POLL: 70 Percent of Republicans Would Consider Joining Trump-Led Party

/in , , , , /by

I believe it’s higher because we have no party.

70 Percent of Republicans Would Consider Joining Trump-Led Party, Poll Finds

By GQ Pan, The Epoch Times, February 11, 2021:

More than two-thirds of Republicans would join or consider joining a new political party if former President Donald Trump were to start one, a CBS News poll suggests.

Thirty-three percent of Republicans participating in the survey, conducted between Feb. 5 and Feb. 8, said they would join a Trump-led breakaway party.

Another 37 percent said “maybe” they would join the new party, while the remaining 30 percent said they would stay with the Republican Party.

The poll was conducted among 2,508 adults living in the United States by YouGov, a London-based online polling company, with a plus/minus 2.3 point error margin. The sample was weighted according to gender, age, race and education based on the U.S. Bureau of the Census’ American Community Survey, as well as the 2020 presidential vote and registration status.

In addition, 46 percent of respondents identified as Republicans said they believe it is “very important” for the party to remain loyal to Trump, with 27 percent saying it is “somewhat important.” Fifteen percent said the Republican loyalty to Trump is “not too important” and twelve percent said it is not important at all.

When it came to the Republican support of the second impeachment effort against Trump, 71 percent of Republicans chose the option given saying it was “disloyal” for party members to vote in favor of the former president’s impeachment or conviction, compared to 29 percent who chose the option saying it was “principled” to do so.

The poll also highlighted the hostility between Democrats and Republicans, with the latter somewhat more likely to view the former as enemies rather than political opponents. Fifty-seven percent of Republicans described Democrats as “enemies,” with the belief that their “life or entire way of life may be threatened” if their Democratic counterparts win. Forty-three percent say the Democrats are “political opposition,” that is, Republicans “just won’t get the policies they want” if Democrats win.

By contrast, 41 percent of Democrats described Republicans as enemies and 59 percent described them as political opposition.

Earlier this month, a Hill-HarrisX poll reported that 64 percent of Republican said they would either join or might join a “MAGA Party” or “Patriot Party” led by Trump. Thirty-six percent of respondents said it would be more likely for them to stay with the Republican Party.

“If Trump were to split from the GOP and create his own party, polling suggests he might well create the second largest political party in the country, knocking the GOP down to third place,” Dritan Nesho, CEO and chief pollster at HarrisX, told Hill.TV.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLE: INGRATE: Nikki Haley criticizes Trump and says he has no future in the GOP

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Evidence Shows Capitol Breach Was Pre-Planned, Proving Trump Did Not “Incite”

/in , , , , , , /by

Congress Leadership Knew of Capitol Riot Days Before January 6, 2021.

More to the point, it was leftist rioters who were behind the break in.

Further, evidence seems to indicate Congress leadership knew of Capitol riot days before.

“Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) said that from the evidence coming out about the Capitol riot, it appears that congressional leadership had been aware of the planned attack ahead of time, but “did nothing” about it.”

Evidence Mounts that Capitol Breach Was Pre-Planned, Eroding Incitement Allegation in Trump Impeachment Trial

By Tom Ozimek Epoch Times, February 8, 2021:

As former President Donald Trump’s Tuesday impeachment trial approaches, there is a growing body of evidence in criminal complaints and affidavits that the Jan. 6 Capitol breach had been pre-planned, undercutting the allegation leveled against Trump that he is guilty of “incitement to insurrection.”

A number of FBI affidavits filed in support of various charges—including conspiracy—against accused participants in the Capitol breach show evidence of pre-planning, reinforcing an argument made by critics of the impeachment trial against Trump, namely that participants couldn’t have been incited by the president to break into the building if they had earlier planned to do so.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said recently that parts of the Capitol incident had been coordinated well before Trump’s Jan. 6 speech. Trump’s accusers have described the speech as a call to storm the building.

While Trump said in his speech that “we fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,” the former president appeared to be making a general reference to political activism, as he called on supporters to “peacefully and patriotically” make their voices heard during the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress.

Graham, in a Feb. 1 interview on Fox News, said, “There’s mounting evidence that the people who came to Washington preplanned the attack before the president ever spoke.”

“If you open up that can of worms, we’ll want the FBI to come in and tell us about how people preplanned this attack and what happened with the security footprint of the Capitol. You open up Pandora’s box if you call one witness,” Graham added, in reference to calls for witnesses to testify at Trump’s impeachment trial.

The former president’s son Donald Trump Jr. argued in a tweet last month, “If these federal law enforcement agencies had prior knowledge that this was a planned attack then POTUS didn’t incite anything.”

A review of some of the affidavits in Capitol incursion cases shows evidence of pre-planning.

An affidavit (pdf) filed in the case against Thomas Caldwell, who is believed to have a leadership in the Oath Keepers group and who faces charges of conspiracy and conspiracy to impede or injure an officer, alleges that Caldwell and others planned parts of the incursion in advance.

“As described more fully herein, CALDWELL planned with DONOVAN CROWL, JESSICA WATKINS, and others known and unknown, to forcibly storm the U.S. Capitol,” the affidavit states.

“Evidence uncovered in the course of the investigation demonstrates that not only did CALDWELL, CROWL, WATKINS, and others conspire to forcibly storm the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021—they communicated with one another in advance of the incursion and planned their attack.”

The document cites communication between Watkins and other suspected Oath Keepers during the Capitol incursion, noting that an individual whom the FBI believes to be Watkins said: “We have a good group. We have about 30-40 of us. We are sticking together and sticking to the plan.”

Charging documents (pdf) against Eric Munchel and his mother, Lisa Eisenhart, both of whom face conspiracy charges, cite a Jan. 10 article in The Times of London, in which Eisenhart expressed that the two had gone into the Capitol as “observers” but quotes Munchel’s characterization of the incursion as a “flexing of muscles.”

“We wanted to show that we’re willing to rise up, band together and fight if necessary. Same as our forefathers, who established this country in 1776,” Munchel told the outlet. “It was a kind of flexing of muscles.

“The intentions of going in were not to fight the police. The point of getting inside the building is to show them that we can, and we will.”

Alex Harkrider, who faces charges of conspiracy and unlawful entry with a dangerous weapon, was alleged in an affidavit (pdf) to have made statements about planning a “civil war.”

The affidavit indicates that a witness contacted the FBI alleging they had photos from Harkrider’s social media pages showing that he stated that he and others were “planning a civil war.”

An affidavit (pdf) in the case against Andrew Bennett, who faces charges of disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds, indicates that “on January 4, 2021 at approximately 5:02 a.m. EST, Bennett posted the following, along with a photograph of a caravan of vehicles on a road carrying American flags: ‘You better be ready chaos is coming and I will be in DC on 1/6/2021 fighting for my freedom!’”

Meanwhile, the FBI has said it notified other law enforcement agencies, including the U.S. Capitol Police, the day before the Capitol incursion about an online message about a “war” and storming the building. The FBI stated on Jan. 12 that the warning was issued through the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and the U.S. Capitol Police have members on the task force, The Associated Press reported.

The Washington Post reported that an FBI bulletin described that people had been sharing maps of the Capitol’s tunnels and discussed rallying points to meet up to travel to Washington. The newspaper also reported that the document detailed posts calling for violence, including that “Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in, and blood from their BLM and Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Professor Says He’s ‘Struggling’ with His Christian Faith Because of Trump, But Beheadings Shouldn’t Reflect on Islam

/in , , , , /by

Religions shouldn’t be considered responsible for the misdeeds of their followers, right? That has been the consistent establishment media line on Islam since 9/11, and before that, and it has been enshrined in public policy on both sides of the Atlantic and become axiomatic in the West’s approach to terrorism.

But wait. Issac Bailey is a columnist and a professor of Public Policy at Davidson College in North Carolina. He writes in Newsweek:

“If Christianity can convince so many to follow a man like Trump almost worshipfully—or couldn’t at least help millions discern the unique threat Trump represented—what good is it really?”

So now apparently the followers of a religion do reflect on the religion itself – if the religion is Christianity, and the evil follower is Donald Trump.

Bailey explains: “I’m struggling to hold fast to my Christianity—because of Donald Trump. Not exactly Trump himself, though, but the undying support of the self-professed Christian pro-life movement that he enjoyed. My faith is in tatters because of that alliance. And I am constantly wondering if I am indirectly complicit because I dedicated my life to the same Jesus the insurrectionists prayed to in the Capitol building after ransacking it and promising to kill those who didn’t do their bidding.”

Faith in tatters! Heavens to Betsy! Yet this poor lost soul Issac Bailey is manifesting confused thinking in all sorts of ways. Trump is not and never claimed to be the leader of a Christian sect. Millions of people didn’t support Trump because of Christianity, but because of the policies he stood for and implemented.

He is an academic, after all, and so it’s no surprise that Bailey’s thinking gets even more confused than that. On December 6, 2020, he tweeted:

“In the aftermath of 9/11, some Americans warned politicians would use that horrific event to pass laws that stifled freedom and targeted Muslims. They were right. That’s what’s being referred to here. Beheadings should not be used to target Muslims and excuse racism.”

He is setting up a straw man here, as no decent person wants to “target Muslims” or “excuse racism.” Anyway, his point is that jihad terror should not have been considered to reflect poorly on Islam and thereby lead to this alleged “targeting” of Muslims. But if he can say that Trump is so evil that he is struggling with his Christianity because many Christians support Trump, why doesn’t the same reasoning go for Islam? Issac Bailey does not write and likely never would dream of writing something like this: “If Islam can convince so many to follow a man like Osama bin Laden or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi almost worshipfully—or couldn’t at least help millions discern the unique threat they and others like them represented—what good is it really?”

To say such a thing would be “Islamophobic,” and it is easy to get the impression from his published writings that Issac Bailey, like the overwhelming majority of his professorial colleagues, would assiduously avoid any appearance of “Islamophobia.”

Bailey’s confusion on these issues goes back years. In 2015, he wrote:

For awhile now, I’ve been asking people a simple question.

If the terrorist organization ISIL is Islamic, and represents something profound about that faith, does the same standard apply to Christianity and the Christian Knights of the Ku Klux Klan?

I haven’t gotten many good answers, or any direct ones, actually.

I’ve usually posed the question to people who most adamantly believe that because ISIL said it is adhering to its faith, the group’s members must be true Muslims.

“Islam is right there, in their name!” they shout.

That clarity of conviction disappears when talk turns to the Christian Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, a group that had long operated in South Carolina, inflicting terror on black residents, those who supported them and others deemed undesirables.

All right. But it is unclear which point of view Bailey himself favors. Does he think the KKK is un-Christian, or does he think that the Islamic State is un-Islamic? It seems likely that he wants to shame Christians by making them admit that the Klan is Christian, yet here again, it is virtually certain that he would never dare to ask “what good is it really” about Islam under any circumstances.

The academic environment all over the country today, and in Europe as well, is anti-Christian and pro-Islam. Most academics are all too willing to make the leaps of logic necessary to sustain this perspective. And when we see the recent graduates of American colleges and universities out rioting for socialism and increasing racial polarization, the effect that deep-thinking professors such as Issac Bailey have on their hapless charges is all too obvious.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Sharia-enforcing Amazon Brownshirts Delete Islamocritical Book

/in , , , /by

Over at Amazon you can still get Friedrich Nietzsche’s God Is Dead. God Remains Dead. And We Have Killed Him. You can still get Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion You can get Christianity Disproved: The conclusive proof that Christianity is false. You can get God Needs To Go: Why Christian Beliefs Fail. You can get All That’s Wrong with the Bible: Contradictions, Absurdities, and More. You can get Four Disturbing Questions with One Simple Answer: Breaking the Spell of Christian Belief. And on and on and on. But you can’t get Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion by my old Jihad Watch colleague, the New English Review‘s Rebecca Bynum, who wrote for this site when the world was young, the grass was green, and spring was in the air.

Now that the winter of Leftist/Islamic censorship is upon us in a big way, Amazon has removed her book from sale, so as not to offend those who must not be offended, and to stick to offending those who can and must be offended with impunity. This is done at least in part because those who must not be offended might kill you, while those who must be offended will not. Now, I don’t agree with my old friend that Islam is not a religion, but I am not being churlish or fastidious to point that out. I believe that ideas should be evaluated on the basis of whether and to what extent they correspond to and elucidate reality. Ideas should be discussed freely and accepted or rejected on their merits. But the totalitarian fascists of Amazon believe that the ideas they have judged to be beyond the pale must not be heard, and since they have an effective monopoly on the book business, when they drop a book, it will indeed for the most part not be heard.

Now that they have begun dropping Islamocritical books, expect more of this. After all, who on the Left will raise a voice for the freedom of speech? Not Old Joe. Not Kamala-in-Waiting. Not Old Joe’s handlers. Not Schumer or Pelosi or AOC or Ilhan Omar. Not a soul. The fascists are emboldened. It has been nice knowing you all, but it’s clearly coming to an end. Soon the only way you’ll be able to hear dissidents will be via whispers and furtive handovers of shoddily printed material, by the few who have the courage to continue to dissent when the darkness that is descending has finally enveloped us completely. I hope to see you there.

“Amazon Cancels Allah is Dead,” by Rebecca Bynum, New English Review, February 9, 2021:

Cancel culture progresses one burned book at a time.

My book, Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion, has been removed from the Amazon website. Therefore I’m re-posting a talk I gave on the subject that nicely summarizes the book:

Good Evening. I’m here to talk about a subject no one wants to discuss – religion. Many people in our post-Christian society (especially journalists) are afraid of it, misinformed about it and ignorant of the most basic theological concepts. And our theologians are often too specialized in their work to be able to discuss religion in its broadest outlines or our Churchmen are often soo concerned with finding common ground that they gloss over and ignore the theology of Islam….

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK actress inundated with death threats after revealing that she left Islam

Saudi Arabia: Woman’s rights activist was allegedly raped repeatedly while in prison

France: Le Pen goes on trial on charges she broke hate speech laws by tweeting pictures of Islamic State atrocities

Nigeria: Christian who refused to convert to Islam enters 3rd year of captivity, captors call her ‘slave for life’

Turkey: Chief imam of Hagia Sophia calls for elimination of principle of secularism in new constitution

Lebanese singer hopes Hizballah top dog will let him blow himself up ‘out of belief in his religion and his Quran’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Who needs the Stasi? We’ve already got Google

/in , , , , , /by

The cancelling of Gina Carano foreshadows more sinister developments.

The Force is no longer with Gina Carano, one of the stars of The Mandalorian, the wildly popular spin-off from the Star Wars films. She has been cancelled. Twitter erupted with #FireGinaCarano and Lucasfilm dutifully complied.

Carano, a 38-year-old mixed-martial arts expert who has moved into acting, became so popular after playing Cara Dune, a battle-hardened mercenary and marshal, that at one point she was being considered for her own show. But last year’s election brought about her downfall. She was allegedly transphobic, supported anti-vaxxers, spread “misinformation” about Covid-19 and supported Trump. Lucasfilm was probably hungry for an excuse to erase this scabrous blot of political incorrectness.

Carano obliged. In a recent Instagram post she wrote:

“Jews were beaten in the streets, not by Nazi soldiers but by their neighbours… even by children. Because history is edited, most people today don’t realise that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbours hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views.”

There are two ways of interpreting this. Lucasfilm chose the negative one: “her social media posts denigrating people based on their cultural and religious identities are abhorrent and unacceptable.” Apparently Lucasfilm believes that Carano was equating the suffering of Republicans under Biden with the suffering of Jews under Hitler. This is preposterous.

The positive interpretation is that ordinary folks can become haters and bigots if their prejudices are whipped up by government-controlled media.

And that is what happened in the 1930s. In the words of the US Holocaust Memorial Museum: “Individual citizens chose to be involved when, out of a sense of duty, or prejudice, or some opportunity for business or other personal gain, they voluntarily denounced their co-workers and neighbors to the police because of their alleged wrongdoings as Jews, anti-Hitlerites, or gays.”

Isn’t something similar is happening in the United States today? Anonymous accusers are denouncing incorrect attitudes to the “authorities”. Gina Carano is right, although she was dumb to compare the situation with Nazi Germany. More apposite is East Germany under the Communists.

From 1950 to 1990 the Ministry for State Security, better known as the Stasi, enforced political correctness through police spying and a vast network of informers. The Oscar-winning film The Secret Lives of Others portrays the dehumanising world in which East Germans had to live. But it still failed to convey the enormity of the totalitarian surveillance. The Stasi even collected jars of the body odour of people it had under observation.

To deal with trouble-makers the Stasi had a policy called, in German, Zersetzung. It’s a difficult word to translate. Originally it meant “decomposition”. But in the context of the East German police state, it meant destroying dissidents. “The goal,” according to German historian Hubertus Knabe, “was to destroy secretly the self-confidence of people, for example by damaging their reputation, by organizing failures in their work, and by destroying their personal relationships.” Sound familiar?

A striking feature of Stasi control was how cooperative ordinary citizens were. In 1989, in a population of about 16 million, the Stasi employed about 200,000 informers. Between 1950 and 1989, about 620,000 people are believed to have been informers at some stage or other. It appears that young men between 25 and 40 were over-represented. So much for the idealism of youth.

It doesn’t take much imagination to appreciate that in the age of internet shaming, deplatforming, cancelling and Google monitoring we are recapitulating the surveillance state of East Germany.

Consider what happened after the Capitol Hill riot. The videos which have been screened in President Trump’s impeachment trial in the Senate are horrifying. The frenzied mob violence was terrifying. There can be no doubt that hundreds of people deserve to face criminal charges.

Everyone wanted to know who these barbarians were.

An army of “online sleuths” went to work to identify and profile the rioters. The FBI appealed for digital information about the day’s tragic events. “This kind of crowdsourcing is not the same thing as a formal investigation. It’s certainly not a replacement for the investigations done by the judicial system,” says John Scott-Railton, from Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. But “it’s an excellent mechanism for surfacing clues.”

One result of this internet detective work was an impressive feature in the New York Times which aggregated data about 175 rioters who had been charged, along with his or her photo, and a brief profile. It was a jaw-dropping revelation of how easy it is for pyjama-clad detectives to nab criminals. A number of these people were summarily fired by their employers after this information became public.

Spadework done by other organisations shows the power of online sleuthing. Bellingcat, “an independent international collective of researchers, investigators and citizen journalists using open source and social media investigation to probe a variety of subjects” created an impressively researched profile of Ashli Babbitt, the 35-year-old woman who was shot and killed by Capitol Police, based upon her social media posts.

In the age of Google, criminal profiling by ordinary citizens almost seems like a patriotic duty. But actors with fewer scruples can do this as well.

Consider the website of Rose City Antifa, which contributed to the detective work. Its mission is collecting information about “fascists” – pictures, addresses, cars and licence plates, physical features like height, build, hair/eye/skin colour, hair length, tattoos and piercings – so that it can doxx them.

Doxxing is the practice of publishing private information about a person to discredit and shame them. “It’s only when their privately held hate is made public that they face repercussions,” according to the website. “As it turns out, a lot of people don’t want to work with or live near a nazi. Go figure!”

It’s not difficult to imagine how destructive the work of online sleuths can be for people who don’t deserve to be called Nazis.

Which is something that retired Chicago firefighter David Quintavalle discovered after the riots. One of the army of online sleuths matched his face with the face of the suspect who hurled a fire extinguisher at a Capitol policeman who later died. He was bombarded with hundreds of tweets calling him a cop killer and with phone messages like this: “Hey Dave you’re a murderer and a traitor. And I can’t believe you killed a cop and your son is a cop. Wow. Good luck in Prison.” He needed police protection. But Quintavalle had been at home all the time.

But only ignorant scumbags would do stuff like this, right?

Wrong. New York Times reporters are being paid to do something similar, as independent journalist Glenn Greenwald pointed out in a recent column. “The tech reporters of The New York Times (Mike Isaac, Kevin Roose, Sheera Frenkel) — devote the bulk of their ‘journalism’ to searching for online spaces where they believe speech and conduct rules are being violated, flagging them, and then pleading that punitive action be taken (banning, censorship, content regulation, after-school detention),” he wrote.

No doubt these reporters are more scrupulous about checking their sources than those ignorant scumbags. But they’re more devious and dangerous. They search out private communications and betray them to the raving mobs of Twitter. It’s both “infantile and despotic”, says Greenwald.

Greenwald is not a rustbucket MAGA zealot. He worked for The Guardian; he is a free speech advocate, an animal rights supporter, a supporter of Julian Assange, and a human rights activist. He is openly gay and is married to a Brazilian congressman. But he writes in his column:

“The overarching rule of liberal media circles and liberal politics is that you are free to accuse anyone who deviates from liberal orthodoxy of any kind of bigotry that casually crosses your mind — just smear them as a racist, misogynist, homophobe, transphobe, etc. without the slightest need for evidence — and it will be regarded as completely acceptable.”

Which brings us back to the Stasi.

Thanks to the internet, the United States is moving dangerously close to East Germany’s surveillance society. It may be open source, decentralised, and anarchic — but high tech Zersetzung crushes people like Gina Carano just as effectively as the Stasi’s blackmail. Greenwald calls the online sleuths “tattletales”, “voluntary hall monitors” and “speech police”. Or perhaps the truth is even more sinister. In the Newspeak lingo of the Stasi, they are inoffizieller Mitarbeiter, unofficial colleagues, informants.

A true democracy respects privacy, confidentiality and intimacy. But social media are hollowing out those values. Gina Carano’s cancelling should remind us that the tyranny depicted in The Secret Lives of Others took place in the German Democratic Republic.

COLUMN BY

Michael Cook

Michael Cook is the editor of MercatorNet More by Michael Cook.

RELATED ARTICLES:

It’s Happening: Southern States Begin to Rebel

Biden and Big Tech Are Coming for Us

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.

Biden’s New Plans to Boost Refugee Numbers. Wants 62,500 by September 30th!

/in , , , , , /by

The extremely unpopular 125,000 number, he now says, is for FY 2022 that begins on October 1, 2021.

However, he wants 62,500 immediately!

He must consult with Congress, but that is pro forma because they can’t stop him (nor would they!) under the Refugee Act of 1980.

See my post at RRW the other day (below).

For the time being I will mention important refugee news here as so few people are reading RRW (I lost thousands of readers when I was deplatformed there), and I think most people must believe that Trump took care of the issue.  He slowed the flow for a few years, but left the program completely intact.

All it needs now is a fresh infusion of your money, your tax dollars!

Your fight is going to be a local one!

The only thing you can do is to look out for your own communities and fight the plans to place more impoverished people in your towns and cities. How do you do that?  I have ideas from past experience.  If you are really interested ask me by commenting to this post and I’ll see how much interest there is in a tutorial of sorts.

(See maps here for present resettlement sites in the US.)

Most of your governors are too weak, too chicken and in the pockets of big business, so they won’t stand up to the Dems who run Washington.

You need to know this information.  It is going to happen more quickly than I had envisioned.  In less than 8 months—62,500!  And during the Chinese virus crisis to boot!

I am guessing this move is to get the federal money flowing to the contractors*** in anticipation of the largest number of clients (they do refer to them as clients!) they could see in over 4 years. 

From the AP at the Baltimore Sun:

Biden wants to raise refugee admissions to 62,500, quadrupling Trump’s record-low limit

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden wants to raise refugee admissions to 62,500 for the current budget year, overriding former President Donald Trump’s record-low limit of 15,000, a U.S. official and others said Thursday.

The official and others with knowledge of the plans spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

Trump set the ceiling on refugee admissions in October when the 2021 budget year started, and it runs until September 30. Biden’s proposal of 62,500 would replace that, and the president has already announced plans to raise admissions to twice that amount in 2022.

Biden plans to top anything St. Obama ever did in terms of refugee resettlement! 125,000 would do it!  Would be the highest number in nearly 3 decades.

Biden is said to have wanted to raise refugee admissions immediately but not set the target as high as 125,000 people because that would be unrealistic to reach this year with the coronavirus pandemic and the work needed to rebuild the refugee program that had been largely dismantled by the Trump administration.

Biden by law must submit his proposal to Congress and consult with lawmakers before making a presidential determination. The U.S. State Department confirmed that it sent the president’s report to Congress, starting that process.

Putting Refugees before the well-being of suffering Americans!

***For those of you new to Refugee Resettlement, these are the nine federal refugee contractors who worked to put Biden and Harris in the White House and are lobbying for millions of illegal aliens to be transformed into legal voting citizens, as well as raising the refugee admissions ceiling from 15,000 this year to 125,000.

They are largely paid by you, the taxpayer, for their work of changing America by changing the people, and in so doing, are putting Americans last!

RELATED ARTICLE: Webinar: Experts Say “Biden Effect” Threatens New Migrant Crisis

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

 

Gaslighting: Technocracy’s Preferred Weapon of War

/in , , , , /by

Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment. – Wikipedia

It is my opinion that the Democrat bill, For the People Act 2021 H.R. 1 – 117th Congress (2021-2022), a laughable title, is the fatal blow to free and fair elections, and the end of the United States of America as we know it.

In case you think I am exaggerating, consider this checklist:

  • The coronavirus “pandemic” was an economic bioweapon designed to collapse Trump’s roaring U.S. economy, terrify Americans into submission, and justify mail-in ballots. The pandemic is and always was political medicine disguised as public health ✔︎
  • The mail-in ballots augmented the digital interference via Dominion Voting Systems/software to steal the 2020 election ✔︎
  • The stolen election installed China-centric puppet Joe Biden ✔︎
  • Biden’s administration can now pack the court and enable imposition of the lethal For the People Act of 2021, which puts the Uniparty of corrupt Democrats, Republicans in name only (RINOs), and Americans in name only (AINOs), in control of U.S. elections in perpetuity ✔︎
  • The globalist Uniparty will have succeeded in establishing planetary governance through “legal” means by duping the public with catastrophic humanitarian hoaxes that have deceitful names like “For the People Act 2021.” No bullets required ✔︎

I am witnessing the greatest, freest republic on earth being transformed into a technocracy that resembles communist China, the most oppressive regime on earth. The coordinated disinformation campaign of the Democrat/technocrat/globalist narrative is an orchestrated effort to make Americans believe the unbelievable, and accept the unacceptable.

The Biden administration and its corrupt, self-serving politicians will sacrifice the country not to be exposed. The useful idiots who support the Biden/Harris ticket are seduced by empty promises, ignore oppressive actions, and are fooled by a communist Chinese dictator wearing a suit.

Bertrand Russell told the world in his 1952 classic, The Impact of Science on Society, that the one with the science rules the world. That was the 20th century – this is the 21st. Today, the science is digital technology, and the information is distributed by the colluding Internet behemoths over social, mainstream, and entertainment media.

The republic will fall in a domestic information war fought without bullets. The science is digital, and technocrats are the most dangerous people on the planet. The ones who control the information, control the world – all for our own good of course.

This brings me to an extraordinary essay written by an unidentified author, that examines the information and the preferred method for information control. It is called gaslighting, and its specialty is cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance is a theory developed in the 1950s by American psychologist Leon Festiger, who said that inconsistency between thoughts or between thoughts and actions leads to discomfort (dissonance) which motivates changes in thoughts and behavior. When the cognitive dissonance becomes too overwhelming the person turns one of the thoughts off. People cannot tolerate double vision, and they cannot tolerate inconsistency – they seek homeostasis.

Gaslighting by unknown author

The term originates in the systematic psychological manipulation of a victim by her husband in Patrick Hamilton’s 1938 stage play Gas Light, and the film adaptations released in 1940 and 1944. In the story, the husband attempts to convince his wife and others that she is insane by manipulating small elements of their environment and insisting that she is mistaken, remembering things incorrectly, or delusional when she points out these changes. The play’s title alludes to how the abusive husband slowly dims the gas lights in their home, while pretending nothing has changed, in an effort to make his wife doubt her own perceptions. The wife repeatedly asks her husband to confirm her perceptions about the dimming lights, but in defiance of reality, he keeps insisting that the lights are the same and instead it is she who is going insane.

Today we are living in a perpetual state of gaslighting. The reality that we are being told by the media is at complete odds with what we are seeing with our own two eyes. And when we question the false reality that we are being presented, or we claim that what we see is that actual reality, we are vilified as racist or bigots or just plain crazy. You’re not racist. You’re not crazy. You’re being gaslighted.

New York State has twice as many deaths from Covid-19 than any other state, and New York has accounted for one fifth of all Covid-19 deaths, but we are told that New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has handled the pandemic better than any other governor. But if we support policies of Governors whose states had only a fraction of the infections and deaths as New York, we’re called anti-science and want people to die. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy? No, you’re being gaslighted.

We see mobs of people looting stores, smashing windows, setting cars on fire and burning down buildings, but we are told that these demonstrations are peaceful protests, and when we call this destruction of our cities, riots, we are called racists. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy? No, you’re being gaslighted.

We see the major problem destroying many inner-cities is crime; murder, gang violence, drug dealing, drive-by shootings, armed robbery, but we are told that it is not crime, but the police that are the problem in the inner-cities. We are told we must defund the police and remove law enforcement from crime-riddled cities to make them safer But if we advocate for more policing in cities overrun by crime, we are accused of being white supremacists and racists. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy? No, you’re being gaslighted.

The United States of America accepts more immigrants than any other country in the world. The vast majority of the immigrants are “people of color”, and these immigrants are enjoying freedom and economic opportunity not available to them in their country of origin, but we are told that the United States is the most racist and oppressive country on the planet, and if we disagree, we are called racist and xenophobic. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy? No, you’re being gaslighted.

Capitalist countries are the most prosperous countries in the world. The standard of living is the highest in capitalist countries. We see more poor people move up the economic ladder to the middle and even the wealthy class through their effort and ability in capitalist countries than any other economic system in the world, but we are told capitalism is an oppressive system designed to keep people down. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy? No, you’re being gaslighted.

Communist countries killed over 100 million people in the 20th century. Communist countries strip their citizens of basic human rights, dictate every aspect of their lives, treat their citizens as slaves, and drive their economies into the ground, but we are told that Communism is the fairest, most equitable, freest, and most prosperous economic system in the world. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy? No, you’re being gaslighted.

The most egregious example of gaslighting is the concept of “white fragility”. You spend your life trying to be a good person, trying to treat people fairly and with respect. You disavow racism and bigotry in all its forms. You judge people solely on the content of their character and not by the color of their skin. You don’t discriminate based on race or ethnicity. But you are told you are a racist, not because of something you did or said, but solely because of the color of your skin. You know instinctively that charging someone with racism because of their skin color is itself racist. You know that you are not racist, so you defend yourself and your character, but you are told that your defense of yourself is proof of your racism. So, we ask ourselves, am I crazy? No, you’re being gaslighted.

Gaslighting has become one of the most pervasive and destructive tactics in American politics. It is the exact opposite of what our political system was meant to be. It deals in lies and psychological coercion, and not the truth and intellectual discourse. If you ever ask yourself if you’re crazy, you are not. Crazy people aren’t sane enough to ask themselves if they’re crazy. So, trust yourself, believe what’s in your heart. Trust your eyes over what you are told. Never listen to the people who tell you that you are crazy, because you are not, you’re being gaslighted.

Sophocles said: ‘What people believe prevails over the truth.’ And that’s what the media is trying to exploit.

Ironically, this excellent essay on gaslighting dramatizes the description of America’s Civil War II presented in my 2011 philosophy book, Dear America: Who’s Driving the Bus?

“Civil War II is not a race war, an economic war, or a war between states. It is a psychological battle between states of mind that will determine who has the power in our society, who is in control (p.13). . . . Civil War II begins as a personal, internal war and eventually finds its way into external society.” (p.15)

Gaslighting is the deliberate, psychological weapon being used by the enemies of America against rational adult Americans. Rational adults live in the world of objective reality/facts. The goal of gaslighting is to reduce rational adults to childlike thinking, the world of subjective reality/feelings, where regressed adults believe what they are told and can be easily controlled. Gaslighting seeks to drive rational adults insane—into the world of subjective reality.

I wrote Dear America in an attempt to help people understand their behavior, so that they would have the tools to change their behavior. I never imagined in 2011 that the enemies of American sovereignty would use psychological manipulation against American citizens for political gain.

In 2020, I wrote a political sequel to Dear America in advance of the pivotal presidential election. The Book of Humanitarian Hoaxes: Killing America with ‘Kindness’, exposes the sinister, coordinated, interconnecting attacks on America and our hold on objective reality, deceitfully disguised as altruism.

Gaslighting is the weapon of choice being used against Americans in an effort to force them into subjective reality where they will accept the 2020 election coup, installation of the illegitimate Biden/Harris administration, and the imposition of a totalitarian technocracy of China-centric Democrat/globalist rule.

The defense against gaslighting is knowing that you are being gaslit. From the film Gaslight, “You’re not going out of your mind! You’re slowly and systematically being driven out of your mind.”

We must hold onto objective reality in America to save the republic. The alternative is the dystopian nightmare of globalist technocracy.

©Linda Goudsmit. All rights reserved. For further reading on cognitive dissonance and gaslighting, please refer to my related articles. They are all archived in my Pundicity website ARTICLES tab: goudsmit.pundicity.com

RELATED ARTICLES:

Remembering Martha Mitchell 10.20.2020

Ultimate Election Malfeasance: The Manipulation of Reality 9.21.2020

The Riddle of Animals and Small Children 8.17.2020

What Happens When Objective and Subjective Reality Collide? 12.30.2020

Cognitive Dissonance and the Lazy Eye 8.9.2018

One, Two, Three Strikes, You’re Out! 7.21.2018

What do Sociopaths and Leftists Have in Common? 11.5.2017

The Re-Education of America 8.7.2017

Anarchy in Academia: Cry-Bullies Gone Wild 5.31.2017

Motive for Madness 5.30.2017

Andy Ngo: Goal of Antifa/BLM Is to Abolish Nation States

/in , , , , , /by

Thursday on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily, Andy Ngo, journalist and author of Unmasked: Inside Antifa’s Radical Plan to Destroy Democracy, revealed that the shared goal of leftist groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter is to abolish nation states.

Ngo stated that “violent extremism” and “domestic terrorism” from these revolutionary movements is “being legitimized in the name of social justice” by celebrities, government officials, news media figures, and politicians.

“It’s hard for me to describe how ill that makes me feel,” he remarked. “I think the future for this country — for the United States — is particularly bleak, because when you delegitimize all the norms that have made our society prosperous such as non-violence, resolving differences through discussion or through the legal or democratic process, the rule of law when you break all that down as Antifa and BLM and their allies do, what else is there to the United States?

“You’re attacking all that is the American philosophy, as well,” Ngo added. “This speaks to the broader agenda of Antifa… So when people ask me, ‘What do Antifa really want? What’s the point of them doing this type of wanton violence?’ Well, the goal is, ultimately, to abolish nation states, but they view the United States in particular as the principal enemy.”

Ngo continued:

“They view the U.S. as an imperialistic fascist state because of its rule of law, property rights, all of that they view as intrinsically linked with white supremacy and fascism.”

“The opposition to the ‘Trump fascist regime’ was always pretextual, and their enemy is the United States, the republic itself,” Ngo explained. “Trump was just a convenient thing to latch onto, because the fellow useful idiots in the chattering classes were blaming Trump and saying that we’re on the cusp of another Holocaust.”

Ngo concluded about Antifa,

“They want to create failed states, because in that power vacuum, they say they want to create a world that[‘s] essentially without rules, but they are the most brutal enforcers of rules, [where] you can be killed based on having the wrong views.”

Antifa

42 Known Connections

Threatening a Republican Senator & His Family

On January 4, 2021, the Antifa-affiliated organization ShutDownDC organized a protest outside the District of Columbia home of Republican Senator Josh Hawley, in response to his announcement that he would object to Joe Biden’s alleged Electoral College victory. The demonstration, which took place while Hawley’s wife and newborn daughter were inside the house alone, featured approximately a dozen activists shouting threats through a bullhorn, pounding on the front door, and terrorizing Hawley’s wife. They also shouted phrases like “Shame” and “Protect democracy from the GOP,” and threatened to come back to the Hawley home every single day. Characterizing the protest as “an hour-long vigil,” ShutDown DC activist Patrick Young later said: “We came to let Hawley know that his actions are undemocratic and unacceptable. Voters decided who they wanted to be president and now Hawley is trying to silence their voices, even after Republican election officials certified the vote counts.”

To learn more about Antifa, click here for the profile link.

©Discover the Networks. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis SLAMS Media Over Tampa Bay Fans Celebrating Over Super Bowl Win

/in , , , , , , /by

More outstanding work by Governor Ron DeSantis. He handles the MSM beautifully. Never backs down. What a fighter. That’s why he can win in 2024. Watch the whole press conference below.

The media- otherwise known as the Ministry of Misery – punishes the happy, the free, the American.

https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1359732409256841216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1359732409256841216%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2021%2F02%2Fflorida-gov-ron-desantis-slams-media-over-tampa-bay-fans-celebrating-over-super-bowl-win.html%2F

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis SLAMS Media Over Tampa Bay Fans Celebrating Over Super Bowl Win

By 911.com, February 11, 2021

Tampa Bay Buccaneers fans were on top of the world after Tom Brady and company mopped the Kansas City Chiefs in Super Bowl LV in Tampa.

Fans flooded to the streets to celebrate, prompting backlash from democrat leaders and members of the media, who were seemingly outraged at the large crowds gathered during a pandemic.

On Wednesday, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was asked if he was worried that not enough was being done to stop the spread of Coronavirus during the celebrations.

“The media’s worried about that, obviously. You guys really love that,” DeSantis scoffed.

“You don’t care as much if it’s a ‘peaceful protest’… and then it’s fine. You don’t care as much if they’re celebrating a Biden election. You only care about it if it’s people you don’t like. So, I’m a Bucs fan. I’m damn proud of what they did on Sunday night.”

“..in terms of the UK variant, here’s what we know, we know, based on all the evidence, that these vaccines are going to be effective against that,” he said. “And that’s really the main concern, I mean we’re getting our seniors vaccinated. We’ve not seen any data, or any evidence to suggest that these vaccines are not effective and so if we get the seniors vaccinated.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Conservatives slam Biden administration over possible restrictions on Florida travel due to China virus fearmongering

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Elite San Francisco School Nixes Merit-Based Admission

/in , , , , /by

What’s next? A Mao-ist cultural revolution style purge/persecution/execution of intellectuals?

Elite San Francisco School Nixes Merit-Based Admission

Students and faculty at majority-minority Lowell High School claim current system is racist

By: Washington Free Beacon, February 11, 2021:

The San Francisco Board of Education voted late Tuesday to abandon the merit-based admissions process at a prestigious public high school after students, faculty, and others claimed the system perpetuates white supremacy.

Lowell High School—a public school within the San Francisco Unified School District often ranked among the nation’s best high schools—will now admit students through a lottery, rather than choosing students with the best grades and test scores.

The school board’s resolution alleges that the admissions process at Lowell “perpetuates the culture of white supremacy and racial abuse towards black and Latinx students” and calls on the district to conduct an audit of racist incidents and create antiracist training programs for students.

While students of color currently make up more than 75 percent ofthe student body, Lowell is often critiqued for lacking diversity.More than half of studentsare Asian, less than 2 percent are black, and less than 12 percent are Latino.

Like many schools across the country, Lowell High School paused its merit-based admissions process last fall after the coronavirus pandemic interrupted admissions tests, much to the chagrin of Lowell parents and alumni. Families of high-achieving students in San Francisco view the selective, academically rigorous school as a more economical alternative to private schooling, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

Rather than dismantling the current enrollment system at Lowell, critics of the resolution—including students who spoke at the board meeting Tuesday night—suggest that the school district should do more to assist black and Latino students at the elementary and middle school levels.

“If the board wants to fight racism and truly believes that ‘all SFUSD high schools are academic schools,’ then simply put more resources into all the other high schools,” Lowell High School alum Emil Guillermo wrote in the Chronicle. “Don’t lower the bar at Lowell. Raise the bar at the neighborhood schools and make them all shine.”

Lowell is the only high school in the San Francisco Unified School District that uses a merit-based admissions process. The school board’s resolution claims California law prohibits public high schools from enrolling students based on grades.

The school’s Black Student Union has for years spoken out against an allegedly exclusive and discriminatory culture at Lowell. Last week, members of the group protested against a racist incident that occurred during an online antiracist training session last month. Hackers, who some believe could have been students, posted racial slurs aimed at black and Jewish students, as well as pornographic images, on an online conversation board.

Neither the San Francisco Unified School District nor the school board responded to the Washington Free Beacon’s request for comment in time for publication.

Last week’s resolution came alongside the district’s decision to change the names of 44 San Francisco public schools named after historical figures now deemed problematic. Schools named after presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln will be renamed. Critics objected to the district’s reasons for renaming 3 of those 44 schools: Paul Revere Preparatory School, James Lick Middle School, and Lowell High School.

Lowell is the latest elite American high school to abandon merit-based admissions in favor of processes that can be used to achieve racial quotas. Last fall, the Fairfax County Public Schools Board in Virginia eliminated the entrance test for the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in an effort to boost black and Latino enrollment numbers

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLE: The West’s Decline of Intelligence

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Trump Impeachment II: George Washington Warned About Political Factions

/in , , , , , , /by

Maybe it’s just me, but I am starting to come to the conclusion that Nancy Pelosi just doesn’t like former President Donald Trump. She seems to have been the driving force behind Trump Impeachment II.

Jeff Charles of Red State calls it:

“the Democrats’ new production of ‘An Impeachment Story Part II: Maybe It’ll Work This Time.’”

Impeachment is a Constitutional provision to potentially remove a sitting president. But, of course, now Trump is a private citizen. Where is the Chief Justice? He is supposed to preside over a legitimate impeachment hearing. But Chief Roberts will have nothing to do with this farce.

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul says, “The Constitution says two things about impeachment—it is a tool to remove the officeholder, and it must be presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.”

Instead, notes Paul, this is an act by “hyper-partisan Democrats,” who have a “deranged hatred” against the former president. He adds that they are “wasting the nation’s time.”

Did the president receive due process during the House trial against him a couple of weeks ago? No, says John Eidsmoe, constitutional attorney and prolific author.

Eidsmoe wrote an open letter to the Senate: “As an attorney and law professor who has practiced and taught Constitutional Law for many decades, I strongly oppose the proposal to impeach and convict President Donald J. Trump and bar him from holding public office.”

Eidsmoe’s reasons include that the charges are factually baseless. For example, Trump is being accused of causing an insurrection because he held a rally in D.C. on January 6th, outlining once again why he thought the election was stolen.

The former president told his supporters at the rally: “We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated.  I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” [Emphasis added]

It is important to note that the breach of the Capitol had already begun before Trump even told his followers to “peacefully” go over there (about a 25-minute walk away). He didn’t say anything about violence, vandalism, or mayhem. He wasn’t leading an Antifa rally or the like.

What is happening in our country is a nightmare our first president warned about—factionalism taking over.

The father of our country, George Washington, issued some parting wisdom in his Farewell Address, printed in newspapers beginning September 19, 1796. The U. S. Senate Historical Office has posted the Farewell Address.

They note: “He believed that the stability of the Republic was threatened by the forces of geographical sectionalism, political factionalism, and interference by foreign powers in the nation’s domestic affairs. He urged Americans to subordinate sectional jealousies to common national interests. Writing at a time before political parties had become accepted as vital extraconstitutional, opinion-focusing agencies, Washington feared that they carried the seeds of the nation’s destruction through petty factionalism.” [Emphasis added].

In his day, there were not the fully developed political parties as we’ve seen in America since. If you had to categorize him party-wise, he would have been a Federalist, in contrast with the Democrat Party (initially the Republican Democrat Party, just to confuse things) that arose with Thomas Jefferson and New Yorker Aaron Burr, later a traitor to America.

Here’s what Washington said in the Farewell Address, regarding putting party-loyalty above country-loyalty: “The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty.”

Public liberty today is at risk because of the rise of the petty factionalists. Gary Bauer points out that in recent times both Senate Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi are on record potentially inciting violence—far more than Trump’s remarks to “peacefully and patriotically make your voice heard.” For example, Pelosi said, “I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country” against Trump.

Meanwhile, Trump’s legal team wrote a letter, explaining why he was not going to appear to testify in person at this week’s sham impeachment hearing. Their February 4, 2021 letter closes: “The use of our Constitution to bring a purported impeachment proceeding is much too serious to try to play these games.” I think George Washington would agree.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: We Know Trump didn’t Incite Violence, But How did our Intelligence Community Miss the Planning?

November 7, 1983: ‘May 19th Communist Organization (M19)’ Detonates a Bomb in the U.S. Capitol to Kill Republicans

/in , , , /by

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana

Members of Congress and the media seems to confuse real insurrection with what happened during the “mostly peaceful” protest in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021. These same members of Congress and their media allies have conveniently forgotten history.

One example is the November 7, 1983 attack on the U.S. Capitol by the ‘May 19th Communist Organization (M19)’ which was intended to kill Republican members of Congress. M19 was made up and led by women who were hard core Communists.

The Smithsonian Magazine in an article titled “In the 1980s, a Far-Left, Female-Led Domestic Terrorism Group Bombed the U.S. Capitol” outlines historian William Rosenau investigation of the little-known militant group M19’s bombing attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Amidst the social and political turmoil of the 1970s, a handful of women—among them a onetime Barnard student, a Texas sorority sister, the daughter of a former communist journalist—joined and became leaders of the May 19th Communist Organization. Named to honor the shared birthday of civil rights icon Malcolm X and Vietnamese leader Ho Chi Minh, M19 took its belief in “revolutionary anti-imperialism” to violent extremes: It is “the first and only women-created and women-led terrorist group,” says national security expert and historian William Rosenau.

M19’s status as an “incredible outlier” from male-led terrorist organizations prompted Rosenau, an international security fellow at the think tank New America, to excavate the inner workings of the secretive and short-lived militant group. The resulting book, Tonight We Bombed the Capitol, pieces together the unfamiliar story of “a group of essentially middle-class, well educated, white people who made a journey essentially from anti-war and civil rights protest to terrorism,” he says.

According to Rosenau:

Just before 11 p.m. on November 7, 1983, they [M19] called the U.S. Capitol switchboard and warned them to evacuate the building. Ten minutes later, a bomb detonated in the building’s north wing, harming no one but blasting a 15-foot gash in a wall and causing $1 million in damage. Over the course of a 20-month span in 1983 and 1984, M19 also bombed an FBI office, the Israel Aircraft Industries building, and the South African consulate in New York, D.C.’s Fort McNair and Navy Yard (which they hit twice.)

M19 and the Weather Underground

Smithsonian magazine asked Rosenau about other left-wing extremist groups,

Where would you position M19 relative to groups that people may be more familiar with, like the Weather Underground?

They are sort of an offshoot of the Weather Underground, which essentially cracked up in the mid 1980s. These women decided to continue the armed struggle. Many of them had been in the Weather Underground, but they thought the Weather Underground had made important ideological mistakes, that the Weather Underground saw itself as a vanguard of revolution, when in fact the real revolutions were going on in the third world. Or in the United States itself, in places like Puerto Rico or among Native Americans.

But the real revolutionaries were these third-world freedom fighters. And it should be the job of North American anti-imperialists, as they called themselves, to support those liberation movements in whatever way they could. So if that meant bombing the Navy to protest the role of the United States in Central America in the early 1980s, they would do that. If it meant attacking the South African consulate in New York that represented the apartheid regime [which they did in September 1984], they would do that.

They really saw themselves as being as supporters and followers of these third-world struggles in the Middle East, in southern Africa and in this hemisphere particularly. They talked about themselves as being in the belly of the beast, being at the center of this imperialist monster. So they had a particular responsibility, in their view, to carry out actions to bring this monster to heel.

Remember that Bill Ayers was the co-founder of the Weather Underground and Communist Bernardine Dohrn were friends of Barrack Obama in Chicago.

Today we have off shoots of M19 and the Weather Underground. Today they are know as Black Lives Matter and Antifa. Same ideology, same tactics, same goals.

Rosenau stated:

Historical context is absolutely paramount. We kind of lump terrorism together, like groups as disparate as Students for a Democratic Society, Al Qaeda, Red Army Faction, Aum Shinrikyo, but these are all products of particular times and particular places.

BLM and Antifa are products of our particular times and particular places. BLM and Antifa are products of Democrat Party rhetoric and incitement. They are part of the hate America, hate Trump and hate capitalism movement that dates back to the Russian Revolution. The times change but the failed Marxist ideology doesn’t.

Time for Americans to understand how history in now repeating itself.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

‘Beating Democrat Electoral Corruption’

/in , , , , /by

Don’t back down, push back.

Beating Democrat Electoral Corruption

By J.R. Dunn, American Thinker, February 10, 2021:

Nov. 3rd, one particular line has been repeated almost to the point of becoming a meme: “There will never be another honest election in this country.”

I’ve seen it in a dozen articles I’ve worked on for AT, and at least twice that many times elsewhere. It wouldn’t be going too far to say that it has became a piece of received wisdom, along the lines of “Biden is the asterisk president”: there will never be another honest election in the U.S.

To some extent, this attitude is understandable, and you can’t blame people for holding it. I myself entertained similar thoughts in the wake of the electoral coup this past fall.

This reflects conservative defeatism. Unfortunately, the default position for most conservatives is to give up, retreat into the think tank and spend time tossing off remarks about how horrible our doom will be, mixed with attacks on anyone trying to stop it. It’s in times like this that this fatal, self-inflicted flaw becomes most evident.

But all the same, it’s wrong, and it’s wrong for a very apparent and simple human reason.

At first glance, the idea seems to have a lot going for it. As November 3rd clearly revealed (and Molly Ball and Time mag foolishly underlined), the electoral fraud machinery is immense and the Dems went to incredible effort and expense to put it together. So why would they use it only once? That would make no sense whatsoever. Surely, the Democrat’s theft machine is built for the long haul, like the Tammany machine of the 19th century or the Cook County machine of the 20th.

But there are number of reasons why it’s unlikely that it will ever be reused – at least not at the level it was last November. The first involves COVID-19. COVID was the key element in last fall’s electoral fraud. Probably the foulest example yet of the Dem’s “never let a crisis go to waste” philosophy.  There’s no question that Democrats have exploited the pandemic for their own benefit – the Empress of Ice Cream has boasted as much. It may be going too far to assert that Democrat policies have deliberately intensified the effects of the disease, though at times it’s hard to avoid that conclusion. Certainly, the irrationality of the anti-disease efforts (what, exactly, is a curfew supposed to do to control a disease?) is hard to explain any other way.

COVID enabled the Democrats to ram through a vastly expanded use of absentee ballots on the grounds that voting was now “dangerous.” As we all know, the COVID virus avoids attacking Antifa riots and BLM demos, hoarding its efforts to strike down voters alone. It has to be that way – otherwise, Dr. Anthony Fauci, third in humanitarian stature only behind Gandhi and MLK, Jr. (recall the story of how he descended from his white steed to divide his cloak in two in order to share it with a poor COVID victim) would have told us.

It was the absentee ballots that were the core of the fraud effort. If you look at the chain of events surrounding the fraud, you’ll note that almost all the irregularities involved the absentee ballots. It was regarding those ballots that all the questionable court decisions were handed down, those ballots that corrupt governors and secretaries of state intervened to permit. Vote counts were halted to allow time for those ballots to be manufactured, and GOP vote counters were sent home for the sole purpose of allowing those votes to arrive unobserved. It was those votes that GOP observers were denied the right to examine, and it was to hide those votes that windows were blocked. While other efforts might have been underfoot, it was the absentee ballots that bore the weight of the fraud.  It was those that comprised the bulk of President Asterisk’s 13 million votes out of hyperspace.

These circumstances are unlikely to be repeated. While the Dems are stretching the COVID “crisis” (in truth, it’s the botched response that actually triggered the “crisis”) as long as they can, it’s unlikely to be tolerated much longer, let alone the 21 months that would be required for them to drag it on into the 2022 election. And faking up a new plague would simply be too obvious (though not too idiotic – see Molly Ball) for the Dems to attempt. Once we’re out from under the COVID “countermeasures,” it’s likely that most people will look back on them as a gross overreaction that caused more chaos that they were worth.

COVID was a one-shot deal. But what about the fraudulent systems already put in place during the 2020 campaign? It happens that almost all the battleground states (along with nearly half the states in the country) excepting Nevada are GOP-controlled at the legislative level. It also happens that many of these politicians in these states are looking at re-election in 2022.

What this means that the Republicans are finally going to get off their fat duffs and do something. The GOP may not be willing to lift a finger to help Donald Trump or protect the Constitution. But save their own penny-ante political careers? That’s another story. That’s important. That has to be defended at all costs.

And so we’re beginning to see efforts to do just that. In Pennsylvania, the legislature is addressing the problem in the session that began this week. Several proposals have been made to abolish mail-in ballots completely. The Dems have protested, which simply shows how much these procedures mean to them.

The problem with PA is that Gov. Tom Wolf is up to his neck in last year’s election corruption (no single politician was more closely involved with the promotion of absentee ballots) and is unlikely to budge an inch. A veto-proof majority will be necessary to overcome inevitable opposition from Wolf.

The Arizona GOP is willing to go even farther. House Bill 2720 would enable the Arizona House to revoke certification of presidential electors. While passage of this bill may be unlikely, there are a number of proposals for either eliminating (House Bill 2701) or modifying absentee ballots ranging from requiring that they be dropped off in person (Senate Bill 1503) to including a copy of a driver’s license (House Bill 2369).

There are also rumblings from Georgia, but it’s difficult to imagine any meaningful reforms with Kemp and Raffensperger in charge. Both refuse to admit any responsibility for the multiple electoral disasters that struck their state, both seem blind to future dangers, and both are evidently happier battling members of their own party than the political opposition. But the January 5th runoff, run under the same rules as the November election and resulting in the “defeats” of Douglas Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, has no doubt put the fear of Jehovah into the hearts of state politicians. We will see reform in Georgia.

These are only the leading edge of efforts to attack the universal electoral corruption revealed last November, efforts that will be given further impetus by court decisions such as the late January decision finding Virginia’s late election law changes illegal. (We can also forget about the section of U.S. House bill H.R. 1 that attempts to seize control of national elections form the states. This is blatantly unconstitutional and will be found to be exactly that once Roberts and the Three Musketeers can be dragged awl out from their hiding place beneath the bench.)

This is all very appropriate. In our system, the states are the last line of defense. It’s the states that will undermine the Dem’s headlong rush to a totally corrupt single-party state. Apart from that, it’s often overlooked that the Founders, in their wisdom (that amount of brainpower out of only 2.5 million people. If you were to look for a dozen Americans to match them out of our 330-odd million, you would utterly fail), based our system on human frailty. As has been said in other cases, any system based on that is based on a strong foundation indeed. We’ll see plenty of evidence of that in the months to come.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

TREACHERY: MI Senate Leader Says Insurrection Was ‘Hoax’ Pushed by McConnell and Others Who Wanted a ‘Mess’

/in , , , , /by

These craven quislings should be publicly flogged.

MI Senate Leader Says Insurrection Was “Hoax” Pushed by McConnell and Others Who Wanted a “Mess”

What Michigan’s top leader just said is exactly how the majority of conservatives feel…

By Missy Crane, Wayne Dupree, February 10, 2021

The top leader of the Michigan Senate called out the Capitol Insurrection as a hoax.

Mike Shirkey said in recorded comments that the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol in Washington D.C. falsely framed Trump supporters for causing a so-called “insurrection.”

“That’s been a hoax from day one,” Shirkey said, later adding that what occurred was “all staged” and implied Sen. Mitch McConnell and other leaders “wanted to have a mess.”

The recording lasts for more than an hour and shows Shirkey arguing with members of the Hillsdale County Republican Party about his pending censure from the party in between ordering food and drinks. He frequently used expletives and discussed a wide range of issues with the group, ranging from the election results to his support of banning open carry in the Michigan Capitol building.

Elsewhere in the conversation, Shirkey remarked that he contemplated inviting Gov. Gretchen Whitmer “to a fistfight on the Capitol lawn” and “spanked” her on a number of issues.

“We’ve spanked her hard on the budget, spanked her hard on appointments,” he said.

The recording was filmed by Hillsdale County Republican Party Secretary Jon Smith, who confirmed to an MLive reporter that he recorded the video.

Hillsdale County Republican Party Chair Daren Wiseley declined to comment on whether he agreed with Shirkey’s position that what transpired in Washington was a hoax, but said he was surprised by his remarks.

“I was surprised Shirkey openly said it was a hoax,” Wiseley said. “That doesn’t really seem like a position he’d hold.”

He went on to blame people like Mitch McConnell for whipping everyone into a frenzy because they wanted a “mess.”

RELATED ARTICLE: The Circus Day 3

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Daniel Pearl’s Widow Highlights Message She Got About His Murder: ‘This is Not Islam’

/in , , , , , /by

Suicidal self-hatred continues to sweep the West. Mariane Pearl, the widow of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was kidnapped and beheaded by Islamic jihadis in Pakistan in 2002, has suffered a great deal, and it is perhaps churlish and uncharitable to venture any critical word at all. But it isn’t she I am criticizing. It is the general tendency, the felt need or the unspoken imperative, to take all possible opportunities to exonerate Islam of all connection to crimes done in its name and in accord with its teachings. One can never solve a problem by pretending it doesn’t exist. But that is exactly what we are doing.

The 19th anniversary of Daniel Pearl’s murder was Monday, and on Wednesday, Mariane Pearl published an op-ed in the Washington Post entitled “My husband’s killer could go free in Pakistan. Despite the injustice, I still have hope.” It began: “Almost two decades ago, the people of Pakistan sent me messages expressing sadness and anger at the murder of my husband, Daniel Pearl, in their beloved country. Danny was 38 years old and the Wall Street Journal’s bureau chief for South Asia. “I am a Muslim and this, my friend, is not Islam,” one wrote. My favorite message read: “Your husband had a great smile . . . a happy mixture of Pope John Paul and Dean Martin.”

It is certain that Mariane Pearl received numerous messages after the murder of her husband. The one that she and/or the Post chose to give first mention, however, was “I am a Muslim and this, my friend, is not Islam.”

The first question that springs to mind about this is: Why this message? Why is cleansing Islam’s image the number one priority?

The second question is: Why is this always asserted but never explained? Daniel Pearl was made to state that he was a Jew in a video, where he likely read a statement the jihadis had prepared for him: “My name is Daniel Pearl. I am a Jewish American from Encino, California USA. I come from, uh, on my father’s side the family is Zionist. My father’s Jewish, my mother’s Jewish, I’m Jewish. My family follows Judaism. We’ve made numerous family visits to Israel. Back in the town of Bnei Brak there is a street named after my great grandfather Chaim Pearl who is one of the founders of the town.” Then he was beheaded.

In a hadith that Muslims consider authentic, Muhammad is depicted as saying:

“The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.” (Sahih Muslim 6985)

And the Qur’an says:

“When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks…” (47:4)

In light of all that, it is unfortunate that Mariane Pearl’s interlocutor apparently did not explain how the killing of Daniel Pearl was not Islam, how the jihadis who killed him were transgressing Islamic tenets, or how the passages of the Qur’an and Hadith that seem to allow for such behavior actually have some other meaning or can be interpreted in a benign manner.

In the article, Mariane Pearl describes how it all happened, and how a Muslim who was the chief of the counter-terrorism unit in Karachi offered his help. Mariane Pearl jokes in response to kindness from this man and his wife: “Stop being so nice. How am I ever going to hate you guys?” That is the choice as most people see it today: one must either hate Muslims, or pretend that Islam is a religion of peace. But in reality, the fact that Islam teaches warfare against unbelievers does not mean that every Muslim will believe this to be an imperative or practice it. It doesn’t mean that no Muslims will be kind to unbelievers. But to believe that such kindness precludes the possibility that Islam does teach this warfare is to be willfully blind. And that’s where we are as a society.

The third and easiest question to answer is: Would the Washington Post ever print an explanation of the Islamic justification for the murder of Daniel Pearl, even if such a story included statements by Muslim spokesmen in the West offering differing interpretations of the passages in question? And the answer is, Not on your life! Not only is the Post, and all the rest of the establishment media as well, dedicated indefatigably to whitewashing and obfuscating the ideological roots of jihad terrorism; it is also determined to pretend that there isn’t even a question about those roots: they lay, according to the Post and its colleagues, in “racism” and “Islamophobia,” not in Islamic texts and teachings, and anyone who suggests otherwise is a racist “Islamophobe” himself.

The victory of “Islamophobia” propaganda has been so complete that the elites don’t even consider it remotely necessary even to address the arguments of those whom they smear as “Islamophobes,” or to acknowledge that they have any arguments at all. The only problem with all this is that the jihad, motivated by Islamic texts and teachings according to numerous statements of jihadis themselves, is not going to go away for all this pretending that it doesn’t exist.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Khamenei: ‘Enemies cannot do a damn thing against the Islamic Republic and that Islam’s power is growing’

Professor says he’s ‘struggling’ with his Christian faith because of Trump, beheadings shouldn’t reflect on Islam

Universities get billions from Islamic entities, Biden drops rule forcing revelation of cash from propaganda centers

Pakistan’s Khan: ‘West associated Islam with terrorism. Muslims should have made it clear that there is no link.’

Nigeria’s military executes 6 Christian soldiers framed by a Muslim colonel for a crime they didn’t commit

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.