Col Klink:   No it’s not possible, General Mulendorf
Gestapo Captain Borman: With his arm around your shoulders.  
Col Klink: Yes we were friends
Gestapo Captain Borman: Close Friends, and very possibly associated in za plot to assassinate the Führer
Col Klink: I hardly knew the man, went to school together ten years, saw each other every day but what’s that?
Gestapo Captain Borman: You were also best man at his wedding
Col Klink:  Oh, Well I had nothing else to do that afternoon.

Hogan’s Heroes: The Big Picture 1970

In yesterday’s post on the Montreal Anti-Semitic Imam story I pointed out that the press in their writing seemed to miss that the outrage of the Muslim Community to invited guest Jordanian cleric Sheikh Muhammad bin Musa Al Nasr didn’t materialize until after the rest of the world saw the translation of his words in English months after he was invited, spoke and the words put online in arabic. Today’s piece touches on a more subtle but even more telling bit from the story is this quote from Imam Ziad Asali of the Association of Islamic Charitable Projects, presumably someone who knows a thing or two about his religion on the verse sited by the Jordanian Sheikh as reported by the CBC.

The hadith is one of more than 100,000 that are written in many books, some of which are considered authentic, while others are not, said Asali.

Now if your goal is to minimize the role of Islam as understood by Muslims you would do what the CBC did and move directly on, but if you were a reporter interesting is finding the truth, then Imam’s Asali’s quote leads to a rather obvious question:

Is the Hadith and the quote within it considered “Authentic” by Muslims?

Well to answer the question one would need to know what a Hadith is, which one this is and where it came from.

The encyclopedia Britannica defines a Hadith as:

Hadith, Arabic Ḥadīth (“News” or “Story”), also spelled Hadīt , record of the traditions or sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, revered and received as a major source of religious law and moral guidance, second only to the authority of the Qurʾān, the holy book of Islam. It might be defined as the biography of Muhammad perpetuated by the long memory of his community for their exemplification and obedience. The development of Hadith is a vital element during the first three centuries of Islamic history, and its study provides a broad index to the mind and ethos of Islam.

 

Hmmmm it would seem to me then that being a “major source of religious law and moral guidance” and “second only to the authority of the Qurʾān,” a Hadith is not something to be taken lightly and dismissed in the cavalier fashion. One would think Imam Asali would know this.

But even if this is true about Hadith’s in general, the question still remains, is this Hadith a valid one?

The Hadith in question is titled: The Book of Miscellaneous ahadith of Significant Values which in addition to the offending quote has gems such as:

وعنه رضي الله عنه أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال‏:‏ ‏ “‏يتبع الدجال من يهود أصبهان سبعون ألفا عليهم الطيالسة‏”‏ ‏(‏‏(‏رواه مسلم‏)‏‏)‏‏.‏

or in English

The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, “Dajjal (the Antichrist) will be followed by seventy thousand Jews of Isfahan and will be dressed in robes of green coloured satin.”

So the question now on the floor would be: Is The Book of Miscellaneous ahadith of Significant Values an authentic book from a credible source?

Well a quick net search answers that question. It comes from a fellow by the name of Imam Al Nawawi. Here is some background:

Al-Imām Muhy al-Dīn Abū Zakariyyā Yahyā ibn Sharaf al-Nawawī, born in the village of Nawa on the Horan Plain of southern Syria in 631 H. He was the imām of the later Shāfiʿī School, the scholar of his time in knowledge, piety, and abstinence, a hadīth master (hāfiẓ), biographer, lexicologist, and Sufi.

So this is a guy who was an early Islamic scholar but we need more than that.  What kind of guy is he, is he a well known scholar credible scholar of Islam?:

His Character

The scholars, elite of his society, and the public greatly respected Imam Nawawi on account of his piety, learning, and excellent character. He dressed and ate simply and humbly. Devout scholars do not care about attaining worldly possessions, they give preference to religious and academic pursuits, and the dissemination and propagation of faith. They experience more heavenly delight and joy in such activities than those who seek satisfaction in luxurious life styles. He was God-fearing who had high ambitions and aims in the dissemination and propagation of faith.

His Works and Death

Imam Nawawi had a very short life (44 years) but even during this short period, he wrote a large number of books on various subjects. Nearly every work is a masterpiece and a treasure of knowledge. Hundreds of thousands of people have benefited from these works.

Some of the prestigious works of Imam Nawawi, apart from the compilation of the “40 Hadith” (al-Arbaʿīn) include:

Riyāḍ al-Ṣāliḥīn
Commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī
Commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (Al-Minhāj fi Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim)
Sharḥ Sunan Abī Dāwūd
Mukhtaṣar Al-Tirmidhī
Kitāb al-Rawḍah
Kitāb al-Adhkār
Al-Taqrīb fī ʿIlm al-Ḥadīth wa al-Irshād fīhi
Al-Tibyān
Bustān al-ʿĀrifīn
After spending 28 years in scholarly pursuits away from home, Imam Nawawi returned to his hometown. Soon after his arrival in Nawā, he fell ill and died. His works are of everlasting value. May Allah bless him.

Emphasis mine.  That seems like a guy whose work is credible, but are they still sought after today?  Here is Kitaabun.com a site that sells Islamic books and items offering his works

The famous 5th Century Hijri, Ahadith compilation by Imam Al-Nawawi, The ahadith are predominantly from Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim (Other ahadith are from the reliable Books such as Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah and Muwatta Imam Malik),
Considered by Many as the Most Important Book after the Qur’an Simply because it is a Summary of authentic Traditions of the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W).

1900 Ahadith compiled over 372 Chapters and 19 Sections which can be generalised as follows:
The Book of Good Manners – The Book about the Etiquette of Eating – The Book of Dress -The Book of the Etiquette of Sleeping, Lying and Sitting, etc.- The book of Greetings – The Book of Visiting the Sick – The Book of Etiquette of Traveling – The Book of Virtues – The Book of I’tikaf – The Book of Hajj – The Book of Jihad – The Book of Knowledge – The Book of Praise and Gratitude to Allah – The Book of Supplicating Allah to Exalt the Mention of Allah’s Messenger (phuh) – The Book of the Remembrance of Allah – The Book of Du’a (Supplications) – The Book of the Prohibited Actions – The Book of Miscellaneous Ahadith of Significant values – The Book of Forgiveness

About Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277)

Imam Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi was Born in the village of Nawa in Southern Syria, Imam Nawawi spent most of his life in Damascus where he lived in a simple manner, devoted to Allah, engaging single-mindedly in worship, study, writing and teaching various Islamic sciences. .
Although best known for his works in hadith, Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277) was also the Imam of the later Shafi’i school of Jurisprudence, and widely acknowledged as the intellectual heir to Imam Shafi’i. He was a renowned scholar and jurist who dedicated his life to the pursuit of Islamic learning.

emphasis mine. You can see a screen shot here it case it mysteriously disappears tomorrow, but if so you can always go to Amazon.com and find not only his books

but scholarly commentaries on them

Now I don’t claim to be an Islamic scholar, but all this tells me that Imam Al Nawawi is a significant scholar in the History of Islam and that his Hadiths are considered authentic.

So lets get back to his original statement about the Hadith in question from Imam Ziad Asali of the Association of Islamic Charitable Projects

The hadith is one of more than 100,000 that are written in many books, some of which are considered authentic, while others are not, said Asali.

The statement is factually true, this is one of more that 100,000 Hadith, there are many books of them and some of those books are considered authentic and some are not.

However the Books of Miscellaneous Ahadith of Significant values isn’t just one of many books. It’s a historically significant book written by reputable and respected early scholar of Islam that is without a doubt considered authentic by Muslims to this day.

Now it’s of course theoretically  possible that all of these facts that I was able to discover in an hour or two on the net about Imam Al Nawawi and his place in Islamic Scholarship, and the Hadith The Book of Miscellaneous Ahadith of Significant Values are completely unknown to Imam Ziad Asali of the Association of Islamic Charitable Projects, but I suspect not. I suspect instead that he rightly assumed that the CBC had no interest in clarifying this question, and he was right.

Alas for Iman Asali, I don’t work for the CBC.


If you think this and all we do is worthwhile and would like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in your funds we’ll always accept your prayers.

To those who like to argue that Islam is a religion of piece and those who wish to support terror and or kill Jews simply because they are Jews, this story out of Canada reported by CBC news:

Imam calling for Jews to be killed in sermon at Montreal mosque draws police complaint

Larger Muslim community wants apology from mosque and wonders why controversial imam was invited to preach

and at the Daily Mail

Outrage as Jordanian imam ‘recites anti-Semitic religious verse calling for Jewish people to be killed’ during sermon at Montreal mosque

  • A Jewish advocacy group filed a complaint Monday in Montreal, Canada
  • Spoke out against a sermon given by Sheikh Muhammad bin Musa Al Nasr
  • Jordanian cleric is believed to have been invited as a guest to the mosque
  • Quoted a verse that says: ‘O Muslim, O servant of Allah, O Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him’
  • The larger Muslim community has condemned the use of the verse and urged the mosque to apologize 

But in the rush to congratulate the larger Canadian Muslim community on demonstrating their outrage and tolerance themselves on showing how tolerant the media reporting this story are missing two important points. Today let’s deal with the first one:

Where was the outrage of Muslims WHEN IT HAPPENED?

The CBC story states

The sermon took place at the Dar Al-Arqam Mosque in the city’s Saint-Michel neighbourhood on Dec. 23, 2016.

That means this imam spoke three months ago to a crowd of listeners at a Mosque in Canada. If you look at the listeners in the video, did you see people objecting? Did you see people complaining, did you see anyone raising a hand in dissent or even looking uncomfortable? Did any of them run to the Newspapers or even send them a letter saying how outraged they were over the event?

Nope.

Furthermore note what follows

The video was posted to the mosque’s YouTube channel three days later.

So since December 26th this video has been out there in plain sight (at least until this report, I wasn’t able to find it myself) and for some reason neither the folks at the Mosque nor any other Canadian Muslim who happened to watch the video during that time was all that outraged, Nor did any of the Muslims who viewed it, even if they might have agreed with it, think to say to the folks at the Mosque in question: “You know you might want to take that down as it doesn’t reflect well on us.”

Why, I submit and suggest because Canada’s Muslim community didn’t have a problem with it until it became known to non-Muslims and was plastered all over the web so every non-Muslim out there could see Islam preached as it is, by an Imam who knows his faith to an audience of believers completely unfazed by what they are hearing.

That’s when suddenly Muslims in Canada not only made it a point to condemn it to the press, but according to the Daily Mail calling themselves victims:

Another imam, Ziad Asali, firmly condemned the use of the verse.
‘I do not understand how this person was invited to come and give a sermon and spread this hatred in Montreal against any community,’ he told CBC.
‘To use the themes of the Prophet to spread hatred is actually something that is disrespectful towards the Prophet himself.’
Asali also spoke out against any mosque spreading extremist messages.
‘These people, not only do they show hatred towards non-Muslims, they even show hatred to us Muslims,’ he added

Yup, nothing shows hatred to Muslims like the quoting a Hadith of Islam by an Imam of Islam to a group of Muslims.

That the CBC didn’t find this nasty bit of weaseling, worth questioning says something, both about Muslims in Canada and the press that enables them, but there is something worse, but that comes tomorrow.

Closing thought: Canada has no first amendment and considers such speech unlawful so while I consider such laws unjust they had better damn well apply them equally to those who profess Islam as to those who profess Christianity in its many forms.

But if it was up to me as a big first amendment guy if this Imam wants to quote stuff like this and people want to hear him I say it let him because of the principles of freedom of speech and freedom of religion demand it. And By the same token people like me must be free to not only expose him these words, but be free to publicly critique and rebuke him, all those who follow him for expressing such things free to condemn his religion as false and wrong. He has the right to offend, we have the right to express our offense and offend him right back.

The easiest way to find who you are enslaved to is to discover who you are not allowed to offend by penalty of law.
******************

If you like the idea of the new media asking the questions people like the CBC won’t and would like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in your funds we’ll always accept your prayers.

During all that time the theory had been failed to be proven wrong so it could have temporarily have been taken as right but it can never be proven right because tomorrow’s experiment may succeed in proving what you thought was right wrong, so we can never be proved right we can only be sure we’re wrong.

Richard Feynman 1964

Back in my youth one of the more interesting comics that Marvel put out was titled “What If” which provided alternate stories outside of the established Marvel timeline by changing one component of a story (What if Spider-Man joined the Fantastic Four, What if Conan walked the earth today, what if Conan was stranded in the 20th century which was an alternate ending the previous what if alternative event etc…) and postulating a different ending.

When dealing with the MSM however the game is different because rather than postulating on imaginary events we can play with real ones, for example.

What if this video instead of showing Democrats for months stating as fact, that Donald Trump paid no income taxes

Consisted of Republicans making a factual claim about Barack Obama that was conclusively proved false?

Given what we’ve seen in the past our media and press would be not only confronting every single member of the GOP that made this claim, not only asking them why they should be trusted in the present, but further asking other members of the GOP to denounce them.

Or let’s play What IF this tweet from rapper Bow Wow:

“Ayo @realDonaldTrump shut your punk a– up talking s–t about my uncle @SnoopDogg before we pimp your wife and make her work for us.”

and this tweet from the NYT making light of it

Had been about Michelle Obama?

Well as Hollywood in toto tells us we already saw how when a rodeo clown made fun of Barack Obama CNN considered it national news pols were made to condemn him and he was banned for life from the circuit. I suspect that if Mr. Bow Wow was a country singer whose primary audience consisted of Obama opponents pressure would be put on the GOP to condemn him in public, venues would be protested that had him and the journalist who made light of it would not have the public editor of the “paper of record” condemning such a reporter and demanding his resignation for being a misogynist rather than claiming:

After talking to the writer and the Culture editor, Danielle Mattoon, I came away convinced that Deb’s intentions were innocent, that he was not trying to align himself with the off-color sentiments of a rapper, but merely trying to pull off a pun.

The problem is, not everyone is “in” on the joke. Conservatives may use such tweets — or retweets — to further their case that the “liberal media” will do and say anything. More significantly, mainstream readers who hear of or see the tweet out of context might easily take offense. It’s a lose, lose.

…that the main problem with the tweet would be it would be misunderstood or used by their ideological enemies against them.

So in the tradition of Richard Feynman explanation on the scientific method starting with a guess and measuring it against the evidence

I propose the following theory:

The level of Outrage or interest of the media and their allies of on the left concerning any insult or prevarication concerning person or thing will routinely be equal to the inverse of the degree of the political distance between said media / leftists and and the target of said insult or prevarication at the time it is made.

Now in fairness we have years of evidence to support this theory at this time but our media friends can at any time provide evidence that this theory is wrong by simply being consistent in their outrage based not on the source or target, but on what is actually said and done.

They just choose not to.


There isn’t as much money in just reporting and telling the truth as we see it. But if you’d like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in we will always happily accept your prayers

Roger Cobb: Terry? I guess it wasn’t meant to be between us. I’ll always regret that. But I want you to know that, wherever it is you’re going, I hope you’ll be very happy.
Terry Hoskins:: I will. I’ve got a wonderful house, beautiful horses and all the money in the world why shouldn’t I be happy?
Roger Cobb: What?
Terry Hoskins:: If you think I’m really going through with this you’re not just stupid, you’re crazy.
Edwina Cutwatter {in Roger’s Body} What?
Roger Cobb: I’ll handle this. What?
Terry Hoskins::From the beginning I thought if mad Edwina wants to give her money away, she may as well give it to me. I never thought that “Flying Nun” could do it.

All of Me 1984

One thing about the Trump Tax story that’s actually more interesting than the left going from:

 Trump is keeping his tax returns from the Public because it will hurt him

to

Trump tricked us into releasing his tax return to the public because it will help him

Is  this question being asked by Allahpundit:’

Maddow’s fans idolize her as a smart liberal with a supposedly foolproof bullsh*t detector — yet here she was last night not only bullsh*tting them at length about the news value of the returns but quite possibly doing so as an unwitting pawn in a limited hangout by the Trump White House. She got suckered by someone, maybe the Republican president himself, which is something that should never, ever happen to MSNBC’s liberal eggheads. It’s sufficiently bad for her brand that it’s hard to imagine how she could have rationalized one night of mega-ratings as being worth the letdown and loss of faith in her judgment that she’d suffer among her regular fans. So I ask again: Why the ridiculous hype? I can’t figure it out.

which is even more cogent given this excellent point

by the time she finally got into the details of the 1040, it was Geraldo and the Al Capone vault all over again. Which brings us back to the question: Why? Why make viewers wait with bated breath for something you know can only disappoint them?

John Ziegler’s explanation is that hype is usually inversely proportional to actual news value. That is, it’s because Maddow knew she had nothing that she had to draw out the suspense. If there was anything truly juicy in the return, he reasons, don’t you think it would have been revealed by NBC’s hard news division, most likely Lester Holt’s program, instead of by Maddow during the 9 p.m. hour of liberal power?

So the questions on the floor are:

Why did Maddow push this?

Why are MSNBC and the rest of the press are still pushing it‘?

The Answer is as Stacy McCain alludes to is:  this is what the liberal rubes want.

After finally “reporting” the numbers, Maddow then filled the extra time with a lot of blabber — wild speculation about what sinister secrets might be hidden behind those opaque numbers. She suggested there could be debts owed to shady foreign entities (Russians, nudge, nudge, wink, wink) who could thereby influence Trump’s policies. While it is of course possible that such things could be true, speculation is not news, or else I could win a Pulitzer Prize for my seven-part series speculating that Rachel Maddow could be having a secret affair with Mika Brzezinski. Because, hey, why not?

The circular logic of Maddow’s “investigative journalism”:

  1. Donald Trump is a Republican;
  2. Republicans are evil;
    therefore
  3. Somewhere, there must be evidence of how evil Trump is.

Really, that’s all she’s got — a belief in Trump’s evil, which permits her (and every other liberal journalist) to constantly locate mountainous “scandals” where anyone with common sense sees only a molehill. Ever since Hillary lost the election, the media have been dogpiling every possible variation on the Russians-hacked-the-election conspiracy theory, because that’s what their core audience of disappointed Democrat voters want to believe. [emphasis mine]

Remember we’ve seen this before, when the Target was Michelle Bachmann

For many months we’re heard about Bachmann “scandals” that have been ready to break .

With a left dying to beat her and a media scoffing at and hating her it would be only a matter of time before the chickens would come home to roost.

Bull.

You have an IRS that was leaking tax information to the left, you have an AG going after Fox news reporters and their families, you had a press united in their disdain for the congresswoman and you think if there was some there there we would not have seen some actual meat out there?

And of course there was Fitzmas, when the entire left was convinced that prosecutor was just a step away from indicting Karl Rove, who would lead to Dick Cheney and maybe even George W. Bush.  Do you remember the anticipation, the jokes on late night and all that?  Stacy McCain did

For the love of God, have we forgotten “Fitzmas,” the 2005 rumor that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald’s federal grand jury was about to indict Rove or Cheney or both? Who could ever forget the ridiculous farce of “investigative journalist” Scott Leopold “reporting” in May 2006 that Rove had been indicted?

And most importantly how it ended for them

05.10.25.BlueFitzmas-X

Stacy again

All of that ridiculous “PlameGate” nonsense was taken very seriously by the mainstream media, as though it were a real scandal that might implicate the president in High Crimes and Misdemeanors, and yet it was transparently absurd from start to finish.

That sounds really familiar doesn’t it, Trump Russia, Trump and Taxes, Trump and Bannon, etc etc etc the MSM keeps pushing this stuff, not because they believe it but because they know their customer base on the left does and will keep believing, and even if They’re burned

They just keep grabbing the next one.

You see liberalism is a religion and Their primary belief is that Conservatives/Republicans are the focus of evil in the world and we’re only one leak or investigation away from them being exposed forever.

That’s why this 2nd tweet from Ali is evergreen

Just substitute Bush, or Cheney, or Rove, or Palin, or Bachmann, and that tweet would be true in the past. We can put Conway or Bannon instead or (or along with) Trump and that sentence still works. And someday and someday in the future those names will be replaced by Republicans we’ve never heard of.

But the Democrats will still be the same and the MSM and the professional left will be there to play them, just as Ironically Buzzfeed reports that even Brett Kimberlin is back to play the rubes. Yeah Kimberlin is a bomber, a con man, a violent mendacious serial litigator but he’s not so stupid as not to recognize an easy mark when he sees them.

This is religion for the left and they’ll keep believing no matter what reality says to the contrary and if it doesn’t pan out they’ll wipe away their memory of their last failure just like Wikipedia wiped away Fitzmas removing its entry & redirecting it down the memory hole and grasp the next “scandal”.

I’ll give the last word to Peter Cook and Rowan Atkinson who demonstrate here

that Monty Python isn’t the only British comedy that the left has mistakenly decided was actually a guide to life.


Alas there isn’t as much money in just reporting and telling the truth as we see it. But if you’d like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in dollars we will always happily accept your prayers.

The worst part of the Trump tax story is what it doesn’t to the favorite meme of the left.

We are constantly told that the rich need to pay “Their fair share” in taxes and Democrats constantly use that line to justify all kinds of tax increases that affect the rich and middle class alike.

With that 35 Million figure it’s going to be pretty hard for the left to argue that President Trump doesn’t pay his fair share particularly since that figure doesn’t count state taxes, local taxes, payroll taxes, property taxes, excise taxes, sales taxes, personal property taxes and any of the assorted fees that he might be required to pay.

So the question on the table for Rachel Maddow and the left:

How much of someone else’s money do you have to take from someone before they’ve paid “their fair share”?

Take your time.

Exit questions:

  1. If the left considers it legit to leak Trump’s taxes illegally does that mean it’s open season on anyone they consider the enemy?

  2. Will reporters start complaining when their tax returns start leaking?

Over the last few weeks the leftist media have elevated several Democrat successes in retaining seats in blue state races that they were already favored to win as a sign that the Trump era is already in retreat.

Oddly enough I haven’t seen them promote a result that, for my money, is not only the biggest election story since November, it is  fact one of the biggest stories of a week full of big stories.

It comes from Rutland Vermont where incumbent mayor of 10 years Chris Louras was beaten in a 4 person race by a city counselor  in his latest attempt at re-election as Vermont Public Radio reports:

In Rutland, the third time was a charm for challenger David Allaire, who unseated longtime mayor Christopher Louras in a surprise upset.

Allaire, a 19-year veteran of the Rutland City Board of Aldermen, won 52 percent of the votes in a four-way race against Louras and challengers Mike Coppinger and Kam Johnston.

Louras, who had held the job since 2007, won 34 percent of the votes; Coppinger won 13 percent and Johnston 1 percent.

Now you might be thinking: sure it’s a tad unusual for an incumbent to lose like that and for a challenger to take over 50% in a 4 person race but even so why is a mayors race in the land of Bernie Sanders is that worthy of a post here? Well it turns out last April the sitting mayor introduced a plan that might sound a tad familiar to those who follow national politicts:

Officials in Rutland say the city will take in 100 Syrian refugees beginning in October. Rutland Mayor Christopher Louras said he’s been working closely with state and federal refugee agencies to create Vermont’s first relocation community for Syrians.

The refugee announcement was made at a packed City Hall press conference Tuesday.

It’s worth noting that the April Story from Vermont Public Radio seemed to lionize the decision here’s a screen shot from the online piece

Look how they bold the mayor’s dramatic words. See how important this move is (I thought the “cultural enrichment” line was interested so I highlighted that myself)

Well in fact it was SO important that he didn’t bother to consult either the people or the aldermen

Last week, Rutland Mayor Chris Louras announced about 100 refugees would be arriving in the city starting in October. The announcement came as a surprise to local lawmakers and residents, who up until that point had not been told anything about the plan.

And it turns out that liberal as Vt in General and Rutland in particular is, that didn’t sit all too well:

Critics of a plan to bring 100 Syrian refugees to Rutland lambasted city officials and resettlement experts during a heated Board of Aldermen meeting on Wednesday night.

Many aldermen complained that they were shut out of deliberations on the plan, which was hatched by Mayor Chris Louras and the nonprofit Vermont Refugee Resettlement Program.

“I have a big concern about how this has played out … behind the backs of the city of Rutland,” Alderman David Allaire said before a standing-room-only crowd of more than 100 people in the Godnick Adult Center. “How can you come to our city and decide for our citizens what information is to be released and when? How can you ever regain the trust of the citizens of Rutland?”

Well it’s actually pretty easy to decide for the citizens if you make sure they get no say:

Voters in Rutland will not get the chance to weigh in on whether to bring in 100 Syrian refugees. A 6-4 vote by members of the Rutland City Board of Aldermen fell one short of the seven needed to put it on the ballot.

Nearly 100 people attended Tuesday night’s Board of Aldermen meeting to weigh in on that issue.

Several board members expressed frustration that Mayor Christopher Louras had orchestrated the refugee resettlement effort without their input. They complained the secrecy and lack of information early on had put them in a difficult position and created unease among many local residents.

Aldermen Matt Bloomer says he felt torn. On the one hand, he supported bringing refugees to Rutland and he voted against putting the issue on the ballot.

“But I also felt like it would be difficult to ignore the petition and just throw it in the trash and say, ‘We disagree with the public vote,’ and we’re not going to do anything to address the concerns of what I feel is a fairly decent size part of the community,” Bloomer says.

Apparently it wasn’t difficult enough for the Alderman to allow the public to vote on the issue.

So with the quashing of a public vote in July the program proceeded, by September the Obama Administration approved the plan, even Trump’s election wasn’t going to derail it:

Rutland Mayor Chris Louras has risked his political career on a controversial proposal to welcome 100 Syrian refugees to his long-struggling city, and spent most of the past year beating back fierce opposition and nativist rhetoric from his critics.

Despite president-elect Donald Trump’s victory after a campaign in which he vowed to bar Muslim immigrants from entering America, Louras said he and his allies are proceeding apace.

I love the pejorative in that first paragraph don’t you?

True to his word the plan proceeded and so in the final week of the Obama Administration the first refugees arrived in Rutland.

A family of Syrian refugees arrived in Rutland on Wednesday, according to the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants. Another family is expected to make it to the city on Thursday evening, said Stacie Blake, the USCRI’s director of government and community relations.

And while President Trump’s 1st executive order was a danger to the plan, once it was overturned the only thing standing in the way of the full contingent of refugees arriving was the Mayoral election in March which given the liberalism of Vermont and the support of the press was likely a foregone conclusion particularly with the opposition divided into three parts and all of his opponents not daring to oppose resettlement but objecting to the lack of transparency. In the final debate he bluntly stated that the world would judge Rutland on this vote:

Louras, who’s been mayor since 2007, stands by his actions and says Rutland will be defined by its attitude toward refugees and by the results of next week’s election.

“I have absolutely no regrets with respect to bringing refugees to Rutland,” said Louras after Wednesday night’s forum. “And the fact is, I would challenge anyone in this community to look into the eyes of the children, as I have, and challenge them to say, if I had my way, you wouldn’t be here right now.”

The 56-year-old says resettling refugees creates economic benefits and brings more youth and diversity to a city that he says needs both. 

And who could be against “economic benefits”m “youth and diversity”  certainly nobody in Vermont the land of Bernie Sanders.

Nobody, except the voters:

In unofficial voting results, David Allaire, a city alderman and leading critic of the resettlement, trounced Louras, a 10-year mayoral incumbent, by a 776-vote margin, according to results cited by the Rutland Herald and WCAX-TV.

How could this be? After all his success in bringing Syrian refugees to Rutland was “legacy defining victory” according to the press. How could he have lost?

Rutland Mayor Chris Louras didn’t utter the word “refugee” during his reelection kickoff speech, and tried desperately to make the campaign about more than just the resettlement debate that roiled his city for the past year.

But Wednesday, as he processed his lopsided defeat to Alderman Dave Allaire, the chief opponent of his plan to bring 100 Syrian and Iraqi refugees to the city, Louras said he had been wrong on two key points:

One, the refugee issue was the only one that mattered to voters. And two, he was apparently mistaken in his oft-stated belief that the refugees’ supporters outnumbered their opponents in the community.

“In spite of the fact that we tried to make this campaign about issues and about facts, the reality is that it was in fact a referendum on resettlement,” Louras told Seven Days. “They voted on emotion. Rutland is a microcosm of the national dialogue around immigrants and refugees [and] I believe that was  the major contributing factor to this campaign and to the voters’ decision.”

Now I’m not from Vermont nor Rutland but If I had to guess I’d say the major factor in the decision was a bunch of people who decided they not only knew best but that anyone who thought otherwise was some kind of bigot or racist and suggested it to their faces.   This comment from the final story really says it all.

Mayor Louras,

You need to stop blaming your loss on the refugee situation you created..

You clearly lost because you are a deceitful person and have no problem lying to the public.

I think it is sad that you cannot accept that and you still want to cast a dark cloud on the hard-working honest people of Rutland Vermont and the surrounding area.

When I attended the mayoral debate I heard you make the statement that everyone is watching to see the results of the mayoral election.

It seemed as though you threatened everyone that if you weren’t elected the people of Rutland Vermont would look like they were against the refugees.

The people in this community should have been allowed to have some input in this major decision but YOU decided to leave them out.

You losing this election is only the result of you being deceitful and ignoring the voters of Rutland, VT.

Posted by Richard Ley on 03/08/2017 at 9:25 PM

I invite you dear readers to take a look at this series of stories and ask yourself Was this not the National Election in miniature played out in the most liberal of states?  A long time pol with the press solidly behind him arrogantly pushing a radical agenda and suggesting till the very last moment that a vote against him would define the electorate as bigots?

Now I’m sure former Mayor Louras will do fine.   Both of VT’s Senators are very old and I suspect the left might be very happy to turn you into a heroic martyr to the cause of resisting Donald Trump and you’ll do very well running again the “rabble” (the word used to describe those who voted against you in comments) who voted you out in seeking national office.

But if I’m the Democrat party, and I’ve just spent the last two months excoriating Donald Trump over his refugee/immigration policies all over the media and I can’t win an election that was admittedly a referendum on taking in refugees in VERMONT, I’d be pretty scared right now.

Perhaps that’s why the MSM which found former mayor Louras’ refugee plan newsworthy in January for their paper of record

 

They hustled into the church on a biting winter evening, unburdened themselves of scarves and gloves, and settled into pews to sound out words in Arabic.

“Ahlan fii Rutland,” said Fran Knapp, a retiree who lives about 20 minutes away, one of two or three dozen people who have attended a class here on rudimentary Arabic.

Welcome to Rutland.

It was one of many preparations this remote city in central Vermont is making before 100 refugees from Syria and Iraq arrive here over the next year, with the first expected to come later this month.

The plan’s fiercest advocate has been the mayor of Rutland, Christopher Louras, who has cited not the moral argument for resettling refugees, but an economic one:

 

has apparently decided this local election story in the 3rd largest city in Vt wasn’t worth bringing national attention to and left it to places like Breitbart and me.

Unexpectedly.

Update:  Fixed a typo in paragraph 3 and woke from my overnight job to an Instalanche Thanks Stephen.  If you have the time please check out my extensive amount of interviews from CPAC,  (my latest with Senator Santorum is here) There were so many that even with two posts a day with two interviews per post  they won’t all be up till the 13th just check the bottom of the Santorum post and keep scrolling.  Interviews with Cynthia Yockey, James O’Keefe, The Former head of CPAC & the NRA David Keene, Lee Stranahan and more still to come.

Update 2:  Commentator Bill Peschell notes the NYT online links an AP story on the result.  so noted

Update 3:  Commentator Cardinal ACK notes the voice of Rutland online doesn’t consider the city liberal.  However in the last election Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 46% to 42% with  Johnson at 3% and Stein at 1.5% and 59.9 % of the vote in the primaries were cast in the Democrat race vs the GOP.

I suppose for Vermont that as liberal as most

***************************

 

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

If you like and you trust what you see here and want to help pay for it (not to mention mitigate the costs of hospital bills and debt from work that both my wife and missing as she recovers from her “routine” surgery please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to cover major events in person all over the country and do this full time every day.

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



If you are not

President Merkin Muffley: But this is absolute madness, Ambassador! Why should you *build* such a thing?
Ambassador de Sadesky: There were those of us who fought against it, but in the end we could not keep up with the expense involved in the arms race, the space race, and the peace race. At the same time our people grumbled for more nylons and washing machines. Our doomsday scheme cost us just a small fraction of what we had been spending on defense in a single year. The deciding factor was when we learned that your country was working along similar lines, and we were afraid of a doomsday gap.
President Merkin Muffley: This is preposterous. I’ve never approved of anything like that.
Ambassador de Sadesky: Our source was the New York Times.

Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Stop Worrying & Love the Bomb 1964

While Donald Trump has only been in office a few weeks it’s already pretty easy to see the pattern of how he operates, he’ll put something out there, the left/media will loudly denounce/disclaim what’s been said and then within a few days or weeks events end up showing Trump right. The best example of this is Sweden where Trump talked about their problems concerning Islamic immigration. The media , which spent years ignoring stories concerning this, pronounced it all phony and right on cue a new set of riots took place for the people who had not been paying attention before to see.

The media’s decision to go all in on denials of Obama Administration wiretaping of the Trump campaign, which is notable for the phase “without presenting any evidence” following any mention of the current president’s claims highlighted by the repeated. You can’t go to a MSM site without seeing people loudly saying that Obama did not or could not have ordered the bugging of the Trump campaign.

The first problem for the MSM narrative came when Glenn Reynolds pointed out in his USA Today piece that the Obama administration has a history of this kind of thing

It’s certainly not impossible to believe that the Obama administration spied on Trump. Obama wouldn’t be the first president to engage in illegal surveillance of opposition candidates, and his administration has been noted for its great enthusiasm for domestic spying. In an effort to plug embarrassing leaks, the Obama administration spied on Associated Press reporters and seized the phone records not only of a Fox News reporter but also of his parents. Obama’s political allies even alleged that his CIA spied on Congress.

Nor is it unbelievable that under the Obama administration, supposedly non-partisan civil servants would go after political opponents. After all, the notorious IRS scandal was about exactly that.

This must have been news to USA Today’s readers who normally aren’t treated to the stories the MSM has done it’s best to ignore.

The next blow came from old friend Yid with Lid who noticed an interesting coincidence, at the New York Times

On January 19th and 20th 2017, The NY Times reported that wiretaps of people on the Trump team were passed along to the Obama White House, one of the story’s authors was Michael S. Schmidt. On Saturday that same Michael S. Schmidt was one of the reporters who wrote the story, “Trump, Offering No Evidence, Says Obama Tapped His Phones.” That’s right, the same NY Times reporter who was one of the sources for the President’s claim, said that there was no evidence for the claim.

This post noting the NYT arguing with itself got him not only the attention of Breitbart and others but the well deserved attention of Rush Limbaugh which spread this evidence even further.

And Jeffrey Lord a CNN regular put the icing on the cake at the American Spectator:

Obamagate is here.

And Mark Levin is on the case. First on his Thursday radio show and then in his appearance on Fox and Friends over the weekend, Mark laid out in chapter and verse the mainstream media’s own reporting that the Obama administration was responsible for using government agencies to spy on its political opponents — namely Donald Trump, his aides, and then-U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions, now the Attorney General of the United States.

Said the former chief of staff to U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese III:

This is not about President Trump’s tweeting; this is about the Obama administration spying.… The issue isn’t whether the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign or transition of surrogates; the issue is the extent of it…. Donald Trump is the victim. His campaign is the victim. His transition team is the victim. His surrogates are the victim.

To the question of whether former President Obama was involved? After noting that there were repeated stories on the government’s spying of Trump and others in the New York Times and the Washington Post — newspapers unquestionably well-read by the Obama White House — the talk radio host added: “I will tell you this, he’s more involved than he says; it’s his executive branch.”

Bingo!

It will be a fun week on CNN as the panels he’s on explain where all the “Trump Russia” stuff comes from while at the same time denying any wiretapping, of course as Andrew McCarthy noted the demise of that line of attack might be an interesting side effect of this whole business:

Here’s the most interesting part: Now that they’ve been called on it, the media and Democrats are gradually retreating from the investigation they’ve been touting for months as the glue for their conspiracy theory. It’s actually quite amusing to watch: How dare you suggest President Obama would ever order surveillance! Who said anything about FISA orders? What evidence do you lunatic conservatives have — uh, other than what we media professionals been reporting — that there was any investigation of the Trump campaign?

But have you noticed? While all this head-spinning legal jibber-jabber goes back and forth, the foundation of the false narrative we’ve been hearing since November 8 has vanished. Now that we’re supposed to believe there was no real investigation of Trump and his campaign, what else can we conclude but that there was no real evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia . . . which makes sense, since Russia did not actually hack the election, so the purported objective of the collusion never existed.

How bad is it, so bad you have law professor & Obama voter Ann Althouse writing this short post which I quote in full

I’m tired of reading things like “President Trump’s astonishing and reckless accusation that he was wiretapped on orders from President Barack Obama should finally be the tipping point in how the country views him and his presidency.” (That’s E.J. Dionne in The Washington Post.)

From what I’ve read, “ordered” is the weasel word that allows anti-Trumpsters to make flat statements portraying Trump as out of his mind. But the notorious Trump tweets do not say that Obama “ordered” a wiretapping. They ask if it is “legal for a sitting President to be ‘wire tapping’ a race for president prior to an election?” and refer to what a court had done. Though Trump didn’t precisely say this, any “order” came from the court. He then said “President Obama was tapping my phones,” which isn’t to say that he “ordered” it. I think the story Trump is relying on is that the FISA court granted a warrant (after some funny business to get around a previous denial), not that Obama just “ordered” it. Then, Trump tweeted that Obama had gone “low… to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process.” Trump portrays Obama as doing something, not “ordering” it.

Unless the anti-Trumpsters can speak clearly avoid the safety of that word, I will not trust what they say. 

Well that’s logical, after all the MSM is apparently asserting that they’re past reporting can’t be trusted either.

Exit Question 1. How bad is it for the left when even Erick Erickson, the origonal Trump foe hitting the attacks on him.

Exit Question 2. How long before we see the first Judicial Watch FOIA Suit on the subject?

Update: There’s a reason why I perfer paper books to electronic it makes it much harder for the NYT to change this:

into this


and pretend they never said what they did.

I’d be very interested in discovering when this change took place. If it was after the President’s charge against the Obama admin then it speaks volumes about the left trying to re-write history.

On the bright side it provides an actual legit reason for a conservative to buy the dead tree version of the Times


2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

If you like and you trust what you see here and want to help pay for it (not to mention mitigate the costs of hospital bills and debt from work that both my wife and missing as she recovers from her “routine” surgery please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 209K+ unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to cover major events in person all over the country.

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



If you are not in the position to hit DaTipJar We will be very happy to accept your prayers

Former Congressman Bob Michel died last month just shy of his 94th birthday.

Michel was elected in 1956 and represented his district in Illinois until his retirement in 1995 he became a member of the GOP leadership in 1975 and became house minority leader in 1981 until his retirement so for 20 years he was either the GOP leader or the #2 man in the house for the Republican party .

Given that he was in congress for the passage of some of the most consequential laws on the books (such as the various civil rights act) during Vietnam and Watergate, and was in the leadership during the Reagan and Bush years you might think that Congressman Michel’s death might have gotten a little more attention.

You would be wrong.

You see even though he served under GOP presidents for more than half of that time you almost never saw hide nor hair of Mr. Michel on the evening news, or on the cable shows or getting much press in the paper. In fact the one memory I have of him was a reference in Tip O’Neil’s autobiography where he gives a quip about how Michel has “his eyes on the speaker’s chair” and that it’s all he’s going to have and I was an absolute news junkie in my youth.

Why, is this the case? Well that’s because during his entire 38 years in the congress he was in the minority and no matter what his opinion on legislation barring a huge divide among Democrats on an issue neither his party’s opinion in general nor his own opinion in particular mattered one jot (although the National Review would disagree). If a Democrat was in office they weren’t needed and if the GOP was in office it was all about securing enough democrats to pass the president’s priorities

“But DaTechGuy?” You ask, “That’s ridiculous, after all Nancy Pelosi has spent the last 6 years in the minority, she has little or no chance of getting back the majority before 2022 and the next round of redistricting and thus practically zero chance of influencing any legislation, yet every single day you have the media quoting her, the Newspapers making headlines of her declarations and the Sunday shows discussing her moves. And not only her a day doesn’t pass when a Democrat congressman is not on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC CBS, PBS etc talking about their priorities.” In fact Nancy Pelosi was on Jake Tapper’s show this week!

And my answer is, Exactly.

Bob Michel was a republican, a conservative, maybe not as conservative as some but a conservative nonetheless.

That means as far as the MSM was concerned. He was a non-entity, a minor personage, a person whose opinion was not sought, whose comment was not important enough to be worth the time of a media whose only objective is to advance the desires and the objectives of the Democrat party.

So the next time someone tells you that the idea of the MSM being “Democrats with bylines” or “out to get Trump”, or the “opposition party” is nonsense, particularly someone my age. ask them who Bob Michel is and what they remember from his time in congress.

Their silence and ignorance will speak volumes.

If you want to understand how the MSM operates the best illustration comes from this very short video

Because why talk to one of 10,000 conservatives excited to be at CPAC or speak with attendees and shoot dozens of videos with them to find out what they think if they support Trump when you can find one Nazi looking for publicity and paint all those who dare support your opponent in the White House with that brush?

Alas for them CPAC was smart enough not to play that game.

Well, things aren’t going too well for white nationalist Richard Spencer who showed up at CPAC today:

Spencer replied that Grizzly Joe is a moron who can’t dress: And shortly after this exchange, Spencer was kicked out of CPAC:

While not as important as the video above the next two videos show the pack mentality in action.

The best thing to do in that situation? Abandon the pack!

I think I’d rather be out there interviewing a dozen folks in attendance rather than losing 40 minutes in the hope of getting one shot as part of the crowd.

If you’re interested in telling your readers a story rather than saying “look at me I’m media!” that’s the way to go.

Update of course I have my own fake news story but that’s for tomorrow.


DaTechGuy at CPAC 2017 (all videos not blogged about yet here)

2/24
Voices of CPAC 2017 Donald Trump Single lines from CPAC speech as he makes them
Voices of CPAC 2017 the Indefatigable Kira Innis

2/23
Voices of Cpac 2017 Steve & Shen, Ed Morrissey of Hotair and a Kellyanne Conway Cannoli Story
Voices of CPAC 2017 Radio Row Sharon Angle & Rick Trader Daria Novak & Frank Vernuccio
CPAC 2017 Photos & Brief videos from the Sean Hannity Taping

Voices at CPAC 2017 Advocates: Melissa of Able Americans, Matt of American Majority
Voices at CPAC 2017 Yvonne (from almost #NeverTrump to Evangelical Coordinator) & Michael
Voices of CPAC 2017 Joe on Life behind the Berlin Wall

2/22

Voices at CPAC 2017 Liz a Cook County Republican (and Kasich delegate)
CPAC 2017 First Interviews Theresa an Attendee and Rob Eno of Conservative Review

2/21
Some Quick pre-cpac video and thoughts

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

If you like the work I have done at CPAC and wish to support it (along with paying for the ER & Surgery bills for DaWife’s illness that our insurance doesn’t anymore (thanks Democrats and Obamacare!) please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 209K+ unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to cover major events in person all over the country.

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Last week a person on Gab asked me to: “explain how to journalism” I replied with seven points

1. Write the truth as you see it
2. Don’t be afraid to admit a screw up.
3. Say what you think, let the other guy do so too.
4. Never edit an interview dishonestly.
5. Don’t get angry over critique
6. remember being wrong isn’t the same as being evil
7. be open about your biases

I think that hold up pretty well, and I’d add one thing for the sake of CNN’s Anderson Cooper who just spent the last hour saying there’s no evidence of any voter fraud in NH.

8. Remember Choosing not to cover a story doesn’t make it not exist.

That’s important because while CNN and the left totally ignored voter fraud stories out of NH, Granite Grok the premiere political blog of the state was on the job

Here is my favorite of the batch:

Well, she’s got another opportunity for fame and misfortune. Elected house Democrat and Fiance Committee and party leader Cindy Rosenwald has the additional distinction of having allowed someone who is currently a regional field director for Virginia candidate for Governor Terry McAuliffe to register to vote from her home in Nashua last November.

Skip broke the story last night on the Grok. He nick-named Rosenwald’s 101 Wellington Street in Nashua home “The Rosenwald Rest Home for Wayward Voters.” I was thinking more along the lines of the “Rosenwald’s Vote Fraud Redoubt”, or “Cindy’s Nashua ballot Box Buffet- “Everyone leaves stuffed.”

I’m sure CNN has an intern or two who could go through those stories and maybe interview some of the groksters, but of course that wouldn’t be good for the narrative would it?

Incidentally I wrote about this back in 2013, where was CNN then?