Alt-Right

Alt-Right Nativists Launch Witch Hunt Against Chobani Yogurt Founder For Helping Refugees

They want to stop even private charity by private citizens

|

Not to put too fine a point on it, but in the libertarian moral universe, liberal government programs are bad and private charity is good. In fact, one of the core

Syrian refugee girl
Bengin Ahmad via Foter.com

libertarian arguments against government aid is not just that it is wasteful and inefficient but that it displaces private acts of philanthropy. Over time, this erodes a functioning civil society that thrives on voluntary altruism that Alexis de Tocqueville praised as the true and unique spirit of America. (Sorry Ayn Rand!)

This is one reason — beyond just ordinary human decency — that libertarians should be particularly alarmed that alt-righters are now going after Chobani yogurt founder Hamdi Ulukaya for using his own money and his own resources to help resettle Syrian refugees legally admitted into America after "extreme vetting." (It takes up to three years of screening by multiple agencies before refugees are admitted into the country which is why the risk of an American being killed by a refugee-perpetrated terrorist attack is one in 3.6 billion, lower odds than dying by their clothes catching fire. Even then, since Syria's civil war began in 2011, the U.S. until last year had admitted fewer than 1,600 of Syria's estimated four million refugees. After a lot of international shaming, the Obama administration took in 10,000 Syrian refugees this year, still a pittance given that more people have been displaced in this conflict than in World War II.)

As I noted in my Reason feature, "Muslim in America," post 9-11, a cottage industry of Muslim baiters has sprouted in this country that has turned demonizing Muslims from a hobby to a livelihood. Led by Pamela Geller of the Draw-the-Mohammad-Cartoon fame and gutter sites such as World Net Daily and Breitbart, they make their living off of depicting every Muslim community in America as a precursor to a caliphate in the United States. And now they've all turned their collective sights on Chobani's Ulukaya.

Ulukaya, a Muslim, is the kind of immigrant success story that has Made America Great – Again and Again and Again. He came as a student in the 1990s to New York from a Turkish town near Syria. But within a few years, he started selling feta cheese and kosher yogurt made from his family recipe to a Long Island grocery store. His products were so popular that by 2005 he had purchased a defunct Kraft factory with an $800,000 loan and within 10 years turned it into a $1.5 billion yogurt empire employing 2,000 people with plants in New York and Twin Falls, Idaho. In fact, during my recent visit to Syracuse, an old white cab driver who drove me to Colgate University regaled me with stories all the way of just what a boon Chobani had been to local dairy farmers (the company purchases 4 million pounds of milk everyday) and local youth looking for decent employment (Ulukaya pays workers far above minimum wage, offers generous benefits such as company-paid maternity leave and recently pledged to give away 10 percent of the company's shares to employees).

But because Ulukaya is an immigrant himself, even before the current refugee crisis, he had made it a point to hire fleeing refugees, both in upstate New York and Idaho which has a history of resettling refugees that dates back to at least the 1970s when the Vietnamese Boat People started arriving on America's shores. Indeed, Idaho, which for half a century has relied on immigrant labor for its agricultural economy, has among the largest refugee populations in the country on a per capita basis. And Ulukaya has always employed these refugees – first Nepalese, Vietnamese and others – and now also Syrians and other Muslims. About 30 percent of Ulukaya's Twin Falls factory labor force is composed of refugees because, he believes, "the minute a refugee has a job, that's the minute they stop being a refugee"—and, one might add, they become far less likely to rely on government welfare. He offers them transportation from their camps and special translation services to help them settle into their new workplace. None of this costs local taxpayers a dime. Nor does it displace native workers given that unemployment in Twin Falls is less than 4 percent.

All of this is not just laudable, but entirely in keeping with America's pre-welfare state tradition in the early 20th Century when fraternal organizations of various ethnic groups funded by members provided insurance and other social services to new arrivals, as University of Alabama libertarian economist David Beito has richly documented.

But where most people see goodness and success, alt-righter nativists see darkness and danger.

Chief anti-Muslim conspiracy monger Geller got the ball rolling against Ulukaya this summer. She dubbed his plea during the annual Davos summit to corporate CEOs to assist Syrian refugees as "stealth jihad in Davos." This Cassandra warned these companies that if they employ fleeing Muslims they should be prepared for lawsuits for prayer rooms, prayer times, or stopping the line for Islamic rituals. "He [Ulukaya] is Muslim — they won't hurt him," she declared. "But mark my words: Airbnb, LinkedIn, MasterCard, UPS and IKEA will all be the target of Islamic supremacists."

World Net Daily followed suit with its own charming little anti-Ulukaya jihad, running a piece with a headline – subsequently changed, as The Daily Beast's Jamie Kirchik reported—"American Yogurt Tycoon Vows to Choke U.S. With Muslims." The story claimed, falsely, that refugees were being sent to Twin Falls specifically to work at the Chobani plant.

The worst, however, was Breitbart that dedicated a reporter to filing regular dispatches from Twin Falls. One dispatch misleadingly linked an alleged 500 percent spike in tuberculosis a few years ago to the opening of a Chobani plant. The spike consisted of six cases over eight counties, not just in Twin Falls, up from one case the year before. But the real kicker, Kirchik notes, is that none of cases were found to be Chobain employees. Another "story" — in the true sense of the term — mischaracterized an inappropriate sexual encounter of minor refugee boys with a five-year-old girl as a "gang rape."

A white nationalist organization misnamed the American Freedom Party used such ammo for robocalls all across Idaho to discredit the state's refugee resettlement program by informing listeners that the "nonwhite invasion of their state and all white areas constitutes white genocide." This is the same racist outfit that endorsed Trump, points out Kirchik, calling him the "Great White Hope," and paid for robocalls on his behalf in the run-up to the Iowa caucuses.

Accusing immigrants of bringing disease, crime and debauchery is a perennial leaf in the nativist playbook. Indeed, 150 years before Breitbart and WND arrived on the scene, nativist, Know Nothing publications such as WASP and Judge were running cartoons depicting immigrants as harbingers of "disease, immorality and filth."

But an added twist in the age of social media, reported The New York Times last week, is that alt-righters have mobilized on twitter to issue death threats not just against Ulukaya but also Shawn Barigar, the mayor of Twin Falls. The rap against Barigar is that he is a "globalist corporatist" who is colluding with Ulukaya to help him secure cheap labor and Islamicize America — accusations that have ominous and obvious parallels with anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda that accused Jews of taking over international banks in order to undermine Western civilization.

Chobani's saga shows of course the ongoing radicalization of the restrictionist movement both in its demands and its methods. No longer is it content on calling into the Rush Limbaugh and other right-wing talk shows to oppose amnesty for illegals in the name of an alleged rule of law. Now it touts its nativism openly and makes no pretense of its agenda to stop all immigration — family-based, refugees, economic migrants including, mind you, the high-skilled variety that Alabama Republican Senator Jeff Sessions, a nativist hero, recently attacked at a Trump rally, suggesting that the H-1B visa program for foreign techies should be scrapped. And it is willing to use any means necessary to accomplish its ends — including violence and intimidation to stop private acts of charity by private individuals on trumped up (no pun intended) charges of harm to natives.

This is a profoundly indecent and anti-freedom movement that should spook all decent people, but especially libertarians.

NEXT: A watershed moment for marijuana legalization

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. An article about nativism by Dalmia. May the shitstorm of comments begin!

    1. Making more coffee now

        1. My best friend’s ex-wife makes $95/hr on the laptop. She has been unemployed for 6 months but last month her income with big fat bonus was over $15000 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more on this site… http://www.Trends88.com

          1. This is most likely the most sensible comment in this entire thread.

            1. This is most likely the most sensible comment in the entire thread.

      1. My best friend’s ex-wife makes $95/hr on the laptop. She has been unemployed for 6 months but last month her income with big fat bonus was over $15000 just working on the laptop for a few hours.
        Read more on this site… http://www.Trends88.com

        1. The laptop, you say? Get out!

  2. “Refugee” is an inherently question-begging term. The scam’s been exposed. Inform yourself.

    1. Refugees don’t exist! I read it on VDARE!

      1. Open borders – not even once.

    2. “Inform yourself.”

      Yeah, it is not like we don’t know the end of the story. Just look across the Atlantic. How’s it working out for Europe?

  3. Darkness and danger? it seems to me You are the one shouting dark! danger! the fucking alt=right is a fictional media creation, typical

  4. Shikha,

    Re: “This is the same racist outfit that endorsed Trump, points out Kirchik, calling him the “Great White Hope,” and paid for robocalls on his behalf in the run-up to the Iowa caucuses.”

    You’re accusations that some people are voting for Trump because they are irredeemiable racists and assholes is morally repugnant. I’m cancelling my Reason subscription, burning copies of all my Reason magazines and throwing all the ashes into a particle accelerator so that the subatomic particles can be stripped of their top quarks. Pathetic.

    1. You’ve made a number of comments on Reason too. Time to throw yourself from the top of a public works bridge.

      1. Or he can just stand on it long enough for it to crumble beneath him.

        1. Probably happen sooner than him paying his mortgage.

    2. They aren’t racist because they are supporting Trump. They are supporting Trump because they are racists.
      I mean if their argument is that Trump will stop the “white genocide”, what other conclusion can you draw?

  5. Refugees are eligible for all welfare and other benefits as Americans the first day they arrive in the US

    Refugees agencies pretend they are charities but in fact are thinly disguised government contractors who get paid for every “refugee” they handle

    By handle i mean they give out taxpayer money and benefits until they are signed up for Federal, State and local taxpayer paid for benefits.

    Here are some of the benefits the refugees can get

    Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) formerly known as AFDC
    ? Medicaid
    ? Food Stamps
    ? Public Housing
    ? Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
    ? Social Security Disability Insurance
    ? Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD) (direct services only)
    ? Child Care and Development Fund
    ? Independent Living Program
    ? Job Opportunities for Low Income Individuals (JOLI)
    ? Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
    ? Postsecondary Education Loans and Grants
    ? Refugee Assistance Programs
    ? Title IV Foster Care and Adoption Assistance Payments (if parents are ?qualified immigrants ? refugees, asylees, etc)
    ? Title XX Social Services Block Grant Funds

    1. Is there no end to your suffering.

      1. No, my taxes go up every year.

        1. Maybe you should go to Syria as a refugee from American taxes.

          1. Since we can’t break our addiction to giving people free stuff, we must round them all up and ship them out. That will solve the problem. I use a similar strategy for midnight snacking – I put a big chain around my refrigerator at night and swallow the key. So far it’s working great, though it aggravates my diverticulitis.

            1. I know just how you feel. Tony aggravates my diverticulitis, too. That is to say – he gripes my ass.

          2. Then you have to pay the Jizya, unless you convert of course.

          3. Taiwan is more suitable.

          4. Tony, I am more than willing to accept any non-terror affiliated refugee who wants to come here. However, in exchange, ten progressives are stripped of citizenship and sent to the Marxist paradises you all so envy for each refugee taken in. So are you in?

            FYI, I will choose who goes.

    2. All of those goodies of course completely alter the quality and type of migrants that we receive. Incentives matter and on this issue the cosmotarians/left libertarians/thick libertarians or whatever you want to call them, pretend that incentives are wholly irrelevant to the issue. Immigration is another government program, make no mistake about it. It’s been custom formed to facilitate the growth of the state and the popularity of statism within the electorate. Welfare taken with immigration as we have it, promotes low IQ and low skill immigration by making it artificially easier for those people to subsist in the advanced American economy.

      This government program is a crime against society.

    3. And refugees are pretty much exempt from local welfare fraud investigations.

      1. And refugees are pretty much exempt from local welfare fraud investigations.

        [citation needed]

        1. its amazing how these nazis pull this out of thin air. TANF requires residency & in my state requires you be a woman w/ children, cant own a car or other property totalling over $500 & a host of other shit. plus the application process takes months, multiple meetings w social workers, etc. the fastest application u can process is food stamps – you can get those in about 90 days provided you are homeless (if u have any income it takes longer).

          different states have different procedures and processes for how they dole out funds, but no one is eligible for anything “their first day” off the boat – minimum requirement is state residency & thats 6 months everywhere, and in just about every state in the union citizenship is a requirement also.

          1. Sounds about right. Of course, my experience with the bureaucracy is jury duty, the post office, drivers license office and I have to admit online sites have helped avoid many wasted days and wasted nights.

    4. If they have good jobs at the yogurt plant, they won’t need those benefits.

    5. That’s an argument for limiting welfare, not keeping out refugees.

  6. I like their fruit on the bottom yogurts. Have one everyday.

    1. You’re supposed to shake it up first.

      1. yo gurt to be kidding me.

  7. Do you think Is Reason pissed off because the Alt-Right has become more influential in the last year than the libertarians have been in the last 50?

    It really sucks not to be the cool new kids at school anymore, doesn’t it?

    1. The alt-right is a coalition of movements not really a movement unto itself, so it’s not a fair comparison.

      The alt-right actually have a fairly sizable libertarian faction that are probably the most influential in terms of the economic thought that prevails among the whole coalition.

      1. that are probably the most influential in terms of the economic thought

        Well, except for all the populism and pro-fascist stuff that crops up.

        1. No, not “except for”, just “in addition to”. Everyone is part of the mix that is the world.

          1. I just don’t see the fairly consistent trend of ‘businesses/the economy exist to benefit the nation/Volk’ in alt-right decisions as particularly pro-libertarian in terms of economics. To them capitalism works, but it exists to serve the interests of the group, not the individual.

      2. the alt-right is a coalition of movements not really a movement unto itself,

        Hmm. Two thoughts:

        (1) Maybe that’s not a bad description of libertarianism? You’ve got your anti-tax, you’ve got your legal pot, you’ve got anti-eminent domain, etc etc

        (2) If not, then perhaps libertarianism would be stronger if it was more of a coalition?

        1. The Cato folks went thru a stage of thinking (2) 40 years ago. Except not thinking of the -ism, but the movement, as that.

        1. Insightful, and brilliant.

  8. “Ulukaya pays workers far above minimum wage, offers generous benefits such as company-paid maternity leave and recently pledged to give away 10 percent of the company’s shares to employees”

    Sounds like a good target for a hostile takeover

    1. Not only is this un-American bastard offering above-minimum wages, generous benefits and an ESOP, he’s doing it making foreign shit like fetid cheese and coleslaw yogurt – and get this, he’s lived in New York for how long and the fucker is still so unassimilated he’s still going around being nice to people for no reason? That’s just downright unacceptable!

      1. You can’t be a true American until your hopes and dreams are crushed.

      2. I know. He had to flee to Idaho! To escape the crazies!

  9. “He came as a student in the 1990s to New York from a Turkish town near Syria”

    So right befire 9/11, hmm, very interesting

  10. Yes it’s a witch hunt. The key is to make up excuses to cry “witch!” and then attack them with pitchforks or midnight panty raids or perhaps some other more “humane” way to round them out and then abuse and exploit them. A fun time was had by all.

  11. Is this “Going after”-stuff Shikha accuses these Nativist types of…. just exercise of free speech?

    Because I seem to recall that’s what people called it when SJW-types mob-shamed/boycotted/forced-out-of-business various groups which were on the wrong side of some other culture-war battle.

    e.g.

    when the left-wing twitter mobs went after Memories Pizza for saying, “(hypothetically) we’d not cater a gay wedding (but no one’s ever actually asked)”…. they were driven out of business. And what was the reaction from Reason?

    supporters of gay equality can do anything they want (short of violence) to combat the views of the O’Connors.

    pretty unequivocal. free-speech is free speech. Robby there goes on to say that, as long as the public doesn’t compel government to intervene and stop this business from doing what it chooses to do, its all fair game.

    And Shikha’s bashing of her perceived enemies in the press is also all well and good up until she starts pretending that Sticks and Stones are being used.

    e.g.

    … it is willing to use any means necessary to accomplish its ends ? including violence and intimidation to stop private acts of charity by private individuals

    Which is funny – because everything cited as evidence up until that point was just “speech she doesn’t like”.

    *forgive me if i ignore unsubstantiated claims of ‘death threats’. aka the “gamergate”-defense.

    1. Exactly what I was wondering. Was shikha up in arms when the head of moxilla was forced to resign for daring to participate in the political process? Reason does seem to have its morality diode in full working order.

      1. They can simply pivot and say, “Well, our hysterical criticism of other people’s speech is just speech too!!”

        of course. But its just that this “defense of free speech”-gimmick they whip out is so particularly selective.

        And, in particular – there is a problem when they start accusing others of the “Sticks and Stones”-stuff.

        e.g. when you characterize some people’s speech as effective-violence …. but then characterize other people’s exact same behavior as *not*

        e.g. Robby says its perfectly Ok for Yelp-mobs to put Memories Pizza out of business, and is ‘not violence”; that the ouster of Mozilla CEO is the market at work, and so on ……but that somehow the people agitating against Chobani or any other private business are somehow acting like terrorists?

        It when this sort of flip-flop becomes apparent that you lose your intellectual credibility.

        I liked Stephanie Slade’s take here, which was more focused on the religious/secular divide, but still relevant.

    2. Most boycotts aren’t even successful. I don’t agree with everyone on immigration but I certainly recognize that this place we call America has room for strange religious cults, furries, drag queens, NASCAR fanatics, meth heads, NRA members, Canadians-by-birth, Republicans, Nation of Islam, communists, anarchists, even Millenials.

      1. I consider myself a staunch libertarian, but I fully support the government knocking on every door, and hunting down every single Canadian and removing them from our great land.

    3. Yup. The double standards are palpable.

    4. Progressivism is nothing if not complete cognitive dissonance towards it’s own malignance and hypocrisy. So goeth Shikha.

  12. “mischaracterized an inappropriate sexual encounter of minor refugee boys with a five-year-old girl ”

    What exactly do you call that?

    1. Yeah, I was kinda wondering the same thing. A lot turns on the age of the “boys”.

      Naturally, no links to anything providing a reliable account of the “encounter” are provided. Good interwebbing there, Shikha.

  13. Syrian refugees legally admitted into America after “extreme vetting.”

    Aren’t some claiming that the inability of these people to integrate into Western society makes their as yet unborn children and grandchildren a risk we wouldn’t have otherwise?

    “(It takes up to three years of screening by multiple agencies before refugees are admitted into the country which is why the risk of an American being killed by a refugee-perpetrated terrorist attack is one in 3.6 billion, lower odds than dying by their clothes catching fire.”

    I think this statement deserves more precise wording.

    Are you saying that the risk of any American being killed in a refugee perpetrated attack is one-in-3.6 billion?

    Or are you saying that the risk of me, Ken Shultz, being the American that gets killed in the refugee perpetrated attack is one-in-3.6 billion?

    Someone dies by their clothes catching on fire every year–it’s just that the odds are it won’t be me.

    Some of us are concerned about government responses to these attacks–not so much about whether we’ll be the victims of the attack itself.

    What’s the risk of more Patriot Act, mass surveillance by the NSA, gun control, financial regulation, etc. in response to an attack. Are they going to come after my pilot’s license? Are we getting national ID cards?

    1. The “odds” argument is mostly nonsense. What are the odds of an American being killed in a terror attack by a non-Muslim refugee? Basically zero. The risk comes from the “Muslim” part.

      1. Perhaps the math is being done backwards here?

        Isn’t the relevant question really “what’s the risk that a Muslim “refugee” will commit terror?

        I doubt Shikha would say that we should stop screening immigrants for infectious disease because the risk of any given American catching a disease from any given immigrant is so low. No, we screen for infectious disease because (a) there’s no reason to take any such risk and/or (b) the risk of an immigrant having an infectious disease is higher than an American.

        1. Exactly. And the risk of terrorism from Muslims (refugees or not, or from their descendants) is hugely higher than from any other class of immigrant. It’s stupid to take any.

          1. Collectives are responsible for the behavior of their worst members. That’s the truly “libertarian” view!

            Americans should not be allowed to immigrate to other countries because the chance that they are Crips or Bloods is hugely higher than from any other class of immigrant. It’s stupid to take any.

            (oh, shit, I’m making the mistake of talking to PapayaSF about immigration again… sigh…)

            1. Well then don’t do it, jerk.

              Your error (one of them) is to ignore the fact that it is perfectly rational and fair to judge “collectives” by their collective beliefs. A religion is a set of tenets. It is not “collectivizing” to judge individuals by their membership in an ideological collective. I don’t want Communists to immigrate, either. Of course few Communists have personally created mass famines or tossed people into gulags, but those behaviors are intrinsically connected with Communism.

              The Muslim religion is explicitly and fundamentally anti-liberty, anti-gay, anti-women, anti-separation of church and state, anti-Jew, and anti-every other religion. Their official, stated destiny is to rule the world via totalitarian sharia law. Of course every single Muslim does not act on those beliefs every day, but that’s small consolation. “Don’t worry, most of them don’t practice all of their religion!”

              1. Of course every single Muslim does not act on those beliefs every day, but that’s small consolation.

                It’s a good thing that the Christian Bible doesn’t contain any such “obsolete” instructions to kill unbelievers, otherwise your argument wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense.

                Deuteronomy 13:6-10

                13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
                13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
                13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
                13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
                13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

                Don’t worry, though… most Christians don’t practice all of their religion!

                1. For the record, I do think there is a valid critique that much of modern Islamic jurisprudence is effectively pre-“Reformation,” but that doesn’t seem to be the argument you’re making. You seem to be saying that it’s impossible for a religion whose holy books say that you should murder unbelievers to ever reform. But that’s just what happened with Christianity…

                  1. Your error (one of them) is to ignore the fact that it is perfectly rational and fair to judge “collectives” by their collective beliefs.

                    Fallacy of Composition

                    1. No, it is not the “Fallacy of Composition,” cripes. The Muslim religion is defined by certain beliefs. It is not a fallacy to say “Muslims believe what their religion tells them to believe.” If they didn’t believe those things, they would not be Muslims.

                      Now, of course one can argue about details and degrees of compliance and so on. Yes, a Christian can murder, even though the religion says not to. But the core of islam is different than the core of Christianity. It’s not the same religion with a few words changed.

                  2. The Bible was not dictated to Jesus, a perfect copy of the one in Heaven, and the final and unalterable word of God in the language He speaks. The Bible was written by people “inspired” by God, in a bunch of different languages, and acknowledged to have been edited. Deuteronomy is Old Testament, largely supplanted by the New. There’s a lot more room for interpretation than the Quran.

                    The fact that you are making that glib equivalence proves how little you know on this topic. Go away.

                    1. The fact that you are making that glib equivalence proves how little you know on this topic.

                      Yuh huh. I clearly am ignorant of the things you think I’m ignorant of.

                      Or maybe, instead, I’m saying what I’ve now said about three times : the canon does not fucking matter at the end of the day. Buddhist canon in no way justifies the murder of non-believers, and yet Buddhists found supposedly Buddhist reasons to murder Christians in Japan. Similarly, Muslims plainly feel free to pick and choose what subset of the “unalterable word of God” they obey, which you would know if you had ever met an actual Muslim in real life.

                      PS – Still waiting for an answer on where you got the hilariously wrong idea that California’s margin for Clinton is 5%.

                2. Don’t worry, though… most Christians don’t practice all of their religion!

                  Strictly speaking, isn’t Deuteronomy part of the Jewish religion rather than the Christian?

                  1. I almost made that distinction, but… /shrug, Leviticus is also in the Old Testament and Christians (selectively) cite its prohibitions…

                    1. Some Christians selectively cite various things from all parts of both the Old and New Testaments – as does the Devil so they say. I’m neither a believer or a Christian.

                    2. If you read both the old and New Testament I think you learn that Islam is not an outlier with respect to religious conversion by might.

                      Rather it is islam and Judaism that are two peas in a pod. One difference is that Islam converts more readily by the sword. It takes three generations to convert to Judaism.

                      By any reasonable interpretation I think the New Testament stands out for its pacifism in contrast with the other two.

                      Yes “Christians” can also be assholes. That is why I believe in a personal relationship with Jesus Christ that is not dependent upon mortal intermediaries such as the idol and ancestor-worshipping pope.

                  2. According to the New Testament, Jesus did not come to throw out the old laws, i.e. it’s still relevant to Christians. Well except for the stuff he explicitly overturns, or something; I’m not actually a Christian.

                3. I am cooling with banning Jews.

                  You might want to read the New Testament before applying Deuteronomy to Christians.

                  1. Cool with

                  2. You might want to read the New Testament before applying Deuteronomy to Christians.

                    So… Christians no longer believe in the Ten Commandments[1]? Is that the claim that you’re making?

                    [1] Deuteronomy 5:6?21

                4. They do practice all of their religion, you just have no fucking clue what that might be. So you resort to quoting Biblical text, as if Christianity is strictly literal with the entire Old Testament. Which it patently cannot be.

                  1. Never mind that your entire ‘argument’ is nothing more than “look squirrel” because you know you cannot refute the arguments regarding Islam.

                    1. If you think that’s what it sums to, your comprehension of my argument is extremely limited. Have a good day.

                  2. You think I don’t realize that Christians pick and choose which parts of the Old Testament they respect, based on, apparently, absolutely nothing but their personal preferences? Trust me, I haven’t missed this transparent hypocrisy, it surrounds Christians every time they appeal to 2000 year old rules while judging others.

                    God Hates Shrimp, after all. But somehow Christians ignore that bit of Leviticus and skip right to the hating homos bit…

                    1. There is more picking and choosing in the Bible because that’s officially allowed (to a degree). All Christians know that the Bible is not 100% God’s perfect and eternal word. It’s translated, edited, internally superseded, etc. Islam’s relation to the Quran is not the same. They think the Quran is perfect and eternal, and that Muhammad was the “perfect man.” A religion that sees a caravan robber, warlord, mass murder, rapist, and pedophile as “perfect” is going to be different than one built around a pacifist carpenter.

                    2. There is more picking and choosing in the Bible

                      Thank you for conceding that there is “more” picking and choosing in the Bible, but that there is not zero picking and choosing among Muslims vis a vis the Quran.

                      To summarize your view :

                      1) christians and muslims both have holy books that tell them to do bad stuff
                      2) but only muslims are robotic people who must and do obey 1000000% of what their holy book says
                      3) and because the books say those things, they cannot possibly disagree with any part of them without rendering themselves non-muslim
                      4) but when christians hold views that conflict with their canon, they remain christian

                      I agree that there is a continuum of flexibility built into any religious framework, with some religions more able to plausibly justify certain actions than others. But around the time the followers of a “pacifist carpenter” launch genocidal wars of religious conquest, and the followers of a universalist monk execute all non-believers in their country, I start to get the feeling that plausible justification wrt to the canon is not as important as you seem to think it is.

                    3. As a simple example, from this Pew survey :

                      In the South Asian countries of Afghanistan and Pakistan, strong majorities of those who favor making Islamic law the official law of the land also approve of executing apostates (79% and 76%, respectively). However, in Bangladesh far fewer (44%) share this view.

                      Your statements seem to suggest that you would expect a 100% rate among all Muslims. The above dramatic variance among groups of Muslims suggests the reality is otherwise.

                    4. I really need to invent the de-muslimifier ray ASAP. Then I can change them all back to normal.

                    5. God Hates Shrimp, after all. But somehow Christians ignore that bit of Leviticus and skip right to the hating homos bit…

                      The prohibition on shrimp eating was explicitly repealed by a vision to the apostle Peter in Acts chapter 10, if that’s what you mean by “somehow”.

                      You’ll notice that Christians also do not execute the punishment for homosexuality prescribed in Leviticus, although they still believe it is a moral absolute. That’s because the law is fulfilled and they do not have that authority. The penalty for breaking that law was paid by Christ’s death, the same as all others. You think you’re being very clever based on a complete and abject lack of understanding of Christian theology since the Council of Nicea. There’s an old saying nearly as old as the religions you’re clueless about: better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

                5. The Old Testament isn’t part of Christianity, other than as history. The rules in Deuteronomy only apply to the Jews, not to Christians.

                  1. So you know nothing of Christianity?

                    Matthew 5:17-19 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

                    The Law and the Prophets
                    17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter,[a] not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks[b] one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

                    1. So you know nothing of Christianity?

                      Or you don’t. See below. The precise meaning of the verse you’ve cited is that the law is fulfilled in Christ. The fulfillment of the law removed the requirement for punishment, but the law is not abolished. You’ll notice that the penalty for breaking the law or teaching others to do the same is a diminished status in a future celestial kingdom, not the punishment prescribed by the law. That’s because the law is still given full moral authority.

                6. It’s a good thing that the Christian Bible doesn’t contain any such “obsolete” instructions to kill unbelievers

                  It may, perhaps (spoiler: it doesn’t), but the chapter and verse you’ve cited is not an example since the Deuteronomical law in Christian theology was fulfilled by the death of Christ. Christians believe in salvation by faith because Christ served the penalty for all sin by his death and resurrection. So while Christians still believe in the moral teaching of the law, the penalties are no longer required because Christ already paid them for all of humanity – only repentance is required.

                  You’d be on firmer ground leveling the accusation of terrorist theology against the Jews, to whom the law was given and by whom it should still be practiced. But you’d have to wait until the Messianic Era, because until the Jewish diaspora is reunited in Israel under a re-constituted Sanhedrin and a new temple, those laws are not to be enforced.

                7. > most Christians don’t practice all of their religion!

                  It’s not part of their religion, idiot. Christians don’t practice the Old Testament (that includes Deuteronomy – FYI) at all. It’s a history of Judaism *before* Christ – not part of Christ’s teachings.

  14. “Even then, since Syria’s civil war began in 2011, the U.S. until last year had admitted fewer than 1,600 of Syria’s estimated four million refugees. After a lot of international shaming, the Obama administration took in 10,000 Syrian refugees this year, still a pittance given that more people have been displaced in this conflict than in World War II.)

    What does admitting more refugees do to the odds of there being a refugee perpetrated terrorist attack?

    It’s a rhetorical question. We all know the answer.

    1. Japan let in six.

      1. I think we should have a matching refugee-resettlement-program with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, UAE, etc.

        We’ll accept 2 for every 1 they resettle locally.

        1. That policy would actually de-radicalize Saudi Arabia.

      2. Leave us out of this. Here, have some ??

        1. Keep your circles to yourselves. But send more eel.

          1. And more schoolgirl’s used underwear.

          2. I like eels.
            Except as meals.
            And the way they feels.

    1. There have been some good *(and very bad) arguments made about why we need to stop demanding media be ‘objective’

      the very-bad arguments seem to pretend that Media Objectivity is akin to the “Fairness Doctrine”, and requires journalists to give equal time and consideration to both sides of an issue.

      Their case is that ‘some arguments/positions are just *objectively* bad, and there’s nothing wrong with ignoring or pre-judging one side. e.g. no mainstream paper should feel bad that they only run articles about Trump’s ignorant uneducated poor white trash political base. Because that’s what they are, duh.

      Part of the problem with their case is that what they’re really saying is that they want to change what the *definition* of objectivity is = which is just conformity to a popular consensus. Basically, they seem to want to retain the imprimatur of an Unbiased Media, while excusing their own injection of editorial bias into everything. Because that’s what *smart journalists do*.

      The good case against “objectivity in media” is an argument that everyone should put their cards on the table and state their own bias up front.

      The difference between this and the above is that the above tries to pretend that there’s only 2 sides = the “correct (popular) and incorrect (unpopular)” ones. It pretends that there is no ‘other side’ that deserves equal consideration.

      1. There were actually some great examples of the above-mentioned arguments which spring to mind but which i can’t find right now

        (*particularly one from Salon/Slate which basically said, “Journalists are smarter and better informed than readers, so we should expect them to help explain things” -…. yes, i know, it was that bad)

        But just to whip out a sampling…

        Here are a few examples

        1. The problem is that the media is largely comprised of 25 year old asshats. They really shouldn’t be allowed to have opinions.

    2. TED is nothing but a platform for fraudsters and self-promoting hacks.

  15. Yogurt is cultural appropriation.

    1. How about throat yoghurt?

  16. “reported The New York Times last week”

    So this entire screed is based on an article that is most likely total bullshit.

  17. She threatens who?

    Oh…that poor little girl…so heartbreaking! LET’S LET EVERYBODY IN!!

    1. She threatens who?

      A lot of people, when the man you let in instead of or alongside her straps a bomb to her and sends her into a crowd.

  18. If you rearrange the word *syrian*, it almost spells *syringa*, which is the state flower of Idaho, where his Twin Falls plant is….That is fucking scary coincidence.

  19. So I’m searching through Reason… where the hell are the wikileaks dumps?

    A “libertarian” website hasn’t even covered them?

    Maybe Walter Block is on to something.

  20. SD;DR

  21. Yeah Shikha, that Pamela Geller is sure a paranoid, anti-Muslim fruitcake. I mean, it’s not like Muslims tried to kill her or something.

    Yep, nothing to see hear.

    And of course, every single jihadi attack is quickly and loudly condemned by Muslims around the world.

    Islam is an entirely peaceful religion whose teachings condemn violence of all kinds and its founder was a strict pacificist who would have never dreamed of using violence and intimidation.

    Sahih Bukhari (84:57) – “[In the words of] Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'”

    Hey, what awful Islamophobe posted that? Well, whoever it was, they taking it out of context! And besides, there are extremists in every religion. Are you going to deny the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition? Now shut up and vote for Hillary.

    1. I am coming to believe that basic Enlightenment values have a huge flaw. The idea of freedom of religion, that all religions should be treated equally, was (to a great degree) born inside Christianity, as a way of increasing tolerance between Christian sects. It has been extended universally, but it’s hugely problematic with Islam, because Islam does not believe in freedom of religion. You can’t square that concept with death for apostasy, or conversion to Islam by force, or second-class citizenship for non-Muslims living under sharia law, which are all core tenets of Islam.

      1. second-class citizenship for non-Muslims

        Yes, Europe never historically treated religious minorities as “second-class citizens” so your critique here is really coherent. After all, white folks are super “Enlightened” donchaknow.

        1. You are really straining. Religious minorities have had largely equal rights in most of Europe for quite some time. And of course, you’d have to strain to find in the Bible, or in any Christian church, or in any Christian majority country, an explicit belief in second-class citizenship for non-Christians, much less a law enforcing such a thing. And yet that is a core tenet of Islam, and pretty much the case in every country ruled by Islam. It is simply not equivalent to Christianity.

          1. So when Medieval Jews were restricted in terms of what professions they could hold, that was… not resulting from “an explicit belief in second-class citizenship for non-Christians”? There were no “laws enforcing such a thing”? The Spanish Inquisition never happened, resulting in the flight of massive amounts of Spanish Jews? Because the foundational beliefs of Christianity just don’t allow for that sort of thing… unlike Islam?

            I swear, when I read your posts, I wonder if you’ve ever read any history whatsoever. Or are you going with “this all magically ended when the ‘Enlightenment’ happened, so it never happened, but Islam will necessarily stay this way forever”?

            1. The world has changed quite a bit since the time period you’re talking about.

              Equating the past crimes of Christianity to the current crimes of Islam is intellectually dishonest at best.

              1. If the premise is that the holy books command this behavior against non-believer, what is inconsistent? If Christians could eventually “stop” treating non-believers so harshly despite their history of doing so, why can Muslims not?

                Of course, all we have to do is look up the history of Buddhist persecution of religious minorities to understand how unreasonable the whole line of reasoning is… they didn’t need an “explicit belief” spelled out in their scripture to motivate them. Perhaps sufficiently motivated in-groups will always violently abuse sufficiently hated out-groups, regardless of what their holy books actually say?

                1. It’s clearly not about the specific words in the books, because other religions also have terrible shit in their books but they aren’t murdering people in the modern world in the name of it.

                  “Why can Muslims not?”

                  Because they haven’t. But Christians have. Jews have. Buddhists have.

                  You continue to equate crimes from long ago with crimes being committed in the modern world. It’s a false equivalency. When those other religions were committing their crimes, the average life expectancy was about 25, slavery was the world’s largest business and people dumped their shit in piss in the middle of the street. A little murder was par for the course. But in 2016 we actually understand that those things are bad.

                  1. You continue to equate crimes from long ago with crimes being committed in the modern world.

                    What a progressive world view you have there.

                    Someone should tell these Buddhists that they have reformed, because they don’t seem to have gotten the memo and went on an anti-Muslim pogrom in 2013. (“The riot reportedly began when a Muslim girl on a bicycle accidently bumped into a Buddhist monk, knocking over his alms bowl.”)

                    Or maybe someone should tell the Lord’s Resistance Army that they’re not Christian?

                    As I mentioned before, I agree that there are meaningful differences between the current state of Islamic jurisprudence and the jurisprudence of other religions as they relate to violent conversion or murder of non-believers. But PapayaSF and others like him are claiming that this difference is a permanent one.

                    “Islam has yet to reform” and “Islam cannot reform” are two very different statements. I lean towards the “Islam has yet to reform” view and believe my examples are counterpunctual to the “Islam cannot reform” view.

                2. If the premise is that the holy books command this behavior against non-believer, what is inconsistent? If Christians could eventually “stop” treating non-believers so harshly despite their history of doing so, why can Muslims not

                  I realize that you so want to believe that all religions are essentially the same and that since Christianity evolved (from a caricature of violent extremism to pacifism n your magination) that Islam will also do so in due course. The problem with your conception is that you are collectivizing all ‘religions’ together regardless of the beliefs of those religions. Perhaps an analogy will hel you see the follow of doing so (admittedly, probably not):If the premise is that the holy books command this behavior against non-believer, what is inconsistent? If Christians could eventually “stop” treating non-believers so harshly despite their history of doing so, why can Muslims not

                  Commnism and Libertarianism are both ideologies, therefor they are the same category of belief and libertarians would turn to violent repression if they ever gained power, just as communists did.

                  I’m sure that you see that as fallacious, but it is directly analogous to you supposition that Islam will evolve as Christianity has over the last several centuries.

                  1. As far as I can tell, all religions are essentially the same in this regard : believers can and will justify absolutely anything and claim their faith supports it, regardless of how implausible that in light of their canon.

                    Around the time nominal Buddhists start lining up and executing Christians (as in Japan) I’m pretty sure the disconnect between foundational beliefs and the actions of believers is complete.

                    tl;dr – If Buddhists can become murderous despite their canon being anti-murderous, why cannot Muslims become anti-murderous despite their canon being murderous?

                    1. “If Buddhists can become murderous despite their canon being anti-murderous, why cannot Muslims become anti-murderous despite their canon being murderous?”

                      Because there is a significant and fundamental difference in what happens to a person between “become murderous” and “become anti-murderous”. If you can’t see that, there’s no hope for you.

            2. It’s pretty fucking disingenuous to go back to medieval Europe in order to try and paint post-Enlightenment Christians as morally equivalent to modern day Muslims.

              1. medieval Europe

                Ok, how about 20th century pogroms? How about the Final Solution? Were the Russians and Germans somehow not “Christian” when they were murdering all those Jews?

                1. You can’t possibly be serious.
                  http://bit.ly/2fporGS

                  1. So because the putative ultimate goal of the highest leadership was the end of Christianity, the fact that almost all of the people who carried out the orders were Christians[1] before and after their participation is irrelevant?

                    Ok.

                    [1] “54% considered themselves Protestant, 40% Catholic,” per your link

                2. No, I would not say that the Russians and Germans were Christian, especially considering the former’s rejection of any religion that wasn’t the State. And if they tried to claim that the Bible called on them to exterminate the Jews, they were absolutely fucking wrong.

                  Look, I know plenty of decent, hard working Muslims that immigrated here to build a better life for their families. But there’s a huge difference between not killing people when the founder of your religion says you should and killing people when the founder of your religion says you shouldn’t.

                  1. I would not say that the Russians and Germans were Christian

                    Thank you so much for this, it was an hilarious addition to my Saturday night.

                    1. Lol. An explicitly a-religious ideology that officially suppressed all religious writing and murdered hundreds of thousands of clergy in cold blood explicitly because of their faith was a Christian regime acting on the violent theology of the Bible.

                      I’m sorry I responded seriously to you above, I didn’t realize you were an abject and irredeemable historically illiterate retard.

                    2. Of course, you’re spot on about the Nazis though. If there was one thing Hitler loved more than genocide it was Christianity.

            3. The Spanish Inquisition had less to do with beliefs inherent in Christianity then with the State seeing religious fidelity as equivalent to loyalty to the State. Since the Spanish had very recently liberated their peninsula from its Islamic overlords they were a bit sensitive about potential enemies living in their midst.

      2. Yes. Freedom of religion was originally conceived as freedom to practice Christianity.

        Ben Franklin made a reference to Islam in the form of a Mufti but it was hypothetical at best.

    2. Geller was a fruitcake for years before her life was threatened by those idiots. Her entire profession, supported largely by the Israel-right-or-wrong crowd, is anti-Islam activism, seasoned copiously with deliberate provocation of extremist sentiments.

      Your translation is also incorrect. The haddith should read, “Who changes THE religion, kill him,” meaning those who fly a false flag of Islam in an act of insurrection, much like some parties did following the death of Muhammad, leading to the Ridda Wars. “ISIS” would certainly qualify as such a party, which is why you find that it’s mostly muslims who are fighting them. It’s never been about simple apostasy.

      But what do I know? I’ve only been studying Islam for a quarter of a century.

      1. Wow–so I bet you spend your life going around telling Muslims that punishing people for apostasy is wrong and that it should not be done.

        What? No? You don’t?

        Ah.

  22. Led by Pamela Geller of the Draw-the-Mohammad-Cartoon fame and gutter sites such as World Net Daily and Breitbart, they make their living off of depicting every Muslim community in America as a precursor to a caliphate in the United States. And now they’ve all turned their collective sights on Chobani’s Ulukaya.

    No mention of the fact that radical Islamists tried to murder Geller. If you want to bitch and moan about Geller being mean to Muslims, perhaps you want to also be angry about Muslims wanting to murder her. Moreover, since when is there anything wrong with drawing Muhammad or ridiculing any religion be it Islam or Christianity or anything else? By Skia’s standards, someone like Penn Gillette is no different than Geller. He just has a different target. Yet, I don’t remember seeing Dalmia ever criticize Gillette and I have a bridge to sell anyone who thinks she ever will.

    Dalmia apparently buys into the idea that PC dictates against being racism makes insulting or criticizing or satirizing Islam unacceptable in a way that doing so to other religions is not. That is a pretty fucking appalling idea to apear in a Libertarian magazine and for someone employed by such a magazine to hold. We all joke about Dalmia but the reality is she has become an open sore at this publication. I don’t see how reason can continue to employ her and call itself a Libertarian publication.

    1. Leftists find it perfectly acceptable to criticize and ridicule Christians and Jews. But you cannot criticize the religion of peace? Why? Because leftists are cowards and Muslims will cut off heads if you insult their camel merchant prophet and invisible sky god.

      1. Yes, to both John and Hyperion here.

      2. I think it’s funny how leftists pander to both Muslims and gays. I wonder how that would pan out if they achieved one-party rule and implemented their utopia here in the US. Personally, I think they’d throw the gays to the wolves.

        1. You can guarantee they would. They wouldn’t even think twice.

    2. If the Left believed that Islam wasn’t in a Muslim’s DNA, maybe they’d get the big picture. But it’s against the belief system. If you kill all the bad people in a purge, you get Utopia. Meanwhile their leaders understand that’s bullshit. If you scare the fuck out of everyone, you get compliance and thus Utopia.

    3. Well, she says mean things about them, so the attempted murder is entirely logical.

      1. Attempted murder! What kind of a crime is that. Do they give Nobel Prize for Attempted Chemistry?

    4. Dalmia is basically a progtard.

    5. Geller was an anti-Islam activist long before those idiots sought to kill her. I’m not sure why you feel compelled to defend her as if she’s some kind of martyr, which she isn’t. If you want to bitch and moan about a handful of extremists violently reacting to a cartoon, perhaps you should also be angry about Jews lobbying European governments to effectively imprison people merely for expressing “unofficial” accounts of the Holocaust?. That’s a far more widespread phenomenon, and one that receives absolutely no attention throughout America’s vaunted media outlets.

      Comparing Gillette with Geller just demonstrates how little you know about both individuals. Geller, as well as her fellow travelers in the anti-Islam brigades, are devoted specifically to the cause of eliminating the liberty of muslim Americans.

      And I see nothing in this article about curtailing your right to free expression. You’re just firing blanks everywhere like a loud-mouthed drunk, and you’re far less entertaining at that.

      1. Geller was an anti-Islam activist long before those idiots sought to kill her.

        I guess some people have the capacity to see what happens to other people and think, “Hey, that could be me!”, and have a problem with that.

        There’s also that Islam has done more than try to kill her (and everyone else); they’ve also tried to silence her (and everyone else).

        1. I guess some people have the capacity to see what happens to other people and think, “Hey, that could be me!”, and have a problem with that.

          Why? You follow in Geller’s footsteps, laboring to provoke extremist reactions among muslims at every possible turn? If not, the shoe doesn’t fit.

          Tell me, do you have a problem with the Israel lobby’s long-standing, aggressive campaign to relegate criticism of Israeli policies to anti-Semitism and criminalize boycotts of Israeli goods? That’s a far more troubling problem facing us in America today.

          There’s also that Islam has done more than try to kill her (and everyone else); they’ve also tried to silence her (and everyone else).

          Islam doesn’t kill people. It’s a religion. And the number of extremists among us is roughly proportionate to those among non-muslims.

          This muslim American wants neither to kill her nor silence her, and he advocates the same among his brothers in faith, who agree with him. Of course, if you’re a Geller acolyte, you’ll say I’m lying in accordance with my faith, thereby ending any conversation before it starts.

          I’m sure she’d be quite pleased with that.

  23. So, it’s the mythical “alt-right” who are to blame for Muslims from the middle east getting somewhat of a bad rap? I mean, there’s no consideration here that maybe, just maybe it has something to do with calls for jihad, shariah law, and things getting blown up in the name of Allah? I mean, I’m just asking if that’s something that should come into the conversation. Or should we just say all Muslims are good folks and anyone who is suspicious of them should be branded an ‘Islamophobe’ and hateful racist bigot monster?

    I’m pro-immigration. But sometimes I wonder why it’s so important for everyone on the planet to move to the USA. Why is their own country so bad and why can’t they fix it? Global warming? Rethuglicans? LIbertarians? I’m just waiting for a few countries to empty completely, so I can move to one of them and be left the fuck alone. I’m thinking Honduras, since it’s looking like 100% of their population will be in VA or MD within a couple more years.

    1. As insulting, stupid and awful as Damia is, the worst part about her is her conceit that no one could ever have a rational reason to oppose Muslim immigration. She is incapable of acknowledging any possibility that there could be a legitimate criticism of Islam or that Syrian refugees have created problems and given people legitimate grievances regarding their arrival. Nope every position but hers is not just wrong it is done in bad faith and ill legitimate. She is just an embarrassment.

      1. Russia and the US need to stop bombing Syria. Then guess what? They won’t have to flee.

        It’s just a twist on the old drug war strategy – create a propaganda scare about drug addiction or terrorism and use that as an excuse to bomb a foreign country and create a flood of refugees to exploit for cheap labor. Sorry we’re gettin’ wise to your tricks, anarcho-Trumpkins.

        1. “Russia and the US need to stop bombing Syria. Then guess what? They won’t have to flee.”

          And shreek is ready for Hillary, just to make sure that happens! LOL, BLOOP BOINK BONK DERP! The Trumputins are descending on Dogdick to get shreek!

          1. Yes Hillary is terrible, but she’s much better than her predecessors, and she’s improving. Trump is bad and TrumPutin will start WW III against North Africa. Them’s your choices.

            1. She is much better than Obama? You are as always a total racist

              1. Well I was referring to her role as Sec of State. But no she is not better than Obama. (I miss him already.)

                Jill Stein approves this message.

            2. You mean the same Hillary that thinks we should bomb the fuck out of Syria and keeps poking her finger into Putins eye?

              Jesus Christ you are one stupid motherfucker.

      2. Is she Pakistani? Indian Hindus never seem to run out of reasons to oppose muslims.

    2. Plus they are making Chobani – by far the grossest yogurt flavored food by-product ever. Round ’em up!

      1. Nice to finally see you make a legitimate argument in opposition to what someone else writes, Shreek. Great job there.

        1. Or is it a food-flavored yogurt by-product? This distinction will help us tell the witches from the sorceresses.

          1. And here I’d assumed you had already early voted for hillary. Wait, what am I thinking? Of course you have. You’re just trying to figure out how many more times you vote for her.

            1. Sorry I’m shilling for Jill these days.

              Jill Stein approves this message.

              1. Why choose when you can have both?

  24. And if you are going to go after Geller and the people objecting to admitting the Syrian refugees, you might want to at least address the explosion of violence and crime that has occurred in Europe as a result of the flood of refugees. Do the people in Europe who have been victimized by refugees just not count? Is it there duty to die or be assaulted so Dalmia can feel good about herself.

  25. ISIS killed about 400 civilians trying to flee Mosul in mass executions today. And they have kidnapped thousands of people to use as human shields.

    When it comes to jihadis, the only sensible strategy is kill ’em with fire and piss in the ashes.

    1. If we just let them come here, they’ll immediately forget about their silly jihad and become liberal hipsters, you xenophobic CIS shitlord!

      What is really so absurd about this, is any idea that Muslims and our so called ‘liberals’ are going to become the bestest of buddies. It’s maybe the most absurd idea I’ve ever heard.

      1. Each group believes the other group are useful idiots, and they’re both right.

        Both groups know their systems will never be as attractive as free markets and personal freedom. The Frankfurt School said it, Sayid Qutb said it. And that is the reason why the seek its destruction, because it offers a tempting alternative.

        When Qutb returned from his stay in the US, he was in a panic. He knew that there was no way people would pick fundamentalist Islam over liberal capitalism if they had a choice. And that why he considered the US to be Islam’s prime enemy.

        The Frankfurt School bunch saw that there was no way planned economies could deliver the prosperity that capitalism provided, so instead they decided the best way to advance socialism was to undermine all the beliefs and culture that produced it by cultural Marxism.

        1. “Each group believes the other group are useful idiots, and they’re both right.”

          Exactly this.

          And yes, both type of systems you wrote of, have to be forced. Some people will willingly go along, but most people will not. So there has to be force. This is why leftists in this country are rallying against the first and second amendments. Those two things have to be taken out of the way before they can force their oppressive system on everyone.

        2. Each group believes the other group are useful idiots, and they’re both right.

          Literally why Iranian revolution ended how it ended. Sidelined liberals, then mullahs turned out to be faster and better organized than commies and beat them to the prize.

        3. Why is there no +10000 button?

  26. Classic. Libertarian writer says that, basically, business person should be able to hire whomever they want. Libertarian commentariat disagrees. Trumpkins have caused you libertarians to come a long way, baby.

    1. What ‘libertarian’ wrote that? An you used a big L. You already have no good reputation as a serious person. I see you’re not trying to change that.

      1. He used a big L because libertarian came at the beginning of a sentence, Hyperion.

      2. I hope his mortgage lender sends some Temster style thugs to beat the money he owes out of him. I would pay them just to let me watch the savage beating and listen to his shrill screams of agony (plus the unanswered please for mercy…….mmmmmm…..).

        Hard to beat that kind of entertainment.

    2. I haven’t seen anyone say he can’t hire who he wants. What they’ve argued is that there is a distinct possibility that those refugees may not be on the up and up.

  27. See, Dalmia, let me sum up exactly why you’re a hack:

    Pamela Geller? Not alt-right.

    Jamie Kirchik? Not alt-right (boy, these Jews, well loved by the alt-right, am I right?)

    American Freedom Party? White nationalist, anti-Semitic, doesn’t identify as alt-right, but certainly close. Pass on that one.

    “Alt-righters have mobilized on twitter to issue death threats.” Excellent, some actual alt-righters. With no evidence provided and only a vague claim of ‘internet death threats’. ‘Internet death threats’ of course being substantial and worrying things, not the bellows of the mob.

    Somehow multiple individuals and organizations with different goals morphs into the (DUN DUN DUN) united alt-right menace engaging in a ‘witch hunt’. Ultimately, said horrible ‘witch hunt’ of the situation is people exercising free speech rights to say things that you don’t like about groups you like. Which is why you don’t care when the exact same behaviour is enacted towards groups or individuals you don’t care about (see: death threats against Geller herself, common internet statements about Christians, atheists, etc.). Lose the moral condescension, you haven’t earned it.

    1. It’s a blatant witch hunt. Anarcho-Trumpkinism is a far greater threat to western civilization than “radical islamic terrorism”. If you are so scared that they will upload videos to the youtubes and radicalize your own children to jihad against you then maybe don’t have kids in the first place.

      1. AM, you’ve completely went off script there. Did you forget that you’re not logged in as Butthead?

        F-

        1. Teach your children right and wrong, Hype. It’s not too late. Don’t know where to start? Here’s a hint: “In the beginning….”

      2. Accuses other people of a hyperbolic witch hunt, while engaging in his own hyperbolic witch hunt towards Trump supporters. Good job, moron.

        1. Yes but my ‘hyperbolic witch hunts’ consist of ridicule while yours consists of fantasies of rounding people up and shoving them into boxcars and nuking their home countries because “they terrists!!”.

          1. Please do not conflate your delusions with any position I have stated. I have made no statement in favour of anything you have just said.

            Yet for some reason, you had to engage in a paranoid delusion to cast me so. Almost like it’s a witch hunt or something.

            1. Then re-read the comment thread. Playing down death threats is a classic tactic of witch hunts: “Oh they are not being serious in their calls to kill you. You are being paranoid.”

              I condemn violence. You cannot do the same.

              1. No, what I’m actually doing is recognizing why internet death threats are used. They are specifically used because morons like you will engage in Chicken Little freakouts that devalue your position. Particularly in an environment like the internet, where ‘death threats’ are common and often times completely harmless. In the past month I have had multiple people threaten me on the internet, and multiple ones telling me to kill myself. None of them are actually going to do anything to harm me, and they are entirely making those statements in an attempt at social intimidation. The human equivalent of gorillas making eye contact until one looks away. You lose gravitas in the social sphere by treating it seriously.

                I mean, Jesus Christ, I know you’re probably not intelligent enough to have ever studied PSYOP but this is textbook stuff.

                1. True, and I regularly counsel progressives towards suicide.

              2. Yeah, it’s a good thing the left NEVER engages in that kind of rhetoric.

    2. I still cannot figure out who the alt-right are. Why? Because it’s just another scary boogeyman made up by the left. Just imagine when the KGB joins forces with them. Maybe bigfoot has also formed an evil alliance with the alt-right and Trumputin. Who knows, maybe even the lizard people and Illuminati are in on the plot.

      1. It is basically a few dozen full time trolls on Reddit who are somehow a mortal threat to America.

      2. Why? Because it’s just another scary boogeyman made up by the left.

        No, idiots like Dalmia and Clinton are using ‘alt-right’ in the scary boogeyman fashion, i.e. to cast everything they disagree with as a new Beer Hall Putsch. But they do exist on the internet, in extremely small numbers, propped up by sites like Radix. They are ultimately defined by white, pan-European nationalist, anti-Semitic views that either call for a reactionary return to more traditional models or a full-on conversation to a fascist state (there’s still plenty of debate in their circles about this).

        Admittedly I find them rather interesting, but they are not some rising power. Populism is filling that role.

        1. The irony is that by refusing to even acknowledge that there could be legitimate objections to Muslim immigration and calling everyone who voices an objection a racist, people like Dalmia just make the alt right more appealing by making them the only ones who will acknowledge people’s concerns. If the alt right wanted to create a trolling personality to discredit supporters of Muslim immigration it would not look any different from Dalmia.

          1. Alt-right, PUAs, the Longtorsos of the world, etc. are ultimately the counter-response to the social justice thesis. It should not be a surprise to anyone that, in response to a worldview that the white race is some ultimate evil and other races should focus on their own group interests while diminishing their power, a worldview emerges that argues that the white race should do the exact same thing. Human tribalism 101. Libertarianism could ultimately offer up a ‘third way’ to this dynamic, but our current ‘cultural gatekeepers’ are largely content to remain bogged down in it, failing to articulate an alternative in favour of a vague consent to the more popular position.

            Of course I believe Hegelian dialectics are a thing so your mileage may vary.

            1. You can’t have a society where every group but one is allowed to play racial politics. It can’t last. If you don’t want a white identity movement, then tell every other ethnic group that has one to give it up and go to a color blind society. It is all or no one. There is no middle ground.

    3. Alt-righters have mobilized on twitter to issue death threats

      I have no doubt that there are alt-righters who would twit a death threat. However, “internet death threats” are notorious for being false flag operations. Not taking this at face value without corroboration.

      1. Muslims have committed multiple acts of mass murder. The alt right says mean things about people on Twitter. Can’t you see how it is the alt right that is the danger?

    4. See, Dalmia, let me sum up exactly why you’re a hack

      There’s a 1500 character post limit…

  28. Also, this:

    still a pittance given that more people have been displaced in this conflict than in World War II.

    Is a bold-faced fabrication, and you’re either historically ignorant or lying. The report itself actually says after World War II, not in. Because in World War II over a hundred million Chinese alone were displaced in the invasion by Japan. Shockingly, after the war, once the aggressive powers had been crushed and a semblance of order had been returned, refugee populations suddenly dropped dramatically.

    1. She is both ignorant and dishonest but makes up for it by being lazy. Seriously why does reason contintue to employ her?

      1. I wonder the same about Sheldon and Steve Chapman.

    2. Sorry, I missed your post. Mentioned the same thing below. With perhaps a bit more colorful language.

    1. My ball says we should go back to your place and have sex.

    2. Well, it was UWF, which is a glorified junior college

  29. Hey Trumpkins,

    Have we stopped with the “HRC is a mentally deficient Parkinson’s Disease patient” line and commenced with the “HRC is a criminal mastermind who has had the Justice Department kill hundreds of her right-wing opponents” line. I want to know what to tell my friends. Thanks.

    1. No clue. Ask a Trumpkin.

      1. You don’t understand. If you do not 100% support Hillary, you’re a Trumpkin. /shreek and Tony

    2. Tell them what you told your mortgage company: what difference at this point does it make?

    3. AmSoc, you are fucking full od shit. We all know full well you have no friends. No one could possibly ever love you.

  30. Let me just add that any article on refugees that shows a pic of a winsome toddler is just about guaranteed to be propaganda. In the mass immigration of “Syrian” “refugees”, little girls are probably the most under-represented demographic.

    1. Remember when the media were all over the refugee crisis in Europe, showing pictures of little children and women, only, and saying ‘but why are you afraid of a few women and children? How scary can they be?’. And then what do we see? Thousands of young men causing mayhem in the streets of European cities and hardly a woman or child refugee to be seen. Yes, the media are shameless liars, again, as always.

      1. You can’t fool us, those young male “refugees” causing all the trouble are actually the alt-right /media

  31. One of the worst mistakes I have seen her make: stating the number of refugees “in this conflict” is more than from WWII. Are you that fucking stupid?? Check the link. The total number of refugees IN THE WORLD TODAY is greater than the number of people who were displaced at the end of WWII. I mean just think for a minute about what you typed. FFS!

  32. I hope Trump wins – it’s so much fun ridiculing the Nazi Trumptards.

    1. It’s even more fun watching raving dolts, such as yourself, rave doltishly.

  33. Ever notice how blowback only occcurs with Muslims? Every bad act a Muslim commits is for reason totally the result of the actions of the American military. But the fact that Muslims have engaged in a stream of high profile acts of mass murder against Europe and America could never explain why people would object to Muslim immigration. No it is all racism.

    1. The American military is hardly blameless here. Blowing up people in poor 3rd world countries and then bringing those left alive or displaced here, is just bad, moronic policy.

      1. You miss the point. If you believe that then why wouldn’t Muslim terrorism make people not like Muslims?

        1. It does. It’s not that the left have less trust for Muslim immigrants than anyone else does. It’s just that they see Muslim immigrants as life long Democrat voters. That’s all they care about, is their goals. It’s all the left have ever cared about. The end goal is all that matters, by any means possible. If we need to have Shariah law and no-go zones all over the country and a few unlucky Americans die by jihad, then that’s the price that must be paid to get to utopia. It’s Utopia, John, it will be just as glorious as the former Soviet Union! Don’t you get it? Forward, comrades!

    2. Yet Trump never got the expected ‘bump’ from terrorist attacks. Seems like people are realizing that ‘bomb the hell out of them’ won’t solve the problem.

      1. Take your mess Shreek. No one cares.

    3. It isn’t about them being Muslims for me.

      I don’t want the government banning speech–not even speech that’s bad for society.

      I don’t want the government banning handguns–even IF IF IF handguns are bad for society.

      And I don’t want the government discriminating between various religions–even if some religions are bad for society.

      Thankfully, we have an awesome amendment to our constitution that prohibits precisely that.

      There’s a security threat where terrorism is common and so is anti-Americanism. I don’t trust our government’s ability to detect the difference between those who mean us harm and those who don’t–and I don’t understand why we should bother when we could just prohibit them all from coming here and eliminate the risk entirely.

      The government has a legitimate responsibility to protect our rights and liberties from foreign threats, and right now, people from North Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere represent significant threats to our rights and liberties.

      The State Department updates a website for travel warnings:

      “We issue a Travel Warning when we want you to consider very carefully whether you should go to a country at all.”

      http://tinyurl.com/jcshc4p

      If they think we should reconsider going to those countries at all because there are a significant number of terrorists and people who hate Americans, etc., then maybe we also shouldn’t be bringing people here from the countries on that list.

      1. “The government has a legitimate responsibility to protect our rights and liberties from foreign threats, and right now, people from North Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere represent significant threats to our rights and liberties”

        That’s libtard logic. Like saying that people with guns represent significant threats to our rights and liberties, when the truth is, a tiny minority of people with guns.represent significant threats to our rights and liberties. Same with ‘people from ‘North Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere’ a list which includes Tibet, Luxembourg, and The USA.

        1. Actually, no.

          What I said was, “There’s a security threat where terrorism is common and so is anti-Americanism.”

          Them telling us not to go to that list of countries for that reason isn’t libtard logic.

          There is a significant threat from terrorists who want to kill Americans just for being Americans in some of those countries.

          Are you Tulpa?

          1. Probably just stupid.

    4. Wait, you missed the Great Serbian Reign of Terror 1993-2000? Damn, I gotta tell Black Hand Chicago Chapter they need to up their game.

      And who could forget the Vietnamese Revenge Massacres of the mid-70s?

  34. The real question is, “Why we should take any risk that isn’t in the interests of the United States?”

    I’ll call an ambulance to help a homeless guy bleeding to death in street as quickly as the next guy, but, surely, that doesn’t mean I have to take him home with me when he’s released from the hospital.

    There must be something we can do to help that doesn’t include bringing refugees within our borders.

    I think the legitimate purpose of government is to protect our rights, that protecting our rights from foreign threats is a legitimate function of government, and that avoiding the taking of unnecessary risks with our security is part of that.

    Why accept a small unnecessary risk when we could have no risk instead?

    1. “There must be something we can do to help that doesn’t include bringing refugees within our borders.”

      1. Stop invading their countries, blowing up their homes, and killing them.

      2. Stop running a racket to bring all the survivors here for purely political reasons.

      The End

      1. There’s more to it than that.

        The Arab Spring coming to Syria didn’t have anything to do with us bombing anybody.

        No doubt, ISIS wouldn’t be what it is without our invasion of Iraq, but there would have been a revolution and a civil war in Syria regardless.

        Like I said before, if I see a homeless guy bleeding to death in the street, I call an ambulance–even if it means turning to government.

        When refugees present themselves who would die without our help, we probably have a moral obligation to help them. Whether we have a legal obligation to help them is another question entirely.

        I’m just saying that when refugees who would die without our help present themselves, I don’t think that help needs to necessarily be in the form of bringing them to the USA. Life in a refugee camp stinks, but then so does not having anywhere to go before the American backed UN shows up. The choice isn’t really between bringing them here and doing nothing. It’s between bringing them here or not bringing them here.

        1. And no foreigner has any unilateral right to come here

    2. Hmm… how about we stop bombing them? Then they won’t be ‘bleeding to death in the street’ and then you don’t have to take them home with you.

      1. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. And then it votes for Hillary and completely negates the point.

        1. Please decide if the problem with Hillary is that she doesn’t take the Muslim threat seriously enough, or that she’ll be too quick to bomb their home countries.

          1. It can easily be both.

            As we have learned from the email traffic around Libya, bombing someplace is only secondarily about military matters or national security. Its mainly a business opportunity for her cronies.

            1. Like I said, she’s terrible. But she’s better than her predecessors and she’s getting better. She has a strong “NO MORE WAR” wing in her party and she selected dovish Kaine for VP – a very good sign. Whereas TrumPutin will nuke north africa, not to mention the witch hunts described in this article. Them’s your choices.

              1. No she doesn’t.

              2. “She has a strong “NO MORE WAR” wing in her party”

                Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

      2. Jackass, Muslims were bloodthirsty murderers long before there even was an America.

    3. If these refugee status are being vetted then show me where they are being sent back?

      Moreover, it is not legally permissible to vet refugees anyway. You either are in danger if you are sent back or not. There is no “we think you might be a terrorist” grounds to deny an application for refugee status. The entire thing is a fraud. They are not vetting anyone and couldn’t if they wanted to.

      Dalliance is an idiot and doesn’t understand that and actually seems to believe they are vetting these people.

      1. We can send them back if the danger they’re in is due to their home country wanting to prosecute them for legitimate crimes. If the refugee protections were as absolute as you say, it would be impossible to extradite anybody.

    4. From all the reading I’ve done, the Syrian refugees largely prefer resettlement within the region, so long as they aren’t being shot at. Bringing them to the US is just part of some globalist agenda.

  35. Here’s a question:

    How much are we actually spending on this multi-year “extreme vetting”? What’s our global outlay for this program, per refugee admitted? This sounds like a pretty good group of FTEs. What’s the payroll? If we’ve got 100 FTEs working this, that’s probably $15mm/year, easy, and then add in the overhead and out of pocket.

    1. How much are we actually spending on this multi-year “extreme vetting”? What’s our global outlay for this program, per refugee admitted?

      Its part of the State Dept budget. and i doubt it has been significantly over-funded, so basically if they spend more time on refugees, it simply narrows how many they can ‘clear’ per year. Its a bottleck issue.

      Its almost impossible to find an article detailing how the “Vetting” process works which isn’t being spun by some partisan organization, so here’s a couple from competing viewpoints

      Heritage

      Time

      Noted = this piece says that the department has recently “slashed the vetting time to 3 months

      “While the resettlement process usually takes 18 to 24 months, under the surge operation this will be reduced to three months, [regional refugee coordinator Gina] Kassem said,” the AP reported Wednesday.

      1. “While the resettlement process usually takes 18 to 24 months, under the surge operation this will be reduced to three months, [regional refugee coordinator Gina] Kassem said,” the AP reported Wednesday.”

        Because it’s an emergency situation. And if we have to bomb them some more, we’re going to make sure it remains an emergency!

        1. Understand there is no legal basis to deny someone refugee status because you think they are a terrorist.

  36. So, that “child rape” case against Trump got dropped. When even The Guardian said it smells like a scam, that should have been a big clue.

    Meanwhile, the Drudge headline:

    COLORADO: TIED
    MICHIGAN: TIED
    NEW HAMPSHIRE: TIED
    NEVADA: TIED
    PENNSYLVANIA: TIED

    Plus, all the “spirit cooking” stuff. (Now the #2 suggestion on Google if you search for “spirit,” and “spirit cooking dinner” is #3.)

    I’ve been busy, so I don’t know if Reason has covered that and the supposed pedophile code words (cheese pizza, hot dogs, pasta, etc.) in the Podesta emails. I know, it sounds like a feverish partisan smear, but who writes things like this if they aren’t code?

    “Would love to get a pizza for an hour?” (Who gets pizza for an hour?)

    “If you will be around for dinner or pizza on Sunday” (Dinner or pizza?)

    “Hi John, The realtor found a handkerchief (I think it has a map that seems pizza-related. Is it yorus [sic]?” (Huh?)

    “Ps. Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?” (My favorite. WTF?)

    1. Wow. That is weird. My question is why did the NYPD go so crazy and go to battle with DOJ over this? Sorry they found something in the Weiner computer beyond just the usual corruption.

      1. I keep hearing what amounts to rumors of that, but nothing so far. Anonymous claims they are going to drop a blockbuster today, but obviously, that means little or nothing, because anyone can claim to be Anonymous and say anything.

        1. Yeah. It is 2 pm edt and 8pm in Europe. Nothing yet. So I am skeptical.

          1. “Lots more to come”: posted four hours ago.

            1. Anonymous is a bunch of criminals but they generally don’t just make things up let alone something like this.

              This is deeply weird.

              1. It really is.

    2. You can’t really pay too much attention to Drudge headlines. They’re cherry picking polls.

      Looking at RCP avg, right now:

      PA – Hillary +2.5

      MI – Hillary +4

      NH – Trump +1.6

      NV – Trump +2

      CO – Hillary +2.9

      RCP Avg national – Hillary +1.9

      Still, too close to call.

      1. Every one of those states is a statistical tie (within the margin of error). Accurate (more accurate?) to call them “ties” than “leads”.

        1. Yes, every battleground state is now within the 4 pt margin of error. That doesn’t look good for Clinton because some of the polls are intentionally oversampling Democrats. That could = 2 points or more. But who knows if the Democrats can get enough dead people to vote 6 times. Maybe they can.

          1. And even the averages are not looking good. Hillary was up by margins outside of the margins of error in most of those states as recently as ten days ago. I don’t think I have ever seen a candidate collapse like this. Have you?

            1. Trump has the momentum right now, when it counts the most. I am also seeing anecdotal evidence of leaners or even Hillary supporters switching to Trump after the spirit cooking stuff. And no sign of Hillary gaining voters from the Trump side.

              Even on MSNBC, a commenter was saying that her rallies do not seem like the rallies of a winning candidate. Kaine recently had an event in a lobby.

              1. If the election were not held for another week or two, they might not be able to fill a broom closet.

        2. Every one of those states is a statistical tie (within the margin of error).

          You fail statistics forever.

          Margin of error does not mean “within this margin means we don’t know”. It’s a confidence interval. There’s a 95% probability the real statistic is within the margin of error of the reported value, and a 68% probability it’s within half the margin of error of the reported value.

          It also falls off evenly in both directions, meaning that if Hillary is reported as ahead by 3 and the margin of error is 4, then the likelihood that Trump is actually ahead is equal to the likelihood that Hillary is actually winning by more than 6 points. i.e. not very likely.

          Also, averaging several independent polls (as RCP does) shrinks the margin of error way below the margins of the individual polls. So those differences are probably not even within the margin of error.

      2. That being said, Trump clearly still has the momentum for the last week. If Hillary cannot stop this by Tuesday, I think she’s toast.

      3. The average includes polls going back weeks in some cases when you are talking about state polls. So it the race really did shift in the last week, it is not going to show up in the averages. The average only tells you the state of the race if the race is stable over the time covered by the polls included in the average. The race is not stable so the average is not meaningful.

    3. I think you should invest a great deal of time and energy into pursuing your “Pizza” theory.

      (gets popcorn)

      1. Would it shock you if it turned out Podesta is a devient? I don’t know that he is but I would not rule it out either.

        1. ….

          still not sure how we got from “pizza” to assumption of sexual-deviancy, but OK.

          1. John and Papaya know that asking someone to get pizza – or maybe even dinner – is pedo code for “let’s go fuck a child.”

            Open your eyes, stupid.

            1. The emails make no sense is it possible they are code for kids? Sure. How likely that is I have no idea. But I wouldn’t say it is impossible. Why do you think it is impossible as opposed to be shocking and unlikely? Do you know Podesta such that you can vouch for the meanings? If not, then you have no basis to say it is.

              1. There are a lot of strange facts about Podesta, so I don’t see how musing openly that maybe – just maybe – he is a pedophile because he has strange emails is productive in any way whatsoever.

                1. If anonymous were not making the allegation and claiming to have proof of it that they plan to release, I would agree. But they have done that and I think that makes speculating on whether there is any reason to think they are telling the truth fair game.

                2. True, and let’s ne honest. High level democrats tend to be all kinds of vile things. Teddy K. was a murderer and probable rapist, BC is a serial rapist, and possible pedo, Weiner is some form of predator, etc.. That sort of thing is usually overlooked i their party because not only do they have no strict morals, even worse, strict morals are something to be scorned.

              2. The word “pizza” used in those emails is clearly cod for something. Could be beer or a doobie or smack or butt bobbing or any numbe of other things. It is a huge jump however to assume it means molesting kids.

            2. John and Papaya know that asking someone to get pizza – or maybe even dinner – is pedo code for “let’s go fuck a child

              Well, you certainly can’t *rule it out*

              I mean, look at the sort of stuff pedos do these days

            3. Don’t be dense, Crusty. I am not saying all this is true, but it’s mighty weird.

              A handkerchief with “a map that seems pizza-related”?

              “Do you think I’ll do better playing dominos on cheese than on pasta?”

              Please give me the “nothing-to-see-here” explanations of those phrases.

              1. While you’re at it, explain Agile Cyborg

                1. Agile Cyborg is a visitor from an alternate universe that is based on a different set of quantum physics. He also drops a lot of acid.

          2. There are other kinds of deviancy.

            Besides, 14, fish… I’m thinking something in Troy McClure line here.

      2. Well, it’s not my theory, and I am just relaying it and wondering. There are very odd things in those emails that I have no simple explanation for. Like this image, which Podesta emailed three times. What is the meaning of the 14 and the fish? What’s up with the bracelet? Is it just a coincidence that he has a bandage on the middle finger of his left hand, when the instructions in the “spirit cooking” ceremony tell you to stab yourself in the middle finger of your left hand?

        Most. Bizarre. Election. EVER.

        1. Hey, you’re just asking questions.

          1. Yeah. You know when you are a public official and your emails get leaked and contain buzzard criptic references and also that you get invited to Satanic rituals people are going to ask questions. People are like that

            You seem to have the assumption that just because something is really shocking it can’t be true. I don’t know what would cause you to think that. Anonymous says they have proof this is referring to a child sex ring. I will believe that when I see it. But I am not going to dismiss it as impossible either.

  37. OH GOD I HOPE TRUMP WINS.

  38. On a positive note, we just got a new simulation/training mannikin in our labor and delivery unit. These mannikins are incredible; we have a number of them for different purposes. This one does the following (partial list):

    breathes
    pupils dilate,
    simulate a distressed mother,
    simulate a distressed baby,
    simulate a breech delivery, a simple delivery, increased blood loss, etc.
    we can run tracings on her and then once she delivers, we can monitor her vitals.

      1. Keep that away from the perverts….

        1. TW: Only 60% of that page is masturbateable.

          1. You need to learn how to harden the fuck up, mate.

  39. OT: so recently I’ve had an issue here where if I open a new internet window from here on my android and then come back, no charactors that I type in a comment box will display unless I refresh the page first. Anyone else experience this?

    1. I was having a similar problem on my (android) smartphone this morning.

        1. I have Mototola droid turbo II

        2. Same problem here

          Same phone too

  40. mischaracterized an inappropriate sexual encounter of minor refugee boys with a five-year-old girl as a “gang rape.”

    Fuck you for making me Google this. From fucking Slate

    Yet as wild as the rumors were, they’d grown from a kernel of truth. There had been an incident involving three boys, ages 7, 10, and 14, and a mentally disabled 5-year-old girl;

    The youngest boy is from Iraq while the older ones, brothers, are from an Eritrean family that passed through Sudanese refugee camps. (Most news reports have identified the older boys as Sudanese.) Only the youngest boy, Loebs said, is alleged to have touched the girl, though investigators suspect the 10-year-old might have as well; the elder boys reportedly made a video.

    That’s about it. Article is 95% about how Trump’s America is horrible to poor refugees over this. And how, well yeah, it sounds bad, but right-wing media lied. The boys weren’t Syrian.
    What the fuck do you think would happen if 3 white American boys of same ages did this to a 5 year old Arab girl? Think we might hear something? There may be some pants shitting over it? A riot or two?
    Fuck you and your journalist colleagues.

    1. “Why is trust in the media at record lows? And why is libertarianism failing to have its moment at time of extreme cynicism towards the establishment?”

      -Lacking in self-awareness Reason hacks (there’s still some good ones).

    2. Dalmia is a lying sack of shit. Her continued employment at Reason calls the entire organization’s integrity into question

      1. They are a diverse magazine who publish many competing viewpoints. She’s not an employee, she is just a contributor, like Napolitano, Chapman or Richman, providing a vast tapestry of diverse viewpoints.

        Of course they’d all resign in protest if they had to publish an article by, say, Mark Steyn but they are diverse! DIVERSE!

        1. Also has nothing to do with the fact that Mark Steyn would run circles around Richman, Chapman or Dalmia in a verbal or written debate on say, foreign policy or Muslim immigration.

          1. I know, but even on say, police violence or speech, where Steyn aligns with Reason 100% (for example, he says he mentioned the Chipper incident when he was hosting Limbaugh show), he still wouldn’t be able to get the article in, because he don’t like Muslim immigration. Unlike, say, being a commie, this is an unforgivable sin.

            1. I blame the insular DC Reason environment. Reason’s moderate lean to the left is fairly obvious, and I think throwing in some contradicting writers would be healthy. I’ve been saying for years that they need to balance Richman out with an IR realist. Or *gasp*actual international correspondents, not just Dalmia’s India freakouts.

              1. The problem with reason is not that it has writers who lean outside of the Libertarian mainstream. The problem is that they always lean left. Writers like Chapman and Richman will go crazy left but never once does a writer skew right on anything.

        2. She is an employee, just not of reason magazine directly. She’s a policy analyst with Reason Foundation.

          1. That’s the best they can do?

      2. I am astonished by this one:

        more people have been displaced in this conflict than in World War II.

        Its indefensible. Its obviously false on its face, it mischaracterizes the linked report brutally (as noted, its not “this conflict” being counted in the report, its worldwide, AND, its not “in WWII” counted in the report, its post-WWII).

        Stupidity? Propaganda? Who cares? Fire her already.

        1. Stupidity? Propaganda?

          We calls that “journalism” round here parts. Now respect your betters!

    3. mischaracterized an inappropriate sexual encounter of minor refugee boys with a five-year-old girl as a “gang rape.”

      meanwhile, Trump’s ‘locker-room talk’ is de-facto Sexual Assault

      and Brock Turner is a rapist, never mind the actual convictions .

      “mischaracterizations” are the bread & butter of political journalism. If that’s the worst accusation you can make, its basically saying, “i got nothing”.

      1. Brock Turner conviction – time to burn down the internet.

        20 year old’s conviction of raping a 10 year old overturned because he may not have understood he was raping – do not talk about.

        Do you want President Trump? Because that’s how you get President Trump.

        1. Don’t even get me started on the irony of a libertarian magazine going after a judge for the crime of not punishing someone harahly enough. Yeah because setting the precedent that any judge who doesn’t sentence a convicted person to a harsh enough sentence to satisfy the public is going to be run out of public life and have no one who will speak up for him will end real well.

          The reason staff is stupid more than anything.

      2. Really? That’s your rebuttal? It’s ok that reporters misrepresent a situation to serve their own needs because a man who dragged an unconscious woman behind a dumpster, disrobed her, penetrated her with his fingers, rubbed his body against her and only stopped because he was caught wasn’t technically convicted of rape due to the legal definition in the jurisdiction where he was tried and convicted, even though it’s not a universal definition and isn’t a term invented by the legal community there, and someone called him a rapist in a news story? That’s really fucking weak. Do you agree with the SJW community that rape is only penile penetration and only men can rape?

        If you want to argue that Shikha is a terrible writer that doesn’t even read her supposed sources for the crap she puts in her articles, I’ll agree. I usually don’t even read her stories, but was half way through before I realized it was one of hers and figured I would see it through, although I do agree with what I think is her central thesis that the boycott is stupid, just like the attempted Chik-Fil-A boycott, and I wouldn’t purposefully take part if I ever ate yogurt. But Brock Turner is a rapist, and any attempt to whitewash or even diminish that is pretty fucking retarded.

  41. Like the terms “fascist,” “neo-liberal,” “neo-conservative,” and “Belgian” before it, when Pamela (((((((((((((((Geller))))))))))))) is labeled “alt-right,” the term now officially means nothing.

    Thanks, Dalmia!

    1. Well “neocon” was losing steam, “neo-liberal” is uncomfortable for American lefties because of the “liberal” part, and “crypto-fascist” got clotheslined by Red Dwarf*. Society needed new tag for all the Wrong Thinkers.

      *can’t find the clip, I fail at YouTube.

      1. Hillary is the neocon in this election.

    2. Yeah, but yoghurt is still disgusting.

      1. It really is. And, I’m going to lose some friends here, but Mayo is just as disgusting, maybe even more so.

        1. I didn’t;t realize you were ethnically black.

    3. No, I think Dalmia’s onto something, clearly the Jews are so clever and insidious that they’ve already taken over the alt-right! FALSE FLAG, FALSE FLAG, the goyim will never know!

      1. Now that’s 4D chess. Start a right-wing movement, convince them that Jews are the problem, then compromise with “they have Israel, they should live there.”

        Brilliant!

        1. God dammit, Moore, stop making Mr A sound awesome!

          1. Well, you can score heroin from Mr. A….

  42. …that should spook all decent people…

    That is so racist.

  43. Now, far be it for me to disparage an entire state (cough cough Oklahoma sucks cough), nor do I wish to blame the victim, but who da fudge thought that Idaho, yes IDAHO(!), was the best place to resettle Syrian refugees?

    1. I can only speak of the way Canada does things, but. Don’t think of them as “refugees”. Think of them as “future Liberal Democrat voters”.

      Who the fuck concentrates Somalis in Edmonton? People who see the trend of urban centers switching from Conservative to Liberal and want to speed it along.
      Who the fuck removes Syrian Christians and Yazidis from priority for refugee status? People who think Muslim votes are theirs, but Christians might be tempted to go Conservative.

      1. Think of them as “future Liberal voters”.

        Well, until they see the Prime Minister marching in a gay pride parade.

        1. You can get Community Leaders to explain that away, and you don’t schedule elections anywhere near Pride.

          Of course, ultimately they may start creating their own parties (e.g. Respect, which is also a lovely illustration of Marxist-Islamist alliance) but it’s probably easier to keep them within tent federally.

      2. This. They’re dumping refugees into Republican districts so they can (illegally) vote Democrat and turn the House.

        1. Correct.

        2. Refugees! Because democrats can’t compete in the marketplace of ideas. Even with the shittiest version of the GOP ever.

    2. They did not want them anywhere near anyone who mattered. And Obama wanted to fuck people he didn’t like. Also if they had placed them rationally people who supported it would have been faced with the problems it created and might have stopped supporting it. The people in those places already objected. So their opinion won’t change. Meanwhile people like Dalmia can continue to call everyone who objects racist without worrying about ever having to deal with the effects.

  44. Huh, this seems like a fairly unobjectionable article by Dalmia standards.

    /looks at comments

    *Sigh*

    1. You have a strange definition of “Fairly unobjectionable”.

      Starting at the headline there assumptions and moral judgements baked in before you even get to the content.

      I’ve stopped going past the byline on Dalmia articles (I’d stop sooner, but I don’t know the source before then) because of past performance.

  45. I’m making $86 an hour working from home. I was shocked when my neighbour told me she was averaging $95 but I see how it works now. I feel so much freedom now that I’m my own boss. This is what I do,…

    ——————– http://www.jobnet70.com

  46. I’m making $86 an hour working from home. I was shocked when my neighbour told me she was averaging $95 but I see how it works now. I feel so much freedom now that I’m my own boss. This is what I do,…

    ——————– http://www.jobnet70.com

  47. Over time, this erodes a functioning civil society that thrives on voluntary altruism that Alexis de Tocqueville praised as the true and unique spirit of America. (Sorry Ayn Rand!)

    Sorry, Shikha, but the “true and unique spirit of America” is that for the first time in the history of mankind the right of an individual human being to live out his life for his own sake and happiness, without having to justify his existence by service or use to some other entity, was recognized and for the most part, protected. It is that which made America exceptional. It is also what made a truly civil or civilized society.

    1. If my memory serves me right, de Tocqueville praised ‘enlightened self-interest’ or something to that tune. ‘Altruism’ was coined by Comte about the same years and hadn’t yet made mainstream.

  48. “It takes up to three years of screening by multiple agencies before refugees are admitted into the country”

    Because if a government bureaucracy spends a lot of money, and takes a long time to do something, it must be very effective in doing it.

    In an article by a regular Reason writer.

    Sad.

    The is how strong the Open Borders cognitive dissonance runs.

    1. And the longer the screening process takes, the more opportunity fake refugees have to get lost by the system.

  49. No resources, no education or identifiable useful skill, no grasp of the common tongue, a culture antithetical to western values, an average IQ too low to form an acceptable semblance of democracy, a proclivity for child and female abuse, what’s not to love?!
    Why isn’t Reason making the argument that Chobani man do his charitable good deeds by helping “refugees” settle in their homeland or at the very least a land with a comparable culture? Must we (considering our MASSIVE welfare state) be the compost heap every third-world’er gets thrown onto?
    I really don’t think the crux of the opposition is a fear of terrorists, just more low quality throngs of dependents who have a tendency to breed like bunny rabbits consuming what scraps of property and resources we have left. Enough is enough already.

  50. It takes up to three years of screening by multiple agencies before refugees are admitted into the country

    1. “Up to” is a euphemism for “less than”. Common dishonest advertising trick, unsurprisingly deployed by Dalmia here.
    2. The refugees are allowed to stay in the US during the “screening” process, so while they may only be formally admitted at the end of the process, they are really admitted at the beginning.

  51. The Alt-right name is a creation of the leftist media supporting the Hildebeast. I can’t tell if I’m reading Reason or Slate.

    1. No, it is a thing and they (mostly) self-identify that way.

      1. No, it’s only a thing on left-wing media.

        1. You speaking to a member of the Alt-Right. I think you should accept his self-designation.

          1. Why do you speak of yourself in the third person?

  52. Excellent article. Thank you, Reason, for living up to the name. (Some of your readers, on the other hand….)

    1. No. It’s a shit article. The readers have it right, for the most part.

  53. “depicts every Muslim community in America as a precursor to a caliphate”

    That’s because every Muslim community anywhere IS a precursor to a caliphate. Their religious values demand it. And their religious values are at odds to American values. There is no way to peacefully coexist with Muslims who actually desire to live according to Islamic teachings. It’s only those who are lax or are Muslim in name only who can be assimilated into American culture.

  54. Is this the same Chobani that lost a major false advertising lawsuit after libeling Dannon and Yoplait? I believe it is!

    Is this the same Chobani that imported the degenerates that are molesting and raping poor folks in Idaho? I believe it is!

    Is this the same Chobani that hires illegal aliens fresh from the Syrian jihad that get fast tracked past ANY vetting? I believe it is!

    Is this the same writer that libels anyone that doesn’t wholeheartedly embrace the destruction of non-Islamist culture? I believe it is!

    1. hires illegal aliens fresh from the Syrian jihad that get fast tracked past ANY vetting

      [citation needed]

    2. “Is this the same Chobani that hires illegal aliens fresh from the Syrian jihad that get fast tracked past ANY vetting? I believe it is!”

      If they are getting fast tracked past vetting, they are being let into the country legally. Derp da derp da tiddly terp.

      1. But I’m told the Trump people don’t have a problem with legal immigration. I’m shocked.

    3. Dalmia is a Hindu, you retard. She has as much reason as anyone to be aware of Islamist radicalism. She’s just not a fucking racist moron, like you.

      1. Dalmia is a progressive, you retard. She has as much reason as any progtard to be an apologist for Islamist radicalism. She is a total fucking progtard who writes moronic things like HazelMeade.

        There Hazel, I fixed it for you. Feel free to thank me.

      2. She may not be that type of racist moron, but she is one bieves someone like Bobby Jindal no longer counts as an authentic ethnic Indian because he is a Catholic.

        1. Hard to say, but I imagine them both wallowing (metaphorically at least) in their own bullshit. Not one bit of honest cognitive analysis between the two of them.

  55. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  56. Insist on teaching and requiring English, and I will be a great deal more accepting of open borders. Insist that terrorism is not a legitimate religious value, and deport Imams who preach it, and my unease with decrease more. Cut down the amount of government largesse available to everybody and his dog (since it dosn’t seem to accomplish much other than supporting a large class of beurocratic parasites) and I will worry less about importing large numbers of poor.

    Restrain the State FIRST, THEN open the borders.

  57. http://tinyurl.com/jd8ol6o

    “There was no gang rape, there was no Syrian involvement, there were no Syrian refugees involved, there was no knife used, there was no inactivity by the police,” Loebs said, according to the Spokesman-Review. “I’m looking at the Drudge Report headline: ‘Syrian Refugees Rape Little Girl at Knifepoint in Idaho’ ? all false.”

    1. WaPo is not a reliable unbiased source of anything. You might as well link a Slate or Mediamatters article. Although I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t understand the difference there either.

  58. I get paid over $87 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Here’s what I’ve been doing

    +_+_+_+_+ http://www.MaxJob4.Com

  59. H&R seriously needs to clean out its comment section.

    1. This. We need a place (or maybe a space?) that’s safe for discussing ideas and policies without encountering any negativity or alternative thinking.

  60. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new? after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.
    Here’s what I do?>> http://www.NetNote70.com

  61. Here’s a breakdown of some recent history:

    1. A self-described “cabal” operating out of the Pentagon, one openly committed to regime change in Iraq and Syria, stovepipes false intelligence to Bush, convincing him to invade Iraq.
    2. American invades Iraq and its armies and private mercenaries wreak havoc there, inciting religious extremism which will eventually lead to the rise of ISIS.
    3. America withdraws as promised and the CIA-appointed satrap’s army is gobsmacked by ISIS, who had been patiently waiting in the wings.
    4. ISIS wreaks havoc throughout Iraq and Syria, exacerbating the civil war already underway in Syria.
    5. Many regions of Syria become uninhabitable and millions of Syrians become homeless without recourse to any means of livelihood in their already war-riven homeland. They are, as such, compelled to flee.

    Geller broadbrushes these refugees as terrorists and lobbies for legislation to prevent them from seeking relief here in America. Ulukaya, out of his own pocket, provides a legal means for them to obtain that relief.

    So tell me, o guardians of liberty, which of these is an enemy to your sacred principles?

    1. Here’s a breakdown of simplistic narratives:

      1. State the origin of the problem in some way that reflects your viewpoint bias
      2. Set up a false dichotomy where the characters in your morality play are either all good or all evil
      3. Conclude with the premise that was hidden in your narrative from the beginning
      4. Ask stupid rhetorical questions that reinforce the simplistic narrative

      You can save time, skip a few steps, and look no less stupid by just shouting epithets at people you disagree with. You’re engaged with the argument to the same level but the succinctness is merciful.

      1. 1. Bias is inherent in everyone. Using the term merely reveals you disagree with my perspective, nothing more.
        2. Nowhere did I state or suggest that Geller is “all evil” or that Ulukaya is “all good.” That’s your projection. The topic of discussion raised by Dalmia is actually quite narrow, but you intend to make it appear otherwise.
        3. My “premise” ~ if you wish to call it that ~ is intended to engage others in discussion, not to silence it (which appears to be your objective).
        4. Your critique of both the question and the narrative betray nothing more than intellectual sloth as well as personal bias.

        Congratulations. You just provided proof of why Americans are stuck with the leaders they have: their brightest young citizens are too busy trying to make themselves look smart to positively affect any change in that regard.

  62. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  63. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  64. I’ve made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. Im using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Heres what I do,

    —————— http://YoutubeJobs.Nypost55.com

  65. Just to summarize: boycotting a yogurt company- bad; boycotting NC or any company that supports Trump- fine. So, a consumer can boycott a company, as is their prerogative, so long as the boycott the right company. All boycotts are equal, but some are more equal than others, apparently.

    Chasing the latest tastes of the rich white liberal is just going to contradict your supposed belief system (as Reason has done multiple, multiple times). Where’s Walter Block when you need him.

  66. America has too large a population already to be sustainable in natural resources, financial resources, and social cohesion. The 1970 population of 203,392,031, due to birth and death was a net push. The 2016 population of an estimated population of 322,762,018 is for the most part immigration, and children of immigrants. Whites a minority for 10 years, in 20 years will need to speak Spanish to be employable. [Quoting Daily Mail regarding Swedish immigration: In 15 years’ time, demographers say, indigenous Swedes will be in a minority because the men who arrive are allowed to send home for wives and children, who in turn will have their own children. The Swedish economist Tino Sanandaji, who himself has an Iranian-Kurdish background, recently described what’s happening in Sweden as ‘quite disastrous’. He said: ‘This is an irreversible social experiment that no wealthy state has ever attempted. There are almost no ideas or visions over how this can be solved. ‘You can’t combine open borders with a welfare state. If you offer generous benefits, and anyone can come and use these benefits, a very large number of people will try to do that. It’s just mathematically impossible for a small country like Sweden to fund that.’]

    There is a limit even in America to offer open borders with a welfare state, and there’s no room at the inn. America is already too multicultural and its population put in some type of social blender to assimilate what it already has.

  67. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  68. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  69. Facebook gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  70. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  71. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that…my… brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac …….

    …….. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  72. As an anarcho-capitalist, no politician is going to be better at running the criminal state than another. Keeping the pressure up on the alt-right (who exactly does that include?) and other deniers of natural rights is a tireless activity.

    So, the MSM should have the Trump admin in its sights, and presumably its attacks on individual and property rights will be shown more light than Barry’s ever were the past 8 years…

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.