With the Fourth of July days away, Democrats have officially flagged the next target in the culture war to undermine and unravel America. The official Twitter account of the Democratic National Committee shot out a tweet associating Mount Rushmore with white supremacy.
The Democrats think Mt Rushmore is a display of white supremacy.
There’s no saving this country if Biden gets elected.
Claiming Mount Rushmore as a site of white supremacy is just the latest attack. It comes at the heels of many others, including a “wink-wink” tweet by anthropology professor Sarah Parcak on how to take down an obelisk, the shape of the Washington Monument in D.C.
As Clarion Project reported, Parcak shot out a tweet with hand-drawn instructions for taking down the towering monument:
PSA For ANYONE who might be interested in how to pull down an obelisk* safely from an Egyptologist who never ever in a million years thought this advice might come in handy
*might be masquerading as a racist monument I dunno
An attack on America’s founding fathers isn’t limited to Mount Rushmore or the Washington Monument.
Last week, a statute of Abraham Lincoln was declared racist. The statue, called the Emancipation Memorial (to honor the Emancipation Proclamation), was paid for by freed slaves and Frederick Douglass spoke at its dedication.
Protesters Vow To Take Down Emancipation Memorial Statue — That Was Entirely Funded By Freed Slaves. https://t.co/rkTVivogrC
Critics of the Emancipation Memorial say the designers of the statue didn’t take into account the views of African Americans. Clarion Project’s National Correspondent Shireen Qudosi, shares the sentiment of many immigrants to America who escaped the instability of their native countries:
“Virtue extremists of the hour are not just satisfied with modifying the behavior of the living; they’ll punish the dead for living in the past. Nothing ever becomes good enough once a victim narrative sets in that’s constantly looking in the rear-view mirror. As immigrants, we’ve seen this happen in our home countries. Now it’s happening here.”
Those looking with rear-view vision, intent to lash out at history, also attacked statues of George Washington.
Trump says government is ‘tracking down the two anarchists’ who threw paint on Washington statuehttps://t.co/YLdkCJAH0X
In the new America, where anything can be labeled as “white supremacy” by overnight “experts” on racism, it’s even more important to know how to spot an extremist movement.
For Qudosi, the issue is a lack of forgiveness, mercy and compassion toward a brutal history and between each other.
“We’re in a vicious cycle of ‘attack mode.’ Most of our peers in the Preventing Violent Extremism field feel deeply worried about the fate our society now. Not enough people are trained in what extremism looks like and how to understand the narrative of the other without demonizing them. That needs to change.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Clarion Projecthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngClarion Project2020-07-01 10:44:562020-07-01 10:44:56Ahead of July 4th, Democrats Eye Mount Rushmore
Why a Democrat State Senator Was Beaten by the Black Lives Matter Mob He Supported
[To get the whole story on the Left’s suicidal political odyssey, read Jamie Glazov’s United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror:CLICK HERE.]
How Vittorio Arrigoni Went to Gaza Hoping to Die.
By Jamie Glazov
“Bit by bit, decorate it, arrange the details, find the ingredients, imagine it, choose it, get advice on it, shape it into a work without spectators, one which exists only for oneself, just for the shortest little moment of life.”
—Michel Foucault, describing the pleasure of preparing oneself for suicide.
The Italian cheerleader for Hamas, Vittorio Arrigoni, has died at the hands of the Islamic terrorism that he venerated throughout his life. The fellow traveler journeyed to the Gaza Strip to prostrate himself before his secular deity, Hamas, and to assist its venture of perpetrating genocide against Israelis. Islamic terrorists, who call themselves “Salafists,” showed their gratitude to Arrigoni by kidnapping, mercilessly beating, and executing him.
This episode was, of course, all part of an expected script: even though the media and our higher literary culture never discuss the reasons, the historical record reveals one undeniable fact: like thousands of political pilgrims before him, Vittorio Arrigoni went to Gaza to die. Indeed, consciously or unconsciously, in their unquenchable quest for sacrificing human life on the altar of their utopian ideals, fellow travelers always lust for death, and if not the death of others, then of their own.
It is no coincidence that a short while before “Salafists” killed Arrigoni, Juliano Mer-Khamis, a cheerleader of terrorism in Israel who, like Arrigoni, dedicated his life to praising the Palestinian death cult and working for the annihilation of Israel, was murdered by Islamic terrorists in Jenin. It is no coincidence that Rachel Corrie, the infamous enabler of the International Solidarity Movement, a group that disrupts anti-terrorism activities of the Israel Defense Forces, committed suicide in protecting Hamas terrorists by throwing herself in front of an Israeli bulldozer. And it is no coincidence that female leftist “peace” activists are routinely raped, brutalized, and enslaved by the Arabs of Judea and Samaria that they come to aid and glorify in their Jew-hating odyssey against Israel. And don’t hold your breath, by the way, waiting for leftist feminists to protest this phenomenon; they are faithfully following in the footsteps of American fellow traveler Anna Louise Strong and the Stalinist German writer Bertolt Brecht, two typical leftist believers who were completely undisturbed by the arrests and deaths of their friends in the Stalinist purges – having never even inquired about them after their disappearance.
Beneath the leftist believer’s veneration of the despotic enemy lies one of his most powerful yearnings: to submit his whole being to a totalist entity. This psychological dynamic involves negative identification, whereby a person who has failed to identify positively with his own environment subjugates his individuality to a powerful, authoritarian entity, through which he vicariously experiences a feeling of power and purpose. The historian David Potter has succinctly crystallized this phenomenon:
… most of us, if not all of us, fulfill ourselves and realize our own identities as persons through our relations with others; we are, in a sense, what our community, or as some sociologists would say, more precisely, what our reference group, recognizes us as being. If it does not recognize us, or if we do not feel that it does, or if we are confused as to what the recognition is, then we become not only lonely, but even lost, and profoundly unsure of our identity. We are driven by this uncertainty into a somewhat obsessive effort to discover our identity and to make certain of it. If this quest proves too long or too difficult, the need for identity becomes psychically very burdensome and the individual may be driven to escape this need by renouncing his own identity and surrendering himself to some seemingly greater cause outside himself.
This surrender to the totality involves the believer’s craving not only to relinquish his individuality to a greater whole but also, ideally, to sacrifice his life for it. Lusting for his own self-extinction, the believer craves martyrdom for the idea. As Eric Hoffer points out in his classic The True Believer, the opportunity to die for the cause gives meaning to the believer’s desire to shed his inner self: “a substitute embraced in moderation cannot supplant and efface the self we want to forget. We cannot be sure that we have something worth living for unless we are ready to die for it.”
Thus, Vittorio Arrigoni, Juliano Mer-Khasin, and Rachel Corrie were simply just faithfully continuing the long suicidal tradition of their political faith. We are well aware, after all, of the dark fate of the believers who journeyed to Russia after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution to build communism; we are well versed of what happened to the leftist Iranians who returned to their country after the 1979 Iranian Revolution to aid Khomeini in building the Islamic paradise. Only those who cannot accept the true motivations of utopian believers can still deny what those political pilgrims were searching for in their odyssey to shed themselves of their own unwanted selves.
Does one need to excessively explain why “progressive” feminist Naomi Klein called out for bringing “Najaf to New York” in her infamous 2004 column in The Nation_,_ in which she reached her hand out in solidarity to Muqtada al-Sadr and his Islamofascist Mahdi Army in the Iraqi Shi’ite stronghold of Najaf? Bringing Najaf to New York would mean that the Iraqi Shi’ite stronghold, where Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army at one time ran their torture chambers and sowed their terror, would be replicated on America’s shores. What could Naomi Klein possibly see admirable in the vicious nihilistic terror of the Mahdi Army? Would she remain alive for more than sixty seconds upon contact with it?
Is it possible that Klein’s impulses are related to those of Noam Chomsky, a Jew, who has distinguished himself, among other intriguing ways, by traveling to Lebanon to personally embrace the leaders of Hezbollah, whose stated top priority is to rid the world of Jews?
The murder by Iraqi terrorists of American hostage Tom Fox in March 2006 was a perfect example of this pathological phenomenon. Fox was among four members of the leftist group Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) who were kidnapped by Islamic terrorists in Iraq in November 2005. Aside from voicing support for the terrorists, one of the group’s most powerfully articulated themes entailed the longing for death. In the 1984 speech, “God’s People Reconciling,” for example, which gave rise to the formation of the Christian Peacemaker Teams, Mennonite minister Ron Sider urged his listeners: “We must be prepared to die by the thousands.”
It is not unsurprising that when British and American troops rescued the other three CPT hostages and saved their lives, the freed captives refused to thank their liberators — who had risked their own lives participating in the rescue — or to cooperate in a critical debriefing session with intelligence officers. Doug Pritchard, the co-chairman of CPT, went out of his way to tell the world that the kidnapping itself (and by implication Fox’s murder) was _America’s _fault, not the kidnappers’ or the executioners’. “The illegal occupation of Iraq by multinational forces,” he affirmed, was the “root cause” of the kidnappings. In other words, the devil made them do it.
The freed captives resented the fact that they had been liberated by the very forces they despised. And the rescuers had robbed the remaining hostages of the idealized fate suffered by Fox. Jan Benvie, an Edinburgh teacher who was getting ready to go to Iraq with the group in the summer of 2006, learned the lesson well. She announced before her departure: “We make clear that if we are kidnapped we do not want there to be force or any form of violence used to release us.”
To the end of his life, the French philosopher Michel Foucault, who supported and adored Khomeini’s killing fields, adamantly defended “everyone’s right to kill himself.” Suicide, he boastfully wrote in a 1979 essay, was “the simplest of pleasures.” Is it a coincidence that Foucault, who had attempted to kill himself several times out of guilt feelings regarding his homosexuality, passionately supported an Islamic death cult that murdered homosexuals?
Gaza terrorists have a long history of kidnapping and abusing, raping and killing those who come to aid and abet them.
Vittorio Arrigoni knew that very well.
In the end, Arrigoni’s story is the story of the Left – a story best summarized by the dictum of Goethe’s devil, which Marx perpetually invoked, as he did in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon: “All that exists deserves to perish.”
Arrigoni is the contemporary poster boy for the political pilgrims who traveled to despotisms to help build the paradises in which they hoped to shed themselves of their own unwanted selves. They paid the ultimate price. And no lesser cost must be paid for the momentous transformation of sterilizing the unclean earth. Such disinfection can be made possible only by the purifying power of human blood — blood which, in the utopian enterprise, must, in the final chapter, become one’s own.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jamie Glazovhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJamie Glazov2020-06-29 06:40:472020-06-29 06:40:47Why a Democrat State Senator Was Beaten by the Black Lives Matter Mob He Supported
Activists are wasting their time tearing down old statues. Abuse is happening here and now.
Over the last month, global protests have been drawing attention to the unjust treatment of minority communities. As an organisation and as a slogan Black Lives Matter has captured the world’s attention.
In America particularly, police departments are facing serious scrutiny in an effort to root out racial bias and corruption. The Minneapolis Police—whose officers were responsible for George Floyd’s unjust death—is even being disbanded.
Many have suggested an unbroken link between systemic injustice today and the Trans-Atlantic slave trade to which most black Americans trace their roots. But for all the talk about a slavery that was outlawed 150 years ago, there’s an eerie silence about the slavery that continues today.
Pornhub is the world’s largest pornographic website, receiving some 42 billion visits every year. Users can upload their own content and view that of others, resulting in a vast video library of rape, revenge porn, abuse and torture—including that of children.
Several Pornhub-linked kidnapping cases have recently made the news, such as 15-year-old Rose Kalemba. As a result, Pornhub has been forced to remove the offending content. But even after 118 confirmed cases of child abuse, Pornhub itself remains untouched as a sex trafficker’s dream, rewarding the most popular content with monetised ads.
The company recently took to Twitter to polish its halo. It declared, “Pornhub stands in solidarity against racism and social injustice,” and it encouraged followers to donate to anti-racist charities.
But the New York Post has called Pornhub out on its hypocrisy. An article by anti-porn campaigner Laila Mickelwait highlighted recent Pornhub content like a video entitled “I Can’t Breathe” that made use of search tags such as “George Floyd” and “choke-out”.
Mickelwait went on: “Countless other titles on Pornhub feature variations on the N-word and “white master”. Exploited black teens” and “black slave” are suggested search terms deliberately promoted by Pornhub to its users.”
If you would like to tell Pornhub that black lives matter, you can join a million others in signing the Trafficking hub petition. The petition’s goal is to shut down Pornhub and hold its executives accountable for aiding sex trafficking. (Click here to sign the petition).
Planned Parenthood is another corporate giant causing immense harm to minority communities. In fact, if you were on the hunt for a still-thriving organisation to “cancel” for its racist past, you couldn’t find a better candidate.
Planned Parenthood was founded by the racist eugenicist Margaret Sanger, who had ties to the Ku Klux Klan. In a 1939 private letter, Sanger wrote, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” To this day, Planned Parenthood celebrates Sanger as a ‘woman of heroic accomplishments.’
And it continues to carry out her ambitions. The Guttmacher Institute, once Planned Parenthood’s research division, found that African-American women are five times more likely to choose abortion over white women. This data is used by Planned Parenthood with deadly effect.
In 2010, census statistics revealed that almost 80 percent of its surgical abortion clinics were within walking distance of African-American or Hispanic communities. Today, over one-third of Planned Parenthood’s 340,000 abortions are carried out on black babies, even though the black community makes up only 13 percent of America’s population.
As America’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood receives over US$500 million in federal tax dollars. If you would like to take a practical stand against systemic racism and tell Planned Parenthood that black lives matter, you can join 700,000 others in signing Live Action’s petition to defund the abortion giant. (Click here to sign the petition).
There really is no point saying that black lives matter if we don’t actually mean it.
Kurt Mahlburg
Kurt Mahlburg is a teacher and freelance writer, writing for the Canberra Declaration and occasionally the Spectator Australia. He also blogs at kurtmahlburg.blog. More by Kurt Mahlburg.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2020-06-26 06:41:272020-06-26 06:42:39Tell Pornhub and Planned Parenthood that Black Lives Matter
“It’s no coincidence that the riots here escalated in Fairfax, the icon of the Jewish community. I saw the Watts and the Rodney King riots. They never touched a synagogue or house of prayer. The graffiti showed blatant antisemitism. It’s Kristallnacht all over again,” Rabbi Shimon Raichik, a Chabad Rabbi in Los Angeles, wrote.
These scenes from what the media has falsely called peaceful protests and the Jewish community in the Fairfax neighborhood of Los Angeles has called the Shavuot Riots, after the biblical holiday during which the worst of the attacks on the community occurred, has fundamentally divided Los Angeles Jews.
Allyson Rowen Taylor, the former Associate Director of the American Jewish Congress in LA, and a co-founder of StandWithUs, passed on an account of hearing chants of, “F___ the police and kill the Jews.”
“The antisemitic chants are not being widely reported. This is insane and very, very scary,” she noted.
After the conclusion of Shavuot and the Shabbat, members of the Jewish community went to pick up the pieces, battling looters and checking out the damage. Even synagogues that had been untouched began evacuating their Torah scrolls to places of safety, unprecedented outside of a major natural disaster.
Aryeh Rosenfeld, an Orthodox Jewish small business owner in the area, described to the Jerusalem Post hearing screams of, “F___ Jews” during the riots and looting as he tried to protect his store.
The looting not only devastated countless small businesses in the area, but graffiti, some of it explicitly anti-Semitic, was scrawled across at least 5 Orthodox Jewish synagogues and 3 religious schools.
“The attack on our community last night was vicious and criminal. Fairfax is the center of the oldest Jewish community in Los Angeles,” Councilman Paul Koretz said. “As we watched the fires and looting, what didn’t get covered were the anti-Semitic hate crimes and incidents.”
Melina Abdullah, the lead organizer of Black Lives Matter in LA and a professor of Pan-African Studies at Cal State, had been very clear about her motive for bringing her hateful campaign to the area.
“We’ve been very deliberate in saying that the violence and pain and hurt that’s experienced on a daily basis by black folks at the hands of a repressive system should also be visited upon, to a degree, to those who think that they can just retreat to white affluence,” the BLM-LA co-founder ranted.
Melina Abdullah has a hateful record of appearing at Farrakhan and Nation of Islam events and praising the antisemitic hate group and its leader. When Facebook decided to remove Farrakhan over his hateful rhetoric toward Jews, the Black Lives Matter LA co-founder came to his defense.
“Facebook and Instagram’s decision to ban The Honorable Minister Farrakhan along with known white-supremacists represents the ultimate in false equivalencies,” Abdullah complained. “As a Black community, we should be very wary when others attempt to silence our leaders. We should also think about how to organize beyond social media. I continue to appreciate the Minister’s fearless leadership and intense love for our people.”
Farrakhan has praised Hitler, compared Jews to termites, and had declared, “Those who call themselves ‘Jews,’ who are not really Jews, but are in fact Satan”, claimed, “Hitler was trying to destroy the international bankers controlling Europe”, and boasted, “there has not been a black leader in America locked in a struggle with the Jewish community, but Louis Farrakhan.”
And Abdullah has made no secret of sharing Farrakhan’s hostility toward Jews.
When CNN parted ways with Marc Lamont Hill after he once again endorsed the murder of Jews, Abdullah accused CNN of standing “with a Zionist Israel that murders and terrorizes the Palestinian people.” The BLM-LA leader had complained that the Women’s March included “Zionists”.
At the Women’s March, Thandiwe Abdullah, her daughter, now the co-founder of the BLM Youth Vanguard, had said that as a “black Muslim girl, it is very important to me that Black Lives Matter also values the lives of the Muslim women in Palestine” and accused Israel of “genocide”.
Thandiwe also spoke at the Fairfax Black Lives Matter protest, where she ranted, “I know you want to tear some s___ up… if you want to set some corporations on fire, you know what? I don’t care about Target burning. I don’t care that capitalism burns. I don’t care that white people in their f____ office buildings are upset.”
Not just Melina, but Black Lives Matter LA, had partnered with the Nation of Islam, as she had noted in the past, “Minister Farrakhan was calling on folks not to spend their dollars with the White corporations that keep us oppressed, and so we partnered with the Nation and helped to amplify that call.”
The media not only failed to report the scale of vandalism against Jewish synagogues and schools, but treated it as a mysterious aberration while failing to report that BLM LA’s lead organizer had a history of anti-Semitism, and that BLM-LA had allied with one of the most vicious anti-Semitic hate groups around.
It did not note her own statement that “violence and pain and hurt” should also be “visited” on the people living and working in an area which included one of LA’s major Jewish communities.
The media repeatedly described Abdullah as an activist against police violence while ignoring her affinity for a racist black supremacist hate group whose leader has described Jews as satanic and subhuman.
The level of duplicity and malpractice by the media which covered this up is its own hate crime.
Imagine if a rally by a supporter of the KKK had turned into attacks on black churches and stores. The media would not be pretending that the two events were somehow separate and unrelated.
The national media, the local media, and even the local Jewish media failed to cover these facts.
In the aftermath of the Black Lives Matter riots, Los Angeles Jews, like millions of other Americans, found themselves deeply divided between standing with the rioters or their victims. And that unfortunately included some in the Modern Orthodox Jewish community.
After the attacks on synagogues in Fairfax, the major Modern Orthodox synagogues in nearby Beverlywood, the more modern counterpart of the community, conducted Black Lives Matter sessions. Even though these same synagogues had to rush out their Torah scrolls to protect them from a racist mob, they did not voice any pain or outrage, or offer solidarity to their fellow vandalized synagogues.
Unlike the statements by Young Israel and the Agudah, the Orthodox Union failed to even address the attacks on synagogues. Local leaders urged Orthodox Jews, who were the victims of the racist violence, to atone for their imaginary crimes of racism and to take up the hateful slogan of Black Lives Matter.
On a street in Beverlywood, high school kids from one of the more liberal schools in the area chalked slogans denouncing “white silence” and the same police who keep the mansions of their parents safe.
In Fairfax, the more traditional Orthodox Jews, in black pants and white shirts, in dangling tzitzit and black hats, had cheered the LAPD and other law enforcement agencies as they rolled in after the pogrom, and Persian Jews handed out donuts and snacks to the members of the National Guard.
There is an unbridgeable moral gap between the Chabad synagogue that opened its doors to the National Guard and the Modern Orthodox synagogues that opened their doors to black nationalists. And that gap in the Orthodox community can be seen in those teens cheering the LAPD in Fairfax and those chalking slogans against it in Beverlywood. That gap will determine which community has a future.
A community that teaches its children that they are privileged racists and that standing up for Israel and for their own homes and synagogues has to take a back seat to black nationalism, has no future.
As Rabbi Pini Dunner, of the Young Israel of North Beverly Hills, wrote, “If supporting BLM means collective suicide, you can count me out.”
Those Jews who have had the courage to speak up have been told that now is not a Jewish moment. This is a time for empathizing with criminals, not for standing up for the victims of anti-Semitism.
Jay Sanderson, the president of the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles, worried that focusing on the attacks on synagogues would detract from the important cause of the protests.
“This is not about us,” Los Angeles Jews have been told.
And yet the vandalism of synagogues and businesses, the cries of, “F___ Jews”, and the “F___ Israel” graffiti on a synagogue eloquently testify to the inescapable truth of anti-Semitism that it is about Jews.
And if Jews don’t stand up when their synagogues and stores are attacked, who will?
Paint can be cleaned off, glass can be swept away, and family savings and dreams can be put away, but there is a bigger price to be paid for failing to stand up to the rise of someone like Melina Abdullah. Bigoted mobs don’t go away when you fail to stand up to them. They gain power and legitimacy. And the price of standing up to them grows while the toll they take with each attack becomes unbearable.
The true moral cost of the Los Angeles Pogrom can be measured in the fact that racists were able to get away with attacking synagogues while intimidating some Jews into keeping quiet and supporting them.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2020-06-24 07:31:212020-06-24 07:36:19A Farrakhan Supporter Led the LA Black Lives Matter Rally That Became a Pogrom
The story of her astonishing claim is at the Jerusalem Post here:
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said on Thursday that she is “concerned” about a possible Israeli move to annex parts of the West Bank.
“Unilateral annexation puts the future at risk and undermines US national security interests,” she said in a webinar hosted by the Jewish Democratic Council of America (JDCA). “It undermines our national security interests and decades of bipartisan policy. We always want it to be bipartisan,” she continued.
The extension of Israel’s sovereignty to the “West Bank” – the name Jordan gave in 1950 to those parts of Judea and Samaria it had managed to hold onto during the 1948-49 war – is based on the Palestine Mandate itself. That Mandate assigned to the future Jewish state all of the land from Mt. Hermon in the north, to the Red Sea in the south, and from the Jordan River in the west, to the Mediterranean in the east. At the end of Arab-Israeli hostilities in 1949, the Jordanian army remained in possession of part of Judea and Samaria; Jordan renamed that territory the “West Bank” in order to efface the Jewish connection to the land, much as the Romans nearly 2000 years before had replaced the name “Judea” with “Palestine.” When Israel took possession of the “West Bank” after the Six-Day War, this did not create its legal, historic, and moral claim to land where Jews had lived for 3,500 years, but allowed the Jewish state to finally enforce its preexisting claim.
A second, and independent source for the Jewish claim to extend its sovereignty to a considerable part of the “West Bank” is U.N. Resolution 242.
The chief drafter of Resolution 242 was Lord Caradon (Hugh M. Foot), the permanent representative of the United Kingdom to the United Nations from 1964-1970. At the time of the Resolution’s discussion and subsequent unanimous passage, and on many occasions since, Lord Caradon always insisted that the phrase “from the territories” quite deliberately did not mean “all the territories,” but merely some of the territories:
Much play has been made of the fact that we didn’t say “the” territories or “all the” territories. But that was deliberate. I myself knew very well the 1967 boundaries and if we had put in the “the” or “all the” that could only have meant that we wished to see the 1967 boundaries perpetuated in the form of a permanent frontier. This I was certainly not prepared to recommend.
On another occasion, to an interviewer from the Journal of Palestine Studies (Spring-Summer 1976), he again insisted on the deliberateness of the wording. He was asked:
The basis for any settlement will be United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, of which you were the architect. Would you say there is a contradiction between the part of the resolution that stresses the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and that which calls for Israeli withdrawal from “occupied territories,” but not from “the occupied territories”?
Nota bene: “from territories occupied” is not the same thing as “from occupied territories” – the first is neutral, the second a loaded description. Lord Caradon answered:
“I defend the resolution as it stands. What it states, as you know, is first the general principle of inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. That means that you can’t justify holding onto territory merely because you conquered it. We could have said: well, you go back to the 1967 line. But I know the 1967 line, and it’s a rotten line. You couldn’t have a worse line for a permanent international boundary. It’s where the troops happened to be on a certain night in 1948. It’s got no relation to the needs of the situation.
“Had we said that you must go back to the 1967 line, which would have resulted if we had specified a retreat from all the occupied territories, we would have been wrong.”
Note how Lord Caradon says that “you can’t justify holding onto territory merely because you conquered it,” with that “merely” applying to Jordan, but not to Israel, because of the Mandate’s explicit provisions allocating the territory known now as the “West Bank” to the Jewish state. Note, too, the firmness of his dismissal of the 1967 lines as nothing more than “where the troops happened to be on a certain night in 1948,” that is, nothing more than armistice lines and not internationally recognized borders.
Does Speaker Pelosi understand the legal, historic, and moral claims of Israel to Judea and Samaria (a/k/a the “West Bank)”? Does she understand the intent of the Mandate for Palestine, in recognizing those claims, and does she have a firm understanding of the territory that was included by the League of Nations in that Mandate? Does she comprehend, as well, the meaning of U.N. Resolution 242, which allows Israel to make territorial adjustments to ensure its own security? Is she aware that an American military mission, sent to Israel by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on the orders of President Johnson, to study what territories, at a minimum, Israel would have to retain after the Six-Day War, reported back that Israel would need to keep the Jordan Valley and parts of the West Bank in order to slow down, or prevent, a possible invasion force from the east that could cut Israel in two at its narrowest point; within the 1949 armistice lines, Israel was only nine miles wide from Qalqilya to the sea.
Would comprehending the Mandate for Palestine (especially the Preamble, and Articles 4 and 6), and U.N. Resolution 242, make a difference to Nancy Pelosi? Would she be less quick to lecture Israel on not annexing territory in the West Bank, if she knew Israel had a perfect right to that territory – the Jordan Valley and the settlements – according to both the Mandate, and U.N. Resolution 242?
Pelosi’s bizarre claim is that any Israel “annexation” of territory would “harm America’s national security interests.” She has it exactly backwards. Any annexation by Israel of territory to which it is entitled, and which will increase the Jewish state’s ability to protect itself, will contribute to American national security. Deprived of control of the Jordan Valley, forced to surrender some of its settlements, Israel would be much more vulnerable to attack. And though Israel has never asked for a single American soldier to help defend it, unlike several Arab states, including Saudi Arabia and Lebanon, if it is squeezed back into something like the 1949 armistice lines – i.e., the pre-1967 lines which Abba Eban famously described as “the lines of Auschwitz” — that could make more likely the need, in some future war, for Israel to request American help. That’s not something either Israel, or America, wants. And if Israel were to be squeezed back into something like the 1949 armistice lines, and as a consequence was in danger, in case of war, of being cut in two by an invader from the East, does anyone doubt that if the Israelis ever felt their national survival was at stake, they would use some of their nuclear weapons as a last resort. Does Pelosi want to make such a possibility more likely?
Nancy Pelosi claims that Israel’s annexation of land in the West Bank will harm America’s national security interests; she has things backwards. The better able Israel is to defend itself, the less likely that it will ever have to ask for American aid. And what about the Arab states? Would they be angry with the United States if Israel held onto most or even all of the West Bank? We know that while the member states of the Arab League, for public consumption, have deplored Israeli “annexation,” behind the scenes several of these same states have expressed their support, more muted in some cases than in others, for the Trump Deal of the Century which allows for that Israeli annexation. The ambassadors of three Arab states — Bahrain, Oman, and the UAE – in a sign of support even attended the White House ceremony in which the Trump Plan was rolled out. Though Jordan has denounced any “annexation,” privately Jordanian officials have said they do not want the Palestinians to control the West Bank, for they fear a possible alliance of Palestinians on both sides of the Jordan against the Hashemite monarchy. Two other important Arab states, Egypt and, especially, Saudi Arabia, have lost interest in the “Palestinians” – Crown Prince Muhammad angrily told Mahmoud Abbas to “take whatever deal” he can that the Americans offer – and are more interested in Israeli help, including the sharing of its intelligence with them, in combating Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood. When the Israelis were about to annex the Golan Heights, it was predicted that all hell would break loose in the Arab countries. Nothing happened. When Trump decided to move the American Embassy to Jerusalem, we were again warned that Arabs and Muslims would be inflamed. Again nothing of the sort occurred.
Now we are being assured that if Israel annexes the Jordan Valley and the settlements, the Arabs will this time really rise up. Why should we believe it? Even in the West Bank, where Mahmoud Abbas insists he has now torn up all agreements with Israel, on the ground there is still security cooperation between the P.A. and Israel. On May 20 it was reported that an unnamed senior Palestinian official sent messages to the Israel Defense Forces and the Shin Bet security service saying that some coordination would continue and that the Palestinian security organizations will continue to do their best to foil terror attacks against Israel. Even if cooperation really is ended, the official vowed that terror groups will not be permitted to act freely in areas under the control of the Palestinian Authority. So there is a lot less to Abbas’s threats to “end all cooperation with Israel” than meets the eye. Abbas knows how valuable is the intelligence the P.A. receives from Israel on its deadly rivals Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and their operatives in the West Bank. Will he really want to do without Israeli assistance that on several occasions has even helped to foil plots to murder him and his cronies?
What should Nancy Pelosi in decency do? She should study the Palestine Mandate and its maps. She should remember that even though the League of Nations dissolved in 1946, its successor organization, the United Nations, included in its Charter Article 80 (called the “Jewish people’s article”), which recognized the continuing validity of the Mandate for Palestine. And finally, she should study the text of U.N. Resolution 242, and the authoritative explanation of that text by its main drafter, Lord Caradon. Only when she has thoroughly digested the meaning of both the U.N. Resolution 242 and of the Mandate for Palestine, will she have earned the right to comment on what Israel “should” or “must” do.
She might then say, for example, that “I am well aware that Israel has a right to keep the entire West Bank if it so wishes. I do not challenge that right. But I challenge its wisdom. Wouldn’t it be better to keep the territories Israel currently controls, without a formal annexation that will merely serve to roil the Arab world?” I still think she’d be wrong, but at least she would no longer be outrageously, offensively, intolerably wrong.
The Speaker told participants that Democrats are taking “a great pride” in former president Barack Obama’s memorandum of understanding, which provides Israel with $38 billion worth of security assistance over a decade. “That’s our commitment. And we continue to have that,” she said. “It was signed in 2016 to help Israel defend itself in a variety of ways. And we stand committed to that, but we’re very concerned about what we see happening in terms of annexation.”
“I’m not a big fan of the Palestinian leadership in terms of their capability to be good negotiating partners,” she added. “I wish they could be better. But I think that everybody can be doing better in terms of that.” She also sent a barb to the Trump administration’s peace plan, saying that it has “nothing in common with the word peace or plan.”
Pelosi is “not a big fan of the Palestinian negotiating partners in terms of their capability to be good negotiating partners”? That’s a historic understatement. Mahmoud Abbas for the last twelve years refused outright to engage in any negotiations with Israel. He’s not been a “negotiating partner” at all. And in 2008, when he negotiated for the first and last time with the Israelis, he refused Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s offer of 94% of the West Bank, together with Israeli territory equivalent to 5.8% of the West Bank, and on top of that, Olmert also offered to relinquish Israeli control of the Old City to an international body. Abbas refused, and walked out. Pelosi should have told the truth: the Palestinians have shown themselves completely unwilling to seriously engage in negotiations with the Israelis.
Pelosi’s brusque dismissal of Trump’s peace plan — it has, she said, “nothing in common with the word peace or plan” – is intolerable. It is the first American effort that, had it been accepted, would have led to the creation of a Palestinian state, one which would include 97% of all the Palestinians living in the West Bank. For the first time in their history, the Palestinians would have a state. What’s more, according to the Trump Plan, the Palestinians would be given two large swathes of territory in Israel’s Negev, along the border with Egypt, to compensate for territory taken by Israel – as is its right under the Mandate – in the West Bank. Further, Gaza would be directly linked to the West Bank part of “Palestine” by traffic corridors. An enormous effort went into the Administration’s constructing a viable Arab state, consisting of contiguous territories in the West Bank where 97% of the Palestinians now live, and from which they would not have to move. Speaker Pelosi should look at all the work that went into carving out this state before so airily dismissing it.
Finally, in what is surely the most generous offer of aid in history, the Trump Administration promised that international donors would provide the state of Palestine with $50 billion dollars in aid; by comparison, the Marshall Plan allotted a total of $60 billion (in 2020 dollars) not for just one but for sixteen countries. Why does Nancy Pelosi say this carefully worked-out effort was not a “plan”? Has she looked at the maps, and seen with what care the Trump Administration managed to ensure that 97% of the Palestinians now in the West Bank would be included, in contiguous territories forming the state of Palestine, while 97% of the Israelis in the West Bank would be included, without having to move, in the state of Israel. It was a real feat of boundary-drawing. And why does Pelosi say the Trump Plan has nothing to do with “peace” when that is its main goal, to keep the peace between Palestinians and Israelis, by means of both the statehood and the prosperity– that $50 billion in aid — promised to the Palestinians, and through the demilitarization that would be required of the future state of “Palestine”?
American national security interests will not be harmed but enhanced if Israel and the Palestinians make peace, based on the Trump Plan, and if the Palestinians achieve a level of prosperity in their own state that they would not wish to endanger through war, while Israel’s deterrent power is increased by its permanent control, through annexation, of West Bank territories, and especially of the Jordan Valley, that can help prevent or slow down an invasion from the East. There may be a brief display of displeasure from the Arab street, if the Trump Plan is accepted, but in the corridors of power in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, Bahrain, and Oman, there will be quiet satisfaction that the Trump Plan has put paid to Palestinian irredentism, given the Palestinians a state of their own, and imposed demilitarization on that state. Israel, more secure than ever, can continue to help them deal with their real worries – the Muslim Brotherhood, the assorted terror groups including Hezbollah (Iran’s proxy), and Hamas (which is merely a branch of the Brotherhood), and above all, Iran.
It is difficult for many Democrats to admit that something good might actually come out of the White House, where they long ago consigned its occupant to the outer darkness. And who has the time to read all that stuff – the Mandate for Palestine, U.N. Resolution 242, Article 80 of the U.N. Charter – or learn about the history of the non-existent negotiations between Mahmoud Abbas and several different Israeli leaders? Who has the time to find out what the Arab leaders really want, which is not always what they say they want? It’s a lot to ask. But try, Speaker Pelosi. Just try.
This was utterly predictable in today’s atmosphere of leftist insanity, but it’s appalling nonetheless. As the sage Joe Biden would say, Look, Fat, look, here’s the deal: I’ve been warning for years that it would sooner or later become “Islamophobic” to offer even the mildest opposition to jihad violence and that the “Islamophobia” mongers would become increasingly open about their support for jihad terrorists, and here we are. On Thursday, 174 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted against an amendment to the Rights for Transportation Security Officers Act that would prevent the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) from hiring convicted terrorists.
Yes, that’s right: if these House Democrats had gotten their way, on your next flight, you could have gotten a pat-down from a TSA agent who previously conspired to down the airplane you were planning to fly on. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) explained that the amendment “was pulled back by leadership because the socialist wing of the party did not want to have that amendment go forward on this bill. When it was offered, overwhelmingly the majority of the House would like to see the TSA not hire terrorists or those who have been convicted of sexual misconduct with minors and others. But the socialist wing of the party, that controls now the Democratic Party, said that that could not be offered.”
However, as these prospective TSA employees might have said, Allahu akbar! The whole thing exploded in their faces: enough Republicans and renegade Democrats voted for the amendment to pass it. But among the luminaries who thought it so important to avoid even the appearance of “Islamophobia” that they opposed an amendment barring terrorists from pawing through your belongings as you made your way through security were the infamous “Squad,” Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D, Minn.), Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.), and Ayanna Pressley (D., Mass.), along with the supposedly sane and responsible House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D., Md.).
The TSA has always been more security theatre than actual security, but that’s beside the point here: AOC, Omar, Tlaib, and the 171 other House Democrats who opposed this measure didn’t vote against it because it would be ineffective, but clearly because it would offend a key portion of their constituency, which for most, if not all, Democrats today consists of people who believe that terrorists are victims, that American imperialism is the real problem, and that Donald Trump is “racist” for wanting to protect Americans from jihad terror attacks by foreign nationals coming from the countries included in his travel ban and from violent crimes by illegal aliens coming into the country from Mexico.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2020-03-17 06:56:102020-03-17 06:57:39House Democrats: Let Convicted Terrorists Work for the TSA!
A Phoenix-area resident, who is alleged to have been the leader of a group of Al-Qaeda terrorists in Al-Fallujah, Iraq, appeared today before a federal magistrate judge in Phoenix, Arizona in connection with proceedings to extradite him to the Republic of Iraq. He is wanted to stand trial in Iraq for two charges of premeditated murder committed in 2006 in Al-Fallujah.
The arrest was announced by Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Michael Bailey for the District of Arizona.
An Iraqi judge issued a warrant for the arrest of Ali Yousif Ahmed Al-Nouri, 42, on murder charges. The Government of Iraq subsequently requested Ahmed’s extradition from the United States. In accordance with its treaty obligations to Iraq, the United States filed a complaint in Phoenix seeking a warrant for Ahmed’s arrest based on the extradition request. U.S. Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle issued the warrant on January 29, 2020, and Ahmed was arrested the following day.
Subsequent news reports have indicated that Al-Nouri entered the United States as a refugee some ten years ago, was recently married and has been operating a driving school in Arizona.
That an alleged al-Qaeda terrorist and Iraqi fugitive, wanted for murder would enter the United States gives rise a long list of questions that includes the obvious and disconcerting question- was he here to participate in or support a terror attack?
That Al-Nouri was able to enter the United States as a refugee calls into focus the apparent failure of the vetting process that enabled him to legally enter the United States, provided the allegations made by the Iraqi government about him are true.
In point of fact, for decades, a long list of other terrorists were able to game the vetting process and the immigration benefits program to enter the U.S. and embed themselves in preparation for a deadly terror attack.
This brings us the fact that on the very same day that the DOJ announced the arrest of a suspected terrorists and international fugitive by the FBI, ICE and the U.S. Marshals Service, on January 31st, perhaps coincidentally, The Hill reported, Trump administration restricts travel from Nigeria and five other countries. Here is an excerpt from that report:
The government will curb the ability of citizens of Nigeria, Myanmar, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Sudan and Tanzania to get certain immigration visas, according to officials with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and State Department, but it is not a blanket travel ban.”Because we have higher confidence that these six countries will be able to make improvements in their system in a reasonable period of time, we did not feel it would be proportionate to impose restrictions on all immigrant and non-immigration visas,” a DHS official said.
The official cited national security concerns as the reason for the restrictions, saying the governments of the six countries do not meet requirements for information-sharing and passport security.
President Trump was expected to sign a proclamation approving the restrictions on Friday afternoon, and it will go into effect on Feb. 22.
The actions of President Trump to tighten up the vetting process for alines entering the United States are, in reality, consistent with standing law and with the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) ripped President Trump’s expanded travel ban after he included six other countries to the list of those that will face increased travel restrictions.
“The Trump Administration’s expansion of its outrageous, un-American travel ban threatens our security, our values and the rule of law. The sweeping rule, barring more than 350 million individuals from predominantly African nations from traveling to the United States, is discrimination disguised as policy,” Pelosi said in a statement.
In reality the so-called “travel ban” is actually an “entry restriction” and, far from being illegal is actually one of many authorities provide to the President of the United States to protect national security and public safety. Nevertheless, Speaker Pelosi falsely and recklessly claimed that somehow the President’s decision to use standing law to control the entry of aliens whose presence would pose a national security threat would do the precise opposite and supposedly threaten national security and the rule of law.
As I have noted in previous articles and testimony, under one of the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Specifically 8 U.S. Code § 1182: (f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President the President has wide-ranging authority to suspend the entry of any and/or all aliens if he determines that their entry would be detrimental to the interests of the United States. The term “detrimental to the interests of the United States” is as low a bar as could be imagined.
Here is that section of the Immigration and Nationality Act:
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
This then raises the obvious and unavoidable questions that the mainstream media would never ask Ms Pelosi, how could she claim that is it illegal for the President of the United States to impose a restriction on the entry of aliens, when long-standing federal law provides that very authority to the President?
How does President Trump’s decision to prevent the entry of aliens who might pose a threat to national security threaten national security?
In point of fact, the preface of the official report, 9/11 and Terrorist Travel begins with this unambiguous paragraph:
It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.
This is hardly the first time, and I suspect will not be the last time, that Pelosi and her fellow immigration anarchists will attack the President and immigration law enforcement personnel who are dedicated to protecting national security and the lives of innocent Americans.
Indeed, she has frequently alleged that the President has acted “Unconstitutionally” when he insists on securing our nation’s borders against the illegal entry of aliens and/or enforcing our immigration laws.
In anticipation of that bogus claim Ms Pelosi and her fellow radicals should read Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution:
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
A national emergency is a situation in which a government is empowered to perform actions not normally permitted. The 1976 National Emergencies Act implemented various legal requirements regarding emergencies declared by the President of the United States.
The current situation at the southern border presents a border security and humanitarian crisis that threatens core national security interests and constitutes a national emergency. The southern border is a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics. The problem of large-scale unlawful migration through the southern border is long-standing, and despite the executive branch’s exercise of existing statutory authorities, the situation has worsened in certain respects in recent years.
President Trump took this action because Democrats in Congress have:
Failed to recognize that there is a crisis on the Southern border and
Failed to fund the border wall during the normal budgetary process.
The building of a border wall was a campaign promise made by candidate Trump and remains a major goal of the Trump administration.
Earleir [sic] this year, The White House declared a phony “national emergency” at the border in an attempt to get funding for his wall.
Then months later, they requested $4.5 BILLION from Congress to fund ICE, expand family detention, and lock up more vulnerable migrants.
Now, they’re trying to get an ADDITIONAL $1.4 billion to double down on their cruel immigration policies!
This is a DISASTER. But thankfully, Progressives around the country are already proposing needed cuts to The White House’s ICE budget.
Are you with us? Please, sign on today to tell Congress to CUT funding for ICE:
The Democrat Congressional Progressive Caucus
What is the Democrat Congressional Progressive Caucus and who are its members?
According to their website:
The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) consists of one United States Senator and seventy eight members of the United States House of Representatives, and is the largest caucus within the House Democratic Caucus. Established in 1991, the CPC reflects the diversity and strength of the American people and seeks to give voice to the needs and aspirations of all Americans and to build a more just and humane society.
[ … ]
Our Caucus members promote a strong, progressive agenda, what we call “The Progressive Promise–Fairness for All”. The Progressive Promise is rooted in four core principles that embody national priorities and are consistent with the values, needs and aspirations of all the American people, not just the powerful and the privileged. They reflect a fundamental belief in government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
The four, core principles of the Progressive Promise:
1. Fighting for economic justice and security for all;
2. Protecting and preserving our civil rights and civil liberties;
3. Promoting global peace and security; and
4. Advancing environmental protection and energy independence
It is the Democrat Congressional Progressive Caucus that is driving the policies and politics of the Democrat Party.
Is there a National Emergency on our Southern Border?
The Democrat Congressional Progressive Caucus, according to their email, truly believes that there is no “national emergency” on our Southern border. They call President Trump’s February 15, 2019 declaration “phony.” Yet the last two Presidents have used this Executive privilage under law to declare a national emergency.
Former President Clinton issued 17 national emergency proclamations of which 6 are still current.
Former President George W. Bush declared 13 national emergencies including one after the September 11th, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.
Former President Barack Obama declare 12 national emergencies during his presidency including one to respond to the “swine flu epidemic in 2009.” President Trump to date has issued 3 national emergency proclamation.
If swine flu is permissible why aren’t the illegal flow of aliens, including the diseases they bring with them, across our borders a crisis?
If 9/11 is permissible why are the terrorist activities of the drug cartels crossing our borders not a crisis?
If even a single American is killed by someone here illegally then why isn’t that a border crisis?
New research establishes the extent to which violent Islamic jihadists infiltrated over land borders as a new method to clandestinely reach targets in Europe, a first in contemporary terrorism history. This series explores the implications of Europe’s experience for U.S. border security.
On September 30, 2017, a Somali immigrant who initially had himself smuggled over the Mexico-California border conducted a double vehicle ramming and stabbing attack, carrying an ISIS flag, that left a police officer and four others gravely injured in Edmonton, Alberta.
But Abdulahi Hasan Sharif arguably would never have been present in Canada for his melee had he not been able to claim one of America’s most indulgent and abused immigration benefits: political asylum. Simply asking a U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer at the border for asylum sets in motion a process that guarantees most foreign strangers legal entry into the United States for as long as processing takes, which can amount to years.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2019-12-09 07:49:382019-12-09 08:40:02The Democrats Hate ICE Because They Hate Americans
First Lady Melania Trump was booed by students when she spoke at an opioid awareness summit in Baltimore. Snowflake adults said the students were justified because Melania’s husband hurt their feelings by saying bad things about their city.
Folks, this infuriated me. I am so sick of snowflake adults who create dumb-down, brain-dead and wimpy snowflake youths. Taught to believe they are entitled, snowflakes are unable to submit to authority or deal with the normal pressures of life; living in their parent’s basement playing video games at age 30.
As a child, I lived in the Baltimore projects. I don’t remember any neighborhood so horribly out-of-control that no one dared to venture after dark. And yet, that is the ridiculous situation in Baltimore today.
Visiting Baltimore for my dad’s funeral, it was shocking to see endless blocks of empty rundown row-houses, rats and trash. What the heck happened to my beloved hometown once renowned as “Charm City”?
In the 1980s, Baltimore’s first black mayor, Kurt Schmoke ordered that my song “Hello Baltimore” be placed into the city’s time capsule. To illustrate Charm City’s shocking transformation, I made a music video of my song using footage of recent Baltimore riots.
Back in the day, the neighborhood around Pimlico Race Track where the Preakness Race is held was safe and upscale. Today, the Pimlico neighborhood has dramatically declined, infested with drugs and crime.
In the 1990s, I saw the beginning of the end for Baltimore because of stupid liberal Democrat policies. Park Avenue was the place to enjoy dinner at an upscale restaurant. Smelly, dirty vagrants began sleeping on the sidewalks and aggressively pestering patrons outside of the beautiful restaurants. Due to the city’s commitment to political correctness, restaurant owners could do nothing to save their businesses. Finally, every restaurant closed or moved away.
Living in the projects as a child, I loved exploring Park Avenue downtown. “The lights are much brighter there. You can forget all your troubles, forgot all your cares. Downtown, things’ll be great when you’re downtown. Everything’s waiting for you.” Park Avenue has become another depressed section of the city unsafe after dark.
Incredibly, liberal Democrats who run Baltimore still have not learned to be friendly to businesses. During the recent Baltimore riots the mayor ordered the police to stand down and allow thugs to destroy businesses to express their frustrations regarding racial injustice. Unbelievable.
Late Democrat congressman Elijah Cummings received billions in federal grants to clean up his rat and crime infested district. The money was wasted or stolen. By the way, idiot black relatives of mine who live in Baltimore still praise Cummings for his wonderful service to the black community. Sorry, I had to get that off my chest.
White liberals in fake news media claim to be advocates for black empowerment. The liberal Congressional Black Caucus and NAACP also lie about their commitment to black empowerment. These black and white liberals viciously attack anyone who dares to address problems which plague blacks in cities controlled by Democrats.
Thank God president Trump cares enough to address the problems of blacks who are suffering in Democrat urban plantations. Therefore, I don’t give a rat’s derriere about the hurt feelings of spoiled-brat snowflake youths, upset because Trump told the truth about their cesspool city run by corrupt Democrats. Adults who defended the students for booing our first lady are a part of our nation’s morally bankrupt and wimpy culture. They should be ashamed of themselves.
This hypersensitivity to “hurt feelings” turns my stomach. For crying out loud, adults need to start instructing wimpy youths to grow a spine.
World War II Americans are turning over in their graves in disgust of this new generation of snowflake Americans. My black dad passed away at age 90. When my brother was a teen, he quit his summer job because his boss hurt his feelings by yelling at him.
Dad could hardly believe his ears. Annoyed at my brother, Dad said, “He hurt your feelings? Boy, you had better go back and get your job!” Dad was teaching my brother to be a man!
As a black civil rights pioneer in the Merchant Marines and Baltimore City Fire Department, Dad endured all kinds of humiliation and hurt feelings. But Dad knew a man has to do what a man has to do. He had a wife and five kids to feed. His hurt feelings were irrelevant.
To restore our youths, we need to have zero tolerance for all this hypersensitivity, wimpy-ness and entitlement that liberals have instilled in our youths.
A snowflake reading this article will probably say, “Lloyd you sound angry. I feel triggered. Your toxic masculinity makes me feel unsafe. You should be silenced and jailed.”
Can you imagine what a nightmare it would be if a snowflake ever became president?
Thank God president Trump is a real man.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Lloyd Marcushttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLloyd Marcus2019-11-30 07:59:542019-11-30 08:01:09First Lady Dissed by Wimpy Snowflakes
Elizabeth Warren reacted to Secretary Pompeo’s statement that in the view of the Administration, Israel’s settlements did not violate international law with characteristic swift certainty:
“Another blatantly ideological attempt by the Trump administration to distract from its failures in the region. Not only do these settlements violate international law — they make peace harder to achieve. As president, I will reverse this policy and pursue a two-state solution,” Warren said.
Was Pompeo’s announcement merely a cynical attempt to “distract” the public “from its failures in the region”? Surely such an announcement was certain to have exactly the opposite effect – it would focus the media’s attention on the Israelis and Palestinians as it had not been so focussed since the Great March of Return began on March 30, 2018. Every major media outlet – CNN, AP, BBC, Reuters, New York Times, Washington Post – covered Pompeo’s remarks in detail. Those remarks were hardly designed to “distract” from supposed “failures in the region.” And as for those “failures,” what does Warren have in mind? Was the defeat, by the Americans and the Kurds, of ISIS in Syria a “failure”? Was the collapse of ISIS in Iraq, to which American military assistance contributed, a “failure”? Was the body-blow to Iran’s economy, that the Administration brought about by reimposing sanctions, that in turn led to the streets of Iran now being filled with Iranians shouting against the regime, a “failure”? Was cutting off aid to the massively corrupt UNRWA a “failure”? Was cutting off aid to the Palestinian Authority, because of its Pay-for-Slay program, a “failure”?
Warren then blithely noted that the settlements “violate international law.” This was not always her understanding. At a Town Hall in August 2014, Warren called into question the notion that future US aid to Israel should be contingent on the halting of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Clearly she did not then regard the settlements as being “illegal.”
And two years later, in September 2016, ahead of a U.N vote on a resolution condemning Israeli settlements, Warren was one of 88 senators who signed a letter to President Obama sponsored by the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, urging him to “veto any one-sided UNSC resolution that may be offered in the coming months”: the resolution was approved by the Security Council 14-1-0, with the United States shamefully abstaining.
Again, Warren was still willing to urge the government to veto a Security Council resolution that treated the West Bank settlements as “illegal.”
What changed her mind? Perhaps, after Bernie Sanders’s claim that he would take some aid money away from Israel and give it to the Palestinians in Gaza, Warren felt she needed to establish her bona-fides among the “progressives” in the Democratic Party, who have become increasingly anti-Israel. And what better way to do it than to instantly attack Pompeo on the “legality” of Israel’s West Bank settlements?
A law professor for many years, Warren is well-versed in reading statutes and codes. As a professor of bankruptcy law, she can comprehend the Bankruptcy Code, so he Mandate for Palestine ought to be child’s play. If she reads that Mandate, she will understand that the League of Nations established, on a sliver of land that had been identified with the Jewish people for two thousand years, and that had formerly been part of the Ottoman Empire, the Mandate for Palestine. That Palestine Mandate was entrusted to Great Britain, whose task it was to prepare that territory for independence as the Jewish National Home. There were other Mandates that were intended to create Arab states – Syria, Lebanon, Iraq – but the Mandate for Palestine was intended solely for the Jews. Warren would then want to know, as the thorough policy wonk she is, precisely what territory was to be included in that Mandate. Upon investigation, she would discover that the Mandate for Palestine applied to all the territory from Dan in the north to Beersheva in the south, and from the river Jordan in the east to the Mediterranean Sea in the West. In other words, all of what is present day Israel, and the entire West Bank, was included in the Mandate. Israel cannot be called the “occupier” of land that was assigned by the League of Nations to be part of the Jewish National Home, which would then become the State of Israel. When the League of Nations shut down, its successor organization, the United Nations, implicitly recognized in Article 80 of its Charter (the so-called Jewish People’s article) the continuing in force of the Mandate for Palestine. The only thing that prevented the West Bank from becoming, as it legally should have, part of the state of Israel in 1949, was that Jordan managed to hold onto the West Bank, and remained its “occupier” until 1967.
Elizabeth Warren never mentions the Mandate for Palestine, which is the indispensable document in judging the legality of the Israeli settlements. Nor does she mention, in any of her statements online, U.N. Resolution 242 and its significance in giving Israel the right to “secure and recognizable boundaries.” She has a duty to study both the Mandate, and Resolution 242, before making her self-assured and dismissive pronouncements about how those settlements “violate international law.” And she might also explain why those same settlements did not “violate international law” back in 2014, when she opposed making aid to Israel contingent on its halting of settlement building. Did she know something in 2014 about the settlements’ legality that she then forgot, or did she learn something since about their supposed illegality?
Then there is Warren’s remark that the settlements are not only “illegal,” but that they “make peace harder to achieve.” How does she, and the many others who mindlessly repeat this mantra – “settlements make peace harder to achieve” – know this? Because the Arabs – the Palestinians – keep telling them so.
What kind of “peace” is possible between Israel and the Palestinians? Some may insist that by squeezing itself back within the 1949 armistice lines, what Ambassador Abba Eban called “the lines of Auschwitz,” Israel makes peace more likely. But those who recognize that the war being waged, by all possible means, including terrorism, combat (qitaal), economic and diplomatic warfare, and demographic jihad, against Israel has no end, for Muslims, until the complete disappearance of the Jewish state, will not be so quick to put their trust in treaties. That is especially true because the Muslim model for all treaty-making with non-Muslims is the agreement that Muhammad reached with the Meccans at al-Hudaibiyya in 628 A.D., a treaty that was to last for ten years, but which he broke after 18 months, attacking the Meccans as soon as he felt his forces were strong enough to win. Given that Muhammad is the Model of Conduct for all Muslims, Israel cannot rely on a peace treaty with Muslim Arabs to be kept indefinitely.
Instead, there is another and better way to maintain the peace between Israel and its neighbors. That is deterrence: the enemy’s understanding that if Israel is attacked, it will respond, and much more devastatingly. Egypt and Syria now know what they did not know in October 1973, when they launched a surprise attack on Israel. Despite early losses, Israel delivered punishing blows in response. No Arab state since has tried to attack Israel; terror groups are a different matter, for their members are ready to be “martyrs.” For rational actors – fanatic Muslim groups and groupuscules are not among them – deterrence works. It kept the peace between the United States and the Soviet Union for more than four decades after World War II. Israel must remain overwhelmingly, and obviously, stronger than its enemies for deterrence to be effective.
That is where the West Bank settlements come in. The 400,000 Jews who live in the West Bank, with all of the adults having undergone military training when fulfilling their mandatory service in the IDF, are an indispensable part of that deterrence. Those settlements throughout the West Bank, especially those strategically placed on the Judean hills, and overlooking, the Jordan Valley, are a powerful obstacle to invasion from the east. The settlements significantly improve Israel’s deterrence, and a credible deterrence is the only guarantee that peace between Israel and the Arabs will be kept.
Warren claims the settlements will make peace “harder to achieve.” She has things backwards. The settlements may make a “peace treaty” harder to achieve, but they will make the only peace that really matters, a peace based on deterrence, easier to achieve.
In addition to the Mandate for Palestine (especially the Preamble and Articles 4 and 6), and U.N. Resolution 242, Elizabeth Warren should read about the treaty of Al-Hudaibiyya and its continuing significance, in Majid Khadduri’s magisterial War and Peace in the Law of Islam. That’s all the studying she need devote to the matter for now. The exam will be take-home. We’re all hoping that Professor Warren earns an A.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2019-11-29 07:01:442019-11-29 07:02:55Elizabeth Warren: Those Settlements ‘Violate International Law and Make Peace Harder to Achieve’ by Hugh Fitzgerald
Senior Democratic members of Congress are “are considering releasing a statement of no confidence” in Israel’s ambassador to the U.S. Ron Dermer and “opening an inspector-general investigation” into U.S. envoy to Israel David Friedman over Israel’s decision to ban Congresswomen Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar from entering Israel.
The Democratic lawmakers are advancing the idea that Omar and Tlaib were banned from Israel because they are Muslim; nothing could be further from the truth. The Dems:
raised an incident in 1975 in which Henry Waxman, a longtime Democratic congressman from California, was initially banned from Saudi Arabia for his Jewish roots. He was eventually granted entry following pressure from the State Department.
Friedman’s endorsement of Israel’s decision to bar Omar and Tlaib’s entry into the country broke with that precedent, they argued, and as a result called for an investigation “the role the ambassador played in barring them from entering the country.”
The Waxman case is completely different from that of Omar and Tlaib. Waxman was banned from Saudi Arabia because he was Jewish, while Omar and Tlaib have been banned from Israel because they are a security threat to the Jewish state. They were going there with the intention of furthering the Palestinian jihad against Israel, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained when he defended his decision on the basis that the “the two intended to use the visit to harm Israel.” He stated:
“Several days ago, we received [Omar and Tlaib’s] trip itinerary,” Netanyahu said, “which clarified that they planned a visit whose sole purpose was to support boycotts and deny Israel’s legitimacy. For example, they called their destination ‘Palestine’ and not ‘Israel,’ and unlike all Democratic and Republican members of Congress before them, they did not seek any meeting with any Israeli official, whether government or opposition.”
Omar and Tlaib have brought to the forefront a fact that has been virtually ignored since 1948: that the aim of the Palestinian Authority, Fatah, Hamas, the Palestinian Liberation Organization and every other Palestinian movement is to obliterate the state of Israel. Accusations against Israel about “racism,” “apartheid,” and the so-called “occupation” are intended to delegitimize the Jewish state. When Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas declared that “not a single Israeli” would live in a future Palestinian state, that was a demonstration of apartheid.
Omar and Tlaib are not just Congresswomen with opinions that are critical of Israel. They are not just spokesmen; they are activists. They are active apologists for the jihad terror networks Hamas and Hizballah.
In 2017, Israel passed a law that barred entry to those advocating for Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel, and “Israel’s Interior and Strategic Affairs Ministries have denied visas to students, activists and artists who have a proven record of publicly calling for the boycott of Israel.” Tlaib and Omar not only advocate for BDS; they also sponsored a bill in Congress to support it, and Tlaib has compared the boycott of Israel to the American boycott of Nazi Germany.
Without the support of useful idiots, the relentless Palestinian jihad would not have advanced into Congress and continued its dogged efforts there. In the words of Rashida Tlaib:
The more they try to silence us, our voices rise. The more they try to weaken us, the stronger we become.
But in reality, the supporters of BDS and other anti-Israel initiatives are emboldened by the weakness they perceive in their opposition.
“Report: House Democrats Weighing Action Against Israeli, U.S. Envoys over Tlaib, Omar Ban,” by Deborah Danan, Breitbart, August 18, 2019:
TEL AVIV – Senior Democratic members of Congress are said to have launched discussions to formally censure the U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Jerusalem’s envoy in Washington over Israel’s decision to bar entry to congresswomen Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar.
Around a dozen lawmakers, several of whom are Jewish, have begun talks to communicate a “deep lack of confidence and trust” in Israel’s ambassador to the U.S. Ron Dermer and U.S. envoy to Israel David Friedman, the McClatchy news service reported, citing congressional sources.
According to the report, the Democrats are considering releasing a statement of no confidence in Dermer and opening an inspector-general investigation into Friedman.
Among the twelve are House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel and House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey, two Jewish lawmakers from New York.
“We are reviewing all of our options,” McClatchy quoted a source as saying. “With Dermer, the issue is that there already was a severe lack of trust. But now there is a severe lack of confidence. It is completely unclear that he represents his government given he has made promises that he has not kept and wasn’t clear if he ever had any chance of keeping.”
Last month, Dermer assured lawmakers that Omar and Tlaib — open supporters of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel — would be allowed into Israel “out of respect for Congress.”
However, on Thursday, Israel said the two would be denied entry.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a statement defending the decision to bar entry to Omar and Tlaib, said the two intended to use the visit to harm Israel.
“Several days ago, we received [Omar and Tlaib’s] trip itinerary,” Netanyahu said, “which clarified that they planned a visit whose sole purpose was to support boycotts and deny Israel’s legitimacy. For example, they called their destination ‘Palestine’ and not ‘Israel,’ and unlike all Democratic and Republican members of Congress before them, they did not seek any meeting with any Israeli official, whether government or opposition.”
On Friday, Omar claimed that she had planned to meet with Knesset members and security officials, although the jam-packed itinerary — released days before their planned visit — showed otherwise.
The trip, according to the itinerary, would be based exclusively in the Palestinian territories with the exception of the first day that would take place in the primarily Arab-populated eastern area of Jerusalem. The two were slated to meet only with Palestinian officials as well as representatives from human rights groups and other organizations.
The congresswomen were scheduled to meet with representatives from Palestinian groups Miftah, a sponsor of the trip, and the Defense for Children International-Palestine (DCI-P), groups that have endorsed terrorism and have ties to terror organizations.
“In addition, the organization that is funding their trip is Miftah, which is an avid supporter of BDS, and among whose members are those who have expressed support for terrorism against Israel,” Netanyahu said.
The prime minister said that Tlaib was welcome to apply to visit on humanitarian grounds to see her family, with the caveat that she not engage in promoting boycotts of Israel while in the country. Tlaib acquiesced, and quickly received permission to visit. However, she changed her mind hours later, saying that coming to Israel on its terms would be “humiliating” and she would not “bow down to their oppressive & racist policies.”
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who recently led a large Democratic delegation to Israel, issued a statement Thursday censuring Israel over the decision and said it contradicted what he and others had been told by Dermer.
McClatchy quoted the source as saying, “Dermer is saying privately that he expects this to go away within a day — it’s a real lack of understanding on the consequences of this.”
In the discussions Friday, the lawmakers raised an incident in 1975 in which Henry Waxman, a longtime Democratic congressman from California, was initially banned from Saudi Arabia for his Jewish roots. He was eventually granted entry following pressure from the State Department…..
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2019-08-20 07:26:242019-08-21 07:45:21House Democrats consider action against Israeli and U.S. ambassadors over banning of Tlaib and Omar
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 Democrat party platform for 2020 is a staggering political humanitarian hoax that disguises anti-Americanism as altruism. The Democratic National Committee presents itself as “working hard to advance issues like immigration reform, education reform, health care reform, and alternative energy.” Sounds great – all humanitarian hoaxes do. So, let’s see how this works.
Countries are defined by four basic elements and the Democrat party has taken aim at all four. We will examine these elements one at a time.
Territory refers to the demarcation of a country’s physical borders that define its earthly space and separate it from other countries, each with its own government. Without borders there is no country.
The open borders platform embraced by the Democrat party is their signature anti-American immigration reform. Open borders deliberately threaten the sovereign territorial borders of the United States by rejecting any attempts to defend the borders against the current mass invasion of illegal immigrants. While disingenuously insisting that open borders are a humanitarian issue, Democrat candidates oppose border wall funding and propose abolishing ICE so that nothing and no one can stop the flow of this massive invasion.
Open borders are an anti-American power grab by Democrats with twin benefits to themselves. First, mass immigration will overwhelm the country with illegals who will vote for the Democrats who let them in, creating a one-party system for the foreseeable future. Second, uncontrolled immigration will collapse the economy by overloading the welfare system – it is the destructive socialists’ Cloward-Piven strategy on steroids.
In a stunning interview published on YouTube July 11, 2019, Nancy Pelosi tutors illegal aliens on how to avoid deportation and actually says that the United States is part of a global community and illegals have rights!
Excuse me? Illegals are illegal by definition and are most definitely NOT entitled to the rights of citizens according to the U.S. Constitution. Yet, anti-American globalist Nancy Pelosi, voicing the 2020 Democrat party platform, declares the United States is not a sovereign country with defensible borders, and that U.S. politicians have no right to stop this illegal migration.
Former Florida Rep. and retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel Allen West responded saying that Pelosi’s actions border on treason, “Unless I am grossly mistaken, Ms. Pelosi just violated her oath of office and has committed a high crime and misdemeanor.”
Globalism and American sovereignty are mutually exclusive. American sovereignty depends upon defensible territorial borders and a sovereign American government that upholds the U.S. Constitution. The 2020 Democrat party platform is a globalist, no-borders, anti-American, attack on the Constitution that advances the doctrine of one world government.
Population refers to the people living in a country. The United States is the third most populous country in the world with almost 329 million people as of May 2019. The U.S. Census Bureau is the primary source of information about our nation’s people. The Census Bureau counts the entire U.S. population every ten years. The results of the census are used politically for apportionment. Apportionment determines the proportional number of members each U.S. state sends to the House of Representatives, and also establishes the number of eligible voters in that state. The question of citizenship has been part of the U.S. Census since its inception until Barack Obama eliminated it.
The Democrat party platform rejects restoring the census citizenship question because its results will reduce their apportionment in Congress and the number of eligible Democrat voters when illegals are not counted.
Demography is the study of the characteristics of a population and it is often said that demography is destiny. What does this mean?
Demography studies the size, structure, and distribution of different groups of people defined by age, sex, religion, education, nationality, ethnicity, etc. Social demography examines the relationship between economic, social, cultural, and biological processes influencing a population. As the demographics of a population change public policy adapts to meet the changing requirements. So, flooding America with an immigrant population, particularly those with globalist and/or sharia-compliant hostile norms, changes the demographics and eventually public policy. This is the essence of the open borders immigration reform embraced by the Democrat humanitarian hucksters led by huckster-in-chief Barack Obama himself.
In America, Barack Obama imported 43,000 sharia compliant Somali refugees into the United States, many were resettled in Minnesota. Ilhan Omar, also a sharia compliant Muslim, was elected by her constituency and protects their hostile norms in the name of diversity actually accusing anyone who objects as Islamophobic or racist. The same thing that is happening in Minnesota happened in Luton, England because demographics are destiny.
The small English town of Luton had only one mosque. Following the European Union demand for mass immigration of sharia compliant Muslims into England, the number of mosques swelled to thirty. This changed the demographics of Luton. The hostile social and cultural norms of sharia compliant Muslim immigrants created crime and social chaos in Luton. UK journalist began reporting on Muslim grooming and rape gangs that were raping little English girls according to sharia law. British authorities protected the Muslim perpetrators in the name of cultural diversity, and punished Tommy Robinson for exposing the crimes and the British coverup. Demographics are destiny.
Culture refers to the pattern of human activity and the symbols that give significance to them. Culture manifests itself in the forms of art, literature, clothing, customs, language, and religion. The way people live and what they believe constitutes their culture. Their principles and moral values also form an important part of their culture. People from different parts of the world have different cultural values. Cultural differences contribute to the diversity in people’s thinking and living styles.
Culture is not innate it is learned. Culture is passed down from generation to generation at home and in school. American traditional Judeo-Christian values were taught at home and reinforced in schools. Not anymore. Since Barack Obama forced Common Core education into the public school system, American education has become globalized instruction that reflects its anti-American, antisemitic, anti-Christian, pro-Muslim, pro-globalist agenda. Common Core comports with the United Nations Agenda 2030 and its 17 sustainable goals designed to internationalize the world under one world government. The Common Core rejects American sovereignty, American exceptionalism, American Judeo-Christian traditions, and the American meritocracy. Common Core’s educational goal is to prepare the world’s children for membership in the globalized new world order of one world government.
Common Core has had a calamitous effect on America, American children, and American families. Joy Pullman’s recent book, The Education Invasion: How Common Core fights parents for control of American kids, describes this catastrophe and exposes the federalized education scheme and the globalist funding that promoted it. Parents and teachers are finally recognizing the crippling anti-American nature of Common Core and are fighting to have it removed.
Common Core is the globalized anti-American education reform embraced by the Democrat party platform in 2020. Its anti-American curriculum content provided by Pearson Education is Obama’s dream of a globalized, internationalized pro-Muslim education facilitated courtesy of the Qatari government, Qatar Foundation International, and the Libyan Investment Authority’s major Islam-promoting donors.
Common Core teaches American history as white racist oppression. Our American children are being indoctrinated to be self-loathing Americans who will reject Americanism, American Judeo-Christian values, American exceptionalism, the American meritocracy, and eventually vote for collectivism and one-world government. Common Core is part of the anti-American information revolution that will be won at the ballot box – no bullets required.
The current Democrat party platform presents reparations as the remedy for white racist oppression. Reparations?? Really?
Any student of history knows slavery was a heinous historical reality in every part of the world including the United States. Any student of history also knows that Americans and Republican President Abraham Lincoln went to war and 750,000 Americans died to free the slaves in this country. Slavery is still legal in 15 countries including China, Russia, North Korea, India, Uzbekistan, Dem. Republic of the Congo, Pakistan, Sudan, Dominican Republic, Yemen, Iraq, Indonesia, Philippines, Guatemala, and Nigeria.
Racism in America began as the consequence of slavery. Slavery was outlawed in America with the 13th Amendment on December 6, 1865, eight months after the end of the Civil War, but the racist attitudes that supported it did not immediately disappear. America is not a racist country – we elected a black president – enough talk about reparations.
Race hustlers in the Democrat party platform disingenuously focus on historical slavery and intentionally ignore the ongoing slavery integral to Islamic sharia law. Women are the property of their husbands – owning a human being is slavery. Young infidel girls are groomed to be sex slave – rape and sex grooming is slavery. In the name of diversity, the Democrat party has surrendered its Judeo-Christian culture to the barbarism of Islamic sharia law.
The United States of America was formed as a constitutional representative republic designed to provide minimum government and maximum freedom for its citizens. The Democrat Party 2020 platform offers maximum government and minimum freedom for the people. This is how the reversal works.
Barack Obama’s post-presidency “resistance” movement has mobilized his loyal soldiers embedded in the government, and unleashed a cadre of anti-American activists, politicians, and community organizers bound together by identity politics and an anti-American ideology seeking to overthrow the duly elected President Donald Trump. Obama’s hope for change agenda is the Democrat party 2020 platform featuring:
Open borders
Illegal immigration
Educational indoctrination
Anti-traditional norms of our Judeo-Christian culture
Economy killing Green New Deal
Centralized government offering one-payer health insurance
Dissolution of the Constitution and our representative republic in favor of socialism and one world government
Obama’s resistance movement poured the footing for this anti-American revolution of the 21st century. He subverted the liberal Democrat party launching its transformation into the extreme leftist, anti-American, anti-Christian, antisemitic, pro-socialist, pro-Muslim, pro-globalist debacle that it is today.
Radical newcomers Omar, Tlaib, Cortex, and Pressley have cracked the once unified Democrat party and radicalized it to staggering levels. Obama’s sycophants and embedded operatives targeted the pillars of American society including the meritocracy, the family, Judeo-Christian norms, and the Protestant work ethic. The 2020 Democrat party and its platform is an anti-American, antisemitic, anti-Christian, pro-communist, pro-Muslim, pro-globalist consortium of bad actors with common cause to shatter the United States of America from within.
If the Democrat party prevails in 2020 and manages to destroy the four elements that make a country a country, America will cease to exist as a sovereign nation. What then?
Historically, to the victor goes the spoils – not this time. The leftist/socialist/Islamist alliance of the 2020 Democrat party platform will shatter and the infighting will begin. The leftist socialist Democrats foolishly presume they will impose their socialist fantasy of collectivism upon America. The Muslim Brotherhood leftist sharia-compliant Democrats foolishly presume they will settle America and make it Muslim. Both alliance partners are too arrogant to realize that they are the useful idiots of the globalist who have outwitted them. The globalists have exploited them and their common cause to create the social chaos required for globalist ambitions to rule the world themselves under one world government.
Leftists and Islamists brought a knife to a gunfight. English aristocrat Sir Bertrand Russell described the planned globalist takeover in his classic 1952 book, The Impact of Science on Society. The fight for world domination is not new – it just has new scripts, new actors, and new costumes.
Barack Obama won the starring role of U.S. President in the 2008 Washington D.C. theatrical hit “Hope and Change” and then renewed his contract for the 2012-2016 season. As with so many long-running shows, “Hope and Change” flopped at the box office in 2016. The audience rejected Hillary Clinton, the actress hired to replace Obama, and stopped buying tickets to the play. A new script titled “Resistance” was created for Obama, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez auditioned for the supporting role of New York congresswoman and won the part. She performs her scripted lines well and will continue to do so until she is replaced by another auditioned actress.
The Democrat party is currently auditioning parts for the 2020-2024 season of “Resistance.” Its plot disguises anti-Americanism as altruism which explains why its globalist authors have requested anonymity. “Resistance” poses a clear and present danger to the world order of sovereign nations. Americans must recognize the humanitarian hoax being performed in “Resistance” and stop buying tickets at the box office.
Voters are being urged to invest in “Resistance,” and millions of dollars are being spent to promote it. This particular globalist extravaganza enjoys record levels of free publicity by the mainstream media and on the Internet.
The 2020 presidential elections will determine the success or failure of “Resistance.” Voting Americans will decide if art imitates life or if life imitates art.
EDITORS NOTE: This Goudsmit Pundicity column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Linda Goudsmithttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLinda Goudsmit2019-07-13 20:18:082019-07-13 20:21:45The Humanitarian Hoax of the 2020 Democrat Party Platform: Killing America With Kindness
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Vlad Tepes Bloghttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngVlad Tepes Blog2019-06-15 04:51:292019-06-15 19:12:44Trevor Loudon documentary on ANTIFA, a worthy use of one’s time
Sen. Bernie Sanders belatedly released his tax returns this week. The New York Times reported:
The returns show that Mr. Sanders’s earnings shot up after his first presidential bid, when he built up a vast national following. He and his wife, Jane O’Meara Sanders, reported income that topped $1 million in 2016 and 2017, lifted by proceeds from his books.
The couple had an adjusted gross income of $561,293 in 2018, according to their most recent tax return. Mr. Sanders had about $393,000 in book income last year, and he and his wife reported giving nearly $19,000 to charity.
His income now puts him within the top 1 percent of taxpayers, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service.
Apparently, nothing succeeds like penalizing success.
Sanders Shrugged
Sen. Sanders said, “I wrote a best-selling book. If you write a best-selling book, you can be a millionaire, too.” But his incarnation as John Galt didn’t last. In a Fox News town-hall, Bret Baier asked him, “When you wrote the book and you made the money, isn’t that the definition of capitalism and the American dream?”
After an uncomfortable pause, the senator answered, “No.”
But he is wrong. Having an idea, acting on it, and making a pile of money is the very definition of successful entrepreneurship.
Sen. Sanders took a laptop costing a few hundred dollars and produced, in Our Revolution: A Future to Believe In, a document for which he was paid $795,000. Taking an input valued at a few hundred dollars and turning it into an output worth $795,000 is the essence of entrepreneurial capitalism.
And Senator Sanders is right—he deserves that money. In January 2018, an estimated 73 percent of US adults owned either a desktop or a laptop. That’s 187.4 million people. How many of them produced a word document worth $795,000? Very few. No doubt Jersey Shore’s Snooki used a laptop like Sen. Sanders’ to produce Gorilla Beach, her debut novel, but there were more people willing to pay—and pay more money—for Sen. Sanders’ book. Value is subjective, after all. By providing greater satisfaction, Sen. Sanders reaped greater rewards.
Be the Change? You First
Sen. Sanders and his wife paid an effective tax rate of 26 percent, well below the levels of 70 percent or so he claims “the 1 percent”—which includes him—ought to pay. They topped this up with $19,000 in charitable donations, another 3.4 percent of their income.
But if Sen. Sanders really thinks he isn’t having enough of his income taken from him, he can solve this situation unilaterally, and he can do it today—without waiting for Congress. He can donate his money to the federal government.
On Wednesday night, Tucker Carlson asked a Sanders supporter, Nomiki Konst, why he didn’t do just that. “Because that’s not how our government functions,” she replied, “Where do you send that form? The IRS? ‘Hi IRS, here’s a cheque for 70 percent?’”
“Who does that?” she went on, “I would love to see one guest on your show that has actually written an entire paycheck.” In fact, so far in 2019, the Treasury has received $3.7 million in “Gift Contributions to Reduce Debt Held by the Public.” Carlson could get one of these donors on his show.
There’s an old line that “Government is simply the name we give to the things we choose to do together.” Konst’s argument shows how hollow that phrase really is.
Sen. Sanders has a choice, as do the members of the so-called Patriotic Millionaires. If they truly feel that politicians are not getting enough money to spend, they can give them some more. They can choose to “Be the change.” But they don’t. They will only act on their professed desire if other people are forced to act along with them. For all their talk about wanting to give the government more money, they make such payment contingent on other people who may not want to do so being forced to by law.
This is a curious form of generosity. It is an even more curious form of choice. Where is the choice for the people who think they already pay enough in tax? Government is not simply the name we give to the things we “choose to do together,” it is the name we give to things where 51 percent of people choose something, and the other 49 percent have to go along. As economist Milton Friedman once wrote, “You may get to vote once a year—on what? On a long, long list of propositions, with very little relationship between your vote and what ultimately happens.”
Socialism Is Not about Sharing
Sen. Sanders claims to be a socialist, and socialism is often described as “sharing.” But there is nothing inherently socialist about sharing. You can just as easily share under capitalism. Indeed, the latest World Giving Index produced by the Charities Aid Foundation listed the United States, New Zealand, Canada, Australia, Ireland, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands—all seven of them capitalist countries—in the top 10 most charitable countries over the last five years. By contrast, Venezuela, formerly Sen. Sanders’s poster child for “democratic” socialism, ranked a miserly 115th in 2017.
In 2011, the year when Sen. Sanders was boosting Venezuela, it ranked 118th compared to first place for the capitalist USA. But then, according to the World Bank, in 2011, GDP per capita in the US was $49,000 compared to just $14,000 in Venezuela*. Under capitalism, you actually have something to share. As Margaret Thatcher once put it,
No one would remember the Good Samaritan if he’d only had good intentions; he had money, as well.
Giving your money voluntarily—what most people would think of as sharing—is not what socialists actually mean by the word. That is why Sen. Sanders and the Patriotic Millionaires refuse to give the federal government their money voluntarily while a mechanism exists to do so and others are already using it. Their idea of sharing is that the government takes money from somebody else to hand it out as it sees fit. We already have a degree of this in capitalist societies. Today’s socialists want to increase the amount of people’s wealth that passes through the hands of the government.
The socialist notion of “sharing” is nothing of the kind. Sharing is voluntary, this is coerced. It is not sharing but coercion that is the essence of socialism. As the British author Kingsley Amis—a youthful socialist who came to support Thatcher—put it, “if socialism is not about compulsion, it is about nothing.”
EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2019-04-22 05:52:322019-04-24 05:41:23Bernie Is a Capitalist, Whether He Likes It or Not
The biggest political scandal in US history has been exposed. The treasonous illegal take down (insurance policy – which has lapsed), and the failed coup d’ etat is exposed for the world to see. We are now living in a post Mueller Investigation. It’s a brand new day! The disruptive cloud of the collusion hoax has been lifted. President Trump is unchained. Watch Trump at this recent rally in Michigan as he unleashes on the fake news, democrats and the deep state. Furthermore, we will begin to see even greater success with international leaders and negotiations with such countries as China and North Korea etc. Any delays or uncertainties that the witch hunt created will no longer be an obstacle to forging ahead with our allies and trading partners as Trump dismantles globalism and the new world order.
Trump Unchained
With this hoax, for all intents and purposes behind us, President Trump has now openly gone on the offense. The enemy has been and continues to be doing an excellent job at destroying themselves. The president has expressed his views on the dedicated one hour show with Sean Hannity (a must watch), as well as to the international media and from his busy Twitter account. The president acknowledged that this was not only a complete fabricated hoax, but in fact a treasonous illegal take down and failed coup d’ etat against a duly elected president. Trump vows to expose this so that justice will be served. The president stated this must never happen again to any president.
When asked by Hannity about declassifying FISA and other intel records and releasing this to the public, the President concurred that this will now take place. Trump indicated to Sean Hannity that he will now look into Hillary Clinton which I have a well documented track record stating this day would come. President Trump has used words such as evil individuals. Sick people doing really bad things. With regards to the media in a tweet, the president said “The Fake News Media is going Crazy! They are suffering a major “breakdown,” have ZERO credibility or respect, & must be thinking about going legit. I have learned to live with Fake News, which has never been more corrupt than it is right now. Someday, I will tell you the secret! Looking forward to the secret revealed Mr. President.
The president talked with Sean about Obama and his responsibility in all this since it was under BHO’s watch and BHO’s DOJ, FBI, CIA where and when all this originated. We’ve known all along about the Bushes, Clinton’s and Obama’s. The Bush’s are now under Trump’s control. Beginning perhaps from the bottom up, we will see Clinton and Obama in due time, facing justice. What did the founding fathers say is the punishment for elected officials guilty of high crimes, sedition and treason? Oh yeah, execution.
Keep in mind that Google hearings are on going. Facebook is under federal investigation and frantically data dumping as an attempt to hide their crimes. FB, Twitter, Google, Microsoft YouTube etc. will be challenged further. Are they news sites? Are they breaking any laws with regards to censorship? Shadow banning? Data mining? Algorithms designed to silence the opposition? Leave this up to intel and the lawyers but I am sure we will be hearing about monopolies and anti trust laws along the way.
Q has told us there are over 82,000 sealed indictments. We are witnessing sedition and treason. We are witnessing felonies, high crimes and misdemeanors. These acts will now see the light of day and the facts will be known as the day of reckoning is upon is. Comey, Shiff, Schummer, Pelosi, Feinstein, Ryan, Burr along with McCabe, Clapper, Brennan and so many others.
Watch Lindsey Graham and Rand Paul. The probes, hearings, investigations, grand juries, subpoenas, indictments as well as military tribunals, will now commence and quicker than we may think. This will, however go on for several years. But it’s a new day dawning. In fact, President Trump stated on that Hannity interview I mentioned, that we are in a very dark, dark period but we are now shedding light and coming into the truth and into the light. Yes, from dark to light.
Closing Remarks
President Trump mentioned in the Hannity interview that he is working on restoring election integrity of which I have written extensively about in my book “Trump and the Resurrection of America“. Trump talked about the importance of a paper ballot back up to computers which we now all know are rigged. The chapter in my book titled “Free and Fair Elections” is perhaps among the first to reveal what really went on rigging the polls, election theft and voter fraud. We have now officially entered steps six, seven and eight on the scale of discovery and action which will prove to be the longest and most dangerous phase as we are well engaged in America’s second revolution. The democrats, fake news and the deep state will fight back with a vengeance. Expect further false narratives and legal attacks and attempts against the president. False flags will continue and perhaps escalate in terms of damage. Be prepared spiritually, personally and economically.
The hoax has ended. Take a win. Calm down and enjoy the ride. And so the Nuremberg style trials that I wrote about back in August of 2017 are now at our doorstep. In fact with the tribunals of both John McCain and George Herbert Walker Bush already behind us, I stand corrected as this has already begun. Get the popcorn and enjoy the show.
Informed – Connected – Grounded
Read through my books and nearly 400 articles here on this website. Sign up for the JMC Report. I have a pretty good track record for over two decades. It’s either us or them. Mark my words. They are all going down. The global financial reset and the rule of law reset are the underlying policies of which our brilliant and brave President is operating. President Trump is restoring power to the people and re-directing the course for humanity. We are on God’s side. May the force remain with us.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00John Michael Chambershttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJohn Michael Chambers2019-03-31 06:55:332019-03-31 08:52:18Treasonous Illegal Take Down and the Failed Coup d’ etat
