Security guard wounded in first ISIS attack in U.S. sues FBI, charges cover-up

Good for Bruce Joiner. There are many, many unanswered questions about what happened at Garland, and about the FBI was doing there. 60 Minutes ran a feature last March about the FBI curious role in the May 2015 Garland, Texas jihad attack at a free speech event co-organized by Pamela Geller and me. It was, predictably enough, viciously biased, sloppy, and incomplete, but it was nonetheless illuminating in raising a hard and unanswerable question: did the FBI want Pamela Geller and me dead?

Despite the fact that the jihad attack took place at our event, neither Geller nor I appear, except in one still photo, in the 60 Minutes piece. All they say is that “a self-described free speech advocate named Pamela Geller was holding a provocative contest.”

Despite all the predictable politically correct whitewashing and appeasement, CBS did a good job of highlighting a curious and still unexplained aspect of the attack: the FBI clearly knew the attack was coming (although it didn’t bother to inform us or our security team), as the FBI agent was right there, following behind the jihadis, whom he had encouraged to “tear up Texas.” But even though they knew the attack was coming, they didn’t have a team in place to stop the jihadis. They had one man there, and one man only. The jihadis were not stopped by FBI agents, but by our own security team. If the jihadis had gotten through our team, they would have killed Pamela Geller and me, and many others. (They would no doubt have loved to kill Geert Wilders, but he left before they arrived.)

The Daily Beast wrote in August 2016 about how this undercover FBI agent encouraged the jihadis. The Beast’s Katie Zavadski wrote: “Days before an ISIS sympathizer attacked a cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, he received a text from an undercover FBI agent. ‘Tear up Texas,’ the agent messaged Elton Simpson days before he opened fire at the Draw Muhammad event, according to an affidavit (pdf) filed in federal court Thursday.”

What was the FBI’s game in telling them to “tear up Texas”? Why didn’t they have a phalanx of agents in place, ready to stop the attack? Or did they want the attack to succeed, so that Barack Obama’s vow that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” would be vividly illustrated, and intimidate any other Americans who might be contemplating defending the freedom of speech into silence?

We twice asked the FBI for an investigation into this matter. They ignored us. Of course. After all, it isn’t as if this happened to someone important, like Linda Sarsour.

Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, soldiers of ISIS.

“Victim of ‘Draw Muhammad’ ISIS-inspired terror attack sues FBI, accuses James Comey of cover-up,” by Todd Shepherd, Washington Examiner, October 2, 2017 (thanks to Marc):

The security guard wounded in a 2015 ISIS-inspired terrorist attack at the “Draw Muhammad” event in Garland, Texas, is suing the FBI, and argues the bureau is liable for his damages because an agent “solicited, encouraged, directed and aided members of ISIS in planning and carrying out the May 3 attack,” according to court documents filed Monday.

If the plaintiff, Bruce Joiner, doesn’t settle with the bureau, the case could shake loose hundreds of documents from both local and federal officials about what happened that day, and could answer the question of why an FBI agent was in a car directly behind the attackers and did nothing as the events unfolded.

In May of 2015, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi drove from their home in Phoenix to the Curtis Culwell center in Garland where the “Draw Muhammad” contest was being held, in a car loaded with three rifles, three handguns, and about 1,500 rounds of ammunition.

The two never made it inside, as guards, including Joiner, stopped them outside at a perimeter checkpoint, at which time Simpson and Soofi opened fire. Because the event was heavily guarded, the two were quickly shot and killed and barely made past the checkpoint where they opened fire.

Joiner was the only victim that day. He took a bullet to the left leg, and ISIS would later claim credit for orchestrating the attack, making it the first ISIS-backed terror event on U.S. soil.

Joiner’s lawsuit is seeking just over $8 million in damages, and argues that the FBI essentially allowed the attack to happen.

“The FBI helped the terrorists obtain a weapon that was used in the attack by lifting a hold during a background check, incited the terrorist to attack the Garland event, and even sent an agent to accompany the terrorists as they carried out the attack,” the court filing said.

The filing also alleged that former FBI Director Jim Comey lied in a “post-attack cover-up” about the bureau’s knowledge of how the attack unfolded and what Comey and the bureau knew about what was likely to transpire.

“In the aftermath of the attack, former FBI Director James Comey lied to the American people by claiming that Simpson was a needle in a haystack’ that was ‘invisible to us,’” the filing alleged. “Even after it had come to light that an undercover FBI agent had been communicating extensively with the terrorists during the week prior to the event and had accompanied them as they carried out the attack, the FBI continued to assert that “[t]here was no advance knowledge of a plot to attack the cartoon drawing contest.”

The FBI did not respond to a request for comment.

Since the attack, a separate court case and a “60 Minutes” report in March revealed that an undercover FBI agent was in the car directly behind Simpson and Soofi when they opened fire, and was even taking pictures of the car about 30 seconds before the first shots were fired. That case even revealed that the agent had texted Simpson just weeks before with the message, “Tear up Texas.”

Shortly after the first shots were fired, the agent fled, and was briefly detained by Garland Police, as seen in a video still from WFAA TV in Dallas.

Because of a separate court case tangentially related to Simpson and Soofi, it’s known that the FBI had been monitoring Simpson for years, and that the FBI agent was undercover in the Phoenix ISIS cell had direct contact with them routinely in the months leading up to the attack.

Joiner’s attorney, Trenton Roberts told the Washington Examiner this year that he now believes the FBI might have been willing to let the attack unfold to even greater lengths.

“It seems like it had to have been one or the other,” Roberts told the Washington Examiner in April. “Just a complete botched operation where they [the FBI] don’t want the attack to actually take place, or, it’s something where they need the attack to take place in order for this guy [the agent] to advance in the world of ISIS.”

“And that’s really what I think. I think that they thought, ‘he’s undercover and in order to advance, he needed to get pictures or video of this attack,’ and then that would bolster his street cred within ISIS,” Roberts said….

RELATED ARTICLE: Paris: Five Muslims arrested for jihad bomb plot in apartment building in “chic” Paris neighborhood

VIDEO: President Trump’s full comments on the Las Vegas mass shooting

TRANSCRIPT:

My fellow Americans, we are joined together today in sadness, shock, and grief. Last night, a gunman opened fire on a large crowd at a country music concert in Las Vegas, Nevada. He brutally murdered more than 50 people, and wounded hundreds more. It was an act of pure evil.

The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are working closely with local authorities to assist with the investigation, and they will provide updates as to the investigation and how it develops.

I want to thank the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and all of the first responders for their courageous efforts, and for helping to save the lives of so many. The speed with which they acted is miraculous, and prevented further loss of life. To have found the shooter so quickly after the first shots were fired is something for which we will always be thankful and grateful. It shows what true professionalism is all about.

Hundreds of our fellow citizens are now mourning the sudden loss of a loved one — a parent, a child, a brother or sister. We cannot fathom their pain. We cannot imagine their loss. To the families of the victims: We are praying for you and we are here for you, and we ask God to help see you through this very dark period.

Scripture teaches us, “The Lord is close to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit.” We seek comfort in those words, for we know that God lives in the hearts of those who grieve. To the wounded who are now recovering in hospitals, we are praying for your full and speedy recovery, and pledge to you our support from this day forward.

In memory of the fallen, I have directed that our great flag be flown at half-staff.

I will be visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday to meet with law enforcement, first responders, and the families of the victims.

In moments of tragedy and horror, America comes together as one — and it always has. We call upon the bonds that unite us — our faith, our family, and our shared values. We call upon the bonds of citizenship, the ties of community, and the comfort of our common humanity.

Our unity cannot be shattered by evil. Our bonds cannot be broken by violence. And though we feel such great anger at the senseless murder of our fellow citizens, it is our love that defines us today — and always will, forever.

In times such as these, I know we are searching for some kind of meaning in the chaos, some kind of light in the darkness. The answers do not come easy. But we can take solace knowing that even the darkest space can be brightened by a single light, and even the most terrible despair can be illuminated by a single ray of hope.

Melania and I are praying for every American who has been hurt, wounded, or lost the ones they love so dearly in this terrible, terrible attack. We pray for the entire nation to find unity and peace. And we pray for the day when evil is banished, and the innocent are safe from hatred and from fear.

May God bless the souls of the lives that are lost. May God give us the grace of healing. And may God provide the grieving families with strength to carry on.

Thank you. God bless America. Thank you.

VIDEOS: Mass shooting at music festival on the Las Vegas strip

“Right-wing extremists”? Or…?

“Mass shooting at music festival on the Las Vegas strip,” by Chris Perez, New York Post, October 2, 2017:

A gunman opened fire during a country music festival in Las Vegas on Sunday night — shooting multiple people with a high-powered assault rifle before fleeing the scene, according to reports.

At least 24 people were shot, including two fatally, according to Reuters.

Las Vegas police responded to the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino at around 10 p.m. after receiving calls about an active shooter targeting concertgoers at the Route 91 country music fest.

About an hour later police confirmed at least one suspect is down.

“This is an active investigation,” they added.

Cops were urging people to avoid the area as SWAT teams searched for the gunman.

Witnesses reported seeing a police officer down, but authorities couldn’t immediately confirm this.

University Medical Center spokeswoman Danita Cohen said the local hospital had taken in “several” people with gunshot wounds. She didn’t offer any more details.

One Las Vegas hospital reported treating at least 20 victims with gunshot wounds, according to KABC.

Professional poker player and Instagram star Dan Bilzerian, who was at the concert, said on his IG story that he saw the shooting unfold and witnessed a girl getting shot right in front of him.

“Holy f–k this girl just got shot in the f–king head,” Bilzerian said. “So f–king crazy…So I had to go grab a gun, I’m f–king heading back…Some kind of mass shooting…Guy had a heavy caliber weapon for sure…Saw a girl f–king get shot in the face right next to me, her brains f–king hanging out.”

Another witness, who spoke to News3LV, recalled how “bullets were flying everywhere” and concertgoers were running….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Who is Stephen Paddock? Las Vegas shooting suspect named as 64-year-old man

Post-jihad attack, Edmonton cop warns against “backlashes against people of colour and Muslims”

The Humanitarian Hoax of Sanctuary Cities: Killing America With Kindness

The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.

Obama, the humanitarian huckster-in-chief, weakened the United States for eight years by persuading America to accept his crippling politically correct sanctuary city policies as altruistic when in fact they were designed to destabilize and destroy civil society. His legacy, the Leftist Democratic Party and its “resistance” movement, is the party of the Humanitarian Hoax attempting to destroy American democracy and replace it with socialism.

The term “sanctuary city” originated in the 1980’s when San Francisco passed a city ordinance forbidding city police or city magistrates from assisting federal immigration officers in enforcing immigration policies that denied asylum to refugees from Guatemala and El Salvador. The mission of the sanctuary city was to protect innocent refugees from deportation – although these immigrants were in the U.S. illegally they had not committed any other crimes.

Today sanctuary cities are actually sanctuary jurisdictions because they include cities counties and states. Over 300 sanctuary jurisdictions exist in America today actively hindering federal authorities from seizing illegal criminal aliens, rapists, murderers, terrorists, and drug dealers for deportation.

The shocking murder of 21 year old Kate Steinle on July 1, 2015 publicized the danger of sanctuary jurisdictions. The shooter, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an illegal immigrant from Mexico with seven felony convictions had been deported five times and intentionally sought shelter in San Francisco. Yet officials in “sanctuary city” San Francisco refused to turn him over to federal authorities for deportation and instead released him into society enabling him to kill Kate Steinle.

The three young Muslim migrant boys who savagely raped and urinated in the mouth of an innocent five year old girl in Twin Falls, Idaho last year were protected as well. No jail, no deportation, in fact these monsters were shielded by the mainstream media and local city officials who tried to cover up the case and pretend that Twin Falls was a model for multiculturalism. Wendy Olson, Obama-appointed U.S. attorney for Idaho stunned the country by threatening to prosecute Idahoans who spoke out about the heinous crime in ways SHE considered “false or inflammatory.” Judge Thomas Borresen issued an equally stunning gag order that denied the right of anyone in the courtroom to speak about the sentencing even AFTER the case ended.

Twin Falls is one of two Muslim refugee relocation centers in Idaho. Rather than identifying themselves as a “sanctuary city” Twin Falls has chosen the equally disingenuous name of “welcoming city” and declared themselves to be a “neighborly community.” REALLY? Protecting rapists and censoring free speech is definitely not neighborly for the victims!

The word sanctuary implies safety from a threat – it does not mean shelter for immigrant criminal felons, rapists, murderers and terrorists who threaten the safety of law abiding citizens. Why would any law abiding citizen endorse the protection of these criminals whether they are illegal aliens or legal citizens? The answer lies in the active participation by the mainstream media in the humanitarian hoax of sanctuary cities. The media has deliberately romanticized sanctuary cities as humanitarian havens for the oppressed instead of honestly reporting them as despicable safety zones for criminal aliens. The colluding media has duped the trusting American public and exploited their compassion and good will.

The original mission of sanctuary cities has been perverted from the protection of innocent refugees into the protection of guilty criminal aliens at the expense of public safety. Sanctuary cities in America continue to flagrantly defy the law. Thirty years after San Francisco became the first sanctuary city California seeks to become the first sanctuary state.

The protection of illegal aliens from deportation incentivizes illegal entry into the U.S. which has enormous economic consequences as well. Illegal aliens overload our welfare system, cost American taxpayers a whopping $116 BILLION, and rob legal citizens of their jobs.

Obama gave sanctuary cities the freedom to ignore detention orders from ICE through his own Priority Enforcement Program which allowed local agencies to ignore ICE notifications of deportable aliens in their custody. Why? The Leftist Democrat Party under Obama supported sanctuary cities by ignoring the 1996 law 8 U.S.C. § 1373 that repealed sanctuary city policies? Why?

If you want to know the motive look at the result. Increasing the number of illegal aliens:

  • Secures more Democrat legal and illegal votes for the Leftist agenda through chain migration.
  • Creates social chaos by importing populations with hostile cultural norms.
  • Creates divisiveness by taking American jobs.
  • Alienates legal citizens who receive far fewer government benefits.
  • Eventually collapse the economy of sanctuary jurisdictions.

Finally, in July, 2016 Republican Representative John Culberson-TX, Chairman of the Commerce, Justice, and Science Committee on Appropriations took action against the danger and sent a letter to the DOJ demanding federal law enforcement grants be denied to cities not in compliance with the 1996 law 8 U.S.C. § 1373 that repealed sanctuary city policies.

During the five years from 2011-2016 local and state governments had received over $3.4 BILLION in federal law enforcement grants. The Culberson choice was between receiving billions of dollars in federal law enforcement grant money or protecting dangerous illegal criminal aliens. Sanctuary jurisdictions could no longer do both.

Sanctuary jurisdictions doubled down and continue to defy the law.

No-go zones are geographic areas within a country that flagrantly disregard the laws of the country. No-go zones establish a two-tier system of justice within a country because they observe a different set of laws. All across Europe Islamists have established religious no-go zones that recognize Islamic sharia law exclusively. All across America Leftists have created lawless sanctuary jurisdiction that flagrantly defy federal law.

People will stand quietly and peacefully in long lines until one person jumps the line. It is a fascinating social dynamic that as long as members of a group abide by the same rules the consequence is harmony. It is the unfairness of the line-jumper that creates anger and social chaos. Social chaos is the goal of the Leftist/Islamist axis that supports the two-tier system of justice created by secular sanctuary jurisdictions and religious no-go zones.

The goal and the underlying motive of the globalist elite’s campaign to destroy America from within is the imposition of one-world government. Obama is the primary globalist huckster. American democracy is the single greatest existential threat to one-world government and President Donald Trump is America’s leader. The globalist elite are desperate to stop Trump because if Obama’s Leftist/Islamist resistance movement is exposed as their deliberate political tactic to destabilize and destroy America it leaves the globalist elite without their primetime huckster to continue marching America toward anarchy and social chaos.

If the globalists are successful the world will be returned to the dystopian existence of masters and slaves because a willfully blind American public was seduced by the Humanitarian Hoax of sanctuary cities. The Humanitarian Hoax will have succeeded in killing America with “kindness.”

Sanctuary List

States

California
Connecticut
New Mexico
Colorado

Cities and Counties

California

Alameda County
Berkley
Contra Costa County
Los Angeles County
Los Angeles
Monterey County
Napa County
Orange County
Orange County
Riverside County
Sacramento County
San Bernardino County
San Diego County
San Francisco County
San Mateo County
Santa Ana
Santa Clara County
Santa Cruz County
Sonoma County

Colorado

Arapahoe County
Aurora
Boulder County
Denver County
Garfield County
Grand County
Jefferson County
Larimer County
Mesa County
Pitkin County
Pueblo County
Routt County
San Miguel County
Weld County

Connecticut

East Haven
Hartford

District Of Columbia

Washington

Florida

Alachua County
Clay County
Hernando County

Georgia

Clayton County
DeKalb County

Iowa

Benton County
Cass County
Franklin County
Fremont County
Greene County
Ida County
Iowa City
Iowa City, Johnson County
Jefferson County
Marion County
Monona County
Montgomery County
Pottawattamie County
Sioux County

Illinois

Chicago
Cook County

Kansas

Butler County
Harvey County
Sedgwick County
Shawnee County

Louisiana

New Orleans

Massachusetts

Amherst
Boston
Cambridge
Lawrence
Northhampton
Somerville

Maryland

Baltimore
Montgomery County
Prince George’s County

Minnesota

Hennepin County

Nebraska

Hall County
Sarpy County

New Jersey

Middlesex County
Newark
Ocean County
Union County

New Mexico

Benalillo
New Mexico County Jails
San Miguel

Nevada

Washoe County

New York

Franklin County
Ithaca
Nassau County
New York City
Omondaga County
St. Lawrence County
Wayne County

Oregon

Baker County
Clackamas County
Clatsop County
Coos County
Crook County
Curry County
Deschutes County
Douglas County
Gilliam County
Grant County
Hood River County
Jackson County
Jefferson County
Josephine County
Lane Countyn
Lincoln County
Linn County
Malheur County
Marion County
Marlon County
Multnomah County
Polk County
Sherman County
Springfield
Tillamok County
Umatilla County
Union County
Wallowa County
Wasco County
Washington County
Wheeler County
Yamhill County

Pennsylvania

Bradford County
Bucks County
Butler County
Chester County
Clarion County
Delaware County
Eerie County
Franklin County
Lebanon County
Lehigh County
Lycoming County
Montgomery County
Montour County
Perry County
Philadelphia
Pike County
Westmoreland County

Rhode Island

Providence, Rhode Island
Rhode Island Department of Corrections

Texas

Dallas County
Travis County

Virginia

Arlington County
Chesterfield County

Vermont

Monteplier
Winooski

Washington

Chelan County
Clallam County
Clark County
Cowlitz County
Franklin County
Jefferson County
King County
Kitsap County
Pierce County
San Juan County
Skagit County
Snohomish County
Spokane County
Thurston County
Walla Walla County
Wallowa County
Whatcom County
Yakima County

Wisconsin

Milwaukee

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Goudsmit Pundicity

On Average an NFL Player is Arrested Every Seven Days for a Violent Crime

There is a dark side to the National Football League that few media outlets are talking about. Donald J. Trump, Jr. highlighted the issues in a Tweet:

According to NFLarrest.com:

The average time between [NFL player] arrests is just seven days, while the recorded without an arrest is slightly more than two months, at 65 days.

NFLarrest.com provides an interactive database of National Football League player arrests and charges. NOTE: Due to a spike in visits the website is now down and is asking for “donations will be put into development and server upkeep.”

The NFL appears to embrace players who abuse women.

Stephen L. Carter in a Chicago Tribune article titled “The NFL has a serious violence problem” on the 2017 NFL draft wrote:

In the first round, the Oakland Raiders drafted Gareon Conley, who has been accused of rape. In the second round, the Cincinnati Bengals selected Joe Mixon, who in a much-viewed video punches a woman so hard that she falls down unconscious. In the sixth round, the Cleveland Brownsselected Caleb Brantley, who was accused of doing pretty much what Mixon did. And they are not the only drafted players who face or have faced such charges.

The below chart from NFLarrest.com shows the past 5 years data on crimes/arrests by NFL team:

NFLarrest.com notes that the top team for arrests is the Minnesota Vikings with the top 5 teams for arrests are: Denver Broncos, Cincinnati Bengals, Tennessee Titans and Jacksonville Jaguars.

In 2006 there were 71 arrests of NFL players, 2013 had 62 arrests, while the lowest in the NFLarrest.com data base is 28 arrests. The player with the most arrests is Adam Jones who has played for both the Tennessee Titans and Cincinnati Bengals.

The top positions of those arrested are:

  • Wide receiver – 140
  • Linebacker – 119
  • Cornerback – 116
  • Running back – 99
  • Defensive tackle – 80

In 2016 the Berkeley Journal of Entertainment and Sports Law issued a report titled Unnecessary Roughness: The NFL’s History of Domestic Violence and the Need for Immediate ChangeThe report reads:

One week after the start of the National Football League (NFL)’s 2014-15 season, TMZ.com publicly released a video showing the Baltimore Ravens’ star running back, Ray Rice, knocking his fiancée Janay Rice unconscious in an
Atlantic City casino elevator. The couple is seen arguing in the casino lobby as they walk towards a waiting elevator. Less than ten seconds after entering the elevator, the grainy surveillance video shows Ray Rice slap Janay across the head. Less than ten seconds after entering the elevator, the grainy surveillance video shows Ray Rice slap Janay across the head. She immediately lunges towards him in the elevator to confront him and he punches her in the temple. Her head hits the metal safety rail in the elevator as she falls, rendering her unconscious. When the elevator doors reopen, Ray Rice, who has been described as a 212-pound “fire hydrant of muscle and speed” 1 drags the unconscious body of his fiancée halfway out of the elevator as her small black dress gathers around her waist.

[ … ]

The video shocked and horrified the nation.

Today the nation is shocked and horrified by players disrespecting the American flag and the National Anthem. Perhaps the National Football League should look inward.

RELATED ARTICLE: Boycott the NFL on Veterans Weekend, Sunday, November 12th

RELATED INFOGRAPHICS:

Federal Court of Appeals Declines to Reconsider Opinion Striking Down District of Columbia Concealed Carry Ban

District of Columbia—In the latest victory for the Second Amendment rights of residents of the District of Columbia, the full federal court of appeals that sits in the District declined, on Thursday, to rehear an earlier decision by three judges of that court striking down provisions of the City’s code that barred most D.C. residents from carrying firearms for self-protection. The law at issue requires law-abiding citizens who wish to carry a firearm in public to obtain a license to do so, but restricts the issuance of licenses to those citizens who can show a specific, documented need for self-defense—for example, by proving that they had been previously attacked or were receiving death threats. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued an opinion in July invalidating that restriction as fundamentally incompatible with Second Amendment. The District then asked the full circuit court to hear the case, arguing that allowing ordinary, law-abiding citizens to carry firearms—the regime that prevails in 42 of the 50 States and in major cities including Chicago, Houston, Miami, and Philadelphia—would “increase crime and cost lives.” On Thursday, the full court issued a short order turning away the District’s plea to reconsider the case.

“We applaud the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals for reaffirming the rights of ordinary, law-abiding citizens to carry firearms to protect themselves and their families in the District of Columbia,” said Chris Cox, Executive Director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action. “The District’s draconian restrictions on core Second-Amendment rights are out of step with the mainstream protections in the rest of the country, and as the D.C. Circuit’s opinion shows, they are equally out of step with our Nation’s traditions and fundamental law.”


EDITORS NOTE: Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. More than five million members strong, NRA continues to uphold the Second Amendment and advocates enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the armed services. Be sure to follow the NRA on Facebook at NRA on Facebook and Twitter @NRA.

Trump Courts Conservatives with Solid Judges

Apart from tweets, the only thing this president is cranking out more of is judicial nominees. Yesterday, the White House sent its eighth wave of picks to the Senate, shattering the records of his predecessors and giving conservatives something to cheer about after an exasperating month.When Trump took office, he faced more court vacancies than all but one of the past five administrations. Almost immediately, he set to work, chipping away at the 150 empty seats on the bench. And to voters’ delight, his choices haven’t just been quick — but solid. One after another, the nominees have all shared a reverence for the Constitution, a respect for their role, and a commitment to impartiality. Under liberal fire, the handful who’ve had the benefit of a confirmation hearing have faced the Left’s insults with poise.

This bunch will be no different. With four tapped for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, Trump is methodically balancing benches that have leaned Left for years. Conservatives couldn’t be happier about his choices, which include Louisiana’s former Solicitor General Kyle Duncan and Eastern District Chief Judge Kurt Engelhardt. “Top to bottom, this is an extraordinary list of judicial nominees,” said the Judicial Crisis Network’s Carrie Severino. “President Trump continues to hit grand slams in an area that unites and excites Republicans.”

Of course, the president has been very clear about the type of judges that he would appoint: judges who interpret the Constitution and laws according to the plain meaning of the words written. And that’s exactly who he’s nominating today.

I’ve known Kyle Duncan for years — going back to my time in state government in Louisiana. Kyle is an experienced litigator — arguing cases throughout the country including at the appellate and Supreme Court levels. Apart from being well-qualified, I’m certain he’ll adhere to the Constitution. Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett is another acute legal mind that I worked with during my time as a policymaker in Louisiana, and I was pleased to see him nominated. He’s built a strong reputation for integrity and a devotion to the principles that have made this a great nation.

Obviously, the administration is all-in when it comes to leveling the playing field that Barack Obama tipped with radical, agenda-driven activists. Now that Trump’s done his part, let’s hope Republican senators do theirs — and send these nominees on their way to a speedy confirmation.


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


Also in the September 29 Washington Update:

Fall o’ the Leader? House Urges McConnell’s Ouster

Voters Ask White House to Man up on Mandate

FRC in the Spotlight

Collier County Textbook Lawsuit puts all 67 Florida School Districts on Notice

Keeping you updated on what’s happening with the Collier County Lawsuit:

TIMELINE

  • May 31, 2017: Florida Citizens’ Alliance and 3 Collier County parents filed suit against the Collier County School System for buying unacceptable social studies textbooks (details).
  • June 13, 2017: Collier Circuit Court Judge Shenko denied our emergency injunctionThe good news is he actually improved our odds by refusing to let our side present its evidence and then basing his ruling on the faulty school board’s summary brief.
  • July 12, 2017:Florida Citizens Alliance and 3 Collier Parents filed an appeal in Florida 2nd Court of Appeal.
  • August 10th: Our lawyers finalized supporting documentation for our appeal.
  • August 12th: We filed supporting detail for our appeal

Current Status: The Collier School Board had 30 days from the date of our filing (8/12) to file their appeal details. Their due date corresponded to the arrival of Hurricane Irma. The courts were closed as a result of the hurricane, and we have not heard anything from them at this point.

We continue to press forward! This is important not only to the children of Collier County, but every child in Florida public schools!

All 67 counties buy from the same 3 publishing companies, so our effort puts every school board on notice! Regardless of what county you live in, this case has broad implications for your children and grandchildren.

Please help us continue the fight and give generously. Your donation is tax deductible!

WE DO SERIOUSLY NEED YOUR HELP – WE ARE IN DEBT ON THIS PROJECT.

Remember, this is about our children’s future and the future of our Constitutional Republic.

Oklahoma Beheading Trial of Jah’Keem Yisrael: Is Obeying the Qur’an a Form of Mental Illness?

Jah’Keem Yisrael formerly Alton Alexander Nolen

Seems both the prosecution and defense are “Islamophobes.” My latest in PJ Media:

The trial of Alton Alexander Nolen — a.k.a. Jah’Keem Yisrael, who beheaded a coworker, Colleen Hufford, and tried to behead another, Traci Johnson, at Vaughan Foods in Moore, Oklahoma in September 2014 — has revealed anew the incoherence and inconsistency of our official response to the jihad threat.

Nolen insists he was merely following the Qur’an. In statements he made days after the attack that have just been revealed during his trial, Nolen couldn’t have been clearer about his mindset, worldview, and motivations. When he was read his rights, he responded:

I’m a Muslim.

When asked why he beheaded Hufford, he answered:

I just feel like … I did what I needed to do. What Allah … says in the Qur’an to do. Oppressors don’t need to be here.

Nolen has a case. The Qur’an says:

When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks (47:4).

Nolen thought Colleen Hufford was not just an unbeliever, but something even worse: she was, he explained, a “slave to the devil.” Nolen himself, on the other hand, was a “slave to Allah.” He told police:

You know the Muslim is somebody who submits their will to Allah … Whatever he wants done, that’s what we do … And you know he wants us to get the oppressors out of this place.

When asked if he regretted murdering Hufford, Nolen answered:

This wasn’t nothing but a trial for me. I passed it … because, like I said, I felt oppressed. … I knew for sure that … if I was to die right then … I was going to heaven.

He added:

I feel, you know, you know what I’m saying, if I was to die in five or 10 minutes I’m going to Heaven. That’s all that matters to me.

Here again, Nolen has a case. The Qur’an promises Paradise to those who “kill and are killed” for Allah (9:111). Nolen is, of course, still alive, but like the Fort Hood jihad mass murderer Nidal Malik Hasan, he likely believes that if he were to be executed, it would complete the requirements of the passage, and ensure his ticket to Paradise.

When asked if anyone had told him to behead unbelievers, he was quite clear about where he got the idea:

Uh, no. I read the Qur’an. Like I say, the Qur’an is easy to understand. … No one guides me but Allah.

Nolen also confirmed that he screamed “Allahu akbar” as he beheaded Hufford.

Both prosecuting and defense attorneys, however, seem to be discounting Nolen’s statements. The Oklahoman reported:

[H]is court-appointed defense attorneys are asking the jury to find him not guilty by reason of insanity. They have told jurors he is mentally ill and believed what he was doing was right because of delusional misinterpretations of Islamic teachings.

Cleveland County District Attorney Greg Mashburn, meanwhile, went even farther, saying:

[Nolen] didn’t know the difference between right and wrong, and didn’t know the consequences of his actions.

Nonsense. He knows very well the difference between right and wrong. The Qur’an says: “When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks,” and as far as he is concerned, that is right, and he knows that as a consequence of his actions, he will go to Paradise.

Mashburn is saying that standard Islamic belief is tantamount to insanity. Does he have any idea of how “Islamophobic” he is being?

We have seen this before. In Montreal last March, a police complaint was filed against the Dar Al-Arqam Mosque in Montreal for hosting an imam, Sheikh Muhammad bin Musa Al Nasr, who preached:

O Muslim, O servant of Allah, O Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.

But this is a quotation that is attributed to Muhammad. Are the Canadian police really going to stop imams from quoting Muhammad? Are Oklahoma authorities really going to ascribe obedience to Qur’anic commands to insanity?…

Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Al-Qaeda wants Trump “dead or alive” for “crimes against Islam”

Taliban try to kill Mattis during Afghanistan visit, say Afghan security forces tipped them off

I’m a Conservative College Student. The First Amendment Is Dying on Campuses Like Mine.

As a conservative columnist for my campus newspaper, it’s not unusual for me to be derided and accused of hate by leftist students.

Some have been calling for my firing ever since I started writing. I’m a mainstream conservative-libertarian. Apparently, that is beyond the pale.

Campuses are lively places, full of debate on political, social, and religious topics. But new ideological boundary lines have been drawn, and their crossing is met with reproach, accusations of hate, and even violence.

In March, a professor at Middlebury College in Vermont was hospitalized after protesters disrupted a speech by the social scientist Charles Murray.

Conservative commentator Ann Coulter also felt the wrath of campus extremism when threats of violence prompted the University of California, Berkeley to cancel her speech.

These events and others have marked the erosion of the free speech at colleges that were once lauded for their commitment to it. On today’s campuses, anyone with a remotely controversial idea comes under attack. Why?

Millennials seem to have a problem with free speech.

In a study by the Pew Research Center, 40 percent of millennials agreed that “the government should be able to prevent people publicly making statements that are offensive to minority groups.”

The study found that today’s youth are much more likely than their parents and grandparents to support the suppression of controversial speech—a fact that young conservatives like me know all too well.

The hate mail, electronic diatribes, personal attacks, and threats I faced during my freshman year at the University of Massachusetts Amherst would make you think I’d done something horrible. In reality, all I’d done was write in The Collegian, the school paper—columns arguing against the sanctuary campus movement, safe spaces, political correctness, and overzealous cultural appropriation policies.

But what has fueled this hostility toward alternate ideas?

It’s simple: College campuses, once lively places of debate and controversy, have come under the tyranny of groupthink. In an age defined by diversity, we’ve left no space for differences that go deeper than the skin.

Some professors blatantly teach their opinion as fact and belittle the few students who don’t subscribe to their gospel of leftism.

The result? College classrooms that used to be places of robust conversation now cultivate a spirit of complacency. Institutions of higher education are complicit in fostering a culture of comfort—and in doing so, they are doing students a disservice.

The real world can be an ugly place where college graduates are regularly confronted by ideas they disagree with and things they find offensive.

College campuses are not that way. They’ve become “safe spaces,” where students are sheltered from the very expansion of their worldview that is meant to be the purpose of their education.

At Wellesley College, six professors suggested that the university set up a “censorship committee” in order to make sure that “guest speakers with controversial and objectionable beliefs” were barred from campus. In 2015, the president of Northwestern University, Morton Schapiro, took to The Washington Post to write that “we all deserve safe spaces.”

On my own campus, some professors responded to the election of Donald Trump by bringing therapy dogs to class and giving out free hugs. The desire to shield students from offense has stymied the debate that actually prepares them for life in the real world.

Students are being taught that opposing viewpoints are akin to intellectual violence and that “provocateurs” like me are basically assailants.

Free speech is dying on campus, but millennials aren’t the ones killing it. Guilt lies with the institutions that have chosen to coddle students when they should be challenging them.

One reason conservative speech garners such violent responses is that students aren’t used to hearing ideas they disagree with. On today’s campuses, liberal professors outnumber their conservative counterparts 12 to 1, even though the general public consists of more self-identified conservatives than liberals.

For all our talk about minority inclusion, we haven’t addressed the under-representation of nearly half the political population. Students have gotten used to their side of the story, and have no tolerance for anyone who rationally challenges them.

In his question, my friend hit upon the tensions that are dividing college campuses like never before. For me, the current climate means that I’ll keep getting anonymous hate mail in my inbox.

But in the meantime, universities are creating a generation so hostile to free speech that the First Amendment has more than idle threats to worry about.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Bradley Polumbo

Bradley Polumbo

Bradley Polumbo is a student at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

Texas Wins the Second Round on Sanctuary Cities

Texas has just won the second (procedural) round in the fight over the state Legislature’s attempt to punish cities that implement sanctuary policies.

A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily stayed on Monday key portions of the injunction issued in September by a federal judge in San Antonio that prevented the state from implementing major parts of the law.

As explained here, the 2017 statute applies to illegal aliens arrested or otherwise lawfully detained by local law enforcement.

The core parts of the law ban Texas cities from prohibiting or “materially limit[ing]” local law enforcement from:

  1. Notifying federal immigration officials that an illegal alien has been arrested.
  2. Cooperating with immigration authorities (including honoring detainer warrants on illegal aliens issued by federal authorities).
  3. Allowing federal immigration officers to enter local jails to conduct investigations of criminal illegal aliens.

The lower court federal judge had enjoined Texas from implementing the second and third provisions. However, the 5th Circuit issued a stay of that portion of the injunction.

Holding that Texas was likely to succeed on the merits of those two provisions, the 5th Circuit lifted the injunction until the appeals court has a chance to consider the merits of the case. Otherwise, the “state necessarily suffers the irreparable harms of denying the public interest in the enforcement of its laws.”

Prior case law holds that when it is a state appealing, the state’s “interest and harm merges with that of the public.”

According to the appeals court, the lower court judge misinterpreted federal law when he enjoined the Texas provision on cooperation and assistance with federal immigration authorities. The statute he cited, 8 U.S.C. §1357(g), actually “provides for such assistance.”

So Texas can “prohibit” local jurisdictions from engaging in such behavior, although the injunction remains in place on the phrase “materially limits” because that phrase needs “clarifying.” But being able to “prohibit” gives Texas what it needs in order to stop these sanctuary policies.

The appeals court also threw out the injunction on the section of the Texas law that requires local law enforcement to “comply with, honor, and fulfill” any immigration detainer request issued by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The 5th Circuit panel noted that local jurisdictions would not have to comply with a detainer request if the detainee “provide[s] proof” of lawful immigration status. Further, unlike the view of the lower court judge, this provision of the Texas law only “mandates that local agencies cooperate according to existing ICE detainer practice and law.”

This means that the most important provisions of the Texas statute that are intended to stop sanctuary policies from being implemented locally are still in force, and will remain in force until the 5th Circuit issues a decision on the merits.

That is vital to the public safety of the citizens of Texas. Sanctuary policies create sanctuaries for criminals.

According to PJ Media, an unreleased internal report from the Texas Department of Public Safety revealed that from 2008 to 2014, criminal aliens committed over 600,000 crimes in the state, including almost 3,000 murders.

Yet cities like Dallas and Austin, which are among the challengers in this litigation, are telling their residents that they would rather release criminal illegal aliens who have been convicted of crimes such as assault, burglary, sexual assault, theft, and even homicide into their local communities (where they can victimize even more people) than call federal immigration authorities so that they can be picked up and deported.

As Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said, “Enforcing immigration law helps prevent dangerous criminals from being released into Texas communities.”

We can only hope the 5th Circuit realizes this when issuing its final decision on this Texas law.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Hans von Spakovsky

Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research. Twitter: .

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

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

Hundreds of Illegal Voters Revealed in Philadelphia

According to a Philadelphia elections official, hundreds of individuals who are not U.S. citizens have registered to vote in Philadelphia and nearly half of them voted in past elections. Since 2006, 317 registered voters have contacted the City Commissioners, which oversees Philadelphia elections, asking that their registrations be canceled because they are not citizens.

Philly.com reported that many of them registered while either applying for or renewing their driver’s licenses. All applicants were offered the option to register to vote even after providing documentation to DMV officials that although they were in the country legally, they were not citizens.

Al Schmidt, the lone Republican on the Philadelphia election commission, said that all 317 registrations have been canceled and he has been speaking with the Pennsylvania Department of State about the problem.

“For the majority of these people, it’s completely plausible to believe they thought they were eligible to vote,” Schmidt claimed, despite the fact that voter registration applications require an applicant to answer a citizenship question and to swear under oath that he is a U.S. citizen.

“All voter fraud is an irregularity; not all voter irregularities are fraud,” Schmidt said, adding that it is still illegal. “Regardless of the intent, the damage is still the same.”

A year before Schmidt stoked these recent concerns about Philadelphia election integrity, he was fighting a federal lawsuit after failing to disclose the same information about noncitizens and his failure to remove felons from the voter roll.

Public Interest Legal Foundation later published a report detailing 86 cases of noncitizens whose voter registrations were quietly revoked between 2013 and 2015. Almost half of them had voted at least once.

When the commissioner is not busy claiming to find alien voters who actually outed themselves, he still defends the city’s policy of keeping felons registered. Unlike most states, Pennsylvania does not require that someone in prison have his or her record removed or otherwise marked to prevent ineligible voting—a violation of the National Voter Registration Act, an American Civil Rights Union suit argues.

A major component of Philadelphia registering noncitizens involves the National Voter Registration Act, or “motor voter,” which was passed in 1993. It requires state governments to offer voter registration to any eligible person who is applying for or renewing their driver’s license or registration.

This requirement has been misinterpreted by state officials as supposedly prohibiting them from failing to offer everyone who applies for a driver’s license the opportunity to register. This includes cases where the DMV official knows the individual is not a U.S. citizen.

Schmidt’s office has obtained data on 220 of the 317 registrations. Of these 220, 44 voted in one election while 46 voted in multiple elections. It is unclear how many more noncitizens are registered and voting since Philadelphia election officials take absolutely no steps whatsoever to verify the citizenship status of individuals who register to vote. They only found out about the 317 because these registered noncitizens asked to be removed from the rolls.

The Pennsylvania Department of State has a review underway; but has already reported that, since 1972, 1,160 voters statewide have requested their registrations be canceled because they were not citizens. There can be little doubt this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Separately, in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, there have been 98 noncitizens who have canceled their voter registration since 2006. Elections Director Mark Wolosik stated that the aliens became aware of the problem when they were asked about their voter registration by the Department of Homeland Security when they applied for citizenship.

Two other cases of noncitizen registration and voting show that this is not solely a Pennsylvania problem. Earlier this month, Public Interest Legal Foundation published a report after a six-month review of New Jersey voter registrations. It found that 616 noncitizens registered to vote, 76 percent of whom admitted their noncitizenship status at the outset. Yet they were registered by election officials anyway. Some noncitizens were even asked if they wanted to register to vote after presenting a “Green Card” to get their driver’s license.

Added to the Pennsylvania and New Jersey cases, Virginia has also faced a multitude of noncitizens registering to vote. This May, Public Interest Legal Foundation published a report showing that between 2011 and May 2017, Virginia removed 5,556 noncitizens from its voter rolls. Those noncitizens cast 7,474 votes in multiple elections. And in the last 12 years in Virginia, there have been two statewide attorney general races that have been decided by fewer than a thousand votes.

Just more evidence of the kind of problems that exist in our voter registration and election process.

COMMENTARY BY

Meagan Devlin is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.

Portrait of Hans von Spakovsky

Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research. Twitter: 

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

EDITORS NOTE: Since 2006, 317 registered voters have contacted the City Commissioners, which oversees Philadelphia elections, asking that their registrations be canceled because they are not citizens. (Photo: Caro / Sorge/Newscom) Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can’t be done alone. Find out more >>

UC Berkeley cancels Free Speech Week events as Hate Speech

University campuses have become safe zones against freedom of speech. University of California at Berkeley was the epicenter of the 1960s Free Speech Movement (FSM). According to the UC Berkeley Visual History: Free Speech Movement 1964 website from September 14th to October 1st, 1964:

[September 1st] Student organizations receive a letter from Dean of Students Katherine Towle announcing that tables will no longer be permitted in this area, and that collecting money or recruiting participants for off-campus political activity and taking positions on off-campus political issues will be prohibited. Over the next two weeks, student groups and administrators exchange demands and responses while demonstrations continue.

[September 14th] Students from SNCC and CORE set up tables at Sather Gate without permits from the Dean of Students. University administration representatives take the names of those manning the tables. Five students and three demonstrators are called for disciplinary action. More than 500 sympathizers join them in what is to become the first of the Sproul Hall sit-ins. A little after 2:00 am, the sit-in is disbanded. The eight students are suspended.

[October 1st] In defiance of the ban on on-campus political activities, at 10:00 am Jack Weinberg from campus CORE sets up a table with political information. At 11:45 am he is arrested after refusing to vacate or identify himself.

Eight UC Berkeley students suspended are: Left to right. Seated: Brian Turner, Sandor Fuchs, Arthur Goldberg, Elizabeth Gardner. Standing: David Lance Goines, Mark Bravo, Don Hatch, Mario Savio.

Eight students were suspended for operating a table on campus without a permit.

Fast forward to September 2017. Students at UC Berkeley are now the subjects of an investigation and possible civil or criminal prosecution and suspension for hanging posters promoting a Free Speech Week.

Watch this video with comments on the cancellation of Free Speech Week hosted by Milo Yiannopoulos with Pamela Geller and Mike Cernovich.

The home of off-campus political activity on political issues is now officially dead at UC Berkeley.

RELATED ARTICLE: Antifa leader, teacher Yvonne Felarca arrested at ’empathy tent’ Berkeley brawl

Documented Cases of Religious Discrimination Jump 15% by Ian Snively

Freedom of religion isn’t as protected as some Americans may think. In fact, reported attacks on religion are increasing in the U.S. and, according to First Liberty Institute, the evidence is undeniable.

The 2017 edition of a First Liberty report called “Undeniable” shows threats to Americans’ First Amendment rights spanning the past five years.

The number of documented incidents of religious discrimination grew 15 percent in 2016 compared with 2015. The number of incidents increased by 133 percent, from 600 to more than 1,400, between 2011 and 2016.

“We’re in a battle right now for religious freedom in the future of our country,” First Liberty President Kelly Shackelford said in a Facebook Live video Sept. 12.

Justin Butterfield, editor-in-chief of the study, said in an interview with The Daily Signal that much of the data comes from court filings from across the country.

The research team also collects reports from news outlets and other organizations, including the Freedom From Religion Foundation, an atheist group.

Butterfield, who has a law degree from Harvard, said researchers specifically looked for instances where someone was illegally restricted from, or prosecuted for, practicing his or her faith.

“Undeniable” divides cases into four categories: attacks on religion in public areas and the workplace; in schools; in churches and ministries; and in the military.

First Liberty, a nonprofit legal organization established in 1997, focuses on defending religious freedom in court cases. It has participated and provided information in court cases at all levels, including the Supreme Court. It also publishes reports educating Americans about the relevance of the First Amendment.

First Liberty began research in 2004, when Shackelford and others testified during a Senate hearing on discrimination and intolerance based on religion. Two senators, the late Democrat Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and John Cornyn of Texas, got in touch with Shackelford, wanting to know how prevalent the issue was.

Butterfield said Kennedy and Cornyn asked First Liberty to collect more reports of attacks on religion. The organization  first published “Undeniable” in 2012, and has published a new edition every year since.

One court case in 2012 that he found particularly appalling, Butterfield recalled, was Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC. In it, a teacher fired by a Lutheran school sued under the Americans With Disabilities Act, even though churches have the freedom to choose leaders.

When asked why he thought more cases of religious intolerance were emerging, Butterfield said that now more than ever in America, the “concept of religious freedom is unpopular.” Some Americans, he said, are “increasingly hostile to religious beliefs that differ from their own.”

But what separates the U.S. from other countries, he said, is Americans’ persistence in fighting for their faith.

“When people stand up to their religious liberties, they win,” Butterfield said.

Ian Snively

Ian Snively is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

There Should Be No Religious Tests for Judicial Nominees

White House Rebuts Attacks by Democrats, New York Times on Catholic Court Nominee

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of San Diego County firefighter Steven Hay prays on Sept. 11 at Grossmont College for those lost in the 9/11 terror attacks. (Photo: Nelvin C. Cepeda/Zuma Press/Newscom) Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can’t be done alone. Find out more >>

FATWA: Hunted in America

Pamela Geller’s shocking new book published by Milo’s New Publishing House, Dangerous Books

At a major news conference kicking off the now cancelled “free Speech Week” at Berkeley San Francisco, Milo announced the launch of the shocking new book, Fatwa: Hunted in America. It will be the first book published by Milo’s groundbreaking new publishing house, Dangerous Books. Old school publishers would be terrified to publish this book.

Get it. Now. Support the work. Support new media.

Look what they are they saying:

When Pamela Geller talks about Islam, she does it with both barrels. For sparing us the platitudes when confronting this direct and present danger, she is reviled by society’s bien pensant. In this book, she recounts her adventures in “hate speech,” or as we used to call it, “telling the truth.”  It is both an enlightening and gripping tale.

—- Ann Coulter, Bestselling Author

“How did a nice Jewish girl from Long Island become the Joan of Arc of the counterjihad movement? In this remarkably absorbing page-turner of a book, Pamela Geller tells her story – a story of courage in the face not only of the jihadist enemy but of a veritable army of apologists, appeasers, pacifists, whitewashers, self-styled “bridge-builders,” and assorted cowards, careerists, and sellouts. Armed only with the truth and a passionate love of American liberty, Geller has survived their smears and kept hope alive. It’s an inspiring story that I hope will encourage other freedom-lovers to stand up and be counted before it’s too late.” 

— Bruce Bawer, author of The Victims’ Revolution: The Rise of Identity Studies and the Closing of the Liberal Mind.

Pamela Geller’s fascinating book is the vivid chronicle of a courageous woman who fought vigilantly and with fierceness, confronting dangers, threats and vile defamation, to preserve the American soul of freedom and democratic liberties. A most actual record of our perilous time.

—- Bat Ye’or, Historian, author of Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, and of Europe, Globalization and the Coming Universal Caliphate

“Pamela Geller is a towering hero of freedom. If free people survive into the next generation, which is by no means assured, Pamela Geller will be celebrated as one of those who stood against the tide of Leftism and Islamic supremacism when it was at its apogee. No proper history of the freedom of the human spirit in our darkening age can be written without including her.”

—- Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch and author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad.”

“Free-speech advocates who don’t make waves are not doing their jobs. Pamela Geller writes a guidebook here for Paladins of the First Amendment.”

—- Ambassador John Bolton