Everyone is scratching their heads trying to figure out what has gone wrong when disturbing stories break of more attacks by young men killing strangers at random. We are reeling as a nation in the wake of these mass shootings and wondering what has gone wrong.
Our cultural elites have led us down a path of unbelief, and now we are reaping the consequences.
I’m reminded of the story about Voltaire, the famous French skeptic, who helped grease the skids for the bloody French Revolution. When one of his skeptical guests was talking loudly at his home, Voltaire asked him to lower his voice. He didn’t want the servants to hear their godless philosophy, lest they steal the silverware.
It’s the morality, stupid. Of course, this phrase piggybacks on the unofficial campaign slogan of Bill Clinton in 1992: “It’s the economy, stupid!” This simple phrase kept them focused, eventually on to victory.
In today’s crisis, which is not something brand new, it’s been brewing for decades in America: It’s the morality, stupid And what’s the cause of this morality? We have driven God out of the public arena.
Unbelief assumes there is no divine accountability. When there is no fear of God in the land, then people do whatever they feel like doing—even if it inflicts mayhem on others. As an atheist character in Dostoyevsky’s Brothers Karamazov put it: “…since there is no infinite God, there’s no such thing as virtue either and there’s no need for it at all.”
America is ultimately an experiment in self-government. After the founding fathers hammered out the Constitution in the convention in 1787 in Philadelphia, a Mrs. Powell of that city asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government they gave us. His answer was classic: “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it.”
The founders knew that the only way we could sustain this self-government was by the people being virtuous, acting in a moral way. And how would that morality be sustained? Answer: through voluntary religion.
The man who spoke more than any other at the Constitutional Convention was Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania. He is credited with writing some of the Constitution, including the preamble (“We the people”). He noted that religion is necessary for morality: “Religion is the only solid basis of good morals; therefore education should teach the precepts of religion, and the duties of man toward God.”
George Washington said in his Farewell Address that it is religion that sustains morality. If you undermine religion, you’ll undermine morality.
That is precisely what has happened to America. Beginning with a whole series of misguided Supreme Court decisions, religious influence—frankly Christian influence—in society was restricted more and more. By the 1960s, God was effectively kicked out of the public schools.
When he was 14 years old, William J. Murray was the plaintiff in one of the key anti-school prayer cases on behalf of his atheist mother, Madalyn Murray O’Hair. Today, Murray is a born- again Christian, ruing the terrible decision and its consequences.
He once told me, “I would like people to take a look at the Baltimore public schools today versus what they were when I went to those schools in 1963 and my mother took prayer out of the schools. We didn’t have armed guards in the hallways then when we had God in the classroom. But I’ll guarantee you there are armed guards [now]. In fact, the city school system of Baltimore now has its own armed police force.”
We lack a fear of God in our land. Young people have no idea that after they die, they will have to give an account to Jesus, whom the founders called in the Declaration of Independence, “the Supreme Judge of the World.”
In the mid-19th century, one of the Speakers of the House of Representatives was Robert Charles Winthrop, a descendant of John (“a City on a Hill”) Winthrop, the Puritan founder of Boston.
Robert Winthrop gave an address in 1849 at the Massachusetts Bible Society, in which he noted, in effect, our choice is clear: Christianity or violence?
Here’s what Winthrop said:
“All societies of men must be governed in some way or other. The less they have of stringent State Government, the more they must have of individual self-government. The less they rely on public law or physical force, the more they must rely on private moral restraint.
“Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them, or a power without them; either by the word of God, or by the strong arm of man; either by the Bible or by the bayonet.”
Would that we choose the Bible today, as the settlers and the founders of our nation chose to do.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jerry Newcombe, D. Min.http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJerry Newcombe, D. Min.2019-08-07 16:10:332019-08-07 16:20:53It’s the Morality, Stupid
We saw the changes coming. We heard all the historic revisionism about Israel and the boycott/divestment/sanctions of the only democratic state in the Middle East; the anti-Zionist textbooks and programs that took root in colleges and universities across the country; and the assault upon the vulnerable K-12 students. We learned that schools were discouraging little ones from having a “best friend,” that they would be isolated in front of a computer every day, with the adults’ role changing from teacher to facilitator, to increase learning frustration. We know that Common Core brought them difficult math and uninspiring literature, the children learning less, knowing less, and with equalized grades, grasping that they are less sure of themselves. Yes, they’re graduating, but they don’t seem to know enough to hold a decent job or qualify for a higher wage. They know less about their own country, its founding, its history and mission, and more about Islam, resulting in less pride in their heritage and feeling more discontent. They’re learning that men, particularly white men, are worthless, that boys can be girls, that they can indulge in sexual activity at a young age and human babies are dispensable. Has the educational establishment lost its mind and/or purposely ceded control to powers with severely evil intent?
National Education Association (NEA), the largest labor union of professionals with three million members in 14,000 communities across the country, held a 7,000-strong assembly in Houston. They represented faculty and support staff of public schools, colleges and universities, and retirees. With an exemplar budget of more than $341 million for fiscal year 2012-2013, its official mission is “to advocate for educational professionals and to unite our members and the nation to fulfill the promise of public education to prepare every student to succeed in a diverse and interdependent world.” It has drifted off course. Originally conservative, it now lobbies and firmly supports with ample campaign contributions the Democrat party, changing the tenor of the promise of education to indoctrination at full throttle. The assemblage was described as an anti-Israel fest.
The program’s New Business Item #26may be read in its entirety on the link. The several supporting groups listed are notably anti-American, antisemitic, anti-Israel, and supportive of the Palestinian narrative. They form part of the Red/Green Axis (Communist and agents of Islam), using propaganda designed to destroy America’s ideals, undermine Israel’s legitimacy, and to remove security, liberty and our Judeo-Christian values from our children by seeking to sever Christianity from its Jewish roots and graft it onto Islam.
Parents Against Child Detentions (PACD) is an organization of Palestinians in the (Judea-Samaria) West Bank’s Jenin refugee camp, the site of the infamous April 2002 “Jenin Massacre.” Jenin had been the launch site for numerous terrorist attacks against Israel, and Israel’s Defense Forces (IDF) entered, only to walk into a booby-trapped ambush. After a 12-day battle, with 46 to 55 Palestinian fighters and 23 IDF soldiers killed, the Palestinians surrendered and the IDF withdrew a week later. Yet, the official Palestinian report accused Israel of full-scale genocide, a massacre. However, Doctors Without Borders revealed that 500 bodies were actually corpses that had been unearthed from a cemetery and booby-trapped (wired with explosives) by the Palestinians. Islam relies on lies for their agenda; the “massacre” was a hoax to reap world sympathy.
Instead of revealing the truth that Jenin’s constant refugee status continues because their brethren are unwelcoming, PACD blames Israel to again engage world pity. It also accuses Israel of incarcerating Palestinian children, insinuating that these are young, innocent children, but without providing the backstory. To the West, children are our most precious possessions, but to Islam, they are the expendable warrior class, pressed into jihad, trained to kill with deadly weapons and become enthusiastic martyrs. They are practiced at throwing deadly missiles at passing Israeli vehicles; igniting and sending aloft incendiary kites and balloons that destroyed thousands of acres of Israel’s agricultural land, forestry and wildlife; and stabbing unarmed citizens on the streets. Judaism teaches values and ethics, basic life skills, and provides their children with a strong education for a productive future. Islam teaches the obligation of self-sacrifice for Hamas and Allah, for exploitation and death. Their early immersion in warrior activities feeds their desire to engage in criminality and become suicide bombers, with their parents generously rewarded.
Hamoked: Center for the Defense of the Individual is an Israel-based, anti-Israel human rights organization, funded by Europe, the Ford Foundation, The Forward (NY newspaper), the Finnish government, a Ramallah-based NGO and other anti-Semitic foundations. It seeks self-determination for a fictitious “Palestinian” people at the expense of self-determination for the indigenous people, Jews, on their own land for 3,000 years. They use terminology, such as “occupier” and “settlement,” to demonize Israel as the fraud, engaging in apartheid rhetoric to support anti-Israel BDS and cripple her economy. Some of its activities include challenging delays at checkpoints, never acknowledging the need to prevent infiltration for border security, and against the IDF’s destruction of illegal housing built by Bedouins or the UN in defiance of building requirements. Bedouins often refuse other viable land. Again, the slander validates the Palestinians for world opinion.
Defense for Children International-Palestine (DCIPalestine) is an independent Palestinian organization created to defend human rights of children in the Arab-made “humanitarian crisis,” falsely dubbed “Occupied Palestinian Territory.” Again, jihad includes a war of language. Occupied” implies illegality and aggression, but Israel occupies only historically and legally documented territory, and this territory became Israel’s when she won her defensive war of 1967 against five attacking Arab armies. Every inch of Gaza is now under Palestinian control, containing not one Israeli soldier, not one Jewish settler. Yes, their children need to be protected — from the Islamic culture in which they are objectified, used by their parents and Hamas as weapons to carry out violence. The children understand that their lives have little value and their futures hold little promise.
American Friends Service Committee is a religious Quaker society that alleges to work for nonviolence and justice, yet it supports the Islamic culture that encourages violence. Ignoring all the peoples that have lost to Islam, the Friends desire land for Palestinians at the expense of Israel, which is just 1/6th of 1% of the Arab land mass. Friends have worked with UNRWA schools, never changing the students’ educational message that includes biases and violence against Jews, resulting in the continued support of youthful Palestinian terrorists who are at the front lines, shooting, igniting volatile missiles to Israel, and carrying out stabbings and suicidal explosions among Israeli citizens.
Jews Against Anti-Muslim Racism (JAAMR), offers resources for “community education and organizing.” Part of the Islamic psychological war strategy against the West is to go on the offensive with a defensive approach, challenging Islamophobia and anti-Muslim racism to make their prey apologetic and obedient. They instruct and use the word “terrorist” to include white supremacists and others who commit ideologically motivated acts of violence, thereby deflecting the focus from Muslims. A member of JAAMR’s advisory circle, blatantly antisemitic activist and jihada, Linda Sarsour, often speaks to the community, organizations and foundations, high schools and universities, synagogues and Hebrew schools, to curb free speech and whitewash Islamic crimes and stealth jihad.
Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), a left-wing activist organization, claims to oppose anti-Jewish, anti-Muslim and anti-Arab bigotry, but Its members disrespect the international laws of Israel’s sovereignty by speaking of Israeli occupation on her own land. Generously supported by Nazi collaborator George Soros, JVP stands with antisemitic representative Ilhan Omar, BDS and Trump resistance, and against Israel. Very active on college campuses across the country, the group uses organizers for grassroots anti-Israel advocacy, and strong-arm tactics to censor pro-Israel speakers. Their objective is to create a widespread Jewish anti-Zionist movement.
The final entry listed was the No Way to Treat a Child campaign, designed to continue the victimhood position of Islam, in this instance, to pressure relevant Israeli authorities to “end the detention and abuse of Palestinian children.” This is blatant mendacity; it is not – neither has it ever been – Israeli policy to kidnap and incarcerate small children! There are 203 minors in Israeli prisons, 80 percent over 16, none under 14, all guilty of having committed deadly jihad crimes. While we understand childhood to be the time for developing building blocks for educational achievement, economic productivity, responsible citizenship, lifelong health, and successful parenting of the next generation, Islam’s belief system is diametrically opposed to our own. It is a shame-blame culture that creates stress, emphasizes victimhood and, in fact, weakens the brain’s development. Females are subservient, the males disrespectful of all women, and their youth are made ready to do battle and sacrifice their lives for jihad. Palestinian children are kept uneducated, exploited by their families as terrorist decoys, human shields, and participants in propaganda films for monetary gain. Islam is no way to treat a child; it is the dehumanization of the individual.
Why have some Christian groups joined on the side of Islam? We may first credit the strain of Christianity’s bitter split from Judaism, the ensuing framework for the negative perception of the Jew, and the charge of deicide by Bishop Melito of Sardis in the second century and into the time of the Crusades, when antisemitism became an integral part of European and Western culture. It may be the desire for supersessionism, or replacement theology, which asserts that the New Covenant has superseded the Mosaic covenant.
There are myriad speculations for why such Jews become virulent and join the antisemites to disparage and harm other Jews, but there are no definitive answers. I believe them to be collateral damage from the many centuries of persecution, and the totality of stories of cruelty and exile in an unwelcoming world. These “Jews” have abandoned Judaism and are eager to become invisible and unrecognizable as they join their foes in a future globalist world. There is a curious parallel with Chancellor Angela Merkel, who apparently seeks to erase Germany and its dark, evil past by receiving hordes of migrants of another culture, but also to annihilate and completely change her country, hoping to make Germany invisible and indistinguishable within the burgeoning global community.
Of the Red and Green factions, there is bound to be a battle for sole domination of the rest of us, and there’s no telling what the globalists will be – a choice between poisons – but neither bodes well.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Tabitha Korolhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngTabitha Korol2019-08-07 15:48:372019-08-07 15:53:38More bad news from the home front . . . the betrayal by the National Education Association
YouTube blacklisted Killing Europe, a documentary about Islam and mass immigration in Europe that had previously been hosted on the platform for over a year, just days after Amazon Prime made the same decision.
Unlike Amazon, which said it censored the documentary due to “quality” concerns, YouTube accused the documentary — a critical examination of immigration in Europe — of violating its “hate speech” policy.
The documentary is a mix of on-the-ground footage and interviews, including interviews with ex-Muslims, British politicians, and victims of the notorious Rotherham rape epidemic.
“This is America, not Canada and not Europe — we’re supposed to have free speech,” said director Michael Hansen in a video message to his subscribers. “So why is it that they’re working so hard to [pull] my movies down?”
Supporters of the documentary have since uploaded it to BitChute, a decentralized free-speech oriented YouTube competitor.
YouTube’s takedown message to Hansen is as follows:
Hi WeAre138 Productions,
Our team has reviewed your content, and, unfortunately, we think it violates our hate speech policy. We’ve removed the following content from YouTube:
How ironic that, on the day Democrat Senator Robert Byrd who was a recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan and rose to the title of Kleagle and Exalted Cyclops of his local chapter died, the US Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the gun control laws that are embedded firmly in the Democratic Party’s racist roots.
At the heart of the McDonald v. City of Chicago case that is posted on the US Supreme Court’s Internet site is the Court’s decision that the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution – that was pushed through by Republicans after the Civil War, led by Republican Senator Charles Sumner – is the anchor that binds state and local governments to the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self defense.
Otis McDonald, one of the plaintiffs, is a black man who just wanted to have the right to protect himself from criminals who terrorized him in his home with frequent break-ins. The only current black US Supreme Court member, Justice Clarence Thomas who was appointed by Republican President George H. W. Bush, courageously delved into the racist origins of gun control laws to demonstrate that such laws have no place in a nation of free people. The liberal justices on the Court, including Justice Sonia Sotomayor who was appointed last year by Democrat President Barack Obama, voted against the black plaintiff and his fellow Chicago residents.
The McDonald case provides a bird eye’s view of the history of Democratic Party racism. Referenced in the Court’s opinion is the 1856 Republican Party Platform that includes language about the “right of the people to keep and bear arms.” A key source used by the Court is the book “Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution 1863-1877” by Dr. Eric Foner.
Forner’s book reveals how, before the Civil War ended, Southern states enacted “Slave Codes” that prohibited slaves from owning firearms. After Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the 1863 Emancipation Proclamation that freed slaves in the rebelling states, and after Republicans pushed through the Thirteenth Amendment freeing all the remaining slaves, Democrats in the South persisted in keeping the newly freed slaves from owning the means to protect themselves – guns.
The Supreme Court in the McDonald decision wrote also about how, after the Civil War, the Southern States started passing laws, called “Black Codes”, to systematically disarm blacks, specifically the over 180,000 blacks who returned to the states of the old Confederacy after serving in the Union Army. In response to the “Black Codes,” the Republican-controlled Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866. But the Democrats would not be deterred. Very soon after the 1866 law was enacted, Alabama, followed by other Southern states, again passed “Black Codes” that made it illegal for blacks to own firearms.
Cited by the Court in the McDonald case, as an example of such a discriminatory code, is the Mississippi law that stated: “no freedman, free negro or mulatto, not in the military service of the United States government, and not licensed so to do by the board of police of his or her county, shall keep or carry fire-arms of any kind, or any ammunition, dirk or bowie knife.” In one Southern town, according to the Supreme Court, the marshal confiscated the weapons of the returning black Union soldiers and, at every opportunity, promptly shot black people.
The Court’s McDonald decision records that: “Throughout the South, armed parties, often consisting of ex-Confederate soldiers serving in the state militias, forcibly took firearms from newly freed slaves”. In his book about Reconstruction, Dr. Foner revealed that in 1866, the Ku Klux Klan was started as a Tennessee social club. The Klan then became a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party and spread into other Southern states, launching a “reign of terror” against Republican leaders, black and white. The Klan would “order the colored men to give up their arms; saying that everybody would be Kukluxed in whose house fire-arms were found”.
In the McDonald decision, the Court pointed out how the Republican-controlled Congress, while debating the Fourteenth Amendment, referred to the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental right deserving of protection.
Republican Senator Samuel Pomeroy described three “indispensable” “safeguards of liberty under our form of Government”, one of which was the right to keep and bear arms. Pomeroy said: “Every man . . . should have the right to bear arms for the defense of himself and family and his homestead. And if the cabin door of the freedman is broken open and the intruder enters for purposes as vile as were known to slavery, then should a well-loaded musket be in the hand of the occupant to send the polluted wretch to another world, where his wretchedness will forever remain complete”.
Pomeroy’s words reflect exactly the sentiment expressed by Otis McDonald when he and his fellow Chicagoans filed a law suit against the Democrat-controlled City of Chicago that had confiscated their weapons, leaving them to the mercy of intruders who had broken open his door and entered his home for vile purposes.
With leftists seeking to blame the El Paso shooting on President Trump, guns, white people and whatever other boogieman will help score political points, a simple fact should be understood:
Murder is a Democrat thing.
We can start with the striking statistic that 68 percent of all homicides occur in just certain parts of 5 percent of America’s counties — and all, or virtually all, of these are Democrat areas.
Also striking is Democrats’ devolution on prenatal infanticide. The line always was, though the savvy never believed it, “We want abortion to be safe, legal and rare.” Leftists also insisted that “we don’t really know when life begins” or when “an unviable tissue mass becomes a baby.” To echo Barack Obama’s debate disclaimer from some years ago, that’s above their “pay grade.”
But all that has been aborted. Now leftists support prenatal infanticide up until birth, and sometimes beyond, though this is subject to change without notice. (Coming, perhaps, is the day leftists will absolutely know when an “unviable tissue mass” becomes human: when it can vote Democrat.)
In other words, yes, he’s a baby; yes, he’s human.
And, yes, you can murder him because you feel like it. How sociopathic can you get?
This devolution is no surprise. Leftists are, almost one and all, de facto atheists; as such, they essentially believe man is just a material being, a chemicals-and-water organic robot. To quote barrel-of-laughs botanist Lawrence Trevanion, people are “objects that perceive.”
Obviously, viewing people as objects leads to objectification; you use objects and, when the spirit moves you, maybe even abuse objects. This is why leftists such as sanctimonious Pete Buttigieg and Irish Bob (O’Rourke) will politicize tragedies such as the El Paso and Dayton shootings before the blood is even dry. To them, the victims are objects that serve a purpose, a means to an end.
So they can be human props, just like the Illegal-alien Children in Cages™, or kids paraded in front of press conferences or on stage at Democratic National Conventions. “Do it for the children?” It’s really, “Do it with the children” or “Do it to the children” — whatever yields the power you crave.
Of course, projecting, leftists are also full of the hate they ascribe to others. (After all, they’re incapable of hating what they see as the sin without hating who they see as the sinner, so they assume others operate likewise.) This is why former CNN host Reza Aslan, an Iranian immigrant who once ate human flesh on television, recently sent a tweet in which he appeared to say that all Trump supporters should be eradicated.
If that was his meaning, he’d just be carrying on a long tradition. The “Left” has been bloody ever since it was born during the French Revolution, where Maximilien Robespierre’s crew killed thousands in the Reign of Terror. Since then, the USSR’s Stalin, China’s Mao, Cambodia’s Pol Pot and others have added approximately 100 million corpses to the total. The formula is simple, too: Leftists+Sufficient Power=Dropped Mask and Mass murder.
Power really is the only limiting factor because godlessness, that leftist norm, correlates with moral nihilism, and thus are leftists bereft of true moral constraints. Fyodor Dostoevsky explained this state of being in The Brothers Karamazov, writing, “Without God, all things are permitted.” Leftists don’t have principles, but preferences — which is why they’re notorious for the political-winds-enabled goalpost shift.
Worse still is how leftists (and the conservatives who defend yesterday’s liberals’ mistakes) destroy children, on the inside, with corruptive miseducation, entertainment and sexual-devolutionary messages and temptations. From bodies to hearts to minds to souls to statues and traditions and beyond, threatening all that’s great and good, destruction is leftists’ stock in trade.
Leftists were once part of the counter-culture, but the only culture that’s truly theirs is the Culture of Death, that dark phenomenon Pope John Paul II so lamented. So you can point fingers, modern Democrats, but in your hearts some of you, I suspect, know exactly what too many of you are: stone-cold killers.
A study from the University of Pennsylvania finds that racism in the U.S. has significantly decreased since President Trump’s election in 2016.
This finding comes amid backlash from students, when many on college campuses are claiming that Trump is racist.
A recent study from the University of Pennsylvania finds that racism in America has significantly decreased since President Donald Trump’s election in 2016, directly contradicting the narrative pushed among many academics and mainstream media personalities.
The Rise of Trump, the Fall of Prejudice? Tracking White Americans’ Racial Attitudes 2008-2018 via a Panel Survey was authored by UPenn political science professor Daniel J. Hopkins and research assistant Samantha Washington.
Hopkins, in an article for FiveThirtyEight, detailed on Tuesday the study, which used 13 waves of panel surveys to gather data and determined that white racial prejudice against African Americans and Hispanic Americans has declined since 2016, when Trump was elected president.
Hopkins noted that the fall in prejudice was present for both Democrats and Republicans.
Hopkins and Washington, according to the study, voice their opinions on Trump and his statements.
“As a political leader, Donald Trump has used racist rhetoric to build political support,” the study states.
“In his campaign and first few years in office, Donald Trump consistently defied contemporary norms by using explicit, negative rhetoric targeting ethnic/racial minorities. Did this rhetoric lead white Americans to express more prejudiced views of African Americans or Hispanics, whether through the normalization of prejudice or other mechanisms?” the study’s co-authors asked at another point in the study.
Ultimately, though, the study found that the “racist” rhetoric from the president has not resulted in more racist attitudes among Americans.
“We find that via most measures, white Americans’ expressed anti-Black and anti-Hispanic prejudice declined after the 2016 campaign and election, and we can rule out even small increases in the expression of prejudice,” the study’s abstract states.
This new finding contradicts ongoing public perception.
A Quinnipiac University poll found in 2018 that 55 percent of survey respondents believed that “President Trump has emboldened people who hold racist beliefs,” according to the study.
“Latino approval of President Trump has skyrocketed to 50 percent. We’ve had the lowest Latino unemployment in history under President Trump,” Joel Valdez, a Mexican-American and recent student at the University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign. “Latinos and African-American[s] are prospering under the Trump Administration.”
“Yet, according to the left and the mainstream media, you’d expect worse,” Valdez, who is also an intern at the Leadership Institute, Campus Reform’s parent organization, continued. “As a Latino, I’m told to expect rampant racism, but that’s not America today or one I’ve experienced, especially under President Trump.”
Hopkins, however, explains that he believes that Trump has been “elevating racially charged issues.”
“For a president who has routinely made appeals to white voters’ racial anxieties, it might sound counterintuitive that white Americans have become less prejudiced since his election,” Hopkins said in his article. “Even if Americans aren’t becoming more racist on average, racist rhetoric, like Trump’s attacks on the Democratic congresswomen, still can reshape the political environment.”
The UPenn results also come amid a time during which many politicians have labeled Trump “racist.” Prominent Democrats, like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and presidential candidate Sen. Cory Booker, have both accused the president of racism.
“You have a racist mind in your head, and a racist heart in your chest,” Ocasio-Cortez told Trump on Twitter.
Booker alleged that Trump is “worse than a racist,” according to CNN.
Perceptions that Trump is “racist” extend far beyond members of Congress, though.
In the last week alone, Campus Reform has reported on a professor who doubled down after comparing young Trump supporters to Hitler Youth, as well as another professor who asserted that Trump is the “most racist person.”
As Campus Reform previously reported, students indicated that Obama’s immigration policy quote was racist, but only when they thought it was actually a Trump quote.
“I think that policy comes from a place of white American nationalism,” one student said about the quote, before being told that Obama had said it.
Another student remarked that “Donald Trump has embraced this rhetoric of racism and xenophobia that’s not beneficial to our country at all.”
In another recent Campus Reform video, students characterized statements made by former Vice President Joe Biden as “racist” when they thought those quotes were from Trump.
Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @ethanycai.
Will you help expose liberal bias on America’s campuses?
Campus Reform exposes the liberal bias and abuse against conservatives on America’s colleges and universities.
As a Campus Reform reader, you know about the abuse taking place at our nation’s higher education institutions, and you know how important it is to bring these stories to light.
College campuses are no longer bastions of higher learning. Leftist professors indoctrinate students with their agendas. They even silence conservative students with their attempts to suppress free speech.
Campus Reform depends on the financial support of concerned Americans like you to report on leftist indoctrination on college campuses and uncover the blatant misconduct of university administrators, faculty, and students.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Campus Reform Campus Wirehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCampus Reform Campus Wire2019-08-07 10:48:472019-08-07 10:48:47UPenn study on racism in Trump era SMASHES the Left’s narrative
What is the Transgender Revolution? John Horvat II has described what we are seeing in America and across Western Civilization today as “sexual anarchy.”
Thus, the present phase of the Sexual Revolution is the transgender agenda—a step that was proposed immediately after the imposition of same-sex “marriage.”
The transgender agenda allows people of one sex to mutilate themselves surgically and chemically to appear like the other sex. It also permits people to self-identify as any number of imaginary “genders” that express their psychological state. Finally, transgender activists seek to get the government to recognize, finance and legally protect their declared state. It even threatens those who refuse to accept the charade with penalties. [Emphasis added]
The Church Militant has been documenting the Transgender Revolution and sexual anarchy within the Catholic Church. Michael Voris, founder of Church Militant and a former homosexual, did a faith based investigation video expose titled “Homosexuality.” Church Militant notes, “Persons with same sex attractions deserve our respect and compassion. But the militant gay movement’s message that ‘gay’ is good is completely false. This lie is confusing society and hurting the individuals themselves.” [Emphasis added]
The Boy Scouts of America are continuing to cover-up a “pedophilia epidemic within their organization,” a group of lawyers alleged Tuesday in a new lawsuit.
The Abused in Scouting lawyers said they’ve identified 350 previously unknown scoutmasters and volunteers who allegedly preyed on boys — and whose names were not known to law enforcement or in the BSA’s internal database, which critics have called “perversion files.”
“You can’t look at these files and not come to the conclusion that this was a massive problem that was hidden,” attorney Tim Kosnoff said at a press conference.
The Boy Scouts of America placed transgenders in leadership positions. The result is massive lawsuits that may bankrupt an organization because it violated the 12th Scout Law:
“A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent.” [Emphasis added]
Social media giants like Facebook and Google and public schools have embraced the Transgender Revolution. Social media sites allow individuals to choose their preferred gender pronoun. In Virginia a high school teacher was fired for using the wrong gender pronoun. In Colorado the Christian owned Masterpiece Cakeshop was sued for refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same sex couple. In Canada a salon has been forced to closed for refusing to remove the hair on a transgender man’s genitals.
The next phase of Sexual Anarchy
Horvat warns, “To understand the Sexual Revolution, one must see it as a process leading to anarchy and nihilism. Its revolutionaries will always be searching for ever more anarchical manifestations of sexuality. They will always give free rein to unbridled passions on the path to self-annihilation.All taboos must be overturned. Everyone must accept all behaviors, which must be given protection of the law.” [Emphasis added]
There is a movement to add pedophiles to the LGBTQ movement by redefining them as “minor attracted persons.” The sexual anarchy can only lead to the destruction of the traditional nuclear family. Where anything goes so goes the nuclear family.
We are also seeing governments lowering the minimum age of consent, Hollywood pushing polygamy and unbridled passions in films like Midsommar about a pagan cult. If you thought it couldn’t get worse we now have the rise of sex robots (i.e. like those in the original Blade Runner and Austin Powers’ sexbots). The Glazov Gang interviewed Barak Lurie on The Rise of the Sex Machines, where he reveals how many women will soon lose their husbands to sex robots.
Gird yourself to a time of debauchery not seen since the fall of the Roman Empire. We are now in a dangerous even deadly period of sexual anarchy.
The New York Post reported that, “Dayton mass shooter Connor Betts was reportedly the lead singer of a misogynistic “pornogrind” metal band called Menstrual Munchies — which released songs about rape, murder, necrophilia and other gruesome acts against women.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2019-08-07 08:06:352019-08-17 07:44:19The ‘Transgender Revolution’: Sexual Anarchy in the Catholic Church, Boy Scouts of America and Public Schools
It has become commonplace among Leftists — not just Ilhan Omar — to claim that “white men” are a greater threat than jihad terrorists. (They say nothing about white jihad terrorists.) We have debunked this claim many times here at Jihad Watch, and here is another able takedown of this enduringly popular Big Lie.
“WALSH: Ilhan Omar Claims White Men ‘Cause Most Of The Deaths’ In America. She’s Wrong. Here Are The Facts.” By Matt Walsh, Daily Wire, July 25, 2019:
Imbecilic bigot Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) claimed in a recently resurfaced interview on Qatari propaganda network Al Jazeera that Americans should be “fearful” of white men who are “causing most of the deaths within this country.” These racist and blatantly false comments came in response to a question about Islamophobia. The interviewer asked if Islamophobia might be the result of a reasonable fear people have about Islamic terrorism. Omar could have responded that we shouldn’t fear anyone based on race, ethnicity, or religion, and that each person should be judged according to his or her own merits — but instead, she took the opportunity to fear monger about the dreaded white man.
“I would say our country should be more fearful of white men across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country,” Omar said. “And so if fear was the, the driving force of policies to keep America safe — Americans safe inside of this country — we should be profiling, monitoring, and creating policies to fight the radicalization of white men.”…
It is often claimed, and not just by Omar, that white people are responsible for most of the domestic terrorism in America. The most common source cited for this claim is a 2017 Government Accountability Office report that found that more people have been killed by right-wing terrorists than by Islamic terrorists. How did they arrive at that conclusion? Here’s a relevant passage from the report:
…of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far-right politics violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73%) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27%). The total number of fatalities is 106 for far right violent extremists and 119 for radical Islamist violent extremists over the approximately 15-year period. However, 52% of the deaths attributable to radical Islamist violent extremists occurred in a single event — an attack on the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida in 2016.
In order to make “far-right violent extremists” the deadliest, one has to compile his aggregate numbers beginning on September 12, 2001. That seems an oddly specific date. Why not start on January 1, 2001? How about January 1, 2000? Isn’t it easier and cleaner to look at the numbers over the past 20 years, since the beginning of the new century? Well, the reason for starting on September 12, 2001 is obvious — it excludes the deadliest terror attack in American history, which was carried out by Islamic extremists. In other words, if we arbitrarily ignore the 3,000 people radical Islamists killed in one day, then Muslim terrorists have recently killed fewer people than have right-wing extremists. This is a bit like tabulating the total number of people drowned in shipwrecks except for anyone who happened to drown on April 15, 1912.
If you want to know about shipwrecks, it seems the Titanic ought to be a prominent part of that analysis. Similarly, any analysis of terrorism in the United States must obviously include the most devastating terror attack this country has ever experienced. But here’s the kicker: Even if you did begin your tabulation on September 12, 2001, deaths by Islamic terrorism still dwarf all other categories because over 1,000 people have died from illnesses tied to 9/11 in the intervening years. Or do they also not count?
Of course, if we expand our view and look at the problem on a global scale, the threat of far-right terrorism begins to look like Pluto compared to Islamic terrorism’s Jupiter. The Global Terrorism Index found 66 deaths caused by far-right groups worldwide between 2013 and 2017. It also found that 18,000 total people were killed by terrorists in just the year 2017 alone. Who do we imagine is carrying the bulk of that load? We know it’s not the far-right white men….
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2019-08-07 06:33:382019-08-08 07:22:34Here’s why Ilhan Omar’s claim that ‘white men’ are greater threat than jihad terrorists is wrong
Democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Julian Castro have agreed to speak at the convention of a radical Islamist group with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and hostility towards progressive Muslims and values.
Sanders and Castro will participate in a “presidential forum” held by the Islamic Society of North America(ISNA) during its convention in Houston August 31, 2019.
ISNA says it is inviting other Democratic presidential candidates and President Donald Trump to address its audience.
The U.S. Justice Department lists ISNA as an “entity” of the Muslim Brotherhood, a radical and often violent arm of the Islamist global political project. The Brotherhood’s goal is a worldwide caliphate with all of humanity living under sharia law.
The Trump administration announced three months ago that it was considering designating the Brotherhood as a domestic terrorist organization.
As we reported in June, Trevor Noah, the progressive host of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show, is also slated to speak at the ISNA convention.
He, like Sanders and Castro, is apparently unaware of—or is unconcerned with—ISNA’s radical ideology, including expelling Muslims for Progressive Values, a pro-LGBT group, from its conference in 2017 or the fact one of ISNA’s past presidents endorsed the execution of homosexuals by sharia-based governments.
By speaking at the event, Noah, Sanders and Castro are helping ISNA appear as moderate leaders of the Muslim-American community (not to mention helping ISNA raise money through ticket sales).
The presidential forum is also being hosted by Emgage Foundation and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), a group that has an inflammatory and Islamist-friendly history but has taken a stronger public stance against the Islamist ideology in recent years.
ISNA was designated as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-funding trial in U.S. history – that of the Holy Land Foundation, an entity founded by the Muslim Brotherhood to finance Hamas (the Brotherhood’s Palestinian wing).
It was during this trial that the Justice Department explicitly listed ISNA as an “entity” of the Muslim Brotherhood’s American network. This determination was supported by large quantities of publicly available evidence and internal Brotherhood documents.
The Holy Land Foundation actually operated from within ISNA, with money for Hamas passing from ISNA accounts to the Holy Land Foundation for distribution to the terrorist group.
U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis upheld the designation of ISNA as an unindicted co-conspirator in 2009, citing “ample” evidence linking ISNA to the Hamas/Brotherhood operation.
The current president of ISNA, Sayyid Syeed, was one of ISNA’s founders when it was established by the Brotherhood. ISNA was listed in a 1991 Brotherhood memo, which described their “work in America as a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”
Syeed was filmed in 2006 saying, “Our job is to change the constitution of America.”
The Fiqh Council of North America, once a part of ISNA but now an official “affiliate” of ISNA, also has radical members and underpinnings.
You can read more about the radical makeup of the ISNA-affiliated Fiqh Council here.
The website for ISNA’s upcoming convention does not currently list its speakers but, if the past is any indication, it will include known extremists who appear moderate for condemning Al-Qaeda, ISIS and “terrorism” but support other terrorists like Hamas and an assortment of extremism, bigotry and anti-Western conspiracy theories.
By speaking at ISNA’s event, it is clear that these top leaders in the progressive movement still have a blind spot when it comes to the Islamist ideology. They usually don’t want to name it, exert no effort to identify it and seem uninterested in taking the time for a simple Google search to vet groups like ISNA.
The presence of Trevor Noah, Bernie Sanders, Julian Castro and possibly more Democratic presidential candidates helps ISNA hide behind a moderate veneer and cleverly use its progressive partners to advance its anti-progressive agenda.
If Sanders, Castro and Noah are genuine about the need to detoxify our political environment of extremist rhetoric and ideologies as they say they are, they should cancel their appearances at ISNA’s convention.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Vlad Tepes Bloghttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngVlad Tepes Blog2019-08-07 05:40:452019-08-07 05:44:27VIDEO: More on Google bias by an ENGINEER at Google
Randall Smith, with tongue in cheek, writes of a woman who has finally found the courage to accept her true identity.
I have a friend who came out to me recently – as a Catholic. “I identify as Catholic,” she told me. “I didn’t know there was a name for what I was at first, and I grew up in a community that was constantly mocking Catholics. But deep down, I always knew I was different. And when I found people who were out and proud, I found myself.”
“What pronouns do you use?” I asked her. “All of them,” she replied with a quizzical look. “It depends upon the sex and number of people to which I am referring.” She grew up with a Jewish father who was an editor and a Christian mother who was a school teacher. Her grandfather was a Jewish émigré who made a living as a writer. As a result, she just can’t bring herself to write “Everyone has their book” rather than “Everyone has his book.” “If I wrote it the other way, I would hear my mother groaning in my head.” Nor can she call a single person “they.” “It’s just the way I was raised,” she explains. “I hope people can respect my culture.” When addressing her, she prefers “Mrs.” or “Yes Ma’am.”
She can take a good-natured joke about Catholics, but noting the long history of discrimination against them, most jokes or jibes at the expense of Catholics she considers odious and should be avoided. She is opposed to any and all discrimination against Catholics, naturally, whether in housing or jobs. It would be no more acceptable to her for someone to say to a job applicant, “But Miss X, you’re Catholic,” than it would be to say, “But Miss X, you’re gay.”
She considers it as discriminatory for someone to ask, “But Mrs. X, how could you be a fair-minded federal judge, you’re Catholic?” as it would be to ask, “How could you be a fair-minded federal judge, you’re gay?” She considers people ignorant who would say, “We would like to hire you, but it is just too controversial these days to hire someone who is so openly Catholic.” If that seems odd, just insert the word “gay” for “Catholic,” and you’ll get the idea. She believes these are impermissible and immoral acts of discrimination that must stop.
Since she has come out at as a Catholic, she now makes clear to people that she does not appreciate (or tolerate) the usual crude jokes and bigoted comments people often make about Catholics. And if people speak about sexuality in a casual or coarse way in her presence, she considers this a form of aggression and a violation of her safe space.
She wears her wedding ring very openly, so she considers it extremely rude if any man makes suggestive comments or tries to “hit on her” in a bar. She sees no reason why she shouldn’t be able to visit bars and cafés like every other woman and be able to sit there in peace without be accosted by men who don’t respect her sexual preferences – that is to say, her preference for sexual relations with just one man who is her husband.
Some bigoted people seem to think that she should just stay out of the bar if she isn’t interested in hooking up. But she sees no reason why their sexo-centric orientation should somehow trump her non-sexo-centric orientation.
She likes to talk about philosophy, politics, and religion, and sometimes baseball. And she can’t understand why talk about men and how they look in tight jeans should be considered the default topic of conversation among women. She has found tremendous support for her preferences in this area since she has come out as a Catholic, from women and even from some of the men she has met. She tells me that these people have been tremendously supportive in helping her realize her new Catholic identity.
I knew this woman when she was younger. She said she could never be Catholic. I tried to be understanding and not laugh. But I knew. Most of us knew. That unshakeable desire for truth. We would shake our heads, point to her, and whisper, “Catholic.” It was only a matter of time. I can remember a friend of mine who said that she just needed to spend a little time with others in the community, and she would come out. And sure enough, she did. I’m not saying it’s biological. It’s a choice. But sometimes, you just know.
Her coming out has been hard for some of her more narrow-minded friends, but you know, when you love someone, you just have to accept them for who they are. And she’s made it clear: she is a Catholic. I just hope everyone can put their petty prejudices aside and support her in this brave decision.
Too many people these days are Catholic and just don’t want to admit it. There’s so much pressure to conform and just “fit in” with society. Go to the parties. Drink heavily. Talk about sex like it was a football game or a chess match – as if it were some sort of power struggle. Be crude and indifferent. Disrespect your parents.
But my friend has chosen a different path. It may not be for everyone, but all she is asking for is acceptance. I hope people can support her in her decision as she accustoms herself to this new, liberating sense of self.
My friend has a tremendous talent for organizing, and she has been thinking recently about organizing something she calls “Catholic Awareness Week” to help raise awareness of the history of discrimination against Catholics and to educate people about what it really means to be a Catholic. Moreover people around the country could fly the yellow Vatican flag from their windows everywhere to demonstrate their solidarity with Catholic values and principles and to show that they refuse to discriminate.
How could anyone object to that?
COLUMN BY
Randall Smith
Randall B. Smith is the Scanlan Professor of Theology at the University of St. Thomas in Houston. His most recent book, Reading the Sermons of Thomas Aquinas: A Beginner’s Guide, is now available at Amazon and from Emmaus Academic Press.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Catholic Thinghttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Catholic Thing2019-08-07 05:26:182019-08-07 05:26:18Coming Out as Catholic
“Without a racial classification for Arab-Americans by the U.S. Census Bureau, the population’s mental health goes largely unstudied – particularly in a political climate that threatens it.” – Science writer Passant Rabie.
Here is an article you likely didn’t see from a publication called ScienceLine. Writer Passant Rabie is an Egyptian living in New York who is concerned about environmental justice as well as race and genetics.
In her article she argues that there should be a box for Arabs on questionnaires and on the census to identify the exact number of Arabs living in America.
She explains that their mental health suffers (even more than she says it already does!) when they must check the “white” box.
Arab-Americans’ mental health suffers due to census box
Within my first week of moving from Egypt to the U.S., I was forced to undergo a series of medical exams and receive a host of vaccinations. But it wasn’t the needles piercing into my left arm that made it an unpleasant welcome to a new country. It was the medical forms.
Before filling out my information at the student health center, I was asked to check an ethnicity box. I hovered my pencil over the given options: white, black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander.
I struggled to find where I fit in. And then, right there next to the ‘white’ category, it read in parenthesis, “A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.”
This was awkward. I was about to get a tuberculosis shot in order to stay in a place where I already felt like I didn’t belong.
Rather than having our own racial category, U.S. residents originating from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) are made to check off “white” on their health forms. Even for someone like me, just arrived and whose jet-lag still hadn’t worn off, checking off that ethnic box was alienating. I couldn’t imagine what it would be like for those who had grown up here, and all the times they were made to check off a box that wasn’t theirs.
Beyond cloaking millions of people in invisibility, the lack of a MENA ethnic box has also proven problematic when trying to conduct research on the minority group’s mental health. Approximately 3.7 million Americans claim Arab ancestry, according to estimates by the U.S. Census Bureau. But there is no way to obtain nationwide data on Arab-Americans’ health because they are not identified as an ethnic group. This leads to major health disparities and an inability to provide for the group’s medical and psychological needs.
She tells us that Arabs in America have a lot of mental health problems:
Meanwhile, no MENA box means crucial nation-wide data on the mental health of Arab-Americans’ continues to go unrecorded at a time when anti-Muslim rhetoric and its accompanying mental health stress is on the rise.
People of Middle Eastern descent are more prone to psychological distress, as revealed by a 2013 study that was the first to estimate the prevalence of psychological disorders among the MENA population in the U.S. The study compared the mental health disparities between people grouped as ‘non-Hispanic whites,’ revealing that ‘whites’ from the Middle East were twice as likely to report serious psychological distress when compared to whites of European descent. Additionally, Middle-Easterners suffering from psychological distress were less likely to have seen a mental health professional within the last 12 months, according to the study.
Read the whole thing. She says that mental health problems already existed in the Arab community, but we made the problem worse for them after 9/11. Hmmmm?
See that she also blames Trump (who doesn’t!) because she says his administration nixed the idea of a special category for Arabs on the 2020 Census form.
What do you think?
I do think we need a special category for Arabs so that we can have a count of how many are living in the US.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2019-08-07 05:09:552019-08-07 05:20:49Arab Americans Say their Mental Health Suffers Because There is No Box for Them
A gun rights group has warned President Donald Trump not to underestimate the volatile effect proposing gun control legislation could have on his base.
Gun Owners of America, a gun rights organization with more than 2 million members, called on Trump and other lawmakers Monday to reject calls for gun control in the wake of the El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, shootings.
“We think it’s important for Congress and the president to know that gun owners do not support the gun control measures Trump is advocating,” Erich Pratt, the group’s senior vice president, said in exclusive comments to The Daily Caller News Foundation.
“Many presidents have failed to recognize how gun control motivates voters. He doesn’t know how volatile this issue is. It will be interesting to see how the grassroots react to his comments,” Pratt added.
The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>
Pratt was referring to remarks Trump made Monday about his administration’s plans to work with lawmakers on several gun control measures, including “red flag” laws, which would facilitate confiscation of weapons if someone has been deemed dangerous.
“It is frustrating to see President Donald Trump’s continued support for so-called red flag laws. These red flag laws, properly known as gun confiscation orders, are incompatible with actual due process and allow for the confiscation of firearms from innocent Americans,” Pratt said.
Trump also suggested the need to incorporate mental health status into qualifications for gun possession to prevent unstable individuals from having access to firearms, something Gun Owners of America said it believes is ripe for abuse.
“The GOA opposes all background checks for gun purchases, since unfortunately it could used as a drag net to disqualify individuals who should be able to own a gun,” Pratt said.
“For instance, past proposals have included putting Social Security Disability recipients on the list,” he added.
Trump also mentioned the impact that social media may have on dissemination of unhealthy views, something that Gun Owners of America agrees with, so long as it doesn’t lead to censorship.
“Broadly, we recognize the ‘copycat’ phenomena out there. Some of these shooters just want to get noticed,” Pratt said.
“We have to be careful, however,” he said. “We don’t want to get Congress into the business of discriminating against online speech because then they can justify censorship, which we don’t want.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2019-08-06 19:23:442019-08-06 19:24:15Gun Group on Trump’s Response to Shootings: ‘He Doesn’t Know How Volatile This Issue Is’
A white supremacist manifesto was posted on 8chan shortly before the mass shooting in El Paso, Texas on August 3, 2019. It is believed to have been posted by the alleged shooter, although this has not been officially confirmed. What follows is a review and analysis of the manifesto.
Introduction
On August 3, 2019, in a Walmart store in the Cielo Vista Mall in El Paso, Texas, a lone gunman opened fire, killing 22 and injuring 24. The suspect, Patrick Wood Crusius, 21, was arrested and charged with capital murder. The crime is being investigated by the FBI as an act of domestic terrorism and a hate crime.
Approximately 19 minutes before the attack, an anonymous user, believed to be Crusius, made a post on 8chan alluding to the planned attack.[1] His post stated: “Fuck this is going to be so shit but I can’t wait any longer. Do your part and spread this brothers! Of course, only spread it if the attack is successful. I know that the media is going to frame my [me] incorrectly, but y’all will know the truth! I’m probably going to die today. Keep up the good fight.” A follow-up post stated: “Hello FBI.”[2] Attached to the post was a PDF file named “P. Crusius – Notification Letter,” which contained a four-page manifesto titled “The Inconvenient Truth.” The manifesto expresses support for Christchurch, New Zealand shooter Brenton Tarrant,[3] and cites Tarrant’s own online manifesto as inspiration for it. The writer lists his reasons for targeting the Hispanic community, stating his belief that Hispanics pose a threat to American racial and cultural identity. He also describes the weapons he has chosen for the attack.
Connection To Recent White Supremacist Attacks
The El Paso shooter’s methods and ideology has notable, and often explicitly stated, similarities to other white supremacist attacks of recent years. Crusius, like Tarrant, mentioned a belief in the imminent danger of “white geocide,” also known as the “great replacement.”[4] Tarrant, like the Norwegian shooter Andres Breivik,[5] viewed Muslims as invaders threatening white civilization. Meanwhile, Robert Bowers, who attacked the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh,[6] and John Earnest, the shooter targeting Jews in Poway, California,[7] viewed Jews as the greatest threat.
All these shooters stated that they acted from a sense of urgency and in self-defense. They viewed themselves as some of the few defenders of an endangered white race. Driven by this certainty, all four sought to publish manifestos presenting what they believed to be the rational arguments informing their choice to attack. Moreover, Crusius, Earnest, and Tarrant explicitly cited other white supremacists as their inspiration, expressed a sense of comradery with an online community who shared their ideology, and called on it to continue in the struggle. They also provided operational advice to be used by others in future attacks.
The many links between these attackers suggest that while they may initially seem like “lone wolf” extremists, they are in fact part of an active community, which views itself as the vanguard in a critical struggle seeking to spread its ideas and encourage further attacks.[8]
Ideology
In his manifesto, the El Paso shooter states that he was inspired by Tarrant’s manifesto to target the Hispanic community. Like Tarrant, he views immigration as an “invasion,” and an attempt to replace the white race. He states: “This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas. They are the instigator, not me. I am simply defending my country from cultural and ethnic replacement brought on by an invasion.” Hispanics, he continues, “will turn Texas into an instrument of a political coup which will hasten the destruction of our country.” He states that the main idea he wishes to convey in his manifesto is that “Inaction is a choice. I can no longer bear the shame of inaction knowing that our founding fathers have endowed me with the rights needed to save our country from the brink [of] destruction.” Europe is similarly under attack, he believes, but there people do not have “the gun rights needed to repel the millions of invaders that plague their country.”
People who attribute racist motives to his attack are hypocritical, he states, “because they support imperialistic wars that have caused the loss of tens of thousands of American lives and untold numbers of civilian lives”. He adds, “the argument that mass murder is okay when it is state sanctioned is absurd. Our government has killed a whole lot more people for a whole lot less.”
Regarding his choice to target Hispanics, the writer states that even if other non-immigrant targets would have a greater impact, he could not bring himself to kill other Americans, including Americans who seem hell-bent on destroying their country, who he refers to as “shameless race mixers, massive polluters, haters of our collective values..” He declares his long-time objection to “race mixing” as based in his belief that it “destroys genetic diversity and creates identity problems.”
He goes on to state that at this time the best solution will be to divide America into a confederacy of territories, with at least one territory for each race, arguing that physical separation will almost completely eliminate race mixing, and thus improve social unity by granting each race the right of self-determination in their own territory.
Political, Economic, And Environmental Reasoning
According to the manifesto, both the Democratic and the Republican parties in the U.S. have been failing the American public for decades due to their complacency and due to the “takeover of the United States government by unchecked corporations, one of the biggest betrayals of the American public in history.” He predicts that the U.S. will soon be controlled by the Democrats in a one-state country because of the demise of the baby-boomer generation, the anti-immigration rhetoric of the right, and the growing Hispanic population in the U.S. Republicans, meanwhile, are also culpable in the replacement of the white race, as so many Republican factions prioritize corporate interests, thus encouraging immigration as a cheap labor force.
Another perceived threat he describes in the manifesto is environmental damage led by corporate interests that will negatively impact future generations. To him, this too is an anti-immigration argument. He states that since Americans are not willing to change their materialistic, consumerist lifestyle, “the next logical step is to decrease the number of people in America using resources. If we can get rid of enough people, then our way of life can become more sustainable.” Likewise, he states, the welfare system can become more effective if tens of millions of recent immigrants are removed.
Preparing For The Attack
The manifesto discusses the reason for choosing to attack with a semi-automatic AK47 rifle. The author states that he did not spend a lot of time preparing for the attack, estimating that he spent less than a month preparing, due to the urgency of his need to take action. He states: “I have to do this before I lose my nerve. I figured that an under-prepared attack and a meh manifesto is better than no attack and no manifesto.” He also states that he expects to die in the attack: “If I’m not killed by the police, then I’ll probably be gunned down by one of the invaders. Capture in this case is far worse than dying during the shooting because I’ll get the death penalty anyway. Worse still is that I would live knowing that my family despises me.”
A Message To Those Planning Similar Attacks
Addressing those who may decide to carry out similar attacks, Crusius advises against attacking heavily guarded areas in a way that would serve to fulfill a “super soldier COD [Call of Duty video game] fantasy” but rather to attack low security targets.
The manifesto concludes with a further expression of allegiance to what he believes is a growing movement: “Many people think that the fight for America is already lost. They couldn’t be more wrong. This is just the beginning of the fight for America and Europe. I am honored to head the fight to reclaim my country from destruction.”
[5] In 2011, Anders Behring Breivik carried out two terrorist attacks in Norway. The first was a van bomb which killed eight people in Oslo in July; in the second, he shot and killed 69 campers at a Norwegian Labour Party youth summer camp on the island of Utøya.
[6] On October 27, 2018, Bowers shot and killed 11 people and wounded six at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, PA.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Middle East Media Research Institutehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMiddle East Media Research Institute2019-08-06 18:57:042019-08-06 18:57:04The Manifesto Posted On 8chan By Alleged El Paso Shooter Minutes Before Attack
The other day, I saw a T-shirt worn by a supporter of the old, hypocritical socialist Bernie Sanders.
Across the chest of the shirt was a classically brain-dead slogan which read in part: “College for all. Jobs for all. Justice for all.”
And therein lies the problem with socialism and why the Catholic Church outright condemns it since it first reared its ugly head over a century ago.
Socialism pretends everyone is equal and somehow justice means everyone getting treated the same.
Nothing could be further from the truth. There is, of course, like all great lies, a little smidgeon of truth buried in the lie, which is what makes it have an appeal to the unthinking.
Everyone is the same as regards their human dignity being made in the image and likeness of God — and that’s where it ends. After that, the idea of sameness or equality goes out the window.
It doesn’t matter if you are talking about intellect, ambition, looks, creativity, physical strength — you name whatever category you want — there is virtually nothing you can point to where people are the same and therefore deserve the same treatment.
For example, take the politically and culturally suicidal notion that everyone has a right to a job. Really? Even the guy who comes in late? Even the guy who shows zero initiative? Even the incompetent worker? Jobs for all?
Of course, in an ideal and just society, everyone should have the opportunity for a job, to earn a living, to own private property and all that. But not everyone has a right to an actual job. That entirely depends on their ability and choices, which is ultimately what separates one man from another — the choices he makes.
But socialists don’t care about that. They just like ginning up support for their idiocy by appealing to the emotional — not intellectual, emotional mind — that everyone is the same and everyone should have what everyone else has because that’s fair.
Socialists mistakenly equate fairness with equality and then incorrectly label it all as justice. Fairness relates to opportunity, meaning providing an equal playing field for everyone to approach.
After that, it’s every man for himself based on his abilities and choices. This is true not only in the natural world, but most especially in the supernatural world. It would be the greatest travesty of justice imaginable if everyone was admitted to Heaven.
Justice is specifically the giving to each according to what is due to them, not just everyone getting the same outcome.
In the case of the courts, for example, imagine every criminal, regardless of the crime, being given the exact same sentence. That’s manifestly stupid, as well as gravely unjust. And if it’s true on earth, how much more true is it in the next world?
So no, not everyone deserves a job. All that can be said is everyone deserves a chance at a job; likewise, this asinine talking point of socialist Democrats that everyone has a right to college — no they don’t.
Again, everyone should have a right at the chance to go to college, but the decision on whether or not they actually are accepted should depend on their academic performance and choices.
Did they do their homework? Did they study hard and make good grades? Did they manifest a certain level of determination to excel academically?
If not, why should they be accepted to college? Because an old, hypocritical socialist says so? Because his decidedly leftward lurching party says so?
Baloney — but see, spiritually speaking, the intellectual rot behind this cheap appeal to emotions is a further attempt to dislodge Western culture from its grounding in Catholicism.
The Church instantly recognized that a false belief that all men should be treated the same regardless of their choices was a direct assault on Catholic theology.
Catholic theology is built on the hierarchical order of the world. Different souls mount to different heights — or plunge to deeper depths — depending on how well or not well they cooperate with grace.
To try and paint the world as though everyone deserves the same outcome because that’s somehow “fair” is to destroy the understanding that our choices matter and have consequences.
Know this: Every great political or cultural movement that dresses up a lie has as its author, Satan. Socialism is satanic because its aim is to disrupt the natural order so that the supernatural order will be obscured.
As an aside, if that was the case, why does Bernie think he’s more fit to be president than any other American, which he obviously does?
Because he’s a liar and hypocrite. He thinks he’s a better choice — more qualified, a better candidate than any of the other child murderers in his morally bankrupt party.
The perfect retort to these peddlers of socialism is lay the ax to the root of their lie. Everyone is not equal in terms of their choices, not their abilities, and equal outcomes contradict not only common sense but also divine law.
As St. Paul tells the early Catholics in Rome, “God will repay each one according to his deeds.”
Yep, we aren’t all the same. We have different abilities and make different choices. And in the very end, some will go to Heaven and others will be damned.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Church Militanthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChurch Militant2019-08-06 18:34:432019-08-09 17:19:11VIDEO: The Vortex — Socialism Is Satanic. ‘Justice’ for all is a lie.
