Fighting marriage battles in Hong Kong, Finland, and more

As the international homosexual movement pushes “gay marriage” around the world, pro-family citizens in several countries are turning to MassResistance for help fighting back.

VIDEO:
posted by Hong Kong pro-family activists
 — MassResistance video on marriage with audio in Cantonese!

Last September – originally at the request of activists in Australia — we created our comprehensive 28-minute videoWhat “gay marriage” did to Massachusetts. It documents in chilling detail how “gay marriage” really changes society in less than a decade over a wide range of areas including schools, courts, businesses, churches, and more. The video is an expansion of our 2012 booklet, What same-sex “marriage” has done to Massachusetts. Thousands of copies of that booklet have poured across America — from Hawaii to Maine — and several foreign countries.

Brand new — MassResistance stickers. Show your solidarity! (See below for how to get them.)

Here are some of the latest battles:

Hong Kong

At the beginning of the year the well-funded international homosexual lobby begantheir lobbying push in Hong Kong to legalize “gay marriage.” Pro-family activists there began working with MassResistance in February.

They have just released a version of the MassResistance video with the audio in Cantonese (see above) . It is now being widely shown in Hong Kong. They told us that they are very pleased that now people can watch the video and it will “help them to understand” what they are really facing.

Last week the activists emailed us:

[This video] will definitely benefit more people to understand the seriousness of the issue involved. Without your kind support, we really cannot make this happen! Many thanks indeed!

Now they can see what may be on the horizon. On Monday, we received the following message from one of the Hong Kong activists:

The issue on Gender Recognition is creeping in as there is a recent court ruling to recognise the reassigned gender after sex reassignment surgery. I saw that Transgenderism is also forcing its way to school education at your side. The battle is getting increasingly tough…

We’ll be working hard for them as things develop.

Finland

The Finnish Parliament is about to begin debating a “gay marriage” bill. Back in February the homosexual movement submitted thousands of petitions to force the issue into Parliament.

In March a group of Finnish religious leaders contacted MassResistance. They began using our materials to educate their people. A few days ago they posted a version ofour MassResistance video with Finnish sub-titles and began promoting it across the country.

VIDEO
Posted by Finnish religious leaders
 — MassResistance video on marriage with Finnish sub-titles.

They have also distributed our materials to Parliament. This week religious leaders will be meeting with Members of Parliament on the issue.

Here’s what the Finnish religious leaders wrote us on Monday:

Your materials have helped us very much indeed. Finnish Parliament Law Committee have asked some church leaders to come in there on Wednesday the 7th of May for the interview concerning the same sex marriage legislation.

We have forwarded your materials all over the land and to all members of Parliament.

We have sent your video all over the country and people are surprised
to see it — many have woken up to understand serious consequences of that foolish legislation.

I am going to encourage the church leaders to stand firm on that issue.
Media is one of the worst enemies propagating solely the same sex marriage.

I will let you know what happens here. May God bless you and all of us who uphold traditional life values. Yours in common cause!

Here is one of their sites with information on the “gay marriage” fight.

They also informed us on Monday that one of the Finnish national televisionstations has agreed to broadcast the MassResistance video nationwide! 

Sweden and Estonia

We have also just been informed that Swedish and Estonian language versions of the MassResistance video are being prepared for broadcast on national TV in those countries.

We’ll post those links when they become available.

Back in the USA: Virginia

Back here in the US, pro-family citizens in Virginia are reeling from an outrageous federal court ruling in February where an activist federal judge struck down the state’s “gay marriage” ban voted by the people in 2006. One of the reasons the judge gave was that it conflicts with the phrase “all men are created equal” in the state’s constitution!

And Virginia’s Democrat Attorney General, Mark Herring, has refused to defend it in court, claiming that it violates the U.S. Constitution. Nevertheless, the ruling is being appealed by pro-family lawyers. The Federal Appeals Court in Richmond will hear oral arguments May 13.

In the meantime, pro-family activists are not letting up. Marriage activists contacted MassResistance in February and we’ve sent materials.

VIDEO by Virginia marriage activists.A powerful lesson on “gay marriage” using some MassResistance material. One of the best.

On April 24, Virginia activists released a powerful video on marriage to call together Virginians to a rally at the May 13 court hearing, and also a marriage rally in Washington, DC. Their video uses some of our MassResistance material, and is really worth watching. This is one of the best general “gay marriage” videos we’ve seen yet.

And many other battles over the last several months

For many across the country and around the world, MassResistance is the go-to place for pro-family activism and information. In addition to the above, in just the last several months we’ve worked with pro-family activists in Australia, Croatia, Jamaica, England, France, Ghana, Uganda, and Canada. And here in the U.S. we’ve worked with activists in Hawaii, Minnesota, Illinois, Utah, Idaho, Louisiana. We get more calls every week.

In addition, of course, we’re on the ground here in Massachusetts!

What we’re also fighting: Big money and generated fear

The homosexual movement is able to push “gay marriage” and its other agendas on a large scale because it receives millions of dollars from major US corporations, wealthy liberals, and in many places, your tax dollars.

Unfortunately, the front-line pro-family movement fighting back gets virtually no funding from corporations, conservative donors (who’ve chickened out on this issue – don’t get us started on that), and certainly not government. Even on good days we’re probably outspent by 500-1 (or worse).

Much of this is because the homosexual movement is constantly working to create a climate of fear. They are trying to make everyone afraid to even speak up, much less get involved. We’ve all seen that over and over.

Show your solidarity and help MassResistance keep fighting back

Hot off the press: We have brand new MassResistance stickers, suitable for car bumpers or anywhere else! Be a part of the not-so-silent majority. Show your solidarity with the international pro-family movement fighting back! Let the world know you’re not afraid.

(Oval, 6″ wide, 4″ high)

Over the next three weeks — until Memorial Day — in return for any size donation ($10 or more if using the credit card page) you will get two stickers.

DONATE – DONATE – DONATE – Get your stickers!

We’re up against a funding behemoth, so front-line groups like MassResistance must get broad financial support from lots of ordinary people. It really makes a difference. We need your help to keep our fight going.

Especially if you haven’t donated before, this is the time to do it.

The big psychological weapon we have

Because our opponents thrive on our fear, one of the biggest psychological weapons the pro-family movement can use is to show that we’re not afraid of them — or of telling the truth. In our experience, that seemingly small thing is astonishingly effective.  It makes them uncomfortable and disoriented. It’s been a powerful tool against any totalitarian movement. In fact, Pope John Paul II attributed the ultimate fall of the Soviet empire to people’s acting without fear!

Training Your Congressman!

Is it possible that we can straighten out poorly performing politicians?  I say absolutely!

Has John Boehner suddenly been trained to stand for justice for Benghazi? Or is he just blowing smoke because election day is coming?

[youtube]http://youtu.be/Gj52ToRLr_4[/youtube]

The View from the Bottom

It tells you everything you need to know about the utter contempt those in the White House and the circles of power that the announcement of 0.01% economic growth thus far this year was blamed on—wait for it—the weather! Specifically, a cold winter.

AA - Blame the Weather

If you have been paying any attention of late, the weather and the climate have become the reason foreverything in general and for tornadoes, floods and forest fires, in particular. The fact that these natural events have always been subject to whatever the weather is or the larger climate trends seems to have escaped the notice of too many people. If winter automatically drives down the economy to a point of invisibility, that is news to me.

I’m surprised some economist hasn’t blamed winter for the major decline in home ownership. It has hit its lowest level since the mid-1990s according to the Census Bureau. As the Wall Street Journal reported, “despite two years of recovery in the housing market there are still fewer homeowners than there were before the recession.”  Oh? The recession is over? You could have fooled me.

It is no surprise, however, that China is poised to pass the United States as the world’s leading economic power this year. The U.S. has been the global leader since 1872 when it replaced the United Kingdom and now “most economists previously thought China would pull ahead in 2019 according to the Financial Times.

Bear in mind that the U.S. has survived financial crises in the past, but the 2008 meltdown has persisted since around January 20, 2009 when a new President was sworn into office. It didn’t take him long to receive a Nobel Peace Prize that year and to preside over the first reduction in the nation’s top ranked credit rating in 2011.

Could the economic decline have something to do with the insane increase of federal government regulation? As John Merline asked in Investor’s Business Daily, “After years of rapid growth during the Obama administration, the cost of federal regulations is now bigger than the entire economics of all but nine countries in the world.” He was reporting on the annual report. “Ten Thousands Commandments”, issued by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Compiled by Clyde Wayne Crews, this year’s report found that the “regulation tax” imposed on the economy now tops $1.86 trillion. “By comparison, Canada’s entire GDP is $1.82 trillion and India’s is $1.84 trillion.”

“The problem, Crews notes, is that the combined cost of this ‘tax’ never shows up anywhere in the federal budget—or any other official report—even though it is now bigger than individual and corporate income taxes combined.” The CEI report noted that federal regulatory costs average $14,974 per household “which is more than the typical household spends on just about anything else.”

So you don’t have to have an economics degree to figure out what is wrong. “Last year,” Merline reported, “regulators issued 3,659 rules. That’s equal to one new rule every 2 l/2 hours of every day7 or nearly two federal rules issued every business hour.” Why is this happening? Because the 2013 Federal Registered contains 79,311 pages, the fourth highest ever and the top two all-time totals were both under President Obama. Big government? No, TOO BIG Big Government.

A new poll surveying young Americans’ political attitudes was released at the end of April by Harvard University’s Institute of Politics. As indoctrinated as those 18 to 29 have been in our public schools, they are not brain-dead. The survey found that the millennials have less trust in government than ever before in the President, Congress, the Supreme Court, the military, and federal government as a whole. There is a comparable lack of confidence in Wall Street and the United Nations. Unfortunately, less than one-in-four (25%) of Americans under 30 said they would definitely vote in the forthcoming midterm elections, a decrease since last autumn, though more Republican millennials will vote than Democrats.

It’s not just the youth who are unhappy. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll taken in late April revealed “a marked change from past decades” as “nearly half of those surveyed wanted the U.S. to be less active on the global state, with fewer than one-fifth call for more active engagement—and anti-interventionist current that sweeps across party lines.”

This is hardly a surprise as one looks back on the years since 9/11 in which engagement in Afghanistan and Iraq turned out to be failures. In this regard Obama has his finger on the pulse of Americans who are weary of military interventions, but it is equally true he has used this to impose vast reductions on the U.S. military. If they are needed, there will be far less of them and the arsenal they will need.

The poll showed that approval of Obama’s handling of foreign policy has sunk to the lowest level of his presidency with 38% approval. His overall job performance now pulls in 47% or so. Both are below half the population of likely voters. The poll also demonstrated how disenchanted they are with the economy “that many believe is stacked against them.” The views expressed correlated with income and education, rather than party affiliation.

The state of the economy reflects the factors noted; too much regulation, Obamacare’s attack on one sixth of the economy, replete with dozens of taxes within it, as well as the serious disruption of the healthcare system.  What it has also done is cause many businesses to put a cap on how many they employ, a dagger in the heart of those coming out of college with few real prospects, those seeking employment after having been laid off due to Obamacare and other factors—some 90 million still.

If the nation does survive Obama, historians will express wonder that he was reelected and that his approval ratings weren’t considerably lower. He is still being defended by the mainstream media, so that might account for the latter, but recent revelations about the Benghazi cover-up may have an impact.

The people I talk with are “hanging on”, struggling to get by on what money comes in. They are not happy and I suspect they reflect a general unhappiness from the millennials to the senior set.

They are observing the nation and the world from the bottom of the barrel.

We’re Americans. We don’t like being number two.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Angie Schwendemann. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

Florida: Court collision pushing Pinellas Term Limits case toward Supreme Court

Crash!

The April 16 decision by the Florida 2nd District Court of Appeals excusing Pinellas County from enforcing its voter-approved 8-year county commission term limits law collided head on with a 2011 decision from the 4th DCA which required that they be enforced. Indeed, after the Florida Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the 4th DCA decision, every county in Florida is enforcing their county term limits except Pinellas.

Why is Pinellas so special?  In its April 16 decision, the 2nd DCA did  not answer that question. In fact, its only response was: “Affirmed.” No explanation was given at all!

That won’t do. It is pretty clear this case must be settled in the Florida Supreme Court as the conflict between the two decisions are so stark.  Must counties enforce their voter-approved charter amendments or not?

It is an important question that affects all 20 of Florida’s charter — or ‘home rule’ — counties, not just the 12 whose voters have opted to impose term limits on their county politicians.

On this basis, the Pinellas citizens who have been defending the Pinellas term limits law in court have filed for a rehearing, requesting the court revisit its decision or at least provide an explanation that they can bring to the Supreme Court.

It is difficult to see what the defense the county politicians have. The case set out in the good guys’ Motion for Clarification appears incontrovertible:

  1. Voters overwhelmingly approved 8-year term limits on county commissioners and constitutional officers in 1996.
  2. In Cook (2002),  the Florida Supreme Court (in a split decision) struck down the term limits on constitutional officers, but did not address county commission term limits.
  3. The Pinellas charter’s severability clause (7.01) clearly provides that if one section of the charter is found unconstitutional, others survive.
  4. As an example of this under Florida law, Florida voters approved in 1992 term limits on both federal Congress members and state legislators. When the U.S. Supreme Court shot down Congressional term limits in U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton (1995), the Congressional term limits were nullified but — per Florida’s Ray v. Mortham (1999) — the state legislative term limits still stand.
  5. In 2011-12, the 4th DCA and then the Florida Supreme Court both unanimously affirmed the constitutionality of county commission term limits and also reversed their earlier decision regarding constitutional officer term limits as well.
  6. All Florida county term limits on the books today have been ruled constitutional and are being enforced, except in Pinellas County. There is no reason why Pinellas should be treated differently.

Due to the conflict between the DCAs, appellants Maria Scruggs and H. Patrick Wheeler argue the 2nd DCA owes the public — and the Supremes — an explanation. If we get one, it will be due to the hard work and personal sacrifice of these two individuals.

Obama administration chooses environmentalists over unions on Keystone XL and fracking

While some environmental groups applauded the latest delay of the Keystone XL pipeline, unions whose members would be building it ripped the administration. Sean McGarvey, President of North America’s Building Trades Unions, AFL-CIO, called it “a cold, hard slap in the face for hard working Americans who are literally waiting for President Obama’s approval and the tens of thousands of jobs it will generate.”

Laborers’ International Union of North America (LIUNA) general president Terry O’Sullivan was more colorful, saying, “It’s clear the administration needs to grow a set of antlers, or perhaps take a lesson from Popeye and eat some spinach.”

The Keystone XL pipeline isn’t the only energy issue dividing anti-energy environmental groups and unions who want jobs for their members. Over the weekend, the Associated Press reported that development of shale energy using hydraulic fracturing had strong union support in Pennsylvania:

“The shale became a lifesaver and a lifeline for a lot of working families,” said Dennis Martire, the mid-Atlantic regional manager for the Laborers’ International Union, or LIUNA, which represents workers in numerous construction trades.

Martire said that as huge quantities of natural gas were extracted from the vast shale reserves over the last five years, union work on large pipeline jobs in Pennsylvania and West Virginia has increased significantly. In 2008, LIUNA members worked about 400,000 hours on such jobs; by 2012, that had risen to 5.7 million hours.

In contrast, environmental groups like the Natural Resource Defense Council who patted the administration on the back for the Keystone XL delay, strongly oppose hydraulic fracturing.

In his Keystone XL statement, McGarvey head of the building trades union asked a good question:

Why does President Obama continue to side with radicals instead of the middle class that, twice, put him office, and supports this project by a significant majority?

Out of work American union members would like to know.

[H/T Lachlan Markay at the Washington Free Beacon.]

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo of a rig drilling for natural gas at a hydraulic fracturing site in Pennsylvania is courtesy of photographer Ty Wright/Bloomberg.

The Stolen Election of 2012

The April 2, 2014 edition of National Review Online contains a blockbuster story detailing the results of a widespread vote fraud investigation conducted by the North Carolina State Board of Elections. In their review of the 2012 General Election, the board searched some 101,000,000 voter records in databases of 27 other states, using the same names, dates of birth, and Social Security numbers of individuals who voted in the North Carolina General Election.

What they found provides convincing proof that Democrats were not going to take any chances in 2012; they were not going to allow Mitt Romney to ruin Barack Obama’s chances for a second term. What the study of the 2012 election shows is that 35,570 North Carolina voters shared the same first names, last names, and dates of birth with individuals registered to vote in other states. Another 765 North Carolina voters had the same first names, last names, birthdays, and final four digits of a Social Security number as those who voted in other states, stretching credulity to its absolute limits. Barack Obama carried North Carolina in 2012 by a margin of just 14,177 votes (0.33%). To what extent were those voters residents of North Carolina who also voted in 27 other states, or were many of them residents of 27 other states who also voted in North Carolina?

In another recent study by the State of Virginia, it was found that some 44,000 Virginia voters are also registered to vote in Maryland. Of course, fraudulent voting by Democrats is not unique to North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland. For Democrats, vote fraud is a way of life… standard operating procedure. And if the Republican Party had any leaders fit to be called leaders, they would see to it that the voting statistics of every state in the nation are evaluated in exactly the same way as the North Carolina voting age population.

For starters, the North Carolina attorney general should hold a press conference, extending an invitation to the 765 North Carolinians with the same first names, last names, birth dates, and Social Security numbers as individuals who were found to have voted in other states to come forward and identify themselves. Those individuals should be allowed to plead guilty to felony vote fraud, pay a hefty fine, and lose their voting rights for a period as prescribed by law.

Of course, not all those who engage in vote fraud could be expected to self-identify themselves. In such cases, the North Carolina attorney general should conduct forensic examinations of absentee ballots held in North Carolina and other states, lifting latent fingerprints from absentee ballots and subjecting signatures to expert handwriting analysis. Those who fail to self-identify, but whose latent fingerprints are later found on absentee ballots should be indicted, tried, subject to a heavy fine, and sentenced to prison. Upon being sentenced for felony vote fraud they should also lose voting rights as prescribed by law.

Federal law requires that all state election boards retain absentee ballots for at least twenty-two months following an election. Many states require ballots to be retained for twenty-four months, or longer. So it is essential that investigators conduct studies of double voting within two years following an election or much of the evidence of vote fraud will be destroyed.

In a recent speech before Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, Barack Obama attempted to rally his base by charging that Republicans are attempting to suppress the black vote in the coming 2014 General Election. Demonstrating once again that he is the dimmest bulb on the porch, he said, “The principle of one person-one vote is the single greatest tool we have to redress an unjust status quo.  You would think there would not be an argument about this anymore.  But the stark, simple truth is this:  The right to vote is threatened today in a way that it has not been since the Voting Rights Act became law nearly five decades ago.”

Of course, as is the case with almost everything Obama says, he was not speaking the truth; he was only saying what he thought would appeal to his low-information base. The fact is, except for Democrat-sponsored fraud, the right to vote has not been threatened at all in recent decades, compared to the years between the Civil War and the mid-1950s. In those years Democrats used the KKK to intimidate and/or murder thousands of blacks for no other reason than that they insisted on the right to vote. Yes, the one person-one vote principle is a critical concept in our system, but that means one person-one vote, not one Republican-one vote and one Democrat-two votes or three votes, as most Democrats see as their birthright.

He went on to say, “Across the country, Republicans have led efforts to pass laws making it harder, not easier, for people to vote…” So if that is a true statement, it must also be correct to say that Republicans have led efforts to make it impossible to board an airplane, to cash a check, to make purchases with credit cards, to enter public buildings, to sign up for food stamps, to sign up for unemployment benefits, and to purchase beer, wine, liquor, and cigarettes. But we all know that’s not the case, so once again Obama is caught telling untruths to people who are either too dumb or too gullible to know that they’re being propagandized by a four-Pinocchio liar.

The truth is, since the vast majority of those behind prison bars are registered Democrats… those who’ve either attempted to disrupt the social order or who’ve attempted to enrich themselves at the expense of others… it is only fair to say that it is Democrats who are directly responsible for most of these impositions on our time and integrity.

He said, “Now, I want to be clear! I am not against reasonable attempts to secure the ballot.  We understand that there has (sic) to be rules in place.  But I am against requiring an ID that millions of Americans don’t have.  That shouldn’t suddenly prevent you from exercising your right to vote.  So, yes, we’re right to be on guard against voter fraud.  Voter fraud would impinge on our democracy, as well.  We don’t want folks voting that shouldn’t be voting.  We all agree on that. Let’s stipulate to that, as the lawyers say.”

Unfortunately, with an attorney general like Eric Holder, Obama can stipulate all he wants to. It means about as much as a doctor stipulating that a patient suffers from a terminal, but curable, disease, but then prescribes no course of treatment. Eric Holder has been handed irrefutable evidence of vote fraud crimes by Democrats, all of which have been filed in the “round file.”

Then, suggesting to his gullible listeners that vote fraud is not a problem, he offered a few statistics. He said, “One recent study found only 10 cases of alleged voter impersonation in 12 years… 10 cases.  Another analysis found that, out of 197 million votes cast for federal elections between 2002 and 2005, only 40 voters… out of 197 million… were indicted for fraud…”

Since a great many Democratic precincts regularly produce far more than ten cases of in-person voter impersonations, the people who put words on Obama’s teleprompter must have searched long and hard to find a source that would attest to only 10 cases in the entire United States in a 12 year period. Since Obama failed to cite the source for his statistics, one might suspect that they came either from Eric Holder or from the PR office at the Democrat National Committee.

It apparently escaped Obama’s attention that, in 2012, in precincts all across the country, in major cities with heavy Democratic majorities and powerful Democratic machines, Mitt Romney was completely “skunked,” receiving not a single vote out of hundreds of thousands of votes cast. This, of course, is not only a statistical improbability, it is a statistical impossibility, but it went completely unchallenged by Romney and the Republican National Committee.

Giving a tip-of-the-hat to a former racist Democrat president, Obama told his nearly all-black audience that, at the time Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, some of his advisors were recommending caution, saying, “Well, all right, just wait.  You’ve done a big thing now; let’s let the dust settle, don’t stir folks up.” But Obama quotes Johnson as replying, “No, no, I can’t wait.  We’ve got to press forward and pass the Voting Rights Act.  About this there can and should be no argument.  Every American citizen must have an equal right to vote.”

Of course, that represents only Obama’s sanitized version of what Johnson may have said at the time. According to two Democratic governors who flew with him on Air Force One, what LBJ actually said was, “I’ll have those n_ _ _ ers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

The point is, African-Americans are rarely told the truth about where white Democrats actually stand on the issue of race. If the Republican Party had leaders worthy of the title, they would begin to tell them the truth, treating them as if they are grownups.

To the best of my knowledge, only one fraudulent voter in the entire state of Ohio went to jail for vote fraud in 2013. According to a story in the Cincinnati Enquirer, Melowese Richardson was convicted of voting 5 times for Barack Obama in 2012. She was released on March 11, 2014, after serving only eight months of a five year sentence on the grounds that she is mentally ill… a condition not uncommon among Obama voters.

It’s long past time that Republicans moved forward with a national voter registration database, tying every registered voter to a name, address, birth date, and Social Security number. It’s also long past time that we began making a lot more Melowese Richardsons, whether Democrats or Republicans. And if we don’t have Republican leaders with the stomach for the task, then it’s time to get new Republican leadership. We don’t have to jail all Democrats who commit fraud… we could never build enough jail cells… we only have to jail enough of them to make the rest wonder if perhaps they’ll be the next to hear a knock on their door.

RELATED STORY: Judges and Voter ID If the state provides free IDs, is there really an “unjustified burden” on poor voters? 

“Mayday” fits Christ’s 7-Fold Warning for Huge Geopolitical Events in Mid-May

A CIA expert has damning evidence of impeachable crimes by Obama, Clinton and others that are expected to precipitate a man-made calamity and martial law to maintain control warning of impending loss if we aren’t ready for a crisis and chaos in America.  The CIA expert interview on TruNews.com is linked below.

Christ’s 7-fold warning of sudden events that come as a thief appear to fit what could be reality, reminding us also of “sudden destruction” coming as a thief in 1 Thessalonians 5:3. Christ even said He would come as a thief if we don’t watch. Rev 3:3.

This is an invisible coming in judgment as clued by His seven examples prior to His visible return in Matthew 25:31. The cost of being prepared is not large; failure on these points could mean huge loss.

  1. We could be hungry when the fig tree withers (Matthew 24:32), even as Christ was hungry when He looked for food, Matt 21:19. His warning included “when summer is nigh”–summer is nigh in May. The fig tree parable was about the Jewish nation then, but it applies to the “Christian” nation now that aborts its unborn, and approves perverted marriages “as in the days of Lot [Sodom],” Luke 17:28.
  2. We could lose family or friends in the sudden destruction (1Thess 5:1-6), even “as in the days of Noah….[when] the Flood came and took them all away,” Matthew 24:37. The ark was big enough for all who wanted to enter. After the animals came in pairs to enter, many may have wanted to go in, but fear of being laughed at or looking stupid stopped them. Crazy may be ok!
  3. We could lose our freedom when “one shall be taken [to a FEMA camp?], and the other left,” Matt 24:40. An “Emergency Police State” can come easily with a man-made disaster like the earthquakes that destroyed Fukushima and Haita. If you don’t understand how those were man-made, type “HAARP, Ventura” into YouTube.
  4. We could have our house broken by the thief’s coming, (Matt 24:43) because we don’t know when to “watch” (or what it means); similar reference by the apostle Paul in 1Thessalonians 5.
  5. We could lose our comfort as “the evil servant begins to smite his fellow servants.” Matt 24:48. Islam teaches eradication of infidels to be ready for the Madi. Revelation 9:7,8 describes “faces like men (beards) and hair like women (long hair). This may seem remote, but there are many areas in the U.S. where Sharia Law is making headway.
  6. We could lose our destiny as the foolish women who weren’t ready in Matt 25:6. Using the Rule of 1st Use [where a word or phrase is 1st found in the Bible, it often has a meaning or context to consider for end-times because Christ is he Word…”the First and the Last,” Rev 1:11 so the cry at midnight in Matt 25:6 is understood from the midnight cry in Egypt at Passover, Exod 12:29. If we doubt the history of the Exodus, we can type “chariot wheels, Red Sea” into YouTube.
  7. We could lose our money as the slothful servant who wasn’t prepared for his lord’s return in Matt 25:26. Many warn us of impending bank failures. There is low risk to taking our money out of the bank when we might lose it if something huge happens.

Each of the above examples fit with the execution of judgment on a deserving nation or persons, but we forget the biblical time to execute judgment was Passover, Exodus 12:12. Several of the clues point to 2nd Passover, a provision in the biblical law for Passover in May, Numbers 9:10,11.

Examples 6 and 7 above are punctuated by Christ’s saying again, “Watch…for the kingdom of heaven is like a man traveling to a far country.” Matt 25:14.  After winter, Israelites traveled in the spring, but if they couldn’t get back for Passover, the law [in effect till heaven and earth passes Matt 5:18] specified  Passover the 2nd spring month (May) as a time.

be awake smallPassover was a time when animal sacrifices were fulfilled by Christ, proclaimed as “the Lamb of God” by a Jewish prophet, John 1:29. But while Passover is no longer a time for animal sacrifices that prefigure judgment, it is still a time to “watch and pray” that God will pass over us in judgment.

Watch is translated from the Greek word, gregoreo, meaning to be awake. We can’t be awake every night, but Passover was the only time it was commanded of all, Exodus 12:10, Matt 26:38-41.

Wednesday evening, May 14/15 is the night that most churches have a prayer meeting. It would be wonderful if churches world-wide would understand the issues, to watch (be awake) and pray that God will pass over them as they seek biblical answers to what is impending.

I believe readers should hear the interview by TruNews’ Chuck Wiles of the CIA expert to understand that America as we’ve known it, is gone, and civil war may be impending.

Florida: Education the Defining Issue in the 2014 Governor Race?

On Tuesday, November 4th Floridians will go to the polls to select their governor. Currently there are thirty-two active candidates running. The gubernatorial race is the only statewide race in Florida. So what will make one of these candidates standout from the crowded field? If a recent election is any indicator, the defining issue will be – education – specifically Common Core State Standards (CCSS). People are rising up in Florida and across the country to stop Common Core. As George Will wrote, “Viewed from Washington, opposition to the Common Core State Standards Initiative still seems as small as the biblical cloud that ariseth out of the sea, no larger than a man’s hand. Soon, however, this education policy will fill a significant portion of the political sky.”

Chris Quackenbush in her column Common Core: The Chain of Betrayal notes, “Political battles are now being won and lost on the education issue as in the Florida Congressional District 19, where an ‘outsider’ Curt Clawson, beat sitting State Senate Majority Leader Lizbeth Benaquisto by 12 points largely because of her duplicity on Common Core.  Her conservative base was not fooled by her superficial conversion after sponsoring a bill in 2013 to implement Common Core as she is allied with Jeb Bush.  His tentacles reach far in Florida where he is a major donor and supporter of many State Legislators including Governor Scott.”

Quackenbush states, “Common Core is the final nail in the coffin of American Exceptionalism.” That’s how heated the debate has become in Florida.

Associated Press reporter Thomas Beaumont wrote, “Raising U.S. educational expectations through national goals was a priority for Republican President George W. Bush. But many of his would-be successors in the GOP are calling for just the opposite of government-set rules, and it’s splitting the party as the GOP class of 2016 presidential hopefuls takes shape.” Common Core is splitting the party between those who support Jeb Bush and those who support parents, teachers, administrators, academics and citizens who favor keeping local control of education.

While Florida Democrats want to focus on income equality, the minimum wage, legalizing marijuana and abortion rights, and the Republican Party of Florida focused on the economy, jobs and tax reform, the defining issue remains public education.

Will the Florida race for governor in 2014 be a harbinger for the 2016 race for president? Those interested in a winning formula will, by all indications, be keeping a close eye on Florida on November 4th.

Candidates for Florida Governor

Candidate Status Primary General
GibsonKyle Chaderwick (NPA) Active
AdeshinaYinka Abosede (REP) Active
AllenJoe  (NPA) Active
AndersonRubin Lewis (NPA) Active
AngiolilloVincent Dominic (REP) Active
CristCharlie  (DEM) Active
Cuevas-NeunderElizabeth  (REP) Active
DevineTimothy Michael (REP) Active
FraleighJames Edward (INT) Active
GazetasVassilia  (NPA) Active
GigerHerman Lee (NPA) Active
GriffisMark D. (NPA) Active
HorwathJefferson L. (NPA) Active
KhavariFarid A (NPA) Active
LeeMonroe  (DEM) Active
LipnerRyan Adam (DEM) Active
MartellyMarcelle  (DEM) Active
McCoyRoland  (DEM) Active
MurrayPaul  (WRI) Active
ReedC. C. (NPA) Active
RichNan H. (DEM) Active
RolleLeonard  (NPA) Active
SamuelBerthram B. (REP) Active
ScottRichard L. (REP)  *Incumbent Active
SmithDr. Joe  (REP) Active
SmithJohn Wayne (LPF) Active
StewartJessica Lana (DEM) Active
TolbertCharles Frederick (NPA) Active
TrujilloLesther  (NPA) Active
WyllieAdrian  (LPF) Active
YarrowAtlee David (SPF) Active
ZapataRandy  (DEM) Active

Active candidate list courtesy of the Sarasota Supervisor of Elections.

RELATED STORIES:

The Dying of the Light: How Common Core Damages Poetry – by Esolen, Highfill, Stotsky
AP: Common Core a Defining Issue for GOP 2016 Hopefuls
Revolt: Common Core gets gored

Racist Offsets now accepted by NAACP

The LA chapter of the NAACP is refunding Donald Sterling’s contributions, for now at least. In a public statement Monday afternoon Chapter President Leon Jenkins said he was open to the idea of talking with Mr. Sterling, to negotiate a price for Racist Offsets no doubt.

“God teaches us to forgive, and the way I look at it, after a sustained period of proof to the African American community that those words don’t reflect his heart, I think there’s room for forgiveness. I wouldn’t be a Christian if I said there wasn’t.”

Most glorious compassion indeed. Mr. Jenkins continued…

“We are negotiating with him about giving more moneys to African American students at UCLA, and so we are in preliminary discussions.”

You read it right, comrades… “negotiations”. Mr. Sterling, with an undoubtedly generous “Racist Offsets” donation will be forgiven for his misdeeds. Let no racist rant go unfunded, comrades. 

“Mr. Sterling has given out a tremendous amount of scholarships, he has invited numerous African American kids to summer camps, and his donations are bigger than other sports franchises… “

As long as the Racist Offsets continue to roll in, Mr. Sterling’s rants will be forgiven by the NAACP. As they should be.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/47WR-FrNYew[/youtube]

The 2014 state of wind energy: Desperately seeking subsidies by Marita Noon

With the growing story coming out of Ukraine, the ongoing search for the missing Malaysian jet, the intensifying Nevada cattle battle, and the new announcement about the additional Keystone pipeline delay, little attention is being paid to the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind energy—or any of the other 50 lapsed tax breaks the Senate Finance Committee approved earlier this month. But, despite the low news profile, the gears of government continue to grind up taxpayer dollars.

The Expiring Provisions Improvement Reform and Efficiency Act (EXPIRE) did not originally include the PT; however, prior to the committee markup hearing on April 3, Senators Charles Grassley (R-IA), Michael Bennet (D-CO), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) pushed for an amendment to add a 2-year PTC extension. The tax extender package passed out of committee and has been sent to the Senate floor for debate. There, its future is uncertain.

“If the bill becomes law,” reports the Energy Collective, “it will allow wind energy developers to qualify for tax credits if they begin construction by the end of 2015.” The American Wind Energy Association’s (AWEA) website calls on Congress to: “act quickly to retroactively extend the PTC.”

The PTC is often the deciding factor in determining whether or not to build a wind farm. According to Bloomberg, wind power advocates fear: “Without the restoration of the subsidies, worth $23 per megawatt hour to turbine owners, the industry might not recover, and the U.S. may lose ground in its race to reduce dependence on fossil fuels driving global warming.” \

NRELThe National Renewable Energy Laboratory released a report earlier this month affirming the importance of the subsidies to the wind industry. It showed that the PTC has been critical to the development of the U.S. wind power industry. The report also found: PTC “extension options that would ramp down by the end of 2022 appear to be insufficient to support recent levels of deployment.… Extending the production tax credit at its historical level could provide the best opportunity to sustain strong U.S. wind energy installation and domestic manufacturing.”

The PTC was originally part of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. It has expired many times— most recently at the close of 2013. The last-minute 2012 extension, as a part of the American Tax Relief Act, included an eligibility criteria adjustment that allows projects that began construction in 2013, and maintain construction through as long as 2016, to qualify for the 10-year tax credit designed to establish a production incentive. Previously, projects would have had to be producing electricity at the time the PTC expired to qualify.

Thomas Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, which represents the interests of oil, coal, and natural gas companies, called the 2013 expiration of the wind PTC “a victory for taxpayers.” He explained: “The notion that the wind industry is an infant that needs the PTC to get on its feet is simply not true. The PTC has overstayed its welcome and any attempt to extend it would do a great disservice to the American people.”

As recently as 2006-2007, “the wind PTC had no natural enemies,” states a new report on the PTC’s future. “The Declining Appetite for the Wind PTC” report points to the assumption that “all extenders are extended eventually, and that enacting the extension is purely a matter of routine, in which gridlock on unrelated topics is the only source of uncertainty and delay.” The report then concludes: “That has been a correct view in past years.”

The report predicts that the PTC will follow “the same political trajectory as the ethanol mandate and the ethanol blenders’ tax credit before it.” The mandate remains—albeit in a slightly weakened state—and the tax credit is gone: “Ethanol no longer needed the blenders’ tax credit because it had the strong support of a mandate (an implicit subsidy) behind it.”

The PTC once enjoyed support from some in the utility industry that needed it to bolster wind power development to meet the mandates. Today, utilities have met their state mandates—or come close enough, the report points out: “their state utility commissioners will not allow them to build more.” It is important to realize that the commissioners are appointed or elected to protect the ratepayers and insure that the rates charged by the utilities are fair and as low as possible. Because of the increased cost of wind energy over conventional sources, commissioners won’t allow any more than is necessary to meet the mandates passed by the legislatures.

The abundance of natural gas and subsequent low price has also hurt wind energy’s predicted price parity. South Dakota Gov. Dennis Daugaard (R), in Bloombergsaid: “If gas prices weren’t so cheap, then wind might be able to compete on its own.” David Crane, chief executive officer of NRG Energy Inc.—which builds both gas and renewable power plants—agrees: “Cheap gas has definitely made it harder to compete.” With the subsidy, companies were able to propose wind projects “below the price of gas.” Without the PTC, Stephen Munro, an analyst at New Energy Finance, confirms: “we don’t expect wind to be at cost parity with gas.”

The changing conditions combined with “wide agreement that the majority of extenders are special interest handouts, the pet political projects of a few influential members of Congress,” mean that “the wind PTC is not a sure bet for extension.” Bloomberg declares: “Wind power in the U.S. is on a respirator.” Mike Krancer, who previously served as secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, in an article in Roll Callstates: “Washington’s usual handout to keep the turbines spinning may be harder to win this time around.”

Despite the claim of “Loud support for the PTC” from North American Windpower (NAW), the report predicts “political resistance.” NAW points to letters from 144 members of Congress urging colleagues to “act quickly to revive the incentives.” Twenty-six Senate members signed the letter to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR), and 118 House members signed a similar letter to Speaker John Boehner (R-OH). However, of the 118, only six were Republicans—which, even if the PTC extension makes it out of the Senate, points to the difficulty of getting it extended in the Republican-controlled House.

Bloomberg cites AWEA as saying: “the Republican-led House of Representatives may not support efforts to extend the tax credits before the November campelection.” This supports the view stated in the report. House Ways & Means Committee Chairman David Camp (R-MI) held his first hearing on tax extenders on April 8. He only wants two of the 55 tax breaks continued: small business depreciation and the R & D tax credit. The report states: “Camp says that he will probably hold hearings on which extenders should be permanent through the spring and into the summer. He hasn’t said when he would do an extenders proposal himself, but our guess is that he will wait until after the fall elections. …We think the PTC is most endangered if Republicans win a Senate majority in the fall.”

So, even if the PTC survives the current Senate’s floor debate (Senator Pat Toomey [R-PA] offered an amendment that would have entirely done away with the PTC), it is only the “first step in a long journey” and, according to David Burton, a partner at law firm Akin Gump Hauer and Feld, is “unlikely on its own to create enough confidence to spur investment in the development of new projects.” Plus, the House will likely hold up its resurrection.

Not to mention the growing opposition to wind energy due to the slaughter of birds and bats—including the protected bald and golden eagles. Or, growing fears about health impacts, maintenance costs, and abandoned turbines.

All of these factors have likely led Jeffrey Immelt, chief executive officer of General Electric Co.—the biggest U.S. turbine supplier—to recently state: “We’re planning for a world that’s unsubsidized. Renewables have to find a way to get to the grid unsubsidized.”

Perhaps this time, the PTC is really dead, leaving smaller manufacturers desperately seeking subsidies.

About the Author: Marita Noon

Marita NoonThe author of Energy FreedomMarita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). Together they work to educate the public and influence policy makers regarding energy, its role in freedom, and the American way of life. Combining energy, news, politics, and, the environment through public events, speaking engagements, and media, the organizations’ combined efforts serve as America’s voice for energy.

Secure property rights: Hold government to the law by Ron Arnold

Cliven Bundy marched into my life one Friday morning in January 1992 in a protest bound for a federal courthouse in Las Vegas. He held up one side of a street-width banner that asked, “Has the West been won or has the fight just begun?”

To my great relief, just as Bundy promised, nearly 200 ranchers from all over the state marched behind him, yelling “Property rights!” Nearly a mile later, the marchers fell silent and filed into the courtroom where Wayne Hage of Pine Creek Ranch faced arraignment for the felony of cleaning brush out of his ditches without a U.S. Forest Service permit.

The Forest Service had already confiscated Hage’s cattle and left him bankrupt, just as the Bureau of Land Management would try with Bundy 22 years later.

Hage had already filed a lawsuit against the Forest Service in the U.S. Court of Claims, just as Bundy now has cause to do against the BLM – last week, during their failed attempt to confiscate Bundy’s cattle, agents wantonly bulldozed his water supply into oblivion without court authority.

Wayne Hage did not stand in that courtroom alone because I was honor bound to prevent it – I had published his 1989 book, Storm Over Rangelands: Private Rights in Federal Lands, which unleashed the federal fury.

The message terrified abusive bureaucrats: There are private rights in federal lands – vested rights, not privileges.

His book, the product of three intensive, grueling years consulting with dozens of experts and sifting through many archives, found the dirty little secret that could destroy the abusive power of all federal Western land agencies – by making them obey their own laws.

It was so stunning that a sitting Supreme Court justice secretly sent Wayne a message marveling at his shining intellect – burnished with a masters degree in animal science and honed by academic colloquies as a trustee of the University of Nevada Foundation – and warning of the titanic battle to come.

How true: Hage was convicted of brush cutting but acquitted on appeal. His own lawsuit against the United States took almost 20 years, but proved there are private rights in federal land. He died of cancer in 2006 before he could see how great a victory he had won – and how the battle is still just beginning, as Bundy foresaw.

Wayne’s son, Wayne N. Hage, now manages Pine Creek, and his daughter Ramona Hage Morrison is his intellectual heir. She helped research his book, lived the courthouse agonies with her father and assisted with his seminars on protecting ranchers’ rights. Morrison said:

Private rights in federal lands were recognized in an 1866 water law. It says, Bundy cattle“… whenever, by priority of possession, rights to the use of water have vested and accrued, and the same are recognized and acknowledged by the local customs, laws, and the decisions of courts, the possessors and owners of such vested rights shall be maintained and protected in the same.”

That Act was passed a long time ago, but every federal land law since then contains a clause with language similar to, “Nothing in this Act shall be construed to impair any vested right in existence on the effective date of this Act.”

Most ranchers don’t know that and federal agencies exploit their ignorance with harassment that runs them off the land. Actually, understanding vested rights is not too hard – they’re absolute rights not subject to cancellation – but proving up those rights by assembling your chain of title and other technicalities and then making the government protect them is very hard.

The agencies know they don’t own the water rights, so their lawyers fight viciously with misdirection to save their empire from the owners. Ranchers lose in court because they don’t know how to prove up their vested rights and they don’t get lawyers who know the precision required to plead a vested rights case. Very few lawyers know.

Ranchers, get smart. Don’t assume anything. You probably believe a lot of things that aren’t true. Get busy and prove up your vested rights as we did. Get a court to adjudicate them as we did. Yes, your whole life will be one battle after another, like ours. Seek help to develop an army of supporters, as we did. You can shout freedom slogans all you want, but only the courts can destroy the root power of federal abuse.

The BLM has now withdrawn. Bundy has his moment of triumph. The cries of victory are thrilling.

But we know it’s not over yet. The BLM did not leave because angry citizens outnumbered their assault force by 100 to 1. Nothing has touched the BLM’s ability to return.

Get real: the BLM invaders left when it got ugly because it’s an election year and they’re all Democrats. They’ll be back.

Supreme Court 3Property rights defenders can stop them. We can go on the attack in the courts with organized funding to adjudicate protection for every last vested right in the American West. We have the laws to do it. We now need organization, money, brains, and the will to make it happen. Every vested right that we protect will destroy that much federal power to abuse.

Let no ranching family go unprotected.

That’s the hard way, but it’s the only way that works. Stay on target: the federal power to abuse must be destroyed.

EDITORS NOTE: This article originally appeared in the Washington Examiner.

About the Author: Ron Arnold

Ron Arnold is executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.

Grover Norquist: The Wizard of K Street — “The LOVE of Money is the Root of all EVIL”

khan_norquist-320x240

To learn more about Grover Norquist click on the photo.

BAD GUYS, GOVERNMENT LIES, MUSLIM SPIES: THE WIZARD OF “K” STREET EPISODE 1 – “The LOVE of Money is the Root of all EVIL”

In episode one we establish that the most powerful “un-elected” man in Washington LOVES money above all else. Grover Norquist eats, drinks, works, thinks, plans and sleeps – MONEY. Money is what defines Grover and directs Grover. The more money the better. Forget about Republican principles, forget about Ronald Reagan and his three legged stool, forget about friends and family. Remember, Grover = MONEY, the more the better.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/qO6FxkZiXjk[/youtube]

FAQ’S

WHAT IS A MICRO-SERIES?

A micro-series is our new term for a compilation of very short, to the point videos which make a fundamental point and stand alone, but when woven together form a complete investigative expose’ documentary. We plan to release a new episode each week.

WHY DID YOU SELECT GROVER NORQUIST TO EXPOSE AS A BAD GUY?

That’s easy! If half of what has been written and discovered about Grover is true than this guy is clearly an ideological enemy of the state and NOT the Republican savior that many believe. Therefore, he must be de-legitimized before his various Boards and completely rejected by the dopey politicians who are beholden to him for their political careers.

IF NO ONE HAS BEEN ABLE TO DISLODGE GROVER’S DEEP ROOTS OF INFLUENCE IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WHAT MAKES YOU THINK YOU CAN?

The way we see it, if we are able to disrupt, disable or destroy Grover’s influence operation in America, the country is better off. But if we are not than we will have tons of material for our “edutainment” programs where we educate through entertainment. And what better subject for ridicule than a short-fat-bearded man who loves guns almost as much as he loves money, idolizes terrorists and is probably a “secret” Muslim, collects “Grover” dolls and has a black-board-screechy speaking voice that ought to be used at GITMO to torture terrorists!

Look, when your job is to fight, Bad Guys, Government Lies and Muslim Spies…you gotta have some fun!

France: The Front National’s dark underside

Nigel Farage, head of Britain’s UKIP, has flatly rejected an alliance with France’s Front National. While granting FN president Marine Le Pen’s courage and perspicacity on some crucial issues, Farage says she has failed to rid the party of its endemic anti-Semitism. Coupled with an earlier decision announced by Søren Espersen of the Danish People’s Party, this effectively dashes Marine Le Pen’s hopes of presiding over an influential 7-country Eurexit group at the EU Parliament.
A review of material readily available in French lends credibility to Farage’s evaluation.

Midway between the Municipal and the European elections, Front National VP Florian Philippot says the FN is France’s number one party and Marine Le Pen will be president in 2017. For all the ballyhoo over the FN’s inexorable ascension, the party won a small handful of municipalities, none of its bigwigs were elected (including Philippot who ran for mayor of Forbach), and the opposition UMP inflicted an unprecedented defeat on the Socialists without any FN alliances. Philippot, chairman of the European campaign, promises they’ll send 15 to 20 deputies to the EU Parliament where they’ll lead a strong Eurexit coalition and liberate France from the EU and the euro. While other parties will certainly indulge in opportunistic euroskepticism during the campaign, says Philippot, “We have ideas and convictions.”i Polls are showing a too close to call race for 1st and 2nd position, with the Socialists in third place.

Is the Front National a political party… or a posture? Founded in 1972, the FN was a fringe group with virtually no experience in government, indelibly colored by the foul mouth of its leader, Jean-Marie Le Pen. The election of heir apparent Marine Le Pen as president in January 2011 earned overnight legitimacy for the long decried Front National. The cordon sanitaire was spliced. No political broadcast is complete without an FN voice snidely dismissing the two major parliamentary parties—UMP and PS—as a Siamese twin UMPS that never keeps its promises. The FN is a double-edged sword. Issues like national identity, security, laïcité, or defense against Islamization are labeled “FN.” If the UMP tackles those issues, it is accused of “Lepenization” And the FN, claiming ownership of these issues, draws voters away from the UMP. This contributed largely to the defeat of Nicolas Sarkozy’s 2012 re-election bid.

While the notoriously provocative father has remained honorary president of the FN, the daughter claims to have banished unsavory ideas and elements that—unfairly–justified its “demonization.” Cleansed of anti-Semitism, negationism, racism and other reprehensible traits associated with the “Far Right Populist” strain of postwar European politics, the Front National poses as the only line of defense of the West against Islamization, EU tyranny, globalization, cheap Chinese merchandise, rampant capitalism, the banks, the international oligarchy that exploits the hardworking little man… and what other evils?

According to an investigation published in January 2014 by Frédéric Haziza, Vol au-dessus d’un nid de fachos [Flight over a nest of fascists]ii the Front National gravitates in a “Populist Far Right” constellation that includes the skinhead Serge Ayoub, the intellectual Alain Soral, the ex-comic Dieudonné, the PR wizard Frédéric Chatillon, and assorted like-minded personalities. Members and leaders of these groups fall in and out with each other, conveniently allowing them to disavow specific reprehensible acts or associations, but their core principles are largely compatible: Third Reich nostalgia, negationism, obsessive hatred of Jews/Zionists, rejection of capitalism and parliamentary democracy. Historically and currently, these groups maintain close financial and ideological ties with Arab-Muslim powers: Jean-Marie Le Pen was a friend and ally of Saddam Hussein, today’s National Socialists [a more accurate designation, in my opinion, than “populist Far Right”] are tied to the Iranian and Syrian regimes, Hezbullah, and their ilk… They speak out against immigration and Islamization, hang out with homegrown jihadis, and woo banlieue youth to their cause. The convergence of these ideas, emotions, and ambitions was manifest in the Day of Wrath on January 26th.iii And in the huge crowds that rush to attend Dieudonné’s “shows” (in fact Jew-hating rallies) plus the millions who click on his Youtubes.

Frédéric Chatillon (former president of GUD Groupe Union et défense)iv is a close advisor of Marine Le Pen. His PR firm, Riwal [http://www.riwal.fr/], handles communications, events, and other FN campaign operations. Through the Front’s micro-party “Jeanne,” Riwal makes interest-beating loans and sells (obligatory) campaign kits to FN candidates. Through another branch of Riwal [http://www.riwalsyria.fr/contact.htm ] Chatillon handles PR for the Syrian government, generating annual income of some €150,000. An additional Riwal site [INFOSyrie [http://www.infosyrie.fr/] counters disinformation about the Syrian regime.v Chatillon’s friendship with the Syrian General Mustapha Tlassvi and his son Manaf is common knowledge.vii When Manaf defected, Chatillon published a harsh note accusing him of betraying Bashar and the troops killed in combat.

Questioned about her association with Chatillon,viii Marine Le Pen snapped back, “Frédéric Haziza, is a monomaniac, he sees Nazis everywhere, there’s no Nazi problem, none!” She says Frédéric Chatillon is a friend and a very competent professional. She admits he was on the Far Right when he was in his 20s. Adding, “Who wasn’t? Or the Far Left?” What does she think of the Anelka affair? She thinks it’s number 1,013 on the list of priorities for French people. Florian Philippot says Manuel Valls (then Interior Minister) is obsessed with Dieudonné; the FN doesn’t defend Dieudonné, it defends freedom of speech and condemns the censorship of Dieudonné’s country-wide tour. Nicolas Anelka, fined by the FIFA and kicked off the Woolwich soccer team after celebrating a goal with a quenelle, says Valls is influenced by his wife [who is Jewish.]ix

Chatillon is quotedx as saying the quenelle is “… amusing, it means ‘up your ass,’ It’s the new anarchism.” On Soral, who walked out of the FN in 2011 because he wasn’t given the place he wanted on the electoral list: “When we talk about Jews he doesn’t say anything anti-Semitic, he’s like me, against the lobby and against Israel.” (Soral claims the Mohamed Merah affair is a Franco-Zionist plot to sully Islam; a sort of “cut-rate 9/11.”)

Youthful excess? Chatillon, says Haziza,xi hangs out in Iranian circles and is an agent for Hezbollah. He met personally with Sheikh Nasrallah. (This is confirmed by reliable sources). In 2006 Chatillon brought Dieudonné, Alain Soral, Thierry Meyssan, and Ahmed Moualek (president of “La Banlieue s’exprime”) to meet with his friends in Syria and Lebanon.xii The trip was in large part financed by the Tlass family. Subsequently Dieudonné made four trips to Iran, and also hooked up with Khadafi in Libya. Soral, Meyssan, Chatillon, and Jean-Marie Le Pen were photographed with Dieudonné after enjoying the show at his theater. Syrian funds financed the publication by Chatillon of revisionist texts subsequently translated into Arabic and distributed in the Middle East. In 2007, says Haziza, Chatillon and Alain Soral invested in “Local,” the bar/HQ of Serge Ayoub, chief of Jeunesses Nationalistes Révolutionnaires and Troisième Voie, dissolved by orders from the Interior Ministry after the killing of Clément Méric.xiii

Philippe Peninque, also former GUD, who handles finances for the Front National, co-founded “Egalité et Reconciliation” with Alain Soral in 2007. He is working on a strategy to attract banlieue youth to the FN for the 2017 presidential campaign. Axel Loustau, in charge of security for the FN, is also a former member of GUD.
Daniel Bensoussan-Bursztein, who has been researching and writing (Cahiers Bernard Lazare) on the Front National for years, traces (hypocritical) efforts by Marine Le Pen to attract Jewish support based on the notion of a common enemy—radical Islam. One episode concerns relations with the LDJ [Ligue de defense juive] After an FN delegation invited itself to a march in memory of Ilan Halimi,xiv an LDJ delegation appealed to Marine Le Pen, in vain, for an aggiornamento. On the contrary, she declared (in an interview with the European Jewish Press) that the victory of Hamas is not necessarily a bad thing, and Dieudonné is not a bad guy; she wanted to dialogue with him, not condemn him. Months later, some LDJ members checked out the FN’s Bleu Blanc Rouge Fête, only to see Dieudonné arrive as a VIP surrounded by supporters and FN bodyguards. A JDL fellow shouted at him: “anti-Semite.” One of the FN bodyguards retorted: “Go back to Israel.”

In January 2011, Louis Alliot (companion of Marine Le Pen and co- VP of the party) set up the Union des Français Juifs, directed by two contributors to the anti-Islamization site Riposte Laïque– Stéphane Shinazi, who helped organize Marine’s visit to the US, and Michael Ciardixv (who has since turned against the FN). Alliot made a visit to Israel, with special attention to residents of Judea-Samaria. At the same time, a notorious anti-Zionist, Edouard Ferraud, was serving as Marine’s international relations advisor. In the run-up to the 2012 presidential elections, Marine Le Pen made frequent statements in favor of Israel while heavily emphasizing the anti-Islamization arguments: Muslim street prayers, halal canteen meals, women in hijab, proliferation of mosque construction, insecurity… Bensoussan-Bursztein says Jews are making a big mistake if they think the FN is on their side. It is more acceptable today to profess anti-Islamization than to be openly anti-Semitic he says, but it’s window-dressing. Marie Le Pen’s de-demonization strategy is not a change of policy, values, or affinities; it is a change of image. Whatever small progress Marine Le Pen had made if, in fact, she truly intended to rid the party of its worst elements, is lost, says Bensoussan-Bursztein. Now she’s going in the other direction.

In any event, he says, the anti-Islamization discourse doesn’t prevent friendship with FN activists like the Islamist Nouari Khiari, who delighted in the 2002 defeat of Socialist Lionel Jospin, “friend of the Jews and Israel.” Farid Smahi, who slammed the door in 2011, accusing the FN of being “one of those nationalistic right-wing parties financed by Israel to practice anti-Islamism,” was recently convinced by Alliot and Jean-Marie Le Pen to reintegrate the party.xvi

(In another bizarre twist, Ludovine de la Rochère, current leader of the Manif’ pour Tous [mobilization against same sex marriage] was an honored guest at the Congress of the UOIF, France’s Muslim Brotherhood branch.)

Was the anti-Islamization discourse a club to beat Sarkozy’s UMP? Front National leaders clearly expressed their intention to destroy and replace the conservative opposition. Today, when François Hollande’s approval rating has sunk to 12%, the Front National is courting disgruntled Leftists, the unemployed, small businessmen, tradesmen, the little guys who think they’re getting a raw deal, impoverished pensioners, Eurexit nationalists… Without losing her grip on the anti-jihad vote, Marine Le Pen denies any hint of racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia behind the Front National’s “French-first” employment policy: “Naturalized immigrants are French, they will benefit just like any others.” Some will think she is skirting the issue. Others will remember the party’s strategy of wooing banlieue youth.
The interlocking affinities sketched out here can be verified from multiple sources. They suggest, at the very least, a confusion of values and interests in the heart of a party that claims to be the sole rampart against the destruction of French sovereignty and, by extension, the natural leader of the defense of Europe. Where is the bridge between these claims, brandished by dozens of unsavory fringe groups left in the wake of World War 2, and anti-jihad movements spawned in the ruins of the WTC?

List of References:

i Le Talk Figaro Orange
ii Haziza, Fréderic. Vol au-dessus d’un nid de fachos/ Dieudonné, Soral, Ayoub et les autres. Paris 2014. Fayard.
iii http://www.d-intl.com/2014/02/10/frances-united-front-of-jew-hatred/?lang=en
iv http://contresubversion.wordpress.com/2011/11/26/lautre-fn-de-frederic-chatillon/ According to this source, it was Chatillon who influenced the GUD to become radically anti-Zionist
v Idem : “He expressed support for Bashar al Assad : ‘The Zionist lobby (that gives orders to the French press) dreams of destabilizing your magnificent country. Those who participate directly or indirectly in those demonstrations are accomplices of the lobby.’ (We Are Syria Facebook page, 26 March 2011).”
vi Author of the blood libel saga The Matzoh of Zion
vii http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/la-revolte-syrienne/20120711.OBS6760/syrie-les-precieux-liens-francais-du-deserteur-tlass.html
viii Ruth el Krief, BFM TV, 27 February 2014
ix http://www.lejdd.fr/Sport/Football/Anelka-Valls-a-ete-sous-l-influence-de-sa-femme-sur-cette-affaire-de-quenelle-660165
x Haziza, p. 163, interview with Frédéric Chatillon , 4 October 2013
xi Idem p 114
xii Idem p. 93, http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/la-revolte-syrienne/20120711.OBS6760/syrie-les-precieux-liens-francais-du-deserteur-tlass.html
xiii http://www.d-intl.com/2013/06/12/young-neo-nazi-kills-young-anti-fascist-in-paris/?lang=en
xiv Cahiers Bernard Lazare N°321 December 2010
xv [personal conversation] Ciardi told Marine Le Pen she should visit Israel; it would stifle doubts about her commitment to ridding the party of remnants of anti-Semitism. She replied that she couldn’t do it yet.
xvi Cahiers BL N°336 March 2012

Benghazi emails show White House effort to protect Obama

The most disturbing aspect of this whole episode, aside from the murders of Ambassador Stevens and the others, was the fact that the Obama White House decided to blame the Internet video for the attack, thus making an indirect assault on the freedom of speech and a sidelong endorsement of Sharia blasphemy restrictions.

“Benghazi Emails Show White House Effort to Protect Obama,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, April 29, 2014:

Previously unreleased internal Obama administration emails show that a coordinated effort was made in the days following the Benghazi terror attacks to portray the incident as “rooted in [an] Internet video, and not [in] a broader failure or policy.”

Emails sent by senior White House adviser Ben Rhodes to other top administration officials reveal an effort to insulate President Barack Obama from the attacks that killed four Americans.

Rhodes sent this email to top White House officials such as David Plouffe and Jay Carney just a day before National Security Adviser Susan Rice made her infamous Sunday news show appearances to discuss the attack.

The “goal,” according to these emails, was “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure or policy.”

Rice came under fierce criticism following her appearances on television after she adhered to these talking points and blamed the attack on a little-watched Internet video.

The newly released internal White House e-mails show that Rice’s orders came from top Obama administration communications officials.

“[W]e’ve made our views on this video crystal clear. The United States government had nothing to do with it,” Rhodes wrote in the email, which was released on Tuesday by the advocacy group Judicial Watch.

“We reject its message and its contents,” he wrote. “We find it disgusting and reprehensible. But there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence. And we are working to make sure that people around the globe hear that message.”

Rhodes also suggested that Rice tout Obama’s reputation as “steady and statesmanlike.”

“I think that people have come to trust that President Obama provides leadership that is steady and statesmanlike,” he wrote. “There are always going to be challenges that emerge around the world, and time and again, he has shown that we can meet them.”

Also contained in the 41 pages of documents obtained by Judicial Watch is a Sep. 12, 2012 email from Payton Knopf, the former deputy spokesman at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.

In this communication, Knopf informs Rice that senior officials had already dubbed the Benghazi attack as “complex” and planned in advance. Despite this information, Rice still insisted that attacks were “spontaneous.”

The newly released cache of emails also appear to confirm that the CIA altered its original talking points on the attacks in the following days.

Then-CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell is identified as the person who heavily edited the critical fact sheet.

“The first draft apparently seemed unsuitable … because they seemed to encourage the reader to infer incorrectly that the CIA had warned about a specific attack on our embassy,” states one email. “Morell noted that these points were not good and he had taken a heavy hand to editing them. He noted that he would be happy to work with [then deputy chief of staff to Hillary Clinton] Jake Sullivan and Rhodes to develop appropriate talking points.”…

RELATED STORIES:

Benghazi emails rock DC: Expose ‘a cover-up of a cover-up,’ says Krauthammer
Egypt: Islamic jihadists threaten Pepsi
Arizona: Muslim claims Islamic law gives him right to kill wife
Abducted Nigerian schoolgirls auctioned off to Boko Haram jihadis for $12.45 each

Florida: Public school 7th grade Civics worksheet portrays Republicans negatively, Democrats positively

Below is a worksheet from a 7th grade civics class currently being taught in Martin County Public Schools. It describes the Democratic and Republican parties to public school students. The handout appears, on the surface, to portray Democrats in a positive light and Republicans negatively. There are several factual errors and omissions in the worksheet, noted by a relative of the student. The highlighted text was done by the student’s relative.

The worksheet portrays the Democrat party supporting “the ideas of equal rights” when in fact the Republican party voted in higher numbers for the Civil Rights Act and is the party of Lincoln, who freed the slaves. It explains that “Many support Democrats legislation to protect gays and lesbians against discrimination.” It does not explain what the consequences are to traditional marriage, or a persons health (HIV/AIDS), well-being and the community.

The worksheet states “Democrats believe that the environment needs protecting… with the help of government laws that prevent pollution, even if it means penalizing businesses that cause pollution”. It does not mention that the Environmental Protection Agency was created under Republican President Richard M. Nixon based upon the findings of the Ash Council in April of 1970. It also states Democrats believe in “a strong military”. Currently, President Obama, a Democrat, has reduced the US military strength to pre-WW II levels. The military was reduced after WW II by President Harry Truman, and again after the end of the Cold War by President Bill Clinton, both Democrats.

Republicans are portrayed as supporting “the rights of business owners large and small”, “that the government should have a limited role in daily life”, “oppose the right to abortion”, “oppose same-sex marriage”, and in general “support gun ownership rights.” All are true but not for every Republican and conversely not for every Democrat. The handout states Republicans “favor a strong military”, “support school choice” “charter schools”. It states that Republicans “do not support a universal heath care system like those found in Europe and Canada.” No context is provided to explain how Europeans and Canadians fair under a universal health care system, nor does it explain the current issues with the Affordable Healthcare Act.

A request for comment has been sent to Martin County Superintendent Laurie Gaylord. Any reply will be published as an update to this column.

Martin County 7th grade civics class political parties

For a larger view click on the image.

RELATED STORY: AP: Common Core a Defining Issue for GOP 2016 Hopefuls