Dear Ms. Albright: The U.S. already collects religious identity data — including for Muslims

/in , , , , , /by

Madeleine Jana Korbel Albright is an American politician and diplomat. She is the first woman to have become the United States Secretary of State under former President Bill Clinton. After President Trump signed several Executive Orders dealing with immigration and refugee resettlement Albright tweeted the following:

alright muslim tweet

Dear Ms. Albright, there already is data available on the religious affiliation, a registry if you will, of millions of Americans and immigrants, including Muslims.  Even the U.S. Department of State has a Temporary Religious Worker Visa form. The U.S. State Department is also required to enforce the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 which was meant to exclude certain immigrants from immigrating to America. The McCarran-Walter Act moved away from excluding immigrants based simply upon country of origin. Instead it focused upon denying immigrants who were unlawful, immoral, diseased in any way, politically radical etc. and accepting those who were willing and able to assimilate into the U.S. economic, social, and political structures, which restructured how immigration law was handled.

According the U.S. Census Bureau website, the bureau “statistics on the growth, distribution, and characteristics of the U.S. population. The principal source of these data is the U.S. Census Bureau, which conducts a decennial census of population, a monthly population survey, a program of population estimates and projections, and a number of other periodic surveys relating to population characteristics.”

The U.S. Census Bureau collects religious identity as follows:

The methodology of the American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) 2008 replicated that used in previous surveys. The three surveys are based on random-digit-dialing telephone surveys of residential households in the continental U.S.A (48 states): 54,461 interviews in 2008, 50,281 in 2001, and 113,723 in 1990. Respondents were asked to describe themselves in terms of religion with an open-ended question. Interviewers did not prompt or offer a suggested list of potential answers. Moreover, the self-description of respondents was not based on whether established religious bodies, institutions, churches, mosques or synagogues considered them to be members. Instead, the surveys sought to determine whether the respondents regarded themselves as adherents of a religious community. Subjective rather than objective standards of religious identification were tapped by the surveys] [Emphasis added]

Here are links to three Census Bureau documents on religious identification in the United States:

xls file   75 – Self-Described Religious Identification of Adult Population

xls file   76 – Religious Bodies–Selected Data

xls file 77 – Christian Church Adherents and Jewish Population, States

 It is the role of all U.S. government agencies to insure those coming to America are properly vetted, whether they here temporarily or are seeking citizenship. It is important for U.S. government agencies to maintain data on the religious identification of America citizens, temporary visitors and those seeking citizenship. Not to do so impacts many programs and the national security of the United States.

Therefore, Ms. Albright you may contact the U.S. Census Bureau and take their questionnaire for the 2020 Census and declare yourself a Muslim. Your religious identification will be duly recorded and noted.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (Walter-McCarran Act)

EDITORS NOTE: The Library of Congress lists countries who have a religious basis for legislation and those whose constitution designates a religious state.

II. Countries Whose Constitutions Indicate a Religious Basis for Legislation

III. Countries Whose Constitutions Simply Indicate a Religion of the State

A picture is worth a thousand words: What happens to women in Islamic countries

/in , , , , /by

“A picture is worth a thousand words” is an English idiom. It refers to the notion that a complex idea can be conveyed with just a single still image or that an image of a subject conveys its meaning or essence more effectively than a description does.

During the Women’s March in Washington, D.C. we noticed the below photograph of American women holding posters of a Muslim woman in a burka made from the American flag. It is meant to depict unity with Muslim woman and to promote wearing of the burka, which is required by Islamic (shariah) law.

womans march hijabs

The poster is one of a series of five created by the Amplifier Foundation under the title “We the People.” The Amplifier Foundation website states:

WE THE PEOPLE CAMPAIGN

We the People is a nonpartisan campaign dedicated to igniting a national dialogue about American identity and values through public art and story sharing

The posters include: “Greater than Fear” (a woman is U.S. flag burka, seen below), “Defend Dignity” (depicting a women with a flower in her hair), “Protect Each Other” (depicting a black woman), “We the Resilient” (depicting a native American woman) and “We The Indivisible” (featuring two lesbian women).

All of those depicted in the Amplifier Foundation posters are at risk under Islamic law. A woman married to Mohammed is a second class citizen, a non-Muslim woman is considered an infidel, black women are being traded in the ISIS slave markets, native American women are also infidels and homosexuals are thrown off of roofs by the soldiers of Allah.

Perhaps the three women at the march have not read the column titled “Top ten rules in the Quran that oppress women” by James Arlandson. Here are a few of the rules in the Quran dealing with women:

The Quran in Sura (Chapter) 2:223 says:

Your women are your fields, so go into your fields whichever way you like . . . . (MAS Abdel Haleem, The Qur’an, Oxford UP, 2004)

. . . ‘If a man invites his wife to sleep with him and she refuses to come to him, then the angels send their curses on her till morning.’ (Bukhari)

I heard the Prophet saying. ‘Evil omen is in three things: The horse, the woman and the house.’ (Bukhari)

The share of the male shall be twice that of a female . . . . (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 311)

Read more..

The Women’s March used gender identity to promote cultural diversity to include women who are the wives or daughters of the followers of Mohammed in America. These women are “married to Mohammed.” What the  Amplifier Foundation does not understand is that Islam has misogynistic world view. A view that seeks to paint women of the entire planet in a misogynistic colors – black and blue.

The Quran in Sura 4:34 says:

4:34 . . . If you fear highhandedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great. (Haleem, emphasis added)

A reader sent us the below series of pictures to illustrate how women in various Middle Eastern countries dressed before and then after the imposition of Islamic laws upon women. Each of these pictures is worth a thousand words:

afghani dresses burkas

Bangladeshi dresses or burkas

iraqi dress burka

malasian dress burka

Clearly, once upon a time, these colorful dresses were created by women for themselves. So what has changed? Answer: Islamic laws have replaced Western values in these and other countries like Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Europe and parts of America.

Women who march without the understanding of what they are marching for is folly at best and dangerous at the worst. In this case, promoting Islamic law upon women is misogynistic and extremely dangerous. “American identity and values” are about women’s rights, freedom, equal justice under the law and religious liberty. All a missing under Islamic law.

The below picture makes our point better than thousands of words…

muslim woman violence

Trump’s Planned Wall is Essential to Protect America and Americans

/in , , , /by

On Inauguration Day (Jan. 20), the day before and the day after, protestors who opposed Donald Trump’s election as the 45th U.S. President and his campaign promises, particularly his promise to build a wall, took to the streets. Among their hand-held signs, some read, “Build bridges, not walls,” a slogan that demonstrates how naive and ill-informed the protesters are.

Also on Jan. 20, the Department of Justice issued a press release that heralded the extradition to the United States of the leader of the Sinaloa Drug Cartel and of arguably the world’s most violent drug dealer.

The press release, “Joaquin ‘El Chapo’ Guzman Loera Faces Charges in New York for Leading a Continuing Criminal Enterprise and other Drug-Related Charges,” painted a clear image of the magnitude of the drug trafficking crimes, including crimes of extreme violence for which he has been indicted.

The press release contains links to the Detention Memo and the Indictment, and begins with these two paragraphs:

“The indictment alleges that between January 1989 and December 2014, Guzman Loera led a continuing criminal enterprise responsible for importing into the United States and distributing massive amounts of illegal narcotics and conspiring to murder persons who posed a threat to Guzman Loera’s narcotics enterprise.

“Guzman Loera is also charged with using firearms in relation to his drug trafficking and money laundering relating to the bulk smuggling from the United States to Mexico of more than $14 billion in cash proceeds from narcotics sales throughout the United States and Canada. As part of this investigation, nearly 200,000 kilograms of cocaine linked to the Sinaloa Cartel have been seized. The indictment seeks forfeiture of more than $14 billion in drug proceeds and illicit profits.”

In order to be successful in their drug trafficking crimes, the Sinaloa Cartel obviously needed to cross the border that is supposed to separate the U.S. from Mexico, not only to move mega-tonnage of heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana into the U.S., but also the employees of the cartel that include “enforcers,” thugs who, on orders from their Cartel bosses, kill, kidnap and torture those who get in the way.

These criminals, almost invariably, were aliens who entered the U.S. illegally. It is alleged that in Mexico the Sinaloa Cartel was responsible for the murder of thousands of individuals, many of whom were beheaded to further intimidate those who posed a threat to the cartel.

However the violence was not limited to Mexico.

The press release noted that this investigation was conducted by courageous law enforcement officers in Colombia, Mexico, the U.S. and elsewhere. In the U.S., the investigation was pursued by the multi-agency Organized Crime, Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) that includes agents of the DEA, FBI, ICE and ATF, as well as members of local and state police departments.

Having spent the final ten years of my career with the INS assigned to OCDETF, I am extremely familiar with the effectiveness of the multiagency task force approach to the investigation and dismantling of large-scale narcotics trafficking organizations. They are critical to border security and effective enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws.

The extradition and prosecution of El Chapo and others are major U.S. law enforcement achievements made in cooperation with the valiant law enforcement officers of Mexico and Colombia. But, the “War on Drugs” continues.

Nevertheless, when Donald Trump campaigned to build a wall to secure the border that is supposed to separate the United States from Mexico to prevent criminals, terrorists and drugs from entering the country, the globalists, aided and abetted by dishonest journalists, created the false narrative equating Trump’s goals and the goals of Americans who demand that our borders be secured against illegal entry with racism.

The provisions of Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens guides CBP inspectors at ports of entry in making determinations as to the admissibility of aliens seeking entry into the U.S. These determinations have nothing to do with race, religion or ethnicity.

Jimmy Carter created the term “undocumented immigrant” to describe illegal aliens. Over time, that Orwellian tactic has come to enable immigration anarchists to con many Americans into believing that deporting illegal aliens actually refers to deporting all “immigrants” when nothing could be further from the truth.

Securing our borders against illegal entry is not to be equated with preventing all aliens from entering the U.S., only those aliens who violate our laws.

As I noted when I testified at a Congressional hearing several years ago, a country without secure borders can no more stand than can a house without walls.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The president alone can conclude treaties and trade agreements, there is no role for Congress

The secret meaning of Donald Trump’s incredible first 100 hours

EDITORS NOTE: The column originally appeared on the Californians for Population Stabilization website.

Yes Oxymorons, there is Voter Fraud

/in , , , , /by

If you go to Google and type in the search words “illegal aliens voting” you will get 2 million links to articles on this topic. The first article listed is titled “FLASHBACK: WaPo Publishes Study That Claims Millions of Illegal Aliens Vote” by The Daily Wire.

President Trump has come out and said that there was voter fraud during the November 8th, 2016 election. How is that controversial?

There have been multiple reports that imply the Russians “hacked” the election. The Democrats, joined by Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, are holding hearings to determine if there was election fraud and any role played in the alleged fraud by Russians or any others. White House press secretary Sean Spicer said, “The President does believe that, I think he’s stated that before, and stated his concern of voter fraud and people voting illegally during the campaign and continues to maintain that belief based on studies and evidence people have brought to him.”

The media narrative is that there is no “evidence of voter fraud” and the President’s belief is “unsubstantiated.”

But is it? In a column titled “Substantial Numbers of Non-Citizens Vote Illegally in U.S. Elections” James D. Agresti from JustFactsDaily.com wrote:

Several major media outlets pounced on Trump’s [“In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.” Twitter] comment. The New York Times, for example, reported that “virtually no evidence of such improprieties has been discovered.” The Times editorial board then called Trump’s statement “a lie,” and the Washington Post’s Fact Checker declared “this is a bogus claim with no documented proof.”

These media reports and Trump’s comment are all misleading. There is material evidence of substantial vote fraud, though it does not prove that Trump would have won the popular vote if such fraud were prevented. It only shows that this is a possibility.

This evidence is documented in a 2014 paper published by the journal Electoral Studies. Based on survey data and election records, the authors of this paper found that the number of non-citizens who voted illegally in the 2008 election ranged “from just over 38,000 at the very minimum to nearly 2.8 million at the maximum.” Their “best estimate” is that 1.2 million or “6.4% of non-citizens actually voted.”

Even Snopes confirms that in California alone illegals could vote and in large numbers, perhaps millions.

Snopes in the article “License to Vote” by Dan Evon determined that California passed a law to allow undocumented immigrants to vote to be “false.” Evon reported, “In February 2016, California officials announced that more than 600,000 undocumented people were granted driver’s licenses in 2015 (the first year after AB 60 took effect).” But their own article shows this to be untrue. Snopes’ Evon writes:

While critics of the New Motor Voter Act fear that undocumented people may slip through the loopholes and get registered to vote, it’s false to say that California has made it legal for undocumented people to vote. In fact, California Secretary of State Alex Padilla said that the new law is actually more secure:

The way automatic registration works is relatively simple: Eligible citizens are registered to vote when they show up at a Department of Motor Vehicles office to obtain a driver’s license or state ID. The DMV gives the eligible voter a chance to opt out if they prefer not to register. If the person does not opt out, the DMV electronically transfers their voter registration information to the Secretary of State’s office, rather than making election officials enter data by hand from paper registration forms…

“… Automated voter registration is actually a more secure way of doing things,” California Secretary of State Alex Padilla told HuffPost in September. Potential voters “have to demonstrate proof of age, the vast majority of time people are showing a birth certificate or a passport, which also reflects citizenship. That’s arguably more secure than someone checking a box under penalty of perjury,” Padilla said. [Emphasis added]

So if an illegal alien shows up at a California DMV gets a drivers license but does not “opt out” is he or she is automatically registered to vote?

Question: How may of those 600,000 illegals given a California drivers license in 2015 opted out? How many more drivers licenses were issued to illegal aliens by the state of California in 2016 before the election?

Remember California is one of four “sanctuary states.”

We may never know, without a through investigation, just how many of those illegals in California “opted out” because the Secretary of State is all in providing sanctuary to illegals. It is proper to determine how many illegals, dead people or people register in two states voted illegally. Now there’s a new sheriff in town and voter fraud will not stand for it is the foundation of our Constitutional Republican form of government.

Sounds like President Trump is on to something big that demands a through investigation before the midterm elections in 2018.

RELATED ARTICLE: Justice Department Likely to Find Many Offenses in Voter Fraud Probe, Experts Say

The Women’s March and the Real Deplorables

/in , , , /by

In a recent viral Facebook post, a conservative woman found it necessary to point out that she wasn’t a “disgrace to women” for not supporting the Women’s March on Washington. Of course not. Saying otherwise is a bit like having called a soldier a disgrace to soldiers for not having supported the My Lai Massacre.

mother daughter racist sign

Mother and daughter with Woman’s March sign.

One D.C. marcher held a placard stating, “I am more than my v****a.” This was clear: She was also a mouth and a sign.

British journalist Katie Hopkins, who attended the Saturday event, cited the above message and pointed out that possession of such an anatomical feature “is a matter of biology, not a political argument” — and that the marchers had no political arguments. Theirs was a collective tantrum.

Madonna spoke at the rally, dropped f-bombs, led the throng in chanting “I’M NOT YOUR B****!” and then, quite ironically, complained that “Good” didn’t win in the election. Hopkins quipped that she didn’t “even know Good was a candidate.” If he was, though, Madonna should have told us whether Donald Trump is the Bad or the Ugly. Then we’d better know what to expect the next four years.

But Madonna, don’t preach; you’re in trouble deep. It’s not just that the Secret Service is now investigating her for saying at the march that she thought about “blowing up the White House.” It’s that she’s blowing up her own life and helped blow up our culture.

After peddling sexuality to make money and demonstrating a pathological unwillingness to constrain herself, Madonna has (as a parent must) tried to constrain her children. Unsurprisingly, however, son Rocco Ritchie rebelled against the immaterial girl and now lives with his father.

The 58-year-old pop tart has also become the Peter Pan Syndrome personified and is clearly unhappy, as 2016 on-stage meltdowns evidenced. Is this woman, whose own ship is listing badly, one to advise on the ship of state? Madonna, take the log out of your own eye before worrying about the speck in Donald Trump’s.

Actress Ashley Judd spoke at the rally as well (and as badly). Perhaps now too dependent on having others write her material, she recited a poem disgorged by a 19-year-old Dunkin’ Donuts worker which included the line, “I feel Hitler in these streets, a mustache traded for a toupee.” What profundity! Move over, Whitman and Yeats — you’ve just been dunked on.

Banner at Women’s March in Washington, D.C.

In the same vein, there were march messages such as “This p***y bites and she slays,” “P***y power — it’ll grab ya’,” “B*****s get stuff done” (finally, some specificity!), “Ovaries before brovaries,” “My p***y bites,” “Utereses before duderuses” (so obsessed with sexual body parts but can’t spell them?), and “Trump is a big p***y.” They forgot to say he smells and has cooties.

These were, mind you, among 150 slogans provided for protesters to choose from because, well, no one could ascend to such heights of intellectualism all by himself.

Additionally, many marchers wore pink “p***y hats,” which, Yahoo.com stated, would “Unite Millions at Women’s Marches Around the World.” If men held a rally and wore doggy hats with phallic symbolism, would they be called brave or boorish, be exalted as protesters or excoriated as pigs?

The march was pointless, classless and brainless, but not harmless. One common theme was anger at certain crass comments Trump made in the past. To combat this, the march’s leaders and their lemmings decided to be crude, lewd and even more crass in the present. It’s much like trying to correct your child’s cursing by cursing him out.

A famous sentiment used to justify such behavior, and one written on a protester’s sign, stated, “Well behaved women seldom make history.” This is like complaining that well behaved children seldom make a mess, for empowered ill-behaved people often do make history — and make a mess of it.

Contrary to this was the father of our nation, George Washington. He defeated his time’s greatest power and won our nation’s independence, all while being a pillar of civility. Not only is he known for helping popularize 110 “Rules of Civility & Decent Behavior,” but in 1776 he issued general orders to the Continental Army condemning the practice of “profane cursing,” writing that every man of “character…detests and despises it.”

Seeking rights without character is like seeking health without nourishment. Washington himself observed, “Human rights can only be assured among a virtuous people” while fellow founder Samuel Adams warned that “public liberty will not long survive the total extinction of morals.” The DC vixens-cum-vice peddlers should take note.

Fortunately, there are millions more women making history by, every day, molding the next generation to be well behaved — and to not mistake boorishness for bravery and sexual snake oil for sophistication.

America’s Enemies on Parade

/in , , , , , /by

As the 45th President and Vice President of the United States were sworn into office, America’s enemies within took to the streets and it was pure evil and ignorance on parade. From DisrputJ20 to the so-called “women’s rights” advocates, the enemies within could not wait to demonstrate just how messed up many in American society are after decades of leftist indoctrination.

The protesters for peace were anything but peaceful. The young and foolish who worry that “Trump will destroy America” were busy destroying America themselves, as they broke out windows of retail stores, office buildings and hotels. These are not protesters, they are pure anarchists.

They claim to be protesting the election and inauguration of Donald Trump. But why? On what basis were these indoctrinated, trained, funded and mobilized malcontents protesting a man who has never done anything to deserve such hate and fearmongering?

In cities across America and as far away as Madrid, women were out in force to protest someone they clearly know nothing about. What was it about his inaugural speech that set them in motion? What caused these women to identify themselves as mere vaginas? Who is behind the so-called women’s rights operation? Why were they protesting Donald Trump?

Do these protesters (aka anarchists) object to Trump’s foundational promises? – “We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and restore its promise for all of our people.” Do they not include themselves as “citizens of America?”

Was it this? – “Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning because today, we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another or from one party to another, but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the people.” – Do they not include themselves among “the people” to whom Trump promised to return governmental powers?

Why do these so-called protesters object to such all-American ideas?

Why are anarchists protesting “the power of the people” responsible for the Trump Revolution, in favor of tyrannical central power in D.C. under Obama’s pen? Why are women displaying themselves as nothing but a vagina complete with “p**syhats” – demanding their right as women, to become men, to kill their young, to destroy the family unit and the basic fabric of any decent society?

As a man, I would never wear a penis hat anywhere I wanted to be taken seriously!

Why is a woman in Madrid flashing her breasts in public, calling for all women to “grab patriarchy by the balls?” Is Trump the new president of Madrid? Why did Madonna threaten to “blow up the White House” as women cheered her on? Blow up the White House? For what possible reason?

Contrast with Obama never-ending self-adulation, Trump was saying “It belongs to everyone gathered here today and everyone watching all across America. This is your day. This is your celebration. And this, the United States of America, is your country.” Why did this upset Americas enemies within?

Trump was elected based on specific promises he appears on his way to keeping. Which of those promises is causing this backlash from the media, women and anarchist kids?

  • We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and restore its promise for all of our people.
  • For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost. Washington flourished, but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered, but the jobs left and the factories closed.
  • What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people.
  • January 20th, 2017 will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again.
  • The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.
  • At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction, that a nation exists to serve its citizens.
  • We will follow two simple rules; buy American and hire American.

Or was it this promise that upset the snowflakes? “From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first, America first.”

Only anti-American zealots here or around the globe would object to anything Trump has promised to do over the coming four years. There is nothing in Trump’s campaign promises or Inaugural statements that any true American or real woman should or would find objectional.

Enemies within

What rights do men have in America that women don’t have? How can women pretend to be a minority interest when they make up a majority of American citizens, 52% to be exact? What anarchist would find objection with Trump’s promise to return our Federal Government to – of, by and for all Americans?

Why do these anti-American zealots refer to our Constitutional Republic as a mere mob rule democracy, and then act out in totally undemocratic manner and method, opposing a democratic election process?

These people are not just enemies of Donald Trump. They are enemies of all Americans and all American principles and values. They are anti-American at their core and foundation.

Besides the right to be men, marry each other and kill American children for their own convenience, what do the women in this movement really stand for? Women are born in control of “reproductive rights.” 99.9% of the time, violent rape being the exception, women control all reproductive rights with a simple YES or NO. Men cannot bear children without them… Nor can women bear children without men.

So, what is this really all about?

Just as the left did with minority race groups, minority gender and sexual preference groups and unionized labor have been tricked, coopted, indoctrinated, trained, funded and mobilized to oppose all foundational American principles and values in the name of their special interest items, so have a significant number of women in America been hijacked.

In the late 60s and early 70s, a group of anti-American terrorists operating under Weather Underground issued an operational manifesto titled Prairie Fire, written about extensively in a FIVE STAR book about the 2016 people’s revolt against the establishment, TRUMPED The New American Revolution.

Prairie Fire lays out the strategic plan of the anti-imperialist global left to hijack and co-opt every minority special interest group in America and use them to destroy America from within by simply indoctrinating these groups against American principles and values and convincing them that the political left is working for them… when in fact, they had all of these groups working for their cause, global Marxism in America.

Today, some call it progressive, but there is nothing progressive about Democratic Socialism, a modern term for Marxism, a gentler term for communism.

The people rioting in the streets over the past few days are not anti-Trump. They are anti-America… They do not believe in or support a constitutional inalienable right to Life. They do not believe in or support freedom or individual liberty. They do not support the right of every American citizen to define and pursue happiness under their own dreams and energies… They do not believe in a morally and ethically fit society capable of self-governance… They oppose ALL these things, openly!

It is these things they protest, not Trump. Trump is the target simply because he has proclaimed these things as the foundation of his personal beliefs, his campaign and his administration. They hate Trump simply because he has taken a stand for these things…

Everyone who voted for Trump believes in those same principles and values… which makes the anarchists in our streets, enemies to us all.

When will the Americans who oppose all of these anti-American zealots rise up and shut them down? When will we stop them from destroying our cities, our people and our country? When will enough be enough?

VIDEO: Former Homeland Security agent describes ‘cursory screening’ of Muslim migrants

/in , , , /by

Just discovered by a citizen activist is this May 2016 discussion about the pros and cons of admitting Middle Eastern refugees to the U.S. at McCuistion, a non-profit organization. We learned that The Foundation for Responsible Television has been producing the McCuistion Program for 20 years.

a-j-irwin

It is a 28-minute program and you can watch the whole thing below, but what our activist wanted you to hear is near the beginning of the discussion where A.J. Irwin, a former Homeland Security agent and expert on terrorism (see here at wikipedia) describes the screening process that we have been told is so long and so thorough.  (Hat tip: Jim)

Remember, for the Syrians, the Obama Administration sent more agents to the Middle East to reduce the time it takes to bring them in. They processed them to your towns and cities within 3 months.

Begin listening at 2:50 until 4:57 and learn about the screening process that has largely been kept secret from us with euphemisms about how “robust” it is! Watch the full discussion below or click here:

A.J. Irwin:

“…when we send refugee officers over there to interview people, they have a mission and their mission is not to detect fraud or identify terrorists, it’s to process these people and get ’em into the system….

When they sit down at their desks or their cubicle, the line is as far as they can see. And they have the pressure of processing these people. So they don’t spend a whole lot of time talking to them. They get their basic information, they see if they meet the basic requirements – have a credible fear – what it’s based on. And then they move on to the next person. So this process is very rapid and the mission, again, is more service. It is not enforcement; it’s not detection of fraud or national security.”

Be sure to see Senators Cruz and Sessions let loose on Homeland Security rep at hearing last September. Leon Rodriguez, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services was forced to admit that many Syrians were admitted on the basis of their “personal stories.”  [Donald where are you, this would be easy to stop!—ed]

You know and I know that they all have manufactured stories about how they will be persecuted if we don’t take them to America. I bet the vast majority say that ISIS is after them. Ha! Well if we destroy ISIS, then what? Will they go home?

RELATED ARTICLES: 

“New site development guide” for those attempting to make your town a new refugee resettlement site

Is there a Refugee placement office in your town? Updated list available

Muslim woman investigates groups behind “Women’s march,” finds Soros everywhere

European nationalists meet: European migration policy a daily disaster

Bye! Bye! Bob! (Carey) Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement

National Prayer Service No Place For Muslim Brotherhood Imam

/in , , , /by

How did a well-known Muslim Brotherhood-connected Imam receive an invitation to speak at President Trump’s prayer service at the National Cathedral? The only explanation is that a rat must be in the inner circle.

It is no secret, at least to those who understand the threat of the Islamic movement in the United States, who Imam Mohamad Majid is and what his connections are. All the more alarming is his position as head Imam of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) as well as the president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).

The ADAMS Center is one of the most Sharia adherent Mosques in the country and according to US District Court documents, ISNA was involved in funding terrorism.

ISNA is the largest Islamic organization in North America. In 2008 they requested to have their name removed from a list of unindicted co-conspirators from the biggest terrorism financing trial in the history of our country, The Holy Land Foundation trials. Thankfully the motion was rejected.

Mohamed Magid

Mohamed Magid

The United States District Court response to ISNA’s motion for equitable relief said this:

“Even if their filing were timely, which it is not, Petitioners’ motion would be moot. During last year’s trial, numerous exhibits were entered into evidence establishing both ISNA’s and NAIT’s intimate relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestine Committee, and the defendants in this case. Accordingly, there is no possible basis for petitioner’s “expungement” from the Government’s list of co-conspirators and joint venturers. Even sealing the co-conspirator list at this juncture would be futile – the evidence has been appropriately introduced during the course of a public trial.”

Yet despite this man’s shady involvement with the Muslim Brotherhood who is HAMAS, Majid was appointed to the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism Working Group by Obama. And according to Discover the Networks,

“Magid was authorized to train and advise personnel affiliated with the FBI and other federal agencies. He soon became a regular visitor to the White House, and merged as perhaps the most influential and sought-after Muslim authority in the United States.”

So, not only was Imam Majid given access to our national security apparatus, but a leadership role directing how our law enforcement would be trained to fight Islamic terrorism. You really can’t make this stuff up, and as many have said before me it is a case of the fox guarding the hen-house.

After understanding just a little of this man’s background and involvement with the Muslim Brotherhood, a group seeking to undermine our Constitution in order to establish the Caliphate through Sharia Law, one could appreciate the anger of seeing him pray in the National Cathedral last Saturday.

According to Center for Security Policy,

“A new group, Faith Leaders for America (FLA), has just issued a strong statement opposing Imam Mohamed Magid’s inclusion in the service attended by the President and Vice President this morning at the National Cathedral.”

The FLA presented their concerns about the Muslim Brotherhood in America the day before President Trump’s inauguration. Their statement to Trump follows,

“We want you to know you have our prayerful support as you begin to counter jihad and protect Americans from Islamic terrorism. When you label the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, we support you.”

More importantly, who invited and vetted this Imam in order for him to participate in a prayer service for our country and newly elected President Trump? This is troubling when you consider President Trump vowed the day before in his inaugural address to rid the world of radical Islamic terrorism.

Only two angles are possible here, either the person making those executive decisions within the transition team is ignorant of this very real threat to our Constitution by the insidious Muslim Brotherhood or they are complicit in their goals. Either way, someone should answer for it, and Imam Majid should not be given one iota of access to President Trump.

We are in a battle for the heart of our country in many areas. One of those is an Islamic infiltration of our government in the form of The Muslim Brotherhood/HAMAS front organizations. The war cannot be won against Islamic ideology if we allow the heads of those groups to have leadership and prominent positions in our national security sectors and be given time to speak and “pray” over our new President and his administration.

President Trump gave the government back to We the People, so we need to demand that it be free of the influence of our enemies. The best way forward is to have the Secretary of State declare The Muslim Brotherhood a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

This declaration would free our law enforcement to uproot those Muslim Brotherhood members not only from sensitive areas in our government, but also from Mosques throughout this country who continue to preach hate towards Western Civilization as well as encourage jihad on our soil.

It is up to us to make America great again. This cannot happen if we continue to shelter the enemy, and allow people to grant the Muslim Brotherhood protected status in Trump’s new administration.

*Incidentally the ADAMS center just purchased land to build a 22,400 square foot Mosque in Prince William County, Virginia.

Trump-Hating Protesters, Deceit & Willful Blindness: Left’s lies about Immigration, Drugs & Terrorism

/in , , , , , , /by

On January 20, 2017, the very same day that President Donald J. Trump was inaugurated, protestors who opposed Trump’s election and his campaign promises took to the streets in Washington, DC and elsewhere. They falsely equated securing America’s borders and enforcing our immigration laws with bigotry and racism.

The protestors carried signs with a variety of slogans including a slogan favored by Hillary Clinton during her failed bid for the presidency, “Build bridges, not walls.”

Where were these protestors when Obama violated the Constitution, released hundreds of thousands of criminal aliens, commuted the sentences of record numbers of drug dealers and ignored the findings of the 9/11 Commission and imported millions of foreign workers to take Americans’ jobs?

Ironically, on that same day, the Justice Department issued a press release, “Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman Loera Faces Charges in New York for Leading a Continuing Criminal Enterprise and other Drug-Related Charges.”

El Chapo was the leader of the Sinaloa Cartel that smuggled multi-ton quantities of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana into the United States and used extreme violence and corruption in order to achieve their criminal goals that included the smuggling of huge quantities of illegal drugs into the United States.

The press release contains links to the Detention Memo and the Indictment and begins with these two paragraphs:

The indictment alleges that between January 1989 and December 2014, Guzman Loera led a continuing criminal enterprise responsible for importing into the United States and distributing massive amounts of illegal narcotics and conspiring to murder persons who posed a threat to Guzman Loera’s narcotics enterprise.

Guzman Loera is also charged with using firearms in relation to his drug trafficking and money laundering relating to the bulk smuggling from the United States to Mexico of more than $14 billion in cash proceeds from narcotics sales throughout the United States and Canada. As part of this investigation, nearly 200,000 kilograms of cocaine linked to the Sinaloa Cartel have been seized. The indictment seeks forfeiture of more than $14 billion in drug proceeds and illicit profits.

Leaders of Drug Trafficking Organizations, alien smuggling rings and terrorists seeking to enter the United States surreptitiously could not devise a better slogan than “Build bridges not walls” to promote their criminal interests.

Perhaps, given the numerous reports about tunnels under the U.S./Mexican border, the open borders/immigration anarchists should amend their signs to read, “Build bridges and tunnels not walls.”

That slogan must really resonate with El Chapo the leader of the violent Sinaloa Mexican Drug Trafficking Organization that, not unlike other such cartels, required the ability to cross the U.S./Mexican border to not only transport their drugs but their “employees” into the United States as well.

These cartel “employees” are primarily aliens who enter the United States illegally.  Among them as noted in the criminal indictment, are “sicarios,” or hit men who carried out hundreds of acts of violence, including murders, assaults, kidnappings, assassinations and acts of torture at the direction of the defendants.

Often the victims of the violence are members of the ethnic immigrant communities in which these thugs operate.

The majority of violent crime in the United States has a nexus to the use and/or trafficking in narcotics and dangerous drugs.  The proceeds of the drug trade enriches the drug cartels and street gangs.  This fast flow of money also enriches terror organizations around the world.

All too often those who become addicted to drugs have bleak futures.  Tragically, often these addicts are teenagers.

The magnitude of the quantity of drugs smuggled into the United States across the U.S./Mexican border and through other means (in the holds of ships and in the cargo holds of airliners and in the baggage and secreted on passengers of airliners) is, in the aggregate, truly staggering.

El Chapo is being prosecuted in the Eastern District of New York because of the magnitude of his wholesale operations in New York City.  The Sinaloa Cartel also operated in Atlanta, Chicago, Miami, Los Angeles and throughout parts of Arizona.

The magnitude and scope of the violence used by the Sinaloa Cartel was staggering and the press release noted that thousands of individuals were killed in Mexico to eliminate those who got in their way.

They killed law enforcement officials and others to intimidate those who would compete against this criminal organization or cooperate with law enforcement.  Many of the victims were beheaded as an intimidation tactic.

This investigation was conducted by courageous law enforcement officers in Colombia, Mexico, the United States and elsewhere.  In the United States the investigation was pursued by the multi-agency Organized Crime, Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) that includes agents of the DEA, FBI, ICE, ATF as well as members of local and state police departments.

Having spent the final ten years of my career with the INS assigned to OCDETF I am extremely familiar with the effectiveness of the multiagency task force approach to the investigation and dismantling of late-scale narcotics trafficking organizations and just how critical border security and effective enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws, from within the interior of the United States, are to the success of these law enforcement efforts.

Incredibly, however, when Donald Trump promised to build a wall to secure the border that is supposed to separate the United States from Mexico to prevent criminals, terrorists and drugs from entering the United States, the globalists, aided and abetted by dishonest journalists, created the false narrative equating Trump’s goals and the goals of Americans who demand that our borders be secured against illegal entry with racism.

Securing our borders against illegal entry is not to be equated with preventing all aliens from entering the United States, only those aliens who violate our laws.

The doors on our homes have locks that can be unlatched not only so that we can enter our own homes, but so that we can selectively open our doors to those who wish to visit us.  However sensible people lock their doors to prevent the entry of burglars and those who might pose a threat to their safety.

This is comparable to the mission of the inspections process conducted at ports of entry by the more than 20,000 inspectors of CBP (Customs and Border Protection) the same agency that employs approximately 20,000 Border Patrol agents to attempt to interdict those aliens who seek to avoid the inspections process by running our borders.

Determinations as to the admissibility of aliens seeking entry into the United States is guided not by race, religion or ethnicity as politicians, pundits and pollsters falsely claim, but by the provisions of Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens.

Jimmy Carter created the Orwellian term “Undocumented Immigrant” to describe illegal aliens that has, over time, enabled immigration anarchists to con many Americans into believing that deporting illegal aliens actually refers to deporting all “immigrants.”

For the sake of clarity, the difference between and immigrant and an illegal alien is comparable to the difference between a houseguest and a burglar.

However, while the protestors demonstrate and engage in free speech, they need to be mindful that a one-sided conversation is not a conversation.

When news organizations provide only one side of the debate and, indeed, create a false narrative under the guise of the First Amendment, they are doing a huge disservice to their profession and to America and Americans.

How many of the protestors who demanded that we “build bridges not walls” would have participated in the demonstration carrying those signs, if the organizations, faculty members of universities and teachers in our nation’s schools would truly honor the First Amendment by ending “Safe Spaces” and encouraging and fostering honest and open debates to provide Americans with a vital but increasingly rare commodity:  The Truth?

It is unfathomable that hundreds of thousands of people, many of them parents, would protest on behalf of El Chapo and others engaged in the drug trade to facilitate the trafficking or narcotics in the United States and the violent crimes and malevolent transnational gangs associated with the drug trade.  Yet, unwittingly, this is precisely what they are doing.

It is equally likely that the numbers of such protestors would have been greatly reduced if the media and our politicians had honestly reported on the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission when reporting on the threat of terrorism and its nexus to failures of the immigration system.

Yet there they were, demanding that our borders be left vulnerable and our immigration laws not be enforced.

“Free speech” does not protect individuals who falsely cry, “Fire!” in a crowded theater to spark a stampede.

Memo to professors, journalists, pollsters and politicians: It is time for honest speech.

Meet our First Lady — A Proverbs 31 Woman

/in , , , , /by

There was a Woman’s March in Washington, D.C. but one woman was not marching. Her name is Melania Trump, the First Lady of the United States. But that does not mean she did not have a long journey from the small Slovenian railroad town of Sevnica to the White House.

Melania has known poverty, living under a tyrannical and oppressive communist regime, she has known hard work, failure and success and is the second First Lady in over 200 years who immigrated to the United States.

melania trump son baron

Barron William and Melania Trump.

QPolitical.com’s NPO wrote an article about Melania titled “Melania Trump Reveals Her Heartbreaking Journey To Achieving The American Dream.” In it NPO wrote, “Although the famous former model seems to have it all, Melania’s testimony tells the story of someone who’s struggled against all odds — and overcome.”

NPO wrote, “The mystery that comes with her reserved personality makes Melania an easy target for liberals as articles labeling her as a ‘mannequin’ and condemning her silence are published daily… When I learned the TRUTH about Melania Trump, I realized she was the living definition of a Proverbs 31 woman — the kind of First Lady that America has been deprived of for far too long.”

NPO noted:

Melanija Knavs was born on April 26, 1970 in the small Slovenian railroad town of Sevnica — long before she changed the spelling of her name to pursue a modeling career.

Despite the struggles many Slovenians faced during the country’s Communist times, the Knavses worked extremely hard to give their children a positive upbringing.

Melania’s mother, Amalija Ulčnik, worked developing patterns at a factory that manufactured children’s clothing. She had met Viktor Knavs in 1966 who worked as a chauffeur for a nearby town’s mayor.

They instilled Melania and her sister with conservative values such as putting family first and having exceptional work ethic. After looking at the picture of Melania’s parents below, it’s clear she inherited their timeless good looks too!

While pursuing her degree in design and architecture, Melania remained focused in school. She didn’t drink, or party, nor did she smoke. Even with the temptations surrounding her as a college student and successful model, Melania lived a quiet homebound life.

Below is the official White House biography of our First Lady. We commend it to you so that you may learn that she is a mother, wife, has the IQ of a genius and is a woman worthy of respect.

As Proverbs 31:25 says, “She is clothed with strength and dignity; she can laugh at the days to come.”

First Lady Melania Trump.

First Lady of the United States Melania Trump is the wife of President Donald J. Trump, and was born on April 26, 1970 in Slovenia.

Melania Knavs began her modeling career at the age of sixteen. She would pursue a degree at the University of Ljubljana in Slovenia, but pause her studies to advance her modeling career in Milan and Paris before moving to New York in 1996.  As a model, Melania has appeared in high profile ad campaigns and worked with some of the top photographers in the fashion industry, including Patrick Demarchelier, Helmut Newton, Arthur Elgort, Ellen Von Unwerth, Peter Arnell, Antoine Verglas and Mario Testino. She has graced the covers of Vogue, Harper’s Bazaar, British GQ, Ocean Drive, Avenue, In Style, and New York Magazine. Her major layouts include the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue, Allure, Vogue, Self, Glamour, Vanity Fair, and Elle. In addition, Melania has appeared in numerous television commercials and television programs, including co-hosting The View with Barbara Walters.

With a penchant and passion for the arts, architecture, design, fashion and beauty, Melania has thrived on the cultural diversification of New York City. This passion can only be surpassed by her dedication to helping others, and her generosity has been noted. She was Honorary Chairwoman for Martha Graham Dance Company in April 2005, is an active member of the Police Athletic League which honored her with Woman of The Year 2006, has been an Honorary Chairwoman for The Boy’s Club of New York for five consecutive years, and in 2005 The American Red Cross awarded her with Goodwill Ambassador which she has proudly served for four years.  In April of 2008, she was asked by Love Our Children USA and NASDAQ to participate in the Fifth Annual National Love Our Children Day and the beginning of National Child Abuse Prevention month by ringing the closing bell at NASDAQ.  In 2010, Melania was the Chairwoman for The American Heart Association which raised $1.7 Million for research.  Melania’s philanthropic interests represent her humanitarian side, and she remains an indefatigable and dedicated New Yorker.

Melania married Donald Trump in January 2005.  In March of 2006 they welcomed their first child, Barron William Trump.

Melania is also a successful entrepreneur. In April 2010, Melania Trump launched her own jewelry collection.

In 2006, Melania Trump proudly became a citizen of the United States of America.  She is only the second First Lady born outside of the United States. The first since Louisa Adams, wife to John Quincy Adams, the nation’s sixth president.

Mrs. Trump cares deeply about issues impacting women and children, and she has focused her platform as First Lady on the problem of cyber bullying among our youth.

PresidentTrump Signs Executive Order Defunding Planned Parenthood International

/in , , , , , /by

Donald J. Trump has taken the first step confirming his promise to be a pro-life President. The day after the rallies by pro-abortionists across the United States and overseas, the President by executive order defunded Planned Parenthood International.

Steven Ertelt from Life Site News reports:

President Donald Trump today signed an executive order to defund International Planned Parenthood.

Most pro-life Americans are anxiously awaiting Congress to pass a bill to defund the Planned Parenthood abortion business. While that defunding legislation concerns the domestic-based Planned Parenthood abortion corporation, President Trump has the ability to put in place an executive order that would revoke funding for its International affiliate.

When pro-abortion former President Barack Obama took office, Obama overturned a policy that prevented funding of groups that promote or perform abortions overseas. The Mexico City Policy covered over $400 million in federal funds, part of which flowed to the abortion businesses International Planned Parenthood and Marie Stopes International for their foreign efforts.

As LifeNews.com reported, the pro-life policy had been in place during the entirety of the Bush administration and Obama rescinded it on his first week in office. Named for a 1984 population conference where President Reagan initially announced it, the Mexico City Policy made it so family planning funds could only go to groups that would agree to not do abortions or lobby foreign nations to overturn their pro-life laws.

Today, Trump restored the Mexico City Policy by executive order.

Read more…

Every day Americans learn that President Trump is a man of his word. Tens of thousands of the innocent will now live with this stroke of a pen.

RELATED ARTICLE: Pastors lift Trump administration as ‘God’s instruments for good’

Marco Rubio has a hard time with Rex Tillerson — but backed Communist John Kerry

/in , , , /by

Senator Marco Rubio,

I understand you are having a difficult time trying to decide to vote yes to confirm President Trump’s pick for Secretary of State.

Such a shame that you have such a low disregard for Mr. Tillerson because he does not wish to engage Russia as our enemy but as a mutual strategic partner in trade and national security and to defeat terrorism.

John Kerry speaks at Senate Foreign Relations Committee on behalf of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War in Washington, D.C. on April 22, 1971. (AP Photo/Henry Griffin)

Perhaps you should have shown this moral clarity when you voted YES and confirmed the Communist sympathizer John Kerry as Secretary of State.

No Sir – you gave John Kerry  a pass even though this man shredded the US Constitution, engaged us in unconstitutional wars and broke US law by illegally negotiating with Communist North Vietnam while our boys came home in body bags from NAM.

My friend Colonel Bud Day Medal of Honor (RIP)  helped end John Kerry’s presidential aspirations then dipsticks like you hired him as the Secretary of State giving him 4th in line to the presidency.

I think you need to call Bud Day’s widow Doris and apologize to her on your hands and knees for your blatant disrespect for this nation and its Vietnam Veterans.

You supported John Kerry even though he disparaged and lied to Congress about our brave and honorable  Vietnam Veterans – a man who threw his medals (handed to him in under 40 days in Nam)  over the White House fence –  yet you attacked Mr. Tillerson for his support of our future ally Russia.

The New World Order – George Soros Communists hate Russia so you apparently also support this New World Order ideology – shame on you.    Perhaps George Soros is texting you to vote NO on Tillerson.

I salute all our brave and courageous Vietnam Veterans across this nation. I did not serve in Vietnam, but I say this to you all  “Welcome home my brothers”  “May God bless you always”.

As for you Senator Rubio –  go home and find your safe space in Miami. You are not strong enough to protect this nation in the U.S. Senate.

UPDATE: Rubio states he has reservations but will now vote for Mr. Tillerson –  my only question is why did Rubio have NO reservations about supporting John Kerry.

Oxfam Uses Absurd Metrics and Gets Absurd Results by Chelsea Follett

/in , , , /by

Every year, Oxfam releases a report meant to shock the public about the extent of income and wealth inequality. This year’s report claims that the eight richest people on Earth have as much wealth as the bottom half of the world’s population (3.6 out of 7.2 billion people). That’s certainly shocking. It’s also profoundly misleading.

As others have pointed out, Oxfam reached that number with a questionable methodology, which also led them to several other absurd conclusions. According to their own graphs, more poor people live in North America and Europe than China (see the far left of the chart below). How can that be, given that traditional poverty measures show the opposite?

Oxfam isn’t using a traditional poverty measure (such as the number of people with a purchasing-power-adjusted income of less than, say, $2 per day). Instead, they focus on something called “net wealth.” This is the sum of an individual’s wealth minus any debts.

Of course, many people in rich countries carry debt due to university loans or a home mortgage, yet also enjoy high incomes and an enviable standard of living.

Here are some illustrations of just how absurd it is to use net wealth as a measure of poverty.

Consider this. Oxfam claims a penniless, starving man in rural Asia or Sub-Saharan Africa is far richer than an American university graduate with student debt but a high-paying office job, a $2,000 laptop and a penchant for drinking $8 designer coffees.

Let that sink in.

(I must credit Cato’s Adam Bates for that example).

Here is another example, courtesy of Johan Norberg. He points out that his daughter, a child with only about twenty dollars in her piggy bank, is richer than 2 billion people by Oxfam’s logic. If that were true, then the solution would surely not be to take away the humble savings of his daughter and redistribute them among those 2 billion souls, but rather to generate more total wealth, “enlarging the pie” so to speak.

That’s the core problem with obsessing over “inequality.” If the goal is to further human wellbeing, then instead of decreasing inequality through redistribution, we should focus on decreasing poverty by creating ever more wealth. Happily, thanks to the wealth-creating power of market exchange, we’re doing just that. The trend lines all show that poverty (by any reasonable measure) is in retreat.

Republished from the Cato Institute.

Chelsea Follett

Chelsea Follett

Chelsea Follet works at the Cato Institute as a Researcher and Managing Editor of HumanProgress.org.

Sweet and Sour Paris Peace Conference

/in , , , /by

Given a choice, monsieur the diplomat, between two International Peace Conferences-Kazakhstan for Syria or Paris for the Middle East- which would you prefer? Would you like to plough your brain trying to sort out the Islamist rebels from the plain Islamists, finding someone less brutal to replace Assad and a few factions to support him, resisting pressure from the Russians, Iranians, Turks, Hezbollah and the like? Wouldn’t you rather sit around a table in Paris, rubbing shoulders with distinguished ladies and gentlemen, and repeating that it is urgent to settle the “oldest conflict” by finally implementing the oldest solution: two states side by side in security?

For low ranking journalists that didn’t have the chance to come anywhere near the delegations, “covering” the Conference meant  receiving the elevated  address of Foreign Affairs Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault who would present the conclusions reached by the diplomats united in a spirit of sincere friendship for the parties to the conflict. (The day after the Conference, that hasn’t generated much interest worldwide, documents in several languages and videos of some speeches were posted on the Ministry website.)

I easily found a seat in the second row. Most of the people around me were speaking Arabic. I don’t usually cover events in the ministries. My stamping ground is more in the neighborhood of the UPJF, the BNVCA, and defamation hearings at the Palais de Justice. I greeted Gideon Kuntz, didn’t see any familiar faces… until a woman took a seat on my left, turned to me, and said: “I know you.” Right. We met about ten days ago at a party thrown by a journalist friend.  Hustle and bustle near the door. The minister will enter any minute. My fellow American gives me some inside information: “A little while ago I was sitting next to a Palestinian. He told me that the father of one of the female soldiers killed in Jerusalem wrote on his Facebook page, ‘What can you expect when we keep them cooped up like that?'” Brushing aside a dozen reactions that tumbled around in my mind, I answered like a good journalist: “Could be. We’d have to verify it.” She shrugs: “It’s Facebook.” And I say to myself: “It’s a Palestinian.” The minister walks in, accompanied by about 15 people that line up along the wall.

Busy taking notes in my red moleskin notebook with my real fountain pen, I don’t even have the fun of observing the audience. Except for the bald head of Harlem Désir, foreign relations secretary of the Socialist party, seated right in front of me. I wished I could remind him of his gallantry that day in 1990 when a momentous wind storm caught us on the top floor of the Arche de la Défense, during an encounter with delegates from Central Europe. Maybe they represented the new democracies? The wind forced open the sliding glass doors and came barreling into the hall. You could see the wind, it was light green and terrifying. After a long wait someone finally came to take us to an elevator that brought us down to an exit at the top of a long flight of stairs. The wind was too strong, it almost blew me away, I grabbed onto Harlem Désir who escorted me all the way to the metro entrance. Those were different times.

Today, too, the times have changed. The arrogant disdain for Israel that marked the first yeas of the century has morphed here into moderate, measured benevolence, all soft and gentle. Everything about the Conference, from the motivation, hopes, and concerns, to the final recommendations is dipped in the honey of sincere egalitarian friendship. Everything is unanimous, they are all united in the same spirit, they all condemned the horrible terror attack in Jerusalem and all forms of violence and incitement to violence. But. But resolution 2334 of the UN Security Council denounced the colonization; this decision is “stamped with international legality, it’s serious.” To show just how serious that condemnation is, the minister used a strange expression: “it is the voice of the world that spoke.”

And that was the sense of his whole brief speech. The united assembly of more than 70 countries and organizations had acted like a supreme being that observes, weighs, judges, and speaks in a unanimous voice to say the two-state solution, the only viable solution, is in danger. What can be done to reinforce the engagement of the international community and persuade the conflicting parties to resume negotiations? Because direct negotiations are the only way to solve the conflict. The parameters are known: ’67frontières, major UN resolutions, and the 2002 Arab initiative.  Why not “Auschwitz borders?” Jean-Marc Ayrault could have said it straight out in that honeyed voice, the voice of the world, the voice of sincere friendship for Israelis, for Palestinians… He could have said it that way, without a change of tone, without reservations, in his role as honorable spokesman of the international community that says the Law.

The minister repeats that it is urgent to promote the two-state solution, to convince Israelis and Palestinians to resume direct negotiations that, he says again, are the only way to resolve this conflict that has been going on for 50 years, and “produced” 3 wars since 2006. We cannot have stability in the Middle East without peace between Israel and Palestine, peace that is desired by the entire international community. And so on and so forth. Only good things. Peace and friendship and economic development. We are ready to help, says the minister. Help who? The Palestinians that for decades have been swallowing up exorbitant contributions in the belly of corruption? Europe will be able to help the flourishing super high tech Israeli economy that just wants to keep growing without shackles? What encouragement can be expected from France that voted-in sincere friendship and for the good of Israel-for labeling products from the “colonies”?

The minister concludes modestly: we are realists. It’s step by step, little step by little step that we will reach our goal. And sums up: “This Conference is an outstretched hand.”

Three little questions are taken. Q: Will the communiqué be presented tomorrow at the EU foreign affairs Council and on the 17th at the Security Council?  A: Yes for the EU no for the UN.

Q: You said the transfer of the American embassy to Jerusalem would be a provocation. What will be done if the transfer is in fact made? A: I’ll discuss it with Rex Tillerson.

Q: A few months ago France was prepared to recognize the Palestinian state. Is that still on the table? A: We never said it like that. It was meant to be unilateral. We do not want any misunderstanding on that score. Everything will be done in the spirit of this Conference: subdued, restrained, moderate.

End of story. Gidéon, who had tried in vain to ask a question, drops his arm, exasperated.

I leave the building, brave the icy rain, cross Paris in a packed bus, chilled to the bone, starved (no ministerial petit-four for us), and prepared to face up to one more lost cause before midnight: the second debate of the presidential primaries of the left. But first I dash over to i24 news, the only channel that mentions the peace conference. Big news! The Brits opted out of the voice of the world. They didn’t sign the declaration [and subsequently blocked its adoption by the EU Council]. Did my American neighbor know? How about the Irish correspondent she introduced to me just before we went our separate ways? One thing is certain: Jean-Marc Ayrault knew, all the time he was telling us about the unanimous unanimity. Ça alors…

Having struggled for two weeks to find practical information about the venue and accreditation procedures, I had come to think that the dreaded Conference was virtual. Nothing to compare with the urban effervescence last spring, before the weekly demonstrations against the el Khomri labor reform. There were no signs of prestigious delegations in our city or our media.

So it seems that instead of accelerating the tempo of the latest Palestinian diplomatic offensive that began with the UNESCO resolutions forged to slice the bonds between the Jewish people, the land, and the sacred places, the ghost Paris Peace Conference sabotaged it. Hopes of carrying the conclusions to the Security Council where they would be transformed into a binding resolution are apparently dashed.

The closing address like the Conference itself was a sort of non-sequitur: Divorced from reality, as vague as it was pretentious, devoid of concrete details on the chain of words and deeds that have led the peace process to its current impasse. If the conflict persists, it’s not for lack of benevolent attention from the international community. The territorial Israel-Palestinian conflict that could have been solved by the creation of a Palestinian state is imaginary. What is happening and has been going on for more than 50 years, for more than  1400 years, that produces countless wars and atrocities is the old Islamic vindictive hatred* of Judaism. What is playing out in the Middle East is 21st century jihad conquest held in check by a sovereign Jewish state that rejects the suicidal advice poured on it by an ancien régime that calls itself the “international community.”

We owe ourselves a brief moment of satisfaction at the fiasco of the Paris Conference before we face up to the coming episodes of the saga. If it’s true that they cried victory in Ramallah, we should forget the outright refusal of the “Kerry parameters” hammered out by PLO executive committee’s Mustafa Barghouti:

 “First, you cannot make the issue of Palestinian refugees only an issue of compensation; you cannot deny people their right to return to their home,” Limiting the rights of Palestinian refugees to compensation? Unacceptable! “Second, recognition of Israel as a Jewish state would deny the right of the Palestinian people who are citizens of Israel and that is totally unacceptable.” Israel cannot be a Jewish and a democratic state at the same time,” concludes Barghouti, he too speaks the voice of the world.

* Daniel Sibony, Islam, Phobie, Culpabilité

RELATED VIDEO: Fatah’s armed wing hold demonstration.

EDITORS NOTE: The original French version of this column was published by Infoequitable.org. 

The Deception Behind The Women’s March In Washington

/in , , , , /by

The Women’s March which descended upon Washington D.C. and across the nation, apparently in response to the election of Trump as president, marketed itself as being inclusive, non-partisan and generated a statement on their official website that says, “We stand together, recognizing that defending the most marginalized among us is defending all of us.”

Ironically, the rally was held on the 43rd anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 1973 abortion ruling in Roe vs. Wade. Apparently, unborn fetuses don’t need to be defended, just helpless women who hold a grudge against society after eight years of Democrat rule in the White House under Obama.

It is estimated that over 1800 buses were used to shuttle women from across the country like cattle to the event. However, many of the women who had brought their children had a difficult time articulating why they were even there. Ironically, pro-life Muslim women were welcome but non-Muslim women who were pro-life were not. Perhaps this may have had something to do with one of the organizer’s, Linda Sarsour, a Muslim Palestinian- American activist, who has ties to Hamas inspired organizations and has a record of defending Islamic Jihad members such as Muhammad Allen, a known recruiter of suicide bombers. Sarsour has a history of being involved in a number of protests including Black Lives Matter, Ferguson and the Trayvon Martin uprisings.

More evidence has revealed that more than 50 Soros-Funded groups partnered with the Women’s March. Not only was this a well organized event, it was a partisan event and Soros money was everywhere. NYT reporter Asra A. Nomani found financial ties between Soros and at least 56 of the March’s “partners.”

Another group which promoted the ‘March’ and has been prevalent at protests across the country is CPUSA, Communist Party U.S.A. It actively promoted the Women’s March on its website and never has missed an opportunity for disruption at events such as BLM, Ferguson and Trump rallies.

Interestingly, another shadow pro-abortion group who has strongly opposed President Trump on the campaign trail that didn’t hesitate to take to the streets in protest was the Satanic Temple, a group of self-proclaimed atheists and Satanists. This group proudly walked down the street dressed in all black holding the Satanic Temple sign. The Satanists are beginning to become less elusive, though and are now promoting after school Satanic groups for our youth and a self declared Satanic middle school teacher was able to successfully have a Satanic symbol displayed at a square in Boca Raton, Florida.

After Trump’s inauguration many supporters believed that our country had been saved from the over reach of an out of control government and influence from radical leftists and Islamists. It appears that the battle will continue as some organizers who support shariah law claim to fight for women’s rights, others who support communist demagoguery call for women’s emancipation, while others who deny God have chosen promote an evil darkness.

RELATED ARTICLES:

More Than 50 Soros-Funded Groups Partnered With Women’s March On Washington

Women’s March Organizer is a vicious Jew-hater with ties to Islamic Terror

Women’s March on Washington – Communist Party USA

Even Women Who Identify As Satanists And Atheists Protested Donald Trump

VIDEO: Muslim Co-Chair of Woman’s March tried to bury film fighting for Women’s Rights
Twenty Pro-Trump Supporters Killed after pro-Trump demonstration

“Black Lives Matter” and other anarchists riot and destroy D.C.