Michigan, California, Georgia, Texas, Florida, NJ public schools: Islam glorified, Christianity vilified, U.S. bashed

There is nothing wrong with students learning about Islam in school, if what they’re taught is accurate. But it isn’t. Because of the overpowering influence of the multiculturalist ethos and fears of charges of “Islamophobia” and “racism,” public school materials on Islam and other religions are for the most part heavily biased, with scarcely a critical word about Islam, Muhammad depicted as a cross between Gandhi and Sheriff Andy Taylor, no mention of jihad or dhimmitude, and harsh criticism of Christianity.

TMLC Uncovers Tax-Payer Funded Islamic Propaganda Forced On Teachers,” Thomas More Law Center, August 22, 2019 (thanks to R.):

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, has uncovered evidence of a well-orchestrated Islamic propaganda campaign aimed at teachers in school systems throughout Michigan and several other states.

Concerned about a two-day mandatory teacher-training seminar on Islam conducted by a Muslim consultant hired by Michigan’s Novi Community Schools District, TMLC filed a Freedom of Information Act request for documents related to the workshop.

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Law Center, commented on the results of their investigation, “We found that the teachers were subjected to two days of Islamic propaganda, where Islam was glorified, Christianity disparaged, and America bashed—all funded by Novi taxpayers.”

Moreover, during the past five years the school district has presented no teacher-training seminars focusing on Christianity, Judaism or any other religion – only Islam.

The hired Muslim consultant was Huda Essa, a resident of the Dearborn area and of Arab descent. She appeared before the Novi teachers in a hijab, the Muslim headscarf, billing herself as an expert in “cultural competency” and “culturally responsive teaching.”

Most disappointing was the fact that of the more than 400 teachers attending the workshop, not one teacher challenged Essa’s denigration of Christianity or attacks on America.

TMLC inspected dozens of internal school documents, including audio recordings of Essa’s presentation.

The information on Islam she provided to Novi teachers was riddled with falsehoods and errors of omission that were clearly meant to deceive.

Essa provided no truthful information on Sharia law and jihad, two of the most important aspects of Islam. All references to terrorism were dismissed as having nothing to do with Islam. White Christian males, she suggested, are more dangerous than Islamic radicals.

Essa is the face behind Culture Links LLC, a Michigan-based consultancy. She describes herself on the Culture Links website as an advocate of social justice who encourages children to “take pride in their many identities.”

But, as TMLC discovered from the Novi documents, the one identity Essa does not celebrate is that of patriotic Americans who believe in our nation’s exceptionalism.

And her message extends far beyond Novi.

Essa’s client list reveals she has been spreading her “trash America first” philosophy to colleges, universities, schools and professional educator associations throughout Michigan, California, Georgia, Texas, Florida and beyond. In Michigan alone her website lists nine school districts as clients – Oakland County Schools, Ann Arbor Schools, L’Anse Creuse Public Schools, Plymouth-Canton Community Schools, Roseville Community Schools, Farmington Public Schools, Dearborn Public Schools, Birmingham Public Schools and Melvindale Public Schools.

Under the banner of promoting diversity, inclusion and a multicultural approach to education, Essa sets about comparing Islam to Christianity, calling them “mostly similar.” The one big difference, she claims, is that Islam is the world’s “only purely monotheistic religion.”

Islam’s holy book, the Koran, came straight from Allah to the prophet Muhammad and, unlike the Jewish and Christian scriptures, has never been altered or changed, she told the Novi teachers. Significantly, the Koran commands Muslims to “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.” (Koran 9:5)

Her message was clear: The Koran is superior to the Bible. But she did not address the fact that it calls for the extermination of Christian and Jews.

While quick to indict America as guilty of “cultural genocide,” Essa was silent on the 1400 years of actual genocides, also known as jihads, in which Muslims wiped out Jewish tribes on the Arabian Peninsula, and slaughtered millions of Christians throughout the Middle East, North Africa and the European Continent. Referring to Islam, Winston Churchill wrote, “No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

Novi’s Islamic teacher-training is just the latest example of professional Islamic indoctrinators infiltrating U.S. public schools even as Christianity has been forced out of the classroom.

“This type of infiltration amounts to an Islamic Trojan horse within our public-school systems,” Thompson said. “No other religion gets this kind of special treatment in our schools.”

Only action by patriotic American parents will put a stop to the indoctrination of teachers and students. They must attend school board meetings and call their board’s attention to the existence of unconstitutional Islamic propaganda whenever they find evidence of it in their children’s schools. And when their board is unresponsive, they must be willing to take legal action to stop it whenever the law permits.

TMLC has several active cases involving public schools bending over backwards to promote Islam while trashing Christianity.

In New Jersey, seventh-grade students at Chatham Middle School were taught “Islam is the true faith,” required to learn the Shahada, or Muslim creed, and forced to watch videos that sought to convert them.

TMLC is representing another student at La Plata High School in Maryland, where pupils in world-history classes were taught that “Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian” and “Islam at heart is a peaceful religion.”

Jihad, meanwhile, was introduced to La Plata students as a “personal” spiritual struggle, having nothing to do with using violence to spread the faith. And, like in New Jersey, the Maryland students were forced to learn the Five Pillars of Islam and memorize the Shahada.

A SERIES OF DECEPTIONS

Essa spent a great deal of time in her Novi presentation talking about Muslim women, whom she described as victims of Islamophobia on the part of bigoted Americans.

She said her own mother’s decision to wear the hijab was met with “rage” from random Americans. Other hijab-wearing Muslim women have been spat upon, had hot liquids poured on them, been beaten and even killed because they wear the hijab, Essa said, without giving details of when or where these atrocities supposedly occurred.

Essa presented no statistics on hate crimes to back up her claims. FBI crime stats show that anti-Muslim attacks are relatively rare in America and actually fell by 17 percent in 2017. Anti-Jewish hate crimes that year out-numbered anti-Muslim offenses by nearly four to one.

Globally, Christians are the most persecuted of all religious groups, according to the watchdog Open Doors. Of the top-ten most dangerous countries to be a Christian, all but two of them are Muslim-majority nations, according to Open Doors’ 2019 World Watch List.

But Essa’s attempts to con Novi teachers into accepting her anti-American, pro-Islamic worldview didn’t stop with the idea that Muslims are the most persecuted and victimized people.

She said any poor treatment of women in Islamic countries should be attributed to “cultural” differences, not the religion of Islam.

She failed to mention that Muhammad, Islam’s prophet, is reported to have said that the majority of hell would be populated by women (hadith by Sahih Bukhari Vol. 1:28, 301, Vol. 2:161, Vol. 7:124-126). Also absent from her presentation was the Koranic instruction for husbands to beat a disobedient wife (Sura 4:34).

Exercising the art of deception, Essa said Muslims love Jesus and refer to him as “messiah.”

But the word “messiah” has a different meaning for Muslims than for Christians. When Christians speak of Jesus their Messiah, they are referring to God’s “anointed One,” who has the power to forgive sin and grant salvation.

Muslims confer no such divine authority to their Jesus. Under Islam Jesus was only a man, a lower prophet under Muhammad, not the Son of God, and he did not die on a cross or rise from the dead as documented in the gospels.

Essa hammered Novi teachers with the Islamic teaching that the Jewish and Christian scriptures are not to be trusted. Although once pure, they were gradually “corrupted” by unscrupulous men. Only the Koran contains the final, “pure” words of God, she said.

Essa also schooled teachers in the proper use of the phrase “Allahu Akbar!” or “Allah is greatest!” While this is widely known as battle-cry of Muslim terrorists, Essa said it’s really just a refrain that Muslims use to convey feelings of happiness, sadness, anger, or thankfulness while praising Allah.

Essa said the word “Islam” is an offshoot of the Arabic term “Salaam,” which means peace. This is a common ploy used by Muslim apologists to deceive uninformed Westerners.

“Islam” is more accurately translated as “submission” and good Muslims know they must submit to Allah and his Sharia (Islamic law), above all other systems of law.

Essa noted Islam is the world’s fastest-growing religion without mentioning that Muslims are forbidden from leaving the faith. Considered apostates, those leaving the faith are subject to severe punishment, up to and including death. And forced conversions have been a well-documented fact of history.

The Middle East and North Africa, once overwhelmingly Christian, were Islamized by a series of jihads starting with Muhammad, his successor caliphs and later by the Ottoman Turks.

She completely ignored the jihadi terrorist attacks conducted on U.S. soil: The 9/11 attack that murdered nearly 3,000 people, the Fort Hood massacre of 12 U.S. soldiers, the Pulse Nightclub attack that killed 49 Americans in Orlando, the San Bernardino attack that killed 14 at a Christmas party, the Chattanooga shooting that killed five at a Navy recruitment and reserve center, the Boston Marathon bombing that killed three and left hundreds wounded, and the Chelsea, New York, pipe-bombing that injured 30 innocent Americans. Not to mention the countless terror attacks that have been foiled by the FBI.

Here are some other facts uncovered by TMLC’s Freedom of Information Act requests:

  • Novi school district has no guidelines for the selection of presenters for teacher-training events.
  • The school district did not fully vet Huda Essa before selecting her as a presenter and providing her with data about the school district and its students.
  • Essa was given access to data from student and teacher surveys.
  • The school district said it had no records that would indicate it ever conducted a factual analysis of Essa’s presentation.
  • The school district signed a contract on August 2, 2017, agreeing to pay Essa $5,000 for her two-day seminar on August 28 and 29, 2017.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Austria: Muslim migrant arrested for attempted arson at office of party that warns against Islamization

Tlaib’s “Palestinian” village is wealthy and thriving as she whines about “oppression”

Denmark: MP proposes ban on migrants “with Muslim values” becoming Danish citizens

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

BB&T and SunTrust are merging – make sure they support 2ndVote values

By the end of 2019, two of America’s leading banks are expected to create a new mega-bank: Truist, a merger of BB&T (2.1 – Leaning Liberal) and SunTrust (2.3 – Leaning Liberal). The new company will serve 10 million Americans and be worth $66 billion, making it the nation’s sixth-largest bank.

Truist is meant to convey “trust” and “true.” As the merger comes closer to reality, 2ndVote is urging you to make sure the new company can be trusted to be true to American values. Currently, SunTrust ranks a 2.3 (lean liberal) on the 2ndVote scale, and BB&T ranks a 2.1 (lean liberal).

Neither of these rankings is impressive – but there is great potential for Truist to be a bank instead of a funder of the left-wing agenda. SunTrust donates to many groups who support liberty, such as The Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute. Other donations are to groups which advocate for left-wing policies but have legitimate missions – such as Susan G. Komen and United Way.

Alas, SunTrust did recently pull the financial rug out from under two companies which partner with the federal government to house immigrants. That’s a policy which must not carry forward to Truist.

BB&T doesn’t engage in much corporate activism at all. Their greatest challenge is the total acquiescing to the LGBT agenda – BB&T ranks a 100 percent on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index. This means that while they don’t push LGBT priorities in their external donations, their corporate structure is set up to make LGBT activists happy.

2ndVote Americans can engage with the future Truist in several key ways to urge the new bank to serve all Americans instead of using your money to serve the liberal agenda.

First, contact BB&T CEO Kelly King and SunTrust CEO Bill Rogers. They will serve in top leadership roles at Truist for the next several years – they must know how their Middle America customers feel and what you believe.

Second, spread the word on social media and among your friends and family. Let everyone know that these companies lean left, but that with the right pressure they may get back on the path of serving customers instead of spending hard-earned money on political advocacy. It’ll take everyone working together, but it can be done if all 2ndVote Americans are working arm-in-arm.

Third, let the future Truist know that you need to see progress or you’ll have to take your business elsewhere. No bank is truly neutral on the 2ndVote scale, but Central Pacific Financial is close –  a 2.9. Its main issue is that it donates to the gun control-supporting YWCA. However, they balance that support with donations made to Catholic Charities and The Salvation Army.

Again, the name “Truist” is meant to convey trust and true. You can help make that a reality instead of simply a slogan.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Company Contrast – Marriott International

EDITORS NOTE: This 2nd Vote column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

64% Of Federal Arrests Were Of Non-Citizens In 2018, DOJ Finds

Federal arrests of non-citizens has increased exponentially over the past two decades, and account for the majority of all federal arrests, data released by the Justice Department revealed.

Non-citizens made up 64% of all federal arrests in 2018 despite making up 7% of the U.S. population, according to Justice Department data released Thursday and reviewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation. Between 1998 and 2018, federal arrests of non-citizens grew by 234%, while federal arrests of U.S. citizens climbed 10%.

While the numbers provide credence to President Donald Trump’s argument that illegal immigration results in increased crime, immigration experts also pointed out that migrant apprehensions make up a significant portion of current federal arrests.

“Experience has taught the immigration agencies and DOJ that this works to reduce recidivism — in other words, when illegal crossers face some more severe consequence than just being sent back home, they don’t keep doing it,” Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies told the Washington Examiner.

Trump made increased immigration enforcement a hallmark goal of his administration. His efforts at beefing up border security and providing additional funding to the Customs and Border Protection have yielded satisfactory results. Federal immigration apprehensions climbed more than 50,000 from 2017 to 2018, according to the Justice Department data.

Ninety-five percent of the increase in federal arrests over the past 20 years were, in fact, due to immigration offenses, the Justice Department data found. Non-citizens accounted for 28% of all federal fraud arrests, 25% of all federal property arrests, and 24% of all federal drug arrests. The Justice Department identified the top five crimes non-citizens were most likely be prosecuted for: illegal re-entry, drugs, fraud, alien smuggling and misuse of visas.

“Opponents of immigration enforcement are obsessed with trying to establish that illegal aliens and legal immigrants commit fewer crimes than Americans, and so, as their narrative goes, local law enforcement agencies should not cooperate with ICE and should adopt sanctuary policies,” Vaughan continued in her statement. “This is first of all not true, but is off-point and a dangerous conclusion.”

COLUMN BY

JASON HOPKINS

Immigration and politics reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Hundreds Of Illegal Migrants Carry Criminal Histories, DHS Investigation Finds

109 US Counties Have Become Majority Non-White Since 2000, Analysis Finds

Just 20 Miles From White House, Illegal Immigrant Rape Cases Keep Piling Up

New Report Shows Taxpayers Lost BIG TIME Last Year Because Of ‘Non-Citizens”

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Nigerians Arrested by FBI for Scamming Millions from Elderly and Vulnerable Women

“We believe this is one of the largest cases of its kind in U.S. history.” – US Attorney Nick Hanna

The FBI announced this week that over a dozen were under arrest in the U.S. and efforts were being made to find additional co-conspirators around the world in fraud schemes  involving at least 32 victims.

Here is The Hill on this good news,

Justice charges 80 in massive online fraud case linked to Nigerian defendants

The Department of Justice on Thursday unsealed a 252-count federal indictment charging 80 defendants, many of whom are Nigerian nationals, with conspiring to steal millions of dollars through online scams.

The indictment was unsealed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California and was made public shortly afterauthorities arrested 14 of the defendants across the United States, with 11 of these defendants apprehended in the Los Angeles region. The majority of the defendants are outside the country, with many likely in Nigeria.

The defendants involved in the case were charged with attempting to defraud individuals of millions of dollars through the use of business email compromise (BEC) and online romance scams, in addition to other schemes meant to target the elderly.

The investigation is being led by the FBI, with each of the defendants charged with “conspiracy to commit fraud, conspiracy to launder money, and aggravated identity theft,” according to Justice Department. Some defendants also face fraud and money laundering charges.

U.S. Attorney Nick Hanna described the scams used by the defendants during a press conference on Thursday, saying that “fraud networks now target individuals and businesses alike.”

“In the BEC scams, the fraudsters will often hack a company’s email system, impersonate company personnel, and direct payments to bank accounts that funnel money back to the fraudsters in Nigeria,” Hanna said. “In the romance scams, victims think they are developing a dating relationship, when in fact they are just being tricked into sending money to the fraudsters.”

Hanna added that “we believe this is one of the largest cases of its kind in U.S. history.”

Paul Delacourt, the assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles field office, said during the same press conference that losses involved in this case for victims total around $10 million. He said defendants attempted to obtain $40 million from victims.

There were at least 32 victims in the case, from the United States and other countries including Japan, the United Kingdom, Lebanon, Ukraine, China, Mexico, Germany, Indonesia, the United Arab Emirates, and Trinidad and Tobago.

Delacourt said the case began in 2016 after one individual was victimized by the defendants. The two main defendants in the case are Nigerian citizens Valentine Iro and Chukwudi Christogunus Igbokwe.

More here.

And, don’t miss the  Stars and Stripes story about how some of the crooks pretended to be US military personnel when they scammed hundreds of thousands from lonely women.

I know you are shaking your head and wondering who in their right mind would be so foolish to send money to a stranger they met on the internet.  Well, as we have heard in previous posts on Nigerian romance scammers, these Nigerian creeps are skilled actors and preying on vulnerable and lonely people seems to come naturally to them.

Keep an eye on your elderly friends and family members and don’t let them fall for these despicable scams.

RELATED ARTICLES:

64% Of Federal Arrests Were Of Non-Citizens In 2018, DOJ Finds

Just 20 Miles From White House, Illegal Immigrant Rape Cases Keep Piling Up

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: American Decency Rallies

Finally! A plan to push back against the forces of evil in America!

Modesto, CA has denied citizens the right to celebrate heterosexuality, life, the USA and Faith.

Rejecting Every Premise Of The New York Times 1619 Project

There are a lot of lies, factual errors, misrepresentations, selective history and general nonsense in the New York Times’ 1619 project that are worthy of rejection.

According to the Times:

“The goal of The 1619 Project, a major initiative from The New York Times that this issue of the magazine inaugurates, is to reframe American history by considering what it would mean to regard 1619 as our nation’s birth year. Doing so requires us to place the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are as a country.”

It is worth rejecting that slavery should be placed “at the very center” of our history. Was it a large and terrible part? Yes. It caused misery culminating in a bloody Civil War and its legacy endured through Jim Crow. But at the very center? Not the religious freedom that brought the first Pilgrims in Massachusetts? Not the idea of an upside down government that dethroned the king and put the people on the top and the government subservient (“for the people and by the people”?) That was a first in history, while slavery was a universal part of world history on every continent and among every race — both enslaving and being enslaved.

On the cover the 1619 Project, overlaying on a full-page black and white picture of a very dark ocean, are these words:

“In August of 1619, a ship appeared on this horizon, near Point Comfort, a coastal port in the British colony of Virginia. It carried more than 20 enslaved Africans, who were sold to the colonists. America was not yet America, but this was the moment it began. No aspect of the country that would be formed here has been untouched by the 250 years of slavery that followed. On the 400th anniversary of this fateful moment, it is finally time to tell our story truthfully.”

Picking 1619 is the worst of “journalistic” cherry-picking. There was no America until 1776. Before that, Florida and other South and Southwestern areas were variously Spanish colonies, or French colonies, and finally most were British colonies — all before the American Revolution created the new nation. Slavery ran most of its life in North America when we were all British subjects, or Spanish and French subjects.

This is crucial, because all of these nations — and all of the rest of the world — were practicing slavery at this time and had from time immemorial. Slavery was part of the Asian world, a large part of the Muslim world, practiced throughout Central and South America even before the first Conquistadors arrived, and importantly for our discussion, rampant through Africa by other Africans.

Most of the slaves transported to America were not captured by white slavers as depicted in the movie Roots. That happened, but the majority were simply bought from Africans who had enslaved nearby tribes they had conquered. It was a facet of Africa like it was the rest of the world, and to call it a uniquely American evil is factually wrong and dishonest. It was — and still is — a worldwide evil.

Slavery in the United States of America ran 87 years from 1776-1863. Or in President Lincoln’s famous Gettysburg Address, “Four score and seven years ago…” Just a fact, something journalists used to care about.

A common lie told today by leftists, and it is repeated in the Time’s 1619 Project by several of the writers, is that the “white men” who created the Constitution, did not see black people as fully human and not worthy of rights. This is also factually wrong. The northern colonies were packed with abolitionists — white people — who argued that this was the moment to end the atrocity of slavery, at the outset of the new nation. But there were other white people in the southern colonies, slave holders, who would not agree to form a single country to fight for freedom from British rule if emancipation were included.

It’s possible that the majority of the framers preferred to free blacks and give them rights in the newly formed country. But freedom could not be won unless all the colonies were bound together against the greatest empire on earth at the time. So the painful compromise was made to win freedom from Britain. And then, within a few generations, a bloody Civil War was fought almost entirely by white people to free the slaves. (About 90 percent of Union troops were white.)

The Times ignores this and misrepresents world history, our history and the founders and framers, by saying all of the framers saw blacks as subhuman. The publication is intent on doing this because as modern leftists they have an almost instinctive antipathy toward America and the very idea of American greatness. But more relevant to the moment, they are doing this literally to help beat Donald Trump and Republicans in 2020.

It does not require any special analytical abilities to deduce this. Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet essentially says so.

A recording of a full Times staff meeting was leaked to Slate last week, which then published a transcript of it. Baquet held this staff meeting two weeks ago to explain a coming change in coverage after the collapse of the Trump-Russia narrative.

“Chapter 1 of the story of Donald Trump, not only for our newsroom but, frankly, for our readers, was: Did Donald Trump have untoward relationships with the Russians, and was there obstruction of justice? That was a really hard story, by the way, let’s not forget that. We set ourselves up to cover that story. I’m going to say it. We won two Pulitzer Prizes covering that story. And I think we covered that story better than anybody else.”

Pulitzers are award by like-minded leftists. Only one type of story wins those. But despite two years and virtually unlimited legal and financial resources, Mueller failed to establish that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia during the 2016 election. Which essentially means those years of reporting got it wrong. But Pulitzers.

Baquet went on, and this really pulls the veil back:

“The day Bob Mueller walked off that witness stand, two things happened. Our readers who want Donald Trump to go away suddenly thought, ‘Holy shit, Bob Mueller is not going to do it.’ And Donald Trump got a little emboldened politically, I think. Because, you know, for obvious reasons. And I think that the story changed. A lot of the stuff we’re talking about started to emerge like six or seven weeks ago. We’re a little tiny bit flat-footed. I mean, that’s what happens when a story looks a certain way for two years. Right?”

But Pulitzers — unless of course they were just political accolades by fellow travelers and not about actual journalism.

Baquet:

“We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well…Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story.”

That is, a different angle of attack on President Trump, since Trump-Russia it turns out was never really a story. The real story the Times will not tell is how we got a two-year special counsel investigation of an event that did not happen. Baquet, not knowing this would become public of course, just puts it out there openly.

“I mean, the vision for coverage for the next two years is what I talked about earlier: How do we cover a guy who makes these kinds of remarks? How do we cover the world’s reaction to him? How do we do that while continuing to cover his policies? How do we cover America, that’s become so divided by Donald Trump?”

Divided by Trump. Amazing. Baquet said the Times must “write more deeply about the country, race, and other divisions.”

And there it is. The 1619 Project.

“It aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are.”

“Reframing” history is just a deceptive way of saying “rewrite” history. And there is no conceivable way this does not inflame racial tensions and make us more divided. And understand, most news outlets across the country take their cue on story importance and framing from the New York Times.

The first lines of the massive project let it all hang out.

“Our democracy’s founding ideals were false when they were written. Black Americans have fought to make them true…”

No. Another premise to reject that just flat wrong. Blacks did indeed fight to earn their claim to them, as did whites. But the ideals were true and right — changing support for values does not in any way alter the moral standing of the values themselves. That would be self-evident to a non propagandist. Those ideas simply were imperfectly implemented, as mentioned above.

Our nation’s story actually is one of consistently moving closer to those ideals, striving through emancipation in the 19th century to the civil rights movement of the mid 20th century. Blacks have been fully equal to whites under the law in this country for 50 years.

But the Times will never tell that story.

Baquet told his staff that over the next two years, the Times will “teach” its readers to see race everywhere, to view every issue through race. Stories will strive to “reframe” each issue through the lens of race. The next two years just coincidentally happen to cover the entire presidential election cycle.

And that brings us to the final premise to reject: That the New York Times is a news organization. It is not. And it has not been for a long while. But it took its own mask off now. It is virtually self-described now as an anti-American, leftist, Democratic propaganda outlet — with some news stories sprinkled in.

No independent-minded person should think otherwise.

RELATED ARTICLE: The New York Times 1959 Project—Similar to Their 1619 Project

RELATED VIDEO: “Propaganda” For NYT’s “1619 Project” To Claim American Revolution Was About Protecting Slavery.

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Islamists and Neo-Nazis Are Not Opposites – On the Contrary

You may think that Islamists and neo-Nazis/white supremacists are complete opposites. After all, they’re willing to take physical violence against each other to the streets. Both use the threat of the other one as a recruiting tool to boost numbers.

But their bitter enmity is surface level. When we look at the views of Islamists and neo-Nazis/white supremacists — what we will call for simplicity, the Far Right — we start to see the similarities.

For groups that hate each other, Islamists and the Far Right tend to talk about a lot of the same things.

Here are just a few of the views they share:

  • They hate gay people
  • They hate democracy
  • They hate Jews
  • They think women should stay at home to bear and raise children
  • They support use of extreme violence against their enemies
  • They are both obsessed with group identity
  • They are both obsessed with masculinity and the concept of “honor”

These are not accidental similarities. And, in truth, they are not different movements doing different things: They are fundamentally the same idea, just expressed in different cultures. 

Before the French Revolution, societies were governed by monarchies, who ruled in accordance with the principles of their particular religion.

They may have claimed Divine right, or simply ruled in the name of a particular faith. The state was considered an extension of the family, with the King or the Emperor’s family at the head of it. He had a right to rule, just as a man had the right to rule over his household.

There was no concept of sovereignty of the people or universal rights or any of those ideas. There was certainly no separation of religion and state.

If you are interested in how societies transitioned into the ones we have now, see Clarion Project’s series on the First Amendment.

Since the late 18th century, a series of revolutions, starting in America, Haiti and France, brought democracy to the world. With it, they brought the concept of civil rights, separation of religion and state, rights for women, an end to slavery and a host of other positive transformations.

Both the Far Right and Islamists seek to reverse those gains. The objective of any genuinely neo-Nazi program is to empower a strong and powerful leader to create a powerful authoritarian state.

This project, it is thought, will bring honor and victory to the community, instead of the liberalism and decadence of the modern secular world.

Muslim Brotherhood and Islamist ideologue Sayyid Qutb’s febrile rantings about the raw sensuality of the American woman mirror the Nazi slogan of the woman’s role as restricted to “Kinder, Kirche, Kuche” (children, church, cooking).

Its misogyny and its broader political program go hand-in-hand: The power of the male in the home mirrors the power of the state in general — and the power of the state brings honor of the people.

It is violent machismoism taken to its ultimate conclusion and extreme.

Both Islamists and the Far Right look to the Crusades for their example. Online images of knights, in particular the Knights Templar, are used by the Far Right; Islamists glorify Saladin, the Crusaders’ nemisis.

The reason Islamists and the neo-Nazis both use rhetoric and symbolism from the Middle Ages and other pre-modern periods is that they see themselves in that context.

They view all of recent history as one giant mistake – a mistake that needs to be rectified through the point of a sword.

Perhaps this is why Vona Gábor, the head of the Hungarian Far-Right party Jobbik, praised Islam as a bulwark against globalization in 2018.

The connection of the Third Reich to Islamist extremism is well documented. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem personally met Hitler, and raised units of Muslim soldiers to fight for the Nazis. Muslim Brotherhood founder and leader Hassan al-Banna was so enamored of Hitler that he had Mein Kampf translated into Arabic.

The Islamist/neo-Nazi position takes same attitude to the world, just reflected through different cultural lenses. Once this is understood, combating both positions at the same time becomes a whole lot simpler.

RELATED STORIES

Rebranding the White Supremacy Movement in the US 

White Supremacists Alive and Well in Canada 

CAIR: Hard on White Supremacists, Soft on Islamist Supremacists

EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Reps. Tlaib, Omar claim Israel is neither an ally nor a democracy

“Denying visit to duly elected members of Congress is not consistent with being an ally. And denying millions of people freedom of movement or expression or self determination is not consistent with being a democracy.”

The sponsors of their trip have been linked to anti-Semitism and jihad terrorism. They had nothing to say about that.

The reason why the freedom of movement of any “Palestinian” is restricted is because of “Palestinian” genocidal incitement and celebration of the jihad murder of Israeli civilians. They had nothing to say about that.

The “Palestinians” have turned down numerous peace offers from Israel, not content with anything other than the total destruction of Israel, as I show in my forthcoming book The Palestinian Delusion: The Catastrophic History of the Middle East Peace Process. They had nothing to say about that.

Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar denounce Israel’s travel restrictions during press conference,” by Camilo Montoya-Galvez, CBS News, August 19, 2019:

Standing side by side on Monday, Democratic Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar forcefully denounced the controversial decision by the Israeli government to deny them entry into the country, casting the travel restrictions as part of a broader effort to suppress voices of dissent against the treatment of Palestinians in occupied and disputed territories.

“Netanyahu’s decision to deny us entry might be unprecedented for members of Congress,” Omar said during a press conference, referring to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “But it is the policy of his government when it comes to Palestinians. This is the policy of his government when it comes to anyone who holds views that threaten the occupation.”

“The only way to preserve unjust policy is to suppress people’s freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of movement,” Omar added….

The Israeli government did offer to let Tlaib in on humanitarian grounds to visit her 90-year-old Palestinian grandmother on the condition that she did not promote a boycott of Israel. Tlaib initially agreed, but later rejected the offer, saying she would not make the visit under “oppressive conditions.”

Getting visibly emotional, Tlaib said she made the decision to not accept the conditional travel permit after consulting with her grandmother and other family members.

“Through tears, at three o’clock in the morning, we all decided as a family that I could not go until I was a free, American United States Congresswoman coming there, not only to see my grandmother but to talk to Palestinian and Israeli organizations that believed that my grandmother deserves human dignity as much as anyone else does,” she said….

Omar suggested the travel restrictions contradict longstanding beliefs by Republican and Democratic administrations that Israel is one of America’s most steadfast allies and the sole true democracy in the Middle East.

“Denying visit to duly elected members of Congress is not consistent with being an ally,” she said. “And denying millions of people freedom of movement or expression or self determination is not consistent with being a democracy.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

It’s all about the Benjamins: Far-Left group fundraises on Tlaib/Omar Israel ban

“The Southern Poverty Law Center is a hate-based scam that nearly caused me to be murdered”

Al Jazeera Bemoans the Celebration, in Italy, of Oriana Fallaci

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Are Other American Muslims As Concerned about Rep. Ilhan Omar as the Former Miss Iraq?

By Tommy Waller

On August 7, 2019, radio host Sara Carter interviewed former Miss Iraq, Sarah Idan, about the backlash, including death threats, that she faced after posting online a photograph with Miss Israel, Adar Gandelsman, at the 2017 Miss Universe Pageant.  Because of the backlash over this photo, Sarah Idan’s family was forced to flee Iraq.

During this interview, Idan described how she had been taught as a child that Americans and Israelis were “evil” and how this inculcation was reversed by her witnessing the virtuous behavior of American soldiers in Iraq.

Idan explained how she later served as an interpreter for the American military, risking her life and ostracizing from her community.  She not only helped U.S. soldiers navigate the difficult terrain of the jihadi insurgency but inspired her own family to understand the importance of fighting against it.

Over time, Idan also gained a great respect for Israel, leading her to recently address the United Nations Human Rights Council’s 41st Session where she denounced the human rights violations of Hamas, the antisemitism taught in Islamic nations, and biased media that enables both.

During her interview, Idan stated that Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) “does not represent me as a Muslim and does not represent millions of Muslims in the Middle East…in Arab countries we call her the Muslim Brotherhood.”  This statement precipitated an ongoing battle between Idan and Omar on Twitter which aptly illustrates the difference between these two American Muslim women.

Idan exemplified that difference when she tweeted a response to Omar stating:  “When you @IlhanMN come to my State, My City, My zip code right here in CA & accept an award from CAIR [the Council on American Islamic Relations], a Muslim brotherhood affiliated organization, IT IS my business!”  She added, “First was the Middle East, then Europe & now the USA. I fled from the same ideology you’re trying to export here.”

Why would Sarah Idan want people to know that Omar doesn’t “represent” her?  Why would she call out Omar for fundraising for CAIR?   And, what exactly is the ideology that she fled?

On a subsequent media interview on i24 News, Idan described what she fled as “the ideology of trying to push Islam to make it the ruling system in the country.”

Of the Muslim Brotherhood, Idan stated, “…they’re jihadis, and they have this ideology that they want to control the world.”

Perhaps Idan is aware of the overwhelming evidence pointing toward CAIR’s activities as a front for the Muslim Brotherhood and the designated terrorist organization Hamas.

Still, though, what about Ilhan Omar would lead the former Miss Iraq to have such a strong disdain for her behavior?  Here are just a few examples:

“When I grew up in Iraq I always felt alone and felt misunderstood and I couldn’t talk about many issues but here you have freedom…,” Idan said on her interview with Sara Carter.

The question now is whether other Muslims in America will join Idan in pointing out the worrisome anti-Semitic and anti-American behavior of Omar, or will they will remain silent and leave Idan with the same loneliness she faced in Iraq?  Will they side with Omar, CAIR, and others who she says possess “the ideology of trying to push Islam to make it the ruling system in the country?”

The answer will have implications for more than just the former Miss Iraq.

About Tommy Waller

Tommy Waller serves as Vice President, Special Projects at the Center for Security Policy.  Tommy manages the Secure the Grid Coalition – a group of policymakers, defense professionals, and activists working diligently to secure America’s most critical infrastructure – the U.S. Electric Grid.  Prior to joining the Center, Tommy served in the U.S. Marine Corps as an Infantry and Recon Officer with combat service overseas in numerous theaters.  His full bio can be found hereView all posts by Tommy Waller 

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Trump Administration Proposal Would Limit Refugee Placement to Only Towns/States that Want Them!

Updates on the Islamic State

Minor League Owner Rejects Connecticut Democrats’ Demand to Meet CAIR

Al Qaeda Supporter Indicted in Arkansas

Yes, the Russians Are Testing Nuclear Weapons and It Is Very Important

Ilhan Omar Biography – Discover the Networks

EDITORS NOTE: This CSP column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Socialism Is Theft—Why Are Candidates Espousing It?

I recently preached a sermon on the subject of stealing in our church’s series on the Ten Commandments. And one of the points I made is that socialism is a form of theft.

I mentioned the slogan going around during the 1960s—“property is theft.”

But the Bible says, “Thou shalt not steal.” Implied in that commandment is the sanctity of private property—I’m not allowed to simply take it because someone else owns it. And the Bible does not say, “Thou shalt not steal, unless thou art the government.”

Socialism is a form of governmental theft. The government has no money of its own. It simply forcibly takes from Citizen A and gives to Citizen B. But, of course, the one who benefits the most from this socialistic scheme is Citizen C, the government bureaucrat who administers the welfare state.

Some of the wealthiest counties in the entire nation are the bedroom communities in the greater Washington, D. C. area, where government workers live, who administer all the many wealth transfer programs for our country.

To paraphrase George Bernard Shaw: if you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on Paul’s vote.

The Bible teaches us to help the needy. That is all voluntary. That is the church’s job. When the government gets involved in the “charity business,” it is not only wasteful, it undermines the family, human dignity, and self-reliance.

It’s one thing to have a safety net for those who may fall through the cracks. It’s another thing to grow the size of the federal government and our national debt more and more with never-ending spending until one day, the whole thing explodes.

Meanwhile, we have leading Democrat presidential candidates who want to add more and more to our federal government spending. According to a Fox News poll, Elizabeth Warren is up to 20 percent as of August 16, and Bernie Sanders up to 10 percent. That represents a lot of Americans apparently buying into a socialist-type message.

Senator Warren may chafe at one using the term “socialist” to describe her policies. But big government is big government by any other name. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson: Big government, small liberty.

One of Elizabeth Warren’s big promises is to forgive student loans. It’s tragic that so many young people have become so loaded with college debt. But these student loans are freely assumed debts. Why should everyone else be forced to pay for them?

What’s ironic about it is that many of these costly degrees really don’t confer much value in terms of gainful employment.

It reminds me of the joke about two women, who hadn’t seen each other in a while, had an encounter at the supermarket. One woman asked the other about her three children. One son had become a poet and had just received his master’s degree in literature. The daughter just graduated from college with a degree in modern art. But the third son? She sheepishly shared, “Well, you know Freddy. Freddy is still Freddy. He wouldn’t go to college—he became a plumber instead. By the way, if it weren’t for him, we’d all be starving.”

Virginia Prodan, an international human rights attorney, grew up under Communist Romania. She strives to warn Americans to never go down the socialist path. She came to the U.S. during the Reagan years, essentially as a political refugee. She wrote a book about her miraculous escape from an assassination attempt in her book, Saving My Assassin. I have interviewed her on the radio a few times.

She told me, “Socialism is the government starting to lie to you about free things, and you believe them…then the government establishes socialism. It gains power and transforms into a communist [state].”

If you disagree with the government under such a scheme, she notes, they will “kill you and take your property.” In other words, socialism is the gateway to communism.

When I asked her about why socialism was so popular today among young people in America, she responded, “They have been deceived by the same lies my parents and relatives had been deceived by, so many years ago—lies that led Romania to be transformed from a free country to a repressive, socialist government.”

Prodan notes that, “Few Americans know, even those who are dream about socialism, that the socialist leader, Vladimir Lenin, declared that ‘Liberty is so precious that it must be carefully rationed to ordinary people.’ Ordinary people are you and me.”

How many times must humanity, including parts of America, go down the socialist path before we realize the emperor has no clothes? The government has no money trees. We should listen to survivors of socialism and communism, like Virginia Prodan, rather than politicians who are essentially trying to buy votes with taxpayers’ money.

© All rights reserved.

The Omar-Tlaib affair: Tough questions for AIPAC

Notwithstanding AIPAC’s discomfort over the Omar-Tlaib case, there is more than a hint of hypocrisy in its joining the general assault on Israel.

The brouhaha over the ruckus that erupted last Thursday between the Netanyahu government and the two radical, anti-Israeli Congresswomen, Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), refuses to subside.

It continues to generate headlines even after almost a week since Israel reversed its original decision to allow them to visit the country—invoking a 2017 law that permits the government to bar entry to foreign citizens, who support anti-Israel boycotts. Coincidentally—or not—this dramatic change of heart took place soon after President Trump posted a somewhat caustic tweet, deriding Israel’s previous position to permit their arrival.

Thus, on Monday (8.19.2019), the two held a well-choreographed and emotive press conference , unsurprisingly well-covered in the international media, in which they lambasted Israel for its heavy-handed “oppression” of the Palestinians and its “undemocratic” prohibition of their planned trip. Likewise, they urged other US law-makers to visit Israel to discover for themselves the “iniquitous realities” that, according to them, prevail here.

Israel’s perceived capitulation to Trumpian pressure sparked wall-to-wall condemnation from the Democratic Party—even from long-standing Israel supporters. A good number of pundits warned that the barring of the Democratic Congresswomen could herald the end of the era of bipartisan support for Israel, and expressed concern over what might await it in a post-Trump era—or at least, a post-Republican era.

Clearly, the requested visit by two of Israel most vehement detractors created an extremely awkward situation for the Netanyahu government. Equally clearly, the government’s clumsy vacillation in dealing with the problem was anything but flawless, and created a number of irksome questions marks as to its conduct—for itself and for its advocates in the public arena.

However, despite any misgiving one may have over the government’s handling of the “hot potato” left at its doorstep, the Omar-Tlaib episode—and the intensity of the reactions to it—raise several troubling issues.

Bipartisanship: At what price?

The first of these is the question of the price that Israel is called upon to preserve bi-partisan support for it.  After all, no-one can assume that the two fiercely anti-Israel Congresswomen would not exploit their stay in Israel to inflict the maximum possible damage on it—irrespective of any “inconvenient facts” they might have happened to encounter on it.

Accordingly, if Israel is required to forsake important national interests in order to appease a party, in which some of its most prominent members are viscerally opposed to the Jewish state, one might very well question the value—even, the very point—of preserving such bi-partisanship. Indeed, at some point, bi-partisanship may well cease to be an invaluable asset and become a burdensome liability instead!

In this regard, perhaps the most telling—and most surprising—censure came from the prestigious and powerful pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC, which, as a rule, has consistently backed the decisions of the Israeli government—virtually without exception.  Accordingly, public reproach from an organization so closely identified with pro-Israel advocacy is, without doubt, extraordinarily significant.  Of course, for AIPAC, the issue of bi-partisanship is an almost sacred value, the very “holy grail” of its political influence. Indeed, it attributes—with considerable justification—much of its political stature and sway to its ability to harness such bi-partisan support for Israel. It is thus, clearly understandable that it will react negatively to any development that appears to threaten that ability.

AIPAC’s hypocrisy?

However, not withstanding AIPAC’s discomfort in the Omar-Tlaib case, there is more than a hint of hypocrisy in its joining the general assault on Israel.

After all, it would be difficult—even impossible—to imagine that the AIPAC leadership would extend an invitation to either Omar or to Tlaib to address its annual convention, and to provide them an opportunity to publicly berate Israel and blacken its name with baseless accusations.

Accordingly, the trenchant question that this raises is the following: If AIPAC would not permit access to Omar and Tlaib to allow them a platform to denigrate Israel, why would it find fault with Israel for not permitting them access to a very similar platform?

This, then, is the question, which should be directed at the AIPAC leadership—and which they should be called on to address.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Israel Right to Shut Out the Hostile Voices of Tlaib and Omar

Judicial Watch Major Court Victory: Montgomery County, Maryland Must Clean up Voter Rolls!

Since we are on the subject of sanctuary county—Montgomery County, MD (see my previous post)—here is a bit of good news for a change!  (Hat tip: Cathy)

Thank God for Judicial Watch!  Note that it took TWO full years before the county is being forced to comply.

From JW’s press release:

JUDICIAL WATCH VICTORY: FEDERAL COURT ORDERS MARYLAND TO PRODUCE VOTER REGISTRATION LIST DATA TO JUDICIAL WATCH

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a federal court has ordered the State of Maryland to produce voter list data for Montgomery County, the state’s biggest county. The court ruling comes in the Judicial Watch lawsuit filed July 18, 2017, against Montgomery County and the Maryland State Boards of Elections under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Baltimore Division (Judicial Watch vs. Linda H. Lamone, et al. (No. 1:17-cv-02006)). The decision follows NVRA-related Judicial Watch successes in California and Kentucky that could lead to removal of up to 1.85 million inactive voters from voter registration lists. The NVRA requires states to take reasonable steps to clean up its voting rolls and to make documents about its voter list maintenance practices available to anyone who asks.

Judicial Watch had sought the Maryland voter list data after discovering that there were more registered voters in Montgomery County than citizens over the age of 18 who could register.

[….]

The dispute over the voter registration list arose from an April 11, 2017, notice letter sent to Maryland election officials, in which Judicial Watch explained Montgomery County had an impossibly high registration rate. The letter threatened a lawsuit if the problems with Montgomery County’s voter rolls were not fixed. The letter also requested access to Montgomery County voter registration lists in order to evaluate the efficacy of any “programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of Maryland’s official eligible voter lists during the past 2 years.”

Democrat Maryland officials, in response, attacked and smeared Judicial Watch by suggesting it was an agent of Russia.

More here.

Just a reminder!  Maryland is run by the Dems even as it has a Republican (never Trumper!) governor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

4 Things to Know About Trump’s New Voter Fraud Claim

Another Rape in Montgomery County, MD, Sanctuary to Illegals

Trump Administration to Close Loophole Blocking Immigration Enforcement

The New York Times Works for the Left, and Now Everyone Should Know It

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

“Jews who vote democrat have a lack of knowledge or great disloyalty.” — President Donald Trump [Videos]

Posted by Eeyore

This seems like the right time to re-post this important clip from Israeli TV, where a well known and accomplished Israeli intellectual, predicts that Leftist Jews, will bring unto themselves a pogram from the USA for their failure to support President Donald Trump. The only leader in these times who is both willing and capable of supporting the United States as a non-communist polity, as well as a firm defender of the state of Israel.

It is my sincere hope that should this predicted pogrom come to pass, Israel will not allow in the leftist Jews who caused it, just as they would not allow in Tlaib and Omar. In fact, this kind of treason from within is far more dangerous than clear and obvious enemies of both nations, and freedom and individualism itself.

At the end of the day, “I”, not we here at VladTepesBlog, but I myself only, agree with President Trump 100%. I cannot speak for other readers or contributors of this site on this issue. But I stand with president Trump on this 100%.

© All rights reserved.

Baby Killers

Trump Administration mandated that taxpayer-funded family planning clinics immediately stop referring women for abortions, maintain separate finances from facilities that provide abortions, and that both kinds of facilities not be under the same roof.


“Thou shalt not kill.” Exodus 20:13

”…I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live:”Deuteronomy 30:19

Remember good ole boy Johnny Edwards—actually North Carolina Democrat Senator John Edwards (1998-2012), VP candidate in 2004, and presidential candidate in 2008? Edwards is hard to forget because he burst upon the national stage as the golden-tongued lawyer who was famous for defending the rights of the unborn.

According to writer Douglas Johnson in National Review, “in 1985, John Edwards stood before a jury and channeled the words of an unborn baby girl. In his closing argument to the jury, Edwards conveyed what the unborn child, Jennifer Campbell, purportedly had been feeling hour-by-hour as her distress grew.”

“She speaks to you through me,” Edwards told the jury. “And I have to tell you right now—I didn’t plan to talk about this—right now I feel her. I feel her presence. She’s inside me, and she’s talking to you.”

Edwards won that lawsuit and went on to file at least 20 similar lawsuits in the years following, achieving verdicts and settlements of more than $60 million for his clients.

Johnson writes that 13 years after the Jennifer Campbell lawsuit, Edwards was elected to the U.S. Senate from North Carolina, but “…somewhere along the line, John Edwards lost his ability to hear the voices of unborn victims.”

Yep…that’s what happens when the poohbahs of the Democrat Party dictate that anyone who wants “in” to their baby-killer cabal get rid of that empathic feel-for-the-baby stuff and embrace their kill-‘em-in-the-womb mantra. And Mr. Smoothie did just that—became deaf to the pain of in-utero infants and on-board with the baby killers.

MR. PRESCIENT

It is chillingly accurate to say of the former pretty-boy senatornot to mention his affair with Rielle Hunter and the baby girl they had while his wife was dying of breast cancer—that he was a morbid harbinger of his fellow Democrats’ devolution.

While abortion was always their Holy Grail—a virtual litmus test for admittance into the world of their perverse values—even Mr. Edwards and his flexible morality could not have imagined that in January of 2019, the entire Democrat New York State legislature would give a standing ovation to the passage of a law that sanctioned abortion up until the very moment of birth!

That’s right, a law that gave the right to a mother—exhausted by labor and in pain—to decide to snuff out the life of her fully-developed, perfectly intact full-term baby.

Did these Democrats recoil at the very idea of this kind of savagery? Did they weep or wring their hands at the barbarity of it all? Did they stage a protest against the infanticide that is forbidden in both Hebrew and Christian bibles?

No—they stood up and applauded!

Writer Wesley Smith, in Infanticide Makes a Comeback, recalls a recent Senate bill—the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act”—that requires any baby who survives an abortion to be treated with “the same degree of professional skill and care as [would be given] to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.” And the bill also would have outlawed infanticide.

Guess who objected to these eminently reasonable and humane guidelines in February of this year? None other than 44 out of 47 Senate Democrats who blocked the Senate from voting on this bill, including presidential wannabes Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Cory Booker, and Elizabeth Warren!

WHAT THEY KNOW

Since Roe v Wade was passed in January 1973, over 61 million babies have been killed—legally.

To underscore the kind of vibrant lives of each of these babies—even at 12 weeks—and who these “pro-choice” candidates want to continue to snuff out, here is the clearest MRI of a pregnancy every recorded—only 44 seconds:

Every Democrat candidate for president has seen this or a similar film, and is also aware of the following irrefutable fact: Unborn babies feel! This is the conclusion of one of many studies—this one from Heidelberg psychotherapist Ludwig Janus, reported in February of this year.

“Babies in utero are happy…angry….fearful…and they like music,” Janus concluded. By eight weeks, the fetus has developed a sense of touch, by 13 weeks taste, at 17 weeks hearing, at 25 weeks sight, the miracles go on.

But none of this matters to people who think that the inconvenience of an unwanted pregnancy is worthy of infanticide.

And to think—one of these moral paragons wants your vote! Who will they target next—your disabled child, your elderly parent, your beloved pet?

THE PARTY OF DEATH

Clearly dazzled by the beauty of the NY State infanticide law, the governor of Virginia, Ralph Northam—a pediatric neurologist no less!—decided to go one better. Within days of the NY decision, he announced that, in his state, mothers whose babies survived abortion would and should have the right to kill their babies after they’re born.

“If a mother is in labor,” Gov. Northam said, “I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

Disgusted yet? It gets worse.

IN LOVE WITH DEATH

If you had a measured conversation with a Democrat—in strict privacy and away from cell phones, microphones and cameras—and asked if he or she actually liked:

  • High taxes
  • Regulations that require months or years simply to add a room to one’s home
  • A weakened military
  • Billions spent on Sanctuary Cities to afford illegal aliens free housing, food, healthcare, education, on and on

All of them would tell you a resounding NO!

But if you followed up and asked, then how on earth could you vote Democrat? Reflexively, they would answer: ABORTION!

According to Sebastian Gorka, former Deputy Asst. to President Trump, in his recent article “Death and the Democrats”, “our existence as free men and women starts not with the right of association, or a free press, or freedom of conscience, or the right to keep and bear arms. Everything begins with the right to life. But in 2019—the Democrat Party “has quite literally become the political party of death.”

Gorka documents the grisly statistics: “The U.S. abortion industry that Planned Parenthood champions kills at least 600,000 babies in utero each year. For perspective, the 70,000 plus deaths last year from opioid overdoses is deemed to be a national crisis with federal and state programs created to staunch the flow of drugs into our nations and prevent needless loss of life.

“But more than eight times that number are killed as a matter of choice, not addiction or accident, and the Left celebrates it and wants more….the arch-eugenicist Margaret Sanger and Adolf Hitler would be most proud.”

RACIST DEMOCRATS

In fact, writer Patricia McCarthy reminds us that Sanger “founded Planned Parenthood to purposefully dispose of black babies—and the Democrat Party has at last embraced her cause openly and without shame.”

Pro-life advocates remind us that abortions are not only immoral but are racist, in effect decimating the black population.

According to Right to Life of Michigan:

  • More than 19 million black babies have been aborted since 1973
  • Black women have a significantly higher abortion rate than whites and Hispanics.
  • 36.0% of all abortions in the U.S. in 2014 were performed on black women, yet only about

13.3% of the total population is black

And Professor William D. Rubinstein of the University of Wales posits in his stunning article, “Legalized Abortion and the Triumph of Eugenics,” that “the total black population of the United States is about 40 million. Including the children and grandchildren of these 19 million who were never born, it is reasonable to assume that, without legalized abortions, America’s black population would be in the order of 70 million or even more.”

And fake news calls Republicans racist! Typical projection—accusing your competition of what you yourself are guilty of!

THE BANDWAGON EFFECT

The Democrat governors of New York and Virginia are not alone in their cravenly enthusiastic approval of infanticide. According to Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, Wisconsin Democrat Governor Tony Evers (who succeeded pro-life Republican Gov. Scott Walker) “is perfectly okay with…infanticide as long as it’s done neatly and under the watchful eye of a healthcare professional.”

“We have all sorts of issues to deal with in the state of Wisconsin,” Evers told reporters, “and to pass a bill [like born-alive] seems to be not a productive use of time.”

In other words, kill those pesky babies so we can get to the important work of raising your taxes!

Following suit, the state of Rhode Island, led by Governor Gina Raimondo—you guessed it, a Democrat!—just enacted legislation to make abortion legal up to the moment of birth, including partial birth abortions.

And we know that California’s Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom is hunky dory about abortions at any stage, but ever so sanguine about the lives of career murderers. He just abolished the state’s death penalty, effectively sparing the lives of over 700 savage killers on death row.

Not to omit that last May, the Illinois House passed a bill to repeal the ban on “partial-birth” abortions, and the Illinois Senate did them one better by expanding abortions through nine months and requiring insurance companies to provide coverage—and Democrat Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed it in June.

Democrat depravity marches on!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hundreds of Babies are Born Alive After Failed Abortions and Left to Die

Ohio Gov Signs Budget Removing Planned Parenthood Funding, Will Fund Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers Instead

Alyssa Milano Says Her ‘Life Would Be Completely Lacking’ If Not For Her Abortions

CBS Trashes President Trump After He Cuts Planned Parenthood Funding: He Hates Women

Iceland Holds Funeral to Mourn Melting Glacier, Kills 100% of Its Babies With Down Syndrome

EDITORS NOTE: This Canada Free Press column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Congress’s Behavior Police To Register Potential Future Criminals

By KrisAnne Hall.

The TAPS Act is not the solution to gun violence many members of Congress are professing it to be. The unlimited and arbitrary authority this Act bestows upon an unaccountable bureaucracy of 24 people, combined with the language of double-speak and contradictions creating loopholes allowing completely unsupervised and unchecked authority, is reminiscent of the Sedition Act of 1798.

The TAPS Act will create a brand new bureaucracy under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security. A non-elected bureaucrat will be authorized by Congress to appoint 23 other non-elected bureaucrats to “identify individuals who are exhibiting patterns of concerning behavior” and then to “manage” those Americans.

The sole purpose of this bureaucracy of 24 will be to create State and federal behavioral policing body ruling over the perceived behavior of the American people — a KGB-style agency not only monitoring the behavior of Americans, but also functioning as judge, jury, and executioner.

This Act mandates the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a Joint Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management Task Force: a 24 member bureaucracy consisting of one government employee (level GS-15 or above) and 23 people from non-governmental organizations of the Secretary’s choosing. Not a single member of this 24 person bureaucracy will be elected by the people, therefore the people will retain no control whatsoever over the actions or activity of this newly created bureaucracy that will possess, by Congressional consent, an enormous amount of arbitrary and unchecked power over the people (see §4(a)).

The sole purpose of this task force is “identifying individuals who are exhibiting patterns of concerning behavior” and create a power to control those people on a federal and local level (§3(2)). This Act contains no clear definition of “concerning behavior.” As a matter of fact, the Act relies upon the Task Force (24 non-elected bureaucrats) to first define “concerning behavior” and then empower the “monitors” tasked with “identifying individuals” that exhibit that behavior.

According to (§3(2)(a)) no actual criminal act must take place to invoke the power this bureaucracy creates. A Federal or State agent must only believe an individual is “interested” in committing their definition of “concerning behavior” to summon this new and undefined power to action.  The DHS will then be “empowered” to implement these arbitrary rules with no acknowledgement of any of the rights of the people.

To take the legal-eeze off it, this is intended to create a registry of people who may commit crimes at some unspecified and unknown time in the future. This registry will then be used to begin a step-by-step usurpation of their individual rights, from the assumption of innocence and due process to the 1st and 2nd Amendments and more.

Once a State or federal gent has identified an American believed to be interested in some kind of concerning behavior, §3(2)(b) authorizes the bureaucracy to empower these agents to investigate and gather information from multiple sources (sources remain undefined in this Act) on this individual American to find “articulable facts” supporting whether this person is truly exhibiting an “interest” in committing “concerning behavior.”

The 4th Amendment requires the government to obtain a warrant based upon probable cause (not articulable facts), supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the places to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. Under the 4 th Amendment, it is impossible for this Task Force to empower any government agent to do what Congress has authorized it to do. But the Act makes no mention of the 4 th Amendment or the government’s requirement to respect and secure the rights of the people.  According to §3(2)(c) of this Act, after the bureaucracy has compiled its “articulable facts” by circumventing the 4th Amendment’s requirements on government, the bureaucracy is now empower an government agent to “manage” the threat of “concerning behavior.” There is no definition within the Act for the word “manage.” However, the “Powers of the Task Force” are defined in §4(f) as follows:

“Any member of the Task Force may, if authorized by the Task Force, take any action which the Task Force is authorized to take by this section.”

While there are no guidelines created by Congress on how this bureaucracy is supposed to define “manage” or “identify” the behavior of Americans, §2 of the Act establishes that the Task Force will create its own “guidelines and best practices” in order to devise a “national standard” of action.  Therefore, it seems indisputable through §2 and §4(f) that any member of the Task Force can take any action it chooses as long the Task Force will establish the guidelines and practices for such action. The only limit of a government agent and the agency as a whole, rests solely upon the whim of the individual bureaucrat and the bureaucracy to limit itself.  There’s not a lot of history suggesting that would happen.

No Real Congressional Oversight

Congress retains no real authority to check, balance, limit, modify, or control the exercise of power created by this bureaucracy.  The only requirement for this new bureaucracy is to operate as the behavioral police in America and after one year the Secretary (the GS-15 government employee) will submit a report to Congress telling Congress what they have been doing for the past year. The Act then requires DHS to report to Congress once a year every subsequent year on how the guidelines are working, not as a check and balance.

A deceived member of Congress may attempt to assert that the only authority of the bureaucracy is to make “suggestions to Congress” as to what the proper course of action should be. However, that assertion can be seen as pure error by reading §3(2)(c) of this Act.

A deceived member of Congress may believe that this federal bureaucracy will have no power over the State and local police powers. However §8 of this Act establishes that federal grant money will be given to local jurisdictions which will undeniably establish the power for this Bureaucracy to control local and State authorities once they accept that money. So just as with the Department of Education and so many other federal agencies, if the States submit to federal authority, they’ll get the money. Most to all States will. (Surely the American people recognize this sleight of hand by now!)

A deceived Supreme Court, upon legal challenge, will likely fail to recognize this Act to be vague and full of self-defining authority for a non-elected bureaucracy. SCOTUS has long held great deference to federal agencies and their agents to define their own authority and procedures when Congress leaves holes in the laws.

The Constitution delegates no authority to Congress to fund, recommend, or create a behavioral police for the people. The writing of this Act and the Act’s website proves that every co-sponsor of this Bill knows this as fact! First, the Act makes no mention of due process, the rights of the people, nor any reliance upon or limit established by the Constitution of the United States.

Secondly, if you go to the Bill’s website and click on the hyperlink “Constitutional Authority Statement” the link takes you back to a copy of the Bill text, with no statement of authority whatsoever. The Constitution is not what the foundation for this Act, but fear of guns on the left and fear of terrorists on the right.

So, with the passage of this Act, Congress will create a new bureaucracy who will be empowered to create its own guidelines and procedures on how it will operate; and to define, identify, and enforce government control upon its self-defined “concerning behavior” of individuals in America — complete autonomous, arbitrary, self-defined authority resting in the hands of bureaucrats elected by no one, and controlled by no one.

This Act, on its face, violates the 4th , 5th , 6th , and 8th Amendments. But as in every arbitrary law, the whole truth of its offense to the rights of the people cannot be fully known until the law is put into action. If this Act is used as some members of Congress profess, it is highly likely that execution of this Act will violate large swaths of the Constitution — including the 1st , 2nd , 4th , 5th , 6th , 7th , 8th , 9th , and 10th Amendments. Constitution and the rights of the people be damned, the bureaucrats will have their power under the illusion of keeping people safe — always the justification for taking away rights.

Members of Congress are championing this Bill as the “be all and end all” solution to gun violence in America, yet the Bill does not even once mention the words “gun” or “ammunition.” It should be clear now that the TAPS Act is not about gun control at all, it is about people control. It will target any American who voices, types, or indicates a thought toward questioning government policy, people, or power. (See the FBI Memo defining and identifying the “new” standard for domestic terrorist.)

How any politician who professes a knowledge of the Constitution or professes a love for America, her people, and their rights could ever back this insidious piece of legislation is completely beyond my comprehension. And as Patrick Henry said in 1788: “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel.”

It’s time for the American people to hold these pretend patriots suspect and tell them to change their vote or change their vocation.

If any person, including members of Congress would like to discuss this with me, my door is open. My website: KrisAnneHall.com.

ABOUT KRISANNE HALL

KrisAnne Hall is a former biochemist, Russian linguist for the US Army, and former prosecutor for the State of Florida. KrisAnne also practiced First Amendment Law for a prominent Florida non-profit Law firm. KrisAnne now travels the country teaching the foundational principles of Liberty and our Constitutional Republic. KrisAnne is the author of 6 books on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, she also has an internationally popular radio and television show and her books and classes have been featured on C-SPAN TV. KrisAnne can be found at www.KrisAnneHall.com.