Dutch Secret Service investigated Geert Wilders’ ‘ties to Israel and their possible influence on his loyalty’

/in , , , , , /by

Breathtaking. This shows how thoroughly the Dutch establishment has been compromised by its avidity to appease Islamic supremacists and pretend that the massive influx of Muslim migrants is not transforming Dutch society for the worse. Like dhimmi Middle Eastern Christians who adopt the Muslim perspective on Israel, they, too, have adopted the notion that support for and alliance with Israel is something nefarious, something to be investigated.

Many swamps are in dire need of draining.

“Report: Dutch Secret Service Investigated Far-right Leader’s Ties to Israel,” by Shlomo Papirblat, Haaretz, December 5, 2016:

BRUSSELS – Geert Wilders, leader of Holland’s far-right anti-Muslim Party of Freedom, was investigated in the past by the country’s General Intelligence and Security Service (AVID) over his “ties to Israel and their possible influence on his loyalty.”

Wilders, whose party is leading the polls ahead of the upcoming election in March, is likely to be a key figure in the next government.

The undercover investigation was exposed over the weekend by the veteran daily De Volkskrant. According to the article, AVID agents conducted the investigation from 2009 to 2010, with its existence and results remaining unknown until now. The Dutch central intelligence organization is in charge of safeguarding internal national security, handling non-military dangers to the country and preventing espionage.

An investigation of this kind into an active politician is an exceptional occurrence in Holland, the newspaper noted. If conducted, it is only in cases in which there are very reasonable grounds for suspicion. Wilders was a member of parliament at the time, with his party supporting the right-center coalition government from the outside and enabling it to remain in power.

The reason for the investigation, according to the newspaper, was concern in the Dutch security service about “the possibility that Geert Wilders is influenced by Israeli factors,” with whom he had close ties. He visited Israel at the end of 2008, meeting with “Gen. Amos Gilad in his office in the main military headquarters in Tel Aviv, and regularly attended meetings with Israel’s ambassador to Holland at the time,” according to De Volkskrant….

RELATED ARTICLE: Hizballah top dog: “Christians and Muslims together oppose the challenges presented to them by Israel and the infidels”

Ohio Concealed Carry Bill Passes Assembly with Impressive Majority

/in , , , , /by

Fairfax, Va.— The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) applauds the Ohio General Assembly for its overwhelming support of legislation that expands the rights of concealed carry permit holders in the Buckeye state.

“Crimes can happen anywhere, at any time. Gun free zones don’t deter criminals, they create victims,” said Amy Hunter, Ohio spokesperson, NRA-ILA. “This important piece of legislation will make people safer. If enacted, concealed carry permit holders will be able to exercise their rights in places where they are currently left defenseless. Additionally, this bill awards military members – who are already among America’s most trusted citizens – more freedom to employ their Second Amendment freedoms.”

If signed by Gov. John Kasich, Senate Bill 199 will expand the list of places a concealed carry permit holder can have their firearm. For example, SB 199 would allow permit holders to store their firearms in their vehicles when parked at work. Additionally, SB 199 will allow members of the military to carry concealed without a permit.

The bill overwhelmingly passed the General Assembly early Friday and now heads to the governor’s desk to await his signature.

“This legislation would make Ohio a safer place. It’s as simple as that,” concluded Hunter.

New ‘Watchlist’ Sends Outspoken Academics into a Tailspin

/in , , /by

A new “watchlist” is ruffling feathers in the academic community, with critics calling it “Orwellian,” “grotesque,” “an assault on academic freedom,” and even “the right’s new McCarythyism.”

Oh, we’ve been there, too. NRA has long warned of the dangers of using secret government blacklists to deny people their Second Amendment rights without due process, transparency, or oversight.

Gun control advocates (including the Obama White House), on the other hand, believe the use of black lists to curtail Second Amendment rights is a “common sense step.” They also argue that the government should run a background check any time a lawfully owned firearm changes hands, even between neighbors, friends, and relatives. It’s a “no-brainer,” they’ll tell you. 

But watchlists and background checks are not so popular with Obama and his fans in other contexts. 

When used to screen out job applicants with criminal histories, for example, background checks are said to be discriminatory, even if the same hiring standards apply to all. It’s not “common sense,” apparently, to favor a law-abiding person to handle a business’s merchandise or money over someone who has recently been convicted of fraud or theft. 

And it’s REALLY not common sense, according to a growing roster of anguished media accounts, to aggregate a list of online news stories about academics who publicly espouse certain political points of view, as in the case of the recently launched “Professor Watchlist,” a project of Turning Point USA.

As described on its website, “This watchlist is an aggregated list of pre-existing news stories that were published by a variety of news organizations.” Its editors will “accept tips for new additions on our website,” but will “only publish profiles on incidents that have already been reported by a credible source.” They also state that they “will continue to fight for free speech and the right for professors to say whatever they wish” but that they believe “students, parents, and alumni deserve to know the specific incidents and names of professors that advance a radical agenda in lecture halls.” 

The site is searchable by professor name and employing institution. It is said currently to contain about 200 entries and includes stock photographs of the listed academics, summaries of their purportedly “radical” statements, and links to the underlying sources. The website does not suggest how browsers should use its information, nor advocate for any specific action against the listed individuals.

One entry, for example, concerns Alvin Lee, a human resources training specialist at Purdue University. According to the linked story from The College Fix website, Lee teaches a Management 301 course in which he labels various phrases as “microaggressions” and dismisses the idea of a meritocracy.  The phrases he subjects to criticism include asking a person where he or she is from, suggesting “[e]veryone can succeed in society if they work hard enough, “ and believing “the most qualified person should get the job.”

Several of the entries on the watchlist specifically mentioned the professors’ statements about NRA and its members.

James Pierce, an adjunct professor at Southern State Community College, is cited for a Facebook post in which he wrote, “Look, there’s only one solution. A bunch of us anti-gun types are going to have to arm ourselves, storm the NRA headquarters in Fairfax, VA, and make sure there are no survivors.”

Erik Loomis, a history professor at the University of Rhode Island, is singled out for a series of anti-NRA tweets in which he blamed NRA for the Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy. “I want Wayne LaPierre’s head on a stick,” he wrote. He also claimed “the National Rifle Association has murdered some more children” and asked if NRA membership could count as “dues contributing to a terrorist organization?” 

Journalism professor David Guth, of the University of Kansas, earned his spot on the list with his own tweet after another high profile mass murder. “The blood is on the hands of the #NRA,” he wrote. “Next time, let it be YOUR sons and daughters. Shame on you.” When representatives of the Campus Reform website later asked Guth about the tweet, he acknowledged writing it and expressed no remorse. “I do not regret that Tweet,” Guth stated. “I don’t take it back one bit.”

College is of course a very expensive proposition these days. Parents and potential students have to weigh a multitude of factors in choosing the right institution for their needs. And alumni are perpetually solicited for money to promote the values and educational programs of their former schools. The Professor Watchlist could be considered one more data point for decision-making in these circumstances. One could even think of it as an informal background check on those tasked with influencing the minds and values of America’s rising generation of adults.

But despite inapt comparisons to 1984 and McCarthyism, the effort does not employ the heavy hand of government coercion or official disapproval. It is distinguishable, in that regard, from such efforts as the infamous “Rightwing Extremism” report issued by Barack Obama’s Department of Homeland Security. That report indicated that mainstream and widespread political views, such as opposition to gun control and concern over illegal immigration, were contributing to a rise in “radicalization” and “recruitment” among antigovernment groups. This activity, DHS warned, could “result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities” and “lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.” It’s also distinguishable from the government-maintained Terrorist Watchlist and No-Fly List at the center of various gun control proposals.

The principal behind the private non-profit Turning Point USA is 23-year-old political activist Charlie Kirk. Explaining the motivation behind the watchlist, Kirk stated, “Everyday I hear stories about professors who attack and target conservatives, promote liberal propaganda, and use their position of power to advance liberal agendas in their classroom.” He continued, “Turning Point USA is saying enough is enough.  It’s time we expose these professors.” 

And, after all, isn’t exposure of his or her ideas what every principled and ambitious academic seeks?

In any case, private groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) have been doing similar things for years, appointing themselves curators of this or that list of groups or people who don’t meet their approval for one reason or another. SPLC, for example, maintains its “Extremist Files,” which in some cases include groups that do not advocate violence or lawlessness but which have political or cultural views that diverge from those of the SPLC. Far from being decried by the mainstream press as Orwellian or McCarthyist, however, SPLC is often cited as if it were an authority on the subject of extremism.

Whatever one might think of Turning Point USA’s efforts, it’s hard not to detect more than a hint of hypocrisy amongst an academy and press that revel in pointing condemning fingers at others but shudder with indignant horror when the spotlight is turned on those with whom they identify.

RELATED ARTICLE: What gun groups want from Trump

A Return to Liberal Learning: The Examined Life IS Worth Living

/in , /by

While a post-election mass meltdown is taking place on college campuses across the country (aided and abetted by radical professors), philosophy professor Jack Kerwick carries on, as he should, teaching….philosophy.

A longtime friend of Dissident Prof who contributed an insightful essay to Exiled, Jack Kerwick offers his musings on the purpose of philosophy for these times in today’s post, “A Return to Liberal Learning: The Examined Life IS Worth Living.”

The Examined Life IS Worth Living

by Jack Kerwick, Ph.D., posted December 9, 2016

Not all news coming from academia these days is necessarily bad news. In my own little corner of this world, some of it is actually quite good, and it’s all that much sweeter when it is considered within the larger context of contemporary events.

At a time when universities and colleges around the country are creating “safe spaces,” hosting “cry ins” and “walk outs,” and distributing coloring books and the like for students and faculty who have been traumatized by the election of Donald J. Trump to the presidency; when institutions of higher learning have betrayed their traditional mission by substituting training in political ideology for education of the heads and hearts of their pupils—I’m happy to report that the members of the community of my little college in Southern New Jersey are busy attending to the sorts of matters for the sake of which the liberal arts had historically been prized.

On November 29, the Dean of the Liberal Arts Division at the institution at which I’ve taught philosophy for the last 17 years, Donna Vandergrift, gave a talk in the campus auditorium.  Patterned on the New York Times bestseller, The Last Lecture, the presentation was subtitled, “Do you know who I am?”

Randy Pausch was a professor of computer scientist at Carnegie Mellon when he was diagnosed with terminal cancer.  His last lecture, being that it really was his last, was designed to impart to his audience Pausch’s reflections on the human condition, reflections that were as autobiographical in their inspiration as they were comprehensive in scope: Pausch supplied insights into human existence that were drawn from the unique human life that he lived.

Moreover, it wasn’t just any old reading of the human situation that Pausch delivered. The vision that he bequeathed had neither the pessimism of a Schopenhauer or Hobbes nor the utopian optimism of Rousseau or Godwin.  Rather, life, on Pausch’s reading of it, though hard, was also, ultimately, good.

While she is not terminally ill, Donna carried on in this same vein.  Of course, it was from her own life’s experiences that she drew in buttressing the vision of human existence that provided their subtext, a vision according to which life, though ridden with unforeseen but inevitable trials, contains much in which to delight.  In fact, it’s precisely in surmounting these tribulations, in persisting through the hardships, that no small share of this delight is to be gotten.

There is pain, yes, but without the pain, there is no gain.

Donna is a psychologist by trade.  Her lecture, though, was ripe with philosophical jewels. Long before either Donna or Pausch, there was Saint Augustine.  And centuries after the great Catholic philosopher and theologian had gone to meet his maker, there was the Renaissance man and founder of the genre now known as the essay, Michel de Montaigne.  Both Augustine and Montaigne made subjects of themselves.

Augustine declared: “Men go abroad to wonder at the heights of the mountains, at the huge waves of the sea, at the long courses of the rivers, at the vast compass of the ocean, at the circular motions of the stars, and they pass by themselves without wondering.”

To discern the human condition and its relation to the Creator in Whose likeness it was made, Augustine delved into his own soul.  Montaigne affirmed this maneuver when he remarked: “Each man bears the entire form of man’s estate.” It was this belief, doubtless, that accounts for why Montaigne also said that he studies himself “more than any other subject.”  “That is my metaphysics,” he insisted, “that is my physics.”

This last comment is especially revealing.  Metaphysics is the study of ultimate reality, of what’s really real.  And physics is the study of the material world.  In examining himself, Montaigne recognized, what Augustine had realized centuries earlier, that self-knowledge and the knowledge of everything else—including and most importantly the knowledge of the ground of one’s being—are inseparable.

Augustine and Montaigne exemplified more than most the philosophical spirit at its best.  But their faith that reality, though infinitely diverse, is ultimately one, as well as their courage to unlock the hidden mysteries of the cosmos by plunging ever more deeply into themselves so as to unveil their own secrets were hardly unique to these two men.

Recall, it was Socrates who famously declared that “the unexamined life is not worth living,” and it was his successor Plato who explicitly noted the parallels between the nature of the human soul and that of reality.

Moses, the Buddha, Confucius, and Lao Tzu are some of the ancients from around the world who realized that one’s own condition is a window into reality as a whole.

As to the stuff of which the self, humanity, and reality are made, and as to how these things are related to one another, these are questions that have been answered variously.  Yet there is, it seems to this philosopher, a common theme that unites the vison of each person with that of every other, a theme that transcends the contingencies of time and place, history and culture.

This theme is that of unity-in-difference.

The contradictions between philosophies of humanity and the world no more preclude recognition of common bonds between generations and ages than do the contradictions, the flux, within oneself preclude a sense of individual identity.  Implicit in her talk was this awareness on Donna’s part that while she has spent most of her life oscillating between disparate ideas as to who she “really” is, it is through these internal conflicts that her sense of oneness, her sense of being a unity, a single self, has strengthened.  The more acutely one feels the conflicts in one’s life, the greater is both one’s determination to find resolution and the confidence that one’s quest for wholeness will eventually bear fruit.

In revisiting—or, more accurately, reimagining from the vantage point of the present moment—some of the crucial events of her life, Donna was furthering her journey to both self-discovery and, importantly, self-creation (The two are not mutually exclusive).  And insofar as she enacted and re-enacted her life before the college community, Donna underscored a critical truth that is all too easily forgotten in our exceedingly individualistic age: The forging of one’s own identity is, in significant ways, a communal enterprise of a sort.

Ours is a Politically Correct epoch.  The liberal arts and humanities have been corrupted by the infusion of political ideology in colleges around the country and beyond.  As readers of this column are all too familiar, this is a theme on which I regularly sound off.  Yet when departures from this descent into the abyss occur, when minds are once again provoked to look inward, upward, and outward, they must be celebrated.

And when they occur at my little school, and courtesy of my colleagues, it’s that much more satisfying to be the bearer of glad tidings.

ABOUT JACK KERWICK

Jack Kerwick

Jack Kerwick

Jack Kerwick is a friend of Dissident Prof and contributor to Exiled. He received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Temple University.  A lifelong Roman Catholic, his work has appeared in various publications, both popular and scholarly.  Kerwick is the author of two books, The American Offensive: Dispatches from the Front and the recently published, Misguided Guardians: The Conservative Case Against Neoconservatism.  He teaches philosophy at Rowan College at Burlington County in Mount Laurel, NJ where he resides with his wife and son. You can email him at: jackk610@verizon.net

WANTED: Criminal Illegal Aliens for Rape and Murder

/in , , , , , /by

Doing the same thing and expecting different results is a form of insanity. Democrats are all in for sanctuary cities. Obama protected and increased the numbers of illegals and refugees coming to America. Hillary Clinton’s campaign website states:

Hillary has been committed to the immigrant rights community throughout her career. As president, she will work to fix our broken immigration system and stay true to our fundamental American values: that we are a nation of immigrants, and we treat those who come to our country with dignity and respect—and that we embrace immigrants, not denigrate them.

Note that Obama, Democrat majors of sanctuary cities and Hillary Clinton never mention the words “illegal alien.” If you come here illegally then you have broken America’s laws, rewarding those who break the law leads to lawlessness and deadly consequences. Here are two current examples.

Fox News reports in a column titled “Illegal immigrant accused of killing 2 in hit and run had been deported 8 times“:

The illegal immigrant wanted for allegedly killing two people in a hit-and-run case in Kentucky had been deported eight times, the Department of Justice has confirmed.

Miguel Angel Villasenor-Saucedo, 40, is wanted for the Oct. 22 drunken car crash that killed two women in Louisville. Villasenor-Saucedo was most recently deported in 2013.

“Villasenor-Saucedo fled the scene and [Louisville police] officers later obtained a criminal complaint from the Jefferson County District Court charging Villasenor-Saucedo with leaving the scene of a fatal hit and run accident,” the Justice Department said in a statement. “A warrant has been issued for Villasenor-Saucedo’s arrest.”

Read more…

In an article titled “Illegal Immigrant Rape Suspect Wanted in Louisiana” John Binder writes:

FARMERVILLE, Louisiana – An illegal immigrant suspected of raping pre-teen girls is currently being searched for by Louisiana law enforcement after he was released by federal immigration officials.

Illegal immigrants from Mexico, Christian Ramirez and Mario Rameriz, were both arrested and charged with aggravated rape of pre-teen girls in the northern Louisiana town of Farmerville in 2013, according to KNOE News.

At the time, Mario Rameriz was prosecuted and convicted on the rape charges, as he is now serving a 12-year sentence. Union Parish Sheriff Dusty Gates told KNOE Rameriz was prosecuted quickly “due to the seriousness of the charges.”

Christian Ramirez was turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) while awaiting trial for the rape charges in 2014.

That is when ICE mistakenly released Ramirez.

Read more…

President-elect Donald J. Trump has said this during his illegal immigration speech in Dallas, Texas:

Time to enforce our immigration laws, strengthen our Southern border security and deport criminal illegal aliens.

Time to make America safe again.

RELATED ARTICLE: Mississippi Governor: Don’t send us any Syrians until Washington D.C. ‘welcomes’ them

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Trump supporters protesting outside the Luxe Hotel, where Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump was expected to speak in Brentwood, Los Angeles, California, United States July 10, 2015. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson – RTX1JYHC

Meet Code Pink for Peace: The Face of Anti-Americanism, Anti-Semitism and Socialism

/in , , , /by

When Code Pink: Women for Peace was launched on November 17, 2002, the organization described itself as a “grassroots peace and social justice movement” whose mission was “to end the war in Iraq, stop new wars, and redirect our resources into healthcare, education and other life-affirming activities.” Rejecting “the Bush administration’s fear-based politics that justify violence,” the nascent group called instead “for policies based on compassion, kindness and a commitment to international law.” The group’s name was intended to mock the Bush administration’s “Code Orange,” “Code Red,” and “Code Yellow” designations for the various levels of terrorist threats that, in the government’s estimation, existed at any given time.

Code Pink was founded principally by four radical activists: Jodie Evans, Medea Benjamin, Diane Wilson, and a Wiccan spiritualist calling herself Starhawk. (Approximately 100 additional female activists also participated in getting the organization off the ground.) Evans was, and remains, the nominal leader of the group, which works closely with Ms. Benjamin’s Global Exchange and Leslie Cagan‘s United For Peace and Justice. According to a Capital Research Center report, Code Pink members “subscribe in varying degrees to strands of Marxist, neo-Marxist, and progressive left-wing thought, and their ideas belong to a long and complex history of radical politics going back to the early Bolsheviks.” The group views America as an irremediably “racist” and “sexist” society whose political and economic systems, by their very nature, breed war, poverty, and injustice.

According to the Capital Research Center, “Code Pink is the business name for a nonprofit called Environmentalism through Inspiration and Non-Violent Action.” The name “Code Pink” was selected to parody the Bush administration’s color-coded security alerts regarding terrorist threats—alerts that Code Pink said “were based on fear and were used to justify violence.” By contrast, the “Code Pink Alert”—signifying “the color of the roses … the color of the dawn of a new era when cooperation and negotiation prevail over force”—warned that the Bush administration posed “extreme danger to all the values of nurturing, caring, and compassion that women and loving men have held.” Proclaiming that “women have been the guardians of life … because the men have busied themselves making war,” Code Pink called on “women around the world to rise up and oppose the war in Iraq … to be outrageous for peace.”

Code Pink strove, from its earliest days, to portray itself as a politically nonpartisan organization composed not of seasoned activists, but of ordinary, peace-loving women with no political ax to grind. In truth, however, the group’s founders and leading members had long histories of radical left-wing and pro-socialist activism. For example, a number of Code Pink’s prominent figures were previously, in the 1980s, ardent supporters of the Communist Sandinista regime of Nicaragua. Indeed, both Medea Benjamin and Code Pink organizer Kirsten Moller worked in eighties with the Institute for Food and Development Policy, which aided the Sandinistas. Similarly, Code Pink spokeswoman Sand Brim—who told reporters in January 2003 that she was merely an average woman with reservations about war—had likewise tried to help Central American Communists during the eighties. As executive director of the organization Medical Aid, Brim in 1985 flew an American neurosurgeon to San Salvador to operate on the battle-injured hand of Nidia Diaz, Commander of the Marxist Revolutionary Party that had claimed responsibility for the murders of four U.S. Marines and nine civilians.

Other early and current Code Pink members previously, in the 1990s, helped organize anti-free-trade protests across the globe, targeting large corporations with high-profile campaigns and multi-million-dollar lawsuits. Still others were cutting their radical teeth in the fields of environmentalism and eco-terrorism during the nineties. Code Pink co-founder Jodie Evans, for one, today sits on the directors’ board of the Rainforest Action Network, an anti-capitalist, anti-corporate coalition of environmental groups.

From its inception, Code Pink’s principal modus operandi has been street theater. During each of its first 100 days, the organization staged all-day antiwar vigils in front of the White House. Moreover, it initiated a campaign to present pink slips (women’s lingerie)—a word play on the paper-variety “pink slips” that are given to employees as notification that their jobs are being terminated—to President Bush and other pro-Iraq War officials. During one Washington, DC demonstration, a group of Code Pink activists, garbed entirely in pink, marched up the Capitol steps, unfurled their anti-war banners, and stripped down to their undergarments, shouting: “We’re putting our bodies on the line … you congresspeople better get some spine! We say, stand back, don’t attack—innocent children in Iraq. We don’t want your oil war, peace is what we’re calling for!”

Arguing that the Iraqi resistance against the U.S. troops who had invaded that country in March 2003 was well-justified, Evans said in an August 2003 interview: “Basically what the Americans did was destroy any form of infrastructure that could have held the country together—like the Iraqis say, to wipe anything that could hold the country together off the map…. There isn’t an Iraqi you meet who doesn’t feel that they’re being disrespected, that this is being done on purpose. It’s made them hate the American government, hate it. They just think it’s stupid and cruel and mean and thoughtless and everything you can think of…. What’s cool about the resistance is that the Iraqis don’t back down.”

In conjunction with Global Exchange and United For Peace and Justice, Code Pink in 2004 helped establish Iraq Occupation Watch (IOW) to monitor potential American abuses—including “possible violations of human rights, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly”—during the reconstruction of war-torn Iraq. Code Pink’s and IOW’s common objective was to thin out U.S. forces in Iraq by persuading soldiers to seek discharges and be sent home as conscientious objectors.

On the domestic front, Code Pink endorsed the Civil Liberties Restoration Act of 2004, which was designed to roll back, in the name of protecting civil liberties, vital national-security policies that had been adopted after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Also in 2004, Code Pink was a signatory to a letter urging members of the U.S. Senate to vote against supporting Israel’s construction of an anti-terrorist security fence in the West Bank, a barrier that Code Pink has described as an illegal “apartheid wall” that violates the civil and human rights of Palestinians. To view a list of fellow signers, click here.

In late December 2004, Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin and Jodie Evans participated in a delegation to Iraq that also included representatives of Global Exchange, International Occupation Watch, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and Families for Peace. These delegates delivered more than $600,000 in cash and medical supplies (many of which were donated by Middle East Children’s Alliance and Operation USA) to the families of the insurgents who were fighting American troops in Fallujah, Iraq. Senator Barbara Boxer, Rep. Raul Grijalva, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, and Rep. Henry Waxman provided diplomatic courtesy letters to help facilitate the transport of this aid through Customs. The organizations sponsoring the delegation were Code Pink, Global Exchange, the Middle East Children’s Alliance, Peace Action, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Project Guerrero Azteca for Peace, United for Peace and Justice, and Voices in the Wilderness.

For much of 2005, Code Pink staged weekly protests outside of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, where many wounded U.S. soldiers were being treated. The protesters displayed signs bearing slogans like “Maimed for Lies” (by the Bush administration) and “Enlist here and die for Halliburton.” At one of these rallies, Gold Star Families for Peace founder Cindy Sheehan, who began to work closely with Code Pink as her public persona grew, told the five-year old son of Laura Youngblood, whose husband, a United States Navy Corpsman, had recently been killed in Iraq: “Your daddy died for a lie.”

In July 2005, Code Pink joined a coalition of individuals and organizations demanding the closure of the Guantánamo Bay detention center and an “immediate independent investigation into the widespread allegations of abuse taking place there.” Among the coalition’s members were Eve Ensler, Gloria Steinem, Not In Our Name, the Center for Constitutional Rights, the Culture Project, and United For Peace and Justice.

Also in 2005, Code Pink published a book titled Stop the Next War Now, which included essays by such notables as Medea Benjamin, Phyllis Bennis, Becky Bond, Leslie Cagan, Barbara Ehrenreich, Jodie Evans, Eve Ensler, Randall Forsberg, Kit Gage, Janeane Garofalo, Amy Goodman, Julia Butterfly Hill, Arianna Huffington, Naomi Klein, Barbara Lee, Wangari Maathai, Cynthia McKinney, Nancy Pelosi, Arundhati Roy, Cindy Sheehan, Helen Thomas, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Alice Walker, and Lynn Woolsey.

As the Iraq War continued to rage, Code Pink launched an aggressive Counter-Recruitment campaign aimed at dissuading young men and women from joining the U.S. military. According to the organization, this project represented a way of “standing up to these warmongers and liars” in the Bush administration. To this day, Code Pink continues to maintain:

“Counter-recruitment is a national movement to resist the recruitment of young people into the US military. Counter-recruitment has several components: informing youth of the realities of military service; resisting recruitment through the schools via JROTC and testing; taking action on military sexual trauma; offering career alternatives to the military; vigiling and protesting in front of military recruiting offices; giving support to war resisters and veterans; and building awareness of militarism in our culture.”

Depicting the financial cost of the Iraq War as a drain on resources that would have been better spent on programs to combat the racism, sexism, poverty, corporate corruption, and environmental degradation that were allegedly decimating domestic life in the United States, Code Pink lamented that: “[M]any of our elders … now must choose whether to buy their prescription drugs, or food. Our children’s education is eroded. The air they breathe and the water they drink are polluted. Vast numbers of women and children live in poverty.” The threat of distant terrorists, claimed Code Pink, was insignificant when compared to the “real threats” that Americans faced every day: “the illness or ordinary accident that could plunge us into poverty, the violence on our own streets, the corporate corruption that can result in the loss of our jobs, our pensions, our security.”

In July 2006, Code Pink sponsored “Troops Home Fast,” a 28-day hunger strike against the Iraq War. This action was conducted as a “rolling fast,” where each participant abstained from eating for one day. Among the participants were such luminaries as Cindy Sheehan, Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, Danny Glover, Ed Asner, Willie Nelson, Lynn Woolsey, Maxine Waters, Dennis Kucinich, and Cynthia McKinney.

In August 2006, a 12-person delegation of American radicals—including Cindy Sheehan, Tom Hayden, Medea Benjamin, Jodie Evans, and Judith LeBlanc—traveled to Jordan to meet with 11 members of the Iraqi parliament. According to Benjamin, the parliamentarians, impressed by the spirit underlying the aforementioned 28-day “fast,” had personally invited the delegates.

Upon their arrical In Jordan, the American delegates met with Sheikh Ahmad al-Kubaysi, a Baghdad-based cleric who:

The prime sponsor of the Code Pink-led delegation was the Iraq National Dialogue Front, a coalition headed by Saleh al-Mutlaq, a Sunni who:

  • opposed the new, post-war Iraqi constitution because it guaranteed the establishment of an autonomous region for the Shi’ites;
  • condoned armed “resistance” against American forces;
  • offered to join the Iraqi “insurgency”;
  • regularly called upon the United States to disarm itself in the face of terrorism;
  • derided “the biased people [who] are trying to … to brand as terrorists the honorable national resistance movements”; and
  • demanded the release of all Iraqi prisoners—including a massive number of foreign jihadists and Saddam loyalists—on grounds that all of them were being held “on the basis of suspicions and false reports.”

By the time their meetings with the Iraqi parliamentarians were over, the Code Pink delegates had accepted virtually the entire terrorist platform, saying:

“The common thread among this diverse group of Iraqis and Americans was a desire to set a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, ensure no permanent bases in Iraq, and secure a U.S. commitment to pay for rebuilding Iraq. Other issues that emerged in two-days of intensive talks include the need to dismantle militias, provide amnesty for prisoners and the various armed groups, compensate victims of the violence, revise the Constitution and preserve the unity of Iraq, and reverse U.S.-imposed de-Baathification and economic policies. We left this historic meeting with a commitment to make sure that the voices of these Iraqi parliamentarians are heard here in the U.S., and we will bring a group of them to the U.S. in the Fall.” (Emphasis in original.)

In 2006, Code Pink leaders Cindy Sheehan, Jodie Evans and Medea Benjamin traveled to Venezuela to meet personally with that country’s Communist dictator, Hugo Chavez. After the meeting, Evans reported that Chavez had “called Cindy [Sheehan] ‘Mrs. Hope’” Further, Evans said of Chavez: “He was a doll. Generous, open, passionate, excited, stimulated by the requests and happy to be planning with us. He was realistic but willing to stretch.” In a similar spirit, Medea Benjamin praised Chavez’s policies and stated that “George Bush—and [former Democratic presidential candidate] John Kerry for that matter—could learn a thing or two from Hugo Chavez about winning the hearts and minds of the people.”

In December 2007, when Pakistani President (and American ally) Pervez Musharraf was under pressure to step down from power, Medea Benjamin and Tighe Barry of Code Pink traveled to Pakistan to help America’s enemies increase the pressure on Musharraf. Both were arrested and deported by Pakistani authorities.

In September 2008, a number of Code Pink leaders met personally with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in New York City. Soon thereafter, Code Pink launched an aggressive pro-Hamas, anti-Israel campaign. That November, Jodie Evans and a Code Pink contingent visited Iran at the personal invitation of Ahmadinejad. Davood Mohammad Niar, head of the U.S. Desk of Iran’s Foreign Ministry, escorted the group on a visit the holy city of Qom.

In 2009 Code Pink further escalated the intensity of its international campaign to stop the blockade that Egypt and Israel had imposed on Gaza (to prevent the importation of weaponry) after Hamas‘s 2006 election as the region’s dominant political entity.

In December 2009 Code Pink led an international delegation of anti-Israel leftists to Gaza, where they delivered “tens of thousands of dollars in humanitarian aid” as a gesture of defiance against Israel’s blockade. Hamas protected the demonstrators during their two-day stay in Gaza by tightly controlling their movements and contacts, and by having them stay in a Hamas-owned, Five-Star hotel that one demonstrator described as “the nicest hotel I’ve ever stayed at.” Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh addressed the activists in Gaza via cell phone, while other Hamas officials spoke to them in person.

Next, the demonstrators prepared to go to Egypt, to participate in a Hamas-organized “Gaza Freedom March,” again to protest Israeli policy. Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin told the media that Hamas “has pledged to ensure our safety” in Egypt. Joining Code Pink on the trip were former Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Code Pink’s trip to Gaza and Egypt was timed to mark the one-year anniversary of Israel’s December 2008 defensive action against Hamas terrorists in Gaza, who had fired some 3,300 rockets into Israel during the preceding few months. Hamas marked the anniversary by launching a number of rockets into Israel while the organization hosted the Code Pink delegation.

Also during the trip, Code Pink endorsed the “Cairo Declaration to End Israeli Apartheid” authored by pro-Hamas leftists who likewise had gathered for the “Gaza Freedom March.”  The declaration called for a wide-ranging boycott of Israeli economic, travel, academic, and cultural endeavors.

When the Code Pink excursion to Gaza and Egypt was over in early January 2010, the organization’s website proudly announced that the delegates had focused “worldwide attention on the [Israeli] siege”; “lifted the spirits of the isolated people of Gaza”; “put the spotlight on the negative role Egypt is playing in maintaining the siege”; “forced the Egyptian government to make a concession by etting 100 delegates into Gaza”; and “signed on to a lawsuit against the Egyptian government for building a wall to block off the tunnels that have become the commercial lifeline for the people in Gaza.”

Between 2008 and 2010, Code Pink made nine trips to Egypt in a campaign to undermine the Egyptian government, which was on friendly terms with Israel and was helping to enforce the Israeli blockade against Gaza. Then, when riots erupted in Egypt in late January 2011—ostensibly protesting the autocratic and corrupt regime of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak—Code Pink representatives were on the ground in Cairo from the very start of the uprising. In early February 2011, Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin reported that her organization had already raised more than $10,000 for the anti-Mubarak protesters. In an effort to augment that sum, Code Pink issued an emergency appeal for an additional $5,000 to fund “the next big uprising” against the Egyptian government.

On January 10, 2015, Code Pink activists forced their way through a security fence at the McLean, Virginia home of former Vice President Dick Cheney and stormed his front porch, displaying signs that bore slogans like “Wanted: For Torture and War Crimes.”

During a January 28, 2015 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on U.S. national security strategy in the face of global challenges, testimony was given by three former Secretaries of State: 91-year-old Henry Kissinger, 94-year-old George P. Shultz, and 77-year-old Madeleine Albright. During the proceedings, a number of Code Pink protesters — bearing signs that read “Kissinger War Criminal” and “Cambodia” — rushed up behind the former diplomat at the witness table and tried to arrest him for “war crimes.”

On March 1, 2015, Code Pink participated in an anti-Israel protest at the site of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in Washington, DC. The demonstration featured a Hezbollah flag flying overhead; chants that “BDS is the best” (Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement); chants that “The State of Israel’s Got to Go”; a banner bearing a Star of David and the slogan, “The Blood Is On Your Hands”; and a sign likening Israel to the Islamic State terrorist organization.

Code Pink is an organizational supporter of the Free Gaza Movement. It is also a member organization of the Abolition 2000, After Downing Street, and United for Peace and Justice anti-war coalitions, and a member of the National Council of Women’s Organizations.

Code Pink has received financial support from the Benjamin Fund, Global Exchange, the New Priorities Foundation, the Streisand Foundation, the Threshold Foundation, and the Tides Foundation.

Code Pink identifies dozens of left-wing organizations as its “allies.” Among these are Adalah-NY, Alternet, CommonDreams, Democracy Now, the Feminist Majority Foundation, Global Exchange, Gold Star Families for Peace, the Huffington Post, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Jewish Voice for Peace, MADRE, Military Families Speak Out, The Nation, the National Priorities Project, the New Priorities Network, the Peace Majority Report, Pacifica.org, the Rainforest Action Network, the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, United For Peace and Justice, Veterans For Peace, Women in Black, the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, and Zmag.

As of 2006, Code Pink consisted of at least 250 chapters in the U.S. and elsewhere around the world. In November 2011, Jodie Evans reported that the organization had “about 100 local chapters,”andthat some 200,000 people received its e-mails each week.

Code Pink’s current issue priorities are:

  • Ground the Drones: “Drones (unmanned aerial vehicles) have become the signature weapons of the Obama administration’s air strikes in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Drones scout over the two countries, launching Hellfire missiles into the region, missing their intended targets, [and] resulting in the deaths of many innocent people including children.”
  • Peace with Iran: “Faced with the specter of another catastrophic war, CODEPINK is putting pressure on politicians—and their wives—to use diplomacy, not bombs.”
  • Women Occupy: Deriving its name from the Occupy Wall Street movement, Code Pink urges its members to “focu[s] women’s issues, as well as racism and classism.”
  • War Criminals: “Thus far the U.S. has failed to prosecute anyone up the chain of command for abuses that have occurred in the highest offices of the United States of America [during the George W. Bush administration], setting a precedent for future leaders to repeat the same crimes. That is why CODEPINK is modeling citizen justice … by holding the former Bush administration, Obama administration and others accountable for leading us into unjust and illegal military interventions.”
  • Palestine and Israel: “CODEPINK stands in solidarity with Palestinian and Israeli nonviolent activists and human rights advocates working to hold Israel accountable for its violations of international law and to promote the rights of Palestinians. In addition, we work here in the United States to educate Americans about the realities of Israel’s occupation and to change U.S. foreign policy in the region. We feel personally implicated in Israel’s violations of human rights and international law because our tax dollars—$3 billion annually in military aid—subsidize Israel’s occupation.”
  • Boycott Sodastream: “SodaStream markets itself as an environmentally friendly product to ‘Turn Water Into Fresh Sparkling Water And Soda’… but there is nothing friendly about the destruction of Palestinian life, land and water resources! SodaStream is an Israeli corporation that produces all of its carbonation devices in an illegal settlement in the West Bank. All Israeli settlements exist in direct contravention to international law! This settlement company obscures its true illegal origin by marking its products ‘Made in Israel,’ however ‘made in an illegal Israeli settlement’ is more like it.”
  • Bring Our War $$ Home!: “Spread the truth about how our taxes are being wasted on militarism and war, and help get a bigger piece of the budget pie for our needs at home!”

For additional information on Code Pink, click here.

1247 E St, SE
Washington, DC
20003
Phone :(202) 248-2093
Email :
medea@codepink.org
URL: Website

Trump’s Selection of Andy Puzder for Labor Secretary ‘a win for job creators’

/in , , , /by

ATLANTA, Georgia /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Today, President-Elect Donald Trump’s transition team announced the selection of CKE Restaurants CEO and Job Creators Network Member Andy Puzder as the next Secretary of Labor. Alfredo Ortiz, president and CEO of the Job Creators Network, issued the following statement:

The selection of Andy Puzder as the next Labor Secretary is a win for job creators and the 85 million people in the country who owe their livelihoods to small businesses. Puzder not only understands job creation but is a proven job creator himself, with over 3,000 restaurant franchises in the country that collectively employ over 75,000 people.

Puzder’s understanding of labor markets and job creation stand in stark contrast to the existing Labor Department, which has taken a hostile approach to small business job creators with its support for dramatic minimum wage and overtime exemption increases, a joint-employer mandate, a blacklisting rule, and mandatory paid time off regulations (to name a few).

Puzder is an ideal pick to reverse this overzealous regulation because he understands that economic freedom and a light regulatory burden are the best ways to improve the job market, grow the economy, and raise wages.

The Job Creators Network and American small businesses congratulate President-Elect Donald Trump for doubling-down on his job creation mandate by putting a proven job creator at the helm of the Labor Department.

ABOUT THE JOB CREATORS NETWORK

The Job Creators Network (JCN) is the voice of real job creators that has been missing from the debate on jobs and our economic crisis. JCN members talk about paychecks, not politics, helping the public and policymakers understand how to create jobs. For more information, please visit www.JobCreatorsNetwork.com.

RELATED ARTICLE: Meet the $15 Minimum Wage Opponent Trump Wants to Lead Labor Department

More than the EPA

/in , , , , , , /by

Conservatives and rule of law advocates are rightfully rejoicing at President-elect Trump’s pick of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to head the EPA. Members of the environmental community on the other hand, are crying in their lattés as they lament the end of their power over the people via one of most abusive unconstitutional reigns of a government agency in modern American politics.

However, this gallant new knight at the round table of honest government will need help. Curing the ills of nearly thirty years of United Nations inspired man-made global warming propaganda, and related global, socialistic, sustainability programs tied to a re-distribution of wealth, will take much more than just one inspired leader at the EPA. The cancer of environmental extremism and government dominance over US citizens under the guise of ‘saving the planet’ has now had three decades to metastasize within the body of America and infect all of our fundamental institutions that make up this country.

The roots of the current affliction of man-made global warming (a.k.a. climate change) are spread across the globe but can be identified by several key events in the past. They include the late British PM Margaret Thatcher’s desires to permanently end the UK coal miner’s strikes by going to nuclear power. To achieve this goal, though perhaps not understanding the monster she was creating, she was the first global leader who pumped serious money into resurrecting the long dead greenhouse gas theory in the mid-1980’s. Later, the formation of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN-IPCC) in 1988, created a global forum for publication of often misleading and sometimes fraudulent science reports using the re-minted greenhouse theory. The UN-IPCC’s stated aims were to examine only mankind’s CO2 role in climate change, thus ignoring the role of more important causes like the Sun. Yet, as erroneous as these reports and their associated and failed global climate models have been, they have nonetheless been used by governments around the world to justify the spread the politics of environmental extremism.

This political sickness began its most invasive phase in the USA when a much younger Rep. Nancy Pelosi introduced the United Nations “Agenda 21” on the floor of the House of Representatives during the Bill Clinton administration. Clinton later ushered in a more palatable version of “Agenda 21” as the “Sustainable America” program. This required all elements of the federal government to get on board with a US version of the UN program. The infection then became an integral part of American governance. President Barack Obama took these earlier initiatives to a whole new level with his Clean Power Plan, Climate Action Plan, out-of-control job killing EPA regulations, and his international diplomatic efforts where he was fulfilling a legacy desire to be crowned the world’s climate change king.

As a result of these and numerous other federally controlled climate and renewable energy programs, we now have two generations of Americans who have been brainwashed into believing that mankind controls the Earth’s climate, that the Sun is insignificant in doing so, that polar bears are endangered, and that only by controlling man’s industrial CO2 can we save the planet from catastrophic overheating by the year 2100. None of these assertions has been proven and there is, in fact, substantial evidence against these dubious claims. Many like me, believe they are emblematic of “…the greatest international scientific fraud in human history.”

Yes, the future Trump administration may finally give the American people a chance to truly return scientific integrity to the White House, and cast out the disease of politically driven science and nefarious United Nation programs that run counter to the U.S. Constitution. But it won’t come from just one Lancelot at the EPA.

More to the point, failure to implement a comprehensive treatment for this malady may allow this illness to resurface in another form or agency in the future.

Only a comprehensive nation-wide campaign every bit as rigorous and thorough as the one that created this disease of environmental socialism, will be sufficient to end it, once and for all.

EDITORS NOTE: John L. Casey is the author of the best selling climate book, “Dark Winter.”

Bates College students petition administration to become a sanctuary college

/in , , , , , , /by

All over the country (we are told) college administrators are setting up sanctuaries for illegal aliens (and refugees!) to protect them from Donald Trump and his “deplorable” voters.

Here is what the students are saying at Bates College in Lewiston, Maine.

BTW, Bates is the Alma mater of House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte who is responsible for most immigration issues that come  before the House.  Can’t he get a little pressure going among other alums to stop sending donations if sanctuary is approved.

Or better still, how about seeing what federal money the college is getting and cut it off!

From Bates College students:

We, the concerned students of the Bates Community, move that Bates College follow the lead of over 200 colleges and universities across the nation in seeking official status as a sanctuary campus for undocumented immigrants living at Bates and in Lewiston. This is an imperative step as we prepare to protect the members of our community directly threatened by President-Elect Donald Trump and his administration.

Within the first 100 days in office, President-Elect Donald Trump plans to block funding for sanctuary cities and states and overturn Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). DACA specifically grants protection from deportation to undocumented immigrants who came to the United States under the age of 16 and before June of 2007. With the repeal of DACA, over 13,000 U.S. college students will be in danger of deportation. It is the duty of college and university administrations across the country to act in defense of students most vulnerable to President-Elect Donald Trump’s proposed immigration policies.
screenshot-79

Sanctuary spaces around the country—including cities, states, and college campuses—serve to protect undocumented immigrants by refusing to comply with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Colleges and Universities hold unique power in that ICE officials cannot step foot on campus property without authorization (policy number 10029.2). Not only will sanctuary status serve to protect DACA-mented, undocumented students, faculty, and staff, but it will also serve as a gesture of protection and kindness to Lewiston’s large Somali refugee population (one of the largest populations in Maine with approximately 7,000 Somali refugees)—a group of people whom Donald Trump has directly targeted in his campaign, blaming them for Maine’s increasing crime rates.

I guess the kids haven’t heard about Ohio State? Trump will be there today to meet with student victims.

Continue reading here to see what else the little darlings want.

Here is an idea for Mom and Dad! Instead of spending $50,000 a year for tuition at Bates, if you have so much extra money, maybe take some refugees/DACA kids in to your homes. Why waste it on Bates! Total cost with room and board: $66,000!

As a country we could do with far fewer colleges (like Bates) busy brainwashing kids.  Let’s focus on creating trade schools that might train students for something useful.

Go here for our complete (lengthy) archive on Lewiston, Maine.  And, definitely don’t miss this news  from Lewiston—Maine has a sexual assault problem!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

President-elect to visit Ohio State terror attack victims today

22 Charged, 1 Admits Guilt In Fake N.J. College Scam, Conspiring With 1,000 Foreign Nationals – Cranford, NJ Patch

Pew’s excellent synopsis of where [how many] refugees were resettled in FY2016

/in , , , , , /by

Although we have covered many of these numbers, this is a handy synopsis of where most refugees went in FY2016 and what ethnic groups predominated.

See the story here.

We are now two months in to fiscal year 2017 and see here that our rate of admission will put us way beyond FY2016 levels if Trump doesn’t turn off the spigot on January 21, 2017.

pew-chart

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Nebraska received (per capita) more refugees last year than any other state

At least four (more!) reasons SC Governor Nikki Haley as UN Ambassador makes me nervous

We Know Something that most Americans Don’t — How I became a thought-criminal

/in , , , , /by

This morning I received an email from Piotr Jankowski, managing editor of a Polish-language news website in Warsaw, telling me about an article they had just posted about me, my work, and my recent arrest at GMU by the politically correct campus police. The article was titled, Persecuted: in USSR for anti-communism, in USA for anti-Islamism.

Surfing their site, it didn’t take long to discover close to a dozen People’s Cube images and parodies by me and other Cubists from several years back, translated into Polish.

Since my grandfather was Polish, we had a Polish dictionary and a language manual in the family library. Polish is also close enough to my native Russian and Ukrainian, so with some practice I was able to read Polish magazines, which were more interesting than the Soviet ones.

As a kid, I loved the Polish satirical magazine Szpilki. It wasn’t widely available and their cartoons were often a lot more sexually charged than those in the Soviet print media, so my parents tried to keep them out of my sight. But seeing just one issue was enough to make me wonder why such things didn’t exist in the Soviet Union. It was possibly then that I first experienced adult thoughts about the existence of censorship. Seeing those magazines today wouldn’t probably impress me that much, but at the time they turned me into a thought-criminal. I realized that a world without censorship was more fun to live in.

Granted, Poland was a reluctant Soviet satellite with heavily censored press. And yet Polish movies and books seemed more honest and revealing in just about anything, from sex to politics. Apparently the Poles enjoyed a little less censorship and a little more freedom that we in the USSR did. It was logical to conclude that if a little less censorship meant a little more fun, a world without any censorship whatsoever would be a blast. And that world existed just west of Poland – in Europe, America, and the rest of what we call Western societies.

Ever since I imagined a world without censorship, I wanted to live in it. My own country began to feel less like the Motherland and more like an obstacle to freedom. As a teenager, whenever the Motherland’s embrace felt especially stifling and cold, I stayed warm thinking about parts of the world where people were free. I imagined I was one of them and it made me felt better. These people could speak their mind without the fear of being overheard. They could write and read books, make and watch movies, play and listen to the music without government’s permission. They gave me hope.

The sounds of the Beatles and other rock and roll music of the 1970s also helped. Turning on the tape recorder provided an instant immersion into that free world, a temporary escape from the stuffy Soviet reality. I believe that was a common experience for many young people of the Eastern Bloc. Owning an overpriced pair of blue jeans and listening to Western music went way beyond mere aesthetics; it was a non-verbal expression of our longing for freedom and an analgesic relief from the daily ideological bullying and brainwashing by the Communist regime.

It felt as though all those uncensored cartoons, music, and blue fade-out apparel were made especially for us. Communist propagandists agreed, telling us that all those “Western things” were masterminded by capitalist propagandists with the sole purpose of subverting the Soviet youth and weakening our communist resolve. We laughed at their paranoia, and yet the feeling of some secret messaging addressed to us was inescapable. Living in a totalitarian society will do that to you.

Everything the Communists did had a special political purpose, and they projected the same on their “capitalist adversaries,” claiming that all those “Western things” were part of a clandestine anti-Soviet operation. Later it came almost as a revelation to many Soviets that it wasn’t so. The superior consumer goods were the natural outcome of the capitalist economy, the uncensored art was the outcome of freedom, and rock and roll was a scream of joy that resulted from it. Whatever political messaging the Soviets attached to those things would have most likely surprised their creators.

As for me, I just wanted to experience a world where things were appreciated merely for their beauty, without any political weight clinging to them after they’d been dragged through the garbage of false totalitarian narratives.

Then I finally came to live in the U.S. and discovered a country chained by political correctness, which has become America’s new zeitgeist. Censorship came not as much from the government as from the media denouncements, which were then universally repeated by the mindless adepts of “progressivism.” Wherever I look I see a never-ending buildup of false narratives in an increasingly unfree society, where few things remain to be enjoyed for their beauty without the political ball and chain attached to them. One can’t even buy a chicken sandwich or watch a TV show, let alone read the news, without thinking about political messaging, symbolism, or ulterior motives.

The perpetrator is, once again, leftist ideology. It may not be a replica of the Soviet ideology, but it is nonetheless aligned with the general delusional idea of a world-wide socialist Utopia achieved through a totalitarian rule of “benevolent” elites. And now the totalitarian leftists are teaming up with the totalitarian Islamists. The censorship in Western societies has redoubled since Islam came into play. Apparently the leftists are hoping that Islamic supremacism will quietly go away once it helps them to conquer the world. That is, of course, yet another dangerous delusion.

I hate politics as much as a soldier hates the war but continues to fight because it’s the only way to victory. I’d rather live my life enjoying beautiful things without any politics attached, but today that seems like an impossible dream. The alternative to fighting is a surrender to the stifling totalitarianism and censorship, which will be a lot worse than going back to the Soviet days. The West’s surrender to the leftist agenda means that there will be no other parts of the world left to give us the hope of freedom. Nowhere to smuggle uncensored books, tapes, or cartoons from. Nowhere to run to.

This is why I do what I do. And this is what also drives the people in the far-away Warsaw to do what they do, including the translation of the People’s Cube satires into Polish.

Having grown up in an unfree world, we know something that most Americans don’t.

EDITORS NOTE: This column was first published in the alt-media FrontPage Magazine.

Heartland Institute Experts React to Trump Appointing Scott Pruitt to Head EPA

/in , , , , /by
By H. Sterling Burnett, Jay Lehr, John Nothdurft, Bette Grande, S.T. Karnick, Christopher Essex, Isaac Orr, Marc Morano

“One small appointment for Trump, one giant leap for environmental sanity.” – H. Sterling Burnett

President-elect Donald Trump today named Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to be his administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Pruitt is among some two-dozen state attorney generals suing EPA to stop President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan and the agency’s rule regulating methane emissions.

“With the choice of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to head the Environmental Protection Agency – a man who has fought to uphold federalism, the limits placed upon the federal government in the Constitution, and sound policy on energy and environmental issues – it’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas!

“Pruitt has sued the Environmental Protection Agency over its Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule, its Waters of the United States rule, and the Clean Power Plan. So it seems there is hope the next administration will finally rein in the runaway EPA – by withdrawing or rewriting those and other rules in a way that respects freedom and economic progress, or by deciding not to defend the rules in court. One small appointment for Trump, one giant leap for environmental sanity.”

H. Sterling Burnett
Research Fellow, Environment & Energy Policy
The Heartland Institute
Managing Editor, Environment & Climate News
hburnett@heartland.org
312-377-4000

“There would be many people on my list for great EPA administrators but none would be any higher on it than Scott Pruitt. We have not had a knowledgeable individual at the helm of EPA for more years than I am willing to say. For well over a decade, we have had a combination of incompetence and anti-capitalists at the helm who knew nothing of environmental science and more importantly they did not care. As long as they could place road blocks in the way of progress with no validity whatsoever as to improved environmental protection, they felt they were doing their job.

“This is a great day for the environment, the American people, and the economy – which will soon no longer be crippled by totally insane regulations, including the idea that humans exhale a pollutant with their every breath.”

Jay Lehr
Science Director
The Heartland Institute
jlehr@heartland.org
312-377-4000

“The selection of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt is an obvious commitment to a pro-environment, pro-energy, pro-jobs agenda. Pruitt has been a vocal critic of federal overreach and understands that state agencies are well-positioned to take on a larger role in protecting the environment while also allowing for responsible and necessary commerce and energy production. This pick will go a long way towards correcting the Obama administration’s regulatory overreach, which has cost us jobs, hurt farmers, and has had an insignificant effect on the environment.”

John Nothdurft
Director of Government Relations
The Heartland Institute
jnothdurft@heartland.org
312/377-4000

“There is going to be a new sheriff in town at EPA, and that is welcome news for North Dakota’s agriculture and energy issues. Attorney General Scott Pruitt is a principled federalist who has taken the lead in fighting federal overreach. Our states have been forced into costly litigation with EPA and other regulators simply to protect their sovereignty, and Pruitt has been on the front line. This is a fantastic appointment for those of us in fly-over country, and I can hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth at EPA from my house.

“This is a strong first step by the Trump administration to roll back the federal overreach and burdensome regulations from the Obama administration. Attorney General Pruitt stood up for consumers facing escalating energy costs, our farmers and ranchers, and our energy industry, and will bring a breath of fresh air to EPA. Well done President-elect Trump!”

Bette Grande
Research Fellow, Energy Policy
The Heartland Institute
governmentrelations@heartland.org
312/377-4000

Ms. Grande represented the 41st District in the North Dakota Legislature from 1996 to 2014.

“‘Personnel is policy,’ as the saying goes. This nomination strongly suggests that Trump plans to keep his campaign promises to unleash the nation’s energy production and roll back excessive regulations imposed by the Obama administration. That’s good news for energy consumers and the millions of Americans whose jobs depend on fossil fuels, from factory workers to truck drivers.

“The next step after deregulation would be for Trump and Pruitt to close down the EPA and return its powers to the states, who have been doing the real work of environmental enforcement during the 40-plus years of the agency’s existence. That would give the nation’s energy sector and overall economy a huge boost.”

S.T. Karnick
Director of Research
The Heartland Institute
skarnick@heartland.org
312/377-4000

“Humanity has been in sore need of protection from would-be protectors. Maybe it is coming at long last.”

Christopher Essex
Professor, Department of Applied Mathematics
University of Western Ontario
essex@uwo.ca
312-377-4000

“The appointment of Scott Pruitt should usher in an era of less regulation of the nation’s energy supply. Deregulation would mean a boost to the nation’s energy supply, lower prices and a much needed stimulus to business activity.”

Jack A. Chambless
Economics Professor Valencia College
jchambless@valenciacollege.edu
312/377-4000

“The appointment of Scott Pruitt is a good first step at draining the swamp at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Under President Obama, EPA has become the fourth branch of government, seeking to gain control of nearly every aspect of American lives. This news is good for the nation’s farmers and ranchers, manufacturers, and energy producers.

“The appointment signals a sharp contrast between the Trump and Obama administrations and will be good news for anyone who gets their hands dirty at work, as President Trump will encourage companies to build things in America, whereas President Obama regulated companies out of business.

Isaac Orr
Research Fellow, Energy and Environment Policy
The Heartland Institute
iorr@heartland.org
312/377-4000

“President-Elect Trump’s appointment of Scott Pruitt is a breath of fresh air. No longer do we have to suffer under President Obama’s ridiculous EPA “climate” regulations. It is also refreshing that a Republican president is not throwing EPA over to the green activists and the media by appointing a weak administrator. Christine Todd Whitman he is not!

“Trump’s pick of Pruitt means that a Republican president is finally standing up the green establishment! Historically, EPA chiefs have been the most liberal cabinet members appointed by past Republican presidents from Nixon through Ford, Reagan and both Bushes. Trump has broken the cycle!

“No longer do we have to endure GOP presidents avoiding battle over the green agenda by picking EPA chiefs that who were timid at best. We know how bad GOP EPA picks have been in the past because the former GOP EPA heads all endorsed President Obama’s EPA climate regulations!

“If anyone was worried about Trump’s meeting with former vice president Al Gore earlier this week, the pick of Pruitt is reassuring. Basically Trump listened to what Gore had to say and then he exercised his good judgement and did the exact opposite.

“Kudos to Trump for standing up to the well-funded climate establishment by picking Pruitt!”

Marc Morano
Policy Advisor
The Heartland Institute
Morano@ClimateDepot.com
312/377-4000

RELATED ARTICLE: Delingpole: Trump’s EPA Pick Proves He’s Serious About Slaying the Green Monster

FAIR: General Kelly Strong Choice for DHS, appoint Kris Kobach for Immigration Enforcement Role

/in , , , , /by

“General Kelly has spent his life defending our nation and fully understands the critical role border security plays in protecting the country from the threats of terrorism, uncontrolled illegal immigration, and drugs,” said FAIR President Dan Stein

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) President Dan Stein hailed the selection of Retired General John Kelly as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), noting that the appointment will bring some much needed expertise and unwavering commitment to securing the nation’s borders against terrorism and illegal immigration.

“General Kelly has spent his life defending our nation and fully understands the critical role border security plays in protecting the country from the threats of terrorism, uncontrolled illegal immigration, and drugs.  He will bring a renewed commitment to controlling our borders and ensuring the safety of the American homeland.”

Stein noted that under the Obama Administration, border security has been all but ignored, criminal aliens have been regularly released back onto the streets, and the men and women risking their lives working in immigration enforcement have been largely demoralized.

“General Kelly’s commitment to the nation’s security is without question, and his military expertise and experience fighting the influx of illegal drugs from Latin America gives him unique insight into the challenges faced by the nation’s immigration enforcement agents, as well as practical knowledge of border deterrents,” he said.

Stein also urged the consideration of Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach for a key position with the administration in immigration enforcement.  “Kris Kobach has decades of hands-on experience working both in the administration and with communities on the front-lines of illegal immigration,” said Stein.  “He’s an incredibly sharp constitutional lawyer who understands the law, and knows exactly what needs to be done to quickly regain control of the nation’s borders,” he said.

ABOUT FAIR

Founded in 1979, the Federation for American Immigration Reform is the country’s largest immigration reform group.  With over 500,000 members nationwide, FAIR fights for immigration policies that serve national interests, not special interests.  FAIR believes that immigration reform must enhance national security, improve the economy, protect jobs, preserve our environment, and establish a rule of law that is recognized and enforced.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Surprise! Lutheran refugee contractor got more refugees last year than they planned for

National Border Patrol Council: Incoming DHS Secretary John Kelly ‘Has History on His Side’ for Approach to Border Security

Top House Republican Proposes Aggressive Plan to Help Trump Fight Terrorism

Dodd-Frank Must Go. Here’s the Republican Plan to Save Community Banks, Spur Economic Growth.

SANCTUARY CAMPUSES: How the safety of students and faculty are compromised to achieve the leftist agenda

/in , , , , , /by

Two disturbing articles focusing on “Sanctuary college campuses,” serve as the predication for my article today.

On November 22, 2016 “The Atlantic” published, “The Push for Sanctuary Campuses Prompts More Questions Than Answers: It’s not clear how far colleges would or could go to stop the deportation of students.”

This article detailed how some “Sanctuary” colleges will not cooperate with immigration authorities.

Consider this excerpt from this article:

“Faculty at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, who would like to see the school become a sanctuary campus, met on Monday with administrators to “have a better sense of what their expectations are for a sanctuary campus,” said Joanne Berger-Sweeney, the school’s president. Her faculty expressed interest in the school declining to pass immigration information to federal authorities, and in establishing a network of alumni who are willing to offer pro bono legal help to undocumented students.”

On December 1, 2016 the website, “The College Fix” posted, “UC President Napolitano to campus cops: Don’t enforce federal immigration law.”

Here is are salient excerpts from this article:

Napolitano — who served as Secretary of Homeland Security under the Obama administration, charged with protecting the nation’s borders — put out a statement Wednesday that her office will “vigorously protect the privacy and civil rights of the undocumented members of the UC community and will direct its police departments not to undertake joint efforts with any government agencies to enforce federal immigration law.”

The announcement comes as students in the country illegally and their peer allies are distraught that there might be mass deportations of undocumented students under a Donald Trump presidency. Many student leaders have announced their schools are “sanctuary campuses.” Now campus leaders are essentially following suit.

According to Napolitano’s office, there are about 2,500 undocumented students enrolled across the 10-campus UC system.

“While we still do not know what policies and practices the incoming federal administration may adopt, given the many public pronouncements made during the presidential campaign and its aftermath, we felt it necessary to reaffirm that UC will act upon its deeply held conviction that all members of our community have the right to work, study, and live safely and without fear at all UC locations,” Napolitano stated.

The article went on to report:

With that, the University of California also issued its “Statement of Principles in Support of Undocumented Members of the UC Community,” outlining measures they will take to protect DACA students:

The University will continue to admit students consistent with its nondiscrimination policies so that undocumented students will be considered for admission under the same criteria as U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

It is important to consider Napolitano’s statement about all members of the community “living safely and without fear at all UC locations.”

How safe are students and faculty members on campuses where illegal aliens are shielded from detection by federal authorities?

Napolitano stated that all members of the community have the right to work.  Illegal aliens, however, are forbidden, by law, from working in the United States.

When Napolitano was the Secretary of Homeland Security, she was in charge of the DHS agencies responsible for the enforcement and administer of the immigration laws yet she now equates immigration laws with discrimination.

The DHS was created in the wake of the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. The enforcement and administration of our immigration laws were moved from the Justice Department to the DHS because it was understood that border security and the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws were matters of national security.

Our immigration laws are oblivious about race, religion or ethnicity but seek to prevent the entry or continued presence of foreign nationals (aliens) whose presence would pose a threat to national security or public health or public safety.

Title 8, United States Code, Section 1182 enumerates the categories of aliens who are to be excluded from entering the United States.  This includes aliens who suffer from dangerous communicable, diseases or extreme mental illness, are convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, terrorists and spies.

Aliens who enter the United States without inspection may have evaded that critical vetting process at ports of entry because they have criminal histories, may be fugitives or know that their names are listed on counter-terrorism watch-lists.

Some aliens who are subject to deportation (removal) were lawfully admitted into the United States but subsequently violated their terms of admission.  Some of these aliens are now subject to deportation because the have, since entry, have been convicted of committing felonies.

Janet Napolitano must certainly be aware of this yet she seeks to harbor illegal aliens who may well be criminals, fugitives or even terrorists on college campuses, including the campuses of the University of California she presides over.

The harboring and concealment of such illegal aliens is a felony under Title 8, United States Code §1324. (Bringing in and harboring certain aliens).

Yet the article noted that “The University will not cooperate with any federal effort to create a registry of individuals based on any protected characteristics such as religion, national origin, race or sexual orientation.”

Schools that admit foreign students are required to notify the DHS when foreign students fail to maintain their status as students.

On August 30 2016 the ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) website posted a news release, “ICE releases quarterly international student data” that reported that more than 1.1 million foreign students are currently enrolled in more than 8,000 schools and universities across the United States.

Thousands of foreign students have gone missing in the United States.  How many are being harbored today on “Sanctuary campuses?”

Consider that on September 2, 2014 ABC News reported, “Lost in America: Visa Program Struggles to ‘Track Missing Foreign Students’.”

Here is how this report began:

The Department of Homeland Security has lost track of more than 6,000 foreign nationals who entered the United States on student visas, overstayed their welcome, and essentially vanished — exploiting a security gap that was supposed to be fixed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.

“My greatest concern is that they could be doing anything,” said Peter Edge, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official who oversees investigations into visa violators. “Some of them could be here to do us harm.” 

Homeland Security officials disclosed the breadth of the student visa problem in response to ABC News questions submitted as part of an investigation into persistent complaints about the nation’s entry program for students. 

ABC News found that immigration officials have struggled to keep track of the rapidly increasing numbers of foreign students coming to the U.S. — now in excess of one million each year. The immigration agency’s own figures show that 58,000 students overstayed their visas in the past year. Of those, 6,000 were referred to agents for follow-up because they were determined to be of heightened concern. 

“They just disappear,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. “They get the visas and they disappear.” 

Coburn said since the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, 26 student visa holders have been arrested in the U.S. on terror-related charges. 

Tightening up the student visa program was one of the major recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission, after it was determined that the hijacker who flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had entered the U.S. on a student visa but never showed up for school. 

The official report, “9/11 and  Terrorist Travel – Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States” focused specifically on terrorists entered the United States and ultimately embedded themselves as they went about their deadly preparations.

Page 47 of this report noted:

“Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.” Mohammed Salameh, who rented the truck used in the bombing, overstayed his tourist visa. He then applied for permanent residency under the agricultural workers program, but was rejected. Eyad Mahmoud Ismail, who drove the van containing the bomb, took English-language classes at Wichita State University in Kansas on a student visa; after he dropped out, he remained in the United States out of status.

For starters, any school that declares itself to be a “Sanctuary” for illegal aliens should have its authority to issue the form I-20 to foreign students summarily revoked.

Foreign students must present that form (I-20) to the U.S. embassy or consulate in order to be issued a student visa so that they may be admitted into the United States to attend school.

Foreign student advisors at each and every school are responsible for notifying DHS about foreign students who fail to attend those schools for which they were granted visas.  Clearly “Sanctuary Schools” cannot be trusted to cooperate fully with the DHS and make proper notification to the DHS.

No I-20 Forms:  No Visas:  No Foreign Students.

RELATED ARTICLE: In Texas, Republicans Fight New Sanctuary Cities in Wake of Trump Victory

Outrage: Obama White House tells WWII vets to get over ‘feeling embittered’ over Pearl Harbor

/in , , /by

Yesterday, Josh Earnest, outgoing Obama White House spokesperson, had the effrontery at a press conference to accuse the few survivors and their generations of families and WWII vets  to get over their being  ‘embittered’ over the Japanese sneak attack that resulted in  2,117 dead and 960 missing and presumed dead  on the morning of Sunday, December 7, 1941.  Earnest apparently conveyed the President’s concern over gestures towards the visit by Japanese Premier Abe who will accompany Obama paying a visit to the Arizona Memorial at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii signifying “comfort” but no apologies on behalf of all Japanese citizens on the 75th commemoration. Abe is the first Japanese Prime Minister to make such a visit in memoriam to the victims of the Pearl Harbor attack. The President and Premier Abe will be holding their last summit before the President’s final term in office ends.

That dastardly attack is forever engraved in American history of WWII as “the day that will live in infamy” intoned by FDR at the rostrum of a joint session of Congress on Monday, December 8th when he declared War against the forces of Imperial Japan.

The toll at Pearl Harbor stood until the morning of 9/11 when 15 Saudi, Egyptian and Yemeni Islamikaze of Al Qaeda seized commercial air flights at Boston’s Logan Airport, Newark International Airport and Dulles International Airport in Virginia destroying the Twin Towers in lower Manhattan, taking out a section of the Pentagon and being overcome by the heroic passengers on board Flight 93 forcing it to crash in a field in southwestern Pennsylvania. The sneak attack of 9/11, what we and other’s have called the Pearl Harbor of the 21st Century  killed more than 2,996 injured 6,000 others.

There is something more productive that the Obama White could do in the remaining weeks of its second and final term in office. They could right a wrong done to the Pacific Fleet commander, Admiral Husband Kimmel and U.S. Army, Lt. General Walter Short. They were relieved of commands, demoted one star each, and falsely accused of incompetence that day. Reinstating their full ranks along with absolving them of unfounded accusations with apologies to their families and service colleagues is long overdue.

The story that emerged is one of slipshod communications by the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) and protection of the breaking of the Japanese Diplomatic and Naval codes by the US in the 1930’s. Monitoring of those reports revealed the Japanese Imperial government intent that upon the breakdown of oil boycott negotiations with the FDR Administration, Japan would declare war and unleash the attack.  The CNO archives revealed a memo on December 4, 1941 revealing their Japanese intent but the Pacific fleet command was belatedly alerted.  Earlier Admiral Kimmel had made repeated requests for long range reconnaissance aircraft that might have detected the fleet of six carriers approaching the Hawaiian Islands under radio silence. Then there was the confusion over radar signals that morning, given the simultaneous arrival of a squadron of B-17s from the West Coast. 353 torpedo, dive bombers and fighters swept in from the north of Oahu to unleash their attack and destruction at Hickham Field, Schofield Barracks and scuttling of the Pacific fleet inflicted grievous harm on sailors, soldiers, airmen, nurses and civilians.

Naval Marshal General Isoroku Yamamato graduate of the US Naval War College and Harvard University, who planned, assembled and executed  the surprise attack was famously quoted on January 9, 1942 saying:

“A military man can scarcely pride himself on having ‘smitten a sleeping enemy’; it is more a matter of shame, simply, for the one smitten. I would rather you made your appraisal after seeing what the enemy does, since it is certain that, angered and outraged, he will soon launch a determined counterattack.”

That successful counterattack came six months later in the Battle of Midway, when Naval intelligence, and a decision by Pacific Commander Admiral Nimitz, scored a major victory sinking four of the six carriers involved in the Pearl Harbor attack- the Akagi, Kaga, Soryu and Hiryu. Yamamoto was eventually targeted by Naval intelligence and his Japanese command aircraft and escort fighters were ambushed in Operation Vengeance by a USAAF squadron of P-38 “lightnings” on April 18, 1943, over Buin, Papua, New Guinea.

There are two engrossing PBS documentaries that will reprise on December 7, 2016, about battleships attacked 75 years ago on December 7, 1941.  One is a poignant story about the return of remains to the grandchildren for closure and interment of a young ensign who served on board the Oklahoma, a Naval Academy grad and communications officer, who perished that day.  The PBS documentary includes surviving eye witness testimony.

Watch: “Pearl Harbor USS Oklahoma Final Story.”

The second documentary is an amazing video of a visit paid to the Arizona by expert scuba divers and underwater video personnel from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Research Center in Massachusetts and US Park Service experts, watched by a survivor of the Arizona bombing who was horribly burned that day

Watch: “Into the Arizona.”

Thus, the Obama White House warning to Pearl Harbor survivors their generations of families and all WW II veterans falsely accused of “feeling embittered” deserve an apology.  In sharp contrast they recognize closure on their pain of loss from the visit of Japanese Premier Abe and his “comfort’ for the victims  on this 75th  commemoration of Pearl Harbor.