Syrian Christian Forces Ask President Trump for Help by Ryan Mauro

A Syriac Christian militia in Syria that is fighting the Islamic State (ISIS) and Al-Qaeda and also opposes the Assad regime is asking President Trump for direct military assistance and to be treated as equals with the U.S.-backed Arab forces preparing to take Raqqa, the “capitol” of ISIS.

The Syriac Military Council (MFS) is a Christian component of the 50,000-strong Syrian Democratic Forces, an alliance of Kurds, Sunni Arabs, Turkmen and Christians backed by the United States and formed in October 2015. The U.S. military describes the alliance as its “best partnered forces” in Syria. The special operators helping the forces to fight ISIS say they have “absolute confidence” in them as the forces, including 1,000 women, prepare to attack Raqqa.

The MFS’ request for President Trump’s help reads in part:

 “There is no single reason to exclude us from the same support in equipment as is given to the Arabs. The fact that we suffered under genocides emphasizes the need for delivery of military equipment. If we are weak, we are a target of the extremist forces that the SDF is fighting against. 

“We will be part of any operation against Raqqa, regardless our current level of military equipment. We cannot imagine that the U.S. would deliberately want us to be poorer equipped than our Arab partners when we go into that big battle. 

“We thank the U.S. for the air support given in crucial battles and the support to the SDF. We also hope that this is an opportunity to work together for the long-term security and freedom of our people and all the peoples of the region.”

The MFS statement says that the U.S. military assistance favors the Turkmen and Arab components of the SDF over the Christians and Kurds. It also disputed Turkey’s claim that the Kurdish component is part of the PKK terrorist group.

The MFS has a presence in the Christian areas of northeastern Hasakah Province, a multi-ethnic province with Kurds and Arabs. The province has great potential for U.S. strategy, as it has been suggested as a candidate for a “safe zone” for refugees, most prominently by Dr. Ben Carson when he was running for the GOP presidential nomination. About half of Syria’s oil production is based in Hasakah Province.

The Syriac Military Council (MFS) launched by the Syriac Union Party in January 2013 and is estimated to be about 2,000-strong and includes a Christian female unit named the Beth Nahrin Women Protection Forces. The organization includes Christians identifying as Assyrians, Syriacs and Chaldeans.

Watch a video of the Christian females’ training camp in the Kurdish area of northern Syria. 

The MFS initially tried to ally with various Syrian rebel groups, such as those backed by Turkey who are fighting under the Free Syria Army banner, but their Islamist orientation prevented it from going anywhere. A MFS commander said, “Most have a mentality that they can’t accept diversity within Syria.”

In early 2014, MFS allied with the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), which Turkey considers to be a branch of the PKK Kurdish terrorist group. The U.S. position is that they are operationally separate, which MFS agrees with, even if they are ideologically unified. The YPG is the Kurdish component of the Syrian Democratic Forces.

The MFS is on the side of the secular-democratic Syrian opposition, even if it doesn’t directly engage Assad’s forces. It “started out as a staunchly anti-government militia, and its leaders insist that its views have not changed,” reports Middle East Eye.

The Syriac Military Council (MFS) and its Beth Nahrin Women Protection Forces (HSNB) condemn the Assad regime as a “murder machine.” When they launched, they declared support for “the Syrian people’s revolution in its desire to bring down the Ba’ath regime.”

The MFS commander in Hasakah says the Assad regime and ISIS should be viewed as part of the same enemy, accusing the ruling dictatorship of exploiting ISIS to stay in power.

“They [the Assad regime] are the ones that bring ISIS in…We want to launch attacks on ISIS, but the army of the regime does not allow us to. They have contracted different outside militias, some of which are sympathetic to ISIS, and allowed them to enter and loot homes,” he said.

With President Trump’s reversal on the Assad regime, U.S. policy is now aligned with the Syrian Christian forces that belong to the Syriac Military Council and oppose Assad, ISIS, Al-Qaeda and Islamist rebels.

As the MFS Christians prepare for the bloody battle in Raqqa, they are hoping that President Trump hears their voice. Let’s hope that their statement reaches him.

ABOUT RYAN MAURO

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s national security analyst and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. To invite Ryan to speak please contact us.

RELATED ARTICLE: Fresno shooting rampage – 3 people killed, suspect yelled ‘Allahu Akbar,’ made posts against white people

VIDEO: How President Trump can deal with the North Korean threat

General HR McMaster

President Trump’s National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster.

Trump National Security Adviser, U.S. Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, had an interview with ABC’s Martha Raddatz on  the network’s “This Week” program on Easter Sunday, April 16, 2017. The issue de jour was what to do about bellicose hermit state North  Korea . On the 105th anniversary of the birth of the founder of the dynastic Communist regime , grandfather Kim Il Sung,  a massive military parade was held in Pyongyang ,  Saturday April 15th. There with televised images of huge goose stepping marching formations  and displays of both mobile Musdan intermediate range and submarine launched missiles. As if on cue, North Korea attempted another missile launch following the celebratory parade that blew up on the launching pad, prompting a muted response from the White House.

This followed demonstrations of force with a US Navy Tomahawk missile strike on an airbase in Syria, allegedly the site from which gas attacks were launched against civilians and opposition in Idlib province. That was followed this week by the dropping of a MOAB,  so-called massive ordnance air burst bomb, from a USAF C-130 in Afghanistan. It allegedly  aimed destroyed  caves and tunnels used by ISIS, with conflicting reports as to casualties ranging from 36 to upwards of 100 casualties.

The parade in the vast Pyongyang square was held before hereditary leader Kim Jong-un and what passes for the North Korean Comintern leadership.  McMaster speaking from Kabul, Afghanistan said in response to Raddatz’s question about the Trump Administration would do against this threat overarching that of ISIS and Syria in the Middle East:

While it’s unclear and we do not want to telegraph in any way how we’ll respond to certain incidents, it’s clear that the president is determined not to allow this kind of capability to threaten the United States.

I think there’s an international consensus now, including the Chinese and the Chinese leadership, that this is a situation that just can’t continue. And the president has made clear that he will not accept the United States and its allies and partners in the region being under threat from this hostile regime with nuclear weapons. He said the National Security Council is working with the Pentagon and the State Department, and intelligence agencies  working on providing options “and have them ready” for President Donald Trump “if this pattern of destabilizing behavior continues.”

McMaster said it is the consensus of the US, along with allies in the region,that “this problem is coming to a head. And so it’s time for us to undertake all actions we can, short of a military options, to try to resolve this peacefully.”

Watch the ABC This Week  Martha Raddatz Interview  with National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. McMaster:

Trump tweeted Thursday that he had “great confidence” in China’s ability to “properly deal with North Korea.” He indicated openness to possible US intervention if China can’t convince North Korea to stand down in its nuclear and missile program saying, “If they are unable to do so, the U.S. with its allies, will!!”

Perhaps he was referring to the USS Vinson carrier battle group that was dispatched to the peninsula bristling with missiles, squadrons of carrier based attack aircraft and possibly nuclear warhead missiles  submarines.

Trump dispatched Vice President Pence to South Korea to confer with our ally on the front line of any threat, conventional or non-conventional , that Pyongyang might unleash if the US undertook a preemptive attack.

Japan’s  Premier Abe was concerned about the ability of North Korea to launch a missile with a Sarin gas warhead. That was eerily reminiscent of the domestic  Japanese terrorism attacks of the 1990’s by an apocalyptic cult Aum Shinrikyo, whose chemical laboratory produced the deadly nerve agent that killed over two dozen and in a subway attack exposed thousands to its effects. Doubtless, Abe was prompted by the recent assassination of Kim’s half brother in Kuala Lumpur by two women who administered the deadly nerve agent VX.

Abe and tens of millions of Home Island Japanese are also concerned about possible delivery of a nuclear warhead equipped existing North Korean Missile with a range of 800 miles like the Nodong 1. Equally concerned are the 20 million residents of Seoul South Korean and tens of thousands of U.S. forces on the DMZ. Then there are US Air and Naval assets in Japan, Okinawa and the American Territory of Guam within the 2,000 mile range of those Musudan mobile missiles on display in Pyongyang.

We chanced to watch the PBS Charlie Rose Show on April 14th when he interviewed former acting CIA director Mike Morell about the North Korean threat conundrum.  When queried by Rose about what might Trump ask China President, Xi-Jinping Morrell,  said negotiate with China to intervene with North Korea’s Kin Jong-un  about the consequences of not standing down.

Gordon Chang said it best  in an April 4, 2017 Daily Beast article about what Trump might discuss with Xi-Jinping  just prior to the Mar a-Lago meeting  with President Trump. China should stop selling North Korea those mobile erector TEL launchers for the Musudan and future KN-08 and KN-14 intercontinental ballistic missiles, plans for the Chinese Jl-1 submarine  missile, uranium hexafluoride, pumps   and other components for its nuclear program. We would  also include the sale of  Chinese alumna power and technology used to mix solid propellant for those missiles.

The reality is that none of this is going to persuade  Kim Jong-un, a man who doesn’t stint for murdering his own family, relatives and  senior  Comintern members and  senior officers of North Korea’s military. Trillions of dollars of bribes wouldn’t suffice. Sanctions haven’t worked. What it suggests is some means of removing Kim and perhaps key Comintern leaders from that dias overlooking  the massive parade in Pyongyang on April 15th.

In all seriousness, the China syndrome is not something we want to trigger. Rather it is using the China opening to prevent that from happening along with whatever nuclear missile threat that North Korea has under looming development. The other suggestion was accelerating more effective anti-ballistic missile defense in the critical boost rather than mid-course or terminal phases.  We may know shortly if North Korea has mastered the re-entry shield for deployment of possible multiple targeted  warheads.

Trump has very limited options and time available to do something to stop North Korea before the 2018 midterm election if not the before 2020. He doubtless  will  request that  National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, Pentagon chief Mattis and others on the NSC Principals Committee vet some plausible military and diplomatic  options to deny the hermit kingdom from a preemptive attack on our allies and US military assets in the region. Perhaps they might follow  Chang’s suggestions about what to negotiate with China to forestall North Korea achieving nuclear ICBM hegemony.

RELATED ARTICLE: Pence: ‘Era of strategic patience’ on North Korea is over

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Jesus: Man, Myth, Son of God?

Jesus Christ died.  He died quivering on a cross, after receiving a horrific public thrashing that would have killed any other human.  He died after carrying His own instrument of death, the top part of the cross, to Golgotha where He was brutally and efficiently nailed to the beam He carried. He died after hanging between heaven and earth for about six hours in unexplainable agony.

To make certain of His death, the order was given to pierce His side with a spear which released the very last drops of His blood.  The professional soldiers who carried out the crucifixion detail were seasoned veterans with many crucifixions on their resumes; these hardened men were so certain of Jesus Christ’s death they did not even take the time to break His legs, as it was quite plain to see He was dead, He was finished.  Pilate, the Temple High Priest, and all of the religious leadership in Jerusalem were also certain of this fact, and rested in the knowledge that they had successfully killed an uprising, as well as this so-called King of the Jews, this Son of God.  It is done!  It is finished!

As the afternoon sun faded and the late day shadows began to grow so did the shadows of hopelessness and utter dismay and gloom by Christ’s disciples.  Such brooding sadness appeared that only dazed looks with puzzled grief that knew no words were exchanged among those who had been the closest followers, and may I say, “Believers.”  Utterly crushed, beaten, and most likely Wanted Men…these men had just hours prior sat at table with the man they came to know as The Son of God; the long awaited Messiah!  These men now scattered in an attempt to pick up any remaining pieces of their lives interrupted a little over three years before.

Jesus was confirmed dead, but Pilate was reminded that this strange, troublesome religious Dreamer (Nut) claimed He would rise on the third-day.  So to make certain that no theatrics could be accomplished a Roman Guard was set at the tomb.  The tomb was sealed with the Official Roman Seal to make certain no one would enter (or leave) the burial chamber thereby beginning a new round of zealotry.  Even if an attempt was made to tamper with the seal, the soldiers standing post would prevent a successful conclusion, as well as bring instant death to anyone attempting such an act.  There would be no more talk about His kingdom being established.  There would be no more statements that He could summon twelve legions of angels to His assistance.  There would be no more Messiah…He will trouble us no more!

Then came Sunday morning.

Sometime prior to dawn, in a borrowed burial tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, there was a stirring, a fluttering of unseen forces…the presence of angels, and the unexplainable breath of God moving through the garden and into the tomb.  Immeasurable forces poured life back into the dead body that laid on the cold stone slab in that tomb; and the dead man rose and came out of the grave, and out of the grave clothes, and into life just prior to Mary’s arrival as she came to grieve and stand watch.  But Mary stood in shock and awe in front of the tomb as the massive stone had been rolled away, and now the sepulchre was empty except for the two angels in white sitting, one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.

As Mary cried-out asking, “What have you done with Him?” she heard her name spoken as only her dear, dear friend, Jesus could speak it, only this time all of heaven was in His tone.  And she knew.  She simply replied to Him, “Rabboni,” which is to say, “Master.”

Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary, the mother of James, and a few other women then ran and got the disciples, but they ran with the news that “Christ has Risen…He has Risen indeed!”  The disciples did not expect this to happen no matter how much they wanted it to be true.  How about you?  Would you have expected this, regardless of Jesus spending a little over three years sharing and revealing His purpose on earth, and the will of His Heavenly Father?  How about today?  Right now?

Do you believe Jesus of Nazareth died for you, was buried for your sins and deeds, and then rose on the third-day?  Do you believe?  The disciples will understand your doubts, your hesitancy.  So does the Lord who was actually in that tomb, but came out!  He understands.

Eight days passed, and the disciples were together.  Suddenly Jesus was with them.  These men, who just a very short-time prior were in deep mourning and bewilderment were reported by thousands to be “lights to the world” with their faces and manner, joyous and rejoicing in the good news of Christ’s Resurrection.  Ignorant men?  Self-serving?  An invention by a group of men hoping to cash in?  And would you or anyone you know invent such a story so as to be crucified upside down, like Peter?  How about stay with such a story causing your head to be chopped off, like Paul, or to be stoned to death like Steven?

Each of the disciples, save John, met with a horrible death at the hands of church and government authorities who years later still could not afford to have the Resurrection Story of Jesus Christ shared, much less believed by the masses.  Today the forces of darkness, division, confusion, and humanism do NOT want you to learn, much less accept the truth of Christ’s Resurrection from death.  Maybe even more today than thousands of years ago, the powers aligned against God’s Word do NOT want you to come into the saving knowledge and grace of the Risen Christ, the Begotten Son of God who surrendered His Crown in Heaven for a Crown of Thorns on earth; His Seat at the right hand of the Heavenly Father for the rugged and splintered wooden cross that became His seat of death on earth.

cross risen

Luke 23:44-47 NIV: 44 It was now about noon, and darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon, 45 for the sun stopped shining. And the curtain of the temple was torn in two. 46 Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” When he had said this, he breathed his last. 47 The centurion, seeing what had happened, praised God and said, “Surely this was a righteous man.”

Look at the picture above.  You are looking from inside an empty tomb across the land to an empty cross.  The same cross and tomb Jesus Christ occupied for a short-time before ascending into Heaven for all time, for all eternity.  Jesus is not dead!

The tomb is empty!  Jesus has risen from the dead…He has Risen indeed!

EDITORS NOTE: A Barna study released days before Easter, looking at how U.S. adults see and relate to the central figure of Christianity, shows that almost all Americans believe that Jesus Christ was a real person who actually lived, and that the majority of Americans have made a commitment to Him.

Ninety-three percent of Americans say they believe Jesus is a real person who lived on earth, according to the survey, whose results were released Thursday but was conducted between Aug. 25 and Sep. 10 of 2014 among a representative sample of adults over the age of 18 in each of the 50 United States.

Sixty-three percent of U.S. adults say they have made a commitment to Jesus that is still important in their lives today, shows the study, which included 2005 web-based and phone surveys.

Less than half (43 percent) believe Jesus was God living among humans; 31 percent believe He was uniquely called to reveal God’s purpose in the world; 9 percent say Jesus embodied the best that is possible in each person; and 8 percent say He was a great man and a great teacher, but not divine.

The survey, whose sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points and at the 95 percent confidence level, also found that 59 percent of Americans have no doubt that Jesus will return to earth someday.

A separate, recent Barna study found that while an increasing number of Americans are reportedly abandoning the institutional church and its defined boundary markers of religious identity, many of them still believe in God and practice faith outside its walls, meaning those who “love Jesus but not the church.”

Their beliefs about God are more orthodox than the general population, even rivaling their churchgoing counterparts, that study showed. “For instance, they strongly believe there is only one God (93 percent compared to U.S. adults: 59 percent and practicing Christians: 90 percent); affirm that ‘God is the all-powerful, all- knowing, perfect creator of the universe who rules the world today’ (94 percent compared to U.S. adults: 57 percent and practicing Christians: 85 percent); and strongly agree that God is everywhere (95 percent compared to U.S. adults: 65 percent and practicing Christians: 92 percent).”

While many Christians in the U.S. hold orthodox beliefs, the religious trend in Western Europe appears to be different.

In England, for example, one in four people who identify themselves as “Christians” say that they believe that the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ did not happen, according to a recent poll.

The former chaplain to Queen Elizabeth II argued that those who identify themselves as “Christians” but do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus cannot really be Christians. “Those people who neither believe in the resurrection nor go anywhere near a church cannot be ‘Christians,’” the Rev. Dr. Gavin Ashenden said, according to The Telegraph. “As with so many things, the key is in the definition of terms. Discovering the evidence for the resurrection having taken place to be wholly compelling is one of the things that makes you a Christian; ergo, if you haven’t, you are not.”

Target CEO Admits Transgender Bathroom Policy a Huge Mistake

A very damaging article just out from the Wall Street Journal clearly shows that Target CEO Brian Cornell regrets his company’s policy announcement welcoming men to use women’s restrooms and dressing rooms.

According to the article, Mr. Cornell expressed frustration about how the bathroom policy was publicized without his permission or knowledge, and told colleagues he wouldn’t have approved the decision to flaunt it with a public statement that is still on Target’s website today.

“Target didn’t adequately assess the risk, and the ensuing backlash [AFA boycott] was self-inflicted,” he told staff.

You can read the entire WSJ article here, but be aware that it requires a subscription. Copyright laws prohibit AFA from providing the entire article to you.

The WSJ article explained that Target headquarters sent an internal memo to store managers reiterating its official stance on men using women’s facilities. On April 15, 2016, a group Target calls its “risk committee” emailed executives informing them of a plan to post that message publicly. Mr. Cornell wasn’t among the recipients of that email.

At least two of Mr. Cornell’s lieutenants approved the post, including Target’s chief risk officer, Jackie Rice, and its chief external-engagement officer, Laysha Ward.

AFA agrees with Mary McCandless, a shopper in Winston-Salem, N.C. who told the WSJ, “Target picked a side and pretty much said to the rest of us that we don’t matter.” The 56-year-old financial analyst said she quit using her Target credit card and shifted most shopping online. “At least I don’t have to worry about using the bathroom on Amazon.com.”

Inside the company, executives predicted the backlash would die down. It didn’t, and foot traffic inside stores declined significantly in the months following AFA’s boycott announcement.

Since the boycott started, Target’s stock has lost 35% of its value, and shuttered plans for major expansion projects.

Together we are making an unprecedented financial impact on a corporation whose policy is to allow men to use women’s restrooms and dressing rooms. Target’s decision is unacceptable for families, and their dangerous and misguided policy continues to put women and children in harm’s way.

It is urgent the Target boycott reach 1.5 million signers by the end of April.

Help us reach the 1.5 million signature mark.

If you haven’t signed the boycott pledge, please sign it today!

If you have signed the pledge, please forward this email to your family and

At that point, AFA will personally return to Minneapolis with an additional 500,000 names. AFA will then discuss how Target can invite 1.5 million AFA supporters back to their stores by having a common sense bathroom and dressing room policy that links use of these rooms to a person’s biological sex.

RELATED ARTICLE: The ACLU Is Disregarding the Rights of Millions of Children

Russian Reactions to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s Visit

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s visit to Moscow on April 11-12, 2017 came against the backdrop of a recent U.S. missile strike on a Syrian airbase that was followed by political tensions between Russia and the U.S.[1] At the G7 meeting in Italy just prior to his trip to Moscow, Tillerson had stated: “I think it’s also worth thinking about Russia has [sic] really aligned itself with the Assad regime, the Iranians, and Hizbullah. Is that a long-term alliance that serves Russia’s interest, or would Russia prefer to realign with the United States, with other Western countries and Middle East countries who are seeking to resolve the Syrian crisis? We want to relieve the suffering of the Syrian people. We want to create a future for Syria that is stable and secure. And so Russia can be a part of that future and play an important role, or Russia can maintain its alliance with this group, which we believe is not going to serve Russia’s interest longer-term. But only Russia can answer that question.”[2]

Commenting on Tillerson’s words, Russia Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said: “It’s useless to come to us with ultimatums, it’s just counterproductive.”[3] However, the meeting between Tillerson and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov changed Russia’s internal mood. Maxim Usim, columnist for the Russian daily Kommersant, noted that Tillerson’s language was not confrontational and that this had enabled him to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin just before his departure from Moscow.

The following are reactions to U.S. Secretary of State Tillerson’s Moscow visit:

tillerson russia

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. (Source: State.gov)

Senator Kosachev: “The American Did Not Come With Absurd Proposals… None Of The Parties… Have A Desire To Further Exacerbate The Situation”

Russian Federation Council International Affairs Committee chairman Konstantin Kosachev wrote on his Facebook page: “The first impression is quite positive. No breakthrough occurred, and no one expected it. However, the two sides were able to avoid the temptation of the overstated expectations, and the modest results of the meeting are still positive.” Kosachev stressed that a meaningful result was the Russian and U.S. commitment to maintaining the dialogue by “institutionalizing it in the format of special representatives.”

He added: “The two sides now have a better understanding of the possible and impossible limits in the prospects for bilateral relations and in the interpretation of international problems. The Americans obviously did not come with some absurd proposals similar to exchanging (Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad) for G7 membership, Ukraine for Syria and so on, and also not only with moralizing and ultimatums.”

He stressed: “Otherwise, the meeting with (Russian President Vladimir Putin) would have not taken place, as wasting time on empty words is not his style.”

Kosachev also said that Russia “unambiguously confirmed its willingness to restore cooperation, provided that the two sides could do without the notorious American mentoring and arrogance. Anyway, none of the parties seems to have a desire to further exacerbate the situation, and everyone believes that it is not hopeless.”

(Tass.com, April 13, 2017)

(Source: Sputniknews.com, April 12, 2017)

Kommersant Columnist: Tillerson’s Moderate Language Enabled Meeting With Putin

Maxim Usim, a columnist for the Russian daily Kommersant, wrote that Tillerson’s meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was not confrontational, but rather business oriented. According to Usim, Tillerson avoided using harsh language regarding Russian policies, while Lavrov was reserved and diplomatic. The impression, wrote Usim, is that both sides want to minimize the damage to bilateral relations by “Trump’s Syrian escapade,” adding that the mere fact that Tillerson avoided “speaking in terms of sanctions and ultimatums” made the meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin possible.

(Kommersant.ru, April 12, 2017)

Izvestia: “The First Attempt To Get Along May Be Considered Productive, Even If Not Fully Successful”

The Russian daily Izvestia summarized Tillerson’s the visit as follows: “The most important thing is that during this very short but very intense visit the sides succeeded in reaching an agreement regarding further steps to be taken in order to get rid of the bilateral crisis. At the same time, the visit’s message to the world was: The first attempt to ‘get along’ may be considered productive, even if not fully successful.”

(Izvestia.ru, April 13, 2017)

Duma International Affairs Committee Chairman: “There Was No Ultimatum”

Duma International Affairs Committee chairman Leonid Slutsky stated: “One of the visit’s results is the failed prognosis regarding some kinds of U.S. ultimatum. There was no ultimatum. On the contrary, the sides agreed on establishing a joint group in order to look into the most complicated questions of the Russia-U.S. agenda.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Tillerson: “We want to relieve the suffering of the Iraq… Ouch… Liby… Ouch… Syrian people.” The cartoon was published prior to Tillerson’s visit. (Ria.ru, April 11, 2017)

Senator Klintzevich: “It Is Now Obvious That Tillerson’s Visit Was Not A Waste Of Time”

Senator Franz Klintsevich, deputy chair of the Federation Council Defense and Security Committee, commented: “It is now obvious that Tillerson’s visit was not a waste of time. Reiterating the mutual commitment to fight international terror is the maximum which could have been achieved, given the recent negative developments. At the moment, it’s quite stupid to discuss who won and who lost as the result of the meeting, who saved face and who lost face… The sides opted for mutual compromise, but as a result they secured the chance to really cooperate against ISIS. That’s what is really important.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Ivan Melnikov, Communist Party, Vice-speaker of Duma: “Given the unpredicted U.S. actions influencing the situation, we may judge only by the deeds rather than by the words and intentions. Mr. Tillerson leaves good impression, and speaks respectfully about Russia as a superpower – but what if the principles of the American imperialism remain in force?”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Ruling Party United Russia MP Sergey Zheleznyak: “The meeting demonstrated that despite the differences, our countries are interested in cooperation concerning various areas – solving burning international crises as well as renewing economic cooperation. We’ll see how Tillerson’s words in Moscow will coincide with the administration’s actions and then we’ll draw our conclusions.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Senator Pushkov: The Meeting Was “The Start Of Dialogue”

Senator Alexey Pushkov tweeted: “Frontal confrontation has been cancelled. Russia and the U.S. proceed from the war of words towards exchanging opinions, controlling the differences and cautious dialogue.”

(Twitter.com/Alexey_Pushkov, April 12, 2017)

Pushkov also tweeted: “The summary of the negotiations in Moscow: Not yet a breakthrough, but the start of dialogue and an attempt to strengthen the mutual trust after serious tensions erupted.”

(Twitter.com/Alexey_Pushkov, April 12, 2017)

According to a Russian Defense Ministry source quoted in the Vedomosti newspaper, Moscow is ready for dialogue and does not consider a dangerous direct confrontation with the U.S. to be inevitable. Simultaneously, Moscow demonstrates its readiness to strengthen its military positions in Syria – this is the message delivered by the deployment of the frigate Admiral Grigorovich to the Mediterranean.

(Vedomosti.ru, April 13, 2017)

REFERENCES:

[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6866, Russia’s Reactions To The U.S. Missile Strike In Syria, April 10, 2017.

[2] State.gov, April 11, 2017.

[3] Ria.ru, April 12, 2017.

Crack in Democrat Party: ‘Islamic Supremacists’ fighting ‘Union Infidels’

In the Daily Caller article Influential Muslim Group Fights Employees Over Efforts To Unionize by Ted Goodman it appears that two pro-Democrat organizations are fighting one against the other. This is a classic battle between the Muslim lead Islamic supremacist organization Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Both CAIR and SEIU have historically supported the Democrat Party (go here and here).

Is this a crack in the Democrat base – the Muslim versus the non-Muslim (infidel)?

Goodman reports:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an influential Muslim advocacy group, is fighting efforts by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) to unionize its staff.

SEIU Local 500, which represents 20,000 teachers, health care workers and non-profit employees in Washington, D.C. and Maryland, submitted union authorization cards that were filled out by over half of CAIR’s eligible staff, Christopher Honey, communications director for SEIU Local 500 told The Daily Caller News Foundation Tuesday.

CAIR appealed to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), according to the Washington Examiner, arguing that it is a religious organization and therefore exempt from the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Congress passed the NLRA in 1935, which protected the rights of employees to organize under a union but included exemptions, including one for religious organizations.

The NLRB’s Region 05 rejected CAIR’s argument Friday, asserting the the group is primarily a civil rights organization, not a religious one. The NLRB also set April 24 as the date for employees to vote on whether or not to join the SEIU Local 500 chapter.

Read more…

According to Discover the Networks:

CAIR was co-founded in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber, all of whom had close ties to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook and functioned as Hamas’ public relations and recruitment arm in the United States. Awad and Ahmad previously had served, respectively, as IAP’s Public Relations Director and President. Thus it can be said that CAIR was an outgrowth of IAP.

CAIR opened its first office in Washington, DC, with the help of a $5,000 donation from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a self-described charity founded by Mousa Abu Marzook.

CAIR is a Hamas (Muslim Brotherhood) affiliated organization. The United Kingdom designated the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) a terrorist organization in 2015. Lead by Senator Ted Cruz, legislation has been introduced by the U.S. Congress to also designate the MB a terrorist organization, which would in effect designate CAIR because of its ties to Hamas, a terrorist organization.

Discover the Networks reports the following about SEIU:

Designated as a “527 organization,” SEIU in 2003 became a national partner in the America Votes (AV) coalition. AV, in turn, belongs to the so-called Shadow Democratic Party, a nationwide network of leftwing unions, activist groups, and think tanks engaged in supporting the Democrats. To view SEIU’s fellow partners in America Votes, click here.

[ … ]

A noteworthy affiliate of SEIU is its powerful and militant, New York City-based Local 1199, which has more than 300,000 members and is the world’s largest union local. Sixteen years after its 1932 founding, 1199 was investigated by the House Un-American Activities Committee on suspicion of Communist “infiltration.” When the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) split in 1991, several officials of Local 1199 took many comrades with them into the breakaway group, the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. One of those officials, Rafael Pizarro, also went on to help establish the New Party, a socialist organization that Barack Obama would join in 1995. At a March 2007 meeting, 1199’s executive vice president Steve Kramer spoke enthusiastically about the role which CPUSA had played in building up his union.

[ … ]

In November 2003, SEIU dispatched thousands of volunteers to work on the presidential campaign of Howard Dean. After Dean dropped out of the race in early 2004, Andrew Stern played a major role in persuading the Democratic nominee, John Kerry, to select John Edwards as his running mate. By June 2004, SEIU had already committed $65 million to voter-registration, voter-education, and voter-mobilization initiatives on behalf of the Kerry-Edwards campaign. Moreover, the union pledged to assign 50,000 of its members as get-out-the-vote “volunteers” just prior to, and on, election day.

[ … ]

In 2008, SEIU spent approximately $60.7 million to help elect Barack Obama to the White House, deploying some 100,000 pro-Obama campaign volunteers who “knocked on 1.87 million doors, made 4.4 million phone calls … and sent more than 2.5 million pieces of mail in support of Obama.” During his campaign, Obama told an SEIU audience: “Your agenda has been my agenda in the United States Senate…. Just imagine what we could do together…Imagine having a president whose life’s work was your work…” After Obama’s election, the SEIU became an enormously influential force in his administration: and to SEIU.

Read more…

It appears the red (Communist)/green (Islamist) alliance may be splitting on ideological grounds?

Unionizing CAIR would empower its predominantly Muslim employees to dictate working conditions to its Islamic supremacist superiors. We shall see how this turns on on April 24th, 2017 when the employees vote on becoming members of SEIU.

Researchers and Bible Agree on the Date that Jesus Died

As Christians enter the holy week leading up to the Crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus it is important to note that the Holy Bible and scientific researchers agree on key historical facts about the Son of God. One of these facts is the date that Jesus died on the cross. One writer gives us seven Biblical clues to reveal the year, month, day and hour of His death. What is interesting is that Jesus uttered seven statements (see below) while he was on the cross.

Here are the Biblical and scientific basis that Jesus died on the cross at 3:00 p.m [8:00 a.m. EST] on Friday, April 3, A.D. 33.

In an April 10, 2013 column in The National Catholic Register titled 7 clues tell us ‘precisely’ when Jesus died (the year, month, day, and hour revealed) Jimmy Akin wrote:

We recently celebrated Good Friday and Easter, the annual celebrations of Jesus’ death and resurrection.

We all know that this happened in Jerusalem in the first century.

That separates Jesus from mythical pagan deities, who were supposed to live in places or times that none could specify.

Just how specific can we be with the death of Jesus?

Can we determine the exact day?

We can.

And here’s how . . .

Read more…

Akin lists the following seven clues:

Clue #1: The High Priesthood of Caiaphas
Clue #2: The Governorship of Pontius Pilate
Clue #3: After “the Fifteenth Year of Tiberius Caesar”
Clue #4: Crucified on a Friday
Clue #5: A Friday at Passover
Clue #6: John’s Three Passovers
Clue #7: “The Ninth Hour”

Akin concludes, “This allows us to narrow down the time of Jesus’ death to a very specific point in history: around 3:00 p.m on Friday, April 3, A.D. 33.”

Ivana Kvesic  from the Christian Post Reporter wrote:

Researchers are claiming to have discovered the exact date that Jesus Christ was crucified, according to a new geological study released in an academic journal this week.

The geological survey, published in the International Geology Review, suggests that Christ was crucified on Friday, April 3, in the year 33.

The year of Christ’s crucifixion has been widely debated in religious and scholarly circles, but geologists now believe that their research points to the most likely year Jesus was put on the cross.

“The day and date of the crucifixion are known with a fair degree of precision. But the year has been in question,” geologist Jefferson Williams told Discovery Channel News.

To uncover the date of the crucifixion the scientists studied seismic activity in the Dead Sea by examining three cores from the Ein Gedi Spa beach, which lies adjacent to the Dead Sea 13 miles from Jerusalem.

Scientists decided to look into the history of seismic activity in the region because Chapter 27 in the Gospel of Matthew says that an earthquake coincided with the crucifixion of Christ.

“And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open,” the Gospel reads.

After analyzing seismic activity in the region along with astronomical data, the scientists factored in information from all four Gospels, and determined that the best match for the date of crucifixion would be Friday, April 3, 33.

Science and the Holy Bible agree. Jesus was a 33-year old man who was crucified and died in Jerusalem.

The Holy Bible also accounts his resurrection and assent into heaven. It is Easter 2017. Time to celebrate the greatest gift ever given to mankind. The gift of eternal life. He is risen!

  1. “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23.34).
  2. “Today you shall be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43).
  3. “Behold your son! Behold your mother!” (John 19:26,27).
  4. “My God! My God! Why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46).
  5. “I am thirsty” (John 19:28).
  6. “It is finished!” (John 19:30).
  7. “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” (Luke 23:46).

The Case Against Legalizing Unknown Millions of Illegal Aliens

At least as far back as the administration of Jimmy Carter, the immigration debate has been waged by globalists who have, over time, succeeded in hijacking the language and terminology applied to immigration.

Consider that Jimmy Carter: Orignator of the Orwellian Term “Undocumented Immigrant,” understood that by removing the term “alien” from discussions about immigration he could, over time, subvert the debate by confounding the public’s understanding about the entire immigration issue.

Carter insisted that INS employees immediately stop using the term “Illegal Alien” to describe aliens who were illegally present in the United States but refer to them as being “undocumented aliens.”

Today many politicians and journalists claim that illegal aliens who run America’s borders, thereby evading the inspections process conducted at ports of entry, have entered the United States “undocumented.”

In actuality, aliens who evade the inspections process enter the United States without inspection.  This creates a huge threat to national security and public safety, after all, Entry Without Inspection = Entry Without Vetting.

Additionally, aliens who enter the United States through ports of entry but then go on to violate the terms of their admission, depending on the category of visa they used to enter the United States, certainly are not making “undocumented” entries.

However, to the globalists and immigration anarchists, these facts are merely speed bumps that need to be overcome so that they can craft their false narrative.

One of America’s most cherished symbols is the Statue of Liberty that is equated with America’s rich and diverse immigrant heritage.  Over time his strategy of altering the terminology succeeded in convincing huge numbers of Americans that anyone who would interfere with the flow of “immigrants” into the United States was acting against America’s culture and traditions.

The media was quick to jump on the bandwagon and identified to immigration anarchists who oppose secure borders and effective immigration law enforcement as being “Pro-Immigrant” while branding advocates for effective immigration law enforcement as “Anti-Immigrant.”

Of course if honest and accurate nomenclature was used the two sides should be referred as as “Immigration Anarchists” vs “Pro “Immigration Law Enforcement.”

However the agenda is to eradicate America’s borders which, to the globalists, are impediment to their wealth and political power.

Not being content to alter the language of the debate, the immigration anarchists have concocted a false narrative about the nature of illegal aliens and the way that the immigration crisis can be fixed since, they claim, “The immigration system is broken.”

We can find adherents to this madness in both political parties, however, the Democrats are clearly leading the charge.

Of course, in reality, what has traditionally been “broken” is the lack of resources and political will to enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.  President Trump is certainly sending a clear message that this situation will be finally remedied by hiring many more ICE agents and Immigration Judges and taking the gloves off the agents by stating that there will no longer be any category of illegal aliens who may not be arrested, as was the Obama administration’s policies.

But I am compelled to address an issue that is of great concern.

While many journalists and politicians have agreed that aliens who have serious criminal convictions should be deported, but insist that since the millions of illegal aliens who are present in the United States cannot all be arrested, it is reasonable to provide them with lawful status, especially if they are working and paying taxes.

Of course our immigration laws are not about aliens paying taxes and not only are illegal aliens prohibited from working but aliens admitted under certain categories of visas are also prohibited from working.  This is about protecting the jobs and wages of American workers.

This sort of “reasoning” is never applied to any other area of law enforcement whether we consider the law enforcement response to drunk driving, texting while driving, tax fraud or other crimes.  Yet this supposed solution, is no solution at all, just a thinly veiled effort to meet the demands of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Immigration Lawyers’ Association and a laundry list of industries and special interest groups who make monumental campaign contributions seeking to get “the best government money can buy.”

Additionally, the true number of illegal aliens is unknown and unknowable but the media and many “think tanks” claim that there are between 11 million and 12 million such illegal aliens present in the United States.

During the Reagan administration it was estimated that the Amnesty of 1986 would get roughly one million such aliens “out of the shadows.”  That amnesty eventually enabled more than 3.5 million aliens to acquire lawful status.

immigration-chaos-millions-of-visa-overstays-add-to-illegal-alien-problemIn 2007 the CBO estimated that there were 12 million illegal aliens present in the United States.

Given those factors and others, it is likely that any massive amnesty program would likely provide tens of millions of illegal aliens with lawful status.

The numbers would be so huge that there would be no way to interview these aliens and no way to conduct any field investigations of these millions of aliens who evaded the United States surreptitiously without inspection.

What is not understood by most folks is that an adjudications officer can approve and application in mere minutes but would require days or weeks to deny an applications since it must be expected that when an application is denied the alien will, through his/her attorney, file an appeal of that denial.  Therefore before and application for legalization is denied the adjudicator would likely require an investigator conduct a field investigation and the subsequent denial would have to be reviewed by a government attorney to make certain it meets minimal standards to withstand any legal challenges.

Consequently, it is likely that well over 90% of these applications will be approved.

Since no field investigations could be conducted, there would be no way to determine who many of these aliens actually are.  There would be no way to ascertain when these aliens actually entered the United States.

It would be simple matter for aliens to claim to have entered the United States prior to whatever cutoff date would be established to meet the statutory requirement.  As more and more aliens succeed in gaming the system more and more aliens will be encouraged to enter the United States and make similar false claims about entry data and other pertinent facts, thereby creating a vicious cycle of fraud.

The 9/11 Commission found that immigration fraud played a major role in the ability of terrorists to enter the United States and embed themselves.

twin towersThis was my focus in my article, Reflections on 9/11’s Vulnerabilities.

Most terrorists have not had criminal histories.

Terrorists, not unlike spies and other “Sleeper” agents seek to maintain a low profile.

Indeed, it is believed that at least four of the 9/11 hijackers had been encountered by police officers for motor vehicle violations.  The police officers simply treated their motor vehicle violations as routine matters and permitted them to go on their way.

On January 9, 2002 BBC reported, Hijacker ‘pulled over by police’ as did CNN, Another hijacker was stopped for traffic violation.

Clearly aliens who have serious criminals histories or established involvement in gang or other criminal activities should be deported.

I would also strongly recommend that illegal aliens who frequent places of criminality such as brothels or locations associated with the drug trade should be arrested and deported (removed) in an effort to combat these criminal enterprises.

So-called “collateral” arrests are essential to imbue the immigration law enforcement program with integrity so that aliens understand that we are serious about our immigration laws.

This helps to deter aliens from entering the United States illegally.

Additionally, under the law enforcement principle known as “randomness” by arresting illegal aliens during the course of routine field work, it is to be expected that ICE agents will stumble across serious crimes and intelligence concerning major criminal organizations and even potentially uncover terrorists and aliens who support terrorism.

My very first assigned fraud investigation, as a brand new agent in 1976, led me to uncover a terror plot in Israel that was, thankfully averted.  The investigation began with a young man from Israel who attempted entry in the United States with and altered visa.

No one expected this mundane and routine assignment to trigger a major international investigation.

Finally, aliens who are provided with lawful status are entitled, under our immigration laws, to immediately petition to have their spouses and all of their minor children to be admitted into the United States.

Families in Third World Countries tend to have many children.  It is entirely possible that a massive amnesty program would enable more minor aliens to be granted visas than the number of illegal aliens who would be granted lawful status.

The impact of admitting tens of millions of children who would immediately be enrolled in school systems across the United States would be devastating to already beleaguered school districts across the United States.

President Trump’s immigration policies are already having the desired impact of deterring illegal immigration as reported by the Border Patrol.  It is important that he stay the course he has wisely plotted, America and Americans will benefit from his courageous leadership.

Another Known Wolf: Truck jihadi had been in Swedish Security Service files

“Anders Thornberg, head of the Swedish Security Service, said ‘the suspect didn’t appear in our recent files but he earlier has been in our files.’”

One long-term strategy of the Islamic State is to overwhelm the security services of the West with so many jihadis and would-be jihadis that they collapse. And they’re well on their way.

Anders Thornberg

“The Latest: King: Sweden is still be [sic] safe, peaceful country,” Associated Press, April 8, 2017 (thanks to Darcy):

…Swedish prosecutors Hans Ihrman confirms that the suspect detained over Friday’s deadly truck attack is a 39-year-old Uzbekistan-born man.

The head of Sweden’s domestic intelligence agency says the man had been on authorities’ radar some time ago.

Anders Thornberg, head of the Swedish Security Service, said “the suspect didn’t appear in our recent files but he earlier has been in our files.”

He said the security services are working with other nations’ security agencies on the matter, but declined to elaborate….

RELATED ARICLE:

King: “Sweden is…and will continue to be a safe and peaceful country”

Detroit: Muslim who spoke of attacking church and hospital wanted to skin victims “like sheep”

RELATED VIDEO:

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy on One News.

America as the Last Man Standing

Let us not forget those who warned us of the threat to our Constitutional Republic, our culture and Western Civilization. The greatest threat to the free world – the massive global Muslim migration.

The below speech by Geert Wilders, given in New York City in 2008, is prophetic.

Democrats and their allies in the courts are fighting to keep the Muslim migration flowing in the name of social justice, while those with vision see what is happening in Europe with growing alarm. There are two elections to watch in the coming months. The first in France and then in Germany. If the populists win in these two countries, then the free world wins. If not, Europe is doomed.

As Dr. Andrew Bostom wrote:

… liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives.

All throughout Europe American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe’s children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.


wilders i fight for freedomGeert Wilders, chairman Party for Freedom, the Netherlands

Speech at the Four Seasons, New York

September 25, 2008

Dear friends,

Thank you very much for inviting me. Great to be at the Four Seasons. I come from a country that has one season only: a rainy season that starts January 1st and ends December 31st. When we have three sunny days in a row, the government declares a national emergency. So Four Seasons, that’s new to me.

It’s great to be in New York. When I see the skyscrapers and office buildings, I think of what Ayn Rand said: “The sky over New York and the will of man made visible.” Of course. Without the Dutch you would have been nowhere, still figuring out how to buy this island from the Indians. But we are glad we did it for you. And, frankly, you did a far better job than we possibly could have done.

I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe. This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West. The danger I see looming is the scenario of America as the last man standing. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe. In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe? Patriots from around Europe risk their lives every day to prevent precisely this scenario form becoming a reality.

My short lecture consists of 4 parts.

First I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe. Then, I will say a few things about Islam. Thirdly, if you are still here, I will talk a little bit about the movie you just saw. To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem.

The Europe you know is changing. You have probably seen the landmarks. The Eiffel Tower and Trafalgar Square and Rome’s ancient buildings and maybe the canals of Amsterdam. They are still there. And they still look very much the same as they did a hundred years ago.

But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world, a world very few visitors see – and one that does not appear in your tourist guidebook. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration. All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighbourhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are, they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It’s the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corner. The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighbourhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe. These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe, street by street, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, city by city.

There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe. With larger congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region. Clearly, the signal is: we rule.

Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam, Marseille and Malmo in Sweden. In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim. Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim neighbourhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities. In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims. Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils. In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear “whore, whore”. Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of origin. In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin. The history of the Holocaust can in many cases no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity. In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system. Many neighbourhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head scarves. Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels, because he was drinking during the Ramadan. Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya, Israel. I could go on forever with stories like this. Stories about Islamization.

A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe. San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few signs of that. The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France. One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favour of a worldwide caliphate. A Dutch study reported that half of Dutch Muslims admit they “understand” the 9/11 attacks.

Muslims demand what they call ‘respect’. And this is how we give them respect. Our elites are willing to give in. To give up. In my own country we have gone from calls by one cabinet member to turn Muslim holidays into official state holidays, to statements by another cabinet member, that Islam is part of Dutch culture, to an affirmation by the Christian-Democratic attorney general that he is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey.

Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behaviour, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus. Some prefer to see these as isolated incidents, but I call it a Muslim intifada. I call the perpetrators “settlers”. Because that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies, they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they are settlers.

Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighbourhoods, their cities, their countries.

Politicians shy away from taking a stand against this creeping sharia. They believe in the equality of all cultures. Moreover, on a mundane level, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

Our many problems with Islam cannot be explained by poverty, repression or the European colonial past, as the Left claims. Nor does it have anything to do with Palestinians or American troops in Iraq. The problem is Islam itself.

Allow me to give you a brief Islam 101. The first thing you need to know about Islam is the importance of the book of the Quran. The Quran is Allah’s personal word, revealed by an angel to Mohammed, the prophet. This is where the trouble starts. Every word in the Quran is Allah’s word and therefore not open to discussion or interpretation. It is valid for every Muslim and for all times. Therefore, there is no such a thing as moderate Islam. Sure, there are a lot of moderate Muslims. But a moderate Islam is non-existent.

The Quran calls for hatred, violence, submission, murder, and terrorism. The Quran calls for Muslims to kill non-Muslims, to terrorize non-Muslims and to fulfil their duty to wage war: violent jihad. Jihad is a duty for every Muslim, Islam is to rule the world – by the sword. The Quran is clearly anti-Semitic, describing Jews as monkeys and pigs.

The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet. His behaviour is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages – at the same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. He advised on matters of slavery, but never advised to liberate slaves. Islam has no other morality than the advancement of Islam. If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad. There is no gray area or other side.

Quran as Allah’s own word and Mohammed as the perfect man are the two most important facets of Islam. Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means ‘submission’. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies.

This is what you need to know about Islam, in order to understand what is going on in Europe. For millions of Muslims the Quran and the live of Mohammed are not 14 centuries old, but are an everyday reality, an ideal, that guide every aspect of their lives. Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam “the most retrograde force in the world”, and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran.

Which brings me to my movie, Fitna.

I am a lawmaker, and not a movie maker. But I felt I had the moral duty to educate about Islam. The duty to make clear that the Quran stands at the heart of what some people call terrorism but is in reality jihad. I wanted to show that the problems of Islam are at the core of Islam, and do not belong to its fringes.

Now, from the day the plan for my movie was made public, it caused quite a stir, in the Netherlands and throughout Europe. First, there was a political storm, with government leaders, across the continent in sheer panic. The Netherlands was put under a heightened terror alert, because of possible attacks or a revolt by our Muslim population. The Dutch branch of the Islamic organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir declared that the Netherlands was due for an attack. Internationally, there was a series of incidents. The Taliban threatened to organize additional attacks against Dutch troops in Afghanistan, and a website linked to Al Qaeda published the message that I ought to be killed, while various muftis in the Middle East stated that I would be responsible for all the bloodshed after the screening of the movie. In Afghanistan and Pakistan the Dutch flag was burned on several occasions. Dolls representing me were also burned. The Indonesian President announced that I will never be admitted into Indonesia again, while the UN Secretary General and the European Union issued cowardly statements in the same vein as those made by the Dutch Government. I could go on and on. It was an absolute disgrace, a sell-out.

A plethora of legal troubles also followed, and have not ended yet. Currently the state of Jordan is litigating against me. Only last week there were renewed security agency reports about a heightened terror alert for the Netherlands because of Fitna.

Now, I would like to say a few things about Israel. Because, very soon, we will get together in its capitol. The best way for a politician in Europe to loose votes is to say something positive about Israel. The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor. I, however, will continue to speak up for Israel. I see defending Israel as a matter of principle. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I support Israel. First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz, second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.

Samuel Huntington writes it so aptly: “Islam has bloody borders”. Israel is located precisely on that border. This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam’s territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines, Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan, Lebanon, and Aceh in Indonesia. Israel is simply in the way. The same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War.

The war against Israel is not a war against Israel. It is a war against the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us. If there would have been no Israel, Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West. It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior, and accept our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination. If they can get Israel, they can get everything. Therefore, it is not that the West has a stake in Israel. It is Israel.

It is very difficult to be an optimist in the face of the growing Islamization of Europe. All the tides are against us. On all fronts we are losing. Demographically the momentum is with Islam. Muslim immigration is even a source of pride within ruling liberal parties. Academia, the arts, the media, trade unions, the churches, the business world, the entire political establishment have all converted to the suicidal theory of multiculturalism. So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a ‘right-wing extremists’ or ‘racists’. The entire establishment has sided with our enemy. Leftists, liberals and Christian-Democrats are now all in bed with Islam.

This is the most painful thing to see: the betrayal by our elites. At this moment in Europe’s history, our elites are supposed to lead us. To stand up for centuries of civilization. To defend our heritage. To honour our eternal Judeo-Christian values that made Europe what it is today. But there are very few signs of hope to be seen at the governmental level. Sarkozy, Merkel, Brown, Berlusconi; in private, they probably know how grave the situation is. But when the little red light goes on, they stare into the camera and tell us that Islam is a religion of peace, and we should all try to get along nicely and sing Kumbaya. They willingly participate in, what President Reagan so aptly called: “the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.”

If there is hope in Europe, it comes from the people, not from the elites. Change can only come from a grass-roots level. It has to come from the citizens themselves. Yet these patriots will have to take on the entire political, legal and media establishment.

Over the past years there have been some small, but encouraging, signs of a rebirth of the original European spirit. Maybe the elites turn their backs on freedom, the public does not. In my country, the Netherlands, 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat to our national identity. I don’t think the public opinion in Holland is very different from other European countries.

Patriotic parties that oppose jihad are growing, against all odds. My own party debuted two years ago, with five percent of the vote. Now it stands at ten percent in the polls. The same is true of all smililary-minded parties in Europe. They are fighting the liberal establishment, and are gaining footholds on the political arena, one voter at the time.

Now, for the first time, these patriotic parties will come together and exchange experiences. It may be the start of something big. Something that might change the map of Europe for decades to come. It might also be Europe’s last chance.

This December a conference will take place in Jerusalem. Thanks to Professor Aryeh Eldad, a member of Knesset, we will be able to watch Fitna in the Knesset building and discuss the jihad. We are organizing this event in Israel to emphasize the fact that we are all in the same boat together, and that Israel is part of our common heritage. Those attending will be a select audience. No racist organizations will be allowed. And we will only admit parties that are solidly democratic.

This conference will be the start of an Alliance of European patriots. This Alliance will serve as the backbone for all organizations and political parties that oppose jihad and Islamization. For this Alliance I seek your support.

This endeavor may be crucial to America and to the West. America may hold fast to the dream that, thanks tot its location, it is safe from jihad and shaira. But seven years ago to the day, there was still smoke rising from ground zero, following the attacks that forever shattered that dream. Yet there is a danger even greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America – as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe, it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome, Athens and Jerusalem.

Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe’s children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.

This is not the first time our civilization is under threat. We have seen dangers before. We have been betrayed by our elites before. They have sided with our enemies before. And yet, then, freedom prevailed.

These are not times in which to take lessons from appeasement, capitulation, giving away, giving up or giving in. These are not times in which to draw lessons from Mr. Chamberlain. These are times calling us to draw lessons from Mr. Churchill and the words he spoke in 1942:

“Never give in, never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy”.

RELATED ARTICLE: Another French Jew murdered in Paris by Muslim neighbor “screaming “Allahu Akbar.”

RELATED VIDEO: Fitna.

EDITORS NOTE:  To learn more about Islam please visit: www.Fitnaphobia.com.

EU tells Hungary and Poland: Accept mass Muslim migration or leave

France and Germany, along with a host of up to 21 other countries, are set to demand Hungary and Poland either accept migrants under the quota system or leave the European Union.

The European Union is set to be a fragmented jumble, plagued by crime and broken economies, and it is all due to the reckless leadership of corrupt politicians who flung open the doors of their borders to unvetted Muslim refugees, at the expense of their own citizens. Based on the stance of the leaders of Hungary and Poland, those countries appear to be ready to thumb their noses at the EU and leave it.

Hungary has been detaining migrants and sending them back. Hungarian leader Viktor Orban angrily lashed out at Angela Merkel, warning her that the Muslim migrant crime problem in Germany would spill over into neighbouring countries, and stating that Hungary would not pay for Merkel’s error. Hungary also recently opened a military base at its border to stop migrants; Orban has declared 2017 “a year of rebellion” to “make Hungary great again,” and has rightly stated that “Europe is not free” because “freedom begins with speaking the truth.”

And in Poland:

Poland’s conservative Law and Justice Party (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość – PiS) swept to victory in 2015, partly due to voter anger over the previous government agreeing to take migrants under the quota system.

Back in January, riots erupted in Poland when Muslim migrants stabbed a local youngster to death after rumors that he had thrown a firecracker inside a Kebab diner.

Just hours after the initial riots took place at the crime scene, clashes between police and rioters in the neighbouring Polish town, Lublin, occurred as vandals sprayed anti-Muslim graffiti on a kebab shop that read: “F*** Islam and f*** ISIS.”

“European Union Tells Hungary and Poland To Accept Mass Migration Or Leave”, by Virginia Hale, Breitbart, April 4, 2017:

France and Germany, along with a host of up to 21 other countries, are set to demand Hungary and Poland either accept migrants under the quota system or leave the European Union (EU).

The two nations have ignored Brussels’ insistence that they take migrants presently residing in great numbers in Italy and Greece. Public opinion in Hungary and Poland is also strongly against being forced to accept thousands of migrants from non-European cultures.

Poland’s conservative Law and Justice Party (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość – PiS) swept to victory in 2015, partly due to voter anger over the previous government agreeing to take migrants under the quota system.

In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has been a vocal opponent of the scheme from its conception, asserting that forcing member countries to take a compulsory quota of migrants is unlawful and will “spread terrorism around Europe”.

Later this year, the two countries will be given an ultimatum and have to decide whether they are willing to maintain an anti-mass migration stances if it puts their membership of the EU at threat, a senior diplomatic source from one of the bloc’s six founding member states told The Times.

The source said: “They will have to make a choice: are they in the European system or not? You cannot blackmail the EU, unity has a price.”

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is expected to hold a hearing on the legality of migrant quotas in the coming weeks, with a judgement — widely expected to be in favour of the scheme — likely by the end of the year.

“We are confident that the ECJ will confirm validation,” the source said. “Then they must abide by the decision. If they don’t then they will face consequences, both financial and political. No more opt-outs. There is no more ‘one foot in and one foot out’. We are going to be very tough on this.”

Hungary challenged the court, insisting that it is culturally and constitutionally unreasonable to impose asylum seekers on unwilling member states.

In December, referring to policies of importing large numbers of people from the third world, Orbán stated that Hungary and other countries in Central Europe “have had the opportunity to learn from Western Europe’s mistakes”.

“Hungary is a stable island in the turbulent western world because the people were consulted on their opinions here, and we defended the country against illegal immigration.”

In 2015, when European Commission Vice-President Frans Timmermans demanded Eastern and Central EU nations undergo similar demographic transitions as in Western Europe, Hungary was singled out for special mention.

“Any society, anywhere in the world, will be diverse in the future — that’s the future of the world,” Timmermans said. “So [Central European countries] will have to get used to that. They need political leaders who have the courage to explain that to their population instead of playing into the fears as I’ve seen Mr Orbán doing in the last couple of months.”

Breitbart London reported that the European Union is to open asylum processing centres in west Africa and countries on the southern shore of the Mediterranean because the continent “needs six million migrants…..

RELATED ARTICLES:

Sweden: Muslim school segregates boys and girls, makes girls enter bus at the back

San Francisco police officer fired for private “anti-Muslim” text messages

PHONY: Chuck Schumer’s Fraudulent Opposition to Neil Gorsuch

U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer — who has feasted in Washington political office for 37 years — is the poster child for what Americans hate about fraudulent D.C. politics, and what is slowly draining our country of its vitality.

The New York Democrat is in blustery high dudgeon about maintaining the Senate tradition of 60 votes for a Supreme Court nominee and the “terrible” idea of changing Senate rules.

Except there is no such tradition.

As recently as 2006, Justice Samuel Alito was approved to the Supreme Court 58-42. Another current member of the Court, Justice Clarence Thomas, was barely approved 52-48. Both were nominated by Republican presidents. Republicans contributed to Obama’s picks being approved by large margins — even though they were hardened ideologues.

Further, Sen. Harry Reid, also a Democrat, changed the Senate rules in 2013 with a slim majority to bypass the filibuster and stacked the D.C. Court of Appeals. And Schumer supported Reid blowing up the Senate rules.

It was not just the “nuclear option” that the media loves to drone on about — blowing out the filibuster with a simple majority vote — but as talk radio host and law professor Hugh Hewitt has pointed out, the Reid Rule was actually more about the Senate being able to change any of its rules with a simple majority — when that traditionally required a supermajority of 60 votes.

Reid’s short-term power play, supported by Schumer just four years ago, is now coming back to bite Democrats just as Sen. Mitch McConnell said it would when he pleaded with Reid not to do it.

Schumer, true to form as a lifelong partisan D.C. denizen, now blames Republicans. But don’t think his chutzpah stops there.

Meet the truth, Senator

Schumer was on Meet the Press Sunday, and host Chuck Todd did yeoman’s work trying to point out Schumer’s colossal hypocrisy over such a short span of time.

Schumer made his talking point to Todd: “That’s how you get a mainstream justice. Mitch (McConnell) calls it a filibuster, we call it the 60-vote standard. Most Americans believe in the 60-vote standard.”

First, of course, that is nonsense, constitutionally speaking. And thinking that most Americans even know what the 60 votes is referring to, and that it was ever a standard is just more nonsense piled upon nonsense.

But this one wild prevarication during the interview, and attempt to re-write reality is simply astonishing.

Todd points out the two justices on the Court who received less than 60 votes to get confirmed. Schumer’s answer is pure mind-numbing swamp-speak:

“Well, actually Clarence Thomas is the only one, because when the filibuster came up with Alito, there were 72 votes to go forward. So there’s just one, just about every nominee gets 60 votes because in the past, presidents have actually consulted the other side before picking someone.”

Here’s how this works in the D.C. establishment mind of a Democrat leader:

Sure, sure Thomas only got 52 votes and not 60 — exactly like Chuck Todd said. But see, Schumer and others had wanted to filibuster the Thomas vote so it would never even happen. The Senate, however, including several Democrats, voted against the filibuster with 72 votes. So Schumer counts those votes to close the filibuster as as Thomas getting more than 60 votes — not the actual 52 votes he did get.

It’s just leaves one almost speechless.

Goes around, comes around

In the second part of that breathtaking quote is the idea that past presidents consulted the other side before picking a nominee. Maybe some did. But President Obama did not. In fact, his haughty quote that elections have consequences is directly on point to getting judges and justices he wanted on the bench.

Cases in point are Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. Both of these justices are liberal ideologues, but Sotomayor is virtually a radical leftist.

The New York Times reports that Sonia Sotomayor is to the left of even liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg based on her voting record and opinions. “Justice Sotomayor, Mr. Obama’s first nominee to the court, surpassed Justice Ginsburg as the court’s most liberal justice.” Yet she was confirmed 68-31, with many Republicans voting for her.

Obama never consulted Republicans or conservatives on the Kagan and Sotomayor nominations. Schumer is just making stuff up, saying it on national television, and expecting to get away with it. But his team was the rule-breaker, so now there is precedent.

Elections have consequences, Obama said. Yup. They sure do.

The data points are clear. It is the Democrats who have continued to politicize the courts. So when Schumer does his shtick on Meet the Press or any gaggle of microphones, remember, it’s all a big fraud. He’s a gold level supporter and beneficiary of the Swamp.

Swamp does not want draining

Living organisms typically attack threats.

Washington, D.C.’s sprawling government industrial complex, from politicians to an army of entrenched bureaucrats and lobbyists enriched by leviathan government to a powerful and self-insulated media establishment — all with self interests — is in a sense a living organism. It is a bit akin to a swamp parasite attached to the body of the American public, drawing sustenance in the form of taxes and power and driven always to grow. When it is attacked, it fights back viciously.

Trump, for all his faults — and some doubts that he will truly carry through — is still acting like he may try to make major changes in Washington that would benefit the American people — minus the parasitic class. Because of those efforts, from deregulation to tax reform to bypassing the media, the organism is fighting back.

Schumer disseminating, government functionaries leaking, reporters protecting the status quo, are all part and parcel of the beast lashing out at those threatening its sustenance.

The question is: Will President Trump really try to drain the swamp and destroy the menacing and formidable parasite as best he can, or was it just campaign talk. If it is the latter, he will turn out to be just another politician and a major disappointment to his supporters.

So far, however, he has been working to keep campaign promises right and left, rousing the parasite. If he continues, the organism will lash out with more virulence. But its attacks will also become more obvious for what they are.

And maybe it will be a chance for the body to expel it.

Please check our Youtube Channel

RELATED ARTICLES:

DEFUND: The Dazzlingly Bad Idea of Government-Funded Media

BUILD THE WALL: Why? To Reduce Murders and Rapes, For Starters

EXPLAINED: Government Healthcare is not Christian

HEALTHCARE REFORM: Freedom Is Its Own Indispensable Goal

CULTURE WATCH: Looking Through the Black Hole in the Big Bang

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

Partners in Crime: Mayors of Sanctuary Cities, Human Traffickers and Other Criminals

CartoonRamirezSanctuaryCityGunSFAdvocates for immigration anarchy known as “Sanctuary Cities” threaten national security and public safety in numerous ways. In point of fact, those municipalities should be referred to as “Magnet Cities” because they attract aliens who are criminals or terrorists or fugitives from justice in countries from around the world.

While it is obvious that Sanctuary Cities are extremely helpful to aliens who are illegally present in the United States, what may not be immediately obvious is that Sanctuary Cities support the smuggling activities of human traffickers who enable illegal aliens to enter the U.S. surreptitiously, thereby evading the vital inspections process conducted at America’s 325 ports of entry located along our nation’s northern and southern borders, at seaports and international airports.

Other smuggling activities also include criminals and criminal organizations that provide fraudulent documentation or opportunities for aliens to enter into conspiracies to defraud the visa process and enter through ports of entry.

The 9/11 Commission determined that such activities support terrorist entry into the U.S. In fact, on page 54 of the the 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel, this excerpt under the heading, 3.2 Terrorist Travel Tactics by Plot, is found:

Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti.

During my 30-year career with the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service), one of my most important tools was my ability to recruit illegal aliens to assist my investigations by providing me (and my colleagues) with actionable intelligence.

When appropriate, in arresting illegal aliens, we would offer them the opportunity to remain in the U.S. and be granted legal authorization to work, at least for a temporary period and possibly permanently, if they cooperated with investigations into criminal and/or terrorist organizations, including providing essential information about the smugglers who assisted them in entering the U.S. illegally or by procuring visas through fraud.

This enabled us to conduct successful investigations into such criminal organizations that ultimately resulted in the arrest of the criminals and the dismantling of criminal organizations and networks, among them those that engaged in human trafficking and narcotics smuggling. Many of our investigations could not have been conducted without the assistance of those aliens.

The bogus narrative of the mayors of Sanctuary Cities is that they are being “compassionate” by shielding illegal aliens from detection by ICE agents. This concerted effort to vilify federal agents is unprecedented and is limited only to immigration law enforcement personnel.

Meanwhile, what is rarely if ever reported in the media is the nexus between immigration law enforcement and efforts to combat international terrorism. For example, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) operates under the aegis of the FBI and consists of law enforcement personnel from a broad array of law enforcement agencies on the local, city and state levels.

As might be expected, the FBI contributes the greatest number of personnel to this important organization. Not often recognized is that agents of ICE are the second largest contingent  assigned to the JTTF and HSI (Homeland Security Investigations).

However, this aggressive campaign of deception by the mayors of Sanctuary Cities and other advocates for immigration anarchy discourages immigrants and illegal aliens alike to cooperate with immigration law enforcement personnel, thereby obstructing essential investigations.

This issue was the focus in my recent article, “Opponents Of Border Security and Immigration Law Enforcement Aid Human Traffickers.” My follow-up article focused primarily on the latest and ever-expanding sanctuary policies promulgated by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti.

Bottom line, to reiterate what was stated atop, mayors and other political officials who support harboring illegal aliens via Sanctuary Cities endanger national security and public safety.

RELATED INFOGRAPHIC:

list of top 12 sanctuary cities

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on CAPSweb.org.

Facebook, Twitter SUED by more victims of Islamic terror

Filing a lawsuit against the internet is like filing a lawsuit against Johannes Gutenberg in the late 1400s. It’s absurd. Technology and progress are not the problem. Ideology is the problem. Why don’t victims of jihad terror sue the mosques and the world’s leading Islamic institutions such as Al Azhar university? Why not sue the publishers that print Qurans and hadiths that incite to jihad? Jihad terror has been plaguing humanity long before the interwebs came into existence.

Suing Twitter, Google, and Facebook is killing the messenger. It’s folly.


TWITTER, FACEBOOK TARGETED BY MORE PULSE SHOOTING VICTIMS

social-iconsBy Paul Brinkmann, Orlando Sentinel. April 3, 2017:

TEN NEW PLAINTIFFS HAVE JOINED A FEDERAL LAWSUIT THAT TARGETS TWITTER, GOOGLE, AND FACEBOOK WITH ALLEGATIONS THAT ISIS USED SOCIAL MEDIA TO RADICALIZE THE PULSE NIGHTCLUB GUNMAN.

The lawsuit is the second in recent weeks where more than a dozen Pulse victims or their families are now suing over the tragedy. The other big lawsuit is directed at the G4S security firm, where the shooter worked as a security guard, and his wife.

ne of the new plaintiffs in the social media case is Christine Leinonen, mother of deceased victim Christopher “Dru” Leinonen. She has been one of the most visible activists among the Pulse victims’ families, appearing at the Democratic National Convention during the presidential campaign to speak about curbing gun violence.

“I think this is one lawsuit that may actually work, so that we could prevent some future tragedies. It’s not going to eliminate them altogether because the [expletive] that want to distribute this kind of carnage can still meet in a coffeehouse or a cave or wherever,” Leinonen said. “They are taking men who might be slightly angry because they’re not getting along with their boss or their wife, and they’re making monsters out of them.”

Money from the lawsuit would be put into her son’s foundation, called The Dru Project, to help start up and support gay-straight alliances in schools.She said the lawsuit is not about money.

“Even if the damages are minimal, that’s irrelevant. I have the opportunity to eradicate future evil. That would promote my son’s honor, his name, his legacy,” Leinonen said.

The lawsuit seeks a judge’s order declaring the social media companies to have violated the Anti-Terrorism Act by allowing ISIS sympathizers to use their services. The act defines terrorism as acts dangerous to human life, which appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, among other things, and provides for penalties against anyone aiding terrorists.

Twitter, Google and Facebook have fought back in court, filing a motion to dismiss the case already.

The social media lawsuit was first filed in December by family members controlling estates of three deceased victims, by the Michigan-based firm 1-800-Law-Firm. Ten more joined the suit last week, according to a new amended complaint.

The social media suit alleges that the shooter, Omar Mateen, was radicalized by ISIS’s use of social media websites to conduct terrorist operations. However, the companies have argued that the suit alleges no facts indicating that the Orlando attack “was in any way impacted, helped by, or the result of ISIS’s presence on the social networks.”

Mateen opened fire at Pulse, a gay nightclub south of downtown Orlando, about 2 a.m. on June 12, killing 49 people and injuring at least 68 others.

Besides Leinonen, the new plaintiffs are family or estate representatives of deceased victims including: Lydia Perez and family members of the late Jean Carlos Mendez Perez; Carlos Sanfeliz and Maria Sanfeliz-Mendoza, family of the late Christopher Joseph Sanfeliz; Jose Luis Vielma, family of the late Luis Sergio Vielma; Jackson J. Josaphat, family of the late Jason B. Josaphat; Stanley Almodovar, family of the late Stanley Almodovar III.

Four of the new plaintiffs are Pulse victims who recovered: Chris Littlestar, Nicholaz Perez, Asael Abad and Jillian Amador.

The lawsuit cites numerous media accounts of investigations into the shooting by the FBI and by a Congressional committee.

Although the suit says the FBI believes Mateen was radicalized by viewing online material, including videos, the suit doesn’t have any specific examples of Mateen viewing ISIS material. The only direct reference in the lawsuit to Mateen using social media is about him going on Facebook during the shooting itself to find reaction.

Another lawsuit filed by victims’ families, filed targets the G4S security firm, where the shooter worked as a security guard, and his wife.

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

Black Lives Matter Leader Rachel Gilmer: ‘Zionism at its core is white supremacy’

John Rossomando in an IPT News article “Panelists Prove Jewish Voice for Peace is Neither” reported:

jewish voices for peaceThere’s a simple way to end global oppression, racism and immediately create a world overflowing with “equality, dignity and human rights,” panelists agreed Saturday [April 1st, 2017] morning during a Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) Conference in Chicago.

Simply eliminate Zionism from the planet.

“Arguing for a softer, less harsh, nicer version of capitalism, colonialism and racism won’t do it,” said Black Lives Matter leader Rachel Gilmer. “Many liberal Zionists believe that the problem with Israeli apartheid is simply a few bad policies, or Netanyahu, or the wall, but the problem is with the ideological foundation of the state itself: Zionism. Zionism at its core is white supremacy.” [Emphasis added]

Read more…

So who is Black Lives Matter leader Rachel Gilmer?

The Canary Mission published a profile of Gilmer:

Rachel Gilmer is the chief of strategy for Dream Defenders (DD) and a supporterof the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

In May 2016, Gilmer participated in a DD trip to Israel in support of the BDS movement.

On August 2, 2016, Gilmer co-authored the Movement for Black Lives (M4BL) Policy Platform which endorsed BDS and accused Israel of committing a “genocide” against Palestinians. The platform and DD’s defense of it are discussed further below.

But is gets worse. According to Canary Mission:

On May 16, 2016, Gilmer appeared in a photo wearing a t-shirt supporting the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a designated terrorist organization by the European Union, Canada, the United States and Israel.

The PFLP shirt featured a quote from the late PFLP leader Ghassan Kanafani stating: “Don’t die without being a rival.” The quote in Arabic — لا تمت قبل ان تكون ندا — is used by the PFLP and its supporters.

Gilmer wore the PFLP shirt while in the Dheisheh Refugee Camp (Dheisheh) near Bethlehem while on the May 2016 DD trip. Dheisheh is known as a PFLP stronghold.

On March 2016, DD produced an educational series that glorifies the PFLP. Intended for sixth to eleventh graders, the curriculum titled “Blacked Out History – Rebellion Curriculum Toolkit,” preaches violence under the euphemism of “struggle” (page 6).

The curriculum mentions various violent PFLP strategies (page 25) such as “hijackings, assassinations, car bombings, suicide bombings, paramilitary operations against civilian and military targets” and concludes “[t]hey want to be free from global imperialism. They want liberation. They want equal rights. Just like the Dream Defenders” (page 26).

Gilmer Supports Violence

On July 18, 2016, Gilmer shared a post defending two minors who stabbed a security guard on a Jerusalem train on October 10, 2015.

On November 7, 2016, Gilmer shared a post whitewashing attempted murderer Ahmad Manasra who joined his cousin in an Jerusalem stabbing attack over one year earlier. They critically wounded a 13 year-old Israeli boy and moderate wounded a 25 year-old man. Manasra admitted “I went there to stab Jews.”

These attacks came during a wave of religiously incited violence, known variously as the “Knife Intifada” or the “Stabbing Intifada” when Palestinian radicals across Israel stabbed scores of Israeli civilians. The attacks were sparked and fueled by the libel — often spread by Palestinian leaders — that Israel intended to desecrate the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.

On September 9, 2016, Gilmer shared an article on Facebook defending violent agitator Issa Amro, who is known for attacking Israeli soldiers and vandalism.

What is ironic is that Rachel Gilmer was raised Jewish. 

Sam Kestenbaum in a column titled “How Did Black Lives Matter Come to Charge Israel with Genocide?” notes:

Rachel Gilmer, a 28-year-old African American who was raised Jewish, has long been involved in black-Palestinian solidarity work. Gilmer is associated with the activist group Dream Defenders, which has been on the forefront of recent black-Palestinian solidarity efforts, such as bringing high-profile delegations of African-American activists to Israel and the West Bank.

Born to an African-American father and a white Jewish mother, Gilmer was raised as a Jew and participated as a teen in Young Judaea, the Zionist youth group. There, she rose to become a leading member of her local group. But Gilmer later distanced herself from organized religion.

Read more…

Why do some Jews, like Gilmer, eat their own? Why did Gilmer become a Judenrat?

RELATED ARTICLE: BDS Activist at JVP Conference Urges ‘Guerilla Disobedience’ Against Israel

EDITORS NOTE: Here are Gilmer’s close connections: Ahmad Abuznaid, Nadia Ben-Youssef, Maria Castro, Jonel Edwards, Nyle Fort, Steven Gilliam, Kimberly Gonzalez, Janaya Khan, Ramah Kudaimi, Didier Ortiz,  Steve Pargett, Umi Selah, Ciara Taylor