There’s been a lot of talk recently about how Millennials – the generation born between roughly 1980 and 2000 – think about economics. Much of it was sparked by the fanatical support for self-described “Democratic Socialist” Bernie Sanders from young people in the Democratic primary for president last year.
Millennials have economic attitudes that are different from older Americans.
Gallup found in April 2016 that, whereas Hillary Clinton had a net favorability rating of -23 among 18-24 year-olds, Sanders’s score was +39.
A Harvard University poll administered at about the same time revealed how this has been translated into policy views. The survey reported that only 42% of Millennials supported capitalism. According to a contemporaneous Gallup poll, that was about 10 percentage points lower than the general population. The Harvard survey showed 33% of Millennials wanted socialism.
So Millennials have economic attitudes that are different from older Americans. But is their economic behavior different? Do they walk the socialist walk?
Here, the evidence is decidedly mixed.
Health Care
Socialists tend to embrace public goods because all citizens can consume them. Millennials certainly like them. A Pew Research Center poll from June revealed 45% of 18–29-year-olds favored a single-payer health care system. This was 14 percentage points higher than any other single age group.
Census data show Millennials adopted health insurance more rapidly than any other age cohort when Obamacare began in 2014-15. I’m not entirely sure what kind of political philosophy this behavior illustrates, but it does seem to suggest Millennials embraced the Affordable Care Act, legislation most people believe moved health care in this country solidly to the left.
Recycling and Personal Consumption
Socialism, unlike capitalism, makes a virtue of constrained personal consumption. A major reason for this, of course, is that it is less suited to production. But the connection has helped fuse ecology to socialism in the platforms of left-wing parties across the globe.
You may have heard the argument that Millennials are more environmentally conscious than the rest of us – they don’t use plastic shopping bags or flush the toilet, etc. A survey commissioned by Rubbermaid reported earlier this year that two-thirds of Millennials would give up social media for a week if everyone at their company recycled.
Interestingly, however, the data on behavior do not bear this out. A 2014 Harris poll conducted for the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI) revealed that whereas roughly a half of respondents over thirty said they “always” recycled, only a third of the younger group did.
Millennials talk about saving the planet for humanity, behavior a socialist mindset deems heroic, but they do not seem to be doing more than anyone else to secure our world’s survival.
Transportation
Millennials also use public transportation much more than other groups. Over one-fifth ride a bus or train on a daily or almost-daily basis according to a Pew survey from late 2015. This was nearly double the proportion of any other age group.
Indeed, younger people seem to have much less love than their elders for that ultimate of American private goods, one’s own car. The number of licensed drivers in both the 24-29-year-old and 30-34-year-old cohorts decreased by about 10% between 1983 and 2014 according to the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute. The drop for 18-year-olds was a fifth. At the same time, everyone over 45 continues their love affair with the automobile.
This seems consistent with the socialist rejection of material goods, but whether this is correlation or causation is unclear.
Sharing Economy
Moreover, Millennials have almost single-handedly nurtured the “sharing” economy – a marketplace in which peer-to-peer transactions are facilitated by a software platform that permits participants to divide consumption, as exemplified by Uber and Airbnb. According to Vugo, 57% of all ridesharing customers are aged 25 to 34.
The sharing economy may sound quite socialist because it seems to eschew private ownership. But as Duke professor Mike Munger has pointed out, people, in general, wish to consume the services that tangible goods provide, not the goods themselves. The sharing economy, in fact, provides access to the services of more material goods than the user would otherwise have – whether that’s a five-minute ride in a car or a two-day stay in a house. Its fundamental principles, therefore, are capitalist.
Entrepreneurialism
A 2014 Bentley University survey of Millennials reported that two-thirds of respondents expressed a desire to start their own business. But Millennial behavior is different. An analysis by the Wall Street Journal last year found that the proportion of Americans under 30 who own a business has dropped by 65% since the 1980s. Millennials might say they want to be Mark Zuckerberg, but they’re not particularly entrepreneurial.
There does exist therefore a disconnect between Millennial economic attitudes and behavior. What explains it? The generation is intrigued by the idea of socialism. It embraces many of its values and the public policies that would bring it about. But Millennials’ behavior is ambiguous. Entrepreneurship in private enterprise is not a particularly appealing career path to them in practice.
Additionally, Millennials’ reduced consumption is probably as much a function of economic necessity as it is a sacrifice of their personal wants to some grand social plan. The Great Recession has left them playing financial catch-up. A Pew analysis of census data reveals 15% of 25-to-35-year-olds still live with their parents. Traditionally that fraction has been around one tenth. A 2016 study by the left-leaning Center for American Progress found that Millennials make less than Gen Xers did in their early 30s. They only earn about the same as Boomers, who are 30 years older and 50% less likely to have graduated from college.
So perhaps there’s another explanation: When they appear to be rejecting capitalism, it’s often because Millennials are simply adjusting America’s core economic principles to new technologies and economic realities.
Andrew J. Taylor is professor of Political Science in the School of Public and International Affairs at NC State University. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Connecticut and teaches courses in American politics, including Introduction to American Government, the Presidency and Congress, the Legislative Process, Public Choice and Political Institutions, and the Classical Liberal Tradition.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/LOVE-TWO-GIRLS.gif300600Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2017-08-25 13:09:502017-08-25 13:09:50Millennials Are in a Love Triangle with Capitalism and Socialism by Andrew J. Taylor
I appeared on Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News on August 22, 2017 to discuss PayPal banning Jihad Watch under Leftist pressure, and the Left’s war against the freedom of speech.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/bill-oreilly-spencer-e1503607627574.png370640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2017-08-24 16:47:192017-08-24 16:47:19PODCAST: Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News on PayPal and the Left’s war on the freedom of speech
Rosario is Argentina’s second oldest city. Located by the Paraná river, it is the home of hard-working people, a busy port, the national flag memorial, and the country’s bitterest football rivalry between Rosario Central and Newell’s Old Boys.
It is also the birthplace of Ernesto “Ché” Guevara.
In the last fifteen years or so, coincidentally with the rise of leftist populism in Argentina and the rest of South America, there have been plenty of tributes to the figure of “Ché.” All of these tributes are state-financed, one way or another. The most prominent is a 13-foot high statue placed in a public square.
Fundación Bases has its main headquarters in Rosario. Teaming up with the Naumann Foundation, we decided to launch a campaign to remove all the state tributes to “Ché” Guevara. We knew this would generate controversy but, honestly, we didn’t expect the level of reaction that has occurred.
About the Man
So, who was this “Ché” Guevara? Ernesto Guevara de la Serna, globally known as “Ché”, came from an aristocratic, though impoverished, family. He studied medicine and when he was about to finish university he took an initiatory trip across Latin America. In some of the places he visited he saw harsh realities and even exploitation. This part of his life made it to the big screen, starred by then Latin sensation Gael García Bernal.
Nonetheless, he wasn’t a communist yet. As Juan José Sebreli explains, he was more of the adventurous type, looking for a cause, whatever cause this might be. In fact, he was planning to go to Europe when he met the Castro brothers in Mexico in 1955. He joined them and become a revolutionary for the “liberation” of Cuba.
Under the command of Fidel Castro, “Ché” achieved his only military victory. All his other revolutionary adventures were disastrous and eventually got him killed. However, during the Cuban struggle, he quickly became known for his ruthlessness and violence. He executed many, both during the conflict and after the revolutionaries got into power. He not only precisely described how he blew some poor bastard’s brains out but also acknowledged at the United Nations General Assembly that his government executed many and would continue executing as long as it was “necessary.”
He was also responsible for the opening of the first Cuban concentration camp – where homosexuals and Christians were tortured and re-educated.
What is more, he believed hate was the most powerful force and was an admirer of Joseph Stalin.
As a public official, he was president of Cuba’s central bank and minister of industry. In both roles, he failed miserably. As central banker, he basically destroyed the Cuban peso – which for many decades had been at parity with the US dollar. As industry planner, his administration was so chaotic that they even bought snow removal machines for a Caribbean country like Cuba.
The regime “Ché” helped established in Cuba is one of the most authoritarian in the world. Since the triumph of the revolution in 1959, more than 10,000 have been killed, 80,000 have died at sea trying to escape the island, and 1.5 million have had to forcefully migrate.
Remove All Tributes to ‘Ché’
With all this in mind, Fundación Bases launched the campaign “Remove all tributes to ‘Ché’ Guevara.” We are asking the city government to eliminate the plethora of state tributes that have mushroomed in the last fifteen years.
We know it will be difficult to achieve this because the same politicians who started this “Ché” industry are still in power. But we also know we are starting a conversation and a necessary debate.
We want kids who wear “Ché” T-Shirts to know that he’s not an article of fashion but a cold killing machine. Wearing a T-Shirt with his face is the same as wearing one with Stalin, Mao or Hitler.
Moreover, we want to explain to the people in our city that this “Ché” cult is a falsification of history. The local authorities who have raised him to the level of pagan saint neglect to mention his well-documented crimes but also that he has done nothing for Argentina. In fact, he only lived in Rosario until the age of one.
What Fundación Bases stands for is classical liberalism. And classical liberalism is the anti-Ché. We believe in cooperation between individuals and nations, free trade, and peace. As our Executive Director Franco López put it in an interview with Colombian media, “we are for human rights for everybody, regardless of their political ideology.”
Many Friends and Some Foes
Immediately after being launched, the campaign picked up the attention of local media. And in July Jack Aldwinckle wrote a half-page article in The Economist.
After the article, media attention skyrocketed. From then on, basically, all major newspapers, radios shows, and TV channels in the country have covered the campaign. For example, in “La Nación” – the most traditional nation-wide newspaper in Argentina – our article was the most read of the day.
Definitely, one the campaign’s highlights is the help we have received by like-minded institutions and people. Great guys like Bob Murphy, Gustavo Lazzari, Javier Milei, Steve Horwitz, Roberto Cachanosky, Marcelo Duclos. And also think tanks like Libertad y Progreso, Atlas Network, Austrian Economics Center, Independent Institute, Relial, Mises Hispano, Instituto Juan de Mariana, and so on.
The general public reaction towards our campaign has been spectacular. Our posts on social media are highly retweeted and shared. Roughly 65 percent of the social media comments have been in favor of our view. What’s more, our online petition has received thousands of signatures.
Of course, it would have been impossible to escape some leftist hysterical reactions. We have been called all names you can imagine, from “neoliberals” to “neonazis.”
We have received death threats and some very sick wishes. For instance, a commenter on Facebook called for the arrival of a communist dictatorship to make us all disappear.
Federico N. Fernández is the Senior Research Fellow of Austrian Economics Center and Vice president of Fundación Bases
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/che-statue-e1503573013641.jpg370640Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2017-08-24 07:15:152017-08-24 07:15:15Removing Statues of Violent Bigots? Start with Ché by Federico N. Fernández
On June 28, 2017 a press release from the office of Vice President Pence stated:
This morning, Vice President Mike Pence held an organizational call with members of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. The Vice President reiterated President Trump’s charge to the commission with producing a set of recommendations to increase the American people’s confidence in the integrity of our election systems.
“The integrity of the vote is a foundation of our democracy; this bipartisan commission will review ways to strengthen that integrity in order to protect and preserve the principle of one person, one vote,” the Vice President told commission members today.
The commission set July 19 as its first meeting, which will take place in Washington, D.C.
Vice Chair of the Commission and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach told members a letter will be sent today to the 50 states and District of Columbia on behalf of the Commission requesting publicly-available data from state voter rolls and feedback on how to improve election integrity.
According to a new study of U.S. Census data, America has more registered voters than actual live voters. It’s a troubling fact that puts our nation’s future in peril.
As reported by the National Review’s Deroy Murdock, who did some numbers-crunching of his own, “some 3.5 million more people are registered to vote in the U.S. than are alive among America’s adult citizens. Such staggering inaccuracy is an engraved invitation to voter fraud.”
Murdock counted Judicial Watch’s state-by-state tally and found that 462 U.S. counties had a registration rate exceeding 100% of all eligible voters. That’s 3.552 million people, who Murdock calls “ghost voters.”And how many people is that? There are 21 states that don’t have that many people.
Nor are these tiny, rural counties or places that don’t have the wherewithal to police their voter rolls.
California, for instance, has 11 counties with more registered voters than actual voters.Perhaps not surprisingly — it is deep-Blue State California, after all — 10 of those counties voted heavily for Hillary Clinton.
Los Angeles County, whose more than 10 million people make it the nation’s most populous county, had 12% more registered voters than live ones, some 707,475 votes. That’s a huge number of possible votes in an election.
But, Murdock notes, “California’s San Diego County earns the enchilada grande. Its 138% registration translates into 810,966 ghost voters.”
State by state, this is an enormous problem that needs to be dealt with seriously. Having so many bogus voters out there is a temptation to voter fraud. In California, where Hillary Clinton racked up a massive majority over Trump, it would have made little difference.
EDITORS NOTE: Any member of the public wishing to submit written comments for the Commission’s consideration may do so via email at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov. Please note that the Commission may post such written comments publicly on their website, including names and contact information that are submitted.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/America-Voter-Fraud.jpg360640Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2017-08-22 18:43:372017-08-23 04:51:50U.S. Has 3.5 Million More Registered Voters Than Live Adults
Washington, D.C. – Judicial Watch today announced that it filed two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the U.S. Department of State for records of communications regarding anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions’ (BDS) groups’ efforts to lobby the Obama administration to ignore trade laws that protect Israel.
Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Department of Homeland Security failed to respond to two June 20 FOIA requests, one to the Department itself and one to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Bureau (CBP), a component of DHS (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:17-cv-1650)). Judicial Watch is seeking:
All emails which mention West Bank country-of-origin marking requirements, and were sent between [DHS or CBP] and any of the following groups: Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, Al-Awda, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Friends of Sabeel-North America, If Americans Knew, the International Solidarity Movement, Jewish Voice for Peace, the Muslim American Society, Students for Justice in Palestine, or the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation (the “BDS Groups”).
All emails internal to [DHS and/or CBP] discussing the efforts of the BDS Groups to strengthen enforcement of the West Bank country-of-origin marking requirements.
Judicial Watch also filed a FOIA lawsuit against the State Department after it failed to respond to a June 20 request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:17-cv-01651)). Judicial Watch is seeking:
All emails which mention protections for Israel in the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, and were sent between [State Department] and any of the following groups: Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, Al-Awda, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Friends of Sabeel-North America, If Americans Knew, the International Solidarity Movement, Jewish Voice for Peace, the Muslim American Society, Students for Justice in Palestine, or the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation (the “BDS Groups”).
All internal [State Department] emails discussing the efforts of the BDS Groups to limit protections for Israel in the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015.
In February 2016 President Obama signed the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 into law, which forces U.S. trade partners to cut ties to the BDS movement and protects Israel territories. But Obama announced:
Certain provisions of this Act, by conflating Israel and “Israeli-controlled territories,” are contrary to longstanding bipartisan United States policy, including with regard to the treatment of settlements. Moreover, consistent with longstanding constitutional practice, my Administration will interpret and implement the provisions in the Act that purport to direct the Executive to seek to negotiate and enter into particular international agreements (section 414(a)(1)) or to take certain positions in international negotiations with respect to international agreements with foreign countries not qualifying for trade authorities procedures (sections 108(b), 414(a)(2), 415, and 909(c)) in a manner that does not interfere with my constitutional authority to conduct diplomacy.
Shortly after Obama signed the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, the Customs and Border Protection Bureau restated the West Bank Country of Origin Marking Requirement rules requiring labeling of goods from the West Bank. The Jerusalem Post later reported the restated rules were a result of several complaints filed by activists seeking the U.S. follow policy guidelines distinguishing goods produced from Israel and the West Bank.
The West Bank country-of-origin marking requirements is said to stem from “longstanding bipartisan U.S. policy” toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. First put in place in 1995 under the Clinton administration, the rule is to preserve the distinction between the goods produced in State of Israel and the good produced in the territories it controls over the Green Line.
The BDS movement was started by the PLO and other anti-Israel groups to encourage an economic and cultural boycott of Israel. It has gained the support of radical leftwing groups here in the United States, especially on college campuses.
“President Obama advanced the agenda of anti-Israel radicals in subverting U.S. law that rejects the malicious anti-Israel boycott movement,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And it is no surprise the Deep State ignores our FOIA requests that could expose the Obama-BDS connections. It is well past time for the Trump administration to stop this obstruction and follow the FOIA law.”
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/bds-logo-1.jpg370640Judicial Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJudicial Watch2017-08-21 19:25:482017-08-21 19:26:13Judicial Watch Sues for Anti-Israel ‘BDS’ Lobbying Records
In the 2018 mid-term elections, all 435 U.S. House members are up for reelection and in the U.S. Senate, 25 democrats and 9 republicans are running for reelection. Not one of them has kept their oath of office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, “so help me God.”
The 2016 election was a landmark shift away from liberal concepts to American concepts, as demonstrated by voters crossing party lines to support long-shot outsider Donald J. Trump for President with a common concern in mind.
The TOP 4 2016 election issues with voters from both parties
Terrorism and National Security – 87% across party lines
The economy – 87% across party lines
Employment, Jobs – 84% across party lines
Health Care – 79% across party lines, although not in agreement on the solution
In the end, voters across party lines shared the same four primary concerns in 2016 by wide margins and they trusted Donald J. Trump more than Hillary Clinton to deal with these four primary issues.
On other matters of interest, the political divisions become more visible.
Other TOP issues for Republican Voters 2016
National Debt and ongoing deficit spending
Foreign Threats
Ineffective Government
Illegal Immigration
Rising taxation without representation
Other TOP issues for Democrat Voters 2016
Free Government funded education K through College
Government redistribution of private wealth
Issues of less interest to voters from either party
Gun Laws
Wall Street and Bank Regulations
Social issues, gay marriage, abortion, transgender
Climate Change
(All data taken from broad-based Gallup polls HERE)
The result of the 2016 election cycle was Republican Party control of the White House, the House of Representatives and the Senate. The demise of democrat political power that had cost the party over 1000 political seats between 2008-2016, continued in 2016, leaving democrats essentially completely powerless under normal circumstances.
But the circumstances present as the new administration took power in January 2017 were anything but normal. The global “never-Trump” operation was about to hit overdrive. Establishment career politicians on both sides of the aisle were sent a loud and clear message… Represent OUR will or we will repeal and replace YOU! They had to double down and fast…
The Next Seven Months
Immediately following the 2016 upset of “sure thing” Hillary Clinton, the “never-Trump” operation launched into overdrive. Every possible tool and tactic was on the table. The only rule of engagement was – destroy Trump by any means necessary.
Trump had stepped between Making America Great Again and the Global Governance Agenda launched by Bill and Hillary Clinton in the early 90s, labeled Global Governance 2030, later labeled UN Agenda 21 by the United Nations.
Trump stepped into much worse than any “swamp.” He stepped squarely between the global power structure hell-bent on reducing the United States to a 3rd world level partner in a global commune -and- American voters from all party affiliations who want no part of it.
The “never-Trump” operation involves foreign governments, the United Nations, the Democratic Party, many members of the Republican Party in congress and state governments, 97% of all Federal Employees, the “fake news” media, Hollywood, DOJ Officials, the FBI, CIA, NSA, the DNI, George Soros and his more than 200 NGOs, the Communist Party USA, Socialist Party USA and Democratic Socialists of America, Islamists, illegal alien invaders, ANTIFA and BLM, giant international corporations, the education system and K-College kids…. On and on and on….
It’s not just a “swamp.” Trump stepped into the middle of a velvet global war to destroy America and took a stand with the dying breed of Americans who still believe our foundations can make America great again. Trump and his voters are at war… and the sooner they realize it, the better.
Beyond Executive Orders, some of which are also blocked by judicial tyranny, the 2016 election agenda is entirely blocked by congress. Congressional republicans even took measures to prevent any recess appointments by Trump. The agenda is being blocked by republicans in charge, working with democrats to remove Trump from the Oval Office and keep America on track to global governance.
Repeal and Replace Congress 2018
The national agenda of more than 63 million Trump voters has been stalled for the first seven months of the Trump Administration. Trump and his original team have been under constant daily assault by the “never-Trump” operation since the day Trump announced his bid for the White House.
But it isn’t just democrat global Marxists working to subvert and undermine Trump and his supporters. Republicans like Jeff Flake (AZ) and Bob Corker (TN) have been working with known enemies like John McCain (AZ) and Lindsey Graham (SC) to force the demise of the Trump presidency in short order. As a result, democrats are still running Washington DC despite republican majorities. Should politicians who fail to keep their oath even be allowed to run for reelection?
If the people who supported Trump in 2016 remain committed to their pro-American agenda, they will have to repeal and replace congress in 2018. Trump cannot MAGA alone and under constant assault.
Republican members running for reelection must be replaced in the primaries by challengers who will keep their oaths. Democrats must be defeated in the general election by viable conservative challengers. The same way 63 million voters TRUMPED the 2016 elections, they will have to TRUMP congress in 2018.
Assuming Trump can successfully defend against those at war with him long enough to see the mid-term elections, the people of this country must eliminate as many career turncoats as possible in 2018, or their agenda will remain beyond their grasp.
The people must start right now, unite for the fight, organize in coordinated strategic plans district by district, state by state with senators, and they must not fail. Voters hold the future in their hands. Evil will prevail if good people do nothing!
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/capital-building-1.jpg354640J.B. Williamshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJ.B. Williams2017-08-20 11:59:362017-08-20 11:59:51Repeal and Replace Congress 2018
More on how the Left is moving in for the kill and trying to destroy the freedom of speech completely.
“ProPublica, Working with Google to ‘Document Hate,’ Threatens Conservative Bloggers,” by Paula Bolyard, PJ Media, August 19, 2017:
Google revealed in a blog post that it is now using machine learning to document “hate crimes and events” in America. They’ve partnered with liberal groups like ProPublica, BuzzFeed News, and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) to make information about “hate events” easily accessible to journalists. And now, there are troubling signs that this tool could be used to ferret out writers and websites that run afoul of the progressive orthodoxy.
In the announcement, Simon Rogers, data editor of Google News Labs, wrote:
Now, with ProPublica, we are launching a new machine learning tool to help journalists covering hate news leverage this data in their reporting.
The Documenting Hate News Index — built by the Google News Lab, data visualization studio Pitch Interactive and ProPublica — takes a raw feed of Google News articles from the past six months and uses the Google Cloud Natural Language API to create a visual tool to help reporters find news happening across the country. It’s a constantly-updating snapshot of data from this year, one which is valuable as a starting point to reporting on this area of news.
The Documenting Hate project launched in response to the lack of national data on hate crimes. While the FBI is required by law to collect data about hate crimes, the data is incomplete because local jurisdictions aren’t required to report incidents up to the federal government.
All of which underlines the value of the Documenting Hate Project, which is powered by a number of different news organisations and journalists who collect and verify reports of hate crimes and events. Documenting Hate is informed by both reports from members of the public and raw Google News data of stories from across the nation.
On the surface, this looks rather innocuous. It’s presented by Google as an attempt to create a database of hate crimes — information that should be available with a quick Google search, it should be noted. But a quick glance at the list of partners for this project should raise some red flags:
ProPublica poses as a middle-of-the-road non-profit journalistic operation, but in reality, it’s funded by a stable of uber-liberal donors, including George Soros’s Open Society Foundation and Herb and Marion Sandler, billionaire former mortgage bankers whose Golden West Financial Corp. allegedly targeted subprime borrowers with “pick-a-pay” mortgages that led to toxic assets that were blamed for the collapse of Wachovia. The Southern Poverty Law Center, of course, is infamous for targeting legitimate conservatives groups, branding them as “hate groups” because they refuse to walk in lockstep with the progressive agenda. And it goes with out saying that The New York Times and BuzzFeed News lean left.
A perusal of the raw data that’s been compiled thus far on hate stories shows articles from a wide array of center-right sites, including The Daily Caller, Breitbart News, The Washington Times, National Review, and the Washington Examiner. It also includes many articles from liberal sites like BuzzFeed News and The New York Times. One story from PJ Media’s Bridget Johnson is included in the list. It’s a report about a Sikh ad campaign aimed at reducing hate crimes against members of their faith community. Many of the articles are simply reports about alleged hate crimes from sources running the gamut of the political spectrum.
Note that Google, which recently fired an employee for expressing his counter-progressive opinions, thinks this information could be used to “help journalists covering hate news leverage this data in their reporting.” What do they mean by “leverage this data”? They don’t say, but an email sent to several conservative writers by a ProPublica reporter may give us some indication. Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer along with some others received this from ProPublica “reporter” Lauren Kirchner:
I am a reporter at ProPublica, a nonprofit investigative newsroom in New York. I am contacting you to let you know that we are including your website in a list of sites that have been designated as hate or extremist by the American Defamation League or the Southern Poverty Law Center. We have identified all the tech platforms that are supporting websites on the ADL and SPLC lists.
We would like to ask you a few questions:
1) Do you disagree with the designation of your website as hate or extremist? Why?
2) We identified several tech companies on your website: PayPal, Amazon, Newsmax, and Revcontent. Can you confirm that you receive funds from your relationship with those tech companies? How would the loss of those funds affect your operations, and how would you be able to replace them?
3) Have you been shut down by other tech companies for being an alleged hate or extremist web site? Which companies?
4) Many people opposed to sites like yours are currently pressuring tech companies to cease their relationships with them – what is your view of this campaign? Why?
In other words, nice website you’ve got there. It would be a shame if anything happened to it.
To summarize: Liberal ProPublica, working with the smear merchants at SPLC — powered by Google — sent a reporter out to issue not so veiled threats against conservative websites. It’s blatantly obvious that the goal here is to tank websites they disagree with by mounting a campaign to pressure their advertisers and tech providers to drop them as clients. This comes on the heels of Google, GoDaddy, CloudFlare, Apple, and others singling out alt-right sites for destruction in the wake of the Charlottesville riots.
Robert Spencer (who also writes for PJ Media) responded to the threat on his Jihad Watch blog:
The intent of your questions, and no doubt of your forthcoming article, will be to try to compel these sites to cut off any connection with us based on our opposition to jihad terror. Are you comfortable with what you’re enabling? Not only are you inhibiting honest analysis of the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, but you’re aiding the attempt to deny people a platform based on their political views. This could come back to bite you if your own views ever fall out of favor. Have you ever lived in a totalitarian state, where the powerful determine the parameters of the public discourse and cut off all voice from the powerless? Do you really want to live in one now? You might find, once you get there, that it isn’t as wonderful as you thought it would be.
Spencer has recently criticized Google and the SPLC here at PJ Media for their attempts to squelch dissent, so it’s not surprising that they’ve decided to target him. Only instead of fighting Spencer’s words with words of their own, they’re lashing out with actions designed to silence him….
Robert Spencer wrote, “Authoritarianism in service of any cause leads to a slave society despite the best intentions of those who helped usher it in.”…
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/google-broken-e1503228120789.jpg370640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2017-08-20 07:23:132017-08-21 17:15:41ProPublica working with Google to ‘document hate’ direct threat to counter-terrorism bloggers
Progressives talk a lot about the evil of hate. We are told that if we object to Sharia law and jihad, then we are intolerant haters. But what about hating harms people?
I hate wife-beating, yet the Sharia, Koran and Sunna support it.
I am intolerant of child abuse, including child marriage, but the Sunna and Sharia support it.
I hate the jihadist killings of Christians, Jews, Buddhists and apostates.
I am intolerant of religious leaders, such as the Pope and Dai Lama, who will not condemn the jihadic killing of their groups.
I hate dualistic ethics, which lack integrity.
I am intolerant of face coverings, since it cuts off open communication.
As a society, we have lost the ability to become morally outraged and are incapable of anger about the Islamic harm of innocents. I hate that.
Why are people being banned and silenced? “Hate speech.”
Silicon Valley billionaires claim to love free speech, but they forbid speech that doesn’t fit their narrative, and call it “hate.” And who determines what “hate” is? They do. Based on their performance, they are the Red/Green alliance–Marxists and Muslims, the new Big Brother.
Progressives talk a lot about the evil of “hate.” We are told that if we object to Sharia law and jihad, then we are intolerant haters. But what about hating harms people?
I hate child marriage
I hate rape of kafir women
I hate wife beating
I hate the jihadist killing of Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus & apostates
I hate the suppression of free speech
As a society, we have lost the ability to become morally outraged and are incapable of anger about the Islamic harm of innocents and the Left’s ignorant embrace of Islam.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/TruthNewHateSpeech1-e1434184303471.jpg370640Bill Warnerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngBill Warner2017-08-19 19:04:372017-08-19 19:04:37VIDEO: The Jihad Against Free Speech
We are witnessing two extremes in America. Both are fascist.
One is called Alt-Right and the other the Alt Left. Neither is conservative or liberal they both represent the growth of Fascism, Socialism and Communism in America. Unfortunately the liberal media and to a great extent the Democrat Party and Democrats have aligned themselves with the so called Alt-Left.
The removal of statues, pictures or other historical items is comparable to the ‘book burning’ in Nazi Germany during that 1930’s. Hitler was intent on erasing German and Western history and culture. In America today we see a similar movement against the likes of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson and other slave owners.
Does this mean we should remove pictures and statures of George Washington and many of our other forefathers who wrote the Constitution. Should we erase George Washington and Thomas Jefferson from Mt. Rushmore with jack hammers? Does this mean we should burn the U.S. Constitution which was written by slave owners? Does this mean we should outlaw the Democrat Party which fought to preserve slavery?
Question: Where does this all end?
Please read an interesting article by Melanie Phillips–“How totalitarianism is winning in the West”.
Credit to the left-leaning Atlantic magazine for running a piece by Peter Beinart, who has actually looked at what is happening in American society and reached an uncomfortable conclusion which would be hard to find elsewhere in the media – and which is all-too pertinent in the wake of Charlottesville.
For Beinart warns that the left is lurching into totalitarianism and violence. “Antifa” purport to be anti-fascist. But they define as fascist anyone they disagree with including mainstream conservatives. Hence their violent suppression of commentators and scholars such as the conservative columnist Ann Coulter, the Breitbart controversialist Milo Yiannopoulos and the political scientist Charles Murray.
What Antifa most certainly do not do is defend democracy, freedom and liberal values. As Beinart observes:
“Since antifa is heavily composed of anarchists, its activists place little faith in the state, which they consider complicit in fascism and racism. They prefer direct action: They pressure venues to deny white supremacists space to meet. They pressure employers to fire them and landlords to evict them. And when people they deem racists and fascists manage to assemble, antifa’s partisans try to break up their gatherings, including by force.”
If this was just a bunch of anarchists, the problem wouldn’t be so bad. What takes this onto a different level altogether is the fact that the mainstream left does not disavow Antifa but tolerates, sanitises and condones it. Referring specifically to the assault last January on the white supremacist Richard Spencer, Beinart continues:
“Such tactics have elicited substantial support from the mainstream left. When the masked antifa activist was filmed assaulting Spencer on Inauguration Day, another piece in The Nation described his punch as an act of ‘kinetic beauty.’ Slate ran an approving article about a humorous piano ballad that glorified the assault. Twitter was inundated with viral versions of the video set to different songs, prompting the former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau to tweet, ‘I don’t care how many different songs you set Richard Spencer being punched to, I’ll laugh at every one.’
“The violence is not directed only at avowed racists like Spencer: In June of last year, demonstrators – at least some of whom were associated with antifa – punched and threw eggs at people exiting a Trump rally in San Jose, California. An article in It’s Going Down celebrated the ‘righteous beatings.’”
As I wrote in The Times (£) yesterday, this has produced an unholy alliance between the left and the far right:
“A white supremacist called Richard Spencer invented the blanket term ‘alt-right’ to associate his ilk with conservatives seeking merely to defend American identity and core values. Through this tactic, Spencer intended to boost the far right and simultaneously smear and thus destroy regular conservatives.
“The left has seized upon this smear with unbridled joy, routinely using the ‘alt-right’ term to try to destroy the national identity agenda by bracketing it with white supremacism. The result is a powerful boost for the far right. From deserved obscurity, they suddenly find the left are transmitting their every utterance to the world. The phrase “useful idiots” comes inescapably to mind.”
RELATED VIDEO:Connecting-The-Dots Between Charlottesville, Soros, Hillary Clinton and McCain:
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Both-are-fascist-e1503095382355.jpg356647Robert Hellerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRobert Heller2017-08-18 18:29:562017-08-19 06:03:52We are witnessing two extremes in America. Both are fascist.
The tag line and mission of Bolduc and Bracci is to “Level a Tilted Playing Field.” This references the well-known fact that there is an extreme leftist-liberal bias in the media. Presently, the media complex is working in lockstep to destroy President Trump, and is using Charlottesville as its new front. Through false reporting, the media is working to paint Trump as a white racist bigot, despite his decades-long career in the public eye showing he is anything but that.
It is difficult to put this issue into words, but writer Dov Fischer, self-described as a Jew from Manhattan, does a good job of stepping back and putting today’s issues into perspective, discussing the truth about what Trump actually said in totality, and providing real history references. His article at Spectator.org is titled “And Yet President Trump, In His Classically Inartful Way, Was Absolutely Right.”
“Watch him say what he said, not what others said he said.
I just did something fascinating. I just watched the President’s entire 14-minute impromptu news conference at Trump Tower on Monday that sparked all the latest barrage of anti-Trump screeds from the left media that will criticize him every day, no matter what he does, augmented by the “Never Trump” Republicans and neo-conservatives who will not rest until they can re-conquer the political party they lost because of three terms of two failed Bush presidencies, followed by the two failed Presidential candidacies of Sen. John McCain and of Gov. Mitt Romney.
Not the reportage about the conference, but the entire 14 minutes unedited, uninterrupted. I found myself agreeing with his every word. I did not find his tone or demeanor “unpresidential” in the least. He sharply and explicitly condemned the Nazis and White Supremacists unequivocally. He also condemned the extreme leftists who premeditatedly came armed with weapons to smash up a demonstration that, rightly or wrongly, had been granted a legal permit. (I personally wish that ACLU liberals were not so proactive in advancing the right of Nazis to get permits to rally at public venues, but the demonstration had a permit. Meanwhile, the Antifa Alt-Left thugs came with flame-throwers, bats, and shields, and they came to fight.) All the while, the police did nothing for much too long. Chaos and violence ensued.”
With all of the misreporting about what Trump has actually said, and who actually participated at the Charlottesville protest, articles such as Fischer’s are needed to level the playing field on an issue that continues to be used politically to further gin up public divide in our country, and to isolate our president by creating a false image painting him as a racist.**
**Note: This isolation tactic is akin to our local Naples Daily News editors and writers who paint Collier County school board member Kelly Lichter as “boisterous” (click for prior report) because Lichter simply wants the school district to focus on education in the classroom — and to eliminate the Superintendent’s mission drift into the collectivist, “collaborative” projects which our community’s so-called “leaders” and “non-profits” find so endearing. Threatened by Lichter, our local establishment and the media they control seek to destroy her.
Fischer’s article goes beyond Trump into the issue of destroying statues that have stood for decades if not centuries in our country. Yes, it is understandable how some may find those statues offensive if they take them only as symbols of a southern culture protecting slavery. But where does this end, and to what extent might those statues be symbols of other things, such as the principle of Federalism wherein state’s rights are paramount to the federal government? Cannot those states honor soldiers and military officers who fought not for “slavery,” but to defend state’s rights? If Florida sought to secede from the U.S. today, and an actual war was occurring, would you or your children fight to defend your family, your home, and your neighbors — or would you join the federal army, and seek to destroy your own family members? This is not to decide one way or another, but to consider the reality of the choices that those citizens of southern states had to make when civil war erupted. In that context, might there be some understanding of the citizens of those states honoring their own fallen heroes who fought not to protect “slavery,” but to protect their own family members during a time of war?
Not everything deemed “offensive” needs to be cleansed from society. That is a very dangerous concept. Free speech is protected not to ensure the “popular” speech, but to preserve “unpopular” speech. Many important free speech and land use decisions by our U.S. Supreme Court involve protecting the rights of those who society finds least respectable. (Think the case of Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, 1988 Florida Supreme Court, defending Larry Flynt’s First Amendment free speech rights). Our U.S. Supreme Court recognizes the rights of these people to speak their minds — not because the Supreme Court agrees with those thoughts, but because it is dangerous to squelch free speech, as to do otherwise will lead to tyranny.
Is the destruction of Civil War statues not the same thing, only in “symbol” or “image” form?
On that point, Fischer states the following:
There is no easy answer for the statue issue. I have seen that issue for years and years, long before it became the Issue du Jour. In my travels for several months through the South and at the great Civil War battlefields, I saw the monuments everywhere: in main thoroughfares along Monument Row in Richmond, at the State Capitol in Nashville, at street corners. At the South Carolina state capitol in Columbia, they have preserved the broken walking stick attached to the monument of George Washington, so as never to forget how Sherman’s men ransacked the state and even desecrated the monument of Washington. Similarly, they have refused to repair Union cannonball damage to the building, preferring instead to cover gaping holes with metal patches that starkly remind visitors of the attack that happened there. I have seen the aesthetic beauty and passion that went into sculpting those monuments, and I have read the inscriptions that breathe not a word about slavery nor the social injustices of the Confederacy but of brave young boys, who never owned a slave — the vast majority of Southerners never owned slaves — but who gave their lives for their communities, for their honor, in some cases even for their women.
As a Jew hailing from the North, whose persecuted East European ancestors did not even arrive in this country from Russia and Poland until a quarter century after the Civil War, I also perceived that those monuments constitute a horrible daily insult and vile dishonor to African Americans and, frankly, an incomprehensible curiosity for a country that had defeated the Confederacy and had reunited. What indeed were all those monuments to the losing side doing all over the place? I came to a sense that perhaps those monuments should be moved to Civil War museums, to the great preserved battlefields at Antietam/Sharpsburg, Chancellorsville, Bull Run/Manassas, Fredericksburg, The Wilderness, Spotsylvania, Shiloh, Lookout Mountain, Cold Harbor, Vicksburg, and Petersburg. (Gettysburg already has its full complement.) Perhaps move them to cemeteries where Confederates lie buried.
But I do believe, as President Trump tried to say in his way, that many of those at the demonstrations indeed were decent people motivated solely by wanting peacefully to preserve the heroes of their history, oblivious to the ramifications — that, sadly, their history includes much that is shameful, even if Lee solely was motivated by a soldier’s rules of honor and service, as taught at West Point; even if Jackson was motivated solely by that same code of a soldier’s honor and service, amplified by a religious believer’s sense that he had a duty to country.
President Trump sadly is correct. George Washington owned slaves. So did Thomas Jefferson at Monticello and James Madison at Montpelier. So did many who signed the Declaration of Independence. Shall we take down the Washington Monument? Shall we rename the nation’s capital and the state where the liberal Democrats of Seattle govern? Should we tear down the Jefferson Memorial? Is there now yet another reason to change the name of the Washington Redskins!
And, while at it: How about encouraging some violent street-fighting in Manhattan, tearing down the Peter Stuyvesant statue in Manhattan and renaming that eponymous public school? He was the most vicious anti-Semite of pre-independence America.
The racial division presently occurring in this country is indeed worrisome; equally worrisome, however, is the use of that issue to justify the squelching of speech — in oral, written, or symbolic form. Either of these issues could ultimately lead to the demise of our nation and the symbol of freedom for which it stands.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Who-Controls-the-Present-Controls-the-Past-367x480-e1503089214827.jpg350640Bolduc & Braccihttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngBolduc & Bracci2017-08-18 11:20:482017-08-18 16:47:05Beware the False Reporting on Trump, Charlottesville, and the Need to Erase History By Destroying Statues
ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, today announces that the closing chapter in a lawsuit has ended with a victory for Bill Donohue and free speech, as the time for appealing TMLC’s win in the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court has passed.
Bill Donohue, President and CEO of the Catholic League, is considered by most Americans as the fiercest defender of the Catholic Church in the world. He is often called to appear on national TV to respond to controversial attacks made against the Church. So, when he asked the Thomas More Law Center to defend him and the Catholic League in a defamation lawsuit filed because of comments in a press release, without hesitation we agreed.
Beginning in 2014, the case wound its way through both the state and federal courts. On April 18, 2017, the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals issued its opinion affirming a lower court decision which ruled in favor of Bill Donohue and the Catholic League by dismissing all claims in the lawsuit, including the defamation claim. The 90-day window for asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals decision has now lapsed.
Erin Mersino, who handled the case on behalf of the Thomas More Law Center always contended that lawsuit filed by Jon David Couzens, Jr. lacked legal merit and required dismissal. Although she no longer works for TMLC, Erin recently commented on the final end of case:
“The plaintiff’s decision not to appeal the case further vindicates this important victory for free speech. The Thomas More Law Center and the Catholic League are two heroic organizations that vigorously fight for religious freedom in our culture today. It has been a true honor representing Bill Donohue, the President and tenacious captain of the Catholic League.”
What is the Catholic League?
The Catholic League is the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization. Founded in 1973 by the late Father Virgil C. Blum, S.J., the Catholic League defends the right of Catholics – lay and clergy alike – to participate in American public life without defamation or discrimination.
Motivated by the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment, the Catholic League works to safeguard both the religious freedom rights and the free speech rights of Catholics whenever and wherever they are threatened.
The Catholic League is listed in the Official Catholic Directory and has won the plaudits of many bishops.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/catholic-league-logo.jpg363640Thomas More Law Centerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThomas More Law Center2017-08-17 18:26:552017-08-17 18:26:55Lawsuit Ends in Free Speech/Religious Freedom Victory for the Catholic League
If, post-Charlottesville, the establishment media and the Left are going to embark upon a full-scale jihad (I wouldn’t want to offend Leftists by calling it a “crusade”) against neo-Nazis and white supremacists, they’re going to catch in their net a great many legitimate groups if they rely on the SPLC to direct them to the “hate groups.” My latest in PJ Media:
Charlottesville was a huge victory for the hard-Left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). And that’s not good for anyone who loves freedom.
The driver of the car who plowed into a crowd of Leftist demonstrators in Charlottesville Saturday was a neo-Nazi, and on Monday President Trump denounced the Ku Klux Klan, “neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups,” which he rightly said were “repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.”
Leftist media outlets are making all they can out of this opportunity to stigmatize and marginalize definitively all “hate groups,” using the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) list of such groups. There’s just one problem: the SPLC’s “hate group” list is an irresponsible and libelous mélange of real hate groups with organizations that simply oppose the SPLC’s hard-Left agenda.
The mainstream media has for years conferred an aura of legitimacy on the SPLC, treating this cynical gang of profiteers as if it were a neutral and reliable arbiter of what constitutes a “hate group” and what does not. Charlotte Allen wrote in The Weekly Standard last March:
It’s hard to say what’s worse: the outrageousness of the Southern Poverty Law Center in pinning the label “white nationalist” and “extremist” on anyone who bucks the prevailing politically correct narrative, or the credulity of the mainstream media in treating the SPLC as a neutral source.
Yet CNN did it again Monday in a story about how GoDaddy had revoked the account of a site called Daily Stormer in the wake of Charlottesville:
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, “the Daily Stormer is dedicated to spreading anti-Semitism, neo-Nazism, and white nationalism, primarily through guttural hyperbole and epithet-laden stories about topics like alleged Jewish world control and black-on-white crime.” The SPLC, which tracks hate groups, says the unapologetic hatred on the Daily Stormer — which also takes aim at African-Americans and opponents of President Donald Trump, for example — is a catalyst for division.
There are 917 hate groups currently operating across the U.S., according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
And that’s where the SPLC’s hate group listing becomes insidious. If, post-Charlottesville, the establishment media and the Left are going to embark upon a full-scale jihad (I wouldn’t want to offend Leftists by calling it a “crusade”) against neo-Nazis and white supremacists, they’re going to catch in their net a great many legitimate groups if they rely on the SPLC to direct them to the “hate groups.”
Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) wrote in the Washington Post in March:
Since 2007, the Southern Poverty Law Center has methodically added mainstream organizations critical of current immigration policy to its blacklist of “hate groups,” including the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the Immigration Reform Law Institute and Californians for Population Stabilization, among others. In February, my own organization, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), got its turn.
The wickedness of the SPLC’s blacklist lies in the fact that it conflates groups that really do preach hatred, such as the Ku Klux Klan and Nation of Islam, with ones that simply do not share the SPLC’s political preferences. The obvious goal is to marginalize the organizations in this second category by bullying reporters into avoiding them, scaring away writers and researchers from working for them, and limiting invitations for them to discuss their work.
Before you book a spokesperson from an anti-Muslim extremist group or quote them in a story, research their background — detailed in this in-depth guide to 15 of the most visible anti-Muslim activists — and consider the consequences of giving them a platform.
They wish to silence those who speak honestly about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, blaming us for a supposed rise in “Islamophobia.” If they really want to stamp out suspicion of Islam, of course, they will move against not us, but the likes of Omar Mateen, Syed Rizwan Farook, Tashfeen Malik, Nidal Malik Hasan, Mohammed Abdulazeez, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and the myriad other Muslims who commit violence in the name of Islam and justify it by reference to Islamic teachings.
The SPLC doesn’t do that because its objective is not really to stop “Islamophobia” at all, but to create the illusion of a powerful and moneyed network of “Islamophobes” whom can only be stopped if you write a check to the SPLC. That’s what this is really all about.
In constructing this illusory edifice, the SPLC labeled me and fourteen others “anti-Muslim extremists.”
We are, of course, no more “anti-Muslim” than foes of the Nazis were anti-German, but note the word “extremists.” In what way are we “extremists”? Has anyone on the SPLC’s hit list (and given the SPLC’s track record of inciting violence against its targets, that is exactly what it is) ever blown anything or anyone up? Beheaded anyone? Boasted of our imminent conquest of any territory and the massacre of or enslavement of its people?
No, all we have done is speak critically about jihad terror and Sharia oppression. The SPLC is trying to further the libel that we are the other side of the coin, the non-Muslim bin Ladens and Awlakis. Until we commit any terror attacks or conspire with others to do so, however, the SPLC’s libel is only that: a libel….
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Punch-More-Nazis.jpg370640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2017-08-17 06:25:082017-08-17 06:25:08Charlottesville Shows How Dangerous the Southern Poverty Law Center Really Is
Mentioned below is an article found on World Net Daily with the authors noted. Below the article is a site which will take you to a list of endangered Confederate monuments and memorials.
This article and the list portray a sad, sad commentary as to the aberrant behaviors and incredibly controlled and dumbed-down mind sets turned loose across our country.
Protesters in Durham topple Confederate statue:
Noted commentator, Laura Ingraham, is thoroughly correct stating that the actions of rebellion are not about racial healing.
The destructive actions and emotional chaos are deliberately orchestrated to create civil unrest, and purposefully (and professionally) stirred and agitated to birth riots, then the increased levels of damage and mayhem are scripted by those hidden well behind the enlisted street thugs to not only control the narrative of a prostituted media, but also to bring about the elimination of our Nation’s history including all the costs, including grievous errors from which life lessons were learned, and from which values and principles sprang forth leading this country to become one of the very few in the world that learns from its’ sins, and seeks to do things better for all.
If and when you perform an “after-action” autopsy of the events surrounding the purposefully launched mayhem in Charlottesville, Virginia, and then with the descending of a Confederate statute in Durham, North Carolina, you will learn that paid socialist and communist rioters were at the core of these incidents. But there is no intention of these conscripted gangs who are recruited, in part, because of their hatred of all things America, to stop. Already multiple cities are confronting growing threats to remove monuments in their communities, or face similar actions as we have seen in Virginia over this past weekend.
The memorial to President Abraham Lincoln, who led the US through the Civil War, has been vandalized in Washington DC. Photo: National Park Service
And it doesn’t stop even at that, as already the revered Lincoln Memorial had a pillar spray painted red, and there is a call beginning to tear down the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D.C. Even in Arizona a shout began to destroy a Civil War memorial in the only battle of that era fought here in the desert, but amazingly, our Governor had the strength not to cave to political correctness that has so ensnared our country. In Dallas, Texas, a Civil War monument is targeted for destruction by anarchists, but a contingent of blacks from that community banded together, surrounded the memorial, and made it quite clear there would be no destruction of the memorial…(I am certain no media outside of local will carry that story).
All these despicable acts of violence and destruction across our country are not about racial healing! The war taking place in plain sight is about the impatience of Marxists and other haters of America who are dedicated to their core to fundamentally transform America into a vision only they have, and to which they mean to beat anyone and everyone else into submission to accept. They have no interest, no regard, and absolutely no respect for constitutional order.
The Marxists and other groupings of American haters care only about their agenda winning, and to be in control of every aspect until their agenda prevails. Donald Trump’s victory was, and still is, an absolute harrowing event to the host of American haters. Trump threatens to dismantle the very agenda and mechanisms so calculatingly put into place by Obama, and assuredly going to be continued, and even enlarged by Hillary Clinton. Issues like racial healing are part of the script employed to manipulate the masses, accumulate support, increase the base of rebellion, bring about or even seize power, and then fundamentally change the social order, principles and values of America.
Americans better begin to speak up and shout, “Enough!” Elected officials better begin to stand up, speak up, and help stop the perpetrators of tyranny already behind the gates.
The Big List: U.S. epidemic of endangered monuments
In Durham, North Carolina, an assembly of communist and socialist groups descended on a statue to Confederate war dead, attached ropes to the bronze figure, and tore the monument down (Photo: Twitter)
‘This is not about racial healing. This is about control of the narrative’
By Liam Clancy and Chelsea Schilling
WASHINGTON – A nationwide effort is underway to remove Confederate statues and symbols from government grounds across America.
In dozens of cities across the U.S., activists are vandalizing and toppling Confederate monuments and symbols. They’re also pushing for cities, counties and states to destroy or relocate statues dating back more than a hundred years.
Talk-radio host Laura Ingraham warned that the recent violence and efforts to erase America’s history are not about racial healing.
“We do give respect to the dead. All of our war dead. We respect them. Not respect everything they stood for, but respect the fact that when the time came they stood up and fought for their views in this country,” Ingraham said on Fox and Friends. “What else will be subjected to their eradication and denunciation? This is not about racial healing. This is about the control of the narrative and the destruction of historical recognition. That is terrifying. What about books? Will they start burning books too? “We see it with the Taliban, pulling down Christian historical sites. We’ve seen this in the old Soviet Union. We see this with the Stalinists,” Ingraham
Daniel Horowitz, author of “Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges from Transforming America” commented in an editorial that these monuments are unrelated to “racism,” and should not be targeted, even following a possible racist terror attack.
“Until this current era of leftism, everyone was able to appreciate that a large segment of this country had fairly recent ancestors who fought bravely on both sides of the terrible war,” Horowitz writes.
“Yes, the leadership of the South clearly pushed the war in large part to promote slavery, but the average soldier in gray, like my wife’s great-great-grandfather, was as poor as can be, didn’t own any slaves, and fought bravely for his cause. It was those soldiers in gray who were honored by the monument in Durham, which was vandalized by communist and anarchist protesters.”
Paul Nehlen, Republican candidate for Congress challenging House Speaker Paul Ryan in Wisconsin’s 1st district, tweeted that these actions are “never about the monuments. It was always about shutting you up, and forcing your compliance.”
Leftist activists justified these criminal acts due to the recent outbreak of violence at a rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, as white nationalists, neo-Nazis, and other groups battled in the street with “antifa” and counter-protesters.
The rally was held in response to the Charlottesville City Council’s plan to remove a statue of the Confederate General Robert E. Lee. James Fields, 20, who attended the pro-monument rally, killed one and injured 19 when he rammed his car into a gathering of counter-protesters, who then responded by smashing in the car’s windows with bats.
WND has compiled the following big list of the nation’s endangered Confederate monuments and symbols:
Asheville, North Carolina: Vance Monument
There are growing calls to remove a 75-foot granite obelisk in Pack Square known as the Vance Monument in Asheville, North Carolina.
The monument, which was erected in 1896, is a tribute to Zebulon Vance, a Civil War governor of North Carolina and a U.S. senator during the Reconstruction period.
The monument resembles the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina: ‘Silent Sam’
Another memorial targeted for removal is the 1913 “Silent Sam” statue at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The $7,500 for the monument was funded by UNC alumni and the United Daughters of the Confederacy.
After the Charlottesville, Virginia, violence, protesters gathered around the statue and draped a banner over the monument that read, “Rest in Power: Heather Heyer,” memorializing a woman who was killed in Virginia after a man rammed a crowd of counter-protesters with his car.
In 2015, the monument was spray-painted with “Black Lives Matter,” “KKK” and “murderer.”
UNC history professor Harry Watson told the Tarheel: “I used to feel movements to take down the monument would require more effort that it would be worth. But I’ve come to realize that symbols are important, and if enough people decided to take it down, I’d support it.”
Also that year, UNC Young Democrats political director Andrew Brennan told the paper: “It honors and celebrates white supremacy. To me, it doesn’t seem to have a place at UNC in 2015.”
Black Student Movement President Jeremy McKellar said the monument makes UNC students feel uncomfortable.
“Do we keep it because it’s the history of our nation, or do we tear it down because of what it represents? I’m still not sure what the answer is,” he said.
After Black Lives Matter spray-painted the statue, McKellar said: “I’m not a big supporter of vandalism, but it may have been needed to bring more attention to it.”
Greenville, North Carolina: Confederate Soldiers statue
Residents in Greenville, North Carolina, are circulating a petition demanding removal of the Confederate Soldiers statue at the Pitt County Courthouse, according to WITN-TV.
The monument, which was dedicated in 1914, states, “Erected by the people of Pitt County in grateful remembrance of the courage & fortitude of her Confederate Soldiers.”
The petition calling for its removal says: “We, the residents of Greenville, submit that the time has come for the removal of the Confederate statue at the courthouse. It is time to take immediate action to remove this monument to slavery, sedition and racial oppression. Additionally, it is our assertion that this statue subverts and undermines our core principles of liberty and justice for all. It is unconscionable that anyone going to the courthouse, a place promising equal justice for all, should be forced to do so under a shadow of injustice and suppression. The statue was dedicated in 1914, which that date itself should be reason enough as to why it is time for our community to move forward and leave the confederate memorabilia to museums and not in public spaces. We stand in solidarity with #Charlottesville and those who were injured and/or killed by white supremacists that marched on the city. We appeal to Pitt County Commissioners to outline and commit to a process for the timely and definitive removal of this monument.”
Activists say they will present their concerns to the Pitt County Commissioners at a meeting scheduled for Aug. 21.
Pitt County NAACP President Calvin Henderson said there’s a chance the Confederate statue will be removed and could “trigger off action all over the country.”
“This is 2017,” he told WITN. “We need to be moving forward, not backward. This is a step backward when you see this type of action [in Charlottesville, Virginia], to allow these extreme organizations to come in with that type of mentality.”
Nashville, Tennessee: Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest
In Nashville Monday, protesters called for removal of a bust of Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest at the state capitol, the Tennessean reported.
Protesters chanted “White silence is violence,” “Which side are you on?” and “Tear it down.”
The activists also marched to Gov. Bill Haslam’s office to push for removal of the bust.
“My position on this issue has not changed – I do not believe Nathan Bedford Forrest should be one of the individuals we honor at the Capitol,” Haslam said in a statement, according to the Tennessean. “The General Assembly has established a process for addressing these matters, and I strongly encourage the Capitol Commission and the Historical Commission to act.”
Removal of the bust requires a two-thirds vote from the Tennessee Historical Commission.
Memphis, Tennessee: Nathan Bedford Forrest and Jefferson Davis
The city of Memphis is threatening to sue Tennessee to remove two Confederate states from city property, according to Fox News. The city must get approval from the Tennessee Historical Commission.
The city is seeking to remove statues of Nathan Bedford Forrest and Jefferson Davis. And the legal battle could go to the Tennessee Supreme Court.
“I think one thing that is for sure, there is no place in the city of Memphis for signs or symbols of hatred, bigotry or racism,” said City Council Chairman Berlin Boyd.
Memphis Mayor Jim Strickland said in a statement: “It’s great to see more citizens join the cause we’ve been working on for years. We continue to be actively engaged in exploring all avenues to remove the Confederate statues in our city.”
The Sons of Confederate Veterans issued the following statement, according to Fox: “The city of Memphis should in no way want to remove statues and monuments to our history. These monuments are part of our development and both Jefferson Davis and Bedford Forrest were U.S. Army veterans as well as leaders in the Confederate States. Both lived in Memphis and contributed to its rebuilding and renewal after the War for Southern Independence. The city of Memphis should not play the part of ISIS historical terrorists in attempting to remove our historical monuments. Such actions are an insult to the families and citizens – and all veterans – of our city, county, state, and country. Leave the monuments and leave history alone.”
Chattanooga, Tennessee: Lt. Gen. Alexander P. Stewart
In Chattanooga, Tennessee, a statue of Confederate Lt. Gen. Alexander P. Stewart has been in the crosshairs of activists demanding its removal.
The local chapter of the NAACP has called for it to be taken down
“We find it offensive to be reminded constantly of the atrocities that they represent,” Quenston A. Coleman, second vice president of the Chattanooga branch of the NAACP, told WTVC in June.
Gloria Sweet Love, president of the Tennessee NAACP, told the station her group plans to ask commissioners to remove the statue.
WTVC reported, “If they don’t comply, they will take more action because ‘it’s time for these to come down.’”
The NAACP later issued a statement saying it wouldn’t actively push for the statue’s removal at this time.
Dallas, Texas: Gen. Robert E. Lee & Founders Cemetery monument
Dallas, Texas Mayor Mike Rawlings has called for a task force to review removal options for Confederate statues in the city. The task force will present its findings to the Office of Cultural Affairs, Fox 4 reported. Then they would be given to the city council, which would make a formal decision on whether to remove the monuments.
“It’s easy to jump on the bandwagon and say tear them down because it is, frankly, politically correct and makes us all feel good,” he said. “But I hesitate. And the reason is, I realize the city of Dallas is better, stronger when we are united and not divided.”
The monuments are located in a historic cemetery near the Dallas Convention Center and in Robert E. Lee Park.
“I think they’re dangerous totems in our Dallas society because they divide us versus unite us,” Rawlings said.
Councilman Philip Kingston, who has called for a vote on the statue removal, told Fox 4: “If he’s convinced that these are symbols of racial propaganda, which I agree 100 percent, the path forward is pretty clear. Let’s make a policy statement on how we use public property.”
Rawlings expressed concern about major protests against the monuments that are scheduled for this weekend.
“We will not have street brawls in our city,” he said.
San Antonio, Texas: Confederate soldier statue
Approximately 500 protesters attended a vigil for Charlottesville in San Antonio’s Travis Park on Aug, 13, and a monument for a Confederate soldier there was a subject of the rally, the San Antonio Express-News reported.
San Antonio Councilman Robert Trevino has called for removal of the statue.
“This is not an important art piece but a monument to power,” Trevino said. “It was put in to remind people of that power. It is an unfortunate message of hate, and we think it’s important to relocate it. We do think that history is important, so we’re looking for an appropriate location for it.”
Tampa, Florida: ‘Memoria In Aeterna’
Members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans are standing guard by a Confederate monument on the grounds of the historic county courthouse in Tampa, Florida, the Tampa Bay Times reported.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans learned that leftist activists had plans to topple the marble statue, known as “Memoria In Aeterna,” which depicts a Confederate soldier heading to war and another soldier returning home wearing a ragged uniform. On Aug. 13, 200 protesters marched through the streets in Tampa, and several climbed the monument.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans guards arrived hours after they heard of the statue toppled by protesters in Durham, North Carolina.
“Durham has given impetus to people who want to take them down,” David McCallister, commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans’ Judah P. Benjamin Camp, told the Tampa Bay Times. “They won’t just let them get removed quietly and peacefully.”
The newspaper reported that McCallister said members of his group “heard a rumor that a busload of activists planned to arrive to pull down the monument with a cable.”
“The main thing was to keep watch and signal and alert the authorities if anything did happen,” McCallister explained. “It wouldn’t take much with a sledge hammer to basically crumble the soldiers, and I wouldn’t put it past the people who want it removed to do that. The soldiers themselves would be martyrs at that point.”
The men plan to stand watch over the monument through the night.
“Nobody’s going to try anything during the day,” McCallister said.
Gainesville, Florida: ‘Old Joe’
In Gainesville, Florida, crews removed a Confederate memorial on Aug. 14 that had been dedicated to men in the area who served in the Civil War and lost their lives fighting.
The statue, known as “Old Joe,” was removed from the grounds of the Alachua County Administrative Building and given back to the United Daughters of the Confederacy, a group that had the bronze monument constructed and erected in 1904.
Annapolis, Maryland: Supreme Court Justice Roger B. Taney
Maryland House Speaker Michael E. Busch is targeting a statue of former Supreme Court Justice Roger B. Taney, who ruled against Dred Scott in 1857, denying citizenship to black people. The statue is located in front of the statehouse. Busch told the Baltimore Sun Monday that “it’s the appropriate time to remove it.”
Bush said he has “always considered Maryland’s State House grounds to reflect the evolutionary arch of history … the movement of our State over time toward a more perfect union.” But, he said, “we can find a better way to honor history while lighting a path toward progress, equality and understanding.”
Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan has echoed Busch’s request and says he will ask the State House Trust to “immediately” remove the monument, the Washington Post reported.
The leftist group Our Maryland has launched a petition calling for the statue’s removal.
Baltimore, Maryland: Jackson-Lee Monument
On Aug. 13, protesters called on Baltimore city leaders to remove the Jackson-Lee Monument, a Confederate symbol, at Wyman Dell Park near Johns Hopkins University.
The activists erected their own statue in front of the Jackson-Lee Monument. It depicted a pregnant black woman with her fist in the air and a child on her back, the Baltimore Sun reported.
A passerby pushed the protesters’ statue over. A photo posted to Twitter Tuesday by “Baltimore BLOC” showed the Jackson-Lee Monument with “Black Lives Matter” and “Remember C-Ville” (Remember Charlottesville) spray-painted on the sides.
Ellicott City, Maryland: Stone honoring 92 Confederate soldiers
A Confederate monument dedicated in 1948 and bearing the names of 92 soldiers may be removed from outside Howard County’s Circuit Court building in Ellicott City, Maryland.
County Executive Allan Kittleman and the county council are reportedly discussing relocation of the monument to the Howard County Historical Society Museum, the Baltimore Sun reported Tuesday.
Council Chairman Jon Weinstein told the paper the monument will not be destroyed. He said the council is attempting to find a more “appropriate” location for it.
“We need to put that sort of history into context and understand it but not revere it,” Weinstein said. “It is a monument. It is a representation of the fact that people in Ellicott City served in the Confederate army. We don’t have to be proud of that fact, but it is a fact.”
Councilman Calvin Ball said he prefers to see the monument moved immediately.
“The environment that we create going towards the halls of justice should be one of freedom, equality and fairness,” he said. “And monuments to the Confederacy do not convey that.”
Rockville, Maryland: Confederate soldier statue
Officials in Montgomery County, Maryland, ordered a 13-ton bronze Confederate soldier statue removed from the grounds of Rockville’s Red Brick Courthouse. The memorial depicts a young soldier with his arms folded and a saber at his side. The statue’s plaque states: “To Our Heroes of Montgomery Co., Maryland, That We Through Life May Not Forget To Love The Thin Gray Line.”
The monument was given to the county in 1913 by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. In 2015, County Executive Isiah Leggett ordered it removed from the property.
“This statue is inaccurate because it pays tribute only to the Montgomery County young men who fought for the Confederacy, not also to those county residents who fought to preserve the Union and free those held in bondage,” said Leggett, the first black man elected to the city council and to become county executive.
After Leggett’s order, vandals defaced the monument with spray paint and a message stating, “Black Lives Matter.”
The county encased the statue in a wooden box after that incident. Earlier this year, it was moved to private property at White’s Ferry in Dickerson.
Lexington, Kentucky: Confederate Gen. John Hunt Morgan & Confederate Secretary of War John C. Breckinridge
In Lexington, Kentucky, Mayor Jim Gray said he will make an announcement next week concerning an effort there to remove two statues of Confederate figures – one of Confederate Gen. John Hunt Morgan and another of Confederate Secretary of War John C. Breckinridge, who was also the 14th vice president of the United States – from the grounds of a former courthouse.
Louisville, Kentucky: Confederate monument to Civil War soldiers
A 70-foot-tall granite and bronze Confederate monument at the University of Louisville in Louisville, Kentucky, was removed in 2016 by the college. That statue was erected in 1895 by the Kentucky Women’s Confederate Monument Association to honor Confederate soldiers who died during the Civil War.
The statue was relocated to a site in Brandenburg, Kentucky.
Birmingham, Alabama: Confederate Soldiers and Sailors monument
The mayor of Birmingham, Alabama, William Bell, has ordered that a Confederate Soldiers and Sailors monument be covered in plastic while the city examines its legal options for removal, WIAT-TV 42 reported Tuesday.
The 35-foot monument, which was gifted to the city in 1905 by the United Daughters of the Confederacy, is located in Linn Park. Linn Park is named after Confederate Capt. Charles Linn, whose name appears on many of the city’s buildings.
In 2015, the city voted to look into removal of the statue after the murder of nine black church attendees at the hands of shooter Dylann Roof.
New Orleans, Louisiana: Gen. Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis & Gen. P.G.T. Beauregard
Four Confederate monuments have been removed in New Orleans and stored in a warehouse. The last, a 20-foot bronze statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, was removed in May 2017.
Other statues removed included one of Confederate president Jefferson Davis, another of Gen. P.G.T. Beauregard and a stone obelisk commemorating the “Battle of Liberty Place.”
The city council voted in 2015 to remove the monuments after Mayor Mitch Landrieu proposed that they be taken down. Landrieu made the proposal after gunman Dylann Roof murdered nine black church attendees in 2015.
Landrieu has said the monuments do not represent New Orleans.
“These statues are not just stone and metal,” he said, according to the New York Post. “They are not just remembrances of a benign history. These monuments celebrate a fictional, sanitized Confederacy; ignoring the death, ignoring the enslavement, ignoring the terror that it actually stood for.
“After the Civil War, these statues were part of that terrorism, such as burning a cross on someone’s lawn. They were erected purposefully to send a strong message to all who walked in their shadows about who was still in charge of this city.”
There’s now a movement in Shreveport, Louisiana, to remove a Confederate monument on courthouse grounds. The Caddo Parish Confederate Monument features busts of four Confederate generals – Gens. Henry Watkins Allen, P.G.T. Beauregard, Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson – and a statue of a soldier. It was dedicated in 1906 and marks the location where the Confederate flag was lowered on land.
Caddo County commissioners have held public hearings on plans to move the monument to a museum. An online petition to remove the monument has garnered more than 6,600 signatures.
The petition states: “It is time to take immediate action to remove this monument to slavery, sedition and racial oppression. Additionally, it is our assertion that this statue subverts and undermines our core principles of liberty and justice for all. It is unconscionable that anyone going to the courthouse, a place promising equal justice for all, should be forced to do so under a shadow of injustice and oppression.”
Protesters gathered for a vigil there this week after the Charlottesville violence. And now an online petition is calling for removal of Decatur’s “Lost Cause” monument, which was erected in 1908 and is located near the historic DeKalb County Courthouse.
Activists plan to deliver the petition to city, county and state officials.
The petition states: “The statue refers to those listed on the monument as a ‘covenant to keeping race’ and thus, the statue serves as a shrine to white supremacists like those we saw in Charlottesville. If the city of Decatur and DeKalb County truly value diversity, then both entities will listen to its citizens and fight vigorously for the removal of this monument.”
St. Louis, Missouri: Confederate Memorial is removed
In June, St. Louis, Missouri, officials removed a 32-foot granite and bronze Confederate memorial in Forest Park. The Missouri Civil War Museum paid for the relocation and will store it until a new location is found for the statue at a museum, battlefield or cemetery, Reuters reported.
“We wanted it down,” said St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson during a livestreamed news conference in June.
The memorial, which was located on Confederate Drive, was dedicated in December 1914 by the Ladies Confederate Monument Association.
It features “The Angel of the Spirit of the Confederacy” over a family sending a soldier to war.
Reuters reported that the memorial had been repeatedly spray-painted with “Black Lives Matter” and “End Racism.”
Amid calls for removal of Confederate statues, Richmond, Virginia, Mayor Levar Stoney has announced a different idea: add context to the monuments instead of removing them.
While Stoney said the monuments are “very offensive” to him, he explained: “Currently, as I’ve always said, since my remarks earlier on this year, the way those statues stand currently, they’re a shameful representation of the past that we all disagree with. For me, it’s about telling the complete truth. I don’t think removal of symbols does anything for telling the actual truth or changes the state and culture of racism in this country today.”
A pro-monument rally had been scheduled for this weekend, but it was canceled in light of the Charlottesville violence.
Brag Bowling, of the Coalition for Monument Preservation, told WTVR: “I’m totally opposed to those groups that were in Charlottesville and the causes that they wanted. I’m here for preserving Richmond’s monuments, not to get in some racial fight with radicals.”
The crowd urged West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice to take it down.
“I want people to know that hillbillies do not stand for this type of hate,” Dustin White told WSAZ. “this is an issue that has been laying under the surface for quite some time.”
Washington, D.C.: Gen. Albert Pike
At least 1,000 protesters gathered outside the White House this week and then marched to a 1901 statue of Confederate Gen. Albert Pike, which is located near the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department headquarters.
The crowd booed and chanted “tear it down” in front of the statue. Some protesters climbed the statue.
On Monday, more protesters marched to the site with signs that said, “White Supremacy is Terrorism” and “Black Lives Matter.”
Eugene Puryear, an activist with Stop Police Terror Project D.C., said: “[Pike] is a guy who loved slavery so much that he quit two political parties. He wrote pamphlets about it. And then, when the Civil War started, he raised three regiments of troops. The Richard Spencers of the world, they want to invoke fear in people. They want people to fear their fascist movement. This [vigil] is a sign that people are not going to let that genie out of that bottle, that people are going to fight back.”
Washington, D.C.: Lincoln Memorial
Destructive activists even attended to the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., where red paint spelling out “F— Law” was found on a column on Tuesday.
Workers have begun to repair the damage, NBC Washington reported.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/lincoln-memorial-with-statue-at-night-1-e1502880423128.jpg379640Lyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D.http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D.2017-08-16 06:47:302017-08-16 18:28:51List of Endangered Monuments — Will the Lincoln Memorial be next?
In anticipation of the 2018 mid term elections President Trump has release a new ad. The ad is titled “Let President Trump Do His Job”:
Featured in the ad are Democrats such as Senators Chuck Schumer and Elizabeth Warren as well as California Rep. Maxine Water, plus members of the media and the punditry class including:
CNN’s Don Lemon
CNN’s Anderson Cooper
MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough
MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski
CNN’s Dana Bash
MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow
NBC’s Brian Williams
MSNBC’s Chris Hayes
CNN’s John King
CNN’s Brian Stelter
MSNBC’s Chuck Todd
American Urban Radio Networks’ April Ryan
The Democrats are taking offense at being labeled obstructionists. An “urgent” Democrat National Campaign Committee email reads:
We’re fuming. In the wake of this weekend’s events, Trump released his first re-election attack ad. And he’s BLAMING DEMOCRATS for dividing the country!
It’s horrific. It’s disgusting. And it couldn’t be further from the truth. We need to create a backlash so large that Trump regrets EVER releasing this shameful attack.
Every gift will go towards electing Democrats who oppose Trump and his bigotry.
So there you have it. Denial by Democrats. Of course its not the Democrats who are obstructing the repeal and replacement of Obamacare. Its not the Democrats who are holding up President Trumps appointments to key positions within his administration. Its not Democrats who have called for “resistance” against anything and all things in the President’s agenda like:
Build the wall.
Cut taxes.
Reduce and eliminate regulatory burden on small businesses.
Increase spending for the U.S. military.
And on, and on, and on.
What makes their efforts to resist the President lies in one word – “bigot.” Using this word makes all of their obstruction just wash itself away.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/trump-ad.gif253450Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2017-08-14 15:43:132017-08-14 15:56:44President Trump releases new campaign ad, Democrats go nucking futs over it!
The hijab, progressives’ new diversity symbol, was invented in the 1970s over 1300 years after the Quran was written. While Muslim women protest the Islamist hijab dictates in Iran and Saudi Arabia, American Eagle Outfitters and Nike promote the oppressive headgear in America.
100,000 Iranian women protest in Teran the Islamist dictate requiring them to wear the hijab in 1979.
There are two action emails are provided near the end of this article.
The hijab, progressives’ new diversity symbol, was invented in the 1970s over 1300 years after the Quran was written. The truth is the hijab is not derived from the Quran but is legislated by Islamist dictates and fatwas that oppress and dominate woman. Strict Islamic law and fatwa enforcement requiring women to wear the hijab started only within the last 50 years. Muslim women protest the Islamist dictate in Iran and Saudi Arabia while American Eagle Outfitters and Nike promote the oppressive headgear. American Eagle Outfitters’ and Nike’s sale of the hijab is empowering “the well-financed effort by conservative (ie radical) Muslims to dominate modern Muslim societies.”
The hijab was invented in the early 1970s by Mussa Sadr, an Iranian mullah who had won the leadership of the Lebanese Shi’ite community. Muslims believe that the Quran was writtenover a period of 23 years, beginning on 22 December 609 CE, when Muhammad was 40, and concluding in 632, the year of his death.
This means the hijab was invented over 1300 years after the Quran was written.
Islamic law and fatwas did not start forcing women to wear the hijab until 1981. “In 1981, Abol-Hassan Bani-Sadr, the first president of the Islamic Republic, announced that “scientific research had shown that women’s hair emitted rays that drove men insane.” To protect the public, the new Islamist regime passed a law in 1982 making the hijab mandatory for females aged above six, regardless of religious faith. Violating the hijab code was made punishable by 100 lashes of the cane and six months imprisonment. By the mid 1980s, a form of hijab never seen in Islam before the 1970s had become standard gear for millions of women all over the world, including Europe and America.”
Iranian women continue to protest the oppressive hijab today.
The New York Times published an article titled“The day 100,000 Iranian women protested the head scarf (hijab).” A seldom-seen collection of photographs, shot in Tehran in 1979, is challenging perceptions of the feminist movement in Iran. The article states in part: When 34-year-old photographer Azadeh Fatehrad first laid eyes on an image by Hengameh Golestan, of women protesting in the streets of Tehran in 1979, she was struck immediately — it was unlike anything she had seen before.
Born in 1981 in Iran, Fatehrad had learned in school that women made a smooth transition to Islamic rules imposed after the 1979 Revolution — in particular adopting a compulsory dress code, the hijab. But Golestan’s image told a different story: thousands of women in the street, protesting the announcement that the headwear would be mandatory.
OddNaari published an article on July 13, 2013 titled “Iranian women are now defying compulsory hijab rule by refusing to wear it inside their cars.” The article states in part: “The women of Iran have taken the fight against hijab to another level now.”
All perfect praise be to Allah, the Lord of all worlds. May Allah’s Peace and Blessings be upon the noblest Prophet and Messenger Muhammad, his family, and Companions. I have read an article written by the person called Ahmad Baha’ Al-Din, in some newspapers. He alleged the lawfulness of some things that Allah prohibits. In his column “Yawmiyyat”, (Al-Ahram Newspaper, issues nos. 36992, 36993, 36994, 36996), the writer launched a severe attack on Hijab (veil) and Niqab (face veil). He called to unveiling the face and considered Hijab a Bid`ah (innovation in the religion). He claimed it is just a matter of dress that is part of personal freedom. He even alleged that women used to wear Niqab as a tradition and Islam did not ordain or come with it. He falsely claimed that women used to sit with the Prophet (peace be upon him) unveiled and used to go for trade, pasturing and war with their faces uncovered and they remained in such a state during the era of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, the Umayyad, and Abbasid Caliphates. He said that when the Turks embraced Islam, they spread their non-Islamic traditions of their tribes, such as the one-eyed veil, yashmak, and imposed them on Muslim and Arab women. The writer expressed his views on the permissibility of unveiling the face, denied Hijab, inserted false claims and lies, and twisted the proofs to give different implications.
It is known that urging women to unveil their faces is an evil call, rejected by Islam and the sound intellect; it is an anti-Islamic idea, indeed.
Saudi women are also pushing back against Islamic law requiring them to wear the hijab. StepFed published an article on July 14, 2017 titled: “Saudi religious police will study why some women don’t wear hijab.”
on December 21, 2015 titled “As Muslim women, we actually ask you not to wear the hijab in the name of interfaith solidarity.” The article states in part:
For us, as mainstream Muslim women, born in Egypt and India, the spectacle at the mosque was a painful reminder of the well-financed effort by conservative Muslims to dominate modern Muslim societies. We reject this interpretation that the “hijab” is merely a symbol of modesty and dignity adopted by faithful female followers of Islam.
This modern-day movement, codified by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Taliban Afghanistan and the Islamic State, has erroneously made the Arabic word hijab synonymous with “
headscarf.” This conflation of hijab with the secular word headscarf is misleading. “Hijab” literally means “curtain” in Arabic. It also means “hiding,” ”obstructing” and “isolating” someone or something. It is never used in the Koran to mean headscarf.
In colloquial Arabic, the word for “headscarf” is tarha. In classical Arabic, “head” is al-ra’as and cover is gheta’a. No matter what formula you use, “hijab” never means headscarf. The media must stop spreading this misleading interpretation.
Pew Research found that only forty three percent (43%) of American Muslim women wear hijabs according to an article published by NPR on April 21, 2011. The NPR article states in part “The split between women who’ve covered and women who’ve never done so has existed for decades. But now a generation of women is taking off the headscarf, or hijab.” Therefore, after six years of “a generation of women taking off the hijab” the number of Muslim women now wearing the hijab in America is likely even less than forty three percent.
American Eagle Outfitters’ and Nike’s sale of the hijab is empowering “the well-financed effort by conservative (ie radical) Muslims to dominate modern Muslim societies.” These retailers are making it more difficult for Muslim women to break away from the Islamist domination and embrace American culture.
Florida Family Association has prepared emails for you to send to urge American Eagle Outfitters and Nike officials to discontinue selling the hijab which is a symbol of Islamist oppression.
To send your email, please click the following links, enter your name and email address then click the “Send Your Message” button. You may also edit the subject or message text if you wish.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/womans-march-hijabs-1-e1485255824108.jpg438640Florida Family Associationhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFlorida Family Association2017-08-13 05:53:422017-08-20 08:30:45The Left’s neo-diversity symbol ‘the hijab’ was invented in the 1970s, 1338 years after the Quran was written
“ProPublica, Working with Google to ‘Document Hate,’ Threatens Conservative Bloggers,” by Paula Bolyard, 
All perfect praise be to Allah, the Lord of all worlds. May Allah’s Peace and Blessings be upon the noblest Prophet and Messenger Muhammad, his family, and Companions. I have read an article written by the person called Ahmad Baha’ Al-Din, in some newspapers. He alleged the lawfulness of some things that Allah prohibits. In his column “Yawmiyyat”, (Al-Ahram Newspaper, issues nos. 36992, 36993, 36994, 36996), the writer launched a severe attack on Hijab (veil) and Niqab (face veil). He called to unveiling the face and considered Hijab a Bid`ah (innovation in the religion). He claimed it is just a matter of dress that is part of personal freedom. He even alleged that women used to wear Niqab as a tradition and Islam did not ordain or come with it. He falsely claimed that women used to sit with the Prophet (peace be upon him) unveiled and used to go for trade, pasturing and war with their faces uncovered and they remained in such a state during the era of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, the Umayyad, and Abbasid Caliphates. He said that when the Turks embraced Islam, they spread their non-Islamic traditions of their tribes, such as the one-eyed veil, yashmak, and imposed them on Muslim and Arab women. The writer expressed his views on the permissibility of unveiling the face, denied Hijab, inserted false claims and lies, and twisted the proofs to give different implications.