Is President Trump’s National Security Team Trustworthy?

President Trump’s recent foray into regime change and nation building in Syria has shaken some of his campaign supporters to the core and rattled their broad-based (almost unconditional) confidence. His Tomahawk attack on Syria represents a 180-degree reversal from his campaign rhetoric criticizing Obama era incursions into unilateral regime change across the Middle East over the past eight years.

On 3 April, 2017… President Trump signed an order departing from Obama era regime change policies in Syria and the Middle East. On 4 April, 2017, Syrian President Assad was accused of dropping chemical weapons on the ISIS stronghold town of Khan Sheikhoun, wherein a reported 74 were killed, including 23 children. On 7 April, 2017, President Trump launched a unilateral missile assault on a Syrian air base from which Assad allegedly launched his chemical assault three-days earlier, destroying an estimated 20% of the planes on the ground and none of the runways.

Both Assad and Russia have denied any involvement in the use of chemical weapons – claiming instead, that Assad dropped conventional weapons in Khan Sheikhoun to take out a chemical weapons cache held by ISIS in that town. By hitting the chemical weapons cache, some chemicals were released into the air locally where those weapons were stockpiled, resulting in the death of 74 in the area.

But the U.S. intelligence community was telling President Trump a very different version of events on the ground in Syria. U.S. Intelligence officers and National Security Advisors had very quickly convinced Trump that Assad had “once again used chemical weapons on his own people.” U.S. Intelligence tends to refer to Assad opposition in Syria as “rebels” or “freedom fighters.” Yet, Syrians on the ground have repeatedly accused the U.S. of funding, arming and supporting ISIS and Al Qaeda since 2013.

It’s no secret that Obama, Clinton, Kerry, McCain and Graham have been toppling foreign governments across the Middle East from Libya and Lebanon to Egypt and beyond, installing the Muslim Brotherhood into power in each incident – or that they likewise, set their sights on deposing Assad in Syria long ago.

It’s also no secret that the war-for-profit (Military Industrial Complex) crowd in the U.S. has been involved in numerous “regime change” operations across the Middle East during the Obama administration, or that this is the group that has been “leaking” intel from inside Trump’s White House, and supplying intel to Trump that resulted in his missile attack in Syria. They are also pushing Trump to put boots on the ground in Syria.

Trump’s policy reversal and unilateral attack on Syria resulted in an immediate and somewhat violent backlash from about half of his voters, who found themselves in social media tussles with the other 50% of Trump loyalists who never separated Trump’s well-intended decision from the quality of intel he was acting on, delivered by the likes of McCain and Graham, both of whom have been anti-Trump from the start.

Not only had Trump’s opponents succeeded in getting Trump to reverse his policy and unilaterally attack Syria without provocation, they were succeeding in dividing Trump loyalists in that process.

Clearly, there are two very different conflicting stories regarding chemical attacks in Syria and who may be responsible for the release of chemical or biological gas in Syria. It’s only a little odd that many Trump supporters supported Trump’s decision to strike Syria, even though the attack was unprovoked and without congressional authorization… But it is very odd that those folks would suddenly trust the very swamp creatures Trump was supposed to drain, and the intel they provided to get Trump to take that action…

Half of Trump supporters oppose Trump’s attack on Syria – not because they no longer believe in Trump, but because they still don’t believe in the swamp creatures providing the intel. The other half support Trump without ever considering the possibility that the same people they didn’t trust before, may now be feeding rotten intel to Trump.

Even as they watch the “leaked” internal conflict between Bannon and neocons surrounding Trump, they just can’t do the math…

So, what’s the truth here? Were chemical weapons used in Syria and if so, by whom?

A few basic facts…

  • During the Obama years, the globalist left has affected regime change in numerous Middle Eastern countries, every one of them resulting in the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood and mass terrorism filling the void. Each of those countries is worse off today than before their dictators were toppled.
  • Obama confirmed that Assad had turned over all chemical and biological weapons to the U.S. in 2014. According to Obama, Assad has no chemical weapons since 2014.
  • The U.S., Russia, Iran, ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hamas and Syria all have boots on the ground in Syria and have had since 2013. The U.S., Iran, ISIS and Al Qaeda are on the same side trying to remove Assad from power. Russia is standing in defense of Assad, fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda in Syria.
  • Assad is the one person in Syria with nothing to gain and everything to lose by using chemical weapons in Syria while the U.S., ISIS and Al Qaeda are working to depose his regime. Assad’s opposition had something to gain…
  • Past intelligence confirms that Hillary Clinton approved the transfer of chemical weapons turned over by Assad, to “rebels” or “ISIS and Al Qaeda”
  • The entire globalist left has been pushing for regime change in Syria for years, led by Obama, Clinton, Kerry, McCain and Graham.
  • There is video evidence showing ISIS and Al Qaeda (Syrian rebels) firing chemical weapons in Aleppo. Of course, this footage is nowhere to be found in the U.S.A. news media, which has also favored Islam and regime change across the Middle East – It has only been reported abroad because the “rebels” in Syria are McCain and Graham’s “freedom fighters.” They are better known by the Syrian people as ISIS and Al Qaeda… as exposed by Democrat House member and former U.S. soldier from Hawaii, Tulsi Gabbard.

(The Syrians) asked me, “Why are the United States and its allies supporting these terror groups which are destroying Syria, when it was al Qaeda that attacked the United States on 9/11, not Syria.’ I didn’t have an answer to them.”

The US government claims it does not fund these groups and only provides assistance to so-called moderate rebels. However, Gabbard said the Syrians she met with told her that there are no moderate rebels in the country. “Let the Syrian people themselves determine their future, not the United States, not some foreign country,” Gabbard said.”

It is this public first-hand testimony from Gabbard that has resulted in her fellow democrats calling for her removal from office

Who is Lt. General McMasters?

The adviser, Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, told the staff of the National Security Council on Thursday, in his first “all hands” staff meeting, that the label “radical Islamic terrorism” was not helpful because terrorists are “un-Islamic,” according to people who were in the meeting.

Could Trump’s 180-degree reversal on Syria have anything to do with the pro-Islam advice he is now receiving from McMasters? What is McMasters association with Obama era advisors, or McCain and Graham? Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, why does McMasters defend the brutal nature of Islam taken directly from the Quran?

As reported by Rick Wells, Lou Dobbs is the only newsman in America asking the right questions. PolitiFact points out that Trump’s new policy in Syria is nothing more than Obama’s old policy for the entire Middle East. It should shock no one that the “gang of eight” and the leftist media is finally all behind Trump, as they push him into unilateral military action against a sovereign state, just as Obama had done in several other foreign countries.

Meanwhile, McCain and Co. are busy stripping Trump’s budget of any funds for “the wall” Trump promised to build, as they continue to side with the importing of jihadists via refugee resettlement and open the borders to all comers, including drug cartels and violent gangs like. And… the only man truly loyal to Trump in the White House, Bannon, is on his way out!

Clearly, Trump is losing the battle for leadership in America to his opponents in the ongoing showdown with Soros NGOs and globalists on both sides of the political aisle.

mccain graham

U.S. Senators McCain, Graham and Blumenthal giving an honorary service award to Abdel Hakim Belhadj.

This is a picture of U.S. Senators McCain, Graham and Blumenthal giving an honorary service award to Abdel Hakim Belhadj — the former head of the al Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and a major player in the U.S. – backed overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi, has reportedly joined the Islamic State and is leading its forces there.

On 20 December, 2016 – I asked “Will we really drain the swamp?” and offered three very basic high-priority items Trump would have to address immediately, or he would be consumed by the swamp. Trump did not do any of those three things and today, he finds himself rapidly sinking in the quicksand, surrounded by swamp creatures advising his demise.

Can Trump still clutch victory from the jaws of defeat?

Yes, he can… But will he? Unfortunately, with each passing day, it becomes less and less likely as he grows ever more influenced by and dependent upon the “expert advice” of his adversaries.

Every time you see McCain, Graham or the main stream media backing Trump, you know that Trump is doing something wrong. Sadly, too many Americans exist in an echo chamber void of any facts or truths. Even more unfortunate is the fact that they like it that way…

I have repeatedly warned that “the people” would have to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Trump or Trump would be eaten alive in that swamp. Is Trump failing the people? Or did the people fail Trump?

RELATED ARTICLE: FBI agent “didn’t try to stop” Garland jihad attackers — did FBI want Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer dead?

Why Black Families Are Rejecting Public Schools by Annie Holmquist

Because of their long-fought battle for equal access to education, it is generally assumed that black families are big fans of public schooling.

That assumption, however, is beginning to show its datedness, as evidenced by the research of University of Georgia College of Education professor Cheryl Fields-Smith. In a recent interview with The 74, Dr. Fields-Smith suggested that black families are abandoning public schools because said schools exhibit:

1. A hyper-focus on race

According to Dr. Fields-Smith, pioneering black homeschoolers were not always interested in having their children integrate the public schools. Today’s black homeschoolers see a different problem. They are choosing to bring their children home because schools have resegregated, and they don’t want them to have such a black-centric view of the world.

2. Safety issues

As with many other homeschoolers, one of the big motivations for black families to homeschool revolves around instances of violence in school. But black parents are also concerned that classroom stereotyping will negatively affect their children:

“One of the predominant themes was a sense of wanting to protect their children from being labeled a troublemaker, or suggestions that they should be in special ed, or even [schools not] acknowledging the intellect of their child because they are so focused on the behavior.”

3. A narrow vision of diversity

Although public schools pride themselves on embracing diversity and emphasizing the history of minorities, black families feel their children need a broader vision than the one currently fed to them:

“I know I had to supplement that with my kids, had to make sure that they knew their black history, because it’s not really being taught in public school. We get one month, and usually it harps on the same people. We have a very rich legacy of contributing to this country, and more than just in entertainment and sports.

4. Poor education

As Dr. Fields-Smith explains, public schools offer a “basic education” to every child. Homeschoolers, however, are able to help their children rise above the label of average. Evidence of this was revealed in a 2015 report by Dr. Brian Ray, who found that homeschooled black children register in a percentile above the national average and far above their black public school peers:

Dr. Fields-Smith goes on to say:

“My families expressed empathy for the public schools; they want the public schools to succeed. It’s just that their particular children weren’t thriving in that environment.”

Is it possible that such a sentiment could be expressed by more than just black families? Have the public schools lost their savor to the American public because they can no longer offer an environment in which children of all ages, races, and abilities can thrive?

Republished from Intellectual Takeout.

Annie Holmquist

Annie Holmquist

Annie is a research associate with Intellectual Takeout. In her role, she writes for the blog, conducts a variety of research for the organization’s websites and social media pages, and assists with development projects. She particularly loves digging into the historical aspects of America’s educational structure.

RELATED ARTICLE: How Political Correctness Holds African-Americans Back

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer right about Syria, Sarin Gas and the Nazis

Daily we are bombarded with fake news. The latest is about what White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said about the use of sarin gas in Syria and the Nazis. You would think that by now the fakestream media would know about Google search and the internet.

While Hitler did use Zyklon B, a cyanide-based pesticide invented in Germany in the early 1920s, to kill millions of Jews and other enemies of the Nazis, he did not use Sarin gas during the war.

But there is a connection between Assad’s Ba’ath party and the Nazis.

al-AssadGeorge Kerevan in an article titled The Syrian-Iraqi Baath party and its Nazi beginnings reported:

In Arabic, baath means renaissance or resurrection. The Baath Arab Socialist Party, to give the organisation its formal title, is the original secular Arab nationalist movement, founded in Damascus in the 1940s to combat Western colonial rule. But since then, the Baath Party has undergone many chameleon-like twists in belief and purpose. Even the young men in Iraq who today claim its discredited banner might be surprised at the party’s real origins.

[ … ]

But the rise of German fascism also played a role. Many in the Arab world saw Hitler as an ally. In 1941, the Arab world was electrified by a pro-Axis coup in Baghdad. At that time, Iraq was nominally independent but Britain maintained a strong military presence. An Arab nationalist by the name of Rashid Ali al-Kailani organised an army coup against the pro-British Iraqi monarchy and requested help from Nazi Germany. In Damascus, then a Vichy French colony, the Baath Party founders immediately organised public demonstrations in support of Rashid Ali.

[ … ]

Like the Nazi and Communist parties, the Baath is organised through small cells in a rigid hierarchy. [Emphasis added]

Read more…

Like Zyklon B, Sarin gas was created by a German. The Times of Israel reported on April 8th that sarin gas was discovered in Nazi Germany and was the chemical agent was used by Saddam Hussein’s regime to gas thousands of Kurds in 1988.  The Times of Israel stated:

Originally conceived as a pesticide, sarin was used by Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s regime to gas thousands of Kurds in the northern town of Halabja in 1988.

[ … ]

“Sarin is 26 times more deadly than cyanide gas. Just a pinprick-sized droplet will kill a human,” according to the World Health Organization.

[ … ]

The name sarin comes from the [German] chemists who discovered it by chance: Schrader, Ambros, Ruediger et Van der Linde. The scientists had been trying to create stronger pesticides but the formula was then taken up by the Nazi military for chemical weapons.

adolf hitler

Adolf Hitler

In a column titled Hitler refused to use sarin during WWII. The mystery is why. by Washington Post reporter Michael S. Rosenwald notes:

Adolf Hitler gassed and killed 6 million Jews during World War II — a genocide that makes his reluctance to use sarin against his military adversaries an enduring mystery.

[ … ]

White House press secretary Sean Spicer on April 11 said Adolf Hitler didn’t use chemical weapons during World War II. Hitler’s regime exterminated millions of Jews in gas chambers. (Reuters)

And it wasn’t because Hitler didn’t have sarin. A German scientist had stumbled onto sarin while experimenting with compounds in an attempt to kill beetles. The German military built a sarin factory in 1943. Officers pleaded with Hitler to use it.

He didn’t.

Why?

Over the years, historians (armchair and scholarly) and psychologists have speculated that maybe Hitler didn’t use sarin because he was a victim of a mustard gas attack in 1918, during World War I, and knew the misery of such weapons.

“He and several comrades, retreating from their dug-out during a gas attack, were partially blinded by the gas and found their way to safety only by clinging on to each other and following a comrade who was slightly less badly afflicted,” Ian Kershaw wrote in his critically acclaimed Hitler biography.

Read more…

It is also important to note that the United States and Great Britain planned on using mustard gas during WWII. According to Rense.com:

Both the USA and Great Britain planned and meant to use gas during WWII. Germany as a consequence of the Versailles dictate of 1919, was forbidden to produce and import any kind of gas or liquids that could be used to produce such gasses, Article 171.

The Reich kept strictly to the requirement of the Versailles dictate regarding chemical warfare equipment. Even the Weimar Republic kept to the dictate. During the Sea Disarmament Conference, 1921/22, in Washington, the following nations did not agree to gas or any chemical weapons being dangerous weapons: USA, England, France, Japan and Italy. The use of chemical weapons were discussed, but without an agreement being signed.

In June 1925 in Geneva the question was once again discussed, one reached the so-called Geneva Gas-War Protocol. Out of the 44 nations attending the Geneva conference 38 had, by the end of 1935, signed the protocol. 21 nations took reservation, 17 were reluctant. By the end of 1935, 28 nations had ratified the convention. But 10 refused, among those were USA, Japan, Czechoslovakia, Luxemburg, and various nations in South America. The Reich signed without any reservations.

Read more…

RELATED ARTICLE: Nazi poison gas: Gas, Gas, Already yet! FAEM April 1995

A 1,389 Year-Old ‘Phobia’? by Raymond Ibrahim

A direct correlation exists between Western ignorance of history and Western ignorance of Islam’s “troublesome” doctrines. It is this connection that allows Islam’s apologists to get away with so many distortions and outright lies meant to shield Islam.

Take Reza Aslan, CNN’s resident “cannibal”: he recently claimed that “Islamophobia” — defined by CAIR and others as “unfounded fear of and hostility towards Islam” — was created by a few “clowns” in 2014.

To be sure, Western fear of Islam is something of a recent phenomenon in modern times. Because the world was a much bigger place a few decades ago, and Islam was oceans away, the average American hardly knew anything about Muhammad’s creed. However, as the world has become smaller — as Muslims have grown in numbers in Western societies, as modern technology has made it possible for the weaker to terrorize the stronger, and then broadcast it for the world to see (via Internet) — so has the Western world been hearing, seeing, and experiencing more and more of Islam.

But Aslan’s lament is not that people were once ignorant but now are wise to Islam. Rather, he accuses a number of writers and activists — the aforementioned “clowns” — of manufacturing a menacing image of Islam, which, in turn, has prompted Western people to develop an “unfounded fear of and hostility towards Islam” — or, in a word, “Islamophobia.”

Such a claim relies on an obscene amount of historical ignorance. The fact is, Western peoples, including some of their luminaries, have portrayed Islam as a hostile and violent force from the very start — often in terms that would make today’s “Islamophobe” blush. And that wasn’t because Europeans were “recasting the other” to “validate their imperial aspirations” (to use the tired terminology of Edward Said that has long dominated academia’s treatment of Western-Muslim interactions). Rather, it was because, from the very start, Islam treated the “infidel” the same way ISIS treats the infidel: atrociously.

According to Muslim history, in 628, Muhammad summoned the Roman (or “Byzantine”) emperor, Heraclius — the symbolic head of “the West,” then known as “Christendom” — to submit to Islam; when the emperor refused, a virulent jihad was unleashed against the Western world. Less than 100 years later, Islam had conquered more than two-thirds of Christendom, and was raiding deep into France. While these far-reaching conquests are often allotted a sentence, if that, in today’s textbooks, the chroniclers of the time, including Muslim ones, make clear that these were cataclysmic events that had a traumatic effect on, and played no small part in forming, the unconquered portion of Christendom, which became Europe proper. As Ibn Khaldun famously put it after describing incessant Muslim raids for booty and slaves all along Europe’s Mediterranean coasts during the ninth and tenth centuries, “the Christians could no longer float a plank on the sea.” They took to the inlands, and the Dark Ages began.

But it wasn’t just what they personally experienced at the hands of Muslims that developed this ancient “phobia” to Islam. As far back as the eighth century, Islam’s scriptures and histories — the Koran, hadith, sira and maghazi literature — became available to those Christian communities living adjacent to, or even under the authority of, the caliphates. Based solely on these primary sources of Islam, Christians concluded that Muhammad was a (possibly demon possessed) false prophet who had very obviously concocted a creed to justify the worst depravities of man — for dominion, plunder, cruelty and carnality. This view prevailed for well over a millennium all over Europe (and till this day among “Islamophobes”); and it was augmented by the fact that Muslims were still, well over a millennium, invading Christian territories, plundering them, and abducting their women and children. The United States’ first brush with Islam — the early nineteenth century Barbary Wars — came by way of Muslim raids on American ships for booty and slaves in the name of Allah.

Here is a minuscule sampling of what Europeans thought of Islam throughout the centuries:

Theophanes, the Byzantine chronicler (d.818):

He [Muhammad] taught those who gave ear to him that the one slaying the enemy — or being slain by the enemy — entered into paradise [see Koran 9:111]. And he said paradise was carnal and sensual — orgies of eating, drinking, and women. Also, there was a river of wine … and the women were of another sort, and the duration of sex greatly prolonged and its pleasure long-enduring [e.g., Koran 56: 7-40, 78:31, 55:70-77]. And all sorts of other nonsense.

Thomas Aquinas, one of Christendom’s most influential philosophers (d. 1274):

He [Muhammad] seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh urges us …. and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine…. Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms — which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants [i.e., his “proof” that God was with him is that he was able to conquer and plunder others]….  Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms.

Marco Polo, world famous traveler (d. 1324):

According to their [Muslims’] doctrine, whatever is stolen or plundered from others of a different faith, is properly taken, and the theft is no crime; whilst those who suffer death or injury by the hands of Christians, are considered as martyrs. If, therefore, they were not prohibited and restrained by the [Mongol] powers who now govern them, they would commit many outrages. These principles are common to all Saracens.

When the Mongol Khan later discovered the depraved criminality of Achmath (or Ahmed), one of his Muslim governors, Polo writes that that the Khan’s

attention [went] to the doctrines of the Sect of the Saracens [i.e., Islam], which excuse every crime, yea, even murder itself, when committed on such as are not of their religion. And seeing that this doctrine had led the accursed Achmath and his sons to act as they did without any sense of guilt, the Khan was led to entertain the greatest disgust and abomination for it. So he summoned the Saracens and prohibited their doing many things which their religion enjoined.

Alexis de Tocqueville, French political thinker and philosopher, best known for Democracy in America (d. 1859):

I studied the Quran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.

Winston Churchill, a leader of the Allied war effort against Hitler during WWII (d. 1965):

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism [Islam] lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.  The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.  A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.  The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Lest it seem that these and other historic charges against Islam are simply products of Christian/Western xenophobia that cannot tolerate the “other,” it should be noted that many of Islam’s Western critics regularly praised other non-Muslim civilizations, as well as what is called today “moderate Muslims.”   Thus Marco Polo hailed the Brahmins of India as being “most honorable,” possessing a “hatred for cheating or of taking the goods of other persons.” And despite his criticisms of the “sect of the Saracens,” that is, Islam, he referred to one Muslim leader as governing “with justice,” and another who “showed himself [to be] a very good lord, and made himself beloved by everybody.”

Winston Churchill summed up the matter as follows: “Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities — but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

Apologists such as Reza Aslan can say whatever they want; they can claim that Islam is forever and perpetually “misunderstood,” and can bank on Western ignorance of its own history to get away with it. But fear and dislike of Islam has been the mainstream position among Christian/Western people for nearly 1,400 years — ever since Muhammad started raiding, plundering, massacring, and enslaving non-Muslims (“infidels”) in the name of his god; and it is because his followers, Muslims, continue raiding, plundering, massacring, and enslaving “infidels” that fear and dislike of Islam — what is called “Islamophobia” — exists to this day.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Egypt: Muslim man sexually harasses, cuts throat of Christian woman on busy street

Hugh Fitzgerald: Prester John in the Forbidden City?

Mormon Boy Scout troop being used to promote MORE refugees

It is really pretty shameful to use Boy Scouts who couldn’t possibly understand the complexity of the US Refugee Admissions Program to be shilling for a resettlement contractor paid by the head to place refugees in communities like Twin Falls just so local businesses can take advantage of taxpayer-supported cheap/captive labor that refugees represent.

boy scoutsHere is the latest from Leo Hohmann at WND.  Be sure to see previous posts of mine about how the Mormon church is getting in to the refugee seeding process. LOL! I think they are angling to become VOLAG number ten!

One week after three refugee boys from Sudan and Iraq pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 5-year-old girl in Twin Falls, Idaho, the city council has voted unanimously to lay out the welcome mat for more refugees.

The council voted 7-0 to direct the city staff to draft a resolution declaring Twin Falls a “welcoming city” after hearing a pitch from local Boy Scout Troop 4, which is sponsored by the Mormon Church.

The Latter Day Saints Church sponsors a scouting troop that is involved in an Eagle Scout project to help refugees being resettled in the area by the College of Southern Idaho.

About 12 scouts and their parents showed up to promote the CSI Refugee Center and its continued resettlement of refugees from Sudan, Iraq and other parts of the world.

But not all residents were for the idea of making Twin Falls a “welcoming city.”

“By putting people into different categories instead of all residents, we’re setting aside a precedent that we’re all created equal with equal rights,” local property owner Terry Edwards told the council. “It’s surprising to me that we have a Scout troop here that are in favor of the refugee center, and I don’t know that they know a whole lot about it.”

[…..]

On Monday, LDS parents and relatives of the Boy Scout troop filled the council’s meeting chambers, along with a leader of the Idaho Dairymen’s Association, local doctors, teachers and attorneys who all spoke in favor of more refugees. [Big Milk (big yogurt!) wants the cheap labor!—ed]

The LDS community has been supportive of refugee resettlement in Utah and Idaho, offering volunteers and financial donations to the resettlement agencies.

Please read on, there is much more.

Click here for our huge archive on Twin Falls.

The clock is ticking for Turkish secularization and EU membership

BRUSSELS, Belgium /PRNewswire/ — European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center – a think tank specializing in collecting and analyzing sources of intelligence in the areas of security, geopolitics and economy – has published an article on the upcoming, and highly controversial, Turkish constitutional referendum.

The proposed concentration of powers in the presidential office would entail shifting the “civilizational vector” back from the system set up by the creator of modern Turkey Kemal Atatürk. This destabilizing move can potentially undermine national stability and might even trigger a popular revolt, yet those in Turkey who predict this possibility are being either silenced or demonized by linking them to terrorist groups and the Gülenists, note the authors. They also add that among the reasons for Erdogan’s urgency on the matter of constitutional changes is the increasing number of serious problems brewing in the Turkish economy. It is vitally important for the president to broaden his mandate before the plummeting social and economic standards start to seriously erode his support basis in the country, possibly leading to dissent and civil unrest.

“The frail veneer of democracy of the Turkish leadership, contradicted by the authoritarian positions and the massive propaganda campaign in favor of passing the referendum, proves that the EU should not accept a positive outcome of the referendum as to do so would entail an implicit acceptance of the authoritarian shift in the country and of the repression of dissidents in the Turkish society,” – conclude Genovefa Etienne and Claude Moniquet of the ESISC.


turkey erdigonThe clock is ticking for Turkish secularization and EU membership

Turkey is heading towards a controversial referendum on constitutional changes that will concentrate powers in the office of Presidency. If passed, the reform would lead to an authoritarian shift in the country that would sweep away the Kemalist Revolution and strain the relationships with the EU and NATO in a heartbeat.

On Sunday, April 16 2017, Turkish citizens will vote on the highly debated constitutional referendum sponsored by the Justice and Development Party (AKP) of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and of Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım with the support of the opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) chaired by Devlet Bahçeli. The voters will decide on a set of eighteen amendments to the Constitution of Turkey, aiming to transform the current presidential system into a presidential system.

The proposal for constitutional reform has been on the table of negotiations from 2011, and became a core point of AKP electoral programme in the 2015 general elections in June and November. In October 2015, the majority impasse in the Parliament was overcome as the MHP, traditionally hostile to an executive presidency, decided to cooperate in drafting and passing the reform. In May 2016, current prime minister Yildirim succeeded to his predecessor Ahmet Davutoğlu, who allegedly resigned due to clashing views with the President on the change of the form of government. In a vote held in January 2017,  the Parliament consented to submit the reform of the constitution to the popular vote.

The reform has raised concerns in the Turkish civil society and in the European Union because the envisaged measures would lead to a concentration of powers in the hands of the Presidential figure. Since the President would be elected by a popular vote and since the office of the Prime Minister would be eliminated in favour of the creation of two or three vice-Presidencies, the president would de facto become the head of the state and of the government. Furthermore, the Presidential office would gain the command of the armed forces and of the national security services, the right to settle budgets, to appoint and dismiss ministers and judges of the Supreme Court and to issue decrees in some legislative areas. Last but not least, whereas today the President is obliged to take a neutral stance, in case of a “Yes” victory the Presidency would be allowed to have a clear-cut political affiliation.

It is an open secret that President Erdoğan has been willing to secure his grip on power for a very long time. However, the urgency of the referendum is influenced by the severe plummeting of social and economic standards in the country. The rising unemployment rate, the high inflation and external debt and the recent downgrading of Turkey’s international rating are leading to an economic crisis and are eroding the President’s popular support basis. Therefore, it is vitally important for the current leadership of the country to broaden its mandate in order to avoid ousting in case the economic crisis leads to unrest and rebellion.

Nevertheless, Turkish civil society would have to pay a high price to let President Erdoğan hold power until potentially 2029 on the levels of national concern and of the country’s international relations.

From the internal point of view, the constitutional reform promoted by the AKP and the MHP would indeed dismantle the secularization of the country implemented by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in the beginning of last century to create an authoritarian state of Islamist orientation. But since the Kemalist Revolution is still cherished by the Turkish citizens and since Atatürk is still considered the father of the modern Turkish country, any attempt of interfering with this system seriously undermines the national stability and might trigger popular revolt. This is confirmed by the high mobilization of the opposition forces supporting the “No”, which gather around the slogan “For Our Future”, and by the electoral polls showing that the two opposite outcomes are neck and neck only one week ahead of the vote – circumstance that raises the spectrum of electoral frauds.

The liberal and pro-democracy strata of the society are struggling to win this battle as the current leadership is implementing an overwhelming propaganda operation of stigmatisation of the “No” supported by conducting an attentive stick and carrot policy. Although President Erdoğan has conceded an appearance in a rally supporting the “No”, the government and the AKP officials are indeed hammering a demonization campaign against any opposition by linking them to terrorist groups such as ISIS, the PKK and and the Gülenists, i.e. the followers of the cleric exiled in the US who stands accused of staging the July putsch. Voices of intestine dissent are equally silenced: the provincial AKP deputy Ozan Erdem was forced to resign after he declared that the country would face civil war if the constitutional changes were defeated in the vote.

From the external point of view, instead, the referendum is worsening the relationship with the EU with some of its member countries. As a “yes” victory would entail the shift of the “civilizational vector” of the society, the consequent loss of rights and freedoms would strike a fatal blow to Turkish EU membership, already lying in a state of permanent freezing. This would entail drastic consequences for the pro-European strata of the Turkish society, which tend to be the most educated and economically active, and which do not wish a departure from the EU and its values.

The European Union has taken stance on the side of democracy against holding the vote in the current state of emergency, lasting from last July’s coup d’état, and warned Turkey against the disruptive potential of the referendum outcome.

In the statement by the High Representative Federica Mogherini and Commissioner Johannes Hahn, the EU argued indeed that “the proposed Constitutional amendments raise serious concerns at the excessive concentration of powers in one office, with serious effect on the necessary checks and balances and on the independence of the judiciary. It is also of concern that this process of constitutional change is taking place under the state of emergency”. Moreover, the representatives of the EU Commission declared that “the proposed amendments, if approved at the referendum of 16 April, and especially their practical implementation, will be assessed in light of Turkey’s obligations as an EU candidate country and as a member of the Council of Europe”.

In addition to that, the Turkish government has triggered clashes and diplomatic crises with several EU countries, notably Netherlands few days ahead of the elections and Germany, by qualifying them as “Nazis” because they would not allow Turkish ministers to campaign for the “Yes” among Turkish communities living within their borders. If the constitutional reform will be approved this Sunday, it is likely that relations will become even further strained.

The frail veneer of democracy of the Turkish leadership, contradicted by the authoritarian positions and the massive propaganda campaign in favor of passing the referendum, proves that the EU should not accept a positive outcome of the referendum as to do so would entail an implicit acceptance of the authoritarian shift in the country and of the repression of dissidents in the Turkish society. These consequences would contradict the values of democracy promoted not only by the EU, but also by NATO. Therefore, although cooperation with Turkey is useful with regard to the regulation of the refugees’ flow to Europe and to military cooperation, in case of approval of the constitutional changes both EU and NATO should reassess the need for allied relations with a country which is more and more revolving around an authoritarian leader.

 

Will you share this with just one person?

We are VERY close to reaching the 1.5 million signature goal on the Target boycott. Your help is critical as we approach the one-year anniversary since we launched the boycott.

At the time I send you this email, 1,484,630 people have pledged to boycott Target until it reverses its dangerous policy of allowing men into women’s restrooms and dressing rooms. You can see the very latest count here. Once we reach 1.5 million, I will personally deliver the signatures to Target’s headquarters in Minneapolis, MN.

Just how dangerous is Target’s policy to its customers? Just last month, a man was allowed inside a Tennessee Target store dressing room without any restriction at all.

According to the police report, “the suspect had been in and out of the dressing room for over an hour before he was caught taking photographs of the victim. I [the officer] observed around 5 or 6 other women enter the dressing room during this time, with each time the suspect entering the dressing room and exiting a short time after the females leave.”

Help us reach the 1.5 million signature mark.

Please, please….forward this email to just ONE FRIEND who you think should know that Target allows men in women’s restrooms and dressing rooms. Forwarding it to just one friend will help us reach our goal of 1.5 million pledges.

When you forward it, please consider changing the subject line to a personal note from you. Here are a few samples:

  • Have you heard about what happened at Target?
  • I’m boycotting Target…and you should too!
  • Target is not a safe place for women and children.

Secondly, reach more friends by sharing this on your Facebook page.

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

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

Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association

RELATED ARTICLE: The Target boycott cost more than anyone expected — and the CEO was blindsided

Poland’s Semi-Authoritarian Slide Is a Wake Up Call for Europe by Katarzyna Szczypska

polandIn the fall of 2015, the Polish political arena was shaken by the overwhelming victory of the socially conservative and nationalist Law and Justice Party (PiS). The party has subsequently embarked on dismantling democracy through media control, limits on civil liberties, and paralyzing judicial independence. Poland, once an unquestionable success story in the former Eastern Bloc, is altering its democratic trajectory and threatening its hard-won achievements. If the situation in Poland continues to be ignored, this dangerous dynamic might soon spread to other European capitals, securing PiS-like parties in mainstream politics.

Started at the Bottom … Now Back at the Bottom

Initially a poor Soviet satellite, Poland became one of Europe’s most dynamic economies. Unlike its formerly communist neighbors, Poland underwent the so-called “shock therapy,” a rapid transition from a centrally planned economy to a market-oriented one. In late 1989, many voiced concerns that the “patient” could “die” as a result of taking such a radical path. But the patient not only survived, it prospered, making Poland the poster child for both adopting democratic norms and embracing capitalism. Formerly an example to follow, Poland is now undergoing another surgery.For almost two decades, Polish political elections looked like a rollercoaster – the government leadership switched party hands after every four-year term. The system finally stabilized with the victory of the classically liberal Civic Platform Party (PO), securing a re-election for a second term of office. Ultimately, however, the party abandoned its initial drive for reforms and embraced an unambitious agenda aimed only at prolonging time in office, which was dubbed “the politics of warm water in the taps.” For years, many predicted that the main PO opponent, PiS, would never rule again. Yet the ongoing sense of PO’s exhaustion and stagnation, with its ministers spending most of their time on crisis management, enabled PiS’s comeback.

Modern Authoritarianism

Since it came to power in 2015, the new Polish government has taken greater control over the state-owned media. Although there was no clear separation between media and the government before PiS’s victory, after they came to power, any previous autonomy the Polish media enjoyed quickly eroded. Besides appointing loyalist media management boards and meddling with free speech protections, the government has increased the scale of censorship in state-owned radio and TV channels.

First, the PiS is using the media to promote its socially conservative, highly religious, and nationalist agenda. Masses from churches are widely broadcast and TV channels refrain from showing movies that could “harm Poland’s reputation,” even if the stories are historically true. This was clear in the authorities’ outrageous attack on the Oscar-winning film Ida for apparently not emphasizing the role of non-Jewish Poles in rescuing Jews from the Nazis. The PiS argued that the movie content might corrupt the minds of those who encounter it. In truth, it is better understood as a suppression of the Poles’ right to think for themselves.

Moreover, the PiS also manipulates the impartiality of the judiciary, leading to the paralysis of the country’s highest court, the Constitutional Court. The Polish Constitutional Court crisis, during which six so-called “repair bills” were passed without providing any tangible relief for the situation, led to wide protests throughout Poland, as well as a condemnation by the European Union and other international institutions.What is currently going on in Poland is something which the country had not seen since the legendary resistance movement Solidarity in the 1980s. The crises over the Constitutional Tribunal led to the establishment of the Committee for the Defense of Democracy (KOD). This grassroots movement organized a great number of protests all over Poland. Right now, protesters regularly occupy every major city in the country. Moreover, the fight against the PiS’s actions escalated inside the parliament itself. In December 2016, a group of opposition representatives occupied the rostrum in the plenary chamber for a month, which PiS leaders later described, quite dramatically, as an “attempted coup.”

What widely escapes the public notice is the fact that the recent Polish case is harmful both for the country itself and for the rest of Europe. This deeply rooted Polish populism is likely to provide momentum for similar tendencies in other European countries. Therefore, as journalist Remi Adekoya indicates, if the Polish case is ignored, this dangerous dynamic might soon wake up in other European capitals, securing PiS-like parties in mainstream positions. The situation in Poland should be closely monitored. As Adekoya argues, ignoring reality has never made it go away, but rather led to a growing number of people that became more willing to tolerate semi-authoritarian tendencies.

Katarzyna Szczypska

Katarzyna Szczypska is originally from Poland. She now works in a think tank in Washington D.C., dealing with the transformation processes in Eastern Europe.

We are deporting Somalis — 4,000 are in the pipeline!

Although, much to my dismay, the Trump Administration is continuing to admit refugees (including hundreds of Somalis), I’m happy to see news like this about illegal alien Somalis being found and deported to Somalia.

For years we didn’t send Somalis back even when they committed one crime after another, but at least this portion of the Trump agenda is being carried out.

(BTW, the theory about not sending illegal migrants, even criminals, back to hellhole countries has been that it is too cruel for them and they will be in danger there.)

From the Voice of America:

Obama with Somali Ambassador to US in June 2016.

Somalia’s U.S. ambassador says his embassy has learned that U.S. immigration agents are planning to deport about 4,000 Somali nationals now living in the United States.

“We learned through immigration sources that the total number of the Somalis that are in the books of [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] to be removed are close to 4,000,” Ahmed Isse Awad told VOA’s Somali service Saturday. “Most of them are not in detention centers.”  [Good luck finding them! They are probably on the way to Canada!—ed]

Since Somalia’s embassy in Washington reopened in November 2015, the ambassador said, about 170 Somali immigrants who either ran afoul of U.S. law or had their asylum applications rejected have been deported to Mogadishu, the Somali capital.

Most of those previously deported had applied for but been denied political asylum in the U.S., he added. Another group of Somali applicants whose requests for asylum have been denied are now in detention centers or prisons, awaiting deportation.

Is Virginia a magnet for criminal aliens?

ICE agents recently arrested 82 people from 26 nations during a five-day operation in and around the U.S. capital.

According to a statement from ICE, 68 of those detained March 26-30 had previous criminal convictions, for crimes including armed robbery, larceny and drug offenses. All but three were arrested in the state of Virginia.

Be sure to see the whole story.  VOA reports on one Somali deported in the past who simply returned with a new name.  He has been here for decades.  How many more like him are out there?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Jeff Sessions Delivers Sweeping Reforms to Protect the Border and U.S. Citizens

Australian Christians told not to wear cross after Muslims attack man wearing crucifix, yelling ‘F*ck Jesus’

On Abundance

Allegory of the Eucharist by Alexander Coosemans, c. 1680 Musée de Tessé, Le Mans

The dominant contemporary “feeling” is that we live in a parsimonious world. Nature is running out of gas. Natural resources are scandalously being “used up,” never to be replaced. Besides, too many people exist on the planet, consuming everything in sight. Species of birds and bugs die out. “Consumerism” knows no bounds to desires. The great enemy of mankind is man himself. He is out of control. Survival prospects for even a small number of gaunt human being are grim. We must act now, decisively, before it is too late.

This doomsday scenario is found in schools, media, governments, churches, and businesses. In the minds of its advocates, its validity is stronger than any faith. To question its tenets approaches blasphemy. Mother Earth is finally unveiled as a cruel goddess. Many find meaning in this collective panic over presumed decreasing resources. It provides an urgent mission. We can now venture forth in a mighty cause to save the world from itself. Evil is now defined not by sins, but by our greedy use of spare resources. Governments are empowered with the welcome task of controlling man by drastically limiting the goods needed for his long-term survival down the planetary ages.

Is there an alternative vision? Why doesn’t the evidence incline us to look at the world’s extraordinary abundance? How is it possible that already so much was available to us for so long? The word “abundance” means overflow, plenty. It comes from the Latin word for wave (unda). When a wave crashes over itself, the sea is filled, full, surging with overflowing waters. The more puzzling thing about the world is not that it contains too little for its purposes, but, astonishingly, way too much, as if it had another purpose in mind.

The initial question is not: “How many resources do we have?” But, “Do we have sufficient and more than sufficient resources for the purpose of our existence on this earth?”

Calculations about what might be needed and what is given have little direct relation to the reason why man exists on this planet. No reason can be found to think that, when man ends his stay on this planet, resources to support him will have run out at the same time

Click here to read the rest of Father Schall’s column . . .

James V. Schall, S.J.

About James V. Schall, S.J.

James V. Schall, S.J., who served as a professor at Georgetown University for thirty-five years, is one of the most prolific Catholic writers in America. Among his recent books are The Mind That Is Catholic, The Modern Age, Political Philosophy and Revelation: A Catholic Reading, Reasonable Pleasures, and, new from St. Augustine’s Press, Docilitas: On Teaching and Being Taught.

A Response to Media Biases Against Restoring Checks and Balances

NOTE: Several liberal Florida newspaper columnists responded without research or thought to Rep. Julio Gonzalez’s proposal to create judicial accountability and restore governmental balance of powers. They were predictably snide and shallow. Some were just factually wrong. Here is Gonzalez’s response to one specific column— which they could have had if any had even called him for an interview.

By Representative Julio Gonzalez

This morning, I awoke to the displeasure of reading Tom Lyons’s Sarasota Herald-Tribune piece on my proposal for a legislative override of a judicial opinion, otherwise known as a Notwithstanding Clause.

I was displeased, not at learning that Lyons disagreed with my proposal, as a robust discussion representing all sides of such an important matter is of central importance to the continued existence of a vibrant republic, but because of the shear negligence, disingenuousness, and ignorance displayed in Mr. Lyons article.

For starters, Lyons purposely fails to inform his readers that it was not I who first identified this problem, but Thomas Jefferson. 

Looking to Jefferson

In 1820, Jefferson wrote a letter to Jarvis Williams regarding a series of essays Williams wrote where he mentioned the judiciary’s role in overturning laws it found to be unconstitutional.  Perfectly on point, Jefferson said, “to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.” Moreover, Jefferson pointed out that the situation was made even more dangerous, “as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control.

As with so many other issues, Jefferson’s thoughts on this matter were prescient.

Lyons also neglected sharing that Canada has such a provision in its Constitution that has been working seamlessly since 1982.

This information and so much more was available to Lyons, but he failed to disclose it to his readers. Fortunately, the facts he did not present are available in an article I wrote and published at TheRevolutionaryAct.com and in my book, The Federalist Pages.

The fact is that Americans have been concerned over the courts’ plenary authority when speaking on constitutional issues for decades. They recognize that in a system characterized by checks and balances, there is no check on the Supreme Court. Contrary to Lyons’s ill-informed opinion, any serious constitutional law observer will tell you of the courts’ increasing activism over the past 100+ years. And it is an issue that was discussed at length in law school.

Recognizing the threat that giving plenary authority on any matter to a branch of government represents to a republic, Canada enacted a solution. And other variations exist in England, Israel, and Australia, among others, none of which are mentioned by Lyons.

It’s time we have the same discussion about our own system

Whether Florida, and indeed our nation, ought to implement a judicial override is a very serious matter, and if it is in anyway forehead-slap-worthy as Lyons states, it’s in the astonishment that it fell upon the physician/lawyer son of a Cuban immigrant who haphazardly landed in his state’s legislature to suggest it nearly 200 years after the problem was first identified.

Let a thoughtful debate begin 

The Notwithstanding Clause is not a radical proposal, as Lyons calls it, nor is it the result of partisan strife as his article feeblemindedly suggests.

No. The Notwithstanding Clause is a serious proposal designed to address a quintessential threat to our American system of government and a loophole in the system of checks and balances the Framers built. And once again, I cannot take credit for identifying the threat, as George Washington spoke about it in his farewell address. He called such an intrusion into another branch’s function usurpation and said, “though this in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”

I hope Floridians, and Americans in general, shut out the sophomoric rants from irresponsible and under informed pseudopundents like Lyons and learn more about this very important topic. Doing so will place them on a path of discovering more about our great foundational documents and of the people who proposed them. Once they do, I bet more than 60% of the people will agree with Jefferson, Washington, and countless others on the necessity and wisdom of an American Notwithstanding Clause.

ABOUT DR. JULIO GONZALEZ

Dr. Julio Gonzalez is an orthopedic surgeon, lawyer and State Representative for South Sarasota County, Florida.  He is the author of The Federalist Pages, available at thefederalistpages.com or at Amazon.  He is available for speaking engagements and can be reached at gonzopod@gmail.com.

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

The Islamist nexus between the Huffington Post and Al Jazeera

The Huffington Post has former Al Jazeera journalists writing articles.  Huffington Post Arabic is led by hard line Islamists from Al Jazeera.  The Islamist nexus between the Huffington Post and Al Jazeera is one of the top reasons why Florida Family Association is encouraging Corporate America to stop supporting the Huffington Post with their advertising dollars.

The Huffington Post published an article written by Ben Piven on January 12, 2017 titled“Why Al Jazeera America Failed, And Why We Need It More Than Ever.”  The subtitle stated “America desperately needs something similar to pioneer this new era of uncertainty and misinformation.”  Ben Piven “was at Al Jazeera for over 5 years, including several years at AJAM in New York City and also in Doha at AJE during the height of the Arab Spring.”

The Huffington Post Arabic edition is run by two hardline Islamists according to a report published by Breitbart.

Breitbart:  The Huffington Post Arabic venture is led by hardline Islamists

The two men leading Huffington Post’s new Arabic-language site have in the past been accused of having direct involvement with the Muslim Brotherhood and radical clerics; and one has openly expressed conspiratorial views that have been interpreted as having an anti-Semitic connotation.

Anas Fouda, an Egyptian native now living in Muslim Brotherhood-friendly Turkey, is the new editor-in-chief of HuffPost Arabi. He was arrested by UAE authorities in 2013 after being charged with being a leader in the Islamist group, according to a NOW Lebanon, which linked to an article in which Fouda allegedly admitted that he has been a member of the Brotherhood since 1988. Prior to becoming the Huffington Post Arabic editor, Fouda was an executive producer at Al Jazeera Arabic, a network accused of having rabidly pro-Brotherhood biases.

After examining his past statements, NOW Lebanon writer Alex Rowell described Fouda as “bread and butter MB; recommending for instance, articles praising” Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who is considered the spiritual leader of the Islamist group. Qaradawi has in the past praised Nazi leader Adolf Hitler as someone “sent by Allah” to “punish” the Jews. The Muslim Brotherhood kingpin’s arrest is now being sought by INTERPOL, the international counter-terror organization.

The Huffington Post’s Arabic venture was created after the left-wing news network teamed up with Integral Media Strategies, an organization led by Wadah Khanfar, who was previously employed as Al Jazeera Arabic’s managing director. Khanfar, like Fouda, has been arrested by an Arab government (Jordan) on suspicion that he was a leader in the Muslim Brotherhood terror group. Additionally, Zvi Mazel, the former Israeli Ambassador to Egypt, has in the past noted with certainty that “Wadah Khanfar is a Muslim Brother,” and that the former Al Jazeera chief turned the network into a “weapon in the service of” the Muslim Brotherhood.

Khanfar was known to “work closely” with al-Qaradawi and the Qatari government, the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs has reported. Under Khanfar’s control, Al Jazeera Arabic’s coverage shifted towards “encouraging opposition and promoting incitement against Arab regimes, exposing the corruption of their leaders and their entourage, while holding to an extreme Arab nationalist attitude against the US and Israel and extolling the values of conservative – and sometimes extremist – Islam,” the research institute found.

The Islamist nexus between the Huffington Post and Al Jazeera is one of the top reasons why Florida Family Association is encouraging Corporate America to stop supporting the Huffington Post with their advertising dollars.

WATCHDOG WATCH: The Media’s Smiley Face Islam

ISLAM SMILEY FACE

Islam smiley face Imogen.

Smiley face Islam.

That seems to be how the media is determined to depict the face of Islam. The media has unacknowledged, and at times unknown agendas on multiple fronts. It’s the perfectly natural outcome when a large group of people have essentially the same worldview and their check and balance on that worldview is each other.

There is not going to be much of a check or balance. In a word, bias.

The bias in Muslim coverage seems to be ensuring that all Muslims are painted as exactly like every other American, and that Islam as a religion is depicted the same as any other religion. The truth is that Islam is a mixed bag in 2017 unlike any other religion. There are many productive, pro-American, peaceable Muslims in the United States. We probably have the most moderate Muslim population in the world, on a whole, and a majority fit into the American culture.

But while polls show that American Muslims are some of the least radicalized in the world, they also show that Islam worldwide does not fit the media narrative and hundreds of millions believe Sharia law, for instance, a legal system antithetical to American beliefs. And that raises questions of immigration.

Yet the media persists in describing Islam as an overtly peaceful religion that preaches tolerance, and the thousands of adherents to Islam that participate in atrocities are not really Muslims. No real reporting on the millions that support atrocious behavior, but do not participate directly.

So the truth is there really exists a smiley face Islam. But there also really exists a hateful, murderous Islam. Both are true, but the media highlights one.

The happy face example

An example that beautifully illustrates this bias was published a little over a year ago in a well-regarded Florida daily newspaper. In fact, this particular Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper helpfully directed readers with the headline, “The Face of Islam in Southwest Florida.”

Here is the lead:

“Imam Yousuf Memon is the face of Islam in Sarasota and Bradenton — and it’s a face that smiles constantly and is quick to laugh.

“Memon, only 24, shatters the stereotype of a Muslim cleric.

“Before services Friday, he was dressed in a trendy Abercrombie & Fitch hoodie, jeans and flip-flops.

“He admits he’s much younger than most Islamic clergy, but in the eight months since he became Imam of Sarasota’s diverse Muslim community, his efforts have drawn wide acclaim.”

The brave Imam — truly a brave young man — condemns violence in the name of Islam and says if he got wind of radicalized Muslims in his community, the first thing he would do is report them to the authorities. Here here! That is precisely the type of leadership many Americans hope for from Muslim clerics. So that’s all great and may God protect him.

What is missing journalistically

But as to the journalism…this story is one big promotional puff piece for smiley face Islam on Page 1 of a newspaper. Paid advertising is only mildly more overt. There are verrrrrrry long quotes (which you rarely see) by the Imam explaining that his view is true Islam and not the violent views of others around the world and occasionally in the United States. That’s legitimate, except that there is zero balance in the story.

What is missing? No normal journalistic push back. No context. No actual tough questions or topics, which are abundant with the Muslim issue. As a former journalist, I would ask some basics such as:

  • Do you believe in Sharia law?
  • Do you think it is safe to let in Syrians?
  • How have ISIS and others gained such huge followings in your religion, particularly when no other religion has anything like this going on?
  • Why do such large percentages of Muslims around the world support Sharia and even support terrorism and terror organizations in many instances?

That used to be basic journalism. But none of those were asked — or were not reported if they were asked, which seems unlikely. Instead, we got a happy face Islam promotional piece ignoring all the tough questions.

This type of coverage played out recently in President Trump’s 90-day ban on people traveling to the United States from seven predominantly Muslim countries. The first day of the ban, 109 people were detained because of it, out of 325,000 who entered the country that day. All were released within 48 hours. But the media reported chaos at the airports (which was caused in part by a major computer outage at Delta) and referred for a while to the “Muslim ban” (an absurd characterization) while endlessly quoting people about the inhumanity and civil rights violations and un-Americanism of it all.

This is a constant within media coverage, and driven by a monolithic worldview that sees Islam as peaceful, violence as not Islamic, and Christian extremists are an equal threat as Islamic extremists. This is done in two ways: One, equating maybe half a dozen terrorist acts attributed to Christians in the past 30 years, to literally thousands of acts attributed to Muslims in the past 10 years. The false equivalence muddies the waters and makes way for the second way, smiley face Islam the reality.

There are obviously Americans like Imam Yousuf Memon who is an important and productive part of his communities. If all Islam were like him, obviously there would be no conversation. But the data overwhelmingly demonstrates that is not the case.

You just won’t get that in most media reporting.

RELATED ARTICLE: 100% of Christians Face Persecution in These 21 Countries

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

Commander-In-Chief Donald J. Trump

Is our involvement in Syria and Iraq SCHITZOPHRENIC?

Many in leadership positions such as National Security Director McMaster and Secretary of Defense Mattis are woefully ignorant about the ideology of Islam as are most of their staffs and advisors. They have been Politically Correct for far too long which has led to this willful ignorance of what and who we are dealing with in the Middle East. This is a tragedy.

Islam has been split between two sides for about 1200 years. There are two major tribes and their hatred of one-another is intractable.

One tribe are the Sunnis, which includes the Wahhabis and some fellow travelers. They include most of the Moslem world starting with their chief financier, Saudi Arabia. For the sake of simplicity here, I’ll call this gang the SS which includes the Taliban of Afghanistan and Pakistan, al Qaeda, ISIS, DAESH, and other alphabet soup monikers. They are SS.

The other are the Shia of Iran and Iraq which includes the Alawites of Syria. For the sake of simplicity, I’ll call these the SA. Hezbollah is a part of the SA.

Both are sharia compliant fundamentalists, hate the civilized west, and live for the death and destruction of us and one-another.

We cannot choose sides because no matter what we do, we will be the fall guy, the hated foreigners sticking our noses into their business, despised by one and all.

President Trump has vowed to destroy ISIS, which is SS, and we’ve been working to do this for years. This war on SS’s ISIS benefits the SA.

Last week the SA used a WMD in a gas attack on the SS in Syria.

President Trump attacked the SA in Syria which benefitted the SS’s ISIS.

Yeah, take some time to wrap your head around this. We are now taking both sides – simultaneously helping both tribes while attacking both tribes. Schizophrenic?

The media, and government officials are claiming that Assad attacked his own people. TILT! Fake news! Willful ignorance at its best! Assad, a member of the greater SA tribe – in keeping with a long standing 1200-year tradition attacked the hated SS tribe.

We defeated Saddam Hussein, a leader in the SS tribal branch in Iraq and turned the country over to the SA who have been exacting savage, barbaric revenge on SS tribal members for a decade. It will not stop.

Mosul, in Anbar province has been a homeland to SS tribals for about six hundred years. We are now helping the SA to ‘liberate’ SS Mosul by driving SS tribal members from a traditional SS homeland. Does this make sense? Or, will this become another cause for the SS to wage even more savage warfare against us and the SA.

The Iraq/Syria theatre (in military terms) does not meet the definition of a quagmire (defined as soft, wet ground). There is no appropriate counter-term that would define what I will now refer to as a sandmire (a sand pit) which aptly describes much of Iraq and Syria. Include Iran and we can call it the Greater Iran, a creature of our own doing.

We’ve been involved in battles in the sand mire for 27-years, since Iraq invaded Kuwait. [Before that, we assisted SS member Saddam in his long war with SA Iran.] We’ve squandered thousands of precious American lives and multiple billions of our treasure.

Most recently, we’ve been sending increasing numbers of our troops over there to fight (with the SA) against the SS. But, just this week, we joined forces with the SS to wage war against the SA.

We, our leadership, our media, our ‘intelligentsia’, the elitists in academia, have no real idea regarding who or what we are dealing with after 27-years without a clear victory. Might it be time to pack up and get out until we have a clear understand of who and what we are dealing with regarding this eternal war between the SS and SA tribes.

Who does know and understand: The Moslem Brotherhood in America. Russia knows.

The creators of the Balfour Declaration that chopped the Ottoman empire into countries occupied by both SS and SA members understand, too. For the British and French, it was a classically clever example of divide and conquer – keep both sides in permanent strife against one another to protect the greater civilized world.

Russia’s involvement is clearly defined and simple. The SS have attacked Russia’s southern flank for a thousand years, including being allied with Hitler in WWII. Russia hates the SS – the Turk branch in particular. Accordingly, allying themselves with the SA makes good strategic sense to them and letting the SS and SA to butcher one-another is fine. It keeps from killing more Russians.

Our involvement, with great willful ignorance influenced by the Moslem Brotherhood (MB) in America leaves us flopping around all over the place like schizophrenics.

What should we do? What is actually good for America?

Recognize that the Moslem Brotherhood is a dedicated hard core sharia compliant Civilization phobic organization that has infiltrated our government and insinuated itself all over America.

  1. Follow the lead of several relatively level headed, mature, and responsible Moslem nations and outlaw the Moslem Brotherhood and the alphabet soup initials identifying their dozens of subordinate anti-American entities in America. This has been proposed to President Trump who inexplicably has been waffling – which provides great benefit to the America hating MB – the SS whose worldwide SS members finance and support ISIS, al Qaeda and others, and who recruit Moslems from America to engage in hostilities (mostly anti-American or anti-Western) of one form or another all over the world.
  2. Take out the SA’s Iranian nuclear weapons programs. The Russians understand that when their honeymoon with the SA eventually ends, the SA (Iran) will unquestionably aim their nukes at Russia.
  3. Consider joining with Russia to provide all of the conventional arms to both the SS and SA that they need so that they can keep killing one-another which will reduce their attacks on us. This will also suit the “New World Order’ and Agenda 21 population reduction goals, especially regarding the SA and SS who have enormous birth rates.

The Case Against Legalizing Unknown Millions of Illegal Aliens

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Most terrorists have not had criminal histories.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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