PART 1: CNN Insider Blows Whistle on Network President Jeff Zucker’s Personal Vendetta Against POTUS

  • Cary Poarch, Who Works at CNN’s Washington DC Bureau, Says: “I Decided to Wear a Hidden Camera…to Expose the Bias”
  • Records Zucker’s 9AM Daily Rundown Calls
  • Zucker Emphatically States Fox News is “Beyond Destructive for America”
  • Zucker to Staffers: “Impeachment is the Story,” Ignore Other Stories
  • Employees Ordered by Zuckerto ‘Knock Off’ Their Friendliness Towards Lindsey Graham
  •  Nick Neville, CNN Media Coordinator: “Jeff Zucker…has a Personal Vendetta Against Trump,” “…Then You Get on the 9AM Call and the Big Boss, Jeff Zucker, F**king Tells What to Do”
  •  Neville: It’s About ‘Ratings,’ “…It’s, Like, They Pulled Names Out of a Hat and It’s Like We’re Watching the Gameshow Network”
  • CNN Floor Manager Mike Brevna: “It’s the Trump Network, Dog…They Sold Themselves to The Devil”
  • Brevna Recalls Colleagues ‘Sobbing,’ And Says The “Office Was Like a Funeral” After Trump Election Victory
  • CNN Media Coordinator, Christian Sierra, Confesses CNN Prepares ‘Softball Interviews’for Democrats Compared to Republicans, and Suggests “Anti-Trump Crusade” After 2016 Election
  • Top Network Executive David Chalian Says Republicans are ‘Delusional, Defiant, or Silent’ With Regards to Trump’s Impeachment Story
CNN Floor Director Hiram Gonzalez: “…We Created This Monster…Media Created the Trump Monster”

(Washington, D.C.) A brave CNN insider came to Project Veritas to expose anti-Trump bias at the cable giant. Cary Poarch, who works at CNN’s Washington D.C. Bureau, tells Project Veritas “I decided to wear a hidden camera…to expose the bias running rampant” at the network. Poarch documented CNN’s bias for months; recording undercover footage of numerous long-term employees, some of which talk about Jeff Zucker’s anti-Trump agenda. In the video are Nick Neville, Christian Sierra, Hiram Gonzalez, David Chalian, and Mike Brevna. These employee’s positions range from media coordinator to high-ranking executives. I decided to secretly record the 9:00am rundown call meetings with senior management and executives, says Poarch. In the recordings, Zucker details his expectations for CNN’s coverage and very matter-of-factly states “impeachment is the story.”

Impeachment Push 

 

Jeff Zucker has served as president of CNN Worldwide since 2013. In recordings of daily phone calls, Zucker directed staffers to push the impeachment narrative.

“I want to stay with this, our top, top – our own reporters, our own political analysts, the top, the top [unintelligible] we have. Okay, so make sure we’re doing thatAll these moves are moves towards impeachment. So, don’t – don’t lose sight of what the biggest story is.”

Attacks on Fox News and Republicans

 

In one 9AM rundown call, Zucker and another executive disparage Republicans about Trump and attack FoxNews:

I think what’s going on in America now is really fundamentally result of years of fake news, conspiracy nonsense from Fox News that has taken root in this country…”

Zucker continues, “The fake conspiracy nonsense that Fox has spread for years is now deeply embedded in American society and at the highest levels of the Republican elected officials as we’ve seen…and frankly that is beyond destructive for America…”

CNN’s Vice President & Political Director David Chalian on Republicans:

I think as big of a story as big of a story as what President Trump has done here is the Republican’s sort of either delusional or defiant or silent responses.” 

 Zucker: CNN Employees Must ‘Knock Off’ Friendliness Towards Graham 

Yeah, so I just want to say on the Lindsey Graham front, I know that there’s a lot of people at CNN that are friendly with Lindsey Graham. It’s time to knock that off and it’s time to call him out.”

CNN Media Coordinator Details How Zucker Runs the Network; Describes ‘Gameshow’ 

Nick Neville, a CNN Media Coordinator, also opened up to our insider. Neville tells our insider who really controls CNN’s programming, and how much top-down control Zucker exerts:

Like, there are a lot of people who are out here trying to play like, just do what they think is the best journalistic integrity. Then you get on the 9am call and the big boss, Jeff Zucker, f**king tells what to do….”

“Jeff Zucker- basically president of CNN has a personal vendetta against Trump. Your own biases are gonna be there. They’re going to seep into what you think, they’re gonna seep into what you say, so if Jeff Zucker like blatantly hates Trump, and he runs CNN (which he does), it’s not gonna be positive (for you guys)…no I mean it’s not gonna be positive for Trump. He hates him. It’s gonna be negative!”

The CNN Media Coordinator goes on to lament his own network’s debate preparation format, connecting it to their push to prioritize ratings:

“But then you have higher up executives, like Zucker and other people, who are saying, “Well, we gotta make profits.” So, you end up with things like- I don’t know if you heard this, but this week they had like a fucking gameshow to, like, decide what dates they’re, it’s gonna be this debate.”

CNN Floor Manager Describes Election Night Despair at CNN 

Mike Brevna, Floor Manager, CNN: “The election- Yeah, I came in at about ten or eleven o’clock that night…. And as I started walking towards this person, as I got closer, I could hear her sobbing …. People were like, in shock.”

CNN Floor Director Shares His Perspective on the Cause of Trump’s Political Ascension

 

Hiram Gonzalez, Floor Director, CNN: “Between you and I, we created this monster and now we’re eating him full plate every single day. Media created the Trump monster.”

CNN Media Coordinator Confesses to Network Bias 

Christian Sierra, a CNN Media Coordinator, describes the mood inside CNN after Trump’s election victory:

“That day, man, when I came in, everyone was silent. Nobody wanted to talk. I’m like, like the mood was just so sour the whole day…It was a f**king dreary day. I bet at Fox it was like euphoria.”

When questioned about how the CNN anchors feel about Trump, Sierra unloads: “Cooper hates him;” “Don Lemon hates him;” “Cuomo doesn’t like him;” and Tapper “doesn’t like him either.”

Sierra goes on to admit to our insider that:

“…MSNBC is tougher on Republicans, and we’re tough on the Republicans too. More than so than the Democrats. Our Democratic interviews are like softballs, compared to the Republicans… if you notice like every time, we ask questions to Republicans, like it’s always a little tougher than when we do get the Democrats.”

Project Veritas intends to continue its investigation into corruption in the Mainstream Media. We encourage brave insiders at these organizations to come forward with any information they have, so that the public knows what is really going on within these media companies.

EDITORS NOTE: This Project Veritas investigative report with video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Turning Generation Z Into Faith-Filled Leaders

Culture is constantly changing ,but there are principles of truth that never change. It is those principles which the Imago Dei Leadership Forum seeks to empower young people with so they can be leaders who influence culture.

John Murray, founder and president of Imago Dei Leadership Forum, joins The Daily Signal podcast to offer advice on how we can bridge cultural divides in our nation and train the next generation to be thoughtful leaders who live out their faith. Read the lightly edited transcript, posted below, or listen on the podcast:

Virginia Allen: I am joined by John Murray, author, speaker, and the founder and president of the Imago Dei Leadership Forum, an organization that is changing the lives of young people by empowering them to be thoughtful leaders who live out their faith.

John, thank you so much for joining me.

John Murray: Thank you for having me, Virginia. It’s great to be here.

Allen: The mission of the Imago Dei Leadership Forum is to raise up a generation of young people that view themselves and others as leaders who are image-bearers of God. 

John, you all seek to accomplish this mission through a fellowship program for eighth-grade students and a powerful curriculum that can be used by schools, churches, or family, as well as through lectures and other resources. And we will talk a bit more about that in a moment but I want to begin by asking you to explain more about the mission of the organization and why you founded Imago Dei.

Murray: That’s a great question. Well, I had been teaching a leadership class at my school in the D.C. area for a couple of years, as our graduates left eighth grade and went out into different schools in the D.C. area, both public and private. And I developed a leadership retreat where we went down into D.C., and stayed in D.C., and met with different leaders, both in politics and the media and civil rights.

Then we also did an end-of-the-year retreat before the students graduated in Gettysburg, just to talk through the challenges and fears and excitements they were going to face as they went into high school the next year.

Fast forward to July 2014, I came to St. Louis and brought my family to lead a multiracial school, a K through sixth grade, one night before Ferguson.

So after Ferguson happened and all the events began to unfold, I realized that I had a lot to learn to lead a school that was one-third African Americans.

One of the lessons I quickly learned from friends of mine in St. Louis was just the need to better facilitate personal relationships between the white and black parents in our school community so they could understand and learn from each other’s perspectives, especially just for a lot of our white parents to understand the racism that a number of our African American parents had faced in St. Louis for many years.

After seeing the power of these relationships and conversations at the parent level, I decided to develop a leadership forum for our alumni and other students in the community to affirm both their identity and faith in Jesus, and learn more of the importance of loving others different from themselves as image-bearers of God, both in history and today.

So that was kind of the genesis of my program when I came here and implemented it to reach a racially, socioeconomically, and denominationally diverse group of students.

Allen: That is so critical, and obviously such a need in our current culture.

What is the advice that you give to parents, young people, and educators who come to you and want to know how do we engage in those conversations with people that are of different backgrounds, look different than us, and maybe live out their faith differently?

Murray: That’s great. And that’s really what I try to model just in my leadership forum is I talk about this with other school communities and parents.

[The] first group that I led had 20 students, and I choose eighth grade because I feel like this is a really pivotal age as they’re preparing to go into high school, as they start to own their faith and are still going from concrete thinking to critical thinking, and their emotional and social development, they’re still open to engaging.

So we met for 10 nights on Sunday nights over the course of a spring semester, for 10 weeks, I should say, culminated with a weeklong combined trip to Gettysburg and D.C.

What was so neat as I walked them through the curriculum that I had put together on “Who am I?”—asking a lot of questions, it was very question-based, you know, “How does the media influence me? What is my identity? Where did I come from? Where does my creativity come from? How should I view others? How should I not view others?”

Bringing diverse kids together and hearing their perspectives on going through these questions was just really powerful for kids to understand how people may think about things differently than they do, or how things may impact them differently than they do, whether it’s in the mediaor the books they read and so forth.

So, to me, that is what’s so powerful is talking about the challenging issues of our day in a racially diverse group to understand one another, so they can treat each other well, even if they may not always agree with one another. I think this is preparing them to be leaders in their schools, particularly in just such a hyper-partisan, polarized country that we find ourselves in now.

Allen: John, this has been an exciting season for you all. Can you explain what the Imago Dei Leadership Forum has been working on in regards to your new curriculum?

Murray: I’ve … gone full time with this. This past year I got my 501(c)(3) nonprofit status, and through the help of a grant from the Maclellan Foundation, I produced a curriculum that has research that was done by the Barna Group just on the questions I was asking Gen Z students, students ages 13 to 18 at this point, as well as I produce 40 videos that go along with the e-textbook that kids can click on and watch.

So my goal is to get this curriculum into Christian schools all over the country so they can engage in these issues and just see diverse perspectives on how do we engage the culture, but all bringing it back to a biblical worldview of what it means to be an image-bearer of God, and how we should approach one another.

My vision is for schools to emulate what I’m doing, whether it’s in the classroom, an eighth grade classroom, or starting their own leadership group within their school, or maybe partnering with an urban school and bringing together leaders that they would walk through something outside of school so that it would be a resource that can be used in schools across the country.

Obviously, I’m available to train faculty, and come in and lead sessions or speak to students. So the genesis is here in St. Louis, and I do a local leadership group each year, and this is going to be our sixth year. I’m also providing materials to enable schools around the country to do this as well.

Allen: That is so critical, and it’s so practical to have a curriculum that families can take and use, that schools can use in their classrooms. And that’s called “In Whose Image?” Correct?

Murray: Yes.

Allen: OK, great. John, I want to ask, we live in a culture that is constantly changing, and it’s honestly really hard to keep up with sometimes. At Imago Dei, how are you all ensuring that the resources like “In Whose Image?” are staying up to date with the challenges that parents and educators are facing?

Murray: That’s a great question, and that was one of the reasons when I did my grant proposal, was to do this as an e-textbook. There is no hard copy because when I have six, seven videos per chapter, I’m asking questions such as, “Do you know what it means to be an image-bearer of God?” Or, “Do you know what it means how to define you and your life and bring meaning to your life?”

I’m using, a lot of times, movie clips or TV commercials or pop culture to speak into these issues, and teach critical thinking and discernment. But I have the ability, since these are linked to my website, to go in and update these, or there’s a new issue that comes up that I feel like we really need to speak into, then I can do that so it can remain current.

Allen: That’s great. And I think that so many parents today, and even young adults like myself who want to have a family one day, really wrestle with this question of, “How do we raise men and women of integrity when we live in a culture that sometimes undermines traditional values?” What advice do you give to those parents?

Murray: Well, it’s a great challenge, and I think that’s honestly one of the great fears of many parents in our country. What I think is that, obviously, [keep things] age appropriate as you raise your children, just to engage them in things that you feel like they can handle, whether it’s current events or media that’s coming out, whether it’s a Disney movie or a song on the radio that you start engaging them and teaching them critical thinking skills and media discernment.

So you’re not making them fearful to culture or fearful of the media, but really helping them discern what is right and what is wrong. Because that is still like, there’s too much out there, there’s no way we can shield our kids from everything. And if they go over to other friends’ houses, they may be exposed to things, or even in their schools. So it’s just equipping them as they grow up, and they’re ready to take on different issues, just how to speak in these issues. And from my perspective, being a Christian educator, [that] would be from a biblical worldview.

Allen: Yeah, absolutely. And why the name Imago Dei?

Murray: Imago Dei is Latin for Image of God. And when I thought about this leadership forum, and I look at all the challenges that we’re facing currently in this generation—training up Generation Z, whether it’s, like I said, in the media, or with our identity, whether it’s our race, or our gender, where we come from, this goes back to the Declaration of Independence, that we are all created equal, that we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights.

This is a belief that [has] taken many, many years for different groups to be realized in American history. But as one, if you go back and look at when civil rights were fought—for women, for African Americans, for Native Americans, for the disabled, for [the] mentally ill—the leaders on the forefront of these movements were many a times quoting not only the declaration, but the Bible where it talks about [how] God created us in his image, male and female. Galatians 3:28 talks about whether male, female, basically rich or poor, slave or free, that we are all one in Christ.

So this idea of how we treat one another as image-bearers, and how we view ourselves, because with social media it’s so easy to just have this fear of what other people think of us and having low self-esteem, just helping students understand where their self-worth ultimately comes from.

All these things are why I think it’s so important to this—what it means to bear God’s image, not only just in our country’s history, but just in the history of the faith, but in how we should view ourselves and others is hugely important given all of the challenges facing this generation.

Allen: It’s an exciting time for you all. There’s no shortage of issues to engage on. What are your hopes for Imago Dei, let’s say over the course of the next year?

Murray: Well, again, my prayer would be that this could be a resource that would help schools that would want to implement this, whether it’s a Christian school or even a public school that might be instituting a faith-based curriculum to work with their students after school. Again, just looking at these issues of how to view others and ourselves in a healthy way.

Also, this is a great resource, I think, for homeschool families that they can go through with their eighth- or ninth-grader, as well as church youth groups. This is obviously a curriculum that would work well in a Sunday school class or in a Bible study just because it does weave in a biblical worldview as I look at it through all these.

But I also really write this from a perspective that a nonbeliever would hopefully be able to engage with the material because I am quoting a lot of research and statistics. A lot of brain research is just on the impact of [the] heavy media diet on us, and ultraviolet media, or pornographic media, that it does have negative impact, and there are brain differences that we need to know about between boys and girls. You know, just these types of things, but to what a healthy screen life looks like, and a healthy way of treating others.

So again, in looking at part two of my book, which I’m getting ready to launch, it’s called “Hollywood Needs the Apostles’ Creed,” which looks at how the faith is portrayed in the media both positively and unbiblically just to help kids own their faith and understand their faith from a biblical perspective. Then part three is looking at how this belief in image-bearer of God has impacted history, particularly American history.

If you ask me a year from now what I think this would look [like], we’d see people using this curriculum, whether it’s in their schools, or home, or church at youth group, but also preparing for part two and three to come to also speak into these other issues.

It’s looking at, again, affirming a student’s identity, their faith in Christ, and learning the importance of loving others as image-bearers, both in history and today. So it’s kind of multifaceted as I go forward.

Allen: For any young people or parents who might be interested, how can they find out more and apply for the fellowship, or attain some of those resources, the curriculum and so forth?

Murray: Yeah. If you go to my website IDleadershipforum.org, you’ll see just the curriculum resources that we have, as well as opportunities [for] the different topics that I can come speak on, whether it’s a student assembly, or a parent meeting, or a youth or faculty meeting. As well as if they wanted to model a leadership forum in their community after what we’re doing with our forum here in St. Louis, they could do that as well, and I would be happy to equip them with what we do on our leadership retreat and so forth.

Which, going back to one of your original questions of how we’re helping students, speaking to this, is taking them away and really allowing them to bond with one another, and see each other outside of their school environments is huge, and just being a community.

Then hearing from these speakers who are very inspirational, and just hearing their stories of how they’ve faced adversity, whether white or black, male or female, and just how God has used them to glorify him in their areas, whether it’s, like I said, the media or politics or in civil rights has been very powerful.

One of the really neat things we do is we actually get a permit from the National Park Service, and they come and set up a podium and a sound system on the very spot where Dr. King gave his “I Have a Dream” speech, and we all take turns reading from that speech with everyone around at the Lincoln Memorial. It’s just so powerful.

We’ve done that the last two years now, and just to be able to read that speech together, and on the very spot where he did that, is very meaningful. So it’s just creating those experiences that I think they’ll never forget.

We read the Gettysburg Address on the very site on the cemetery where Lincoln gave it. And you know, he hearkens back to this idea of all being created equal, as we’ve been fighting for these rights in our country for many years.

So I just think that’s part of what … is so important, is just bringing kids together around, ultimately, in our case, the common bond of Christ and learning from each other’s perspectives, but also just learning from history and how we can go back in our schools and be leaders.

Allen: Wow. Well, John, thank you for what you’re doing through Imago Dei to train up young people that are leaders and that are seeking to bridge those cultural divides, and bring unity. And we thank you so much for your time, as well.

Murray: Thank you so much, Virginia. Thanks for giving me [the] opportunity to share about what we’re doing here, and hopefully to really help parents in raising Generation Z, which I think is a fantastic group of students, just to glorify God in all they do.

Allen: Our pleasure.

COLUMN BY

Virginia Allen

Virginia Allen is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Twitter: @Virginia_Allen5.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

‘Godlessness and Big Government Go Hand in Hand,’ Allie Beth Stuckey Tells Social Conservatives

Growing Up to Be Good Is More Important Than Career

Trump Announces $50 Million for Christians, Other Minorities in Syria


A Note for our Readers:

In the wake of every tragic mass shooting or high-profile incident involving gun violence, we hear the same narrative: To stop these horrible atrocities from happening, we must crack down on gun laws.

But is the answer really to create more laws around gun control, or is this just an opportunity to limit your Constitutional right to bear arms?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you better understand the 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Make your voice heard! Tell the NBA what you think!

Three years ago, the National Basketball Association (NBA) caved to LGBT extremists who wanted to force North Carolina’s businesses, schools, and local governments to allow men into women’s restrooms and locker rooms. The NBA All-Star Game was supposed to be held in North Carolina that year. Thanks to the NBA’s lack of courage, it didn’t take place in North Carolina until 2019…after HB 2, which protected women’s rights, was repealed.

Now, the NBA is caving again – this time to Communist China. Via CNBC:

Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey tried Sunday to defuse the rapidly growing international fallout over his deleted tweet that showed support for Hong Kong anti-government protesters, saying he did not intend to offend any of the team’s Chinese fans or sponsors.

Morey apologized on Twitter over a now-deleted tweet that spoke in support of the Hong Kong protests, after his remarks were attacked by the Chinese Consulate-General in Houston and the Chinese Basketball Association.

Morey’s sin was to support the pro-freedom Hong Kong protesters who are under literal and figurative assault as they protest for freedom. The NBA has issued its own apology as part of an effort to keep its Chinese business partners and audience happy.

As the Philadelphia Inquirer suggested, the protestors should have waved dollar bills instead of American flags if they wanted to get attention from the NBA. America is supposed to be the leading light of liberty, yet the association is refusing to stand with Hong Kong protesters.

2ndVote has long ranked the NBA poorly on religious liberty. Now we know where they stand on appeasing autocratic governments overseas as well as domestically.

The silver lining here is that the NBA’s statement makes it clear that they will fold on just about any issue with enough pressure. Therefore, we urge 2ndVote Americans to take a strong stance. First, send an email to the NBA urging them to stop supporting Communist China and allowing men in women’s restrooms. Then post on social media. Finally, make sure your friends and family know of the NBA’s cowardice on protecting freedoms domestically and abroad.

We can make a difference, but it’s going to take all of us, so let’s get started!

RELATED ARTICLES:

NBA Proves That Corporate Social Activism Is All About the Dollars

The Evilness of Modern China

EDITORS NOTE: This 2nd Vote column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

There is no Whistle Blower and there is Nothing to Whistle Blow

I had an on air discussion with a regurgitating, four AM talking point, BHO appointed Ambassador, Dr. Susan Johnson Cook. I re-directed the narrative to help bring us closer to the truth. Check out the RT interview link below.

This impeachment farce is a sham and will prove to be yet another failed illegal coup against President Trump and we the people. The deep state, Dems. and its operatives in the media, are panicking and they are all going down soon. This is the narrative. Why? Because IG II will release FISA and FISA will bring down the house. In my view, we may very well see Comey, Schiff, Page, Strzok, Brenna, McCabe and others as the first notable names to be indicted and charged. When you may ask? Very, very soon. This may possibly occur in a matter of a couple of weeks. Will Biden, Clinton and Obama be implicated? Of course they will, in due time ass timing is everything. And later, they too will be held accountable.

Watch This Clip John Enters at about 8:26

There is no Whistle Blower and there is Nothing to Whistle Blow

There is no whistle-blower and there is nothing to whistle blow. Trump released the transcript. End of story. Yet another failed coup. DOA!

A third party anonymous source. A parody from pencil neck shifty Schiff, Boom! Busted! Trump releases the phone transcript. Now Pelosi and the Democrats are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. This is not an impeachment process at all. It is a contrived coup and attempt to unseat a duly elected President.

Why now? Because they know that AG Barr, Durham and team Trump are coming after them with IG II report. They are panicking and resorting to a blatant coup. If they actually have a formal true inquiry, then a vote in the House, this opens them up to team Trump and the Senate to issues subpoenas to defend and fight back. That brings down the house of cards against them. Pelosi and the rest of them do not want this to happen.

As we are getting down to the wire, perhaps but a few weeks away, we can expect a hard coup, false flags and assassination attempts against the President. This is all they have left. This is why the marines have been activated to protect civilians and to protect the President. According to numerous sources including the official website of the US Marines, United States Marine Corps reserve units via MARADMINS number 550/19, signed on Oct. 3, 2019, authorized by Brigadier General Daniel L. Shipley, Director, Manpower Plans and Policy, “MARINES ARE ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY ISO DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES.”

Offense In Motion

The offensive strategy has just begun. Have you noticed President Trump’s change in demeanor? He is holding nothing back. The strategy is to drip out investigative findings, facts and intel daily and this has been happening putting the deep state and media into a panic, death by a thousand lashes. The offense is now in motion. With Tom Fitton of Judicial watch, Lyndsey Graham, Rudy Giuliani, AG Barr, John Durham, and now Trey Gowdy aboard as well and many others, the hammer of justice will make its entry into the news cycle. Mark my words.

MUST SEE DONALD TRUMP ENTERS AT 6:28:00

And the President at this explosive rally in Minnesota, went on the attack. These are but a few of the issues and hard attacks made by President Trump to nearly 20,000 people in the arena in a speech that went on for nearly two hours.

* Omar is a fraud including her illegal entry into the US

* AOC in serious violation of campaign finance laws

* Strzok, Page the Russian Hoax and insurance policy

* Rigged polls no different than rigged media

* “Biden’s only a good VP because he understood how to kiss Obama’s ass” – DT

* Where’s Hunter? Silent media

* Minnesota transformed by influx of Somalian Muslims by BHO and its devastating impact on the state of MN

* First amendment assault, censorship – erasing our voice and our future

Time has virtually run out for the deep state, the Dems. and the fake news media. They are all going down. Pray for our President and his family. We are at war. Stay the course. Trust the plan and remember, freedom, it’s up to U.S.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Schiff Says Congress May Not Need To Interview Whistleblower After All

Details Of EU Ambassador’s Planned Testimony About Quid Pro Quo Have Leaked

EDITORS NOTE: This JMC column with video and images is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The 2020 Presidential Election is all about preserving Obama’s legacy — the rise of the ‘Obamanauts’

For those few of us who are watching the various and sundry debates and forums in which the media puts on, and in which the Democrat Party candidates gladly participate, there are some revelations. Revelations like President Trump being labeled a “white supremacist” during the third Democrat presidential debate. Name calling is the soup du jour for Democrats.

To date these debates and forums have included but are not limited to:

There have been many statements and promises made by the various Democrats running for president at each of the above events. What is most revealing is that each candidate puts forth policies that are reminiscent of those implemented under former President Barrack Obama. Some might even say that some of the policies put forth by Dem candidates are Obama on steroids such as: Medicare for all (Obamacare on steroids), New Green Deal (Paris Accord on steroids) and LGBTQ agenda (pseudo equality on steroids).

What defines these candidates? Who is their political mentor? What do they want for the American people? Are they progressives or regressives?

What’s the Democrat Common Denominator?

The common denominator among all of the Democrats running for president (including Hillary Clinton should she jump in) is to reclaim Obama’s legacy.

Dissent Magazine published an article titled The Obamanauts: What is the defining achievement of Barack Obama? written by Corey Robin. Robin writes:

[N]ot only do the Obamanauts wish to salvage Obama’s legacy from Donald Trump; they also believe Obama’s legacy can save us from Donald Trump.

Democrats are committed to going back to the future by undoing everything that President Trump has done to undo everything Obama did during his 8-years as president.

Robin notes:

What is the defining achievement of Barack Obama? For a time, it seemed it would be his foreign policy: the Paris Agreement, diplomatic relations with Cuba, and getting Iran to give up its nuclear weapons program. When Trump got elected and those deals got undone, it seemed it would be the Affordable Care Act. But after plummeting for several years, the uninsured rate among adults has begun to creep back up. Obama did avert a second Great Depression, but history is not kind to averters: with time, what didn’t happen tends to get eclipsed by what did. And what did happen under Obama is a recovery that was slow and weak. Black homeownership rates, which took a major hit during the financial crisis, are the lowest they’ve ever been.

What is interesting is that the media and some Democrats are trying to cause a recession in order to defeat President Trump. Various Democrats running for president have called pullout from the Paris Climate Accord and Iran Nuclear deal mistakes. Some Democrats, and even Republicans, have called President Trump’s pull back of some forces in Syria reckless. Democrats are running a “free-stuff primary” including: canceling all student debt held by the government, giving everyone a federal job under the New Green Deal, and promising voters free housing and a free education.

Are the Democrats running for president Obamanauts?

The Public Policy Red-lines are Crystal Clear

In January 16, 2016 NJ.com published a article titled 10 huge differences between Democratic and Republican platforms by who wrote:

It’s hard to say you don’t have a clear choice this [2016] presidential election year. The Democratic and Republican platforms show views of world 180 degrees apart.

Salant’s words echo today even more so than in January of 2016. Here are the 10 huge differences that Salant listed:

  1. Abortion
  2. Same Sex Marriage
  3. Immigration
  4. Climate Change
  5. Medicare
  6. Wall Street
  7. Iran
  8. Israel
  9. Money in Politics
  10. Voting Rights

These are the same issues in 2020. With the addition of: eliminate the Electoral College, Supreme Court appointments and impeachment.

The only differences are that Democrats have become more extremist in each of these policy categories.

  1. Abortion has now become infanticide and the harvesting of body parts from live fetuses for profit.
  2. Same sex marriage has become a full frontal assault on religious liberty under the First Amendment.
  3. National security, national sovereignty and immigration are front and center with building the wall and the Trump administration’s efforts to enforce immigration laws over the objections of Democrats and Democrat appointed judges.
  4. Climate Change has morphed into the Green New Deal, which expands government control as never seen before.
  5. Medicare for all is the war cry of Democrats, including, as they all raised their hands, providing Medicare for illegal aliens (a term that can get you find $250,000 if used in a derogatory way in New York City).
  6. Wall Street is panicked that if Elizabeth Warren becomes the nominee free markets will disappear.
  7. Iran is threatening the world with violence and conducting terrorist acts globally at an ever increasing rate.
  8. Israel has been boycotted, divested and sanctioned by the Democrats who have become the party of anti-Semitism.
  9. There is more dark money in politics now than every before.
  10. And finally Democrats want voting rights given to illegal aliens, felons and every other non-citizen, without question.

The 2020 election is a repeat of the same issues, but these issues have been radicalized by the Democrat Party.

The 2020 election is about choosing between a Marxist form of totalitarianism or a keeping our Constitutional Republican form of government.

Choose wisely.

RELATED VIDEO: Steve Hilton — What the impeachment inquiry of Trump is really about.

© All rights reserved.

Film JEXI — Time to throw away your smart phone before it becomes too smart?

I went to see the CBS Films, Entertainment One film JEXI. Here’s the trailer.

JEXI is the next edition of the smart phone that is programmed to “make your life better.” But does it?

The film struck me in several ways.

First, it portrays a young man Phil (brilliantly played by Adam DeVine) who is disconnected from the real world and lives solely in the digital world of his new smart phone named JEXI whose voice is played by Rose Byrne.

Second, it shows the dangers of smart phones that become too smart, a.k.a. JEXI, for our own good.

Thirdly, the film could have been made PG if it weren’t for the extreme foul language and unnecessary sexual content, i.e. Phil has smart phone sex with JEXI! WARING: Don’t take you children to see this film.

I want everyone, especially our youth, mothers and fathers, to see this film. It shows the real and present dangers of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Big Digital (BD).

I grew up before we had portable phones. In high school I read one of the greatest books about the dangers of robotics and AI – I Robot by Issac Asimov. JEXI reminded me of how robotics and AI must at all cost have a “moral set of rules” that puts the human being above the machine. Here is a video of Asimov explaining The Three Laws of Robotics.

Here is how JEXI violates the three laws of robotics in the film:

  1. robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. JEXI tries to run down Phil using a self-driving car and narrowly misses killing him. JEXI actively works to destroy Phil’s life and livelihood after he rejects her in favor of Alexandra Shipp a real woman played by Cate Finnegan.
  2. robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. JEXI continually refuses to accept commands from Phil throughout the film in multiple, often times hilarious, ways.
  3. robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. JEXI protects her own existence while consistently violating the First and Second laws.

Perhaps the most frightening part of JEXI is how AI works to control the individual, in this case Phil. But we are all becoming Phils and Phyllises aren’t we? Locked in a Digital Gulag where we become our own prison guards.

In his book Google Archipelago: The Digital Gulag and the Simulation of Freedom Michael Rectenwald writes:

Although Big Digital does use censorship and bias to achieve governmental ends, the constraints are also technological and the technology itself is intrinsically political. Political ideology is not merely a subsidiary feature of Big Digital. Ideology is coded into its very DNA, which is replicated in every organizational offshoot and new technology. Big Digital’s ideology circulates through the deep neural networks of cyberspace and other digital spheres. It is intrinsic to the foundations of the Internet, the cloud, algorithms, apps, AI bots, social media services, web navigation tracking software systems, virtual assistants, and more.

JEXI is a perfect product of Big Digital. Get your new smart phone and while you get connected and become a slave to Big Digital. You, like Phil, become a prisoner in a prison of your own design.

Scary, isn’t it?

Oh, BTW. JEXI is filmed in the city of San Francisco, California. The producers and director do everything they can to make the city look beautiful and clean. But we know better don’t we!

RELATED ARTICLE: Google’s stealth plan to defeat Trump in 2020

© All rights reserved.

AMAZON SYNOD VIDEO REPORT: Amazonian Infanticide — Do synod fathers really believe it doesn’t happen?

TRANSCRIPT

Infanticide — probably not the topic Pope Francis and Amazon synod organizers wanted stealing headlines, but it is.

In the Vatican press hall today, reporters were reading stories from international publications talking about the issue.

One reporter in particular, Giuseppe Rusconi, was delighted to see the expanding coverage. It was his question about infanticide that all over the world that Peruvian Cdl. Pedro Barreto went nuclear over, denying it happens and demanding proof.

Well, “proof,” such as it is, comes in numerous forms.

For one, an ongoing debate in the Brazilian Parliament, where a law to ban the practice among the indigenous Amazonian tribes is being debated.

While that might sound strange to Western ears that a debate is even being had about burying alive children born with deformities, it is, in fact, the case.

The liberal position is that native peoples cannot be told what to do by the state, even when it comes to killing their own children, because those are imperialistic and colonialistic.

The position is supported by leading South American academics, who publish papers on the issue, this one by one of the leading proponents — Dr. Rita Segato — who argues that very point.

Segato’s paper is published on the website of a pro-indigenous organization called Cimi.

Cimi is closely aligned with the Brazilian Catholic bishops’ conference, and until the day after Rusconi’s question, the bishops’ conference had a link to Cimi and Dr. Segato’s paper defending the practice.

We say the day after the question, because the day after his question, the link was taken down, but not before the Rusconi found the link and printed out hard copies of all of it.

If a link on the Brazilian bishops’ website proving that the practice exists and a debate in the Brazilian Parliament over whether it should be allowed to continue owing to political correctness isn’t enough for Cdl. Barreto, then perhaps this will help.

It’s a documentary reenactment showing how some tribes of the Amazon go about the practice of burying children alive when they are born with deformities — or other reasons the village or tribes think they should not be allowed to live. What other reasons could that be?

That issue came up at yesterday’s press conference and was addressed quite ably by Bp. Wilmar Santin of Itaituba, Brazil, who quite openly admitted that sometimes, at least historically, when twins are born to some tribes, it is the belief that one is evil and the other good.

So, one of them is killed. On occasion, because parents and villagers can’t decide which one is evil and which one is good, both newborns are killed.

He added that he doesn’t know if this is still the practice and has seen evidence that it may be changing, but he can’t say for sure, which brings us back to Cdl. Barreto and his getting lit up over the issue, even pulling off his translator headphones to deny it when Rusconi asked the question.

Keep in mind the documents Rusconi found on the Brazilian bishops’ website acknowledging infanticide among some indigenous tribes.

Barreto isn’t just some run-of-the-mill cardinal here at the synod. He is a Pope Francis-created cardinal. He is also vice president of the Peruvian bishops’ conference.

But most importantly, he is vice president of the Pan-Amazonian Ecclesial Network and is one of the three president-delegates of the current synod.

That’s some pretty big firepower. In short, it doesn’t get very much bigger than Barreto, and yet he denies the practice exists in spite of there being the proof.

Brazilian Cdl. Cláudio Hummes is the senior prelate of the synod and a long-time associate of Pope Francis.

It is difficult to believe that the president of the conference is totally unaware of a debate in his home country’s parliament over a bill that would allow infanticide to continue and that his own bishops’ conference has — or rather, had — documents acknowledging it all.

Who took those documents down from the site within hours of the topic being brought up in the press hall? Who ordered them to be taken down? Why?

Lots of questions here on a day where another proposal put forward in the synod suggests that a list of so-called ecological sins should be developed and added to lists of more traditional sins.

Perhaps synod fathers might find room on that eco-sin list for burying deformed children alive — that is, if it wouldn’t offend sensibilities about impinging on the ancestral wisdom of the people of the forest, who the Church has much to learn from through listening and accompanying them.

Reporting to you from the Pan-Amazon Synod here at the Vatican.

INFANTICIDE: Live Organ Harvesting Commonplace in U.S. Abortion Mills [Video]

Daleiden, Merritt trial reveals beating hearts cut from abortion survivors

by Stephen Wynne  •  ChurchMilitant.com

SAN FRANCISCO (ChurchMilitant.com) – Bombshell testimony from the trial of Center for Medical Progress undercover journalists David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt has revealed that infanticide is commonplace inside U.S. abortion mills.

Earlier this month, attorneys for Daleiden submitted a closing argument brief detailing that live births are occurring inside the facilities and that these newborns are routinely killed — their organs harvested while still alive.

Describing Daleiden’s research into the practice, the brief recounts that he discovered “a mainstream media exposé produced and aired in 2000 by Chris Wallace for the program ’20/20.'”

From Wallace’s report, Daleiden learned of Dean Alberty, who worked as a fetal tissue procurement technician inside a Planned Parenthood facility in suburban Kansas City.

According to the brief:

From the “20/20” video he learned that Alberty had been handed whole fetuses from Planned Parenthood doctors and had harvested beating hearts. Alberty had also testified before Congress and described a live birth of twins who were actually cuddling each other. He would not harvest from them and the abortion doctor drowned them in a pan of water.

The practice was not isolated to Kansas City, Daleiden discovered.

In the course of his research, he came across the book Beyond Abortion: A Chronicle of Fetal Experimentation, which documents experiments performed on unborn babies, as well as the removal of organs from infant abortion survivors.

In Beyond Abortion, Daleiden found an article titled “Artificial Placenta,” which described “obtaining live fetuses as old as 24 weeks from unnamed abortionists and keeping them alive in a machine for study but letting them drown in the machine after obtaining data.”

In the summer of 2011, he learned of a company named StemExpress, which specializes in providing “biospecimens” to researchers across the country; a deeper look at the firm revealed the scale of tissue harvesting occurring inside American abortion mills.

Daleiden discovered that StemExpress required “tissue procurers to service 48 universities and 8 private entities with fetal organs and tissues.”

He later uncovered “a StemExpress order form with a list of organs and tissues for sale, including whole hearts, hearts with veins and arteries attached, as well as brains, livers and other organs.”

He then found “a Stanford study using whole human fetal hearts obtained from StemExpress which they put on a Langendorff perfusion machine.”

According to the brief:

Mr. Daleiden learned through his own research and by consulting experts, including Dr. Theresa Deisher, that in order to use the Langendorff machine the heart had to either still be beating when it was placed on the machine or a beating heart had to be arrested in a relaxed state in a potassium solution and then quickly transported to the machine. … Dr. Deisher testified that she told Mr. Daleiden that the “most horrifying aspect of the use of the remains of aborted fetuses was that some of the babies had to be alive, have beating hearts when they were harvested.”

Deisher, a stem cell research scientist, testified that based on her experience with stem cell research on hearts, this was a frequent occurrence. The babies’ hearts have to be harvested while still beating, she explained, as otherwise the organ would have no research value because once in “contracture,” the heart’s cells would no longer be capable of regenerative growth.

The brief detailed additional evidence of infanticide — including testimony by a former StemExpress employee:

Mr. Daleiden continued to gather evidence for his investigation. He met Holly O’Donnell who had worked for StemExpress and told him she left after seeing a late gestated fetus. She was directed to dissect its brain. She did so. She also told him that her superior Jessica tapped the fetuses’ heart and it started beating. She also told him of seeing a message stating that an intact fetus was being sent to the StemExpress facility.

Daleiden later learned that “StemExpress technicians had to work very closely with the abortion doctors at [Planned Parenthood] MarMonte who increased dilation on the patients in order to obtain intact fetuses with beating hearts.”

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra — a self-identified Catholic — is prosecuting Daleiden and Merritt for their undercover work. In his preliminary hearing closing argument, he made no effort to rebut testimony about the harvesting of infant abortion survivors’ organs.

Instead, Becerra suggested that harvesting organs from newly born infants is protected by the state’s abortion statutes.

The “defendants willfully misrepresent the law on homicide in California,” he argued. “California law is clear that therapeutic abortion is not homicide.”

Pro-life advocates counter that there is nothing “therapeutic” about harvesting beating hearts from live infants.

RELATED ARTICLES:

ABP. VIGANÒ: Pope must give ‘Clear Statement’ on Christ’s Divinity

Canadian Prime Minister’s ‘New’ Sex Scandal

Insurance Provider Won’t Pay for Sex Abuse in Buffalo

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant column with video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

This is how Western civilization commits suicide. Watch this video

Great Britain is no longer great. Watch this video by Paul Joseph Watson a Englishman about the death of England.

Paul Joseph Watson states,

English people are terrified of displaying their own flag after being endlessly lectured that it’s racist and offensive to immigrants.

Taking Britain by taking down one British flag at a time in the name of tolerance?

Clarion Special Report: New York’s Sharia Patrol

When Muslim Community Patrol & Services rolled their police-cruiser-like cars onto the streets of New York City in November 2018, there was no prior media briefing, no public announcement, no ceremony or grand unveiling.

Summary

Not surprisingly, the sight of official-looking cars – made to look like police New York City cars — emblazoned with the words “Muslim Community Patrol” cruising the avenues of Brooklyn and Staten Island—in the United States of America—was quick to generate news coverage, commentary and alarm.

Most of the mainstream American media reacted in typical fashion. Ever fearful of offending radicalized Muslim communities or digging too deeply into unsavory truths, they gushed in glowing news reports about the new patrol cars and portrayed them as a “neighborhood watch” for Muslim-dominated areas.

Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams said the Muslim patrol units would help keep the city safe and vowed that his administration would help organizers acquire more police-style cars and equipment.

“We believe we need to do more to assist them,” he told NY1 News.

Yet, a little digging shows that the Muslim Community Patrol has an underlying agenda: to enforce Islamic sharia law first in the Muslim community and then in American community at large.

Muslim Patrols Initially Billed as Safety Patrols but the Message Changed Quickly

Community-based safety patrols are in fact not unusual in the Big Apple. From crime-prevention (groups like the Guardian Angels) to the Brooklyn South Safety Patrol (a Jewish civilian patrol), New York City has seen its share of neighborhood watch groups.

Some of those patrols have even become embroiled in controversy of their own, with the Jewish patrol once being described as “bullies” and criticized as acting like “judge, jury and executioner.”

Unlike other New York City safety patrols, however, MCP&S attracted suspicion, alarm and consternation from the very start. But the backlash from concerned citizens, political groups and conservative news organizations has been to no avail.

The liberal Brooklyn news organization Bklyner declared: “Muslim Community Patrol & Services is here to stay.”

Whether they actually are here to stay might depend on more than a pontificating headline. For the moment, however, Muslim Community Patrol cars are on the streets of New York City with organizers planning to expand their humble fleet of three cars to nearly 30 fully operational units in the near future.

At the outset of the cars’ deployment, MCP&S Vice President Noor Rabah repeatedly claimed that his “officers” were nothing more than a watchdog group that would act as a liaison between the Muslim community and the NYPD, because his officers know Muslim culture, “lingo” and “vibes.”

“They (Muslims) know we are approachable. We can speak, mingle, talk,” he told Spectrum News NY 1 in early January 2019.

That message swiftly changed four months later on March 15, after the much-publicized massacre at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, which resulted in 51 deaths.

“Defense Force”

MCP&S now describes their role as that of a much needed defense and security force for the Muslim community and its mosques. On their official Facebook page the group states, “Our goal is to ensure that our brothers and sisters in Islam are protected.”

In addition, Rahab told the BBC that his Muslim Community Patrol is “security on steroids.”

Such bold claims of providing “security” and protection, however, could put MPC&S at odds with New York state and city laws, which require security companies and their paid employees to go through the rigorous process of obtaining licenses, which MCP&S does not have.

Licensed guards must also submit to FBI background checks, be fingerprinted, and attend training classes. Regardless of its legal status as a security company or its publicized purpose of being a watchdog group, organizers privately admit that MCP&S was established to do more than protect Muslims, guard mosques or be a neighborhood watch.

It was also created for a purpose familiar to anyone who has lived in a Muslim-governed state: to enforce Sharia law on citizens.

Sharia Enforcement Revealed in Emergency Meeting

That function, which has never been publicly revealed, was acknowledged during an emergency conference held in early 2019 at the Masjid Kawthar on Nostrand Ave. in Brooklyn.

Along with the Masjid Kawthar, three other Brooklyn-area mosques participated in the conference: Masjid Farooq, Masjid Khalifa and Masjid Taqwa. All are located in or near Crown Heights.

The urgent meeting was sparked by a late-afternoon incident that had occurred outside the Masjid Kawthar a week before. Several young African-American men were standing outside the mosque smoking marijuana when a Muslim Community Patrol officer arrived in his car and approached them.

He issued instructions for them to stop smoking pot and to move away from the mosque. A shouting match ensued with the young men cursing at the MCP officer, calling him a “phony cop” and making threats to shoot him if he returned.

The loud, raucous exchange got the attention of the mosque’s imam, Rasheed Jabarr, who came outside to calm people down and settle the dispute. After accomplishing this, the imam demanded an emergency conference with the three other area mosques to address the danger of MCP cars patrolling the east side of Brooklyn.

The conference revealed much of what the public and media did not know about the purpose of the MCP cars, the group’s organizational goals through the eyes of one its proponents.

Radical Imam Siraj Wahhaj, Sr.: The Sharia Force Behind the Patrols

Taking center stage was the controversial imam of Masjid Taqwa, Siraj Wahhaj, Sr.. He is known among law enforcement officials for his links to terrorist operatives and radicalized Islamists.

Wahhaj’s supporters affectionately call him “America’s imam.” Though stays out of the public eye regarding MPC&S, he serves directly under its director of operations, Mahwish Fathma.

Wahhaj’s duties include the command and deployment of MPC&S officers. All questions, criticism and suggestions were directed to the 69-year-old Islamic extremist during the often-heated discussion.

From the start of the conference, the opposition imams told Wahhaj that they did not want his patrol cars operating on their side of Brooklyn, from Bedford Stuyvesant to Boerum Hill. The presence of MPC&S in that section of Brooklyn was presented to Wahhaj as an untenable situation.

The opposing imams argued that the area was rife with drug dealers and users, as well as crime lords. An MCP officer causing trouble with an African-American over his or her use of drugs or the selling of drugs, or any other type of criminal activity, could spark a violent reaction against their mosques.

“You got a lot of ‘Bloods and Crips’ out there,” said “Abdul,” who attended the conference and asked that his real name not be revealed. “You don’t want to mess with these people. Park Place is known for a lot of shootings.”

As the opposing imams saw it, Wahhaj’s MCP cars patrolling African-American neighborhoods could have disastrous consequences. If something got out of hand between an MCP officer and a drug dealer, for instance, one of their mosques might be shot at or burned down in retaliation.

“If something went wrong, there would be violence against the MCP cars by the drug dealers. The mosques would then have to come down on the side of the MCP because Muslims have to defend their brothers,” Abdul said. It would set the stage for all out war.

“What’s worse, the people running the MCP cars might not even be there when the violence breaks out. So these mosques would be left carrying the bag. The drug dealers would try to close the mosque. They would either burn it down or start shooting at it. And once that happens, no Muslim is going to feel safe going through the doors of that mosque and it’s going to get shut down,” Abdul predicted.

Wahhaj fiercely defended the presence of MCP vehicles in the Crown Heights area, saying the cars were needed to secure and protect the mosques.

Sharia Enforcement

This is where things got interesting. He went on to say that the patrol presence was needed not just for protecting mosques, but also to stop people— Muslim people, in particular—from doing what was harmful and what the Quran considers haram, or forbidden, for Muslims.

Abdul remembered Wahhaj saying, “The mosques need protection and the MCP cars can help stop people who were not following the rules and regulations of the sharia, doing what they’re not supposed to be doing, but still doing it.”

That is, they were there to physically enforce “laws” that were not U.S. or New York laws.

Wahhaj reportedly went on to say he was concerned about stopping such things as “Muslim women being out after dark, Muslim men hanging out in the corners doing dope, Muslims drinking liquor. Basically, the fundamentals of the Sharia,” Abdul said.

Though Wahhaj, who was born in Brooklyn, briefly dug in and said he was going to keep the cars in the area, he eventually relented and agreed to redeploy them until the MCP could obtain a sufficient number of vehicles to provide a round-the-clock presence. The cars, he said, would be moved to the Bay Ridge area of Brooklyn, sternly warning the other imams, “Don’t call us if you have any problems.”

Imam Tariq of the Masjid Kawthar shot back, “We’ll kick their a** if they come over to my masjid [mosque]. We’ll keep watch over our own Muslims.”

The impromptu, emergency meeting at Masjid Kawthar revealed the hidden agenda of Wahhaj’s MCP cars: They were not put on the streets to connect with the culture, “lingo” and “vibes” of the Muslim community, or act as an intermediary between Muslims and the NYPD.

That was only a pretext. They were put on the streets to enforce sharia law as well as provide security for mosques, all under the direction of Wahhaj, who is serving as second in command to the operations director of MCP&S.

“Everything is going to be sharia,” Abdul said. “That’s Wahhaj’s main thing. He’s working on a ‘one sheikh’ and ‘one government’ system that practices sharia. What he’s trying to do is find grounds for running the sharia. That’s what these cars are all about.”

According to an eyewitness who spoke personally to Mahwish Fathma, the operations director for MCP&S, Abdul is correct. Fathma said sharia enforcement is the group’s primary objective.

“When I asked her whether sharia was going to be enforced, she said, ‘Of course it is,’ said “Hashim,” who also asked not to be identified by his real name. “She said they’d enforce it on Muslims first, then on non-Muslims. They’ll be enforcing sharia law and American law.

“She said it would be contradictory to only enforce sharia law without also upholding the laws of the land (meaning American laws).”

Wahhaj’s Radical History

Wahhaj has a long history of issuing statements that denounce America and its democratic system while advocating that it be replaced by Allah’s deen, meaning the Islamic way of life.

“Islam is better than democracy. Allah will cause his deen, Islam, to prevail over every kind of system, and you know what? It will happen,” Wahhaj has said.

Wahhaj supports sharia methods of punishment, declaring. “If Allah says 100 strikes, 100 strikes it is. If Allah says cut off their hand, you cut off their hand. If Allah says stone them to death, through the Prophet Muhammad, then you stone them to death, because it’s the obedience of Allah and his messenger—nothing personal.”

In a September 1991 speech in Toronto titled “The Afghanistan Jihad,” Wahhaj encouraged his fellow Muslims to engage in holy war: “Those who struggle for Allah, it doesn’t matter what kind of weapons [you use], I’m telling you it doesn’t matter! You don’t need nuclear weapons or even guns! If you have faith in Allah and a knife! If Allah wants you to win, you will win! Because Allah is the only one who fights. And when his hand is over your hand, whoever is at war against my friends, I declare war on them … The Americans are not your friends … ”

He also expressed his hatred for America again in a 2011 lecture called “Fundamentalism and Terrorism.”

“America is one of the greatest terrorist nations on this earth, but you know, they hide it with magic. They pretend to be so nice,” he said.

MCP&S is not Wahhaj’s first attempt at fielding an Islamic security force with the stated intention of “protecting” New York City’s Muslim community.

In January 1988 he announced an initiative called “40 Days and 40 Nights” with the goal of clearing out troubled spots in the Fulton Street commercial corridor, between Franklin and Bedford Avenues in Brooklyn.

At the time, the area was flooded with drug users, dealers and crack cocaine-related crime. Wahhaj’s security team boasted four dozen men, some with prior law enforcement experience. Some other personnel, however, were convicted criminals, drug users or dealers themselves.

Those with licenses to carry guns did so, while others toted nightsticks. At the end of the “40 Days and 40 Nights” campaign, Wahhaj declared the program a success, claiming his patrol had managed to rid the community of numerous drug dens.

In announcing his victory he gave credit to his guards’ “stoic demeanor and reputation for retribution.” That “reputation for retribution,” however, meant the willingness of his guards to use violence.

Newsday described Wahhaj’s guards as “a private police force, as heavily armed and sometimes as violent as the dealers it is hired to confront.”

A former associate of Wahhaj claimed the entire operation was nothing more than an effort to oust drug dealers who were competing with Wahhaj’s own drug distribution business. “It was just a front, because he had his own drug operation going on,” said the associate, who asked to remain anonymous. “And he didn’t shut it down because it was a success, he shut it down because the police didn’t like their violent tactics. They went in and beat the s*** out of Wahhaj while he was in his mosque.

The police said, ‘You ain’t that big now, are you?’ That’s when he stopped doing it.”

Publicly, the police praised Wahhaj. At the time, Deputy Police Chief Thomas Gallagher of the Brooklyn North command said, “This is a good example of what the police and community can do working together.”

Others claimed the operation served no purpose at all, as the drug dealers simply relocated a few hundred feet away from their previous location.

“Sure, the patrols may clean up around here,” said Tony Johnson, a clerk at the Manufacturers Hanover Trust office on Fulton Street, “but the druggies just go to another block. So what’s the use? Just a few feet away, the same thing is going on.”

There was even considerable skepticism over whether Wahhaj’s security force actually cleaned up any of the drug dens in the Fulton Street commercial corridor, as he had claimed.

During the same time period as Wahhaj’s “40 Days and 40 Nights” operation, the NYPD’s 79th precinct raided 12 known crack-selling locations and made 32 arrests. Some credit Wahhaj only with keeping the drug dens out of the area only after the police had already forced them to leave.

Even before Wahhaj announced his “40 Days and 40 Nights” campaign, the controversial imam had been engaged in a war with local drug lords.

Wahhaj’s Arrest on Weapons Charges

In 1987, Wahhaj and four others were arrested on weapons charges after stealing firearms from drug dealers in a Tompkins Avenue dwelling. In what can only be described as a twisted turn of events, Wahhaj and his security team raided a drug dealer’s den under the pretext of shutting down their operations.

After Wahhaj and his team ordered the dealers to leave, they stole their weapons. In a surprise move, the “victims” called the police on Wahhaj to report the theft.

“The one thing we didn’t expect was that they would call the cops on us,” Wahhaj said.

Police were able to track down Wahhaj’s getaway car and pulled the team over. Inside. police found a shotgun, a .38-caliber handgun, numerous knives and a club.

Wahhaj and his four accomplices were immediately arrested. One of Wahhaj’s accomplices was Abud-Rauf Shakir, previously convicted in 1971 for the attempted murder of a New Jersey state trooper.

At the time, Shakir was also running the school at Wahhaj’s Masjid Taqwa. Shakir also faced attempted-murder charges in connection with the shooting of a 16-year-old suspected crack dealer only two weeks before the Tompkins Avenue incident.

Shakir failed to show up at his trial and was tried in absentia. Assistant District Attorney Edgar N. Foxx III told the jury that Wahhaj’s Muslim patrol operated with a zeal that “blinded them to the law.”

Believing “40 Days and 40 Nights” was not long enough to clean up the Fulton Street commercial district, Wahhaj vowed to continue his campaign. He would formally morph his 50-man security team into a licensed operation called SSI Patrol Services.

The New York Times described them in 1991 as a company whose “tools are the same ones employed by its adversaries: violence and intimidation.”

Violent battles often erupted between Wahhaj’s SSI Patrols, who dressed in black fatigues and black M65 jackets, and area drug dealers. As before, some of Wahhaj’s guards were convicted criminals and drug runners themselves who had converted to Islam while in prison.

Wahhaj encouraged them to fight to the death. “That means using force, standing up, putting our lives on the line,” Wahhaj told the Times. “We are willing to fight, willing to die and willing to kill, although I want to stress that we only kill in self-defense.”

Self-Defense or Violence Vengeance

The claim his guards “only kill in self-defense” rang hollow when compared to press statements made by those very same guards. One SSI Patrol member told the Times, “If they spill one pin of our blood, we spill gallons of theirs.”

Spilling “gallons of blood” for “one pin of our blood” does not exactly suggest self-restraint, peacekeeping or the use of deadly force only for self-defense. It suggests vengeance, intimidation and reckless escalation.

Another SSI Patrol member said, “We go in and shoot the walls,” adding, “We tell them next time we will shoot them in the head.”

Try to imagine actual, uniformed police officers behaving in this manner. A high-ranking officer of the 73rd police precinct failed to see much difference between the drug dealers and Wahhaj’s SSI Patrol Services.

“In the end, what is the difference between a bunch of vigilantes using force to take over a street corner and a bunch of drug dealers? It still involves gun battles and flying bullets.”

Seventy-year-old Earl Banks is a convicted murderer who is now in charge of recruiting officers for Muslim Community Patrol & Services. In 1970, Banks was arrested for burglary, kidnapping in the first degree and murder and sentenced to life in prison.

He was released in 1985 after spending only 15 years in jail. While in prison he changed his name to Ali Mustapha. By 1988 he was serving as an SSI guard on Siraj Wahhaj’s security team, cleaning up the Fulton Street commercial district. During the same period Wahhaj’s guards had also been hired by slumlords to drive drug traffickers from apartment buildings.

Such was the case on December 14 of that year, when Earl Banks and other SSI security guards were sent to an apartment complex on Nostrand Avenue to clean out a drug den. The raid resulted in one of the alleged crack dealers being fatally shot. Initially two witnesses came forward to say Banks murdered 51-year-old Rainford Salmon after he disobeyed commands.

Witness Intimidation and Murder

Earl Banks was charged with Rainford Salmon’s murder. Following Banks’ arrest, both witnesses began receiving death threats soon after testifying before a grand jury.

The first witness was Steven John, who was shot and wounded. After being released from Kings County Hospital, John fled to Baltimore. He was brought back to New York City but was then unwilling to testify.

The second witness was Oscar Brown. He had been attacked and beaten several times over a six-month period after his grand jury testimony but remained determined to come forward as a witness against Earl Banks, who was better known at the time as Ali Mustapha.

Also during that period, Brown’s mother, Delores, began receiving weekly telephone calls from a man claiming to be calling on behalf of “Ali.” The man pled with Brown’s mother to persuade her son to either change his testimony or not testify at all.

Mrs. Brown said her son remained determined to appear in court. “He told me he was going to tell the court just what he saw,” she told The New York Times.

On June 7, 1989 Oscar Brown’s body was found on Van Sinderen Avenue. Neighbors said several men had forced him into a car the previous night.

His murder had all the hallmarks of a targeted assassination. The Supreme Court of Kings County reported, “He had been shot 16 times and sustained a shotgun blast as well as bullet wounds.”

With one witness dead and another refusing to testify, Earl Banks (Ali Mustapha) was eventually cleared of murder charges. Earl Banks now serves directly under the command of Siraj Wahhaj as a recruitment officer for MCP&S and as a supervisor of its male officers.

Wahhaj’s Children: Owners of Terrorist Camps in New Mexico and Alabama

On March 13, 2019,  Siraj Wahhaj’s son (Siraj Ibn Wahhaj) and his two daughters (Hujrah and Subhannah) were indicted on federal terrorism charges. Two others were also indicted, Lucas Morton and Jany Leveille. The indictment came nearly seven months after the five were arrested on child abuse allegations following a raid on a suspected Islamic training compound in Amalia, N.M. That raid drew national media coverage.

The investigation began as a search for the elder Siraj Wahhaj’s grandson, who had been reported missing for months in Georgia, and who was last seen in the arms of his father, Siraj Ibn Wahhaj.

Law enforcement officials were also concerned that children inside the isolated and filthy camp were being insufficiently fed and clothed.

After a raid on August 3, 2018 raid, the body of three-year-old Abdul-Ghani Wahhaj (the elder Wahhaj’s grandson) was discovered. The boy had been dead for what appeared to be weeks.

Prior to his death the child had reportedly been suffering from neurological problems, which his father attributed to demonic possession. According to Wahhaj’s son, the child died during a failed Islamic exorcism ceremony.

Authorities also discovered 11 other children inside the camp, ages one to 15. Nine of the youngsters were grandchildren of the elder Siraj Wahhaj.

Also found were numerous rifles and handguns, a shotgun, 500 rounds of ammunition and a bulletproof vest. The camp included a secret tunnel and a shooting range.

Federal authorities described the camp as “a training compound to prepare for attacks on government, military and other institutions.”

U.S. Attorney John C. Anderson said the adult members were engaged in “a conspiracy to stage deadly attacks on American soil,” which he predicted were “imminent.”

“No Prior Knowledge”

The elder Siraj Wahhaj publicly claimed to have had no prior knowledge of his son and daughters’ involvement in the suspected terrorist camp and would later say, “To me, obviously something happened—a mental disorder, or something. This doesn’t seem like them.”

That “something” could have been the results of teachings by Siraj Wahhaj, who — for several decades — has preached about America’s destruction.

In a 2008 sermon Wahhaj said, “In time, this so-called democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing, and the only thing that will remain will be Islam.”

When Wahhaj’s son was just 12 years old, Wahhaj delivered a sermon titled, “The Muslim Agenda in the New World Order,” in which he declared: “If only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.”

Wahhaj added that Muslims should come to the United States to establish an Islamic country, saying, “Wherever you came from, you came to America. And you came for one reason—for one reason only—to establish Allah’s deen.”

Federal authorities would learn later of another suspected terrorist camp controlled by Siraj Wahhaj’s son. On May 10, 2019, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, armed with a search warrant, raided a “makeshift military-style obstacle course” in Macon County, Alabama that was owned by Siraj Ibn Wahhaj.

The FBI had suspicions about the camp dating back to December 2017 after Siraj Ibn Wahhaj crashed his Ford Explorer in rural Chilton County, Alabama.

Inside Wahhaj, Jr.’s vehicle were five guns, a bulletproof vest and a bag of ammunition.

Though the elder Wahhaj claims to have had no knowledge of his son or daughters’ involvement in suspected terrorist activity, he did not miss the opportunity to reap a hefty profit from the tragedy of his grandson’s death and his own children’s terrorist-related arrests and charges.

Shortly after news broke of the law enforcement raid on the New Mexico compound, a group of Muslims raised $71,485 to give directly to Wahhaj to do “as he sees fit”—either to help out his children or to uphold “the tenets of Islam and the law of the land.”

Muslim Patrol is the Testing Ground

In accordance with the Feb. 15, 2019 Masjid Kawthar agreement, Imam Siraj Wahhaj promised that MCP&S will keep their limited number of patrol cars confined to the Bay Ridge area of Brooklyn until the force can be expanded.

All acknowledged that the Bay Ridge area would be more suitable to test the Muslim patrol cars because of its fast-growing of Arab immigrant population, comprised largely of Lebanese, Palestinians, Syrians, Egyptians, Yemenis and Moroccans.

Immigrants from these Islamic countries offered qualities and traits not found in Brooklyn’s existing African-American communities. The synoptic view held that foreign-born Muslims are more likely to be accustomed to sharia law enforcement than Black Muslims born in America.

Foreign Muslims are also more inclined to have feelings of guilt if found disobeying the Quran and engaging in activities considered haram (forbidden).

In addition, the reasoning is that foreigners might submit to MCP authority more readily if they equated the MCP cars with actual police cars, since they closely mimic NYPD vehicles in make, labeling and design.

Finally, foreign-born immigrants are more susceptible to bullying and intimidation than African-Americans who grew up in Brooklyn.

One African-American Muslim who attended the Masjid Kawthar event explained it this way: “In Bay Ridge you could punch one of those Muslims in the face and they’re not going to do anything about it. But if you punch a Black Muslim on this side of Brooklyn there’s going to be trouble.

“The Bay Ridge area has foreigners, a lot of Caucasian Muslims. The MCP cars are going to have a better chance surviving there. The foreigners are more open and they come from countries where they know they shouldn’t be doing certain things. They’re probably going to listen to the MCP officers,” said the attendee, who asked to remain anonymous.

“And I’m going to tell you something else,” he added. “The Black Muslims will shoot the s*** out of you. They’re not going to sit home. They’re going to handle it right there. Foreigners, however, when they get together all they want to do is plan. But the Black Muslims, it’s going to be bang, bang, bang.”

The incident leading up to the emergency Masjid Kawthar conference, in which the MCP&S officer confronted the group of pot-smoking young African Americans outside a mosque, could be considered an attempt to enforce both U.S. and sharia law, since smoking pot is both illegal in New York City and considered haram in the Quran.

Regardless of which set of laws the MCP&S officer was actually attempting to enforce, the organization quickly learned that it lacked the experience and training necessary to handle confrontations that could turn violent.

To address similar issues in the future, some MCP&S officers are now undergoing specialized training with policemen from NYPD’s 72nd precinct. Officers are receiving instructions in both self-defense and suspect-restraint techniques.

MCP&S is also attempting to recruit Muslim officers of the NYPD, asking them to serve as off-duty patrol volunteers. These officers could provide MCP&S with the capability of issuing citations and making arrests. They also have the advantage of being able to carry weapons.

Sharia Law Enforcement Sparks Opposition in Brooklyn

As plans of MCP&S to enforce Sharia law began to circulate in the Brooklyn area, another emergency meeting was held on June 23, 2019. The meeting was called to order by Lewis Watkins, the former district manager of Community Board 3, and held in a community room on 1545 Fulton St.

Watkins told MCP&S Operations Director, Mahwish Fathma, that he was going to do everything within his power to eliminate the Muslim patrol units.

“I feel there is a hidden agenda and I’m going to look into it,” he told Fathma. “I don’t want you in my zone and I don’t want you in Brooklyn.”

He further told Fathma that he would be issuing a formal complaint at “One Police Plaza” (NYPD Headquarters) in an effort to stop the 72nd Precinct from continuing to train their officers.

Two Shiites Muslims at the meeting also complained to Fathma about the patrol’s plans to enforce sharia law, saying that Sunni law differs in many ways from the sharia of Shiites.

According to an insider close to the group, if MCP&S officers do find themselves in trouble they will first call Ali Mustapha, who, as mentioned, is a convicted murderer and serves directly under Siraj Wahhaj as a field supervisor and hiring agent.

“Oldest Trick in the Book”

If Mustapha is called, he will have the option of dispatching his personal security team to handle the problem before getting the police involved.

Though not officially associated with MCP&S, Mustapha’s security team is licensed to carry weapons and have often used violence to subdue subjects in the past.

“This is the oldest trick in the book,” said the insider. “It’s what we used to do when I worked at a Muslim security guard in the ‘90s. “If something happens, MCP may call police, but they’ll call Ali (Mustapha) first. They carry guns and have physical defense training. And then, after they finish doing what they do, they’ll call the NYPD and turn them over. If someone gets hurt, they’ll just say he fell and hit his head or eye,” the former guard said.

The insider, who is a former member of Siraj Wahhaj’s mosque, described the goal of MCP&S as an effort “to get Muslims and non-Muslims in the United States to live under sharia as a whole.”

“This whole thing is a test before they buy more cars,” he said. “They want to see how it goes.”

If all goes “well,” Muslim Community Patrol & Services says it will expand from its three current cars to seven by the end of summer 2019, with the purchase of up to 30 cars in the near future.

RELATED STORIES

Clarion Intel EXCLUSIVE: Nationwide Militant Islamist Network

Clarion EXCLUSIVE Report: Foreign Influence Ops on US Universities

Exclusive: FBI Confirms Jihadi Training Camps in America

ISRAEL: Dopey Doves

“Until 1967, Israel did not hold an inch of the Sinai Peninsula, West Bank, Gaza Strip or Golan Heights…Year after year Israel called for …peace. The answer was a blank refusal and more war” – Yitzhak Rabin, 1976

“The most righteous of men cannot live in peace if his evil neighbor will not let him be.” from Wilhelm Tell Act IV, scene III, by Friedrich von Schiller, 1804.

“It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism, while the wolf remains of a different opinion.” – R. Inge, Dean of St. Paul’s Cathedral, 1915.

“He who comes to kill you, rise up early and kill him first” – The Talmud


The Oslo process that resulted in the signature of the Declaration of Principles” on the White House Lawns on September 13, 1993, was in many ways a point of singularity in the history of Zionism, after which everything was qualitatively different from that which it was before. It was a point of inflection in the time-line of the evolution of Jewish political independence, at which what were once vaunted values became vilified vices.

Metamorphosis: From deterrence to appeasement?

Thus, almost at a stroke, Jewish settlement and attachment to land, once the essence of the Zionist ethos, were branded as the epitome of egregious extremism. Jewish military might, once exalted as a symbol of national resurgence and self-reliance, was excoriated as the instrument of repression and subjugation.

This metamorphosis is decidedly perplexing. After all, even by the early1990s, Zionism had proved to be one of the most successful—arguably, the most successful—movement of national liberation that arose from the dissolution of the great Empires—providing political independence, economic prosperity and personal liberties to a degree unrivalled by other such movements.

Moreover, despite the manifest justice on which it was founded, Zionism was always territorial and only prevailed, progressed and prospered because it was reinforced by force of arms. Without either of these two components—the land and the sword—it would be no more than an historical footnote today.

The staggering metamorphosis that took place in the Israeli leadership’s approach was aptly described by Daniel Pipes, who—almost two decades ago—wrote:

“the policy of deterrence dominated Israeli thinking during the country’s first 45 years, 1948-93, and it worked well…. Eventually, Israelis became impatient for a quicker and more active approach…That impatience brought on the Oslo accords in 1993, in which Israelis initiated more creative and active steps to end the conflict. So totally did deterrence disappear from the Israeli vocabulary, it is today not even considered when policy options are discussed.”

“…Historians will be baffled…”

Presciently, he summed up the consequences of this ill-advised change:

“In retrospect, the 1990s will be seen as Israel’s lost decade, the time when the fruits of earlier years were squandered, when the country’s security regressed. The history books will portray Israel at this time, like Britain and France in the 1930s, as a place under the sway of illusion, where dreams of avoiding war in fact sowed the seeds of the next conflict.”

His dour prediction was starkly borne out.

Indeed, since then Israel has been compelled to wage four major military campaigns to quell Palestinian-Arab carnage against its citizens and its cities—one in Judea-Samaria, Operation Defensive Shield (2002); Operations Cast Lead (2008-9), Pillar of Defense (2012) and Protective Edge (2014) in Gaza—with a fourth round of fighting in Gaza widely considered only a matter of time.

Pipes’s caveat is eerily reminiscent of Winston Churchill’s stern address  to the House of Commons barely a year before the outbreak of World War II:

“…historians a thousand years hence will still be baffled by the mystery of our affairs. They will never understand how it was that a victorious nation, with everything in hand, suffered themselves to be brought low, and to cast away all that they had gained by measureless sacrifice and absolute victory….”

It is difficult not to see much of the same pattern reflected in Israel’s behavior after its sweeping victory in the 1967 Six Day War. For it has frittered away nearly all the fruits of that great triumph.

How terrorist nuisances evolved into strategic threats

It relinquished the vast expanses of the Sinai Peninsula for a grudging peace agreement with Egypt—which resembles an uneasy state of non-belligerence far more than harmonious set of relationships between the two signatories. The one major achievement of the agreement—the demilitarization of Sinai—is being eroded away, even without Israeli consent, as Cairo bolsters its military presence on the peninsula in a (less than successful) effort to deal with sustained and stubborn Jihadi insurgency. Concern over this is two-fold. Firstly, this could permanently undermine the demilitarization of the Sinai—especially if a more inimical regime than the present Sisi one is (re)installed in Cairo. Secondly, it is an open question whether the Egyptian military will have the resolve and the resources in the long run to impose law and order in Sinai, and much of its weaponry will fall into the hands of the Jihadi militants it is meant to subdue—as has happened in the past on a thankfully small scale.

In Gaza, the dovish doctrine of political appeasement and territorial withdrawal lead to the razing of Jewish communities, the uninterment of Jewish graves and the desecration and destruction of Jewish places of worship. With the IDF gone, the extremist Hamas ejected the somewhat less extreme Fatah and exploited the freedom of action the evacuation provided it to transform itself from being a terrorist nuisance into a quasi-strategic threat.

On Israel’s northern front, territorial retreat (or rather flight) from South Lebanon and the dishonorable desertion of local allies there, abandoned the area to the Islamist Hezbollah, who amassed a formidable arsenal, bristling with rockets and missiles, trained on Israel’s population centers and strategic installations. Here again, the concept of concessions allowed—indeed, induced—a terrorist nuisance to evolve into a genuine strategic threat.

“Destroying peace; promoting violence…”

On Israel’s eastern flank, Oslowian concessions allowed armed militia to deploy within mortar range of the nation’s parliament, the Prime Minister’s office and the Supreme Court; and gave the Palestinian-Arab terror groups free access to military grade explosives and automatic weapons that brought tragedy and trauma to Israel’s streets, sidewalks and shopping malls. In trying to coax the Palestinian-Arabs into an agreed resolution of conflict, Israel made perilous, gut-wrenching concessions and in return, received not only waves of gory terror, but a flood of Judeophobic indoctrination and Judeocidal incitement from the official Palestinian Authority (PA) media and education system.

Indeed, recently, the PA changed the content of schoolbooks used from “first grade through[out] high school”, in which virtually any reference to peace, the peace process and any agreement concluded with Israel has been erased. Likewise, removed from the new curriculum was any information, previously taught to Palestinian pupils, relating to ancient Jewish history in “Palestine” and the Jewish presence and connection to Jerusalem. Indeed, according to Marcus Sheff, CEO of IMPACT-se (the Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education) that conducted the study of the new Palestinian school books: “The new curriculum destroys any possibility for peace with Israel, enhances and promotes violence and hatred more than ever.”

“I trust Obama to get a good deal.”

Further afield, the application of concession rather than coercion continued to bear bitter fruits for Israel. Instead of being brought to its knees by the Obama administration in 2015, the tyrannical theocracy in Tehran was given much needed relief that allowed it to continue its mischief far and wide, sowing murder and mayhem across the Middle East.

By the terms of the scandalous JCPOA signed between Iran and the P5+1 nations, the “Islamic Republic” was given free rein to promote terror and enhance its military power (especially its missile capabilities) with relative impunity and considerably more cash.

True, the decision regarding the Iranian deal was not an Israeli one, but domestic rivals of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly criticized his rigorous opposition to the Obama approach to Iran and its nuclear ambitions, and chastised him for publicly clashing with the US president—this despite the fact “…that Netanyahu [had] tried to impact the president’s stance in years of one-on-one conversations and in the endless top-level contacts between his officials and the Obama administration…indicated that private argument and entreaty…failed.

Indeed, during the high profile 2015 Saban Forum, just months before the conclusion of the Iran nuclear accord, then-head of the opposition, the dovish Isaac Herzog, declared: “I trust the Obama administration to get a good deal.” Just how unfounded that trust proved to be is now a matter of historical record.

There, of course, can be little doubt that domestic division in Israel on the Iranian issue, or at least on the approach to it, helped accentuate the bipartisan rift in the US and facilitated the Democratic majority that approved the deal.

Today, almost five years and billions of dollars later, Iran’s recent attack on Saudi oil installations has demonstrated how it has upgraded its prowess, leaving Israel to confront a new and deadly menace, within the appalling parameters of the JCPOA!

Imagine the dread

But not only have continued concessions, withdrawal and retreat precipitated continued conflict and violence, but the converse seems true as well.

Indeed, one can only shudder with dread at the thought of the perilous predicament the country would be facing, had it heeded the call from the allegedly “enlightened and progressive” voices, who – right up until the gory events of the Syrian civil war that erupted in 2011—hailed the British trained doctor, Bashar al-Assad, as a moderate reformer, with whom a durable peace deal could be cut – if only an intransigent Israel would yield the Golan to his regime.

For, as ominous as the current Iranian military deployment in Syria is, it might well have been far more menacing. After all, the fact that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is not perched on the Golan Heights, overlooking the Sea of Galilee, is solely because Israel did not fall prey to the seductive temptation of the land-for-peace formula, as urged by many, in both the international community and in its own security establishment—and did not cede the strategic plateau that commands the approaches to the entire north of the country.

The lessons of what transpired when Israel made concessions and when it did not, when it favored diplomacy and when it relied on deterrence, are lessons Israel can ill afford to ignore.

Real reasons & recalcitrant realities

Yet despite decades of proven failure, Israel’s doves still cling doggedly to their fatally flawed dogma, insisting if only Israel would make additional concessions, a new epoch of Judeo-Arab peace and prosperity would dawn.

Thus, impervious to reality and oblivious to reason, they refuse to acknowledge error, no matter how blatant. Undeterred by catastrophe, unmoved by disaster, they persist in urging Israel toward ever greater perils.

Just how different things once were, before the doves began to dominate the discourse, is starkly underscored by an address by Yitzhak Rabin before a joint session of the US Congress (28 January 1976).

In it, he pointed out that,

“Until 1967, Israel did not hold an inch of the Sinai Peninsula and the West Bank, the Gaza Strip or the Golan Heights. Israel held not an acre of what is now considered disputed territory. And yet we enjoyed no peace. Year after year Israel called for – pleaded for – a negotiated peace with the Arab governments. Their answer was a blank refusal and more war.”

He then went on to identify the causes of conflict: “The reason was not a conflict over territorial claims. The reason was, and remains, the fact that a Free Jewish State sits on territory at all.”

Although Rabin later diverged from his diagnosis, the subsequent chain of death and destruction proved its validity. The real reason for the conflict is “the fact that a Free Jewish State sits on [any] territory at all!

The unpalatable, but unavoidable, conclusion, for doves and hawks alike, that arises from this is that:

The maximum Israel can hope for is to be grudging accepted. The minimum it must strive for is to greatly be feared. Its very survival depends on it.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Survivor of Bus #14 – The World of Extremism.

Warren Wants Trans Child to Approve Education Secretary

During CNN’s “Equality Town Hall” on Thursday night, presidential contender and radical leftist Elizabeth Warren applauded a “transgender American” child and then suggested the child assist her in choosing an education secretary if she wins the White House.

“My name is Jacob, and I am a 9-year-old transgender American,” Jacob Lemay said. Warren and the crowd applauded this as if it were an achievement. “What will you do in your first week as president to make sure kids like me feel safer in schools, and what do you think schools need to do better to make sure that I don’t have to worry about anything but my homework?” said Lemay, who was obviously coached by adult activists.

“I want to make sure that the person I think is the right secretary of education meets you and hears your story, and then I want you to tell me if you think that’s the right person and then we’ll make the deal,” Warren said.

While bullying is never acceptable, the right Secretary of Education should focus on actual education, not indoctrination or safe spaces.


Elizabeth Warren

During a question-and-answer session hosted by Congressional Black Caucus chairman Cedric Richmond at the historically black Dillard University in New Orleans, Warren delivered what she called “the hard truth about our criminal justice system: It’s racist … I mean front to back.” In the course of her remarks, the senator cited such things as disproportionate arrests of blacks for petty drug possession; an overburdened public defender system; and state laws that sometimes bar convicted felons from voting in political elections for the rest of their lives.

To learn more, click on the profile link here.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Francis, Jesus and Scalfari — Weird. Really weird.

TRANSCRIPT

I’m Michael Voris coming to you from Vatican City, specifically with some thoughts on the disturbing news about the Pope Francis-Eugenio Scalfari interview about whether Jesus was, in fact, divine — God.

There’s a lot to say about this, a lot that is problematic, from the original story to the Vatican’s somewhat wobbly response, to the further questions raised about the whole affair.

First, the conversation between the Pope and Eugenio Scalfari. Scalfari is a very old Italian journalist, who has known the Pope for a very long time and who enjoys a warm friendship with Francis.

That friendship has earned Scalfari various interviews in the past — and not without controversy.

Scalfari reported last year that Pope Francis does not believe in Hell, that human souls do not go there. Scalfari says the Pope told him that souls aren’t eternally damned, they are just annihilated, pass into non-existence.

That comment set off a firestorm, which the Vatican feebly tried to put out by saying that Scalfari’s interviews aren’t reliable. They are just rough freely interpreted recollections.

OK, so why keep giving interviews to a man who apparently doesn’t electronically record the interviews, does not take any notes and just rambles with a very bad memory when recounting the interview?

You’d think the Pope being misquoted as denying the immortality of the soul and that no human is ever damned would be enough to decline the next interview request from Scalfari.

But, no — not in this pontificate.

The man who zipped his mouth shut on the plane back from Ireland when the Viganò accusations emerged and told the reporters on board he would not say a single word; when the man who refuses to defuse the controversy surrounding his supposed denial of humans in Hell and immortality of the soul; when the man — the Pope — who refuses to meet with the remaining dubia cardinals does meet with an atheist reporter who, according to the Vatican, can’t be trusted to get the story right — then Houston, we have a problem.

Here’s the overarching problem which frames this controversy. Francis continues meeting with this atheist journalist, knowing he will be quoted, accurately or inaccurately.

And in the midst of everything, here’s the question that hasn’t been asked: Just how could Scalfari get this so wrong?

Seriously, how does a reporter sit down with a long-time friend, who he constantly says he knows very well and talk about things like, oh, whether Jesus is God — or not.

The Pope says, “Yep, Eugenio. Jesus is God,” and then Eugenio goes, “Yep. Got it. Jesus is not God.”

That scenario is more difficult to believe than a pope who doesn’t believe in the divinity of Jesus while he was on earth. How could a journalist get this so terribly wrong? Not even close, 100% wrong, 180 degrees backward.

Yet, if we are to believe the Vatican statement, then that’s precisely what you must believe, which of course begs the questions: Why isn’t the Vatican actually denying the content, not just soft-balling and saying Scalfari is wrong? And two, why do you keep giving this guy interviews?

For years, decades really, there has been a theme running through the Jesuits, a kind of Arianism, that while Jesus was on earth, walking around during His Galilean days, He either actually wasn’t divine, or didn’t really know He was divine.

That second proposition is completely stupid because how could God, which is a being who is all-knowing, not know He is God?

But nonetheless, this is a Jesuit thing echoed almost constantly by the likes of James Martin, who says things like Jesus learned His mission from the Syrophoenician woman — really?

Well, I guess the rest of the human race has her to thank for bringing to Jesus’ consciousness that He needed to redeem us — phew!

But don’t forget that this is precisely what Bp. Barron’s hero, Hans Urs von Balthasar, believed, that the Second Person of the Holy Trinity “deposited” His divinity — his term — before the incarnation.

He had a “kind of access” to His divinity when He prayed to the Father, but He Himself while on earth, nope, not divine.

Now, when you have that background, the Jesuits’ decades-long denial, or at least fudging, of Jesus’ divinity while on earth, von Balthasar’s insane claim that he deposited, whatever that means, His divinity before the incarnation and you go back and read the interview, what Scalfari wrote, it starts to get a little dicey because what Scalfari says the Pope said is exactly what all these other guys say.

That Jesus wasn’t divine when He was walking around on earth — a good man, full of virtue, blah blah, but not a God.

There is a very disturbing convergence here between what has become accepted theology among many Jesuits — and Pope Francis is a Jesuit — and what Scalfari says the Pope told him.

And there’s that annoying, pestering, nagging question in the back of your mind on this one: How could the Pope say Jesus was divine and Scalfari take away the Pope said Jesus isn’t divine?

Weird. Really weird.

VIDEO: Hong Kong’s Freedom Protestors are Making Democrats Grimace

During his farewell address from the Oval Office, Ronald Regan referred to the country he loved as “that shining city upon a hill … a magnet for all who must have freedom.” A century and a quarter earlier, Abraham Lincoln, on the verge of signing the Emancipation Proclamation, sent a letter to Congress in which he referred to America as “the last best hope of earth.”

Now threatened by the kind of ironfisted crackdown common to every communist nation in history (no exceptions), the people of Hong Kong see the great United States of America as that shining city upon a hill.

In the days since China threatened harsh action against the growing protest movement, freedom-loving Hong Kongers have defiantly waved U.S. flags at massive demonstrations in the city that finds itself in the crosshairs of the world’s most heavily-armed communist nation.

Not everyone sees America as that shining city on a hill, the last best hope of mankind. China certainly doesn’t see America that way, nor do other totalitarian countries, such as Russia, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela. And neither does the modern Democratic Party, which decades ago stopped seeing their country as the greatest land of freedom the world has ever known.

That’s a tough charge, so please allow me to justify it.

Democrat icons of the 1960s—Adlai Stevenson, Henry “Scoop” Jackson, George McGovern, Hubert Humphrey and JFK, to name a few—were genuine American patriots who loved their country and saw it as a force for good, both at home and abroad, a sentiment shared by an overwhelming majority of that era’s rank and file Democrats.

Such is no longer the case.

According to Gallup, less than a third of today’s Democrats are extremely proud of their country. Less than a third, and trending sharply downward.  Democrats have soured on the place Lincoln saw as the last best hope of earth, the only country that ever went to war with itself to end the scourge of slavery.

Just as ominous as the precipitous drop in love of country among Democrats, an astounding 77% of today’s Democrats have fallen under the spell of socialism, according to a survey by Public Opinion Strategies. In other words, a solid majority of Democrats believe America’s 2-party capitalist system must be torn down and replaced with single-party socialism.

Must America be fundamentally transformed?

From ending slavery and dismantling segregation to Brown v. Topeka Board and the $22 trillion War on Poverty, no country in the history of the world has ever done more than this country to right the wrongs once committed against an oppressed minority of its own citizens.

Despite the remarkable racial progress since the 1960s—a fact no one can intelligently deny—the modern Democratic Party leaves no stone unturned at trying to con black Americans to believe that even after all these years, their country is still a racist hellhole, as it most definitely was in the 1960s.

Through its identity politics election strategy, the modern Democratic Party has not only tried to turn black Americans against their country, it has done the same with other “victim” groups it created, telling members of each group that their deeply-flawed country has it in for them.

Identity Politics

To overthrow a capitalist society, The Communist Manifesto calls for fomenting a titanic struggle by pitting a large victim class against alleged oppressors. In the Russian Revolution of 1917, the Bolsheviks rose to power by pitting the proletariat against the bourgeoisie. Over the last half-century, the Democratic Party has taken the concept of Marxist/Leninist class struggle to a new level through its use of identity politics. The term refers to politically subdividing the electorate into multiple factions (voting blocks), whose members are indoctrinated to believe that they have been singled out for persecution due to systemic prejudice against the identity group to which they belong. To wit: People of color are persecuted by racists & white supremacists, women by sexists & misogynists, refugees & illegal immigrants by xenophobes, Muslims by Islamophobes, gays & lesbians by religious bigots, the 99% by the 1%, and so on. The self-serving narrative of identity politics is that caring, inclusive and tolerant Democrats will righteously defend the members (voters) of each identity group from the constant onslaught of outrages inflicted by a country that has lost its way.

According to the most admired leader of the modern Democratic Party, the America of today is so flawed that things can be made right only through its “fundamental transformation.” At a July 2008 campaign rally, presidential candidate Barack Obama used that term when he vowed to “fundamentally transform the United States of America.”  If you’ve never seen the 10-sec. video, click on the preceding link. It’s chilling.

When Obama vowed five days before his first election to fundamentally transform the nation he soon would lead, few who voted for him thought to ask, transform it to what? America always needs improving, but is it such a sorry place that it must be fundamentally transformed?

Apparently so, according to Obama.

To fundamentally transform a nation means to bring about profound changes to its principles, values and institutions.  In the case of America, that means doing away with its two-party capitalist system in favor of single-party socialist rule that promises to cleanse society of oppression and provide a honeyed existence to all.

Sadly, Democrats have turned on that shining city on a hill, the last best hope of mankind. But not so the freedom-loving people of Hong Kong, who are waving American flags in defiance of tyranny, which you can bet your last dime is causing Stage 4 grimacing to the party of post-Americanism.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: ANTIFA attempts to stop a Canadian prof. from speaking because he believes classical civilization is the best

70 Years. Endless Negotiations. Yet No Peace. Here’s Why.

Ever since the modern State of Israel was founded in 1948, and even before that, there have been attempts to negotiate a peace settlement that would enable Israelis and their neighbors to live side-by-side in an atmosphere of harmony and mutual tolerance.

Presidents, Kings, Premiers, dictators, strongmen, weaklings — all of them and more gave their best efforts to achieving a peace settlement.

All failed.

Yet every new American administration, every new President, every new Secretary of State, thinks that he or she possesses the solution that has eluded everyone else. Everyone thinks he can untie the Gordian knot that has confounded the world.

And again, all fail.

It is one of the most curious situations that has ever occurred in world history: peace settlement after peace settlement has failed, yet no one ever seems to stop and wonder why. Instead, they go back to the drawing board, thinking that this time will be unlike all the others, this time the key to peace will be revealed, this time they’ll finally hit upon the secret.

In The Palestinian Delusion: The Catastrophic History of the Middle East Peace Process, I tell the fascinating, never-before-told story of these negotiations, and I do provide the key that has eluded everyone else: in this book, I show why the negotiations failed, and why the entire “peace process” has been ill-conceived from the start.

And yes, I do offer a way forward out of this most intractable of problems.

This is one of the only books to buck the convention wisdom about this vexed issue, which affects not only the Middle East, but the entire world — and American policy.

It’s long past time for a realistic appraisal of the situation and a new approach. The book will be out December 3. You can preorder it here.

More about it coming soon.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Germany: Muslim who stole truck and smashed it into cars while screaming “Allah” entered with 2015 migrant influx

Turkey: Human rights activist sentenced ten years jail for “blasphemy” against Islam

UK: 500 men raped victim of Muslim rape gang from age of 11, authorities did nothing, fearing “Islamophobia” charges

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