A Surprise Sign of God’s People for when Pope Francis visits America

God has given set times [mo’ed] as appointments for us. The Pope’s visit to Congress falls on one of them.

Happiness is based on relationships described in the 10 Commandments. People who break them—people who lie, steal, kill or commit adultery are not happy people and will not be in heaven.

Our salvation also involves our willingness to relate to God on His terms in the 1st table of stone (no other gods, no images, not abusing His name, keeping His appointments—times He set for us to honor Him). He regards those set-apart days as times we show our appreciation for Him, and they are for our best good. If we didn’t rest one day in seven, we would wear ourselves out.

We recognize that we cannot earn salvation by our efforts at keeping the law, but because He has provided for our salvation, we choose to honor Him in all we do. The Bible says, I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them.” Ezek 20:12.

The surprise is the “s” on Sabbaths and a realization that God gave annual Sabbaths to teach truths in the plan of salvation. They are found in Leviticus 23 where they are called “the feasts of the LORD.” Not Jewish festivals as the papacy characterized them in the Vatican’s claim to have abolished them, Dan 7:25.

They were designed to teach the people that at the time appointed One would come to whom those ceremonies pointed. We see this with Passover—Christ died as the Passover Lamb on Passover. Isa 53:3-7; John 19:16.  As we approach end-times, we might expect key events to occur at those times—they are “shadows of things to come.” Col 2:16,17.

One of those “things to come” is a wedding opportunity when “the Bridegroom comes,” Matt 25:6  But the previous verse implies that we are asleep with lights out on this topic. For a better understanding, we look at the previous wedding parable that shows a man thrown out for no wedding garment. Matt 22:12,13

Could that be us? We should recall that the last of seven churches is described as *lukewarm, content with materialism as Christ knocks at the door. But bad situation–“blind” means a slow process to find the door and “naked” means a need to dress first. US churches fit this description* of unreadiness. Rev 3:17,20

The Bible offers a remedy and current events suggest our need to consider it. The remedy is the change of garment that comes from observing the day of Atonement as Joshua did in Zechariah 3. He had filthy garments, but received a change of garments in connection with day of Atonement imagery.

The current event that suggests our need to keep this time as God’s appointment is the pope’s visit on that very date, to Congress.

Most Jews will observe September 23, because they accept NASA’s dark moon to start their count, but in Bible times, they blew the trumpet when they saw the thin crescent in the west after sunset. That evening and the next day were the first day of the month. The 10th was the day of Atonement. It means at-one-ment with God and is so by fasting and prayer, seeking harmony with Him, Lev 23:27-32.

“Blow the trumpet in Zion, sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly,” Joel 2:15. This was the only day in the year that God’s people were commanded to fast and those who did not, were “cut off,” from God’s people. Why not consider keeping God’s appointment this year? It could be the time that the prophet Joel foretold. If so, we might expect a major trumpet event like economic collapse on Sept 15 to support this view and underscore our need to see God at His appointed time.

Bible imagery for the first trumpet in Revelation 8:7 implies economic collapse because it decodes grass that withers to riches in James 1:9-11, King James Bible. If something huge happens Sept. 15, we should seek a better understanding from the Bible about what the pope has to offer; a crash isn’t a good omen.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Illegitimate Pope: Election of Jorge Bergoglio as Pope Francis was contaminated by lobbying in violation of papal laws

EDITORS NOTE: Dr. Richard Ruhling is a physician whose main interest in retirement is end-times prophecy and the wedding parables. His ebook, The Alpha & Omega Bible Code, has mostly 5-star reviews on Amazon Kindle but he includes a bonus for visiting his website. More information on the pope’s visit ma be found here.

Finland Moves to Repeal Gay Marriage Law

With a new pro-family government elected this year, the “gay marriage” battle is gearing up across Finland again with more energy and momentum than ever, using Finnish language versions of MassResistance materials to educate voters.

New Finnish version of MassResistance booklet (read it here), and original version (read it here).

Late last year, as we reported, the Finnish Parliament narrowly passed a “gay marriage” law. As we’ve seen in so many other places, proponents used an aggressive, undemocratic strategy that allowed no parliamentary debate, discussion, or amendments to push the bill through its final stages. Within a week, over 12,000 people had resigned from the Finnish Lutheran Church over its Bishop’s pro-gay marriage remarks.

But last April’s nationwide elections changed the political landscape. A new Parliament was elected.  The top people in government are openly pro-traditional marriage. As a result, the Finnish pro-family movement has ignited across the country to get the bill repealed. Over 70,000 people have already signed a special petition to get it before the Parliament. And to counter the “gay” propaganda, they are out educating the population and the political leaders about the consequences of “gay marriage” for society.


The Finnish pro-family movement is gathering thousands of signatures to force Parliament to re-visit the “gay marriage” law.

MassResistance materials

MassResistance materials are being used extensively. Last month Finnish activists finished creating a Finnish-language version of our booklet “What same-sex ‘marriage’ has done to Massachusetts.”  It is being distributed across the country and to the nation’s political leaders.  Our video, “What gay ‘marriage’ did to Massachusetts” is being shown on national TV translated into Finnish, Swedish, and Estonian.

MassResistance same-sex marriage VIDEO modified for Finland
Posted on Finnish TV site and broadcast on Finnish national TV. Versions in Finnish, Swedish, and Estonian.

During July, one of the coalition leaders emailed us on their progress:

We are so thankful what you have been doing to support us in this battle. Homoseksual lobby is claiming that this issue is settled, but it is not over, for we have a very good chance to defeat them.

Now your booklet is finally translated into Finnish language and is ready for the distribution. We are going to hand it out free of charge all over this country. We’ve also added a few additional pages in the beginning and at the end of this publication to apply your message specifically to our setting here.

We are now working to inform our Prime Minister, his government and the Parliament as well as all church leaders and all leaders, what is really involved in this same-sex marriage. We are mailing your booklet to all of them and after that, all over Finland so much as possible, to wake up the whole nation.  I will let you know how our leaders respond to this campaign. Your publication will support also a new nation wide effort by www.aitoavioliitto.fi association to stop the same-sex marriage legislation.

People have been very much touched by your video, which is in three TV7 Channels – In Finnish language, Swedish and Estonian. It has already stirred up large multitude and we believe that the additional impact will come over this whole nation.

They are clearly gaining momentum.

Breath of fresh air. New Finnish Prime Minister Juha Sipila is not afraid to say he supports traditional marriage. But will he act on it?

Latest report from the front

Just this morning we received this updated report from the Finnish pro-family leader. (Note his comment that the Minister of Justice is not cooperating with enforcement of the “gay marriage” law. We need more of that spirit here in the US!)

Yes, set up is quite favorable for our cause.

(1) The Prime minister Juha Sipilä, the Foreign minister Timo Soini, the Minister of Justice Jari Lindström and several others are – as far as their personal opinion is concerned – for the traditional marriage standing with us.  How forcefully they are willing to persuade their parties to stand with them – that is one of the questions now!

(2) The Minister of Justice, Jari Lindström has set up his mind not to carry on – not to workout – not to confirm legislation concerning the same-sex marriage. Finnish media is quite mad with him.

(3) People defending the traditional marriage between one woman and one man – they are campaigning to defeat the same-sex marriage – foolish voting done in the parliament. Up to this date well over 70.000 have rallied behind us in this aitoavioliitto.fi campaign.

However, according to statistics there are in Finland about 3.000.000 who personally are for the traditional marriage, but most of them think – it does not matter what happens – it does not affect me. They do not understand how serious it is to legislate the same-sex marriage. Your video and booklet is wonderfully stirring up sleeping ones. My personal target is especially the men and women in high position, those who do have the authority to make the final decision concerning this matter.

(4) Our greatest obstacle is the media! Media is by and large for the homosexual lobby. Media is ‘brain washing’ multitudes with false information. The whole nation and political leaders have been programmed by the media – unfortunately!

(5) The second problem is our situation in Finland. We are part of the European Union and our previous governments have shoveled most of the money to outsiders, especially to Greece. Financial problems, unemployment and various kinds of difficulties are heavily resting upon our ministers and they do not have time to put themselves to see what we say.

However, due to this aitoavioliitto.fi campaign – our parliament has to reconsider what we say. They are bound to take it again to the legislative committee and for general voting in the parliament.

Consequently, the government ministers, the members of our parliament, the media – these are key factors to determine what happens. The final result depends on what they do.

All over Finland there is a large prayer campaign going on to stop and to defeat the homosexual movement. Homosexual lobby is rallying little children to march with them in Pride Parades waving the rainbow flags. We trust that the sensible part of our population could wake up and get upset of that ‘sexual force feeding’!

I will let you know what happens when the parliament is reconsidering our aitoavioliitto.fi demand. You could see the campaign webpage www.aitoavioliitto.fi and my personal campaign page www.suomijeesukselle.fi  Your materials, links to see them and to read them are posted in my campaign webpage www.suomijeesukselle.fi  Thank you for standing together with us and providing your materials to support us in this worldwide battle to uphold traditional & Christian family values.

The petition has until September to collect names. Given the change in government after the recent election — and the momentum across the country to reverse the “gay marriage” law forced on citizens — it’s possible that the challenge could be taken up in Parliament this fall. Or maybe sooner?

In any case, it will be a big battle!  We’ll keep you informed.

Former CIA Operations Officer: Iran has never told the truth about its nuclear program

Clare Lopez, a former CIA Operations officer and the Vice-President of Research & Analysis at Center for Security Policy. is our featured guest on today’s short promotional for the “DAY OF ACTION” in Santa Barbara, California on Sunday Aug 30, 2015.

Clare is one of America’s top experts on Iran and their march to the Atomic bomb and she has much to say about the very bad Iran nuke deal made by the Obama Administration.

Join us in STOPPING THE IRAN DEAL!

We have TWO amazing events on August 30th!

The first is a Roundtable Luncheon featuring a panel of national and local experts on the Iran Treaty, on the US and Israel and how it will affect Santa Barbara County. Tickets are $60. Sponsorships are available at different levels. A ticket to the lunch gets you a VIP seat at the rally (details below). If you are not able to attend but would like to donate (100% tax-deductible) to help offset to costs of this grassroots effort, it would be appreciated. To purchase tickets, to sponsor or to donate, go to: StopIran.eventbrite.com

After the lunch, there will be a Stop Iran NOW Rally at the Santa Barbara Courthouse Sunken Gardens co-hosted by Stand With Us, The Clarion Project, The United West and other local groups. The rally is FREE and we need as many people as possible to attend. Please forward to your friends, family, neighbors and co-workers. It’s up to US to stop this deal! Signs and flags will be provided.

Did Iran Order the Rocket Attack from Syria on Northern Israel?

Yesterday, four rockets fired from the Syrian side of the Golan frontier hit near Kfar Sold in Northern Israel causing fires in the area. In response the IAF dispatched aircraft and attacked 14 positions inside Syria, while the IDF on the Golan opened up artillery fire on suspected targets. According to aTimes of Israel  (TOI) report six civilians were killed, seven wounded in an IAF  attack on a vehicle 10 kilometers from the Syrian Israel frontier  in the Quneitra region of  Southern Syria.  That Israeli attack may have targeted members of a Palestinian Islamic Jihad cell. However, Daud Shihab a spokesman for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad continued claiming no responsibility for the attack. Nevertheless, he suggested that they knew were to attack saying:

We’ll know when to respond to an Israeli attack — and that will be where the Iron Dome was installed yesterday,” he said, referring to Israeli missile defense systems deployed the southern cities of Ashdod and Beersheba on Thursday.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights in London suggested five of the casualties may have been members of the National Defense Force.  Early Friday morning, August 21, 2015, the Syrian military fired a missile at an Israeli aircraft.

An IDF senior officer contend that the group behind these attacks the Palestinian Islamic Jihad based in Gaza, with headquarters in Damascus, was ordered by Iran to execute the attacks. The TOI cited an Israel source who said:

We were monitoring this cell and it was attacked some 10-15 kilometers from the border, on territory firmly in the control of the Syrian military. This is an Islamic Jihad cell directed by Iran.

The Iran-controlled Al-Mayadeen TV in Damascus reported that three of those killed were Palestinian.

The pretext for these attacks may have been the hunger strike, just ended, by an Israeli held prisoner, Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader, Mohammed Allan. The Palestinian Islamic Jihad said it would undertake reprisal attacks of its own choosing in response to those killed and wounded in the Israel drone attack.  Israel PM Netanyahu cautioned that he didn’t want this incident to escalate into a wider conflict saying:

We have no intention of ratcheting up this confrontation, but our policy [of retaliating for attacks against Israeli civilians] remains as it was.

Notwithstanding Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said:

The strike against the cell was proof that Israel will not tolerate efforts to harm the security of its citizens.

“We have no intention of compromising on this issue, and I suggest no one test our resolve on this matter,” he said in a brief statement after the attack.

i24News reported  an IDF officer commenting:

It’s clear that Iran is behind all of the terror attacks here [in the Golan] in the past two years. The Iranians are using the border – they establish units – whether it’s [Imad] Mughniyeh, [Samir] Kuntar, and more – to carry out [the attacks].

The officer added that the Iranian regime was transferring funds, providing training and sending advisers to Syria to help the Islamist group Hezbollah.

Remember the IAF attack in January 2015 on the Syrian side of the Golan frontier that took out a senior Iran IRGC general and Hezbollah officers including Jihad, the son of the late master terrorist Imad Mughniyah? That led to an abrupt series of clashes with Hezbollah in the disputed Shebaa Farms area on the Lebanese border.  Today’s rocket attacks in Israel’s north  and immediate IAF air attacks and IDF artillery fire demonstrates both resolve and concern by Israeli PM Netanyahu and his security cabinet to stifle a possible rocket war in the country’s North. Given the huge arsenal  of rockets and missiles  held by Hezbollah, Israel wants to  avoid a much larger onslaught than  the Hezbollah rocket attacks during the Second Lebanon War in 2006 that displaced over a million Israelis during the 34 day war.

We have argued that Israel may have to undertake incursions across the UNDOF demilitarized zone to clear out Iranian Quds force supported Palestinian Jihad fighters. As my colleague Ilana Freedman and  this  writer noted in a  January 2015, NER article the IDF also needs to address detection and destruction of  possible cross border tunneling  in Israel’s north by Hezbollah. Given Tehran ” success” with the P5+1 nuclear deal and this week’s sale of S300 Russian advanced air defense systems to Iran’s Quds Force commander Gen. Soleimani feels emboldened to foment more proxy conflicts destabilizing the Middle East region. Clearly with this week’s attacks in the country’s north Israel is in the Quds Force gun sights. Ayatollah Khamenei’s playbook called “Palestine” suggests that Israel will be routed not with nuclear weapons but low intensity warfare.

Back in January we noted this comment from Maj. Gen. (ret.) Yaakov Armidror and former National Security Advisor:

Yaakov Armidror, former IDF Maj. Gen. (ret.) and National Security Advisor in a recent strategic evaluation of  Terrorist  threats  facing Israel, published by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies , reported by the Jerusalem Post, noted Hezbollah capabilities:

Looking ahead to 2015, Israel faces threats posed mainly by non-state entities motivated by Islamic ideology.

“The strongest of them is Hezbollah, which was formed with a dual purpose in mind.  It represents Iran’s long reach in the area and against Israel, while at the same time it aims to control Lebanon, where the Shi’ites are the largest ethnic group,” Amidror added.

Hezbollah most closely resembles an army, and its arsenal totals some 150,000 missiles and rockets, several thousand of which can target any area in Israel.

“This rare and substantial firepower apparently even exceeded the firepower possessed by most of the European states combined,” Amidror said in the report.

Additionally, Hezbollah is armed with surface-to-sea missiles, anti-aircraft missiles, drones and modern anti-tank missiles.

“It is well organized into a military-style hierarchy and appears to possess command and control systems of high quality. It was established by Iranian leaders, but its leadership has always consisted of Lebanese people who were closely linked to Iran’s interests,” the report continued. “Hezbollah assisted the Shi’ites by providing for their needs in the civilian sphere as a base for building its military power.”

We concluded:

Hezbollah’s possible invasion threat would be costly to the Shi’ite terrorist army.  Especially in view of both Israeli intelligence penetration of the Iranian proxy. Nonetheless, the Israel’s military command must be on alert for possible retaliation by Hezbollah in the Shebaa Farms area adjacent to the Golan and in the Galilee.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon on a tour of the northern border, August 18, 2015. Source: Amos Ben-Gershom/GPO.

A Watershed Moment in U.S. History

After weeks of agonizing by establishment Republicans and the mainstream media… agonizing over the question of what a bull-in-the-china-shop candidate like Donald Trump is doing among the largest-ever field of well-qualified Republican presidential candidates… Trump has announced a simple, straightforward plan for immigration reform, a plan that could represent a “watershed moment” in U.S. history.  The Trump plan is based on three core principles:

  1. That the U.S. – Mexican border must be secured by building a wall or a fence along the entirety of our southern border,
  2. That all immigration laws currently on the books must be fully and rigidly enforced, and
  3. That the number one priority for any future immigration plan must be based on what is in the best cultural and economic interests of the American people… and nothing else.

As part of his immigration plan, Trump calls for a nationwide system to identify and locate all illegal aliens… those who have entered the country illegally, as well as those who’ve entered legally and overstayed their visas.  To accomplish that end, Trump proposes tripling the number of immigration and customs enforcement (ICE) agents.

What he suggests is precisely what conservatives and Republicans have been promoting ever since mass illegal immigration began.  However, Trump departs from Republican orthodoxy by taking a totally no-nonsense approach to the problem of the so-called “anchor babies,” defined as infants born to pregnant foreign women who come to the Unites States, illegally, just to insure that their babies can acquire U.S. citizenship by being born on American soil.

The purpose of the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, was to grant U.S. citizenship to former slaves and their children who were born on U.S. soil.  The authors of the amendment could never have conceived of a time when pregnant women would travel great distances from foreign lands for the sole purpose of taking advantage of the 14th Amendment.  The “anchor baby” concept has created an entire underclass of undocumented aliens who are allowed to remain in the country under an unwritten law that protects families from being separated and prevents infants with U.S. citizenship from being forcibly deported along with their illegal alien parents.  Trump, who says what conservatives and Republicans have always feared to say, merely scoffs at suggestions that to deport all illegal aliens would separate foreign parents from their minor children.  In an August 16 appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” he made his position on “anchor babies” crystal clear, saying, “We have to keep the families together, but they have to go.”

He also ventures outside Republican orthodoxy by taking a no-nonsense approach to the status of Obama’s so-called “Dreamers” – non-citizens who were brought to the United States illegally as children, who’ve grown up here, who’ve been educated here, and who would be political and cultural strangers in the native lands of their parents.  He expresses no desire to separate “Dreamers” from their illegal alien parents by allowing them to remain in the United States while their parents are deported.  Instead, he insists that Obama’s executive order shielding the “Dreamers” from deportation must be rescinded.

So what is it about Trump’s immigration reform plan that would qualify it as a “watershed moment” in American history?  Its significance is not that it has a chance of being enacted and fully implemented; as a nation we are still far too politically correct and we have far too many “squeaky wheels” among liberals and Hispanic activists to accomplish that anytime soon.  No, the significance of Trump’s immigration reform proposal is much more subtle.  Just as Rush Limbaugh’s major contribution to our national persona is not that he has caused elections to be won or lost, but that he has caused millions of politically uncommitted Americans to understand where they fit in the political spectrum, Trump’s straightforward approach to solving the illegal immigration problem has made it okay for previously hesitant Americans to openly agree with his no-nonsense approach.  It is what most Americans have always believed, but were afraid to put into words for fear that they would be branded as racists or xenophobes.

The point is, Americans are fair and reasonable people.  Scratch almost any American and you’ll find a person who would fully expect to be deported from a foreign country where they were living illegally.  So why would they not expect foreigners living in the United States illegally to react in the same way?  In short, it’s time we expected our uninvited guests to act like grownups, and Trump’s no-nonsense approach to the problem of illegal immigration gives us all license to finally put those expectations into words.

But more importantly, his courageous stance on illegal immigration also provides us with the opportunity to bring other critically important issues to the fore… issues that, until now, have been stuck in quagmires of constitutional uncertainties and/or political correctness.  Of these, none are more important than the unrelenting invasion of radicalized Muslims and the chilling threat of Islamic terrorism inside our own borders.

According to the Center for Immigration Studies, “Islamists arrive in the United States despising the country and all it represents, intending to make converts, exploit the freedoms and rights granted them, and build a movement that will effect basic changes in the country’s way of life and its government.  The superpower status of the United States makes it especially attractive to those who wish to change the world order; what better place to start?  Islamists do not accept the United States as it is but want to change it into a majority Muslim country where the Qur’an replaces the Constitution.”

The United States has already provided refugee status for more Muslims than all the other nations in the world combined.  Yet, in spite of that insanity, the Obama administration has recently announced that we are prepared to receive an additional 70,000 unvetted Muslim refugees, including many with strong ties to ISIS and al-Qaeda.  Some come seeking safety, some come seeking a better life, but many others come in the hope of doing us great harm.

In order to neutralize and reverse radical Islam’s contribution to the cultural infestation of the United States, we must attack the problem of Muslim immigration with the same level of courage with which Donald Trump approaches illegal immigration.  In short, we should not hesitate to confront Muslim infiltration by enacting new legislation, tailoring the language of the

Communist Control Act of 1954 to read as follows:

SEC. 1.  PREAMBLE.  The Congress hereby finds and declares that certain organizations exist within our borders which, although purporting to be political or religious in nature, are in fact instrumentalities of foreign political or religious entities or ideologies whose purpose it is to overthrow the Government of the United States by any available means, including force and violence.  Such organizations operate as authoritarian dictatorships within our borders, demanding for themselves the rights and privileges generally accorded to all political parties and religious denominations, but denying to all others the liberties guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution.        

SEC. 2. PROSCRIBED ORGANIZATIONS.  Any political or religious organization as described herein, or any successors or affiliates of such organizations, regardless of the assumed name, whose object or purpose is to overthrow the government of the United States by force or violence, or the government of any State, Territory, District, possession, or political subdivision thereof, are not entitled to any of the rights, privileges, and immunities attendant upon legal bodies created under the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States or its political subdivisions; and whatever rights, privileges, and immunities heretofore granted to said religious or political organizations, or any subsidiary or affiliate organizations, by reason of the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof, are hereby rescinded:  Provided that nothing in this section shall be construed as amending the Internal Security Act of 1950, as amended.

With that statute on the books, making the practice or the promotion of Islamic jihad illegal, we can make it very uncomfortable for radical Islamists.  We can make their presence in our country so unpleasant that they will long for a return to whatever hellhole they and their predecessors crawled out of, ccausing them to self-repatriate in increasingly large numbers.  With eyes and ears planted in every mosque and every Muslim cultural center in America, radical Islamists could be readily identified and FBI agents could quickly make arrests.

American policymakers could take a lesson from the Slovakians.  When asked by United Nations officials to accept “their share” of Muslim refugees, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry, Ivan Metic, replied, “We could take 800 Muslims, but we don’t have any mosques in Slovakia so how can Muslims be integrated if they are not going to like it here?”  Clearly, what Metic was saying is that building permits for mosques might be very difficult to obtain in Slovakia.  Officials in the United States and other western nations should learn to be equally “welcoming” to Islamists.

What Donald Trump’s straightforward no-nonsense approach has done is to finally make it acceptable to debate some of our major national problems by putting political correctness behind us.  When all is said and done, Trump may not be electable.  However, if his presence in the race ultimately makes it permissible for us to deal with racial discord, immigration reform, and the threat of radical Islam without fear of being branded racist, Islamophobic, xenophobic, or politically incorrect, his candidacy will truly be seen as a “watershed moment” in U.S. history.

NOTE: Such organizations acknowledge no constitutional or statutory limitations upon their conduct or upon that of their members.  The membership of such organizations, while relatively small in number, gives scant indication of their capacity ever to attain their objectives by lawful means.  Rather, the peril inherent in their existence arises not from their numbers, but from their failure to acknowledge any limitation as to the nature of their activities, and their dedication to the proposition that the present constitutional Government of the United States ultimately must be brought to ruin by any available means, including resort to force and violence.  Holding that doctrine, their role as the instrumentalities of hostile foreign political powers or religious ideologies renders their existence a clear, present, and continuing danger to the security of the United States. 

‘Sandboxing’ Islam: How to Protect America from Jihad Terrorism by Ralph Sidway

Enforcing the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) can give us the legal and tactical edge in countering the threat from Islamic supremacism.

Background

It should be obvious for anyone with eyes to see that Islam — its scriptures, the example of Muhammad, its doctrines, and its overall ideology — is behind the spread of most terrorism and unrest in the world today.

From the Islamic State (ISIS), Boko Haram, al-Nusra and al-Shabaab, to slightly older groups such as al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and the Muslim Brotherhood, to lesser known jihadi organizations throughout Central Asia, India, Southeast Asia, the Pacific Rim, and China, a survey of terrorist attacks reveals Muslim involvement throughout the entire world.

Here in the United States, we are seeing a dramatic rise in Muslim “lone wolf” jihad terrorist attacks (and, as some have described them, known wolves”). Further, from all points of the compass, we are seeing literally tens of thousands of Muslims flocking to the Middle East to join the Islamic State caliphate and support the jihad with their very lives.

The scenario gets worse. Some analysts argue that we are seriously underestimating the numbers of Western Muslims joining the Islamic State.

Here at home, we have a “ full blown insurgency.” The FBI has already arrested seventy IS-inspired Muslim terrorists, and has active investigations of IS-inspired jihad plots in all 56 of its field offices. NewsMax reports “the government’s terrorist watch list carries 700,000 to a million names.”

The Challenge: Jihad-Linked Mosques

This is all indisputable fact. The threat is real and growing. Even worse, the threat is specifically from devout, observant Muslims who attend mosque. Behind every lone-or-known-wolf jihadi and every Islamic State recruit there is a mosque where they are receiving instruction in Islam.

That should give us pause, as four separate studies in recent years show that 80% of mosques in the U.S. teach, preach or advocate for jihad and the imposition of sharia law in America. 

Confirming these mosque studies are proven links between mosques and terrorists.  For example, one of the two Mississippi Muslims recently arrested for trying to join the Islamic State is the son of the imam at the local mosque. Many terror-linked mosques have spawned multiple jihadis. The Phoenix mosque attended by the Garland TX jihadis is notorious for having two other members in federal prison on terrorism-related convictions. Perhaps most infamous is the Islamic Society of Boston, which was attended not only by the Boston Marathon Bombers, but by numerous other jihad-terror-linked Muslims. The list goes on and on.

For many people, especially in our political class and certainly among the 2016 field of presidential candidates, there seems to be no solution to this national security nightmare of terror-linked mosques and known wolf jihadis. To date, there is no coherent, principle-based policy to address Islamic terrorism in the United States.

The Solution: ‘Sandboxing’ Islam in America

This is where I believe the simple analogy of “Sandboxing” can help us.

You’ve probably heard the term, even if you’re not a computer geek. One tech source offers this definition:

A “sandbox” is a play area for young children: it is supposed to be safe for them (they cannot hurt themselves) and safe from them (it is sand, they cannot break it). In the context of IT security, “sandboxing” means isolating some piece of software in such a way that whatever it does, it will not spread havoc elsewhere.

If we think of America as being, ideally, a safe and free place for its citizens, within which we should be able to live, work, play, and, as the ubiquitous bumper sticker says, “Coexist,” then when it comes to Islam and Muslims, we need a solution analogous to the IT security process of “sandboxing.” We need to isolate malicious jihadi forces, “in such a way that whatever they do, they will not spread havoc elsewhere.”

What would “sandboxing” look like when it comes to Muslims in America? In practice, it could include the following policies:

  • A moratorium — a complete freeze — on Muslim immigration. Senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul expressed a similar policy concept following the Chattanooga jihad murders of five US servicemen, proposing a halt to immigration from Muslim countries with known jihad activity. Going one step further, Franklin Graham wrote at the same time that “We should stop all immigration of Muslims to the U.S. until this threat with Islam has been settled.
  • All mosques must be classified and treated as “agents of foreign power,” in accordance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), a U.S. law (22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.) passed in 1938.

The law presciently allows for application in gray areas such as Islam presents, as it states that any entity with a “political or quasi-political capacity” disclose their relationship with the foreign government and information about related activities and finances. The purpose is to facilitate “evaluation by the government and the American people of the statements and activities of such persons.” [Source]

Islam certainly thinks and behaves like a foreign power, is guided in America by the Muslim Brotherhood, the Saudis and other foreign Islamic groups, and has a definite political dimension. (See also here.)

  • Any and all mosques associated with Muslim terrorists must be investigated, and if found to be advancing jihad doctrine, sharia law, and Islamic supremacism over the United States, they should be prosecuted and closed, in accordance with the FARA act referenced above.
  • Stop all foreign funding of mosques, whether by FARA, new legislation, or executive power. We already know that Saudi Arabia is providing extensive funding to advance its extremist Wahhabi strain of Islam worldwide, including of mosques in America, as is Turkey. There already exist covert lobbying groups for Muslim nations, including Iran.

These are just some starting points to aid in getting this conversation going. The American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) has an 18-point platform with similar policy proposals which may be considered as well.

We must have hope that, just as illegal immigration has become a major issue in the presidential race, so also we may be successful in elevating public awareness of the clear and present danger from Islam and Muslim jihad terrorists. This is a generational if not century-long struggle ahead of us, and should resonate with voters.

The concept of “sandboxing” is, I believe, the most helpful image in making our case to not only the American people, but also to the political elite and the 2016 candidates.

We must publicly challenge the Republican presidential candidates to take the initiative, and to fearlessly raise the issue of Islam up to the same level as Immigration. We must demand of them to be bold and daring when it comes to defeating jihad. The defense of our nation, our freedoms, and the lives of our fellow citizens and men-and-women in uniform should be paramount for whoever would be Commander-in-Chief. This issue will be topmost on that person’s desk in the Oval Office from Day One. Better to tackle it now with a strong and visionary policy, than to be knocked back on our heels by a surprise attack in 2017.

Now is the time to put misbehaving Muslims and their terror-linked-mosques on time-out. Islam is at war with us. More and more Muslims are heeding the summons from Islamic State and Al-Qaeda, taking up arms against us in this war, and killing American citizens right here at home. Denying the reality and threat of Islamic jihad is not a valid policy, it is civilizational suicide.

It is time to “sandbox” Islam in America, and use decisive, legal means to counter its threat to our freedoms and our way of life.

ABOUT RALPH SIDWAY

Ralph Sidway is an Orthodox Christian researcher and writer, and author of Facing Islam: What the Ancient Church has to say about the Religion of Muhammad. He operates the Facing Islam blog.

RELATED ARTICLES:

West Virginia: “Support ISIS & The Taliban” sign left at war memorial

Childhood in the caliphate: toddler happily beheads teddy bear

Will the UN Side Deal Kill Obama’s Iran Nuke Deal?

The swirl of controversy in the wake of Wednesday’s AP exclusive story deepened yesterday with contradictory statements from IAEA director General Yukia Amano. Amano released a statement saying the report was “misleading,” that he was satisfied with the access his people will receive under the deal. Referring to the AP report Amano said “Such statements misrepresent the way in which we will undertake this important verification work.” The AP story cited drafts of a separate inspection protocol about Iran being granted control over inspections of the disputed Parchin test site allegedly involved with tests of nuclear triggers a decade ago.

The IAEA is charged with developing a so-called Road Map of prior military developments upon hinges release of over $100 billion in sanctioned funds to the Islamic Republic of Iran in December 2015. A few weeks ago , when IAEA chief Amano briefed Senators on Capitol Hill, many came away less than impressed by his presentation of the inspection regime that  Administration negotiators, Secretary of State Kerry, Undersecretary Sherman and Energy Secretary Dr. Earnest Moniz said were” intrusive and robust verification” of Iran’s compliance with the JCPOA provisions.  Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) and Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) weren’t satisfied and conducted their own due diligence at IAEA headquarters in Vienna. In an August 2, 2015 Wall Street Journal op-ed they argued that the so-called secret side deals should be released in compliance with the requirements of the Iran Nuclear Review Agreement Act. They commented:

Weaponization lies at the heart of our dispute with Iran and is central to determining whether this deal is acceptable. Inspections of Parchin are necessary to ensure that Iran is adhering to its end of the agreement. Without knowing this baseline, inspectors cannot properly evaluate Iran’s compliance. It’s like beginning a diet without knowing your starting weight. That the administration would accept side agreements on these critical issues—and ask the U.S. Congress to do the same—is irresponsible.

AP, Fox News and other media   obtained copies of Separate Agreement II leaked by an anonymous senior IAEA official revealing that the IAEA had adopted a protocol for the PMS Road Map giving Iran complete authority over soil sampling, video and photographic evidence at the disputed Parchin Site.  Armin Rosen of Business Insider revealed the text in his report:

Separate arrangement II agreed by the Islamic State of Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency on 11 July 2015, regarding the Road-map, Paragraph 5

Iran and the Agency agreed on the following sequential arrangement with regard to the Parchin issue:

1. Iran will provide to the Agency photos of the locations, including those identified in paragraph 3 below, which would be mutually agreed between Iran and the Agency, taking into account military concerns.

1. Iran will provide to the Agency videos of the locations, including those identified in paragraph 3 below, which would be mutually agreed between Iran and the Agency, taking into account military concerns.

1. Iran will provide to the Agency 7 environmental samples taken from points inside one building already identified by the Agency and agreed by Iran, and 2 points outside of the Parchin complex which would be agreed between Iran and the Agency.

1. The Agency will ensure the technical authenticity of the activities referred to in paragraphs 1-3 above. Activities will be carried out using Iran’s authenticated equipment, consistent with technical specifications provided by the Agency, and the Agency’s containers and seals.

1. The above mentioned measures would be followed, as a courtesy by Iran, by a public visit of the Director General, as a dignitary guest of the Government of Iran, accompanied by his deputy for safeguards.

6. Iran and the Agency will organize a one-day technical roundtable on issues relevant to Parchin.

Rosen went on to write:

The final text confirms that at least one aspect of the IAEA’s road map — the agreement meant to resolve the agency’s numerous outstanding questions on the status of Iran’s nuclear weaponization program — was settled on terms favorable to Iran.

Iran has barred IAEA inspectors from Parchin despite nearly a decade of requests for access. The roadmap, which is meant to settle years of unanswered questions about Iran’s nuclear weaponization drive, apparently doesn’t change that.

If the Parchin investigation is happening on Tehran’s terms, it raises the possibility that the rest of the roadmap inquiry will be carried out under a process that Iran can strongly influence or even control.

This is by design: As Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran’s atomic energy agency told regime-linked media in early August, one of Iran’s negotiating objectives was limiting the IAEA’s reach inside of the country, according to a report from the Washington Institute for Near East Studies:

We do not have an optimistic view of the [IAEA]. There is no doubt that they will release the information [that we are giving them]. We need to be careful in the information that we supply to them …We are not only dealing with the agency and these spies. We are dealing with all the countries that own nuclear programs. There are formulas and methods to prevent supplying information to the agency’s inspectors. We did not know about these methods in the past and supplied some information that should not have been supplied.

Iran’s “formulas and methods” for limiting the IAEA’s reach are now apparent, at least as Parchin is concerned. Whether the Parchin arrangement is part of a larger trade off to ensure IAEA access to other, possibly more important sites is currently unknown — the other implementation agreement governing whom IAEA inspectors can talk to and what facilities they can visit as part of their investigation is still secret.

Yesterday, State Department spokesperson, Admiral John Kirby was besieged with journalists’ questions about the relinquishing of IAEA inspection to Iran on development of the Road Map. He endeavored to repeat Administration claims of being “confident and comfortable” that the Inspection regime adopted via the IAEA would provide the information for the Roadmap. Besides, as he is often wont to say, ‘we have enough evidence of what went on at Parchin and other known sites”.  The skepticism of inquiring journalists was risible. I am reminded of I.F. Stone, the radical alleged KBG agent and US Journalist during the Vietnam anti-War era in Washington, whose eponymous weekly report was emblazoned with this masthead quote: “all governments are led by liars don’t believe a word they say”.

Watch this C-Span video excerpt of yesterday’s State Department briefing on the Parchin prior military developments inspection protocol:

There are those of us like Stephen and Shoshana Bryen and my colleague Ilana Freedman and this writer  suggest that the IAEA will never be able to inspect the more likely venue of Iran nuclear weaponization experimentation since 2003, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Given the revelations of the AP  and other  media news stories, Members of both Chambers of Congress  who favor the President’s position might reassess their positions and request  vigorous due diligence  gathering  all of the side agreements  for the JCPOA, prior to casting a vote by the mid-September  on the pending resolution .  Otherwise, they might, as Senator Menendez warned in his Seton Hall University address this week, they might find having   their names added to Iran’s bomb.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of IAEA Director General Yukia Amano and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, Tehran, July 2, 2015. Source: Europhoto.

Europe Must Confront Its Financial Problems, Not Subdue Them

Permanent instability appears to be the order of the day in Europe. The announcement by the Greek Prime Minister Alex Tsipras that he is stepping down and calling new elections comes as a surprise to no one. The Tsipras era has been no less volatile than that of his recent predecessors.

The immediate cause of his resignation is the loss of confidence in him by members of his own party, specifically over the agreement Tsipras made on the latest bailout with Greece’s European creditors. A new party has already been formed by the former energy minister, Panagiotis Lafazanis. When they stand before the electorate they are likely to be offering the Greek people almost exactly what Syriza offered the people before the party came across the realities that Greece is facing and that any party in government there must recognise.

But the truth is that the Greek people – and the people of the EU in general – deserve better than this. Specifically they deserve better leadership. It is not enough that the Greek government continues to revert to the people every few months in order to request that they suggest new ways to reorganise the deck chairs. The Greek governing class continues to behave as though there is a way of averting the inevitable – which is that the country face up to its creditors. Instead of that, a substantial portion of the Greek political class prefers to pretend that they will one day succeed in facing those creditors down.

In some ways the stasis exemplified in this Greek political groundhog day finds expression in other parts of the continent’s politics as well. In Sweden new polls show that the Sweden Democrats – a party with historical far-right leanings – is polling above any other party in the country. The cause is not complex: immigration. All the other Swedish political parties keep putting off the growing problems of their current asylum, immigration and integration strategies. Only the Sweden Democrats have been addressing them and as they have addressed them the other parties have stepped away from the issue rather than into it. And so a matter of the utmost concern to the Swedish people becomes addressed only by people who should have remained on the margins.

These are testing times across the continent, from north to south. There are no simple solutions to any of the problems the continent faces, but unless the mainstream political class in each of our countries is honest with the people and addresses their concerns rather than trying to subdue them, permanent instability will be the least of our worries.


mendozahjsFROM THE DIRECTOR’S DESK 

This week’s revelation that over $1 billion in US military equipment has now flowed to the Lebanese Army in one sense counts as no surprise.

Lebanon has been seriously affected by the conflict in Syria and has been rocked by instability caused by massive refugee flows that have swollen the country’s population by 25% of its pre-war total. Sectarian tensions have simmered and occasionally flared into violence. With ISIS claiming sovereignty over the country and Iran’s Lebanese catspaw Hezbollah having been drafted in to defend President Assad’s faltering rule, Lebanon runs the constant risk of once again being torn apart by conflict within its region. It stands to reason that its army therefore needs bolstering.

Except that in Lebanon, nothing is ever straightforward. The careful internal balance within the country has meant that the army cannot enforce the state evenhandedly. Hezbollah has long acted with impunity for example, acting as an armed militia which cannot be controlled. Worse, the army’s links with Hezbollah have been scrutinised in the past, with the US Congress stopping military aid several times on account of fears that Hezbollah would get hold of US equipment and use it against US strategic interests.

Given this, what explains the US move? The answer, as with part of the rationale for the Iran nuclear deal, seems clear: President Obama has decided to gamble on Iran and its allies becoming a fully fledged part of the coalition against ISIS, and that this bet is worth the potential consequences of a strengthened Iran in the region

This is a strange decision to make. Hezbollah is no friend of the US. Commencing with its murder of US marines in Beirut in 1983, it has consistently targeted US interests in the country. It poses a direct threat to the US’s Israeli ally, and has engaged in terrorism overseas in other US allied countries. Its military support for the Assad regime keeps the murderous dictator in power, helping ISIS radicalise foreign Muslims to come and wage jihad against him.

This US decision once again therefore marks the triumph of blind optimism over experience as the guiding principle of US foreign policy today. We must hope it is not one that will return to haunt the US in years to come.

Dr Alan Mendoza is Executive Director of The Henry Jackson Society
Follow Alan on Twitter: @AlanMendoza

Hollywood Filmmaker says Iran Nuke Deal a Very Bad Deal

dan gordon

Captain Dan Gordon, IDF.

Dan Gordon, a Hollywood screen writer and IDF Reserves Captain, is our featured guest on today’s short promotional for the “DAY OF ACTION” in Santa Barbara, California on Sunday Aug 30, 2015.

Dan Gordon is also a successful Hollywood filmmaker and award-winning author. with the unique perspective of living in two countries, America and Israel, has much to say about the very bad Iran nuke deal made by the Obama Administration.

Join us in STOPPING THE IRAN DEAL!

We have TWO amazing events on August 30th!

The first is a Roundtable Luncheon featuring a panel of national and local experts on the Iran Treaty, on the U.S. and Israel and how it will affect Santa Barbara County. Tickets are $60. Sponsorships are available at different levels. A ticket to the lunch gets you a VIP seat at the rally (details below). If you are not able to attend but would like to donate (100% tax-deductible) to help offset to costs of this grassroots effort, it would be appreciated. To purchase tickets, to sponsor or to donate, go to: StopIran.eventbrite.com

After the lunch, there will be a Stop Iran NOW Rally at the Santa Barbara Courthouse Sunken Gardens co-hosted by Stand With Us, The Clarion Project, The United West and other local groups. The rally is FREE and we need as many people as possible to attend. Please forward to your friends, family, neighbors and co-workers. It’s up to US to stop this deal! Signs and flags will be provided.

RELATED ARTICLE: Why Obama’s Wrong: Iran Deal Would Make War More Likely

Real Hero Jesse Owens: “Hitler Didn’t Snub Me — It Was Our President” by Lawrence W. Reed

James Cleveland “Jesse” Owens famously won four gold medals, all at the 1936 games in Berlin, Germany. But in the hearts of Americans who know their Olympic history, this African American man did more than win races: he struggled against racism.

At the time of Owens’s death in 1980 at age 66, President Jimmy Carter paid this tribute to him:

Perhaps no athlete better symbolized the human struggle against tyranny, poverty, and racial bigotry. His personal triumphs as a world-class athlete and record holder were the prelude to a career devoted to helping others. His work with young athletes, as an unofficial ambassador overseas, and a spokesman for freedom are a rich legacy to his fellow Americans.

Carter’s words were especially fitting in light of an unfortunate fact in Owens’s life: unforgivably, a previous American president had given him the brush-off.

Born in Alabama in 1913, James Owens at the age of nine moved with his family to the town in Ohio that bore his middle name, Cleveland. His first school teacher there asked him his name. With a deep Southern twang, he replied “J.C. Owens.” She heard “Jesse,” so that’s what she wrote down. The name stuck for the next 57 years.

Jesse could run like the wind and jump like a kangaroo. He broke junior high school records in the high jump and the broad jump. In high school, he won every major track event in which he competed, tying or breaking world records in the 100-yard and 220-yard dashes and setting a new world record in the broad jump. Universities showered him with scholarship offers, but he turned them all down and chose Ohio State, which wasn’t extending track scholarships at the time.

Imagine it. You come from a relatively poor family. You could go to any number of colleges for next to nothing, but you pick one you have to pay for. At 21, you have a wife to support as well. So what do you do? If you are Jesse Owens, you work your way through school as a gas station attendant, a waiter, an all-night elevator operator, a library assistant, even a page in the Ohio legislature. Owens worked, studied, practiced on the field, and set more records in track during his years at OSU.

The biography at JesseOwens.com tells the stunning story that unfolded in 1935:

Jesse gave the world a preview of things to come in Berlin while at the Big Ten Championships in Ann Arbor on May 25, 1935, [where] he set three world records and tied a fourth, all in a span of about 45 minutes. Jesse was uncertain as to whether he would be able to participate at all, as he was suffering from a sore back as a result of a fall down a flight of stairs. He convinced his coach to allow him to run the 100-yard dash as a test for his back, and amazingly he recorded an official time of 9.4 seconds, once again tying the world record. Despite the pain, he then went on to participate in three other events, setting a world record in each event. In a span of 45 minutes, Jesse accomplished what many experts still feel is the greatest athletic feat in history — setting three world records and tying a fourth in four grueling track and field events.

Ohio wasn’t the Deep South, but in the mid-1930s, it wasn’t a paradise of racial equality, either. OSU required Owens and other black athletes to live together off campus. They had to order carryout or eat at “black-only” restaurants and stay in segregated hotels when traveling with the team.

The eyes of the world were focused on Berlin in early August 1936. Five years earlier and before the Nazis came to power, the German capital had been selected as the site for the summer 1936 Olympic games. An effort to boycott them because of Hitler’s racism fizzled. It would be a few more years before events convinced the world of the socialist dictator’s evil intentions. Jesse Owens entered the competition with Americans thrilled at his prospects but wondering how Hitler would react if “Aryan superiority” fell short of his expectations.

Jesse didn’t go to Berlin with a political axe to grind. “I wanted no part of politics,” he said. “And I wasn’t in Berlin to compete against any one athlete. The purpose of the Olympics, anyway, was to do your best. As I’d learned long ago … the only victory that counts is the one over yourself.”

If, a hundred years from now, only one name is remembered among those who competed at the Berlin games, it will surely be that of Jesse Owens.

Owens won the 100-meter sprint, the long jump, the 200-meter sprint, and the 4 x 100 sprint relay. In the process, he became the first American to claim four gold medals in a single Olympiad. Owens waved at Hitler and Hitler waved back, but the nasty little paper-hanger expressed his annoyance privately to fellow Nazi Albert Speer. He opined that blacks should never be allowed to compete in the games again.

A side story of Owens’s Berlin experience was the friendship he made with a German competitor named Lutz Long. A decent man by any measure, Long exhibited no racial animosity and even offered tips to Owens that the American found helpful during the games. Of Long, Owens would later tell an interviewer,

It took a lot of courage for him to befriend me in front of Hitler.… You can melt down all the medals and cups I have and they wouldn’t be a plating on the 24-karat friendship I felt for Lutz Long at that moment. Hitler must have gone crazy watching us embrace. The sad part of the story is I never saw Long again. He was killed in World War II.

Back home, ticker tape parades feted Owens in New York City and Cleveland. Hundreds of thousands of Americans came out to cheer him. Letters, phone calls, and telegrams streamed in from around the world to congratulate him. From one important man, however, no word of recognition ever came. As Owens later put it, “Hitler didn’t snub me; it was our president who snubbed me. The president didn’t even send a telegram.”

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, leader of a major political party with deep roots in racism, couldn’t bring himself to utter a word of support, which may have been a factor in Owens’s decision to campaign for Republican Alf Landon in the 1936 presidential election.

“It all goes so fast, and character makes the difference when it’s close,” Owens once said about athletic competition. He could have taught FDR a few lessons in character, but the president never gave him the chance. Owens wouldn’t be invited to the White House for almost 20 years — not until Dwight Eisenhower named him “Ambassador of Sports” in 1955.

Life after the Olympics wasn’t always kind to Jesse Owens. When he wanted to earn money from commercial endorsements, athletic officials yanked his amateur status. Then the commercial offers dried up. He was forced to file for bankruptcy. He felt the sting of racial discrimination again. But for the last 30 years of his life, until he died in 1980 of lung cancer, he found helping underprivileged teenagers to be even more personally satisfying that his Olympic gold medals.

For further information, see:

Jeremy Schaap’s Triumph: The Untold Story of Jesse Owens and Hitler’s Olympics

David Clay Large’s Nazi Games: The Olympics of 1936

Lawrence W. Reed
Lawrence W. Reed

Lawrence W. (“Larry”) Reed became president of FEE in 2008 after serving as chairman of its board of trustees in the 1990s and both writing and speaking for FEE since the late 1970s.

EDITORS NOTE: Each week, Mr. Reed will relate the stories of people whose choices and actions make them heroes. See the table of contents for previous installments.

Washington Post Editorial Board Supports Jeb Bush in His Common Core Quandary

On August 17, 2015, the Washington Post editorial board wrote a piece in which it “did not blame Mr. [Jeb] Bush from shying away from the term [Common Core].”

Bush has his political career on his mind, and using the term “Common Core” is “poison” to that career. So, Bush is using a carefully-crafted Common-Core euphemism, saying that he is for “higher standards, state-created, locally implemented, where the federal government has no role in the creation of standards, content or curriculum.”

The Washington Post editorial board sympathizes with Bush, who supposedly was put in this position because of the “bogus premise” that Common Core is a “federal takeover of education.”

In 2009, the federal government used future Race to the Top (RTTT) funding to entice governors to sign their states up for a Common Core that did not yet exist. The 2009 National Governors Association (NGA) Symposium is clear about this in its 16-page document from the Symposium.

However, the intention was not only for there to be a Common Core. Common Core was only one of four interconnected, test-centric reforms known as the Four Assurances (listed here in brief):

1. Common standards and assessments

2. Teacher performance (value-added assessment)

3. “Turnaround” of “low performing” schools

4. Building data systems.

In 2009, the governors of 46 states and three territories signed NGA’s agreement detailing how Common Core was to be developed (note that “states” were being directed by the nonprofit NGA and another nonprofit, the Council of Chief State School Officers, CCSSO, on this “state led” development) and which was intended to lead to unquestioned, automatic Common Core adoption.

Why would so many governors fall for this?

The money. US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan was at this 2009 NGA Symposium, and he promised these governors a potential slice of billions of dollars in American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA)  funding– but only if they agreed to incorporate all Four Assurances into the education systems of their states. The excerpt below is from the NGA’s 16-page, 2009 report:

Governors have an unprecedented opportunity through the ARRA to make bold reforms in education. With momentum building around the four assurances and the Race to the Top funds, governors may want to consider the following as they move forward with their education reform agendas:

1. The four assurances do not exist in a vacuum. To improve educational outcomes for students in the U.S. and qualify for RTT funding, governors will need to work on all four assurances simultaneously. The issues discussed in this report are all interconnected, and policies which may seem likely to improve one area could have unintended consequences for another area of reform. Joanne Weiss from the U.S. Department of Education explained that when deciding which states will receive awards from the $4.35 billion Race to the Top competitive grant program, the Department will be watching for integrated plans that address all four of the reform areas. Therefore, states must work in concert on improving standards and assessments, increasing teacher effectiveness, providing support for low-performing schools, and strengthening data quality. [Emphasis added.]

At the 2009 NGA Symposium, Duncan made the grand announcement that the feds would cover the costs to get the “common assessments” off of the ground:

At the Symposium, Secretary Duncan made an important announcement regarding these [ARRA] funds: $350 million of the Race to the Top funds has been earmarked to support the development of high-quality common assessments.

These governors were led right into the federal will for state-level education by the promise of federal money. It was just that easy.

The governors traded state autonomy for federal money. And the federal government– US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan backed by President Barack Obama– encouraged them to do so and allowed it to happen.

In its Jeb Bush defense, the Washington Post editorial staff not only downplays the federal enticement; the Washington Post editorial board defends the federal role:

The pressure [Republicans in the presidential race to turn against Common Core] is built on bogus premises. Common Core is not a federal takeover of education. States developed the standards, accepted them voluntarily and implement them with local flexibility. The federal government merely encouraged states to adopt them, as it should have.  [Emphasis added.]

The Washington Post editorial board assumes that the governors who signed on for Common Core did so for some primary reason greater that the federal dollars doing so would possibly bring into their states. However, any governor who really wanted “higher standards” would surely have insisted on some empirical evidence that the resulting standards were indeed “higher” prior to agreeing to adopt them. Yet this common-sense insistence did not happen.

The promise of federal dollars won.

The RTTT competition for federal funding if a state agreed to institute the Four Assurances did happen, as did the federal “competition” to fund two Common Core testing consortia, PARCC and Smarter Balanced.

Even the pro-Common Core Fordham Institute could not could not construct “evidence” that Common Core was “higher” than the current standards in all 50 states and DC– but it still not only endorsed Common Core but also traveled to states with standards it rated as “higher” than Common Core, only to try to convince these states to settle for Common Core.

However, it was bound to happen that a number of these governors would put their own careers ahead of any Common Core allegiance since their initial commitment was only a superficial, bandwagon commitment to federal money.

And now, we have the Washington Post giving a thumbs-up to Republican Jeb Bush and Democratic governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, for “fighting the poison.” However, the Washington Post’s publicly aligning Republican Jeb! with a Democratic governor– and one whose approval rating is at an all-time low (also here)– probably does little to advance Jeb! and his euphemistic “higher standards” before a public that is growing increasingly wise to federally-enticed Common Core.

Which GOP Presidential Candidate Will Keep Their Word if Elected?

My wife and I were a very nervous and excited young couple purchasing our first home. Our home builder was a dear friend of my parents. Upon going to closing, there were numerous odds and ends the builder had not completed. He vowed to complete my home asap and asked that I sign a paper for the bank stating that he completed all the work on my home.

My mom cautioned me not to sign the paper. Mom said, “Eaten bread is soon forgotten.” I ignored Mom’s counsel. Sure enough, after my builder received his check from the bank, I had to chase him for over a year to complete my home.

Just like my builder said whatever necessary to get paid, politicians make voter-pleasing promises on the campaign trail. After they are elected, they forget their promises. Therefore, the final Jeopardy question is – Which GOP presidential contender will keep their word if elected? Having been burnt so many times, trustworthiness, character and backbone must be paramount in selecting our nominee.

In this primary season, we have witnessed honorable conservative candidates dialing back their original comments or apologizing due to pressure from the mainstream media and the candidate’s handlers. This raises concerns in me about how these candidates will holdup under world class attacks once they are in the WH.

Leftists (mainstream media, Democrats and liberals) viciously insulted and accused president Ronald Reagan of every nasty thing imaginable. It takes a rare human being to stand firm in the midst of 24/7 relentless character assassination. Thus, my question. Which GOP contender will follow through with their conservative promises?

At the top of my list is Senator Ted Cruz. On several issues, Cruz seems to always end up on the opposite side of the GOP establishment and Leftist Democrats; in-sync with We the People. Cruz never follows the crowd. Eagles fly alone.

Remember Cruz getting hammered by Democrats and Republicans for fighting to defund Obamacare? Win or lose, We the People desperately needed to see someone on our side not simply rolling over and playing dead in surrender to Obama as he transforms our great country.

Cruz boldly says he is a Christian. During the GOP debate, I was struck by how naturally Cruz shared his dad’s testimony; transformed from an alcoholic abandoning his wife and three year old Ted to giving his heart to Jesus and reuniting with his family. Politicians do not speak that freely about God and Jesus these days in the political public square. Obviously, Ted Cruz rejected the Left and MSM’s memo banning God. As I said, eagles fly alone.

Some GOP contenders are wishy-washy on illegal immigration, even joining the liberal mainstream media in calling Trump racist for addressing it. Imagine how easily such a president’s position could be swayed when he or she is trashed by the media.

Another GOP contender hopes to win black votes by exempting them from having to show a photo ID to vote. We do not want a president who is willing to surrender to the absurd Democrat party lie that it is too challenging for blacks to find their way to the DMV to acquire a photo ID. Americans do not want another president pandering to various voting blocs and selectively enforcing our laws.

While any of our GOP 17 are far superior to another socialist in the WH, a few are GOP establishment, big donor and Chamber of Commerce Trojan horses. They talk a good conservative game before the election. But once in the WH, they will prove to be a Manchurian candidate of the Washington cartel.

The Bible repulses the MSM like showing Dracula the cross. Still, Cruz quoted scripture, “you shall know them by their fruit.” Cruz said we see lots of “campaign conservatives.” He added that to win in 2016, we need a consistent fiscal, social and national security conservative. Cruz also touted that he has been a defender of life his entire career. This guy paints in bold colors folks.
Cruz looked America squarely in the eye and made bold promises during the GOP debate causing him to surge in the polls. On his first day as president, Cruz vows to rescind every illegal and unconstitutional executive action taken by Obama. He will instruct the DOJ to investigate the shocking videos and prosecute Planned Parenthood for any criminal violations. He will defend religious liberty, cancel the Iran deal and move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

Cruz also vows to repeal Obamacare.

Again, as I stated, while all of our contenders know how to say what We the People want to hear, the $64,000 Question (1950s TV game show) is which one is “for real?” Who will keep their word?

Here is Cruz’s last statement of the GOP debate. “I will keep my word. My father fled Cuba, and I will fight to defend liberty because my family knows what it’s like to lose it.”

I believe him, folks. I believe him.

‘We the People’ or the Political Elite

“We the People,” those symbolic words mean that for the first time in world history, a government was set up to not only recognize the God given rights of you and I, but also operate according to that most worthy premise “We the People.”  Unfortunately, the progressive political elitists have reversed the role and mission of the federal government.  So now, it is a rogue anti unalienable rights regime that only looks out for illegal immigrants, American born thugs, and anyone who is on a mission to destroy our exceptional nation way of life.

The federal government is most certainly rouge and is now a clear and present danger to the very continuation of our republic turned mob ruled democracy.  Not only is the federal government, but increasingly, state and local government are working diligently to obstruct the ability of sovereign citizens to live free from tyranny and to be the best that God would have them to be.

Often through government over regulations and draconian taxes people are obstructed from freely opening and running a family business.  Abusive government regulations are now so a stringent, they are literally choking the life out of what was at one time the most vibrant economy the world had ever known.

The latest round of proposed Environmental Protection Agency laws would at the very least increase household and small business energy bills 30 to 50 percent.  Why?  Because President Obama and others hate American greatness and power.  They are working overtime to use any method they can to destroy the United States.  Or at the very least, have her severely weakened and under the influence of islam by the time Obama leaves office.

The Obama administration is nothing more than a lightning rod of calculated destructive measures.  Some of which have practically destroyed a decent quality of life for not only black Americans, but increasingly for more and more Americans of all backgrounds.  The sad truth is, that some Americans are now too dumb to even understand just how screwed over they really are.

After five decades of indoctrination rom their liberal masters and a steady decrease in their standard of living, many psyched out black Americans are more enamored with running around carrying black lives matter signs, than building a good quality of life with their families and fellow Americans.

They are foolishly self-centered in their so-called progressive struggle, that they have the nerve to be upset because a presidential candidate and fellow progressive socialist stated that “all lives matter.”   To add insult to their stupid injury, the black socialist progressives even consider the “all lives matter” statement to be hate speech or a violent statement.   One has to wonder, what society can continue to remain great and economically prominent when millions of it’s brainwashed citizens are so bitter?  Then add in their low quality of cognitive functioning and increasing their numbers through breeding, what is occurring is a massive negative drain on our nation making us vulnerable to external enemies and economic collapse.

Unfortunately, far too many Americans have devolved into what the Bible refers to as those who would prefer to believe lies over the truth.  That is a direct result of at least five decades of unrelenting indoctrination of generations of American students against all that is good and morally correct.

There was a time if an individual chose to believe that he or she was entitled to someone else’s property and chose to rob them, I the were shot or beaten, that was considered just and no big deal.  But now, certain people are so off kilter morally, that brute force against an aggressive burglar is considered more horrendous than aborting innocent babies.

By the way, the black lives matter folks, President Obama and thugs can celebrate because local police forces have been prevented from going hard after thugs who choose to commit crimes against their fellow citizens.  So now, crime has dramatically increased in every city where there are substantial black populations.

In Chicago, over the past year murder of blacks by blacks is up 10 percent and rape has increased seven percent.  In Las Angeles, violent crime is up 20 percent year after year.  In Cleveland, the city is going through a tremendous revival downtown and in many neighborhoods that are not populated by mostly black Americans.  But in the city’s notorious east side, (with the exception of University Circle and Little Italy) is a black dominated war zone where they are seemingly bumping each other off for the sport of it.

Such developments or devolutions are the direct result of a wholesale rejection of morality and the Biblical principles that were the foundational building blocks of all that was great about this nation.  The continued dangerous practice of repudiating that which is good is literally destroying our republic.

Only through the rejection of that which is evil and learning about and accepting the good, will America have even a chance of once again becoming that shining city on a hill nation.

The choice is completely up to “We the People” not the political elites.

U.S. State Department: 8,000 Syrian Muslims to arrive in FY 2016

That is according to Breitbart (hat tip: Rosemary).   It is a huge number, but I think they will go for even greater numbers since their contractor friends and 14 U.S. Senators are recommending 65,000!

Here is Breitbart:

The State Department is anticipating that the U.S. will admit up to 8,000 Syrian refugees in Fiscal Year 2016.

In written responses to the Senate Judiciary Immigration and the National Interest Subcommittee Republicans obtained by Breitbart News, the State Department reveals that it is expecting the U.S. will accelerate its acceptance of Syrian refugees next year.

“As of July 30, the United States has admitted 1,042 Syrian refugees in FY 2015 and anticipates admitting a total of 1,500-1,800 Syrians this fiscal year. We anticipate admitting 5,000-8,000 Syrian refugees in FY 2016,” the State Department wrote.

The Obama administration’s effort to resettle thousands of Syrian refugees into the U.S. has come under fire as a potential national security risk.

Here is David Miliband, CEO of U.S. resettlement contractor the International Rescue Committee, pushing for 65,000 (mostly Muslim) Syrians to be sent to your towns and cities before Obama leaves office.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Germany: Muslim ‘Refugees’ riot, stone police over torn Qur’an, 15 wounded

The Debate Over Birthright Citizenship, Explained in 90 Seconds

VIDEO: The Obama administration’s anti-Christian, pro-Islam bias explained by Raymond Ibrahim

Last week I appeared on Newsmax Prime, hosted by JD Hayworth and Miranda Khan.  We discussed how the West in general, the Obama administration in particular, not only ignore but exacerbate the plight of Mideast Christians.  The six-minute clip is above.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Geller: I’m Getting Death Threats Daily — and the FBI Is Warning About… Me

Islamic State links its origins to the killing of Osama and U.S. withdrawal from Iraq