Sweden is the seventh richest country in the world in terms of GDP per capita and its high standard of living. It is famous for supporting the Norwegian resistance during World War II; for helping to rescue Danish Jews from deportation to concentration camps; and for its native son, Raoul Wallenberg, who rescued up to 100,000 Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust.

We recognize Sweden as the country that gave us the incomparable Ingrid Bergman and Greta Garbo, writers Ingmar Bergman and August Strindberg, IKEA furniture, high-quality steel production, the Volvo, the pop group ABBA, and Pippi Longstocking.

But Sweden’s latest source of prominence, its third largest city, Malmo, founded c. 1275, is now known as the City to Leave. Its Jewish population is fleeing, as Malmo has become home to Muslim immigrants, anti-Semitism and violence, which has earned for Sweden the dubious distinction ofRape Capital of the World. How is it possible for the Muslims to comprise a mere 6% of Sweden’s population, yet be responsible for 77% of the rapes committed? According to the Counter Jihad report, one in four Swedish women will be raped, some killed, as sexual assaults increase by 500%.

Now, since President Obama invited 80,000 Muslims into the United States, with a promise of 100,000 per year over the next five years, and studies show that Islamic immigration brings a rise in rates of rape and molestation, there can be no doubt that we will see a corresponding increase in rape crime in America accordingly.

Purim Guide for the Perplexed, 2014:Amb. (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger

1. Purim’s Scroll of Esther represents fundamental tenets of Judaism:
*Faith in God, in contrast to idolatry and cynicism;
*Value/principle-driven realism (right vs. wrong and civil liberties), in contrast to opportunism and wishful-thinking;
*Attachment to roots (religious, cultural, historical), in contrast to detachment;
*Optimism confidence and courage, in contrast to fatalism, despair and fear;
*Tenacious defiance of enormous adversity, in contrast to defeatism, submission and accommodation;
*Community-driven responsibility, in contrast to selfishness/recklessness.

2. According to Jewish sages (as indicated by Yoram Hazony’s, The Dawn.), the Torah was initially bestowed upon the Jewish people in Sinai, and then – symbolically – during the time of Queen Esther. Hazony explores the political sophistication of (the eventual vizier) Mordechai and Queen Esther, who snatched – against all odds – victory out of the jaws of a Haman-conspired holocaust. Mordechai’s political savory was preceded by that of Joseph, who, a thousand year earlier, ascended to be the vizier for Pharaoh, and Daniel, who had risen to a similar position in the court of Persia’s Darius a few decades earlier. Hazony contends that the Mordechai-Haman confrontation was also a clash of civilizations between faith in God and idolatry, as was the confrontation between Moses and Pharaoh and Abraham and pagan worshippers. Mordechai introduced civil disobedience, insisting that absolute right and wrong are superior to state decrees. In addition, Mordechai, Moses and Abraham, as well as Gideon, the Judge and Samuel, the Prophet, ushered in the concepts of limited government, civil liberties and the centrality of the constituents.

3. Purim’s Clash of Civilizations constitutes an early edition of the war between right and wrong, liberty and tyranny, justice and evil, truth and lies, as were/are Adam/Eve and the snake, Abel and Cain, Abraham and Sodom and Gomorrah, Jacob and Esau (grandfather of Amalek), the Maccabees and the Assyrians, the Allies and the Nazis, the West and the Communist Bloc and Western democracies versus Islamic rogue and terrorist regimes.

4. Purim’s historical background according to Prof. Israel Eldad:

*Xerxes the Great, King Ahasuerus, succeeded Darius the Great. He ruled the Persian Empire (from India to Ethiopia) during 465-486BC, 150 years before the rise of Alexander the Great, who defeated the Persian Empire.

*Greece was Persia’s key opponent in its expansion towards the Mediterranean and Europe, hence the alliance between Persia and the Phoenician-related Carthage, a rival of Greece.

*Greece supported Egypt’s revolt against Persian rule, which was subdued by Persia with the help of the Jewish warriors of Yeb (in Egypt) and Carthage, which had a significant Jewish population and a Jewish-Hebrew connection dating back to King Solomon’s alliance with the Phoenician kingdom (e.g., the names of Carthage’s heroes, Hannibal and Barca, derived from the Hebrew names, Hananyah and Barak).

*Xerxes was defeated by Greece at the battle of Salamis (480 BC), but challenged Greece again in 470 BC.

*According to a Greek translation of the Scroll of Esther, Haman (the Agagi) was Macedonian by orientation or by birth. Agagi could refer to Agag, the Amalekite King (who intended to annihilate the Jews) or to the Greek Aegean Islands. Haman aspired to decimate the Jews of Persia and opposed improved relations between Xerxes and the Jews of Yeb. He led the pro-Greek and anti-Carthage faction in Persia, while Mordechai was a chief advocate for the pro-Carthage orientation.

ANDREW BOSTOM:Preface to “Iran’s Final Solution for Israel”

Product Details

Iran’s Final Solution for Israel: The Legacy of Shi’ite Islamic Jew-Hatred in Iran by Andrew Bostom (Mar 9, 2014)
Link to ebook at

Link to Preface:

Author’s Preface

With great fanfare, and giddy expectations of continued diplomatic success, the so-called “P5 +1” interim agreement was announced on November 24, 2013. p1 Ostensibly, these negotiations were going to eliminate Iran’s ability to produce nuclear weapons, and constrain the regime’s hegemonic aspirations, including its oft-repeated bellicose threats to destroy the Jewish State of Israel.

Less than three months later, punctuated by cries of “down with the U.S.”—and “Death to Israel”—Iranians took to the streets en masse, February 11, 2014, commemorating the 35th anniversary of the 1979 Islamic putsch, which firmly re-established Iran’s legacy of centuries of Shiite theocracy, transiently interrupted by the 54-year reign (r. 1925-1979) of the 20th century Pahlavi Shahs. p2 Celebratory statements by “moderate” Iranian President Rouhani claimed Iran would pursue its nuclear program “forever,” and decried Western economic sanctions, designed specifically to forestall Iran’s nuclear weapons producing capability, as “brutal, illegal, and wrong.” p3 Major-General Yahya Rahim Safavi, a senior military aide to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, threatened that any Israeli effort to pre-empt Iran’s relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons, meant for Israel’s annihilation, would be countered by retaliatory “destruction of the Zionist regime by Hezbollah forces of Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah.” p3 Simultaneous triumphal commemorative pronouncements (from 2/11/14) included: p4

· Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehquani’s declaration that Iran’s test firing of ballistic missiles—including a long-range ballistic missile with radar-evading capabilities—was (somehow) an appropriate response to “unfounded allegations” by the U.S.

· Iranian Navy Commander Admiral Habibollah Sayari’s confirmation that Iranian warships had been deployed toward the territorial waters of the U.S. Atlantic coast. The good Admiral announced: “Iran’s military fleet is approaching the United States’ maritime borders, and this move has a message. Like the arrogant powers that are present near our maritime borders, we will also have a powerful presence close to the American [maritime] borders.”

Moreover, within eight-days after Iran’s 35th anniversary celebrations of its retrograde “Islamic revolution,” the following stories were reported:

· Iran’s chief “P5 + 1” negotiator, Muhammad Javad Zarif derided (unusually candid) comments by U.S. lead negotiator with Iran, Wendy Sherman, that if Iran’s nuclear program was only for peaceful purposes, the Islamic Republic “does not need” the fortified, underground uranium enrichment center at Fordow, or its plutonium heavy-water reactor at Arak. A defiant Zarif, referring explicitly to Sherman’s observations, opined, “Iran’s nuclear technology is non-negotiable and comments about Iran’s nuclear facilities are worthless and there is no need to negotiate or hold talks about them.” p5

· Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister, Abbas Aragchi stated Iran would not capitulate to pressure from the U.S. and the five other world powers to dismantle any of its nuclear facilities. p6

· Iran rejected the U.S. contention that its ballistic missile program must be included as a key component of negotiations on a permanent nuclear agreement. Abbas Aragchi stated on Iranian state television: “The Islamic Republic of Iran’s defensive issues are neither negotiable nor subject to compromise. They are definitely among our red lines in any talks. We won’t discuss any issue other than the nuclear dossier in the negotiations.” p7

· Despite such brazen Iranian intransigence, White House National Security Spokesman Caitlin Hayden revealed the Obama Administration would not interfere with Iran’s burgeoning oil sales, which are generating billions of additional revenues as economic sanctions collapse in the wake of the P5 + 1 interim deal. p8


Few figures in American political life have been as consistently wrong as often as John Kerry. The former Senator bet on every Communist leader and Middle Eastern tyrant he could find only to watch the wheels of history roll over his mistakes. And now as Secretary of State, Kerry is at it again.

In between peddling a Syrian peace process that no one but him believes in, he took a break to peddle the even more discredited peace process between Israel and the terrorists.

In a speech to the American Jewish Committee, Kerry invoked the litany of failures, “Madrid to Oslo to Wye River and Camp David and Annapolis”, but urged his audience not to pay attention to history and “give in to cynicism”.

“Cynicism has never solved anything,” he said. But then again neither has the Peace Process. And while cynicism isn’t likely to usher in an era of peace or grow money on trees, it offers you the power to extract yourself from bad situations instead of taking refuge in more of the same wishful thinking that got you into them.

Global Warming & the Mongolian Empire’s Rise Humanity’s greatest land empire was made possible by non-human climate change. By Alec Torres

Many phenomena, real and imagined, have been attributed to global warming. From rising ocean levels to increased agricultural yields to tornadoes to polar vortices to droughts to rapes to car thefts, global warming now stands as the cause of just about anything. And because of current political dogma, man is ultimately blamed for all these evils (and occasional goods).

Now a recent study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences argues that there is a correlation between increasing global temperatures and the rise of the Mongolian empire. According to “Pluvials, droughts, the Mongol Empire, and modern Mongolia,” the “dramatic increase in temperature and precipitation in the 13th century” increased grassland production, favoring the formation of Mongolian power, which was predominantly reliant on horses.

For global-warming alarmists, there’s one problem: The Mongolian empire, fueled by a “dramatic increase in temperatures,” grew to power in the early 1200s, over 500 years before the first Industrial Revolution, when man began pumping large amounts of carbon into the atmosphere.

The scientific facts of the study are clear, even if the researcher’s sociopolitical conclusions are debatable. Annual tree-ring records show a warming period through the 12th and 13th centuries, which yielded “persistent moisture unprecedented in the last 1,000 years” correlating with the rise of the Mongolian empire. Much like the Medieval Warm Period of the 10th to 13th centuries, which warmed the North Atlantic region, this hot spell contradicts those few who contend that global warming is purely man-made. Furthermore, according to the study, this pre-industrial global warming was significant enough to cause the rise of the largest land empire in the history of mankind.


The House of Representatives came one step closer Tuesday to holding former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress.

As Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) prepares to call a committee vote on the matter, the body released a report intended to build the case that Lerner has obstructed the work of Congress by providing false and misleading information to the committee and refusing to testify before it.

If the Oversight Committee votes to hold Lerner in contempt, House speaker John Boehner could move the matter to the full Congress. His previous comments suggest he would do so. “At some point, she has to testify or she should be held in contempt,” Boehner told reporters Wednesday.

The 141-page report makes the case that Lerner’s testimony is critical to the Oversight Committee’s investigation and that she has obstructed the panel’s work by providing it with inaccurate information. Without Lerner’s testimony, the report says, “The committee will never be able to fully understand the IRS’s actions. Lerner has unique, firsthand knowledge of how and why” the IRS decided to scrutinize conservative applicants for tax exemption.

Lerner has twice invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and refused to answer questions from lawmakers. The committee voted in June that she waived that right by making a voluntary opening statement at a May hearing. Lerner retired from the IRS in September.

The report charges that Lerner, the former director of the IRS’s Exempt Organizations division, misled Congress on four occasions. In a February 2012 briefing with the Oversight Committee, the report notes, she denied that the criteria for evaluating applications for tax exemption had changed. In fact, according to an inspector general’s report released last May, Lerner ordered that the criteria be broadened in June 2011. According to a colleague, she was concerned that current criteria, which included terms such as “tea party” and “patriot,” were “too pejorative.”

“Obama & Energy – Ideology Before Growth”- Sydney Williams   The best antidote for economic doldrums is more rapid growth. President Obama was handed a unique opportunity, in terms of an explosion in the production of oil and gas that was just getting underway when he was inaugurated in January 2009. Unfortunately, he let ideology dictate his response. Nevertheless, in spite of Mr. […]


Sorry to disagree…This is minor jousting with no real winner and no real foreign policy. Neither Cruz (Whom I prefer) nor (g)Rand (standing) Ron can claim to be Reagan’s heir. Have they even mentioned North Korea, or resurgent Islam and Jihad, or gone beyond the requisite blather of “we cannot allow Iran to build nukes” ???? Reagan was the ideological heir to Barry Goldwater who revived a conservative agenda. Cruz comes closer but Rand is soooo far behind with his libertarianism…..rsk
2016: The Battle to Be Reagan’s Heir
Paul and Cruz each try to win the base by channeling the Gipper. By Jonah Goldberg

It’s on! Ostensible allies for the last couple of years, senators Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and Rand Paul (R., Ky.) have commenced the battle for the unofficial title of conservative front-runner. That’s no surprise, but what is remarkable is their choice of weapons: foreign policy. For the last several years, there has been a lot of overblown hype about how the GOP, particularly the party base, is becoming isolationist. So it’s interesting that Cruz would seek to get to Paul’s right on the issue.

The first round began in earnest less than 24 hours after Paul — to no one’s surprise — won the Conservative Political Action Conference straw poll by a country mile. (Ron and Rand Paul have always overperformed in such contests, and Rand has his father’s machine working for him.)


Stay tuned to the election series at Family Security Matters….. (

In Florida the deadline for filing is not until May and the primary is not until August…..but a special election was held yesterday for the seat of Rep. C.W. “Bill Young (Republican) who died in October 2013. David Jolly will be the Incumbent in the election in November 2014. Read what the issues are that propelled his victory versus Alex Sink a popular Democrat. This is from the election series on FSM that has already posted Alaska, Alabama, Arizona, Texas (primary completed) and will feature Arkansas tomorrow and California next week…..rsk


C.W. “Bill” Young (R ) Died in office in October 2103

A special election for Florida’s 13th congressional district will be held on March 11, 2014 to elect a member of the United States House of Representatives, following the death of incumbent Republican Congressman Bill Young on October 18, 2013.

DAVID JOLLY (R) Won a special primary held on January 14, 2014 and won against Alex Sink (D) in a the special election on March 11, 2014 to fill Rep. Young’s seat until December 2014



Main campaign promise to repeal Obamacare

Obamacare has hurt Pinellas families and businesses, driving up premium prices for many, leading to cancelled policies for many, and burdening small businesses with additional costs that ultimately deter future hiring and reduce jobs in our community. It should be repealed now, and then Congress and the Administration should begin to consider private sector solutions that address very specific problems in the health insurance industry. A government take-over of approximately 1/6 of our nation’s economy is the wrong answer, and ultimately one that will reduce the quality of care for everyone. Government has never shown an ability to improve service and reduce costs; only the private sector can achieve that.


We need to secure our borders. To discuss comprehensive immigration reform while we continue to have a porous border where more people can continue to enter our country illegally ultimately ignores the very basic principle that people in our country illegally should not be given special treatment over those who have been patiently waiting in their country of origin to enter our country legally.




Improving the Affordable Care Act: Keep the Good, Fix the Bad

The rollout of the website and problems that have arisen with the implementation are unacceptable: The Obama Administration needs to be held accountable to get the website running, and making any necessary changes to fix any problems with the law. If these changes cannot be made in a timely way, then components of the law should be delayed until these issues are addressed.

But we cannot go back to a time when individuals with pre-existing conditions were denied care, seniors were forced to pay more for medicine, or insurance companies could do whatever they wanted – including kicking families off their plans because they got sick.

What is not helpful in Congress’ conversation about America’s healthcare was the government shutdown, or the gridlock in Washington that is holding Republicans and Democrats back from working together to get results and solutions – and it’s exactly this culture of dysfunction that I’m running to change.


Republican David Jolly won the special election to fill the House seat left vacant by the death of his former boss, Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.).

With nearly all of the votes counted Tuesday night, Jolly had 48.5 percent of the vote to Alex Sink’s 46.7 percent. Libertarian Lucas Overby had 4.8 percent.

Sink lost the 2010 governor’s race to Rick Scott. The Democratic Party sunk extensive ad funding into the congressional battle, and DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) tried to paint the loss as a positive.

“Republican special interest groups poured in millions to hold onto a Republican congressional district that they’ve comfortably held for nearly 60 years. Tonight, Republicans fell short of their normal margin in this district because the agenda they are offering voters has a singular focus – that a majority of voters oppose – repealing the Affordable Care Act that would return us to the same old broken health care system,” Wasserman Schultz said in a DNC rapid response statement.

“While tonight Democrats didn’t win, we are proud of Alex and the race she ran based on a vision of opportunity for all and an agenda that would grow the middle class and protect Florida’s families,” she said.