ICE Field Operation Helps American Workers

When will compassion apply to beleaguered Americans?

On August 7, 2019 ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) issued a press release that announced, ICE executes federal search warrants at multiple Mississippi locations.  Fox News also reported on that massive field operation in its report, ICE raids on Mississippi food processing plants result in 680 arrests.

The mainstream media, in reporting on the ICE field operation, immediately sought to paint the most disturbing picture it could about the nature of the ICE operation and along the way, the children of illegal aliens who had been arrested were interviewed on camera, hysterically crying that they wanted their mother/father or both to come home to take care of them.

However, I doubt the media will show the lines of American workers lining up to take the jobs that have been liberated by the ICE agents.

While it is admittedly heart-wrenching to see a child in distress, it is remarkable that the media totally ignores that children are frequently separated from the parents whenever their parents are arrested for a wide spectrum of violations of law that include administrative motor vehicle violations.

Every year as the dreaded “Tax Day” approaches, the IRS frequently arrests tax cheats and fraudsters and publicizes their law enforcement actions to remind tax payers that they should not defraud the IRS.  This is a clear tactic of intimidation that creates a “climate of fear.”  Yet Nancy Pelosi who frequently lambasted immigration law enforcement efforts for creating such a climate of fear, I have never seen her or any other politician complaining about the tactics of the IRS.

When taxpayers are arrested for not paying their taxes, it is likely that their children will have to be cared for by other family members, friends of the family or, as a last resort, child welfare.

However, when was the last time you saw a reporter interview a child who parent was carted off by the IRS or other law enforcement agency?

As a former INS special agent, my goal today is to set the record straight.

I was an INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) special agent for 26 of my 30 year career with the INS.  Having rotated through all of the squads within the Investigations Branch of the New York District Office I participate in many similar “raids” to locate and arrest aliens working illegally in the United States.  Therefore my comments are not based on speculation but real-world experiences.

To begin with, since the passage of the massive immigration amnesty legislation in 1986 known as IRCA (Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986) employers who can be shown to have knowingly hired illegal aliens can be fined and even criminally prosecuted for such hiring practices.  This is important because until passage of IRCA employers were essentially shielded from any adverse consequences for hiring illegal aliens unless they were involved in smuggling such aliens into the United States and/or harboring them.

Employers could also be punished for failing to meet labor standards or committing tax fraud, but there were no penalties for knowingly hiring illegal aliens.  Most illegal aliens violate our immigration laws to work illegally and it was believed that punishing unscrupulous employers who intentionally hire exploitable illegal aliens would deter their crooked hiring practices, thereby turning off the “jobs magnet.”

Of course there has always been an abject lack of immigration law enforcement personnel for this to work effectively.

Prior to World War II the Labor Department bore the primary responsibility for enforcing and administering our immigration laws.  The concern was that illegal alien workers would displace American workers and, adversely impact wages and working conditions for American workers.

That mission is now one of many assumed by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

I began my career with the INS as an Immigration Inspector assigned to John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York.  While we were concerned about preventing fugitives, criminals and spies from entering the United States and worked closely with other federal as well as state and local law enforcement agencies, our most frequent concern was that aliens we admitted might disappear and take jobs that they were not authorized to take.

You would imagine that all Americans would be happy that our goal as immigration law enforcement agents was to protect the jobs and wages of American and lawful immigrant workers and that all politicians from both parties would support that vital mission.

But today, we live in a time that only George Orwell could have predicted where up is down and good is evil!

This past April I wrote an article about another massive field operation to locate and apprehend aliens working illegally while also seeking to punish the employer, Ice Field Operation Liberates Hundreds Of Jobs.  In that article I noted that such interior enforcement of our  immigration laws helps American workers.

The meatpacking industry used to provide decent-paying jobs for Americans.  The work was always filthy and dangerous but the wages were essentially commensurate with the nature of those jobs.  In the mid 1980s such workers generally earned roughly $20 per hour.

Today those jobs frequently pay approximately half that amount, but when taking inflation into account, in reality, the purchasing power that the wages provide is far less than half of what the wages had been before illegal aliens flooded into that industry.

Wikipedia posted an insightful article under the title, Labor rights in American meatpacking industry.  This excerpt was published under the heading of “Meatpacker Demographics”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that in 2000, 148,100 people worked in meatpacking and over 250,000 worked in poultry processing. Despite the growth of the meat production industry, slaughterhouse workers’ wages have been decreasing rapidly. Slaughterhouse workers’ wages were historically higher than the average manufacturing wage. This trend reversed in 1983 when slaughterhouse worker wages fell below the average manufacturing wage. By 2002, slaughterhouse workers’ wages were 24% below the average manufacturing wage. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2006, the median wage for slaughterhouse workers was $10.43 per hour which comes out to $21,690 per year.

Isn’t it remarkable that the Democrats insist that they want to establish a minimum wage of $15.00 per hour today while years ago workers in slaughterhouses were earning more than $20.00 per hour until illegal aliens displaced American workers.  Yet today the Democrats want to import an endless supply of exploitable illegal alien workers, figuratively and literally, at the expense of hardworking American and lawful immigrant workers.

Frequently illegal aliens who take jobs in the United States have violate more than our immigration laws.  Many such aliens also have committed identity theft, hardly a “victimless crime” and some of these aliens may also have criminal histories and may be fugitives in their home countries.

As an INS special agent I frequently arrested aliens from countries around the world who we found working illegally in various jobs who had extensive criminal backgrounds.  This placed their coworkers at risk.

However, one case in particular stands out.  I remember in the early 1980’s encountering a man in his mid-thirties from Honduras working at a glass factory in Brooklyn.  He claimed that he had become a naturalized United States citizen.  I took down his name, date of birth and other relevant information and his boss approached me and told me that this guy had worked for him for a few years and was extremely trust worthy- so much so that he had given him the keys to the factory so that he could open the factory if he was late and lock up at night if he had to leave early.

I checked in with my office but they could find no record of this individual.  The only solution was to bring him down to our office.  It turned out that he was a citizen of Honduras but that he had not only lied about his name and date of birth but he had left out some additional information.  He had pleaded guilty to homicide and had been sentenced to jail time.  Upon his release he had been deported from the United States, only to return illegally.  Because of his criminal conviction he was arrested and prosecuted for unlawful reentry after deportation and escaped from a federal penitentiary where he was serving his sentence.

You should have seen the look on his employer’s face when I briefed him on his “loyal employee’s” extensive criminal “resume!”

If you believe that employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens are being compassionate, then you would likely believe that the person who puts cheese on a mousetrap is simply trying to feed hungry mice!

Employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens are not demonstrating compassion but greed.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Church World Service on the Sanctuary Bandwagon; Cut Their Federal Funding!

Everyday Americans Shoulder The Burden Of The Immigration Crisis

What Democrats Say Happens At The Border Vs. What Actually Happens

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

What Happens On November 4, 2020?

I asked this question on social media, where I interact with people across the political spectrum: What happens on Nov. 4, 2020, the day after the election?

It’s a legitimate worry. Based on what happened after November 2016, the day after this next election will tell us where our democracy stands. Because we’re setting the stage where whichever side loses they may feel justified in claiming it was rigged or illegal, and the 2020 winner is illegitimate.

This is hardly unfounded considering both what we know and what we are seeing coming.

First, on the Left.

Given that the Left and most Democrats have lived at Defcon One since the day after the 2016 election; given that they have called Trump a white supremacist, a racist, a Russian agent, an existential threat to the Republic, and have run from the beginning with the hashtag NotMyPresident; given that Antifa is allowed to grow and even control at times a major U.S. city and other violence has been common; given that Russia will interfere again (which can be assumed because they have for generations); then what can we expect on the day after the election if Trump is victorious?

Will the Left’s fury just be spent and they will attempt an inward evaluation of the Democratic Party as the GOP did in 2012? That doesn’t seem to be the tenor of the revolutionaries and those playing to them.

It seems more likely that there could well be a far worse response from the Left than there has been since 2016. Maybe not just mass demonstrations, but actual riots. After all, four more years of an existential threat, a foreign agent in the White House? Many would feel fully justified in taking extreme actions.

How about on the right?

If over the next 16 months the media continues to act in a blatantly partisan way; if social media increasingly bans, de-platforms and generally cuts off access to Republicans (under the guise of hate speech) while tilting the field to Democrats; if tech companies take conservative websites offline (not just the extremist fringe sites); if Democrats in Congress, no less, continue to dox and put a physical target on the back of Trump and GOP donors; if mainstream media outlets block effective Republican advertisements (essentially, the left greatly reducing Trump and Republicans’ ability to communicate with voters); and then Trump loses, how will the right respond?

There may be a sense of justification for extreme action. It seems less likely, because generally, other than the rather subdued Tea Party movement, conservatives rarely take to the streets and never refuse to accept election results. (Remember, Democrats already have twice this century.)

But we are in somewhat uncharted water. There would arise a fringe element on the right that could react in extra-legal ways. The frustration level would be sky-high if most of the above conditions are in place.

If neither side will accept 2020, then we actually do have an existential threat.

This situation is even more dangerous than a socialist winning the presidency, as horrible as that would  be. We have seen over and over how the Framers’ genius has spared us from terrible leadership. However, if the American public does not accept election results, that genius is for naught.

Democrats were right in saying ahead of 2016 — when they were sure Hillary would win — that Republicans and Trump need to accept the results (which was always going to happen) but then unfortunately those Democrats chose not to accept them when Hillary lost. Remember, Hillary still travels around saying she won, just as Democrat Stacey Abrams does after losing the Georgia governor’s race by a handy amount.)

On my social media, everyone on the right said they would accept the results, but almost none of them thought that Democrats would. Most on the left, but given that my connections are not the radical side of the Democratic Party, said they would essentially cry all night and move on. They were not so sure what the right and Trump supporters would do.

My guess, and it is only that, is that if Sen. Kamala Harris or Sen. Elizabeth Warren win the election, the right will essentially accept it, even with all those elements stacked against us. But it’s only a guess.

On the other side, I can barely imagine what the left and Democrats will do if Trump is re-elected, because I could never have imagined the hysteria and violence that has followed his initial election.

What happens Nov. 4, 2020 will tell us where our democracy stands.

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Millennial Becomes Unhinged After Boss Corrects Her Spelling of “Hamster”

Being simultaneously comical and tragic, perhaps nothing reflects our descent into Idiocracy more than millennials who’ll insist their misspellings of words are correct. Just yesterday I read an eyebrow-raising story about this that was quite timely, as I’d experienced millennial spelling moronity just the day prior.

My case involved a leftist who emailed me with some deep, substantive criticism: He said I was “insane,” “nuttier than a fruitcake” and “f*****g” nuts.”  I responded to him. While I generally don’t play the spelling Nazi, leftists’ characteristic superciliousness inspired me to mention to him, kindly, that he’d written “you’re” as “your” three times in six sentences. His response?

“I am under 40,” he wrote. “Your vs you’re is interchangeable.”

(Come to think of it, if that’s his I.Q., it would explain his answer.)

But on to the far more interesting and dramatic story I mentioned earlier. According to The Fellowship of the Minds (FOTM) blog, it’s from a series of July tweets by a Georgetown University adjunct professor of public relations and journalism named Carol Blymire; it relates something she’d witnessed. As the blog presents it:

In office space near a client, a young woman was meeting with her boss. She was (by my estimation) in her late 20s.

The boss (also a woman) was giving her feedback and reviewing edits she had made on something this young woman wrote.

They had been speaking in low tones, but their volume got louder toward the end of the conversation because the young woman was getting agitated about a particular edit.

That particular edit was correcting the spelling of “hampster” to “hamster”. [sic] Apparently she had used the phrase “like spinning in a hamster wheel” in this draft (presumably) speech or op-ed.

The young woman kept saying, “I don’t know why you corrected that because I spell it with the P in it.” The boss said (calmly), “But that’s not how the word is spelled. There is no P in hamster.”

Young woman: “But you don’t know that! I learned to spell it with a P in it so that’s how I spell it.”

The boss (remaining very calm and professional), [said] let’s go to https://t.co/n2ZU5Uuuy3 and look it up together. (mind you, this is a woman in her late 20s, not a 5th grader) [sic]

The young woman insists she doesn’t need to look it up because it’s FINE to spell it with a P because that’s HOW SHE WANTED TO SPELL IT.

The boss says, “Let’s look over the rest of the piece so I can explain the rest of my edits.” They do, and I can see the young woman is fighting back tears. The boss is calm, cool, and handles this with professionalism and empathy.

Boss says, “I know edits can be difficult to go over sometimes, especially when you’re working on new kinds of things as you grow in your career, but it’s a necessary process and makes us all better at what we do.”

Boss gets up from table and goes to her office and the young woman can barely hold it together. She moves to another table in the common workspace area, drops all her stuff loudly on the table top, and starts texting. A minute later, her phone rings.

It was her mom. She had texted her mom to call her because it was urgent, and I’m sure her mother maybe thought she was in the ER or something. She then … PUTS HER MOM ON SPEAKERPHONE. IN THE WORKPLACE.

She bursts into tears and wants her mom to call her boss and tell her not to be mean about telling her how to spell words like “hamster”. [sic]

The mother tells her that her boss is an idiot and she doesn’t have to listen to her and she should go to the boss’ boss to file a complaint about not allowing creativity in her writing.

The young woman kept saying, “I thought what I wrote was perfect and she just made all these changes and then had the nerve to tell me I was spelling words wrong when I know they are right because that is how I have always spelled them.”

She then went on (still on speakerphone) to tell her mom I’m very great and office-inappropriate detail about how hungover she was and what she and her friends did with some guys the night before. Mom laughed and laughed.

The colleagues in and around the workplace kept looking at one another and some even put earbuds/headphones in/on. It appeared as though this was a regular thing with her.

She ended the conversation asking her mom how she should bring this up with the boss’ boss. “I mean, I always spell hamster with a P, [sic] she has no right to criticize me.” […]

Based on the way her mom spoke to her and they way they spoke to one another, it seemed as though this young woman had never been told she was anything but perfect by family. […]

Her boss seemed as dumbfounded through the conversation as I was in overhearing it.

I think I was most perplexed by the insistence of wanting to spell something the way she wanted to because SHE WANTED TO, ignoring the fact that there are rules and dictionaries. And seeming offended that anyone would suggest the use of an outside resource as reference.

Had I been the boss, I’m sure the young woman’s tears would have flowed much sooner and more profusely. It would have been the result of the dressing-down I’d have given her. I was never one to suffer fools gladly.

The FOTM mentions that this isn’t an isolated case, either. In fact, the blogger, who apparently has taught in college herself, related a story about what transpired when an undergraduate complained to her about a poor grade she gave him on a paper. After telling him that she had trouble understanding his work because it was riddled with errors, he replied “I don’t subscribe to the rules of the English language!” and marched from the classroom.

It would be easy to chalk this up to “inventive spelling,” a phenomenon of recent decades whereby, instead of correcting a child’s spelling, a teacher will allow him to misspell words based on his phonetic conception of them. But it goes far deeper than that.

First, we live in the post-Truth West. A study I often cite vindicates this assessment, showing that less than 10 percent of teenagers believe in Truth (absolute by definition) and that a majority of Americans are most likely to make what should be moral decisions “based on feelings.”

Why is this relevant? If people believe Truth doesn’t exist and, therefore, that what we call morality (divine rules) is mere “perspective,” they probably won’t care much about man’s rules — especially since, by their lights, those rules can’t possibly correspond to anything transcending man. Their governing philosophy then becomes “If it feels good, do it.” This was evident in the young woman in the story, who, essentially, insisted she was correct because her feelings told her so.

Relating to this, there’s also the narcissism, the solipsism, the self-centeredness that results when you raise godless children on self-esteem bunk and treat them as if their body odor is a floral scent. And, related to that, there’s pridefulness, which precludes self-improvement. A humble person can accept correction, see flaw in himself and learn. The prideful person’s ego impedes great improvement in anything.

As for employees who are mere overgrown children, I’d respond to their antipathy for rules and their inventive spelling by giving them an inventive paycheck.

EDITORS NOTE: Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Gab (preferably) or Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com. © All rights reserved.

HUMAN TRAFFICKING: “Women are significantly involved in trafficking of persons, both as victims and as offenders.” “75% of the sex traffickers were African American.”

We witnessed in the 1960s the feminist movement and feminist activism. More recently we have seen the rapid growth of the #MeToo movement in October, 2017. But to what end? Both movements have failed to stem the tide of human trafficking, which harms primarily underage girls and women. The #MeToo movement isn’t focused on the roles of women as both victims and perpetrators of human trafficking. Immigration and human trafficking go hand in hand. Organized crime and human trafficking go hand in hand. Businesses need for cheap labor and human trafficking go hand in hand.

Background

In preparing for this exposé we looked at four reports on human trafficking:

  1. The 2014 United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime’s Global Report on Trafficking in Persons.
  2. The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Human Trafficking/Involuntary Servitude website.
  3. The McCain Institutes’ A Six-Year Analysis of Sex Traffickers of Minors.
  4. and The National Criminal Justice Services’ An Empirical Analysis of the Intersection of Organized Crime and Human Trafficking In the United States.

We selected these four reports to find commonalities and insights into human trafficking globally and within the United States. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security Blue Campaign defines human trafficking as:

Human trafficking involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to obtain some type of labor or commercial sex act.

Homeland Security lists the following facts about human trafficking:

Human trafficking exists in every country, including the United States.  It exists nationwide—in cities, suburbs, and rural towns—and possibly in your own community.

Human trafficking victims can be any age, race, gender, or nationality.  They may come from any socioeconomic group.

Sex trafficking exists, but it is not the only type of human trafficking. Forced labor is another type of human trafficking; both involve exploitation of people.  Victims are found in legitimate and illegitimate labor industries, including sweatshops, massage parlors, agriculture, restaurants, hotels, and domestic service.

Under U.S. federal law, any minor under the age of 18 who is induced to perform commercial sex acts is a victim of human trafficking, regardless of whether he or she is forced or coerced.

Human trafficking is not the same as smuggling.  “Trafficking” is based on exploitation and does not require movement across borders.  “Smuggling” is based on movement and involves moving a person across a country’s border with that person’s consent in violation of immigration laws. Although human smuggling is very different from human trafficking, human smuggling can turn into trafficking if the smuggler uses force, fraud, or coercion to hold people against their will for the purposes of labor or sexual exploitation.  Under federal law, every minor induced to engage in commercial sex is a victim of human trafficking.

Human trafficking is often a hidden crime.  Victims may be afraid to come forward and get help; they may be forced or coerced through threats or violence; they may fear retribution from traffickers, including danger to their families; and they may not be in possession of or have control of their identification documents.

The Villainy of Human Trafficking – Key Findings

Here are some key findings taken from the the UN, FBI, McCain Institute and National Criminal Justice Services reports:

United Nations:

  • UN report detected victims of trafficking in persons, by age and gender, 2011: 49% women, 21% girls, 18% men, 12% boys.
  • Human trafficking for sexual exploitation by region: Europe and Central Asia 66%; Africa and Middle East 53%; Americas 48%; East Asia, South Asia and Pacific 26%.
  • Human trafficking for forced labour, servitude and slavery like by region: East Asia, South Asia and Pacific 64%; Americas 47%; Africa and the Middle East 37%; Europe and Central Asia 26%.

The Department of Justice Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit reports:

  • In recent months we have convicted labor traffickers who exploited victims in restaurants, bars, and cantinas on Long Island, New York, and in massage parlors in Chicago, Illinois.
  • We convicted a Seattle couple who held a young Micronesian woman in domestic servitude, and secured a 14-month sentence against a defendant who held two young Nigerian women in domestic servitude in Georgia.
  • We have indicted labor traffickers who exploited Vietnamese victims in bridal shops in Arizona, and we have dismantled organized criminal networks that held Dominican, Filipino, and Jamaican workers in forced labor on cleaning crews.

McCain Institute:

  • Three-quarters of the cases involved only minor victims.
  • The average age of the sex traffickers of minors was 28.5 years old and the average age decreased significantly from 2010 to 2015.
  • 24.4% of the sex traffickers were female and they were younger than the male sex traffickers.
  • 75% of the sex traffickers were African American.
  • Nearly one out of five arrests for sex trafficking of a minor involved a person who was gang involved.
  • 55.5% of the females arrested were identified in the report as the role of a“bottom” which is the most trusted sex trafficked person by the sex trafficker who may also be prostituted, may recruit victims, give rules and trainings, and may give out punishment.
  • 24% of the arrested sex traffickers had a previous criminal history, the most common previous crime was a violent crime. o4% had a previous arrest for sex trafficking of a minor.
  • The minor victims were transported to up to 17 states for the purpose of being prostituted with the average of 2.7 states.
  • 67.3% of the cases used technology (email, online ads, smart phones) in the sex trafficking activities. oBackpage.com was used by the sex trafficker in 592 cases (41.8%).
  • Recruitment tactics focused on runaways; friendship, romance, giving a place to stay to the victim, and promises of money and wealth.

National Criminal Justice Services:

  • 58% (1227) of all defendants in human trafficking cases operated as part of an organized criminal group.
  • Although Cartels/Mafias/Syndicates are not represented at all among the federally prosecuted human trafficking cases involving organized crime, there is evidence that they are involved in facilitating the human trafficking operations of other types of organized criminals (facilitating transportation, providing false documentation, etc.).
  • Defendants who trafficked minors for commercial sex come from 13 different countries of origin. The vast majority is from United States.
  • Primary push factors involve socio-environmental variables over which the individual has very little control. These include: childhood abuse and/or neglect, lack of education, and a destructive social network.
  • Secondary push factors are symptoms of the primary push factors. They include criminal history, drug and/or substance abuse, and financial stress. These lead to feeling a lack of control over one’s life.
  • Based on federal prosecution records, the counties in the United States with the most bases of operations of organized crime groups engaging human trafficking include: Harris County, Houston, TX; Fulton County, Atlanta, GA; and Queens County, Queens, NY.

Human trafficking for the purposes of either sexual or labor slavery is spreading across America. Congress needs to come together to address this growing problem in light of the Jeffery Epstein case.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Utah: Nigerian Man Charged in Killing of College Coed had Child Pornography in his Home

Tell Your U.S. Senators and Representative to Oppose Gun Control

In the wake of two recent criminal mass attacks, a number of gun control proposals have begun to circulate in our nation’s capital. None of these proposals would have prevented either of last weekend’s tragedies, but they all would restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

“Universal” Background Checks Won’t Stop Mass Shootings

Every perpetrator of high-profile mass shootings has either passed a background check or acquired a firearm in a way that would be unaffected by a universal background check (either through theft or the use of a “straw purchaser”).

“Universal” Background Checks Do Not Stop Criminals

According to the Department of Justice (DOJ), 75 percent of criminals in state and federal prison who had possessed a firearm during their offense acquired the firearm through theft, “Off the street/underground market,” or “from a family member or friend, or as a gift.” Less than one percent got firearms from dealers or non-dealers at gun shows.

Criminals defeat the background check system by getting guns through straw purchasers. ATF has reported, “[t]he most frequent type of trafficking channel identified in ATF investigations is straw purchasing from federally licensed firearms dealers. Nearly 50 percent….”

In a 2018 study, researchers at the Bloomberg School of Public Health and the UC Davis School of Medicine found that comprehensive background checks and prohibitions based on violent misdemeanors “were not associated with changes in firearm suicide or homicide.”

“Universal” Background Checks Are Not as Universally Popular as Advocates Claim

Despite claims of the near universal popularity of “universal” background checks, these proposals have not been nearly as popular as claimed when presented to voters. In 2016, Maine and Nevada both had “universal” background check initiatives on the ballot.

Despite being outspent by Bloomberg-backed gun control groups by $5.3 million to $1.2 million, Mainers defeated the initiative by 3.6 percentage points.

In Nevada, where Bloomberg-backed groups spent almost $19 million in support of the initiative versus less than seven million spent against, the initiative passed by less than one percentage point.

Banning “Assault Weapons” Isn’t the Answer Either

FBI data shows that four times as many individuals are killed with “knives or cutting instruments,” than with rifles of any kind. The data also shows that rifles were listed as being used in fewer homicides than “blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.)” or “personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.).”

A 1997 Department of Justice-funded study of the 1994 “assault weapons” ban determined that “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders.”

A 2004 follow-up Department of Justice-funded study determined that “the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.” Presented with the overwhelming evidence of the ban’s inefficacy, Congress did not renew it.

In 2018, a RAND Corporation study found no conclusive evidence that such bans have an effect on mass shootings or violent crime.

The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in the U.S. The immense popularity of the AR-15 has come about at a time when Americans cite self-defense as their primary reason for owning a gun.

The effectiveness of the commonly-owned semi-automatic rifle in defense of self and others was illustrated in 2017 during an attack on a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Upon learning of the attack, resident Stephen Willeford retrieved his AR-15 rifle and shot and wounded the gunman. Since 2017, other Armed Citizens have used commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms to thwart an armed robbery in Texas, stop a trio of home invaders in Oklahoma, and halt a stabbing attack in Illinois.

Now Is the Time To Act

Please contact your Senators and Representative TODAY and urge them to oppose ineffective gun control measures that won’t make us any safer but will infringe on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. You can use this link to send them an email or call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Bill Clinton Touts Failed Gun Ban With Bogus Info

“Universal” Background Checks Aren’t as Universally Popular as You’ve Been Led to Believe

Kamala Harris and Her Perplexing Anti-Gun Ideas

EDITORS NOTE: This NRA-ILA column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Humanitarian Hoax of White Supremacy: Killing America With Kindness

The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.

The radical leftist hucksters in the Democrat party have repeatedly accused President Trump of being racist and a white supremacist. Is it true? Let’s find out.

Racial unity has been the subject of political speeches since before the Civil War. The United States was founded in 1776 during an era of worldwide slavery when even black men owned black slaves. Supremacy is the corollary of enslavement – you have to be a supremacist to own a slave. Slavery was outlawed in the United States in 1865 with the passage of the 13th Amendment. So, let’s be clear, slavery has been illegal in the United States of America for 154 years.

Many countries and religions in the world continue to legally practice and embrace slavery – not Judeo-Christian America. The United States has Constitutionally rejected slavery and the attitude of supremacism that supports it. Instead, our American national credo strives for racial equality that is made possible through upward mobility and a robust middle class.

Equality in America is a matter of equal opportunity, not a guarantee of equal outcome. This is a very important distinction because it is what separates President Trump’s America-first ethos of individualism, from the radical leftist Democrat party’s ethos of collectivism. We will come back to that.

President Donald Trump is an unapologetic advocate of upward mobility and wealth creation for ALL Americans. Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! President Trump’s economic policies are color-blind and responsible for the lowest unemployment in the black community in history, as well as the lowest unemployment rate for Hispanics in America since records were kept.

President Trump’s color-blind America-first economic policies are bringing jobs back to America. In 2017, 171,000 manufacturing jobs were added. In 2018, 284,000 manufacturing jobs were added – it was the largest job increase in 21 years. In 2017, the President signed an Executive Order for an apprenticeship program to fill 6 million open positions. So, why do the hucksters call President Trump a racist and a white supremacist? Let’s find out.

We begin with a discussion of supremacy as a concept. A supremacist advocates the superiority of a particular group. Black supremacists believe blacks are the superior group. White supremacists believe whites are the superior group. Islamic supremacists believe Muslims are the superior group. Leftist supremacists believe that the radical left is the superior group. Male chauvinists believe men are the superior group, and radical feminists believe women are the superior group. So, being a supremacist is an arrogant attitude of exclusion, superiority, but not necessarily a racial issue.

Of all the possible divisions in society, racial divisions are the easiest to see and, therefore, the easiest to exploit. Why does this matter?

President Trump is unapologetically pro-American and demands American sovereignty, and the protection and preservation of the United States Constitution which is a document of inclusion and equality. President Trump is the existential enemy of the Leftist/Islamist/Globalist axis that seeks his destruction, and the destruction of the Constitution he protects. The tactical strategy of the Axis is projection. The Axis accuses the President of being what they themselves are – political, religious, and philosophical supremacists. Does this surprise you? Let’s take a look.

Arrogant Leftists seek to destroy the Constitution and replace it with the centralized government of socialism. Arrogant Islamists seek to destroy the Constitution and replace it with supremacist Islamic sharia law. Arrogant globalists seek to destroy the Constitution and internationalize the world under one world government that they themselves rule. America-first President Donald Trump opposes them all, and no Axis member can succeed in any individual objective without first succeeding in the shared objective of toppling President Trump and shattering America from within. How can they do it?

There are two separate judiciaries adjudicating cases in the United States today with two very different agendas. The first is the legitimate federal judiciary, one of three co-equal branches of government organized under the United States Constitution and laws of the federal government. The federal judiciary has courthouses where cases are adjudicating according to rules of evidence designed to establish the truth with facts, and a foundational presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The second, is the illegitimate court of public opinion where the humanitarian hucksters try their cases on the Internet and in the entertainment media without regard for truth or facts, and without the Constitutional presumption of innocence. Why?

The goal of the court of public opinion is mass social engineering. What this means is that the Leftist/Islamist/Globalist axis is cooperating in their shared effort to topple President Trump by smearing him with false accusations of racism and white supremacy. The accusations are patently absurd but the directors of the Axis powers don’t care. Their “ends justifies the means” tactic is the foundation of every dictatorship in the world.

The once independent informational World Wide Web has been co-opted by the radical Leftist/Islamist/Globalist axis for political purposes. This is how it works.

The Leftist/Islamist/Globalist axis falsely and hypocritically claim that open borders are humanitarian, and that President Trump’s attempts to secure the border are racist and a function of his white supremacy. Axis members do not accuse Iran of being too Islamic. Axis members do not accuse Nigeria of being too black. Axis members do not accuse Indonesia of slavery. Why not?

Because the Axis powers are not interested in facts, truth, and a presumption of innocence – the court of public opinion is only interested in destroying President Donald Trump. They are deceitfully using the court of public opinion to smear President Trump in preparation for the 2020 election.

Now let’s continue our discussion of individualism and collectivism to see how it fits into this deception. Socialism, communism, globalism, and Islamism are collectivist systems of centralized government where the group takes precedence over the individual. Capitalism is a system that prioritizes the individual and the opportunity for upward mobility and free enterprise. In capitalism there is private property and the individual rights that support it. In capitalism, individual property rights insure upward mobility. Upward mobility is the foundation of the American dream that has taken the United States from an era of worldwide slavery to the election of a black president.

In collectivism there is no private property and no individual rights – the government owns and distributes the fruits of your labor. The disingenuous accusations of racism and white supremacy lodged against President Donald Trump completely disguise the racism and supremacist ideals of the Leftist/Islamist/Globalist axis accusers. What?

The black supremacist Black Panthers do not represent the greater black community, the white supremacist KKK does not represent the greater white community, the sharia-compliant Islamic supremacists do not represent the Muslim community who embrace our Constitution. One must be able to distinguish between groups in order to foment discord and divisiveness between them. The court of public opinion makes no such distinction. They insist that since President Trump is white he is a racist and a white supremacist. Their argument has no rational basis, no truth, and no facts, but that does not matter in the court of public opinion.

The court of public opinion does not respect Constitutional law and the presumption of innocence. The court of public opinion follows the 12 rules for social revolution articulated in Saul Alinsky’s infamous manual Rules for Radicals. According to Alinsky, “Before men can act, an issue must be polarized. Men will act when they are convinced their cause is 100 percent on the side of the angels, and that the opposition are 100 percent on the side of the devil. . . This includes lying a hundred thousand times over, if necessary, and always with a straight face.”

The Axis liars are non-sectarian supremacists following the rules of revolution where the ends justify the means. The Leftists and Globalists liars are endorsed by Alinsky. The Islamist liars are endorsed by taqiyya (lying in the service of Islam). If we are to avoid violent revolution we must turn off the noise of the divisive false accusations made by the illegitimate court of public opinion. We must examine the facts of President Trump’s color-blind policies and accomplishments according to the rules of evidence defined by the Constitution. Unity has a purpose and so does disunity.

The disunity that is facilitated by the false accusations of racism and white supremacy made in the court of public opinion are designed to create the social chaos necessary to make the supremacist Axis Dreams come true. Personally, I prefer ordered liberty and the equality of the American Dream. I reject the supremacism of Leftism, Islamism, and Globalism entirely.

Do not be fooled by the illegitimate court of public opinion – it is deliberately facilitating the humanitarian hoax of white supremacy designed to kill America with kindness. President Donald J. Trump represents equality, ordered liberty, and the color-blind upward mobility of the American Dream. In the legitimate federal judiciary the facts prove that POTUS is not a racist or a supremacist – his enemies are.

RELATED ARTICLE: Why Blacks Should Ignore the Liberal Agenda

EDITORS NOTE: This Goudsmit Pundicity column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Maine Homeless Question Why Asylum Seekers Will Get Housing Before They do!

“How do they have a place for them but not for us?”  – (A homeless woman in Maine)

I can’t believe my eyes.  A local media outlet has dared to publish this news and it comes at a time when the national media is dumping on the President who says Americans should come first when it comes to public assistance!

150 African asylum seekers have jumped ahead of 18,000 Mainers who have been on a waiting list for years for Section 8 housing!

From WGME-13 (hat tip: Jeannine):

I-Team: Homeless Mainers feel left behind as asylum seekers get housing

PORTLAND (WGME) – Nearly 200 asylum seekers have to be out of an emergency shelter at the Portland Expo by this Thursday as the Red Claws move back in.

While state and city leaders scramble to find them housing, some homeless Mainers say they feel left behind.

The I-Team found more than 18,000 Mainers are on a waiting list for Section 8 and that’s just one program to help low-income families get affordable housing.

Many of those people are homeless and hungry and have already been waiting years for their number to be called. [Am I dreaming? I can’t believe any media in America would report this news!—-ed]

Zanetta Smith said she’s thankful for a storage shack in the woods where a friend is letting her live.

She said it’s not much, but it’s better than living in her car where she’s been for the last 5 years.

“It was pretty tough in the winter,” Smith said.

She lost her apartment after she got sick and couldn’t work anymore.

“You fall into bad times, and sometimes it’s hard to get out of it,” she said.

She’s trying to get a place of her own with a toilet, shower, and running water, which her temporary housing doesn’t have.

She said she’s been on the waiting list for a Section 8 voucher for years.

According to Maine Housing, the statewide Maine Centralized Section 8 waiting list is now up to 18,316.

“It’s years, unfortunately. We just don’t have the supply and stock,” said Dan Brennan, director of the Maine State Housing Authority.

Brennan said it could be five years to get a voucher to help pay for rent, and even if you get one, there’s no guarantee you’ll find a place.

“There simply is not enough supply of units available for people who need them,” Brennan said.
Local housing authorities also have waiting lists for public housing.

In Portland, for example, we found nearly 1,400 people waiting for a unit to open up, which could take as long as three years.

“Of course when the asylum seekers come up here they offered them free housing. How do they have a place for them but not for us?” Smith wants to know.

At last check, more than 150 asylum seekers who arrived in Portland since June have moved out of a makeshift shelter at the Portland Expo and into units in Bath, Brunswick, Lewiston, Portland, and Scarborough.

There is more!  Continue reading here.

See all of my previous posts on the DR Congolese migration to Maine, here.

BTW, yesterday I told you that over 11,000 DR Congolese were legally admitted as refugees to the US in the first ten months of this fiscal year.  This bunch in Maine came illegally and are now jumping the line for taxpayer supported housing!

RELATED ARTICLE167 Jewish Groups Urge President to Admit “at least 95,000 refugees” in FY2020

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

Joe Biden’s Adventures in the Natural Law

Hadley Arkes on a fair trade: The Church will not instruct a Biden or a Cuomo about politics, if they’ll stop misleading Catholics about Church teaching.


William Blackstone, that venerable commentator on the English law, remarked that it was a contradiction in terms to suggest that the law may recognize a principle of revolution.  And yet, James Wilson, one of the premier minds among the American Founders, insisted that the law in America could indeed encompass a principle of revolution.

For the law in America began with the recognition that there could be an unjust law – a measure passed with all of the trappings of legality and yet wanting in the very substance of justice.  Americans could readily grasp that point because they began with an understanding of moral truths and natural rights quite apart from the laws that were “posited” or enacted in any place. And that body of natural law would supply the standards for judging the rightness or justice of the things enacted as law.

But by the end of the 19th century, the natural law had become an object of derision among lawyers.  In our own time, conservatives sharpened the reaction against natural law as they recoiled from liberal judges, moving outside the text of the Constitution, inventing new rights to contraception and abortion.  They were false constructions of natural right, but they had to be met by showing what was false in the reasoning.

The conservatives, however, were losing their confidence in moral reasoning, and so their ingenious strategy was to avoid any hint of moral reasoning altogether.

When Robert Bork was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1987, he had shaped a remarkable record as a professor and a wise jurist, but with a deep dubiety about the natural law.   At the infamous hearings over his confirmation, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, was the redoubtable Joseph Biden.  Faced with a legal “positivist,” Biden thought he would embarrass Bork by staking out a strong position in natural law:

As a child of God, I believe my rights are not derived from the Constitution.  My rights are not derived from any government. My rights are not derived from any majority.  My rights are because I exist.  They were given to me and each of my fellow citizens by our creator and they represent the essence of human dignity.

Biden was striking this posture because Bork would have been a likely vote in overturning Roe v. Wade.   That right to abortion was being treated now by the Left as a species of “natural right.”  And yet, James Wilson had raised the question: If we have natural rights as human beings, when do they begin? The answer: as soon as we begin to be.  Which was why, as Wilson said, the common law cast its protection over human beings “when the infant is first able to stir in the womb.”

Despite his Catholic background Joe Biden was, and remains today, a firm defender of a right to abortion.  And yet, if I have those rights, “as a child of God . . . because I exist,” the child in the womb must be the bearer of those rights.   How could a pregnant woman have a right then to sweep away the natural rights of the child by the simple expedient of removing, in a stroke, the bearer of those rights?

Biden’s position might have been salvaged, I guess, if he just didn’t consider the child in the womb a human being on the same plane as any other human. But if our rights do not depend on the votes of majorities, could it be that our very standing as human beings could be left in the hands of majorities, in legislatures or courts?  Or worse: that the decision could be left to the woman and man who have already found an interest in killing the child?

But four years later Biden found himself delivered from his problem. He now had before his Committee, for hearings, Clarence Thomas, who was charged with the offense of taking natural law seriously at times.  That new threat to Roe v. Wade marked a change of 180 degrees.

In an op-ed in the Washington Post, Biden warned that if we had judges again who took natural law seriously, we would have a throwback to those reactionary judges who resisted the New Deal in the 1930s, with its regulation of business.  We would go back, he said, to the kinds of teachings offered by this Professor Arkes in this preposterous book, First Things.

The years would roll on and Joe Biden would settle in with the clichés offered by the Cuomos and Pelosis: He would not impose, through the laws, the “personal” “beliefs” he had absorbed through his religion. But the Church, on abortion, has never appealed to “beliefs.”  The teaching has drawn on the facts of embryology, woven with principled reasoning.

Since they were moral teachings, made communal, they had never been merely “personal.”  We’ve come to see the deep reluctance of bishops to challenge the leading Catholic politicians who have offered this oh-so-familiar evasion, for they don’t want those politicians charged with the offense of taking orders from their Church.

And yet, one wonders why something as simple as this may not be said: The Church would not tell the Bidens and Cuomos what to say as they make their careers in politics, but they surely would have no moral right to mislead a wide audience of Catholics about the teachings of their own Church.

COLUMN BY

Hadley Arkes

Hadley Arkes is the Ney Professor of Jurisprudence Emeritus at Amherst College and the Founder/Director of the James Wilson Institute on Natural Rights & the American Founding. His most recent book is Constitutional Illusions & Anchoring Truths: The Touchstone of the Natural Law. Volume II of his audio lectures from The Modern Scholar, First Principles and Natural Law is now available for download.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

WARNING: Thanos is Still Alive… And Everywhere.

When we last talked about Thanos, we focused on the nature of resources, the value of humanity, and the history of failed overpopulation doomsday proclamations.

This time, we’re following up on some of those themes with a deeper discussion of environmentalism and the role wealth creation plays in generating better standards of living for both people *and* the environment around us, then we shift gears to the concept of “central planning” and explain why Thanos’ is no different than countless historical and modern tyrants who believe they can easily plan out the future for billions (or trillions) of people… and what inevitably happens when things don’t go their way.

CREDITS: Written & Produced by Sean W. Malone. Edited by Arash Ayrom & Sean W. Malone.

EDITORS NOTE: This Foundation for Economic Education video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Why Is California Such a Mess?

The glamour and sophistication often associated with California stands in startling difference to its reality. The Golden State, home to some of the wealthiest people in the US, is also home to a disproportionate number of people who are living in poverty.

Check out FEE’s newest Out of Frame video, “Thanos is Still Alive… And Everywhere.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Foundation for Economic Education video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

President Donald J. Trump is Ensuring Non-Citizens Do Not Abuse Our Nation’s Public Benefits

PROTECTING PUBLIC RESOURCES: The Trump Administration is taking action to help ensure that non-citizens in this country are self-sufficient and not a strain on public resources.  

  • The Trump Administration is releasing a final rule that will protect American taxpayers, preserve our social safety net for vulnerable Americans, and uphold the rule of law.
  • This action will help ensure that if aliens want to enter or remain in the United States they must support themselves, and not rely on public benefits.
  • An alien who receives public benefits above a certain threshold is known as a “public charge.”
    • Aliens will be barred from entering the United States if they are found likely to become public charges.
    • Aliens in the United States who are found likely to become public charges will also be barred from adjusting their immigration status.
  • President Trump is enforcing this longstanding law to prevent aliens from depending on public benefit programs.
    • The Immigration and Nationality Act makes clear that those seeking to come to the United States cannot be a public charge.
  • For many years, this clear legal requirement went largely unenforced, imposing vast burdens on American taxpayers. Now, public charge law will finally be utilized.

ENCOURAGING SELF-SUFFICIENCY: Self-sufficiency has long been a basic principle of our Nation’s immigration laws that has enjoyed widespread support.

  • Public charge has been a part of United States immigration law for more than 100 years as a ground of inadmissibility.
  • Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed two bipartisan bills in 1996 to help stop aliens from exploiting public benefits.
    • This included the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act.
    • As Congress made clear at the time, it is our national policy that aliens should “not depend on public resources to meet their needs.”
  • Americans widely agree that individuals coming to our country should be self-sufficient, with 73 percent in favor of requiring immigrants to be able to support themselves financially.

PRESERVING THE SOCIAL SAFETY NET: We must ensure that non-citizens do not abuse our public benefit programs and jeopardize the social safety net needed by vulnerable Americans. 

  • Large numbers of non-citizens and their families have taken advantage of our generous public benefits, limited resources that could otherwise go to vulnerable Americans.
  • 78 percent of households headed by a non-citizen with no more than a high school education use at least one welfare program.
  • 58 percent of all households headed by a non-citizen use at least one welfare program.
  • Half of all non-citizen headed households include at least one person who uses Medicaid.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Why Blacks Should Ignore the Liberal Agenda

This Sheriff Was Sued for Cooperating With ICE. Now, He’s Vindicated.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Catholic AND Democrat? Not possible.

TRANSCRIPT

The political season hasn’t really even gotten into gear yet, but the political posturing and positioning certainly has — and Catholics, in particular, should be paying close attention.

First, last week, The New York Times published a pre-election analysis that pointed to the fact that millions of Americans who back in 2016 said they didn’t like [President Donald] Trump, have now changed their minds and come aboard the Trump train.

While his overall favorability rating is still below 50%, it has increased 10 points since 2016, and that news sent the loony left into a social media meltdown from which they haven’t yet recovered; some even demanding The New York Times take the story down.

Now the news — specifically Catholic — Trump won the Catholic vote in 2016 52%-48% over the wicked Hillary Clinton.

This year, it appears right now, although nothing is ever certain in politics, that Joe Biden, a Catholic — although in name only — is in the lead among the 245,000 other Democrats running for the nomination.

If he were to win, that would set up quite the clash of orthodoxies for U.S. bishops, who almost to a man hate Trump and never miss an opportunity to strike out at him to cover their own multitude of sins.

The clash would be how they could publicly get behind a Biden presidential run when Biden is an avowed, committed, never-look-back supporter of child murder.

This very topic was homed in on on Fox News last week by Martha MacCallum, a devout Catholic, during an interview with Cdl. Raymond Burke.

Burke flat-out laid it out.

[Transcript unavailable]

Not just the Catholic vote, but actual Catholic involvement in next year’s election here in the United States could be the pivotal deciding point for who wins.

It’s one reason, not the main one, but an important one nonetheless that Church Militant is retooling and equipping our studios here in Ferndale to be the source of news and information for Catholics during the upcoming campaign season.

One very important fact that has largely gone under the radar so far is the importance of Texas, once considered impenetrable by Democrats, a virtual lock for the GOP.

If the Party of Death could capture the Lone Star State in 2020, that would almost completely guarantee a defeat for Trump.

Texas has 38 Electoral College votes, absolutely critical to the Trump campaign. If Texas went blue, even by a whisker, the Democrats would seize the White House.

So how possible is it that Texas could turn? According to the phony Hispanic candidate Robert O’Rourke — who goes by the name “Beto” to pull an Elizabeth Warren on Hispanic voters — he says Texas is in play this year.

He made the claim in one of the debates a couple of weeks ago and has some history to back it up.

He came pretty darn close to upsetting Republican incumbent senator Ted Cruz in 2016, a lot closer than most people thought heading into election day.

Prior to Church Militant’s recent Strength and Honor Conference, we had an opportunity to sit down with the president of Texas Right to Life, Jim Graham, who was up for the conference.

Graham has his pulse on Texas politics perhaps better than any other person in the state, and he sees dark clouds on the political horizon.

But most troubling for Graham, and especially related to the all-important Catholic vote in Texas, which is much more so Hispanic than most other red states, he says too many of the state’s Catholic bishops are working behind the scenes for the Democrats, even down to how they personally vote.

With potentially one-third of Texas bishops, perhaps even more, actually casting votes for the Party of Death, the state must now become a focal point, perhaps more than any other in the country, when assessing Trump’s re-election campaign and the Catholic vote.

Cardinal Burke has been down this road before. In 2004, as archbishop of St. Louis, he created a major controversy when he said then-Democratic presidential candidate, Catholic-in-name-only John Kerry, could not receive Holy Communion owing to his obstinate support of abortion.

Burke was plotted against by serial homopredator Theodore McCarrick and Donald Wuerl, who covered up for and lied about McCarrick’s filth, something he still does to this day.

McCarrick lied to the bishops, with Wuerl’s knowledge, about a Vatican answer to the U.S. bishops question about whether Holy Communion should be denied to pro-abort Catholic politicians.

The Vatican had answered in the affirmative, saying, yes, such child killers were not to be admitted to Holy Communion.

But McCarrick, who was still sexually assaulting seminarians in the Jersey Shore beach house, simply lied and said the Vatican has said no, it was OK for them to receive.

He had deliberately quoted from an only semi-related footnote, which made it appear it was OK, but the footnote had nothing to do with the question about actual pro-abort politician themselves.

Regarding them specifically, the Vatican’s Cdl. Joseph Ratzinger, who wrote the decision for the U.S. bishops, has flat-out, unambiguously declared, no they cannot receive.

So when Cdl. Burke goes on Fox News and says Biden should not be given Holy Communion, he’s right. This all matters, both spiritually and politically.

The positions of the Luciferian Left, like their father, are all built on lies, be those lies political or theological.

The father of lies has been actively trying to corrupt the Catholic Church since the days of Our Lord’s earthly mission — remember Judas. In that regard, only the cast of characters has changed, not the war itself.

Much is at stake next year, mostly the truth, and Catholics can expect a major assault against the truths of the Church not only around the nation, but squarely in Texas, and like the case with McCarrick and Wuerl and the rest of them, they can expect the assault to come from various Catholic prelates.

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

VIDEO: Former Islamist Extremist Describes His Escape From the Ideology

What leads a person to become an Islamist extremist? For one immigrant, it was not fitting in with his American classmates.

Mohammed Khalid, a former Islamist extremist, described what drew him to the radical ideology and why he left it at an event last month at The Heritage Foundation.

Khalid, now a scholar in cybersecurity studies at the University of Maryland, was born in the United Arab Emirates and lived in Pakistan before emigrating to the United States in 2010.

As a 14-year-old struggling to fit in at an American public high school, Khalid said he turned to the internet to make sense of what some saw as the negative connotation of his first name, “Mohammed.”

He said he quickly became enthralled with the answers online extremists offered.

He absorbed as much material as he could, Khalid said, watching propaganda videos that painted the West in a negative light. He said the ideology resonated with him because he remembered seeing the same clips on the news when he lived in Pakistan.

“One of the biggest things that I remember was that the Twin Towers, when they were falling down—I could not forget one of the comments,” Khalid said. “One of the commentators was like, ‘Well, maybe they had it coming.’ This was when it began to kind of make sense to me, that well, maybe what’s happening to me is reflective of a wider ideology that I’m not aware of.”

At 16, Khalid said he was spending 40 hours a week communicating with Islamists through password-protected online forums, translating Islamist propaganda videos into English to radicalize American Muslims. He confided in these Islamists, whom he considered closer than family.

“The more I confided in them, the more separated and secluded I became from my own family,” Khalid said. “My family could not figure out what was wrong with me; they did not know what was happening because I kept it very well hidden from them.”

Khalid was arrested in April 2014, charged with conspiracy to provide material to terrorists, and convicted. He says he spent five years in federal prison.

At 17, he was the youngest person to be convicted of terrorism-related charges in the U.S.

Slowly, with the help of officers at the juvenile detention center, he said, he began to emerge from the extremist mindset.

The officers “explained about their struggles, they explained about their dreams, about their journeys,” Khalid said.

“And so began a process of humanization, a process in which I was able to finally relate to these people whom I’d other-ized under the umbrella of Islamist ideology, and whom I finally, when I reached that beginning step, began to see as human beings,” he said.

When an audience member asked whether it is possible for Muslims to reject extremism without leaving their faith, Khalid, who remains a Muslim, answered yes:

I see … a lot of my friends actually struggling to reconcile [Islam] with the society they find themselves in. They want to be partakers of this American culture. At the same time, they want to hold on to a Muslim identity that unfortunately, you know, sometimes is collapsed together with a whole bunch of outdated traditions. … I think moving forward, a lot of people individually have to decide how they want to interpret the religion, instead of letting religion be this one-size-fits-all approach.

Maajid Nawaz, founder and chairman of the London-based counterextremism think tank Quilliam, also spoke at the event.

Nawaz said the most vulnerable groups in society are former Muslims. He suggested that Islamic theology should be updated to develop a “Western Muslim identity.”

Muslims have a responsibility to respect those who leave the religion, he added, rather than isolating or targeting them.

“If Muslims … want to explore other faith traditions, or none, we have to protect them and their right to do so,” Nawaz said. “Because in our communities still, that is a big to-do, and they are discriminated against.”

COLUMN BY

Carmel Kookogey

Carmel Kookogey is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.


A Note for our Readers:

Conservative lawmakers MUST be able to point to tremendous policy victories they have been able to achieve by the end of 2019.

To do that, they will need to be focused on a few specific priorities before the end of the year arrives.

Guess who has the ideas for a clear plan policy agenda for conservative leadership? That’s right — The Heritage Foundation.

Click here to learn how you can do your part in achieving policy victories for conservatives everywhere today.

LEARN MORE >>


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

On August 12, 1898 the United States of America became a Global Power

From the National Constitution Center:

On August 12, 1898, the United States and Spain reached a cease-fire agreement in its brief conflict over Cuba and the Philippines. The war marked America’s entrance onto the global stage as a military power.

The Spanish-American War is just one of five conflicts where Congress approved an official declaration of war using its constitutional powers. In total, war declarations have been declared by Congress in the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, World War I and World War II.

The dispute between the two nations over Cuba had been simmering for decades. Earlier in the 19th Century, American forces landed on Cuban soil on several occasions to pursue pirates, and then the United States’ government tried to buy Cuba from Spain.

Prior to the war declaration by Congress on April 25, 1898, tensions were high as United States business interests eyed the sugar-producing industry in Cuba. The island had been ravaged by three years of civil war, which had been highly dramatized in some American newspapers.

And after the sinking of the battleship Maine in Havana’s harbor on February 15, war seemed inevitable. The Maine had been sent to Cuba by President William McKinley to safeguard American interests. On March 9, 1898 Congress passed a law to build up the United States’ military strength. On March 28, 1898 an investigation found that a mine blew up the Maine.

On April 21 President McKinley orders a blockade of Cuba, leading to Spain breaking off diplomatic relations, and four days later the U.S. Congress declared war on Spain, two days after Spain issued its own war declaration.

The actual fighting in the declared war lasted for a 10-week period. On May 1, in Manila Bay, Commodore George Dewey’s Asiatic Squadron defeated the Spanish naval force located in the Philippines, another Spanish possession. In June, American troops captured Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and attacked the harbor city of Santiago. After defeating the Spanish army on the ground in Cuba, the U.S. used its Navy to destroy the Spanish Caribbean squadron in July.

By late July, France intervened for Spain to start peace negotiations, and a cease-fire was signed on August 12. The final peace between U.S. and Spanish governments came with the Treaty of Paris on December 10, 1898.

The costs to Spain were heavy. It had to guarantee the independence of Cuba, give Guam and Puerto Rico to the United States, and agree to sell the Philippines to the United States for the sum of $20 million.

For the United States, the monetary cast was $250 million for the war. About 3,000 troops died in the conflict, with an estimated 90 percent dying from diseases.

But there was one final constitutional step in the process: the U.S. Senate had to ratify the treaty in February 1899, and that was far from guaranteed.

A two-thirds majority of the Senate is needed to approve a treaty, and a powerful anti-Imperialist group opposed expanding the United States into a global power. The lobby included former Presidents Benjamin Harrison and Grover Cleveland, and industrialist Andrew Carnegie.

The U.S. Senate ratified the treaty on February 6, 1899, by a margin of just one vote, after William Jennings Bryan decided to support a treaty backed by his arch rival, President McKinley.

Also, during the conflict, the United States annexed Hawaii. A joint resolution of Congress made Hawaii a U.S. territory on August 12, 1898, as concerns grew about its strategic importance in protecting the prospective new American interests in the Pacific. The United States also purchased a perpetual lease on Guantanamo Bay in Cuba in the war’s aftermath.

Federal Lawsuit Filed On Behalf of Marine Dad Banned from School Property After He Objected to Islamic Indoctrination of Daughter

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, yesterday afternoon, filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of former Marine, John Kevin Wood, and his wife, Melissa, who refuse to allow their teenage daughter to be subjected to Islamic indoctrination and propaganda in her high school World History class.  The lawsuit was filed against the Charles County Public Schools, the Board of Education, and the Principal and Vice-Principal of La Plata High School located in La Plata, Maryland.

The Woods’ daughter was forced to profess and to write out the Shahada in worksheets and quizzes.  The Shahada is the Islamic Creed, “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”  For non-Muslims, reciting the statement is sufficient to convert one to Islam.  Moreover, the second part of the statement, “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah,” signifies the person has accepted Muhammad as their spiritual leader.  The teenager was also required to memorize and recite the Five Pillars of Islam.

Charles County Public Schools disparaged Christianity by teaching its 11th grade students, including the Woods’ daughter, that: “Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian.”

The Charles County Public Schools also taught the following:

  • “Islam, at heart, is a peaceful
  • “To Muslims, Allah is the same God that is worshiped in Christianity and Judaism.”
  • The Koran states, “Men are the managers of the affairs of women” and “Righteous women are thereforeobedient.”

Read the two exhibits containing Student worksheets here.

The sugarcoated version of Islam taught at La Plata High School did not mention that the Koran explicitly instructs Muslims “to kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.”  (Sura 9-5)

When John Kevin Wood discovered the Islamic propaganda and indoctrination of his daughter, he was rightfully outraged.  He immediately contacted the school to voice his objections and to obtain an alternative assignment for his daughter.

The Woods, as Christians, believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and our Savior, that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins, and that following the teachings of Jesus Christ is the only path to eternal salvation.  The Woods believe that it is a sin to profess commitment in word or writing to any god other than the Christian God.  Thus, they object to their daughter being forced to deny the Christian God and to her high school promoting Islam over other religions.

The school ultimately refused to allow the Woods’ daughter to opt-out of the assignments, forcing her to either violate her faith by pledging to Allah or receive zeros for the assignments.  Together, John Kevin Wood, Melissa Wood, and their daughter chose to remain faithful to God and refused to complete the assignments, even though failing grades would harm her future admission to college and her opportunities to obtain college scholarships.

Adding insult to injury, in an effort to silence all pro-Christian speech in her school, La Plata’s principal, without a hearing or any opportunity to refute the false allegations against him, issued a “No Trespass” notice against John Kevin Wood denying him any access to school grounds.

Wood served 8 years in the Marine Corps.  He was deployed in Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm and lost friends to Islamic extremists.  A few years later, Wood responded as a firefighter to the 9-11 Islamic terrorist attack on the Pentagon.  Wood witnessed firsthand the destruction created in the name of Allah and knows that Islam is not “a religion of peace.”  The school prevented John Kevin Wood from defending his daughter’s Christian beliefs against Islamic indoctrination, even though as a Marine, he stood in harm’s way to defend our nation, and the Charles County Public Schools.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented: “Defendants forced Wood’s daughter to disparage her Christian faith by reciting the Shahada, and acknowledging Mohammed as her spiritual leader. Her World History class spent one day on Christianity and two weeks immersed in Islam. Such discriminatory treatment of Christianity is an unconstitutional promotion of one religion over another.”

Thompson added, “The course also taught false statements such as “Allah is the same God worshiped by Christians, and Islam as a “religion of peace. Parents must be ever vigilant to the Islamic indoctrination of their children under the guise of teaching history and multiculturalism.  This is happening in public schools across the country.  And they must take action to stop it.”

The Woods’ lawsuit seeks a court declaration that Defendants violated their constitutional and statutory rights, a temporary and permanent injunction barring Defendants from endorsing Islam or favoring Islam over Christianity and other religions, and from enforcing the no trespassing order issued against John Kevin Wood.

Read entire Federal Complaint here.