Hate in America

hate-horizontal

If you don’t read anything else this week, you should take the time to read this 3 part series on “hate”.

 

If someone went by the claims of “Black Lives Matter” and the “Southern Poverty Law Center” then they would believe that any minority person in America is in grave danger at all times.

They would believe that Churches across America are nothing more than places for racists to gather and think up ways to discriminate against people.

Since Obama became President in 2008 you can no longer disagree politically with ANY minority, especially Barrack Obama or you become a “racist”. The liberal media will proudly label you as a racist, and parade you on television for all to see.

They will tell their viewers that racism is to blame any time you disagree with any Democrat who happens to be a minority. And if you don’t believe the Federal government should pay for abortions then you “Hate women” and are labeled a sexist pig. Immediately they’ll throw out the phrase  “War on Women” that has become so popular to describe those who don’t believe the Federal Government should pay for abortions.

The liberal media loves to quote the “Southern Poverty Law Center” who will label anyone the Democratic Party dislikes a “Racist” or a “Hate Group”.

I’ve learned to ignore the liberal media. I’ve called for boycotts of their advertisers to try making them tell the truth. And I’ve exposed 1000’s of lies they have told to Americans on the evening news. But none of it helps because they still lie, and some Americans still believe them.

Under the Obama Administration the SPLC was even advising the Justice Department. I cannot stress to you enough that the people at the SPLC are nothing more than a political group that is used as a weapon against anyone who disagrees with the politics of the left.

I want to share with all of you a 3 part series of articles highlighting “Hate Groups in America which are supported and funded by the Left. Written by a much better writer than myself, John Perazzo over at FRONTPAGE MAG.

I hope you’ll take the time to read them all. There is a lot of information contained in these 3 articles. Information showing how the left supports and uses “Hate” as a tool against political rivals and anyone else who stands in their way. I’m sure glad that FRONTPAGE MAG  did this series to illustrate political use of hatred in America.

vd3a0jcp

 


The Hate Group That Tracks Down ‘Hate Groups’

The despicable Southern Poverty Law Center.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) was founded in 1971 by two Alabama attorneys, Morris Dees and Joseph Levin Jr. The latter served as the Center’s legal director from 1971-76, but it was Dees, who views the U.S. as an irredeemably racist nation, who would emerge as the long-term “face” of the organization.

Identifying itself as a “nonprofit civil rights organization” committed to “fighting hate and bigotry” while “seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of society,” SPLC describes the United States as a country “seething with racial violence” and “intolerance against those who are different.” “Hate in America is a dreadful, daily constant,” says the Center, and violent crimes against members of minority groups like blacks, Latinos, homosexuals, and Arabs/Muslims “are not ‘isolated incidents,’” but rather, commonplace. To combat this ugly state of affairs, SPLC dedicates itself to “tracking and exposing the activities of “hate groups and other domestic extremists” throughout the United States. Specifically, the Center’s “Hate & Extremism” initiative publishes its findings in SPLC’s Hatewatch Blog and in its quarterly journal, the Intelligence Report.

SPLC first gained widespread national recognition in 1987, when it won a $7 million verdict in a high-profile civil lawsuit against the United Klans of America (UKA). By the time that lawsuit was filed, UKA was already a destitute, impotent, disintegrating entity that virtually all white Americans emphatically rejected; the SPLC lawsuit merely drove the final nail into the UKA coffin. SPLC boasts that it has likewise won “crushing jury verdicts” that effectively shut down groups like the White Aryan Resistance, the White Patriot Party militia, and the Aryan Nations.

This has been SPLC’s modus operandi since its inception: to initiate lawsuits against prominent hate groups for crimes that their individual members commit. In these suits, declares Morris Dees proudly: “We absolutely take no prisoners. When we get into a legal fight we go all the way.” The leftist writer Ken Silverstein, who in 2000 wrote a penetrating exposé of SPLC for Harper’s magazine, has noted that the targets of these lawsuits tend to be “mediagenic villains” who are “eager to show off their swastikas for the news cameras.” As Dees and SPLC well understand, such figures stand the best chance of triggering an emotional public response that translates, in turn, into financial contributions from donors eager to combat the perceived threat.

SPLC claims that there are currently 892 active “hate groups” in the U.S. Asserting that the vast majority of such organizations are “right wing,” the Center says they include “the Ku Klux Klan,” “the neo-Nazi movement,” “neo-Confederates,” “racist skinheads,” “antigovernment militias,” “Christian Identity adherents,” and a variety of “anti-immigrant,” “anti-LGBT,” “anti-Muslim,” and “alternative Right” organizations. While also identifying a tiny smattering of black separatist entities as hate groups, SPLC takes pains to point out that black organizations must be judged by a different standard than their white counterparts, because “much black racism in America is, at least in part, a response to centuries of white racism.”

SPLC contends that from 2000 to 2012, the number of hate groups in the U.S. increased by 67%—a surge allegedly “fueled by anger and fear over the nation’s ailing economy, an influx of non-white immigrants, and the diminishing white majority, as symbolized by the election of the nation’s first African-American president” (Barack Obama). And America’s racists, by SPLC’s calculus, are almost all conservatives—as evidenced by the caption featured in the “Hatewatch” section of SPLC’s website: “Hatewatch monitors and exposes the activities of the American radical right.” The radical left gets no mention at all.

SPLC’s “hate group” counts have been shown to be devoid of legitimacy a number of times. Laird Wilcox—a researcher specializing in the study of political fringe movements—reports that many SPLC-designated “hate groups” are untraceable, due either to their inactivity or nonexistence. After analyzing the SPLC Klanwatch Project’s list of 346 “white supremacist groups” in 1992, for instance, Wilcox concluded that in fact there were only “about 50” such groups “that are objectively significant, are actually functioning and have more than a handful of real numbers—not post office box ‘groups’ or two-man local chapters.”[1] In 2005, Wilcox reported: “Several years ago with minimal effort I went through a list of 800-plus ‘hate groups’ published by the SPLC and determined that over half of them were either non-existent, existed in name only, or were inactive.”

JoAnn Wypijewski, who writes for the far-left Nation magazine, once said: “No one has been more assiduous in inflating the profile of [hate] groups than [SPLC’s] millionaire huckster, Morris Dees, who in 1999 began a begging [i.e., fundraising] letter [by stating that] ‘the danger presented by the Klan is greater now than at any time in the past ten years.’” To put Dees’s claim in perspective, the Ku Klux Klan at that time consisted of no more than 3,000 people nationwide—a far cry from the 4 million members it had boasted in the 1920s. Nonetheless, noted Wypijewski, “Dees would have his donors believe” that cadres of “militia nuts” are “lurking around every corner.”

In a similar vein, the late left-wing journalist Alexander Cockburn in 2009 called Dees the “arch-salesman of hate-mongering,” a man who profited by “selling the notion there’s a right resurgence out there in the hinterland with massed legions of haters, ready to march down Main Street draped in Klan robes, a copy of Mein Kampf tucked under one arm and a Bible under the other.” “Ever since 1971,” added Cockburn, “U.S. Postal Service mailbags have bulged with [Dees’s] fundraising letters, scaring dollars out of the pockets of trembling liberals aghast at his lurid depictions of hate-sodden America.”

Regardless of how dramatically SPLC overstates their numbers, white racists like neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and skinheads indisputably deserve to be categorized as “hate groups.” But the Center irresponsibly extends that designation also to numerous conservative and libertarian organizations that harbor no ill will against any demographic group, but merely hold political positions contrary to those of SPLC. As syndicated columnist Don Feder writes: “What makes [SPLC] particularly odious is its habit of taking legitimate conservatives and jumbling them with genuine hate groups (the Klan, Aryan Nation, skinheads, etc.), to make it appear that there’s a logical relationship between, say, opposing affirmative action and lynching, or demands for an end to government services for illegal aliens and attacks on dark-skinned immigrants.”

For instance, one noteworthy organization that SPLC has placed in its cross hairs is the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), which the Center, in a 2003 report authored by researcher/writer Chip Berlet, identified as part of “an array of right-wing foundations and think tanks [that] support efforts to make bigoted and discredited ideas respectable.” Especially objectionable to SPLC was AEI fellow Dinesh D’Souza, an Indian-born scholar (and former Reagan Administration adviser) “whose views,” according to Berlet, “are seen by many as bigoted or even racist.” Specifically, D’Souza has written that affirmative action is an unjust, counterproductive policy; that “many liberals have been peculiarly blind about black racism”; that “virtually all contemporary liberal assumptions about the origin of racism … and what to do about it are wrong”; and that “the civil-rights industry … now has a vested interest in the persistence of the ghetto, because the miseries of poor blacks are the best advertisement for continuing programs of racial preference and set-asides.” “D’Souza has suggested,” wrote Berlet incredulously, “that civil rights activists actually help perpetuate racial tensions and division in the United States.” Such sentiments as D’Souza’s are—notwithstanding the repeatedly divisive rhetoric and actions of racial arsonists like Al SharptonJesse JacksonLouis Farrakhan, and the late Julian Bond—anathema to an organization whose income stream is largely dependent upon an ability to perpetuate public angst over black suffering.

Berlet’s 2003 report likewise denounced another AEI-sponsored scholar, Charles Murray—a Bradley Foundation research fellow who in 1994 co-authored The Bell Curve, which SPLC described as “a book that argues that blacks and Latinos are genetically inferior to whites and that most social welfare and affirmative action programs are doomed to failure as a result.” Addressing unfounded critiques such as this, Hoover Institution scholar Thomas Sowell wrote that widespread “demonization” by “demagogues” who were interested only in hearing “what they want to hear,” had rendered The Bell Curve “one of the most misrepresented books of our time.”

In SPLC’s 2003 report as well, Berlet charged that conservative author David Horowitz “has blamed slavery on ‘black Africans … abetted by dark-skinned Arabs’—a selective rewriting of history.” To this, Horowitz replied:

“I never in my life blamed slavery on black Africans … abetted by dark-skinned Arabs.’ What idiot would not know that white Europeans conducted the Atlantic Slave Trade, which trafficked in 11 million black African chattel? The sentence Berlet mangles is not a historical statement about slavery but a polemical response to the proponents of reparations who are demanding that only whites pay blacks for an institution—slavery—that has been eradicated in the western world (but not Arab and black Africa) for more than 100 years. It is intended to remind people that the slaves transported to America were bought from African and Arab slavers—not to blame Africans and Arabs for sole responsibility for slavery.”

Berlet also took issue with what he called Horowitz’s “false” claim that “there never was an anti-slavery movement until white Christians—Englishmen and Americans—created one.” “Critics note,” Berlet added, “that Horowitz is ignoring everything from the slave revolt led by Spartacus against the Romans and Moses’ rebellion against the Pharaoh to the role of American blacks in the abolition movement.” And yet, Horowitz had already anticipated and discredited these very charges two years earlier, in his 2001 book Uncivil Wars: The Controversy About Slavery, wherein he wrote:

“For thousands of years, until the end of the Eighteenth Century, slavery had been considered a normal institution of human societies. In all that time, no group had arisen to challenge its legitimacy. Of course, there were many slave revolts from the times of Moses and Spartacus, in which those who had been enslaved sought to gain their freedom. But that was not the point. The freedom they had sought was their own. They did not revolt against the institution of slavery as such. What had happened in the English-speaking countries at the dawn of the American Republican was entirely unique. Before then, no one had thought to form a movement dedicated to the belief that the institution of slavery was itself immoral. What was important in this historical fact was that it showed that white Europeans who were the target of the reparations indictment had played a pivotal role in the emancipation from slavery.”

Berlet’s gross misrepresentations of Horowitz’s work can only be understood in the context of Berlet’s own political and ideological track record. For instance, in the mid-1970s he volunteered to work on Counterspy magazine, an anti-CIA periodical founded by Philip Agee, the onetime intelligence officer who subsequently turned against the agency and spent years exposing the identity of undercover American spies who were stationed overseas. During the Cold War, Berlet was a supporter of Communist police states—most notably Albania, one of the most backward and repressive. Indeed, in 1983 Berlet was a founding member of the Chicago Area Friends of Albania, a Communist front group that supported the People’s Socialist Republic of Albania and the repressive political rule of the Marxist-Leninist dictator Enver Hoxha. And for the past 35 years Berlet has been a paralegal member of the National Lawyers Guild, which throughout the Cold War embraced pro-Soviet agendas while systematically opposing the foreign policies of the United States, and which continues to depict America as the principal wellspring of evil on earth.

In 2010 SPLC denounced the Tea Party, which advocated reductions in government spending and taxes, as a movement that was “shot through with rich veins of radical ideas, conspiracy theories, and racism.”

Another of SPLC’s bedrock beliefs is its conviction that the U.S., in addition to being inherently racist, is also a homophobic nation that countenances all manner of injustice against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people—who, according to the Center, are “far more likely to be victims of a violent hate crime than any other minority group in the United States.” SPLC tars anyone objecting to transformative cultural changes involving homosexuals—such as gay marriage—as a “hate” monger whose opinions have no more legitimacy than those of an Aryan militia. Thus did the Center once list the conservative Family Research Council as a hate group, chiefly because of its opposition to same-sex marriage and its view that homosexuality is an “unnatural” condition “associated with negative physical and psychological health effects.” It should be noted that FRC expresses no malice at all toward homosexuals, as demonstrated not only by its professed “sympathy” for “those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions,” but also by its call for “every effort … to assist such persons to overcome those attractions.”

SPLC’s list of hate groups and extremist groups also includes the Traditional Values Coalition, a conservative organization that opposes homosexuality on religious grounds and rejects the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, a bill that would designate transgendered people (cross-dressers) as a “protected class” whom employers would not be free to eliminate from job-applicant pools on that basis.

SPLC sees “Islamophobia”—hatred and fear based on religious faith—as yet another major defect in the American character. The June 2012 edition of Intelligence Report, for instance, featured a hit-piece titled “30 New Activists Heading Up the Radical Right,” which claimed that “an anti-Muslim movement, almost entirely ginned up by political opportunists and hard-line Islamophobes, has grown enormously since taking off in 2010, when reported anti-Muslim hate crimes went up by 50%.”

That seemingly ominous statistic seems less foreboding, however, when one considers that according to FBI data, the number of “reported anti-Muslim hate crimes” nationwide increased from 107 in 2009 to 160 in 2010—technically a 50% increase, but hardly what could be characterized as an epidemic in a nation of more than 300 million people. Further, SPLC’s report gives no indication that the anti-Muslim hate-crime count of 2010 was in fact consistent with the normal, slightly fluctuating incidence of such events in other years—e.g., 155 in 2002, 149 in 2003, and 156 in 2004. Equally noteworthy is the fact that when the number of anti-Muslim hate crimes had dropped from 156 in 2006 to 115 in 2007—and from 481 in 2001 (the year of the 9/11 attacks) to 155 in 2002—the Center never thought to suggest that bigotry against Muslims was steeply declining.

SPLC’s “30 New Activists” report dismisses, as purveyors of hate, a number of scholars, researchers, and journalists who have examined and discussed, in a thoughtful and responsible manner, the teachings, values, history, and objectives of militant Islamists. Among those smeared in the report are World Net Daily publisher Joseph Farah, American Center for Security Policy founder Frank Gaffney, blogger/activist Pamela Geller, and Accuracy in Media director Cliff Kincaid. In an effort to marginalize these individuals, SPLC lumps them together with Klansmen and neo-Nazis.

In October 2016, SPLC published a report titled Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists, a blacklist profiling 15 “Islam-bashing activists” whose “propaganda” was allegedly responsible for “fueling” acts of public “hatred” against “American Muslims,” who purportedly “have been under attack” in the U.S. “ever since the Al Qaeda massacre of Sept. 11, 2001.” The subjects of these profiles included:

  • Ann Corcoran, founder of the blog Refugee Resettlement Watch
  • Steven Emerson, director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism
  • Brigitte Gabriel, founder of ACT for America
  • Frank Gaffney, founder of the Center for Security Policy
  • Pamela Geller, co-founder of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (and Stop Islamization of America)
  • John Guandolo, founder of the consultation and training group, Understanding the Threat
  • Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born activist and author
  • David Horowitz, founder of the David Horowitz Freedom Center
  • Ryan Mauro, a national security analyst with the Clarion Project
  • Robert Muise, co-founder of the American Freedom Law Center
  • Maajid Nawaz, a self-identified “proud Muslim” who opposes the radicalization of his faith
  • Daniel Pipes, founder of the Middle East Forum
  • Walid Shoebat, a Palestinian American activist who converted from Islam to Christianity
  • Robert Spencer, founder of Jihad Watch
  • David Yerushalmi, co-founder of the American Freedom Law Center

Each of these individuals seeks, in writings and speeches that are firmly rooted in factual information, to inform the American public about the beliefs, values, agendas, and activities of Islamic jihadists, and about the potential consequences of widespread Muslim immigration to the United States. But SPLC—rather than simply asserting that it views the arguments or conclusions of these authors as flawed—instead smears them as wild-eyed Islamophobes who, as in the case of Gaffney, are “gripped by paranoid fantasies about Muslims destroying the West from within.” Consider, for instance, some of the easily verifiable—or at least arguable—statements that SPLC has cited as evidence of unhinged bigotry:

  • Corcoran’s assertion that “we have made a grievous error in taking the Muslim refugees, Somalis in particular, who have no intention of becoming Americans”;
  • Emerson’s assertion that the Obama administration “extensively collaborates” with the Muslim Brotherhood, and that Europe has numerous “no-go zones” which non-Muslims cannot enter without great peril to their own safety;
  • Gabriel’s assertion that any “practicing Muslim who believes the word of the Koran to be the word of Allah” and embraces Sharia Law “cannot be a loyal citizen of the United States,” and that Islamists’ “ideology … forbids them to assimilate” to Western culture;
  • Gaffney’s assertion that “we’re witnessing not just the violent kind of jihad that these Islamists believe God compels them to engage in, but also, where they must for tactical reasons, a more stealthy kind, or civilizational jihad as the Muslim Brotherhood calls it”;
  • Geller’s assertion that Islam is “the most radical and extreme ideology on the face of the earth”;
  • Hirsi Ali’s assertion that Islamic schools in the West should be shut down, and that “violence is inherent in Islam”;
  • Horowitz’s 2008 ad campaign stating that the Muslim Students Association was “founded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, the godfather of Al Qaeda and Hamas, to bring jihad into the heart of American higher education” (SPLC had once dubbed Horowitz himself as “the godfather of the anti-Muslim movement”);
  • Muise’s assertion that “stealth jihadists … covertly seek to perpetuate sharia into American society,” and that “80% of the mosques in the United States distribute literature that promotes violence against nonbelievers”;
  • Pipes’s assertion that the infamous terrorist organization ISIS is “100 percent Islamic” and “profoundly Islamic”;
  • Spencer’s assertion that “traditional Islam itself is not moderate or peaceful,” and “is the only major world religion with a developed doctrine and tradition of warfare against unbelievers”; and
  • Yerushalmi’s assertion that “our greatest enemy today is Islam,” and that “the only Islam appearing in any formal way around the world is one that seeks a world Caliphate through murder, terror and fear.”

In a 2016 interview with the Tablet, the aforementioned Maajid Nawaz stated that the SPLC staffers who had collaborated on writing the Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists were “a bunch of first-world, comfortable liberal Americans who are not Muslims [and] have decided from their comfortable perch to label me, an activist who is working within his Muslim community to push back against extremism, an anti-Muslim extremist.” Emphasizing that because SPLC’s blacklist had “put a target on my head,” Nawaz said he believed that his own life was now in danger: “This is what putting people on lists does. When Theo Van Gogh was killed in the Netherlands, a list was stuck to his body that included Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s name. It was a hit list. When Bangladeshi reformers were hacked to death by jihadist terrorists, they were working off lists.” “The left is no longer about advancing progressive values,” Nawaz added. “For them, it’s now about tribal identities, and any internal critique is seen as treachery.”

It is worth noting the serious ramifications that had previously occurred when SPLC in 2012 listed the conservative Family Research Council (FRC) as a hate group. On the morning of August 15, 2012, a domestic terrorist named Floyd Corkins walked into FRC’s Washington, DC headquarters carrying a pistol and 100 rounds of ammunition with the intention of “kill[ing] people in the building.” His plan was thwarted by an operations manager who physically tackled him to the ground. When an FBI agent subsequently asked Corkins why he had chosen to target FRC, the would-be killer replied: “It was a, uh, Southern Poverty Law lists, uh, anti-gay groups. I found them online. I did a little bit of research, went to the website. Stuff like that.”

Adhering to the theme of a profoundly hateful United States, SPLC charges that Latin American immigrants, who “perform some of the hardest, most dangerous jobs in our economy—for the least amount of pay,” are routinely “cheated out of their wages”; “denied basic protections in the workplace”; “subjected to racial profiling and harassment by law enforcement”; and “targeted for violent hate crimes.” These trends, says SPLC, have been “encouraged” by “politicians and media figures” guilty of spreading “false propaganda that scapegoats immigrants for our nation’s problems and foments resentment and hate against them.” The growth of this “civil rights crisis,” as SPLC calls it, “has been driven almost entirely by the immigration debate.” Conspicuously absent from the foregoing assertions is any acknowledgment that it is illegal immigration that sits at the heart of that debate.

SPLC derides the American Legion’s opposition to illegal immigration and amnesty as “Legionnaires’ Disease”—even though the Legion fully supports opportunities for legal immigration. The Center similarly denounces the Minuteman Project—a nonviolent, volunteer effort initiated by private American citizens seeking to restrict the flow of illegal border-crossers—as an organization whose ideals and tactics are rooted in racism. The Arizona-based American Border Patrol, which monitors traffic across Southeastern Arizona’s border with Mexico—the heart of a major smuggling corridor—is classified by SPLC as a “hate group” dominated by “anti-immigrant ideologues.” And Americans for Immigration Control, which contends that illegal immigration is a “lawless” phenomenon that “puts the future of our country in jeopardy,” is branded an “anti-immigrant” hate group.

As is typical of organizations on the left, SPLC is ever-prepared to label its political and ideological adversaries as purveyors of “hate” and “intolerance.” But in reality, that is nothing more than psychological projection. Hatred and intolerance for the opinions and values of others are prime components in the very lifeblood of SPLC.

Yet another major component of that lifeblood is money. Although SPLC possesses reserve assets valued at more than a quarter of a billion dollars, it spends, in comparison to other nonprofit organizations, an unusually small percentage of its revenues on actual program services—and a great deal on salaries, overhead, and fundraising. As The Weekly Standard reports: “CharityWatch, an independent organization that monitors and rates leading nonprofits for their fundraising efficiency, has consistently given the SPLC its lowest grade of ‘F’ (i.e., ‘poor’) for its stockpiling of assets far beyond what CharityWatch deems a reasonable reserve … to tide it over during donation-lean years.”

More than any other organization in America, the Southern Poverty Law Center has turned hate-based identity politics and grievance mongering into a highly profitable scam.

NOTE:

[1] Laird Wilcox, The Watchdogs (Olathe, KS: Editorial Research Service, 1998), p. 55.

Source : FRONTPAGE MAG

 


Jew-Hatred Dressed up As ‘Justice’

A look at the hate group Students for Justice in Palestine.

Editor’s note: The following is the second in a series of articles highlighting the network of major hate groups in America that are supported and funded by the Left. For more information on Students for Justice in Palestine, visit the organization’s profile at DiscoverTheNetworks.org. For the previous profile on the Southern Poverty Law Center, click here

Founded at UC Berkeley in October of 2000, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) is a highly influential campus organization with chapters based at approximately 200 American colleges and universities, where it organizes and sponsors anti-Israel events and campaigns more actively than any other student group in the nation. SJP’s declared mission is to “promote the cause of justice,” “speak out against oppression,” and “educate members of our community specifically about the plight of the Palestinian people” at the hands of alleged Israeli abuses. The benign tenor of this mission statement stands in stark contrast, however, to the countless reams of SJP propaganda that echo much of what is said by the Hamas terrorists who seek to permanently end Israel’s existence as a sovereign Jewish state. The reason for this is simple: SJP was in essence formed to help spread anti-Semitism through the halls of American academia; to wage a campus war against Israel by providing rhetorical support for the Jew-hatred undergirding the Second Palestinian Intifada which Hamas and allied terrorists had recently launched in late September 2000.

SJP’s principal founder, Hatem Bazian, has quoted approvingly from a famous Islamic hadith which calls for the violent slaughter of Jews and which appears in Hamas’s founding charter. He once spoke at a fundraising dinner for a Hamas front group that the U.S. government later shut down due to the organization’s ties to Islamic terrorism. On another occasion, Bazian portrayed Hamas as “a classical anti-colonial nationalist and religious guerrilla movement.” And he described Hamas’s victory in the 2006 Gaza elections as “a monumental event.”

Notwithstanding Hamas’s calls for the mass murder and genocide of Jews, the website of SJP’s UC Berkeley chapter describes Hamas not as a terrorist group but rather as “a vast social organization” that “provides schools, medical care, and day care for a number of Palestinians who otherwise live difficult lives”; a group with a “clean record as far as domestic corruption in governance [is] concerned”; and an entity whose “officials have often stated that they are ready for a long-term truce with Israel during which time final status negotiations can occur.”

It is commonplace for SJP’s rank-and-file members to support, or to at least decline to condemn, Islamic terrorism. As a Columbia University SJP member said in 2002: “We support the right of Palestinians to resist occupation and do not dictate the methods of that struggle. There’s a difference between violence of the oppressed and violence of the oppressors.”

That same year, SJP’s national convention was sponsored by the Islamic Association for Palestine, a now-defunct, Illinois-based front group for Hamas. The conference featured keynote speaker Sami Al-Arian, a former University of South Florida professor who served as the North American leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a terrorist organization whose objectives include the destruction of Israel, the elimination of all Western influences in the Middle East by means of armed warfare, and the convergence of all Muslim countries into a single Islamic caliphate.

Routinely denouncing Israeli self-defense measures as assaults on the civil and human rights of Palestinians, SJP generally neglects to judge those measures in the context of Palestinian terror attacks. For example, in a September 2014 “vigil” at Binghamton University in honor of Palestinians who had been killed in Operation Protective Edge—Israel’s then-recent military incursion into Gaza—SJP member Victoria Brown told the campus newspaper that her group’s goal was to “commemorate” and “humanize” the Palestinian “children, women and innocent civilians who were massacred” by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). Yet she made no mention of the fact that the IDF’s actions were in response to a massive barrage of deadly rockets that Hamas terrorists had been firing indiscriminately into southern Israel.

On another occasion, New York City’s SJP created posters lauding the Palestinian terrorist Leila Khaled—who in September 1970 had participated in the multiple hijacking of five jetliners—for “committing her life to be a freedom fighter in the struggle for Palestinian liberation.”

In a similar spirit, a number of SJP chapters hold annual commemorations in honor of the late Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group which Islam expert Robert Spencer has described as “the parent organization of Hamas and al Qaeda.” Al-Banna was an inveterate Jew-hater who firmly opposed the creation of Israel in 1948 and strove to forge a formal alliance with Hitler and Mussolini when World War II broke out. Al-Banna was also the mentor of Haj Amin Al-Husseni, the pro-Hitler father of Palestinian nationalism.

In 2012, Cornell University’s SJP issued a publication featuring a logo of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a terrorist organization that embraces “a revolutionary understanding of Marxism” and views the “liberation” of Palestine as a key component of Communism’s worldwide ascendancy.

Promoting the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions Movement

SJP is America’s leading campus promoter of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, a Hamas-inspired initiative that aims to use various forms of public protest and economic pressure to advance the Hamas agenda of Israel’s destruction. While Hamas pursues this goal in its low-intensity war against Israel by means of terrorism and bloodshed, BDS supplements those efforts by pushing for three forms of nonviolent punitive action designed to cripple Israel’s economy and bring the nation to its knees politically: (1) coordinated boycotts that aim to intimidate and coerce corporations, universities, and individuals into breaking off their business relationships with Israel; (2) decisions by banks, pension funds, corporations, and other entities to withdraw any financial investments which they may have made in the state of Israel or in companies that operate there; and (3) targeted sanctions—such as trade penalties or bans, arms embargoes, and the severing of diplomatic ties—imposed by governments around the world against Israel specifically.

Using these tactics, SJP and its allies in the BDS movement seek to lay the psychological and rhetorical groundwork for: (a) creating the false impression that Israel has illegally and immorally usurped large swaths of land that rightfully belong to the Palestinians; (b) depicting Israel as a habitual human-rights violator guilty of subjecting its Palestinian neighbors to brutal campaigns of “apartheid,” “ethniccleansing,” “war crimes,” “crimes against humanity,” and “genocide”; (c) likening Israeli public officials and soldiers to “Nazis,” and Gaza to a “concentration camp” or “ghetto”; (d) delegitimizing, in the minds of people worldwide, Israel’s very right to exist as a sovereign state; and (e) promoting the idea that this illegitimate Jewish state should be replaced by an Arab-majority alternative. As NGO Monitor puts it, the effectiveness of BDS campaigns is rooted chiefly “in their ability to penetrate the public and political discourse and blur the lines between legitimate criticism of Israel and the complete delegitimization of Israel in the international arena.”

SJP’s Activities & Tactics

Condemning “the racism and discrimination underlying the policies and laws of the state of Israel,” SJP’s various chapters actively organize protests, memorials, educational forums, lectures, panel discussions, teach-ins, seminars, workshops, film screenings, and other events designed to “give a voice to the Palestinian narrative as well as highlight the plight of the Palestinian people under Israeli aggression.” Particularly notable is the fact that since 2005, a number of SJP chapters have designated one week of every academic year as “Palestine Awareness Week” or, alternatively, “Israel Apartheid Week.” These weeks feature an array of SJP-sponsored events where Israel is repeatedly denounced in incendiary language as an apartheid state that is guilty of human-rights abuses, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and even genocide.

SJP’s Chief Supporter

The most significant and influential supporter of SJP is American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), which was established in 2005 by none other than SJP co-founder Hatem Bazian. Writes Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD): “AMP provides speakers, training, printed materials, a so-called ‘Apartheid Wall,’ and [financial] grants to SJP activists. AMP even has a campus coordinator on staff whose job is to work directly with SJP and other pro-BDS campus groups across the country. According to an email it sent to subscribers, AMP spent $100,000 on campus activities in 2014 alone.” Further, AMP has co-sponsored events with various SJP chapters.

At least eight of AMP’s current board members, key officials, and close allies were previously members of now-defunct Islamic extremist groups that funded terrorist activities. Those groups included the Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood (which was established by the Brotherhood to advance Hamas’s agendas in the U.S.); the Islamic Association for Palestine (which served as the chief U.S. propaganda and recruitment arm of Hamas); the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (which from 1995-2001 contributed approximately $12.4 million in money, goods, and services to Hamas); and KindHearts for Charitable Humanitarian Development (a Hamas fundraising entity).

The Final Analysis

So you see, SJP’s name is highly misleading—not only to the American public, but also to the many useful idiots who constitute the organization’s devoted members and foot soldiers. As far as SJP is concerned, “Justice in Palestine” can best be achieved by advancing the agendas of this generation’s foremost Jew-haters.

Source : FRONTPAGE MAG


The New Black Panther Party: Black Racism Personified

Any “national conversation” on race must acknowledge the most taboo racism of all.

Editor’s note: Below is the third installment in a series of articles highlighting the network of major hate groups in America that are supported and funded by the Left. Click the following for the previous profile on the Souther Poverty Law Center and Students for Justice in Palestine

Founded in 1990, the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense (NBPP) is a militant black separatist organization that promotes racial violence against Jews and whites. NBPP preaches a “Ten-Point Platform” similar to its that of its namesake – the murderous Black panther Party of the 1960s and ’70s – demanding such things as: “full employment for our [black] people,” in light of the fact that “the white man has … used every dirty trick in the book to stand in the way of our freedom and independence”; “the overdue debt of reparations” from “this wicked racist government [that] has robbed us”; exemption for blacks “from all taxation”; and “education for our people that exposes the true nature of this devilish and decadent American society.”

Khalid Abdul Muhammad, a onetime spokesman for Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, joined NBPP in the mid-1990s and by1998 had become NBPP’s chairman. He earned a reputation as an inveterate racist and anti-Semite by characterizing Jews as “slumlords in the black community” who were busy “sucking our [blacks’] blood on a daily and consistent basis”; asserting that Jews had provoked Adolf Hitler when they “went in there, in Germany, the way they do everywhere they go, and they supplanted, they usurped”; telling a San Francisco State University audience that “the white man is the Devil”; declaring that blacks, in retribution against South African whites of the apartheid era, should “kill them all”; and praising a black man who had shot some twenty white and Asian commuters in a racially motivated shooting spree aboard a New York commuter train as a hero who possessed the courage to “just kill every goddamn cracker that he saw.” Muhammad also advised blacks that “[t]here are no good crackers, and if you find one, kill him before he changes.”

When Muhammad died in February 2001, he was succeeded as NBPP chairman by his longtime protégé, Malik Zulu Shabazz. At a rally the previous summer, Shabazz had openly called for a race war in which black young people would unite against the “common enemy” so that “we will see caskets and funerals in the[ir] community.”

In the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, NBPP promoted numerous conspiracy theories alleging Jewish complicity. NBPP officer Amir Muhammad, for instance, suggested that Jews had been forewarned about the terror plot and thus had stayed away from the attack sites on 9/11: “There are reports that as many as 3,000 to 5,000 so-called Jews did not go to work [at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon] that day, and we need to take a serious look at that.”

In yet another false claim, NBPP has consistently maintained that Jews were “significantly and substantially” involved in the transatlantic slave trade.

In March 2012, NBPP weighed in on the explosive case of Trayvon Martin, a black teenager who had recently been shot and killed under disputed circumstances by a “white Hispanic” named George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida. Declaring that “White America” would no longer be permitted to “kill black children and get away with it,” the Panthers initially offered a $10,000 bounty for the “capture” of Zimmerman, “DEAD or ALIVE.” Soon thereafter, the Panthers upped the ante to $1 million, a sum which they expected to collect in donations “from the black community.”

On April 6, 2012, three NBPP leaders conducted a group phone conference to discuss a scheduled rally that was to be held in memory of Trayvon Martin. During the course of that conversation, they called on black people to get “suited, booted, and armed up for this race war” against “these honkies, these crackers, these pigs, these people, these motherfu**er[s],” and they demanded “the destruction” of “that blonde-haired, blue-eyed, sometimes brown-eyed, Caucasian walkin’ around with a mindset, a demonistic mindset, and a nature to do evil and brutality.”

In May 2012, NBPP’s national field marshal, King Samir Shabazz, made a number of racially charged statements, including the following:

  • “I love white-on white-crime, because that is the best crime, and we‘re going say ‘black power’ to that.”
  • “I love black people, and I hate the g*ddamn white man, woman, and child, grandma, aunt, uncle, Pappa Billy Bob, and whoever else…. I hate the very look of white people. I hate the sound of white people. G*ddamnit, I hate the smell of white people.”
  • “You should be thankful we’re not running around here hanging crackers by nooses and all that kind of stuff, yet, yet, yet.”

In a June 2012 segment on NBPP Radio, an NBPP member known as “General TACO” (acronym for “Taking All Capitalists Out”) warned that his organization would “hunt” white people’s “pink asses down” and kill them because of their “history” of pushing “crack, AIDS and unemployment” on black people in order to “exterminate” them. “Once [white people] die,” he added, “we should dig ’em up, and kill ’em again, bury ’em, dig ’em up, and kill ’em again, and again, and again!”

In October 2013, Malik Zulu Shabazz announced that he was stepping down from his position as NBPP’s national chairman in order to focus on his career as an attorney with Black Lawyers for Justice, though he pledged to continue serving NBPP as a “spiritual guide.” His replacement as NBPP’s national chairman was Hashim Nzinga, who had previously served as the organization’s chief of staff.

It was a seamless transition from Shabazz to Nzinga, as the latter took the reins of NBPP with a well-established reputation as a race-baiting hate monger. Indeed, Nzinga proclaims that because America has “declared war on us,” NBPP members are “willing to die or kill to save our babies and to save a black nation that is dying before our eyes.” “So if we say we are at war,” adds Nzinga, “we should be applauded like George Washington. We should be applauded like Thomas Jefferson. We should be applauded like the Founding Fathers of the country.”

Nzinga and his NBPP comrades view themselves as the aspiring founders of a new nation rooted in identity politics and violent tribal hatred – the very antithesis of what Washington and Jefferson envisioned. If the Panthers have their way, American streets will run red with blood, and the values of tolerance and civility that grew out of the Enlightenment will be replaced by a vengeful barbarism no better than that of ISIS and its murderous butchers.

Source : FRONTPAGE MAG


America is at War

We are at War with the liberal media and their lies

We are at War with Hate Groups like those listed above

We are at War with Career Politicians

We are at War with Political Correctness

We are at War with Silence……..

 Because Silence is Consent!!!

Educate yourself and your family and anyone else who will listen!!!

Be silent for no one!!!

 

Staged “Hate Crimes” meant to give credibility to claims of “Islamaphobia”

CAIR and other groups have on more than one occasion “Staged” crimes to give the appearance of “anti-Muslim” sentiment across the U.S..

Why would they do that? Well because they love to get themselves on television where they make claims of “Islamaphobia” and of Americans committing horrible hate crimes against Muslims all across the country.

Since very few crimes are actually committed against the Muslim population in America they have to fabricate some, so they can continue to play “victims” while they victimize others.

It is all a part of the Jihad being fought to take control over this country. The liberal media will go on and on about these fake crimes, repeating these claims often so Americans will feel guilty, and not pay attention to what is taking place here. I’ve seen this many times in the past, and expect to see it many more.

Don’t buy into this nonsense, it is all part of their grand facade, to hide what is actually taking place. The Jihad is real. The dangers are real. These claims of “Islamaphobia” running rampant in the streets of the United States are FAKE!

 

 

 

Here is a story I read today on Jihad Watch :


Fake hate crime in Ohio: Muslim charged with painting anti-Arab graffiti

Hamas-linked CAIR and other Muslims have on many occasions not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating “hate crimes,” including attacks on mosques. A New Jersey Muslim was found guilty of murder that he tried to portray as an “Islamophobic” attack, and in 2014 in California, a Muslim was found guilty of killing his wife, after first blaming her murder on “Islamophobia.”

This kind of thing happens quite frequently. The New York Daily News reported that “a woman who told cops she was called a terrorist and slashed on her cheek in lower Manhattan on Thursday later admitted she made up the story, police said early Friday. The woman, who wore a headscarf, told authorities a blade-wielding wacko sliced open her face as she left a Manhattan cosmetology school, police sources said.”

We were told that a Muslim boy was attacked and beat up on his school bus in North Carolina — but a photo showed him without a scratch and no one on the bus corroborated his story. And recently in Britain, the murder of a popular imam was spread far and wide as another “Islamophobic hate crime” – until his killer also was found to be a Muslim. The Mirror reported that the imam “was targeted because he had made efforts to turn youngsters away from radical Islam.”

According to The Detroit News, a Muslim woman, Saida Chatti, was “charged with making a false police report after she allegedly fabricated a plot to blow up Dearborn Fordson High School to retaliate against the November terrorist attacks in Paris….Police say Chatti called Dearborn investigators Nov. 19, six days after Islamic extremists killed 130 people in Paris.”

And similarly in Britain, a Muslim woman was “fined for lying to police about being attacked for wearing a hijab. The 18-year-old student, known only as Miss Choudhury, said she was violently shoved from behind and punched in the face by a man in Birmingham city centre 10 days after the atrocities in the French capital on November 13.”

“Charges filed in connection to racially charged graffiti on Sylvania Twp. home,” by Christopher Burns, WNWO, February 15, 2017:

SYLVANIA TWP., Oh. (WNWO) — Authorities say charges have been filed in connection to a graffiti incident on the garage door of an Arab family in Lucas County.

Sylvania Township police say Osama Nazzal, 28, of Toledo, was charged with criminal damaging in connection to the incident.

On Jan. 10, the Sylvania Twp. home of Souheir Eltatawi had been spray-painted with a swastika and derogatory phrase that read, “Expletive Arabs.”…

Click the link below to view the original story by Robert Spencer posted on Jihad Watch

Source : Jihad Watch


Robert Spencer and

Jihad Watch

are excellent sources of news. You should subscribe today! Stay informed on the events affecting us all.

Hooray for Gov. Greg Abbott and Hooray for Immigration Enforcement!

 I read the following story this morning in The Daily Texan and thought I’d share it with all of you. People who don’t want existing immigration laws enforced like to call the rest of us things like “bigots” and “racists” just because we want our immigration laws upheld by those charged with their enforcement. That does not make us racists! And it does not make us bigots, or haters, or members of the KKK.

America is a nation of “mutts”. The people here came from all around the world in search of better place to raise their children. Everyone here, with the exception of the Native American Indians, came from somewhere else! The people of America come in every race, creed, and color known to man. We are “Americans”. Not African-American, or Asian-American, or Mexican American etc, we are just Americans. The “Mutts” of the world. Why mutts? We are mutts because just like the name implies, we are a mixed breed of every race and color of human being found  on the planet.

We are the minorities of the world, all of us. That is what makes us the greatest country in the world. So to run around calling Americans names like “racists” just shows your stupidity. I’m not saying that no racists exist in America because they exist, and come in every color. I’m just saying that it’s really hard to be a racist in America, since most Americans are mutts, and come from all across the globe.

What we are talking about here is not racism. We are talking about the rule of law, and enforcing the rule of law in this country. Anyone who calls us racists for wanting the law enforced is nothing more than an agitator, trying to end any debate without even having a debate. They are the brain-washed simpletons that mindlessly repeat what they’ve heard on MSNBC and they are the reason the greatest country in the world is in such a mess. And frankly I’m tired of their mouths! These days being called a racist is an every day occurrence for anyone who disagrees with the socialist agenda of the left. The people who will tell you openly that they support Socialism for America.

Just because we are mostly mutts in this country does not mean that we leave our borders unprotected, and just let anyone into the country who can swim or walk across the border. No country in the world can survive without a border and clear guidelines about who can cross it. Our world is full of terrorists and drug traffickers who want nothing more than to “Come to America”. But we cannot survive as a nation, or as a people if we just let them into our country “no questions asked”.

There is a system in place to deal with people who wish to migrate to America legally. All they need to do is go down to the immigration and naturalization office and fill out the proper forms. Then you see, they can immigrate here legally and they don’t even have to swim! They don’t have to live in fear of ICE coming to arrest and deport them, because they followed the law, instead of entering the country as a criminal. And YES, you ARE a criminal if you break the law to enter this country.

It’s how my great grandparents did it, and most likely how your forefathers done it too. Because they chose to enter America legally we are all now citizens of the greatest country in the world. Had they chose to break the law and enter the U.S. illegally we’d all be illegal aliens. Thank goodness our ancestors were not criminals, and as a reward for them obeying the law, their children and grandchildren are citizens too.

Rewarding the act of illegally crossing into the U.S. with citizenship is not even an option. You cannot survive as a country by rewarding those who break the law. An illegal alien’s first act upon entering this country was to break our immigration laws! That means that him/her should be deported. His/Her children should be deported too. Deported for knowingly violating our immigration laws, PERIOD. And it’s sad. It’s sad to see children and their families deported because their parents broke the law when entering the country.

It was sad when my father-in-law went to prison for 20 years too. But he broke the law, when he robbed the Wells Fargo bank so he went! I mean can we really only enforce laws that make nobody sad? My father-in-law had a wife and children that needed him home, but that did not stop the government from sending him to prison. And rightly so. Because America is a nation of laws, and not of men, we do sad things to maintain law and order.

Why did I go into that you ask. Because most of the arguments from those standing in the way of immigration enforcement will have “The children” in there somewhere. How miserable and pathetic they are, and how we cannot just deport them because of what their parents did. Wonder where those people were when my wife grew up fatherless? The children never entered the picture, the judge said “20 years” and it was over.

We need more strong leaders like Greg Abbott in this country. He has my full support, and that of most Texans. I’ve talked enough, here is the first of 2 stories I’d like to share with you. It was posted in The Daily Texan on 02/01/2017.

And following this story I’d like to share another story from The Dallas Morning News in which you can hear some of what I’m talking about above from immigration enforcement opponents. We have a clip of community organizers, you know the ones who say we are all racists and bigots because we want our immigration laws enforced, and we have Dallas County passing a resolution they call “Welcoming Communities” which basically states they are a sanctuary city. The folks of Dallas County supposedly support this stand. We’ll see how committed to it they are when they are asked to dig into their pockets to replace the Grant money they lost by taking this stand. Anyone can be an idealist, it’s easy with other people’s money. Let’s see how they fare using their own money.

 


Gov. Greg Abbott cuts $1.5 million in funds for Travis County for sheriff’s immigration policy

Photo Credit: Marshall Tidrick | Daily Texan Staff

Gov. Greg Abbott withheld $1.5 million in grants for Travis County after Sheriff Sally Hernandez enacted a policy to not comply with federal immigration agents Wednesday, according to the Texas Tribune.

“We are in a legislative session — we are working on laws that will, one, ban sanctuary cities, remove from office any office holder who promotes sanctuary cities and impose criminal penalties as well as financial penalties,” Abbott told Fox News last week.

The County lost the Criminal Justice Grant from Abbott’s office after Hernandez said, starting today, she would not allow immigration agents to detain undocumented immigrants held in local jails without a warrant. Immigration Agents make detainer requests to investigate jailed undocumented immigrants, and Hernandez said in a video last week these requests only ask but do not require local law enforcement to fulfill them.

“I will not allow fear and misinformation to be my guiding principles as a leader sworn to protect this community,” Hernandez said in a statement from the Travis County Sheriff’s Office on Thursday. “Our community is safer when people can report crimes without fear of deportation.”

Abbott said last week he would seek a bill to remove elected officials who do not comply with federal immigration enforcement. Hernandez said she will comply with detainer requests without warrants from a judge only for undocumented immigrants who commit sexual assault, murder or human trafficking, according to the Statesman.

On Tuesday during his State of the State address, Abbott made banning sanctuary cities an emergency item to discipline those protecting undocumented immigrants from federal immigration enforcement.

“Elected officials cannot pick and choose which laws they will obey,” Abbott said. “Some law enforcement officials in Texas are openly refusing to enforce an existing law. That is unacceptable.”

 

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick filed Senate Bill 4 banning sanctuary cities, and the bill is set for a public hearing on Thursday at 8 a.m.

 


Source : The Daily Texan


 

 

I agree with Greg Abbott 100%. Officials cannot pick and choose which laws they enforce. Their job is to enforce existing laws, period! They cannot allow their political views to obstruct their duties. These officials are refusing to enforce immigration laws which have been on the books for many years. This is a fine example of those who oppose immigration enforcement. It has most of the major elements anyway.

People like us who support immigration enforcement are labeled as “bigots” and “haters” in a round about way, and sometimes are directly called bigots and racists. The lady in the video at the bottom is representative of 95% of those opposing immigration enforcement.

She says “We are not going to stand for bigotry and hatred”. Let me tell you something lady, I DO hate people like you!!! But NOT because of your Gender, Color, or Sexual Orientation etc.

I hate you because you spread hate. You spend your days convincing others that people who want our laws enforced are bigots and racists, when in reality they are only doing their duty as citizens by asking that our laws are upheld by enforcement agencies.

The great thing about America is that if you disagree with a law you have the ability to petition to have it changed. If your Representative won’t see about changing it, then you can vote for one that will. What you cannot do is “pick and choose” which laws you will enforce and which laws you will not. In the era of Obama people seem to have forgotten that.

Just like when Eric Holder and the Justice Department went after Conservative Groups using government agencies to audit, harass, and fine people because they disagree with them politically. That is called “Tyranny” folks. It’s when the laws ore “overlooked” for your friends, but overly enforced on those which you disagree.

This country has allowed Obama and Eric Holder to just steamroll over the rights of their political rivals while overlooking the illegal actions of their friends. They both belong in prison for their actions. If our founders were alive today I guarantee you they’d agree with me, and take actions to make it a reality. I want you to watch the liberals scream and whine like babies when Trump performs the exact same actions that they said Obama “Had the authority” to do!

Here is the story from The Dallas Morning News, The video is a link at the very bottom.

To view the story go to the source page by clicking here

Dallas County leaders fear immigrant kids will be locked up under Gov. Abbott’s new rules

 


Hillary Clinton Tops “Islamist Money in Politics” List

I just don’t know about America these days. We have Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump running for President. Hillary has been manipulating our political system for her own gain for years. And on the other hand, America is full of people who say “It’s time we get rich people out of politics!” Yet one of the richest in America, “The Donald” gets the Republican nomination!

I feel as if Americans are yet again forced to choose “The lesser of the two evils”. Don’t get me wrong, I am in agreement with what Trump says. My only issue with him is his past ACTIONS.

The fact that Trump has been a registered Democrat for the better part of his life doesn’t sit well with me, neither does the fact that he has been one of the biggest financial supporters of politicians who stand diametrically opposed to my way of thinking.

People such as Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel, and Harry Reid. Politicians who  ALL received financial support from Donald Trump in recent years. How can you square that with the Conservative views he now claims to hold??? America seems to have the attention span of a 3rd grader with ADHT in a room full of toys and 30 kids, with 3 children’s  movies playing at one time!

America at War just don’t know anymore!!!

With that being said, here’s the story.


Frontpage Mag

hillary-hijab_3

There are some very dubious awards out there that you just don’t want to win. Being one of the top recipients of Islamic money in politics certainly tops that list. Hillary Clinton likes to complain about dark money. This is as dark as money gets. As the Middle East Forum’s research shows.

Hillary Clinton tops the list, raking in $41,165 from prominent Islamists. This includes $19,249 from senior officials of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates on November 15, 2014.

For example, Mrs. Clinton has accepted $3,900 from former CAIR vice-chairman Ahmad Al-Akhras, who has defended numerous Islamists in Ohio indicted – and later convicted – on terrorism charges.

Among other current presidential candidates, Jill Stein has accepted $250. Donald Trump and Gary Johnson have not received any Islamist money.

Other top recent recipients of money from the enemy include Rep. Keith Ellison ($17,370) and Rep. Andre Carson ($13,225).

The top ten list includes nine Democrats, one independent (Sen. Bernie Sanders accepted $9,285), and no Republicans.

I don’t think that’s too surprising to anyone. Though you have to feel sorry for Jill Stein. She hates Israel and announced she wouldn’t have killed Osama bin Laden. What’s a girl gotta do to get ahead on Jihad Street anyway?

Source : FRONTPAGE MAG

German asylum seekers refuse to work: ‘We are Merkel’s guests’| Jihad Watch

JIHAD WATCH

August 18, 2016 11:47 pm By

Decisions on Muslim migration made by leftist politicians have become a scourge on the German people and other European citizens, who have witnessed the slow metamorphosis of their peaceful communities while they pay with their tax dollars for the recklessness of their leaders such as Angela Merkel. Tens of thousands of crimes and assaults have been committed by Muslim migrants in Germany, but these are less of a concern to the politicians who walk with their security detail and their bank accounts intact.

Even in the midst of the Muslim migrant crisis in Germany, Mayor Bernd Pohlers of the eastern town of Saxony Waldenburg, where the asylum seekers refused to accept work, stated his concern about this latest piece of news playing “into the hands of those opposing the mass migration,” evincing yet again the all too familiar stench of political posturing and a cruel disregard for those who cast their votes in trust.

Merkel-701556

“German asylum seekers refuse to work insisting ‘We are Merkel’s GUESTS’”, by Siobhan McFadyen and Monika Pallenberg, UK Express, August 18, 2016:

ASYLUM seekers in Germany are refusing to undertake work to counteract boredom – using Chancellor Angela Merkel’s generous hospitality as an excuse.

According to mayor Bernd Pohlers of the eastern town of Saxony Waldenburg, the asylum seekers refused to accept the work that was offered to them after they arrived in the country.

The local council spent £600 arranging for the men to have uniforms but were stunned when they were told they would not complete it because they were “guests of Angela Merkel”.

While asylum seekers are not allowed to work under immigration rules within the EU, they are allowed to do voluntary work.

However officials in the district of Zwickau came up with a plan to help encourage those without employment to get back to work and to help them become more accepted within the local community.

In order to do this they created voluntary jobs which included a nominal payment of £18 for 20 hours work.

But all of the male residents of the local refugee accommodation who initially agreed to get involved in the charitable activities quit after discovering there was a minimum wage £7.30 (€8.50) in Germany.

The men had been picked up and offered transportation from their paid-for housing where they are also given food and then dropped home.

Mayor Pohlers said: “It was subsequently argued by these people that they are guests of Mrs. Merkel and guests do not have to work.

“Furthermore, they were of the opinion that there is a minimum wage (€8.50) in Germany, and that this had to be paid by the City Waldenburg.”

Despite attempts at mediation the asylum seekers refused to return to work.

Mayor Pohlers added: “In a specially convened meeting with an interpreter the authorities explained the rules again.

“Unfortunately, no agreement could be reached on the continuation of the measure.”

Now all seven of the jobs have been scrapped.

The mayor spoke out in a bid to highlight the issue of the asylum crisis in Germany.

He said he is aware his statements could play into the hands of those opposing the mass migration.

However after having raised money from the local community to help aid the asylum seeker’s transition into the community, he felt compelled to speak out…..

Source : Jihad Watch


America at War

Featured Image -- 1045

    I Would like to point out that the current administration would like nothing more than to flood our streets with these same “Guests“. And when/if they are allowed to do so, American tax payers will bear the burden. Our “guests” will insist on housing of course, and surely a free college education will be expected for adults and children alike. (most likely in atomic energy or piloting aircraft.)

Featured Image -- 1117

    And what good is an education if our guests don’t have healthcare? And unlike any poor American who must catch the bus or walk, our guests will expect and demand transportation. Next they will be whining about Denny’s serving bacon on the breakfast menu, and demanding the local butcher remove all pork from his shop.

bacon-muslims-1024x536

   Your local school will certainly have to remove any pork from the lunch and breakfast menu, if they haven’t already. American prisoners are already being denied pork in many prisons because of this now, the one source of “meat” a prisoner gets, removed because of…… someone else’s religion???

The complaints about Christian Symbols and Crosses will never cease, but will barely be audible over the “Call to Prayer” blasting from loudspeakers all over town, multiple times daily. (Like can be heard in Michigan today) As the Churches across America fall victim to fire and explosions.

burnt-church

 

   Every non-Muslim who wishes to protect his or her freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution will suddenly become some sort of “Hate-Monger” or “Islamaphobe” because they wish to protect their right to free speech. Because there is no such thing as “free speech” in Islam. If you disagree with Islam then you are killed under Sharia Law.

jd-672x372

    Muslims believe that non-Muslims exist only to serve them. A non-Muslim is viewed as “Unclean, Dirty, Less than Human.” They believe themselves to be superior to you and I, and view us as nothing more than “something to be used for their own benefit.” This is why women Worldwide are raped, tortured, and murdered EVERY SINGLE DAY all across the planet by Muslims. You have NO RIGHTS as a non-Muslim in a Muslim controlled country. You are nothing more than an object. They feel they are superior to you in every way

     When their numbers are great enough, and the murders and the daily beheadings have you afraid, they may allow your family to live as  “Dhimmis” and graciously allow you to contribute to their cause by paying  the “Jizya”, which is a tax levied against non-Muslims in  Muslim countries. If you have never heard of this you should do some research, since it may well be in your future if this Administration has it’s way.

isis-ethiopian-beheading-2-christian-april-2015

     So you’ll be paying for them to come here. Then you’ll pay for their housing, electricity, water, phone, internet, and education. And then you can pay them their “Jizya” tax on Infidels. Then you’ll be expected to clean their house as well…. Just like in Europe today. They won’t work, because they are “guests”. And besides….. You’ll be their little “Dhimmi”, and as such you’ll be required to pay the “Jizya” or be beheaded.

011

    Sounds like good times don’t it?

sharia

Well the fun has not even started yet!!!

    The rapes will begin on day one, and will NEVER end! Women will become nothing more than “meat” like in every other Muslim country across the world. If your wife or daughter gets attacked, raped, and beaten…… Most likely SHE will be put in jail for the crime, or maybe stoned to death. And you’ll be left to suck on it. Because under Sharia Law that’s how it works! Muslim men apparently cannot help themselves, and it is the woman’s fault he rapes her like an animal, because she “tempted” him in some way.  If you don’t believe me, research it for yourself!

11002

Sharia Law is coming soon to a town near YOU!

sweden-rape11

 

So next time you hear a politician (with 15 armed secret service agents) talking about restricting YOUR second amendment right to own a firearm, just remember where we are heading. And then give some serious thought as to why they’d want you disarmed. Then give some serious thought to why we have not locked that scumbag politician up as a traitor, and thrown him in a cell with a 300 pound lonely fella named “Bubba”.

holder_obama_prison_butt_buddy_fudge_packers


  I’d rather die on my feet, than to live on my knees!!!

The right to self-defense is one given to you by Almighty God himself, and no man or government has the authority to strip you of that right!

14352313610615

Protect your Second Amendment Rights!!! Join the NRA TODAY!!!

Join the NRA now for $30 or 5 years for $100

 

Give it some thought, I’m gonna go make a bacon sandwich and clean my gun, maybe read a couple verses in my Bible. Unlike our enemies, I feel safer knowing my neighbors are armed! So ARM YOURSELVES!!!

 

Conservative Thinker

 

 

Obama Decree Targets Gunsmiths and Online Firearm Information

The New American

Wednesday, 17 August 2016 09:19

Obama Decree Targets Gunsmiths and Online Firearm Information

Written by

When Obama vowed to use his “pen and phone” to circumvent Congress and impose his will on America, he was actually telling the truth for once. In the latest example of lawless decrees coming from the executive branch, the Obama administration is taking aim at gunsmiths and free speech. Basically, if a recent “regulation” disguised as “guidance” is not stopped, gunsmithing — an American tradition stretching back centuries that was crucial in the War for Independence — will be effectively made illegal, experts say.

Another controversial element of the decree would purport to unconstitutionally criminalize many forms of gun-related speech on the Internet. If not withdrawn, the illegal Obama decree would purport to shred the rights protected by the Constitution’s First and Second Amendments by making it illegal to post any “how-to” information about guns online. It would also effectively make all gun-related information on the Internet a crime because it could be accessed by foreigners.

However, as has happened with virtually all of Obama’s power grabs, opposition to the newest illegal edict is surging — this time among Second Amendment activists, gun owners, industry, and proponents of constitutional government. Grassroots organizations have called on the Obama administration to immediately withdraw the “unconstitutional power grab.” If it refuses, critics of the scheme said they would work with Congress to defund it.

The controversial decree came just weeks after the United Nations once again demanded that the U.S. government impose “robust gun control” on Americans. As part of an accelerating trend, the dictator-dominated UN increasingly exploits every possible incident to push unconstitutional attacks on gun rights under the guise of protecting what it misleadingly refers to as “human rights.”

The latest anti-gun Obama regulation also appears to be in line with the illegal UN Arms Trade Treaty. The radical treaty, which has not been ratified by the U.S. Senate despite the administration’s pleas, seeks to ultimately create a monopoly on firearms in the hands of government, dictators, and international organizations such as the UN itself — institutions that have killed hundreds of millions of people just in the last century alone.

The new decree, released on July 22 with little media fanfare and without even following the standard procedures for imposing new regulations, came from the increasingly radical John Kerry-controlled State Department. Specifically, the regulation was issued by the “Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC),” a rogue bureaucracy supposedly charged with enforcing the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).

Incredibly, under the new rules, gunsmiths — even people who simply thread a barrel or make a small part for an older firearm, according to experts — will be classified as a weapons “manufacturer” subject to regulation as an exporter of military material. (Apparently the Obama administration’s Fast and Furious efforts to arm Mexican drug cartels are exempt.) That new classification will subject the small-time gunsmiths to onerous federal regulation, in addition to requiring them to register with Kerry’s DDTC and pay thousands of dollars in “fees” for the privilege.

Anyone who does not obey the new decree would be subject to extreme criminal penalties, said analysts who investigated the new regulation. Even minor violations of the complex regulatory maze — designed to prevent the export of advanced military weaponry and technology to terror groups and dictators — could result in criminal prosecution. Countless small gunsmiths will be put out of business, experts said.

The illegal State Department edict purporting to reinterpret legislation passed by Congress makes a number of previously legal activities illegal without federal registration, regulation, and permission. Among other things, the rule bans any “machining, cutting, or drilling” on a firearm, or the use of any equipment on it without complying with the maze of licensing, regulation, and more applied to exporters of military equipment.

The scheme also bans reloading, except possibly on a round-by-round basis, according to analysts. It also prohibits the production of any firearm part whatsoever without the newly required federal licenses. Even assembling firearms kits could be illegal if done more than on an “occasional” basis, with the term occasional not even being defined in the new “guidance.”

A similarly illegal decree issued by Obama’s ATF also uses vague, undefined language to threaten anyone who dares to privately sell a firearm with potential criminal prosecution — despite the fact that private sales are specifically exempt under the (already unconstitutional) laws passed by Congress. Separately, other Obama decrees are being used to disarm veterans and millions of elderly Americans receiving Social Security. And with Congress continuing to enable Obama, more illegal attacks on gun rights are expected before he leaves office.

In addition to the full-blown attack on gunsmiths, Obama is also targeting gun-related speech. Under the guise of prohibiting anyone from “assisting a foreign person in the design, development, and repair of a firearm,” the Obama administration’s “guidance” apparently criminalizes the posting of any how-to information about guns on the Internet.

So if you answer a question on an Internet forum about how to fix some gun problem, or make a Youtube video on how to fix a gun, you could end up facing federal felony charges. “This is unconstitutional under both the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution,” explained Gun Owners of America, the nation’s fiercest, most uncompromising defender of Americans’ gun rights.

“If the State Department hated ISIS as much as it hates the Second Amendment, perhaps American foreign policy would be in better shape,” the group also said in comments about the illegal Obama decrees. “It’s not surprising that two Leftist politicians, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, have produced a bureaucracy which is as consumed by political correctness as it is incapable of performing its core functions. No one is fooled by the fraudulent representations of this administration. And no one is puzzled by why the administration illegally circumvented the regulatory process in order to issue this diktat.”

As such, GOA is demanding that the Obama-Clinton-Kerry State Department immediately withdraw the schemes. “Alternatively, we will ask legislative appropriators in Congress to withdraw it,” the group said.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is also fighting back. “DDTC’s move appears aimed at expanding the regulatory sweep of the AECA/ITAR and culling many smaller commercial gunsmithing operations that do not have the means to pay the annual registration fee or the sophistication to negotiate DDTC’s confusing maze of bureaucracy,” the group’s legislative analysts said, comparing the new regulations to the ATF’s lawless and confusing attempt to intimidate private sellers with threats of arbitrary prosecution.

“The administration’s latest move serves as a timely reminder of how the politicized and arrogant abuse of executive power can be used to suppress Second Amendment rights and curtail lawful firearm-related commerce,” the NRA-ILA concluded. “That lesson should not be forgotten when voters go to the polls this November.”

Unfortunately, it will take either Congress, the courts, the new president, or some combination of those branches of government a great deal of time to undo all of the lawlessness imposed on America by Obama and his GOP enablers. However, the Republican leadership in Congress could very easily nip all of the anti-gun rights extremism in the bud by refusing to appropriate a single penny for its implementation. That way, no matter who becomes president, and no matter what the increasingly rogue federal courts say, the illegal orders issued by Obama and Kerry will be rendered harmless and meaningless.

The fact that Congress even has to consider retroactively defunding the executive branch’s illegal extremism, though, shows how far America has fallen from its roots in lawful, constitutional, self-government and the protection of God-given rights. The whole process is backwards. Long term, the only way to keep such extremism and tyranny at bay is to create an informed electorate that understands the Constitution, as well as the moral, philosophical, and religious foundations upon which America was founded.

Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, education, politics, and more. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com

Related articles:

Obama Pushes More Gun Control; Most Americans Don’t Want It

Obama Executive Orders on Guns Would Spark Mass Resistance

Obama Task Force Plotting Extreme Assault on Gun Rights

Obama Hides Executive Abuses by Calling Decrees “Memoranda”

White House Boasts of Obama Power Grabs as Congress Funds Them

Obama Versus Obama on the Use of Executive Orders

Obama to Prevent “Dangerous” People From Owning Guns

Many Challenges Face Obama’s Gun Control Executive Orders

Obama Imposed 75,000 Pages of New Regulations in 2014

Obama Admin Seeks to Curtail Gun Rights of Those on Disability Benefits

UN Demands “Robust Gun Control” After Orlando Terror

Global Gun Control Advocates to Meet in NYC to Set UN Disarmament Agenda

Obama’s Executive Order Authorizes Peacetime Martial Law

Obama Poised to Use Executive Orders to Attack Gun Rights

3D Printed Guns: More Freedom, Less Government


Source : The New American

Global Gun Control Advocates to Meet in NYC to Set UN Disarmament Agenda

28d51747fd5fd83522efa694064d799c_xl

Written by 

Anti-gun globalists will meet in New York City this week discuss ways to confiscate small arms and ammunition from civilians and to consolidate monopoly control over those weapons in the hands of the governments of United Nations (UN) member states. The convention is part of a UN-controlled process of disarmament called the Programme of Action (PoA).

From June 6-10 delegates from around the world will attend the Sixth Biennial Meeting of States (BMS6) of the PoA. This latest planning meeting will give delegates an opportunity to move the ball closer to the goal of ridding the world’s civilian population of the small arms and ammunition that could challenge the ability of UN-approved governments to carry out the will of the world body.

Serving as an agenda for the deliberations will be the Chair’s Summary published after the last meeting in 2015. For Americans, then, it will be instructive to examine this document and identify all of the proposals that would violate the Constitution, specifically the right to keep and bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment. To this end, I will highlight a few of the provisions of the Chair’s Summary that represent the most clear and present danger to liberty.

First, the plan as put forth in the Chair’s Summary calls for the UN’s member states to eliminate the threat of technologically advanced weapons, including so-called polymer firearms and 3D printed guns, as well as the tracking of materials used in the “craft-production of small arms and light weapons.”

Not surprisingly, the representative from China called for increased UN-mandated regulations on 3D printers and the weapons they produce.

Specifically, the Chair’s Summary calls for “strengthening 3D printing regulations in the context of 3D weapon printing,” for “ensuring export licenses [are] in place for 3D printers,” for drawing global attention to “the need to pay attention to the resale of such printers,” and for “strengthening controls over 3D printing technology.”

No one is shocked, of course, that the globalists at the UN want to draw up comprehensive plans to take guns — any and every variety of gun — out of the hands of civilians.

After discussing similar strategies to lock down the manufacture, purchase, sale, and transfer of polymer weapons and modular weapons, the next item on the agenda warrants an immediate withdrawal of the United States from the world body.

Paragraph 33 of the Chair’s Summary of the meeting calls for urgent tracking of civilian-owned firearms, recommending that manufacturers be forced by the UN to install “RFID and biometric technologies in limiting the access to the weapon to authorized users only,” with authorized users defined as state actors (UN member nations).

That’s right. As part of the Programme of Action (the foundation upon which the Arms Trade Treaty is built — a treaty nearly half of the U.S. Senate supports), the United States has committed to passing legislation that will require domestic firearms and ammunition manufacturers to equip their products with RFID chips and biometric technologies that will help the government slowly but surely disarm civilians.

That’s not all. At the end of that paragraph, the UN suggests governments look into combining RFID chips, biometrics, with GPS tracking technologies to be sure to prevent regular people from getting their hands on guns.

So, at this week’s meeting, the UN will not only set out the schedule of domestic gun regulations, but it will instruct third-world regimes where to look for the money to help pay for the implementation of these new disarmament policies: increased foreign aid from the United States.

Specifically, the unelected, unaccountable UN globocrats call for greater “international cooperation and assistance” (read: American taxpayer dollars) to offset the massive cost of the “transfer of technology and knowledge” necessary to make the proposed gun grab a reality.

It should be noted that Paragraph 42 of the summary proposes funding this fascism “through the UN regular budget,” 22 percent of which is paid by the United States, through a process that can be described as nothing less than legalized theft of the wealth of the American worker.

Next, the document calls for the cultivating of a “culture of peace,” which is certainly shorthand for flooding the United States with UN-created propaganda linking the civilian ownership of firearms with homicide and other violent crimes.

Given the fact that both major party presidential candidates endorse some level of federal restriction on the right to keep and bear arms, it doesn’t take too much foresight to predict a panoply of renewed calls for controlling and regulating civilian access to firearms.

Additionally, according to the text of the Chair’s Summary that will serve as the to-do list for the world’s international cadre of gun confiscators, the POA will serve as an “international instrument to enable states to identify and trace, in a timely and reliable manner,” the small arms and light weapons that are the subject of the scheme.

In practice, this means that the governments of member nations (including the United States) will soon create a massive, all-inclusive database of all parties that manufacture, own, sell, trade, or transfer arms and ammunition.

If recent history is a reliable indicator of how such data would be used, after the catalog is complete, Congress could pass a law (or the president could issue an executive order) compelling “voluntary” surrender of privately-owned weapons, ammo, parts, and components (including reloading equipment). If, after a statutorily-set window, citizens don’t turn in these items to their local law enforcement, then officers will be sent to remind violators of their responsibility under the law to disarm.

How will this worldwide tracking of weapons, ammo, and component parts be carried out?

Paragraph 32 of the Chair’s Summary lays out the plan for “real-time tracking” of firearms and ammunition “from manufacturer to storage and from storage up to the individual users.”

Once the governments of the member nations begin tracking and confiscating weapons from civilians, the Programme of Action (paragraphs 30 and 31) mandates that member governments take “direct control over transfers of small arms and light weapons.”

This control will require the federal government to begin stockpiling these items and making a database of the recently impounded guns, bullets, 3D printers, plastics, polymers, and component parts.

This database must include “the marking, record-keeping and tracing of weapons, and in this regard considered barcodes, radio frequency identification (RFID) and biometrics for purposes of electronically identifying stored items, collecting data on them and enabling the data to be entered automatically into record-keeping systems.”

It is evident from a reading of this latest UN disarmament publication that despite the rhetoric related to ”promotion of a culture of peace,” there are only two reasons the UN is making every effort to disarm the population of the United States: to weaken our sovereignty, and to take from our people their ability to resist those despots (at home and abroad) who would place us under the boot of tyranny and demote us to the ranks of slaves on a “sustainable” global plantation.

Finally, the upcoming confiscation confab will demand member states confirm their commitment to achieving the climate and sustainability goals set out in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which was adopted in September 2015. The startling complexity and comprehensiveness of these goals were examined by The New American’s Alex Newman in an article published earlier this year. Newman writes:

Perhaps the single most striking feature of Agenda 2030 is the practically undisguised roadmap to global socialism and corporatism/fascism, as countless analysts have pointed out. To begin with, consider the agenda’s Goal 10, which calls on the UN, national governments, and every person on Earth to “reduce inequality within and among countries.” To do that, the agreement continues, will “only be possible if wealth is shared and income inequality is addressed.”

Americans committed to preserving their natural right to protect their liberty from those who would threaten it through the implementation of international agreements requiring the de facto repeal of the Second Amendment are encouraged to stand together in this urgent fight for freedom.

There is no organization better positioned to prepare Americans with the resources necessary to defeat the forces of disarmament in the UN and in our own government than The John Birch Society (JBS). For more than five decades, the JBS has worked to “Get U.S. out of the UN.” The strength that results from this unmatched record of results makes the JBS uniquely able to increase the awareness of the American people for the fight to retain the right to keep and bear arms.

Source : The New American


America at War would like to add That there are things in this world worth dying over, and I would have to classify the ability to defend myself as one of those things!!! So you can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead hand