CARAVAN JIHAD?| Jihad Watch

Jihadis among the migrant caravan is not as ridiculous as CNN would have you believe.

 

caravan

CNN on Monday once again posed as the intrepid and impartial fact checker, correcting the falsehoods spread by our ridiculous and hateful President, with the headline: “Trump seizes on right-wing media reports to suggest migrant caravan has been infiltrated by ‘unknown Middle Easterners.’” And as usual, the President is in reality far closer to the mark than CNN ever is. CNN has once again proven itself to be, as Trump has so aptly and indelibly put it, very fake news.

CNN noted that “In a tweet, the President warned that ‘criminals and unknown Middle Easterners are mixed in’ the caravan of thousands of Central American migrants fleeing poverty and violence.”

After that bit of legerdemain, CNN informs the Leftist marks who still take it seriously that Trump is, as expected, all wrong and going off half-cocked yet again: “The President did not support his claim with any evidence. Sarah Sanders, the White House press secretary, told reporters on Monday afternoon that Trump ‘absolutely’ had evidence to indicate there are Middle Easterners in the caravan. Sanders, however, did not provide specific information on the matter and it was still not clear what evidence Trump had to indicate the presence of such individuals in the caravan.”

The evidence is actually abundantly clear; CNN just doesn’t want you to know it exists. The Daily Caller reported Monday that Univision correspondent Francisco Santa Anna stated: “Yesterday when we were traveling through Guatemala, we noticed people from El Salvador and even people from Bangladesh. Can you imagine what they had to do to get here? They infiltrated themselves in this caravan and tried to cross with the crowd. That would have benefited them greatly.”

What’s more, Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales stated last Thursday that his security forces had caught “close to 100 people completely linked to terrorist issues, with ISIS and that not only have we arrested them within our territory, but they have been deported to their countries of origin.” Guatemala’s Secretary of Strategic Intelligence, Mario Duarte, confirmed that “the individuals intercepted, detained, prosecuted or returned to their country of origin, is close to 100.” He referred to “several citizens of Syrian origin who were detained with false documents were detained, for which they were prosecuted and subjected to criminal proceedings,” and then deported in 2016.

The establishment media has made a great deal of the fact that Morales did not say that Guatemalan authorities had caught 100 Islamic State jihadis among the throngs approaching the U.S. border now. However, this is a distinction without a difference. If Islamic State jihadis could enter Guatemala previously, they can do it again, and they may have joined this caravan.

Denis Omar Contreras, a leader of this latest march to the border, summarily dismissed this possibility: “There isn’t a single terrorist here.” Claiming that everyone on the way to the United States was from Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua, he added: “As far as I know there are no terrorists in these four countries, at least beyond the corrupt governments.”

As far as he knows. But how can Denis Omar Contreras be sure? Is there something that would make it impossible for jihadis to infiltrate this migrant group? We do know that jihadis have many times attempted to enter the United States by way of the Southern border. Here are just a few news stories from the last few years, related to such efforts:

Texas: Border patrol apprehends four Muslims from Bangladesh illegally crossing into US

Three Pakistani Muslims apprehended in U.S. at Arizona border

Mexico helping unvetted African migrants to U.S. border, many from Al-Shabaab jihadi hotbed

New Mexico: Muslim “refugee” with gas pipeline plans arrested in border county

Muslim captured coming over southern U.S. border had ties to Taliban

Pakistani Muslim arrested crossing Texas border, lied to FBI

Islamic State jihadi reveals plan to bring jihadis to U.S. via Mexico

Agents nab Pakistani Muslims with jihad terror connections crossing U.S. border

There is also considerable Hizballah activity in Latin America – activity that analysts have been warning for yearsis a threat to the United States.

But CNN and Denis Omar Contreras would have you believe that jihadists could not, simply could not possibly, have infiltrated this latest migrant caravan. Donald Trump is just being racist again to say so.

If some of those on their way to the U.S. get into the country and commit an act of jihad violence, will CNN and Contreras and all the others who are sneering at Trump today apologize? Don’t bet on it. But the best-case scenario will be that no one from this caravan will get in at all, and CNN and the rest can go back to calling Trump “racist” for keeping them out.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

Share

 

 

Advertisements

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

Federal Judge Oversteps

From Kris Anne Hall and OregonLive.com

#‎ActionAlert‬:

We must protest this federal court judge! Federal courts act with virtually NO accountability, that’s why they act like kings and queens. It is time for We The People to hold them accountable and a simple phone call can make a difference!

Every red-blooded, liberty loving American should be outraged by t Federal Judge, Robert E. “Gag Order” Jones’, destruction of the 1st and 6th Amendments.

Contact the judge’s chambers: (503) 326-8340

Now we can even contact this judge’s boss!
Chief District Judge Michael W. Mosman (503) 326-8330

***Tell them we will not tolerate federal destruction of our Rights!***

Once again this federal court judge believes that he can arbitrarily give and take away the Rights of the people. This is so repugnant to Liberty we should not sit quiet!

Defendant Shawna Cox was “admonished” by this judicial tyrant to be silent on not only the charges against her, but ALL ISSUES surrounding her protests against the federal government. When a federal judge, in a federal court, presiding over federal criminal charges, can tell an American to be silent, how can we possibly have fair trials?

Must we remind Senior District Judge Robert E. “Gag Order” Jones about the 1st and 6th Amendments?

Do we now live in an America where an agent of the federal government can declare an American’s Rights to freedom of speech, press, and protest are revoked?

Benjamin Franklin said this:
“Without Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as publick Liberty, without Freedom of Speech; which is the Right of every Man, as far as by it, he does not hurt or controul the Right of another: And this is the only Check it ought to suffer, and the only Bounds it ought to know.”

Franklin continues by explaining the character of men who would deny us these Rights:

“This sacred Privilege is so essential to free Governments, that the Security of Property, and the Freedom of Speech always go together; and in those wretched Countries where a Man cannot call his Tongue his own, he can scarce call any Thing else his own. Whoever would overthrow the Liberty of a Nation, must begin by subduing the Freeness of Speech; a Thing terrible to Publick Traytors.”

And there you have it: Senior District Judge Robert E. “Gag Order” Jones has classified himself as a “Publick Traytor.”

The 1st Amendment is not the only Right infringed by this judicial supremacist; what about the 6th Amendment?

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial…”

Public Trial? How do you have a Public Trial when the government’s agent is imposing gag orders at the threat of force?

We should seriously contemplate WHY our framers would insist on a “Public Trial.” Consider the following:

In the federal system…
1. Laws are written by the federal government;
2. Laws are enforced by federal agents;
3. Laws are prosecuted by federal prosecutors;
4. If you cannot afford an attorney, your liberties will be defended by a federal defense attorney;
5. Once you get to court, your case will be decided by a federal judge.

How can anyone have any hope of a fair trial when the federal government writes the laws, enforces the laws, prosecutes and defends, and finally sits in judgement of you in regard to its own laws?

That is why we MUST have speedy and PUBLIC trials, with a jury of our peers. Without a public trial, the government controls all the facts, dictates the narrative, and the only information received by the public is that which the government approves! That is a court of Kings, not one of the people of a Constitutional Republic.

The actions of Senior District Judge Robert E. “Gag Order” Jones ought to outrage every red blooded American. The dictates of this judicial tyrants ought to be offensive to all who love America and the Liberties our Constitution attempts to secure.

Senior District Judge Robert E. “Gag Order” Jones needs to be SHAMED for his complete disregard for the Rights and Liberties of generations of Americans. If this judge can get away with this without public condemnation, may God have mercy on our Posterity for the federal government WE created in silence.

Let us be silent no more!

Let’s prove to this judge that he cannot order silence. Let’s be Shawna’s voice in defiance of this enemy to Liberty!

Contact the judge’s chambers: (503) 326-8340

Contact his Boss! Chief District Judge Michael W. Mosman (503) 326-8330

Contact the judge’s assistant: Judicial Assistant/Courtroom Deputy: Becky Peer (503) 326-8341

Print out this post and mail it to:
Mark O. Hatfield United States Courthouse
Room 1007
1000 Southwest Third Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97204-2946

Read the Oregon Live article: http://goo.gl/BkWzrV

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Edmond Burke

KrisAnne Hall's photo.

Source : Kris Anne Hall

More Racist Politics from the Obama Gang

From The New American newsletter
Wednesday, 03 February 2016

New Obama Regulations Will Make It Harder to Hire and Promote White Men

Written by 

The Obama administration is obsessed with race and sex. Many know about the administration’s scheme to collect information on the racial composition of American communities in an effort to force neighborhoods to “diversify.” Now the government is applying the same philosophy to businesses in order to “equalize” wages. It’s an effort, critics point out, that will make it harder for white men to find jobs. Writes the New York Post’s Betsy McCaughey:

Claiming women aren’t getting paid enough, President Obama wants to make it easier to accuse employers of gender discrimination and hit them with class-action lawsuits. A new regulation proposed on Friday will require all employers with 100 or more workers to report how much their workforce is paid, broken down by race and [sex].

The rule, slated to go into effect in September 2017, will cause headaches for employers and anyone — man or woman — who works hard and expects to get ahead based on merit. The winners are federal bean counters, class-action lawyers and the Democratic Party, which is playing up the [inter-sex] “wage gap” as usual during this election year.

McCaughey points out that this regulation will hit white men the hardest, and this is echoed by American Thinker’s Thomas Lifson:

Your employer will have to lump workers into 12 salary bands. If you’re a white male up for a raise, but the band above yours already includes too many while males, tough luck. Your boss will be pressured to give the raise to a woman or minority to avoid triggering EEOC scrutiny.

This data collection is a godsend for EEOC regulators looking for targets, and it hands class-action lawyers the statistics they need on a silver platter.

Even worse: the presumption is that the employer discriminates, unless proven otherwise.

The “guilty until proven innocent” standard Lifson refers to seems to reflect “disparate impact” theory; this principle states that if a group cannot measure up to a standard as well as another group, that standard is by definition considered unjustly discriminatory. Applied by the government for decades, it has been used to compel police departments and other entities to scrap qualification exams because women and minorities underperformed on them. As an example, the Obama administration sued the Pennsylvania State Police in 2014 for treating women equally — because doing so yielded unequal outcomes.

As for different salary outcomes in business, McCaughey explains the consequences of the new regulations:

Employers will have to change their policies to avoid these differences — for example, not preferring the job applicant who has a college degree over the applicant who doesn’t, unless the job can be shown to require college skills. The burden is on employers. It’s assumed they’re discriminating, in other words, and they have to prove they’re not.

Jenny Yang, chairwoman of Obama’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, defends the massive fishing expedition, saying, “pay discrimination goes undetected because of a lack of accurate information about what people are paid.”

Of course, it’s impossible not to discover pay “discrimination.” All that term refers to is the process of choosing one or some from between/among two or many. And since meritocracy dictates we discriminate between the intelligent and the stupid, the educated and the ignorant, and the qualified and the unqualified — and since groups have different proclivities and interests — it follows that Yang cannot fail in her mission. But she clearly isn’t interested in the real question: Are inter-group pay gaps actually caused by prejudice?

Demagogues love the slogan “Women make only 79 cents on a man’s dollar!” Yet the same data-collection entities reporting that fact also tell us why — and it has nothing to do with unfair discrimination. I explained this in the 2014 New American piece “Equal Pay for Equal Work: Means Paying Men More,” but female commentators such as Carrie Lukas have made the same points. Here are some of the main factors influencing the inter-sex pay gap:

Men tend to choose more lucrative fields than women do (e.g., the hard sciences as opposed to the soft ones).

Related to the above, women avoid the most dangerous and dirtiest jobs — such as iron-working and commercial fishing — which often bring great compensation.

Full-time men work more hours on average than “full-time” women.

When climbing the corporate ladder, women are six times more likely than men to change positions and career tracks; consequently, men generally have more seniority and experience.

Women are more likely to decline promotions and “tend to place a higher priority on flexibility and personal fulfillment than do men, who focus more on pay. Women tend to avoid jobs that require travel or relocation, and they take more time off and spend fewer hours in the office than men do,” as Lukas wrote in 2007.

The reality is that women don’t get less money for equal work — they get less money for lesser work. Moreover, it seems that some pay gaps are more equal than others. There was much talk late last year about Hollywood actresses making less than actors (poor Jennifer Lawrence had to settle for $52 million, $28 million less than Robert Downey Jr.). Yet no one troubles over the top 10 female fashion models earning more than 10 times as much as their male counterparts do. And even among rank-and-file models, the women make 148 percent more.

But isn’t this “sex discrimination”? Aren’t the models doing equal work? This question gets at a generally ignored but central issue: What constitutes equal work, anyway?

Models don’t get paid because they’re capable of posing, wearing clothing, standing under hot lights or parading down runways; I could do that. They earn wages because their “work” helps satisfy a market — and the female models command more because their “work” satisfies a bigger market than the men’s work does. This is the same reason NBA players make more than WNBA players and heavyweight boxers generally out-earn lightweights. The “work” isn’t just shooting baskets and throwing punches; it involves succeeding in, respectively, the NBA and heavyweight ranks.

This brings us to another significant point: Is it really true that sex and racial discrimination is always unjust? Consider that a quality integral to doing the women models’ work is being female. If the male models were women, they might be able to do the same “work” and satisfy the market equally. There are many other such examples. As I wrote in 2014:

My local hardware store provides knowledgeable workers, all men, who render valuable advice on products and how to perform various home repairs. If it was determined that people found a female in that role less credible and were then not quite as likely to buy from the establishment, would even a highly competent woman be able to do “equal work” in that capacity?

What about the little West Indian restaurant, with all-black workers, I loved when I spent a few weeks in Tampa? If hiring a white person made the eatery seem less authentic and negatively affected its appeal, would that individual be able to do “equal work”? The same, of course, could be asked about a black person working in a German restaurant. In these cases race would be integral to the “work.”

The reality is that the government has no idea what constitutes “equal work,” yet it feels qualified to mandate equal pay. But while one might not expect bureaucrats to have pondered deeper issues such as the above, simple facts can be easily apprehended. And here’s one: Women in the Obama White House make only 84 cents on every male staffer’s dollar. Is this driven by bad intentions? If not, a desire to ascribe such motives to a wider society exhibiting the same phenomenon just might be driven by bad intentions itself.

Source : The New American