospital, but nobody ended up in the morgue, which kept the death toll for the weekend down to fourteen.

Fourteen isn’t pretty, but it’s better than twenty or thirty.

Chicago’s murder rate in 1992 was double what it is today. The death rate was at 33.7 out of 100,000 which meant that you had a pretty good chance of being shot in Chicago. Today it’s down to 15 out of 100,000, which is small comfort to those ending up in the morgue, but it gives everyone else much better odds of surviving to see what ingenious ways the next corrupt mayoral administration will use to rip off the city.

Back in 1992, the cops also blamed guns for the murder rate. But it wasn’t the guns that were killing people. It was the gangs. Now the murder rate is down, but the number of shootings is up. To Chicago’s police boss, that’s a problem, as if it makes a difference to the deceased whether he’s shot, stabbed or dropped in the water wearing cement overshoes. But fighting guns is easier than fighting crime.

The gun obsession is one of the few things that cops and leftists have in common. It’s the last politically acceptable form of prohibitionism in a society that enthusiastically legalizes drugs, even if possessing crack cocaine is statistically much more likely to lead you to kill a man, than possessing a gun will.

Every shooting spree bypasses the obvious problem with calls for more gun laws and something for the youth to do over the weekend that doesn’t involve shooting up the local housing project. This weekend, Rahm Emanuel took on the problem of funding more teen centers while Chicago’s top cop blustered about more gun laws. And then having successfully talked around the issue, they all went home.

The left loves root causes more than it loves red shirts and black bandanas, a fashion choice that it shares with some of the gangs responsible for most of the shootings.

America’s gun violence problem is urban. It’s localized in Democratic enclaves. And it overlaps neatly with its corrupt political machines. It has nothing to do with the NRA and a great deal to do with the party of social engineering, the welfare state and gun bans.

And illegal immigration.

Homicide rates overlap with unemployment rates, especially when accounting for the demographic populations of young minority men who are statistically more likely to kill or be killed.

92% of black male teens in Chicago don’t have a job. In Detroit, 50% of black men are unemployed. It’s not that there aren’t any jobs, but the entry level jobs have been mostly going to immigrants.

The Center for Immigration Studies found that under Obama two-thirds of jobs went to immigrants, both legal and illegal. Throw in a massive illegal alien amnesty and the rush of illegal aliens into the country will turn the employment figures of every city into Detroit and Chicago.

The black male unemployment rate in New York was at 33%. And the murder rate in New York is significantly lower than in Detroit or Chicago. But how long will that last if the unemployment rate in New York rises above 50%? Before long the marginal gangs will swell to monstrous sizes controlling entire neighborhoods. Anyone who can will flee and the city will once again become what it was.

The same process will take place in most major American cities.

The United States of America does not have a shortage of workers. It has a shortage of jobs. The irresponsible immigration policy has created a surplus of workers. Illegal alien amnesty will make that surplus much worse. Legalize twelve million illegal aliens and another twelve million will come. Those who can’t find jobs, will find gangs. Those who lose jobs to them will also find gangs.

The gangs will fight each other for control of entire neighborhoods and the crime wave will set America back decades.

After the 1986 amnesty, the number of murders, which had begun to fall in the early eighties, rose again. They did not return to a pre-amnesty level until 1997. Rapes have only recently returned to a pre-amnesty level. Now the progress we’ve made is about to be undone all over again.

In 1986, murder rates suddenly rose mysteriously in major cities. The New York Times described the crime rates as being the highest since the 1970s.

In Chicago, murders increased by 20%. In New York they increased by 20%. The cities rushed to crack down on guns while insisting that they were mystified by the drastic increase.

The guns weren’t the problem. The illegal alien amnesty which had created a magnet was. Illegal aliens with fake documents headed in hoping to take advantage of amnesty. Later newly legalized immigrants invited their family members to join them. Even before the amnesty took effect, crime rates spiked.

Amnesty advocates claim that immigrants aren’t taking jobs from Americans because they are more likely to be employed at the lower and higher ends of the marketplace. And that’s half true. What it really means is that they displace trained technical workers at the high end of the marketplace. That leads to a further erosion of the native middle class, but it doesn’t directly lead to gang violence.

At the lower end of the marketplace, they not only displace workers, but they displace the workers that might have been. Teenagers who would have started working regular jobs instead roam around aimlessly. The lost entry level jobs are substituted with crime. Neighborhoods fall apart and gang violence increases as gang members compete for turf in the new drug marketplace. And the rest is crime statistics and children taken to morgues in cities that can barely keep the lights on.

If we want to repeat the same cycle again, Super-Amnesty, an amnesty several times bigger than the one in 1986, will make it happen. Entire cities will fall into gang violence. Their economies will collapse and that will have a ripple effect on their suburbs and on entire states.

America will be a more dangerous and poorer place. And the politicians will talk some more about banning guns and about building more teen centers for the youth to hang out in between shootings.

Yesterday afternoon a young woman stood by the side of a road holding up a sign. It read “Gush Etzion”. Those two words summon up spittle-flecked rants about Zionist settlements from the anti-Israel left.

But for Dalia, it was just home. And then it wasn’t.

Dalia caught a ride to a bus stop on the way home from her job as a children’s occupational therapist. Her next stop was a shift at Yad Sarah, a volunteer organization for the elderly and disabled.

But before that could happen, a Muslim attacker did what songs, cartoons and posters distributed by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas encouraging “Car Jihad” had been telling him to do.

He ran her over with a Mazda van.

With the 26-year-old woman on the ground, the courageous Islamic Jihadist stabbed her as she lay dying. Then shouting Allahu Akbar, he began slashing at an unarmed man who had stopped to help. When the unarmed man fighting him off with his bare hands proved too much for the knife-wielding Jihadist, the killer fled, was wounded and taken into custody.

Dalia’s father, a volunteer with Magen David Adom, Israel’s Red Cross, heard that there had been an attack. He did what countless Israeli fathers and mothers began doing right after they heard the news. He called his daughter. There was no answer.

Despite being only in her twenties, Dalia knew what was coming. This wasn’t her killer’s first act of terrorism and it wasn’t her first time as a victim of Islamic terrorism.

When she was seventeen years old, Dalia was attacked by a knife-wielding terrorist in the same place. But the terrorist didn’t have a van and there were armed men at the scene.

“I stood on February 28, 2006 at Gush Etzion Junction when a terrorist came and began to stab those standing at a hitchhiking station,” she would later write.

She described terrorists for whom prison life is “like a hotel”, who watch television, take courses and contact their lawyers. “Those who stab Jews have their rights and privileges. The injustice cries out to Heaven.”

“Punish and expel those who threaten us," Dalia wrote, “no matter the cost to them. They must pay the price for their terror. That is the only way the terrorism will end.”

As you read this, Dalia Lemkus will have already been buried. Her parents and her five brothers and sisters will have cried over her grave. Her killer will receive the best possible care in an Israeli hospital. The Palestinian Authority will use the foreign aid it receives from the United States and the European Union to pay him a salary for life. If he gets out, he will be entitled to everything from special housing to free medical care paid for by you, by me and by all of us.

Stabbing a young woman in the neck while she lay in the street made him a hero of Palestine. He has become a model of Muslim manhood, little boys in UNRWA schools will be taught about his great deed and encouraged to follow in his footsteps. And they will, just as he had followed the example of those great Muslim heroes who had murdered Jewish women and children in Hebron before he was born.

The educational system staffed by Hamas supporters and paid for by foreign aid does its work well. Some countries turn out future doctors and scientists. The Palestinian Authority turns out heroes who can nerve themselves up to take on a 26-year-old Jewish woman as long as they have a few thousand pounds of van or at least a butcher knife on their side. Not to mention Allah and the Koran.

Dalia’s killer may remain behind bars where Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch will complain that his smartphone isn’t fast enough, that his Coca Cola isn’t fizzy enough and that the clothes he shops for remotely with his family using the money that the Palestinian Authority pays to the families of its heroes don’t fit him correctly. But it’s also possible that he will be set free.

He was before.

Dalia’s killer had been in jail for terrorism before he was released. Releasing terrorists is how Israel demonstrates its goodwill toward terrorists.

This year, Obama forced Israel to free over a hundred convicted terrorists as a “gesture” just to get the Palestinian Authority terrorists to discuss continuing talks with Israel. Israel was being pressured into releasing terrorists in exchange for an opportunity to negotiate resuming negotiations. And Israel freed most of the terrorists until the PLO broke the deal and went to the UN.

Secretary of State John Kerry told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that it was Israel’s fault because it “didn’t release the Palestinian prisoners on the day they were supposed to be freed.”

The next time that Obama and Kerry force Israel to release terrorists for the opportunity to negotiate the possibility of negotiating with terrorists, Dalia’s killer may be shouting “Allahu Akbar” all over again. And if Israel doesn’t release him on the day that Obama and the PLO want him released, it will be blamed for not wanting peace. What better way is there to achieve peace than by freeing terrorists?

Dalia left her comments on talkbacks in which Israelis shout to be heard above the reassuring lies told by their media. Now she has been silenced. She will be buried in her native town of Tekoa where her body will rest unless the left and their Islamic partners succeed in forcing the expulsion of the thousand Jews of Tekoa, the living in the houses and the dead from the town cemetery.

The State Department, which rejects the existence of the living and dead Jews of Tekoa and wants them gone, responded to Dalia’s murder by urging both sides to show restraint.

The AP’s Matt Lee asked State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki whether she meant that Israelis should show restraint by standing still and allowing themselves to be stabbed.

“If you’re standing at a bus stop or something and someone runs a car into you or comes up and stabs you, I don’t know how to, I mean, those people aren’t, don’t need to exercise restraint, do they?”

Psaki laughed and refused to address the question. But it’s a question that ought to be addressed.

Israel is constantly ordered to show restraint. It is told that its response to Muslim terrorism is disproportionate. But when does proportionate restraint begin? Is it when a Muslim terrorist is running you over with a van and sinking his knife into your neck? Or is it only when the terrorist is down and you contemplate doing something about the men who sent him and will continue sending more like him?

Israel is generously allowed to fight back once the knife is at its neck. But once it breaks free, then it’s told to show restraint. Taking out the terrorist networks that send out men like this would be disproportionate. Refusing to release the killer of Dalia would show that Israel doesn’t want peace.

And no matter what Israel does, how much it sacrifices, how many young women it buries in its cemeteries after they have been run over, stabbed or blown up, no matter how many of their killers it releases, it is always guilty of not wanting peace badly enough.

Critics of Israel like Jeffrey Goldberg insist that its situation is not “sustainable”. And that’s true.

Struggling with an attacker who has a knife at your throat is not sustainable. Either he cuts your throat or you cut his throat. If every time you get enough breathing room to fight back, you try to negotiate with him, instead of doing to him what he’s trying to do to you, then eventually he will kill you.

Dalia survived her first attack. She didn’t survive her second attack. There are only so many second chances when someone wants to kill you. And if you are a non-Muslim in the Muslim world, then someone always wants to kill you.

The price of restraint is death. Negotiating with your killers lets them trade up from a knife to a van, from a stone to a rocket, from an outpost in Lebanon to fortresses within range of your major cities.

Dalia tried to warn Israelis. She tried to warn the world. Now her voice speaks from the grave. It is the voice of the dead. It is the voice of truth.

“They must pay the price for their terror. That is the only way the terrorism will end.”

There are really two Democratic parties.

One is the old corrupt party of thieves and crooks. Its politicians, black and white, are the products of political machines. They believe in absolutely nothing. They can go from being Dixiecrats to crying racism, from running on family values to pushing gay marriage and the War on Women.

They will say absolutely anything to get elected.

Cunning, but not bright, they are able campaigners. Reformers underestimate them at their own peril because they are determined to win at all costs.

The other Democratic Party is progressive. Its members are radical leftists working within the system. They are natural technocrats and their agendas are full of big projects. They function as community organizers, radicalizing and transforming neighborhoods, cities, states and even the country.

They want to win, but it’s a subset of their bigger agenda. Their goal is to transform the country. If they can do that by winning elections, they’ll win them. But if they can’t, they’ll still follow their agenda.

Sometimes the two Democratic parties blend together really well. Bill Clinton combined the good ol' boy corruption and radical leftist politics of both parties into one package. The secret to his success was that he understood that most Democrats, voters or politicians, didn’t care about his politics, they wanted more practical things. He made sure that his leftist radicalism played second fiddle to their corruption.

Bill Clinton convinced old Dems that he was their man first. Obama stopped pretending to be anything but a hard core progressive.

The 2014 election was a collision course between the two Democratic parties. The aides and staffers spilling dirt into the pages of the New York Times, the Washington Post and Politico reveal that the crackup had been coming for some time now. Now the two Democratic parties are coming apart.

Reid is blaming Obama. The White House is blaming Reid. This isn’t just a showdown between two arrogant men. It’s a battle between two ideas of what the Democratic Party should be.

Senate Dems chose to back away from Obama to appeal to Middle America. Obama wanted to double down on his 2012 strategy of energizing the base at the expense of moderate voters. Reid and his gang are complaining that Obama didn’t back away far enough from them. Instead he reminded voters in the final stretch that the senators were there to pass his agenda. Obama’s people are dismissing them as cowards for not taking him to battleground states and running on positions even further to the left.

Reid’s people think that Obama deliberately tied them to him and that’s probably true. It’s not just about Obama’s ego. His campaigns and his time in office were meant to showcase the progressive position that the only way to win was from the left. Obama and his people would rather radicalize the Democratic Party and lose, than moderate their positions and stand a chance of winning.

The left isn’t interested in being a political flirtation. It nukes any attempt at centrism to send the message that its allies will not be allowed any other alternative except to live or die by its agenda.

Obama deliberately sabotaged Reid’s campaign plans, as Reid’s chief of staff discussed, because that strategy involved disavowing Obama and his legacy. In the time honored tradition of the radical left, Obama would rather have a Republican senate than a Democratic senate won by going to the center.

Republicans benefited from a Democratic civil war. They were running a traditional campaign against a more traditional part of the Democratic Party. They didn’t really beat the left. They beat the old Dems.

The old Dems were crippled by the progressive agenda. They were pretending to be moderates while ObamaCare, illegal alien amnesty and gay marriage were looking over their shoulders. They married Obama and it was too late for them to get a divorce. And it doesn’t look any better down the road.

The Clintons became the public face of the Democrats, but Instead of turning things around, they presided over a series of defeats. Bill Clinton couldn’t even save Mark Pryor in Arkansas. Not only that, he had to watch Republicans take every congressional seat in Arkansas and the governor’s mansion.

Bill had wanted Hillary to play Sarah Palin, turning her into a kingmaker and building on a narrative of female empowerment by having her back female senators. Instead Kay Hagan, Michelle Nunn, Alison Lundergan Grimes and Amanda Curtis lost. Not only did Hillary Clinton fail to deliver, but the War on Women narrative was turned inside out by the rise of Joni Ernst. Ernst’s emergence as the definitive new senator of the election killed any chance that Democrats had of spinning the election results as sexist; even if Harkin’s Taylor Swift crack hadn’t done that on its own.

The Dems had gambled that the War on Women could offset Obama’s unpopularity, but voters were more concerned about the economy than the culture war. Not only novelty candidates like Wendy Davis, but incumbents like Mark Udall, tried for what they thought was a winning strategy.

But the War on Women wasn’t a strategy, it was a fake talking point that their own consultants had forgotten to tell them was disinformation that they had created to seed the media and spread fear among Republicans. Romney had won white women in every age group.

Increased turnout by minority women had skewed the numbers, but those numbers reflected racial solidarity, not a gender gap. Progressives had not bothered to tell their old Dem cousins what they were doing. The Senate Dems marched into political oblivion by adopting the Wendy Davis platform to the bafflement and ridicule of female voters.

The War on Women meme was greeted with laughter in New York and Colorado. Senator Udall was dubbed Mark Uterus by his own supporters and performed worse with female voters than in 2008. Meanwhile in Iowa, Joni Ernst had split the female vote which Harkin had won by 64 percent in 2008.

Not only did Hillary Clinton do more damage to her brand by failing to deliver white and women voters, but the Democratic Party is stunned, confused and divided. And the damage is self-inflicted.

The Clintons thought that they could reunite a splintering Democratic Party by taking on a Republican midterm election wave. Obama sabotaged Reid to keep the Democratic Party leaning to the left. Reid is now attacking Obama openly in a way that would have been inconceivable a year ago. Obama’s people are returning the favor by going after Reid and Schumer. The war of the two parties has begun.

The old Dems have no ideas and no agenda. The progressives want to get as much of their agenda done even if it’s by executive order and even if it makes them even more unpopular than they are now. The old Dems have realized that they are the ones who will pay a political price for progressive radicalism.

And waiting in the wings is the 2016 election.

Obama has made it clear that he is willing to nuke his own party to get amnesty done. But for the first time his party seems less than eager to sacrifice its short term greed for the agendas of the left. And the only man who could tie the two wings together has emerged weakened from the Battle of Arkansas.

Amnesty promises radical demographic change, but red state Dems want to protect their positions today. They aren’t doing it for the ideology. They want to stay in office. The mutual backstabbing ended in disaster for the Democrats and there’s no reason to think that the backstabbing is going to stop.

Obama won’t just have to fight Republicans for the next two years. He’ll also have to fight Democrats.