please don’t send these fat college girls to Gaza. They will only get fatter.

February 13, 2011


Notice the working people are still working through these college freaks.

You see what goes on with the rich college bitches at Princeton? they would be in a burqa in the country they support. Perhaps the best education is to send them there.

FAT JIHAD: Palestine has an obesity problem?   Media made a Whopper of a lie.  Gaza in fact has one of the largest obesity problems in the world.  Perhaps these so called genius bull queer butches are rethinking this insane display after “GAZA” has NOW donated EXCESS food and supplies to Egyptians?   All that oil and the Arabs are starving because their hate is greater then their love of their children… and if they are anything like these ladies from Princeton… who can blame them?

protesting hummus; purportedly made by Israelis (but which actually isn’t). sigh…sigh

the Lady Gaga Version was bad…
but the Bieber version is the new now as in now it sux worse


Did the Poor Cause the Crisis?

February 9, 2011
the answer to the “Title” is NO. The poor were not responsible. It was rich liberal minded Upper Middle Class self haters that were responsible. Those are the one’s who make a witch hunt… and I doubt they will point the finger to themselves. They are the one’s who force a person to plea in court for things they didn’t do because they don’t have the money to investigate. But they were all just hoping to say they were more egalitarian then the rest of us… so they won’t get caught. Am I bitter? I’ve just been in jail

WASHINGTON, DC – The United States continues to be riven by heated debate about the causes of the 2007-2009 financial crisis. Is government to blame for what went wrong, and, if so, in what sense?
In December, the Republican minority on the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC), weighed in with a preemptive dissenting narrative. According to this group, misguided government policies, aimed at increasing homeownership among relatively poor people, pushed too many into taking out subprime mortgages that they could not afford.
This narrative has the potential to gain a great deal of support, particularly in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and in the run-up to the 2012 presidential election. But, while the FCIC Republicans write eloquently, do they have any evidence to back up their assertions? Are poor people in the US responsible for causing the most severe global crisis in more than a generation?
Not according to Daron Acemoglu of MIT (and a co-author of mine on other topics), who presented his findings at the American Finance Association’s annual meeting in early January. (The slides are on his MIT Web site.)
Acemoglu breaks down the Republican narrative into three distinct questions. First, is there evidence that US politicians respond to lower-income voters’ preferences or desires?
The evidence on this point is not as definitive as one might like, but what we have – for example, from the work of Princeton University’s Larry Bartels – suggests that over the past 50 years, virtually the entire US political elite has stopped sharing the preferences of low- or middle-income voters. The views of office holders have moved much closer to those commonly found atop the income distribution.
There are various theories regarding why this shift occurred. In our book 13 Bankers, James Kwak and I emphasized a combination of the rising role of campaign contributions, the revolving door between Wall Street and Washington, and, most of all, an ideological shift towards the view that finance is good, more finance is better, and unfettered finance is best. There is a clear corollary: the voices and interests of relatively poor people count for little in American politics.
Acemoglu’s assessment of recent research on lobbying is that parts of the private sector wanted financial rules to be relaxed – and worked hard and spent heavily to get this outcome. The impetus for a big subprime market came from within the private sector: “innovation” by giant mortgage lenders like Countrywide, Ameriquest, and many others, backed by the big investment banks. And, to be blunt, it was some of Wall Street’s biggest players, not overleveraged homeowners, who received generous government bailouts in the aftermath of the crisis.
Acemoglu next asks whether there is evidence that the income distribution in the US worsened in the late 1990’s, leading politicians to respond by loosening the reins on lending to people who were “falling behind”? Income in the US has, in fact, become much more unequal over the past 40 years, but the timing doesn’t fit this story at all.
For example, from work that Acemoglu has done with David Autor (also at MIT), we know that incomes for the top 10% moved up sharply during the 1980’s. Weekly earnings grew slowly for the bottom 50% and the bottom 10% at the time, but the lower end of the income distribution actually did relatively well in the second half of the 1990’s. So no one was struggling more than they had been in the run-up to the subprime madness, which came in the early 2000’s.
Using data from Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, Acemoglu also points out that the dynamics of the wage distribution for the top 1% of US income earners look different. As Thomas Philippon and Ariell Reshef have suggested, this group’s sharp increase in earning power appears more related to deregulation of finance (and perhaps other sectors). In other words, the big winners from “financial innovation” of all kinds over the past three decades have not been the poor (or even the middle class), but the rich – people already highly paid.
Finally, Acemoglu examines the role of federal government support for housing. To be sure, the US has long provided subsidies to owner-occupied housing – mostly through the tax deduction for mortgage interest. But nothing about this subsidy explains the timing of the boom in housing and outlandish mortgage lending.
The FCIC Republicans point the finger firmly at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and other government-sponsored enterprises that supported housing loans by providing guarantees of various kinds. They are right that Fannie and Freddie were “too big to fail,” which enabled them to borrow more cheaply and take on more risk – with too little equity funding to back up their exposure.
But, while Fannie and Freddie jumped into dubious mortgages (particularly those known as Alt-A) and did some work with subprime lenders, this was relatively small stuff and late in the cycle (e.g., 2004-2005). The main impetus for the boom came from the entire machinery of “private label” securitization, which was just that: private. In fact, as Acemoglu points out, the powerful private-sector players consistently tried to marginalize Fannie and Freddie and exclude them from rapidly expanding market segments.
The FCIC Republicans are right to place the government at the center of what went wrong. But this was not a case of over-regulating and over-reaching. On the contrary, 30 years of financial deregulation, made possible by capturing the hearts and minds of regulators, and of politicians on both sides of the aisle, gave a narrow private-sector elite – mostly on Wall Street – almost all the upside of the housing boom.
The downside was shoved onto the rest of society, particularly the relatively uneducated and underpaid, who now have lost their houses, their jobs, their hopes for their children, or all of the above. These people did not cause the crisis. But they are paying for it.

Simon Johnson, a former chief economist of the IMF, is co-founder of a leading economics blog, http://BaselineScenario.com, a professor at MIT Sloan, and a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. His book, 13 Bankers, co-authored with James Kwak, is now available in paperback.

so nice to be extradited by a Liberal State for a misdemeanor. glad I could put their guilt at rest


BDS Bieber

February 9, 2011

this one was worse then the Lady Gaga Lesbians from Princeton University

How Did Palestine Get It’s Advocates To Have Such Tacky Taste? The lesson is obvious here. If you support people who kill Jews behind Trees because they think it is written to do so… then you probably don’t have the best taste.  Why is it they keep on putting the butch lesbians up to embarrass themselves for a culture that is intolerant to gays?


American Thinker: Free Speech Silenced at Columbia and Princeton

November 24, 2009

Nonie Darwish, the executive director of Former Muslims United and author of Cruel And Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law, was scheduled to speak at Columbia and Princeton University last week, but both events were canceled under pressure from Muslim groups on campus.

Columbia, where Ahmadinejad was welcomed like a returning king. See Israel Matzav: American universities for sale
Just hours before Darwish was scheduled to speak at Columbia, the groups that had invited her to come, the Whig-Clio student debate Society and Tigers of Israel, succumbed to demands from student Muslim groups and canceled her speaking event. Tigers for Israel, my eye. Their name mocks them. The Whig-Clio Society is the oldest debating society in the U.S., founded by James Madison in 1765. These are the students who are supposed to be the leaders of the future. What a joke.
Look at how the cancellation went down at Princeton. Look at the systematic bullying. This is the state of the freedom of speech in the age of jihad. Arab Society president Sami Yabroudi and former president Sarah Mousa issued a joint statement, claiming: “Nonie Darwish is to Arabs and Muslims what Ku Klux Klan members, skinheads and neo-Nazis are to other minorities, and we decided that the role of her talk in the logical, intellectual discourse espoused by Princeton University needed to be questioned.”

The sponsors of her talk immediately caved. Whig-Clio president Ben Weisman said: the society withdrew its sponsorship and did not permit the event to take place in “Our decision to co-host the event was based on our belief that by extending an offer to speak to Ms. Darwish, members of TFI deemed her views a legitimate element of the mainstream discourse and in part agreed with her incendiary opinions. By rescinding their offer, TFI indicated their understanding that Darwish’s views have no place in the campus community.”

Tigers for Israel said in a statement: “On Tuesday evening Tigers for Israel and Whig-Clio rescinded our cosponsorship of today’s Nonie Darwish Lecture. Tigers for Israel accepted the opportunity for her to speak based on a misconception about what she actually believes. After her anti-Islam position was brought to my attention on Tuesday afternoon by the Center for Jewish Life director Rabbi Julie Roth and the Muslim Chaplain Imam Sohaib Sultan, I conducted extensive research and discussed the issue with TFI and Whig-Clio leadership, and we decided to rescind our cosponsorship after concluding that Tigers for Israel disagrees with and does not condone Ms. Darwish and her beliefs on Islam…. As President of TFI I take full responsibility for not vetting Ms. Darwish from the beginning, and I sincerely apologize for offending any person or group on campus, especially the Muslim community. Tigers for Israel deeply regrets the initial sponsorship and we do not in any way endorse her views.”

Cowards. Pathetic cowards. Haven’t these Ivy League know nothings done their homework? Have they studied Islam? Jihad? Have they read Dr. Andrew Bostom’s The Legacy of Jihad and his Legacy of Islamic Anti-Semitism? Here is something they don’t know: Sohaib Sultan, who helped get the Darwish lecture canceled, wrote the book The Koran for Dummies. In that book he says that the medieval Islamic scholar Ibn Kathir is the “most referred to” authority on Islam “in the Muslim world today.” Sultan says that Ibn Kathir offers “an excellent collection of historical analysis on the Koran and his mastery of Islamic law makes his insights especially interesting.” Yet Ibn Kathir taught that Muslims should wage jihad war against Jews and Christians and impose laws upon them that would make them “disgraced, humiliated and belittled.” Ibn Kathir said that “Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah [Jews and Christians] or elevate them above Muslims, for they are miserable, disgraced and humiliated.”

So who is more the KKK or neo-Nazis? A courageous woman standing up for human rights for Muslim women and ex-Muslims, or a Muslim imam who holds up as an authority someone who says that non-Muslims should be “disgraced, humiliated and belitted”?

Darwish told me that she was shocked that just weeks after an Islamic attack on a military base on U.S. soil, the largest such attack in U.S. history, activists who speak the truth about Islam are being shut down and marginalized.

In another assault on free speech last week, they were throwing pies at a Robert Spencer event at NYU. What’s next? Grenades?

For those of us who are chronicling the advancing islamisation of America, things have gotten decidedly worse since Obama took over. We have entered a dark age.

Pamela Geller is the editor and publisher of the Atlas Shrugs Web site and is former associate publisher of the New York Observer.

the Alawi Foundation money at work http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2009/11/american-universities-for-sale.html

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon’s posterous


Free Speech Silenced at Columbia and Princeton

November 24, 2009

Nonie Darwish, the executive director of Former Muslims United and author of Cruel And Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law, was scheduled to speak at Columbia and Princeton University last week, but both events were canceled under pressure from Muslim groups on campus.

Columbia, where Ahmadinejad was welcomed like a returning king. See Israel Matzav: American universities for sale
Just hours before Darwish was scheduled to speak at Columbia, the groups that had invited her to come, the Whig-Clio student debate Society and Tigers of Israel, succumbed to demands from student Muslim groups and canceled her speaking event. Tigers for Israel, my eye. Their name mocks them. The Whig-Clio Society is the oldest debating society in the U.S., founded by James Madison in 1765. These are the students who are supposed to be the leaders of the future. What a joke.
Look at how the cancellation went down at Princeton. Look at the systematic bullying. This is the state of the freedom of speech in the age of jihad. Arab Society president Sami Yabroudi and former president Sarah Mousa issued a joint statement, claiming: “Nonie Darwish is to Arabs and Muslims what Ku Klux Klan members, skinheads and neo-Nazis are to other minorities, and we decided that the role of her talk in the logical, intellectual discourse espoused by Princeton University needed to be questioned.”

The sponsors of her talk immediately caved. Whig-Clio president Ben Weisman said: the society withdrew its sponsorship and did not permit the event to take place in “Our decision to co-host the event was based on our belief that by extending an offer to speak to Ms. Darwish, members of TFI deemed her views a legitimate element of the mainstream discourse and in part agreed with her incendiary opinions. By rescinding their offer, TFI indicated their understanding that Darwish’s views have no place in the campus community.”

Tigers for Israel said in a statement: “On Tuesday evening Tigers for Israel and Whig-Clio rescinded our cosponsorship of today’s Nonie Darwish Lecture. Tigers for Israel accepted the opportunity for her to speak based on a misconception about what she actually believes. After her anti-Islam position was brought to my attention on Tuesday afternoon by the Center for Jewish Life director Rabbi Julie Roth and the Muslim Chaplain Imam Sohaib Sultan, I conducted extensive research and discussed the issue with TFI and Whig-Clio leadership, and we decided to rescind our cosponsorship after concluding that Tigers for Israel disagrees with and does not condone Ms. Darwish and her beliefs on Islam…. As President of TFI I take full responsibility for not vetting Ms. Darwish from the beginning, and I sincerely apologize for offending any person or group on campus, especially the Muslim community. Tigers for Israel deeply regrets the initial sponsorship and we do not in any way endorse her views.”

Cowards. Pathetic cowards. Haven’t these Ivy League know nothings done their homework? Have they studied Islam? Jihad? Have they read Dr. Andrew Bostom’s The Legacy of Jihad and his Legacy of Islamic Anti-Semitism? Here is something they don’t know: Sohaib Sultan, who helped get the Darwish lecture canceled, wrote the book The Koran for Dummies. In that book he says that the medieval Islamic scholar Ibn Kathir is the “most referred to” authority on Islam “in the Muslim world today.” Sultan says that Ibn Kathir offers “an excellent collection of historical analysis on the Koran and his mastery of Islamic law makes his insights especially interesting.” Yet Ibn Kathir taught that Muslims should wage jihad war against Jews and Christians and impose laws upon them that would make them “disgraced, humiliated and belittled.” Ibn Kathir said that “Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah [Jews and Christians] or elevate them above Muslims, for they are miserable, disgraced and humiliated.”

So who is more the KKK or neo-Nazis? A courageous woman standing up for human rights for Muslim women and ex-Muslims, or a Muslim imam who holds up as an authority someone who says that non-Muslims should be “disgraced, humiliated and belitted”?

Darwish told me that she was shocked that just weeks after an Islamic attack on a military base on U.S. soil, the largest such attack in U.S. history, activists who speak the truth about Islam are being shut down and marginalized.

In another assault on free speech last week, they were throwing pies at a Robert Spencer event at NYU. What’s next? Grenades?

For those of us who are chronicling the advancing islamisation of America, things have gotten decidedly worse since Obama took over. We have entered a dark age.

Pamela Geller is the editor and publisher of the Atlas Shrugs Web site and is former associate publisher of the New York Observer.

the Alawi Foundation money at work http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2009/11/american-universities-for-sale.html

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon’s posterous