Woman Assaulted By Islamic Man For Ridiculous Barbaric Reason During Ramadan
Despite claiming to care about women, many on the left refuse to speak honestly about the lives of Muslim women living in the Middle East. They argue that since America isn’t perfect, we have no business telling other countries what to do. As a consequence, Middle Eastern women continue to be regularly subjected to abuse.
For example, last week, a woman was assaulted while riding on a bus in Turkey. The reason? She wasn’t wearing what he considered “appropriate” clothing.
According to reports, Asena Melisa Saglam, a 21-year-old female university student, was assaulted by a Muslim man, who was later identified as Ercan Kiziltas, on a public bus. Before striking the student, Kiziltas, who was sitting behind her at the time, allegedly harassed her for wearing shorts during Ramadan. “From the moment I sat down he was making these remarks ‘you dress like this during Ramadan? You should feel ashamed to be dressed like that,’” recalled Saglam.
Instead of responding, she told reporters that she put headphones in her ears and tried to ignore him. Doing so, however, only angered Kiziltas even more. After waiting for the right moment, he stood up, smacked her hard across the face with the back of his hand, and made his way towards the exit.
In response, Saglam jumped out of her seat and rushed toward the assailant. Unfortunately, she was no match for him. One she got close enough, he grabbed ahold of her and threw her toward the back of the bus. During the altercation, the doors to the bus opened, giving Kiziltas the opportunity to escape. After pushing her away, he ran off of the bus and fled the scene. Clearly shaken, Saglam dropped down in the middle of the bus and started crying, prompting bystanders, who did nothing during the attack, to finally come to her aid. A surveillance video of the incident can be viewed below (Warning, graphic content):
Unsurprisingly, she was deeply traumatized by the assault and called on for justice. “My only wish from the justice system is that an appropriate, dissuasive punishment is given to the assailant,” she told reporters. “I do not want him to walk around freely because I cannot anymore. Since being assaulted I have been unable to go anywhere without my mother. I cannot even get on public transportation,” she continued.
Her mother, Melisa Sağlam, called the attack “unlucky” and used it as an opportunity to remind other mothers to love their children. “We were with her, we supported her, we had to do it,” she stated, noting, “my daughter has had an unlucky incident, I’m always safe and supportive. I’m calling all the mothers. Support your children, do not leave them alone.”
Eyup Saglam, her father, added, “whether it is a head scarf, head open, or [a] mini skirt, we see it on the street, we see it at work, and our society has accepted it.”
Three days after the attack, law enforcement officials managed to track down Kiziltas and brought him into custody. While speaking to a judge, he tried to defend his actions by claiming that she had “provoked” him. “Women dressing this way affect one’s sensuality,” he argued. Despite hearing this ridiculous statement, the judge reportedly granted his release pending investigation, sparking outrage.
On Twitter, We Will Stop Femicide Platform reportedly tweeted, “the release of the attacker is a threat to all women. We will wear whatever we want outside. We will not give up our freedoms.”
However, this turned out to be only partly true, and as a result, the tweet was later deleted. Although the judge did, in fact, grant his release, he was never set free. Instead, shortly before releasing Kiziltas, the police realized that he was previously found guilty in a “tax offense” case and was currently being sought to serve a 3-year and 9-month-long prison sentence. As a result, they threw him behind bars. Hopefully, after the police’s investigation is complete, he’ll be given additional time behind bars for assault.
Women living in the Middle East are some of the most oppressed women in the world. Because of this, they need all the support they can get. For this to happen, people need to start being more honest about Islam.
Democrats Block Critical Witness To Russian Probe In Last-Ditch Effort
Democrats have been milking the imaginary Russia collusion for all it’s worth. Although they have seemed eager to get to the bottom of their “witch hunt,” it is rather surprising that they’ve now adamantly blocked a number of crucial witnesses from testifying.
Carter Page hasn’t been given the opportunity to bring to light what he knows. The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence was scheduled to hear closed-door testimony from Page on June 6. Democrats on the panel blocked his appearance saying that they needed more time to prepare.
Page has been one of the people branded by congressional Democrats as a “mastermind” in the so-called collusion probe. However, the informal previous Trump campaign adviser is angered by the delay. Adam Schiff, Representative from California, is the committee’s Democrat leader. He refuses to respond to questions about the issue, choosing instead to spout inflammatory, unproven accusations.
The oversight panel is investigating both the imaginary Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and the Obama administration’s abuse of power in unmasking citizens.
On May 31, the House committee subpoenaed evidence from the CIA, FBI, and the NSA concerning the troubling behavior of Susan Rice, John Brennan, and Samantha Power, a close friend of Barak Hussein and a former U.S. Ambassador.
The result of those requests has been more stalling. Many of the documents and information needed in the investigation were sent to the Obama library and will remain archived for five years. These type of avoidance methods are consistent with the former liberal rule.
Democrats have long held that their investigation into the Russian hacking will somehow prove that nefarious methods were used to defeat Hillary Clinton. They consistently ignore the tree of Hillary’s corruption and lies. Whether their avoidance of her culpability is deliberate or simply blind allegiance is unknown.
In previous statements by liberal lawmakers, Page has been identified as the person who can prove their unfounded claims. Rep. Schiff has repeatedly implied that the Russian investigation will continue, despite the fact that a number of oversight officials say there is no evidence for the claim.
According to various reports, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was used to generate a warrant for Page while Trump was running for office. The FBI carried out the surveillance in the summer of 2016. Apparently, the Obama administration used the debunked “Russian dossier” to support their claim for monitoring the activities of a free citizen. The dossier is also called the “Steele dossier,” named for the British intelligence agent who compiled it. Originally assembled as opposition research for Trump’s political opponents, the information it contains has largely been proven false.
Page has asked that his testimony be made public, whenever he does get his chance to herald the truth. He has written four letters to the House and Senate Intelligence oversight panels outlining his evidence. Perhaps that’s why Democrats aren’t eager to hear him or allow the general populous to hear his statements.
Page asserts that there was absolutely no collusion or inappropriate interaction between him and Russian businessmen or government representatives. Page says that the real reason Democrats don’t want him to appear is that he will bring to light improper and illegal actions taken by Obama officials.
He says that Obama cronies engaged in election-intelligence gathering of Trump and his associates.
The reasons for the illegal covert operations are anyone’s guess, but it certainly seems like they were targeted efforts to discredit Trump and derail his popularity. That didn’t work, so now congressional Democrats are trying to ruin his presidency by persisting in an investigation that they know is futile.
Rep. Schiff has already started backtracking on his previous comments. On Sunday, he said “I think there is evidence,” and added “whether there is some evidence doesn’t mean there is proof.”
Noting that former FBI Director James Comey has appeared three times, Page thinks that the reason for the stalling tactics is plain. If the FISA warrant for his surveillance was made public, it would prove the president’s claims about Obama wiretapping.
By blocking the testimony of Carter Page it seems blatantly obvious that Democrats know they have absolutely no proof of Russian collusion. What they do have is fear about the tactics of their former fuehrer, Obama.
Illinois Enters Meltdown As Chicago Democrats REFUSE To Give In
For almost two years, the state of Illinois has operated without a complete and balanced budget, and the situation is getting close to a doomsday scenario. Believe it or not, the bills and pension obligations are continuing to pile up and the state is now on the verge of bankruptcy.
This financial meltdown is so incredibly deep that not even the lottery is safe. In fact, a top financial official warned that a hundred percent of the state’s monthly revenue will definitely be eaten up by the court-ordered payments.
Given this situation, Illinois Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner is now calling for a special session of the Democrat-led General Assembly in order to pass what he hopes could be the first full budget package in more than two years. However, the state will literally lose the lottery and much more if the budget fails.
Illinois’ lotto needs a payment from the legislature every year, and the current appropriation expires in nine days. This means they will have no authority to pay any prizes. In anticipation of a terrible budget deadlock, the state is planning to halt Powerball and Mega Millions sales. Regarding this issue, Illinois’ Lottery Acting Director Greg Smith said that he is really disappointed at the legislature’s inability to pass a budget.
For almost three years, the Fiscal Times reported that Illinois had been forced to conduct business under court-ordered spending. They have essentially been using stop-gap measures while running up a colossal deficit.
Apparently, the state now has a pile of unpaid bills totaling almost $15 billion, which represent 40 percent of Illinois’ total operating budget. What’s even worse is that it is quite possible that these bills won’t going to be paid anytime soon.
Most of the current financial issues can be attributed to the huge gridlock between Rauner and the Democratic-controlled state legislature. While liberals keep pushing for more government spending, the Republican governor is fighting for a more balanced budget.
Believe it or not, the late budget –which proposed a $7 billion deficit- was demolished by the state Senate after Rauner threatened to veto it. Given this situation, the governor admitted that the state was in an unimaginable condition and claimed, “We can’t manage our money.”
Nevertheless, the financial mayhem goes all the way back to 2011 when Illinois´ budget crisis was first exposed. In that year, Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn and the Democratic-controlled state legislature had to enact a huge tax increase in order to address a looming deficit of more than $12 billion.
Apparently, that amounted to a third of the entire $35 billion general fund budget. While Quinn’s mandate ended in 2014, nothing has changed since then. Lamentably, as more bills go unpaid, the outlook for the state is becoming even worse.
Multiple agencies and programs that are dependent on state aid are now in danger of losing funding. This includes hospitals, schools, universities, and even the police, which could face serious cutbacks because of this financial meltdown.
Rauner’s special sessions will start today and the state is again operating on a series of stop-gap spending packages.
Considering that Illinois’ financial issues were also caused by the state’s poorly funded pension system, they have been downgraded to the lowest credit rating of any state in America. That rating could take an even bigger cut if the state doesn’t achieve some kind of budget by July 1. Right now, the state has $130 billion in unfunded pension obligations and a huge backlog of unpaid bills.
Naturally, the combination of these elements now has several analysts talking about the state having to file for bankruptcy. The big issue here is that it’s impossible for any state to file for bankruptcy protection unless Congress gets involved.
Illinois facing bankruptcy , run by total Democratic Party. Wake up Democrats vote Republican, Think about your kids and grandkids future 😂😳
— Frank (@Frank45503716) June 17, 2017
While Democrats senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth declined to comment whether they would consider getting involved in introducing any kind of measure to allow the state bankruptcy, Rauner said that Republicans have a plan to remedy the financial inferno.
He stated that conservatives in the General Assembly have laid out a compromise budget that he can sign. This plan incorporates reforms like term limits, property tax relief, and spending caps.
While Governor Rauner inherited a financial mayhem from the Democrats, he now needs to do whatever he can to avoid Illinois sinking into even more trouble.
Trump Tweets Some Advice for Democrats: ‘Obstruction Doesn’t Work!’
(CNSNews.com) – President Donald Trump had some advice for Democrats Wednesday, after they lost the special congressional election in Georgia and South Carolina on Tuesday:
“Democrats would do much better as a party if they got together with Republicans on Healthcare,Tax Cuts,Security. Obstruction doesn’t work!” the president tweeted around 6:30 a.m. (The spacing and capital letters are his.)
Liberal news outlets, meanwhile, came up with their own analysis of what went wrong for Democrats.
The Washington Post, for example, headlined its analysis this way:
“Jon Ossoff chose civility in Georgia race. It failed. So how do Democrats beat Trump?” The blurb beneath that headline said: “The decisive loss is sure to spark more questions about what type of candidates and what type of message Democrats need in the Trump era.”
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) told CNN’s “New Day” on Wednesday that Ossoff’s loss is “not surprising,” given that he was running for a seat that’s been held by a Republican for almost four decades.
Anchor Chris Cuomo told Coons, “You have to figure out why all the negativity toward the president isn’t enough for people to switch, if they are Republicans, to Democrat. What are you not giving them?” Cuomo asked Coons.
“Well, Chris, I think our challenge is to put forward a strong and a clear agenda that helps middle Americans look at the two parties and look at the directions we’d like to take the country and say that they would rather have a Congress in the hands of Democrats.”
Coons noted that Republicans, who control the House, Senate and presidency, now have the opportunity to move their agenda in a way they haven’t had for a long time.
“And we need to be not just pointing at some of the excesses or even outrages of President Trump — some of the statements he made as a candidate, or some of the choices he’s making — and instead put forward a positive and constructive agenda. I think if we don’t do that, we won’t be successful in 2018. If we do do that, I think we’ve got a really strong chance of taking back the House,” Coons said.
Over on MSNBC, liberal Republican Joe Scarborough opined: “All the chips were pushed to the middle of the table here. This was a winner take all. And it was a huge win for republicans and a big loss for Democrats.”
Scarborough suggested that Ossoff may have been the wrong candidate because he’s young, doesn’t have a family and he hasn’t been deeply involved in community activities.
“If you get a guy or a woman that’s from the district that people have seen in worship services for 30 years; that know their families, they’re at the PTA — You know, you get a guy who’s a banker at a small community bank that talks, ‘Oh come on now, Jim. You know me – I’m going to represent you. I’m not going to represent that Nancy Pelosi.’” (Spoken with a southern drawl.)
Scarborough said moving further left will only cost Democrats more elections, particularly in the South.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told MSNBC on Tuesday morning that Democrats should be “hyper-focused on an economic message that tells people that the Republican Party is all about economic growth for millionaires and billionaires and the Democratic Party is about economic growth for everybody.”
(But wait, isn’t that what Democrats have been saying for many years? )
Murphy also said “the fact that we have spent so much time talking about Russia has been a distraction from what should be the clear contrast between Democrats and the Trump agenda.”
Murphy said people in his district “are never talking about issues like Russia; they are not talking, frankly, about what’s on cable news at night.” Murphy said they are talking about wages, education, and public safety.
The Wednesday morning headline in Politico read: “Trump spikes the ball after Georgia election win.”
That was Politico’s response to Trump’s midnight tweet which said: “Well, the Special Elections are over and those that want to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN are 5 and O! All the Fake News, all the money spent = 0.”
Senate announces probe of Loretta Lynch behavior in 2016 election
The Washington Times
The Senate Judiciary Committee has opened a probe into former Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s efforts to shape the FBI’s investigation into 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, the committee’s chairman announced Friday.
In a letter to Ms. Lynch, the committee asks her to detail the depths of her involvement in the FBI’s investigation, including whether she ever assured Clinton confidantes that the probe wouldn’t “push too deeply into the matter.”
Fired FBI Director James B. Comey has said publicly that Ms. Lynch tried to shape the way he talked about the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails, and he also hinted at other behavior “which I cannot talk about yet” that made him worried about Ms. Lynch’s ability to make impartial decisions.
Mr. Comey said that was one reason why he took it upon himself to buck Justice Department tradition and reveal his findings about Mrs. Clinton last year.
The probe into Ms. Lynch comes as the Judiciary Committee is already looking at President Trump’s firing of Mr. Comey.
Sen. Charles E. Grassley, chairman of the committee, said the investigation is bipartisan. The letter to Ms. Lynch is signed by ranking Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and also by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Sheldon Whitehouse, the chairman and ranking member of the key investigative subcommittee.
Letters also went to Clinton campaign staffer Amanda Renteria and Leonard Benardo and Gail Scovell at the Open Society Foundations. Mr. Benardo was reportedly on an email chain from the then-head of the Democratic National Committee suggesting Ms. Lynch had given assurances to Ms. Renteria, the campaign staffer, that the Clinton probe wouldn’t “go too far.”
At a Senate hearing earlier this month, Mr. Comey told lawmakers that Ms. Lynch had attempted to change the way the FBI described its probe of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server. The change appeared to dovetail with how Mrs. Clinton’s supporters were characterizing the probe.
“At one point, [Ms. Lynch] directed me not to call it an ‘investigation’ but instead to call it a ‘matter,’ which confused me and concerned me,” Mr. Comey said during his June 8 testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we are to close this case credibly.”
Acknowledging that he didn’t know whether it was intentional, Mr. Comey said Ms. Lynch’s request “gave the impression the attorney general was looking to align the way we talked about our investigation with the way a political campaign was describing the same activity.”
Mr. Comey said the language suggested by Ms. Lynch was troublesome because it closely mirrored what the Clinton campaign was using. Despite his discomfort, Mr. Comey said, he agreed to Ms. Lynch’s language.
DNC’s May Fundraising at its Lowest Since 2003
(CNSNews.com) — A report filed by The Democratic National Committee (DNC) on June 20 revealed that the DNC has had its worst fundraising for the month of May since 2003, some 14 years ago.
Records from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) show that the DNC raised $4.29 million in May 2017; in May 2016, the DNC raised $12.3 million.
Back in May 2003, the DNC raised $2.03 million.
May isn’t the only month that DNC fundraising fell short.
(Photo: U.S. Treasury.)
Hallie Jackson, an NBC News White House correspondent and anchor for MSNBC, confronted DNC Chairman Tom Perez today and asked him why the DNC had its worst fundraising for the month of April since 2009.
“The DNC, you’ve talked about doubling the budget from $50 million and $100 million this year, but the DNC had its worst fundraising in April since 2009 — it just posted,” said Jackson. “Where does the extra $50 million going to come from?”
Perez said, “Well again, I got there on March 1 [as new DNC chairman]. And so I was the first to say, we have a lot of rebuilding to do.”
The DNC raised $438,000 less in May than in April 2017. The political group brought in $4.7 million in April, according to the FEC.
Here are the May fundraising numbers from the past 15 years:
May 2017: $4.29 Million
May 2016: $12.3 Million
May 2015: $4.5 Million
May 2014: $8.8 Million
May 2013: $5.9 Million
May 2012: $19.9 Million
May 2011: $10.5 Million
May 2010: $6.6 Million
May 2009: $8.4 Million
May 2008: $4.8 Million
May 2007: $4.9 Million
May 2006: $5.0 Million
May 2005: $4.5 Million
May 2004: $14.8 Million
May 2003: $2.7 Million
Ann Coulter: The Left Has One More Argument: Kill Them!
After a Bernie Sanders supporter tried to commit mass murder last week – the second homicidal Bernie supporter so far this year — the media blamed President Trump for lowering the bar on heated political rhetoric by calling his campaign opponents cruel names like “Crooked Hillary” and “Lyin’ Ted.”
As soon as any conservative responds to Trump’s belittling names for his rivals by erupting in a murderous rage, that will be a fantastically good point. But until then, it’s idiotic. Unlike liberals, conservatives aren’t easily incited to violence by words.
What we’re seeing is the following: Prominent liberals repeatedly tell us, with deadly seriousness, that Trump and his supporters are: “Hitler,” “fascists,” “bigots,” “haters,” “racists,” “terrorists,” “criminals,” and “white supremacists,” which is then followed by liberals physically attacking conservatives.
To talk about “both sides” being guilty of provocative rhetoric is like talking about “both genders” being guilty of rape.
Nearly every op-ed writer at The New York Times has compared Trump to Hitler. (The conservative on the op-ed page merely called him a “proto-fascist.”) If Trump is Hitler and his supporters Nazis, then the rational course of action for any civilized person is to kill them.
That’s not just a theory, it’s the result.
A few months ago, 38-year-old Justin Barkley shot and killed a UPS driver in a Walmart parking lot in Ithaca, New York, then ran over his body, because he thought he was killing Donald Trump. During his arraignment, Barkley told the judge: “I shot and killed Donald Trump purposely, intentionally, and very proudly.”
In the past year, there have been at least a hundred physical attacks on Trump supporters or presumed Trump supporters. The mainstream media have ignored them all.
Schoolchildren across the country are being hospitalized from beatings for the crime of liking Trump. In Pasco, Oregon, a 29-year-old Trump supporter was stabbed in the throat by a Hispanic man, Alvaro Campos-Hernandez, after a political argument.
Last month, the anti-jihad scholar Robert Spencer was poisoned in Iceland by a Social Justice Warrior pretending to be a fan, sending Spencer to the hospital.
It’s become so normal for leftist thugs to assault anyone who likes Trump that, in Meriden, Connecticut, Wilson Echevarria and Anthony Hobdy leapt out of their car and started punching and hitting a man holding a Trump sign, rolling him into traffic right in front of a policeman.
If any one of these bloody attacks had been committed by a Trump supporter against a Muslim, a gay, a Mexican, a woman, or a Democrat, the media would have had to drop its Russia conspiracy theory to give us 24-7 coverage of the epidemic of right-wing violence.
The liberal response to this ceaseless mayhem toward conservatives is to produce a single nut, who fired a gun in the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria in Washington, D.C., last December (hurting no one) to “rescue children,” after reading on obscure right-wing blogs that the restaurant hid a Democratic pedophilia ring. (They’ve also hyped a long list of “hate crimes” that were utter hoaxes.)
Congratulations, liberals! You got one. And some tiny number of girls raped men last year. QED: Both sexes have a rape problem.
Liberal aggression has ratcheted up dramatically since the dawn of Trump, as has the dehumanizing rhetoric, but epic violence from the left is nothing new.
We don’t have to go back more than century to note that every presidential assassin and attempted presidential assassin who had a political motive was a leftist, a socialist, a communist, or a member of a hippie commune. (Charles J. Guiteau, Leon Czolgosz, Giuseppe Zangara, Lee Harvey Oswald, Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, and Sara Jane Moore.)
Instead, we’ll start in the 1990s. Al Sharpton’s speeches helped inspire people to murder two people in Crown Heights in 1991 and seven people at Freddie’s Fashion Mart in 1995. As scary as David Duke and Richard Spencer are, I’ve never heard of anyone committing murder after listening to one of their speeches.
During the 2008 presidential campaign, among other acts of violence, Obama supporters Maced elderly volunteers in a McCain campaign office in Galax, Virginia. They threw Molotov cocktails at, stomped, and shredded McCain signs on a half-dozen families’ front yards around Portland. Another Obama supporter broke the McCain sign of a small middle-aged woman in midtown Manhattan, then hit her in the face with the stick.
(All this for John McCain!)
At the Republicans’ convention that year, hundreds of liberals were arrested for smashing police cars, slashing tires, and breaking store windows. Police seized Molotov cocktails, napalm bombs, and assorted firearms from the protesters. Elderly convention-goers were Maced and sent to the hospital after protesters threw bricks through the windows of convention buses. On the first day alone, the cops made 284 arrests, 130 for felonies.
That same year, California voters approved Proposition 8, banning gay marriage. In response, left-wing opponents of the measure ferociously attacked Mormon and Catholic churches, smashing glass doors, spray-painting the churches, and burning holy books on their front steps. The mayor of Fresno and his pastor received death threats serious enough to require around-the-clock police protection.
(Although the measure would not have passed without the support of black voters, liberals held black people blameless for their opposition to gay marriage. Mormons and Catholics were a much funner target.)
In 2009, one conservative had his finger bitten off at a Tea Party rally in Thousand Oaks, California, by a man at a MoveOn.org counter-protest. At a St. Louis Tea Party rally, an African-American selling anti-Obama bumper stickers was beaten up by two Service Employees International Union thugs, resulting in charges.
For the past few years, the media have enthusiastically promoted Black Lives Matter, hoping to galvanize the black vote. The mother of Michael Brown was even invited to appear on stage at the Democrats’ convention. But, as the British discovered with their Indian auxiliaries during the Revolutionary War, having ginned them up, they couldn’t calm them down.
As a result of the media’s tall tales about homicidal, racist cops, Black Lives Matter enthusiasts staged sneak attacks, executing two policemen in Brooklyn, five in Dallas, and three in Baton Rouge.
Liberals know damn well that their audience includes a not-insignificant portion of foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics, prepared, at the slightest provocation, to smash windows, burn down neighborhoods, physically attack, and even murder conservatives. But instead of toning down the rhetoric, the respectable left keeps throwing matches on the bone-dry tinder, and then indignantly asks, “Are you saying conservatives don’t do it, too?”
Please Support our work
