Teach-Organize-Resist

College professors organize national ‘Teach-In’ to challenge ‘Trumpism,’ ‘Islamophobia’

“Islamophobia” is a propaganda term designed to intimidate people into being afraid to resist jihad and Islamic supremacism. But that doesn’t faze today’s enlightened Leftist academics:

“On that day, we intend to organize against the proposed expansion of state violence targeting people of color, undocumented people, queer communities, women, Muslims, and many others. On that day, we intend to resist the institutionalization of ideologies of separation and subordination, including white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, and virulent nationalism.”

State violence? Who is proposing any state violence? Why, no one, of course, but the Left is in the midst of a hysterical meltdown of Vesuvian proportions over the prospect of the inauguration of Trump on Friday. Meanwhile, imagine how surprised these professors will be when their Muslim friends start to force their women into hijabs and niqabs and start to throw the members of “queer communities” off the tops of tall buildings.

“College Professors Organize National ‘Teach-In’ to Challenge ‘Trumpism,’” by Susan Berry, Breitbart, January 15, 2017:

Some 25 colleges and universities – many of them public – have answered a call by professors at UCLA to use their regular class time to “teach, organize, and resist” what they view as the discriminatory political agenda of President-elect Donald Trump.

Slated for Wednesday, January 18, the teach-in, dubbed #J18, is taking place between the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday and Trump’s inauguration. The event’s planners say:

Let it be known that on #J18 and beyond, universities, colleges, and high schools refused to bear silent witness to the politics of hate and fear; that in these times, these places of teaching and learning not only served as a sanctuary for its students and workers but also stood up to proclaim the power of knowledge on the frontlines of social justice.

On January 18, the professors are calling upon their colleagues to “Teach, Organize, Resist,” and “affirm the role of critical thinking and academic knowledge in challenging Trumpism.”

They continue:

On that day, we intend to teach about the agendas and policies of the new administration, be it the proposed dismantling of economic and environmental regulations or the threatened rollback of the hard-won rights that form the fragile scaffolding of American democracy. On that day, we intend to organize against the proposed expansion of state violence targeting people of color, undocumented people, queer communities, women, Muslims, and many others. On that day, we intend to resist the institutionalization of ideologies of separation and subordination, including white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, and virulent nationalism.

In addition to UCLA, universities participating in the event to date include: American University, Washington, D.C.; University of California, Berkeley; University of Cincinnati; University of Dayton; University of Minnesota; New York University; Princeton University; Texas State University; University of Kentucky; Vanderbilt University; and University of Washington….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Where are anti-Trump marchers defending women against abuse by Sharia-adherent Muslims?

US professor says journalists must not call jihad attacks on Israeli soldiers “terrorism”

dr martin luther king

It’s about your mental and moral qualities, not the color of your skin

“I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character,” – Martin Luther King, Jr.

That was the message of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. A message lost on many in the black, white and brown communities today.

It is out of character for any race to think themselves superior to another race. It is out of character for one race to receive special treatment, regardless of past injustices, above another race. It is out of character for one to believe they are above another in their mental or moral qualities based upon the color of their skin. Every race has been enslaved, history tells us so. Dr. King wanted every American to understand that and do something about it.

Today people of color expect, no demand, that they be judged by the color of their skin rather than their mental and moral qualities.

Slavery is defined as, “a condition compared to that of a slave in respect of exhausting labor or restricted freedom.” Being superior to and demanding power over another based solely on skin color is the definition of slavery. The new slavery is being labeled a “racist.” Being labeled a racist has caused people to lose their jobs, impacted religious liberty and restricted freedom of speech.

That is not what Dr. King would have wanted.

Dr. King spent his life seeking equal justice under the law for all. That was his mission, that is his legacy. He left a legacy behind of always fighting for truth and justice. Dr. King was never ashamed of his faith and love for God the Father and His son Jesus Christ.

In 1983, Republican President Ronald Reagan signed the bill to make the third Monday in January a national holiday in honor of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. This day is set aside to commemorate and remember all the hard work and change that Dr. King achieved for racial equality during his short time on earth.

In 1963, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was arrested for demonstrating without a permit. He wrote a letter from Birmingham Jail to call out the Birmingham government for their racial injustice.

Dr. King wrote in his letter,

In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action.

These steps are missing today. Americans witnessed a rush to violence in Orlando, Florida after the shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, followed by riots in Ferguson, Missouri and Baltimore, Maryland. There are those in the black, white and brown community who want to jump to judgement without doing their due diligence when it comes to identifying injustice. Injustice cuts both ways.

One cannot demand justice while denying justice to another. That is immoral. That is out of character.


Here is the full transcript of Dr. King’s letter from a Birmingham Jail:

16 April 1963

My Dear Fellow Clergymen:

While confined here in the Birmingham city jail, I came across your recent statement calling my present activities “unwise and untimely.” Seldom do I pause to answer criticism of my work and ideas. If I sought to answer all the criticisms that cross my desk, my secretaries would have little time for anything other than such correspondence in the course of the day, and I would have no time for constructive work. But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I want to try to answer your statement in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.

I think I should indicate why I am here in Birmingham, since you have been influenced by the view which argues against “outsiders coming in.” I have the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every southern state, with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. We have some eighty five affiliated organizations across the South, and one of them is the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights. Frequently we share staff, educational and financial resources with our affiliates. Several months ago the affiliate here in Birmingham asked us to be on call to engage in a nonviolent direct action program if such were deemed necessary. We readily consented, and when the hour came we lived up to our promise. So I, along with several members of my staff, am here because I was invited here. I am here because I have organizational ties here.

But more basically, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the prophets of the eighth century B.C. left their villages and carried their “thus saith the Lord” far beyond the boundaries of their home towns, and just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to the far corners of the Greco Roman world, so am I compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my own home town. Like Paul, I must constantly respond to the Macedonian call for aid.

Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial “outside agitator” idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds.

You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city’s white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.

In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action. We have gone through all these steps in Birmingham. There can be no gainsaying the fact that racial injustice engulfs this community. Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of brutality is widely known. Negroes have experienced grossly unjust treatment in the courts. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than in any other city in the nation. These are the hard, brutal facts of the case. On the basis of these conditions, Negro leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. But the latter consistently refused to engage in good faith negotiation.

Then, last September, came the opportunity to talk with leaders of Birmingham’s economic community. In the course of the negotiations, certain promises were made by the merchants–for example, to remove the stores’ humiliating racial signs. On the basis of these promises, the Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth and the leaders of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights agreed to a moratorium on all demonstrations. As the weeks and months went by, we realized that we were the victims of a broken promise. A few signs, briefly removed, returned; the others remained. As in so many past experiences, our hopes had been blasted, and the shadow of deep disappointment settled upon us. We had no alternative except to prepare for direct action, whereby we would present our very bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of the local and the national community. Mindful of the difficulties involved, we decided to undertake a process of self purification. We began a series of workshops on nonviolence, and we repeatedly asked ourselves: “Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?” “Are you able to endure the ordeal of jail?” We decided to schedule our direct action program for the Easter season, realizing that except for Christmas, this is the main shopping period of the year. Knowing that a strong economic-withdrawal program would be the by product of direct action, we felt that this would be the best time to bring pressure to bear on the merchants for the needed change.

Then it occurred to us that Birmingham’s mayoral election was coming up in March, and we speedily decided to postpone action until after election day. When we discovered that the Commissioner of Public Safety, Eugene “Bull” Connor, had piled up enough votes to be in the run off, we decided again to postpone action until the day after the run off so that the demonstrations could not be used to cloud the issues. Like many others, we waited to see Mr. Connor defeated, and to this end we endured postponement after postponement. Having aided in this community need, we felt that our direct action program could be delayed no longer.

You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.

One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely. Some have asked: “Why didn’t you give the new city administration time to act?” The only answer that I can give to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one, before it will act. We are sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of Albert Boutwell as mayor will bring the millennium to Birmingham. While Mr. Boutwell is a much more gentle person than Mr. Connor, they are both segregationists, dedicated to maintenance of the status quo. I have hope that Mr. Boutwell will be reasonable enough to see the futility of massive resistance to desegregation. But he will not see this without pressure from devotees of civil rights. My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”

We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, “Wait.” But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can’t go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: “Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?”; when you take a cross county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading “white” and “colored”; when your first name becomes “nigger,” your middle name becomes “boy” (however old you are) and your last name becomes “John,” and your wife and mother are never given the respected title “Mrs.”; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodiness”–then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience. You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”

Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. Segregation, to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, substitutes an “I it” relationship for an “I thou” relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. Hence segregation is not only politically, economically and sociologically unsound, it is morally wrong and sinful. Paul Tillich has said that sin is separation. Is not segregation an existential expression of man’s tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? Thus it is that I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court, for it is morally right; and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong.

Let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal. Let me give another explanation. A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama which set up that state’s segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout Alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties in which, even though Negroes constitute a majority of the population, not a single Negro is registered. Can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically structured?

Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.

I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.

Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.

We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s antireligious laws.

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn’t this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn’t this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn’t this like condemning Jesus because his unique God consciousness and never ceasing devotion to God’s will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber. I had also hoped that the white moderate would reject the myth concerning time in relation to the struggle for freedom. I have just received a letter from a white brother in Texas. He writes: “All Christians know that the colored people will receive equal rights eventually, but it is possible that you are in too great a religious hurry. It has taken Christianity almost two thousand years to accomplish what it has. The teachings of Christ take time to come to earth.” Such an attitude stems from a tragic misconception of time, from the strangely irrational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that will inevitably cure all ills. Actually, time itself is neutral; it can be used either destructively or constructively. More and more I feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than have the people of good will. We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right. Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. Now is the time to lift our national policy from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity.

You speak of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of an extremist. I began thinking about the fact that I stand in the middle of two opposing forces in the Negro community. One is a force of complacency, made up in part of Negroes who, as a result of long years of oppression, are so drained of self respect and a sense of “somebodiness” that they have adjusted to segregation; and in part of a few middle-class Negroes who, because of a degree of academic and economic security and because in some ways they profit by segregation, have become insensitive to the problems of the masses. The other force is one of bitterness and hatred, and it comes perilously close to advocating violence. It is expressed in the various black nationalist groups that are springing up across the nation, the largest and best known being Elijah Muhammad’s Muslim movement. Nourished by the Negro’s frustration over the continued existence of racial discrimination, this movement is made up of people who have lost faith in America, who have absolutely repudiated Christianity, and who have concluded that the white man is an incorrigible “devil.”

I have tried to stand between these two forces, saying that we need emulate neither the “do nothingism” of the complacent nor the hatred and despair of the black nationalist. For there is the more excellent way of love and nonviolent protest. I am grateful to God that, through the influence of the Negro church, the way of nonviolence became an integral part of our struggle. If this philosophy had not emerged, by now many streets of the South would, I am convinced, be flowing with blood. And I am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss as “rabble rousers” and “outside agitators” those of us who employ nonviolent direct action, and if they refuse to support our nonviolent efforts, millions of Negroes will, out of frustration and despair, seek solace and security in black nationalist ideologies–a development that would inevitably lead to a frightening racial nightmare.

Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom, and something without has reminded him that it can be gained. Consciously or unconsciously, he has been caught up by the Zeitgeist, and with his black brothers of Africa and his brown and yellow brothers of Asia, South America and the Caribbean, the United States Negro is moving with a sense of great urgency toward the promised land of racial justice. If one recognizes this vital urge that has engulfed the Negro community, one should readily understand why public demonstrations are taking place. The Negro has many pent up resentments and latent frustrations, and he must release them. So let him march; let him make prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; let him go on freedom rides -and try to understand why he must do so. If his repressed emotions are not released in nonviolent ways, they will seek expression through violence; this is not a threat but a fact of history. So I have not said to my people: “Get rid of your discontent.” Rather, I have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled into the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action. And now this approach is being termed extremist. But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not Jesus an extremist for love: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” Was not Amos an extremist for justice: “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream.” Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel: “I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.” Was not Martin Luther an extremist: “Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God.” And John Bunyan: “I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience.” And Abraham Lincoln: “This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.” And Thomas Jefferson: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal . . .” So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice? In that dramatic scene on Calvary’s hill three men were crucified. We must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime–the crime of extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment. Perhaps the South, the nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.

I had hoped that the white moderate would see this need. Perhaps I was too optimistic; perhaps I expected too much. I suppose I should have realized that few members of the oppressor race can understand the deep groans and passionate yearnings of the oppressed race, and still fewer have the vision to see that injustice must be rooted out by strong, persistent and determined action. I am thankful, however, that some of our white brothers in the South have grasped the meaning of this social revolution and committed themselves to it. They are still all too few in quantity, but they are big in quality. Some -such as Ralph McGill, Lillian Smith, Harry Golden, James McBride Dabbs, Ann Braden and Sarah Patton Boyle–have written about our struggle in eloquent and prophetic terms. Others have marched with us down nameless streets of the South. They have languished in filthy, roach infested jails, suffering the abuse and brutality of policemen who view them as “dirty nigger-lovers.” Unlike so many of their moderate brothers and sisters, they have recognized the urgency of the moment and sensed the need for powerful “action” antidotes to combat the disease of segregation. Let me take note of my other major disappointment. I have been so greatly disappointed with the white church and its leadership. Of course, there are some notable exceptions. I am not unmindful of the fact that each of you has taken some significant stands on this issue. I commend you, Reverend Stallings, for your Christian stand on this past Sunday, in welcoming Negroes to your worship service on a nonsegregated basis. I commend the Catholic leaders of this state for integrating Spring Hill College several years ago.

But despite these notable exceptions, I must honestly reiterate that I have been disappointed with the church. I do not say this as one of those negative critics who can always find something wrong with the church. I say this as a minister of the gospel, who loves the church; who was nurtured in its bosom; who has been sustained by its spiritual blessings and who will remain true to it as long as the cord of life shall lengthen.

When I was suddenly catapulted into the leadership of the bus protest in Montgomery, Alabama, a few years ago, I felt we would be supported by the white church. I felt that the white ministers, priests and rabbis of the South would be among our strongest allies. Instead, some have been outright opponents, refusing to understand the freedom movement and misrepresenting its leaders; all too many others have been more cautious than courageous and have remained silent behind the anesthetizing security of stained glass windows.

In spite of my shattered dreams, I came to Birmingham with the hope that the white religious leadership of this community would see the justice of our cause and, with deep moral concern, would serve as the channel through which our just grievances could reach the power structure. I had hoped that each of you would understand. But again I have been disappointed.

I have heard numerous southern religious leaders admonish their worshipers to comply with a desegregation decision because it is the law, but I have longed to hear white ministers declare: “Follow this decree because integration is morally right and because the Negro is your brother.” In the midst of blatant injustices inflicted upon the Negro, I have watched white churchmen stand on the sideline and mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities. In the midst of a mighty struggle to rid our nation of racial and economic injustice, I have heard many ministers say: “Those are social issues, with which the gospel has no real concern.” And I have watched many churches commit themselves to a completely other worldly religion which makes a strange, un-Biblical distinction between body and soul, between the sacred and the secular.

I have traveled the length and breadth of Alabama, Mississippi and all the other southern states. On sweltering summer days and crisp autumn mornings I have looked at the South’s beautiful churches with their lofty spires pointing heavenward. I have beheld the impressive outlines of her massive religious education buildings. Over and over I have found myself asking: “What kind of people worship here? Who is their God? Where were their voices when the lips of Governor Barnett dripped with words of interposition and nullification? Where were they when Governor Wallace gave a clarion call for defiance and hatred? Where were their voices of support when bruised and weary Negro men and women decided to rise from the dark dungeons of complacency to the bright hills of creative protest?”

Yes, these questions are still in my mind. In deep disappointment I have wept over the laxity of the church. But be assured that my tears have been tears of love. There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love. Yes, I love the church. How could I do otherwise? I am in the rather unique position of being the son, the grandson and the great grandson of preachers. Yes, I see the church as the body of Christ. But, oh! How we have blemished and scarred that body through social neglect and through fear of being nonconformists.

There was a time when the church was very powerful–in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators.”‘ But the Christians pressed on, in the conviction that they were “a colony of heaven,” called to obey God rather than man. Small in number, they were big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.” By their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contests. Things are different now. So often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an archdefender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s silent–and often even vocal–sanction of things as they are.

But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust.

Perhaps I have once again been too optimistic. Is organized religion too inextricably bound to the status quo to save our nation and the world? Perhaps I must turn my faith to the inner spiritual church, the church within the church, as the true ekklesia and the hope of the world. But again I am thankful to God that some noble souls from the ranks of organized religion have broken loose from the paralyzing chains of conformity and joined us as active partners in the struggle for freedom. They have left their secure congregations and walked the streets of Albany, Georgia, with us. They have gone down the highways of the South on tortuous rides for freedom. Yes, they have gone to jail with us. Some have been dismissed from their churches, have lost the support of their bishops and fellow ministers. But they have acted in the faith that right defeated is stronger than evil triumphant. Their witness has been the spiritual salt that has preserved the true meaning of the gospel in these troubled times. They have carved a tunnel of hope through the dark mountain of disappointment. I hope the church as a whole will meet the challenge of this decisive hour. But even if the church does not come to the aid of justice, I have no despair about the future. I have no fear about the outcome of our struggle in Birmingham, even if our motives are at present misunderstood. We will reach the goal of freedom in Birmingham and all over the nation, because the goal of America is freedom. Abused and scorned though we may be, our destiny is tied up with America’s destiny. Before the pilgrims landed at Plymouth, we were here. Before the pen of Jefferson etched the majestic words of the Declaration of Independence across the pages of history, we were here. For more than two centuries our forebears labored in this country without wages; they made cotton king; they built the homes of their masters while suffering gross injustice and shameful humiliation -and yet out of a bottomless vitality they continued to thrive and develop. If the inexpressible cruelties of slavery could not stop us, the opposition we now face will surely fail. We will win our freedom because the sacred heritage of our nation and the eternal will of God are embodied in our echoing demands. Before closing I feel impelled to mention one other point in your statement that has troubled me profoundly. You warmly commended the Birmingham police force for keeping “order” and “preventing violence.” I doubt that you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes. I doubt that you would so quickly commend the policemen if you were to observe their ugly and inhumane treatment of Negroes here in the city jail; if you were to watch them push and curse old Negro women and young Negro girls; if you were to see them slap and kick old Negro men and young boys; if you were to observe them, as they did on two occasions, refuse to give us food because we wanted to sing our grace together. I cannot join you in your praise of the Birmingham police department.

It is true that the police have exercised a degree of discipline in handling the demonstrators. In this sense they have conducted themselves rather “nonviolently” in public. But for what purpose? To preserve the evil system of segregation. Over the past few years I have consistently preached that nonviolence demands that the means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek. I have tried to make clear that it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends. But now I must affirm that it is just as wrong, or perhaps even more so, to use moral means to preserve immoral ends. Perhaps Mr. Connor and his policemen have been rather nonviolent in public, as was Chief Pritchett in Albany, Georgia, but they have used the moral means of nonviolence to maintain the immoral end of racial injustice. As T. S. Eliot has said: “The last temptation is the greatest treason: To do the right deed for the wrong reason.”

I wish you had commended the Negro sit inners and demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes. They will be the James Merediths, with the noble sense of purpose that enables them to face jeering and hostile mobs, and with the agonizing loneliness that characterizes the life of the pioneer. They will be old, oppressed, battered Negro women, symbolized in a seventy two year old woman in Montgomery, Alabama, who rose up with a sense of dignity and with her people decided not to ride segregated buses, and who responded with ungrammatical profundity to one who inquired about her weariness: “My feets is tired, but my soul is at rest.” They will be the young high school and college students, the young ministers of the gospel and a host of their elders, courageously and nonviolently sitting in at lunch counters and willingly going to jail for conscience’ sake. One day the South will know that when these disinherited children of God sat down at lunch counters, they were in reality standing up for what is best in the American dream and for the most sacred values in our Judaeo Christian heritage, thereby bringing our nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in their formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

Never before have I written so long a letter. I’m afraid it is much too long to take your precious time. I can assure you that it would have been much shorter if I had been writing from a comfortable desk, but what else can one do when he is alone in a narrow jail cell, other than write long letters, think long thoughts and pray long prayers?

If I have said anything in this letter that overstates the truth and indicates an unreasonable impatience, I beg you to forgive me. If I have said anything that understates the truth and indicates my having a patience that allows me to settle for anything less than brotherhood, I beg God to forgive me.

I hope this letter finds you strong in the faith. I also hope that circumstances will soon make it possible for me to meet each of you, not as an integrationist or a civil-rights leader but as a fellow clergyman and a Christian brother. Let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice will soon pass away and the deep fog of misunderstanding will be lifted from our fear drenched communities, and in some not too distant tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will shine over our great nation with all their scintillating beauty.

Yours for the cause of Peace and Brotherhood,

Martin Luther King, Jr.

RELATED ARTICLE: Why Martin Luther King, Jr. Still Matters

trump 100 days

‘First Hundred Days’ – President-Elect Trump Bypasses Accepted Tradition

By Wallace Bruschweiler and William Palumbo

Franklin Delano Roosevelt began an American tradition with his “First Hundred Days” of sweeping legislation, ushering in the New Deal and forever changing American politics and, more broadly, American life.

Let there be little doubt about it: President-Elect Donald J. Trump has forever altered this tradition, as he began practically governing the day after he was elected fair and square in an historic upset.

What has Trump accomplished as President-Elect?  The below list only includes the highlights of a truly remarkable (and exciting) transition period.

Jobs

  • This week, Amazon announced a plan to create 100,000 jobs over the next 18 months.
  • Jack Ma, CEO of Chinese tech giant Ali Baba, promised to create “one million” new jobs for American small businesses by making it easier for them to sell to the Chinese market.
  • Automakers Ford and Fiat-Chrysler have announced plans to invest and modernize plants domestically. Ford even cancelled projected plans for Mexican expansion in favor of U.S. investment.
  • Automaker Toyota announced plans to invest $10 billion over the next five years.
  • Apple has begun investigating options to build iPhones in the U.S.
  • The Japanese bank Softbank has pledged to invest $50 billion and create 50,000 new jobs.

Foreign Policy

  • During his campaign, Trump’s criticism of NATO’s outmoded mission caused a re-assessment and stated intent to focus more on terrorism.
  • Several key NATO allies are considering increasing their defense budgets, as a direct response to Trump’s criticism of their relatively, you might say illusory, financial contributions.
  • Already, the Trump administration has been invited to Syrian peace talks in Moscow. In December, the Obama administration was excluded from that summit.
  • Announced and made plans to move the American embassy to Israel’s capital, Jerusalem, period!; and told the Palestinian authorities that, by the way, Palestine does not exist for all practical purposes!

Note to Media: Here are your pre-Inauguration Lessons

From this spate of energizing news, there are a few key lessons not only for the American people, but especially for the dishonest, manipulative, and national embarrassment that we call the “media.”

  • First, the public’s reaction* to Trump’s actions since the election prove we fully reject Barack Hussein Obama and his anti-American agenda. Despite Trump’s modus operandi during the transition period which rivals – if not supersedes – the authority of a sitting president (and thus break with the tradition of “one president at a time”) the public continues to embrace the Trump agenda.  What more proof do you need that the people are ready to “turn the page” on the disgraceful and destructive Obama eight-year era?
  • Second, can we finally reject the specious smears that Donald J. Trump is “BS artist”? This discrediting sneer is repeated daily by leftist pundits.  Yet, an honest assessment of the above pre-office accomplishments concludes that Trump is acting exactly in line with long-held beliefs, as well as all his campaign promises.

Nothing would make the left happier than if Trump broke all his promises.  In fact, to their great chagrin, he has kept them – and aggressively.  In truth, the career politicians in both parties that Trump defeated are professional conmen and conwomen.  And that’s being polite.

  • Third, Trump’s populist movement depends on direct communication with the American people. Trump’s use of Twitter – his way of outmaneuvering the media – has enabled his success.  The leftist media is a machine of mass distortion and falsities.  Cutting out the “middleman” has always been and will continue to be a feature of the Trump phenomenon.

With so much work to be done to “Make America Great Again,” why waste time between the election and January 21st?  President-Election Donald J. Trump has not left us waiting for a change.  He already started it.  And that, we believe, will be the first chapter in his positive legacy over the next eight years as President.  History will be his witness.

* Their very public, uncouth, and strident objections notwithstanding, Hollywood actors and other bubbled elites are not representative of the sensible American public.

jeff sessions confirmation hearing

Jeff Sessions’ Devotion to the Constitution Shines Through in Contentious Confirmation Hearing

On January 10 and 11, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held the confirmation hearing for President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for United States Attorney General, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.). Throughout his distinguished career in public service, which includes 12 years as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama, Sessions has exhibited the utmost respect for our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and has worked tirelessly to prosecute those who use guns in the commission of a crime. Despite the best efforts of some to disrupt the hearing and promote scurrilous allegations, an image of the real Sessions came through during the hearing – that of a principled statesman devoted to our Constitution.

Since his days as a U.S. Attorney, Sessions has pursued the vigorous prosecution of those who misuse firearms to prey on the public. During his opening remarks, Sessions made clear that he will make the prosecution of armed criminals a priority, noting, “If I am confirmed, we will systematically prosecute criminals who use guns in committing crimes. As United States Attorney, my office was a national leader in gun prosecutions every year.”

Later in his opening remarks, Sessions spoke of the importance of the Constitution, stating, “The Justice Department must remain ever faithful to the Constitution’s promise that our government is one of laws, not of men. It will be my unyielding commitment, if I am confirmed, to see that the laws are enforced faithfully, effectively, and impartially.” Given the prior administration’s propensity to stretch federal statute beyond its plain or intended meaning, gun owners should find such devotion to the rule of law a refreshing change.

From the outset, many of Sessions’ Senate colleagues were effusive in their praise of the nominee. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) noted that Sessions “is a man of honor and integrity, dedicated to the faithful and fair enforcement of the law who knows well and deeply respects the Department of Justice and its constitutional role.” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) stated, “I can vouch confidently for the fact that Jeff Sessions is a person of integrity, a principled leader, and a dedicated public servant.” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told Sessions, “You’re a good and decent and honorable man. You’ve got an outstanding record that you should be proud of, and I know you are and you should be.”

Pointing to NRA-supported Project Exile, Cornyn went on to ask Sessions, “Can you assure us that you will make prosecuting those people who cannot legally possess or use firearms a priority again in the Department of Justice?” Sessions responded “I can,” adding that Project Exile “highlighted the progress that was being made by prosecuting criminals who use guns to carry out their crimes.” Sessions further noted that as a result of the strict enforcement of federal gun laws against armed criminals “Fewer people get killed,” and that “we need to step that up. It’s a compassionate thing.”

During his time, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) pointed out some of the dangerous and partisan actions taken by the DOJ under Barack Obama – including Operation Fast and Furious and Operation Chokepoint – and asked whether Republicans, having taken control of the executive branch, should respond in kind by using the DOJ to “advance political preferences favored by the Republican party.” Sessions replied “No,” and explained that such partisan actions have “a corrosive effect on public confidence in the constitutional republic of which we are sworn to uphold.”

Anti-gun Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) questioned Sessions on the topic of gun control, asking, “Will you rigorously enforce statues that prohibit purchase of guns by felons or domestic abusers or drug addicts and use the statues that exist right now on the books to ban those individuals from purchasing guns?” Sessions responded adeptly, explaining, “Congress has passed those laws, they remain the bread and butter enforcement mechanisms throughout our country today to enforce guns laws. The first and foremost goal I think of law enforcement would be to identify persons who are dangerous, who have a tendency or have been proven to be law breakers and been convicted and those who are caught carrying guns during the commission of a crime.”

Despite the fact that, if confirmed, Sessions would be moving from a law-making capacity to enforcing the laws created by Congress, Blumenthal went on to ask Sessions if he supported so-called “universal” background check legislation for firearm transfers. Sessions dismissed the notion as impractical in many circumstances.

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) used his time to ask Sessions to share his thoughts on the Second Amendment. Sessions responded with a staunch defense of the right to keep and bear arms, stating, “I do believe the Second Amendment is a personal right. It’s an historic right of the American people, and the Constitution protects that and explicitly states that. It’s just as much a part of the Constitution as any of the other great rights and liberties that we value.”

As befitting his character, Sessions was not fazed by repeated attempts to disrupt his confirmation hearing. Some of the professional agitators that could be seen in the crowd have previously protested and attempted to disrupt NRA events and business. During the Sessions hearing, one such provocateur from Code Pink was removed from the hearing while carrying a sign that in part read, “Support Civil Rights.” The scene will strike many gun rights supporters as bizarre, given that the protestor’s group has a history of opposing the natural right to self-defense and the corresponding right to keep and bear arms.

In closing the first day of the committee hearing, Grassley told Sessions, “You’re imminently qualified to serve as attorney general and I have every confidence that you’re going to do a superb job.” Grassley is right. However, whether due to petty partisan politics, or attempts at personal political profit, there are still some who seek to derail Sessions’ confirmation.

That is why it is vital that gun owners take the time to urge their Senators to confirm Sessions as U.S. Attorney General. NRA has made it easier than ever for gun rights supporters to contact their elected officials. To help ensure Sessions is the next U.S. Attorney General please use the following link to register your support: https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170105/urge-your-senators-to-confirm-jeff-sessions. You can also call your U.S. Senators via the Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121.

Immigration-form

Immigration anarchists are responsible for undermining the civil rights of every American

Immigration anarchists have repeatedly drawn false analogies between their efforts to block the enforcement of immigration laws and the heroic action of those whose hard-fought efforts for decades provided black Americans with civil rights, but at great cost.

These anarchists emulate Jimmy Carter, creator of the Orwellian term ‘Undocumented Immigrant’ by referring to advocates for fair and effective immigration law enforcement as being “Anti-Immigrant.”  This despicable tactic is now being used to falsely attack Senator Jeff Sessions, the nominee for Attorney General, accuse his support for such effective enforcement of our immigration laws as running contrary to civil rights and being against immigrants.

These anarchists refuse to concede what should be obvious, while aliens illegally present in the United States are entitled to human rights and due process, they are not entitled to broad civil rights protections.  It is an outrageous contradiction in concepts to claim that aliens whose mere presence represents a violation of law should be provided with opportunities equal to those provided to American citizens and lawful immigrants.

In reality, immigration anarchists are, themselves, responsible for undermining the civil rights of Americans, particularly American minorities who suffer the greatest harm because of the failures of our government to enforce the immigration laws.  Those immigration anarchists also are responsible for undermining the civil rights of lawful immigrants.

For the sake of clarity and to prevent any potential misunderstandings, illegal aliens, not unlike others, are entitled to human rights and are properly entitled to due process when accused of committing crimes.  There are two reasons why due process must be devoid of consideration as to the immigration status of the accused.  First of all, it is a matter of fairness and justice.

Creating a lower standard for convicting illegal aliens for committing crimes would undermine the judicial system.

Additionally, unscrupulous prosecutors who simply wanted a “quick kill” would be encouraged to seek the conviction of illegal aliens who did not actually commit the crime.  This is immoral and unjust.  Secondly, under such circumstances, law enforcement authorities would stop looking for the actual criminal who would therefore remain at large and continue to pose a threat.

Civil rights laws were initially enacted to address the wrongs visited upon black Americans beginning with slavery and then segregation.

Today those laws are focused on providing citizens, irrespective of race, religion, ethnicity, gender or sexual identity or orientation, with equal protection under our laws and equal opportunities, thereby enabling them to be full participants in the communities where they live and throughout our nation.

Sanctimonious and hypocritical mayors of “Sanctuary Cities” portray themselves as heroic figures, perhaps on par with the “Freedom Riders” who, decades ago, at great personal risk, fought to end racial discrimination and segregation in the South.

Make no mistake, those Freedom Riders were heroes who should be lauded and remembered for their morality, courage and achievements.

Mayors of Sanctuary Cities, however, are anything but heroes.  They are betrayers.  Betrayers of the Constitution, betrayers of their oaths of office, betrayers of national security and public safety and betrayers of their constituents.

Such rogue politicians act against the best interests of their constituents and those who reside in, or visit their cities by turning their jurisdictions into magnets for aliens who are illegally present in the United States.  Among those illegal aliens are those who have serious criminal histories, have outstanding arrest warrants in the United States or in other countries or may be international terrorists or supporters of terrorism.  These aliens may have entered the United States without inspection or entered through ports of entry but went on to otherwise violate our immigration laws that, it must be noted, are completely and utterly blind as to race, religion or ethnicity.

Such rogue politicians act against the best interests of those who reside in, or visit their cities, because they are turning their jurisdictions into magnets for aliens who are illegally present in the United States.  Among those illegal aliens are those who have serious criminal histories, have outstanding arrest warrants in the United States or in other countries or may be international terrorists or supporters of terrorism.  These aliens may have entered the United States without inspection or entered through ports of entry but went on to otherwise violate our immigration laws that, it must be noted, are completely and utterly blind as to race, religion or ethnicity.

The ultimate “hate crime” involves acts of violence committed against members of a community because of factors such as race, religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation.  Transnational gangs often target their victims because of such factors.  Failures of immigration law enforcement have enabled such violent gangs to flourish across the United States.

Beyond undermining national security and public safety, Sanctuary Cities additionally attract massive numbers of illegal aliens who have no legal authority to work in the United States yet are able to secure illegal employment, thereby displacing American workers.

This includes American teenagers – often American minority teenagers, who find themselves unable to find a job, creating for them the conundrum of not being able to get a job without a resume but not being able to assemble a resume without first getting a job.

Furthermore, labor is a commodity.  Flooding the labor pool with foreign workers, suppresses the value of labor.  Consequently, even Americans and lawful immigrants who don’t lose their jobs to illegal aliens likely face wage suppression because of them.

It is more than mere coincidence that the division of the Civil Rights Commission that deals with discriminatory employment practices is referred to as the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission.

Employment, in point of fact, provides opportunities to those who are able to work.

Opportunities to be self-sufficient, opportunities to succeed and advance and prosper all revolve around the ability to be gainfully employed.

Blocking qualified workers from job opportunities deprives them essential and fundamental opportunities to be successful.

Politicians who comply with the demands of campaign contributors and others who exert pressure on them to flood America with cheap and compliant foreign labor to displace American workers and suppress wages.

The destruction of the middle class is not an “unintended consequence” but the goal of their duplicitous conduct.

A news report on how job losses create multiple stresses quoted Michael McKee, a psychologist at the Center for Integrative Medicine at the Cleveland Clinic who articulated his concerns about how the possible loss of financial ability to support oneself and family my lead to a loss of self-respect and the respect of others.  Thus leading to the loss of identity, security and daily structure, ultimately leading to people who lose meaning and hope.

A study published a couple of years ago found that poverty stresses the brain so much that it’s like losing 13 IQ points.

Prior to the Second World War the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws was vested primarily within the Labor Department to make certain that Americans would not have to compete with foreign workers for jobs.  This is how America created the largest and most upwardly mobile middle class of all countries on this planet at the time, thus creating the “American Dream.”

Civil rights laws also enforced in conjunction with our immigration laws to make certain that employers treat all employees equally including aliens provided that the aliens in question are authorized by law to be employed in the United States.  Indeed, even where the employer sanctions provisions of the Immigration Reform and Control Act.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended segregation and under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, discriminatory employment practices were prohibited to insure, equal employment opportunities.  Over time these laws were amended to protect additional groups of protected workers and even include aliens who are authorized to work in the United States.

In fact, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has posted the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) on its website.  Among the provisions of IRCA was a massive amnesty program for millions of illegal aliens and the provision that, for the very first time, deemed the knowing employment of illegal aliens to be a violation of law.

The EEOC has a vested interest and, indeed, jurisdiction, in cases involving allegations of Employment Discrimination.

Not only does the EEOC have jurisdiction when Americans claim employment discrimination, but it also has jurisdiction if an allegation is made that an alien, authorized to work in the United States seeking employment, suffered discrimination during the hiring process by an overly zealous employer who went beyond the requirements of preparing the Form I-9 to verify the identity and eligibility of an alien applying for a job or if an alien, authorized to work in the United States, faced discriminatory policies by his/her employer.

However, all of the laws and regulations that have been promulgated to end workplace discrimination are undone by the veritable army of foreign workers who have displaced beleaguered American workers.

Think of how many politicians running for office promise to help “create jobs” and to “bring back jobs to America.”

Whether politicians are running for political office on the local, state or federal level.  Whether they seek to become a member of the city council, mayors or governors.  Even if they are candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate or even the Presidency of the United States, they all make that same  promise about jobs and “getting Americans back to work.”

Failures of the immigration system make those promises largely meaningless when American workers are displaced by aliens.

For open borders/immigration anarchists, failures of the immigration system are to be engineered and then celebrated.

In reality, those failures are devastating to America and Americans and undermine the letter and spirit of our civil rights laws.

If immigration anarchists want to point to those responsible for undermining civil rights, they should stand in front of a mirror and point at themselves.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Sanctuary Cities Pose a Danger to Our USA

Austin Mayor Colluded with Obama to Accept Refugees Despite Governor Halting Program

jeff sessions attorney general

Jeff Sessions: Finally a Reasonable Adult Heading the U.S. Department of Justice

Folks, I gotta tell ya’. My heart leaped with joy hearing Jeff Sessions give his opening statement at his confirmation hearing for Attorney General. I thought, “Thank you God! Finally, an America loving adult running our DOJ. What a concept.”

First Obama gave us Eric Holder, a black AG with a chip on his shoulder against whites and America. Out-of-the-box, Holder accused Americans of being racist afraid to honestly discuss racial issues. To racist Leftists like Holder, an honest discussion means white America admitting they are eternal racist plotting 24/7 how to keeping people-of-color down.

Holder sued Arizona, calling them racist for seeking to enforce immigration law. He sued Texas to block their law requiring ID to vote. He refused to prosecute the New Black Panthers because they’re “His people”, black like him. 

Talk about cojones, after Holder’s in-your-face arrogant racism, how can Democrats use drummed up claims of racism to oppose the confirmation of Sessions? Answer: The Democrats know they have the mainstream media securely in their pocket to promote their lies about Sessions.

After Holder, Obama gave us Loretta Lynch as AG. In response to Islamic terrorists murdering innocent Americans on U.S. soil, Lynch immediately threatened to jail anyone speaking badly about Islam. Because the Obama Administration is obsessed with allowing dudes in restrooms with little girls, the DOJ head Lynch filed a lawsuit against North Carolina for righteously saying, “No.” Shamefully, Obama politicized the DOJ. Lynch teamed with Obama’s adviser Al Sharpton to brand America’s police racist to justify the DOJ taking control of all police departments. Thus far, about 30 police departments have been taken over by the DOJ.

Unbelievably, Lynch seeks to prosecute/criminalize those disagreeing with the Left’s narrative regarding climate change.

Do you see why a common-sense thinker like Jeff Sessions as AG heading the DOJ is such a breath of fresh air?

Sessions vowed to turn back the negative undeserved branding of our brave men and women in blue.

Regarding law enforcement, Sessions said, “They are the ones on the front lines. They are better educated, trained and equipped than ever before. They are the ones who we rely on to keep our neighborhoods, and playgrounds, and schools safe. But in the last several years, law enforcement as a whole has been unfairly maligned and blamed for the actions of a few bad actors and for allegations about police that were not true. They believe the political leadership of this country abandoned them. They felt they had become targets. Morale has suffered. And last year, while under intense public criticism, the number of police officers killed in the line of duty increased ten percent over 2015. This is a wake up call. This must not continue.”

BTW, if elected, Hillary vowed to intensify Al Sharpton and Black Lives Matter’s war on cops; purposely demonizing police. Thank God for Trump.

Keeping my article concise, I will not list the long list of Islamic terrorist attacks that Obama’s DOJ refused to admit were Islamic terrorist attacks. It was exciting hearing Sessions publicly name those seeking our demise; radical Islamic terrorists.

In recent years, our law enforcement officers also have been called upon to protect our country from the rising threat of terrorism that has reached our shores. If I am confirmed, protecting the American people from the scourge of radical Islamic terrorism will continue to be a top priority of the Department of Justice. We will work diligently to respond to threats, using all lawful means to keep the American people safe from our nation’s enemies.”

Folks, isn’t this a far cry from Obama’s DOJ refusing to name our enemies and threatening to jail anyone who speaks badly about them? Praise the Lord!

Jeff Sessions is a great pick for Attorney General, a man of character who loves God and country; committed to equal justice for all Americans. Sessions will be confirmed; another step on the yellow-brick road toward making America great again.

female male symbols

Stop Gender Genocide

Following the death of Carrie Fisher — and the death one day later of her mother, Debbie Reynolds — I ran across an article about Fisher’s 24-year-old daughter, Billie Lourd.

Fox 2015 programming presentation Red Carpet Arrivals at Wollamn Rink in Central Park  in New York City Featuring: Billie Lourd Where: New York City, New York, United States When: 11 May 2015 Credit: Alberto Reyes/WENN.com

Carrie Fisher’s daughter, Billie Lourd (pictured above) says her mother “raised me without gender.” Photo credit: Alberto Reyes/WENN.com

Lourd proudly spoke about her upbringing at the hands of single mom and admitted drug abuser Carrie Fisher. Lourd boasted that her mother “raised me to not think of men and women as different. She raised me without gender. It’s kind of the reason she named me Billie.”

Yet clearly Billie Lourd is a woman, despite Fisher’s attempts to raise her without any gender identification. She looks and dresses as a woman, and she dates men. Lourd believes her upbringing was a success, but if the intent was to raise her as gender neutral, it was a dismal failure. Nature, it appears, was victorious.

In another example of what today can only be described as gender genocide, the National Geographic magazine put on its December cover a picture of a nine-year-old transgender, a boy dressed as a girl with long, bright pink hair.

Inside, the story details the difficulties little children encounter living as transgenders. One of these little kids had been struggling since he/she was five years old.

Another little girl, age nine, is described as a Muslim living in India who wants to be a boy so she can earn money and “get stuff for her family.” Is that a good enough reason to neutralize this child’s sex? Maybe for that family it is.

It’s hard to believe that children as little as five are actually struggling with their gender identity unless they are coerced into such a struggle by the adults around them. Kids that age are still contemplating the mystery of Santa Claus, not their gender identity.

This is gender genocide — the willful destruction of our biological sex. It’s the last frontier for the gay lobby (the sex lobby, it may as well be called) and its quest for ultimate control over our sexual behavior and identity. This is a deeply sinister social engineering that seeks to indoctrinate children into thinking they can define their own gender, regardless of their God-given gender.

Having conquered the battlefield of gay marriage (in 2015 when the Supreme Court redefined marriage to include same-sex marriage) … the sex lobby has turned its sights on transgender rights and gender fluidity. The more victories they achieve, the more absurd their goals become. Gay rights … gay adoption … gay partner benefits … gay marriage … transgender acceptance … same-sex bathrooms … gender fluidity … new pronouns. Just when it seems the end is in sight and they can’t possibly do more damage to our culture, they move the bar further.

Eliminating God From American Life

But at its heart, this is a movement to eliminate God’s natural order from our lives, plain and simple. It is a twisted effort to undermine the biblical underpinnings of our culture and eradicate the sexes.

The Bible says that in the beginning, “God made them male and female.” (Gen. 5:2) Pretty clear and straight forward, though the sex lobby never likes the word “straight” in any context.  This rock-solid fact is the one immovable force that they cannot surmount, so they have come up with ways around it.

One way is to declare, despite what our eyes tell us, that people can be any sex they want. We only need to decide which sex we identify with in our minds — and voila, that’s the sex we are. And, it must follow, we should be allowed to use the bathroom of our choice absolutely anywhere and everywhere in the United States … especially in our taxpayer-funded schools.

Literally, this new battle is being waged in the toilet.

But at least now we’re getting to the meat of the issue. If the sex lobby can change the attitudes of our children about sex, and encourage them to follow every urge that pops up in their pubescent heads, they will have a captive army of young adults to march out into the world and tear down the Judeo-Christian foundation of our nation.

Like lemmings following each other off a cliff only to drown in the sea, our young people obey, just like Billie Lourd and other Hollywood celebrities do. In the process, though, they position themselves as role models for our kids, and there’s the danger.

Miley Cyrus says she is “gender fluid.”

miley cyrus

Miley Cyrus says she is “gender fluid.”

Miley Cyrus, who performed a music video stark naked on a wrecking ball, claims she is “gender fluid.”

“I’m just equal,” she gushed in an interview. “I’m just even. It has nothing to do with any parts of me or how I dress or how I look. It’s literally how I feel.” She had to add those last few sentences because she has female body parts and dresses like a woman, so don’t be fooled if she looks like a woman, she’s really whatever she wants to be at the moment.

Hypocrisy Of Gender Warriors

The hypocrisy of the gender genocide advocates is stunning. If gender doesn’t matter anymore, why did women go berserk when Hillary did not become the first FEMALE president? If Hillary’s not a she but a “ze” — the preferred neutral pronoun of the gender genocide lobby — then there’s no glass ceiling to break, right?

Witness also the hysteria that followed the publication of a Washington Post magazine article just recently that displayed the wrong symbol for womanhood (they used the male symbol with the circle and arrow, instead of the circle and cross for female). Male and female heads were exploding over the mistake — which the Washington Post apologized for abjectly and corrected right away.

But if gender doesn’t matter, then why do the symbols matter?

For that matter, why was it so important to legalize same-sex marriage? If genders don’t matter, or if they are all in our head, what’s the big deal?

The answer is obvious to even the little children who are being used as petri dishes for the sex lobby’s ungodly experiments. There are boys and there are girls. Period. Even the most strident advocates for gender neutrality recognize this physical reality.

Within the past couple of years hundreds, perhaps thousands, of school districts, institutions and municipalities have jumped on the gender-neutral bandwagon and declared that their bathrooms are open for use by any gender. Men may use the women’s room if they’re feeling a little feminine that day, and vice versa.

No doctor’s note is required to show that a sex change operation has been performed. No psychiatric exam is required, either.

What is so shocking is the lack of thoughtful and reasoned examination of the movement. Schools and public places are just lining up to follow the new guidelines like brainless robots programmed to obey. They should be asking, Where’s the science?

Christians Toe The Line

At a time when the Christian community should be standing up to these attempts to pollute biblical truths, some so-called Christian institutions are toeing the line. One Christian school in the Seattle, Wash., area, sent home notices to all parents that it would be hosting a “coming out day” for its gay and transgender students, and that students may now use the restrooms that correspond to their gender identity.

The alternative is to be forced out of business or suffer staggering fines. The Obama Administration ordered every public school in the nation to cater to transgenders in the restrooms or lose their federal funding. One transgender girl in a Maine public school was awarded $75,000 because her school forced her to use a staff restroom. That’s a scary prospect for a school district that needs the money — money, mind you, already paid by parents in the form of taxes that should rightfully come back to the schools with no gender strings attacks.

Jonas Maines, left, and his transgender sister, Nicole Maines, stand outside the Penobscot Judicial Center, Wednesday, June 12, 2013, in Bangor, Maine. The siblings were born as identical twins boys. The state supreme court heard arguments on Wednesday over a school district’s handling of Nicole Maine's restroom needs. The lawsuit accuses the school district of breaking a state law in 2007 when it stopped letting the Maines use the girls bathroom and required to her use a staff bathroom after a student's grandfather complained. (AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty)

Nicole Maines, a boy who is a transgender “girl,” sued a Maine public school for forcing her to use a staff restroom. (AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty)

These sick stories remind me of another Bible verse, the one that warns us not to cause children to sin against God.

“If anyone causes one of these little ones — those who believe in me — to stumble,” warned Jesus, “it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea.” (Mark 9:42)

bruce reimer

Bruce Reiner was born as a boy, raised as a girl, had surgery to create a vagina and then later committed suicide.

The Sad Case of Bruce Reimer

I am also reminded of the tragic case of Bruce Reimer, born a male with a twin brother, Brian, in Winnipeg, Canada, in the 1960s. Following a botched circumcision Bruce was raised as a girl, Brenda. Doctors fully castrated him as a baby and later gave him female hormones so he could like his entire life as a woman. Bruce’s clueless parents agreed to this.

Enter the evil mad scientist, Dr. John Money, a “sexologist.” It was Money’s theory — as it is the theory of so many in today’s sex-obsessed culture — that gender identity is the product of nurture rather than nature. Dr. Money followed the twins’ progress throughout their tragic lives, forcing them to strip naked in interviews and examine each others’ genitals … and forcing them to re-enact the sex act as male and female while the mad Dr. Money took pictures.

But Brenda, formerly Bruce, knew in his soul that there was something wrong with him, and as time went on he began to live out a more masculine lifestyle — despite Dr. Money’s efforts to force him to behave like a girl. At the age of seven Dr. Money began to torment Brenda with demands that he have surgery to create a vagina. Brenda resisted to the end.

When, as a young adult, Brenda finally learned that he was a male, he immediately began to live as a man and stopped taking the female hormones. He even married a woman and adopted his wife’s children.

But the horror of what had been done to him was too much for both twins. First the twin brother Brian killed himself with an overdose of anti-depressants. Then, at the age of 38, Bruce shot himself in the head with a shotgun.

Dr. Money was allowed to live out his life in comfort until the age of 85 as a renowned sexologist, dying in 2006. Sadly, at least two of his victims killed themselves because they could not live out the false life that Dr. Money had chosen for them.

Are we repeating today the experiments that Dr. Money performed all those years ago? Are we risking the lives and happiness of our children to satisfy the sex lobby’s insatiable appetite for destruction?

Tragic Human Cost

Like the heartbreaking story of Bruce Reimer, which can be viewed here in a BBC documentary, the lifestyles of Billie Lourd and Miley Cyrus are just exotic theories without regard for the tragic human cost. Because despite the “feelings” of these sad and confused individuals, God made them male and female. Their feelings really don’t matter.

Bruce Reiner was born as a boy, raised as a girl, had surgery to create a vagina and then later committed suicide.

Thankfully, we are beginning to see some pushback to all this nonsense. Thirteen states have filed lawsuits against the Obama edict mandating that transgenders have free access to any bathroom (and locker room) of their choice.

In late 2016 a Texas judge blocked Obama’s edict. And in North Carolina officials enacted a ban on forcing public facilities to provide transgender restrooms. (The LGBT lobby is fighting this tooth and nail and vowing to overturn the ban.)

Taken to its illogical extreme — that we are whatever we think we are — then what is to stop me from claiming age fluidity? So what if my birth certificate shows that I’m a senior citizen. I identify as a 24 year old, at least today.

Or, I may be just 24 and identify as a senior citizen …

… so I demand the senior citizen discount.

Foolish it is, this gender genocide is sweeping our nation. But dangerous, too. In Romans 1 we are warned:

“God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”

And “furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.” And, “although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.”

God help us if we continue on this path toward the utter and complete genocide of the genders that God ordained for us.

lawsuit-bits

Tennessee lawsuit challenging refugee program could be filed by end of January

haslam4

Tennessee Republican Governor Bill Haslam

Faithful readers know that this is a long time in coming, but we now see movement with the legal challenge that has the best shot of success in pushing the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program toward reform.

The case, to be litigated by the Thomas Moore Law Center after the Tennessee legislature voted to sue and the governor agreed to hire them, involves the so-called Wilson-Fish provision that many believe is being used to unlawfully place the refugee program in a non-profit groups’ hands in states where the state government has opted out of the federal program.

Tennessee’s Republican Governor Bill Haslam fought the legislature on this issue. He welcomes more refugees to the state. Tennessee’s two U.S. Senators (Alexander and Corker) also have done nothing to control expansion of the program in Tennessee.

In other words, one of the questions to be resolved is can a non-profit group (working with the feds) say how state taxpayer funds are spent, which is essentially what is happening in states that have withdrawn from the program?

States that could join Tennessee are those that recently withdrew including Texas, Maine, New Jersey and Kansas.  The older Wilson-Fish states, in addition to Tennessee and Kentucky, are also possible litigants, depending on the structure of their program, and include: Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Vermont.

Here is the news from The Tennessean yesterday:

Tennessee’s lawsuit against the federal government over refugee resettlement could be filed by the end of the month, a proponent of the effort said Tuesday.

Senate Majority Leader Mark Norris, R-Collierville, said a team of legal experts was coming to Nashville to discuss the forthcoming lawsuit, which was approved by the legislature last year.

“We will be working on the complaint that we intend to file I hope before the end of the month,” he said, while indicating that there has been interest from some in Kentucky about joining the lawsuit.

Norris said any lawsuit would be filed in the federal court in Nashville or possibly in Washington, D.C.

Tennessee’s lawsuit will be the first of its kind in the nation, given that it will challenge the federal government for noncompliance of the Refugee Act of 1980 based on the 10th Amendment.

[….]

The basis of the lawsuit centers on based on several arguments, including that the federal government has failed to consult with the state on the continued placement of refugees; the cost of administering the refugee resettlement program has been shifted to the state without officials specifically authorizing the appropriation of funds; and that the ongoing placement of refugees is a violation of the 10th Amendment.

Last fall, legislative leaders signed off on the selection of the Thomas More Law Center, a Michigan-based legal group that has taken on several conservative legal causes in recent years.

For our extensive archive on Tennessee, click hereGo here for all of our reporting on Wilson-Fish states.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Congress must tighten Tuberculosis testing and reporting requirements for refugee flow

Refugee contractor may have exaggerated numbers in letter promoting Rutland, VT resettlement

And we almost missed it! US Conference of Catholic Bishops celebrates its National Migration week

Catholic Charities placing Somalis from Uganda refugee camp in Minnesota

More news blaming Trump for Africans crossing in to Canada from US and asking for asylum

obama-dictator

Obama farewell: Half the nation can’t wait to be rid of him

Obama the dreamweaver will leave office with the highest favorable ratings he has enjoyed since the honeymoon months following his 2008 election. Despite this, in the latest RealClearPolitics average of polls judging whether the country is heading in the right direction, roughly the same percentage of Americans who approve of Obama also believe the country is headed the wrong way.

This is not a new phenomenon. Indeed, the growing realization that Obama’s massive social spending programs that have doubled our national debt in just eight years were doing serious damage to our economy has been building for the past four years, and led to Donald Trump’s victory in November.

A majority of Americans are fed up with Obama’s policies, while paradoxically they still retain a favorable view of Obama the person.

Every president should be so lucky.

But a president who is so lucky should also be clear-headed enough to recognize the distinction, and not take his success in the personality contest to mean the American people approve of his policies.

Clearly, Obama has not understood this. His limitless narcissism continues to cloud his view of himself, his policies, and his impact on America.

Obama believes that he is leaving the country with an economy far stronger than the economy he inherited. On the surface, that is true. When you come to office as the economy lurches into an apparent death spiral, any recovery seems good.

Certainly, the economy has climbed back from the depths of the recession. But this has been a jobless recovery, with 95 million Americanswho have bowed out of the labor force, an unprecedented number.

These are not fantasy numbers, but official U.S. government numbers compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), based on a total of 252 million Americans over the age of 16 in the labor pool. The under or unemployed equal 37.7% of that total workforce.

In an effort to minimize those disastrous results, the BLS claims that the majority — including an overwhelming majority of young people aged 16-24 — “do not want a job now.” That is just patently absurd.

Along with this unprecedented rise in unemployment, under Obama the number of Americans receiving food stamps has also risen to historic highs, growing from 28 million when he took office to more than 44 million today, or 14.5% of the U.S. population.

Even left-wing websites such as the DailyKos cannot mask the outrageous — and tragic — rise in dependence on government handouts under this president.

And yet, this president claims that “we’ve turned an economy that was shrinking and losing jobs into one that’s growing and creating jobs, with poverty falling, incomes rising, and wages that have jumped faster over the past few years than at any time in the past four decades.”

He claimed unbelievably in Chicago that health care costs are “rising at the slowest rate in fifty years,” when anyone paying for health insurance today knows just the opposite is the case.

Obama believes he can build his legacy on a tissue of lies, just as he built his presidency.

He wants us to believe that he has reduced race tensions, when any sentient being can see just the opposite is the case. He wants us to believe that crime is down, incomes are up, and terrorism is no more than a law enforcement issue.

He wants us to believe that his withdrawal from Iraq has led to a “sustainable” U.S. presence in that country, when in fact our totally unnecessary and unwanted (by the Iraqi people) withdrawal has led to massive bloodshed and an ISIS takeover of one-third of the country.

In addition to creating ISIS, the power vacuum created by the U.S. withdrawal has handed much of Iraq over to Iranian control, with Iranian government agents now running Iraq’s central government and Iranian-backed militias poised to overrun much of the country.

Since the 2008 election, Obama has proclaimed that Afghanistan was the “right war.” And yet, despite his surge loss of more Americans than during the entire Bush years, Afghanistan is a shambles and the Taliban controls more territory today than it did when he took office.

The Obamas are such phonies, it’s hard to confront their lies with a straight face.

To an enthusiastic crowd in Chicago who had drunk the Kool-Aid, Obama claimed that America was “a better, stronger place than when we started.” And then he set to firing up his base, blaming his opponents for dividing America, when he himself bears the greatest responsibility pitting Americans against each other by race, creed, and income.

Obama’s legacy is a graveyard of disasters.

  • Libya: an unnecessary war, where the United States deposed a pro-U.S. authoritarian who had given up his WMD and joined the fight against al-Qaeda. Today, that country is controlled by ISIS and other Islamist groups.
  • Syria: Obama proclaimed “red-lines” in 2012 and stood by passively as Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad trampled them repeatedly. Today, Russia for the first time since the Cold War has military bases in the country, while Iran and its proxies physically occupy a third of the country.
  • Iran: The nuclear deal Obama heralded? It legitimates Iran’s nuclear weapons program, and actually commits the United States to helping Iran develop its nuclear infrastructure. It also commits us to helping Iran defeat cyber attacks, such as Stuxnet the U.S. and Israel jointly launched under Obama’s stewardship to crash Iran’s uranium enrichment centrifuges.

Obama hinted he wants to become the leader of the anti-Trump movement in the next four years. Certainly, an anti-Trump U.S. media will welcome and promote him.

But as the new president actually grows the economy, expands prosperity, and makes America stronger and safer again in clearly demonstrable ways, my guess is Obama’s game will soon get old.

Let’s hope reality will win out over the delusions of the past eight years.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obamacare’s ’20 Million’ Number Is Fake

In Revealing Article, Obama Puts ‘Progressive Goals’ Before Due Process

13 Inconvenient Truths About Obama’s Legacy

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Hill.

naacp-logo

The NAACP Stoops to New Low with Jeff Sessions Sit-In Protest

Once again, the radical liberal National Association for the Advancement of “Certain” People (NAACP) has proven that Blacks can indeed sellout their own people and even be extremely hypocritical.

The NAACP’s perpetual promotion to the Black community of radical Democratic policies, in recent years, has caused more harm to the Black community than any White man with a sheet over his face.

Like in the Bible, the handwriting is on the wall for the NAACP. I am calling for all people of good conscious to withhold any and all support for this organization, whether monetary or otherwise.

Why am I being so hard on this group you might be asking? Well, last week the NAACP once again showed their total lack of relevance; and they continue to find new ways to further embarrass the Black community.

Cornell Brooks, the national president of the NAACP, was so bored that he decided to gather a few of his cronies to fly down to Mobile, Alabama and hijack Senator Jeff Sessions’ office as an act of civil disobedience.

They demanded that Sessions withdraw his name from consideration for United States Attorney General, because in their perverted minds, he is supposed to be a racist.

As I wrote recently, I worked Sessions’ first senate campaign and you will not find a more decent person on Earth. The radical, liberal NAACP claims that Sessions made what they consider to be “racist” statements 30 years ago.

Oh, really? You want to go there? Alright, then let’s go there.

No one has ever accused Sessions of being a member of the KKK or serving in a leadership capacity in the hate group. So, I find it quite ironic that when former West Virginia U.S. Senator Robert Byrd died in 2010, the NAACP “mourned” his death.

Byrd was not only a member of the KKK, but he also served as Exalted Cyclops, which meant he was basically CEO of his local chapter. Byrd also has the distinction of being the only U.S. Senator to have voted against both Black Supreme Court nominees (Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas). And that’s who the NAACP mourned? You can read more about Byrd’s racism here.

So, they mourn the person with a track record of being a racist and attempt to malign the person with no “credible” evidence of being a racist?

Brooks also claimed that he wanted to “bring attention to issues like the continuing debate over police killings of unarmed civilians, mostly Blacks” of which Sessions had nothing to do with.

Let me point out a few other examples of the NAACP’s hypocrisy in action.

Why didn’t Brooks and his cronies hijack Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel’s office after the murder of Laquan McDonald at the hands of the Chicago police department? Emmanuel intentionally withheld the video of the murder until after his reelection, because he knew that releasing the video before the election would have guaranteed his defeat.

Why didn’t the NAACP hijack Education Secretary Arnie Duncan’s office for the policies he unleashed that devastated Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)?

Why didn’t they hijack Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake’s office in Baltimore, Md., when the Justice Department issued their scathing report in the aftermath of the protests and riots sparked by the police killing of Freddie Gray? Justice Department officials found that Baltimore’s police department was rampant with racism and all sorts of civil rights violations.

Finally, why didn’t they hijack the offices of the Democratic House and Senate leadership over the recently released report about the lack of Black staffers?

So, it seems like the National Association for the Advancement of “Certain” People is only interested in racism when it involves Republicans. They never hold Democrats to the same standard, because they are too busy trying to curry favor; not standing up for those who have truly been aggrieved.

This group’s hypocrisy stinks so much that I believe their days are numbered. They have been weighed in the balances and have been found grossly wanting; wanting for relevance and wanting for money.

They claim to be a non-partisan group, but, in my opinion, the group is nothing more than an arm of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). This is why I am asking my readers to refrain from this day forward from giving them any form of support. Let them continue to wither on the vine.

They have brought total dishonor to the likes of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks. They have also brought shame to the hard work and dedication to lifetime Republicans and lifetime NAACP members like Bob Brown and Bill Coleman.

I am asking this new Congress to convene hearings on the possibility of forcing the I.R.S. to strip groups like these of their tax-exempt status for promoting the Democratic Party.

Would this not be a great way to honor Dr. King’s upcoming birthday? I’m just asking.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Black Press USA.

ira-madison-iii

Who is Ira Madison III and why does he hate Asian children and America?

Daily we see the fringe become more fringe. The latest example is a MTV News reporter named Ira Madison III. Madison, who is black, hates America, loves Obama and takes cheap shots at the grandchild of U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions. Katie McHugh from Breitbart reports:

Culture writer for MTV News Ira Madison III attacked Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions and his Asian-American granddaughter as a “prop” to distract from his “racism.”

ira-madison-iii1

Ira Madison III (left).

In the article “Ira Madison III: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know” by  from Heavy.com describes Madison’s background:

Madison was named in the piece as a “young activist-writer” who was “deeply entrenched” in “identity politics.”

[ … ]

According to his LinkedIn page, Madison is a gradaute [sic] of Loyola University of Chicago where he studied theater and NYU where he studied dramatic writing.

[ … ]

When asked about racism in America, Madison said, “I think at this point, the world has changed so much where I don’t afford people the right to have “different perspectives” if they’re damaging to others. Like, if you’re an asshole and homophobic and racist now, you were the same when you were younger and you knew it was wrong then.”

[ … ]

The day after Donald Trump won the presidency of the United States, Madison posted this throwback photo on Facebook. Madison regularly posts photos of the first family on his photostream. A few days later on his MTV.com column, Madison wrote, “This week, all of America needs to get deleted. You made Barack Obama utter the words “President-elect Donald Trump” and I will honestly never forgive my country for this.”

Here is Madison’s tweet, which has since been taken down:

iramadison-tweet-sessions-granddaughter

Can you feel the hate and anger in this black man for an innocent Asian child?

ira-madison

Ira Madison III

After taking down the above tweet Madison attempted to justify himself by Tweeting, “Why is she a prop? Sessions argued for policy that in the 1880s was used to discriminate against Asian Americans https://t.co/sZitqzLBS4.” The link is to a Think Progress article about a 2013 U.S. Senate committee meeting on comprehensive immigration reform, of which Senator Sessions was a committee member. When you go to the link you find that Senator Sessions was not arguing to discriminate against Asian Americans at all. Rather Senator Sessions asked the President of the Asian American Justice Center Mee Moua “if a country should legitimately decide that it wants to admit one productive family member, but not another, less motivated individual.” Sessions noted:

It’s perfectly logical to think there are two individuals, let’s say in a good friendly country like Honduras. One is a valedictorian of his class, has two years of college, learned English and very much has a vision to come to the United States and the other one has dropped out of high school, has minimum skills. Both are 20 years of age and that latter person has a brother here. What would be in the interest of the United States? …

Clearly it would be in the best interest of the United States to only grant a visa, work permit or citizenship to those who benefit the host country, in this case the United States. Immigration is a key issue for Americans and impacts the economy, jobs, security of the homeland, education, public policy and the criminal justice system.

As the U.S. Attorney General Senator Sessions will be dealing with law and order issues and enforcing the immigration laws of the United States. Laws that make it illegal for someone to come here without permission.

That is something Madison, Obama, Democrats and others fail to understand. When you lose elections, just as when you break the law, there are consequences.

veritas-action-video-trump-black-nyc

VIDEO: 10 Hours of Walking in NYC as a Black Trump Voter

Project Veritas Action Journalist is harassed while walking silently through the streets of Manhattan wearing a Trump T-shirt and hat.

RELATED ARTICLE: Recognizing the Face of Evil BY Rev. Jerry J. Pokorsky

project-veritas-action-logoEDITORS NOTE: Project Veritas Action Fund (a.k.a. Project Veritas Action) was founded by James O’Keefe to investigate and expose corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud and other misconduct.

muslim-workers-at-cargill-meat-solutions-in-colorado

Why Cheap Muslim Refugee Labor has Taken Over Meatpacking Jobs

Editor:  We occasionally post comments or guest posts from readers that are so informative that we don’t want them lost where comments are normally posted.  This is from a reader answering my perennial question about how it came to be that good paying American jobs in the meatpacking industry have now become low paying jobs for immigrants and refugees.

Before you read what Deena has to say, check out a post I wrote in 2008 about how President Bill Clinton brought tens of thousands of mostly Muslim Bosnians in to the US to do meatpacking jobs in Iowa in the mid-1990s (with the help of Lavinia Limon who was Bill Clinton’s director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement). The business model allows BIG MEAT (or LOL! BIG YOGURT) to pay low wages which are then supplemented by welfare that you pay for!

The US State Department is acting as a head-hunter for big business, so forget about the humanitarian mumbo-jumbo they are trying to sell!

From Deena:

You asked if slaughterhouse work used to be a good job. It did; and, in fact, was heavily unionized until sometime in the late 80’s or early 90’s, I believe.

jbs-greeley

Brazilian owned JBS (formerly Swift & Co).

It had its own union (Amalgamated Meat Cutters (AMC)) and the former president of the Iowa AFL-CIO back when I worked for the national AFL-CIO came out of this union. This work was among the best in pay and benefits in the US along with auto work because basically the entire industry was unionized; and like in the UAW, workers spent a lifetime in the trade.

This is a photo I took on my fact-finding mission in the heartland this past summer. Meat giant JBS (formerly Swift & Co) is a Brazilian owned company that encourages Somali refugee labor, and as such it is changing the demographic make-up of Greeley, Colorado.

It ended when the market was flooded by foreign workers – largely illegal. The decent paying companies – and most then fell into this category – were unable to compete with low-paid-unskilled-foreign-worker-filled companies which sprang up. The pay is now about 55% of what it was then. Forget benefits.

The union merged into what is now known as the United Food and Commercial Workers union (UFCW), which largely represents retail workers. The ‘meat cutters’ of today are more likely to cut and package large sections of pre-cut meat into individual packages for purchase by shoppers in local grocery stores like Kroger where I live.

The actual slaughterhouse industry has high turnover – some logging over 100% in a year. The work is hard on the body and dangerous, which is why the wages used to be reasonably high. I’m sure OSHA still requires the posting of health and safety rules but I doubt if most of the workers can even read them, let alone care about them.

Back when Bush was staging company raids, the first things a company would do after losing its illegal workers to a raid were to raise wages to attract legal workers to this hard, dirty work and to offer bonuses to workers who could bring in new workers, proving that this was work that US workers would do, just not for the wages and conditions that prevailed in the plants where illegal workers set the standards. [And where legal refugees are now hired at those low wages—ed]

Construction work has largely followed slaughterhouse work.

The AFL-CIO used to be against massive immigration because of what I just outlined: the law of supply and demand in which large numbers of workers who will work for low wages under bad conditions drive down wages for the remaining ones who stay and force those who can’t or won’t work for these wages out of the field. It changed after Sweeney-Trumka came in 1996, bringing several operatives from the Democratic Party.

screenshot-122

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL)

Recently the AFL-CIO has toed the Democratic Party’s line on immigration – more and faster – and has paid the price.

Their idea seems to be that they can organize these low wage workers, but it doesn’t work out that way. The union numbers keep decreasing. SEIU*** has enjoyed some success but they are organizing workers at low wages who can be easily replaced. If necessary, companies like WalMart simply subcontract out work like janitorial work to companies who will hire illegal workers on the cheap.

Construction companies hire subcontractors for wall boarding, painting, and roofing. Young men who would like a start in construction don’t get hired at these entry level jobs and so don’t make their way up the ladder.

The loss of such careers as meatpacking and construction to non-college educated men is a shame and a disaster.

In 2013, Senator Jeff Sessions called out Trumka and the meat packer lobbyists on the Gang of Eight bill, a bill to legalize more cheap laborers. This is why they hate him so much!

The MSM made much of women voting for Trump. I’d be willing to bet that many non-college educated women would be far happier for their husbands still to be able to get those better paying jobs so that they didn’t have to work full-time and could spend more time at home when the kids are small.

***See our post over the weekend where SEIU is attempting to organize Rohingya refugees.

For more comments worth noting and guest posts, click here.

Sessions photo!  please read this!

Senator Jeff Sessions has been a stalwart in fighting for American workers in the US Senate and tomorrow the Left will try to destroy him!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Don’t miss James Simpson’s prescription for what must be done about the UN/US Refugee Admissions program

Processing country map is instructive: US Dept. of State working hard to clean out UN camps in Kenya

Rochester, NY: Confirmation that the US State Department has packed the pipeline with refugees in advance of Trump

Chicago: Story about Rohingya Muslim airport workers is instructive

Getting new housing in your town? Then you will get refugees!

islamophobia-sf-bus

Those pushing ‘Islamophobia’ are advocating Sharia law, oppression of free speech & hamper public safety

People who push the false Islamophobia narrative are advocating Sharia law, trampling other people’s free speech rights, and hurting public safety.

Approximately 1.7 million Muslims in America believe Sharia is superior to the United States Constitution, and approximately 800,000 Muslims in America believe violent jihad would be justified to make Sharia superior.

Failure to confront this issue could have dire consequences for our freedoms.

Organizations with links to the Muslim Brotherhood like the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Islamic Circle of North America(ICNA), and Muslim Student Association (MSA) together with the leftist media and educational institutions who empower them, are using grade school humiliation tactics of name calling and social stigmatization to intimidate people away from criticizing Islam.

Those who use the term Islamophobe to label and stigmatize people who criticize Islam are enforcing a top tenet of Sharia law.  Muslims are instructed by the Quran to strongly oppose anyone who criticizes Islam even if that means brutal violence.  Quran 5:33 states “Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam.”

Many Americans personal and professional lives have been “maimed” for criticizing Islam on social media and in the marketplace and classroom. The consequences of being labeled an Islamophobe can cost a person their employment, educational opportunities, business relationships, and friendships.

The threat of encountering such personal costs for being labeled an Islamophobe are having a chilling impact on the rights of Americans guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.   The fear of being labeled a racist or Islamophobe has intimidated scores of Americans to forego saying anything about Islam. Such stifling of free speech impairs public safety and helps the Islamist political agenda to go unnoticed and therefore not countered.

It appears that people who push the Islamophobe false narrative believe their First Amendment Right is superior to the First Amendment Right of the people they stigmatize as Islamophobes.  They know that their punitive name calling tactics can “maim” people’s socio-economic status.  Consequently, they know that many people will give up their free speech right to criticize Islam in order to avoid such “maiming” consequences.  The Islamist and leftist progressive will to win the political correctness game at the cost of “maiming” people’s socio-economic lives indicates that they believe their speech is superior to Americans who express legitimate concerns regarding Islam.

This superiority of rights is documented by the statements that CAIR leaders have made. Omar Ahmad, Chairman and founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations, told a Muslim crowd that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”  Mustafa Carroll, executive director of the Dallas-Fort Worth CAIR branch, told a crowd at a Muslim rally in Austin, Texas in 2013 that “if we are practicing Muslims, we are above the law of the land.” 

The Center for Security Policy commissioned a poll in May 2015 which found that 51 percent of Muslims in America preferred Sharia courts over the legal system governed by the U.S. Constitution.  The poll also found that nearly 25 percent of Muslims in America believe the use of violent jihad was justified in establishing Sharia.

Pew Research reports that there are an estimated 3.3 million Muslims living in America. Therefore, based upon the Center for Security Policy poll results approximately 1.7 million Muslims in America believe Sharia is superior to the United States Constitution and approximately 800,000 Muslims in America believe violent jihad would be justified to make Sharia superior.

Islamophobia campaigns attempt to discredit prominent, safety conscious Americans who voice support for vigorous efforts to counter terrorism and the Islamist agenda.  Islamophobia propaganda and “maiming” tactics have caused people to remain silent regarding situations that they have observed that could pose a public safety risk from terrorism.

Fear of being branded an Islamophobe played a role in suppressing communications that may have had different results for the lives of thirty-six people in San Bernardino and 102 people in Orlando.  Townhall.com issued a report titled “Neighbor Didn’t Report Suspicious Activity of San Bernardino Killers For Fear of Being Called Racist.”  The Townhall article by Katie Pavlich on December 03, 2015 reported in part “According to a local Los Angeles news report, a neighbor of San Bernardino massacre suspects Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik didn’t report suspicious activity at their apartment for fear of being accused of racism.” Floridatoday.com issued a report titled “Mateen’s employer ignored complaints about his death threats because he was a Muslim.”  The Floridatoday.com article reported in part “Gilroy, a former Fort Pierce police officer, said Mateen frequently made homophobic and racial comments. Gilroy said he complained to his employer several times but it did nothing because he was Muslim.”

Many in the liberal left media and educational institutions appear to also follow and advocate for other tenets of Sharia law which instruct Muslims to hate Christians and Jews.  Quran 5:51“O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you – then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people.” Quran 9:30 “The Jews and Christians are perverts, fight them.”

The leftist media and educational institutions are complying with and enforcing a top tenet of Sharia law with their Islamophobia propaganda.  Such “maiming” propaganda scares Americans away from reporting suspected Islamic terrorism and thwarts the sharing of facts regarding the Islamist political agenda to subvert the United States Constitution in favor of Sharia law.

EDITORS NOTE: The Florida Family Association is spearheading numerous projects with the goal of countering Islamophobia propaganda.  These projects include countering CAIR’s “maiming” of Americans who are brave enough to oppose Islamism and countering the Huffington Post’s proliferation of Islamophobia propaganda.

kapernick-american-flag

VIDEO: ABC Enrages NFL Viewers With Anti-Trump ‘Black-ish’ ad

America is so sick and tired, so fed up with these dogmatic misanthropes.

Is it any wonder that NFL numbers are in the toilet? Colin Kaepernick and players protesting the National Anthem, and now this….

The liberal ABC-Disney Television Network generated outrage during its televised coverage of the Houston Texans’ victory over the Oakland Raiders Saturday night in the Wild Card round of the AFC Playoffs, but it had nothing to do with the football.

Instead many viewers were annoyed at a promo for next Wednesday’s episode of ABC’s sitcom Black-ish, which features a predominantly African-American cast being decidedly anti-Trump in tone and nature.

By Heat Street Staff | January 8, 2017

In the promo, which bills the episode as the “election through the eyes of Black-ish”, Lucy (a white character played by Christine Reitman) tells her predominantly African-American co-workers: “I voted for Trump!” before adding the clichéd justification, “I’m a racist? I have black friends!”

In another scene, her colleague Daphne (Wanda Sykes) appears to kick out at her for merely expressing that she had chosen to cast her vote for the Republican Party.

Meanwhile the show’s protagonists Dre and Rainbow Johnson are seen looking crestfallen at the outcome of the election while in another scene Rainbow shouts “Go Hillary!”

By Heat Street Staff | 1:07 pm, January 8, 2017

The liberal ABC-Disney Television Network generated outrage during its televised coverage of the Houston Texans’ victory over the Oakland Raiders Saturday night in the Wild Card round of the AFC Playoffs, but it had nothing to do with the football.

MORE: Porn Searches for Trump Family Surge in Wake of Election Victory

Instead many viewers were annoyed at a promo for next Wednesday’s episode of ABC’s sitcom Black-ish, which features a predominantly African-American cast being decidedly anti-Trump in tone and nature.
Get our exclusive newsletter—the best of Heat Street every day

In the promo, which bills the episode as the “election through the eyes of Black-ish”, Lucy (a white character played by Christine Reitman) tells her predominantly African-American co-workers: “I voted for Trump!” before adding the clichéd justification, “I’m a racist? I have black friends!”

In another scene, her colleague Daphne (Wanda Sykes) appears to kick out at her for merely expressing that she had chosen to cast her vote for the Republican Party.

Meanwhile the show’s protagonists Dre and Rainbow Johnson are seen looking crestfallen at the outcome of the election while in another scene Rainbow shouts “Go Hillary!”

The promo announcer goes on to promise: “Oh they’ll be tweeting about this one!”

People already are tweeting about the episode before it’s being aired but it’s not what ABC– owned by Disney– wants to read. Football fans are objecting to Trump voters being ridiculed in such a tiresome and predictable fashion.

“Why does the NFL keep playing an anti-Trump commercial for the terrible show Blackish?” wrote one tweeter. “They must not know their audience”. Another viewer fumed: “I am offended at the preview for the show #blackish about voting for Trump makes you a racist!”

Matt Falk tweeted: “No one watch #blackish. Not everyone who voted for Trump is a racist, That show caters to the lowest common denominator” while Steve James declared on the online social networking service: “Man, Blackish looks so original! A Trump voter isn’t racist because she has black friends! Can’t wait to never watch a second of that show.”

It’s not beyond the realms of possibility that Trump will weigh in on Twitter with his thoughts about Black-ish in the next few days.

After all in October 2014, the President-Elect tweeted: “How is ABC Television allowed to have a show entitled “Blackish”? Can you imagine the furor of a show, “Whiteish”! Racism at highest level?”

EDITORS NOTE: The column originally appeared on The Geller Report.