Tag Archive for: hate

Fired for Speaking Truth

The online mob came for Harald Uhlig.

What terrible thing had he done? As I show in my new video, he tweeted that Black Lives Matter “torpedoed itself, with its full-fledged support of #defundthepolice.” Instead of defunding, Uhlig suggested, “train them better.”

Hundreds of people then signed a petition to demand that Uhlig, a University of Chicago professor and head of the Journal of Political Economy, resign. Even prominent economists like Janet Yellen and Paul Krugman joined the mob. Krugman called Uhlig “another privileged white man who evidently cannot control his urge to belittle the concerns of those less fortunate.”

But that’s just a lie. Uhlig wasn’t belittling concerns of anyone less fortunate.


In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>


“There was nothing racist or discriminatory in how he said it,” says Reason Magazine editor Robby Soave, who covers the new “woke” protests. “But because he has some different views from the protesters, he must be a racist.”

Uhlig was placed on leave by the journal he ran.

The new totalitarians demand that no one criticize their view of the world.

The online mob even attacks its fellow Democrats.

David Shor, an analyst at Democratic polling firm Civis Analytics, tweeted a study that concluded, “race riots reduced Democratic vote share.”

That study was probably accurate. Obviously, rioting alienates voters.

But the mob attacked Shor. “Come get your boy,” one tweeted.

His bosses did. Even though Shor issued a groveling apology, he was fired.

Soave points out, “There’s a cruel streak in activism that says, ‘If you disagree with me … you have no right to speak.’”

“Why are they winning?” I ask. “Their argument is ridiculous.”

“People are afraid to challenge them,” explains Soave. “It just takes one employee at one company to say, ‘Here’s the law that protects my rights to feel safe and comfortable in this workplace. If you’re not making me feel safe and comfortable, I’m going to get you in trouble.’”

So cowardly corporations cave.

A Boeing executive was even forced out for opposing women’s service in the military—30 years ago.

A Los Angeles soccer team fired a player because his wife posted racist comments.

Michigan State pushed out a physicist when a twitter mob from its “Graduate Employees Union” labeled him a “scientific racist.” What racist thing had the physicist done? He “rejects the idea that scientists should categorically exclude the possibility of average genetic differences among groups,” is how a Wall Street Journal column explained it.

Now “cancel culture” has moved abroad.

“Harry Potter” author J.K. Rowling is being smeared as “transphobic.” When a tax researcher was fired for saying, “Identifying as a woman does not make a person a woman,” Rowling tweeted, incredulously, “Force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real?”

She said she has nothing against trans people, but she’s “concerned about the huge explosion in young women wishing to transition.”

The Twitter mob claimed her “hate” was “killing trans people.”

Some staff at Hachette, her publisher, refused to work on her next book. Actors in her “Harry Potter” movies spoke out against her.

But Rowling didn’t back down. “It isn’t hate to speak the truth,” she tweeted.

She also mocked a charity that used the phrase “people who menstruate” instead of women, tweeting: “There used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”

That further incensed the mob. It claimed her “hate … leads to trans women, especially teens and black trans women, becoming victims of sexual assault.”

But Rowling is the rare person popular enough to be able to resist the mob. Her publisher spoke up for her, saying, “Freedom of speech is the cornerstone of publishing.”

And the University of Chicago stood up to the mob, too. The school, after a 10-day investigation, announced there was “no basis” for taking away Harald Uhlig’s job. He’s been reinstated.

That’s how these cases should be handled.

“The solution is to challenge these people,” says Soave. “We just have to speak up.”

Those of us who can, must.

COPYRIGHT 2020 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

John Stossel is host of “Stossel” on the Fox Business Network, and author of “No They Can’t! Why Government Fails—But Individuals Succeed.” Twitter: .


A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

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

GET ACCESS NOW! >>


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

Here Come the Speech Police

Recently, I ran across a piece in The Philadelphia Inquirer that lays out four racist words and phrases that should be banished from the English language. It begins like this:

“Editor’s note: Please be aware offensive terms are repeated here solely for the purpose of identifying and analyzing them honestly. These terms may upset some readers.”

Steel yourself, brave reader, here they are:

  • Peanut gallery.
  • Eenie meenie miney moe.
  • Gyp.
  • No can do.

The same grammarian who authored the piece had previously confronted the “deeply racist connotation” of the word “thug,” noting that President Donald Trump “wasn’t the least bit bashful” when calling Minneapolis rioters “thugs” in a tweet, despite the word’s obvious bigoted history.


In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>


In 2015, President Barack Obama referred to Baltimore rioters as “thugs” as well. He likely did so because “thug”—defined as a “violent person, especially a criminal”—is a good way to describe rioters.

It’s true that not everyone in a riot engages in wanton violent criminality. Some participants are merely “looters”—defined as “people who steal goods during a riot.” That word is also allegedly imbued with racist conations, according to the executive editor of the Los Angeles Times and others.

Attempting to dictate what words we use is another way to exert power over how we think.

Few people, rightly, would have a problem with referring to the Charlottesville Nazis as “thugs.” Only the “protester” who tears down a Ulysses S. Grant statue or participates in an Antifa riot is spared the indignity of being properly defined.

The recent assaults on the English language have consisted largely of euphemisms and pseudoscientific gibberish meant to obscure objective truths—“cisgender,” “heteronormativity” and so on. Now, we’re at the stage of the revolution where completely inoffensive and serviceable words are branded problematic.

CNN, for instance, recently pulled together its own list of words and phrases with racist connotations that have helped bolster systemic racism in America.

Unsuspecting citizens, the piece explains, may not even be aware they are engaging in this linguistic bigotry, because most words are “so entrenched that Americans don’t think twice about using them. But some of these terms are directly rooted in the nation’s history with chattel slavery. Others now evoke racist notions about Black people.”

CNN tells us the term “peanut gallery”—as in “please, no comment from the peanut gallery”—is racist because it harkens back to the days when poor and black Americans were relegated to back sections of theaters.

Now, I hate to be pedantic, but “peanut gallery” isn’t “directly rooted” in the nation’s history of “chattel slavery.” As CNN’s own double-bylined story points out, the cliche wasn’t used until after the Civil War. For that matter, few of the words and phrases that CNN alleges are problematic are rooted, even in the most tenuous sense, in the transatlantic slave trade.

Not even the word “slavery,” which is a concept as old as humankind, is in any way uniquely American. Yet, last week, Twitter announced that it was dropping “master” and “slave” from its coding, to create a “more inclusive programming language.”

Only in this stifling intellectual environment is striking commonly used words considered “inclusive.” Other tech companies are now “confronting” their use of these innocuous words to atone for their imaginary crimes.

We should feel no guilt using the word “master.” Her performance was masterful. She mastered her instrument. The score was a masterpiece. The composer was a mastermind.

Even CNN concedes that “while it’s unclear whether the term is rooted in American slavery on plantations, it evokes that history.”

It’s not unclear, at all. The etymology of the word “master” is from the Old English and rooted in the Latin “magister,” which means “chief, director, teacher, or boss.” “Master’s” degrees were first given to university teachers in the 14th century in Europe.

Until a few months ago, the “master bedroom” evoked visions of the larger bedrooms, and the Masters Tournament evoked images of golfing legends like Tiger Woods, winner of four titles.

Simply because the Nazis used the word “master” in their pseudoscientific racial theories—not in the 1840s, but in 1940s—doesn’t mean I am offended by the postmaster general. We’re grown-ups here, and we can comprehend context.

Or we used to be.

Honestly, I’m disappointed that CNN missed the commonly used “blackmail” —a word that appears in 439 stories on its website. The phrase was first used to describe protection money extracted by mid-16th-century Scottish chieftains. Maybe it’s the Scots who should be offended.

In and of itself, depriving Americans of “eenie meenie miney moe”—a phrase with an opaque and complicated history—isn’t going to hurt anyone. Allowing ideological grievance-mongers to decide what words we’re allowed to use, on the other hand … well, no can do.

“If thoughts can corrupt language, language can also corrupt thoughts,” George Orwell famously wrote. Every time some new correct-speak emerges, CNN and all the media will participate in browbeating us into subservience.

Progressive pundits will laugh off concerns about the Orwellian slippery slope. If we allow the seemingly innocuous attempts to control words and thoughts go uncontested, more-nefarious control will be a lot easier in the future.

COMMENTARY BY

David Harsanyi is a senior writer at National Review and the author of “First Freedom: A Ride through America’s Enduring History With the Gun, From the Revolution to Today.” Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLE: 1619 Project Stokes Racial Division, but Offers No Real Solutions


A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

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

GET ACCESS NOW! >>


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

Black Lives Matter founder: ‘Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here’

Our moral superiors in action.

“The BLM Founder Who Begged Allah For Strength Not To ‘Kill Sub Human Whites’ Received a Government Award ‘Encouraging A Run For Public Office,’” by Natalie Winters, National Pulse, June 27, 2020:

A Black Lives Matter organizer who implored Allah to give her the “strength” to not “kill these men and white folks” and that “white skin is sub-humxn” received an award from the Canadian government meant to encourage a “run for public office.”

The unearthed comments from Yusra Khogali follows co-founders of the U.S. branch of Black Lives Matter (BLM) being exposed by The National Pulse for vowing to oppose capitalism and claiming “we’re trained Marxists.”

The tweet – no longer on the social media platform – read:
“Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here today. Plz plz plz.”

Khogali, an alleged “anti-racist” activist and founder of the Black Liberation Collective Canada, only had one qualm with the tweet: it “drowned out the discussion we sought to spark about the black lives of those who have died at the guns of police in this country.”

The daughter of Sudanese refugees has also insisted white people are “recessive genetic defects” who should be “wiped out,” that “whiteness is not humxness,” and “white skin is sub-humxn” in 2015 Facebook posts.

Despite these clearly racist attacks, Khogali received a Canadian government-sanctioned “Young Women in Leadership Award” in 2018.

Recipients of the awards are connected with “women interested in politics with female leaders on council and in the civil service,” and “the program is meant to encourage women to run for public office. Khogali has also been invited to speak at countless universities….

RELATED ARTICLE: Minnesota: Hamas-linked CAIR enraged, demands firing of barista who wrote “ISIS” on Muslima’s coffee cup

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

VIDEO: Black Lives Matter Protesters Filmed Dancing On American Flag In Washington, D.C.

Black Lives Matter protesters danced on top of an American flag in Washington, D.C. as the city celebrated Independence Day on Saturday.

The footage was posted to Twitter hours before President Donald Trump spoke at the 2nd annual Salute to America in the nation’s capital. Trump centered his speech on the condemnation of protesters who seek to tear down American history.

“I am here as your president to proclaim before the country and before the world: This monument will never be desecrated; these heroes will never be defaced; their legacy will never ever be destroyed; their achievements will not be forgotten, and Mount Rushmore will stand forever as an eternal tribute to our forefathers and our freedom,” Trump said Friday during his speech at Mount Rushmore.

“This movement is openly attacking the legacies of every person on Mount Rushmore,” Trump said of protesters. “Today we will set history and history’s record straight.”

Trump announced the creation of a new national monument while in South Dakota as well, dubbed the  National Garden of American Heroes.

Trump said he had already signed an executive order directing the garden’s construction. The monument will feature statues of great Americans from every walk of life, from music and art to industry, science, and the military, he said. The announcement came at the end of his South Dakota speech condemning protesters for tearing down monuments to America’s founding generation.

COLUMN BY

ANDERS HAGSTROM

White House correspondent.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Colin Kaepernick Condemns July 4th As ‘Celebration Of White Supremacy’

Republican Attorneys General Warn Of ‘Cancel Culture’ Targeting Mt Rushmore Ahead Of 4th Of July Weekend

Trump Campaign Pushing For 4 Live Debates Against Joe Biden

New York Times Ripped For Describing Trump’s Mt. Rushmore Speech As ‘Dark And Divisive’

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

PODCAST: The Summer of HATE

In 1967, hippies gathered in San Francisco for “The Summer of Love,” a phenomenon featuring peace, love, music and dope. It captivated the imagination of the country at the time. Singer Scott McKenzie sang a song [below] written by John Phillips (of the Mamas and the Papas), titled “San Francisco (Be Sure to Wear Flowers in Your Hair),” which became a mega-hit and anthem for the Summer of Love. This was a major cultural phenomenon at the time. Although the clothing, sex and drugs upset parents, it was still peaceful in intent.

Today though, we are experiencing another cultural phenomenon on a much broader scale. Unfortunately, it is more concerned with hate, as opposed to love, which leads me to call it, “The Summer of Hate,” and is ultimately motivated by the 2020 elections. During the last 30 days alone, we have witnessed a wide variety of changes to our country:

Corporate America is now frightened to be accused of racism and, as such, they are rapidly re-branding a plethora of products, including:

  • Cracker Jack and Cracker Barrel are said to be considering name changes as the “cracker” moniker is said to suggest racism, where a whip was allegedly used to keep slaves in line.
  • Rice Krispies are said to be accused of being racist as they feature three white people (“Snap,” “Crackle,” and “Pop”), but no black faces.
  • Quaker is supposed to be re-inventing the “Aunt Jamima” brand as blacks feel the character stereotypes black women as being nothing more than a cook. The same is said to be true of Uncle Ben’s Rice, and the character on the Cream of Wheat box.
  • Ice cream favorite “Eskimo Pie” is considering rebranding their product so Eskimos will not be demeaned.
  • And I’m told, PETA recently accused plain cow’s milk as a symbol of white supremacy.

This has put companies on the defensive. What’s next? Colas shouldn’t be brown? Mister Clean is too white? Pets shouldn’t wear a collar as it is demeaning? Was Jack Daniels a racist? Where does it stop? The point is, it doesn’t, at least not until after the elections. Corporate America will spend millions, if not billions, on re-branding their products so they can be in line with political correctness. This is incredibly inflationary as the companies will not eat the expense, but will inevitably pass it on to consumers instead.

Then we come to the world of entertainment and sports, whereby:

  • Movie classic, “Gone With the Wind,” arguably the greatest movie of all time, is being shelved as it discusses slavery and the Civil War.
  • Warner Brothers is said to have taken the shotgun away from cartoon’s Elmer Fudd as it poses a threat to opponents of the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights (the right to bear arms).
  • It has been proposed the Texas Rangers of Major League Baseball drop their team name, the “Rangers,” as it is alleged the original Rangers were racists.
  • The University of Cincinnati (UC) is considering removing the name of Marge Schott from the school’s baseball stadium. Schott, who passed away sixteen years ago, was well known as the former owner of the Cincinnati Reds. Her philanthropy was well known and she literally gave away millions to a variety of charities, including two million dollars to build the UC stadium. Yet, she is now charged with racism. Marge may have been rough around the edges, but she had a generous heart. My question is, where were the charges of racism when she made her donations? Hypocrites.
  • Both the National Football League and NASCAR now claim it is okay to take a knee when the National Anthem is played. What does this teach our youth, that it is okay to disrespect the country? Au revoir NFL and NASCAR.

These acts by the entertainment and sports industries are trying to alter our sense or morality and patriotism through political correctness.

Then we have the problem of defacing or tearing down historical icons of our past:

  • A Seattle statue of the “Father of our Country,” George Washington, was pulled down. Other historical plaques and statues are facing similar fates, such as that of our Third President Thomas Jefferson, the principal writer of the Declaration of Independence, as well as Presidents Andrew Jackson and Theodore Roosevelt, and discoverer Christopher Columbus. Even a statue of “the Great Emancipator,” Abraham Lincoln, may be removed in Boston, and a statue of Union General Ulysses S. Grant, representing the side freeing the slaves, was toppled. Remarkably, a statue of Lenin stands proudly in Seattle untouched (and No, I do not mean John Lenon). Interestingly, Vladimir Lenin, the founder of the USSR, was responsible for the creation of the Gulag concentration camps where upwards to 70,000 people were used for slave labor, and 14K-20K members of the clergy were executed. Yet, his statue in Seattle is unblemished.

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D), has also ordered the removal or paintings and statues of former Speakers who had a connection to slavery and the Confederacy, even though they served as Speakers well before the Civil War.

What’s next? Most likely we will see a changing of our currency and coins, whereby our founding fathers will be re-examined for their attitudes and the far-Left will demand their removal. I do not think the critics will be happy until they have re-written the history of the 18th & 19th centuries, which I personally consider the most interesting history of all. We will also likely see the 20th century challenged as well.

More immediately, we are seeing the emergence of political settlements, such as Seattle’s Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ), who are trying to bar the police and re-create a form of government with a Socialist agenda. Actually, this is anarchy at work and what we can expect in the coming months. The organizers claim they want to defund police departments, but the reality is they want to obliterate them. Without a form of law and order, they will be allowed to run amok and tear society apart. As to Trump Republicans, the Left continues to harass their opponents, as seen at the recent Trump Rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Make no mistake, these zones are designed to provoke confrontation with authorities, particularly police. Ideally, the anarchists want a fight, much like the 1968 Chicago DNC riots, to make the police look bad, or to ignite a battle featuring lethal weapons.

Undoubtedly, much more is on the way, particularly as we get closer to the election.

  • We will witness attacks on conservatives and the Trump campaign.
  • We will witness more attacks on our institutions, our culture, and our sense of right and wrong.
  • We will witness more attacks on our history and icons.
  • And we will witness attacks along racial lines as identity politics will be actively used. These attacks will only turn the clock backwards in terms of race relations, certainly not forward.
  • The mantra for the summer is simple, “Attack, Attack, Attack,” and never apologize.

This is all from the playbook of the far-Left, who is trying to reinvent our sense of history, values, culture, and government. It is also intended to make white people feel ashamed, but I contend this will backfire on the Democrats as people finally say, “Enough is Enough!” Watch for a massive push-back in November from the silent majority, you know, the people who work hard for a living, pay taxes, and just want peace and prosperity. The harder the Left pushes now, the more it dooms the chances of the Democrats in November. It is interesting to see how hatred can drive a political campaign. All of this is a reflection of the desperation of the Democrats.

So, get ready for “The Summer of Hate.” Frankly, the drug smoking hippies of 1967 do not sound too bad anymore, do they?

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Also, I have a NEW book, “Before You Vote: Know How Your Government Works”, What American youth should know about government, available in Printed, PDF and eBook form. This is the perfect gift for youth!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Twitch Suspends President Trump’s Channel, Citing ‘Hateful Conduct’

NYC Mayor De Blasio Plans $1.5 Billion NYPD Budget Cut

Speaker Pelosi Extends House Proxy Voting Until August Amid Republican Opposition

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

Islamic Republic of Iran: MP offers “$3 million reward in cash to whoever kills Trump”

“U.S. disarmament ambassador Robert Wood dismissed the reward as ‘ridiculous’, telling reporters in Geneva it showed the ‘terrorist underpinnings’ of Iran’s establishment.”

Indeed. And if anyone succeeds in doing this, there will be great rejoicing in Washington and mourning all over Iran. It’s a topsy-turvy world.

“Iran MP offers reward for killing Trump, U.S. calls it ‘ridiculous,’” by Parisa Hafezi, Reuters, January 21, 2020:

DUBAI (Reuters) – An Iranian lawmaker offered a $3 million reward to anyone who killed U.S. President Donald Trump and said Iran could avoid threats if it had nuclear arms, ISNA news agency reported on Tuesday amid Tehran’s latest standoff with Washington.

U.S. disarmament ambassador Robert Wood dismissed the reward as “ridiculous”, telling reporters in Geneva it showed the “terrorist underpinnings” of Iran’s establishment.

Tensions have steadily escalated since Trump pulled Washington out of Tehran’s nuclear agreement with world powers in 2018 and reimposed U.S. sanctions. The standoff erupted into tit-for-tat military strikes this month.

“On behalf of the people of Kerman province, we will pay a $3 million reward in cash to whoever kills Trump,” lawmaker Ahmad Hamzeh told the 290-seat parliament, ISNA reported.

He did not say if the reward had any official backing from Iran’s clerical rulers.

The city of Kerman, in the province south of the capital, is the hometown of Qassem Soleimani, a prominent Iranian commander whose killing in a drone strike ordered by Trump on Jan. 3 in Baghdad prompted Iran to fire missiles at U.S. targets in Iraq.

“If we had nuclear weapons today, we would be protected from threats … We should put the production of long-range missiles capable of carrying unconventional warheads on our agenda. This is our natural right,” he was quoted as saying by ISNA….

This month, Iran announced it was scrapping all limits on its uranium enrichment work, potentially shortening the so-called “breakout time” needed to build a nuclear weapon….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Britain Commits Suicide to Avoid Being Called Racist

Khamenei says Islamic Republic of Iran is “religious democracy” that is “image of resistance” to “highway bully” US

Arab Countries Say “We Miss the Jews”

RELATED AUDIO: Robert Spencer on Iran in context

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

VIDEO: The Vortex — Francis HATES America! He has drunk all the Kool-Aid.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NEW Allegation of Sex Abuse Inside Holy See Seminary

US bishops’ fidelity to Pope Francis challenged.

TRANSCRIPT

It’s become quite apparent that in his admiration for establishing a one-world government administered by a new world order, America is an object of hate for Pope Francis.

The handwriting was on the wall at least two years ago when yet another article from Eugenio Scalfari revealed that the pontiff has so little regard for the United States that he actually thinks we should simply give up our national sovereignty and submit to a new world order.

Maybe the Dems can nominate Pope Francis for their party’s candidate for president. He can assume presidential powers and then dissolve the U.S.A. After all, it seems like he’s got experience doing the same thing with the Church.

The old atheist Italian journalist says that in 2017, Pope Francis called him shortly after the G-20 summit and demanded to see him at four o’clock that afternoon. According to Scalfari, Francis had become agitated about the United States and other nations commanding such power in the world.

Pope Francis told the Italian newspaper La Repubblica that the United States of America has “a distorted vision of the world,” and Americans must be ruled by a world government as soon as possible, “for their own good.”

Now that’s an incredible statement to make, and as the article continued, the disrespect for the idea of national sovereignty mounted. European nations also came under the papal displeasure: “I also thought many times to this problem and came to the conclusion that, not only but also for this reason, Europe must take as soon as possible a federal structure.”

There is without a doubt an extreme dislike with this pope of anything that strikes of nationalism, meaning national sovereignty. Since America seems to lead the world in the area of national pride, the United States is never passed over in the papal condemnations of national sovereignty.

Somewhere, somehow, he has in his head that the idea of individual nations is bad because that translates into immigrants being mistreated, and among rich nations — the First-World nations — poverty escalates and the poor are taken advantage of.

That’s what he thinks, and so the solution for him is to introduce a one-world government, ruled by a single new world order, so all immigrants can get a fair shake out of life.

Last week the reports came out that Pope Francis thinks national pride, touted by political conservatives, is the beginning of Nazism reappearing. He said to an international group of specialists in penal law: “And I must confess to you that when I hear a speech [by] someone responsible for order or for a government, I think of speeches by Hitler in 1934, 1936,” adding, “They are inadmissible behaviors in the rule of law and generally accompany racist prejudices and contempt for socially marginalized groups.”

“It is no coincidence that in these times, emblems and actions typical of Nazism reappear, which, with its persecutions against Jews, gypsies and people of homosexual orientation, represents the negative model par excellence of a culture of waste and hatred,” he continued.

Pope Francis has drunk the Kool-Aid of the Left.

So there it is, perfectly framed by this pontificate: Immigrants and homosexuals need to be protected classes, and sovereign nations must give way to those who do not respect borders and those who reject natural law. And nations, now bordering on embracing Nazism, must surrender their independence because it is the will of God. For their own good, the nations of the world, especially the powerful ones, must pass out of existence, surrender themselves and abolish their borders for their own good.

When Americans are chanting “USA!” at sporting events or political rallies for Republicans, in Pope Francis’ head, that apparently rings as Sieg Heil!

This is dangerous, dangerous stuff. For the occupant of the throne of Peter to be outwardly demonizing nations — especially the leading nation which defeated the Nazis — as Nazis themselves, a line has been crossed from which there is no coming back.

To then turn around and underscore that part of what makes a person a modern-day Nazi is to not go along with the homosexual agenda and resist the evil, this is beyond the pale and must be called out.

Pope Francis has moved into territory that no pope has ever transgressed. He is transferring the mission of the Church from the salvation of souls to the foundation of a one-world government.

What precisely the role of the Church itself would be in that new world order still seems vague, but one thing is clear. Francis never criticizes Islamic nations. He never tells them to clean up their act and stop throwing homosexuals off roofs. He never has a word of criticism for their brutality of FGM (female gential mutilation) or sponsorship of world terror, or torture or forcing people in their nations to convert or have their heads cut off.

Yet he has no problem with hiding behind the Italian military surrounding the walls of the Vatican, protecting him from that same Muslim threat.

This pontificate is a political disaster, one gone completely off the rails.

Serious questions need to be asked about all this: homosexual men, many of whom are either abusers or covered up abuse placed into powerful posts; the theft of hundreds of millions of euros; constant lies and denials of repeated press reports; and multiple appointments of enemies of Christ to high-visibility positions within the Church. And now hurling accusations at political conservatives that their love of country makes them “Nazis,” and opposing the gay agenda means conservatives want homosexuals marched off to gas chambers.

This is outrageous. Francis hates America because America represents everything his twisted political worldview stands in opposition to.

This increased marxist view has been brewing in the Church for decades, and far from being ascendant is now practically the status quo. Love of the homosexual agenda, illegal immigrants, the abolition of nations and Islam’s “favored son” status is what Francis will be remembered for.

The Vatican has yet to comment on the Scalfari interview about Francis reportedly saying America should willingly surrender itself to a one-world government. And actually, no comment is needed. We’ve heard enough.

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

Pro-life Hour met with counter-demonstration in Ottawa

Posted by Eeyore

This is a few moments from two intersections where a one hour pro-life expression took place. At one corner there was a counter-demonstration which seemed to attempt to profane the Catholic Church, suggesting that for them, it is more than a right-to-abort issue, and perhaps more of a complete rejection of Western values.

House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerrold Nadler Doesn’t Get It

House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerrold Nadler epitomizes the irrational HATRED he, his leftist allies in Congress and  the drive-by media have towards President Trump.  Without any evidence produced by the Mueller investigation, Nadler stated  “we are going to initiate investigations into abuses of power, corruption and obstruction of justice.”  He plans to call in 60 former/current Trump officials and many others including those with whom Trump had business dealings long before becoming President.   Trump supporters know this vitriol stems from his legitimate election which Nadler & hi s ilk still can’t accept.

Nadler, like Mueller, is conducting a “Witch Hunt” to create crimes that don’t exist.  His assertion that  “our job is to protect the rule of law” demonstrates the height of hypocrisy and double standards after all the criminal activity conducted by Obama and his administration including “Fast & Furious”; Benghazi; IRS scandal;  failure to follow Obamacare laws;  Iran deal; whitewashed Clinton investigation, etc.

No POTUS before Trump has ever been falsely criticized 24X7 for his first two years much less maintained a 50% approval rating and delivered on every campaign promise.  The left, including Nadler, just don’t get it.  They are lying  themselves into another loss in 2020.

Should Governor Andrew Cuomo be Excommunicated?

George J. Marlin raises a question very much on the minds of many Catholics. Surely, some rebuke from New York’s bishops is necessary. 

In March 1970, the New York State Legislature repealed the anti-abortion law that had been on the books since 1830. The bill narrowly passed, due to support from several legislators from heavily Catholic districts who were subsequently defeated for their apostasy in the November elections.

Back in those days, the Catholic Church in New York possessed moral authority; and the Archbishop of New York, Cardinal Terrence Cooke, was not afraid to use that power in the public square.

Cardinal Cooke led the charge to repeal the law that permitted unrestricted abortions up to 24 weeks. And in May 1972, the State Legislature did just that and reinstated the 1830 statute.

Sadly, Governor Nelson Rockefeller vetoed the repeal of the liberalized abortion law shortly thereafter.

The New York abortion issue became moot, however, when the U.S. Supreme Court handed down Roe v. Wade on January 22, 1973.

Fast forward forty years and abortion has once again made headlines in New York thanks to Governor Andrew Cuomo.

Cuomo, a baptized Catholic and graduate of Archbishop Molly High School in Queens and Fordham University in the Bronx, has abandoned some major moral tenets of his faith.

In 2011, his first year in office, he engineered the passage of same-sex marriage legislation. “Marriage equality,” he declared, “is a question of principle and the state shouldn’t discriminate against same-sex couples who wish to get married.”

Then on January 16, 2014, Cuomo announced, on a radio show, that Catholics and others with traditional moral views were unfit citizens who were no longer welcome in New York:

Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right to life, pro-assault weapons, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York because that’s not who New Yorkers are.

It gets worse.

Cuomo has been off the rails on the subject of abortion. In his 2013 State of the State Address, he cast his lot with the radical pro-abortion lobby, screaming four times, “It’s her body; it’s her choice!”

Cuomo introduced legislation that would repeal the 1970 abortion law, and would codify abortion as a “fundamental right of privacy,” a classification even the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected.

Cuomo’s proposal was bottled up in the Republican-Conservative-controlled State Senate for four years. But last November, the GOP lost control of that legislative chamber.

A jubilant Cuomo boasted that his so-called Reproductive Health Act would be the first order of business before the newly organized Legislature in January 2019.

And so it was.

On January 22, the 46th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Legislature passed the bill, to thundering applause and wild laughter. Minutes later, to a standing ovation, Cuomo signed it into law.


Standing (right to left in the photo), during the visit of Pope Francis to St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York (September 23, 2015), are the author, Mayor Bill DeBlasio, Sandra Lee (Andrew Cuomo’s domestic partner), and the governor.

This law goes far beyond Roe v. Wade. It removes abortion clauses from the penal code and “creates a right to the procedure under the public health law.”

Although abortions are restricted to the first twenty-four weeks of pregnancy, exceptions are so broad (i.e., economic, social, or emotional distress) that anyone will be able to procure an abortion up to minutes before giving birth. In other words, the lives of unborn children who have viability outside the womb can now be terminated by doctors and non-doctors.

Governor Andrew Cuomo is very different than his father, Governor Mario Cuomo. The elder Cuomo tried to be St. Thomas More and Machiavelli at one and the same time.

In his famous 1984 Notre Dame speech on “Religious Belief and Public Morality,” the More-Cuomo said “The Catholic Church is my spiritual home. My head is there and my hope. . . .[and] I accept the Church’s teaching on abortion.” But the Machiavelli-Cuomo gave himself an “out” by claiming that as a public official, he could not impose his private religious views on the rest of society.

Mario Cuomo demonstrated the absurdity of his position every time he vetoed death penalty legislation that was approved overwhelmingly by the Legislature and was supported by over 60 percent of New Yorkers. Cuomo imposed his personal moral objections even though there was public opinion against him.

Andrew Cuomo is vastly different from his father. There is no duality; he prefers to be a Machiavellian and he promotes whatever works to advance his political ambitions.

In fact, it has been reported that when he was Clinton’s Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, one of his first acts “was to distribute the book by Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince, to his key aides. . .telling them: ‘This is my leadership philosophy.’”

Cuomo uses or spurns the Church when it suits his political ends. While he discarded Church teaching on abortion, he embraced and praised Pope Francis’s message concerning the needy and the marginalized. And when the pope visited St. Patrick’s Cathedral on September 24, 2015, Cuomo made sure he was in a front pew. It was great political theater for the governor.

Since Andrew Cuomo has dismissed the fundamental Church teaching that all persons have the right to life because they are made in the image of God, maybe it’s time the Church dismissed him.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states that “Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged.”

So, at the very least, the bishops of New York should announce publicly that because Cuomo has caused public scandal, he must be denied Communion.

Or the bishops, if they have the mettle, might call Cuomo in and point out the canonical penalties they are prepared to impose if he does not renounce his heresy. Whether or not that includes excommunication is a matter for canon lawyers.

But something really must be done, lest New York’s bishops confirm the growing perception that the Catholic Church is a compromised paper tiger.

COLUMN BY

George J. Marlin

George J. Marlin

George J. Marlin, Chairman of the Board of Aid to the Church in Need USA, is the author of The American Catholic VoterNarcissist Nation: Reflections of a Blue-State Conservative, and Christian Persecutions in the Middle East: A 21st Century Tragedy. . His new book, Sons of St. Patrick, written with Brad Miner, was published on St. Patrick’s Day 2017.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Administration Has Sided With a Faith-Based Adoption Provider. Here’s Why That Matters.

Andrew Cuomo Defends Legalizing Abortions Up to Birth: “I’m Not Here to Represent” the Catholic Church

Planned Parenthood: Flush with Taxpayer Cash

New York and the Conscience of a Nation

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column with images is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. The featured image of
Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) is from his Facebook page.

190,000 sign petition to impeach Muslim Rep. Rashida Tlaib who called Trump “motherf**er”

This is unlikely to succeed, but it shows widespread dissatisfaction not just with Tlaib, but with the direction the Left is taking.

“This woman is an anti-Semite, a war mongering hate filled Palestinian who has vowed to try and destroy our constitutional rights, hates America, hates American citizens.”

Can those charges reasonably be disputed?

“150,000 Sign Petition to Impeach Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib,” by Anthony Gockowski, Tennessee Star, January 12, 2019 (thanks to the Geller Report):

A Change.org petition calling for the impeachment of Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI-13) already has close to 160,000 signatures.

“This woman is an anti-Semite, a war mongering hate filled Palestinian who has vowed to try and destroy our constitutional rights, hates America, hates American citizens,” the petition states. “She’s a danger to our sovereignty, a detriment to society, and to this country, and is unfit to serve in any capacity within our government.”

The petition also takes issue with Tlaib’s election, claiming that she “lied about living in Detroit” by “using her father’s house address.”

Tlaib made headlines earlier this week when she vowed to “impeach the motherf—” during a party in celebration of her being sworn in to Congress.

“I stand by impeaching the president of the United States. I ran on that,” she said in an interview discussing her comments. She called her promise to impeach President Donald Trump something she “very much” holds “dearly.”

“They love that I’m real, and that I am very much focused on getting the government back up and running, but also making sure we’ve held the president of the United States accountable,” she said.

Tlaib later apologized that her comments caused a “distraction,” but refused to apologize for the explicit remarks….

SIGN THE IMPEACH RASHIDA TLAIB PETITION

RELATED ARTICLE: Muslim Congresswoman Courts Pro-Terror Activist Who Compared Israel to Nazis and ISIS

RELATED VIDEO: Rashida Tlaib’s brother praises terrorists.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is from Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib’s Facebook page.

Meet the Corporations Supporting the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Assault on Christians and Conservatives

D. James Kennedy Ministries has filed a defamation lawsuit against the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) over the reckless and politically motivated use of the “hate group” tag.

Click here to see the corporate supporters of SPLC.

A spokesman for Kennedy Ministries said:

It’s completely disingenuous to tag D. James Kennedy Ministries as a hate group alongside the KKK and neo-Nazis. We desire all people, with no exceptions, to receive the love of Christ and his forgiveness and healing. We unequivocally condemn violence, and we hate no one.

It’s ridiculous for the SPLC to falsely tag evangelical Christian ministries as “hate groups” simply for upholding the 2,000-year-old Christian consensus on marriage and sexuality. It’s nothing more than an attempt to bulldoze over those who disagree with them, and it has a chilling effect on the free exercise of religion in a nation built on that. We decided not to let their falsehoods stand.

SPLC’s so-called “hate map” has been linked to violent attacks against conservatives in the past. In 2012, a gunman wounded a Family Research Council (FRC) employee when he attempted to gain access to the organization’s Washington, D.C. headquarters. The suspect would later tell FBI investigators he targeted FRC because it was listed as an “anti-gay group” by SPLC and “planned to kill as many people as possible and then to smear [Chick-fil-A] sandwiches on their faces as a political statement.”

SPLC was also linked to the recent attack on the Republican Congressional baseball team practice when U.S. Representative Steve Scalise wounded by a gunman who was reported fan of SPLC’s Facebook page, in addition to other leftist groups.

Other conservative organizations labeled as “hate groups” by SPLC merely for their conservative principles and Judeo-Christian beliefs include Alliance Defending Freedom, American Family Association, organizations opposing illegal immigration, and many more.

The Kennedy Ministries lawsuit is a serious matter because SPLC sits on top of a massive warchest–an endowment of over $300 million–to finance it’s legal battles and political attacks. The Washington Times reports SPLC’s rating was downgraded last year from a “C+” to an “F” for having an inordinate amount of reserve assets compared to annual operating costs. William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection suggests “SPLC’s bad habit sensationalizing and politicizing ‘hate’ ” is designed “to generate even more money for its already bloated coffers.”

Unfortunately, ‘sensationalizing hate’ appears to work for liberal corporations eager to help fund SPLC’s agenda. Both Apple ($1 million) and JPMorgan Chase ($500,000) have pledged to massive donations of corporate dollars in recent days. Apple has also launched a platform to solicit donations to SPLC through it’s iTunes store. Incidentally, the Hollywood liberal icon George Clooney he would be donating $1 million through his foundation as well.

Apple and JPMorgan Chase aren’t the only companies supporting SPLC’s defamation and targeting of conservatives. We’ve compiled a list of sixteen other corporations that directly enable SPLC’s politically motivated attacks. Our SPLC resource page documents the financial relationships between companies like Charles Schwab, Kraft Heinz, Newman’s Own, Verizon, and more and this radical group whose misleading information has helped inspire true violence.

Click here to view 2ndVote’s SPLC resource page.

The lawsuit brought by Kennedy Ministries is a first step to defunding SPLC, but conservatives can support that goal every day through informed shopping decisions.

RELATED ARTICLE: Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Being Labeled an ‘Extremist’ By the Southern Poverty Law Center

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the 2ndVote.com website.

Why are the loudest proponents of ‘tolerance’ and ‘peace’ so frequently ugly, hateful people?

Not physically ugly, but ugly deep in their souls. Georgetown University professor Christine Fair happened upon neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, who is not me, at a gym and began berating him. The gym then revoked Richard Spencer’s membership. I have no regard for Richard Spencer, as often as I am confused with him (even in the comments at National Review on this piece, some clown says that the article should have highlighted Richard Spencer’s remarks on white nationalism, not his criticism of Islam; in reality, he is the one who writes about white nationalism, and I am the one who writes about Islam, and we are two completely different people): he has more than once demanded that I reveal my “real” name, as he is convinced that I am secretly a Jew who has changed my name to fool good white folks like him.

So while I have nothing but disgust for Richard Spencer, I have even greater disgust for Christine Fair, who in this incident showed herself to be more of a Nazi than Richard Spencer could ever hope to be. Like the Nazis, she wants those whom she hates destroyed, full stop. Just destroyed. She doesn’t want them to be able to speak in public. She doesn’t want them to be able to hold memberships in gyms. She doesn’t want them to be allowed to live in the city she lives in. She doesn’t want them to breathe. This is quintessentially Nazi behavior, and is in direct contradiction to the principles that make a society free.

While Richard Spencer is indeed a Nazi, albeit in a different way from how Fair is one, and there is no excuse for that, as long as he is not breaking any laws he has as much right to be in that gym as Christine Fair has. But not as far as Christine Fair is concerned. She has apparently not reflected upon the precedent she is setting, or on the possibility, as remote as it is, that one day her views could be out of favor, and she could find herself getting poisoned, and forbidden to speak, and screamed at by campus fascists, and driven out of gyms, and the like, and that a healthier and freer society allows for the freedom of expression and doesn’t persecute or hound those whose ideas are unpopular or even unarguably obnoxious.

National Review writer Jeremy Carl brings me into this because I have been on the receiving end of Fair’s wrath before, and have found her to be a shockingly rude, unkind, angry, and remarkably unpleasant individual — all while she preens as an exponent of “tolerance” and “peace.” Carl is a bit hasty, in my view, to accept the claims of my critics without evaluating those claims or my work on their merits, but his anxiousness to distance himself from me is perhaps understandable in a piece that appears in the publication that Ann Coulter so famously observed years ago was run by “girly men.”

I would happily debate Jeremy Carl, or Christine Fair, or any serious analyst on the nature of Islam or any of the assertions I have made in my work, and I am confident that the claims about my work that Carl so readily embraces here would, in that event, be proven false. It’s certain, however, that neither Carl nor Fair will agree to debate me, and so that is that. Whatever the undeniable flaws of Carl’s piece, he is dead-on about the Left’s increasing authoritarianism and thuggery. Mark my words: I won’t be the last enemy of the Left that Leftists will try to kill.

Addendum: I just noticed that in her hate screed against Richard Spencer in the Washington Post, Christine Fair cites as factual the thoroughly discredited study claiming that “right-wing extremists” pose a greater threat than Islamic jihadists. This is what an academic is today: not a thinking individual, but a propagandist for the hard-Left.

Georgetown University professor Christine Fair

“Liberal Bullies Threaten Free Speech,” by Jeremy Carl, National Review, May 24, 2017:

…Let’s stipulate that Richard Spencer is a man who has embraced values that are anathema to America’s, and that his vision is quite obviously not one that conservatives or Republicans share. But Fair publicly claims that Spencer’s very presence in the gym, because of his political views, creates an oppressive environment, which is a much more dramatic and potentially dangerous claim. If you are still cheering on Professor Fair, consider the case of another Spencer — Robert Spencer (no relation to Richard), a persistent critic of political Islam and a favorite of Steve Bannon and other figures in the Trump administration.After he spoke to a large audience last week in Reykjavik, Iceland, a leftist approached him as he was dining with companions and managed to slip a combination of MDMA (“Ecstasy”) and Ritalin into his drink, causing him to become ill to the point that he was hospitalized. Fortunately, police seem to have identified the perpetrator. But despite Spencer’s relative prominence and the dramatic nature of the crime, this political poisoning attracted almost no attention from the mainstream media.

As Spencer put it ruefully, “The lesson I learned was that media demonization of those who dissent from the leftist line is a direct incitement to violence. By portraying me and others who raise legitimate questions about jihad terror and Sharia oppression as racist, bigoted ‘Islamophobes’ without allowing us a fair hearing, they paint a huge target on the backs of those who dare to dissent.”

Spencer, the author of two New York Times bestsellers on radical Islam, is certainly controversial — and has his fair share of critics even on the right. But one should be able to be controversial without being poisoned. In the wake of the bombings in Manchester, are critics of political Islam really the people who should be beyond the pale of civil discourse?

hat does all this have to do with Professor Fair? Well, it turns out that Robert Spencer too has had his share of run-ins with Professor Fair, who according to Spencer called him a “lunatic” and likened him to Charles Manson while “refusing (of course) to debate me on questions of substance.” Robert Spencer says he has never met Fair in person, which has not saved him from being a repeated target of Fair’s ire.

Very well, you may say, but Spencer’s harsh and cherry-picked criticism of Islam may have stirred up legitimate anger — there’s no reason to defend him.

Well, how about Asra Nomani, a liberal Muslim immigrant woman, former Wall Street Journal reporter, and Georgetown professor who committed the mortal sin (to Christine Fair) of voting for Donald Trump and then writing a piece in the Washington Post explaining her decision. In response, she was brutally harassed by Professor Fair on Twitter for the better part of a month. As Nomani subsequently wrote to Georgetown in a formal complaint against Fair: “Prof. Fair has directed hateful, vulgar and disrespectful messages to me, including the allegations that I am: a ‘fraud’; ‘fame-mongering clown show’; and a ‘bevkuf,’ or ‘idiot,’ in my native Urdu, who has ‘pimped herself out’ . . . this last allegation amounts to ‘slut-shaming.’”

But while a quick perusal of Fair’s public statements reveals her to be an extreme case, a virtual parody of liberal intolerance, she is hardly the only liberal behaving badly. In just the past year, many conservatives, libertarians, and other assorted right-wingers, from Ann Coulter to Charles Murray to Heather Mac Donald to Milo Yiannopoulos to Ben Shapiro, have been shouted down and prevented, often by violence, from sharing their views, most often on America’s campuses. And so far, almost without exception, those universities have declined to give any significant punishment to the perpetrators. It is all well and good for conservatives to point out that there is a yawning gap between the Richard Spencers of the world and the Charles Murrays and Heather Mac Donalds. But for the Christine Fairs of the world — and an increasing number of her ideological soulmates on the left — they are all the same. None should have the right to speak — and increasingly, they are not even free to lead private lives free of harassment and threats. All of the people named above have been called “Nazis,” “white supremacists,” and similar epithets. If the Right, through silence, decides it’s okay to harass or physically attack Richard Spencer because he is a “Nazi” (a video clip of an Antifa member sucker-punching Spencer has become a favorite Internet meme on the left), they should not expect that the punchers will stop at Richard Spencer — or Robert Spencer, or even Asra Nomani. If we won’t fight for the free speech of those who anger the Left, no matter how distasteful we find their views, because we are afraid that the Left will wrongly ascribe their views to us, then conservatives are little more than feeding red meat to the ravenous left-wing lion in vain hopes that they will be the last ones eaten. And the lion is getting stronger and hungrier.

In his comments on Fair, written long before his poisoning incident, Robert Spencer wondered, “Why are the loudest proponents of ‘tolerance’ and ‘peace’ so frequently ugly, hateful people?” It’s a question the Left doesn’t want to answer — and too many on the right, afraid of being labeled as bigots by the most intolerant voices on the left, are scared to even ask.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Federal appeals court upholds block on Trump’s temporary immigration ban

UK: Manchester mayor Andy Burnham says jihad mass murderer was “not a Muslim”

Who is Ira Madison III and why does he hate Asian children and America?

Daily we see the fringe become more fringe. The latest example is a MTV News reporter named Ira Madison III. Madison, who is black, hates America, loves Obama and takes cheap shots at the grandchild of U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions. Katie McHugh from Breitbart reports:

Culture writer for MTV News Ira Madison III attacked Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions and his Asian-American granddaughter as a “prop” to distract from his “racism.”

ira-madison-iii1

Ira Madison III (left).

In the article “Ira Madison III: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know” by  from Heavy.com describes Madison’s background:

Madison was named in the piece as a “young activist-writer” who was “deeply entrenched” in “identity politics.”

[ … ]

According to his LinkedIn page, Madison is a gradaute [sic] of Loyola University of Chicago where he studied theater and NYU where he studied dramatic writing.

[ … ]

When asked about racism in America, Madison said, “I think at this point, the world has changed so much where I don’t afford people the right to have “different perspectives” if they’re damaging to others. Like, if you’re an asshole and homophobic and racist now, you were the same when you were younger and you knew it was wrong then.”

[ … ]

The day after Donald Trump won the presidency of the United States, Madison posted this throwback photo on Facebook. Madison regularly posts photos of the first family on his photostream. A few days later on his MTV.com column, Madison wrote, “This week, all of America needs to get deleted. You made Barack Obama utter the words “President-elect Donald Trump” and I will honestly never forgive my country for this.”

Here is Madison’s tweet, which has since been taken down:

iramadison-tweet-sessions-granddaughter

Can you feel the hate and anger in this black man for an innocent Asian child?

ira-madison

Ira Madison III

After taking down the above tweet Madison attempted to justify himself by Tweeting, “Why is she a prop? Sessions argued for policy that in the 1880s was used to discriminate against Asian Americans https://t.co/sZitqzLBS4.” The link is to a Think Progress article about a 2013 U.S. Senate committee meeting on comprehensive immigration reform, of which Senator Sessions was a committee member. When you go to the link you find that Senator Sessions was not arguing to discriminate against Asian Americans at all. Rather Senator Sessions asked the President of the Asian American Justice Center Mee Moua “if a country should legitimately decide that it wants to admit one productive family member, but not another, less motivated individual.” Sessions noted:

It’s perfectly logical to think there are two individuals, let’s say in a good friendly country like Honduras. One is a valedictorian of his class, has two years of college, learned English and very much has a vision to come to the United States and the other one has dropped out of high school, has minimum skills. Both are 20 years of age and that latter person has a brother here. What would be in the interest of the United States? …

Clearly it would be in the best interest of the United States to only grant a visa, work permit or citizenship to those who benefit the host country, in this case the United States. Immigration is a key issue for Americans and impacts the economy, jobs, security of the homeland, education, public policy and the criminal justice system.

As the U.S. Attorney General Senator Sessions will be dealing with law and order issues and enforcing the immigration laws of the United States. Laws that make it illegal for someone to come here without permission.

That is something Madison, Obama, Democrats and others fail to understand. When you lose elections, just as when you break the law, there are consequences.

White Drexel University professor wants ‘white genocide’ — you first!

On Christmas Day Drexel NOW in an article titled “Response to Professor George Ciccariello-Maher’s Tweet” stated:

Drexel became aware today of Associate Professor George Ciccariello-Maher’s inflammatory tweet, which was posted on his personal Twitter account on Dec. 24, 2016. While the University recognizes the right of its faculty to freely express their thoughts and opinions in public debate, Professor Ciccariello-Maher’s comments are utterly reprehensible, deeply disturbing, and do not in any way reflect the values of the University.

The University is taking this situation very seriously. We contacted Ciccariello-Maher today to arrange a meeting to discuss this matter in detail. 

Here is Ciccariello-Maher’s Tweet:

So what exactly is there to discuss?

ciccariello_maher

George Ciccariello-Maher. Photo: Drexel University.

White professor George Ciccariello-Maher’s biography states:

I am very excited to have joined the Drexel community after having taught political theory at U.C. Berkeley, San Quentin State Prison, and the Venezuelan School of Planning in Caracas. Everywhere that I have lived, from Caracas to Oakland, has impacted my approach to teaching, research, and how I understand the world more generally, and I expect Drexel and Philadelphia to do the same.

My research and teaching center on what could be called the “decolonial turn” in political thought, the moment of epistemic and political interrogation that emerges in response to colonialism and global social inequality.

Read more…

Ciccariello-Maher’s specialization includes, “Colonialism, social movements, political theory, Latin America, and race and racism.” He “contribute[s] journalistic writing to such publications as Counterpunch, MRZine, and Venezuela Analysis, ZNet, and Alternet among others, and I have written op-eds for the Philadelphia Inquirer and Fox News Latino. I appear regularly in media outlets ranging from community radio to NPR, from Al-Jazeera, CNN, Time Magazine, the Christian Science Monitor, and Fox News.”

Perhaps Ciccariello-Maher should take the lead and be the first to commit “white genocide”? Or maybe he already has?!

RELATED ARTICLES:

White Communist Professor Advocates White Genocide

Racist White Professor Calls For “White Genocide,” Then Blames Everyone Else For Misinterpreting His Racist Tweets