Both suspects in London subway attack are Muslim ‘refugee kids’ nurtured by do-gooders

The ‘kids’ (unaccompanied alien minors?) were from Iraq and Syria.  Both received government-supported foster care from a couple known for their welcome to needy ‘kids.’

Sorry, this is the first thing I thought of – Al Wilson’s 1969 song “The Snake”:

Ronald and Penelope Jones were foster parents for 268 “children.” Photo: Facebook

Of course we have to wonder if they were even kids when they got into the UK, but that’s a story for another day….

Here is just one of many accounts today of what is going on with the latest UK Islamic terror investigation.

From Sky News:

Two men who are believed to have been fostered by the same couple are being questioned by police over the Parsons Green bombing.

Police investigating the Parsons Green Tube bombing are questioning two suspects after searching three properties over the weekend.

An 18-year-old was arrested at Dover ferry port on Saturday morning and a 21-year-old was arrested at a fried chicken shop in Hounslow, west London, on Saturday night. Neither have been named.

Screenshot (847)

Syrian refugee being questioned.  Balding 21-year-old (!) was Facebook friends with Penelope.

The younger man is suspected of planting the device, which exploded on a District Line train in London on Friday morning, injuring 30 people.

He and the other man, reported to be from Syria, are being questioned by police on suspicion of offences under the Terrorism Act.

Both men are believed to have spent time in the care of Penelope and Ronald Jones, who received MBEs [Member of the Order of the British Empire—ed] for services to children and families in 2010.

[….]

…. the 18-year-old who has been held is understood to be an Iraqi orphan who had moved to Britain when he was 15.

More here.

Go here for my complete archive on the ‘Invasion of Europe.’

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Hungary Built a Wall…Cuts Illegal Aliens By 99 Percent

European Attacks Show the Difficulty in Tracking Soaring Terror Suspect Numbers

Parsons Green terror: Foster couple in Tube bomb raid ‘took in Syrian and Iraqi refugees’

Parsons Green bucket bomb suspect named as Syrian refugee, 21, Yahya Faroukh

We want to go to Germany and make Muslim babies…

The Mistake of Pandering to Antifa/Black Lives Matter

Antifa

I cringed when I heard fellow black conservatives who I respect on TV saying that while they condemn the violent behavior of Antifa/Black Lives Matter some of their grievances against America are warranted. I wanted to scream at my TV, “Hogwash!”

These conservative blacks on TV are merely trying to create peace and civility by agreeing with some of the bogus accusations of racism dreamed up by Leftist intellectuals. They are also trying to prove they are not Uncle Toms. I think it is a huge mistake to pander to lies about America; acting as though very little has changed racially since the 1950’s.

As a black person, I know the Black Code. It is the same as what Michael Corleone said to his brother Fredo, “Don’t ever take sides against the family. Ever!” Many blacks and Leftists believe to qualify as an authentic black American, one must harbor a deep seated resentment against white America.

Watching black conservatives on TV saying Antifa/Black Lives Matter have some legit grievances regarding white privilege, I found myself scratching my head. For the life of me, I have no idea what millennial blacks who have never suffered a moment of “real” racism in their lives are so enraged about; whining, complaining and destroying property.

Let’s get real folks. Since the election of Obama, being black is in vogue like never before. Everywhere you turn, American businesses and whites are walking on eggshells, pandering to blacks. This is an undeniable truth that I am not allowed to say out loud, especially as a black person. Leftists will verbally beat the crap out of me on social media.

My 89 year old black dad suffered “real” hardcore racism. He paved the way for these black ungrateful domestic terrorists created by Leftists’ lies.

After spending months at sea as a young Merchant Marine, Dad and the other black seaman were super excited about their much needed shore leave when their ship landed in St Petersburg Florida. Dad and his fellow black shipmate were heartbroken upon hearing that they had to stay on the ship because of St Petersburg’s curfew for blacks. While his black shipmate went on a cussing rant, Dad said he cried.

When Dad was finally allowed to leave the ship, locals attempted to hang him just because he was black. Dad’s life was saved by white shipmates. I remember when Dad was in his 50s, he met for dinner with an old white friend. I later learned it was one of the sailors who saved Dad’s life.

In 1957, blacks were finally permitted to take the test to become a Baltimore City Firefighter. Dad passed the test. Working conditions at the firehouse were horrific for Dad. He was not permitted to use the same eating utensils or drink from the same coffee pot as the white firefighters. Despite humiliating working conditions, Dad won Firefighter of the Year two times. Dad’s weapons for defeating racism were his faith in God, prayer and striving for excellence. Over the years, Dad mentored numerous blacks into becoming firefighters. One of Dad’s young black recruits became Anne Arundel County Maryland’s first black Fire Chief.

In the 1960s, an exclusive white country club offered free membership to Baltimore City firefighters. The club was stunned when Dad and my two younger brothers showed up. Dad said all the whites got out of the swimming pool when he and my brothers got in. Dad kept frequenting the club and the white members eventually got over it.

Folks, I could go on and on with horrific tales of “real” racism blacks suffered back in the day. But praise God, this is a new day in America. While Leftists claim a majority of white Americans are racist, white America voted for the worst president in U.S. history two times because he was black. I know. I know. As a black person, blacks consider me disloyal to my race for telling the truth about Obama.

Is there racism in America? Absolutely, along with every other sin in the heart of man. Is there enough racism to stop anyone from achieving their American Dream? Absolutely not. America is the greatest land of opportunity on the planet for everyone who chooses to go for it. Anything else promoted by fake news media, democrats and Leftist Hollywood is a lie. Pure and simple.

The loudest black voices trashing America are super wealthy Leftist blacks who could not have achieved their mega success without the enthusiastic support of white America. And yet, they are dissing our flag and national anthem. They are cheerleaders for the destruction of historical monuments and clamoring for us to throw out the U.S. Constitution. Shamefully, rich Leftist blacks are using urban blacks as pawns to further Leftists’ socialist/progressive agenda.

Colin Kaepernick is the pro football player who inspired youth across America to disrespect our flag. In essence, Kaepernick is also dissing the men who made the ultimate sacrifice to keep our flag flying high.

In 2016, Kaepernick’s net worth was $22 million. Kaepernick signed a football contract for $126 million. After declining performances and him dissing our national anthem, Kaepernick was let go only receiving $39.4 million of his contract. Oh how racist white America has screwed this poor black man. I am being sarcastic folks. I could call Kaepernick an ungrateful spoiled brat idiot. But Kaepernick is really a tragic example of how decades of Leftists spewing hatred for our country has infected the minds of our youths.

Please black conservatives, do not pander to Leftists’ lies about our country in an attempt to prove your loyalty to your blackness. Only by spreading the truth will we defeat Leftists’ insidious divisive evil and unite us as Americans.

Democrat candidate joins with Islamic supremacists to silence speech in a small Iowa town

This didn’t happen in Berkeley, California or St. Louis, Missouri but in a small Iowa town’s community center.

I’m just going to give you the opening paragraphs of the story, but everyone of you concerned about the future of  our country should read the jaw-dropping account of a public meeting where Democrat protesters and Council on American Islamic Relations representatives teamed up to disrupt a presentation organized by a former Muslim, a convert to Christianity.

Dr. Glenn Hurst of Council Bluffs, Iowa, is a Democrat who organized people against speakers Chris Gaubatz and John Guandolo Thursday, Sept. 14, 2017, accusing them of being ‘racist’ and ‘anti-Muslim bigots’

Dr. Glenn Hurst, a Democrat who is running for local elected office, was the leader (along with CAIR) of the infiltrators who disrupted the meeting requiring police presence so that speakers could continue. “He posted on Facebook suggestions that Guandolo, Christian and Gaubatz did not qualify for free speech rights under the First Amendment.”

Miriam Amer, Executive Director of CAIR-Iowa, was reportedly in attendance.

This is America?

From Leo Hohmann at World Net Daily:

While all eyes were on the University of California, Berkeley, Thursday night to see if radical leftists could control their anger over the mere presence of a conservative speaker on campus, it was a gathering in a tiny Iowa town that attracted the attention of one of the left’s key allies – the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR, which was named an unindicted co-conspirator in a massive terror-financing trial held in 2008, crashed a meeting in Oakland, Iowa – population 1,500 in rural Pottawattamie County.

Why such concern for what’s going on in a place so far off the beaten path?

Actually, it’s not unusual, not in post-Trump America.

CAIR has made it a top priority in the wake of President Trump’s surprising election victory to show up, challenge and cause confusion wherever the truth about Islam is being taught, say experts on the organization. CAIR is worried that a nation under the spell of Barack Obama for eight years may start to wake up to some startling facts and discover that Islam has become the government-favored religion, the only religion Americans are not allowed to criticize.

MiriamAmer_400x400

Miriam Amer

This is all part of CAIR’s nationwide campaign against “Islamophobia” which coincides with the United Nations’ anti-Islamophobia campaign being carried out on a global scale. Cities such as Boston, Minneapolis, San Francisco and Nashville have all taken up the cause of defending Islam against verbal attacks increasing referred to as “hate crimes.”

The speakers who had CAIR worked up into a tizzy were John Guandolo and Chris Gaubatz, partners in Understanding the Threat…..

Click here and read about what happened in Oakland, Iowa, a bigger deal then Berkeley where we have come to expect massive intimidation efforts to silence speech.

When is the last time you heard about Dems/Muslims holding public meetings crashed by people trying to silence their speech?  That’s right, you haven’t!

And, one more thing, if you have people like Hurst running for public office where you live, you better get out and oppose them!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Two weeks away from new fiscal year, FY17 refugee ceiling surpassed by 2,282 refugees

Islamists, leftists, gang up against ‘Muslim Mafia’ investigators

FBI arrests Omaha man accused of threatening U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst

Senate Dems want law followed on refugee Presidential determination

EDITORS NOTE: Mara Klecker a World-Herald staff writer reported that Dr. Glenn Hurst defended the actions of Robert William Simet of Omaha, Nebraska. Simet was arrested by the FBI on July 7, 2017 and charged with threatening the life of Iowa U.S. Senator Joni Ernst, a Republican. Hurst stated, “I wasn’t surprised when I heard about what he said, but I know those threats weren’t based in reality. I want people to know that he’s not a bad guy. He’s a sick guy… What happened isn’t a Democrats versus Republicans issue. It’s about a sick individual with a good heart who needs help.” Hurst is on the executive committee for the activist group Indivisible Nebraskans and has been active in opposing efforts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Read more.

Former Navy SEAL has an answer to the North Korea Problem

Kim Jong Un has hardly the,resources to reach “military equilibrium” with the, U.S.

Having said that he is demonstrating that by starving his people he is endeavoring to punch way above his geo political weight class with rapid progress in both nukes and mobile missile successes.

If you watched the eye opener CNN “Secret State” hour long report last night on what life is like inside the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea the starving population is beholden to thought control by their dear leader with the threat of torture and death in the gulags for any opposition. The documentary showed what happened to the late 22 year old Otto Warmbier who was beaten into a vegetative state for allegedly tearing a propaganda poster off a hotel wall. The documentary noted that North Korea is detaining three Korean Americans. That thought control extends to hatred of all Americans who those average North Korean interviewed in the documentary believe caused the 1950 war that murdered hundreds of thousands of their people.

Watch CNN’s special report “Secret State: Inside North Korea.”

The propaganda poured into the minds of North Korean kids and adults looks like an Orwellian world on the Korean Peninsula. That was evident in the CNN presentation by a veteran U.S. journalist who made 12 trips there and on this trip had access to hidden aspects of the Secret Society under the ever present gaze of minders. A North Korean Lieutenant Colonel interviewed believes that the DMZ is on a war footing. That is reflected even among North Koreans living less than 3 miles from a dynamic South Korea who believe they are better off. Bizarre.

The CNN documentary bolsters former Navy Seal Jocko Willink’s proposal to flood the country with cellphones and free WiFi to burst the hard shell of dear leader suffocating propaganda that verges on being near religious devotion with children captured on video at a privileged summer camp saying the dear leader loves them more than their own parents.

That is what the U.S. and the West are up against.

Kim Jong Un says he’s seeking military ‘equilibrium’ with US

SEOUL/UNITED NATIONS – North Korea said on Saturday it aims to reach an “equilibrium” of military force with the United States, which earlier signaled its…

NYPOST.COM

Telegraaf interview Geert Wilders — ‘In my opinion Islam is not a religion’

Party for Freedom leader Geert Wilders is deeply concerned about Muslim integration. In our series Islam in the Netherlands  he is warning about the “perishing”of our culture. “It is not five to twelve or two to twelve, it is almost morning!” The leader of the second party in the country is pondering about very far-reaching measures.

Geert Wilders (54) is not surprised at the shocking poll results released by daily newspaper De Telegraaf. The fact that only thirteen percent of the Dutch population feel that the problem of integration will solve itself is a writing on the wall, according to him. And that only eleven percent of the Dutch see Islam as an enrichment proves in his opinion that what he has been  calling for years. “If I had said that three years ago, I would have had tens of thousands of police reports thrown at me. But people are completely fed up with it.”

How do you explain the figures?

“Decades ago, a few thousand people from Islamic countries would stay temporarily. But temporarily turned out to be permanently. Those thousands of guest workers became hundreds of thousands. And in Europe millions of people  by now. Back then those people were called upon to integrate and assimilate. But Islam, the word says it already, seeks to dominate. Not long ago Professor Koopmans found that as  much as seventy percent of Muslims find Islamic rules more important than secular laws. In Europe almost weekly innocent people are slaughtered in name of Allah and Islam. Proudly. We have been declared war and we refuse to defend ourselves.”

Who is responsible for this?

“I think that probably the worst of all is that Western European politicians have allowed this to happen. Last week Sybrand Buma of the Christian democratic party CDA was suddenly critical of Islam. That is like a bank robber who, twenty years after the robbery, has spent all the money and apologizes for doing so. He is the one who did it. CDA has been in power in the Netherlands for 50 years.”

Is it not a bit blunt to say …

“No!”

… that Muslims do not integrate?

“I am talking about Islam. But research also points out that 11 percent of Dutch Muslims in the Netherlands are prepared to use violence on behalf of their religion. That is a 110,000 people, twice the size of the Dutch army!”

But perhaps many Muslims in fact take Islam less serious and profess their faith behind the front door, peacefully. Secretary Asscher of Integration said in this paper last week that those people should not be held accountable for terrorist attacks.

“Do you know, secretary Asscher and Prime Minister Rutte are two sides of the same coin. After the second attack in June, Rutte said that Muslims are double the victim, because they are not only victims of attacks, but also blamed for it as a group. For all I care everyone is free to get all teary-eyed but we will perish if we continue. It reminds me of what happened after the murder of Theo van Gogh. Some people, even members of the Royal House, went to a mosque as a  first response. That is total cowardice. We are the victims.”

Who are we? Does it not also include those Muslims not engaged in fanatism? This way people are categorized into a group they do not feel connected to at all.

“Then take your distance from that group. Of course I do not say that all Muslims are cheering at an attack. But I can hardly listen to it, the terror attack commemorations in Parliament. I think we have had ten to twelve this year. I am attending, out of respect for the relatives and the victims and will continue to do so. But every time Rutte reads the same a4-format paper, only altering the name of the city and country where the attack took place. The man does not show any action.”

How do you liberate yourself from the Islamic yoke in your opinion?

“Leave Islam.”

So people must renounce their faith?

“There is nothing they must do. But I would tell: freedom is such a splendorous thing. You do not have anything like it in Islam. I can not force people to leave Islam. They must above all realize what is going on in their minds. But the real concern is what happens in the public space. What is happening in my country and whether we should have more or less of that.”

There are also Muslims who were born in the Netherlands. The country is just as much their country as it is yours.

“For those people that could apply, but not to Islam.”

But according to the constitution it does, a Muslim born here is considered Dutch. According to the Constitution he or she has an equal right to express  what the Netherlands should look like.

“We live in a free country. But in my opinion Islam is not a religion. It is a totalitarian, dangerous and violent ideology, dressed up as a religion. People are allowed to think whatever they like, but I also have the right to say that Islam should not be included in the constitutional freedoms.

Can a Muslim not just be moderate?

“According to the Quran that is not possible. I personally believe there are extremist people and moderate people. But I do not believe in two kinds of Islam. There is only one. One that is impossible to reform. And even if it would be the case, we can not afford to wait for another 150 or 300 years. I think it will never happen. You get your head chopped off should you wish to interpret Islam.”

What do you think should happen?

“Recognize the problem. Dare to say that Islam does not integrate. Define Islam as a violent totalitarian undemocratic thing. And stop immigration from Islamic countries. During cabinet Rutte II, a 100,000 Muslims.were added. These are not all terrorists or bad people, but it is 100,000 times more Islam entering the Netherlands.”

There was a war. People were on the move, lost their homes.

“That was not the case. If they were refugees, they would have stopped in the first safe country after Syria. By the way, this is also part of the solution: all Syrians must return! Tomorrow! Why not? That country is safe. This is our country. Why would a Syrian be able to return from the refugee camps in Jordan or Lebanon and not from a refugee centre here?”

Because the land is in ruins and dictator Assad uses poison gas against his own people for example.

“There are many countries in the world that have not very pleasant regimes.”

Back to the Netherlands. We also have a constitution in this country that protects such things as freedom of education and religion. Should that be altered?

“I do not see the word Islam in any constitution, but in jurisprudence Islam is considered to be a religion.”

Do you want to put into law that Islam is not a religion?

“We will have to see about legal possibilities Can it be done, how can it be done and what way can it be done. But it’s definitely worth studying”

So you want to ban Islam?

“I do not rule out that this may be necessary in the long run. It will concern the expressions. You can not ban an idea, that’s impossible. You can not ban communism either.”

There is religious freedom in this country. But you want to record that Islam is not a religion.

“In my opinion it is not part of religious freedom. That is my political wish. How to execute such a thing is wish number two.”

That is very useful for a politician if he makes a statement. What should we think of?

“That is what we have to look into. I have now lifted a tip of the veil.”

Many people will be startled when they read this.

“We are not going to collect Qurans from people’s homes. What is going on behind their front door is their business. We are talking about public space, but it is too early to say anything about it now.”

Does this not make it very casual?

“No. I have  ventilated this for ten years.”

Some things you mention you have. But banning Islam is something different.

“If it is possible to put it into law, we will put it into law. But it will be about expressions. Recently we have also drafted an administrative detention bill for jihadists. I realize all problems will not be solved tomorrow by closing a mosque. You must make it unattractive in this country to profess Islam. People who want to come to the Netherlands from Islamic countries should think: this is not a place we want to go to! And we do not do this to bully Muslims, but to keep the Netherlands of the future a free Netherlands.”

EDITORS NOTE: This interview was published in De Telegraaf today , the largest daily newspaper in The Netherlands and was translated by the Party for Freedom.

Perverts, pedophiles and pederasts in high offices

Daily Americans are bombarded with negative news about political and religious leaders who have fallen from grace. This has led to a loss of confidence in not only these individuals but the institutions, political parties and churches through which they used their positions of trust to abuse underage children.

Our title includes three distinct classes of abusers. A pervert is, “a person whose sexual behavior is regarded as abnormal and unacceptable.” This category includes both heterosexual and homosexual men and women. A pedophile is, “a person who is sexually attracted to children.” A pederast is, “a man who indulges in pederasty (sexual activity involving a man and a boy).” All pederasts are by definition homosexuals.

Recently there are two reports of the dire situation that our children face from men, and women, perverts, pedophiles and pederasts in power.

In a Daily Caller article titled “Seattle Mayor Steps Down Following Fifth Allegation Of Child Sex Abuse” Jack Crowe reports:

Seattle Mayor Ed Murray announced his resignation Tuesday, hours after a fifth man publicly accused him of child molestation.

“I am announcing my resignation as mayor, effective at 5 p.m. tomorrow. While the allegations against me are not true, it is important that my personal issues do not affect the ability of our City government to conduct the public’s business,” Murray’s resignation statement reads. [Read more.]

But this isn’t the only pervert mayor to resign. There were at least eleven (11) more since 2016.

In The Daily Caller article “At Least 11 Mayors Accused Of Child Sex-Related Crimes Since 2016” associate editor Peter Hasson reports:

Seattle Mayor Ed Murray resigned on Wednesday after a fifth man publicly accused the Democrat of molesting him as a child.

But Murray isn’t alone. At least 11 then-current and former mayors have been accused of child sex abuse-related crimes since 2016. The allegations range from child porn to physical abuse. The alleged victims were as young as four years old.

Stillwater, New York Mayor Rick Nelson resigned earlier this month after being arrested on child porn charges. Nelson has a decades-long history of alleged sexual misconduct involving teenagers and children. The child porn charges marked the fifth such accusation against Nelson, the Times Union reported, including allegations of rape and sodomy.

Nelson was never convicted for the previous alleged abuses, which allegedly included inappropriate behavior with a five year old in 1982 on the school bus that Nelson was driving at the time.

Nelson is the father of Patrick Nelson, a Democratic 2018 congressional candidate who served as one of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ delegates at the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

Just last week, 78-year-old Dale Kenyon, former mayor of Clayton, New York was indicted on charges of sexually abusing a teenager over the course of three years.

Read more.

The Daily Beast’s  in her column “Vatican Whisks Another Alleged Pervert Priest to Safety—This One From Its D.C. Embassy” writes:

ROME—Pope Francis very famously doesn’t like walls, except, it seems, when they come in handy. At least that’s the impression that the Holy See is giving with its response to an August 21 request by the U.S. State Department to lift diplomatic immunity to charge a yet unnamed priest suspected of collecting child pornography. The accused priest, who was described as “high ranking” by the Associated Press, was instead whisked back to Rome where he is now safe from secular prosecution inside the Vatican’s fortified walls.

The New York Times, citing some Italian media and an unnamed American source familiar with the investigation, identified  the perpetrator as 44-year-old Italian Carlo Alberto Capella, who has been a priest since 1993 and part of the Vatican’s diplomatic corps since 2004. Records show he worked closely with the Vatican’s secretariat for the economy focused on the Vatican’s often murky financial affairs.

The Vatican Press Office will not confirm the identity of the priest, but issued a statement Friday morning with scant details. “The Holy See, following the practice of sovereign states, recalled the priest in question, who is currently in Vatican City,” the statement says. “Having received such information from the United States government, the Secretariat of State transmitted this information to the Promoter of Justice of the Vatican Tribunal. The Promoter of Justice opened an investigation and has already commenced international collaboration to obtain elements relative to the case. It should be noted that, as provided by the laws in force applicable to all preliminary inquiries, the investigations carried by the Promoter of Justice are subject to investigative confidentiality.”

In other words, same old story.

Read more.

We have reported on efforts by groups such as B4U-ACT and the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) to indoctrinate our children into believing that sex with men by children is not only normal but encouraged (watch the two videos below for a history of these groups).

Dr. Judith Reisman in her 2016 column “They’re mainstreaming pedophilia!” wrote:

Alfred Kinsey’s ongoing sexual anarchy campaign has no end in sight.

Matt Barber, associate dean of the Liberty University School of Law, and I attended the “B4U-ACT” pedophile conference Aug. 17 [2015]. To eliminate the “stigma” against pedophiles, this growing sexual anarchist lobby wants the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to redefine pedophilia as a normal sexual orientation of “Minor-Attracted Persons.”

Adhering to the Kinsey principle of lulling “straights” into a false sense of security, pedophile dress was largely conservative – short hair, jackets, some ties and few noticeable male ear piercings.

Matt Barber and I sat in the back of the meeting room among roughly 50 activists and their “mental health” attending female enablers. “Pedophilia, Minor-Attracted Persons, and the DSM: Issues and Controversies,” keynoted “Fred Berlin, M.D., Ph.D., as founder, National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma; Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic.”

However, the sex clinic was initially founded by John Money, Ph.D., to give judges “leeway” to keep child molesters out of jail. Money (deceased), a pedophile advocate, also called for an end to all age-of-consent laws. Dr. Berlin was his disciple.

There are many who fear being labeled bigots, homophobic or intolerant for telling the truth about these perverts, pedophiles and pederasts. We hope that our readers will share this column with family, friends and the world via social media. Do so understanding what Jesus said in John 15:18:

17 This is My command to you: Love one another.

18 If the world hates you, understand that it hated Me first.

19 If you were of the world, it would love you as its own. Instead, the world hates you, because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world.…

Remember: In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

CDC: 94 to 95 Percent of HIV Cases among Boys and Young Men Linked to Homosexual Sex

Goal of “gay” programs in schools: Persuade kids to “come out” early as homosexuals. Here’s how they do it —

RELATED VIDEOS: 

Controversy Over Push to Redefine Pedophilia.

Homosexuality

Clinton Emails Reveal Additional Mishandling of Classified Information, the IRS Scandal is Still a Scandal

Clinton Emails Reveal Additional Mishandling of Classified Information

We continue to accumulate details of the communications abuses in the Hillary Clinton State Department, but after you read the following report pause and consider the big picture. For four years the inner workings of her department were porous to prying eyes. Is it just a coincidence that Hillary Clinton’s diplomatic efforts so often failed?

This week we released 1,617 new pages of documents revealing numerous additional examples of classified information being transmitted through the unsecure, non-state.gov account of Huma Abedin, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, as well as many instances of Hillary Clinton donors receiving special favors from the State Department.

The documents included 97 email exchanges with Clinton not previously turned over to the State Department, bringing the known total to date to at least 627emails that were not part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over, and further contradicting a statement by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails had been turned over to department.

The emails are the 20th production of documents obtained in response to a court order in a May 5, 2015, lawsuit we filed against the State Department (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00684)). We sued after State failed to respond to a March 18, 2015, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking: “All emails of official State Department business received or sent by former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin from January 1, 2009 through February 1, 2013 using a non-‘state.gov‘ email address.”

On September 11, 2009, the highly sensitive name and email address of the person giving the classified Presidential Daily Brief was included in an email forwarded to Abedin’s unsecure email account by State Department official Dan Fogerty. The State Department produced many more Clinton and Abedin unsecured emails that were classified:

  • On April 16, 2009, Deputy Assistant Secretary Jeffrey Feltman sent to Abedin’s unsecure email account classified information about an unknown subject.
  • On June 18, 2009, Abedin sent classified information summarizing a June 18, 2009, “Middle East Breakfast” meeting between various senators, representatives and State Department officials, at which Deputy Secretary Jack Lew and George Mitchell briefed the congressmen with “an update on our discussions with the [Middle East] parties.”
  • On June 23, 2009, U.S. diplomat Martin Indyk, who had his security clearance suspended in 2000 for “possible sloppiness” in the handling of classified information, sent a memo containing classified information to Abedin’s unsecure email account. The memo, written for Clinton, pertained to Indyk’s discussions with top Israeli officials:
Could I ask you to review the memo below that I wrote yesterday on my return from Israel?  If you think it worthwhile, I’d be very grateful if you showed it to HRC (I have already shared it with Mitchell and Feltman). A confrontation with Bibi appears imminent.  I’ve never been one to shy away from that, as she may know.  But it has to be done carefully, and that doesn’t appear to be happening.  And I’m concerned that she will be tarred with the same brush if this leads to a bad end.  So I think she needs to make sure that the friction is productive.  I’ve made some suggestions at the end of the memo
  • On August 1, 2009, Abedin forwarded classified information from State Department official Richard Verma to her unsecure email account. The email from Senator Russ Feingold was sent to Hillary Clinton regarding her upcoming Africa trip.
  • On August 4, 2009, Assistant Secretary Jeffrey Feltman sent classified information about discussions with Kuwaiti officials to Abedin’s unsecure email account. Feltman noted that the Kuwaitis felt a lunch they had with Obama was “chilly.” The discussions concerned Guantanamo as well as Kuwait’s treatment of detainees.
  • On Sept 20, 2009, Abedin forwarded classified information to her unsecure email account. The email was from State Department official Esther Brimmer and concerned foreign leaders’ discussions regarding a UNESCO leadership appointment.
  • On November 1, 2009, U.S. Ambassador to the UAE Rick Olson sent classified information to Abedin’s unsecure email account. The email shows that Olsen was traveling with Hillary in the Middle East, and Abedin asked him to “work on a list of everything covered in the mbz [presumably Mohammed bin Zayed bin Sultan Al-Nahyan, the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi] meeting for Hillary.” Olson asks: “do you want it on this system (I can sanitize), or on the other system.” She replies: “This system easier. We are staying without class[ified] computers. Thx.”
  • On December 1, 2009, Abedin sent classified information about foreign military contributions to the Afghanistan war effort to her unsecure email account. The email originated with State official Sean Misko who wrote to Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan that he first “accidentally” sent it on the “high side” (secure) but was resending.
  • On December 25, 2009, Abedin sent to her unsecure email account classified information prepared by Deputy U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Francis Ricciardone concerning the Afghan elections.
  • On December 26, 2009, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Carlos Pascual sent a memo to Clinton, which was found on Abedin’s unsecure email account. It contained extensive classified information involving U.S. and Mexican counter-drug operations in Mexico.
  • On March 22, 2010, Abedin forwarded to her unsecure email account classified information about a telephone conversation between President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.
  • On April 13, 2010, Abedin forwarded to her unsecure email account classified information from Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman regarding diplomatic discussions with the foreign ministers of Algeria and Morocco.
  • On May 24, 2010, Abedin forwarded to her unsecure email accountclassified information about the minutes of a State Department senior staff meeting regarding State Department officials’ meetings in Uganda.
  • Among Abedin’s unsecure email records is a document that is simply titled “NOTE” with the date September 12, 2010. The contents are entirely redacted as classified.
  • On January 28, 2011, Abedin sent Clinton an unsecure email containing classified information relating to a briefing White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave.
  • On March 21, 2012, Clinton received a memo from State Department officials Joseph Yun and Derek Mitchell marked “Sensitive But Unclassified” and sent to Abedin’s unsecure email account. It contained classified information about elections in Burma.
  • Jake Sullivan emailed to Hillary’s unsecure email account classified information in which Sullivan discussed the content of conversations with UK Prime Minister Gordon regarding “the situation” in Northern Ireland. The date of this email is not included on the document.
  • On April 8, 2012, Abedin sent classified information to her unsecure email regarding a call sheet and an “Action Memo” for Clinton relating to a call with Malawi President Joyce Banda. On April 9, 2012, confidential assistant Monica Hanley again forwarded the classified information to Clinton’s unsecure email account.

Other emails contain sensitive information that was sent via Hillary Clinton’s unsecure email servers.

  • On August 18, 2009, Hanley provided Abedin with laptop and fob (a physical device that provides a login code) logins and passwords to log onto a laptop, as well as a secure State Department website at https://one.state.gov. Included were a PIN number and instructions on how to access her email from the secure State Department website. Abedin forwarded this information to her unsecure account.
(The FBI interviewed Hanley in its probe of Clinton’s email practices, and State’s Diplomatic Security staff reprimanded her after she left classified material behind in a Moscow hotel room. Hanley was the staffer tasked with finding BlackBerry phones for Clinton to use.)
  • On August 19, 2009, Hanley asked Abedin to call her and provide Abedin’s computer password so that she could download a UN document for Cheryl Mills from Abedin’s computer. Instead of calling Hanley, Abedin apparently provided the computer password in her unsecure reply email, saying, “Its [redacted].”
  • On April 17, 2009, Clinton aide Lona Valmoro emailed Clinton’s sensitive daily schedule for April 18 to various Clinton Foundation officials, including Doug Band, Terry Krinvic and Justin Cooper. She also forwarded Clinton’s daily schedule for July 16 to numerous Clinton Foundation officials. She did the same thing on September 8, 2009. She did so again on January 10, January 14 and April 11, 2010.
  • The details of Hillary’s arrival on November 18, 2009, in war-torn Kabul, Afghanistan, for the inauguration of President Karzai, were found on Abedin’s unsecure email account. Included were precise times of landing at Kabul Airport, the occupants of her vehicle, arrival and departure times at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, and meeting times with U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

The new documents show that Clinton donors frequently requested and received special favors from the State Department that were connected to the Clinton Foundation.

  • On July 14, 2009, Gordon Griffin, a XL Keystone lobbyist, sent an email to Clinton Foundation executive Doug Band, asking if Band could get him into a Council on Foreign Relations dinner at which Clinton was speaking. Band forwarded the email to Abedin, saying, “Can u get him in?” Abedin replied: “Yes will get him in.” Band was a top aide to President Bill Clinton and co-founder of Teneo. Griffin was a major donor to Hillary Clinton’s Senate and presidential campaigns.
  • On July 16, 2009, Zachary Schwartz asked Band for help getting visas to travel to Cuba for a film production crew from Shangri La Entertainment. Band forwarded the request to Abedin, telling her, “Please call zach asap on this. [Redacted.] Important.” Abedin responded, “I’ll call zach when we land in India.” Abedin concludes with “Enjoy. Cuba is complicated. Am sure you aren’t surprised to hear that.” Schwartz worked for Steve Bing, a mega-donor to the Clintons and owner of Shangri La Entertainment. Bing has reportedly donated $10-25 million to the Clinton Foundation and paid Bill Clinton personally $2.5 million a year to be an adviser to a green construction company Bing owned.
  • On September 11, 2009, Terrence Duffy, chairman of futures brokerage firm CME Group, a donor to the Clinton Foundation, asked Clinton to arrange “government appointments” for him in Singapore and Hong Kong. Clinton, using her HDR22@clintonmail.com address, forwarded the request to Abedin, “fyi.” Abedin responded to Duffy’s email, saying she would “follow up” with Duffy’s secretary, Joyce. Duffy gave $4,600 to Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign; CME Group paid Hillary $225,000 for a speaking fee and has donated between $5,001 and 10,000 to the Clinton Foundation.Abedin, using her huma@clintonmail.com address, later told Joyce, “Would like to get some more information and details so we can try to help.” Further along in the exchange, Joyce responds “We would also like some help in arranging meetings with some key govt officials in both locations, such as the Prime Minister of Singapore, and would appreciate any help you may be able to provide.”

On September 29, 2009, Abedin followed up with Duffy, telling him that “we are happy to assist with any and all meetings” and that she had “discussed you and your trip with our assistant secretary of state for east asia and pacific affairs,” suggesting that Duffy write the assistant secretary, Kurt Campbell. Duffy replied, “Thank you very much. I did connect with Kurt Campbell today.”

  • On May 5, 2010, major Clinton Global Initiative member, Clinton Foundation donor and real estate developer Eddie Trump forwarded to “Dougie” Band a request for assistance from Russian American Foundation Vice President Rina Kirshner to get the Russian American Foundation involved in a State Department program. Band forwarded the request to Abedin, saying, “Can we get this done/mtg set.” As Judicial Watch previously reported, the State Department doled out more than $260,000 to the Russian American Foundation for “public diplomacy.”
  • Major Clinton donor Bal Das, a New York financier who reportedly raised $300,000 for Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign, asked Abedin on November 11, 2009 if Hillary Clinton could address the Japan Society at its annual conference in 2010. Clinton did speak to the Japan Society’s annual conference in 2011.

The emails also provide insight on the inner workings of the Clinton State Department, in particular her engagement with her staff.

  • In a May 19, 2009, “Global Press Conference” memo, Clinton was given in advance the “proposed questions” of four of the seven foreign reporters. Examples include: “What is the Obama administration’s view of Australian PM Rudd’s proposal to form an Asia-Pacific Community” and “Why can’t American drones not find, detect and destroy the insurgency supply line?”
  • In a document entitled “HRC Pakistan Notes” prepared for Clinton by her staff, Clinton apparently had to be reminded about all her trips to Pakistan and of “stories that you have told/remember.” Her reminder instructions include: “You loved Faisal mosque, and it was especially meaningful to have CVC [Chelsea] with you.” And: “Your first Pakistani friend was in College. She introduced you to Pakistani food and clothes.” And: “You have had lots of Pakistani and Pakistani American friends over the years. From Chicago to California to Washington, DC, you have friends all over the country. They know how much you love Pakistani food …”
  • On February 12, 2010, Case Button, a Clinton speechwriter, asked Abedin if her mother, a professor at Dar Al Hekma, a women’s university in Saudi Arabia where Clinton held a town hall meeting, would be willing to give him advice on talking points he was preparing for Clinton. Abedin responded, “Talk to my mom for sure. She will have good points for you.” After reviewing Hillary’s draft remarks, Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, (a controversial Islamist activist), offered some advice: “Do not use the political terms such as ‘democracy/elections/freedom.’ Do not use the term ’empowerment of women’ instead say ‘enabling women’ Do not even mention driving for women! Don’t sound sympathetic to ‘women’s plight’ or be ‘patronizing’ as other visitors have done and made the students extremely annoyed. They rightly consider these as in-house issues …” No references to these issues appear in Clinton’s speech.

Abedin’s involvement in a major appointment at the State Department is controversial given that Abedin’s mother was an Islamist activist.

  • On July 24, 2009, Cheryl Mills forwarded to Abedin a CV for someone being considered for the position of Special Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. It had been sent to Mills from State Department recruiter Margaret Carpenter. Rather than forwarding the resume on to Clinton for her approval, Abedin simply responds to Mills: “I’m a hundred percent fine with him.”

Abedin also offered her opinion to Clinton on administration leaders: On January 21, 2011, while on a trip to Mexico, Abedin emailed Hillary that, “Biden is a disaster here.”

  • On February 20, 2012, Clinton expresses outrage over an apparent wardrobe miscommunication for a meeting in Mexico and sent an email to Abedin with the subject line “I’m venting.” Clinton admonished:

So, here I sit in the meeting surrounded by ever other person dressed in a white shirt provided by the Mexicans. Patricia is not wearing the exact style that all others are but her own white shirt. But, since no one ever told me about this, and instead assumed I didn’t need to know, I had no idea about any of this until I just walked into the large meeting in front of the entire press corps and I’m wearing a green top. So, what’s my answer when asked why I think I’m different than all my colleagues and why I’m dissing our hosts? I am sick of people deciding what I should know rather than giving me the info so I can make a decision. This really annoys me and I told Monica [Hanley] I just didn’t understand.

These emails show ‘what happened’ was that Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin obviously violated laws about the handling of classified information and turned the State Department into a pay for play tool for the corrupt Clinton Foundation. The clear and mounting evidence of pay for play and mishandling of classified information warrant a serious criminal investigation by an independent Trump Justice Department.

To read more about Huma Abedin’s emails, click here.

The IRS Scandal Is Still a Scandal

In a baffling move, President Trump’s Justice Department has decided not to prosecute Lois Lerner, former director of the Exempt Organizations Unit of the IRS, whose own emails place her at the heart of the politicization of the IRS for the targeting of conservative groups:

When we learned of this, I issued this statement:

I have zero confidence that the Justice Department did an adequate review of the IRS scandal. In fact, we’re still fighting the Justice Department and the IRS for records about this very scandal. Today’s decision comes as no surprise considering that the FBI collaborated with the IRS and is unlikely to investigate or prosecute itself. President Trump should order a complete review of the whole issue. Meanwhile, we await accountability for IRS Commissioner Koskinen, who still serves and should be drummed out of office.

Let’s review the history.

Judicial Watch released 294 pages of FBI “302” documents revealing top Washington IRS officials, including Lois Lerner and Holly Paz, knew the agency was specifically targeting “Tea Party” and other conservative organizations two full years before disclosing it to Congress and the public. An FBI 302 document contains detailed narratives of FBI agent investigations. The Obama Justice Department and FBI investigations into the Obama IRS scandal resulted in no criminal charges.

The FBI 302 documents confirm the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) 2013 report, which said, “Senior IRS officials knew that agents were targeting conservative groups for special scrutiny as early as 2011.” Lerner did not reveal the targeting until May 2013, in response to a planted question at an American Bar Association conference. The documents revealed that then-acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller actually wrote Lerner’s response: “They used names like Tea Party or Patriots and they selected cases simply because the applications had those names in the title. That was wrong, that was absolutely incorrect, insensitive, and inappropriate.”

Our litigation forced the IRS first to say that emails belonging to Lerner were supposedly missing and later declare to the court that the emails were on IRS back-up systems. Lerner was one of the top officials responsible for the IRS’ targeting of President Obama’s political opponents.  Judicial Watch exposed various IRS record keeping problems:

  • In June 2014, the IRS claimed to have “lost” responsive emails belonging to Lerner and other IRS officials.
  • In July 2014 Judge Emmett Sullivan ordered the IRS to submit to the court a written declaration under oath about what happened to Lerner’s “lost” emails. The sworn declarations proved to be less than forthcoming.
  • In August 2014, Department of Justice attorneys for the IRS finally admitted Judicial Watch that Lerner’s emails, indeed all government computer records, are backed up by the federal government in case of a government-wide catastrophe. The IRS’ attorneys also disclosed that Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) was looking at several of these backup tapes.
  • In November 2014, the IRS told the court it had failed to search any of the IRS standard computer systems for the “missing” emails of Lerner and other IRS officials.
  • On February 26, 2015, TIGTA officials testified to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that it had received 744 backup tapes containing emails sent and received by Lerner.  This testimony showed that the IRS had falsely represented to both Congress, Judge Sullivan, and Judicial Watch that Lerner’s emails were irretrievably lost. The testimony also revealed that IRS officials responsible for responding to the document requests never asked for the backup tapes and that 424 backup tapes containing Lerner’s emails had been destroyed during the pendency of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit and Congressional investigations.
  • In June 2015, Judicial Watch forced the IRS to admit in a court filing that it was in possession of 6,400 “newly discovered” Lerner emails. Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered the IRS to provide answers on the status of the Lerner emails the IRS had previously declared lost. Judicial Watch raised questions about the IRS’ handling of the missing emails issue in a court filing, demanding answers about Lerner’s emails that had been recovered from the backup tapes.
  • In July 2015, U.S District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan threatened to hold John Koskinen, the commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, and Justice Department attorneys in contempt of court after the IRS failed to produce status reports and recovered Lerner emails, as he had ordered on July 1, 2015.
  • Obama IRS Commissioner Koskinen was nearly impeached in September 2016 for misleading Congress on Lerner’s emails.

While Washington spins in circles trying to find election rigging on the part of Donald Trump, it closes its eyes to genuine election skullduggery.

VIDEO: NFL — The Un-American Football League

Black racists have turned America’s favorite game into a hate filled political battleground and the shameful NFL has chosen the wrong side.

Why NFL viewership declined

Reason Percentage # of people Percentage of total respondents
National anthem protests 26 percent 287 3 percent
Domestic violence 24 percent 265 2.8 percent
Game delays 24 percent 265 2.8 percent
Excessive commercials 20 percent 221 2 percent
Election coverage 16 percent 177 1.9 percent
Cord-cutting 5 percent 55 > 1 percent

Data courtesy of J.D. Power

Urban Myth: Crime Doesn’t Pay – California City Authorizes Stipends to Gang Members

Gang members profit through criminal enterprises in a variety of ways: drug, weapon and human trafficking; theft, robbery, intimidation and extortion, and various kinds of fraud. In a win-win for gangbangers, material gains from criminality in one California municipality will soon include government-sanctioned payola.

In a special meeting on August 29, the nine-member City Council of Sacramento unanimously agreed to allocate $1.5 million in funding and to move forward with a “gun-violence reduction strategy” that will include cash payments (“LifeMAP milestone allowances”) and paid vacations for the handful of gang members suspected of committing the majority of gang-related gun crimes in the city.

The report and funding agreement before the council indicate that the program, the “Peacemaker Fellowship,” is to be implemented by a group called Advance Peace. It proposes to reduce gang violence through “transformational opportunities to young adults identified as most likely to be” involved in “gun violence” and by ensuring “greater connectivity to culturally competent human, social, and economic opportunities” for these individuals. The details, as fleshed out during the council meeting, were that participants will be selected from a small group of gang members thought to be behind the “re-cyclical and retaliatory” gun crimes in the community. Among other things, program participants will be required to identify and commit to “LifeMAP goals” (academic aspirations, or more basic things like “getting a driver’s license or improving their relationship with their parents or their kids”). As part of “incentivizing achievement,” the program’s “touchpoints” include “Transformative Travel” and cash stipends for participants. The cost associated with each participant tops out at an estimated $30,000.

The four-year agreement requires the city to pay $500,000 over the course of two years, starting this year. Implementation will consist of two 18-month segments, with 50 participants in each segment. The expected “outcomes” listed in the report are a reduction in firearm assaults and firearm-related homicides by 50 percent” over the four years, “reduc[ing] by $26 million the government costs associated with gun violence,” and the dismantling of “gang war zones within and around the City.”

At the meeting, only one council member, Angelique Ashby, raised significant concerns with the agreement and the authorizing resolution. Among these deficiencies, she noted that out of the “many, many numbers” referenced in the proposal, including “$26 million in government savings,” there was “not one citation” to explain or substantiate these references. The agreement was “front loaded with the cash,” with all of the funding paid out in the first two years but with “zero outcomes” due until year three, meaning the city had no payments that it could withhold if there was a default in performance. More generally, nothing allowed the city to terminate the agreement if the benchmarks and goals weren’t met, which was complicated further by the fact that the goals (like an initial reduction of 20 percent in gun-related assaults and homicides) had no clearly defined baseline or starting point against which performance would be measured. The agreement start and end dates were left blank; the only “quantifiable dates” in the contract were the dates on which the payments by the city had to be made. Nowhere was there a requirement that the program be coordinated with local law enforcement or schools. And despite an assumption that Advance Peace was going to “match” the city funding with an equal amount, this obligation wasn’t documented in the agreement wording.

Determined to waste not a moment, the council rejected councilor Ashby’s request for a one-week delay to address these concerns, although it agreed to incorporate some changes. 

A much more fundamental problem – considering the whole premise is a reduction in gang-related violence – is that nothing in the agreement or resolution requires fellowship participants to make a commitment to forego violence and forsake their gang lifestyle as a condition of participation, or mandates withholding payments and other incentives from participants who commit violent crimes or are charged or convicted of criminal offenses. While fellowship participants will be evaluated for “new gun charges/arrests” as part of the overall benchmarking reports, this doesn’t extend to criminal charges more generally, or operate as a disqualification. A participant who is paid council-approved funds for accomplishing his “LifeMAP goal” of getting a driver’s license is under no agreement-imposed impediment against using that license to facilitate other criminal acts.  

One law enforcement official – Sacramento County Sheriff Scott Jones – points out the program may actually shield participants who commit crimes. “They do not engage in law enforcement at all, and I have been told that if they become aware of one of the participants committing crime, they will NOT notify law enforcement.”

This funding is not just “counter-intuitive,” it is simply wrong. Apart from the most obvious, glaring lack of anything in the agreement that conditions payments on “good behavior” and a repudiation of gang violence, the perception is this “incentivizing” is compensation for lawbreakers that weakens respect for the law and the criminal justice system. Heather MacDonald, the Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, calls it “an absolute abdication of the law and of the moral authority of the law, and a perfect example of defining deviance down…I mean, you’re basically holding the state hostage.”

These misgivings might arguably be overlooked if there was some guarantee that the spending program significantly reduced gang violence over an appreciable period of time. City residents looking for assurances that their taxpayer funds are being spent wisely will find little in the Council Report. Its lengthy recital of statistics, percentages and cost savings omits, surprisingly, information on the merits and success of this and similar programs. The government bureaucracy may be just as well served, in terms of reducing gang crime and violence in Sacramento, by giving the same participants a bus ticket and $20,000 to stay out of the city. 

Residents who aren’t gang member fellowship recipients will have to wait and see. Unfortunately for them, at the same time that the Sacramento City Council embarks on this bold new program to assist “hard-to-reach” residents to escape crime and violence in their communities, lawmakers across the state continue their efforts to prevent law-abiding Californians from doing the same through the exercise of their Second Amendment rights (here and here and here).

“What Happened”: Clinton Recognizes NRA’s Power, Rewrites History, Urges Dems to Double-down on Gun Control

This week, twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton released her new book, “What Happened,” which chiefly serves to assign blame to the myriad politicians, journalists, organizations, countries, prejudices, and technologies she claims caused her defeat. Gun rights supporters will be happy to know that NRA is featured prominently.

In addition to apportioning NRA its well-deserved share of the blame, Clinton seeks to rewrite her own history on the gun issue and urges her fellow Democrats to ignore political reality and continue to champion gun control.

NRA’s Power

Clinton repeatedly acknowledges NRA’s influence on the 2016 election and the broad political landscape.

Pointing out the grassroots power of gun rights supporters, Clinton explains, “The politics of guns has been toxic for a long time… The vocal minority of voters against gun safety laws have historically been more organized, better funded, and more willing to be single-issue voters.”

Recounting her first policy speech of the 2016 campaign, where she attacked NRA, Clinton admits, “Going after the NRA is dangerous for candidates…”

Reiterating some of the same points Bill Clinton made about NRA’s power in his 2001 autobiography My Life, Clinton writes,

In the 1990s, my husband fought hard to pass both a ten-year ban on assault weapons and the Brady Bill, which, for the first time, required background checks on many gun purchases at federally licensed firearms dealers… The NRA funded an intense backlash to the new safety measures and helped defeat a lot of Democratic members of Congress in the disastrous 1994 midterm elections. Then, in 2000, the NRA helped beat Al Gore.

Discussing NRA’s contribution to her 2016 defeat, Clinton notes, 

As for the NRA, it kept its promise to do everything it could to stop me. All told, the gun lobby spent more than $30 million supporting Trump, more money than any other outside group and more than double what it spent to support Mitt Romney in 2012. About two-thirds of that money paid for more than ten thousand negative ads attacking me in battleground states.

Clinton’s recognition of NRA’s role in her and her husband’s defeats should motivate gun owners in the continuing fight to defend the Second Amendment and serve as a stark warning to anti-gun politicians.

Rewriting History

Despite an established record on gun control that spans her nearly three decades on the national stage, Clinton tries to use her new book to recast herself as a moderate on the issue.

Employing a traditional patronizing tactic of anti-gun politicians, sportswoman Clinton regales the reader with tales of her hunting prowess, and how her experience in the field forged her purported respect for firearm ownership. Clinton writes,

I remembered my father teaching me to shoot in rural Pennsylvania, were we spent summers when I was growing up. I also lived in Arkansas for many years and went on a memorable December duck hunting expedition with some friends in the 1980s. I’ll never forget standing hip deep in freezing water, waiting for the sun to rise, trying to stave off hypothermia. I did manage to shoot a duck, but when I got home, Chelsea, who had just watched Bambi, was outraged by the news that I’d shot “some poor little duck’s mommy or daddy.”
These experiences reinforced for me that, for many Americans, hunting and gun ownership are ingrained in the culture. 

Shortly after this segment, Clinton claims,

In all my political campaigns, I’ve done my best to strike a fair balance between standing up for commonsense gun safety measures and showing respect for responsible gun owners. I’ve always said that I recognize the Second Amendment and have never proposed banning all guns. 

This passage is an outright lie. In her various campaigns for public office Clinton has supported the most extreme gun control proposals and repeatedly rejected the United States Supreme Court’s holding in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. 

During her 2000 senate campaign, Clinton gave a speech to the Newspaper Association of America where she stated, “We need to license and register all handguns… Licensing gun owners and registering their guns are two of the most important pieces of a real gun safety policy.” That year Clinton also acknowledged her support for a “ballistics database for all new guns,” handgun rationing, and a ban on affordable handguns. Anti-gun Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said of candidate Clinton, “New York needs Hillary Clinton because she will vote with us on gun control 100 percent of the time.”

Making clear that Clinton was not interested in striking a “balance” on firearms, during her 2016 presidential campaign, Clinton expressed her support for Australia-style gun confiscation to a town hall meeting in Keene, N.H.

Revealing her disdain for the Second Amendment, at a September 25, 2015 private campaign fundraiser in Manhattan, Clinton was recorded stating, “the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get.” When given the opportunity to clarify her statements, Clinton refused to recognize that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. During a June 2016 appearance on ABC’s This Week, host George Stephanopoulos asked Clinton, “Do you believe that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right – that it’s not linked to service in a militia?” At first Clinton dodged the question, prompting Stephanopoulos to ask it again. Refusing to concede that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, Clinton eventually responded, “If it’s a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulations.”

Further, in her new book, Clinton writes that, “As a young woman, I was moved and inspired watching… Dianne Feinstein take on the NRA.” The time frame Clinton refers to is unclear. Would this pertain to Mayor Feinstein, who worked to enact an unconstitutional handgun ban in San Francisco? Or perhaps Sen. Feinstein (D-Calif.), who in 1995 expressed her desire to confiscate commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms?

Throughout her political career Clinton has shown nothing but contempt for gun owners and the Second Amendment. Given that Clinton’s long-standing antipathy to gun rights is conspicuous and well-documented, her attempts at historical revisionism won’t fool anyone.

Attacks on NRA and Gun Owners

On the 2016 campaign trail, Clinton revealed her contempt for tens of millions of Americans when she famously claimed that “you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables.” In her new book, Clinton uses similarly offensive rhetoric to malign NRA and its millions of supporters.

According to Clinton, NRA is “one of the most reactionary and dangerous political organizations in America.” In her view, NRA and its supporters are on the “wrong side” of “justice, history, [and] basic human decency” and have a “twisted ideology” that “costs thousands of American lives every year.” Those who feign shock at aggressive messaging and decry the debased state of politics should challenge Clinton for such inflammatory writings. 

As much as Clinton would like to portray NRA as an enemy of all mankind, the American public does not share her intolerant view. A 2015 Gallup poll found that 58 percent of Americans had a favorable view of NRA. A 2016 Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll showed that NRA’s favorability outpaced Clinton’s by 9 points, while Clinton’s unfavorable number was 19 points higher than NRA’s.

More recently, a July Bloomberg poll found that Clinton is less popular than President Trump, whom she spends much of her book berating. A June Gallup poll showed that Clinton is now even less popular than she was on Election Day 2016, a circumstance unique among defeated presidential candidates. Rather than smearing wide swathes of the American public, Clinton might do well to reflect on why so much of the population finds her problematic.

Lesson Unlearned

Following the 2016 election, many have suggested that the Democratic Party must reexamine its positions on a number of issues in order to compete in parts of the country that favored President Trump. Despite her defeat, and her acknowledgement that NRA and gun owners influenced the 2016 election, Clinton contends that Democratic leaders should not temper their views on gun control.

Clinton writes,

I’m sure that some of my fellow Democrats will look at this high-priced onslaught and conclude, as many have in the past, that standing up to the NRA just isn’t worth it. Some may put gun safety on the chopping block alongside reproductive rights as “negotiable,” so as not to distract from populist economics… That would be a terrible mistake, Democrats should not respond to my defeat by retreating from our strong commitments on these life-and-death issues. 

Following Al Gore’s defeat in 2000, the national Democratic Party made a concerted effort to downplay their support for gun control. Democratic candidates were permitted to reflect their own constituents’ views on guns and the Democratic Party Platform was changed to better respect the individual right to keep and bear arms. In 2008, Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama sought to avoid the issue altogether. These proved to be smart decisions that helped make the Democratic Party competitive throughout the country.

At this juncture it’s unclear whether Democratic leaders will listen to a twice-failed presidential candidate and continue their assault on the Second Amendment or rediscover the more pragmatic approach that has worked in the past. On September 7, The Hill quoted a “former Clinton fundraiser and surrogate” who told the news outlet, “The best thing she could do is disappear… She’s doing harm to all of us because of her own selfishness. Honestly, I wish she’d just …  go away.” When it comes to Clinton’s outmoded approach to guns, wise Democrats should express a similar sentiment.

House Committee Passes SHARE Act by Wide Margin — TAKE ACTION TODAY ON H.R. 3668, SHARE Act

On Tuesday, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Federal Lands held a hearing on the Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act, which had been introduced on Sept. 1 by Congressman Jeff Duncan (R-SC). Following the subcommittee hearing, the full Committee on Natural Resources marked up and passed the SHARE Act by a vote of 22-13.  All amendments offered in an attempt to weaken the bill were soundly defeated.  The bill now awaits floor action in the U.S. House. 

As we have reported, this year’s version of the SHARE Act is the most expansive and far-reaching yet. Besides previously-introduced provisions aimed at enhancing opportunities for hunting, fishing, and shooting and broadening access to federal lands for these purposes, this year’s SHARE Act contains reforms that would widely benefit sportsmen and the gun-owning public at large. 

These reforms would protect Americans traveling interstate with lawfully-owned firearms, amend provisions of federal law that have been abused by antigun administrations to impose gun control by executive fiat, and make the health-promoting benefits of firearm sound suppressors more accessible. 

Attorney and constitutional scholar Steven Halbrook, who has litigated firearms issues before the U.S. Supreme Court, testified at Tuesday’s hearing that the Act would “enhance protection of Second Amendment guarantees” without “adversely affect[ing] law enforcement interests.” 

Halbrook provided background on several key provisions of the act. He noted that under current law, for example, certain federal courts have denied plaintiffs remedies for violation of their federally-protected right to transport unloaded firearms interstate between jurisdictions where they may be lawfully carried. This has emboldened certain states, like New York and New Jersey, to ignore these protections and arrest law-abiding Americans for exercising their rights under federal law.  “Title XI of the bill will rectify this affront to the right to travel and the Second Amendment by explicitly immunizing law-abiding travelers from arrest and recognizing a civil action for violation,” he stated.

Halbrook also testified about the benefits of suppressors and how they were rarely implicated in violent crime. “That is why suppressors are freely available,” he noted, “even over the counter or by mail order, in many European countries.” In this regard, the bill would eliminate the current $200 transfer tax and a federal approval process that can take as long as a year to complete. 

Others testifying focused on Title IV of the bill, the Recreational Fishing and Hunting Heritage Opportunities Act, which will reduce the regulatory burdens for federal agencies to promote hunting, fishing, and shooting on federal public lands across the nation.

Testifying against the bill was David Chipman, Senior Policy Advisor for the Gabby Giffords/Mark Kelly gun control group, Americans for Responsible Solutions. Chipman claimed to draw on his experience as a special agent for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in arguing that the Act “assaults the interests of our nation’s law enforcement officials and threatens our public safety and security.” In particular, his comments focused on the Act’s removal of impediments to the lawful purchase of suppressors. He also criticized the Act’s reforms to the “sporting purposes” standard for firearm importation.

Ironically, Ronald Turk, ATF’s current second-highest ranking official – who has spent over two decades working up the ranks of the agency from his initial assignments as a street agent – offered far different takes on these same issues in an interagency white paper that became public in February.  Turk cited both of these issues as ripe for “regulatory changes or modifications … that would have an immediate, positive impact on commerce and industry without significantly hindering ATFs mission or adversely affecting public safety.” 

Turk characterized the import restrictions cited by Chipman as serving “questionable public safety interests,” because they often affect firearms “already generally legally available for manufacture and ownership in the United States.” He also suggested a broader understanding of firearm “sports” was appropriate, to include activities and competitions that use “AR-15s, AK-style, and similar rifles.” Regarding suppressors, the white paper opined, “Given the lack of criminality associated with silencers, it is reasonable to conclude that they should not be viewed as a threat to public safety necessitating NFA classification, and should be considered for reclassification under the [Gun Control Act].”

The SHARE Act now heads to the House Floor, where it could receive consideration as early as Sept. 25. 

Ask Your U.S. Representative to co-sponsor H.R. 3668, the SHARE Act.

Please contact your U.S. Representative NOW and ask him or her to co-sponsor H.R. 3668, the SHARE Act. You can call the Congressional Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected to your representative’s office.

TAKE ACTION TODAY

Sarah Halimi’s killer suffered a bouffée délirante

The long-awaited psychiatric evaluation of Sarah Halimi’s killer, Kobili Traoré, was revealed in the media on September 13th. Forensic psychiatrist Daniel Zagury concludes that Traoré committed the crime under the influence of an “acute bouffée délirante” that altered but did not abolish his discernment. This psychopathological state was aggravated, according to doctor Zagury, by the consumption of cannabis, a total of 15 cigarettes. The voluntary drug intake somehow balances out the potential irresponsibility of some sort of temporary insanity in proportions that a judge will be trusted to decide. It is not incompatible with a criminal trial and, according to some reports, Kobili Traoré has already been transferred from a mental facility to the Fresnes prison.

On the night of 4-5 April, Kobili Traoré, a 27 year-old of Malian origin, burst in on Malian neighbors in a state of agitation. The neighbors took refuge in one room of their apartment and called the police. Hearing Traoré reciting Koranic verses, the police called for reinforcements. While they waited in the hallway, Traoré climbed over to the neighboring balcony, broke into the apartment of his Jewish neighbor Sarah Halimi, a retired physician who lived alone in the apartment upstairs from the Traore’s. Shouting allau akhbar and Koranic imprecations, he bashed and battered his victim with relentless fury and then threw her to her death from the 3rd floor balcony. By then, a heavily armed commando had arrived. Too late. Traoré was considered unfit for interrogation, placed in a mental health facility, and finally charged with voluntary manslaughter and sequestration. The aggravating circumstances of antisemitism were not added to the charges. 

A virtual media blackout of the horrific crime was followed by months of dim silence. And now we have a puzzling psychiatric evaluation that confirms the impression of a perverse cover up of a savage Islamic anti-Semitic torture/murder, a systematic refusal to confront the genocidal antisemitism that runs like a deep dark river in Arab-Muslim societies here in France, in Europe, in the countries of origin. How could armed policeman stand down as an enraged man was venting his fury on a defenseless woman? If the killer was possessed by an acute bouffée délirante, the police must have been paralyzed by a bouffée of delirious panic. They reportedly assumed that Traoré must be a terrorist… because he recited koranic verses. Therefore, it would be too dangerous to intervene before the arrival of commandos.

Why did it take more than five months to present this psychiatric evaluation that looks to the naked eye like a whitewash? One more whitewash in an endless series of evasions. Like pre-emptive jail breaks. It has nothing to do with Islam, the car rammer was mentally disturbed, the stabber was depressed by an impending divorce, the mass murderer at the wheel of the truck driving wasn’t even religious, the throat slitter had never read the koran.  

And now the enraged Muslim that batters his Jewish neighbor was a victim of an acute bouffée délirante. My search for the English equivalent of this fearsome psychic state came up with some curious specifics (in italics):

“A French term for a culture-bound symptom complex described in West Africa and Haiti, characterised by an abrupt onset of agitated and aggressive behaviour, confusion and psychomotor excitement.”

Bouffée délirante: an examination of its current status.

Johnson-Sabine EC, Mann AH, Jacoby RJ, Wood KH, Peron-Magnan P, Olié JP, Deniker P

Abstract

“Bouffée délirante is an historic and unique French diagnostic term for a short-lived psychosis. The key diagnostic features are acute, floridly psychotic symptoms with complete remission. Its use in a Paris hospital has been examined, and it appears that the term is declining in popularity. A case-controlled study indicated that the diagnosis is likely to be given to migrants on first admission. A re-diagnosis of case summaries indicated no particular correspondence of bouffée délirante to any one ICD category. However, the usefulness of having a special diagnostic term for psychosis with a good outcome is discussed.” 

What, then, distinguishes an acute bouffée délirante from chronic murderous hatred of Jews among other infidels?  If the latter is garden variety antisemitism then the former must be a sudden onset of savage antisemitism.

If I understand correctly, Doctor Daniel Zagury would or might agree with the above. Where most French media apparently picked up the story as it broke in le Figaro on September 13th, a regional newspaper, La Voix du Nord, saw fit to add further details from “sources close to the case.” “The heavy dose of cannabis could have triggered the acute bouffée délirante but, according to the expert, this would not be ‘incompatible with an antisemitic dimension’ of the crime. Doctor Zagury describes this bouffée délirante as a ‘polymorphous persecution complex with mystical, demonopathic thematics.’ Though the suspect’s antisemitism has not been established by the investigation, the psychiatric expert supposes that ‘common ordinary prejudice or shared representations were transformed into absolute conviction in the ‘state of delirious agitation.'”

Translated into normal language this would give the doctor’s opinion that ordinary everyday prejudices shared by the suspect’s milieu-the belief that Jews are evil, scheming, devious creatures that killed the prophet- were transformed into “absolute conviction,” in other words, an absolute certainty that the Jewish woman, Sarah Halimi was really, truly and absolutely Satan (shietan).

Daniel Zagury, who is a specialist in the evaluation of mass murderers, does not subscribe to the notion that jihadists are mentally deranged individuals that just happen to commit a certain type of crime. On the contrary, he believes that psychological factors are either rare or minor elements. His lifeline neighbors that of Doctor Sarah Halimi née Lucie Attal.  Born in France to Moroccan Jewish parents, Doctor Zagury spent the first ten years of his life in Morocco. He describes himself as a non-believer-Sarah Halimi became orthodox-who neither hides nor displays his Jewish identity-hers was obvious to the neighbors. “It has always been clear to me that being Jewish means standing in a lineage of history, culture, love, stubborn determination, and the commitment to transmission.” 

Dr. Zagury is 67. Sarah Halimi’s life ended at the age of 66.

Maître Jean-Alexandre Buchinger, counsel for Sarah Halimi’s adult children, takes note that the psychiatric evaluation concludes that Kobili Traoré is fit to stand trial. He has nevertheless filed a request for a second evaluation.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Family Security Matters.

VIDEO: The Vortex — “The Dogma Lives Loudly Within” by Michael Voris

By now you have probably seen or heard about this shameful attack by Sen. Diane Feinstein of Amy Coney Barrett, the Notre Dame Law school professor nominated by President Trump to the federal bench. So outrageous was the verbal assault that even heterodox modernist Catholics like Notre Dame’s President Fr. John Jenkins went after Feinstein as did the failing and pro-gay Cdl. Timothy Dolan of New York. But what went largely unreported was the fact that sitting on that side of the judiciary committee bench were two Catholics, Dick Durbin of Illinois and Pat Leahy of Vermont, two fake Catholic pro-abortion senators.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Religious Tests: The Fine Line of Feinstein

Vatican Whisks Another Alleged Pervert Priest to Safety—This One From Its D.C. Embassy

Hostile Territory for Religion in America

TRANSCRIPT

By now you have probably seen or heard about this shameful attack by Sen. Diane Feinstein of Amy Coney Barrett, the Notre Dame Law school professor nominated by President Trump to the federal bench. So outrageous was the verbal assault that even heterodox modernist Catholics like Notre Dame’s President Fr. John Jenkins went after Feinstein as did the failing and pro-gay Cdl. Timothy Dolan of New York. But what went largely unreported was the fact that sitting on that side of the judiciary committee bench were two Catholics, Dick Durbin of Illinois and Pat Leahy of Vermont, two fake Catholic pro-abortion senators.

Notably, it was Durbin, a Catholic who rejects the Catholic Church, who took exception to Barrett’s use of the term “orthodox Catholic.” He said the phrase unfairly maligns Catholics who believe child murder is acceptable and sodomy should be enshrined as a right from which marriage should be defined. For the record, it does not unfairly malign but rather accurately portrays them. They are not “orthodox Catholics” at all. They have abandoned their faith for political glory. Both Leahy and Durbin were at one time pro-life but to hold on to their political power, they switched and started voting for child killing.

Amy Coney Barrett is absolutely correct to make the distinction between orthodox Catholics and phony Catholics. It is the class of phony Catholics that have almost all the ecclesiastical and secular power among Catholics who have any such standing. But where did these Judases come from? Well, that’s pretty simple. They are shining examples, exemplary examples of Church of Nice Catholicism, that pick and choose cafeteria Catholicism so heavily promoted today from within the Church.

Every day on the secular stage, we get a look at these traitors, which reveals the system whereby they easily converted to their phony Catholicism. Washington D.C. is crawling with these apostates — Joe Biden, John Kerry, Dick Durbin, Patrick Leahy and the whole Kennedy Clan before they went before the judgment seat of Almighty God drenched in the blood of innocents.

But they are by no means confined to D.C. — California Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown who was in Jesuit seminary in his young adulthood. Jesuits, hmmm, go figure. And of course former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is also a Catholic — both men betraying the precepts of their faith while in office in more ways than one. The list of traitorous Catholics never denounced or called out or even challenged by the Church Establishment is too long and painful to review, and it’s been that way for decades. Imagine that headline: “Cardinal Terminates Terminator for Terminating Pre-born.” Don’t hold your breath.

Here’s the problem in a nutshell, restating what Pope Benedict told German seminarians, there are too many malformed bishops and orthodox Catholics are just going to have to live through this because what other option is there? But living through this doesn’t mean ignoring and being disengaged. In fact, it means just the opposite, exactly the opposite. It means being even more engaged. It means being dedicated to studying, learning, reviewing the Faith continually. We are in a pitched battle for the Truth, and the sad reality is we have very few allies even in the Church, especially in the Church.

As we’ve covered earlier this week, more than four out of five U.S. Catholics do not believe in the Devil and close to half of European Catholics don’t see any real difference between Catholicism and Protestantism. These horrible realities are the reason we started St. Michael’s Media and Church Militant, and even we didn’t realize how bad it was when we started 12 years ago but we have come to realize, and now we are dedicated to calling out the error, and at the same time pointing to the Truth.

That’s why we are asking you, highly encouraging you to sign up for a Premium subscription to Church Militant. We have hundreds and hundreds of hours of straight-up Catholic programming, ranging from classes to shows to investigations to just about everything you can think of — all to help you fall in love with the Catholic faith. And for those who sign up, just this week, for a recurring monthly subscription, which is just $10 a month, you will receive a complimentary copy of The Vortex published just this spring.

We must rededicate ourselves to knowing and studying the Faith so that we can resist the continuing loss of Catholic identity with all our might. Part of that involves setting aside time to study the Faith — to be enraptured by its glories and mysteries and blinding truth.

Dianne Feinstein would have never said what she said had she been surrounded by orthodox Catholics. But with traitorous Catholics, a by-product of the Church of Nice, she had all the permission and confidence she needed. Far from being surrounded by any orthodox Catholics, she was seated next to a Judas Catholic who actually joined her in attacking and calling out an orthodox Catholic. His conscience no doubt searing inside him.

We have fallen so far, so fast, that the task ahead of us is almost beyond words. It is daunting, true, but that cannot dissuade us from the work. We have to simply knuckle down and get to work every day, in every little way and that includes committing ourselves to knowing the Faith.

So please sign up today for a recurring monthly Premium membership, and not only do you get a copy of The Vortex book but more importantly, you get access to all of our programming so it can be an essential part of your training in the Faith. Thousands already count on Church Militant to be their daily source of consistent knowledge of the One True Faith.

Don’t just sit back and complain about the likes of Feinstein and the current state of affairs. Get involved. Get off the sidelines and get in the game.

God love you, and we’ll see you on the Church Militant Premium channel, and thank you in advance for your Premium subscription. And remember, you want traitorous Catholics to call you out for the dogma living loudly within you.

EDITORS NOTE: This episode of The Vortex with Micheal Voris originally appeared on The Church Militant.

VIDEO: Watch What Happened When Ben Shapiro Spoke at UC Berkeley

Peter Trinko and Christopher Piquette went to University of California Berkeley to check out the protests ahead of conservative commentary Ben Shapiro’s speech on Thursday. Here’s what they saw and what some on the scene had to say (please be aware some protesters used curse words):

And via Fox News, here’s video of Shapiro’s speech itself:

COMMENTARY BY

Peter Trinko

Peter Trinko is a contributor who lives in the Washington, D.C. area. He is originally from Fremont, California, a town near Berkeley, California.

Christopher Piquette

Christopher Piquette is a media analyst. He is originally from Newark, California, a town near Berkeley, California.

EDITORS NOTE: Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can’t be done alone. Find out more >>

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.
Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.
Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.
Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.
The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.
Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.
Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.
You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.
Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

Bate and Switch: On the Fascists of the Left

The Merrian Webster dictionary defines ‘Bate and Switch’ as :

“the ploy of offering a person something desirable to gain favor (such as political support) then thwarting expectations with something less desirable”

Bate and Switch has been practiced on Liberals and Liberalism by the left primarily composed of fascist organizations like Antifa, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, SJP plus many other similar groups who claim to be anti-fascist but are in fact the largest group of Left Wing Fascists in America. They have infiltrated our education, media and political system as Liberals which they are not.

Fascists like Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin all claimed to be reformers and Liberals until they took power. This led to one of histories greatest Bate and Switch disasters. It is interesting to note in each instance Jews and Zionists were always singled out by these fascists. 

The Black Students Union with the support of the African Black Coalition and other Left wing groups have forced forced the UC (university) administration to establish and pay for an on campus ‘Safe Place for Blacks’ calling it a Black Resource Center. They are requesting $547,000 for this Center. For Liberals who supported  desegregation legislation this appalling. It is a form of apartheid to keep whites out and it is coming from left wing groups who are anything but liberal but are wearing the cloak of liberalism. Unwittingly  they are supported by the so called liberal university elites, media and Democrats.

Most Liberals and supporters of the Democrat Party do not realize their organization has been infiltrated by these fascist elements. These so called Left wing anti fascists believe America and Israel are white supremacist nations and must be punished. The growth of these groups is astounding. Unless true Liberals speak out the growth of these groups will continue to grow like a cancer on our society.

Please read this article by Melanie Phillips.

Fascists of the Left

So-called “progressive” Jews think that the major threat to the Jews and humanity in general comes from a few thousand neo-Nazis and white supremacists, while all who organise against them are by definition on the same side as the Jewish people, anti-racism and civilised values.

Really?

As William Jacobson reports here, the antifa are joining up with Israel-haters to defame Zionists as Nazis and Israel as a “white supremacist” country. This despite the fact that some three quarters of Israeli citizens are not of Caucasian origin; more than half of Israeli Jews are not of Caucasian origin either since their families fled to Israel from Arab countries where Jews had lived for thousands of years but from where they were ethnically cleansed after 1948.

According to the SJP, “There is no room for fascists, white supremacists, or Zionists at UIUC.”

The antifa and SJC are thus helping further incite bigotry, intimidation and thuggery against Jewish students on campus.

Antifa+Students for Justice for Palestine = antifascistneo-fascist alliance.