Christian center fires man for helping stage ‘Exposing Sharia’ event

On October 21, Jihad Watch brought you the news of an event in Minnesota called “Exposing Sharia and the Deception of Islam,” that had been canceled by the venue where it was supposed to be held. I just received this email from one of the organizers, explaining what happened next. Please contact the Ironwood Springs Christian Ranch and politely and courteously register disapproval of their Sharia compliance and persecution of Gary Froiland for calling attention to unwelcome and unpopular truths.

I wrote to Bob Bardwell and Tracy Bashore and asked them these questions:

  1. Can you confirm that Gary Froiland was a Board member of Ironwood Springs Christian Ranch?
  2. Can you confirm that he was fired for his role in the “Exposing Sharia” event?
  3. Do you believe that criticism of jihad terror and the oppression that is justified under Islamic law (Sharia) ought to be off-limits? If so, do you believe the same thing about criticism of Christianity? If not, why did you consider it necessary to fire Mr. Froiland?

Bardwell did not answer. Bashore confirmed that Gary Froiland had been on the Ironwood Springs Board but declined comment on anything else.

Thank you for your article sharing the dilemma about our event in Rochester, Minnesota to have Usama Dakdok speak. I am Gary Froiland, one of the guys helping with this event, and I am the one who designed the poster.

After a pastor who promised us his church backed out the night before the event to have Usama Dakdok speak this past spring in Rochester, we planned to attempt it again in the fall with the American Legion. That should be a patriotic place to have an educational speaker explain why Sharia is not compatible with our constitution. But they too backed out of the contract and gave us our money back after they received pressure from the Sheriff’s department. So we tried the Stewartville Sportsman’s Club.

That’s where your article picked up. We had just covered the town of Stewartville putting door hanging sleeves on nearly every house in town, containing the brochure “Islam in a Nutshell, Peaceful or Violent?” which includes the “Growth of Islam” chart by Bill Warner (Center for the Study of Political Islam). That’s when the Rochester Post Bulletin discovered the door hangings, and the Stewartville Sportsman Club backed out of their contract. Our team met with their board, but without convincing them to let us use their facility.

But we were not about to give up. Next I took my turn to rent a facility. The Cascade Town Hall just north of Rochester was suggested. I rented it as a “Pre-Halloween Family Event”, and added that I would be playing music. (you can type in Gary Froiland in YouTube and see some of my One-Man-Band videos). So we were able to rent the facility. We emailed people three hours before the event to give them the location, hoping that would keep protesters away. About 80 people came!

Late afternoon before the event, after Usama had arrived, he called the Rochester Post Bulletin and invited them to interview him. They jumped at that opportunity for a good story, but didn’t stay long enough to hear the heart of the message, but interviewed him, took some pictures and left. That was Sunday night, October 29th.

The next day the article came out with the front page news. Overall, it was a quite honest article. My name, Gary Froiland, is mentioned in the article, since I was the one who had rented the hall. They made it sound like I deceived them when renting, because I never mentioned we’d have a speaker, but that it was a “Pre-Halloween Family Event (the paper called it a “party”). The event was to start at 6 pm, and those invited were told that I would play music at 5:30 pm for those who came early. That I did, and then closed my half hour by leading everyone in the pledge of allegiance, and had a prayer. Then Usama did his nearly 3-hour presentation.

Now the story continues: Monday the article came out in the Post Bulletin, and my boss read it. My name was in the article, and when I got to work the next morning (at Ironwood Springs Christian Ranch, www.ironwoodsprings.com), the boss (Tracy Bashore) met me first thing and fired me for my involvement in an exposing Islam event. So I was out of a job because of our attempt at Freedom of Speech.

I was on the board of that Christian Ranch for 20 years, and the last four years have been a full-time employee. A job opening came up at Ironwood and they hired me for that position in June of 2013. As an employee, I cannot be a board member, so I went off the board at that time. So since June of 2013 I have worked full time at Ironwood.

Bob Bardwell (bob@ironwoodsprings.com) had founded the Ranch in 1976, and even though he’s very involved every day there, he gave the job of Director to Tracy Bashore (tracy@ironwoodsprings.com). It was Tracy and other liberal employees at the Ranch who had a problem with my involvement with exposing Islam, and now that I was more public with it, he made sure it cost me my job. So I guess I don’t have any freedom of speech either.

A week before that, it was my turn to lead in devotions at the Ironwood Staff meeting (we have one on Tuesday mornings and Friday mornings). I had my devotions on Ephesians 6:12 and focused my talk and PowerPoint on Islam and how many of our brothers and sisters are being beheaded for their faith, and some of them praying “Oh Lord, let us be shot”, because they are awaiting execution by beheading, and are praying to die by gunshot instead. The devotions exposed Islam for those on staff who were ignorant. However, there are several liberals working there, and they were very vocal after my devotions about my “Hate” speech.

Tracy related how the Ranch has a good reputation in the community and some Muslims visit the Ranch from time to time, and he doesn’t want to insult them. So with my controversial devotions, and then a week later, my name in the paper having helped make the Usama Dakdok event happen, that was the last straw and cost me my job.

I thought you might be interested in hearing “The Rest of the Story”, so there you have it. I certainly lost my freedom of speech besides losing my job, but I would do it again. My desire is to be a patriot, and cleanse the path that our children will take from evil that lurks. If you want to talk personally to Bob Bardwell or Tracy Bashore, I included their emails above, and the main office phone number of Ironwood Springs Christian Ranch is 507-533-4315.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NYC: Convert to Islam pledges allegiance to ISIS, tells cops “You’re lucky I didn’t shoot you”

UK “loses” 56,000 Muslim migrants due for deportation, including over 700 ex-cons

President Trump Targets Voter Fraud––Dems Go Insane!

“…The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.” – Joseph Stalin, 1923

On Tuesday, American voters will once again go to the polls hoping that the candidate(s) they vote for will fulfill what should be their one and only mission, i.e., to serve the needs of We the People.

Republican, ahem, leaders are appropriately nervous that the phony so-called conservatives they’ve been foisting on us for decades will be replaced by authentic conservatives who will help President Trump fulfill his mission to Make America Great Again!

And––oxymoron here––Democrat leaders are even more agitated because looming over the entire election will be the initiative President Trump announced last May to investigate voter fraud, an issue they are all-too-seedily familiar with.

They are also in high anxiety about the inconvenient truth that, according to journalist Susan Jones, “There have been five special congressional elections so far this year, and in the four races where Republicans ran against Democrats, Republicans have won all four. (In CA, two Democrats vied for a House seat, so a Dem win was the only possible outcome).

VP Mike Pence and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach are leading the commission’s efforts to reassure voters about the integrity of federal elections. The president also appointed Hans von Spakovsky, a GW Bush appointee, to head the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.

The far-left Washington Post called his appointment “divisive,” which to most Americans meant that the president picked the perfect guy. In 2005, von Spakovsky led the Justice Department’s approval of a Georgia law requiring voters to produce photo ID, which was rejected!

Think about that rejection. You need a photo identification card to get a driver’s license, donate your blood, buy alcohol or cigarettes, open a bank account, apply for welfare benefits or food stamps or Medicaid or Social Security or unemployment or a mortgage or a hunting and fishing license, get on an airplane, rent a car, get a prescription, buy a cell phone, visit a casino and get married––and that is the short list!

But the initiative was rejected because Democrats object to any requirement that would prevent illegals and dead people and cartoon characters from voting and potentially swinging an election in their favor.

What do you think Sanctuary cities are all about? They are certainly not about the deep love and empathy leftists have for humanity, or the preference people who work 12 or 16 or 20 hours a day have for giving total strangers free housing, education, healthcare, and ongoing stipends into perpetuity. No no no….sanctuary citizens are all about Democrat votes!

Sure enough, the reliably cringe-producing Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called on the president to reject the embrace of “white supremacy” and the desire to “disenfranchise” voters that motivated such a commission.

And predictably, as reported by freedom-fighter Pamela Geller––author of the sensational new autobiographical book, Fatwa: Hunted in America––the president’s Voter Fraud Commission faced an avalanche of lawsuits. “But peel back the layers…[and] a common denominator emerges––they’re heavily funded by groups tied to George Soros. In fact, the more groups that pile on the suit, the more the dark hand of Soros emerges.”

It is also no surprise that the most corrupt regime in modern American politics––that of the poseur “president” Barack Obama––elevated voter fraud to an art form. As Thomas Lifson of AmericanThinker.com has reported, “One of the most outrageous abuses of the Obama presidency was a scheme by which fines for corporate misbehavior by the biggest Wall Street banks were channeled into the hands of radical leftist groups that are now vehemently opposing the policies of President Trump. We are talking hundreds of millions of dollars that ought to have gone to the federal treasury, but instead became a slush fund for the left.”

Or as journalist and best-selling author Paul Sperry writes in the New York Post: “An estimated $640 million has been diverted into what critics say is an improper, if not unconstitutional, ‘slush fund’ fed from government settlements with JPMorgan Chase and Co., Citigroup Inc. and Bank of America Corp., according to congressional sources.”

No need to discuss the way that Ms. Hillary rigged the Democratic primary in New York against Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) until we learn if, indeed, Leavenworth lies in her future.

Clearly, the Democrats/progressives/liberals/leftists/socialists/communists/jihadists among us have zero trust or faith in the free-and-fair votes cast by citizens across our country, hence the desperate need to rig elections.

FANTASY v REALITY

Daniel Greenfield explains why the delusional Democrats were so cock-sure they’d win last November. “The New York Times rated Hillary’s chances at 93%. The Huffington Post raised that to 98%. That was still too modest for Obama campaign manager David Plouffe who predicted a 100% likelihood of Hillary winning. It wasn’t strategy or statistics that made the Dems think that victory was certain. It was ideology.

“Obama had spent two terms telling them that they were on the ‘right side of history.’ The more the Dems swung left, the closer to the right side of history they were…delusions of superiority had convinced them that Republicans couldn’t win an honest election.”

But “they had confused ideology with electability [and] human beings don’t react well to having their egomaniacal fantasies come apart around them.”

And there is one more thing. Democrats felt confident that they had perfected the voter-fraud scheme so exquisitely that their girl Hillary would cakewalk her way into the Oval Office in a landslide. But the one thing they didn’t count on––and haven’t counted on for four elections in which they’ve sustained thunderous losses in state legislatures, governorships, congressional and senatorial seats and, in 2016, the White House––is the preference of most Americans for sane policies that don’t include:

  • Anguish over going to a public bathroom
  • Dictates that insist nuns tout birth control
  • Burgeoning food-stamp and welfare rolls
  • Sissified Rules of Engagement for our distinctly non-sissified military
  • A dumbed-down, anti-American, Islamophilic federalized education system
  • A socialized medical system

You get the picture.

THE EPIDEMIC

I’ve heard of some cases of Republican gerrymandering. According to Wikipedia, this is “a practice intended to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries. Not really sure how this works, but it pales by light years from the countless examples of Democrat voter fraud. For one thing, gerrymandering is legal, although it can be contested.

Shortly after President Trump’s commission was formed, stories of Democrat voter fraud from all over the country started to emerge. Of course, most of the fake-news liberal media refused to cover these stories, just as they––including the far-left New York Times––kept buried the story of Miramax founder Harvey Weinstein’s predatory sexual harassment and alleged rape for nearly 15 years, the better to protect a huge financial donor to Democrat candidates.

Here is a small sampling of the kind of voter fraud that is perfectly routine in Democrat circles:

  • October 2017: Corruption in Voting! Los Angeles has 144% of Those Eligible to Vote on Voting Rolls.
  • As reported by the National Review’s Deroy Murdock“some 3.5 million more people are registered to vote in the U.S. than are alive among America’s adult citizens…” Murdock counted Judicial Watch’s state-by-state tally and found that 462 U.S. counties had a registration rate exceeding 100% of all eligible voters. That’s 552 million people, who Murdock calls “ghost voters.” 
  • California, for instance, has 11 counties with more registered voters than actual voters and 10 of those counties voted heavily for Hillary Clinton.
  • September 2017: Hundreds of Illegal Voters Revealed in Philadelphia: non-S. citizens registered to vote in Philly and nearly half of them voted in past elections.
  • September 2017: 248 counties have more voters than eligible citizens. Lowndes County, Alabama, has been accused of having 131 percent of its total eligible population on its list of registered voters. Another 247 counties have the same problem.
  • From the same article by Bob Unruh of WorldNetDaily.com: Kentucky has 41 counties with more voters than residents, Michigan 32, Iowa 31, Illinois 22, Mississippi 19, Colorado 17, Texas 12, Alabama 12, South Dakota 12, Nebraska 9, Georgia 6, New York 6, West Virginia 6, New Mexico 5, North Carolina 5, California 2, Louisiana 2, Montana 2, Virginia 2, Arizona 1 and Florida 1.
  • September 2017: The NY Post reported about “the endless rigging of NY politics.”
  • September 2017: An election supervisor in Broward County, Florida, testified in court that both noncitizens and felons have voted illegally in her county––just as then-candidate Trump asserted, to the howling denials of leftists and their media whores.
  • In the second meeting of the Commission on Election Integrity, held on Sept. 12, 2017, computer expert Ken Block found approximately 8,500 voters who voted in two different states in the November 2016 election, including 200 couples who voted illegally together. He estimated that “there would be 40,000 duplicate votes if data from every state were available.”
  • A Commission on Election Integrity reports that “voter history data from only 21 states…found that 8,471 votes in 2016 were ‘highly likely’ duplicates. Extrapolating this to all 50 states would likely produce, with ‘high-confidence,’ around 45,000 duplicate votes.
  • Hillary won New Hampshire by fewer than 3,000 votes out of over 700,000 cast. (NH was one of the states that refused to turn over its data for this study, and it is one of only 15 states that allow same-day voter registration). If 74.8 percent of the 5,513 fraudulent votes were cast for Clinton, then the presidential election in New Hampshire was tipped as well.
  • According to a riveting article by Kris Kobach, statistics released by the Speaker of the New Hampshire House of Representatives on the date of the general election in November 2016, there were 6,540 same-day registrants who voted in New Hampshire using an out-of-state driver’s license to prove their identity. But further research proved that over 5,000 were not legitimate, more than enough to swing an election!
  • August 2017: Judicial Watch reportedthat Mass. state employees sold drivers’ licenses and state identification cards to illegal immigrants…according to the Depart. of Justice (DOJ). Also that there is “an epidemic of voter fraud in the U.S.” and the case in Boston “occurred in multiple cases,” a matter being investigated by JW’s five-year-old Election Integrity Project.
  • On August 18, 2017 Tyler Durden wrote a column on Zero Hedge titled “S. Has 3.5 Million More Registered Voters Than Live Adults – A Red Flag For Electoral Fraud.
  • Virginia’s Governor Terry McAuliffe has said he has no intention of honoring the new commission’s request for information because “there is no evidence of significant voter fraud in Virginia.” This is the same guy who enabled over 60,000 felons to vote in the presidential election last November, the same slick operator who gave over $700,000 dollars to acting FBI director Andrew McCabe’s wife who was running in a local race. Yes, that McCabe, who just coincidentally was running the FBI investigation into Hillary’s use of a home-made e-mail server.
  • Last June, California’s Election Integrity Project (EIP), in a routine audit of CA’s new VoteCal voter registration database, found that five counties alone accounted for nearly one-million more registered voters than citizens of voting age!
  • Officials in College Park, Maryland, don’t like President Trump’s voter fraud commission and are considering giving noncitizens voting rights, a longstanding practice elsewhere in the state. In Maryland, Judicial Watch sued Montgomery County last month after finding more registered voters than citizens of voting age.
  • According to California political commentator Stephan Frank, “Thanks to [Obama’s] “leadership,” five-million (not a typo) of those granted United States citizenship CANNOT speak or read English.”
  • ‘Substantial Evidence’ Over a Million Illegal Aliens Voted in 2016

All of the above cases, from just the past few months, involve Democrat voter fraud and this is the teeniest tiniest tip of the iceberg!

RIGGING 101

Founded in 1970, ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), received multimillions in federal funds, ostensibly to work on social issues like affordable housing and healthcare in poor neighborhoods, as well as voter registration.  It soon became known as a massive voter-fraud scheme that registered dead people, children, illegal aliens, felons, fraudulent absentee voters, even cartoon characters.

The group was finally outed in 2009 by conservative activists Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe who used hidden cameras to expose ACORN’s nefarious agenda. The U.S. Congress cut ACORN’s funding and the group eventually disbanded. But it continues to operate to this day under new names.

According to journalist and author Matthew Vadum, “Project Vote––the voter mobilization division of now-defunct ACORN––leaves behind a legacy of lies, criminal conspiracies, and voter fraud, including millions upon millions of fraudulent voter registrations.” As he documented in his book, Subversion Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts Are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers, “at least 54 ACORN employees and individuals associated with ACORN have been convicted of voter fraud, a blanket term coined by lawyers referring to fraudulent voting, identify fraud, perjury, voter registration fraud, forgery, and other crimes related to the electoral process.”

In a stunning, must-read, three-part series–– here, Part 1 by Katy Grimes, here, Part 2 by Megan Barth and here, Part 3 by Katy Grimes, Grimes begins with a chilling quotation from Joseph Stalin: “…The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”

Grimes and Barth report the massive election fraud that took place during the California primary in June (2016).

  • Thousands upon thousands of California voters showed up at their designated polling stations only to discover that their party registration had been changed, or they were dropped entirely from the rolls. And it was evident this was done from within the state’s electronic voting system.
  • “A group from Princeton needed only seven minutes and simple hacking tools to install a computer program on a voting machine that took votes for one candidate and gave them to another,”
  • Recent DNC delegate manipulations made it so nearly every primary and caucus magically favored Hillary Clinton, despite the millions of winning votes going to Sanders” [and the probability that he won].  Just last week, a new book by longtime democrat consultant Donna Brazile claimed that Hillary rigged the DNC Primary, or, as she corrected that notion on Friday, that Hillary “totally controlled” the bankrupt Democratic National Committee. She did this, as reported by Jon Levine of The Wrap, by agreeing to pay off the DNC’s debt in exchange for overseeing the “party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised.”
  • Three liberal federal judges (two appointed by Pres. Clinton, one by Barack Obama) overturned voter-ID laws––in Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Texas––claiming they were racially discriminatory.

Going back to the fiasco of the 2012 presidential election and liberals’ aversion to voter identification cards, Rev. Austin Miles writes:

  • Voting machines, supplied by George Soros, were rigged to automatically receive an Obama vote, no matter who the voter actually voted for.
  • In 59 voting districts in the Philadelphia region, Obama received 100% of the votes with not a single vote recorded for Romney (a mathematical and statistical impossibility).
  • NOTE: Obama won in every state that did not require a Photo ID and lost in every state that did require a Photo ID in order to vote.

Barth cites a study on Democrat fraud in multiple states, the conclusion of which was that election fraud [occurred] and benefitted Hillary Clinton – especially in states that used unaccountable, electronic voting machines.

“What’s more, two of the three companies that controlled the electronic voting machine market, Dominion Voting and H.I.G. Capital (i.e. Hart Intercivic) were on the list of big money donors that donated to the Clinton campaign, as shown by the DNC documents leaked by Guccifer 2.0.”

These stories were nowhere to be found in the mainstream media. Either was the video––since removed––of a Diebold machine spitting out incorrect votes in favor of Hillary.

In addition, according to Dean Garrison at dcclothesline.com, not only did Reuters rig a major poll to show Hillary winning when Breitbart News was reporting a 17-point swing towards Trump and away from Hillary, but Thomas Reuters, owner of the Reuters News Service, was among the top-tier donors ($1.5 million) to the Clinton Foundation!

It is impossible not to mention the famous “popular vote” that Hillary insisted she won by. Actually, in October of 2015, just a year before the presidential election––perfect timing––a motor-voter law cooked up by California Governor Jerry Brown was enacted. In short, this gave over three-million illegal aliens the “right” to vote.

A report from Investors Business Daily said that: “According to the American Civil Liberties Union—which opposes the motor-voter law—California houses 3.3 million illegals, or a quarter of the nation’s total. So the stage is set not just for extending voting to illegals but for swinging national elections, too.”

Well whaddaya know? That number––3.3 million–– is just about the exact number Hillary and her bitter minions––and her pathetic book––say she won the popular vote by!

We all know how this massive voter-fraud attempt ended. Donald Trump not only won the 2016 election, but successfully exposed the fake news and fake polls that until 8 p.m. on election night continued to insist that Hillary was ahead and would win.

They never ever counted on the one entity for which neither media hacks nor pollsters have any respect: the American public!

WHAT NOW?

To this day, in their profound denial of the outcome of November 2016’s election, Democrats/leftists/progressives––whatever they’re calling themselves these days––are living in the past, denying there’s a new sheriff in town, and railing against the president’s voter fraud commission as if individual or collective temper tantrums by the media or staged bought-and-paid-for demonstrations can undo reality.

Walter Murray of The Horn News, understands this species. “If you can’t win by the rules… change the rules!” he writes. “Crazy? Maybe––but no one has ever accused the far left of being sane when it comes to their plans to seize power, gain control and skew elections.”

One of their desperate schemes, he reports, is “to undermine the electoral process” by using the courts…to forever change presidential elections by doing a complete end run around the Electoral College. He says that liberal Harvard Law School Professor Lawrence Lessig “intends to file lawsuits in 48 of 50 states” to do away with the Electoral College.

“With a winner-take-all, most of America is ignored,” Lessig told Fox News. Murray adds: “By `most of America,’ of course, he means California and New York.” Oh, and Lessig would also like to “disenfranchise older white Americans, who tend to vote Republican.”

But leaving a number of fringe ideologies behind, things are already happening as a result of the president’s commission:

  • As reported by Jim Hoft in July, top Democrats are worried after more than 3,000 likely illegal voters cancelled their registrations in Colorado since learning about President Trump’s voter fraud commission. The same thing happened when the president announced building “the wall” on our southern border and illegal crossings dropped precipitously. This is what happens when a leader is perceived as a “man of his word.”
  • The ever-vigilant Judicial Watch has warned California to clean its voter registration lists or face a federal lawsuit.  The watchdog group sent a notice-of-violation letter to the state of California and 11 of its counties threatening the suit, and it sent similar letters to Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina and Tennessee.
  • We should know by Tuesday’s vote if there has been compliance––and, if not, what the consequences will be.
  • In early September, a federal court required that all voters in Texas present an accepted photo ID card in order to vote. The U.S. Department of Justice and President Donald Trump supported the ruling.
  • The Heritage Foundation’s election fraud database just got a major upgrade. With the addition of powerful new search functions, the database gives Americans a quick and easy way to sort through 1,088 documented instances of fraud, to see how nefarious election activity has affected their own states and communities. The site features over 100 new cases, documents 1,071 instances of voter fraud spanning 47 states, and includes 938 criminal convictions.

Still, huge challenges remain. A couple of months ago,  computer experts told Pres. Trump’s Voter Fraud Commission that the country’s voting machines are susceptible to hacking, which could be done in a way so that it leaves no fingerprints, making it impossible to know whether the outcome was changed.

“There’s no perfect security; there’s only degrees of insecurity,” said Ronald Rivest, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

And here is an irrefutable truism about Democrat voters from an unknown source: “It’s worth noting that the U.S. population has increased since 2012, meaning there are likely more dead and invalid voters than before.”

City of Chicago Uses Trace Report to Deflect From Its Own Failed Governance

This week brought more proof that Chicago’s feckless public officials have perfected the art of scapegoating.

On Sunday, the city released the second edition of its Gun Trace Report. The document presents a host of ATF trace data on firearms recovered in the crime-plagued metropolis and attempts to shift blame for the city’s violence to the Illinois General Assembly, the state legislatures of neighboring and far-flung states, federally licensed firearms dealers, and the U.S. Congress. Lacking any introspection, the report fails to acknowledge any role the city might bear for its current predicament.

At the outset, the report asserts that in relation to crime perpetrated with firearms, “Chicago is in many ways a microcosm of a national epidemic.” This is not true. In 2016, Chicago’s murder rate was more than five times the national average. Moreover, Chicago’s murder problem is so acute that it drives statistical analysis of urban violence nationwide. Research from the NYU School of Law’s Brennan Center for Justice published in December 2016, noted, “The 2016 murder rate is projected to be 14 percent higher than last year in the 30 largest cities. Chicago is projected to account for 43.7 percent of the total increase in murders.”

Bizarrely, after calling the city a “microcosm” of a national gun problem, the report then contends that “Chicago faces a unique predicament in enforcement efforts against illegal gun trafficking. Illinois is surrounded by states that lack comprehensive firearms regulations…” First, trace data shows that Illinois is far and away the largest source state for guns recovered in Chicago; with double the number of firearms of the next highest source state. Second, without conceding to Chicago’s definition of “comprehensive,” the geographers at Chicago City Hall might be surprised to learn that California abuts pro-gun states Arizona and Nevada, while New York is adjacent to Vermont and Pennsylvania. Yet, Los Angeles and New York City’s murder rates are a fraction of the Windy City’s.

Despite their contention that out of state private firearms transfers fuel Chicago’s violent crime, a significant portion of the report targets federal licensed firearms dealers, who are required by federal law to conduct a background check prior to transferring a firearm. The report lists the top 10 gun dealers that firearms recovered in Chicago are traced to. Undermining the report’s contention that loose foreign gun laws are to blame for the city’s problems, “seven of the top ten source dealers are within Illinois.”

To remedy this situation, the report promotes the state-level dealer licensing requirements embodied in the Gun Dealer Licensing Act, which is currently making its way through the Illinois General Assembly. According to the report, “adding state and local law enforcement could greatly enhance regulatory enforcement over gun dealers” and the measure’s requirement to video record all business in a gun store will “deter straw purchasers.”

It is not clear how city officials expect this to reduce the illegal acquisition of firearms. Under current Illinois law, residents must acquire a Firearm Owners Identification Card in order to possess or purchase a firearm. Therefore, prospective straw purchasers must make their identities known to the state government and a dealer in order to purchase a firearm from a gun store. That sale is also documented in the dealer’s records, as required by federal law. A criminal already willing to be documented in this manner is unlikely concerned with how often a dealer’s books are audited for paperwork errors or the superfluous video recordation of his criminal acts. The chief effect of this dealer licensing legislation is to make the business of legally selling firearms prohibitively expensive.

The report also advocates for a state law restricting private transfers between FOID holders, and firearms registration. Missing from the report is any explanation of why those who would divert firearms into the criminal market, who have already displayed a willingness to expose themselves to severe state and federal criminal liability, would be deterred by these additional measures.

As ATFNRA, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation have acknowledged, straw purchasers are a real problem. However, an effective means of thwarting straw purchasers would be to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

Illinois already has an “unlawful purchase of a firearm” statute that targets anyone “who knowingly purchases or attempts to purchase a firearm with the intent to deliver that firearm to another person who is prohibited by federal or State law from possessing a firearm.” Violation of this statute in relation to the purchase of a single firearm carries a maximum sentence of seven years in prison. Further, Illinois law requires a private individual who transfers a firearm to determine the transferee’s status as a FOID holder. Failure to do so can carry a sentence of up to three years in prison.

In what the Chicago police called “not an uncommon example” of straw purchasing, in September 2016, police arrested 22-year-old Simone Mousheh for selling two guns to a gang-affiliated man in Chicago. Reports indicated that Mousheh was “aware that he did not possess an FOID card and that he was on probation for domestic battery.” One of the firearms Mousheh sold was later recovered from a juvenile on Chicago’s West Side. Following a guilty plea, Mousheh was sentenced to 15 days in an alternative work program, 12 months of probation, and a $679 fine.

This sort of lackluster enforcement of existing gun laws might be why a Cook County Jail inmate told a researcher in 2013, “All they need is one person who got a gun card in the ‘hood’ and everybody got one.”

Chicago’s trace report also raises important questions about the permissible use of ATF trace data. Since 2003, Congress has restricted the use of trace data under the “Tiahrt Amendment.” Named after former U.S. Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), the amendment permits federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to have trace data “in connection with and for use in a bona fide criminal investigation or prosecution.” ATF and the Fraternal Order of Police support the Tiahrt Amendment as public disclosure of trace data could imperil ongoing law enforcement investigations, and according to FOP National President Chuck Canterbury, “threaten[s] the safety of officers and witnesses.”

ATF has taken issue with the use of trace data in Chicago’s recent report. A report from Michael Bloomberg anti-gun mouthpiece The Trace, cites an email from ATF spokeswoman Marky Markos who wrote that the Chicago report was “a prohibited use of the data.” Markos also pointed out that, “Through the eTrace [Memorandum of Understanding], parties agree that no data will be publicly disseminated, and that it is law enforcement sensitive information as it relates to criminal investigations.” eTrace is an online trace request submission module for law enforcement agencies.

Chicago issued a flippant response to ATF’s charges. Offering a creative interpretation of when it is necessary to comply with federal law, Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s spokesman, Adam Collins, stated, “This is just classic… The Trump administration is arguing it would be better to hide the facts on the deadly effects of gun trafficking than partner on a solution? Well, burying your head in the sand won’t change the truth and it won’t solve the problem.”

It is ironic that Chicago would accuse the Trump administration of “burying [their] head in the sand” on this issue. The discouraging truth about Chicago’s violence is that it is the product of a host of societal factors – including a lack of vigorous criminal prosecution – that cannot be remedied by a change to the current gun laws. Faced with this complex problem, Chicago’s public officials have repeatedly chosen to disparage their fellow Illinoisans and law-abiding gun owners throughout the country, rather than rise to meet the challenge. The city officials’ continued refusal to confront their own shortcomings and the city’s more intractable problems only serves to prolong the suffering of Chicago’s 2.7 million residents.

Realtors and Homebuilders Put Profits Over Middle Class

By Peter J. Wallison & Edward J. Pinto

Two powerful lobbying groups that advertise themselves as helping Americans buy homes have announced that they will oppose the Republican tax plan. Their reason? Because it will lower housing costs. Seldom have any denizens of “the Swamp” shown their true colors quite so flagrantly.

For years, the National Association of Realtors and the National Association of Home Builders were strong supporters of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two government-backed mortgage companies, because (they argued) the government subsidies these firms received would create affordable housing for the middle class. That was their stated reason. The real rationale, as they have now made clear, is that Fannie and Freddie’s policies drove up housing prices, thereby increasing their members’ profits.

When the Republican tax plan made them choose between helping the middle class to buy homes and reducing their members’ profits, they chose profits. Doubling the standard IRS deduction while reducing or eliminating deductions for state and local taxes would discourage would-be homebuyers from purchasing more expensive homes. Since both the Realtors and the builders earn more from selling bigger homes amid rising prices, they simply oppose any tax plan that does not help inflate housing costs.

Their analysis is instructive. If large numbers of taxpayers use the new—and much higher—standard deduction in the Republican plan, they will not be eligible to use the mortgage interest deduction in calculating offsets to the cost of the home. This will induce them to be more cautious in what they spend. A bigger and more costly home will not necessarily mean a bigger tax deduction. Accordingly, the Realtors and homebuilders would suffer a reduction in profits.

The same thing is true for the state and local tax deduction, which applies to local property taxes. If this deduction is reduced, homebuyers will not take into account the “savings” they would receive from deducting large state and local taxes on a bigger home. This will also reduce their spending on the home, and this too will mean less profit for the Realtors and homebuilders.

The financial crisis in 2008 was the result of government housing policies—strongly backed by both the Realtors and homebuilders—that encouraged and sometimes even demanded reductions in underwriting standards so that more Americans with modest incomes could buy homes. The result was a massive housing boom, which drove up prices for first-time homebuyers. By 2007, housing was unaffordable for people of modest means, no matter how concessionary the mortgage terms. The crash in housing values that followed caused many Americans—who bought houses at inflated prices they couldn’t afford—to lose their homes.

The Realtors and homebuilders, however, did wonderfully well in the booming market before 2007, profiting from the unprecedented rise in housing prices. They want this market back, and since government housing policies haven’t changed since the financial crisis—the crisis was blamed on the banks rather than housing policies—they are on the way to getting what they want. If you want to know what crony capitalism looks like, this is it.

Among other things, Fannie, Freddie (and the Federal Housing Administration) are still doing what they did before the crisis: keeping down payments low—often at 3 percent or less—so that buyers can buy bigger and more expensive homes by borrowing more. Once again, home prices are booming. This puts buyers in danger of eventual foreclosure because of a loss of a job, divorce or illness. But by the time that happens, Realtors and homebuilders have been fully paid. If this keeps up, another housing bust, and possibly another financial crisis, cannot be avoided.

The Realtors and homebuilders are afraid that the GOP tax plan will have the effect of stabilizing housing prices. Although this would be an obvious benefit for young homebuyers trying to purchase their first—or second—homes, it’s wholly undesirable for the builders and real estate agents. All of which raises one central question, which should be in the minds of all Americans—including members of Congress—when they consider the coming tax debate: Whose side are these people on?

RELATED ARTICLES: 

GOP’s tax bill cancels $23 billion in credits claimed by illegal immigrants – Washington Times

GOP Tax Plan Would Revitalize US Economy, Give Significant Tax Relief

Why Democrats Are Obsessed With Wealth Inequality

Trump’s Economic Adviser Explains How You Benefit From Tax Reform

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Real Clear Politics.  Peter J. Wallison is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Edward J. Pinto is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

Language Wars: The Road to Tyranny Is Paved with Language Censorship

The elimination of words leads to the elimination of thoughts, which leads to the elimination of freedom.

We often hear that we are living in a “Politically Correct” era. This is treated as an annoyance when, in reality, the ever-accelerating widespread effort to expunge words and terminology from the vernacular should sound alarm bells.

“Political Correctness” has been viewed as a well intentioned way of combating bigotry by eliminating words of hatred and politely expunging words that are defamatory, insulting, humiliating, or denigrating. Certainly the desire to be compassionate, fair, and considerate is laudable.

It is important to be clear, the true “curse words” are words that insult or humiliate other people. Decent and compassionate people want to be considerate and respectful in their interactions with others. Reasonable individuals avoid hurtful language to describe other people. It has been said, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

Too many decent people have fallen victim to con artists who swindle them out of their life savings, or otherwise take advantage by gaining their confidence. Multiple scams run by pundits, pollsters, and politicians have produced the current immigration crisis. When it comes to immigration, consider how effectively scammers with malevolent motives have cynically played the “compassion card.” They see vulnerabilities to exploit in the compassionate and charitable characteristics of Americans, turning virtues into veritable weapons to be used against Americans. Never forget that Political Correctness is a form of censorship. It can be benign or as dangerous as a weapon, depending on those who are doing the censoring
and what motivates them.

Humans generally construct thoughts with words. Eliminate words and the thoughts those words represent are eliminated. Control of language, therefore, results in control of thought.

This is why “The road to tyranny is paved with words (and thoughts) lost to censorship.” The desire of the majority of people to be fair and polite has been perverted to obfuscate important issues. On border security, immigration, and sovereignty, globalists and other profiteers have resorted to this tactic. When rebels overthrow a government they first seize control of the medium of mass communications and take control of the flow of information to the masses:
television stations, radio stations, and newspapers. Since the human thought process is dependent upon words, censorship is an important tool of totalitarian regimes to maintain control of their citizens.

The Founding Fathers understood the nexus between freedom of speech and all of the other freedoms. This is precisely why the Founders considered Freedom of Speech important enough to enshrine as a protected right in the First Amendment to the Constitution. Control of language (censorship) is the first step along the path to the destruction of the First Amendment, and subsequently all other freedoms. Without free speech no other freedoms are possible. Left unchecked, an attack on words may bring us to the precipice of totalitarianism.

Political Correctness, either by design or by exploitation of those who saw that “golden opportunity” to exploit political correctness, has morphed into censorship to alter perceptions about broader issues. This is not unlike the device of “Newspeak,” a central component of 1984, George Orwell’s 1949 novel about a dystopian state.

“Newspeak” was the term Orwell used to describe a language that was created by the government to slowly but inexorably expunge ever more words from the vernacular of its hapless citizens. Essentially Newspeak was censorship on steroids, based on the idea that control of language would lead to control of thought. Control of language, coupled with extreme surveillance of its citizens that included the installation of telescreens (television monitoring devices) in the citizens’ homes that broadcast a constant barrage of programming from the omnipresent “Big Brother” created the ultimate police state.

A detailed explanation of Newspeak is found in this paragraph from the Appendix to Orwell’s novel, under the title, The Principles of Newspeak:

The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc (English Socialist Party) but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought — that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc — should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meanings and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and by stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meanings whatever. To give a single example. The word free still existed in Newspeak, but it could only be used in such statements as ‘This dog is free from lice’ or ‘This field is free from weeds’. It could not be used in its old sense of ‘politically free’ or ‘intellectually free’ since political and intellectual freedom no longer existed even as concepts, and were therefore of necessity nameless. Quite apart from the suppression of definitely heretical words, reduction of vocabulary was regarded as an end in itself, and no word that could be dispensed with was allowed to survive. Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum.

Today the elimination of words has certainly been expedited by the use of social media, such as Twitter, which limits the number of characters that can be transmitted. America has gone from having a highly literate population to a country where most people are unwilling to read more than the headlines of articles. College campuses which used to be the bastions of free speech and debate now provide “Safe Spaces” to keep the ears and minds of the students from hearing alternative perspectives and, perish the thought, the Truth.

Certainly Democracy is anything but safe when “Safe Spaces” are imposed on college campuses. Further undermining public access to facts and truth are the 24-hour news programs that generally spend no more than three or four minutes on important news reports that do little to truly inform the viewers. This is further exacerbated by “debates” between guests who are not real subject matter experts but are all too often willing to spout a position on important issues without any real background or understanding about the subject that they are discussing, often turning their discussions into “food fights” that don’t inform the viewers but actually obfuscate the truth.

Such debates and discussion could be helpful to educate the viewing audience and enable them to formulate worthwhile fact-based opinions, only if the on-air participants in those segments were true experts. Real expertise would mean that these participants would qualify as expert witnesses in court proceedings about the issue of the debate they are participating in, the broadcast “court of public opinion.”

After the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, having testified before numerous congressional hearings, I was invited to participate in hundreds of news programs to discuss immigration-related issues, especially where immigration policies impacted national security and public safety.

In the beginning I was called by television news program producers who would simply call me up or send me an e-mail about the topic they planned to discuss on air, and ask if I was available and was interested in participating in the on-air discussion.

Over time, in addition to being asked if I was available to appear on the program, some producers subjected me to a “pre-interview.” If I expressed an opinion that did not march lockstep with the narrative that the producers of the program wanted to create, my invitation would be unceremoniously withdrawn, with the producer telling me that they were going to go in a “different direction” or made some other comparable excuse.

The phrase “going in another direction” was invoked by some news program producers if, for example, I drew a nexus between immigration failures and the findings of the 9/11 Commission, or otherwise raised issues that were clearly supposed to be off limits, including the way that “comprehensive immigration reform” would undermine the lives and livelihoods of Americans.

This is an insidious form of censorship because the viewers of that program have no idea that a true expert guest was prevented from appearing on the program to provide a viewpoint that went against that program’s contrived narrative.

Over time, discussions about immigration have come to involve fewer and fewer true subject-matter experts. Often those who do discuss immigration on camera have no direct knowledge or experience with immigration law enforcement.

Today, while news programs still call upon real experts to discuss certain issues, such as military officers and commandos to discuss military matters, retired police officers to discuss homicide patterns and other crime trends, or former astronauts to discuss the space program, immigration-related issues are generally discussed by pollsters, pundits, and political consultants with an occasional radio talk show host thrown in for good measure.

Furthermore, the audience may not be given any meaningful information about the true backgrounds of these “talking heads,” including how they may personally benefit from the position that they take on the issue they are debating.

In such cases the “news” program simply becomes an outlet for propaganda.

All too often the parent company of the news program may also have a vested interest in the issues being discussed. Consider, for example, how broadcast networks that have second language subsidiaries benefit from the increase in viewers who are literate in that other language. Broadcasting is a business. Airtime is expensive, and the amount of money that advertisers pay for airtime is directly proportionate to the size of the viewing audience.

What network executives would want immigration laws enforced if this could lead to a reduction in the size of the viewing audience upon which they base their charges for air time for advertisers? This could easily impact the editorial policies of the networks they run, yet this is never publicly discussed. Many viewers have no idea what constitutes objective and fair reporting.

In totalitarian regimes, political leaders and “journalists,” who are actually thinly disguised propagandists, become the arbiters of acceptable language, not only by the crime of commission, by reporting on false “facts,” controlling the language that the citizens of their countries use, but by the crime of omission, by expunging words from the public lexicon. Today this practice is becoming all too commonplace in the U.S. Leading the charge are journalists.

You are probably familiar with the rhetorical question that asks, “If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to witness its fall, does that tree make a sound?”

Perhaps the more appropriate question that should be asked is, “If a tree falls in the forest, will anyone know about it if reporters don’t report about it?” That question has a clear and obvious and resounding answer: “No!”

This is a matter of common sense. However, what happens when those decisions are not based on honest pragmatism but on political bias? What happens when journalists decide to use language that is based on their prejudice, bias, or political orientation? I am concerned that all reporters have been coerced, in one way or another, to use language that is anything but balanced and/or objective.

In Orwell’s 1984 the “Ministry of Truth” was empowered to erase problematic words from the public lexicon, deciding what words should be expunged and, in some cases, what words or terms should be created. There is a similar arbiter of language control today. This contrivance actually exists today and it reaches into all newsrooms for broadcasters and newspapers alike. It has a firm grip on the publishing industry and on language used on college classrooms across the U.S. It even reaches into corporate boardrooms and corporate and governmental headquarters across our nation. Today control of language is implemented via a number of mechanisms. One of them is the highly influential Associated Press (AP) Stylebook that is widely used in all of the above-noted venues and even more. AP actually describes its stylebook as “The Journalist’s Bible.” It could have been published by the Ministry of Truth. Stylebooks are reference books that lay out how
written words are to be punctuated and how, for example, footnotes are to be used to reference sources quoted in books and articles.

The use of stylebooks is not new, and in fact many colleges require that students use those stylebooks as a sort of “Bible” to make certain that reports and articles they write adhere to certain standards.


The AP Stylebook on ‘Illegal Immigrants’

Anyone following the immigration debate over the years has noticed the mass media’s increased usage of “undocumented workers” in reference to illegal aliens. TSC contributor Michael Cutler draws attention to the influence of political correctness on language and rhetoric when it comes to the topic of illegal immigration.

Accuracy in language usage and the stifling impact of euphemistic uniformity are legitimate concerns. The Associate Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law* is the standard reference guide for journalists. It contains useful information on capitalization, abbreviation, spelling, numerals and usage, punctuation, privacy, access to government information, defamation, and libel.

The AP Stylebook uses the term “illegal immigrant” (not “illegal alien” or “undocumented worker”). It states that illegal immigrant is “used to describe someone who has entered the country illegally or who resides in the country illegally. It is the preferred term, not illegal alien or undocumented worker. Do not use the shortened term an illegal or illegals.”

Immigration and ethnic activists have pushed sympathetic journalists to use “undocumented worker” in their reportage over the years. In December 2010, on NPR’s “Talk of the Nation,” Washington Post columnist Esther Cepeda, mentioned the negative reaction that engulfed one newspaper in California when it used “illegal immigrant.”

“The Fresno Bee in California wrote this eight-day series, this beautifully reported series about all the issues surrounding illegal immigration in California’s Central Valley. And they’re talking about it from an economic perspective, a personal perspective, a bureaucratic perspective, political perspective. And yet what garnered the headlines is that some of the people reading the pieces were just inflamed because the newspaper took the Associated Press Stylebook’s standard of calling illegal immigrants illegal immigrants. And they were just inflamed. It was like the entire conversation went off of how this issue affects a particular community. And it became all about language.”

Truth and factual accuracy should be the benchmark standard when it comes to the use of language, not political pressure from organized interest groups.


Today that widely used reference book has become the guide to censorship in that it also instructs writers about what words are acceptable and what words are not acceptable. Furthermore, the AP Stylebook itself is a “work in progress,” where words may be added or removed at the whim of its faceless editors, who receive their marching orders from others.

What is not known is who those “others” are. There is a total lack of transparency and accountability in this process that has such a profound impact on our First Amendment rights and hence our freedoms. Here is an excerpt from the online version of the AP Stylebook* that should send shivers up your spine and cause our nation’s Founding Fathers to spin in their graves:

At more than 600 pages, the AP Stylebook is widely used as a writing and editing reference in newsrooms, classrooms and corporate offices worldwide. Updated regularly since its initial publication in 1953, the AP Stylebook is a must-have reference for writers, editors, students and professionals. It provides fundamental guidelines for spelling, language, punctuation, usage and journalistic style. It is the definitive resource for journalists.

Let’s focus on how this is playing out in regard to the issue of immigration. Elimination of certain words, such as “alien,” under the guise of being “Politically Correct,” is actually Orwellian in its nature and purpose. Words are being excised from the current language in much the way that Newspeak, the language that Orwell invented for 1984, excised or replaced words to control the thoughts of the masses.

President Jimmy Carter took the first steps to start America on its journey to the implementation of Newspeak, at least when discussing immigration. Carter ordered all INS employees, under penalty of severe adverse action by the agency, to eliminate the term “illegal alien” and instead use the preferred term “Undocumented Immigrant.”

At that time I was a special agent of the INS and shared my colleagues’ rage at this edict. I began referring to illegal aliens as “Pre-Citizens.” Soon many other INS employees adopted my nomenclature. One day a Border Patrol agent called to tell me that he had arrested a “PreCitizen” who was attempting to enter the U.S. without inspection. That alien had been previously arrested and deported from New York City and his Alien File was located in the file room of the NYC District Office. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the all-encompassing body of immigration laws enforced by the DHS, the term “Alien” is described simply as “any person, not a citizen or national of the United States.” There is absolutely no insult in that definition or that term. This is certainly not the equivalent of the “N-Word.”

The elimination of “alien” from the vernacular has had an overwhelming impact on the immigration debate. Because of the elimination of that one word, over time Americans have been utterly misled about the entire issue of immigration In the decades that followed, this bit of Orwellian semantics has created a massive deception, convincing millions of Americans to believe that calls for immigration law enforcement and secure borders are based on racism and bigotry, even though our immigration laws have absolutely nothing to do with race, religion, ethnicity, or other such factors.

The deceptions and lies that have been woven around Carter’s tactics distort the immigration debate to this very day. Carter’s goal to manipulate the immigration system for political purposes did not end with his censoring the language of INS employees. Carter also ordered INS agents not to arrest illegal aliens during the Census. The word from INS Headquarters was that all people needed to be counted during the Census, irrespective of their immigration status. This was done in an effort to gerrymander Congressional Districts and votes in the Electoral College. Most illegal aliens lived in cities that tended to support Democratic Party candidates. By increasing the number of residents of those districts by encouraging illegal aliens to be counted during the Census, Democratic Party strongholds would likely gain representatives in the wake of the Census.

Consequently illegal aliens were provided with political representation even though their mere presence in the U.S. was a violation of some of our nation’s most fundamental laws.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 created a massive amnesty program for more than 3.5 million illegal aliens during the Reagan administration; however, the idea of an amnesty program began during the Carter administration.

That ill-conceived program was supposedly balanced by including in that revision of the immigration laws a provision that, for the very first time, created “employer sanctions,” a series of penalties, including criminal penalties, for employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens.

This was a typical Washington “compromise.” It created the illusion that all of the issues were being addressed. However, while it had been estimated that roughly one million illegal aliens would “emerge from the shadows” (how often do we hear that phrase today?), in reality more than 3.5 million aliens acquired lawful immigrant status.

It was widely known that a lack of resources was a major factor in the growth of the illegal alien population. Yet few additional INS agents were hired, not only to deter illegal immigration but to enforce what were referred to as employer sanctions laws that were part of IRCA, even as that new enforcement imperative requires many agents to enforce those laws. Nature’s laws are immutable. The speed of light is determined by the laws of physics and hence need not be enforced by a police officer wielding a radar gun and summons book. The speed laws that govern motor vehicle speed on our nation’s roads, however, certainly require such law enforcement efforts, if those speed laws are to be meaningful.

The same pragmatic approach needs to be applied to all legislated laws. Laws that are unenforced may as well be erased from the law books if violators of those laws are not identified, apprehended, and face consequences. The Border Patrol has always been seen as the key to immigration law enforcement efforts. While it is essential that our borders are as secure as possible, of at least equal if not greater concern is the ability to effectively enforce U.S. immigration laws.

This is the third leg of what I have come to refer to as the “immigration law enforcement tripod,” in which the Border Patrol enforces our immigration laws along our nation’s borders between ports of entry, the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Inspectors enforce our immigration laws at ports of entry, and the Special Agents and other enforcement personnel enforce our immigration laws within the interior of the U.S. However, politicians and the media portray effective immigration law enforcement as simply a matter of beefing up the Border Patrol, especially along the U.S./Mexico border, and preventing the endless entry of illegal aliens.

Over the years, all of this has convinced many people that our immigration laws are primarily designed to keep out citizens of Mexico. The U.S./Mexico border is roughly two thousand miles long and is unique in that it separates a Third World country from the most powerful and wealthiest nation on earth, the U.S., thereby creating huge economic pressure and a push/pull effect that attracts poverty-stricken Mexicans to enter the U.S. by any means possible.

The widespread official corruption and extreme violence perpetrated by the Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations (DTOs) exacerbates this already volatile situation that resulted in Mexico becoming the source country for the greatest number of illegal aliens. However, what is almost never discussed is that illegal aliens also enter the U.S. without inspection along the much longer U.S./Canadian border, stow away on ships, and then leave those ships covertly or come ashore, without detection along America’s 95,000 miles of coastline.

Furthermore, nearly half of all illegal aliens enter through America’s 325 ports of entry, perhaps by committing visa fraud or by lying to the CBP inspector about their intentions, and then, in one way or another, violate the terms of their admissions determined by the category of visas under which they were admitted. I compare the interior enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws to the necessity of outfielders in a baseball game who chase down balls in the outfield.

The following examples will inevitably occur: first, a given percentage of aliens will successfully evade detection by entering the U.S. without inspection; second, a given percentage of aliens who are lawfully admitted into the country will violate the terms of admission; third, some aliens, prior to their entry, will be convicted of serious crimes; fourth, some aliens will commit fraud in applying for various immigration benefits, such as political asylum, lawful immigrant status, and even U.S. citizenship.

Not unlike the outfielders of baseball who shag balls that are hit over the infielders’ heads or run down line drives that also wind up in the outfield, ICE enforcement personnel need to be able to address the aliens I have described above and conduct vital field investigations. Such investigations are needed to imbue the immigration system with meaningful integrity to prevent aliens from getting away with violating our laws, and also to deter even more aspiring illegal aliens and
fraudsters from attempting to violate the law.

I refer to this as “deterrence through enforcement.” For decades the entire enforcement mission has been all but ignored. President Donald Trump, with able assistance and insight from Attorney General Jeff Sessions, has called for hiring more than ten thousand additional enforcement personnel for the vital mission of enforcing our immigration laws. The vulnerability of the immigration system to incursions was clearly identified by the 9/11 Commission, yet it has been essentially ignored until President Trump took office.

The 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel detailed numerous examples of instances where terrorists made use of visa and immigration benefit fraud, including political asylum fraud, to enter and embed themselves in the U.S. See this excerpt from page 54 of the Report, “3.2 Terrorist Travel Tactics by Plot”:

Although there is evidence that some land and sea border entries (of terrorists) without inspection occurred, these conspirators mainly subverted the legal entry system by entering at airports.

In doing so, they relied on a wide variety of fraudulent documents, on aliases, and on government corruption. Because terrorist operations were not suicide missions in the early to mid-1990s, once in the United States terrorists and their supporters tried to get legal immigration status that would permit them to remain here, primarily by committing serial, or repeated, immigration fraud, by claiming political asylum, and by marrying Americans. Many of these tactics would remain largely unchanged and undetected throughout the 1990s and up to the 9/11 attack. Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.

It is remarkable that the blatantly bogus argument that immigration enforcement is about Latinos in general, and Mexican citizens in particular, persists to this very day.

By referring to all aliens as “immigrants,” as Carter demanded, it became easier to accuse anyone of being “anti-immigrant” who suggests that illegals should be arrested or that our borders should be secured against the entry of “immigrants.”

If proponents of immigration law enforcement and secure borders were to be labeled “anti-immigrant,” it would follow that their opponents should be referred to as “pro-immigrant.”

Over time this has gathered momentum and acceptance, so that today the very word “alien” causes most people to wince, not because the term “alien” is a pejorative, but because of the concerted effort of globalists to condition Americans to believe that it is a pejorative.

This is Pavlovian conditioning at its worst. Over time, perceptions become reality. The term “alien” is problematic for open-borders immigration anarchists because it provides clarity to the immigration issue, and thus runs contrary to the goals of the globalists to eradicate the distinction between not only lawful immigrants and illegal aliens, but ultimately between citizens and aliens.

This is of critical significance because under our nation’s immigration laws, U.S. citizens may never, ever, for any reason whatsoever, be prevented from entering their country. Aliens, on the other hand, have no inherent right to enter the U.S.

By eliminating this critically important distinction, a huge step has been taken to dismantle our borders, which are, in point of fact, America’s first and last line of defense. However, to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a long, long list of other organizations that represent a wide variety of industries and special interest groups, our borders are not viewed as our first and last line of defense, but as impediments to greatly increasing their wealth and power, no matter the cost to the vast majority of Americans.

Criminal aliens and violent transnational gangs from across the planet have entered the U.S. and set up shop in small towns and major cities. Terrorists have been able to enter undetected and carry out deadly attacks.

Foreign workers who take the economic bottom rung jobs have displaced American workers, particularly among America’s minority communities, preventing young Americans from ever setting foot on the economic ladder that is essential to become successful. This crisis is particularly acute among members of America’s minority communities.

This influx of Third World workers has also driven down wages. Labor is a commodity. Flooding the marketplace with any commodity generally depresses the value of that commodity.

Politicians who have accepted the thinly disguised bribes known as “campaign contributions” are quick to say that these aliens are “taking the jobs Americans won’t do,” leaving out, of course, the second part of the sentence — for the wages and working conditions that desperate illegal aliens are willing to accept.

High-tech jobs that highly educated and highly experienced Americans had been doing for decades are now being done by foreign workers, who have replaced their American counterparts through such programs as the infamous H-1B visa program, which the Trump administration is seeking to curtail to favor American and lawful immigrant workers.

Meanwhile politicians ignore the truth and claim that America has a shortage of high-tech workers, even as hundreds of thousands of American workers who have been successfully doing these jobs for years, sometimes decades, are fired and replaced by foreign workers, whom they are ordered to train if they want their severance packages.

Continuing failures to secure our borders and combat fraud in the visa process and immigration benefits program leave America vulnerable to future attacks, but for those supremely wealthy and powerful individuals, organizations, and special interest groups who benefit from these failures, those vulnerabilities are the “price of doing business.”

They are far more concerned with “head counts” to fill airliners, sports stadiums, cruise ships, universities, and work sites than body counts at the morgue. They have employed a strategy that can be thought of as a massive marketing campaign, aided and abetted by politicians who have been “bought and paid for.” Advertising campaigns involve repetition of simple slogans of usually fewer than ten words. Another tactic involves the “branding” or labeling of people who take a position that runs contrary to the narrative created by the politicians and/or “journalists.”

Today nearly every news program or publication refers to advocates for fair and effective immigration law enforcement and for secure borders as being “anti-immigrant.” On the other hand, anyone who calls for massive amnesty programs for illegal aliens, including foreign criminals, is rewarded by being referred to as “pro-immigrant.” There is, however, one unique situation where the term “Alien” is an entirely acceptable term. When the DREAM Act failed to be approved by Congress, President Obama bemoaned “the failure of the Congress to act” when it voted against terrible legislation.

In reality, Congress did act; it just did not act the way that Mr. Obama wanted it to act. Consequently he cobbled together the DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program to provide hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens who claimed that they entered the U.S. before their 16th birthdays with temporary lawful status. They had until age 31 to file their applications. With no resources and no desire to uncover immigration fraud (the 9/11 Commission identified immigration fraud as a threat to national security) there were no interviews of applicants for this immigration nor field investigations conducted of hundreds of thousands of applications.

Today such illegal aliens are commonly referred to as “DREAMERS” because they would have been the beneficiaries of the DREAM Act (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors.) The urge to somehow link a massive amnesty program to the “American Dream” was so strong that its proponents apparently decided that no one would notice the hypocrisy in this acronym, and for the most part they were completely correct.

Immigration law enforcement officers are vilified by politicians who have created “Sanctuary Cities,” openly boasting that they will not cooperate with federal agents.The use of the term “Sanctuary” to describe cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities, whose job is to secure America’s borders against illegal entry, while these cities commit violations of immigration laws is an incredible example of Newspeak. As a noun, “Sanctuary” is defined as a “place of
refuge or safety where…people automatically sought a sanctuary in time of trouble.”

How safe are the residents of a city or town that protects illegal aliens whose identities, backgrounds, and intentions are unknown and unknowable? How safe are the jobs of lawful immigrants and U.S. citizen workers, who have to compete with illegal alien workers, and who will settle for substandard wages under substandard, indeed, illegally dangerous working conditions?

One of the key sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which guides our decisions about the admissibility of aliens seeking entry, is Title 8, United States Code, Section 1182, which enumerates the categories of aliens who are to be excluded. Among these classes of aliens are those who suffer from dangerous communicable diseases or extreme mental illness.

Additionally, convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, terrorists, and spies are to be excluded, as well as aliens who would seek unlawful employment — thus displacing American workers or driving down the wages of American workers who are similarly employed — and aliens who would likely become public charges.

Note that our current immigration laws make absolutely no distinction in any way, shape, or form as to the race, religion, or ethnicity of any alien who seeks entry into or is present in the U.S.

Those who utter the overused phrase that “the U.S. is a nation of immigrants” to justify attacks on those who support effective immigration law enforcement need to be told that the difference between an immigrant and an illegal alien is comparable to the difference between a house-guest and a burglar. America is most certainly not a nation of trespassers. Finally, much has been made in the news of President Trump’s Executive Orders that were issued shortly after he took office to keep his campaign promises to protect America and Americans from international terrorists and criminal aliens. Trump’s Executive Order regarding eligibility of immigrants for admission to the U.S. is entirely consistent with the provision of Section (f) of Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182 — Inadmissible aliens. This statute has been used by previous presidents to prevent the entry of aliens whose presence would be “detrimental to the interests of the United States.” Terrorists
certainly fall into that category. Here is the relevant paragraph:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

President Trump’s Executive Order, because of the news reports, became widely known as the “Travel Ban” for citizens of “Muslim majority countries.” The Executive Order was not a travel ban and it certainly did not contain a single word about the religion of any aliens who would be impacted. In fact, Indonesia has the world’s largest Muslim population but its citizens were not impacted by that Executive Order. Citizens of other Muslim majority countries were similarly
not impacted by the Executive Order.

By comparison, when President Obama issued his immigration Executive Order known as DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), the title of that order was faithfully reported in the media. In point of fact, most Americans have never seen the actual name of the Trump Executive Order that was promulgated to protect America and Americans. The media apparently refused to provide it, perhaps, because publishing the actual name of that Executive Order would end that manufactured controversy that, because of recent court rulings, including the ruling of the Supreme Court, has weakened national security immeasurably and created a legal precedent that will hobble every future U.S. president.

“Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the U.S.” is the actual name of President Trump’s supposedly controversial Executive Order. Today “journalists” are not just content to expunge words they deem troublesome from the public lexicon. Now entire sentences such as the title of a Presidential Executive Order are to be excised, lest the public reject and oppose the globalist agenda being ever more aggressively marketed to the American public.

Back when I attended high school, too many decades ago, George Orwell’s important novel, 1984, was required reading. Today few schools require their students to read that prescient novel.

Whether you have never read 1984 or perhaps read it many years ago, I strongly suggest that you read Orwell’s classic tale of totalitarian control. It will open your eyes to the subversive tactics that are whittling away at our freedoms, thereby undermining our democratic republic.

Americans must always have access to the truth, and the truth begins with honest and clear and uncensored language. Anything less undermines the First Amendment and, with that, the very foundation of our cherished democracy.

Perhaps signs should be posted that read, “Newspeak not spoken here!”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the Fall 2017 edition of The Social Contract.

Two Steps to Drain the Swamp: Prosecute Aggressively, Slash Government

It’s become even clearer with the information made public as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s charges and plea deals that President Trump’s campaign was infected in pre-planned fashion by those trying to entrap him and his team. Goals: ensure his election loss or cripple his presidency.

The first failed, the second is ongoing.

Between a series of set-up meetings with “Russian officials” and Trump election people, including very low-level foreign policy volunteer George Papadopoulos, who just copped a plea with Mueller to presumably provide some dirt on someone, the apparent attempts to plant little scandal timebombs were everywhere. In fact, even the recommendation of Paul Manafort to be campaign chairman, apparently from the Republican establishment in D.C., turned out to be part of the poison with Manafort’s known Russian connections. (Known to the swamp — apparently not to Trump.)

This was the swamp creature reaching out to attack a potential threat. The very thing that Trump was promising to drain to the roaring cheers of thousands of Americans who know instinctively that Washington is only out for itself, was at that very moment oozing its way into his campaign with poison.

Trump was naive. His team inexperienced. But he was an outsider. Very outside. And the swamp had set the rules for a long time. Play by them and you gain. You may lose your soul, but you gain power and money and prestige. Trump doesn’t even know the rules, let alone play by them. Sure, he’s arrogant, abrasive, self-centered and politically shoots himself in the foot too much, but he actually seems to love his country — and he’s not of the swamp. He could be the man for the hour.

The revelations through Mueller’s first prosecutorial moves reveal a lot about how things operate and were operating. First, Mueller’s case looks weak. Paul Manafort is the big fish, but none of the charges have to do with Trump, the Trump campaign or collusion. So essentially, they are not part of what Mueller was even charged with investigating. They’re mostly money-laundering and related criminal activities — most all of which were happening while Mueller was head of the FBI.

Then there’s Papadopoulos, who was a twenty-something volunteer who said he was trying to ingratiate himself and curry favor by showing his chops setting up a meeting with Russians. He was a kid easily being played as a pawn by the Russians — or someone. But he was immediately rebuffed by Trump’s team. He tried again, and was rejected outright again. So all Mueller has on him is lying about his timeline when questioned by the FBI. A basic process charge against a scared kid. Again, there’s nothing there but the chance to get him to flip.

But a weak case doesn’t mean a short-lived investigation. Mueller won’t stop. He and his 16 Democrat lawyers will keep strong-arming witnesses, digging for dirt far beyond his mandate to look into Russian interference in the election. This will go on and on, and the reason is obvious. Keep Trump crippled. The second goal of the entrappers. With a swamp that includes many members of his own party, it’s not really that hard.

So, what to do? There are two broad, strategic strokes the President could pursue that would effectively start draining Washington. They’re bold, but necessary — probably the only way to actually accomplish what Trump promised.

Aggressively prosecute corruption: IRS, obstruction of justice, Uranium One, leaks

Is there any reason we shouldn’t hold Washington to high ethical standards? Why assume and allow all the dirtiness? Just the past eight years has enough corruption to keep hundreds of investigators buried in work. And these are just the ones we know about during the time the watchdog media was being a purring kitten.

Let’s start with the most recent high-profile candidates for prosecution.

 Uranium One. The Obama Administration, under then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, approved the purchase of Uranium One by a Russian company with tight ties to the Kremlin even while the same Russian interests were actively under investigation by the FBI. It was a staggering breach of national security and swampy corruption. In return — and it seems pretty obvious this was a quid pro quo — Bill Clinton was paid a cool $500,000 for one speech by a Kremlin-tied Russian bank just a few months later. This was all part of an ongoing influence-peddling scheme by Russians in the swamp, and the easiest targets when dragging a dollar and requiring influence are the Clintons.

Congressional Republicans were trying to stop the uranium transfer — the media was still purring through all of this — so Eric Holder’s Justice Department actively concealed what it knew from Congress. Team Obama stonewalled Congress for four years and reportedly threatened a whistleblower who wanted to go public. This is truly a massive scandal and considering the entire “Russian reset” from Clinton and Obama, and the ongoing strengthening of the Russian position worldwide during Obama’s term, it screams for a criminal investigation.

 Email crimes and obstructions. The controversy surrounding Hillary Clinton’s private email server is well documented. It was a blatant security breach and a violation of State Department policy. Worse, when those emails were subpoenaed by Congress, she gave Congress a tiny portion of hand-picked emails and then destroyed the rest — 33,000 emails. That was illegal, and in contempt of Congress.

This is all normal Clintonian behavior. The real swampiness comes in when there were absolutely no repercussions for her actions. Why? Because it would tank her presidential bid and implicate everyone up to and including President Obama — who it turns out was communicating with Clinton on the unsecured, private server using a synonym. As National Review points out:

“If Obama himself had been e-mailing over a non-government, non-secure system, then everyone else who had been doing it had a get-out-of-jail-free card.”

Rules, laws, justice, Congress were all flaunted, and yet everyone skated. This all looks totally prosecute-able, but only with the will to do it. And Trump has not shown that. So far.

 Weaponizing the IRS. The Obama administration went far beyond what Nixon ever did in actually targeting political opponents during President Obama’s run for a second term. An unknown number of Tea Party and other conservative political organizations — more than 400 — seeking tax-exempt status were blocked from forming and therefore raising money to oppose Obama.

Lois Lerner, the head of the IRS unit that violated Americans’ rights to equal protection under the law, was put on paid administrative leave indefinitely. After four years, the Obama FBI said there was no evidence to warrant criminal investigation. Naturally.

The Trump administration has agreed to a “very substantial” payout to these groups to settle a class-action lawsuit that was launched because the Obama DoJ wouldn’t do anything. But all this does is transfer some taxpayer money to these groups. Nothing happened to the actual wrongdoers. Lesson learned, and not the one Americans want.

Unfortunately, the Trump Administration has already said it is not going to investigate the IRS on criminal activity. Perhaps even they are afraid of the IRS, but this is a lynchpin now in protecting the swamp if IRS leaders can get away with what Lerner did, with nothing more than a very long, paid vacation. Expect more.

There are many more controversies that should be investigated, such as the illegal sale of arms by the federal government to Mexican drug and sex traffickers for reasons that have never been adequately explained. Those guns have been used to murder American law enforcement officers along the borders. No repercussions.

Then there is the transfer of hundreds of millions of dollars in literal cash, on a plane, to Iran — a known exporter of terrorism by our own definition. A good faith gesture? To terrorists? That’s not just bad “optics.” That should be criminally investigated. But it probably won’t be.

This needs to be as non-partisan as possible. We know there are dirty Republicans. They just have not had executive power recently. Go after them. And lobbyists, lawyers, Deep State leakers, anyone else who is breaking the law. Why were we looking the other way during those years Manafort was working with both Democrats and Republicans in shady activities. Because of the swamp. Everyone knew. And there are hundreds of Manaforts in D.C.

Investigate and prosecute to uphold the law and ethics and start the draining.

Slash the size of the federal government. Deeply.

The primary feeder of the swamp is the monstrous size of the federal government. Congress is currently fashioning a $3.76 trillion — trillion — budget. That’s just to run the federal government for 12 months.

Within that slushy grab-bag of spending — including another $300 billion in debt — there is room for a lot of people to skim and direct money to their pet projects, for re-election projects, for friends and benefactors and for themselves.

But the eye-boggling spending is really only part of the feeding mechanism. The regulatory state is a crushing colossus on Americans, American businesses and state and local governments. Consider just the number of major departments and what they regulate in everyday life (excluding the Department of Defense, which runs our military and does not regulate Americans.)

  • Department of Agriculture
  • Department of Commerce
  • Department of Education
  • Department of Energy
  • Department of Health and Human Services
  • Department of Homeland Security
  • Department of Housing and Urban Development
  • Department of the Interior
  • Department of Justice
  • Department of Labor
  • Department of State
  • Department of Transportation
  • Department of the Treasury
  • Department of Veterans Affairs

There are, of course, hundreds of smaller elements of the federal government fitted with their own armies of overseers. Additionally, here are some of the agencies that directly impact Americans’ lives.

  • Central Intelligence Agency
  • Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
  • Environmental Protection Agency
  • Federal Communications Commission
  • Federal Elections Commission
  • Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
  • Federal Reserve Board
  • Federal Trade Commission
  • General Services Administration
  • International Trade Commission
  • National Labor Relations Board
  • National Transportation Safety Board
  • National Science Foundation
  • Securities and Exchange Commission
  • Selective Service Commission
  • Small Business Administration
  • United States Postal Service

And, not to be forgotten, the Internal Revenue Service. Here is a daunting and depressing list of all of the federal government departments and agencies.

All told, about 2.1 million federal government civilian employees oversee the regulatory behemoth of the federal government. This number excludes about 760,000 military members. So more than 2 million bureaucrats of some sort spend their full-time days controlling Americans’ daily activities.

It’s nearly impossible to overstate the power of the swamp in this regulatory morass. The most powerful corporations in the country, from Google to Microsoft to Exxon to General Motors humbly go hat-in-hand to meet with regulators who can create havoc in their industries and their companies, or can provide protection against competitors. There are plenty of honest bureaucrats trying to do a good job in the swamp, but the inherent features of the place ensure there will be ample players who are out to maximize their own desires. And that requires protecting the means to those desires.

Looking at the list of departments and agencies, wholesale elimination of departments such as Education, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development would in all likelihood have a net benefit to Americans in freeing them up and pushing any actually necessary regulatory control to the more local levels — where it should be. Shouldn’t your local, fairly responsive School Board be in charge of education over distant bureaucratic, unaccountable overseers?

That would eliminate tens of thousands of employees and hundreds of billions of dollars and make Americans freer in the process. And it would weaken the power of the swamp creature. Weakening that feeder system makes it less attractive and could potentially start a downward spiral in swampiness.

Whether Trump would ever undertake such a degree of draining is not clear. So far, he’s been great on deregulation and adequate on government growth. But this requires a far more revolutionary degree of action.

So is the swamp really drainable?

Yes. But the scope of the challenge is clear.

Trump is as constitutionally capable as anyone in that he is not part of the swamp, refuses to change who he is and play by its rules and is almost fearless on the attack. That is the right temperament.

And he clearly has the mandate. “Drain the swamp!” was a rallying cry that became louder than “Build the wall!” and “Lock her up!” Because drainage would more easily lead to the other issues being accomplished.

But it’s not at all clear that Trump has a real vision for it. He recognizes the problem. But he would need to be laser-focused with a long-term strategy, and his opponents are learning how to distract him. Plus, is Congress really in any way capable of slashing the federal government? Is Jeff Sessions really going to lead the charge on aggressive prosecutions?

Long shots, to be generous. But that is the pathway to draining the swamp. And the only one. Anything else is just campaign rhetoric.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act.

VIDEO: U.S. Will Direct Humanitarian Programs in the Middle East — No More UN Funding

Funding that vile international body (driven largely by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation) is as good as funding jihad, Jew-hatred, creed apartheid, gender apartheid and sharia worldwide. The OIC is made up of 56 Muslim countries and the terrorist Palestinian Authority. The OIC, Bat Ye’or explains, is nothing less than a “would-be, universal caliphate.” It might look different from the caliphates of the Ottomans, Fatimids, and Abbasids. It might resemble, instead, a thoroughly modern trans-national bureaucracy. But, already, the OIC exercises significant power through the United Nations, and through the European Union, which has been eager to accommodate the OIC while simultaneously endowing the U.N. with increasing authority for global governance. Among the other organizations that Bat Ye’or says are doing the OIC’s bidding are the U.N. Alliance of Civilizations, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, and the European Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation (PAEAC).

This is long overdue and most welcome. From the outset the UN set out to fail. They have failed the tortured, the oppressed, the poor, in incalculable ways. The graft and corruption is endemic to the institution Those who contribute little or nothing have enormous say.

The alternative? A different organization. “The United Democratic Nations,” an organization of free nations. Shared values. This seems to be one of the malignancies of the UN. How can democracies and dictatorships co-exist in a world body successfully. They can’t. And so immediately the organization is/was destined to fail. The United Nations has been worse than ineffective. It has been outright complicit.

The world has changed a great deal from the time of the United Nations birth in 1945, and so has the United Nations. The United Nations was founded in the wake of the holocaust. The objective was to insure it never happen again. Ironically, it seems to exist now only to insure that it does. Sixty years ago democracies, both nascent and well established, comprised the majority of the founding nations of the UN. The members of the General Assembly were strategically aligned primarily along what would become the lines of the Cold War. America was confident that the UN would be an organization which would work in tandem with American national interests in promoting the welfare of humankind and the basic rights of every human spirit.

We were wrong.

MIKE PENCE: U.S. WILL DIRECT HUMANITARIAN PROGRAMS IN THE MIDDLE EAST; NO MORE U.N. FUNDING

Breitbart, October 28, 2017:

VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE TOLD CHRISTIAN LEADERS FROM THE MIDDLE EAST GATHERED IN THE NATION’S CAPITAL FOR THE ANNUAL IN DEFENSE OF CHRISTIANS SUMMIT ON WEDNESDAY THAT PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP HAS DIRECTED THE U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT TO STOP RELYING ON THE UNITED NATIONS TO PROVIDE HUMANITARIAN AID TO PERSECUTED RELIGIOUS MINORITIES IN THE REGION.

“My friends, those days are over,” Pence said, adding that the Obama administration paid more than one billion dollars for humanitarian aid, with the majority of the funding funneled through the U.N.

“Yet the United Nations has too often failed to help the most vulnerable communities, especially religious minorities,” Pence said. “The result has been that countless people continue to suffer and struggle needlessly.”

Pence called it a “sad reality” that the main U.N. presence in terror-ridden places like Syria and Iraq is their flag posted on abandoned buildings in places where persecuted Christians are not even present.

“And while faith-based groups with proven track records and deep roots in these communities are more than willing to assist, the United Nations too often denies their funding requests,” Pence said.

“Our fellow Christians and all who are persecuted in the Middle East should not have to rely on multinational institutions when America can help them directly,” Pence said, announcing Trump’s order to the State Department to “stop funding ineffective relief efforts at the United Nations.”

“And from this day forward, America will provide support directly to persecuted communities through USAID,” Pence said.

“We will no longer rely on the United Nations alone to assist persecuted Christians and minorities in the wake of genocide and the atrocities of terrorist groups,” Pence said. “The United States will work hand-in-hand from this day forward with faith-based groups and private organizations to help those who are persecuted for their faith.”

“This is the moment,” Pence said. “Now is the time. And America will support these people in their hour of need.”

Aside from making the well-received announcement about the U.N. and the U.S.’s humanitarian efforts going forward, Pence also said that he and the president understand the enemy that has to be defeated.

RELATED ARTICLE: Vice President Mike Pence speaks at World Summit in Defense of Persecuted Christians – White House

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Geller Report.

Pamela Geller’s shocking new book, “FATWA: HUNTED IN AMERICA” is now available on Amazon. It’s Geller’s tell all, her story – and it’s every story – it’s what happens when you stand for freedom today. Buy it. Now. Here.

Trump Is Quietly Deregulating All the Things

And the media is staying silent.

Brittany Hunter

by  Brittany Hunter

Most people alive in America today have probably never had the experience of sending a telegram. There are a host of reasons for this, the main one being that the telegram stopped being fashionable decades ago as burgeoning technology replaced its use in the modern world. The very last Western Union telegram was sent 11 years ago.

Over a decade too late, the FCC has finally decided to end burdensome regulations that stifled telegraph technology. As Reuters reported:

AT&T Inc, originally known as the American Telephone and Telegraph Company, in 2013 lamented the FCC’s failure to formally stop enforcing some telegraph rules.

‘Regulations have a tendency to persist long after they outlived any usefulness and it takes real focus and effort to ultimately remove them from the books even when everyone agrees that it is the common sense thing to do,’ the company said.”

Regulations are far easier to create than they are to dismantle. As Milton Friedman said, “Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.” Yet lately, there has been an undeniable trend of repealing these types of regulations, the likes of which America hasn’t seen since the Reagan Administration. And in the spirit of giving credit where credit is due, this current regulatory rollback is due largely to President Donald Trump.

Setting a New Record

Ronald Reagan left many legacies during his duration in the White House. And while many were less than praiseworthy—the War on Drugs springs to mind—he did accomplish some deregulation.

In fact, during the Reagan presidency, both the Federal Register and federal regulations decreased by more than one-third. And as impressive as this record surely was, it’s already been broken by Donald Trump.

Upon taking office, Donald Trump signed an executive order telling federal agencies that they must cut two existing regulations for each new regulation proposed. Contained within this executive order was the demand that each federal agency create a task force with the explicit purpose of finding regulations worth slashing. This act was intended to help the newly sworn-in president reach his promise of cutting 70 percent of all federal regulations.

While the talk of regulatory cuts is typical red meat rhetoric, the left was obviously less than pleased with this executive order. A coalition of left-leaning organizations even joined together in February and sued Trump on the grounds that his executive order would potentially “block or force the repeal of regulations needed to protect health, safety, and the environment, across a broad range of topics – from automobile safety, to occupational health, to air pollution, to endangered species.” But the lawsuit did not scare Trump away from his objective.

When Obama had been in office as long as Trump currently has, regulations were 28 percent higher. But since taking office, Trump has repealed hundreds of these regulations.

And when it comes to regulations in general, the score speaks for itself. During the same point of time of their respective presidencies, Obama’s regulatory tally was at 1,737 while Trump’s is 1,241. And while Reagan’s own regulatory cuts were admirable, they still don’t compare with Trump’s if you judge them by the same timeframe.

Earlier this October, Trump announced his plans to further cut taxes along with red tape that negatively impacts both businesses and consumers. According to CEI, the current level of federal regulatory burdens have amounted to nearly $2 trillion. And while business owners may pay the initial costs, it will inevitably trickle down to the consumer. When overhead costs are raised on entrepreneurs, that cost must must be made up for somewhere. And as CEI also estimates, these hidden costs can account for about $15,000 per household in any given year.

As the 2017 fiscal year came to a close this month, the White House also released its initiative to cut more red tape to jumpstart the economy. Obviously, the “do nothing” method is a far cry from Obama’s overbearing regulatory intervention.

However, while this rhetoric is pleasing to much of the American public, which is fed up after almost a decade of a stagnating economy, Congress has yet to act on any substantial reform in either the House or the Senate.

Still, the White House has continued its efforts to encourage regulatory relief by pushing for three specific reform efforts, listed by CEI’s Clyde Wayne Crews as follows:

  1. Trump’s January executive order requiring agencies to eliminate at least two rules for every new regulation adopted, and that they ensure net new regulatory costs of zero;
  2. A sweeping  Reorganization Executive Order that requires the Office of Management and Budget to submit a plan aimed at streamlining and reducing the size of the administrative state generally. This plan will set the tone for Trump’s budget proposal next year.
  3. memorandum from the new Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) administrator Neomi Rao directing agencies, for the first time as far as I can tell, to propose an overall incremental regulatory cost allowance for the agency in the new edition of their “Unified Agenda” on regulations. This report will appear in the fall. Prior editions, since the 1980s, would label rules as “economically significant,” but never has there been such a “regulatory budget.” Rao says, “OMB expects that each agency will propose a net reduction in total incremental regulatory costs for FY 2018.”

But what is, perhaps most interesting is how silent the media has been. Usually, the media doesn’t miss an opportunity to criticize the president, making it all the more strange that these massive regulation rollbacks have managed to slip under the radar.

The Importance of Economic Liberty

Without economic liberty there can be no general freedom.

Just as it is important to give credit where credit is due, it is also important to acknowledge that excelling in one area does not negate one’s terrible behavior in another. The appointment of Jeff Sessions by itself is enough of a reason to be wary of Trump. Especially given Sessions’ obsession with reigniting the drug war in a time when public opinion is overwhelmingly trending in the opposite direction. Though in many capacities this makes one of Trump’s weak points similar to Reagan’s.

And the Sessions issue is just one of many. Diplomacy also appears to be one of Trump’s weak points. Taunting a world leader who is threatening to use nuclear arms against your country may not be the wisest idea, but that hasn’t stopped Trump from referring to Kim Jong Un as “Rocket Man” at the height of tensions. And in general, President Trump’s hawkish foreign policy has made a mockery of candidate Trump’s non-interventionist rhetoric.

But increasing economic freedom is no small feat. If there is any doubt of this, just look how long it took to deregulate the telegraph industry. Without economic liberty there can be no general freedom, which is precisely why Trump’s pushback against the regulatory state is so important.

Our modern economy has no doubt been burdened by regulations that have held back the market and prevented others from even entering the workforce. So as hard as Trump is to stomach most of the time, these regulatory scale-backs are cause for celebration.

Brittany Hunter

Brittany Hunter

Brittany Hunter is an associate editor at FEE. Brittany studied political science at Utah Valley University with a minor in Constitutional studies.

VIDEO: Muslim Migrant Named ‘Sword of Allah’ Slaughters in New York City, Again!

Multiple news outlets have identified the man who killed 8 people and injuring 11 as Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov, 29, of Tampa, Florida. Sayfullo is “sword of Allah” in Arabic. Saipov is a Muslim migrant from Uzbekistan who came here, according to sources, under a diversity visa issued by the Obama administration in 2010. According to Wikipedia:

Islam is by far the dominant religion in Uzbekistan, as Muslims constitute 79% of the population while 5% of the population follow Russian Orthodox Christianity, 16% other religious and non-religious.

Here is a video of the attack published by the Wall Street Journal (WARNING some images are disturbing):

According to Fox News reporter Nichole Darrah:

The suspect, identified as Sayfullo Saipov, 29, is originally from Uzbekistan and is not a U.S. citizen, federal law enforcement sources have confirmed to Fox News.

[ … ]

Saipov had handwritten notes pledging his loyalty to the Islamic State terror network and shouted “Allahu akbar” (“God is great”) after the crash, law enforcement officials told Fox News.

[ … ]

The suspect had a green card, a source told Fox News. Saipov came to the U.S. in 2010, and, according to the Associated Press, has a Florida driver’s license but was said to be living in Paterson, N.J.

Remedial ISIS Tutorial Steers Jihadists Toward Heavier, Deadlier Truck Attacks.

Tampa apartment complex of Sayfullo Saipov.

After the attack President Trump tweeted that he was asking all federal agencies to step up their extreme vetting procedures. The President tweeted:

looks like another attack by a very sick and deranged person NOT IN THE U.S.A.!

We must not allow ISIS to return, or enter, our country after defeating them in the Middle East and elsewhere. Enough!

After being briefed by Florida law enforcement Governor Rick Scott released this statement:

I am absolutely disgusted by the act of terror that occurred in Manhattan today. All of Florida is praying for the victims, their families and our brave law enforcement and first responders.”

The United West noted that recently Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi, one of the top Islamic scholars in the world issued a FATWA, an Islamic religious ruling according to Shariah law, about Halloween. Dr. Siddiqi, former president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), stated:

Halloween is an old pagan holiday of the witches and the dead. Later some Christians tried to Christianize it by calling it “All Saints Day“. However there are still many Christians who resent it and consider it a bad holiday. Some of them even call it a “helliday.”

Whether Christians accept it or not, we Muslims should not accept this holiday. It is meaningless. Wearing costumes, going tricking and treating and decorating houses with witches, spider nets and wasting so much pumpkins, etc., are all repugnant things.

It is strange to see reasonable people acting as weirdo and doing foolish things. It is also becoming quite dangerous nowadays. Some people really act like monsters and witches. Muslims should not participate in this holiday.

Allah Almighty knows best.

SOURCE – ABOUT ISLAM

This soldier of Allah is not a lone wolf, he is a known wolf. The ideology he follows, where he came from, how he looks, his name, his migrant status all are indicators that he, and those like him, are a clear and present danger to the United States of America.

This soldier of Allah was driven by his Islamic beliefs to slaughter so as to strike fear in the hearts of every American. As John Michael Chambers wrote, “The opposite of love is not hate, it is fear.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Feds interviewed accused NYC truck attacker in 2015 about possible terror ties

What Kind of Vetting Would Prevent Another NYC Terror Attack

VIDEO: New York City IG — De Blasio Stopped Anti-Terrorism Police Procedures, ‘Caved Into Political Correctness’

RELATED VIDEO: Discussion with Dr. Bill Warner on New York City jihad attack.

Inspectors Stumble on Ghoulish Scene at Abortion Chain

In the abortion debate, there aren’t many areas where the two sides agree. But shouldn’t women’s safety be one of them? Whole Woman’s Health doesn’t think so, and its latest inspection report proves it. The company’s network of abortion centers is making headlines in Texas for subjecting mothers to third-world conditions that show just how little respect the industry has for the women it claims to protect.

Over a six-year period, the Texas Department of State Health Services stumbled on one horrifying scene after another in the group’s chain of facilities. Despite raking in millions from its abortion business, Whole Women’s Health didn’t spend any of it ensuring that women had a safe or clean experience. They were grisly scenes for investigators, who, unfortunately, are used to the disgusting conditions of many abortion businesses. Health workers found dirty and rusty equipment, tools that had been used on multiple patients without being disinfected, bloody suction machines, and staff that weren’t trained or licensed for the procedures they were performing.

“A 2016 report on the McAllen, Texas facility notes a counter so warped it ‘was no longer a wipeable surface, which could harbor bacteria and infectious matter.’ The reports also show cracks, rips, and tears on exam tables’ covers” and other holes that inspectors thought rodents were using to enter the facility, the Washington Free Beacon reports. Lethal prescriptions in one of the Austin locations were completely unaccounted for, and a Beaumont center didn’t even have a registered nurse on staff — a blatant violation of Texas law.

As FRC’s Arina Grossu points out, this is what happens when restaurants and tanning salons are more closely regulated than the abortion industry. “Anyone who cares about women’s health and safety should want abortion facilities to be frequently inspected, no matter what their position is on abortion… [J]ust because it has to do with a hot-button topic doesn’t mean that the abortion industry should get a free pass.”

Like most of the industry, groups like Whole Women’s Health say they care about women but refuse to prove it with common-sense standards. Other abortion tycoons, like Planned Parenthood, refuse to spare the money to upgrade their systems and instead blow millions of dollars in court fighting to keep their business’s shoddy standards in place.

While the CEO of Whole Women’s Health has insisted “there is no safety problem around abortion in Texas,” her own network is exposing mothers to an environment most people wouldn’t want their pets in. Unfortunately, these are the effects of the gradual dulling of the senses for people in the abortion industry. If you destroy innocent lives day in and day out, how could you possibly care about the condition of patients? In the end, the only way to justify taking lives is to become calloused to them.

According to Texas officials, agents have flagged and cited this same company for violating safety standards, “some dozens of times.” It’s time for Washington stop running when the Left yells about a “war on women” and start putting the responsibility for this war where it belongs: on the abortion industry and the pandering politicians who do their bidding.


Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.


Also in the October 31 Washington Update:

Trans Ruling Booed by Legal Experts

Columnist: ‘If you want to understand why people like Trump, watch VVS’

The Who and the What of Behavior: The Reality Revolution

The ability to distinguish between fact (objective reality) and fiction (subjective reality) is an essential survival skill.

Children are easily controlled because they live in the world of feelings and subjective reality. They have not been taught the critical thinking skills required to survive as adults in the world of objective reality.

Civil society and the laws that govern it are based on the acceptance of objective reality. The idea of blind justice is foundational because it evaluates the WHAT of behavior not the WHO. This is an extremely important distinction because it separates childish feelings that focus on the WHO of behavior from adult rational thinking that focuses on the WHAT. This is how it works.

Thought precedes behavior.

If a society can be pressured to remain in eternal childhood they never progress past the WHO of behavior – they remain stuck in the emotional world of childhood accepting what they are told without the critical thinking skills to question the information – the WHAT. They are the unaware compliant population that Hillary Clinton idealized.

The current left-wing liberal progressive (really regressive) identity politics focuses on the WHO of behavior. If you are a member of the group your behavior is defended no matter how anti-social or criminal it is because the metric is the childish WHO of behavior and not the WHAT.

Leftists are at war with America. The movement to indoctrinate America toward the subjective reality of childhood and away from the objective reality of adulthood is a weapon of war. Progressives are determined to infantilize society in an effort to destroy American democracy and replace it with socialism. Obama’s lawless “resistance” movement of identity politics seeks to topple the government of President Trump.

Identity politics are tribal. Like children, tribalism evaluates behavior according to WHO not WHAT is being done. Consider the matter of “Russian collusion” – a prime example of identity politics focusing on the WHO not the WHAT of behavior. Hillary and the DNC (the WHO) commission a fake dossier designed to destroy Trump with false accusations of collusion that deflect attention away from Hillary’s real collusion (the WHAT). The colluding mainstream media embraced the dossier’s false claims and echoed them incessantly.

But it was Hillary and her cronies who actually colluded with Russia on the Uranium One deal that transferred 20% of America’s uranium to Russia – that is the WHAT of the matter. The Obama administration facilitated the anti-American Uranium One deal, but as soon as their complicity was exposed the Leftist media echo chamber went suspiciously silent. Social media, Facebook, Twitter picked up the slack and protected their own by manipulating the search engines, censoring content, and closing down oppositional accounts. The tribal identity politics of the Left are protecting the Clintons, Obama, Holder, Comey, Mueller, Rosenstein, McCabe, and every other person involved from the blind justice and public scrutiny that will determine WHAT they did.

The Leftist war against America is an information war that is pressuring the public to become unaware and compliant – to remain children without the information to make informed decisions about their future. Childhood is the position of powerlessness. A public who only evaluates the WHO of behavior and ignores the WHAT will remain the eternal victims that their identity politics exploit.

From kindergarten through college young Americans are being encouraged to remain perpetual children. In primary school they are disingenuously told they are all butterflies (subjective reality). Individual achievement is discouraged and collectivism is encouraged. By the time they reach college they are so fragile these butterflies require safe spaces and Play-Doh to cope with opposing ideas. This diabolical invitation to remain a nation of children is a sinister campaign to force the public into subjective reality where they will remain unaware, compliant, and easily controlled. A childish dependent population is precisely what the Left needs to destroy American democracy and replace it with socialism.

America is at a crossroads and whoever prevails in the ruthless Leftist information war will determine our future. Blind justice evaluates behavior according to WHAT is being done not WHO is doing it which insures that no one is above the law. Blind justice preserves our democracy and is our guarantee of freedom against tyranny. Freedom is the casualty when the blindfolds come off and the tribal norms of identity politics take over.

This is a battle that must be won. We must demand growth and a commitment to objective reality in our nascent Reality Revolution. We must examine the WHAT of behavior and oppose the Leftist war against America that focuses on the WHO. We must commit ourselves to adulthood and encourage critical thinking skills to oppose the malevolent Leftist plan to keep Americans stuck in childhood. Socialism is not a gift it is the theft of individual freedom.

Our Reality Revolution must reject the Leftist offer to remain unaware, compliant, eternal children. Only fully actualized aware adults insistent upon transparency and the accurate facts of objective reality have the power to oppose this attack on America. We must reject subjective reality, identity politics, and tribalism. We must reject perpetual victimhood and powerlessness. We must embrace adulthood and grow up.

EDITORS NOTE: This column first appeared in the Goudsmit Pundicity.

VIDEO: Understanding the Manafort Indictment

Below, is a special edition of “Inside Judicial Watch,” with Carter Clews, JW director of communications, and Carter sat down with Judicial Watch Director of Public Affairs Jill Farrell to discuss the recent indictment of Trump associate Paul Manafort in the ongoing Trump/Russia investigation. Then, Jill provides some background on the Uranium One scandal involving Hillary Clinton and the Russians as well as the infamous Trump dossier.

RELATED VIDEO: Rep. Trent Franks Delivers Speech On House Floor on Mueller/Uranium One

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Manafort Indictment: Mueller’s charges relate to money-laundering cash from Ukraine. – Wall Street Journal

The Papadopoulos plea – Powerline

VIDEO: Obama for America paid law firm funding Fusion GPS – Fox News

Five things to know about the Manafort indictment

The Evil Empire of Global Terrorism

The recent arguments about the Trump Dossier are not able to bring any credible solution without a deep knowledge of Russian Intelligence. Absence of that subject is also causing a division within the Republican Party itself. For thirty years our elitist leaders in the Democrat Party and the Republican establishment have been exercising erroneous foreign policy, providing time and space for our enemies to harm us and ignoring both the agenda of Socialist ideology and a militant force called the KGB. As a result of that, America and Western civilization are facing a mortal threat today, in October 2017.

Many years ago, writing about our leaders, I compared medicine with world politics. Today that analogy can be seen even more clearly than ever. When a medical doctor treats a patient, he or she fights against a disease and its causes. As a rule, after finding the causes a doctor deals with the disease. That way the patient is cured, his body healed. These physicians are knowledgeable professionals with experience to make a right diagnosis. However, unlike the latter specialists, the medical profession has another type of doctor—they treat the symptoms of the diseases. In that case the patient will never be cured and the treatment will never end nor bring healing.

This example is similar to politicians at the world stage—the current leaders of Western civilization. At this time of war, while we are fighting terrorists, knowledge and the ability to arrive at the right diagnosis is only in identifying the enemy. Doing that, we have the assurance of success and victory in the war. In my column The KGB’s Roots and Pedigrees, October 19, 2017, I have tried to shine light on the main actor in this war who is working undercover—the KGB. Moreover, I have been writing about WW III, waged against Western civilization for at least twenty-five years to show you the actual diagnosis.

Look at the numerous subjects and topics discussed by the politicians and the Media in 2017: North Korea, the Middle East, cultural decline in America, Obama’s stagnant economy, degraded educational system, ‘Climate Change,’ politicization of Intel and media, Niger, and so on. All of these are the symptoms of the disease, the disease itself is the ideology of Soviet Socialism, a system I have named Soviet Fascism. Russia is solely responsible for the human tragedies in the world, especially in the Middle East. That is the reason I have written about the KGB—the militant Russian force of expansion. This force is and has always been the main source of ongoing WW III, an asymmetrical war against Western civilization, waged in many different fronts for the last Hundred Years…

Yes, it has been going on for the last hundred years and our Academia has kept silent, not exposing the fraud of Socialist theory. November 7, 2017 is a centennial of the Socialist Revolution in Russia and creation of the militant force, known to you as the KGB. The agenda of the revolution was identified as the war against Capitalism and the Free Market economy to create a Socialist State and Socialist economy. The KGB is a militant force behind the Tsar-ruler to achieve the agenda. I dedicated to the topic my four books and over seventy articles, describing WW III as “Recruitments, Infiltration, Drugs and Assassinations.” Regrettably our Intel has been constantly suppressing the information about my writings. The result you see today, in October 2017, when new bombshells are striking our psyche every day.

Knowledge is Power

When I entered the Jewish Community Center Women’s Health Club on September 11, 2001, a young woman with horror on her face ran up to me, yelling, “A terrible accident occurred; a plane just hit a tower of the World Trade Center!”  Though I haven’t heard anything about the accident, it took me only a second to answer, “It’s not an accident; it’s a terrorist act!”  She looked at me as if I came from another planet. She did not know the evil, the merchant of death and destruction. I did. The difference between us was knowledge. She did not know Soviet Fascism.  I did.

Do you really believe that the 9/11 terror attack of the twenty-first century came from Afghanistan?  I do not.  Do you think that the spread of terrorism across the globe to sixty countries also came from the Taliban or al-Qaeda?  No chance. We are in the historic struggle of the twenty-first century against criminals of the twentieth century. The young girl I have mentioned was a nurse, she had never been interested in politics and did not know the genesis of the KGB. Senator Corker is responsible for the Senate dealing with foreign policy today and he put on hold dozens of candidates for ambassadorship, including country of Niger. He called himself a professional when criticizing the President. I think, this is a result of his ill-informed mediocracy driven by ambitions. Unfortunately, he is not alone. The Never Trump crowd shares his animosity along with the same questionable qualifications in this dangerous time.

The importance of the embassy in Niger and other African countries is obvious for those who have been engaged in policy and politics. Africa was a Soviet target for many years at the end of WW II. African natural resources were the main objective of the Soviets: they had begun political inculcation of the tribe’s leaders. Several times in my writings I described Africa as a casualty of Soviet Fascism, which infiltrated the continent with its tribalism to mold the tribes’ leaders. Niger has oil. Petroleum industry in Niger has a long history of petroleum exploration dating back to the 1970s: that means the Russian KGB and All-Shabbat were there and the presence of our ambassador in Niger was imperative to help our soldiers there. For your information: all terrorist groups have a structural and ideological affiliation with Russian Intel.

Do you remember the Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow? It was the place where students from all inhabited continents had “studied” under the KGB’s supervision. The Soviet molding of the “student-leaders” later resulted in the bloody confrontations in Africa and around the world. The Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow has changed its name to the People’s Friendship University of Russia, but the substance and agenda stay the same—inculcation in Communist/Socialist tenets.

“In addition to Arabs, the Lumumba University was established in Moscow in the ’60s to prepare young haters of American capitalism, predominantly of dark-colored men from Africa, Middle East, and Asia.  Therefore, we are presently facing professional terrorism with enormous scale globally, which uses Stalin’s tactics and strategy conducted by former Moscow “students.”  What is Happening to America? The Hidden Truth of Global Destruction, Xlibris, 2012.

I have written this page on Senator Corker for a reason—National Security is the crux of the matter for me. And there are three inextricable connections to the terms: Russia, Terrorism, and dark-colored men. Politicians must know this connection. In a preceding column, I promised to write about Blacks vs. Whites. I will, under the condition that you first read a pamphlet composed by the KGB in the 1960s titled The Black Liberation Coordinating Committee’s Message to the Black Movement: A Political Statement from the Black Underground.

The Clinton Mafia

Sabotage in a field of national security is the most threatening thing. I didn’t like Bill Clinton since I have first saw him among a group of the Russian youngsters, organized by the KGB. Then, I found out that Clinton lived in a family of KGB members in Moscow in the 1970s. All of that gave me a real picture of the man. Later it was during the run up to the election, where a suspicious threat to Ross Perrot made Bill Clinton the U.S. President in 1992. His connection with Russia has always alarmed me. His presidency just doubled my dislike of him, as an enormous harm had been done to America.

Considering the connection of Russia to terrorism, there is another event that deserves attention and deep thinking about the Clinton Mafia. Do you remember Monica’s “blue dress?” I have found an interesting chronology connected to the “blue dress” in 1998. The FBI asked for Clinton’s blood sample to compare it with the sperm’s stain on the “blue dress,” three days later the terrorists committed two tragic blasts of American Embassies in Africa. Don’t tell me about the coincidences in life. It was the “work” of the Russian connection to divert attention from Clinton and “the blue dress.”

As usual our Intel was missing the elephant in the global room and we are paying a dear price for neglecting to do deep research into the connection between Russia and the Clinton Foundation (Clinton Global Initiative). I haven’t changed my mind – – the Foundation has been the eyes and ears of the KGB and as such, Clinton’s behavior is perhaps the answer to many of the questions related to our time, when the Democrats actually colluded with Russian intelligence on the Steele Dossier. Look at the leaders of our Intel: Brennon was voting for a communist candidate a couple of years ago, and then he said that the investigation on Trump/Russia collusion was based on the Dossier, and so said Clapper. Both relied on a typical KGB’s disinformation and manufactured fiction. Our national security and lives of millions Americans is in the hand of those incompetent few. We have massive intelligence failure—all seventeen agencies missed the elephant in the global room.

I’d like to remind you also about an existing myth that the Clinton’s presidency had brought an economic boom to America. Yes, it is a myth. There were two main factors that determined prosperity during the Clinton presidency: The first was the Congress, especially the House, led by Newt Gingrich. The second was the ideological climate created by the Reagan presidency – the continuation of his ideas of free market capitalism and personal liberty. Yes, it is a myth about the Clinton presidency, you have not yet realized how much harm he has done to our country. That is the reason, I am now talking about a deep investigation of his presidency, especially Waco, where I can be helpful. Retired head of the FBI agreed with me. Please, listen to him:

Bill Clinton in cahoots with Russia left us with an aggressive Stalinist North Korea. An emerging nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula will rise to the top of the Trump’s agenda, as North Korea shows no signs of slowing or stopping its attempts to achieve an effective nuclear deterrent. She will never surrender, having two communist patrons like Russia and China (the ultimate might of North Korea). To grasp this truth you have to know Stalinism and its ideology of Soviet Fascism. Don’t be fooled by crony capitalism in Russia and China–it is a measure to survive. Remember, all three share the same ideology of Soviet Fascism, all three are the countries with a State-controlled economy. As long as North Korea has those two patrons, its political future is relatively stable—nobody wants a nuclear war…

Clinton shaped the media apparatus a-la the Soviet propaganda machine, serving a one-party system. Don’t expect objectivity from our media. The ideology of Soviet Fascism is working through KGB operatives across the world to harm and damage Western civilization. Who do you think is behind California and Catalonia to separate from their respective countries and harm Western civilization? What would you say if I tell you that Fast and Furious in America was run by the KGB? The Clinton connection with the Podesta brothers is very troubling for me—Tony Podesta was working in British Petroleum, when the terrorist act occurred on the Gulf of Mexico… Do you see the connection? Knowledge is power!

Obama/Putin Joint Venture

Clinton is not the only one I suspect.  For the last nine years I am writing about Obama/Putin Joint Venture–a quite successful attempt to implement Soviet Socialism in America. Following Lenin’s advice, Obama implemented Socialist Obamacare, which had nothing to do with health: it was a pure redistribution of wealth.  With pleasure Obama signed Uranium One deal, giving controlling interest in our uranium to Russia. Today, the Deep State represents the Obama/Putin Joint Venture, continuing the DNC un-American activities. In my book Socialist Lies: From Stalin to the Clintons, Obamas, and Sanders, Xlibris, 2016, I described this Joint Venture in detail. The book is a catalog of Obama’s activities against American interests. Yet, I’d like to repeat the list of its military collaboration, probably, you have never heard about it.

A list of military collaborations between the U.S. and Russia executed under the Obama/Putin joint venture:

  1. Killing of bin-Laden
  2. Invasion of Libya, conspiracy of Obama, Putin, and French Pres. Sarkozy.
  3. Benghazi, murder of the U.S. ambassador Stevens.
  4. “On 6 August 2011, a U.S. Boeing CH-47 Chinook military helicopter was shot down while transporting a quick reaction force attempting to reinforce an engaged unit of Army Rangers in Wardak province, west of Kabul, Afghanistan. The resulting crash killed all 38 people on board—25 American specialists … Fifteen of the Navy SEALs that were killed were members of the Naval… “
  5. Desertion of Bergholt to release five Taliban’s commanders.

If thoroughly investigated, the listed events will open up a huge panorama of activities by the DNC leadership directed against the American Republic. We can do it today with the Trump new FBI and CIA. We can and should start investigating all five cases presented by me to save America the Beautiful. The Trump dossier is a typical fabrication-product of Putin’s KGB. Putin hates America and President Trump. Putin never helped Trump in the election 2016. Of course, Putin tried to influence our election, yet, he is doing it predominantly through the people who had been already recruited…The upcoming investigation can expose a long-term Clinton collaboration with the Kremlin and maybe even more.

Kickback Means the Soviet/Russian Blat

Putin had a friendly relationship with Obama as well. He wanted to enter the American market and Obama helped him to do so. An army of KGB operatives pored onto our soil to undermine our National Security by bribing Americans to get uranium. To understand what is going on in October 2017 you have to know a Socialist reality and the Socialist methods of infiltration. The Uranium Deal was a simple exchange of goods for a money Kickback, the word probably exactable. But in reality, it is a political narrative or term of actions taking place within the Socialist economy.  To learn what Socialism means, I will give you a paragraph from my book titled What is Happening to America? The Hidden Truth of Global Destruction, Xlibeis, 2012.

“In a country of constant shortages of food, having money wasn’t enough. Of course, you had to have some money to buy bread or milk, but that was probably it in the Soviet Russia. To buy meat or butter, having money was not enough: you had to have Blat[1]. All soviet citizens knew the term. This term is probably not familiar to you, as it is a Russian word that applies to Soviet Socialist society. You live under capitalism and the laws of supply and demand, which responds to reality.

Soviet Socialism did not function in response to real conditions, and because of constant shortages and empty shelves, people relied on Blat–“connections with reciprocal favors” – specifically, knowing someone who had access to goods. As a defense attorney, I regularly got meat and other products from my clients who worked in various stores, which all belonged to the state—it was a system of universal corruption from the top to bottom. You can read the details in my book Baltic Winds: Testimony of a Soviet Attorney, Xlibris, 2002, pp. 167-168.”

The tragedy of America illustrated by Bernie Sanders, who calls himself a Democratic Socialist. The term itself is an oxymoron—a democrat can’t be a socialist, a socialist can’t be democratic. The term reveals a total absence of the knowledge of socialist dogma. Socialism means a dictatorship in a struggle to end individual liberty and private property, which is the opposite of democracy. Yet the incompetent and timid Republican establishment didn’t even attempt to argue and reject the fraud. Bernie Sanders is also a Trojan Horse to inculcate our youth in Socialist tenets. Alas, Soviet Socialism has become a legitimate term in America. I called it Soviet Fascism today.

For a hundred years this fraudulent system and ideology has been forcefully implemented in dozens countries and it never worked. It hadn’t worked in America for eight years under Obama. The activities of Obama/Putin Joint Venture and a current Deep State with 30 thousand ‘strong dogs’ of OFA (Organizing for Action) to disrupt everything achieved by Trump in America, I see as a destruction of the American Republic—a criminal act. The activities of OFA remind me the “active measures” of the KGB, mentioned in my columns. The investigation of Uranium One and other Russian involvements should be qualified as a treason and conspiracy against the United States. I believe, the investigation should begin against at least 10-12 individuals, including Eric Holder, Susan Rice, James Comey, and John Brennan. It is time to act!

New Trump administration must expose and stop Russian Spy Ring in America!

The Trump administration must show an evil, pervasive and ubiquitous force that is fighting Western civilization for the last hundred years!

To be continued   www.simonapipko1.com.

Duke University Sued Over Religious Discrimination Against Pro-Life Nurse

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a federal lawsuit last Friday on behalf of Sara T. Pedro, a Catholic nurse in the Emergency Department of Duke University Hospital, who was discriminated and retaliated against after her employer learned of her pro-life religious beliefs.  Named as defendants in the lawsuit are both Duke University and Duke University Health System, Inc. (“Duke”).

Tyler Brooks, the TMLC attorney handling the case, commented: “This case illustrates the unfortunate dangers faced today by individuals who seek to remain faithful to their religious beliefs in the workplace.”

“With this lawsuit, however, we intend to show that even very large employers must respect the civil rights of their Christian employees,” said Mr. Brooks.

The complaint, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, describes how Ms. Pedro compiled an unblemished record during her eight years of work as a nurse prior to being hired by Duke.

During a classroom orientation, a group of newly-hired nurses that included Ms. Pedro was told by a nursing supervisor that Duke categorically refuses to grant religious accommodations for Emergency Department employees who object to assisting in abortions. Learning about Duke’s pro-abortion policy for the first time, Ms. Pedro made written requests for religious accommodation because of her opposition to abortion. Her requests motivated acts of discrimination and retaliation by Duke in violation of federal and state laws.

Duke’s policy and actions violate several federal and state laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Labor Standards Act, North Carolina’s Wage and Hour Act, and North Carolina common law.

The federal lawsuit details several specific acts of retaliation as a result of Ms. Pedro’s requests for religious accommodation. For example, Duke refused to advance Ms. Pedro from training status to regular duty, issued her a written warning for vague and unsubstantiated reasons, and then placed her on administrative leave when she attempted to formally dispute the warning.

To this day, nearly a year after it was first made, Duke has not issued a final decision on Ms. Pedro’s request to be excused from assisting in abortions.  In her complaint, Ms. Pedro alleges that Duke sought to force her out of her job rather than accommodate her religious beliefs as required by Title VII.

The first two paragraphs of TMLC’s complaint describe the essence of the lawsuit:

“At its heart, this case presents a simple yet important question: Must a devout Catholic abandon fundamental tenets of her faith if she wishes to be employed as a nurse at Duke University Hospital?  Despite the fact that Defendant Duke has answered ‘yes’ to this question, federal and state civil rights laws say otherwise. Therefore, Plaintiff Sara Theresa Pedro brings this action to vindicate her rights under the law.

An employee does not forfeit her right to practice her religion and abide by the tenets of her faith when she enters the workplace.”

Read TMLCs entire Federal Complaint here.

ABOUT THE THOMAS MORE LAW CENTER

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Most Aussies want immigration curtailed, 48% want Muslim ban

More than half surveyed said Australia felt like a foreign country!

And, the upshot of this news story is a warning that if the nationalists can mount a  countrywide political campaign they could become the power in Australia.

Rejecting the usual excuse that migrants stimulate economic growth, economics are not a major concern—loss of culture and quality of life is driving the worry.  (Hint! Although it isn’t politically correct, don’t be afraid to bring up those concerns!)

From Perth Now:

THREE quarters of Australians believe the country doesn’t need any more people and nearly half support a partial ban on Muslim immigrants.

Nauru refugees

An Australian Population Research Institute survey of more than 2000 people also found 54 per cent want a reduction in the annual migrant intake.

The independent organisation believes the results are driven by quality of life concerns and rapid changes in Australia’s ethnic and religious make-up.

“Australian voters’ concern about immigration levels and ethnic diversity does not derive from economic adversity,” academics Katharine Betts and Bob Birrell wrote in a report based on the survey.

“Rather, it stems from the increasingly obvious impact of population growth on their quality of life and the rapid change in Australia’s ethnic and religious make-up.”

[….]

… 74 per cent of those surveyed believe Australia is “already full”, with most pointing to roads congestion, hospitals capacity, affordable housing and fewer jobs as evidence.

Some 54 per cent want Australia to cut its annual immigrant intake of about 190,000 people and 48 per cent backed a partial ban on Muslim immigration.

[….]

The strongest support for the partial ban came from One Nation voters (89 per cent), with more than 50 per cent of Liberal voters agreeing and just over a third of Labor supporters.

“The willingness to take a tough, discriminating stance on Muslim immigration is not limited to a small minority, but extends to almost half of all voters,” the report said.

More than half of those surveyed feared Australia risked losing its culture and identity, with a similar number saying it had changed beyond recognition and sometimes “felt like a foreign country”.

More here.

For those of you wondering, there is no fresh news about the possibly 1,250 Australian rejected asylum seekers coming to America after the first 50 or so we reported here last month.

And we have an entire category on news from Australia, click here to learn more.

By the way, RRW gets readers daily from over 100 countries, but Australia is always in the top 3 for sending readers my way.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

The US Chamber of Commerce wants laborers, no concern for you, as they tell Trump to extend ‘temporary’ refugee program

Hungary investigating Soros network, we should be as well