In Beijing, Trump Meets a Man Who Just Quietly Achieves

/in , , , /by

By NSS staff

Imagine being lost somewhere and not even knowing what country you are in. Pretty scary, wouldn’t you say?

And yet that is precisely where most of us Westerners are in our world with regard to where we stand, to the unseen powers holding sway over us and to the powers in the East that oppose the Western elites. Most imagine that Washington (or Brussels) is the centre of the power that protects us and that the US dollar (or euro) pays for this protection and always will. As for the world of ideas, we imagine that there is this thing called “Western values” and it is the centre of our intellectual and moral universe, the collection of all those things we hold dear and are prepared to defend against their enemies – as long as no blood is shed.

We generally believe that there is this thing called freedom of speech, and yet if a Western pastor dared to say from the sanctuary of his pulpit that marriage is designed by God solely as a union between a man and a woman, he would soon be challenged, gingerly at first perhaps but shortly a group of defenders of Western values would likely descend on him and his family demanding that he cease and desist from preaching this obsolete truth and would make it clear in no uncertain terms that they are not kidding. There is no longer debate, just “settled truths.” But the people are not the ones doing the settling.

Thus, paradoxically, while “Western values” includes the concept of free speech, this only applies to speech confined to the narrowing realm of “Western values,” which, under a law that is unwritten but strictly enforced by radical members of the populace, some speech is in fact unavailable to ordinary people.

And this is because the entire West is locked into an ideology, which New Silk Strategies has, in a reference paper, posted in the following 3 parts:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

To recap, the West dances to the tune of the radical school of the Enlightenment, which in the real world of past centuries turned out to be anything but enlightened. It led in fact to the bloody French Revolution and indirectly to Bonaparte’s bloody romp across Europe and Russia. It is an ideology that could be aptly called Benighted Enlightenment or to coin a neologism, Benightenment.

The ideas represented in this benighted enlightenment deny common sense, traditions – Christianity and traditional family in particular – traditional manufacturing-based economics, morality, decency and human kindness and sentiment, and promote a foreign policy that is devoid of any palpable diplomacy, being designed to punish countries that resist “Western values” and to avenge the West of any who dare defy its sacrosanct systems, particularly the banking system, or sully any of numerous economic, political or military interests of the US.
The problem for the “Belightened” Ones is that, while in their tiny make-believe world, all traditions must go, there still persist in their ambiance nuisance countries that nurture traditions, including the most offensive, ie, Christian faith and a traditional definition of marriage and family. Not because traditional methods fail to solve problems – because in fact, they work – but because they see these as hangovers of a Christian world that must be destroyed at all costs because Christianity was peopled by people and not saints, proving that God had failed them. It was a baby to be discarded with the bath water because the bath water is dirty, so the baby must be not clean but defective.

Unlike traditional governments, the US defends its economy not so much through economic development and growth but more by attempting to impoverish others in a zero-sum game based on the belief that wealth is finite, so that there can only be winners and losers and no such thing as a win-win situation. Thus for the US, competition from other countries is more of a declaration of war than a challenge to be met with improvements and growth in the US economy. There’s only room for one of us in this town.

The biggest offenders at this time are Russia and China, who reject this aggressive US ethnocentrism and treat competitors, even those like the US that seek conflict, with respect, calling them partners.

It was in this context that Donald Trump’s former chief White House strategist Steve Bannon told the Economist in an interview shortly after his dismissal (or resignation, depending on whose version you believe): “Let’s go screw up One Belt One Road.” (Bannon apparently did not know that the latest designation was Belt and Road Initiative, BRI). Briefly, the BRI is a massive Chinese infrastructure project designed in part to lift both China and Africa, for example, out of poverty.

Bannon’s statement can be understood and interpreted only in the context briefly described above. It was not just a reflection of his personal ideology but in fact is perfectly in line with the West’s irrational benighted “enlightenment” ideology.

This is the Western world where you are now, a world where hate holds sway over love and profound ignorance over knowledge and wisdom.

But there is a new sheriff and deputy in town.

In the context of Trump’s upcoming visit to China, CNN posted an article on Chinese President Xi Jinping which declared that almost nothing is known about the man. Of course they said that not only because they are ignorant of the East, but also because if they had told the truth about Xi it would present an embarrassing contrast between an Easterner, a truly enlightened man who is challenging the zero-sum US economics with a deeply held belief in a win-win for everyone, and a West that seems not to comprehend this. This simple idea is explained in Xi’s book “Up and Out of Poverty,” which no one in the West seems to have read and no one has meaningfully reviewed. Which is perhaps why CNN thought nothing was known about Xi. The book, written in 1992 and later translated into English and French, tells of Xi’s experience as a social worker in Ningde in Shaanxi Province where he was sent as a youth by the government in a program along the lines of a domestic Peace Corps.

Xi, the son of a Chinese functionary from a relatively well-off city, was shocked at the grinding poverty he found in this town but immediately set about to change this situation. In short, thanks to his efforts, that town, which once had an annual average income of 198 USD, wound up with an average income of 8000 USD last year – virtually unheard of for rural China. Xi thinks he has reason to believe this miracle can be duplicated elsewhere.

Xi has stated in public that the poor concern him more than anything else. But unlike Western politicians, he was not just flapping his jaws.

A Chinese site reported:

“A total of 55.64 million Chinese rural residents were lifted out of poverty from 2013 to 2016 and at least another 10 million will shake off poverty this year, which means the number of rural Chinese lifted out of poverty in five years will exceed 65 million – roughly the population of a major European country such as Britain, France or Italy.”

While CNN admits it knows nothing about this, Xi’s dream is a nightmare to the West, where a Steve Bannon can get away with saying they want to screw up Xi’s dream to raise Africa out of poverty through his Belt and Road Initiative. Bannon was in fact saying to hell with the African poor, probably without even realizing it (the Western narrative is that the BRI is just a way of allowing China to rule the world like a despot, the way the US does now). Even worse, Bannon admitted he wants to destroy Xi’s chances of helping them. These thoughtless statements stick around in the history books. Let them eat cake?

But if the West ignores, wittingly or not, that Xi’s Belt and Road Initiative is aimed at raising Africa and other nations out of poverty, Africa is keenly aware of this and anxiously awaits its culmination.

In June of 2017, Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi gave a keynote address to a meeting at the opening ceremony of the High-Level Dialogue on Poverty Reduction and Development held at the African Union Conference Centre in Addis Ababa, and said that China’s goal is to simultaneously lift the poor in both China and Africa out of poverty. Wang also delivered an inspiring talk about Xi’s book on his experiences working with the poor in Ningde. So unlike US media, the Africans are aware that much is known about President Xi and that Xi is a veteran in battling poverty, with success. Can you name an American president who has successfully lifted anyone out of poverty in the last half-century? Lyndon Johnson birthed welfare, but the ghettos grew in proportion to the money paid out because no attempt was made to allow the poor to lift themselves out of poverty. Xi, however, says that is what he did in Ningde and what he intends to do in the future. He also uses the expression “win-win” often in his speeches, as if to rebuke the West for its zero-sum nonsense.

The US is the leader of the World Bank and the IMF, organizations that have been involved in Africa for decades, issuing loans but not making a dent in African poverty. The reason for their failure is perhaps best summed up in the book “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man” by John Perkins, the CEO for a CIA front company working for the World Bank whose trainer at the beginning of his career bluntly told him the goal of his company was to bankrupt Third World nations, making them dependent on these banks for more and more loans. Thus the West’s policy was self-defeating because — as Xi knows — banks make more money off of rich customers than poor ones. And this is the secret behind China’s policy: I make you rich, you make me richer.

A brief explanation of how the IMF and World Bank keep Africans poor is found here. This is consistent with our report on Iraq: Part 1 and  Part 2.

By contrast, Xi’s China has lifted millions out of poverty from 2013 to 2016. The English-language Chinese site CGTN reports:

“A total of 55.64 million Chinese rural residents were lifted out of poverty from 2013 to 2016 and at least another 10 million will shake off poverty this year, which means the number of rural Chinese lifted out of poverty in five years will exceed 65 million – roughly the population of a major European country such as Britain, France or Italy.”

So when Trump goes to Beijing, a man who boasted about making America great again will meet a man who, without a word of boasting, simply made China a better place to live – and hopes to replicate that experience elsewhere.

East vs West: Who are the Enlightened Ones?

/in , , , , /by

By Vince Dhimos

Thus the old radical school of the Enlightenment had not died out. It not only survived, it acquired more force than ever, despite the removal of the abuses that had prompted the movement in the first place. This was one of the many examples of movements that outlived their raison d’être but continued to exist on sheer inertia and stubbornness.

In 1917 and thereafter, the movement to establish a Soviet Union instead of a renewed and dynamic Russia was led by the Bolsheviks, who were imbued with the ideals of the more radical Enlightenment. As such, once in power, they immediately set about eliminating all older Russian ideas, and history came to see a variation on the theme of the French revolution. Most of these leaders secretly hated Russia, as described here, and wanted a modern European system to replace all old institutions and popular beliefs and behaviors. Thus, at variance with accepted anti-Russian propaganda, the Soviet Union was in no way a product of Russianness. In fact it was due to all things Russian being suppressed.

The Chinese under Mao took this radical Enlightenment idea still further and, again, while focusing on punishing transgressors rather than solving problems, it aimed to destroy the Chinese culture. The Cultural Revolution was in fact a movement to eliminate all of Chinese culture and thought, even smashing precious antiques, and extirpating the wisdom of ancient philosophers like Confucius from the Chinese psyche. As a result they lost a generation that could have been dedicated to education, science and research. Though imbued with Enlightenment ideals, Mao knew nothing about science, which is why his method of collecting metal for industry, by melting down pots and utensils, including antique ones, failed colossally. He discovered late what ancient Chinese metallurgists had always known, namely, that many different kinds of metals when melted together form a useless malleable or brittle material with virtually no strength. The result of his grand experiment wound up on the slag heap.

However, besides a lack of scientific knowledge, what the leaders were missing in their dealings with the people was the old Confucian ideal of harmony. The favorite tactic for keeping people in line was to stir up people with a hysteria against “capitalist running dogs” and former landlords or wealthy people. People were dehumanized, induced to manufacture all kinds of false charges and rat out their friends, neighbors and family members to deflect suspicions from themselves. It was a rein of terror akin to the black-white hysteria that sometimes causes American streets to boil. The accused were generally taken out with a sign around their neck indicating their supposed crime and then beaten by a disorderly crowed, even killed at times. (Further reading here on the Cultural Revolution). But after Mao’s death, the next generation of leaders realized that they had thrown out the baby with the bath and they dusted off the old banned books about Confucius, studying them diligently but without publicising this or admitting that the party policies had changed (they did not intend to sully Mao’s memory).

You may have read about Xi’s response to Trump as they sat over cake at Mar-a-Lago and Trump informed Xi that he had just fired 59 Tomahawks at Khan Sheikhoun. Now Assad is a close ally of China, which has had ties to Syria for decades. In fact, China has plans to rebuild Syria (as shown in our translation of an unusually candid report here). Thus Trump’s obtuse words must have hurt Xi to the quick. But far from confrontational, Xi’s response to Trump was Confucian and harmonious.

According to Trump in a media interview. Xi said:

‘Anybody that uses gases’ —you could almost say or anything else — but ‘anybody that was so brutal and uses gases to do that to young children and babies, it’s okay.’ He was okay with it.”

I suspect even Confucius would have choked at this insincere response. (It reminded me of Will Smith as Hancock, who was advised by a psychologist to compliment his coworkers by saying “good work” after they carried out an assignment, and then proceeded to say this even when it was he who had done the job). Xi’s government later expressed bitter criticism of the Tomahawk attack in its state-owned media.

President Donald J. Trump and President Xi of China | November 8, 2017 (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

Both China and Russia seek harmonious relations even with the most difficult partners. This is the wave of the future and it is the result of the East learning from their earlier mistakes and the mistakes of the West, notably the total rejection of all past thought and behavior. China has turned back to Confucius and Russia has turned back to Christ. The result is the same.

Nietzsche, an old school radical philosopher who, while he criticized the Enlightenment, was focused on shocking people with an across the board rejection of the past, including past wisdom. He made no attempt to be conciliatory. As he wrote, he was a suffering soul confined to his bed, with advanced syphilis, which eventually killed him. Being hopelessly ideology bound, he had apparently rejected the notion that promiscuous sex can be harmful, thinking this taboo to be an outmoded Christian idea rather than the universal truth that it was. Despite years of agony that would have caused others to regret their dissipated past, he had learned nothing from his own mistakes, and many of his readers – worshippers really — are attempting to duplicate his failed experiment.

The West today is imbued with that malignant spirit. Thus, we find swaths of American society, for example, where anyone advocating for traditional marriage can be ostracized or worse, verbally – or even physically — assaulted, or even lose their job (as reported here); a person entering certain parts of their downtown can be beaten for belonging to the wrong race, as described here; and criminals or gang members of a certain national origin will never be arrested because they are assigned to a victim group. The old notion of law and order, decency and politeness has collapsed. The West is now closer to the ideals of perpetual revolution than even Mao’s China and unlike China, where the insanity finally ended with Mao’s death, there is no promise of a respite because the movement is led not by one person but by a faceless mob.

In stark contrast to the ideology-bound West, the East has moved beyond and is now easily winning the war of ideas by focusing on common sense and doing the will of the people. It turns out that the wisdom of the past is still as valid today as it was then. But these countries are also completely focused on science, as both Enlightenment schools were.

Ironically, the one world power that unabashedly lays claim to a Christian foundation for its public policies is, in terms of science, head and shoulders above the US, which abhors Christianity and still clings to the absurd notion that Christianity is incompatible with science. Emblematic of this situation is the fact that the radically secular US is obliged to purchase rocket engines from the openly Christian Russia.

RELATED ARTICLES:

East vs West: Who are the enlightened ones? Part 1

Knockout games

Russia ushering in the Age of Grace

East and West: the twain shall meet

​Making Saudi Arabia great again

​In Russian, Their sons of bitches“: US and Britain arm 70 of the world’s dictators

City’s Illegal Alien Defense Fund Gives $17,500 to Terrorist Front Group

/in , , , , , , /by

Ohio’s capital city has launched a defense fund for illegal immigrants facing deportation and thousands of taxpayer dollars will go to the local chapter of a terrorist front group that promotes itself as a Muslim civil rights organization. The pot of cash is known as Columbus Families Together Fund and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a national organization that serves as the U.S. front for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, will be among the recipients.

CAIR was founded in 1994 by three Middle Eastern extremists (Omar Ahmad, Nihad Awad, and Rafeeq Jaber) who ran the American propaganda wing of Hamas, known then as the Islamic Association for Palestine. In 2008 CAIR was a co-conspirator in a federal terror-finance case involving the Hamas front group Holy Land Foundation. Read more in a Judicial Watch special report that focuses on Muslim charities. Top FBI counter terrorism chiefs have described CAIR as an entity that not only promotes terrorism, but also finances it. One group has dedicated itself to documenting CAIR’s extensive terrorist ties which include a top official sentenced to 20 years in prison for participating in a network of militant jihadists, another convicted of bank fraud for financing a major terrorist group, a board member who was a co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and a fundraiser identified by the U.S. Treasury Department for financing Al Qaeda.

Allocating public funds to assist illegal aliens with their legal problems is bad enough, but giving some of the cash to a group like CAIR is like pouring salt on the wound. The effort started when Donald Trump got elected president. Columbus City Councilwoman Elizabeth Brown vowed to help illegal immigrants fight deportation and posted this on her social media account on January 30: “In Columbus, we stand with immigrants! This morning I announced Council’s commitment to a legal defense fund to support our refugees and immigrants as they face an onslaught of new hurdles to keep their families together. I’m excited to get to work. Who wants to help?”

Last week the Columbus City Council made it official, establishing the new legal defense fund with a $185,000 infusion to help provide legal services to the area’s illegal aliens and their families. The money will go to various nonprofits that will also “educate detained immigrants on their rights under immigration law,” according to a local newspaper report. A nonprofit called Advocates for Basic Legal Equality Inc. will get the largest chunk of city money, the article reveals, but other groups will also benefit. Priority will go to Columbus-area illegal aliens facing deportation in Cleveland Immigration Court and preference will be given to cases involving children. CAIR will receive $17,500 to provide “legal services that help keep families together in the central Ohio immigrant and refugee communities.” This includes “know your rights” education sessions in Columbus that will cover encounters with federal immigration agents. Brown, the councilwoman behind the effort said “we’re sending a signal here tonight. We value our immigrants. We welcome you. We know that the demonization of immigrants throws them into the shadows and makes a class of silent victims. We won’t allow it.”

City leaders feel an obligation to protect immigrant and refugee families in Central Ohio from the financial and emotional devastation that results from aggressive immigration enforcement, according to a document describing the Columbus Families Together Fund. “The wellbeing of our immigrant communities is intertwined with the city’s overall wellbeing,” the document states. “Ultimately, Columbus is a safer, more just, and more economically vibrant city for everyone when we address the needs of all our residents.” It also says that, because an intact family is one determining factor in economic self-sufficiency and long-term child success, the city will also pay for additional services that help keep immigrant and refugee families together.

Columbus is not alone in allocating public funds to help those in the country illegally after the Trump administration announced a harder line on immigration enforcement. Last year two major U.S. cities that have long offered illegal aliens sanctuary allocated millions of dollars to help them avoid deportation. A few days after the Chicago City Council approved a $1.3 million legal defense fund to assist illegal aliens facing deportation, official in Los Angeles unveiled a similar program with a $10 million infusion.

EDITORS NOTE: Readers may donate to Judicial Watch by clicking here.

Responding to Jihad: Going about our Business or Getting Down to Business?

/in , , , /by

Friends: Thanks to all of you who responded – and so generously – yesterday to the first day of our end-of-year fund drive. We heard from readers in almost every state, and in countries from New Zealand to the Slovak Republic. But we’ve still got a long way to go – and I need a lot more of you to help us in our work. I mean it when I say that, without you, The Catholic Thing simply will not continue to exist. All of us these days feel that someone, somewhere has to step up and do something about the many and growing threats to Catholic faith and morals – and to the human future. And to lay out the truth, goodness, and beauty of our tradition. We’re here every day, without fail, working at those tasks. If you’re a TCT reader, you already understand the importance of what we’re about. Many of you have heard me say this before: we publish 30 articles a month, 30,000 words, the size of a substantial magazine. Most magazines would ask subscribers for $35 a year – and if all our readers could give that much, we could get to our goal quickly. But many cannot, which is why we have to ask those of you with greater means to give, not only for yourself. Can you donate $70, $105, or some other multiple of the minimum on behalf of your fellow readers – and to make sure that TCT is fighting the good fight for a long time to come? – Robert Royal

In the wake of the jihad truck attack on a New York City bike path, politicians and the press responded with the usual reassurances that follow – like night follows day.

NYC Mayor de Blasio said, “The last thing we should do is start casting dispersions [sic] on whole races of people or whole religions.” NY State’s Governor Cuomo said, “We’re not going to let them win. We’ll go about our business. . . .Live your life. Don’t let them change us.”

We’ve heard all this before, and after every terror attack we’ve also heard that “this has nothing to do with Islam.” Even figures in the Church – from the Vatican on down – have taken up this mantra.

The latest variation on that theme was NYC Deputy Police Commissioner John Miller’s assurance: “This isn’t about Islam, this isn’t about the mosque he attends.” Meanwhile, members of the press robotically recited from their own playbook. NBC News ran with the now familiar headline, “Muslim American’s Again Brace for Backlash.”

All of which seems to be a rather anemic way to respond to what is essentially a guerilla attack in a world-wide war. “We’ll go about our business.” That’s all? Most people intuit that “going about our business” is not going to solve the problem. “Don’t let them change us.” Seriously? They already have changed us. New York City now deploys thousands of police for public events; in Paris, soldiers patrol the streets. And still the attacks go on.

Most people realize that there are more streets than soldiers and police can possibly guard. Moreover, they understand that the origin of the trouble is not to be found on West Side bike paths or in boulevards in Nice. If you’re going to deploy more police, why not deploy them to the places where the attacks are planned?

That would mean sending more police into predominantly Muslim neighborhoods – not necessarily to patrol the streets, but to gather information, cultivate informants, and to pay visits to mosques and Islamic centers.

That, however, is exactly what the “Muslims-brace-for-backlash” headlines are intended to prevent. It’s what CAIR’s “Islamophobia” campaign is designed to forestall. And it’s why officials like Mayor de Blasio keep harping on the theme that the worst thing we can do is to cast aspersions on “whole races” or “whole religions.”

In fact, the NYPD did have a very effective program for monitoring the Muslim community until de Blasio shut it down in order to appease various Islamic pressure groups. That program included surveillance of the mosque in New Jersey that the attacker, Sayfullo Saipov, attended.

This is the mosque the Deputy Police Commissioner referred to when he said, “this isn’t about the mosque he attends.” But according to Bill McGroarty, a NYPD detective who worked on the investigation, more than twenty men at Saipov’s mosque have been radicalized.

To ordinary people, the NYPD’s canceled monitoring program makes perfect sense: if you want to catch terrorists before they strike, you go to the places where terrorists and potential terrorists live, and you start asking questions.

In an interview with Tucker Carlson, former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino pointed out that this is how the authorities broke up the Mafia. Police and FBI cultivated informants in the – gasp! – Italian-American community. They managed to infiltrate Mafia organizations and were not reluctant to shake some trees.

Bongino? Isn’t that an Italian name? Shouldn’t he have been incensed at this attempt to smear a whole nationality? Shouldn’t he have joined the “anti-Italiphobia” campaign instead?

Fortunately, Italian-Americans didn’t look at it that way. Most of them didn’t take the surveillance of the mob as a sign that America was anti-Italian. Most were happy to get out from under the thumb of the Mafia.

Bongino recommends a similar approach for flushing out the extremists in Muslim communities. Of course, we already know how some will respond. Those who fear being thought “Islamophobic” more than they fear Islamic terror will recoil at the thought. And they will claim that increased monitoring will offend moderate Muslims and maybe even drive them into the radical camp.

But if the vast majority of Muslims are moderate, as is so often claimed, won’t they be glad to cooperate with the police in exposing the handful of extremists who give the community a bad name? If Muslim-Americans are as patriotic as Italian-Americans, won’t they be happy to do their part in clearing the good name of Islam?

And if some are not quite sure of their loyalties, shouldn’t the police and the district attorneys apply some pressure – as police and attorneys undoubtedly had to do on occasion in the Italian-American community?

It’s not as though members of the Muslim communities aren’t already under pressure. Many are under pressure from imams and other religious leaders to put loyalty to the ummahfirst. Many are under similar pressure from their own families. Groups such as CAIR, ISNA, and the Muslim American Society also exert pressure to put Islam above every other loyalty. Some CAIR chapters have even advised Muslims not to cooperate with the FBI.

If the pressures and incentives only come from one side, the result is predictable. If no counter pressure is applied, the moderate influence will weaken, and Muslim communities will fall deeper and deeper under the influence of the more radical sort of Muslim. Eventually, their communities will end up like some areas in France and Belgium – places where the police fear to go, and where the Islamic version of the code of omertà keeps everyone in line.

Truly moderate Muslims will want to avoid that fate. They deserve all the help they can get in resisting it – even if that means putting some of their self-appointed representatives under closer scrutiny.

Donate to Support The Catholic Thing

The U.S. Betrayal of Kurdistan Should be a Warning Sign for Israel

/in , , /by

The Kurdish people have an inalienable right to their own national homeland just as other nations do. The Kurds are the largest ethnic entity in the world, numbering some 30 million people, which does not have a state of its own. Over three years ago, I declared – here on Arutz Sheva – that the world is obligated to see to it that historic justice is granted the Kurds by supporting their dream of being a free nation in their own land.

A referendum was held last month among the Iraqi Kurds over whether or not they should declare independence, while in the background threats emanating from Turkey, Iran, the Iraqi government and even Bashar Assad could be discerned. Joining them were other countries, including the USA and Europe, all of them warning the Kurds – and especially their leader, Masoud Barzani – not to attempt a one-sided declaration of independence. The neighboring countries fear a snowball effect on other minorities in their own countries, including their resident Kurds. More distant countries fear another war in the oil-rich regions such as northern Iraq, which could lead to a much wider conflict.

The referendum showed that a vast majority, over 90% of those voting, support independence. This resulted in Masoud Barzani, head of the Kurdish region, acquiring the ability to wield powerful leverage against the Iraqi government, which was naturally unnerved by the results and tried its best to convince Barazani not to declare independence.

The two main issues in the dialogue between Barzani and the Iraqi regime are:

  1. Delineating the borders of the Kurdish region and whether the oil fields and the nearby city of Kirkuk are within those borders and
  2. What happens to the oil that flows under the ground in the Kurdish region – are the profits Iraqi or do they belong to the Kurds?

Except that Barzani is not the only Kurdish actor on the stage. Jilal Talabani, his rival, did not support the hopes for Kurdish independence espoused by Barzani, and was of the opinion that the Kurds must remain within the national framework of Iraqi sovereignty. He was once the Iraqi president – mainly a ceremonial post – from 2005 to 2014, and died in Germany two weeks ago, on October 3, 2017. A pragmatist, he based his opinion on the realistic understanding that a declaration of independence would have a severely negative effect on the Kurds, because all the surrounding countries would do their utmost to ensure its failure, not balking at the idea of starving the Kurds to death by putting their region under siege.

The differences between Barzani and Talabani are nothing new. In fact, the two famiiies have been at odds for decades, and in the second half of the twentieth century there were actual battles between the two, involving weapons and resulting in dead and wounded. The Iraqi regime knew this well and took advantage of it by forming a coalition of one side against the other. The factionalism of the Kurds prevented them from forming a united stand and the neighboring states – Turkey, Iran and Syria – knew how to make use of this factionalism for their own ends.

This week, the dispute led to facts on the ground: The Iraqi army, supported by Shiite militias, moved towards Kirkuk and the Kurdish Peshmerga fighting force left the city without doing battle. Within two days the Iraqis took over the city and its adjacent oil field without resorting to violence, neutralizing an important part of the leverage Masoud Barzani was hoping th wield during negotiations with the Iraqi government. It seems that the Pershmega are not united and reflect the ongoing internal dispute among the Kurds. Some listen to Barzani’s orders and others act under the influence of Talabani. The forces guarding Kirkuk were under the sway of Talabani and gave up in the struggle against the Iraqi army’s takeover, to Barzani’s dismay. The internal strife among the Kurds distances them from their dream of independence, a dream that will only move farther away for as long as they cannot agree on its parameters.

The tragedy that has befallen the Kurds is even greater because their fighters, part of the coalition led by the US, were the most important force fighting ISIS. They were given arms, weapons, funding and training by their coalition partners, but it is they and not the coalition’s fighters, who shed their blood in street to street, house to house, room to room fighting against ISIS. Hundreds of Peshmerga fighters were killed and wounded in the long, exhausting battle to liberate Mosul from the Jihadists of the Islamic State.

The Kurds expected the world, headed by the US, to stand behind them once ISIS was defeated, remembering their large contribution to that defeat and supporting their demand for independence. These hopes were dashed very quicly when the official American stand turned out to be that “we have no intention of interfering in internal Iraqi affairs” – that is, the US will not support the Kurdish demand for independence led by Masoud Barzani, this despite the referendum and their historic rights. Those Kurds who longed for independence are disappointed and feel betrayed by the nation with whom, for whom and in whose name they fought for a lengthy and bloody period, one filled with battles and Kurdish victims sacrificed in the war against ISIS.

It is possible that the American stand is based on Talabani’s approach, one which saw no need –certainly not an immediate one – for declaring independence and preferred that the Kurds integrate into the Iraqi state for good. Naturally, Talabani’s loyalty to the Iraqi regime is explained by rumors of bribery, jobs and other favors he and his men received from Iraq and Iran. On the other hand, rumors say that Barzani received his own favors from the Saudis, who are interested in preventing a Shiite axis led by Iran. The Mideast news sources are full of these hard to prove stories (Anyone who thinks that Trump invented the concept of “fake news” is unfamiliar with the media and political discourse of the Middle East…)

Conclusions Israel must draw from the Kurdish saga

For the last several years, and particularly since the signing of the nuclear agreement between Iran and the world powers, there has been a discernable warming of relations between Israel and the Arab nations who feel threatened by Iran. Those include Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Kuwait, Egypt and Jordan. As a result there are Israeli pundits, army officers and politicians who view the current regional situation as a golden opportunity that Israel must take advantage of by accepting the Arab peace proposals, establishing a Palestinian state and embarking on a new era of cooperation with the “moderate Sunni axis” in order to bring peace and security to Israel and the entire area. Why? Because all these countries fear Iran as much as, and possibly more, than Israel does.

But let us suppose that the Iranian threat disappears because Israel succeeds in an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. As a result, war breaks out between Israel and Iran (including Hezbollah), Israel sacrifices hundreds of soldiers and civilians – and the Iranian problem ceases to exist. Will the Arab and Western worlds be grateful to Israel and act to protect Israel’s interests?

The answer is simple: What happened to the Kurds will happen to Israel. The Kurds fought ISIS, sacrificed their soldiers and people, and were thrown to the wolves once they were not needed. That is exactly what the world’s nations will do to Israel once it extricates them from the Iranian problem. Why not? The immediate interests of each and every country and not the moral rights of the Kurds and the Israelis are what makes the world go round.

Israel will indeed be the darling of the “moderate Sunni axis” – that is, for as long as there is an Iranian threat. Once that is gone, the fracturing of Iran into ethnic components (on the lines of the former USSR, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia) will obviate the need for relations with Israel. For this reason, Israel would do well not to give up its lands for a piece of paper with the word “peace” stamped on it, because that paper can easily fly away in the desert wind while the worlds on it fade in the blazing Middle Eastern sun.

There are two unassailable proofs for this phenomenon: The first is the peace with Egypt. This peace was a result of Sadat’s need for economic assistance from Europe and Europe’s insistence that peace with Israel precede the granting of that aid so that its money is not squandered on wars. That peace treaty did not stand in Mubarak’s way when he allowed Hamas and its supporters to smuggle arms from Sinai to Gaza, because it was in Mubarak’s interests to bring about a war between Israel and Hamas, allowing Israel to do the dirty work with the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. As soon as the Sinai became Jihadistan and began fighting Egypt, the weapons smuggling from Sinai to Gaza ceased abruptly. In sum, the peace between Israel and Egypt exists for as long as it suits Egyprian interests.

The second proof is the peace with Jordan, based on Yitzchak Rabin and King Hussein’s shared interest in preventing a Palestinian state from being established. This common interest created wide-ranging cooperation between the two countries. Hussein’s son, Abdullah II, changed his father’s policies and is a strong backer of the idea of a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria whose capital is East Jerusalem . That is why he acts against Israel in every international forum, as if he were one of Israel’s greatest enemies. He relates to the peace treaty as an agreement to refrain from war and no more, while enjoying the economic benefits he gained from it.

The clear conclusion from the Kurdish, Egyptian and Jordanian situations is that Israel must not jeopardize its existence, security and interests by placing them in bankrupt Arab insurance companies. Israel absolutely must strengthen its position in the Land of Israel, create local governing emirates for the powerful Arab families in urban Judea and Samaria while battening down Israeli control of the rural areas. No peace treaty can give Israel a lasting insurance policy, and the faster Israel and the world internalize this truth the better.

RELATED ARTICLE: U.S. breaks ground for new permanent base in Israel

EDITORS NOTE: Written for Arutz Sheva, translated from Hebrew by Rochel Sylvetsky, Consulting and Op-ed Editor, Arutz Sheva English site.

Now that ISIS Has Been Decimated What will the Future Look Like?

/in , , /by

Based on all the signs, the Free Syrian Army forces, mostly made up of Kurdish and Syrian militias, are on the verge of liberating the city of Raqqa, the capital of the “Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.” The question that emerges is how the aftermath of ISIS will look.

The answer is threefold and involves the organization, its members and its ideology.

The organization will be routed and eradicated, the large swathe of territory it controlled will be divided between Syria, Iran, Turkey and the Kurds, and its government institutions will become relics of the past. The attempt to re-establish the Islamic caliphate failed because the Muslim world – even before the “infidels” – despised its methods of gruesome, seventh-century style executions.

Most of the organization’s members, however, are already elsewhere, carrying a sense of righteousness in their hearts. They feel betrayed and will seek revenge against all those who attacked them, such as the Kurds and coalition countries; Muslims who stood by and did not help them, such as former Soviet bloc countries; or countries that helped and then abandoned them along the way, such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

These jihadists dispersed in many countries, establishing proxies in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, Libya, Yemen, Nigeria, Mali, the Philippines and more, with every branch adjusting its structure and activities to the environment in which it operates. Variables include the degree to which local governments effectively wield power, the degree to which the local Muslim population is supportive, and the degree to which a terrorist organizational infrastructure already exists and can be utilized.

We saw a similar phenomenon after the defeat of al-Qaida in Afghanistan in late 2001, when one of its offshoots settled in Iraq and joined with the local Sunni population and the remnants of Saddam Hussein’s army to form Islamic State. Beginning in April 2003, it began exploiting the weak central government in Baghdad, and in March 2011, the government in Damascus.

Every local proxy, however, will suffer from the same fundamental problems prevalent in any radical Islamic group: First, there will be disagreements within the group over Shariah law and its implementation; over ruling a territory or remaining a non-sovereign jihadist entity; the severity of punishment for offenders; the title of leader (whether he will be named caliph or not) and his authority; its relations with similarly minded organizations; the status structure within the organization (Arabs versus non-Arabs, Muslims by birth versus Muslims by conversion), and more. There will also be a problem pertaining to the hostility between the Islamic organization and the local population, Muslim or otherwise, over which it wants to rule. In addition, the international community’s traditionally negative view of Islamic terrorist organizations could lead to all-out war.

Another question is how the Islamic world will be affected by the dashed dream of a caliphate. The fall of Islamic State will assuredly bolster those who oppose political Islam. On the other hand, the fall of the Sunni oganization strengthens the Shiite axis. The slow crawl of Sunni leaders (Turkey and Saudi Arabia) toward Iran is one sign of the Shiite axis’ growing power at the expense of the Sunnis. U.S. President Donald Trump’s speech last week may have the effect of slowing this trend down, depending on the action the U.S. takes.

The idea of an Islamic caliphate is not dead. It is alive and well in religious scriptures, textbooks, Friday sermons, internet forums and in the hearts of many millions, and in the near or distant future it will be resurrected, shake off the memory of recent events and begin anew. There will always be people who dream about ancient glory, about the resurrection of ancestral Salafism and its forefathers – Muhammad and his cohort, who “lived an ideal and proper lifestyle and showed us the right path for any place, time and environment.”

What is clear is that the fight against the “heretic, permissive, hedonistic, materialistic, drugged and inebriated West” will persist through lone-wolf or small-cell terrorist attacks. Countries around the world will continue to suffer from ramming attacks, stabbings, shootings, rapes, violence against women and children, public vandalism and other variances of jihad against all those who do not belong to the religion of Muhammad. Islamic State will disappear as an organization, but the world is likely to continue feeling the evil ideology this organization instilled in the hearts and minds of too many Muslims.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

The Emirates Solution Embraced by Arabs

WATCH: Discussing US President Donald Trump’s Major Blow to the Iran Nuclear Deal

VIDEO: San Diego City Council honors Islamic Supremacist Group – One man speaks truth to power

/in , , /by

Patriot Fire posted the below video with this commentary:

The San Diego School Board is already being sued by Charles LiMandri [from] the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund due to their working with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) to implement aspects of Sharia in our public schools under the guise of an anti-Bullying program.

Now the San Diego City Council proclaims November 4th to be “CAIR Day.” The proclamation was sponsored by council member, David Alvarez, and approved by unanimous consent. The measure passed on November 7, 2017.

VIDEO: CNN caught deceptively editing, again

/in , , , /by

Months after Project Veritas exposed CNN for deceptively editing their news — in order to push a phony narrative that the facts don’t justify — they’re up to it again.

Check out this anti-Trump video CNN aired — and then watch as Project Veritas compares it to the footage of what actually happened.

Project Veritas has caught some of the biggest names in news — like CNN and The New York Times — actively pushing a biased, ideological agenda, rather than the facts.

And, somehow, they still think the average American is too dumb to figure it all out.

That’s why Project Veritas’s investigations into the mainstream media are so critical. The mainstream media won’t stop with their lies, deceptions, fake news, and bias — and it’s up to you and me to hold them accountable.

Watch as Project Veritas catches CNN in their latest, shameful round of deceptive editing now — and how our team is holding them accountable.

Thanks again for all your help and continued support of Project Veritas.

Law Center Asks Supreme Court To Prevent Maine’s Persecution Of Pro-Life Pastor

/in , , , , /by

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday (11/06/17) to review a U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit’s decision that allows government officials to use a noise provision to prevent peaceful sidewalk counseling in front of abortion facilities. The petition for review is the latest step in TMLC’s legal battle to prevent the State of Maine from silencing peaceful, pro-life sidewalk counselors.

Kate Oliveri, the TMLC attorney who drafted the petition, commented:

“The First Circuit’s dangerous opinion would allow all levels of government to restrict any speaker with whom they disagree by creative legislation that targets the reason the speaker engages in speech rather than the actual words spoken. This, however, is a distinction without difference that affords governments the right to silence all speech they find disagreeable.”

In 2015, TMLC filed a lawsuit on behalf of Pastor Andrew March against the Maine Attorney General and several police officers challenging the constitutionality of a noise provision in the Maine Civil Rights Act (“MCRA”). That provision prohibits noise outside healthcare buildings made with the intent to interfere with health services. Under Maine law, the term “health services” includes abortions.

Accordingly, this seemingly innocuous statute gives law enforcement officials the power to stop pro-life counselors from speaking on the public sidewalk in front of abortion facilities because they equate an intent to discourage a woman from having an abortion as an intent to interfere with a medical procedure.

The federal district court agreed with TMLC’s legal position and barred the State from using the noise provision because it was a content-based restriction on speech in violation of the First Amendment. However, the Maine Attorney General appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which reversed the lower court and created the false dichotomy that the content of speech can somehow be separated from the purpose of the speaker.

Click here to read TMLC’s entire petition asking for Supreme Court review.

TMLC’s lawsuit on behalf of Pastor March is the third case in three years in which the Law Center has defended pro-life speakers on the public sidewalks of Portland, Maine.  The first federal case, which was filed in 2014 on behalf of several sidewalk counselors, successfully challenged the constitutionality of Portland’s ordinance that established a 39-foot buffer zone around abortion facilities.

However, only two weeks after conceding that the buffer zone was unconstitutional, the Maine Attorney General filed a state lawsuit against Pastor Brian Ingalls under the noise provision of MCRA. TMLC is still defending Pastor Ingalls in the ongoing litigation.

The third case occurred less than a month after charges were filed against Pastor Ingalls. Police, citing the same noise provision in MCRA, issued an official warning to Pastor March, who had taken up Pastor Ingalls’ mantle preaching outside the abortion facility. TMLC filed the federal lawsuit that the petition asks the Supreme Court to review.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Delaware, Beware, of Kids Choosing Their own Race

/in , , , , /by
“White boys could soon self-identify as black girls in Delaware.” So begins one of the latest columns of Fox News’s Todd Starnes, reporting on what parents probably wish was fake news. Unfortunately for the families in The First State, reality may soon be optional for kids in Delaware public schools. In one of the more incredible headlines of the year, local officials in the state’s Department of Education are actually debating a regulation that would let students choose their race and their gender!

If it sounds unbelievable, that’s because it is. For the last few years, families have been shocked that they’d have to defend traditional biology in places as sacred as restrooms, showers, locker and changing rooms. Now, the proponents of this government-sponsored make believe are trying to make everything self-subjective. It’s the campaign for these “protected characteristics,” local liberals argue, that would give children the ability to redefine their most defining traits. And without ever calling home! Under “Regulation 225 Prohibition of Discrimination,” students can make these determinations without letting their parents know.

“Prior to requesting permission from a parent or legal guardian, the school should consult and work closely with the student to access the degree to which, if any, the parent or legal guardian is aware of the Protected Characteristic and is supportive of the student, and the school shall take into consideration the safety, health, and well-being of the student in deciding whether to request permission from the parent or legal guardian,” the proposal states.

“Literally,” Delaware Family Policy Council President Nicole Theis told Starnes, “if a parent affirms their child’s biological sex, and now race, they are [considered] discriminatory through policies like Regulation 225. These policies are setting parents up as… unsupportive, even abusive, if they affirm their child’s biological realities…”

Of course, the irony is that someone’s being abusive, according to the American College of Pediatricians — and it isn’t parents! This is exactly the kind of agenda they classify as “child abuse.” Theis is calling on people across the state to get involved in stopping state officials from putting kids in dangerous situations — and keeping parents in the dark about it.

By law, the people of Delaware have 30 days to “comment” about the regulation, but the agency is under no obligation to change it. Hopefully, parents can apply enough pressure to force the governor to back away from the idea. Join Nicole and other concerned citizens by pushing back on this madness! If you’re from Delaware, click here to speak up!

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

Also in the November 8 Washington Update:

Silver Linings in Blue Victories

The Korean War on Faith

VIDEO: The Korean War on Faith

/in , , , , /by

President Trump’s speech in South Korea was remarkable for several things, but it was his mention of religious persecution that got our attention. In a message of warning to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, the president took the opportunity on one of the world’s largest stages to chastise the horrible conditions for Christians in places like China and North Korea. While the world watched, the president tackled one of the greatest human rights abuses taking place in the Asian part of the globe.

“In the part of Korea that was a stronghold for Christianity before the war, Christians and other people of faith who are found praying or holding a religious book of any kind are now detained, tortured, and, in many cases, even executed.”

“North Korean women are forced to abort babies that are considered ethnically inferior. And if these babies are born, the newborns are murdered. One woman’s baby born to a Chinese father was taken away in a bucket. The guard said it did not deserve to live because it was impure. So why would China feel an obligation to help North Korea?”

For many North Koreans, just the act of worship is a life-threatening proposition. Hunted down and terrorized for their faith, the underground church has lost countless members to prison camps (or worse) simply for sharing the gospel — a freedom most of us take for granted every day. From the very beginning of his administration, Donald Trump has been intentional about his desire to pick up the torch for religious liberty, first trying to secure it for Americans here at home through executive order and other directives. But with his nomination of Sam Brownback to Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom, the administration has shown its sincerity on restoring the United States’ reputation as a voice for the voiceless.

As we know from our friends at Open Doors USA, North Korea is ranked as the most oppressive place in the world for Christians — #1 on the World Watch List. So it’s no small thing that President Trump included the persecuted church in his admonishment of Kim Jung Un. As Open Doors explains, the situation is so dire that Christians are forced to hide their faith even from their own spouses. “Simply owning a Bible is enough to be considered an enemy of the state, and many North Korean Christians are spending the rest of their lives malnourished, mistreated, and dying in prison.” As quickly as things have deteriorated for Americans of faith under Barack Obama, the culture here is nothing like the nightmare our brothers and sisters face overseas.

When so many other priorities hang in the balance, we’re extremely grateful that President Trump made a point of highlighting the plight of North Korean Christians. Now, it’s time for the U.S. Senate to act on Governor Brownback’s confirmation, so that Americans can start giving the world’s persecuted new hope – first, that they aren’t alone, and secondly, that help is on the way.

For more on North Korea, specifically the nuclear threat, don’t miss FRC’s Lt. General Jerry Boykin on Fox News’s “Your World with Neil Cavuto.”

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

Also in the November 8 Washington Update:

Silver Linings in Blue Victories

Delaware, Beware, of Kids Choosing Their own Race

Silver Linings in Blue Victories

/in , , , , /by

It’s been called a “rejection,” “rebuke,” and “disaster” for Republicans, but are last night’s election results really as significant as the media’s making them out to be? Some experts say no. After a string of special election beatings, the victories for Democrats Ralph Northam (Va.) and Phil Murphy (N.J.) are a huge relief to an embattled Left. Watching blue states like Virginia and New Jersey deal a death blow to the GOP’s hopes of recapturing the governor’s mansion was gratifying to liberals, but not incredibly surprising. As CNBC warns its overly exuberant counterparts, these are states that have been “swinging for Democrats for almost two decades.”

“The consensus take on the sweeping wins for the Democrats in the Old Dominion is that this is a repudiation of President Donald Trump, his policies, and his political tone. Not exactly,” warns Jake Novak.

“What the election results really prove without a doubt is that Virginia is now undeniably blue. The Democrats have won the state three straight times in presidential elections, four of the last five governor’s elections, and the once solid red state even has two Democrats representing it in the U.S. Senate. The reasons this has happened are a series of demographic and political factors that were in motion long before Donald Trump became a candidate.”

While the Left is exchanging morning-after high fives, all is hardly lost.

The media’s narrative is that this is a repudiation of President Trump’s agenda. But that doesn’t necessarily jive with other races in Virginia, which, with the exception of Gillespie, were much tighter. In fact, the more conservative down-ticket candidates (like those vying for attorney general and lieutenant governor) won more votes than Gillespie. Liberal donors managed to capture a significant number of statehouse seats, whose campaigns they’d been targeting with significant contributions for months. Republicans couldn’t compete financially — or, it turns out, emotionally.

President Trump, Novak points out, “needn’t worry so much about Virginia, but he should be concerned about Democratic organizing and get-out-the-vote efforts.” The enthusiasm gap definitely favored Democrats, who flooded the polls, turning out eight percent more voters — 28 percent — than 2013. Interestingly enough, it wasn’t a lack of participation on evangelicals’ part that cost Gillespie and others (turnout was only down a single point — to 27 percent — from 2013). Conservatives just couldn’t seem to match the fervor on the other side. Even so, Gillespie still raked in 79 percent of the white evangelical vote compared to 81 percent for Cuccinelli and 80 percent for Trump.

Meanwhile, not all of the news for Democrats was good. They may have won the biggest prizes in New Jersey and the extension of the swamp in Virginia, but they certainly aren’t winning any popularity contests. Analysts were stunned by favorability ratings for the party, which spell disaster once the broader electorate is engaged. As Ryan Struyk tweeted, a lot of Americans seem to have held their noses to vote. “Some frightening splits in new @CNN poll for Dems. Only 48 percent of nonwhites and 33 percent of people under 35 (!) have favorable view of Dem party.” That’s a big picture problem for the democrats, who are facing record highs in disapproval. CNN reports, “Only 37 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of Democrats, down from 44 percent in March of this year. A majority, 54 percent have an unfavorable view, matching their highest mark in polls from CNN and SSRS, CNN/ORC and CNN/USA Today/Gallup stretching back to 1992.”

Of course, the news isn’t exactly rosy for Republicans either, who are feeling the heat of a series of congressional missteps. With Trump’s agenda hampered at almost every turn (in a GOP-controlled Congress), you can’t blame voters for venting their frustration. When Democrats overstep on social issues (as many blame Hillary Clinton for doing in 2016), Americans turn to Republicans — who often fail to act, despite the mandate they’ve been given. Obviously, if the GOP has any hope of preserving its majority, the Senate will have to pull itself together on the big ticket-items before voters have a chance to reconsider.

The takeaway from Tuesday’s results is this: these two states are an extremely small sample size of mainly blue voters. The real test will come in Alabama, the heart of Trump country, where the special election for Jeff Session’s old Senate seat will give us a much better indication of what Americans are thinking. Even now, though, in swing states like Pennsylvania, the support for the president runs deep. Virtually unscathed by the congressional drama, the president still polls well in purple states. In a fascinating article, Politico tries to explain why Trump’s base is still rallying around the president, supplying the bulk of his rocky approval ratings.

“Over the course of three rainy, dreary days last week,” Michael Kruse writes, “I revisited and shook hands with the president’s base — that thirty-something percent of the electorate who resolutely approve of the job he is doing, the segment of voters who share his view that the Russia investigation is a ‘witch hunt’ that ‘has nothing to do with him,’ and who applaud his judicial nominees and his determination to gut the federal regulatory apparatus… In spite of unprecedented unpopularity — nearly all people who voted for Trump would do it again.”

As we saw with Clinton, who was abandoned by blue collar voters for her extreme social stance (“the Democratic Party cared more about where someone else went to the restroom than whether they had a good-paying job”), Middle America still embraces Trump’s agenda. But they also understand his limitations without a cooperative Congress. “I asked [voter Pam] Schilling what would happen if the next three years go the way the last one has,” Kruse shares. “‘I’m not going to blame him,'” Schilling said. “‘Absolutely not.'”

“Next to [another person I was interviewing] was a gray-haired man who told me he voted for Trump and was happy so far because ‘he’s kept his promises.'”

“I asked which ones.”

“‘Border security.’ But there’s no wall yet. “‘No fault of his,’ the man said.”

“What else? ‘Getting rid of Obamacare.’ But he hasn’t. ‘Well, he’s tried to.'”

“What else? ‘Defunding Planned Parenthood.’ But he didn’t. ‘Not his fault again,’ the man said.”

As for Tuesday’s results, liberals have the momentum — that much is clear. But it’s nothing a determined the GOP House and Senate can’t wrestle back with big wins on tax reform and health care. It’s not an impossible task for conservatives, but it’s certainly an urgent one.

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

Also in the November 8 Washington Update:

The Korean War on Faith

Delaware, Beware, of Kids Choosing Their own Race

VIDEO: President Trump shunned ‘fancy lunch’ to dine with U.S. and South Korean soldiers

/in , , /by

Conservative Fighters reported:

n Tuesday, President Donald Trump visited South Korea as part of his Asia trip. He gave a speech about the trade deficit and then sat down for lunch. But the decision of whom he ate with is awesome.

Trump was given the option to have a fancy lunch with South Korean President Moon Jae-In but insisted on sitting down for “Taco Tuesday” with the troops.

Trump said:

“I had a choice of having a beautiful, very fancy lunch and I said no, I want to eat with the troops and we ate with the troops.”

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of President Donald Trump speaks with South Korean President Moon Jae-in and troops from both nations over lunch at Camp Humphreys, South Korea, Tuesday, Nov. 7, 2017. MARCUS FICHTL/STARS AND STRIPES

Democrat Who Opposes Sanctuary Cities Wins Virginia Governor’s Race

/in , , , , , /by

In the Virginia gubernatorial race Tuesday between Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam and Ed Gillespie, immigration was a key issue.

Northam, 58, the 40th and current lieutenant governor of Virginia, won, and had 925,203 votes or 51.8 percent of the vote with 74 percent of precincts reporting, according to The New York Times.

Gillespie, 56, a former chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia and the Republican National Committee as well as counselor to President George W. Bush, had 869,346 votes or 46.8 percent with 76 percent of the precincts reporting, according to The New York Times.

“Clearly immigration has played a significant role in the campaign,” Mark Krikorian, executive director at the Center for Immigration Studies, a nonpartisan immigration research organization, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview, adding:

Don’t take my word for it, ask Ralph Northam. He was first boasting about having cast the deciding vote to kill an anti-sanctuary bill in the Legislature when he was lieutenant governor.

After Gillespie aired an ad that claimed that Northam cast a deciding vote on Feb. 22 in favor of sanctuary cities, Krikorian said Northam’s stance on immigration changed.

[Since] Gillespie’s ads criticizing MS-13 and sanctuary cities, Northam has now flipped and said that if some city did declare it a sanctuary, he would act to stop it if he were governor.

In an article published Nov. 1, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported:

In an interview Wednesday with the Norfolk TV station WAVY, Northam said for the first time that, under certain circumstances, he would sign a bill similar to the one he voted against this year, a vote that spawned a wave of ominous ads from the Gillespie campaign linking Northam to the Latino gang MS-13.

‘If that bill comes to by desk … I sure will. I’ve always been opposed to sanctuary cities. He knows that,’ Northam said of Gillespie …

The Center for Immigration Studies lists Arlington County and Chesterfield County in Virginia as sanctuary cities.

Northam’s position on sanctuary cities drew criticism from some on the left. Progressive group Democracy for America’s executive director Charles Chamberlain released this statement last week:

Ralph Northam’s gutless, politically senseless, and morally debased decision yesterday to openly backtrack on his commitment to standing up for immigrant families is a picture-perfect example of why Democracy for America never endorsed him in the primary … It’s also why, today, we’re announcing that we will no longer do any work to directly aid Northam’s gubernatorial efforts.

Ezra Levin, co-founder of Indivisible, which describes itself as having a “mission … to fuel a progressive grassroots network of local groups to resist the Trump agenda,” tweeted this about Northam’s position:

Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, agrees the immigration issue was influential in the Old Dominion’s 2017 governor’s race.

“Given the fact that Virginians are concerned about sanctuary cities like Virginia Beach and with recent reports of noncitizens voting in Virginia elections, there’s no question that immigration was probably a factor in how Virginians voted,” von Spakovsky told The Daily Signal in an interview.

President Donald Trump made his support of Gillespie no secret on social media.

Trump also participated in a robo call for Gillespie on Tuesday.

“Ed will protect your family from crime, drugs, and violence—something Northam will never do. And Ed loves the vets, loves the military, and loves your Second Amendment,” Trump said during the call.

Ken Cuccinelli, the 46th attorney general of Virginia from 2010-2014, told The Daily Signal in an interview that Democrats worked to make the gubernatorial race about race and immigration. Gillespie’s focus on MS-13, a gang with ties to illegal immigrants, drew criticism from some.

“The other side tried to turn it into a race-baiting thing,” Cuccinelli said, adding:

The problem is, it wasn’t race-baiting, it was fact-telling, and you know, they don’t deal well with the truth, and so it began an interesting back and forth, [but] they overreacted so badly that it really played into Gillespie’s hands to then push again the factual subject, [that] Northam had a vote where he supported sanctuary cities, arguably, and then Northam flip-flopped on it.

The former Virginia attorney general said an ad that came out by the Latino Victory Project in opposition to Gillespie further illustrated how the left distorted Gillespie’s stance on immigration.

“It falls in the category of the left just going overboard … the other side has done it with some of their over-the-top, basically false bigotry charges, and that ad was the granddaddy of them all on that front,” Cuccinelli said.

Logan Churchwell, communications and research director at Public Interest Legal Foundation, a law firm centered on election integrity, told The Daily Signal in an interview that the truck ad illustrated how liberals framed the immigration discussion.

“That truck ad was despicable, and I think it puts in video form how some political interests are comfortable leveraging and exploiting first generation immigrant populations to basically generate a political outcome in the elections that they are hoping for,” Churchwell said.

The ad was taken down Oct. 31, and Cristóbal J. Alex, president of the Latino Victory Fund, said in a statement posted on Twitter that the ad “held a mirror up to the Republican Party, and they don’t like what they see.”

New Jersey choose Democrat Phil Murphy over Republican Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno as its next governor Tuesday night.

The Center for Immigration Studies lists Middlesex County, Newark, Ocean County, and Union County as sanctuary cities in New Jersey.

The issue is not going away anytime soon, said Krikorian at the Center for Immigration Studies.

Continual attention to immigration enforcement as an anti-gang tool is going to be essential, and Northern Virginia is going to have a very direct interest in national immigration policy trying to limit the influx of central American illegal immigrants, because this area is, after Los Angeles, the No. 2 location in the country for Central Americans and … their communities inevitably serve as cover and incubators for these kinds of national criminal gangs, MS-13 [being] just the most notorious of them.

Portrait of Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice is a reporter for The Daily Signal. She is a graduate of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Forge Leadership Network, and The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. Send an email to Rachel. Twitter: @LRacheldG.

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

Trump White House Recognizes 100 Years of Victims of Communism [+Podcast]

/in , , , /by

The White House issued a statement Tuesday commemorating the National Day for the Victims of Communism, on the 100th anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution that led to decades of a murderous totalitarian regime in the Soviet Union.

The statement came the same day that President Donald Trump visited South Korea, which is facing a nuclear threat from its communist neighbor North Korea.

The statement says “oppressive communism” is “incompatible with liberty, prosperity, and the dignity of human life.” The statement continues:

Over the past century, communist totalitarian regimes around the world have killed more than 100 million people and subjected countless more to exploitation, violence, and untold devastation. These movements, under the false pretense of liberation, systematically robbed innocent people of their God-given rights of free worship, freedom of association, and countless other rights we hold sacrosanct. Citizens yearning for freedom were subjugated by the state through the use of coercion, violence, and fear. … Today, we remember those who have died and all who continue to suffer under communism.

Recognizing the current victims of communism was an important step, said Marion Smith, executive director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation.

“What’s particularly important about the [White House] statement is that it mentions all who die and continue to suffer under communism,” Smith told The Daily Signal.

Podcast: Half of Millennials Would Prefer to Live in Socialist or Communist Country.

“Typically the last few presidents have shied away from acknowledging North Korea, China, Cuba, Laos, and Vietnam are communist,” Smith continued. “That’s something we haven’t really heard since President [Ronald] Reagan in connecting the ideas of communism with the consequences.”

Smith noted that President George W. Bush was the last president to recognize the victims of communism, as he was the honorary chairman of the memorial in 2007.

Communism once consumed much of Europe, but now only exists in five countries. That’s largely because the system was such a failure, said Lee Edwards, a distinguished fellow at The Heritage Foundation.

“It’s important to have an acknowledgement from the White House the Bolshevik Revolution was the god that failed,” Edwards told The Daily Signal.

“Communism promised peace, land, and freedom and failed to deliver. Instead of peace, there were decades of communist wars. It took land from people and put them in communes, which resulted in famines.”

Portrait of Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal. Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLES:

New House Caucus Stands Against Communism and for Its Victims

Why Won’t The Nightmare Dream Of Communism Die?

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

FULL TEXT: National Day for the Victims of Communism

Today, the National Day for the Victims of Communism, marks 100 years since the Bolshevik Revolution took place in Russia. The Bolshevik Revolution gave rise to the Soviet Union and its dark decades of oppressive communism, a political philosophy incompatible with liberty, prosperity, and the dignity of human life.

Over the past century, communist totalitarian regimes around the world have killed more than 100 million people and subjected countless more to exploitation, violence, and untold devastation. These movements, under the false pretense of liberation, systematically robbed innocent people of their God-given rights of free worship, freedom of association, and countless other rights we hold sacrosanct. Citizens yearning for freedom were subjugated by the state through the use of coercion, violence, and fear.

Today, we remember those who have died and all who continue to suffer under communism. In their memory and in honor of the indomitable spirit of those who have fought courageously to spread freedom and opportunity around the world, our Nation reaffirms its steadfast resolve to shine the light of liberty for all who yearn for a brighter, freer future.