Iran Threatens U.S. and its Allies with ‘Drugs, Refugees, Bombs and Assassinations’

On December 9, 2018 The Hill, posted an article, that was short and to the point, “Iran: US sanctions will open doors to ‘drugs, refugees and bombs and assassination’ in west.”

The article focused on the remarks of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani made on December 8, 2018 at what was described as an “Anti-terrorism event” in Tehran.  In his remarks Rouhani stated that if nations continued to adhere to the boycott against Iran that was reimposed by President Trump over the bogus Iranian nuclear deal that had been negotiated by the Obama administration, that Iran would not be able to continue its purported efforts to combat drug trafficking.

As reported in The Hill article:

“By making Iran weaker through sanctions, many people will not be safe. Those who do not believe what we say, they had better look at the map,” Rouhani added.

He said Iran spends millions each year against drug trafficking, “the results of which guarantees more health for people from Eastern Europe to Western America and from Northern Africa to Western Asia.”

“I warn all those who boycott, that if our abilities in fighting drugs and terrorism in their origins is undermined, you will not be able to survive the debris of drugs, refugees and bombs and assassination,” he added.

This brings us back to the nexus between U.S. border security and the threats posed to America and Americans by Latin America drug cartels that have been working in close cooperation with Hezbollah and Iranian Qods (Shock Troops) to move huge quantities of narcotics and aliens into the United States.  Smuggling drugs and aliens provides huge profits and provides Iran with the opportunity to embed their sleeper agents among those aliens.

My October 23, 2018 article, The Impending Alien Invasion took on the “Migrant Caravan” and the dangerously misleading rhetoric of the globalist media who described thousands of members of the caravan heading for and then massing along the U.S/Mexican border as simply poor people hoping for a better life in the United States.  While there may well be many poor people among those thousands of illegal aliens hoping to gain entry into the United States and then simply melt into ethnic immigrant communities around the United States, particularly in so-called “Sanctuary Cities” given the clear and unequivocal evidence and testimony provided by a series of expert witness before numerous congressional hearings, terrorists and criminals have infiltrated the “caravan” not unlike the way that ISIS terrorists infiltrate the massive flows of refugees in Europe not long ago.

The concerns about sleeper agents is not hypothetical.

My earlier article, Iranian Agents Charged With Targeting U.S. Locations focused on sleeper agents who have been arrested in the United States.  These individuals were conducting preparatory functions for potential terrorist attacks:

Another of my articles Congressional Hearing: Iranian Sleeper Cells Threaten U.S.– So many hearings, so little action, included this excerpt:

On April 17, 2018 the House Committee on Homeland Security, Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee, chaired by Congressman Peter King of New York, conducted a hearing on the topic, “State Sponsors Of Terrorism: An Examination Of Iran’s Global Terrorism Network.”

The Subcommittee’s website posted this paragraph in announcing the hearing:

Iran, a State Sponsor of Terrorism, continues to invest in proxy terrorist and militant organizations that threaten the Homeland and US interests and engage in activities that impede US counterterrorism goals. This hearing will examine trends in Iran’s external operations and capabilities and consider the near-term and long-term security implications of Iranian support for Shia militants and terrorist groups operating in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Latin America.

My article also noted:

The Washington Free Beacon published a report about the hearing with the unambiguous and disconcerting headline, Iranian-Backed ‘Sleeper Cell’ Militants Hibernating in U.S., Positioned for Attack.

The Washington Free Beacon report began with the following:

Iranian-backed militants are operating across the United States mostly unfettered, raising concerns in Congress and among regional experts that these “sleeper cell” agents are poised to launch a large-scale attack on the American homeland, according to testimony before lawmakers.

Iranian agents tied to the terror group Hezbollah have already been discovered in the United States plotting attacks, giving rise to fears that Tehran could order a strike inside America should tensions between the Trump administration and Islamic Republic reach a boiling point.

Intelligence officials and former White House officials confirmed to Congress on Tuesday that such an attack is not only plausible, but relatively easy for Iran to carry out at a time when the Trump administration is considering abandoning the landmark nuclear deal and reapplying sanctions on Tehran.

There is mounting evidence that Iran poses “a direct threat to the homeland,” according to Rep. Peter King (R., N.Y.), a member of the House Homeland Security Committee and chair of its subcommittee on counterterrorism and intelligence.

In addition to members of Hezbollah, sleepers from other terror organizations have also been arrested in the United States, some of them had been lawfully admitted and had gone on to acquire political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even U.S. citizenship through naturalization.

On August 11, 2018, a local Arizona newspaper posted a report about the investigation and subsequent arrest that fleshed out more and disturbing details.  The report, Man with alleged link to Somali terrorist group arrested in Tucson, includes this excerpt that provided additional insight into the allegations contained in the indictment:

The indictment states Osman gave false information about his name and nationality, telling immigration authorities he was from Somalia, when in fact he was from Ethiopia.

He also denied being associated with a terrorist organization. The indictment states Osman later admitted that he was recruited to join the terrorist group al-Shabab and had moved from Jijiga to Mogadishu, Somalia, at the direction of the terrorist group. He also later admitted to knowing several members of the al-Shabab organization.

Prosecutors allege Osman also lied to an immigration officer about being injured in a bomb blast in a Somali market in 2010. The indictment said he was injured in 2009 while handling explosives.

My extensive article, Immigration Fraud, Lies That Kill9/11 Commission identified immigration fraud as a key embedding tactic of terrorists, examined the nexus between visa fraud, immigration fraud and terrorism.

On May 20, 1997 I participated in my very first congressional hearing.  That hearing was conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, ironically, on the topic of  Visa Fraud And Immigration Benefits Application Fraud and was predicated on two deadly terror attacks that had been carried out in 1993 by radical Islamist alien terrorists who gamed the immigration system to enter the United States and embed themselves.

On February 26, 1993 the World Trade Center was the target of a massive bomb that was detonated in the garage below that iconic centerpiece of the New York City skyline that left six dead, more than one thousand people injured and inflicted approximately on-half billion dollars in damages to the complex of buildings in lower Manhattan just blocks from Wall Street.

One month earlier Mir Qazi, aka Mir Aimal Kasi, a citizen of Pakistan who had applied for political asylum in the U.S. drove his courier van into the parking lot of the CIA compound in Virginia, emerged from the vehicle with an AK-47 and killed two CIA officers and wounded three others.

Since the terror attacks of 9/11 there has been no shortage of hearings and articles about the threat of terror attacks in the United States,  some in response to additional terror attacks.

On May 30, 2013, UPI posted a report that addressed the case of an alleged former member of Hezbollah successfully immigrating the United States by reportedly concealing his terrorist background as noted in this headline, Immigrant allegedly failed to reveal Hezbollah membership.

On March 21, 2012 the House Committee on Homeland Security that was then chaired by New York Congressman Peter King conducted a hearing on the topic Iran, Hezbollah, and the Threat to the Homeland.

The Huffington Post published a report about that hearing,Peter King: Iran May Have ‘Hundreds’ of Hezbollah Agents In U.S. that included this excerpt:

“As Iran moves closer to nuclear weapons and there is increasing concern over war between Iran and Israel, we must also focus on Iran’s secret operatives and their number one terrorist proxy force, Hezbollah, which we know is in America,” said New York Rep. Peter King at a Wednesday hearing of his committee.

The hearing, which featured former government officials and the director of intelligence analysis for the New York Police Department, follows a foiled plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington, D.C., and testimony by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper in late January that Iran’s leaders are “more willing to conduct an attack inside the United States in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime.”

On April 21, 2010 the Washington Times report, Iran boosts Qods shock troops in Venezuela was predicated on a Pentagon report to Congress on Iran’s military operations in Latin America.

Here is an excerpt:

The report gives no details on the activities of the Iranians in Venezuela and Latin America. Iranian-backed terrorists have conducted few attacks in the region.

However, U.S. intelligence officials say Qods operatives are developing networks of terrorists in the region who could be called to attack the United States in the event of a conflict over Iran’s nuclear program.

The 9/11 Commission was clear that first an foremost, the terror attacks of 9/11 and previous attacks they explored were made possible only because of multiple failures of the dysfunctional immigration system.

Nevertheless our southern border is anything but secure, “Sanctuary Cities”  obstruct immigration law enforcement in towns and cities and even some states across the U.S. and the leadership of both parties appear determined to do nothing to address our vulnerabilities.  This was the premise for my article, Sanctuary Country – Immigration failures by design

My dad used to tell me that there are no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided, of course that we learn from those things that go wrong.  To not learn from those mistakes was for him, and for me, unforgivable!

RELATED ARTICLES:

A Year of Protests in Iran: Situation Assessment

Iran’s Missiles in Action Across the Middle East

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared on FrontPage Magazine. It is republished with permission.

Obama’s Mexican Gunrunning Op Could Help Sinaloa Drug Lord’s Defense

Obama’s scandalous Mexican gunrunning operation could help in the defense of a notorious drug lord on trial in New York and the feds are trying to ban its mention in the courtroom. It’s yet another ripple effect of a shameful Obama experiment known as Fast and Furious that let Mexican drug traffickers obtain U.S.-sold weapons.

The failed program was run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) and allowed guns from the U.S. to be smuggled into Mexico so they could eventually be traced to drug cartels. Instead, federal law enforcement officers lost track of hundreds of weapons which were used in an unknown number of crimes, including the murder of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in Arizona.

Now Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, head of the Sinaloa drug cartel, wants to use Fast and Furious to strengthen his defense. The Sinaloa cartel is one of Mexico’s most powerful criminal organizations and Guzman has been charged with a multitude of crimes, including drug trafficking, illegal firearms, money laundering, and conspiracy.

Federal prosecutors say Guzman smuggled enormous amounts of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and marijuana into the U.S. and, as the leader of a multi-national criminal enterprise, used violence—including torture and murder—to maintain an iron-fisted grip on the drug trade across the U.S.-Mexico border. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) refers to Guzman as one of the most dangerous and feared drug kingpins. He was extradited from Mexico last year.

In 2016, Judicial Watch obtained Justice Department documents showing that Fast and Furious weapons have been widely used by members of major Mexican drug cartels, including Guzman. The documents reveal that 94 Fast and Furious firearms have been recovered in Mexico City and 12 Mexican states, with the majority being seized in Sonora, Chihuahua, and Sinaloa. Of the weapons recovered, 82 were rifles and 12 were pistols. Twenty were involved in “violent recoveries,” which means they were utilized in several mass killings.

Among them was a .50 caliber rifle seized from Guzman’s hideout in Los Mochis, Sinaloa, where he was eventually arrested. Guzman’s attorneys want to use Fast and Furious as part of the defense strategy, according to a New York newspaper covering the trial, and federal prosecutors are trying to stop it. “They’re asking a federal judge to block any defense questions about the program in which federal agents allowed illegal weapons to flow over the border to Mexico in an effort to gain intelligence on drug cartels,” the article states. Why? Prosecutors assert that, by focusing on the failures of the Fast and Furious (and there are many), Guzman will “distract and confuse the jury.”

The government pulled the same stunt when two of the men involved in Terry’s murder were tried in federal court. A seasoned Border Patrol agent and Marine Corps veteran, Terry was killed by a Mexican gang member in 2010 in Peck Canyon, Arizona. Federal authorities say he was fatally shot when he and other agents encountered a group of men known as a “rip crew” (a criminal gang that attempts to steal from drug and alien smugglers) operating in a rural area north of Nogales.

The guns—assault weapons known as AK-47s—were traced through their serial numbers to a Glendale, Arizona dealer that led to a Phoenix man the feds repeatedly allowed to smuggle firearms into Mexico. Six men have been charged with crimes involving Terry’s murder and earlier this year, the assailant was extradited from Mexico. A few years ago, when two members of the rip crew were tried in connection to Terry’s murder, federal prosecutors asked the judge to ban mentioning Fast and Furious during proceedings.

The judge agreed, ruling that defendants could not refer to or elicit any testimony regarding the failed gunrunning operation. Terry’s brother, Kent Terry, told Judicial Watch the government wants to keep Fast and Furious out of the limelight for political reasons. “It’s upsetting,” Kent Terry said this week. “If I commit a crime with a gun don’t you think it’s relevant to ask where I got that gun? They’re protecting the criminal.”

Even Mexican media has reported that the Sinaloa drug cartel was able to access more weapons thanks to Operation Fast and Furious. One outlet published an in-depth piece titled “Fast and Furious: Arms for El Chapo”  that reveals U.S. intelligence agencies knew from the start that the Sinaloa cartel was the prime recipient of weapons. Regardless, the U.S. continued the operation and lied to the Mexican government, the article states.

RELATED ARTICLE: More Caravan Crime on the Border

EDITORS NOTE: This column is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Lubo Minar on Unsplash.

Trump Administration scuttles Obama-era WOTUS “Waters of the United States” rule

In a significant victory for farmers, ranchers, and other landowners, the Trump administration December 11 pulled the plug on an Obama-era regulatory scheme that would have subjected millions of acres of private land to federal zoning.

By rolling back Obama’s 2015 “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule, the administration has put an end to the biggest power grab in the 48-year history of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Obama-era rule was sold as an effort to “clarify” the federal government’s jurisdiction over bodies of water under the 1972 Clean Water Act (CWA), which granted EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction over “navigable waters of the United States.”

Over the years, questions arose over whether Washington also had jurisdiction over bodies of water, which may not be navigable themselves, but which are adjacent to, or have some connection to, navigable waters. The Supreme Court’s 2006 Rapanos v. United States decision, failed to resolve the issue, with Justice Anthony Kennedy infamously opining that federal jurisdiction extended to such waters provided they had a “significant nexus” to navigable waters.

The Power Grab

What constituted a “significant nexus” was anyone guess, leaving landowners, municipalities, businesses, and just about everyone else completely in the dark. Eager to take advantage of a murky situation and beef up EPA’s enforcement authority, the Obama administration in 2015 proposed “clarifying” the issue by greatly expanding EPA’s jurisdiction to include ditches, ponds, groundwater, and even “ephemeral” waters (those that form only after rainfall). The rule would have forced farmers, ranchers, and other landowners to obtain permits from EPA if they wanted to make any modifications to their property. A host or organizations sued EPA, and a federal judge ordered a stay on the rule in 24 states.

Having vowed to kill the rule during the 2016 presidential campaign, President Trump issued an executive order in February 2017 directing EPA to carry out the “elimination of this very destructive and horrible rule.” Trump’s first EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, tried to delay implementation of the Obama WOTUS rule, but a U.S. district court in South Carolina invalidated the delay in August 2018.

Now, the Trump administration has its own plan for untangling the jurisdictional mess that has surrounded the regulation of waterways for decades.

What is and What is not Subject to Federal Regulation

“Our proposal would replace the Obama EPA’s 2015 definition with one that respects the limits of the Clean Water Act and provides states and landowners the certainty they need to manage their natural resources and grow local economies,” said Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler in a statement. “For the first time, we are defining the difference between federally protected waterways and state protected waterways.”

Under the Trump proposal, the federal government, for the first time, has divided navigable waters into six categories:

  • traditional navigable waters (rivers, bays, the Great Lakes, etc.);
  • waterways connected to navigable waters, including tributaries;
  • certain navigable ditches used for commercial shipping, such as the Erie Canal;
  • lakes and ponds that contribute to navigable waterways;
  • impoundments of jurisdictional waterways; and
  • wetlands adjacent to navigable waterways through “direct subsurface connection.”

Trump’s WOTUS proposal also clearly states what EPA and the Corps of Engineers will not regulate. These include “features that only include water during or in response to rainfall (e.g., ephemeral features); groundwater; many ditches, including most roadside or farm ditches; prior converted cropland; storm water control features; and waste treatment systems.”

Acting EPA Administrator Wheeler, who has been nominated for the top job at the agency by President Trump, points out that most bodies of water not covered under the new proposal are still subject to state protection. “We don’t need to have the dual protection and the dual requirements and permits at both state and federal levels,” he said on the Hugh Hewitt radio show (Washington Times, Dec. 12).

The difference between the Obama and Trump approaches can not be understated. A 2015 American Farm Bureau Federation study, for example, found that 99% of Pennsylvania would be subject to the Obama WOTUS rule.

“This new rule will empower farmers and ranchers to comply with the law, protect our water resources, and productively work their land without having to hire and army of lawyers and consultants,” said farm bureau president Zippy Duvall (Washington Times, Dec. 12).

The fight is far from over, with environmental groups expected to bring suit against EPA and the Corps.

There will be a 60-day public comment period that will last until mid-February 2019.

COLUMN BY

Bonner Cohen, Ph. D.

Bonner Cohen, Ph. D.

Bonner R. Cohen, Ph. D., is a senior policy analyst with CFACT.

EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column with images is republished with permission.

The LGBTQ Hart Attack is a Good Thing

I am not suggesting that we should experience schadenfreude (feel pleasure from witnessing someone’s troubles, failures or humiliation). However, LGBTQ enforcers viciously seeking to destroy the career of comedian/actor Kevin Hart for tweets he made 9 years ago is encouraging. Finally, even leftists are beginning to see the take-no-prisoners intolerance and bullying LGBTQ enforcers have been applying to everyone who does not celebrate their lifestyle.

Many of us have been sounding the alarm for years that LGBTQ enforcers are relentlessly targeting Christian businesses for destruction; solely for the purpose of forcing Christians to betray their God by bending a knee in worship of leftists’ god of debauchery.

German pastor Martin Niemofller was imprisoned in Dachau concentration camp from 1941-1945. In his famous poem, Niemofller laments that when they came for the Communists, Socialists, Trade Unionists and Jews he did not speak out because he was none of these. Niemofller wrote, “And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.”

Not only did leftists not speak out against LGBTQ bullying, they cheered when LGBTQ bullies came for Sweet Cakes by Melissa. The Christian bakery happily served their lesbian customer for several years. When she asked them to bake a cake for her lesbian wedding, the owners said to do so would betray their faith. The husband and wife bakery owners with five kids were driven out of business. 

Well now, LGBTQ enforcers have come for Kevin Hart who many leftists consider one of their own.

Leftist Snoop Dogg who shot president Trump in the head in his music video passionately expressed his support for Hart. Several leftist celebs are expressing their support for Hart. As I stated, the good news for America in the Hart attacks is leftists are waking up and smelling the tyranny coming from their side of the political aisle by LGBTQ enforcers.

“The Devil’s greatest achievement is convincing people that he does not exist.” LGBTQ enforcers’ greatest achievement and deception is convincing people they are the victims and we, mainstream Americans, are the aggressors.

Kevin Hart was scheduled to host the Oscars. In a video, Hart said, “I swear man, our world is becoming beyond crazy. My team calls me, Oh my God Kevin. The world is upset about tweets you did years ago. Oh my God.” LGBTQ enforcers deemed Hart’s nine-year-old tweets anti-homosexual.

Hart received a call from the Academy telling him to apologize again for his old tweets or be replaced as host of the Oscars. Hart said he has repeatedly addressed the issue and acknowledged the rights and wrongs. Hart said he has evolved since making the tweets years ago. Hart said to apologize again for something so far in the past would be a step backwards rather than moving forward. Therefore, he chose to pass on hosting the Oscars

The American left’s response was mixed. Many rallied behind Hart. Others were furious over Hart refusing to apologize, calling him defiant. Leftist Kathy Griffin disturbed millions with her photo in which she held a bloody severed head of president Trump. In response to Hart refusing to apologize again, Griffin said, “F*** him”. 

Hart did not realize that LGBTQ enforcers have zero-tolerance for anyone who does not fully embrace the lifestyle. Anyone who dares to dis the LGBTQ lifestyle in the slightest must fall on their face and beg forgiveness or suffer complete personal destruction.

Many Americans believe the LGBTQ community is 23% or more of the population. The truth is, they are 3.4 percent

Witnessing LGBTQ enforcers’ relentless media assault on Hart and their efforts to destroy him, I could not help thinking, “Welcome to our world, Mr Hart.” This is the tyrannical assault on free speech Americans face everyday by the LGBTQ thought police. Again, I take no pleasure in seeing Mr Hart suffer.

It was stunning to hear even extreme leftist Joy Behar and leftist women on The View say the attack on Hart puts all comedians at risk. Numerous other high-profile leftist voices are speaking out in agreement.

Folks, LGBTQ enforcers attacking Hart is a real eye-opener for many Americans – a small victory in the war between totalitarian political correctness and constitutional free speech.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is from Kevin Hart’s Facebook page.

Jesus Isn’t Just Ornamental

By FRC’s Alexandra McPhee, Director of the Center for Religious Advocacy

Think American citizens are ready to give Christ the boot this holiday season? Think again. A 2018 report from LifeWay Research shows an overarching sentiment that “Christmas should be more about Jesus” (65 percent).

These numbers reflect the reality of a report from Ozark, Missouri, that many locals clamored to get the government to keep its traditional Christmas light display featuring a cross after the town received legal threats from an activist secular legal group about the display.

According to the Springfield News-Leader, Mayor Rick Gardner received “hundreds” of phone calls, text messages and other communications from members of the Ozark community following the town’s initial announcement [to take the cross down in the face of legal threats]. One person reportedly told Gardner that the cross “is a part of Ozark” and “this is Christian County, for Pete’s sake.”

The legal letter sent to officials claimed that the cross was a violation of the First Amendment. But the United States Supreme Court has said government can “recognize the role religion plays in our society.” And the question whether government can maintain displays depicting religious symbols — like the one in Ozark — is now before the United States Supreme Court.

The heckler’s veto — the one complaint that convinces public officials to cave on behalf of all citizens — might fly in some areas. After all, Ozark was essentially slapped with the same legal letter sent to DoverRavenna, and Streetsboro, Ohio, and Rehoboth Beach, Delaware. Officials in all but Ozark and Streetsboro caved.

But what makes the difference is when citizens — the majority of whom say Christmas should be more about Jesus — make their voices heard. And they say keep the cross up and baby Jesus in the manger.


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


RELATED ARTICLES:

I’ll Be Home(less) for Christmas?

Shop — in the Name of Love!

EDITORS NOTE: This Family Research Council column with images is republished with permission

Misogyny on 34th Street

I can still remember the many happy occasions I spent shopping at Macy’s on 34th, as a child, my pockets filled with hot chestnuts; later, as a new fashion designer fresh out of the Fashion Institute of Technology, either killing time between job interviews or checking out the new styles;  and then as a newlywed, shopping for our first apartment.

It is very difficult to fathom how this company, that produces the world-renowned Macy’s Parade; the magnificent Christmas windows, with incomparable set designs and moving figures that mesmerized crowds of eager spectators, would one day turn on its customers – when Macy’s owners, its board of directors and staff would consent to introduce a line of oppressive clothing to their female clientele.  Known as the veil or hijab and forcibly imposed in tyrannical, misogynistic Islamic regimes, these alone were selected by Macy’s from the world’s many kinds of fashion.

Macy’s headquarters have fallen for the leftist line, that it is prudent to strive for multiculturalism in a country that has long been a thriving melting pot that elicited the envy of the world.  America’s past success has clearly been due to the immigrants’ fervor to live and let live, whereas Islam, by stark contrast, is mandated in their Koran to dominate and subdue all other cultures by any means necessary.  Multiculturalism is repulsive to Islam.

In addition to the denigration of Western religions, the re-writing of our history, the destruction of our statuary, and the attack on gender identity, the public is now being conditioned to accept the appearance of these oppressed, shrouded forms on city streets.

Introducing  Islamic styles to the American public is yet another way of attacking America’s culture and femininity, as the full niqab, burqa and abaya are a means of dehumanizing women, enforcing the devalued female to cede control to the male in the Islamic shame-honor society, and denying her any societal interactions.  The garment serves as an isolation chamber, causing sensory deprivation problems and disrupting bonding with her infant, even if she removes the shroud at home.  There is also a high physical price to pay, for the wearer is deprived of absorbing Vitamin D in northern climes, thereby causing pelvic fractures during childbirth, and triggering iron deficiencies and hypocalcaemic seizures in the child.

The cost of naively introducing these sheathes into American society will eventually destroy the thriving fashion industry as we know it, eliminate the entertainment industry, and affect all other related businesses, in creativity and in employment, until our country is transformed into another backward Islamic country.   Conquest is achieved, not only through war, but also through stealth, slowly, through government, business, schools, and now the shopping sector.  But there will be blood on the hands of those who acquiesce – their own and the blood of their loved ones.

Could it be that Macy’s was visited by CAIR (Council of American-Islamic Relations) and made compliant, or that they never considered that “multi” would mean the influx of many whose intent it is to destroy the host culture, or that the concept of jihad may apply to race and religion, but never to culture?  Was Macy’s coerced into accepting “diversity and inclusivity” to accommodate an oppressive ideology that itself rejects both diversity and inclusivity?  How long before the Macy’s parade, begun in 1924, with its colorful, imaginative merriment, costumes, music, and introduction to a heartwarming holiday season, will be considered an offense to Islam and halted?

We must learn from history, particularly from the history that is playing out now in real time, in much of Europe, that once a substantial number of Muslim women begins to wear these coverings, those who do not accept the veil become fair game, the quarry, for the terrorist, including kidnapping for sexual slavery, and mass rape on the streets (taharrush), an horrific assault when as many as 20 men will rape one young victim repeatedly.  Sweden’s acceptance of multiculturalism has led to the title, Rape Capital of Europe.

Rape is the method by which Islamic terrorists, jihadi, force the women to discard western clothing for the “safety” provided by the confining veils, and the native men to acquiesce politically.  Rape is also indirectly abetted by our socialist school system’s introduction of techniques that are emasculating our boys, diminishing their importance in studies and for courtship, and eliminating man’s instinctive protectiveness toward family and property.

As with academia, Macy’s personnel have elected to speak of diversity and inclusivity out of a mistaken sense of morality, while choosing to endanger their own fellow-Americans, themselves, their families.  The seventh century ideology of Islam is patient and persistent, and this misplaced tolerance will be a stepping stone to further surrender, one store at a time, one city at a time.  Is this how the company functions, without thought to consequences of its decisions?

While the West speaks inanely of reforming Islam, the clerics emphatically insist that it was perfect from its inception and can never be changed.  In light of this, consider that Islamic intolerance has resulted in 690+ million people killed worldwide over 1400 years (600 million Hindus), that the  centuries-long Islamic invasions into India left mountains of skulls.  Most virulent of all is the undying hatred and persecution of Jews long before Israel’s statehood in 1948, and the constant barrage of rockets and fire bombs into Israel since that date.

The wanton destruction and sexual crimes in Sweden, Berlin and Paris are a mere prelude to total control, and once Islam has been established, no country has ever returned to freedom.  Even Spain, conquered by the Muslims in 711 and reconquered by the Spanish in 1492, is once again succumbing to Islamic oppression.

The Muslim Brotherhood has announced its goal: “to get in and impose sharia law to establish an Islamic state.”  Yusaf al-Qaradawi promises conquest, but assures it can be done peacefully – to get all the women to wear the veil and all the men to wear the beard.  If not by war, “it will do so through predication (pronouncement) and ideology.”  Is Macy’s listening?

Macy’s is deceived, and its accommodation of Islam’s lifestyle is foolhardy, for with Islam, there can be only one lifestyle, and it will consume all others.  We ask Macy’s to reconsider their actions and return to being American.

EDITORS NOTE: This column is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Ged Lawson on Unsplash.

What Would Actually Be Affected in a Government Shutdown

“Government shutdown.” Probably no two words strike more fear in the hearts of Washington politicians.

The fact that another shutdown is imminent is a sign of how dysfunctional Washington’s budgeting process really is. What was once an orderly process where timelines were largely met has morphed into a political game plagued by brinkmanship and out-of-control spending.

Despite promises from Congress that the process would be different this year, here we are again.

This time the biggest issue holding up a deal is a confrontation between President Donald Trump and congressional Democrats over border security funding.

As Congress barrels toward a Friday spending showdown, the potential of a partial government shutdown is very real. But what would it actually mean?

A shutdown wouldn’t be good, of course, but it’s not as scary as you think. There wouldn’t be lawlessness in the streets. You’d still get your Social Security check.

Here’s what a shutdown and an alternative might look like:

Government Shutdown

If Congress and the president are unable to reach an agreement by Friday, then the federal government will enter into a partial shutdown. Five of 12 annual spending bills became law in September. That includes the military, so there is no threat to national defense.

It also includes the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Interior, and Veterans Affairs. In fact, 75 percent of the discretionary budget has already been funded through September 2019.

Still, a partial shutdown would mean that major federal agencies such as the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Justice, Homeland Security, State, and Transportation would be left without funding.

Many of the services they provide, however, would not be interrupted. Four hundred and twenty thousand “essential” federal employees would continue to work, including 41,000 law enforcement and correctional officers and up to 88 percent of DHS employees. America’s safety would not be sacrificed.

You shouldn’t worry about your benefit payments being impacted either. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid payments, as well as veterans benefits, would continue uninterrupted. These programs don’t rely on Congress taking action for annual funding to continue, or their appropriations were already passed into law.

Mail service would also continue as scheduled since the Postal Service has its own revenue stream. National parks would remain open, though with reduced staff.

About 380,000 federal employees would be furloughed for the duration of a shutdown, meaning that they wouldn’t be paid nor expected to work. Agencies that would be most affected include the Department of Commerce, NASA, the IRS, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Based on past government shutdowns, all furloughed employees would likely be paid when the shutdown ends.

A Continuing Resolution

Another possible outcome to get around the current funding impasse is for Congress to pursue a continuing resolution to keep the government open. That scenario played out as the last funding deadline approached on Dec. 7.

Under this situation, agencies would operate at their 2018 budget levels for the duration of the continuing resolution. Congress could choose to extend funding for a short period of time (likely into early 2019) or could opt for a full-year continuing resolution.

If Congress passes a short-term continuing resolution, then it would be back in the same mess in just a few short weeks.

Passing a full-year continuing resolution would put an end to the budget drama for this year. However, it would also leave both Republicans and Democrats unsatisfied, with Trump not getting additional border security money and Democrats unable to enact some of their priorities.

But it would save taxpayers money. If unfunded agencies simply continued to receive money at the 2018 level, it would cut spending by $11 billion.

It’s not a lot, but with the national debt soon expected to cross $22 trillion, every penny counts.

Regardless of what happens, one thing is clear: The budget process is broken, and taxpayers are the real losers. When Congress is constantly budgeting by crisis, it erodes oversight and leads to wasteful spending. Citizens should demand that Congress not only make the budget process better, but also ensure a sustainable budget future.

The cost of failing to do that is much scarier than a government shutdown.

Originally Distributed by Tribune News Service

COMMENTARY BY


The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now


EDITORS NOTE: This column with images by The Daily Signal is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Vadim Sherbakov on Unsplash.

5 Takeaways From the Trump Administration’s School Safety Report

The Trump administration is calling for scrapping Obama administration regulations on school discipline, in a school safety report issued Tuesday responding to school shootings.

The Federal Commission on School Safety, established in response to the Parkland, Florida, school shooting in February, issued its final report, making a series of recommendations.

The 177-page report also tackles building security, violence in the media, and school resource officers, and opposes raising the age for buying guns.

“This is one of the most important things we can do for schools and communities to help them think about creating a positive culture and climate in schools,” Education Secretary Betsy DeVos told The Daily Signal, referring to the report. “We have to look at kids as individuals, and make sure they are not lost through the cracks and feel isolated.”

DeVos was among the participants in a White House roundtable discussion with other Cabinet members and with community leaders seeking to protect schools and curb gun violence.

President Donald Trump called the report a “very important thing.”

“Nothing is more important than protecting our nation’s children,” he added.

Marshall County, Kentucky, Sheriff Kevin Byars praised Trump for doing more on the issue than the president’s predecessors.

“I want to thank you for listening,” Byars said during the roundtable talk at the White House. “Previous administrations wanted to bury their heads in the sand.”

Meanwhile, the Justice Department issued a new regulation Tuesday banning bump stocks, devices that make it easier to fire rounds faster from semiautomatic rifles, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders announced.

DeVos noted that Trump previously signed two bills this year, one to fix the national criminal background check system, and another boosting federal grants for school safety.

Tuesday’s report doesn’t call for federal legislative action, but does push for ways that multiple departments and agencies can work with local school districts through federal grants, rulemaking, and guidelines for promoting mental health and security issues in schools.

“This is a start. This will not sit on a bookshelf,” Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said of the report during the roundtable.

Here are the top five takeaways from the report.

1. Restoring School Discipline

The report notes the need to reverse the Obama administration’s policy guidance on how local school districts should be able to discipline misconduct by students.

“Maintaining order in the classroom is a key to keeping schools safe,” the commission’s report says. “Teachers are best positioned to identify and address disorderly conduct.”

The report continued:

However, guidance issued by the prior administration advocated a federal solution that undercut the ability of local officials to address the impact of disciplinary matters on school safety.

The guidance also relies on a dubious reading of federal law. The guidance should be rescinded, and information about resources and best practices for improving school climate and learning outcomes should be developed for schools and school districts.

In 2014, the Obama administration’s Department of Education issued a “Dear Colleague” letter to school districts across the country. The goal was to crack down on the perceived racial disparities in what President Barack Obama called the “school-to-prison pipeline.”

DeVos heard from teachers and administrators about the negative effects of the Obama-era rules, she told The Daily Signal.

“We will be moving fairly quickly to address this rule, because it has been particularly hard for teachers and school leaders to deal with,” she said.

Many experts have argued the new regulations prompt school districts to fear investigations by the U.S. Department of Education, and as a result, adopt lower standards and are unwilling to punish students, and teachers feel they have lost control.

2. The Media’s Role in School Violence

A major problem cited about school shootings is that they make the gunmen famous, DeVos said.

“More than one time, we have heard complaints from parents of the victims about the attention given to those who carry out these awful incidents,” she said. “It [attention] gives an incentive to pursue these horrid, awful acts, because of the notoriety they gain. We’re just asking the media not to use their names and photographs.”

DeVos stressed that that wouldn’t be a matter of censorship. Rather, it’s a matter of asking federal, state, and local officials—as well as media outlets—to minimize the attention given to the perpetrator.

The report calls for local governments and media outlets to adopt a “No Notoriety Campaign,” defined as “not using shooters’ names or photos, but instead focusing on facts and victims,” the report says.

The report also addresses violent entertainment and the rating systems for it.

“The role of the family is central to controlling violent entertainment,” the report says. “State and local educational agencies should collaborate with parents to strengthen internet safety measures to curb access to inappropriate content.”

The report adds that the entertainment industry—movies, TV, and video games—has a role to play.

“In addition, the entertainment industry should ensure its rating systems provide parents with the full complement of information needed to make informed decisions about entertainment for their children.”

3. Arming Teachers and School Staff

During the roundtable, Rusty Norman, president of the board of trustees of Santa Fe, Texas, schools said there was a need for “hardening of schools” from the “epidemic of violence that has got to be stopped.”

The report discusses local school districts considering arming teachers, for which Trump previously expressed support. Already, national programs exist for training teachers and other school staff to respond to an active shooter.

DeVos stressed that would not be a national policy.

“Every school district is different and has different needs,” the education secretary explained.

“States and local communities, in concert with law enforcement, should consider various approaches to school safety based on their own unique needs,” the report says. “School districts may consider arming some specially selected and trained school personnel as a deterrent.”

4. No Age Increases for Gun Purchases

After the Parkland, Florida, school massacre, in which 17 died and 17 others were injured, Trump talked about supporting increasing the age for buying a gun from 18 to 21. Republican Gov. Rick Scott signed legislation to do so in Florida.

However, legal experts said such a proposal posed potential constitutional hurdles.

The report issued Tuesday said such measures were likely ineffective.

“The available research does not support the conclusion that age restrictions for firearms purchases are effective in reducing homicides, suicides, or unintentional deaths,” the report states. “Most school shooters obtain their weapons from family members or friends, rather than by purchasing them. States should consider offering training or other resources to promote safe storage of firearms.”

DeVos said raising the age is something that could require continued study. However, as of now, no evidence exists showing a restriction would reduce violence.

A more effective policy would be for states to adopt laws permitting “extreme-risk protection orders,” the report says.

Such orders are intended to prevent individuals who pose a threat to themselves or others from possessing or purchasing firearms.

5. Building Security and Preparedness

The report notes that “school-based mental health and counseling for young people is an important aspect of prevention.”

The report adds that casualties could have been higher in Parkland if the high school didn’t have a preparedness plan in place.

Building and campus security are also key, the report states.

“A risk assessment can identify vulnerabilities and enable the development of a strategy to address any security gaps,” the report says. “Effective security plans use a layered approach across all three areas of a school: entry points, the building envelope (e.g., walls, roofs, windows, doors), and the classroom.”

COLUMN BY

Portrait of Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLE: Obama’s School Discipline Guidance Could Be Doomed. Here’s Why That’s Great News.


The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now


EDITORS NOTE: This column by The Daily Signal with images is republished with permission. Photo:Chris Kleponis /CNP/Newscom.

Here Are The Six Most Corrupt Congressmen of 2018, According To A Watchdog Group

A conservative-leaning watchdog group says House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are the biggest congressional scofflaws of 2018, for their anemic handling of the settlement slush fund that used an unlimited pot of taxpayer money to pay off congressional staff in exchange for signing legal papers barring them from taking public their claims of sexual harassment and other mistreatment by their congressional employers.

Congress members briefly claimed to be shocked at the victim-gagging slush fund when the media reported on it, but in reality, members of both parties in the House’s leadership oversaw it for years. The Committee on House Administration voted on each settlement and put out statistics that severely understated the scope of the problem. Former Democratic Michigan Rep. John Conyers, whose settlement sparked the initial furor, resigned, and the media moved on from the story.

A bill by then-Rep. Ron Desantis that would have named the congressmen who benefited from these payoffs in past years went nowhere, while the bill agreed to by the administration committee and the Senate is more anemic.

“Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi now has an opportunity to act further and we will be encouraging her to finally bring an end to this systematic cover-up. Every day that goes by without releasing the names of Members who have received taxpayer money to settle harassment and discrimination claims is another day of cover-up and another day more innocent people are put at risk of becoming victims,” said Kendra Arnold, executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT).

Here is a photo of Reps. Gregory Meeks and Elijah Cummings. (Photo: Meeks Congressional office)

Rep. Gregory Meeks, right, settled a complaint involving alleged retaliation against a staffer who said she was sexually assaulted by a politically-connected supporter (Photo: Meeks Congressional office)

FACT was once led by now-acting attorney general Matthew Whitaker.

Others on FACT’s list of worst ethics violators of 2018 include:

  • Former Rep. Elizabeth Esty of Connecticut, for her role in the sexual harassment scandal. When the female Democrat learned that her chief of staff was accused of  “physically beating, sexually harassing and threatening to kill another one of the Congresswoman’s staff members, Esty tried to cover it up,” FACT wrote. She continued to employ him for months, then gave him a golden parachute.
  • Democratic senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Kamala Harris of California, who solicited campaign funds based on their involvement in the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, while they were still ongoing. “Senators are prohibited from campaign fundraising tied to their official duties,” FACT wrote.
  • Former Republican congressional candidate Russell Taub of Rhode Island, for operating an illegal “scam PAC” that raised and failed to distribute $1.5 million to candidates.
  • Florida Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson, who claimed that voting machines in Florida were tampered with by Russia. Since there is no public evidence of this, FACT said he either lied or improperly disclosed classified information.
  • New York Democrat Rep. Yvette Clarke, for having 10 percent of her taxpayer-funded office budget go missing in what her own deputy chief of staff believed was a theft scheme between the chief of staff and the IT aide, Abid Awan. Since Clarke failed to take action and refused to discuss the incident publicly, she managed to win re-election by 1,000 votes. The missing funds would be enough to buy 20 iPads for every employee, and the former chief of staff, Shelley Clarke, signed off on the invoices. Clarke later had the missing items removed from the House inventory as if they never existed.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here Are The Largest Congressional Payments The House Has Admitted

Clarke’s Chief Of Staff Tried To Expose Suspected Theft Ring On Capitol Hill, Was Met With Resistance

Watchdog Group Names Two Top Dems As ‘Top Ethics Violators Of 2018’ For Kavanaugh Antics

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images by The Daily Caller is republished with permission.

7 Questions Explained about France’s Yellow Vest Protests

The massive demonstrations have led to six deaths, 1,648 injuries, and roughly 2,300 arrests—and they have forced the French government to respond to the protesters’ demands.


For the past two months, a protest movement known as Gilets Jaunes (the Yellow Vests) has rocked France. The French government has considered imposing a state of emergency to prevent a recurrence of some of the worst civil unrest in more than a decade.

The protests were started to oppose a “green tax” increase on gasoline and diesel fuel. The taxes are part of an environmental measure to encourage a reduction in the use of fossil fuels. The protesters are demanding a freeze on these taxes because they disproportionately hurt the working class.

However, the protests have expanded to include other economic and social issues, including an increase in the minimum wage, more generous pensions, lower taxes, and easier university entry requirements.

Taxes on diesel fuel have recently gone up 7 euro cents (nearly 8 US cents) and 4 euro cents on gasoline (about 5 US cents).

The price of diesel, the most commonly used fuel in French cars, has risen by around 23 percent over the past 12 months to an average of 1.51 euros ($1.71) per liter ($6.47 per gallon). Gasoline currently costs about 1.64 euros a liter in Paris ($7.06 per gallon).

In January, France was scheduled to boost a carbon tax another 3 euro cents per liter of gas and 6 euro cents per liter on diesel.

For the past decade, French law has required all motorists to have a “high-visibility upper-body garment” within arm’s reach in case the driver needs to get out of an immobilized vehicle. The protestors adopted them because they are widely available, and their distinctive color helps to serve as an identifying marker for the fuel protests.

According to the Interior Ministry, the number of protesters peaked last month at 282,000.

To date, the protests have resulted in the deaths of six people. (Editor’s note: The death toll has since increased to eight.) Approximately 1,648 others have been injured, including 552 police officers. More than 1,600 people have been taken in for questioning and 2,300 arrested.

France’s President Emmanuel Macron has promised several concessions. He agreed to raise the minimum wage by 100 euro per month starting in 2019 (a 7 percent increase), canceled a planned tax increase for low-income retirees, removed a tax on overtime pay, and said that employers would be encouraged to pay a tax-free end of year bonus to employees.

Macron refused to reintroduce the solidarity tax on wealth, though, saying “this would weaken us, we need to create jobs.” That solidarity tax was an annual direct wealth tax on those in France with assets in excess of 1,300,000 euros ($1.47 million).

The estimated cost of the measures is likely to be between 8-10 billion euros.

As Samuel Gregg, the research director for the Acton Institute, explains:

Much of the country is, for example, being crushed by taxes. By international standards, French income tax rates are steep. There’s also a 20 percent Value Added Tax applied to most purchases that disproportionately impacts the less well-off. Altogether, the total tax burden amounts to 45.5 percent of total domestic income. Macron’s now-suspended proposal to raise fuel taxes in the name of fighting climate change turned out to be the last straw for the France that lives outside Paris’s wealthy arrondissements, where few people drive cars.

Why then are taxes so high? One reason is that government spending in France amounts to a whopping 57 percent of annual GDP. Most of this is expended on France’s burgeoning welfare state.

Another longstanding economic problem is France’s labor laws. Despite recent changes, the country’s 3,000-page Code du Travail still makes it hard to fire anyone who possesses what’s called a contrat de travail à durée indéterminée—an open-ended contact with no closing date. Hence, many French businesses simply don’t bother expanding their permanent employee base. Numerous young French men and women are thus reduced to cobbling together part-time arrangements or drifting between temporary contracts. The resulting uncertainty corrodes their ability to make long-term plans, such as when to marry and have children.

For all the chatter about France being laid waste by “neoliberalism,” its large and modern economy isn’t all that free. In the heyday of economic liberalization in Europe in the 1980s and early 1990s, France never had a dynamic Thatcher-like figure. In the 2018 Index of Economic FreedomFrance comes in at an unimpressive 71 out of 180 countries. In the European region, it ranks an embarrassing 34 out of 44, wedged between Montenegro and Portugal.

With the exception of mildly market-friendly reforms implemented by Charles de Gaulle in 1958 and even milder changes introduced by François Mitterrand in the early 1980s, successive French governments have long pursued dirigiste economic policies. One manifestation of this heavy government involvement in the economy is the protection and subsidization of numerous industries at French taxpayers’ expense. Much of this assistance is justified in the name of maintaining what French governments refer to as the country’s “national champions.” It’s good, the argument goes, for France to support its high-flying companies. Contemporary examples include businesses like the train-maker Alstom or the telecom equipment manufacturer Alcatel-Lucent. But if these companies are such world-beaters, why do they require endless help from the French government?

This article was reprinted with permission from the Acton Institute.

COLUMN BY

Baltimore’s Gun Buyback Scheme Is Comically Bad Policy

The city’s pricing scheme provides an excellent way for Baltimore residents to make some quick cash.


I have many examples of gun control humor, all of which were created to mock anti-2nd Amendment zealotry.

But nothing I’ve ever read is as funny as this week’s gun buyback scheme by the Baltimore Police Department, which was organized by anti-gun politicians and bureaucrats.

Here’s what the Baltimore Sun reported about the buyback scheme.

Mayor Catherine E. Pugh and Interim Police Commissioner Gary Tuggle announced the launch of the gun buyback program at a news conference Tuesday at police headquarters. Pugh said the program is one strategy to try to reduce violence in the city… “We are coming towards the end of the year and we are doing everything we can to stay under a certain number, but I don’t want to even talk about that,” Pugh said, describing the buyback event as part of the city’s violence reduction initiatives. …Pugh did not say how much the buyback program would cost, but she believes the city has enough money for it. She said nonprofits would be contributing.

So why is this so funny? Shouldn’t I be upset that Baltimore politicians and bureaucrats want law-abiding people to give up guns, which will make life easier for criminals?

After all, that is bad policy.

But there’s a very amusing part of this story. Baltimore is offering $25 for every “hi-capacity” magazine.

And this creates a very interesting opportunity to make a quick buck since a quick online search reveals that one popular magazine (holds 30 rounds, so easily qualifies) can be purchased for about $11-$13.

Before you buy a truckload of magazines in hopes of some easy cash, I must warn you that there is a slight obstacle. If the poster above is accurate, the buyback is only for residents of Baltimore.

That being said, it shouldn’t be too difficult to find a local guy to act as your “straw seller.”

P.S. Some of you might feel guilty about participating since taxpayer money will be squandered on the buyback. That’s a noble sentiment. However, the story in the Sun also noted that some of the financing would come from nonprofits. And that means participants will probably be helping to deplete the bank accounts of George Soros and Michael Bloomberg. More money for you and less money for them is a win-win situation.

P.P.S. To the best of my recollection, my only other example of gun-buyback humor is at the end of this column.

This article is reprinted with permission from International Liberty.

COLUMN BY

Daniel J. Mitchell

Daniel J. Mitchell

Daniel J. Mitchell is a Washington-based economist who specializes in fiscal policy, particularly tax reform, international tax competition, and the economic burden of government spending. He also serves on the editorial board of the Cayman Financial Review.

RELATED ARTICLE: Baltimore Woman Says She Will Use Gun Buyback Cash To Purchase Bigger Gun

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission from FEE.

Electric Vehicle Tax Credits Another Form of Corporate Welfare

If America’s auto manufacturers wrote letters to Santa, it’s not hard to guess what would be high on their lists: retaining the federal tax credit for electric vehicles.

For several years now, Uncle Sam (who often acts like Santa’s U.S.-based cousin) has tried to encourage the public to buy electric vehicles by offering those who do so a tax credit of up to $7,500.

But the credit wasn’t created to be available forever, and it already caps out when a manufacturer has sold 200,000 electric vehicles.

General Motors Co., which is more than happy to have taxpayer money propping up part of its business, wants the credit made permanent and the cap lifted. So do other auto manufacturers, such as Nissan and Tesla. Many lawmakers on both sides of the aisle seem more than happy to give them what they want.

Guess who isn’t? President Donald Trump. When General Motors recently announced plant closings and a 15 percent cut in its workforce, the president said he was “looking at cutting all GM subsidies, including for electric cars.”

As well he should. Government has no business interfering in the market and trying to push consumers to buy what they don’t want. And it’s even more galling when lawmakers use taxpayer money to do it.

This type of cronyism is bad enough on principle alone. But it gets worse in the case of electric vehicle tax credits.

For one thing, the cost is borne disproportionately by lower- and fixed-income families who can’t afford electric vehicles. Who’s taking advantage of the subsidies? Primarily America’s wealthiest households. They don’t need a tax break to afford an electric vehicle, but hey, if it’s there, they’ll take it.

So, in an ironic twist, we have the government taking money from a wide swath of Americans, including those on the low end of the income scale, to put those who are more well off into “green” vehicles.

The Pacific Research Institute found that in 2014, 79 percent of electric vehicle tax credits went to households making over $100,000, while 99 percent of them went to households making at least $50,000.

Auto manufacturers, like any other company, should base their decisions about what to make solely on what customers want—not on what government wants them to want.

If people want electric vehicles, fine. But it should be their free choice, not something they purchase because they get some “free” money.

But some people may say it’s worth it for the environmental benefit. “Switching to electric cars is key to fixing America’s ‘critically insufficient’ climate policies,” The Guardian wrote earlier this year. That’s the rationale the Obama administration used to justify its push for electric vehicles.

But as economist Nicolas Loris points out in a recent article, “the numbers tell a different story.” In a study published in May, the Manhattan Institute calculated the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from increased adoption of electric vehicles. The bottom line? Yes, electric vehicles reduce emissions, but in amounts far too small to make a difference.

“Based on the [Energy Information Administration’s] projection of the number of new electric vehicles, the net reduction in carbon dioxide emissions between 2018 and 2050 would be only about one-half of 1 percent of total forecast U.S. energy-related carbon emissions,” the report reads. “Such a small change will have no impact whatsoever on climate.”

Plus, let’s keep in mind that the mining of materials for lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles itself pumps out a lot of carbon emissions. Add in the fact that the electricity being used to recharge these batteries is manufactured in coal-powered plants.

The auto manufacturers may disagree, but I have a better wish for Santa: End the electric vehicle credit and other forms of corporate welfare. Let the people decide what they want to buy without Uncle Sam putting his thumb on the scale.

Originally published by The Washington Times

COLUMN BY

Portrait of Ed Feulner

Ed Feulner

Edwin J. Feulner’s 36 years of leadership as president of The Heritage Foundation transformed the think tank from a small policy shop into America’s powerhouse of conservative ideas. Read his research. Twitter: @EdFeulner.


The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column with images is republished with permission. Photo: Gary Cameron/Reuters /Newscom.

You’ve Got to be Taught … to HATE!

No baby comes out of the womb a racist or hater.  Hate is an emotion. Emotions must be learned someplace. Either parent’s teach their children to hate or it is coming from school reinforced by media and Hollywood. How do you get children to hate, just feed them plenty of hate filled adjectives. Children will remember the “Nationalist” President, the “racist president, dictator president.”  They remember the worst president, who hates minorities and stops them fro entering America…illegally.”  Although illegally is never used.  Re-defining words to suit a hate filled agenda is one goal of school.

This week I took a step back and reviewed what the Obama legacy left for President Trump and America.  Obama called for the TRANSFORMATION of AMERICA. What exactly did that mean? To transform something means you must destroy its current status. Obama’s battle cry left me with a question…why are Americans are so ready hate fellow Americans and to give up the American way of life which has brought so much greatness to America and humanity?  Why do so many Americans demonize anyone who disagrees?

Would you be surprised to learn that students learn to hate America in school and it is reinforced by the media and Hollywood? Students learn that humans especially Americans are responsible for all of the bad in the world especially the environment. They are taught that the people supporting American values are evil. “The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

Club of Rome, premier environmental think-tank, consultants to the United Nations

Are Americans ready to give up their life, liberty and personal property?  70-78% of the population aren’t. So why is this happening? Why are we so divided and full of hate?

School starts the hate train. Hate, the emotion is reinforced by our vocabulary which has been altered.  Words may sound the same but definitions are altered to meet the needs of each specific group. This is identity politics and along with political correctness (censorship), makes communication/conversation almost impossible.  Example: The right loves the Constitution of individual rights and limited governmental powers.  The right teaches the constitution as the bedrock of society one set of rule for ALL. The left teaches the constitution is “living” and can be altered at any time for any group.  Attorney’s no longer learn or read the constitution.  They only case law which is altered to fit a case. How can one document provide opposing viewpoints?  In school, leftist teachers teach only the con side. There is no balance. Opposition will get the teacher fired or the child expelled.

Where is all this hate coming from?  Hate is an emotion which must be learned. No one is born with the desire to hate, yet here we are hating each other and allowing 535 people in Congress, in the CFR, the IMF, the UN, Club of Rome, the media and Hollywood to determine who and what we should hate.  We watch, as they hype words in meaningless comments all designed to boil our blood while creating mobs.  Mobs create fear which gets the New World Order (NWO) Globalists power to control 300 million people.  How? We are now trained to give up more rights to make the pain go away. After Parkland, which was created due to government breakdown, we were told it is the fault of the gun.  Hate the NRA. It is their fault.  When we give up our guns, the government can stop the hate. We must give them the power.  After all, they are richer, smarter and more powerful and must make all of the decisions to control every aspect of our lives.

Would you believe the majority of Americans really want the same things and don’t hate anyone? Hate addresses about 10% the population. However as students learn they are victims, envy, fear, jealousy and hate surfaces. Students have no way to express questions or opposition.  They learn that opposition is evil and should be hated.    Students leave school with reading deficits, and are mediocre, lack innovation, curiosity, common sense logic and the ability to reason. Instant gratification is their demand.  Their thoughts and action must turn to something to keep them occupied, so they learn: hate, envy, destroy.  The media hypes HATE, providing the personal attention students crave. They learn that this attention gets more attention as they watch their numbers grow…. This is the plan:  Create a society of hate. Stimulate hate to create riots and destruction. Call in the government to make hate go away. Start all of this hatred in school. Can this be stopped?

Let’s understand first up that this political game is about POWER, not service to country, environment, children, education, animals, health or humanity etc.  It is all about power. Globalists want it. You are in the way because the only way to get power from you is if you give it to them. So let’s not give it to them, simple.  Wrong, nothing in life is simple. We allow these massive lies and manipulation to focus on hate so much so we stop paying attention to the real threat, the destruction of American values.

In order to stop HATE, we must accept the premise, everything happens for a reason and every action has a consequence.  Why are students taught to hate?  Hate is the chosen emotion eliciting the fastest negative response while promoting divide and conquer. Once the nation is divided, conversation is minimal, trust is gone. If family and church are demonized where do the students go to form relationships?  Why on line with other haters. They feed off each other.  Confused students with broken value systems make them the low hanging fruit easy for another group to come in and feed hate and envy then turn little heads from a loving family, church, country to one of hate and envy.  To be accepted (which is all most people want) you belong to a group. You must pick up the mantra of the group.  Your loving comes from the group who hates all those not following their cause in their group.

When I was a child my parents took me to see the play South Pacific.  This song stuck with me, called: You’ve Got to be Carefully Taught.

You’ve got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You’ve got to be taught
From year to year,
It’s got to be drummed
In your dear little ear
You’ve got to be carefully taught.

You’ve got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a different shade,
You’ve got to be carefully taught.

Our schools follow this song to the letter.

Again I ask:  Is America worth saving? If yes what are our doing to help “save” America?  It is up to us. Will you stop the teaching of Hate in school? POTUS gave us the opportunity to control our state curricula but if we leave it to the present crowd, we will get more HATE.  This is our chance to make a difference.

Will you go to floridacitizensalliance.com and sign up to become a textbook reviewer?  http://floridacitizensalliance.com/liberty/want-stop-indoctrination-children-sign/

Will you go to your school board and expose the texts full of hatred?  Will you correct your children, friends, family and neighbors?

Remember: Either you are a victim or an activist. You can’t be both. Slavery or Freedom?  The choice is yours.

EDITORS NOTE: This column is republished with permission. The featured photo is by DESIGNECOLOGIST on Unsplash.

Just give me your Children…

“Give me just one generation of youth, and I’ll transform the whole world.”

“Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”

“Destroy the family, you destroy the country. The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.” — Vladimir Ilyich Lenin


Was the cry of Lenin, Khrushchev, Castro and Hitler and other dictators just before they destroyed their country and used indoctrination with propaganda on the children to turn on their parents and neighbors. The key to the future of our country is its children.  For it does not matter what we accomplish in 8 years to “fix” America, once more “socialists graduate” America will elect socialists.  According to the National Review 2017 40% of the population wants America to be socialist. For the purpose of definition remember that the goal of all ….isms ie, progressivism, globalism, socialism, fascism, collectivism etc. is communism whereby the state (government) control every aspect of human life.

Since the lowest common denominator in America (something ever American does – is attend school) the students are the low hanging fruit.  Also the new brand of communism has changed since the leaders feel they can infiltrate their opponent by mass migration of socialists. By integrating the media, Hollywood and education incremental change and pressure is continual. Weapons are no longer necessary. Winning the “hearts and minds” are the answer. How do you fool millions of people? YOU LIE.

Education is Key… So let’s get directly to the point…

The problem is the content of the curriculum. No amount of money, No choice, no voucher will do anything to fix anything as long as the curriculum stays the same.  The curricula are written by people who want to destroy America. You are seeing the results. Lies, Lies, and more Lies

Students are now taught: The government is gospel, grants your rights and never lies. Your self worth is not important only your group worth.  Facts are not as important as value. Education has become training for work. Being mediocre gets a trophy.  So what happens to a society when mediocre is accepted as the norm.   America now gets mediocre – doctors, inventors, mechanics, teachers, legislators etc.  No more innovation and creation.

2 simple lies, making a huge impact:

Calling America a Democracy:   Our founders were very careful to create a representative republic using our U.S. Constitution as the contract of laws applicable to ALL Americans. (They purposely us words like ALL to eliminate class distinction.)   Article 4 Section 4 guarantees that each American will have a republican form of government. A democracy fails at every turn for it is nothing more than rule by mob.  What is law today can be undone tomorrow by “majority rules”. In addition, if America were a democracy there would be no reason for representatives.  The people would vote directly by referendum.

It is not important to learn English.  What you are not told is that English is the language of Business.  If you can not read contracts, laws and regulations, you are a slave to your interpreter and the government. Welcome to communism. The children in these failing socialist schools have grown up to become your legislators and educators.  Many teachers can not read and write proper English.
The “educators” (the bureaucrats running education who rarely were in a classroom,) today are interested in 3 things:  Money, Power, Control

Money is thrown around by the government, publishers, NGO’s and non-profits as grants to “help” teach the new modern education. As grades slip the cry for MORE MONEY is heard throughout the education community. More money is not the answer. Teaching using programs that work is the answer.  In the 1960’s America was in the top 10 worldwide. After 60 years using proven failed programs America is 37th worldwide and all we hear is: we need more money.

Control is done through standards – in 2013 under the Obama administration a $350 million grant was given to Pearson Publishing to make all its texts Common Core compliant. Pearson supplies about 80% of America’s texts.  Pearson is an English (socialist) company. Does it matter what your state called the standards if all texts follow the same standards?  In addition state got grants as well to help promote common core.

Power: The only way someone can have power over you is if you give it to them.  STOP accepting mediocrity. Have you noticed that the spelling of exceptionalism always comes up as misspelled? Silence is considered compliance.

Education is local and it is the one area I believe that we the people can have control.

The Florida Citizens Alliance in 2017, helped get a bill passed CS989, that gives any Florida resident the right to challenge the texts for accuracy, bias, errors and omissions. Does your state have a bill like that?    Having that bill is only good if you use it.

The Alliance is offering help to form committees and challenge the texts.  It is important that we use their words and framework.  Therefore, under the current guidelines that demand equality we must demand they offer a traditional education as well.  Teaching socialism only “is not fair and equal.”

I now ask you:  Is America worth saving?  If so what will you do?  Do you know what is in your school?   If you are interested in education solutions, contact me:  Karen Schoen  kbschoen@bellsouth.net

For the statistics go to https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/millennials-patriotic-survey/

EDITORS NOTE: This column is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Jose Gomez on Unsplash.

VIDEO: Parkland Father Andrew Pollack Is Leading the Charge for Safer Schools

Andrew Pollack: “Numerous Entities Failed My Daughter.” 10 Months After Parkland.

Father of Meadow Pollack, Andrew Pollack, joins Grant to discuss his efforts to secure schools and protect our children 10 months after the Parkland massacre.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with video is republished with permission. The featured image is from Andrew Pollack – Parkland Parent @meadowmovement Facebook page.