Target Still Hasn’t Learned Its Lesson

As the nation prepares for the back-to-school season, Target still hasn’t learned its lesson.

Earlier this summer, a voyeur was caught taking pictures of two sisters in a Detroit-area Target changing room. This frightening incident is not the first to happen at Target because of its dangerous and misguided restroom and fitting room policy—and it won’t be the last.

What was Target thinking when it proudly announced to the world in April 2016 that it allows men to use women’s restrooms and changing areas in its stores? Certainly not that voyeurs and predators are looking for places where they can victimize women and children, otherwise, the retailer would have never made such a perilous business decision.

Just days after that announcement, the American Family Association initiated #BoycottTarget, a movement that has brought together American families who have said “enough is enough.” More than 1.5 million people have signed the boycott pledge, vowing not to shop at Target until the company reverses its politically correct but potentially dangerous policy. These families—and AFA’s boycott—have had a significant effect on both Target’s foot traffic and sales.

As millions are doing their back-to-school shopping, AFA continues to remind families that shopping at Target just isn’t worth the risk. Even though Target continues to be unapologetic, the #BoycottTarget efforts are having impact. But beyond the financial implications for the company, this is an important cultural issue, and Target chose to make itself the example by issuing a proactive statement on its not only controversial but alienating policy.

AFA has made it clear since the boycott began that our worries do not stem from fear of the transgender community, but rather from the very real threat that predators and voyeurs, or anyone with evil intentions, would take advantage of the Target bathroom policy to harm women and children. And they have.

Besides the incident near Detroit this summer, there are other frightening examples of predators taking advantage of Target’s policy. You can find some of those examples on our #BoycottTarget webpage at www.afa.net/Target.

Despite the dangers, Target has not budged on its policy, other than to state that family restrooms would be installed in stores not already equipped with them. That’s not enough. Women’s restrooms and fitting rooms still have an open door to potential predators, putting mothers, daughters, wives and children at risk.

This boycott will not end until all are safe in Target restrooms and changing areas. With enough pressure, I truly believe America’s families can stop this insanity before more women and children become victims and are scarred with experiences they can never forget.

Here’s the bottom line: Target is still presenting risk and danger to women and children. But since the start of the #BoycottTarget initiative, concerned families and shoppers are making an unprecedented impact on a corporation whose policy is to allow men to use women’s restrooms and dressing rooms.

Target’s actions are unacceptable for families, and this policy continues to put women and children in harm’s way. We must keep the pressure on Target by avoiding stores during back-to-school shopping and educate Target to the fact that its bathroom policy earns a failing grade.

  1. If you haven’t already, sign the #BoycottTarget pledge. Invite your family and friends to sign the pledge too.
  2. Forward this information to friends and family. Invite them to sign the boycott pledge at www.afa.net/target.
  3. Call Target headquarters at 612-304-6073 and personally let them know you are boycotting their stores.

If our mission resonates with you, please consider supporting our work financially with a tax-deductible donation. The easiest way to do that is through online giving. It is easy to use, and most of all, it is secure.


Get Clean: The Importance of Admitting Your Drug-Dependent Child into Rehab

Drug addiction often starts at teenage years. It’s when peer-pressure, parties, and the young mind’s curiosity to try new things that drive an adolescent into using substances that are addictive.

Science has provided us with a myriad of evidence on how addictive drugs cause people to act differently, which can often be destructive to the person’s self or the people around him or her.  Feelings of hostility, states of depression, and changes in eating habits are only a few of the symptoms of drug addiction.

If your adolescent child shows the signs, it’s crucial that you take actions. Admitting him/her into a drug rehabilitation center for teens can be a huge help. For your knowledge, here’s the importance and everything you need to know about teen rehab.

What Happens in a Teen Rehab Facility?

The activities, as well as forms of treatment, may vary from one drug rehabilitation center to another.  But you as a parent or guardian of the patient can expect regular activities and sessions in a rehab center.

Of course, there are therapy sessions and timely medical examinations every day. The rehab center also provides the basic needs of its residents such as their daily meals and snacks and physical exercises. Academic activities and social sessions with their fellows in recovery are also set up by a teen rehab center so that the patients won’t feel alone in their problem.

The Benefits of Admitting Your Child into a Teen Rehab

There are several benefits that a drug rehab center can provide drug-addicted adolescents and their parents. Here are the things on top of the list.

Fresh Environment. The time that you admit your drug-dependent child into rehab, you also provide him or her a new environment away from the usual pressures that allow him or her to use drugs. In the rehab center, your teen can have a fresh start and find new opportunities that can help him or her to live a drug-free life.

New Learning. Adolescents are more open-minded than adults in learning new ideas. As such, changing for the better is not a far-fetched idea for them. A teen rehab center can assist them to discover new and healthy lifestyles so that they won’t slide back to their drug addiction.

Discipline. Teen rehab centers have a disciplinary regimen that their residents should follow. With the strict schedule, the teens in recovery can instill self-discipline and healthy routines so that they’ll maintain their sobriety even after their stint in rehab.

A Breather for the Family. Aside from the person hooked by drug addiction, it also puts a significant impact on the parents and relatives. Thus, it provides parents and relatives the much-needed timeout if their drug-dependent loved ones enter rehab. It doesn’t mean that you shirk away from responsibilities, but you simply help the person start his or her process of healing.

Family Support. Family therapy is one of the treatment sessions in a teen rehab center. Not only that it helps the patient in his or her stint in rehab, but family therapy also proves helpful when the patient comes home. It also assists parents on how to build a healthy relationship with their loved one who is in recovery.

Takeaway

Drug addiction is indeed a serious problem. It victimizes persons from all age brackets, especially teens. Drug addiction takes a toll on the person’s brain function and behavior, and it leads to relationship breakups, crimes, and even death.

That’s why it’s essential that you provide help to your loved one who is dependent on drugs. You should admit the person into a drug rehab so that proper treatments are provided for his or her recovery. You can check rehab centers such as Aurora Recovery Centre for that purpose.

VIDEO: Illegal Alien Charged with Murder of Mollie Tibbetts

Fox News reports:

Cristhian Bahena Rivera

An illegal immigrant from Mexico stands accused of killing college student Mollie Tibbetts and dumping her body in an Iowa cornfield — after he allegedly accosted her during a July 18 jog and she threatened to call police.

Cristhian Bathena Rivera, 24, was charged with first-degree murder Tuesday in Tibbetts’ death, officials confirmed.

Authorities said Rivera, who lived in the rural Poweshiek County area, is being held on a federal immigration detainer. He’s believed to have been in the area for four to seven years.

The body of Tibbetts, a 20-year-old University of Iowa student, was found Tuesday in a field covered with corn stalks.

Authorities said Rivera, who lived in the rural Poweshiek County area, is being held on a federal immigration detainer. He’s believed to have been in the area for four to seven years.

The body of Tibbetts, a 20-year-old University of Iowa student, was found Tuesday in a field covered with corn stalks.

Read more.

RELATED ARTICLE: Donald Trump Jr. slams Elizabeth Warren for Mollie Tibbetts response: ‘You can’t make this crap up’

RELATED VIDEO: The Blood of Mollie Tibbetts.

Democratic Socialism Doesn’t Exist: Like the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot, Democratic Socialism Exists Only in Myth

With the upset primary victory of self-proclaimed “democratic socialist”Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez over long-time Democrat representative Joe Crowley, democratic socialism is receiving another boost of popularity in certain quarters of the country. Given the increasing popularity of socialism among young voters especially, it’s clear a basic truth (one might even call it an “inconvenient truth”) needs to be explained: so-called democratic socialism is a mythological creature. It is the Loch Ness Monster of political economy.

Socialism, as consistently defined by both those who support and oppose it, is predicated on the absence of private property. In fact, Karl Marx was adamant that socialism would bring about the end of “private ownership of the means of production.” This would mean the end of individuals and corporations owning, improving, and exchanging resources, goods, and services. The elimination of private property is a central feature of socialism. (For an excellent explanation of the differences between capitalism and socialism, I highly recommend this book by J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. and Marina Rosser.)

This emphasis on the elimination of private property is important because candidates like Ocasio-Cortez, or Bernie Sanders before her, continuously misrepresent what a socialist system is. By hailing certain Nordic countries as successful examples of democratic socialism, these candidates mislead people about the true nature of both socialism and capitalism. The fact is that the very countries Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez praise have market-capitalist economies.

Not only are they market-capitalist systems, several of them rank higher than the U.S. in economic freedom comparisons. While most of these countries have higher taxes and spend more on social services than does the United States, those are not the measures of whether or not a system is capitalist or socialist. Every single one of these nations’ economies functions through markets which allow individual ownership and voluntary exchange.

Moreover, what is rarely mentioned by those praising the success of these countries’ publicly-provided benefits is that several of them are now struggling to maintain those benefits. As the above-referenced Rossers note in their book, Sweden has had a worker absenteeism rate of nearly twenty-five percent since 1990, its high tax rates are thought to have contributed to a loss in the country’s labor supply of six to ten percent, and it has been moving to privatize many state functions.

Equally important in debunking the democratic socialist myth, is the fact that no truly socialist system has ever been compatible (or even tried to be) with democracy. Friedrich Hayek explained why socialism was ultimately irreconcilable with democratic processes in his famous work The Road to Serfdom. Hayek explained that the very nature of economic planning—an essential feature of socialism—would gradually lead to the abandonment of democratic processes. Wrote Hayek:

Yet agreement that planning is necessary, together with the inability of democratic assemblies to produce a plan, will evoke stronger and stronger demands that the government or some single individual should be given powers to act on their own responsibility. The belief is becoming more and more widespread that, if things are going to get done, the responsible authorities must be freed from the fetters of democratic procedure.

A simple examination of any country which fully embraced the mantle of socialism will demonstrate the validity of Hayek’s assertion. The history of countries such as the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and North Korea stand as glaring examples. Even in Venezuela, where Hugo Chavez, a dedicated socialist, was democratically elected as president in 1999, he quickly began moving to undermine the very democratic institutions that had put him into power.

As the economic crisis ravaged Venezuela following his death, Chavez’s successor, Nicolas Maduro, increasingly resorted to undemocratic means to maintain power.

The need of socialism to control all aspects of economic activity will necessarily lead those in power to restrict the available choices and decisions of individuals. This course of action will also require them to reduce the political power of those individuals to protect the plans of those in charge.

Again, history demonstrates this truth. No single country that has attempted to incorporate the abolition of private property and institute state ownership of the means of production has done so through democratic institutions and processes. In every case, this transition was not carried out through the peaceful means of debate, persuasion, negotiation, and votes but through the power of the gun. They literally killed millions of people (intentionally and unintentionally) to accomplish their socialist vision.

Socialist revolutions have always advocated the abolition of markets and private property. The fact that this has always been forced on populations through violence rather than democratic procedures, and the fact that the people within these countries became impoverished, should tell us something about this system.

Ultimately, socialism is incompatible with democracy because democracy, like market capitalism, allows power to flow to the individual. Democracy tolerates dissent, individual differences, and a multitude of different priorities. Market capitalism allows those differences to be managed peacefully through voluntary exchange. As Hayek warned, socialism cannot tolerate such differences nor the democratic institutions that promote their peaceful coexistence.

When candidates like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez refer to countries with market capitalist economies as “socialist,” it creates confusion about what socialism truly is and how it impacts both individuals and societies.

The experiment of socialism has devastated the social, political, and economic institutions that facilitate both economic growth and democracy in every country in which it has been attempted. In its wake, it has left death and misery for the very people for which it was supposedly enacted.

As with the Loch Ness Monster, there are many who have claimed to have seen democratic socialism and its wonderful benefits. However, like sightings of “Nessie,” on examination, the claims of democratic socialism unravel. What Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez, and their supporters label as democratic socialism is actually market capitalism with a robust (some argue unsustainable) social safety net.

Regardless, it is time to place sightings of this mythical creature in the same category as those of Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and the Abominable Snowman. That’s where discussions of democratic socialism belong.

COLUMN BY

James Davenport

James Davenport

James Davenport is an award-winning professor of political science at Rose State College and has also taught economics at the University of Central Oklahoma. You can find him online here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Millennials’ Rosy View of the Welfare State Dwindles Once They’re Told What It Costs

Democratic Socialism Will Destroy America

A Socialist Nightmare in Venezuela

VIDEO: Montana Governor Steve Bullock Moves Toward Gun Control

Dana Loesch on Montana Governor Steve Bullock’s move toward gun control:

“It’s a typical, slimy, unprincipled, political move. It’s so swamp. And the worst part: Democrats will let him get away with it, so long as he kisses all the right anti-gun rings.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Judges stymie profs’ efforts to overturn campus carry

VIDEO: Jewish Students Speak About Anti-Semitism at George Washington University

Whenever Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) or other anti-Israel activists initiate a Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) campaign, Jewish students become fearful of the accompanying anti-Semitism. This is exactly what happened in April 2018, at George Washington University (GWU).

The ugly face of BDS at  #GWU: Jewish students voice their fears again and again, student government ignores them and votes for a secret ballot to push BDS through with zero accountability.

Please retweet #BDSisAntiSemitic

RELATED ARTICLE: CAIR in the Classroom: Islamist Group Partnering with Public Schools

Massachusetts’ Taxpayers sue over anti-Semitic, pro-Islam public school lessons

At last, some push back against what is a nationwide problem.

“Massachusetts Taxpayers Sue Over Anti-Semitic, Pro-Islam School Lessons,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, August 17, 2018:

A group of Massachusetts-based taxpayers are suing the school committee in the city of Newton, a wealthy, liberal enclave, over what they claim is the leadership’s ongoing promotion of anti-Semitic school materials and the promotion of Islamic religious beliefs, according to an announcement from the organization handling the lawsuit.

Education Without Indoctrination, a local community group driving the lawsuit, “claims multiple violations of the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law stemming from the school committee’s handling of a burgeoning scandal over anti-Semitic lessons and the promotion of Islamic religious beliefs as objective facts in the public school district’s history classes,” according to a press release from the group.

The lawsuit stems from a controversy of Newton Public Schools use of what the group claims are “unvetted educational materials” produced by the Saudi Arabian oil company ARAMCO and the Qatari government, which has long been cited for its funding of terrorism.

“In teaching world history, Newton Public Schools (NPS) use unvetted educational materials funded by the Saudi oil company ARAMCO and the government of Qatar. As a result, Newton public school students are propagandized with materials that slander Israel and the Jewish people, and that falsify history to promote the Islamic religion in public schools,” the press release states.

“Just this past May, Newton North High School invited an anti-Semitic group to screen Palestinian propaganda films to its students,” it continues. “For this, NPS Superintendent David Fleishman earned a rebuke from the New England branch of the Anti-Defamation League and Boston’s Jewish Community Relations Council.”

Concerned parents have been stonewalled in their attempts to gain information from the school leadership about these activities, the group claims….

Colleges Are Turning Red Students Radically Blue

A good friend of mine recently attended his daughter’s high school graduation and was amazed at the high number of students attending prestigious universities around the nation. That includes his daughter, who is traveling across the continent to attend Stanford University.

The high school is located in a very conservative part of Southwest Florida just littered with churches, Republican Clubs and Trump supporters. Most of the transplants are from Midwest states. In other words, this is very red America, and presumably a high number of those graduating students reflect their parents’ values. Certainly my friend’s daughter does.

At this moment. And that’s the rub.

Our university systems are increasingly focused on turning red students radically blue. This is not a stated goal, of course. It’s simply the reality on the ground — taking generally conservative, pro-America Christian students and indoctrinating them over four years into progressive, anti-America non-Christian students. While there are certainly exceptions, the numbers depressingly bear out the effectiveness of this indoctrination.

According to Campus Renewal, more than 70 percent of teens who confess Christianity when they enter college reject Christianity by the time they leave four years later. Previous studies have placed it between 65 and 80 percent. So roughly three out of every four.

Of course some percentage of young people will leave the faith when they leave home anyway. That has always been the case, as William Wilberforce explained more than 200 years ago. But the percentages are significantly lower in that group. So if you have a youth group with 20 kids that go to college, the odds are only five or six will still be Christians four years later. Those are just the facts, and that should be deeply sobering for parents, pastors and priests.

There are virtually no studies on the shift in political views of people before and after college, perhaps because so many are still so young they have not formed firm enough worldviews yet to create a data set. But considering the dominance of liberal professors and the monolithically progressive environment that young, impressionable students are thrown into for four years, it is only reasonably to expect a similar level of influence and “flipping” among them.

This picture is partially painted just from faculty political affiliations. In an article published by the National Association of Scholars, entitled “Homogeneous: The Political Affiliations of Elite Liberal Arts College Faculty,” Brooklyn College professor Mitchell Langbert shows this in pure, dominating numbers. Langbert examined the political affiliations of doctorate-holding faculty members at 51 of the top 66 liberal arts colleges listed by U.S. News & World Report.

His findings are astonishing. Fully 39 percent of the colleges in his sample have no Republican doctorate faculty on staff. Not one.

Langbert also looked at the total Democrat-to-Republican faculty ratios at the most elite colleges. At Williams College, the Democrat-to-Republican ratio is 132-to-1; Amherst College, 34-to-1; Wellesley College, 136-to-1; Davidson College, 10-to-1; Swarthmore College, 120-to-1. Only two colleges of the top 66 are even close to having an even faculty: the U.S. Military Academy (West Point) with a Democrat-to-Republican ratio of 1.3-to-1, and the U.S. Naval Academy, with a ratio 2.3-to-1.

Many on the left and in the media have dismissed such studies by claiming that the GOP has moved far right and so actually it left academia. That doesn’t really pass the smell test, but Sam Abrams, writing at Heterodox Academy, plotted graphs comparing where university faculty stand on the political spectrum and where the American people stand. What he demonstrates is that as liberal as universities were as recently as the 1990s, they are dramatically more so now.

“Professors were more liberal than the country in 1990, but only by about 11 percentage points. By 2013, the gap had tripled; it is now more than 30 points. It seems reasonable to conclude that it is academics who shifted, as there is no equivalent movement among the masses whatsoever.”

This dominance, and the obsequiousness of college administrators, reveals itself in the shift in curriculum.

In 64 of the top 76 universities in the country, students can get a history degree without any American history. Wisconsin is entirely dropping history as a major. So is California. Less than 3 percent of colleges require history or civics to get a degree. This all explains why 75 percent of students support socialism, but can neither define it or give one successful example of it. Ignorance of history is foundational to indoctrination. It’s a form of Orwell’s Memory Hole in “1984.”

This is about as objective as is available right now: Comparing the polling on Christian students, the smothering monolithically Democratic faculty, the leftward lurch compared to the rest of the country and the dramatic shift in curriculum, and the outcome becomes not only obvious, but predictable.

In “What’s So Great About Christianity,” Dinesh D’Souza, makes the broader point about public schools through universities:

“Children spend the majority of their waking hours in school. Parents invest a good portion of their life savings in college education and entrust their offspring to people who are supposed to educate them. Isn’t it wonderful that educators have figured out a way to make parents the instruments of their own undoing? Isn’t it brilliant that they have persuaded Christian moms and dads to finance the destruction of their own beliefs and values? Who said atheists aren’t clever?”

The same holds true about Democrats and political radicalization.

An indicator of the veracity of this truth is that the most liberal of media outlets, such as The New York Times and Vox have been working hard to show that while all these facts may be true, college is not making students more liberal, or professors aren’t doing so, or maybe colleges are just opening students’ eyes — depending on the publication.

In other words, they’re providing cover for the indoctrinators.

The students with the best ability to weather the storm of the politically progressive, theologically anti-Christian college years are those whose parents and churches equip them with strong defenses for their beliefs. Without that they walk into a four-year, sustained assault on everything they believe and the statistics are clear what happens.

There is one silver lining. The small percentage that survive the fires of liberal programming over four years, are some of the most stalwart young conservatives out there and are far more adept at defending their views than their peers on the left who were seldom, if ever, challenged in their worldviews. (See: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.)

Even this small percentage worries the progressive gatekeepers such as the New York Times. And that, at least, is a good thing.

RELATED ARTICLE: Yale honors prof who enraged students by defending free speech

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The Revolutionary Act. The featured image is by ISTOCK/IZUSEK.

Shadow Government Psychopaths and the Deep State

There is a system in place, a clandestine, sophisticated network that controls the world we live in. It creates the narrative that permeates throughout the world and becomes the false reality we have all come to know as our way of life. Our civilization is entering the beginning stages of a major collision, and a much-needed course correction is in order. President Trump and we the people must meet this challenge. Failure is not an option. This Shadow Govt. Psychopaths and the Deep State, are now being exposed and are on the run. The pendulum has shifted. We are winning.

Psychopaths & Sociopaths

The world is run by insane people with insane objectives. These individuals are living in a chronic state of fear and believe that everyone is a threat to them and to their very survival. They are crazy. They seek to dominate. They seek absolute control over every aspect of our lives. They seek to suppress and to destroy. They are warmongers and dictators. Many of the men are dressed in expensive business suits and the women in expensive pant suits. Unlike most of the human race, they carry out their acts with absolutely no conscience whatsoever as they are deranged and detached from the light of God to such an extent that evil permeates through them. You should know by now who these individuals are, and if you don’t you will be able to identify them soon, once you come to learn about False Flag Operations, Problem-Reaction-Solution, and the Hegelian Dialectic. Explore these categories on my blog site for more information.

These psychopaths and sociopaths are hard to detect, as they are intelligent, clever, artful, and often rise to positions of power. Many of these individuals are sexual deviants, pedophiles, and belong to demonic groups as recently released by Wikileaks. They are very manipulative and have seized power and control over every aspect of our lives, our speech, and even our thoughts. They have infiltrated and corrupted our education system, health-care system, religious institutions, the media, and most all forms of entertainment. They have seized control over and poisoned our food supply and all natural resources. Yes, it is this shadow government that controls the world in which live, making Earth and its inhabitants prisoners on a prison planet. Now please don’t shoot me, I am only the messenger. So how do they do this?

The Big Club

They formed, own, and control the “big club” and like the comedian George Carlin said,  “You and me, we ain’t in it.” We are nothing more than pawns on the chessboard of life being used as they so choose. They think of us and describe us as useless eaters. So who is part of the big club? The big club can be described as an intricate, interconnected web of organizations, corporations, religions, and governments mostly made up of unelected leaders, many of whom are inbred.

But once again we are winning. We are at steps six and seven on the scale of discovery and actionTrust the plan. Learn more about Q.

And remember this: “No matter how paranoid or conspiracy-minded you are, what the government is doing is worse than you imagine.” – William Blum (former U.S. State Dept. employee).

EDITORS NOTE: Mr. Chambers was nominated for the 24th Annual Colorado Independent Publishers Association EVVY Awards – LEARN MORE. Readers may follow Mr. Chambers at John Michael Chambers AuthorJohn Michael Chambers SpeakerJohn Michael Chambers BlogFacebook Eye on the World, Facebook Author, Facebook Economic Institute.

Pennsylvania Grand Jury: Cardinal Wuerl Paid Hush Money to Child Porn Priest

Among the most disturbing details in the 884-page Pennsylvania grand jury report was that then-Bishop Donald Wuerl of Pittsburgh gave a priest involved in a child porn ring extra money in exchange for the priest’s silence. Not only that, Wuerl gave the priest a glowing eulogy at his funeral in 2001, even posthumously restoring him to full priestly status.

Image

Fr. George Zirwas with his Cuban boyfriend and their dogs Taco and Tico

Page 233 of the grand jury report, released Tuesday, reveals that in 1996, “[Father George] Zirwas informed the [Pittsburgh] Diocese that he had knowledge of other Pittsburgh Diocese priests’ involvement in illegal sexual activity. In exchange for this information, he demanded that his sustenance payments be increased.”

“In response to this request, Wuerl instructed him to document in writing the names of the priests involved, or, state that he had no knowledge of what he had previously claimed,” the grand jury report continues. “Wuerl advised that this action had to be undertaken before Zirwas could receive any additional assistance.”

“After Zirwas disavowed any knowledge of priest involvement in illegal sexual activity in a letter to the Diocese, he was granted an additional financial stipend and his sustenance payments were continued,” the report explains.

That stipend was used to fund Zirwas’ homosexual lifestyle in Cuba, where he lived for several years in a Havana apartment with his younger Cuban boyfriend, and served as liaison to foreigners looking to hook up with male Cuban prostitutes.

It was Zirwas’ boyfriend who found his body on the morning of May 27, 2001, murdered by a Cuban rent boy Zirwas had picked up and brought back the night before. The rent boy, Abel Medina Valdes, later confessed to killing the priest by shooting animal tranquilizer into the base of his neck, causing cardiac paralysis. Valdes also confessed to having murdered two other foreigners.

A Priest Pederast Ring

Gold chain and cross Zirwas would give to victims of sex abuse.

Zirwas’ case is even more bizarre when it’s revealed he was part of a pederast ring in Pittsburgh involving four priests who used whips and chains on teen altar boys, who were plied with drugs and alcohol and passed around for sex.

George, one of Zirwas’ victims, testified before the grand jury that when he was 15, Zirwas took him to a parish rectory where three other priests were present:

The priests began a conversation about religious statues and asked George to get up on a bed. As the priests watched, they asked George to remove his shirt. They then drew an analogy to the image of Christ on the cross, and told George to remove his pants so that his pose would be more consistent with the image of Christ in a loincloth. At that point, the priests began taking Polaroid pictures of George. As the picture taking continued, the priests directed George to take off his underwear. George was nervous and complied.

George recalled that either Zula or Pucci operated the camera. He stated that all of the men giggled and stated that the pictures would be used as a reference for new religious statues for the parishes. George testified that this occurred before he turned 18 years old and that his genitals were exposed in the photographs. George stated that his photographs were added to a collection of similar photographs depicting other teenage boys.

The teen boys specially chosen for grooming by this group of priests were given gifts of gold chains with a cross. The necklace served as a sign indicating which boys had been picked for sexual abuse.

“They were a signal to other predators that the children had been desensitized to sexual abuse and were optimal targets for further victimization,” the grand jury noted.

Wuerl never told police or the prosecutor in the late 1980s any of the information he had learned about the priest pederast ring, Washington District Attorney John Pettit complaining at the time that Wuerl was uncooperative.

A Long History of Abuse

The diocese first started receiving sex abuse complaints against Zirwas as early as 1987. A second complaint in early 1988 involving inappropriate touching of a young man saw Zirwas sent away to a local hospital for treatment. On his return, he was placed back in active ministry — only for two more complaints to surface in November 1988, after Wuerl was installed as bishop of Pittsburgh.

Image

Cdl. Wuerl standing outside Cardinal Wuerl North Catholic High School in Pittsburgh. A petition by students is demanding that the school remove Wuerl’s name.

A 16-year-old boy had said Zirwas had fondled his genitals, and a 17-year-old boy came forward and said he had also been sexually abused by the priest. Wuerl sent Zirwas away to St. Luke’s Institute and on his release placed him back in active ministry. Wuerl never reported the priest’s crimes to law enforcement.

In 1991, a young man told the diocese Zirwas had groped his genitals. Wuerl simply transferred the priest to a new parish — his third parish assignment in two years.

After two more parish assignments, a victim came forward in 1995 claiming Zirwas had performed oral sex on him when he was 15. Wuerl did not go to law enforcement, instead placing Zirwas on a second leave of absence.

In 1996, diocesan records show that an outraged mother of one of Zirwas’ victims met with the diocese to complain that the bishop had allowed the priest to continue in active ministry for years, in spite of abuse her son had suffered at the priest’s hands in 1988, and in spite of promises from the diocese that the situation “had been handled.”

Two of the priests in the pederast ring were eventually prosecuted, convicted and sent to prison. Nothing ever happened to Zirwas, even though his name came up in court testimony in the late 1980s linking him to the pederast ring.

Instead, Zirwas spent his retirement in comfort, living off a monthly stipend from the diocese (paid by Catholic laity), using it to fund his homosexual lifestyle in Cuba. His boyfriend would later reveal that Zirwas was a fixture on the gay scene in Havana, his apartment a popular stopping place for foreign visitors. Meanwhile, the diocese was telling the public Zirwas was ministering to the poor in Cuba.

A Glowing Eulogy

The U.S. State Department worked with the Swedish embassy in Havana to get Zirwas’ body back to the United States, and his funeral was held in June 2001, presided over by the bishop of Pittsburgh. He was accompanied by Bp. William Winter and 21 priests.

“The one thing we know is that George Zirwas responded to God’s call” in the priesthood, Wuerl said during his homily. Wuerl went on to praise the accused pederast for his “kindness” as a pastor, going on to console mourners that the priest had gone to Heaven.

The funeral Mass indicated “great confidence that Father George will experience new life in Christ,” Wuerl said.

He restored Zirwas to the full honor of priesthood, calling him by the title “Father Zirwas,” a name the priest had been forbidden to use ever since he was placed on leave in 1995 following yet another allegation of sex abuse.

RELATED ARTICLE: US Catholic Bishops launch campaign to pressure Trump to admit large number of refugees

Bank of America and Comcast Back Group Demanding Jack Phillips Bake Transgender Celebration Cake

With the ink barely dry on the Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission is continuing its crusade to punish Jack Phillips for running his business in accordance with his faith.

Earlier this summer, the Supreme Court reprimanded the CCRC for the “hostility” towards Jack’s religious liberty and, stung by the defeat, LGBT activists have prepared another assault on the cake baker. Just days after the ruling, the state agency found probable cause with a complaint filed by a transgender attorney against Masterpiece Cakeshop and ordered Jack’s business to undergo compulsory mediation.

The alleged violation? Declining to create a pink cake with blue icing in commemoration of gender transition.

However, Jack and his attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom are striking back and have filed a lawsuit against the Governor, Attorney General, and members of the CCRC. According to the lawsuit:

It is now clear that Colorado will not rest until Phillips either closes Masterpiece Cakeshop or agrees to violate his religious beliefs. The state’s continuing efforts to target Phillips do not just violate the Constitution; they cross the line into bad faith. This Court should put a stop to Colorado’s unconstitutional bullying.

Not surprisingly, LGBT activist groups are digging in and joining the assault on religious liberty. What is surprising, is that major corporations are funding these efforts with YOUR dollars.

For example, One Colorado, a member of the left-wing Equality Foundation, is working to push an agenda that threatens 1st Amendment protections for Masterpiece Cakeshop and all business owners like Jack. Our research has found several major corporations are sponsors of One Colorado’s annual fundraising event including Bank of America and Comcast.

You can see all the companies that help fund the anti-religious liberty activists at One Colorado here.

Would you do business with a company that works to undermine your 1st Amendment protections? If Bank of American and Comcast are hostile towards religious liberty, we need to hold them accountable and send our dollars to companies that will not fund these radical groups. At 2ndVote we recommend banking with your local community bank where you know the individuals who run the business and know your dollars will stay close to home.

We encourage you to tell Bank of America and Comcast why you’re taking your business elsewhere. Use the links below to contact leadership directly:

Send Bank of America an Email! Send Comcast an Email!

RELATED ARTICLE: The Transgender Language War / Abigail Shrier – WSJ


Help us continue creating content like this and educating conservative shoppers by becoming a 2ndVote Member today!


Fake Blues: The Media’s Worst Enemy Isn’t the President, It’s Themselves

On Thursday, over 300 media outlets joined in a coordinated effort to push back against President Donald Trump. That will hardly come as a shock to many Americans, as it seems mainstream news organizations have done little else throughout his tenure in the White House. Indeed, the stunt was perhaps the most vivid and explicit demonstration to date of the mass groupthink, negative Trump obsession, and narrative of victimhood that characterize the modern media landscape.

The Boston Globe led the campaign, characterizing it as a response to the White House’s “dirty war against the free press.” A senior editor proclaimed: “We are not the enemy of the people.”

On the latter statement, we can at least agree in principle. The Bill of Rights is explicit that “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people … to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” These rights have been broadly interpreted to prohibit government officials and entities of all types from engaging in censorship or suppression of free expression.

Americans should be grateful for those freedoms and protections.

However, the mainstream media has become its own worst enemy by abusing its considerable freedom and squandering whatever goodwill and trust it had with America at large.

In a recent poll of nearly 4,000 Americans, 72% expressed the belief that “traditional major news sources report news they know to be fake, false, or purposely misleading,” with nearly two-thirds attributing the reporting of fake news to the promotion of an agenda. Democrats polled tended to be significantly more trusting of media, while Republicans or Republican-leaning Independents were significantly less so.

That’s not President Trump’s fault. Americans’ trust in media had been falling long before he took office.

And despite the media’s mass pity party for themselves on Thursday, it’s hard to imagine any administration in history that has been subjected to greater press scrutiny – to say nothing of disrespect and vitriol – than the Trump administration. Any suggestion that Trump’s efforts have somehow cowed or suppressed critical coverage of him would be the ultimate example of “fake news.”

What the media is reacting to is not a “dirty war” against them, but a new landscape in which a few well-established, for-profit corporations who claim the high ground of the First Amendment can no longer co-opt or set the terms of the national debate without expecting their own pushback or scrutiny. Americans have awakened to the fact that the self-proclaimed “guardians of truth” must be viewed with a critical eye, and media watchdogs have more tools than ever before to hold irresponsible journalists accountable and to correct the record.

And, yes, we also have an American president who will use tools of modern communication to bring his messages directly to the people and to aggressively counter the tsunami of negative coverage he faces virtually every minute of every day. For many Americans used to watching their chosen representatives be treated like mute punching bags by a sneering, condescending press loyal to the opposition party, it can be bracing to see one finally standing up for himself.

Gun owners in particular have reason to reject the media’s victimhood narrative. We have seen far too many examples of false and misleading media reporting on firearm and Second Amendment related issues to attribute the phenomenon to mere ignorance or laziness. What follows are just a few of the more egregious examples.

Ironically, the most obvious indictment of the media was their inability to report accurately or insightfully on the biggest political story of the 21st Century to date: the success of Donald J. Trump’s insurgent candidacy for the presidency of the United States. It would be an understatement to say they misjudged the depth of discontent arising from the Obama years, the horror with which many regarded Hillary Clinton, or the desire millions of Americans had for a leader who would unabashedly affirm America’s greatness.

Had gun owners taken reporting on the 2016 election at face value, they might have accepted defeat without even showing up at the polls. Then instead of a pro-gun president, they would have had one who believed the same Supreme Court that declared the right to keep and bear arms a fundamental individual liberty was “wrong on the Second Amendment.” Pro-gun Americans’ ability to trust their own instincts and persevere in the face of what the media suggested were hopeless odds literally changed the course of the nation’s history.

Another monumental falsehood perpetrated by the media is that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with the individual right to possess a firearm for self-defense. They did this before the U.S. Supreme Court squarely and conclusively ruled otherwise in 2008 (thereby confirming the prevailing view of the American public), and they’ve continued to do so since then. And to whatever extent they are willing to admit the high court’s precedent makes their own views largely academic, they respond by calling for the outright repeal of the Second Amendment or, more dishonestly, by suggesting that all the gun control they want is completely compatible with it.

But however the media attempt to couch their arguments, they remain nearly unanimous: Congress can and should ban guns, whether that means merely the most popular ones or all of them. Simply put, American gun owners who believe in a robust and meaningful Second Amendment know the mainstream media is and long has been working in the opposite direction. This is a remarkably hypocritical posture for an industry that likes to claim the First Amendment as its mandate and shield.

The third way the media has shown its bias against gun owners is by characterizing them as bad or uncaring people and attacking the NRA in the public square. They have suggested that Americans love their guns more than their own children. They have cast support for gun control (the efficacy of which remains mostly unproven) as a moral imperative. They have called the NRA – and by extension, its millions of law-abiding members – “a terrorist organization” and have accused them of having “blood on their hands” and being responsible for the deaths of innocents. They have advocated for shunning gun owners and the lawful industries that support the Second Amendment, not just in polite society, but through the means of modern commerce.  At least one article in the Washington Post even suggested that merely owning a gun makes a person “responsible” for firearm-related violence committed by others.

On top of this are nearly daily examples of reporters’ laughable ignorancefear-mongeringshady factual claims, and transparently biased “fact-checking” regarding firearms and firearm-related violence in the U.S.

The overall picture is of a media apparatus lacking in judgement, professionalism, trustworthiness, and familiarity with the lives and values of millions of ordinary Americans.

To be sure, there are exceptions, and some reporters work diligently and ethically to report accurate information, even when it goes against the conventional wisdom of their colleagues.

But journalists fretting over their public image have more to fear in the practices of their peers than in any characterizations of their profession coming from the White House. If they want to counter the narrative that they are blindly and single-mindedly focused on hounding a president from office at any cost, openly colluding to scold him for rhetoric that merely mirrors their own contempt may not be the best place to start.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

My Slow News Week: Media more worried about other people’s falsehoods and misstatements; just not their own

How Did the ‘Mainstream Media’ Become the ‘Enemy of the People?’

NRA Wins Lawsuit in Washington State, Prevents I-1639 From Appearing on Ballot

Outrage of the Week: Shopify Targets America’s Guns

NoFundMe: NRA Protest March Nets $70 in National Fundraising Effort

King County Unveils “Common Sense” Action Plan: Ban “Semi-automatic, High Velocity Weapons”

Loesch to Cuomo: Be Quiet and Listen to Your Father

“It seems Andrew Cuomo didn’t listen to his own father that much, who took a very, very different view of America’s greatness… So now I’m going to say to you what I say to my own children, Andrew. Be quiet and listen to your father.” —Dana Loesch

Urban Violence Begins in Broken Homes

The Chicago Tribune reported a big drop in violence in Chicago this past weekend. Forty people were shot.

This down from the weekend before, when 74 were shot.

The Tribune’s Steve Chapman rejects what he calls the “popular myth, cynically promoted by Trump and other outside critics” that Chicago is an “exceptionally dangerous city.”

Yes, 674 people were murdered last year in Chicago, more than in New York City and Los Angeles combined. But that is much better than 1991 when, says Chapman, 920 were murdered, and the 674 killed in 2017 was down 15 percent from 2016.

Whether or not we call this violence “exceptional,” it is certainly unacceptable. It should concern us all, particularly its racial characteristics.

As Chapman notes, “Chicago’s crime problem is concentrated in a small number of poor, blighted, mostly African-American neighborhoods.”

He continues, “Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systematic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over the years.”

For sure, misguided government policies have contributed to this sad state of affairs. But these policies were supposed to help these communities, not destroy them.

Policies, such as excessive taxation and government housing, that have fostered indifferent absentee landlords and crime-ridden neighborhoods.

If there is any “deliberate racial discrimination” that drives violence and crime in black urban areas, it is the racial discrimination of the left. It is the racial discrimination of identity politics, which promote the idea that different ethnicities should live under different rules and receive special treatment.

Let’s recall that the unfairness that blacks had to deal with in America’s history was unequal treatment under the law. This is what needed to be fixed, and this is what was fixed in the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

The problem was that liberals wanted to use their agenda not to fix the law but to change the country. And in the name of racial fairness, the era of big activist government, financed with oceans of taxpayer funds, was born.

But government can’t fix anybody’s life. It can only make sure that the law protecting life, liberty, and property is applied fairly and equally.

The beginning of big activist government fostered the demise of personal responsibility.

The perpetrators, and victims, of violence in Chicago and other urban areas are largely young black men. They mostly come from homes with no father and from communities where this reality is the rule rather than the exception.

Making a child is not hard to do. Raising a child and conveying the values and rules that make for a successful life and responsible adulthood is. Particularly now that popular culture largely dismisses these truths. And in black communities, politics and media are dominated by the left, whose message for them is that life is unfair because of racism and the answer is big government.

According to recent data from the Pew Research Center, 36 percent of black children under 18, compared to 74 percent of white children under 18, live in a household with married parents.

And according to Pew, 30 percent of households headed by a single mother, 17 percent of households headed by a single father, 16 percent of households headed by an unmarried couple, and 8 percent of households headed by a married couple are poor.

Data from the Cook County Department of Health show that, in suburban Cook County and in Cook County under Department of Health jurisdiction, in 2016, 86 percent of babies born to black women between 18-29 were born out of wedlock.

President Donald Trump is doing his job. We have robust economic growth that we haven’t seen in years, with unemployment rates at record lows.

Black leaders need to start doing their job and convey that marriage, work, education, and personal responsibility are the only things that will fix black America.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Star Parker

Star Parker is a columnist for The Daily Signal and president of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education. Twitter: .

COPYRIGHT 2018 STAR PARKER

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM


The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now


Trump Foes Assail Mexican Restaurant Chain After Jeff Sessions Eats There

A popular Mexican restaurant chain in Houston faced such a backlash for serving Attorney General Jeff Sessions that its owners disassociated themselves from Trump administration immigration policy and disabled all social media accounts.

Sessions ate Friday night at the family-owned El Tiempo’s Montrose location, one of eight in Houston.

That night, someone posted a photo on the restaurant chain’s official Facebook page showing executive chef Domenic Laurenzo with Sessions and captioned: “We had the honor to [serve] Mr. Jeff Sessions, Attorney General of the United States. Thank you for allowing us to serve you.”

El Tiempo is owned by Roland Laurenzo and his son, Domenic, also the executive chef.

Soon after the photo with Sessions was uploaded on Facebook, a barrage of hateful comments and harassment directed at the Houston eatery began. The reaction prompted Roland Laurenzo to disable all social media accounts, including Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, over the weekend.

In a later deleted follow-up post on Facebook, Roland Laurenzo wrote that El Tiempo served Sessions without “thinking about the political situations”:

El Tiempo does not in any way support the practice of separating children from parents or any other practices of the government relative to immigration. The posting of a photograph of the Attorney General at one of our restaurants does not represent us supporting his positions.

The secret service contacted us that a government official was coming to dinner at our establishment and his identity was not know until he walked through the door. The man came to dinner and he was served without us even thinking about the political situations. We were preoccupied with the secret service and catering to their wants and needs.

The only thing on our minds was serving great food and giving great customer service. It was posted without review or approval by ownership and this has lead [sic] to everyone jumping to conclusions that somehow we are involved in this political matter. We don’t approve of anyone separating parents and children.

Sessions was in town on government business, including a speech about violent crime and measures his Justice Department is taking to reduce gang violence, delivered to local law enforcement officials and federal prosecutors at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas.

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., among others on the left, has urged those who disagree with Trump and his policies to confront his Cabinet officials in public places and cause disturbances.

“People are insulting us in such a dramatic fashion, and we feel like we don’t deserve it,” Laurenzo told KTRK-TV, the local ABC station. “At least temporarily I had it [social media accounts] taken down because I don’t want to be insulted, my children to be insulted, my family to be insulted.”

The backlash wasn’t limited to online. A small group of protesters targeted the restaurant’s Navigation location earlier this week. KTRK (ABC13) reported that fewer than 20 protesters stood outside.

A University of Houston law student, Jessica Lorena, organized the protest. She told Click2Houston: “What we’re trying to do is make sure that we make the people that are attending this restaurant, and its managers, and its owners, uncomfortable.”

One El Tiempo manager reported threats to employees and a suspicious dumpster fire.

Sarah Isgur Flores, Sessions’ public affairs director, declined to comment on the situation to The Daily Signal.

A silver lining for the restaurant chain: The outrage and calls for boycotts prompted folks across Texas to make a special stop at an El Tiempo restaurant, according to local news stations.

El Tiempo was not the only Mexican restaurant where the attorney general ate during his visit to Houston.

The general manager of La Mexicana, Zulema Gonzalez, confirmed that Sessions had a meal there and told the Houston Chronicle: “We treat everybody the same.”

COLUMN BY

Portrait of Ginny Montalbano

Ginny Montalbano

Ginny Montalbano is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Send an email to Ginny. Twitter: @GinnyMontalbano.


The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now.