VIDEO: Why ‘The Perfect Man’ billboard was brilliant

Here is an interstate billboard in Indiana that describes “The Perfect Man”. Each statement on the billboard is factual according to the biography & traditions of the “Perfect Man”.

The billboard attacked Islam at its weakest point – the prophet of Allah.  Don’t argue about the Koran, instead use Mohammed.  The Koran is confusing and dualistic, but Mohammed is simple to understand.

My latest video discusses the topic of Islam and inbreeding.

Inbreeding is a crime against future humanity. Inbreeding is both Sunna of Mohammed & in the Koran. Unfortunately, according to Sharia (divine Islamic law) inbreeding is permitted.

Subscribe to my Youtube Channel PoliticalIslam, and access over 150 of my videos. 

News Update

I support this effort. Join with others & take the pledge to read the Koran.

The only way to know for sure what’s true about Islam is to read the Koran yourself.

To understand the Koran requires the historical context of Mohammed’s life. Both An Abridged Koran & A Simple Koran have done this and arranged events in chronological order to provide clarity and meaning for the reader. These books are available below.

Supreme Court decision on ‘travel ban’ and refugee ceiling reduction eminent

According to AP at ABC News, here, they have likely already decided and an announcement will come next week.

There are two major issues at stake (maybe more than two, but two for me!).  The first is whether the President has the authority to ban, for a limited time, all entry to the US from six (mostly Muslim countries that are hotbeds of terrorism) in order to keep us safe while they review the entry screening process.  Again, this involves all those of all religions and ethnic groups entering the US through any means from those six countries.

The second issue, and the one more interesting to me, is the one addressed by the Hawaii court (9th Circuit), but NOT by the Maryland court (4th Circuit), and that is whether the President has the legal right to come in at any number below the refugee admissions CEILING set last fall (in this case set by Obama), or more specifically has a legal right to announce a mid-year lowering of the admission ceiling for all refugees, of all religions, from all countries! And, does he have the legal authority to put in place a 120-day moratorium (again all countries, all religions) while the federal government reviews the screening process for refugees.

Presidents always come in under the CEILING, some by very significant numbers, and no one has legally challenged previous presidents on that issue.  There may have been some squawking by federal refugee contractors***, who receive a large portion of their budget based on a per head payment, when Bush came in way low in the wake of 9/11, but I don’t think he was taken to court over it.

See what I said here about how Obama failed to reach some of his ceilings:

In FY2011, they were 23,576 below the CEILING. Did anyone sue President Obama?

In FY2012, they were 17,762 below the CEILING. Did anyone sue President Obama for leaving thousands “stranded in war-torn countries”?

I have my fingers crossed that Justice Department lawyers knew enough to separate the two issues (the overall travel ban from the CEILING issue) which should never have been addressed in the same Executive Order in the first place.

Here is what ABC is reporting:

The Supreme Court has almost certainly decided what to do about President Donald Trump’s travel ban affecting citizens of six mostly Muslim countries.

The country is waiting for the court to make its decision public about the biggest legal controversy in the first five months of Trump’s presidency. The issue has been tied up in the courts since Trump’s original order in January sparked widespread protests just days after he took office.

The justices met Thursday morning for their last regularly scheduled private conference in June and probably took a vote about whether to let the Trump administration immediately enforce the ban and hear the administration’s appeal of lower court rulings blocking the ban.

The court’s decision could come any time and is expected no later than late next week…..

[….]

The case is at the Supreme Court because two federal appellate courts have ruled against the Trump travel policy, which would impose a 90-day pause in travel from citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, said the ban was “rooted in religious animus” toward Muslims and pointed to Trump’s campaign promise to impose a ban on Muslims entering the country as well as tweets and remarks he has made since becoming president.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the travel policy does not comply with federal immigration law, including a prohibition on nationality-based discrimination.

That court also put a hold on separate aspects of the policy that would keep all refugees out of the United States for 120 days and cut by more than half, from 110,000 to 50,000, the cap on refugees in the current government spending year that ends Sept. 30.

More here.

If the court rules against Trump on this last point, I see the contractors getting what they always wanted—the President’s determination set in September in advance of the fiscal year would become a TARGET that must be reached, and not simply a CEILING not to be exceeded.  (The Refugee Act of 1980 does have a mechanism for increasing the ceiling during the course of the year that requires consultation with Congress, but is silent if the President comes in low.)

For a laugh, as the contractors argue in the Supreme Court that the President (in this case, Donald Trump) doesn’t have the right to set the ceiling, they say this (see here) about a bill in Congress that would eliminate some Presidential power to set the ceiling:

“….it would remove presidential authority to set the number of refugees who may enter the country per year.”

Make up your minds—does the President have the power or not? Truth be told, this is about Donald Trump and not if the president was Mark Zuckerberg!

***Federal refugee resettlement contractors are paid by you, on a per head basis, to place refugees in your towns:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

So did President Trump get blindsided by Dept. of State announcement last month?

LA Times headline is deceptive (yes, can you believe it!)

Zuckerberg in Minnesota….running for Prez in 2020?

How Trump Could Change the Country’s Direction With These Court Vacancies

INTERSECTIONALITY: Leftist Politics Designed to Fail

America is a divided nation and supports two distinct narratives – the narrative of survivors and the narrative of victims.

The survivor mentality created America and is defined by its core values of independence, equality, and freedom. It is supported by institutions promoting growth, independence, sovereignty, and the common denominator of American nationalism. The survivor narrative is the narrative of President Donald Trump.

The victim mentality was created to deconstruct America and is defined by its core values of dependence, inequality, and escape from freedom. It is supported by institutions promoting regression, dependence, internationalism, and the common denominator of globalism. The victim mentality is the narrative of the Left and Liberalism – America’s newest religion. Nationalists and Globalists have irreconcilable differences because their fundamental premises are diametrically opposed to one another. Americans must choose between them.

Liberalism disingenuously presents itself as tolerant because it crosses all racial, ethnic, gender, religious, and socio-economic boundaries. But Liberalism only tolerates those who look differently – Liberalism is completely intolerant of anyone who thinks differently. Liberalism, like any orthodoxy, is tyrannical in its demand for conformity. Its adherents pursue Liberalism’s tenets of political correctness, moral relativism, and historical revisionism with religious zeal and narrow-mindedness.

Liberalism’s intolerance explains its inability to debate or discuss opposing ideas – Liberalism demands censorship and safe spaces instead. Liberalism’s intolerance explains its inability to withstand rational scrutiny – Liberalism provides the echo chamber of fake news instead. Liberalism’s intolerance explains its inability to have civilized discourse or follow the rule of law – Liberalism foments anarchy instead. Liberalism’s sinister goal is the destruction of American democracy and its transformation into Socialism. Socialism is the hope and change that radical socialist Barack Obama promoted when he was elected. Most Americans had no idea what hope and change meant to the man who was the most anti-American lawless president in United States history.

So, what did Barack Obama need to fulfill his dream of destroying American democracy? He needed the politics of intersectionality. He needed Hillary Clinton’s “unaware and compliant public.” He needed the empty promises of sloganism.

Intersectionality, the preferred designation of the Left, is simply a descriptor for self-defined group victimhood based on feelings not facts. If you feel life is not fair – you are a victim. If you feel you have been marginalized in any way – you are a victim. If you feel your maleness or femaleness is threatened in any way – you are a victim. If someone says something you don’t like – you are a victim. This is a child’s view of the world.

Victimhood by definition lacks power – identifying oneself as a powerless entity is a self-sabotaging catastrophic strategy that only leads to more powerlessness – childish whining about victimhood perpetuates the status of childish powerlessness.

Self-actualization and a survivor attitude are the strategies for growth and empowerment. Achievement is the mother of self-esteem – actual achievement in objective reality not the sloganism or fiction that “trying is the same as achieving” promoted in the subjective reality of intersectionality.

The escape from victimhood and powerlessness comes from individual achievement – it does not derive from demanding that the environment change to meet the ever increasing inappropriate demands of chronological adults behaving like children. Lowering standards is not equivalent to achievement – it is just lowering standards.

Intersectionality demands are the demands of children that the environment change to meet their needs. It is the wrong answer to the right problem. Achievement is what propels a child toward adulthood. Consider the child who first feeds himself with his fingers and feels empowered – then he wants to feed himself with a fork – then he wants to drink from a cup. Success encourages success and failure encourages failure.

Intersectionality says “I feel victimized because my sister can feed herself with her fingers and I cannot.” “Don’t feel bad,” says the enabling mother, “I will always feed you.”

Intersectionality says “I feel victimized because my sister can feed herself with a fork and I cannot.” “Don’t feel bad,” says the enabling mother, “I will always feed you with a fork.”

Intersectionality says “I feel victimized because my sister can drink from a cup and I cannot.” “Don’t feel bad,” says the enabling mother, “I will always hold your cup for you.”

The enabling mother is co-dependent and destructive. She presents herself as the child’s advocate but really she is keeping the child dependent on herself for her own selfish needs. She is a destroyer. So it is with governments. Governments that incentivize their citizens to remain dependent do so for their own benefit – the votes that will keep them in power. The victimhood and dependence that intersectionality incentivizes is extremely destructive. Just as the enabling mother cripples her child so does the enabling government cripple its citizens.

Intersectionality results in perpetual childhood, dependence, powerlessness, and angry feelings of victimhood over lack of accomplishment and jealousy for those who have actually achieved. Intersectionality that promotes victimhood and socialism’s cradle-to-grave dependence on the government is as crippling to society as the co-dependent mother is to her child. A survivor mentality results in adulthood, independence, empowerment, self-respect, and the self-esteem that achievement produces. A survivor mentality is what made America great and the most powerful nation in the world.

Intersectionality and the culture of victimhood is the flawed strategy of dependence, collectivism, and death because when Mama dies there is no one there to feed the baby. As Margaret Thatcher so succinctly remarked “Socialism cannot work because eventually you run out of other people’s money.” A productive society requires its children to become productive adults. A society of children will necessarily extinguish itself.

Socialism, the goal of intersectionality, is a political system designed to fail.

Social policy based on the self-defined group victimhood of intersectionality cannot succeed in the real world because the cycle of life requires achievement – eventually the child must grow up and learn to eat and drink on his/her own. The noisy cry-bullies on campuses who graduate with useless degrees in fields of “feelings” not facts will find themselves unemployable. What can they do? They have learned nothing useful for work in the real world and their attitudes make them unemployable. The universities may tolerate their tantrums while their mommies and daddies or the government is paying their tuition but employers are not going to pay for the privilege of their childish outbursts.

Restraint, discipline, and self-control are hallmarks of adulthood – the cry-bullies and anarchists that graduate college have nothing to offer in the workplace but infantile tantrums when they do not get their way or are expected to work and produce something. Effort and achievement are not the same in the workplace. If colleges and universities are supposed to be preparing young people for life as adults they have failed their mission – unless of course their 21st century mission under Liberalism is to deliberately graduate unproductive dependent angry individuals who are “unaware and compliant” – exactly what Hillary Clinton described.

Unaware and compliant are the hallmarks of childhood. Why do the Democrats want a population of dependent children who are easily manipulated and controlled? Because the Democrats know that socialism requires a completely dependent population. As long as the Democrats have the population “hooked” on government handouts they will remain dependent, unaware, compliant, and voting Democratic.

Governments that incentivize the growth and independence of their citizens are builders. They incentivize jobs, self-respect, and the self-esteem that gainful employment supplies. President Donald Trump is a builder – his narrative is that of the survivor and his message is to be an empowered adult. Ex-president Obama continues to be a destroyer – his “resistance” narrative is that of the victim and his message is to be a dependent child.

The questions that Americans must answer are these, “Do I want to live as a dependent powerless child under socialism or as an empowered adult in a democracy?” “Do I want to be a victim or a survivor?” The answers to these two questions will determine the course of America.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Some People Love to Call Names

Circuit Court Win for Religious Freedom on Gay Marriage

RELATED VIDEO: Victimization Mentality of the Left

LAWFARE: Hindering President Trump from investigating Obama

The defeated Democrats are colluding with the mainstream media to create an echo chamber of false accusations, fake news, and demands for groundless investigations and frivolous lawsuits to impede President Trump and sabotage his administration by preoccupying them in court. The Trump administration is under siege.

The Democratic Party is not your mother’s Democratic Party. Today the party is composed of radical left-wing liberals and anarchists fully committed to destroying American democracy and replacing it with socialism. The Democrats today have no interest in making America strong and great again – they have the opposite agenda and intend to pursue Obama’s goal of weakening America toward socialism in preparation for Obama’s globalist ambition of one-world government.

The “resistance” movement lead by lawless Obama is designed to topple constitutionally elected President Donald Trump and create social chaos.

There are two tiers to the Democrats’ attack strategy. The blatant goal of toppling President Donald Trump disguises the primary objective of preventing Trump’s Department of Justice from investigating the criminal activities of the Obama administration. Investigations of Obama, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, Lois Lerner, John Brennan, James Comey and the corrupt Clinton Foundation would be devastating to the Democratic Party.

America is no stranger to war – we are just not used to Americans waging war against a sitting president. It is an extremely un-American and treasonous strategy the Democrats have embraced. Instead of complying with the rules of law and fielding a stronger candidate for the 2020 elections they have adopted the tactics of revolution and anarchy – it is appalling. The Democratic party is fomenting anarchy and attempting to delegitimize, destabilize, and topple the government of our constitutionally elected President Donald Trump.

The current strategy of the defeated Democrats still crying and trying to destroy American democracy is lawfareLawfare is a form of asymmetric warfare consisting of using the legal system against an enemy. Lawfare is designed to damage or delegitimize the enemy, tying up their time or winning a public relations victory by casting the pall of criminality and suspicion over them. The theory of lawfare against President Trump is that if the President and his administration are spending their time and resources defending themselves in court he will not be able to govern effectively, keep his promises to strengthen and make America great again, or investigate the criminal activities of Obama and his gang. The Democrats hope disappointment in President Trump will reward the Democrats with a gain of enough seats in the midterm election to impeach President Trump.

Even if the Democrats are unsuccessful in their goal to reverse the balance of power in the midterm elections, their objective is to make it impossible for President Trump to govern effectively and investigate criminality in Obama’s term. Lawfare is the preferred method being used by the Democrats to protect their lord and master Barack Hussein Obama – the greatest threat to American sovereignty and democracy since 1776.

First on the current list of lawfare activists is deceitful James Comey who deliberately leaked a memorandum of a conversation with President Trump saying he thought it might prompt the appointment of a special counsel to discover the truth about Russian interference in the 2016 election. Comey leaked the memo through Columbia Law School professor Daniel Richman who took it to the NYT. Comey deviously made his case for a special counsel by manipulating the colluding media. Later Comey contradicted himself and exposed his actual motive saying he hoped for a special counsel to corroborate his claims that President Trump had asked for his loyalty. Comey implicated himself and revealed his deceit – he was not looking to find the truth about Russia he was looking to bring down President Trump.

Comey was disingenuously presented to the American people by the colluding mainstream media as being bipartisan. In fact, Comey was the FBI director who replaced Mueller under Obama’s lawless presidency and with Lynch’s Justice Department refused to prosecute criminal acts of the Obama Administration. Obama was the King of of Lawlessness in America for eight years and Comey, Clinton, Holder, Lynch, Lerner, Brennan, and Rice were his vassals. This is a short list of unprosecuted crimes that Comey ignored or supported provided by The Millennium Report.

  • The infamous Iran deal
  • Hillary Clinton Benghazi gun running
  • Ambassador Steven’s death
  • Eric Holder’s Fast and Furious gun running
  • Hillary’s private server espionage and treason
  • Bush and Clinton bank bailouts
  • Bombing seven sovereign nations without congressional approval
  • Obama’s IBM Eclipse Foundation’s social networking patent theft
  • James Clapper’s illegal NSA/CIA/FBI surveillance and his perjury before Congress
  • Obama’s energy company subsidies
  • Obama’s misuse of banker fines to support liberal activist groups
  • Obama’s theft of Fannie May and Freddie Mack
  • Obama’s IRS targeting of conservatives
  • Obama and Clinton’s confiscations from the Bureau of Land Management
  • Planned Parenthood eugenics and baby parts trafficking
  • Gold, silver, and LIBOR rate rigging
  • Ignoring “missing person” reports and supporting human trafficking
  • Clinton Foundation theft of $2 billion under the guise of a Presidential Library fund
  • Hillary taking money from foreign nations while Secretary of State
  • Maintaining open borders and Sanctuary Cities
  • Refugee trafficking and fraud
  • Allowing overstayed visas of more than one million people
  • Non-enforcement of existing immigration laws

James Comey has been the fixer for the Clinton crime family for decades beginning in the 1990’s with Whitewater and most famously making the strong case for prosecuting Hillary Clinton for her illegal unsecured private basement server and then stunningly recommending against prosecution. What the public did not realize is that prosecuting Clinton could expose Comey himself which is why he is actually part of the Clinton email cover-up.

Next on the lawfare list is Robert Mueller, James Comey’s mentor and predecessor. Instead of investigating the blatant crimes of Obama and his administration for which there is ample evidence, Robert Mueller is now empowered as special prosecutor to investigate the imaginary crimes of President Trump with a twin purpose. Mueller will keep President Trump bogged down for two years under a false veil of suspicion until the midterm elections in service of the defeated Democrats hoping to regain seats, and more importantly Mueller’s deceitful investigation will hinder any investigation into the Obama administration by President Trump’s Justice Department.

It is incomprehensible why the Trump administration would ever have considered Clinton loyalist James Comey for FBI director or his equally biased mentor Robert Mueller for special prosecutor. Both are proven Obama/Clinton loyalists willing to sabotage President Trump’s presidency.

Third on the lawfare list are Governors Brown, Cuomo, and Inslee. These men are not stupid – they know that what they are doing is not legal and they cannot possibly win – but they do not care. Their bluster narrative is pure political theater intended to tie Trump up in court – more lawfare. Governors do not have the Constitutional authority to make agreements with foreign countries. They cannot usurp the power of the presidency. This treasonous ploy of theirs is just another ignominious example of the Democratic Party’s tactic of lawfare against President Trump.

The Climate Alliance of California, New York, Washington, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Oregon, Colorado, Hawaii, Virginia and Rhode Island has publicly declared on the New York State government website its intention to treasonously “convene U.S. states committed to upholding the Paris Climate Agreement.” Governor Jerry Brown pompously described President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Accord saying, “This is an insane move by this president – deviant behavior from the highest office in the land.”

Really? Insane? Deviant?

Let’s talk about the meaning of insanity and deviant behavior because words matter.

Insanity is defined as unsoundness of mind or lack of the ability to understand that prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or that releases one from criminal or civil responsibility. President Donald Trump was perfectly clear when he explained in a cogent argument that the Paris Accord was extremely harmful to America. So, by definition President Trump’s withdrawal from Obama’s unlawful ant-American agreement was not insane.

The Governors Three by contrast all seem to have serious identity issues – they are out of touch with reality and do not seem to know who they are. They appear confused and  without the soundness of mind to correctly identify themselves as governors and not the president of the United States. Perhaps they missed or slept through the civics class that taught that governors have zero authority to enter agreements or treaties with foreign nations and, in fact, such agreements are a criminal offense in strict violation of the Logan Act. The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that details the fine and/or imprisonment of unauthorized citizens who negotiate with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States.

Deviant is defined as departing from usual or accepted standards. If anyone’s behavior was deviant it was Obama’s when he made the unsanctioned Paris Agreement because he failed to protect the economic interests of the United States. The agreement itself was contemptuous of Congress and the democratic process. It was an example of Obama’s executive overreach and deeply divisive governance.

President Donald Trump recognized the non-binding Paris Agreement made by Obama without Congressional approval to be harmful to the United States. So, by definition President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the agreement followed the accepted standard of an American president protecting America and American interests.

All three governors are public officers sworn to protect America and uphold the Constitution – by entering into agreements they are not authorized to make, particularly agreements that fail to protect American interest, they are derelict in their duties and have, like Obama, deviated from accepted norms. This left-wing liberal threesome are colluding with the international community to de-industrialize America by damaging our mining industries and redistributing our wealth to non-industrialized nations.

It appears that if anyone is insane or deviant the award goes to Democratic Governors Brown, Cuomo, and Inslee.

Perhaps California Governor Brown, New York Governor Cuomo, and Washington Governor Inslee will use an insanity defense to absolve themselves of treason charges for their U.S. Climate Alliance attempts to uphold the anti-American Paris Climate Agreement that President Donald Trump decisively rejected.

Carolyn Glick summarized the path forward for President Trump succinctly saying, “It is time for Trump to delegate the dirty work of attacking his opponents to his attorneys, advisers and supporters. He must devote his public appearances entirely to advancing his own presidential agenda. By firing Mueller, appointing a special counsel to investigate the Obama administration, removing Obama’s political appointees from government and replacing them with his own hires, and concentrating on implementing his agenda, Trump will end the siege on his presidency. He will defeat the self-proclaimed ‘resistance’ whose purpose is to defeat him politically through administrative and bureaucratic abuses.”

It is also time for President Trump to renew an American tradition of speaking (not tweeting) directly to the American people in weekly televised broadcasts from the Oval Office that inform Americans about the efforts and accomplishments of his administration and their progress in making America great again. President Trump was elected by the people for the people and he must speak directly to the people because the mainstream media is colluding with the defeated Democrats to destroy him. President Trump can resist the resistance movement and expose the fabricated lawfare being waged against him by ignoring the media and speaking directly to the American public.

What Alcoholics, Democrats and the Catholic Hierarchy Have in Common

The ability to accept reality is fading in the U.S. Freedom is failing as minorities insist on their rights like eating a piece of pie from the middle.  “A house divided against itself cannot stand”, Abraham Lincoln.

As a young medical intern 50 years ago, I had a patient in the emergency room who had succumbed to the stresses of running a half-way house for alcoholics. As he mended, I went to an Alcoholic Anonymous meeting with him and appreciated two pamphlets I was given: “Alcoholism is a Merry-Go-Round Named Denial,” and “How to Help an Alcoholic Who Insists He Doesn’t Need Any Help.”

The alcoholic denies he has a problem with alcohol. It’s the fault of the kids, the wife, or the boss. There’s an inability to deal with reality without a drink and it affects everyone in his world.

The political views of some leaders, especially Democrats, are intolerance of reality.

They lost the election but there’s an inability to wait for another opportunity while working together to solve mutual problems. Washington, D.C. has been called the alcoholic capitol of the U.S. and politicians seem bent on rule or hostility, egged on by mainstream media that are willing to crumble the cookie by fighting over it. In a WND.com article titled 1 Nation, No More? Joseph Farah warns media’s propaganda war could ‘explode into a shooting war’. Farah writes:

The U.S. motto, “e pluribus unum,” no longer applies.

We don’t live up to the phrase “out of many, one.” We don’t even try.

It’s passé. The opposite is where we’re heading – “out of one, many.” We have lost our commonality. We have shattered the bonds that once held us together – namely the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and the values that inspired them.

Everyone is beginning to notice it. The evidence is in the explosive, vitriolic political rhetoric of the day.

According to a new CBS News poll, three-quarters of Americans feel the current tone of politics and debate is encouraging violence among some people. Violence, not dissent. Violence, not just passion. Violence, not constructive change.

Read more.

The media portray the Catholic leadership as divided over the Pope Francis’ liberal ways, but if this nation needs UN peace-keepers, the Pope will be the power behind the throne to favor the end of U.S. sovereignty.

What we are seeing is the creation of problems and a crisis for which they have the answers.

Truth be told, the Bible offers insight to a coming New World Order. In the books of Daniel and the Revelation, we find world governments depicted as fierce beasts of prey in Daniel 7 where Rome was represented by the 4th beast and the papacy by the little horn that grew out of it. This was supported by Protestant reformers who all saw the abuse of papal power (and why early Americans fled the Old World) as fitting Daniel’s description.

Revelation 13 picks up where Daniel 7 left off. Even though it was written centuries before the Holy Roman Empire, the beast in verse 1 is an amalgamation of Daniel’s beasts that the papacy survived. Then the US (2nd beast, verse 11, causes the world to make an image—a look-alike to the Old World Order. New World Order is what’s coming, also seen by the papacy riding that beast in Revelation 17 where all the clues can only fit one church, also called the Mother of Harlots (false churches that no longer protest her).

Here’s a prophetic view of reality,

“When the time comes and men realize that the social edifice must be rebuilt according to eternal standards, be it tomorrow, or be it centuries from now, the Catholics will arrange things to suit said standards.”

“Undeterred by [others]…They will make obligatory the religious observance of Sunday on behalf of the whole of society and for its own good, revoking the permit for freethinkers and Jews to celebrate incognito, Monday or Saturday on their own account. Those whom this may annoy, will have to put up with the annoyance. Respect will not be refused to the Creator nor repose denied to the creature simply for the sake of humoring certain maniacs, whose frenetic condition causes them stupidly and insolently to block the will of a whole people.” (The Liberal Illusion, Louis Veuillot, published by the National Catholic Welfare Conference, Washington, D.C.).

Never mind that ‘Sunday’ (their creation, also day of pagan sun worship) isn’t commanded in the Bible and “the first day” (reference to what we know as Sunday) is only found once in the book of Acts while “Sabbath” is found nine times—three times as “every Sabbath”–the custom of the apostles. They saw no change in the day of worship. Not Sunday, but baptism by immersion is the Bible symbol to honor the resurrection as we rise to walk in a new, Christian life—not by sprinkling an infant that has no understanding.

This isn’t against sincere Catholics, but against a system that fails to teach the Bible as the basis of life and salvation, Matthew 4:4; 23:9.

RELATED VIDEO: Pope Francis recently met with the delegation of the Communion of Reformed Churches which unites 225 Protestant churches and 100 countries representing at least 80 million Christians. The purpose of this meeting was to promote Christian unity and advance the Ecumenical Movement. Should Protestant churches be seeking unity with the Roman Catholic Church and participate in the Ecumenical Movement?

RELATED VIDEO: Make the Church Great Again.

Steadfast Czechs Fight on Against EU Gun Control

The European Union’s new restrictions on firearms ownership were finalized on May 24, when the misguided changes to the European Firearms Directive were published in the political bloc’s Official Journal. Despite this setback, the Czech Republic has made clear that the country will continue its fight for European firearms freedom.

To quickly recap, following the November 13, 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris, the EU expedited plans to curtail gun ownership across the political union. Of most concern to European gun owners was a new restriction on the ownership of certain types of semi-automatic firearms. However, the legislation also included more stringent requirements for member state-issued firearms licenses, and measures that implicated gun owner privacy. After significant negotiations between the European Parliament and European Council to reform the European Commission’s flawed draft, the final contours of the legislation were agreed to last December. Since the announcement of the European Commission’s draft proposal, the Czech Republic has been among the harshest critics of the gun control legislation. 

On June 14, Czech Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka announced the country’s intention to challenge the new restrictions in the European Court of Justice. Reporting on the development, Agence France-Presse quoted Czech Interior Minister Milan Chovanec, who stated, “We cannot allow the EU to interfere in the position of member states and their citizens under the guise of fighting terrorism” adding, “I’m not happy about the complaint but we have no other option.”

The move came after deliberation by the Czech government, during which some Czech politicians were reluctant to challenge the new controls. However, throughout the process, Chovanec was adamant about the need to confront the new restrictions. On June 8, the Czech News Agency reported that the Interior Minister viewed the EU’s arguments about thwarting terrorism a “mere pretext” to impose the new controls. Expressing his severe disdain for the EU’s gun controls, Chovanec noted “In my opinion, the directive should not be implemented even if it meant that Europe will sanction the country.”

The Czech Republic has a strong tradition of civilian gun ownership and firearms manufacturing, and in recent years has made significant efforts to protect their proud heritage. In addition to confronting the changes to the European Firearms Directive directly, some Czech politicians have supported a change to the Czech constitution that would guarantee the right to keep and bear arms. Further, in July 2016, Czech President Milos Zeman expressed his support for an armed citizenry to confront terrorist threats.

The Czechs have until August 17 to file their formal complaint against the new European Firearms Directive with the European Court of Justice. NRA-ILA will continue to follow the Czechs in their crucial struggle for freedom and apprise U.S. gun owners of any new developments.

7th-year Republican Florida representative claims freshman status to evade 8-year term limit

The ugly hubris that accompanies entrenched power has been noted since human beings started taking notes. Here’s another card for the file:

FL Rep. James “J.W.” Grant (R – District 64)

In Tampa, 7th-year legislator Rep. James Grant is facing his last term in office under Florida’s 8-year term limits law. How is he choosing to finish out his public service?  By filing for re-election and throwing his hat in the ring for Speaker of the House.

No, I am not kidding.

In a case reminiscent of the veteran Palm Beach Gardens City Council member who resigned a few months early in order to restart his term limits clock, Rep. Grant is claiming that because of irregularities which led to a re-vote in his election in 2014, somehow he went back in time and became a freshman legislator.

That is particularly convenient as a meeting of all Republican freshmen is scheduled for Friday, June 30, in Orlando to choose a new speaker of the House for 2022-24. It is a secret meeting but the word is that 7th-year legislator Grant, class of 2010, will be there to cast a vote for himself.

If Rep. Grant wins, he will be dragging his party through the muck, as surely both controversy and litigation will dog their would-be leader from next Friday until he leaves office.  It will also be a slap in the face for voters who approved the 8-year term limits law by 77% back in 1992. Polls show there has been no diminution of support for the law since then.

In Palm Beach Gardens, the local political and media establishment initially circled the wagons around one of their own, offering circuitous technicalities to justify keeping power.  We are seeing this phenomenon to some degree with Rep. Grant as well, as a handful of his party colleagues and even some Tampa media are arguing for giving their golden boy a pass.

But courts are better at resisting group-think and political pressure.  In the Palm Beach Gardens case, the Fourth District Court of Appeals threw that politician out of office in June of last year.  There is no reason to expect the courts will afford Rep. Grant any special dispensation. In fact, U.S. Term limits does not know of any case in any state — ever — where a long-time state legislator busted a voter-approved term limit using this technicality.

(For nit-pickers, this is not a case of a freshman legislator being elected to a partial term via special election.  In such a case, Florida’s law does not count the partial term against the legislator’s term limit. The case here is that the re-election of a veteran, incumbent legislator was flubbed and a second vote was held a few months later. The election SNAFU hardly obviates his past consecutive years of service.)

But the sad truth is that justice will only prevail if voters raise their voices (and maybe eventually money for court fees) to object.  Rep. Grant is betting we won’t.

Let’s prove him wrong by using THIS LINK to inform our own state reps what is going on.

TAKE ACTION: Click on the image to send a message to stop this scam.

What you can say, when they say ______

I’m asked all the time: What can I do?  What can I do?

This is an excellent example of the kind of thing you can do.  This is a list of talking points thoughtfully prepared by Brenda Arthur of the Charleston, WV Act for America chapter.  As a citizen activist, she put some serious time into preparing this point/counterpoint and made it available for all of you!

PROPONENTS OF REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT WILL SAY :

1. Your town is losing population. Bringing refugees will revitalize your city.

  • Truth: Saying that Importing third world poverty into our city or state revitalizes it just defies logic and commonsense.
  • The educational level of many refugees is low. They will only qualify for minimum or low wage jobs. Therefore, they will continue to qualify for some form of government assistance such as Medicaid and/or Food Stamps aka SNAP.
  • Big Business uses refugees for cheap labor thereby depressing wages for Americans with low education levels.
  • The cost of educating a refugee child is apprx $10,000+ per year not to mention the additional cost of English language assistance/interpreters and additional tutoring due to a lack of previous education.
  • Refugees often send some of their money out of the country to family left behind. Those remittances that leave the country are dollars unavailable to the local economy. This is never factored in.
  • As the refugee population grows more languages will be required to be provided by the school system. This erodes the quality of the schools and reduces teaching time for American kids whose parents are paying the bill.
  • In towns where the refugee population has grown, parents are finding 17-20 year-olds in class with their children.
  • Some school districts across the country have as many as 81 languages for which they must provide ESL teachers and interpreters.

2. Another selling point by the proponents is that “It is our moral obligation. That’s who we are as a country.”

  • Our tax dollars were never meant to be someone else’s charity .
  • We should aid refugees where they are. For every one brought here we can help 12 people there. The administration of mercy belongs to each of us individually—-not to the government.
  • Our first moral obligation is to our own people.

Arthur created this refugee crimes poster to use as a visual aid when she speaks to groups in West Virginia. You can do this too!

3. OVER 800,000 REFUGEES (since 9/11) HAVE BEEN ADMITTED TO THE U.S. AND NO TERRORIST PROBLEMS:

  • Proponents will present the picture that everything is “sweetness and light.” Not true. Many problems are occurring with refugee populations in towns all across America: Gangs, increased drug trafficking, sex slave trade, domestic violence, crime, drug resistant strains of TB, female genital mutilation, and more.
  • Cultural differences are often great and cannot be bridged. Some refugee cultures believe that “honor killing” and rape of non-Muslim women is acceptable.
  • In addition, there have been terrorist acts committed by refugees as well as many crimes. Taxpayers pay for expensive trials, and for those who are sentenced we must bear the cost of imprisonment for many years.

4. NO STATE MONEY IS INVOLVED.

  • Yet another selling point of the proponents is that THERE IS NO STATE MONEY INVOLVED. IT’S ALL FEDERAL MONEY. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, FEDERAL MONEY IS OUR MONEY.  SECONDLY, LET’S DISCUSS THE STATE COSTS: MEDICAID , STATE EMPLOYEES, EDUCATION, INTERPRETERS, AND LIKELY CASH WELFARE PAYMENTS.
  • DON’T TELL ME OR ANYONE ELSE THERE IS NO STATE MONEY INVOLVED WITH THIS PROGRAM. It’s a matter of how much.

TO RECAP:

  • Medicaid–Unreimbursed cost to the state
  • TANF–Cash Welfare payments –Unreimbursed costs to the state
  • Interpreters–Provided to students and other refugees as needed
  • Education–Cost for educating children K-12
  • State Employees’ salaries and benefits who work w/refugees

5. The vetting is very, very rigorous.

  • Former FBI Director, James Comey, Obama’s Special Envoy to the Middle East to fight ISIS, General John Allen, Former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, Mike McCaul, Chairman of Homeland Security in the Congress , and now we know from the leaked Wikileaks documents that even Hillary Clinton herself said at a private meeting in 2013 that the refugees cannot possibly be vetted.
  • Further, Leon Rodriguez, former Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, reluctantly told former Senator Jeff Sessions’ Senate Committee in September 2016 that some of the refugees get in based solely on their testimony alone.
  • Fraud is rampant in the refugee program. Many refugees come from failed states. They have no documentation. We are supposed to believe the lie that everyone is who they say they are.
  • ISIS has sworn to infiltrate the refugee population. They already have.

6. The refugees become self-sufficient within 5 years.

  • The fact is that the Office Of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) defines self-sufficiency in a way that is contrary to the common understanding of the word. A household is considered self-sufficient if it is not receiving “a cash assistance grant”. But other welfare programs do not count under the ORR definition. Thus, ORR considers and reports them as self-sufficient even if they are receiving other forms of government assistance such as: Food Stamps (SNAP), Housing subsidies, or Medicaid .
  • Don’t be fooled. Make them define their terms.

7. Refugees pay taxes.

  • Consider that the average educational level of a Middle Eastern refugee is 10.5 years. That is not even a high school diploma. This means that the likelihood of them earning more than $9-$12 /hour is pretty unlikely. Having a low wage job is most likely. Further, even if they work and pay taxes the fact that the earnings level is low will often make them eligible for continuing government subsidies. There are other points to consider:
  • Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is available to people whose income is low. Many, if not most, refugees would likely qualify for this.
  • Child Tax Credit up to $1000 per child would apply based on income guidelines. This credit is IN ADDITION to deductions for dependent children.
  • Once the Tax Credits are applied it is possible that they are getting back all or most of the taxes that were paid and potentially more than they paid.

So, there we have it for those of you looking for something to do.  Use Arthur’s points for letters to the editor, arguing with ‘friends’ on Facebook, or when corresponding with your elected officials.

This post is filed in two categories here at RRW:  ‘Comments worth noting’ (here) and in my new category ‘What you can do’ (here).

And, for all of you interested in Arthur’s home state of West Virginia, go here for my archive on the state.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Crooks, thieves and fraudsters: You will never be told their immigration status

Human Rights Watch badgers Japan to take refugees

Federal Debt is Killing Middle America by Jim Ley

For the last 10 years of my career as a public administrator, I preached fiscal responsibility for two reasons.

First, I was concerned that we were approaching a cyclical recession and I wanted to build reserves so that service levels could be maintained and property tax increases could be avoided during a challenging financial period.

Second, I was fully aware that, at best, the intertwined fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government were devaluing the purchasing price of the dollar, affecting not only municipalities’ purchasing power, but that of the taxpayer. I was concerned that municipalities’ labor forces, facing this reality, would demand more wages and that the taxpayer would be hurt even worse through increased property taxes.

Little did I know that the inevitable recession would be the worst since the Great Depression and the fiscal policies would devalue the purchasing dollar even further.

Debt machinations boil away buying power

I often wonder if we as taxpayers are clueless.

We have been conditioned to look at the ever growing federal debt number as meaningless because nothing bad seems to be happening in any visible fashion that we can translate into our lives. And we believe the politicians who spin the same stories so that they don’t have to do their real job, because it is what we want to hear.

But whether a frog is boiled to death by being immersed in boiling water, or whether it is boiled to death as the temperature is slowly increased to boiling — the frog is still dead. At least in the former case, the frog is at least incentivized to jump out of the boiling water, as opposed to adapting to the increasing but eventually deadly temperature in almost total ignorance of its imminent demise.

We have gone through a period of time where the lower and middle class in this country has seen the value, the purchasing power of their paycheck, decreased by as much as 20 percent. Retirees have seen their retirement funds sit stagnant, while the lack of return on their savings accounts permits inflation to eat into the value of their savings. They can buy less and less.

Anyone with a simple understanding of economics should be able to see what is happening. With a trillion dollar deficit each year, the federal government has to borrow roughly $83 billion a month. How does it do that?

From a little office in Washington, D.C. it auctions off that debt to bankers and governments around the world. As long as things stay relatively depressed economically, and given the good faith and credit of the United States, the interest payment demanded is kept low — thank God.

Irresponsibility will bring it to a crash

The debt doesn’t always sell, or a concern arises that too much of our debt is owned by a foreign power, possibly giving them an economic weapon.

So who buys it then? The U.S. Treasury Department looks to the Federal Reserve, which it funds through the printing of dollars, to buy the remaining debt. So more money is printed to buy the debt. The Fed now owns about $4.5 trillion in U.S. Treasury Bonds on its balance sheet. To control the supply of money in circulation, the Fed promulgates a spider’s web of regulation and control requiring banks to reserve large sums of money to cover the risk associated with future obligations.

Exploring this system of controls, and the impacts the system has had on our financial well being, would require way more space to explain than I have here.

Everyone knows that China owns a huge chunk of our debt — $5 trillion. And of course, there is the debt the Fed owns. But who do you think, what entity do you think, also owns a huge chunk of the federal debt? It is the Social Security and Medicare trust funds with $2.8 trillion. Rather than investing these funds in instruments that could return more to their trust funds, thus ensuring their long-term solvency, these funds are used by the federal government to lower the overall cost of borrowing.

If nothing else, it is a fiduciary conflict of interest. But Congress does not require itself or the federal government to operate under the same rules with which private and nonprofit fiduciaries must comply.

Too bad for all the rest of us.

Because all of these machinations combine to diminish the purchasing power of the dollar, severely impacting the working middle class.

ABOUT JIM LEY

Jim Ley has more than 35 years in public service, the last 25 of which were in top level administrative positions in two of the more dynamic counties in the U.S. Jim served two terms as President of the National Association of County administrators and was a leading “small government” voice in the profession. His administrative focus has been on financial sustainability and accountability to the taxpayer.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act.

Trans-Canada

Carnival in Berlin by Jeanne Mammen, c. 1930 [MOMA, NY]

David Warren on Canadian craziness: if you’re a member of a protected class, you may still say anything; but if you are not, God help you.

One is left speechless by some government legislation. That would be its intention, for it is designed to prevent, or gravely discourage, persons with views other than the Zeitgeist’s from expressing themselves.

The Zeitgeist demands. And what it demands, Courts and Parliaments deliver.

It began as a malicious game among liberals and progressives, to tar their political opponents through a mechanism we call “political correctness,” on college campuses and in other environments over which they were able to wrest control.

It was a “trend” of the late twentieth century. The Berlin Wall came down, to much celebration; but new psychic walls were erected to advance the old project of human engineering, towards the New Soviet Man, placidly obedient to the revolutionary authorities.

Then it launched, like Sputnik, into outer space. For while the bright lights in French, then American, intellectual circles remained instinctively loyal to the old Party Line, their ambitions went beyond it. They did not wish to stop at “worker’s control of the means of production,” or anything so humble. They wanted everything changed.

The Leninists, and their politburos through three generations, did not question so many of the old bourgeois assumptions, inherited from centuries of Christian civilization. To them, for instance, a man was still a man, a woman still a woman, the child was still their child. They made “advances” on such fronts as divorce, and abortion, declared the sexes “equal” – but there were still two sexes, and in Communist societies quite old-fashioned, normative attitudes were maintained.

In many ways, the Communists were among the most “conservative” of rulers. Their movement went back before Marx, to the invention of “workers” in the Industrial Revolution, and to the French bloodbath of Robespierre, in which “the masses” were first organized as a kind of battering ram against the anciently established institutions of Church and State.

Marx, Engels, Lenin, Mao, Ho, Pol Pot, were caught in a European time capsule. All of their adaptations assumed a conventional anthropology (“a man was a man for all that”). You could shoot him, or otherwise twist him to turn against the interests of his own person or family, but you still subconsciously knew what you were twisting.

Click here to read the rest of David Warren’s column . . .

ABOUT DAVID WARREN

David Warren

David Warren is a former editor of the Idler magazine and columnist with the Ottawa Citizen. He has extensive experience in the Near and Far East. His blog, Essays in Idleness, is now to be found at: davidwarrenonline.com.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau waving a LGBT flag with a new trans rights bill today. Photo by Justin Ling.

VIDEO: Colts for England!

What happens when a nation strips its citizens of the tools they need to defend their families?

Jihad! That’s what happens.

We call out the British government over its suicidal, stupid approach to Islam.

EDITORS NOTE: Before America’s entry into WWII small arms and ammunition were purchased from U.S. manufacturers until they were supplied under lend lease in 1941. The weapons obtained from America for the British army included the Tommy gun, Colt M1911A1 semi-automatic handgun and the Colt .45 revolver.

Fake Security is More Dangerous than No Security

How the “Improved Visa Waiver Program” creates the perilous illusion of security.

Once again terrorists have attacked and wounded and killed innocent civilians in London, England.

On June 3rd a terrorist attack at London Bridge and Borough Market was carried out by three apparent Jihadists who used a rented van to mow down pedestrians, whereupon the three emerged from that van and attacked still more victims with their knives.

The terrorists have applied to their attacks the principle behind Occam’s razor, that postulates that in attempting to understand how something is accomplished, the simplest solution is most likely the correct solution.

In the case of terrorists, using a simple strategy and crude weapons such as motor vehicles and knives that are readily available, decreases the likelihood that such plots can be discovered and prevented before they are carried out.

While the TSA, was created in the wake of the terror attacks of 9/11 and its FY 2017 Budget of $7.6 billion and more than 42,000 employees exist to safeguard transportation, with particular emphasis on airliners, most terror attacks do not involve airliners.

Continuing with the concept of Occam’s razor, the United States needs to do whatever is possible and reasonable to prevent international terrorists from entering the United States in the first place.

All vulnerabilities must, therefore be effectively addressed.

If an ounce of protection is worth a pound of cure, preventing the entry of such terrorists represents a ton of cure.

As I have noted in a recent article, Border Security Is National Security.

There is no shortage of ways for terrorists to enter the United States.  Recently attention has turned to the way that aliens who enter the United States through the legal inspections process at ports of entry are able to easily disappear within the United States and embed themselves in the towns and cities where they live and quietly go about their deadly preparations.

That issue and others were raised in the report issued on May 23, 2017 by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Visa Overstays: A Gap in the Nation’s Border.  That report served as the predication for my recent article.

Indeed, the 9/11 Commission noted that most terrorists enter the United States through international airports.

Given these facts it is becoming clear that President Trump’s goal of subjecting aliens seeking entry into the United States to “extreme vetting” is a matter of national security.

In fact, the 9/11 Commission found flaws in the way that visas were issued and noted that the visa adjudications process needed to be tightened up.

The Visa Waiver Program runs contrary to that important mission yet, the number of the countries whose citizens may enter the United States without first applying for visas and receiving visas continues to increase under pressure from such special interest/lobbying groups as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in spite of the fact that the nexus between visa overstays and terrorism has been well known for many years.  In fact, on May 11, 2006 I testified before a hearing conducted by the House Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on the topic, Visa Overstays: Can We Bar The Terrorist Door?

Shortly after the attacks of 9/11 the virtual mantra of our leaders was, “To be successful, the terrorists need only get it ‘right’ while our security depends on our government getting it ‘right’ 100% of the time.”

As concerns about terrorists who are citizens of countries who participate in the Visa Waiver Program increased as more terror attacks were carried out in Europe and elsewhere, the Obama administration and the Congress cooperated to modify the Visa Waiver Program through the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015.

The “improvements” to the Visa Waiver Program are illusory and designed to quell the fears and concerns of Americans while making certain that this dangerous program continues to satisfy the demands of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other such lobbying organizations who, as I have previously noted, are far more concerned with head counts on airliners than body counts in the morgue.

By creating this dangerous illusion, the stage has been set for what may be further attempts to expand this wrong-headed program rather than do what is necessary and terminate it altogether.

Here is how the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) has been modified, as noted in the official CBP website:

Under the Act, travelers in the following categories are no longer eligible to travel or be admitted to the United States under the VWP:

•  Nationals of VWP countries who have been present in Iraq, Syria, or countries listed under specified designation lists (currently including Iran and Sudan) at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited government/military exceptions).

•  Nationals of VWP countries who have been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited government/military exceptions).

These restrictions do not apply to VWP travelers whose presence in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen was to perform military service in the armed forces of a program country, or in order to carry out official duties as a full-time employee of the government of a program country. We recommend those who have traveled to the seven countries listed above for military/official purposes bring with them appropriate documentation when traveling through a U.S. port of entry.

The vast majority of VWP-eligible travelers will not be affected by the new Act. New countries may be added to this list at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security.

On the face of it, rendering citizens of VWP countries ineligible to enter the United States, if they had recently traveled to countries affiliated with terrorism, is a prudent measure.

However, what is the likelihood that our consular officials or our CBP inspectors at ports of entry will know if such aliens had traveled to Syria, Iraq or other such countries?

Is there truly an expectation that such aliens will show up at U.S. embassies and consulates seeking visas after freely admitting that they have made such trips to those countries?

Are we to expect, perhaps, that such individuals might show up with their transcripts in hand, attesting to their acquired prowess in the construction bombs when they attended terror training camps in the Middle East?

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its corporate friends in the hotel, travel, hospitality and manufacturing industries formed an unholy alliance, the Discover America Partnership that, nevertheless, continues to lobby for an expansion of the dangerous Visa Waiver Program, ignoring that ISIS, al-Qaeda and transnational criminals have already “discovered” America.

That partnership opposes any efforts to more effectively scrutinize foreign visitors, pushing for the admission of ever more foreign tourists, foreign students and, of course, huge increases in exploitable foreign workers to displace Americans.

My article, “Visa Waiver Program Endangers Our Safety And Security” included a list of six ways an effectively administered visa program helps combat terrorism and protect America and Americans and even enhances airliner safety.

All of those important benefits are utterly lost when aliens enter the U.S. under Visa Waiver Program.  Under this program aliens do not apply for or receive visas.

To cite a few examples as to how the visa requirement enhance national security and public safety:

Visa applications contain information and biometrics that can be essential to conducting investigations into terrorists and criminals.  Aliens who commit fraud in completing that application face up to 25 years in prison, if the purpose for applying for the visa was to further a terror goal.

Aliens who are required to have visas before traveling to the United States are not permitted to board airliners if they have no visas.  Aliens who are denied visas are subsequently barred from boarding airliners.  Richard Reid, the infamous “Shoe Bomber” was, as a British citizen, able to board the airliner destined to the United States without first receiving a visa.

Yet the Visa Waiver program persists as do the risks that this program creates for national security and public safety.

The final blow to our safety and security is provided by Lethal Sanctuary Cities that are eager to harbor and shield illegal aliens, no matter how they entered the United States, from detection by immigration law enforcement officers.

Simply stated, Sanctuary Cities Endanger – National Security and Public Safety.

National security and public safety must be the absolute priority for our government.  Illusions of security are less then worthless- they are dangerous.

The Visa Waiver Program and Sanctuary Cities must, for once and for all, be terminated.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

Class and Race Are Never an Excuse to Gloat over State Atrocities by Jeffrey A. Tucker

Even with all the news of terrorism around the world, there is something especially chilling and horrifying about the case of 22-year-old Otto Warmbier. Hearing the news of his death wounded me, and, I admit, more so than the usual litany of suffering around the world.

If there is anything redeeming to come of this, it should be a wake-up call to all of us to change the way we think about human rights and stop a terrible trajectory of public rhetoric.

Here was a remarkable young man, an outstanding student, and, by all accounts, an exuberant and warm person. Even if none of this were true, he still had a right not to be kidnapped and killed by an extraordinarily evil government, one of the last surviving full-blown totalitarian states in the world, one run by a leadership cult of the most disgusting type. But this is exactly what happened.

He was on a student trip to China and decided on his own to take a side trip to North Korea. The ad was posted by Young Pioneer Tours, promising “budget travel to destinations your mother would rather you stayed away from.” All seemed fine until he was boarding a plane to return to China. Suddenly, North Korean officials arrested him, accusing him of stealing a propaganda poster from the hotel.

According to NPR, he was trying to bring back a memento of his trip which he planned to take back to Wyoming in exchange for a used car. He tried to remove a sign but it proved too unwieldy and left it on the floor.

It tells you all you need to know that the regime believed that this was a high crime. After an hour-long trial, the government posted this apology video, which is one of the most heart-wrenching things you will ever watch. It is a forced confession straight out of the worst dystopian novel you have ever read.

He was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor. His parents could do nothing. Not even the US government could intervene. There was no jurisdiction. Otto was trapped in a horrid prison state.

Something terrible happened while he was there. The government eventually released him to his parents, citing “humanitarian” concerns. When he arrived for the reunion, he was essentially brain dead. He died two days later. The autopsy showed the North Korean government’s explanation that he had contracted botulism to be a lie.

The Disgrace of the Left

The news of this case first came out more than a year and a half ago, and I distinctly remember a strange schadenfreude emerging from the political left. Almost like this kid had it coming. Actually, not almost. That is what some people said.

Nick Gillespie at Reason dug up the archives to find the evidence.  On Comedy Central’s The Nightly Show, host Larry Wilmore said: “Frat Bro Privilege not valid in totalitarian dystopias.” “North Korea isn’t a playground for college pranks, Kim Jong-un isn’t a fictional character from a Seth Rogen movie, and Pyongyang isn’t some game you play with Coors Light and Solo cups… It’s just tough for me to have much sympathy for this guy and his crocodile tears.”

Then there is this from Ebony: “I’m willing to bet my last dollar that he was aware of the political climate in that country, but privilege is a hell of a drug. The high of privilege told him that North Korea’s history of making examples out of American citizens who dare challenge their rigid legal system in any way was no match for his alabaster American privilege.”

This is incredibly wicked rhetoric, and probably both writers have some regret in retrospect. And yet: what is it that would possess anyone to express such sentiments based on class and race alone, as if this young man, who had never flaunted some imagined privilege, deserved his fate, and that it should be a lesson to all people of his class and race?

The Torture State

As dreadful as this Warmbier case is, it is paradigmatic of the totalitarian behavior of states at war. Legally, the US and North Korea are still at war. Thus does everything become justified. This is true not just in this terror state. Every state uses war as the reason to trample human rights.

New details are emerging from the CIA’s torture program that was active from 2002 to 2009, along with the testimony of two psychologists who ran the program out of a secret prison. Their private company was paid $81 million to apply “enhanced interrogation techniques” to detainees.

This too sounds like a scene from dystopia. What immediately came to my mind when hearing of the techniques (which included the use of insects) was the trained psychologist/torturer known as Scarecrow from Batman Begins.

Waterboarding is only the most famous. Techniques included this one for sleep deprivation, in the words of one of the psychologists:

“There is a tether anchored to the ceiling in the center of the detention cell. The detainee has handcuffs and they’re attached to the tether in a way that they can’t lie down or rest against a wall. They’re monitored to make sure they don’t get edema if they hang on the cuffs too much.”

What useful information came out of this program, which US taxpayers paid for? Nothing, so far as anyone knows, but it is likely that hundreds of lives were ruined, to say nothing of the countless lives lost in the wars of those years. The blowback of a growing army of dedicated terrorists is not hard to predict.

And yet you don’t have to look for small-time pundits to find a defense of these actions. They were overtly defended at the highest levels by Dick Cheney, John McCain, the head of the CIA itself, and the sitting President of the United States.

Their statements are backed by partisan supporters who believe that being from the wrong country and holding to the wrong religion is sufficient reason to rob a person of basic human rights. It’s a form of identity politics taken to a different level. It’s a game everyone plays.

No More

At some point we must say: enough. And this applies not only to the left but also to the alt-right, which daily fills up Twitter with rhetoric placing all blame for all that is wrong with the world on blacks, women, Muslims, intellectuals, or whatever.

There is always someone to cast into the outer darkness, human beings deemed unworthy of rights, people who should be gassed or tossed out of helicopters or exterminated. Every month for several years now, it has gotten worse.

And the problem afflicts not only these extremist voices. Even mainstream politics these days consists mostly of accusations of how the bad group is hurting the good group, how the bad class or race needs to be brought down so that the good class and race can be raised up. Elections are no longer peaceful transitions of managers but contests of will to gain access to the levers of power to use against your enemy.

Harmony Be Gone

Whatever happened to the old liberal ideal that people can and should live in harmony? This ideal gave rise to freedom as the enabling political and social template of a flourishing life. Every human being matters. Everyone has rights. Everyone has value. Dignity should belong to all.

The seeming loss of this dream – at least as regards politics – is the outgrowth of how government serves to divide and conquer. As in The Hunger Games, the players are so wrapped up in playing the game they are given that they forget to look up and out and see that there is a common enemy that is responsible for all this division in the first place.

Which brings us back to Otto. the egregious crime that led to his death had one cause: totalitarian government power. Anyone, regardless of race or class or gender etc., who suffers under such an evil deserves every bit of sympathy from every civilized person. It is true all over the world and even in your home town.

Whenever the violence of the state is brought to bear against the innocent, it surely qualifies among the peccata clamantia, sins that cry out to the heavens for vengeance.

In such divided times, it is incumbent on all decent and civilized people to lay down the weapons we wield against each other and recognize a truth that so many want to ignore: it is only the power of the state that can legally commit such crimes and expect acquiescence from its subjects. The government that did this to this man operated under the cover of its own legal apparatus of compulsion and coercion.

The young generation today looks around to find the source of evil in the world. One side says it is inequality and hence the state is the answer. The other side wants to blame foreigners and deviants and hence the state is the answer. But look more carefully at this case, or any case of torture and death.

What you see is that the state is not the answer at all, but the cruelest possible monster that masquerades as the solution to the problems of its own making.

Otto is a martyr in so many ways. May his death be a reminder to us all that we are all united in a common interest in freedom from the forces extant in the world that took away his life.

Jeffrey A. Tucker

Jeffrey A. Tucker

Jeffrey Tucker is Director of Content for the Foundation for Economic Education. He is also Chief Liberty Officer and founder of Liberty.me, Distinguished Honorary Member of Mises Brazil, research fellow at the Acton Institute, policy adviser of the Heartland Institute, founder of the CryptoCurrency Conference, member of the editorial board of the Molinari Review, an advisor to the blockchain application builder Factom, and author of five books. He has written 150 introductions to books and many thousands of articles appearing in the scholarly and popular press.

White House and Department of State leakers in battle over refugee costs

Can you believe it!  Reuters is reporting on four anonymous leakers (inside and outside the Department of State) who are saying chief White House aide Stephen Miller is trying to skew numbers to make the refugee program look more expensive than they claim it is!

Former Asst. Sec. of State Anne Richard

Most interesting to me is that a former State Department “official” is in on the effort to skewer Miller (and Trump of course!).

Can you say ‘Obama shadow government’!

Note: Sorry I’m giving you a quicky post here.  I am preparing for something this evening and have no time for more comment and analysis, except to say that getting at the true cost of the overall migration of impoverished third world refugees to middle America is almost impossible because in most states, the welfare offices do not track and separate out the different classes of immigrants using social services, medicare, or sending kids to school.

For federal budget planning, I’m guessing Miller is trying to get at the true cost to admit the refugees in the first place which is where the federal budget costs are initially incurred for decision-making needed by September.

Here is Reuters on the ‘Deep State’ undermining the White House (again!), getting more cocky by the day aren’t they!

Is Simon Henshaw leaking?

Two studies that President Donald Trump hopes will buttress his case to cut the number of refugees are at the heart of a fight between senior White House adviser Stephen Miller and career U.S. government officials over immigration policy, four current and former officials said.

Trump in March ordered the U.S. State Department and other agencies to tally only the costs of resettling refugees but not the benefits that policy experts said refugees can also bring, including tax revenues, professional skills and job creation. [Virtually impossible, and are we going to tally medicare, schools, housing, SSI and criminal justice system costs for how many years?—ed]

Is Larry Bartlett leaking?

A current official said Miller had convened meetings with State Department staffers to discuss the refugee cost reports. When department specialists proposed including refugees’ economic contributions in the studies to produce a more balanced assessment, Miller rebuffed the idea, one current and one former U.S. official said.

The White House said Miller did not hold meetings on the specific subject of the cost reports and that Trump’s overall fiscal year 2018 budget proposal sought to “make transparent the net budgetary effects of immigration programs and policy.”

The current and former officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said they believe, however, that the administration wants to help make a case to restrict refugee flows by creating a skewed analysis.

“It’s a policy outcome in search of a rationale,” said a former U.S. official familiar with the debate.

Continue reading here and prepare to be outraged!

EndNote: If Henshaw and Bartlett are not the leakers, they better find out who is! They are responsible for whoever is talking to the press!  Like it or not, they work for President Donald Trump!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Refugee contractors whine about not meeting 110,000 “target” for FY17

Cop Speaks Up: Illegal Immigrants Murdered My Buddy Execution Style

1.4 million illegals working under stolen Social Security numbers

Illegal Immigrant Held in Beating Death of Virginia Teen

Study: 5.7 million noncitizens may have cast illegal votes

Rowan Scarborough from The Washington Times reports:

A research group in New Jersey has taken a fresh look at postelection polling data and concluded that the number of noncitizens voting illegally in U.S. elections is likely far greater than previous estimates.

As many as 5.7 million noncitizens may have voted in the 2008 election, which put Barack Obama in the White House.

The research organization Just Facts, a widely cited, independent think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians, revealed its number-crunching in a report on national immigration.

Just Facts President James D. Agresti and his team looked at data from an extensive Harvard/YouGov study that every two years questions a sample size of tens of thousands of voters. Some acknowledge they are noncitizens and are thus ineligible to vote.

Read more.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in November 2016 stated, “[N]oncitizens and illegal aliens are counted when apportioning congressional districts and when allocating state electors under the Electoral College. This means noncitizens play a role in determining how many congressional representatives a state has and exert an indirect influence on presidential elections.”

FAIR reports:

Mass immigration has had a significant effect on American electoral politics. Despite the fact that it is a crime for aliens to vote in federal elections, noncitizens and illegal aliens are counted when apportioning congressional districts. This means that areas with large numbers of illegal alien residents gain additional representatives in Congress.

In addition, there is evidence that both foreign nationals who are lawfully present in the United States and illegal aliens have voted in recent elections. During this election cycle, noncitizens have been discovered on voter registration rolls in both Virginia and Pennsylvania. And the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of New York recently announced that it charged a Canadian woman with making a false claim to citizenship after she registered and voted in more than 20 elections.

Several past elections – for the presidency and other offices – have been extremely close. Accordingly, ballots cast by noncitizen voters have the potential to improperly alter the outcome of elections. Consider how close the 2000 presidential election was. Could the outcome have been affected by noncitizen voting? The answer is yes.

Download the PDF of this Backgrounder.

President Trump signed an executive order setting up a Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity to try to find on-the-ground truth in illegal voting. The Advisory Commission is headed by Vice President Mike Pence.  The Commission’s mission:

The Commission shall, consistent with applicable law, study the registration and voting processes used in Federal elections.  The Commission shall be solely advisory and shall submit a report to the President that identifies the following:

(a)  those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that enhance the American people’s confidence in the integrity of the voting processes used in Federal elections;

(b)  those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that undermine the American people’s confidence in the integrity of the voting processes used in Federal elections; and

(c)  those vulnerabilities in voting systems and practices used for Federal elections that could lead to improper voter registrations and improper voting, including fraudulent voter registrations and fraudulent voting.

It would seem that Democrats and Republicans alike can rally around this effort.

RELATED ARTICLES:

1.4 million illegals working under stolen Social Security numbers

Study supports Trump: 5.7 million noncitizens may have cast illegal votes

Think tank backs Trump, says large number of non-citizens vote illegally

Did Votes By Noncitizens Cost Trump The 2016 Popular Vote? Sure Looks That Way