VIDEOS: Things are starting to move forward in the exposing of treasonous, or at least corrupt to nth degree, deep state agents

Posted by Eeyore

Mary Millben Is Singing the National Anthem at Trump’s Rally. She Loves Performing America’s Patriotic Music (Just Listen).

Recording artist Mary Millben will perform the national anthem for President Donald Trump at Tuesday’s rally at the Amway Center in Orlando, Florida. Millben headlined The Heritage Foundation’s Annual Leadership Conference in April and spoke to The Daily Signal about her love of America’s patriotic music and what it’s like to perform for three U.S. presidents. She recently celebrated the release of her debut single “Grace Will Lead Me Home,” written for the new film “The Meanest Man in Texas.” The full interview, along with a lightly edited transcript, is below.

Rob Bluey: You’ve had the opportunity to perform before three presidents, most recently at President Donald Trump’s inauguration, but also for Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush. What is that experience like, to sing before the leader of the free world?

Mary Millben: Thanks for having me, it’s been a joy to be here with Heritage and so grateful to Mrs. Kay Coles James for the invitation.

I tell you, it’s pretty surreal, but I will say, a true blessing. I have loved my interfaces within the political arena. And I think every artist, when you have the opportunity to use your platform for good, and it’s certainly in the context of for the country, it’s an honor.

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

To have worked for President Bush and then go into entertainment and sing for President Bush and Mrs. Bush and President Obama and first lady Obama and now our president and first lady Melania Trump, it’s a true honor and a stat, I would say, in my journey that I feel blessed to have.

Bluey: Tell us about your life story, how you ended up in government, and then how you moved into the entertainment world.

Millben: In short, because it’s a pretty lengthy one, I’ll say, entertainment and politics are pretty much the same profession. Every four years a new Broadway show comes into town. Right?

But, I tell you, it’s been great because I started in a pretty robust journey in politics. I was an intern at the White House for President Bush and then went to work the latter four years of the Bush administration.

During my time there I was doing a lot of singing in Washington, D.C. I was singing for Christmas tours in the White House and dinners in D.C. And that’s what really introduced me to the entertainment business.

Following my appointment with the Bush administration, I auditioned for a Broadway show that was opening in D.C. at the time. And right when President Obama came in, I left and went into entertainment.

[It] kind of led me to the concert world and moving to New York and all types of things.

But it’s been wonderful because now in my season of performing I’ve been doing a lot of performing back in Washington, D.C., and in the political arena.

That has been a joy because I care about policy, I care about this country, I love America. I know where my freedom comes, as Gary Sinise says, our good friend.

So it’s been a joy to be able to contribute musically in an arena and an environment that I feel so strongly about.

I think artists have such a unique position because we are apolitical, in that sense, we can advocate for the country, we can advocate for communities in need, we can advocate for the everyday American. That sometimes it’s hard for politicals per se to do.

I’ve been fortunate that I’ve been given a platform that works on both sides of the aisle to make a difference for the country.

Bluey: So when you’re doing the Trump inaugural or other events, you don’t shy away from your pro-America feelings.

Millben: Sure.

Bluey: What has it been like to be in entertainment, though, and have some views that might differ from maybe where the majority of people are?

Millben: It’s certainly not a cake walk. I am a proud conservative, I’m not afraid to say that, and certainly have my convictions and values that I hold true.

But I am in a profession that has diverse views and diverse backgrounds and I respect those views and backgrounds.

So I think, again, artists, entertainers have the great opportunity to use their platforms for broad conversations. I heard a recent person say, “You can’t change the world and resemble the world you want to change.”

I am not afraid to be in a profession that may not particularly agree with everything I say or care for everything I say.

I know that … this is what God has called me to do and I try in everything that I am presented with to represent him first and certainly represent the convictions and values that I believe in.

I feel that we are in a time where we are losing some of that civility in the context of being able to have conversation that may differ. I encourage it more.

The more I sit down with someone that I don’t agree with perhaps or may share a difference of opinion, the better because that’s a way for us to all find common solutions and common ground to bettering the country.

So I’m not afraid of a little opposition in the entertainment business, but certainly always find ways to work with differing opinions to better the country.

Bluey: I’m so glad to hear you say that. That’s really important. I know it’s important to Heritage’s president, Kay Coles James, as well.

Millben: Absolutely.

Bluey: That’s a message that she certainly speaks about frequently.

And you’ve had success in entertainment. So I’d like to hear about some of the things you have coming up. A new single coming out and debuting in a film.

Share with our listeners what they can expect to hear from you in the future.

Millben: Thank you. Well, [I’m] very excited. I have been really blessed as a newbie still in the music business to I have worked with some great songwriters and composers. And it’s just been a blessing.

A couple of years ago I recorded a great song called “Grace Will Lead Me Home” with Stephen Dorff, who is a very popular, three-time Grammy nominee, six-time Emmy nominee, and was inducted into the Songwriters Hall of Fame last year.

And we recorded a song a couple of years ago, landed into a film called “The Meanest Man in Texas,” which opened April 19 in Texas. And will be in theaters across the country here May 20.

We’re so excited about the film, we’re so excited about the song, because it really speaks to the element of grace, which is we are all blessed to have God’s grace and how that sustains all of our lives.

The film did very well in the film festivals across the globe and certainly here in the states. We’re just very excited about the film and the music.

That has just led to a whole new energy of interfaces musically within film and within the recording music industry and so lots of exciting things. I’m really blessed. Really blessed.

Bluey: Who would you say are some of the biggest role models in your life when it comes to the entertainment world?

Millben: Sure.

Bluey: It can, I guess, be political as well.

Millben: I tell you, I’ve been blessed. … My parents are retired ministers, so I come from a a long journey within the faith community and certainly the ministry. A lot of great mentors come from there.

But musically, when I was a little girl, the faces on my wall were the Diana Rosses, and the Barbra Streisands, and Aretha Franklins, and the Clark Sisters coming from the gospel music world. … Musically, [they] were a lot of my inspirations going into music. You can add Whitney Houston right in there, too.

But I would also say politically, Ronald Reagan was on my wall growing up, and certainly [I’ve had] such admiration for the Bush family because of working for them.

I tell you, I’ve been blessed. I’ve had a tremendous amount of mentors from an array of different professions.

And one that we know well is Mrs. Kay Coles James, who is the president of Heritage.

She’s been a tremendous support to me and to my career as a young professional and an artist and just a blessing to be able to be connected to Heritage in this regard musically, but also in what I believe and my conviction.

So I think Mrs. Kay, she’s been a great mentor. Great mentor.

Bluey: Thank you for that. Do you have a favorite song that you’ve performed?

Millben: Goodness. You know, I love music. I was trained classically, so I grew up singing the great arias and the classics. But I love just about everything.

Bluey: OK.

Millben: Actually, my favorite music to sing, and I’m not just saying this because I’m here, I love singing America’s patriotic music.

I love those words of “The Star Spangled Banner” and “America the Beautiful” and “God Bless America.” Those songs are timeless, of course, but they speak to who we are as human beings, as citizens, as a community.

Those types of songs that inspiration are very meaningful to me. So while I love to sing—I love gospel. I love country music. I love jazz. I love Broadway theater. I love just a little bit of everything, but I think it’s the songs of our country that I love singing most.

Bluey: I agree with you on that. They certainly do represent all those values that we talk about.

Millben: Absolutely.

Bluey: Finally, I want to ask you, what advice do you have for young people who may want to make their mark in the entertainment world? Based on your own experience, what would you tell them?

Millben: Be true to who you are. Be true to what God is calling you to sing, and you to say, and you to contribute.

The entertainment business is a tough one. And many times you get into the business and you have a lot of voices and a lot of people telling you what they want you to sing, and what they want you to say, and how they want you to look, and can divert you from what you feel true to.

So, to any young person coming into the business, first: Do it. There’s nothing more rewarding than getting up every morning and saying, “I’m doing what God is calling me to do.”

But more importantly, stay true to who you are. Your voice is unique and there’s only one of you.

So when you get into the business, sing exactly what God is calling you to sing, do exactly what God is calling you to do, and be and become exactly what God is calling you to be and become in the business.

You’ll make an impact beyond what you could ever imagine if you stay true to that as an artist and as a voice in the business.

Bluey: Mary, great advice. Thanks so much for being here.

Millben: Thanks for having me. It was great to be here.

COLUMN BY

Rob Bluey

Rob Bluey is executive editor of The Daily Signal, the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation. Send an email to Rob. Twitter: @RobertBluey


Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. All right reserved.

Pratt: Virginia Beach Demonstrates the Failure of Gun Control

The calls for more gun control are in full swing.

Following the Virginia Beach mass shooting last Friday, Democrat presidential hopefuls are lining up to restrict the rights of honest Americans and to shred the Second Amendment.

The comments from socialist Bernie Sanders are typical. In the aftermath of the shooting, he blasted the gun lobby for “controlling Congress” and called for more “gun safety legislation” as the panacea for every societal ill. Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam followed with his own calls for specific gun restrictions.

But in the midst of all the hyperbole, there was one inadvertent admission. The chief of police in Virginia Beach — a gun control advocate himself — admitted that additional gun control would not have made a difference.

Here’s why Chief James Cervera is right on this point.

1) Gun-free zones are a failure. A key premise to the gun control view is that Americans would be safer if guns were banned at various locations. Hence, we see gun-free zones have been imposed at every school in the country, in government buildings, at sporting events, etc.

But this won’t make Americans safe. Case in point: the Virginia Beach shooting effectively occurred in a gun-free zone. City employees are prohibited from carrying firearms, so they were sitting ducks when the killer chose them as the targets. This shooting is not an isolated incident, as almost 98 percent of the mass shootings that occur in this country occur in gun-free zones.

2) Universal Background Checks proven totally ineffective. The anti-gun left incessantly argues for running every gun purchase through a background check. But they ignore the fact that 95 percent of initial denials are false positives, stopping people who are not really criminals.

Plus, they ignore the fact that virtually every mass shooter in recent memory has passed a background check. This killer was no different — he passed background checks in purchasing his firearms. So how would imposing even MORE background checks make us any safer?

3) Banning AR-15 style firearms misses the mark. Those who hold an irrational fear of firearms are relentless in their calls for banning commonly-owned firearms like the AR-15. But here again, a ban on these guns would have done no good. The Virginia Beach killer used two handguns, which by the way, is the weapon-of-choice for mass shooters — not the AR-15.

4) Suppressors don’t allow “stealth” killing. Anti-gun zealots have seized on the fact that the killer used a suppressor, as justification for banning these items. Yet suppressors are simply a safety device to protect people’s hearing. They are more like a car muffler, rather than the Hollywood notion of a “silencer.”

Suppressors don’t reduce the sound to a whisper as so deceptively portrayed in so many movies. Not surprisingly, witnesses in Virginia Beach reported that they “heard” the gunshots, which is a clear indication that the myth of the silencer is just that — a myth.

5) Limiting magazine capacity becomes harmful to the innocent. Finally, the left would have us believe that if standard-to-large capacity magazines were banned, this killer would have been unable to find magazines larger than five or 10 rounds.

But to believe that, one would have to believe that Prohibition effectively kept people from drinking booze and that the War on Drugs was equally successful.

The truth is that limiting magazine capacity will endanger law-abiding Americans. Consider recent examples of self-defense where Americans needed weapons with so-called “hi-capacity” magazines to protect themselves.

  • A Houston man fired several rounds while fighting off five home invaders this year, utilizing his AK-47 as his primary means of defense;
  • A Florida man used his AR-15 to fire 30 rounds while fighting off seven intruders in the early hours of an April Sunday morning in 2018; and,
  • Then there’s the Texas woman who wished she could have had an AR-15 or AK-47. She used a revolver in defense of two attackers in her home, firing all her rounds and severely wounding one intruder in the stomach. But she completely missed the second assailant.

When he heard the clicking sound, he turned and savagely beat her. The homeowner survived, but she has promised to buy a new gun — one with a good-sized magazine. Good thing, because she needs it.

To hear anti-gunners like Sanders and Northam speak, one would think that the United States is the world leader when it comes to mass shootings. The truth is that our country is near the bottom of the list — placing 64th (in per capita frequency) in a list of 97 countries that have had mass shootings.

And what about the worst 63 nations? They all have stricter gun control than the United States, which just goes to show that gun control is a huge failure — not just here, but around the globe, as well.

COLUMN BY

Erich Pratt

Erich Pratt is the executive director of Gun Owners of America, a gun rights organization representing more than two million gun owners.

RELATED ARTICLE: Gun Rights Made All the Difference for These Intended Victims

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of The Daily Caller.

Viganò: BP. Bransfield a ‘Perfect Example’ of Gay Mafia in the Church

WASHINGTON (ChurchMilitant.com) – Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is offering further confirmation of the “gay mafia” in the Church.

In comments to Italian journalist Marco Tosatti over the weekend, the papal nuncio-turned-whistleblower confirmed that Bp. Michael Bransfield, the subject of a Vatican investigation that revealed extensive sexual and financial malfeasance, is part of a wider network of corrupt gay clergy in positions of power, connected to Theodore McCarrick, Cdl. Donald Wuerl and others.

“Bishop Bransfield is a perfect example of what I was referring to,” Viganò wrote, in remarks following his Washington Post interview, where he had referred to a “corrupt gay mafia” running the Church.

Bishop Bransfield is a perfect example of what I was referring to.Tweet

Bransfield was suspended last fall after allegations of homosexual misconduct. A detailed Vatican investigation, obtained by the Washington Post, revealed that Bransfield harassed and assaulted seminarians and priests, and also misappropriated millions of dollars in diocesan funds for personal expenses, including thousands spent on alcohol, flowers, flying first class and sending cash gifts to fellow prelates.

Bp. Michael Bransfield and the Papal Foundation

“It is important to note that, before being appointed bishop, he was rector of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C. and was president of the [Board of Trustees] of the Papal Foundation, both linked to McCarrick and Cardinal Wuerl,” Viganò explained.

The Papal Foundation, with assets worth $206 million, was co-founded by McCarrick in 1988, Bransfield serving as the first president of its board of trustees.

Controversy engulfed the Pennsylvania charity when three stewards resigned from the audit committee in 2018 after Wuerl pushed for the Vatican to receive $25 million — the largest single grant ever given by the foundation. The money was going toward the Istituto Dermopatico Dell’Immacolata (IDI), a scandal-ridden hospital in Rome investigated by Italian authorities for embezzlement and tax fraud of nearly a billion euros.

Pope Francis had allegedly requested the $25 million in the summer of 2017, and Wuerl, then-chairman of the foundation, lobbied members of the board of trustees to vote to approve the grant (originally a loan, but revised to an outright grant on Wuerl’s insistence).

Board members consist of all nine U.S.-based cardinals as well as various bishops and laymen, making up a total of 24 trustees.

Jim Longon, former head of the audit committee, was first to raise objections to the grant.

According to inside sources, Wuerl at the time considered Longon a lone maverick, confident the vote to send the $25 million would be approved unanimously. He was shocked to find that nine of the 24 board members rejected the proposal after a secret vote.

A leaked report detailing the machinations explained:

In a carefully choreographed process the 15 bishops outvoted the 9 Stewards with a vote of 15 YES, 8 NO, 1 ABSTENTION (two bishops did not participate). It was a clear out-muscling of the Stewards. Political favor replaced sound stewardship of our resources.

Media reported in March 2018 that, after the internal uprising within the foundation, Pope Francis cancelled an annual meeting with the organization. Although the move was reported as originating with the pontiff, inside sources confirm with Church Militant that Wuerl was behind the cancellation.

The cardinal had contacted the pontiff and suggested the move in order to send a clear message of displeasure to trustees. His tactic worked, and the board agreed to give the pope the remaining $12 million (up till then, the board had only given $8 million).

To date, the money has yet to go toward its stated purpose: the Italian hospital. Papal Foundation members continue to wonder where the $25 million is now.

After Wuerl resigned in disgrace last October, Boston’s Cdl. Sean O’Malley was announced to replace Wuerl as chairman, with Cdl. Daniel DiNardo as vice chairman.

A member of the Ad Hoc Committee informed Church Militant these were Wuerl’s hand-picked appointees, made after an initial plan to elect new leadership was scrapped by Wuerl. In other words, Wuerl continues to pull the strings.

The Pennsylvania attorney general’s office is still mulling the possibility of investigating the Papal Foundation, a 501(c)3 corporation registered in Pennsylvania and bound by state law, after it was revealed the vote to send $25 million to Rome could be voided for potential fraud. McCarrick, at the time under investigation by the Vatican, had voted to send the money to the very entity investigating him — a material conflict of interest that amounted to little more than a bribe.

The Papal Foundation has connections to other accused homosexual predators, including Msgr. Thomas Benestad, who first chaired the foundation in 1988, and was singled out by Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro at his August press conference announcing the publication of the Pennsylvania grand jury report.

The report alleged that in the early 1980s (only five years before being named chairman of The Papal Foundation), Benestad had forced a nine-year-old boy into oral sex, afterwards rinsing out his mouth with holy water to “purify” him.

And Wuerl, most recent chairman of The Papal Foundation, has been caught repeatedly lying about his knowledge of McCarrick. Viganò has described Wuerl as a man who “lies shamelessly.”

To this day, Wuerl has not responded to the Pennsylvania grand jury’s evidence — found in a signed note by Wuerl himself when he was bishop of Pittsburgh — that he paid hush money to buy the silence of a priest involved in a sadomasochistic child porn ring. The priest, Fr. George Zirwas, whom Wuerl had reassigned to various parishes in spite of multiple allegations of abuse of minors, was murdered by a gay prostitute in Cuba in 2001.

$350,000 in Cash Gifts

The Vatican investigation revealed that Bransfield had sent $350,000 in cash gifts to various cardinals and bishops, including $29,000 to Cdl. Kevin Farrell, who lived with McCarrick for six years in Washington, D.C., and who used the money to renovate his apartment in Rome; and $10,500 to Abp. William Lori — the very man appointed to carry out the investigation.

Other beneficiaries include Cardinals Wuerl, Timothy Dolan, Raymond Burke and Viganò himself.

Viganò explained to Tosatti that he was told it was the custom of U.S. bishops to send gifts to newly installed papal nuncios, and that he donated the money to charity.

“In truth I don’t remember all the names of those who were sending me these gifts, because I didn’t pay attention to the name of the donor who was sending me the check,” wrote Viganò, “because this was irrelevant to me, as I had no intention of doing anyone any favors.”

“As I said before, my staff explained to me that this was customary in the United States, and not accepting the gift would be an affront to donors,” he continued. “So, after receiving these gifts, I immediately spent this money in my charity account. I can attach some examples of evidence on how I used my personal money together with the money from these various donations.”

I had no intention of doing anyone any favors.Tweet

He recalled gifts specifically from Cdl. Timothy Dolan of New York, Bp. Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn, Cdl. Donald Wuerl and Theodore McCarrick, among others.

“I would like to add that I remember with certainty one of these gifts made immediately after it was announced that I would be sent as a nuncio to the United States, but before I arrived in the United States from the former Cdl. McCarrick, for the amount of $ 1,000,” Viganò said.

Viganò also confirmed that Msgr. Walter Rossi, handpicked by McCarrick to succeed Bransfield as rector of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C., is a member of the “gay mafia.”

According to Viganò, as papal nuncio, he had received complaints of sexual harassment of seminarians by Rossi. Multiple sources at the basilica as well as at Catholic University of America — where Rossi sits on the board of trustees — have also alleged that Rossi is an active homosexual.

Read the latest report on Msgr. Rossi here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Stopping China’s March To World Dominance

The Hong Kong demonstrations reveal that President Trump was right in many ways to identify China early on as a threat to the United States. He saw them as an economic threat and dishonest trading partner. To a lesser degree, he saw them as a military threat.

He was right, although ultimately, their military — including space and cyber warfare — are probably the largest threat.

To be clear, China is a bigger, long-term threat economically and militarily than anyone else, including Russia which has aging nukes but otherwise is a virtual third-world economy and a vastly weakened military. Modern militaries cannot be created and maintained in modern warfare without strong economies underwriting them.

Russia does not have such an economy. China increasingly does. And anyone who thinks China does not have as much — or more — of a goal of world domination, knows nothing of Chinese history and the current goals and philosophies that align with that history.

They continue to think of themselves as the Middle Kingdom — that is, the center of the world — and are intent on reconstituting the world so that is the case in a very real sense. Despite being an atheist Communist regime that oppress religions from Christianity to Islam to Buddhism to hundreds of sects, the Chinese still see the Middle Kingdom as a sort of spiritual destiny.

From the ambitious Belt and Road initiative, with China at the center, to exporting opioids to the U.S. through Mexico, to stealing U.S. technology and intellectual property, to building ports with 100-year leases around the world, to embedding spyware into Huawei products and its global 5G network, to dramatically improving its military capabilities in the air, sea, land and space, China confronts and affronts the U.S. everywhere.

Even presidential candidate Joe Biden has finally seen the danger of China and flipped.  (Although he flips a lot.) According to the New York Post:

Former Vice President Joe Biden toughened up his language on China Tuesday, saying the Asian nation represented a “serious challenge” and sometimes a “real threat” to the United States — just a month after saying “they’re not competition for us.”

“We are in a competition with China. We need to get tough with China. They are a serious challenge to us, and in some areas a real threat,” Biden told an Iowa audience while out campaigning for president.

It’s not readily understood, but China like Russia enjoyed a pushover of a president in Barack Obama, but are getting significant push back in the form of President Trump.

What’s well publicized is the trade war Trump has responded to. It’s so important to remember, and the media either is ignorant or just being willful partisans as usual, but Trump did not start the trade war. China has been cheating and stealing for decades, and getting more bold in recent years. They’ve been at war with us on trade for a long time. Trump has merely returned fire. Finally. But it won’t be easy.

The tariffs and trade war show how stubborn and tough the Chinese leadership can be. They take the long view toward the Middle Kingdom. And they don’t have to answer to their people at the ballot box as American presidents must. It’s one of the dynamics that makes it more difficult for American leadership, yet Trump is doing it anyway. It’s almost like he’s not your typical politician who makes decisions based on his re-election needs.

This goes to his genuineness. He’s authentically who he is. You get what you see. You shouldn’t need to agree with him on all issues to find that refreshing.

In addition to his responding to China’s trade aggressions, Trump has responded militarily with naval movements and, maybe most importantly, with treating Taiwan like the democratic ally they are — instead of quivering before the Chinese Communists like previous presidents and distancing ourselves from our Chinese ally.

As the South China Morning Post points out:

“Washington has been approving arms deals with Taipei at a much faster pace than under Barack Obama and George W Bush, while the self-ruled island has been making public US military movements near the Taiwan Strait – information that would not have been released under previous US administrations.”

In trying to close the southern U.S. border to stop the waves of illegal immigrants, the Trump administration would also be cutting deeply into the supply trough of illegal opioids that are developed in China, shipped to Mexico and smuggled into the U.S. There are many drivers of the awful opioid crisis, but ready availability is certainly one of them.

And Trump has begun the long journey of rebuilding the U.S. military, including the Navy that is critically important to projecting U.S. power in important regions such as the Middle East, but in the future, perhaps even the near future, the Asian Pacific where U.S. allies such as Japan, South Korea and the Philippines are all potential victims of Chinese military aggression one day.

There are many pieces to what China is doing. And they have vulnerabilities in all of them. What’s required is American leadership with the vision and chutzpah to push back on those vulnerabilities. Trump is doing so on trade and in Taiwan military sales and closeness.

President Trump may not understand all of the associated history ancient and recent of China, but he rightly identified the primary threat to American leadership in the world. And that is a dictatorial China. And that is not a better world.

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

Catholic Charities Helping to Relocate Congolese Illegal Aliens

Those entering the U.S. through this route did so because they “were scared the [refugee] process was not gonna work, or that it’s last (sic) a standstill.” (Christina Higgs, Catholic Charities San Antonio)

I am furious to see that the border jumpers claim (or at least their Catholic handlers claim) that the refugee process might not work for them!

Why isn’t the media reporting that we have admitted as refugees to the US over 50,000 DR Congolese refugees in under five years with 8,000 arriving here in the last 8 months!

The DR Congolese are at the moment, by far, the largest refugee ethnic group being admitted to the US.

When is enough, enough?

Not fast enough for them so they headed to South America for a long and EXPENSIVE trip to the southern border.

I sure hope we don’t find out that the Catholic Church has been paying for the migration!

If you missed last night’s post about the Laura Ingraham segment about how cagey the Congolese were when interviewed in Portland, go here.

Then see where else this first batch was placed!  The word is that more are on the way!

From the Washington Examiner,

African migrants pass through San Antonio and swiftly fan out across the country

SAN ANTONIO, Texas — Roughly 300 Congolese and Angolan citizens who arrived in San Antonio the first week of June after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border days earlier have all briskly departed the city for destinations across the country, some with fuzzy plans based partly on hope.

The hundreds of family members and single adults from Central Africa first showed up June 4 at the southern border’s Eagle Pass and Del Rio towns in south-central Texas. The migrants surrendered to Border Patrol agents and claimed asylum after crossing the Rio Grande.

The agency did not, as it is supposed to, turn families over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Instead, it released families onto the streets of Eagle Pass and Del Rio, according to two government and nongovernment officials with first-hand knowledge of the matter. The African migrants then bought bus tickets to either San Antonio or Austin, according to San Antonio Interim Assistant City Manager Colleen Bridger.

“If — a family, the sponsor — it’s been 24-48 hours and they can’t buy the [bus] ticket, then we’ll buy it,” Elizabeth Nemeth, executive director of Catholic Charities’ west side center, told the Washington Examiner Thursday.

[….]

“They come with a place in mind. ‘My friend told me to go to Portland, Maine, because there’s a lot of Congolese families that already live there and it’s welcoming,” said Nemeth. “And they have that plan in mind, right? But they don’t understand the geography — like where it is, how much it costs to get there. There’s a lot of misconceptions. They may think, ‘I have a friend there,’ but they don’t have a friend’s phone number … [We can look into] what is their last name, phone book, call shelter and ask about them, connect the dots. I wouldn’t say that we’re just putting them randomly.They have an idea.”

The African migrants are spending six to seven months traveling to Brazil then up to the U.S.

Those entering the U.S. through this route did so because they “were scared the [refugee] process was not gonna work, or that it’s last a standstill,” said Christina Higgs, Catholic Charities spokeswoman for the San Antonio region. Some worried traveling to or through Europe was “getting really dangerous.”

“He used the term, and I hate to say it, but they were trying to hedge their bets by coming his way and see if they couldn’t get here that way,” she added.

More here.

We have been more than ‘welcoming’ to the DR Congolese, heck we have been busy moving them en masse (on the taxpayers dime) to every corner of America and it still isn’t enough!  Hundreds simply break in!

My head is exploding!

What is it going to take to get the facts to the public when most reporters are ignorant, lazy, or worse!

RELATED ARTICLE: Illegal Aliens Sue Border Patrol. The Lawsuit’s Outcome Can Have Massive Implications. 

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

19 Arrests Later, a Texas Town Is Torn Apart Over Voter Fraud

EDINBURG, Texas—The story that thrust a Rio Grande Valley city into the national spotlight is hardly a new anomaly, say residents such as Richard Monte.

“Down here, voter fraud is not all that unusual,” says Monte, a city planning consultant in a brown suit jacket, sitting with other activists at a table in Coffee Zone on McColl Road. “It’s unusual when they get prosecuted.”

Now, for this south Texas town, that unusual moment has arrived. A November 2017 mayoral election has been under scrutiny from local and state officials, and 19 arrests have been made over alleged voter fraud. The mayor—and winner of the 2017 election—was indicted earlier this month, along with his wife.

Only 8,400 votes were cast in the mayoral election, and Mayor Richard Molina’s final vote count was more than 1,200 votes ahead of the No. 2 candidate, 14-year incumbent Richard Garcia. From what’s known now, the election result couldn’t have been changed by the number of suspicious votes identified.

But Molina reportedly is the first elected official in Texas to face a felony charge under a 2017 statute against vote harvesting, casting the midsize city into the national debate over election integrity. The mayor denies the charges.

“Some people are unfortunate in that they are caught,” Monte tells The Daily Signal.

Fraud and Small Towns

Across the nation, officials made more than 60 formal findings of voter fraud in 2017 alone, according to The Heritage Foundation’s voter fraud database, and six of those cases were out of Texas. And 2018 saw more than 50 official findings of voter fraud.

“Many of the cases in our database are in small towns,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow in the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. “That’s because, one, those kind of races are often decided by a very small number of votes. So it’s easier to commit fraud when you don’t have to fake as many votes.”

“Second, it’s in small towns, particularly rural areas, where, particularly in areas that are economically not as well off as other parts of the country, [that] county and city government are the sources of jobs and contracts,” added von Spakovsky.

“So there is a big incentive in those smaller towns and smaller county governments for people to cheat in order to be in a position of power where they can distribute jobs.”

A federal judge overturned a mayor’s race in Florida’s Miami-Dade County in 1997 because of massive voter fraud that included phony registrations, noted von Spakovsky, who also served on the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.

“You find cases where it’s just an isolated voter taking advantage of the system,” von Spakovsky told The Daily Signal, “but there’s plenty of cases in our database where it is an organized conspiracy oftentimes involving an elected official who wants to ensure he is reelected.”

‘Shady Past’

Edinburg, filled with palm trees, Tex-Mex restaurants, and friendly people, is the Hidalgo County seat. Home to the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley and the Museum of South Texas History, it has a population of 77,000 as of the 2010 census.

Edinburg boasts parks as well as shopping plazas with box stores and fast-food eateries along streets such as Freddy Gonzalez Drive, Cano Street, and University Drive, where Edinburg City Hall stands.

A sign inside City Hall reads “PRISM,” which stands for “Professionalism and Transparency,” “Respect,” “Integrity,” “Synergy and Cross Training,” and “Maximization of Operational Performance.”

Just down University Drive is a nightclub called Sin.

Based on what prosecutors and some residents say, the nightclub’s name might better characterize the region than do the goals of integrity and transparency on the PRISM sign.

The reputation of the Rio Grande Valley, where the town of Edinburg is nestled, long precedes the mayor’s arrest.

The four border counties of Cameron, Hidalgo, Starr, and Zapata have had executive officials, top law enforcement officials, a county judge, and a sheriff either indicted or convicted of criminal charges.

That’s according to an editorial on Molina’s arrest in The Monitor newspaper in McAllen, Texas, about 12 miles away from Edinburg, which adds that various members of city councils, county commissions, and school boards also have faced corruption charges.

The U.S. Justice Department created a Rio Grande Valley Corruption Task Force in 2015, NPR reported, because the area was “steeped in corruption of every stripe: drug smuggling, vote stealing, courthouse bribery, under-the-table payoffs and health care fraud.”

The Molina voter fraud prosecution might be “selective,” suggests Fern McClaugherty, a licensed firearms instructor who was an unsuccessful candidate for City Council in 2017.

“We have a shady past,” McClaugherty said of the city, speaking with The Daily Signal during a meeting with fellow civic activists, including Monte, at the Coffee Zone.

This past, she said, includes what’s known in the region as “politiqueras,” who are paid by political campaigns or parties to turn out the vote. These local operatives visit nursing homes and adult day care centers, and sometimes entice homeless persons to vote by giving them cash or food.

At the suggestion around the table that election winners in the region “stole it fair and square,” someone jokingly corrected: “They buy it fair and square.”

‘Loud and Clear’

Molina won a four-year term as Edinburg mayor on Nov. 7, 2017, and decisively so.

“The people spoke loud and clear—1,240 votes,” Molina told The Daily Signal in a brief interview after a City Council meeting in late May at City Hall.

Molina ran a reform campaign against Garcia, questioning city contracts and other matters under the incumbent mayor’s leadership.

That winning margin over Garcia, first elected in 2003, was out of 8,400 votes cast in the three-candidate race.

“Insurmountable,” Molina said. “If you do research on any of the elections previously, maybe a couple hundred votes determine the outcome of that election. That’s the biggest margin of victory in the history of the city, four figures. It’s never been done before.”

“It’s very obvious that people wanted change,” Molina, the former Army veteran and 11-year Edinburg Police officer said. “There was an incumbent here that was here for 14 years, and people wanted a new face. The public wants me here. I’m not here because I want to be here. Nonpaying job. It’s easier to walk away.”

Edinburg’s mayor and four council members don’t draw salaries. Under the city’s weak-mayor, council-manager form of government, the city manager oversees administration while the mayor and council oversee the legislative side.

Municipal elections are nonpartisan in this heavily Democratic area.

‘Vote Harvesting Scheme’

On April 25 of this year, Molina and his wife, Dalia Molina, were arrested.

“Molina and his wife had numerous voters change their addresses to places they didn’t live—including the apartment complex he owns,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office announced after the arrests, adding that Molina’s “vote harvesting scheme involved the participation of paid campaign workers, among others.”

Vote harvesting is when campaign workers collect and submit voter registration forms and absentee ballots by soliciting people.

Earlier this month, a Hidalgo County grand jury indicted Richard and Dalia Molina on one count each of engaging in organized election fraud and 11 counts of illegal voting. The indictment names nine co-conspirators.

Molina declined to speak with The Daily Signal about the criminal charges, citing the advice of lawyers. However, he noted that his margin of victory over Garcia far exceeded the number of questionable votes cast.

Ricardo Rodriguez, the Hidalgo district attorney who is prosecuting the case, declined an interview with The Daily Signal during a brief meeting at his office at the Hidalgo County Courthouse Annex, saying speaking about the ongoing case could pose legal problems.

Some of Molina’s supporters, however, insist that the other side engaged in a similar voting scheme, and they suggest the prosecutor has a conflict. They filed their own complaints against presumed Garcia voters.

Molina’s defenders also note that Rodriguez is the nephew of Terry Palacios, a law partner of the former mayor in the firm of Garcia, Quintanilla, and Palacios.

‘Pressured and Persuaded’

The criminal complaint against the mayor lays out a scathing picture of recruiting voters from Sept. 19 to Nov. 7,  2017, which was Election Day. The mayor has denied every allegation.

In Texas, it’s a first-degree felony to engage in organized election fraud, under a bill passed by the state Legislature that went into effect on Sept. 1, 2017.

The law outlines what constitutes an offense committed “with the intent to establish, maintain, or participate in a vote harvesting organization.”

Shortly after it went into effect, the criminal complaint alleges, Molina “aided, solicited, and encouraged” and “pressured and persuaded” persons who lived outside Edinburg to register illegally with an address inside the city so they could vote for him. One of the addresses is for an apartment complex the mayor owns, prosecutors said.

Most of the 19 arrested, including the mayor and his wife, were charged with illegal voting, a second-degree felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Two were charged with making a false statement on a voter registration form, a Class B misdemeanor.

Documents from the Attorney General’s Office identify “cooperating conspirator witnesses” whose identities are being shielded.

The most damaging information may have come from the seventh cooperating witness, who claimed to be part of a conversation in which Molina said his strategy was to falsely register some voters with city addresses.

This witness said Dalia Molina advised him or her to register at an Edinburg address and vote for her husband, which the witness did, according to the complaint.

The criminal complaint against the mayor’s wife states that on Aug. 21, 2017, Dalia and Richard Molina first asked someone who later became a cooperating witness to make an address change. The complaint further alleges that she followed up Oct. 10 by giving “Person A” a blank voter registration form.

Mayor’s Apartment Complex

Among those arrested were three sisters and their brother whose voter registrations show them living at a four-building apartment complex at 2416 E. Rogers Rd. The apartment complex is owned by Molina, according to a public announcement and additional arrest reports provided by the Texas Attorney General’s Office.

Arrest reports note that investigators combed through motor vehicle information, school enrollment, and utility bills to determine that those arrested actually lived outside the city limits.

Residents who answered their doors at the apartment complex—located in a rural edge of Edinburg behind several manufactured houses—told The Daily Signal that they didn’t live there in 2017. Some noted that the mayor or his wife collect their rent checks.

“I heard something about a scandal, but I can’t believe he’d be involved in something like that,” said Lewis, 72, a resident who didn’t want to give a last name. “He won by a landslide, from what I heard. Anytime somebody wants to bring down a politician or a preacher or whatever, they just come up with a scandal.”

One of the mayor’s supporters, who asked not to be identified, said it is a low-income complex. Residents rent from month to month, the supporter said, which is why it’s likely someone might have had a different address before or after registering to vote.

Little Blue House

Seven out-of-towners were registered to vote with the address of 409 E. Fay St., a small blue house not far from downtown Edinburg, authorities say. At least four were from a family whose home actually is in Alamo, Texas (about 12 miles away), and another was identified as a boyfriend, according to arrest reports.

The blue house appeared abandoned when visited by The Daily Signal, with boarded-up windows and an overgrown yard. A sign on a chain-link fence says: “For Sale by Owner.”

“They said they all live there,” Molina reportedly said in May 2018 of the seven voters registered with the 409 E. Fay St. address. “I don’t know; I don’t stay in the house with them every day.”

Six others registered to vote with different addresses inside city limits other than East Rogers Road and Fay Street, but didn’t live at those addresses, according to arrest reports.

In May 2018, Texas Ranger Chad Matlock interviewed a cooperating witness who admitted to changing his or her voter registration on Sept. 19, 2017, after Molina said the witness “was permitted to do so.” The witness then voted illegally.

Another witness, in an interview with the Election Fraud Unit’s investigator Sgt. John Waits, admitted to doing the same, falsely registering on Oct. 10, 2017, before illegally voting in the municipal election. This witness claimed he or she “would have never falsely changed” the registration if Richard Molina “did not solicit” the action.

This witness claimed to have received numerous text messages from Molina for several days before the election, as a reminder to vote.

Another witness said Molina “provided the address” to use on a voter registration form.

The Texas Rangers made the first round of arrests in May 2018, charging four individuals with illegal voting, including one they said registered to vote with the Fay Street address and another with the East Rogers Road address, but who actually lived outside the city.

In November 2018, a year after the election, the Rangers made another roundup of Hidalgo County residents mostly connected to the Fay Street and East Rogers Road addresses, charging them with illegal voting.

Of the 10 charged, three were not registered at either the East Rogers Road or the East Fay Street addresses.

Al Alvarez, a McAllen lawyer who represents one of the defendants in the case, is critical of the law that led to the prosecution.

“Historically in Texas, all cases about voting were misdemeanors because we want to encourage people to vote, not discourage them,” Alvarez told The Daily Signal. “It’s difficult to know where the law ends and politics pick up, but the people suspect.”

“Election cases usually don’t do very well,” he said. “Politics don’t change through prosecutions, they change through elections.”

The Investigation’s Start

After Molina’s victory, Mary Alice Palacios, a former municipal judge with connections to the defeated mayor, compiled information about voter addresses. She sent her complaint documenting addresses to the Office of the Texas Secretary of State, which referred most of the questionable registrations to the Texas Attorney General’s Office.

Palacios “alleges that multiple persons provided false information to register to vote and voted illegally,” the attorney general’s Law Enforcement Division said in a memo dated Jan. 22, 2018.

Palacios is the aunt of the Hidalgo county prosecutor involved in the case, Rodriguez. Rodriguez disclosed his connection with her to Paxton’s office, which primarily pursued the case through Waits. Texas Rangers in the state’s Department of Public Safety also investigated, according to the April 25 criminal complaint from Paxton’s office.

Molina has also reportedly called the investigation retaliation because Palacios had a $300,000 insurance contract with the city that was cancelled when Molina was mayor.

Palacios returned a phone call from The Daily Signal, but declined to comment on the case while it is under investigation.

‘Wrong Case?’

Paxton, the attorney general, expressed appreciation in a press release for the district attorney’s “commitment to election integrity” in this and unrelated cases.

However, not everyone in Edinburg thinks the commitment is consistent.

Jerad Najvar, a Houston lawyer who has actively fought voter fraud, represents Molina in the recall matter. He contends that Paxton is pursuing the wrong case.

“Molina’s side filed the same complaints, but the attorney general wanted a big fish. This is a mayor of a reasonable-sized city,” Najvar told The Daily Signal.

Supporters of the mayor, including his wife Dalia, made complaints to Texas Secretary of State David Whitley about presumed Garcia voters. They provided motor vehicles records and land deeds as evidence that likely Garcia voters registered with Edinburg addresses were residents not only of nearby McAllen but also of Houston and San Antonio.

The Secretary of State’s Office received 12 complaints against Garcia’s campaign for recruiting nonresidents to vote in the city election. It determined six complaints had enough evidence to refer to Paxton’s Election Fraud Unit, spokesman Sam Taylor said.

“If there was not enough evidence to warrant an investigation, we didn’t refer,” Taylor told The Daily Signal.

Asked about Molina’s margin of victory, Taylor said: “I’m not aware that there were 1,200 illegally registered voters in the city; I believe [it’s] far less.”

Among the complaints against presumed Garcia voters, alleging they used phony addresses, including one complaint about Mary Alice Palacios.

The one about Palacios, the former judge who filed the first complaint against the Molina campaign, is one of the six complaints the Secretary of State’s Office confirmed forwarding to the attorney general for investigation. It accuses Palacios of living outside the city but using another address.

“They are using prosecutorial discretion to allow prosecution of just one side of the aisle,” Najvar said, referring to the case against Molina. “The incumbent Garcia and Palacios were law partners.”

“The public sees through it. This is an effort to take back the power they lost in 2017,” he said, referring to the mayoral election.

“I’m all for fighting voter fraud and I’ve done so in Hidalgo County,” Najvar said. “Attorney General Paxton is going after voter fraud. That’s fantastic. But Paxton has been jerked around on this by complicit local prosecutors.”

Taylor, spokesman for the secretary of state, said the attorney general’s office typically doesn’t confirm or deny the existence of an investigation. So it doesn’t comment on whether Garcia supporters also are under scrutiny.

Paxton spokeswoman Kayleigh Lovvorn initially told The Daily Signal that someone from the office would address the matter, but the office did not respond to several follow-up calls and emails.

The Next Chapter

As the mayor, his wife, and those accused of voting after registering with fake addresses move toward a trial, the next chapter could be a recall election.

Robert Solis, a nurse anesthetist, says he isn’t particularly political but started a petition drive to recall Molina because he thought Edinburg was getting a black eye.

“It looked bad on our city. I mean, we made The Washington Post, we made The New York Times, USA Today, Austin [American-] Statesman,” Solis told The Daily Signal. “It’s kind of embarrassing.”

Solis and others have collected more than half of the nearly 2,200 signatures they need by June 21 to trigger a recall. They seek signatures at tables set up in the Echo Hotel and at public events such as a 5K race.

Solis, leader of the recall effort, said he is familiar with allegations against both sides, but would like to see the city make a new beginning.

“I know the people that I have talked to on both sides, mainly on the recall side, really want to push, hopefully, somebody new, somebody not involved on either side, somebody that can bring new leadership to Edinburg,” Solis said.

Recall efforts are not unusual at the municipal level in Texas or nationally, and public officials frequently weather the storm, according to data from Ballotpedia, a nonprofit that tracks election information.

“In 2018, Ballotpedia covered 206 recall efforts against 299 officials” nationally, Dave Beaudoin, news editor at Ballotpedia, told The Daily Signal. “Recall attempts targeting 150 officials did not make it to the ballot.”

“Of the 123 officials whose recalls made it to the ballot,” Beaudoin said, “77 were recalled and 46 survived the attempt. Ten other officials resigned before their recalls could go to a vote. That year had the largest percentage of recalls approved at the ballot since our tracking began in 2012.”

Mayors accounted for 13% of the recall efforts across the country in 2018, down from 19% the year before.

The mayor’s office contends it’s business as usual.

“Day-to-day operations are not affected at all,” city spokeswoman Cary Zayas told The Daily Signal, talking about the case against Molina. “The mayor remains the mayor. … He has been very much accessible at all times.”

“He’s at the meetings,” Zayas said of Molina. “He’s conducting business, he’s going to groundbreakings. He’s carrying on with business as usual because he denies any wrongdoing, No. 1; and No. 2, there is no reason why he shouldn’t.”

Monte, the planning consultant, said he worries that a recall election for Molina at this stage is “putting the cart before the horse.”

“Whether you believe the mayor is guilty or not, I think that we need to wait for the process,” Monte said. “He has been arrested, but he has not been tried. He has not been found guilty. There is already a recall. It’s politically based in reference to other people that wish they were mayor or want to be mayor, rather than anything else.”

Other Edinburg residents have differing views.

“If the mayor committed voter fraud, he should pay a price,” Sara Reyes, 47, told The Daily Signal outside a shopping center in Edinburg. “He should stay clean. This is why people don’t trust politicians.”

Abel Rocha, 46, said Molina “seems like a good man.”

“I’ll leave it up to God,” Rocha said in an interview near the same shopping center. “If he committed a crime, or it ends up he did something wrong, he’ll be punished.”

Joseph Schubert, 51, had a more decided view.

“I’ve heard people talk about it, but the mayor won in a landslide,” Schubert said in a parking lot interview. “I think some people are just sore losers.”

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Lucas is also the author of “Tainted by Suspicion: The Secret Deals and Electoral Chaos of Disputed Presidential Elections.”Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLES:

North Carolina Voter ID Ruling Puts Security of Democracy at Stake

Trump’s Expansion of Health Reimbursement Accounts Improves Health Care Choices

How Victim Mentality Is Pushing Women Toward Socialism

Forum on Black Male Mental Health Highlights the Importance of Fathers


Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Georgetown, other universities accused of covering up millions taken from jihad-promoting Qatar

Georgetown University is a national disgrace, employing numerous apologists for jihad and professional dissemblers about the teachings of Islam that incite believers to commit acts of jihad violence. The millions it is alleged to have taken from Qatar may be a partial explanation for its steep decline from academic institution to Islamic dawah and propaganda outfit. The Department of Education is right to be (finally) looking into this.

“FOREIGN MEDDLING: Department Of Education Going After Elite Colleges For Allegedly Taking And Hiding Foreign Cash,” by Luke Rosiak, Daily Caller, June 15, 2019:

The Department of Education is going after U.S universities over supposed ties to foreign governments, after some allegedly took huge quantities of foreign cash and hid it from regulators.

At the top of the list are Georgetown University and Texas A&M, which have taken hundreds of millions of dollars from the government of Qatar, a middle eastern nation with suspected links to international terrorism.

Both schools received letters from the Department of Education Thursday saying they should have disclosed that funding but their filings “may not fully capture” the activity, the Associated Press reported. The letter warned that they could be referred to the attorney general to “compel compliance.”

Georgetown was also asked about possible ties to Russian cybersecurity firm Kaspersky Lab, as well as Saudi Arabian money. Both schools were ordered to disclose funding from Huawei and ZTE, Chinese firms suspected of spying….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Muslim MP slams UK government for silence over Trump’s twitter attack on London Muslim mayor

Dueling Senate Resolutions on Anti-Semitism Condemn Omar, Promote Islam

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

VIDEO: Student Kicked out of Class for Telling Gender Bio-truth

This is terrifying.

Thank you Richard

RELATED VIDEO: The sick pedophile agenda at the heart of ‘sex education.’ Discretion advised. Deeply disturbing.

The Deadly Detriments of a Doctrine of Defense

Every round of violence, in which the results are not a clear-cut IDF victory is, in the eyes of Israel’s enemies, another nail in the coffin of the Zionist entity.” – Veteran war correspondent, Ron Ben Yishai, June 1, 2019.

…the ability to defeat the enemy means taking the offensive. Standing on the defensive indicates insufficient strength; attacking, a superabundance of strength.—Sun Tzu, “The Art of War”, circa 400 BCE


I am, of course, aware that I used this exact same excerpt in commencing my recent column, Cracks in the Dome?, in which I warned of the disturbing defects of adopting an essentially defensive doctrine in facing the escalating threat from Gaza.

However, I make little apology for its re-use, as it is equally—arguably more—fitting for this week’s topic.

Disturbing indications

Indeed, for a considerable time, I have cautioned against Israel’s excessive reliance on defensive measures and its operational derivative of “managing the conflict”—see for example “Conflict management”: The collapse of a concept, and The ruinous results of “conflict management”.

Significantly, recent media reports have provided disquieting signs of corroborating the emergence of at least three perils of which I have warned repeatedly in recent years—and, although some may be inclined to downplay their significance, this would be a grave error.

For while they are, admittedly, very preliminary—indeed, even embryonic—indications of potential future developments, the compelling rationale for their evolution into phenomena far more substantial is too grave to be disregarded.

Readers will doubtless recall that I have warned incessantly that Israel’s current policy:

(a) will eventually result in the erosion of the Jewish population in the Negev;

(b) will allow the Gazan terror groups to devise methods to neutralize the efficacy of the billion dollar anti-tunnel barrier encircling the Gaza Strip—particularly the use of drones; and

(c) because of its innate reticence to engage in a large-scale decisive offensive against the Gazan terrorist entity, is causing Israel to continually back away from conflicts that it can win, risking backing itself into a conflict that it cannot win—or win only at ruinous cost.

Arabs in Gaza or Jews in the Negev?

With regard to the Jewish presence in the Negev, I have argued constantly that unless the violence in Gaza is terminated permanently, Israel may well face the grim prospect of the Negev being depopulated by Jews, who, unable to raise families in adequately secure conditions, will abandon the region for safer locations– see Israel’s stark option: Arabs in Gaza or Jews in Negev.

Last week, reinforcing this very caveat, the media gave high profile coverage to the decision of almost a dozen families in the Gaza border area to leave their homes in the wake of the recent outbreak of violence—see for example here, here and here.

This of course, is only a tiny number, especially given the significant increase in the Jewish population in the South since the end of the 2014 Protective Edge operation. Despite this, the decision led some to express fear that it may well spark the prelude to a larger scale exodus from areas under regular menace of rocket fire and incendiary balloons.

After all, it is not an isolated expression of disaffection by residents of the region. To the contrary, it reflects a wider—and seemingly growing—sentiment of frustration and impatience with life under the ongoing threat from Gaza. Indeed, there is clearly rising exasperation with the government’s impotence in responding to the challenge posed by the continual terror attacks, together with its manifest failure to discharge its most basic duty—providing security to its citizens. Clearly, there should be little wonder at the mounting unwillingness to endure the evermore onerous conditions in which they are being forced to live, with their local economy being devastated—particularly tourism and agriculture—and their livelihoods drastically diminished, with the constant disruption of daily life, and with the ongoing danger to their lives and their families…

The danger of drones

With regard to the almost one billion dollar anti-tunnel barrier currently being constructed to encircle the Gaza Strip, I have forecast time and again that the Gazans will devise methods to neutralize it—or at least greatly reduce its efficacy.

Thus, last year I observed: “Every time the Gazan terrorists developed some offensive tactic, Israel devised some countermeasure that was designed to thwart the attacks, rather than prevent them being launched in the first place.”

Detailing this sequence of measures and counter measures, I wrote: “Thus, suicide attacks resulted in a security fence and secured crossings; which led to the development of enhanced rocket and missile capabilities; which lead to the development of the multimillion dollar Iron Dome; which led to the burrowing of an array of underground attack tunnels; which led to the construction of a billion dollar subterranean barrier; which led to the use of incendiary kites and balloons that have reduced much of the rural South, adjacent to the Gaza border, to blackened charcoal”.

Finally, I cautioned: “…it takes little imagination to envisage the deployment of future modes of Judeocidal assault on the Jewish state and its citizens—such as a possible drone swarm carrying explosive—perhaps even some non-conventional—charges, to be detonated on, or over, some luckless Jewish community.”

Drones (cont.)

Barely two weeks ago, a widely reported incident seemed to indicate that the drone threat is becoming increasingly operational, when the Islamic Jihad released footage allegedly showing a drone attacking an Israeli tank.

The fact that the attack caused little damage should be of scant comfort. Indeed, echoing my earlier concern, one source noted that while: “Security agencies will overlook the minor impact of the device depicted in the video, [they] will instead focus on the implied threat that a larger or more ominous payload would represent.”

Indeed, the Gazan –based terror groups have shown impressive ingenuity in devising, enhancing and honing their aggressive capabilities to assault the Jewish state. Today they have achieved abilities that would have appeared inconceivable in 2005, when Israel unilaterally abandoned the area—and had anyone then predicted Israel would be facing the threat it faces today, he undoubtedly would have been dismissed as an unrealistic scaremonger.

Significantly, the drone threat is gradually receiving increased attention in the public discourse. For example, last month Haaretz ran a piece highlighting Hamas’s focus on drone development with Iranian help.

Thus, although Hamas’s drone program suffered a severe setback with the assassinations in Tunisia (2016) and Malaysia (2018) of leading engineers involved in its development, it is hardly beyond the limits of plausibility that Israel will have to contend with the specter of a swarm of drones, armed with biological or chemical payloads, directed at nearby Israeli communities—rendering the billion dollar anti-tunnel barrier entirely moot. For those who might dismiss this as implausibly alarmist – see here, and here.

“Why Israel will not win the next war”

Of course, while such an attack on a rural community may not constitute a devastating strategic blow, physically, it certainly is likely to constitutes a grave strategic blow to national morale—which leads into the third topic for discussion: Israel’s reluctance to launch a large-scale offensive aimed, not at punishing terror attacks but at preempting them; not at thwarting them, but at preventing them from being launched in the first place.

It is this reluctance that is causing Israel to continually back away from conflicts that it can win, until it backs itself into a conflict that it cannot win or win only at ruinous cost.

In this regard, a stern caveat (in Hebrew) appeared recently in the highly trafficked Ynet web site, entitled Why we will not win the next war .Written by Ron Ben Yishai, one of Israel’s most authoritative military correspondents, it catalogued the reasons preventing the IDF from adopting a strategy of decisive victory over its terrorist adversaries and warned of the grave consequences thereof.

Among the reasons for the relative flaccidity of the IDF’s approach, Ben Yishai enumerates the undue involvement of politicians and the media in security affairs; overly harsh censure of field commanders for operational errors, disproportionate sensitivity to abductions; and excessive interference from soldiers’ parents in determining the conditions of their sons’/daughters’ IDF service.

Emasculating the IDF operational capacity

But, according to Ben Yishai, perhaps the most severe inhibiting factor on the IDF strategy is the hypersensitivity to casualties, which has made avoiding them more important than achieving operational objectives.

According to Ben Yishai, these factors create a situation in which “Israel’s civil society is slowing but surely emasculating the operational ability, the initiative and innovativeness of ]IDF[ field commanders”.

All of this has led to the IDF abandoning the notion of a decisive victory as an attainable objective. Ben Yishai describes the grave implications of this: “Without a clear victory, both physical and psychological, in the battle field, deterrence is eroded, which shortens the period of time until the next conflict occurs…[T]he strategic damage in this is the perception of [Israeli] weakness it conveys to the countries in the region…and gives our enemies the hope that in the long run they will be able to wipe Israel off the map as a sovereign state.”

He warns: “Every round of violence in which the results are not a clear-cut Israeli victory is, in their eyes, another nail in the coffin of the Zionist entity.”

In Ben Yishai’s  assessment: “In order to defeat—once and for all—this strategy of attrition, and the motivation that drives it, Israel must achieve military and psychological victory in every future conflict…until our enemies despair of the possibility of destroying us by means of attrition.

However, to achieve such a victory both “Israeli civil society and the media must adopt a more realistic and less emotionally sensitive attitude to casualties…and restore the value of executing the mission to the top of military priorities.”

“Attack is the secret of defense…”

I began this column with an excerpt from Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War.”  It is, thus, perhaps fitting to end it with one: “Attack is the secret of defense; defense is the planning of an attack.”

It is precisely in this spirit that Ben Yishai concludes his article: “Every…military clash with any enemy in the area must end with an unequivocal IDF victory. Our very existential interest—as a nation and as a people—mandates that we get rid of everything and anything that impedes attaining this objective”.

Doubtless, Sun Tzu would approve.

Muhammad’s Night Journey

What it is:  The basis of the story is that one night while Muhammad was sleeping in Mecca, the angel Gabriel came and woke him and had him mount the mighty steed Buraq, usually described as a steed with supernatural powers.  Buraq took Muhammad to Jerusalem where he found Abraham, Jesus, and other prophets.  There Muhammad led these great prophets in prayer.  Muhammad then mounted a ladder and climbed all the way into the seven heavens where he once again sees all the prophets, as he ascends through the various levels of heaven.  He eventually reached the seventh heaven where he talks with God.

Even though it takes 100,000 light years just to cross our one galaxy of the Milky Way in a starship, Muhammad manages to do the entire universe in just one night . . . while climbing a ladder!

Muhammad’s “night journey,” or laylat al-isra’ w-al-mi’raaj, is one of the most amazing stories found in Islamic culture.  As we can see, it is very fanciful, and at times humorous.  As a result, many Islamic scholars have discounted it, believing that it is not mentioned in the Qur’an and is nothing but stories that found their way into the ahadeeth (a collection of supposedly sacred sayings of Muhammad inspired by the angel Gabriel).  The problem for these Islamic scholars (by trying to deny the night journey) is that it actually is in the Qur’an, or at least sort of.

The 17th chapter (or sura) of the Qur’an is actually titled al-isra’ (meaning the “night journey).  The first verse of that sura says: Glorified is he who caused his servant to travel by night from the inviolable Mosque (Mecca) to the furthest Mosque (Jerusalem).

While it is true that no more details of this fantastic journey are given in the Qur’an, Muhammad’s biography by ibn Ishaq (written 130 years after Muhammad’s death) provides several versions of this story, apparently passed down by word of mouth from those who knew Muhammad.

Before I get into the details of this story, I have to say something about that 17th sura which mentions the night journey.  Muslim scholars classify it as one of the “middle Meccan” suras.  I find that assumption to be outrageous for a couple of reasons:

First, Most authentic (so-called) Mecca suras are written in a childish, choppy style of short two, or three word “sentences,” like children’s nursery rhymes.  Whereas all of the Medina suras are written in a flowing, easier to read, prose with (usually) superior syntax and grammar (in the original Arabic).  And, the surat al-isra’ is written in the style of the Medina suras.

Second, Muhammad’s final wife, ‘Aisha, is often quoted as a witness who said that “his body never left the room” indicating that it was only a vision, and not a physical journey (even though other accounts do make it out to be an actual physical journey).  And, Muhammad did not marry ‘Aisha until late in his life, shortly before he returned to Mecca to conquer it.  Meaning that this sura had to be a Medina sura.

Third, this “night journey,” whatever it was, allegedly took place “when Islam had spread in Mecca among the Quraysh and all the tribes” (ibn ishaq, 263, p.181).  This sentence describes a time late in Muhammad’s life after he had returned from Medina to conquer Mecca.  Because his earlier stay in Mecca only netted him a max of 200 followers, all from among the citizens of Mecca, and none from any of the other tribes–according to the Islamic sources themselves.

FIRST STOP:  JERUSALEM

Buraq was truly an amazing animal because each of his strides covered a distance as far as the eye could see.  Buraq had also been around for a long, long time, since other prophets before Muhammad had ridden on him.  The Arabic word buraaq, is derived from barq meaning “lightning.”  So, you might say that the steed Buraq was as fast as lightning.

The story begins while Muhammad was sleeping in the Hijr (refers to Mecca) the angel Gabriel woke him during his sleep.  Gabriel then led Muhammad outside and there was good old Buraq.  The animal is described as white, half mule and half donkey (an interesting trick since mules are sterile), and it had wings on its sides with which it propelled its feet (an interesting anatomical feature, indeed).

Buraq was more than surprised to see Muhammad.  Heavenly steed that he was he “shied” when Muhammad approached him.  Gabriel then admonished the white steed saying “Are you not ashamed, O Buraq, to behave in this way?  By God, none more honorable before God than Muhammad has ever ridden you before.”  The poor animal was so ashamed that he broke out into a sweat and stood still so Muhammad could mount him.

Muhammad and Gabriel then arrived at Jerusalem (none of the accounts ever say what means of transportation Gabriel used to get there).  Visiting the temple at Jerusalem Muhammad found Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and a bunch of other prophets, whereupon Muhammad led them all in prayer (showing Islam’s superiority over all other religions).

THE ASCENT TO HEAVEN

A popular folk belief among many Muslims is that Muhammad rode the steed Buraq from Jerusalem up to heaven.  However, the accounts given in ibn Ishaq say that Muhammad used a ladder.  “A ladder was brought to me finer than any I have ever seen.”  Muhammad and Gabriel then mounted it until they came to one of the gates of heaven called the Gate of the Watchers.  There they were greeted by an angel called “Isma’il,” and under his command were twelve thousand angels each of which had twelve thousand other angels under their command.  That comes to something like 144 Billion angels, an obvious takeoff on the 144,000 of “super saved” individuals of Christian tradition (The Revelation 7:3-8).

As Muhammad travels through this “lowest rung of heaven” he sees sinners being tortured for their sins.  In the second heaven he sees Jesus and John the Baptist (but I thought that he had just seen Jesus back down in Jerusalem?).

In the third heaven Muhammad sees Joseph, and in the fourth heaven the prophet Idris.  Idris, in Islamic tradition is the first of the prophets after Adam.  He is identified with the Enoch of the Bible, and with the Greek Hermes Trismegistus, and the Egyptian god of wisdom Thoth.

On to the fifth heaven Muhammad sees Aaron, brother of Moses. In the sixth heaven is Moses himself.  In the seventh heaven he meets Abraham.  Abraham then takes Muhammad into “paradise” where he sees “a damsel with dark red lips.  And I asked her to whom she belonged, because she pleased me much when I saw her, and she told me ‘Zayd bin Haritha.'”

Now, this is really interesting on a couple of levels.  First, because Zayd bin Haritha in real life was Muhammad’s adopted son, and it was Zayd’s wife in real life about whom Muhammad lusted over.  So he had a “vision” where Allah tells him that it is permissible for him to marry his adopted son’s wife, and that it would be wrong for him “to deny that which Allah has caused you to desire” (Qur’an 33:37).   And, so Muhammad did indeed marry his adopted son’s wife.  So, in this trip to heaven we see Muhammad having yet another vision implying sexual lust, over Zayd’s wife.

Second, this idea of entering “paradise” and seeing a beautiful maiden reminds me of the ancient Indo-Iranian myth of the worthy soldier, priest, or ruler being met on the bridge linking earth with “paradise” being met by a beautiful young maiden.

Thirdly, this episode plays into the “babes in heaven” fantasies of Islam which reached its apex in the 72 virgins lore of the Islamic ahadeeth.

FIFTY SHADES OF PRAYER, or IS IT JUST FIVE?

While roaming the 7th heaven, Muhammad comes face to face with God.  God tells him that he has to go back down to earth and tell the people that they have to pray 50 times a day.  So, Muhammad begins his trek back down through the layers of heaven.  As soon as he steps down into the sixth heaven he runs dab smack into Moses and tells Moses that God ordered him to command the people to pray 50 times a day.  Moses says that’s way too much.  People are weak, they could never stick with that tough of an assignment.  So, Muhammad goes back up to the 7th heaven to argue with God and got the number reduced down to 40.  Stepping back down to the 6th heaven he told Moses the results, and Moses said, “nah, that’s still to high, go back up there and keep trying.”

So, up and down Muhammad went arguing with God to get the sentence reduced, and then being prodded by Moses to get back up there and tell God that it is still too much.  So, finally God agrees to reduce the number of prayer calls to just five times a day.

Thus, Muslims believe that this little story is the reason why Shari’a law demands Muslims to pray five times a day, even though the Qur’an never mentions more than three prayer calls a day.  This part of the story was obviously invented to deflect the Muslims’ ability to recognize the real reasons why shari’a demands five prayers a day in conflict with the Qur’an.  And, this real reason is that the idea of the five prayer calls a day is one of the many Persian Zoroastrian customs the inventors of Islam imported into their religion.

DANTE’S INFERNO AND ISHTAR’S DESCENT INTO THE UNDERWORLD

In reading Muhammad’s journey through the seven layers of heaven, any student of western literature would easily recognize Dante’s inferno.

But there are even earlier parallels.  The Babylonian fertility goddess Isthar’s descent into the underworld where the dead go, for example.  First off, Ishtar encounters “gates,” just as Muhammad encountered “gates” up in the various levels of heaven . . . where the dead people go.

Each “gate” that Ishtar goes through, takes her through a layer of the underworld.

But guess how many layers, or “gates” Ishtar encounters and goes through in the underworld?  Yeah, that’s right, seven–paralleled by Muhammad’s seven heavens.

In order to enter each new level, Ishtar has to remove an article of clothing until she is completely naked upon reaching the seventh level (a precursor of Salome’s “Dance of the Seven Viels”).

There, Ishtar also has to divest herself of her life (and her body) and face Ereshkigal, the Goddess of the underworld devoid of everything except her spirit.  Perhaps presaging Muhammad’s alleged “out of body experience.”

And, of course, the Ishtar story was borrowed from an even earlier Sumerian story of the Sumerian fertility goddess Inanna’s descent into the underworld involving, yes, seven layers.

BIBLICAL PARALLELS

The ladder that Muhammad ascended to heaven on reminded me of the story about “Jacob’s ladder” in Genesis 29:10-13.

A new testament parallel is found in I Peter 3:18-22.   In this story Jesus Christ, like Ishtar, is put to death in the flesh, but with his spirit still vibrant “he also went and preached unto the spirits in prison.”  What prison are these “spirits” in?  The prison of the same underworld that Ishtar and Inanna visited, the 1st layer of heaven that Muhammad visited.

The difference between Jesus and Muhammad here is that Jesus preaches to these sinners to give them one more chance to see the light so they can repent and find a better resting place in the afterworld.  Muhammad, on the other hand, simply passes right on by these sinners suffering in torment totally unconcerned about their fate.  I think that illustrates the different attitudes of the two religions:  Christianity is about helping others.  Islam is entirely self-absorbed like its Jew-hating, infidel beheading, sex-slaving “prophet.”

After ministering unto the sinners, Jesus then ascends up to the highest level, to God’s right hand.  This is, of course, echoed by Muhammad’s ascending up to the highest level of heaven to be in God’s presence (and Ishtar’s reaching the seventh level of the underworld to face Ereshkigal).

THE BOOK OF ENOCH

But now, we turn to the best example of all, and this is Enoch’s ascension into heaven.  Genesis 5:22 mentions that “Enoch walked with God:  Enoch walked with God; and he was not; for God took him.”  This passage could simply mean that Enoch died.  But the full story of Enoch was fleshed out in a collection of apocryphal literatures written in the century before and century after the birth of Christ.  The book of Enoch itself is believed to have been written during the earliest years of Christianity, and had a considerable influence on the New Testament writers.

Enoch’s ascension is told in the first book of Enoch: 3-22.  Unlike Jesus and Ishtar, but like Muhammad, Enoch did not really have to die because he lived to come back to earth to tell his sons about his journey–just as Muhammad was to return to earth to tell his followers about his journey.

Unlike Muhammad, Enoch did not have to climb all the way up to heaven on a ladder, no, he was born aloft on the wings of angels.  Strangely though, Enoch describes 10 heavens, rather than seven.  However, at one point of this journey, Enoch is stranded and left alone on the 7th level of heaven.  He cries out to God to help him, and shortly who should show up to accompany him through the eighth, ninth, and tenth levels?  None other than the angel Gabriel, who was to play the same role for Muhammad six and a half centuries later.

SUMMARY

Muhammad’s much ballyhooed night journey to Jerusalem and ascension to heaven was cobbled together from a long list of previous such journey’s to the seven layers of the afterworld, and the face-to-face meetings with God.  Inanna, Ishtar, Enoch, Jesus, and Muhammad all have similar  experiences of going through “layers” in the afterworld before meeting up face-to-face with deity.

The Muhammad story itself reads more like a disjointed dream than an actual experience.  Even Islamic scholars today are beginning to recognize that the night trip to Jerusalem never did occur.  For one thing, in the seventh century it took a full month to travel from Mecca to Jerusalem, so to claim that Muhammad did it one night sort of negates the veracity of the story.  Even his wife ‘Aisha claimed that his body never left the room.

Another serious problem with the Muhammad story is the claim that he prayed in masjed al-aqsa (the furthest mosque) in Jerusalem.  There were no mosques in Jerusalem until after the Arab conquest in the late 630s.  Jerusalem was taken in 638, six years after Muhammad’s death.  The masjid al-aqsa was not built until around 700, probably in 705.

Therefore, it is safe to say that this entire story of the night journey to Jerusalem was back-written many decades after Muhammad’s death.

These facts are important for today’s Israeli-Palestinian struggle.  This is because the only claim that Arabs and Muslims have to Jerusalem is this alleged tenuous dream of Muhammad which was back-written decades after Muhammad’s death–even if there was such a person a this Muhammad.

For decades I have always said that the only reason Jerusalem is important to Islam is because it is important to Christians and is the only holy site for the Jews.  Therefore Islam just had to steal it away.

Muslims can counter by saying that Jerusalem is important because it was the first gibla (meaning the city that Muslims must face when they pray).  In fact, some of the early “mosques” are alleged to be oriented towards Jerusalem instead of Mecca.

But this is because the Arabian portion of Islam evolved out of the Jewish Ebionite Christianity which was popular in Arabia during the 5th and 6th centuries.  And, the “northern” portion of Islam was cobbled together from elements of the Christianity of the followers of Bishop Arius, the Gnostics, and Talmudic Christianity, all of which, like the Jewish-Christian Ebionites in Arabia, would have venerated Jerusalem as the holy city.  Besides, Mecca did not become an important site in Islam until at least 630 when Muhammad conquered it, if one believe the traditional Islamic interpretation of Islam’s origins.  In the skeptic’s view, that shown by history, linguistics, and archaeology, that of the “out-of-Arabia” origin of Islam, Mecca was not chosen as Islam’s holy site until sometime around 700 A.D.

Ironically, the “out-of-Arabia” view of the origins of Islam gives Muslims a much stronger connection to Jerusalem than does their own made up, back-written stories about Muhammad’s night journey and ascension to heaven.

June is LGBTQ Pride Month: So What Are They Proud of?

I have read on Twitter comments by many who question why we have an annual gay pride month. This is a question deserving of an answer.

Who started the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) Pride Month?

According to the Library of Congress website:

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) Pride Month is currently celebrated each year in the month of June to honor the 1969 Stonewall Uprising in Manhattan. The Stonewall Uprising was a tipping point for the Gay Liberation Movement in the United States. In the United States the last Sunday in June was initially celebrated as “Gay Pride Day,” but the actual day was flexible.

The Law Library of Congress has compiled guides to commemorative observations, including a comprehensive inventory of the Public Laws, Presidential Proclamations and congressional resolutions related to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender and Queer Pride Month.

Former Presidents Clinton and Obama issued proclamations related to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer Pride Month.

President Trump on May 31st, 2019 tweeted:

As we celebrate LGBT Pride Month and recognize the outstanding contributions LGBT people have made to our great Nation, let us also stand in solidarity with the many LGBT people who live in dozens of countries worldwide that punish, imprison, or even execute individuals….on the basis of their sexual orientation. My Administration has launched a global campaign to decriminalize homosexuality and invite all nations to join us in this effort!

What are gays supposed to be proud OF?

In a June 6, 2011 Scientific American article titled “Why I’m Not Proud of Being Gay” Jessie Bering wonders, “I’m particularly interested in knowing what it is, exactly, that I’m supposed to be proud of.”

What is pride? Bering used the below Oxford English Dictionary definitions:

pride n. A high, esp. an excessively high, opinion of one’s own worth or importance which gives rise to a feeling or attitude of superiority over others; inordinate self-esteem.

pride n. Arrogant, haughty, or overbearing behaviour, demeanour, or treatment of others, esp. as exhibiting an inordinately high opinion of oneself.

Bering wrote:

In fact, a team of University of British Columbia psychologists led by Jessica Tracy would note that the foregoing definitions of pride are actually referring to a particularly ancient, evolutionarily derived subtype, which they refer to as hubristic pride. Tracy and her colleagues have argued that hubristic pride evolved to promote and sustain dominance, with the emotional engines of conceit and arrogance motivating individuals to scale the social hierarchy, which translates to genetic fitness. Laboratory participants induced to feel hubristic pride display increased aggression, hostility, and manipulation—all tactics of a tooth-and-nail pathway to social dominance that is based primarily on fear rather than respect. It’s not terribly surprising, in this light, that individuals who are more prone to exhibiting hubristic pride tend also to be more disagreeable, neurotic, narcissistic, are less conscientious and have a history of poor relationships and mental health problems. [Emphasis added]

Is the LGBTQ community suffering from hubristic pride?

Bering believes not when he wrote:

After all, these are people that have been “culturally victimized” by an overwhelmingly oppressive heterosexist society, one that has systematically devalued and derided them as deviants for as long as they can remember. Developing in such a society is emotionally crippling and poisonous to one’s self-esteem; it’s not exactly a recipe for creating hubris and an inflated ego.

Bering offhandedly dismisses the beliefs of the three Abrahamic religions, Judaism (Genesis 19:1-7), Christianity (Romans 1:24-28) and Islam (Al-Mustadrak 2/375), concerning sodomy and pride. IslamWeb.net notes this about pride and arrogance:

Pride and Arrogance:

Allah, Almighty, Says (what means): “I will turn away from My Ayaat (verses of the Quran) those who behave arrogantly on the earth, without a right, and (even) if they see all the Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons signs, revelations, etc.), they will not believe in them…” [Quran; 7:146] and (what means) “… truly He likes not the proud.” [Quran; 16:23]

Bering stated,

“These definitions clearly sit astride religious notions of pride being one of the Seven Deadly Sins . To many Christians, pride is the worst sin of all because placing oneself above others conflicts with spiritual egalitarianism. From a scientific perspective, at least, we can safely dismiss the God-hewn conjectures of pride being essentially evil, since there is no evil in essence, and there almost certainly is no God .

Are there objective moral values?

In an article published by BeThinking.org titled “Can Moral Objectivism Do Without God?” Peter S. Williams notes:

The most discussed moral argument for God’s existence is currently the argument concerning the ontological basis for objective moral values:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist
2. Objective moral values do exist
3. Therefore, God exists.

[ … ]

Francis J. Beckwith observes how “our experience indicates that moral obligation … is deeply connected to our obligations toward other persons.” I have moral obligations, but since I can’t be obligated by anything non-personal (e.g. the evolutionary history of my species), I must be obligated by something personal. Since there are objective moral obligations that transcend all finite persons (or groups thereof), there must therefore be a transcendent personal reality to whom we are most fundamentally obligated.

Read more.

Laws are based upon objective moral values such as: murder is morally wrong and therefore must be punished. So too are the seven deadly sins: lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy and pride. Each leads to breaking the moral values (laws) created by mankind over the millennia to prevent immoral values from becoming cultural norms.

Billions of people have faith and believe there is a monotheistic God. Jews, Christians and Muslims alike hold this faith and belief.

New Questions.

Since 1969 there is growing scientific evidence that homosexuality leads to serious health problems. According to EchoHealthAlliance.org:

That virus, commonly known as HIV, is the defining pandemic of our time. More than 35 million people have been killed by the virus to date.

Seeing what is happening today there are new questions that the LGBTQ community must answer.

  1. Are gays proud of what they have done to the Catholic Church?
  2. Are gays proud of what they have done to the Boy Scouts?
  3. Are gays proud of what they have done to a baker who didn’t bake them a wedding cake?
  4. Are gays proud of the annual march in Boston dressed in revealing clothing and performing sexual acts in public, in front of children?

Given what has happened since 1969, the question: What are gays proud of?, is still relevant.

Conclusion

The LGBTQ community must regain its objective moral obligations to society.

RELATED ARTICLES:

MassResistance mothers expose what really happens to children at LGBT “Youth Pride” events

Vermont Poised to Let Kids, Not Parents, Make Gender Decisions

Transgenderism and Perfect Freedom

Transgender Surgery Isn’t the Solution

The Most Cited Study In The Transgender Athlete Debate Is Bad Science

MassResistance activists help stop reparative therapy bans in state legislatures across the country

Money Can’t Buy You Health

Preview:  So how would government-funded primary care have prevented the diseases my patients have had? Heart failure? (Statin drugs probably make it worse.) Heart attacks? (When the patient has one, it is too late to prevent it.) Stroke? (Preventive aspirin is now criticized because of the bleeding it may cause.) Osteoarthritis? (We have great joint replacements but are much better at blocking access to surgery than at curing the arthritis.) Gall bladder disease, cancer, pneumonia, blood clots, thyroid disease, cataracts, arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation, herniated disks, asthma, endocarditis from drug abuse, on and on. If we put all the doctors to work pretending to keep people healthy, who would treat disease and injury?

Healing the sick is what medicine is about. The politicians who promise to “fix healthcare” can only destroy medicine—while bankrupting the country.


“Healthcare” is supposed to be the big election issue, and politicians promise to give people universal and equal “healthcare,” or prevent the bad guys from taking it away.

Everyone of course wants to be healthy, and a $3 trillion industry wants to keep the money flowing.

So, I have a confession to make as a doctor: I don’t think I have ever kept anybody healthy. If someone comes to me asking for “health maintenance,” I don’t have a shot of “health” to give, or a prescription for “health” to be filled at your neighborhood Walgreens, CVS, or Rite-Aid.

And as a patient, I can’t recall any ways in which doctors kept me healthy, although they did save my life by taking out my appendix, and they treated some illnesses and injuries. I am very grateful to them, and whatever I paid them seemed reasonable and well worth it.

To my mind, a healthy person is one who does not have to see a “healthcare provider” regularly or take medicine every day, and who can go to work, take care of family, and generally lead an active life.

We hear endless complaints about how we spend too much money treating sickness instead of preventing it. If only we had the government take all the money, plus trillions more, and “invest” it in health, we wouldn’t have to spend so much, and everyone would be healthier—so they say.

This was the rationale for the National Health Service in Britain. Once the NHS took care of the backlog of untreated illnesses, much of the need for it would melt away. This did not happen. Expenditures kept rising and were never enough. The backlogs and waiting lists grew. Ambulances circle emergency departments, and patients are crammed into hallways and storage rooms.

Suppose you go for your government-funded, “value-based” health maintenance visit. Details of your once-private life will be entered into a very expensive electronic health record. (For most people, it will be their own data, but occasionally someone else’s will be cut-and-pasted in, causing endless trouble.) You will be checked for diabetes or pre-diabetes, hypertension or pre-hypertension, tobacco use, cholesterol, in many cases gun ownership, body mass index, and other government-mandated items. You will get educated about the evils of tobacco (in case you have been on Mars and hadn’t heard). You’ll be lectured about obesity if your BMI is too high. You’ll very likely get a prescription to lower your blood pressure or cholesterol, and you may get vaccinated for something.

Your provider will likely get a bonus for checking all the right boxes and for “keeping you healthy,” and will get penalized if your “numbers” don’t improve or you get sick. Since I don’t think others are any better than I am at creating health, there is a huge incentive to “manage the case mix” to discourage unhealthy or noncompliant patients from joining the practice.

People on drugs for blood pressure or cholesterol may feel worse rather than better, but are supposed to be less likely to have a heart attack or stroke decades later. Studies with huge numbers of patients, who may be very different from you, have shown a decrease in such events with treatment. So far, a decrease in expenditures has not been shown, in view of the cost of all the drugs and side effects.

Of course, as an internist I treat high blood pressure and diabetes, but I consider this to be disease management. Would better diet prevent these things? Possibly, but what diet? I recommended low-fat diets for years. This government-approved advice is now questioned.

So how would government-funded primary care have prevented the diseases my patients have had? Heart failure? (Statin drugs probably make it worse.) Heart attacks? (When the patient has one, it is too late to prevent it.) Stroke? (Preventive aspirin is now criticized because of the bleeding it may cause.) Osteoarthritis? (We have great joint replacements but are much better at blocking access to surgery than at curing the arthritis.) Gall bladder disease, cancer, pneumonia, blood clots, thyroid disease, cataracts, arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation, herniated disks, asthma, endocarditis from drug abuse, on and on. If we put all the doctors to work pretending to keep people healthy, who would treat disease and injury?

Healing the sick is what medicine is about. The politicians who promise to “fix healthcare” can only destroy medicine—while bankrupting the country.

FINALLY: Trump administration to scrutinize impact of foreign funding of US colleges and universities

The U.S. Education Department has opened investigations into foreign funding at Georgetown University and Texas A&M University as part of a broader push to monitor international money flowing to American colleges:

“The inquiries are part of a broader campaign to scrutinize foreign funding going to universities and to improve reporting by schools, according to a Trump administration official familiar with the effort.

More schools probably will face questioning as federal officials focus on an issue they see as crucial to transparency and national security, according to the official, who was not authorized to publicly discuss the investigations and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Federal law requires U.S. colleges to report contracts and donations from foreign sources totaling $250,000 or more, but past filings from Georgetown and Texas A&M “may not fully capture” that information, according to the letters.

As an example, department officials wrote, both schools should have reported funding related to branch campuses they operate in Qatar, an oil-rich nation in the Mideast that hosts the outposts of several U.S. colleges.

The records being sought by investigators go far beyond Qatar, though, and include dealings with China, Russia and Saudi Arabia, and specific companies in those nations. Investigators ordered both schools to disclose funding from Huawei or ZTE, the Chinese tech giants that some U.S. officials call a threat to national security. Georgetown is being asked to detail money it received from any sources in Saudi Arabia or Russia, including Kaspersky Lab, a Russian cybersecurity company.

The letters warn that Georgetown and Texas A&M could face legal action and financial penalties if they’re found to have broken the rules. If investigators find a violation, it can be referred to the U.S. attorney general’s office for action “to compel compliance and to recover the full costs’” of the investigation and enforcement, according to the letters.”

This is not a new issue, but it is one that has gone unnoticed until the Trump administration wisely decided to start making sure that America’s colleges and universities were in fact complying with the law.

The American public has an interest in knowing the forces that influence and impact the education of our children.

Various groups make large donations to institutions of higher education for reasons of self-interest. Funding sources can inhibit the independence and autonomy of academia because donors generally have the ability to determine how benefactors use the money they donate.

When funding comes from foreign entities–individuals, organizations, corporations, royal families or governments–the potential for influence can be even more disturbing.

There is precedent elsewhere in the Western world regarding worrying influence from foreign donations to colleges and universities.

Large foreign donations are influencing courses at British universities, according to an April 2009 report (A Degree of Influence, from the Centre for Social Cohesion http://www.christopherdavidson.net/files/Foreign_funding.pdf). Money from foreign donors comes with strings attached. And dangerously so, according to this research that claims foreign governments have corrupted British universities and threatened their academic impartiality. Robin Simcox, the report’s author, says foreign donors that give enough money get a say in how things are run. “Edinburgh and Cambridge received £8m each from Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia to set up Islamic studies centres,” he said. “He got to appoint as many as three or five members of the management committee.”

To regard all or even most foreign donations to America’s colleges or universities as somehow nefarious would obviously be a serious mistake. America’s universities — with their superb curricula and research in science, medicine, agriculture, engineering and other fields — justifiably benefit from the financial support of America’s foreign friends and allies, many of whom have benefited directly from the technical expertise developed in these institutions. On the other hand, there are also reasonable grounds to suspect that some foreign gifts may purchase undue influence over the way in which highly controversial subjects are treated in American university lecture halls and texts.

Disclosure of Foreign Gifts to Higher Education

After the terrorist attacks of 9/11, many suggested the need for further disclosure of contributions, gifts and contracts made to America’s colleges and universities from foreign governments, corporations, foundations and individuals.  Often, these donations are made by foreigners who want to influence the college’s or university’s policies and curricula.

Sunshine is the best disinfectant, especially for taxpayer-funded public entities. Foreign gifts disclosure laws allow for the sun to shine on significant foreign contributions made to our public colleges and universities by requiring public disclosure of gifts from foreign governments, entities and individuals to state colleges and universities.

Contributions made to universities by foreign governments, entities, and persons have come under heightened scrutiny, especially some made from Islamist foundations whose active denial of the Holocaust and outspoken anti-Semitic views have caused great criticism. Some contributions have funded university-sponsored Islamic centers, whose denunciation of US foreign policies, support for the application of Shariah Law in the US and lack of condemnation against calls for “jihad” against Americans are worrisome.

Universities that receive federal funding must report foreign gifts to the Department of Education, however, federal enforcement has been poor to non-existent. As a result of federal incompetence, some states have taken the initiative

The purpose of the state laws is to promote transparency in government on the state level and ensure disclosure of all financial arrangements and relationships to the taxpayers and elected officials.

These laws simply require public disclosure of these foreign gifts. They in no way discourage legitimate donations from foreign governments, entities or individuals; they merely mandate that the donations to state colleges and universities be made transparent and disclosed to the public. Public disclosure is the check and balance that will ensure that our taxpayer-supported public colleges and universities will not accept gifts or contributions that are not publicly defendable. Any gift not given by a foreign entity due to public disclosure is a gift that should not be accepted.

Below are examples of these laws on the state level:

New York

New York Education – Part 1 – § 207-A Disclosure of Gifts Made to Institutions of Higher Education by Foreign Governments, Persons and Entities

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/education/EDN0207-A_207-A.html

Utah

Disclosure of Donations to Higher Education Institutions

http://le.utah.gov/~2010/bills/hbillenr/hb0114.htm

Louisiana

Disclosure of Gifts Made to Institutions of Higher Education by Foreign Governments, Persons, and Entities

https://law.justia.com/codes/louisiana/2013/code-revisedstatutes/title-17/rs-17-1818/

The extent of the problem has perhaps been most starkly demonstrated at Harvard Law School, which has established a Shariah Law and Shariah Finance section, while also receiving tens of millions of dollars from royalty in Islamic nations, notably Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

When such donations find their way into taxpayer-supported public colleges and universities, the public has a right to know where the foreign donations are coming from and to what purpose they are directed. Elected officials and other policymakers have a duty to see to it that there is full public disclosure on all aspects of such donations.

Again, sunshine is the best antiseptic. Any foreign donation to a taxpayer-supported public college or university that cannot be disclosed to the public probably should not be accepted in the first place.

Hopefully more states will follow the example set by New York, Utah and Louisiana and pass laws enforcing full disclosure–at least until “the swamp” on the federal level decides to get out of the way.

COLUMN BY

Christopher Holton

Christopher Holton is Vice President for Outreach at the Center for Security Policy. Mr. Holton came to the Center after serving as president and marketing director of Blanchard & Co. and editor-in-chief of the Blanchard Economic Research Unit from 1990 to 2003. As chief of the Blanchard Economic Research Unit in 2000, he conceived and commissioned the Center for Security Policy special report “Clinton’s Legacy: The Dangerous Decade.” Holton is a member of the Board of Advisers of WorldTribune.com. Follow Holton on Twitter @CHoltonCSP.

View all posts by Christopher Holton →

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

The Connection Between Hollywood and China

Don’t be fooled by the Americans behind the camera. In today’s Hollywood, there’s one director — and that’s China. As important as U.S. audiences are, filmmakers know there’s a bigger one. And they’re willing to do anything they can to tap into it, even if it means becoming co-conspirators with one of the most evil censorship operations in the world.

It’s the biggest partnership no one knows about, and according to some experts, the most dangerous. The majority of Americans probably have no idea when they buy a ticket to the latest blockbuster that the film they’re about to see was either partially financed by China or altered because of it. In the last several years, there hasn’t been a more powerful influence over Hollywood than the communist regime — and with Chinese ticket sales set to overtake the U.S., the situation is only going to get worse.

There’s a sinister side to all of this, which is that the more Hollywood relies on China’s market to make movies, the more those movies are going to cater to the country’s demands. The Heritage Foundation’s Mike Gonzalez has been tracking the major revolution in filmmaking because of the Chinese market and thinks more Americans need to be paying attention. “Hollywood does all kinds of things to make sure they have a slice of the Chinese pie,” he told listeners on “Washington Watch.” “And they’re quite open about it. They don’t hide it. They’re quite happy to submit to the censorship of the Chinese Communist Party.”

“It goes something like this,” he explained. “In order for the U.S. film to crack the Chinese market, certain themes cannot be portrayed, certain products must be taken out, and certain speech must be limited.” The process has become so rigorous that a lot of studios are actually flying over these Chinese censors to sit in on filming. In some instances, entire scripts have been changed — either to conform to the communists’ messaging or showcase China in the best possible light. Others try to save themselves the time and money of those overhauls by just co-producing their movies with the Chinese from the start — including, in 2018, some of the biggest box office successes: Mission: Impossible: Fallout, Venom, The MEG, and Pacific Rim: Uprising.

The obvious result of all this, Mike argues, is that “American audiences are being submitted to censorship — not our own censorship, but a foreign power’s censorship — and a Communist Party censorship. We get shown a very benign view of China, in which China is a normal country, no different from Paris, or Britain, or Germany. That isn’t the case obviously. If you speak against the government in Germany, nothing happens to you. If you speak against the government in China, they’ll throw you in jail.”

By letting China call the shots, these filmmakers have actually become complicit in the attack on free expression — their expression. Just think about it, Mike said. “How come there’s never been a movie about the Tiananmen Square massacre? That was drama there. There were students who were crushed by soldiers. There was blood, there was death, there was scheming. And yet Hollywood has never made a movie about Tiananmen. Why? Because any studio who makes a movie about Tiananmen knows that will be shut out forever from the Chinese box office market.”

This is a country with such suffocating strictness that even Winnie the Pooh is banned. Why? Because the government is worried he’ll be compared to President Xi Jinping. (Maybe they don’t want the world’s worst human rights abusers to look soft.) Either way, Hollywood is going along with it, prostituting its voice — and America’s influence — in the process.

Of course, most people probably aren’t surprised that Tinseltown would sell its soul to make a few bucks. What they are amazed by is all of the political sanctimony from filmmakers here at home. This is an industry in partnership with the Chinese government, a notoriously brutal regime, who’s turning around and telling places like Georgia: We’re not doing business with you because you passed pro-life laws.

Unbelievable. Hollywood has no problem climbing down from its moral high horse to sell tickets in China — where people are being viciously tortured and killed — but decides it can’t possibly ally itself with states that protect their own people. They’d rather be a puppet of the communist state and its nightmarish record on human rights than support a democratic process that saves lives. That’s 100-percent hypocrisy no matter what language you speak.

If the entertainment industry wants to wrap itself in the Chinese flag, that’s literally their business. Just don’t be shocked when the alliance backfires. Because in a world of bad actors, the People’s Republic is the worst.


Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.


RELATED ARTICLES:

AMA Issues Shot against Parental Consent

Help Us End Birth Day Abortion

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