THE MOST HISTORIC MOMENTS FROM THE KIM-MOON SUMMIT~”COMPLETE DE-NUCLEARIZATION” & “ONE AGAIN” POSSIBLE BY MERGING COMMUNISM WITH DEMOCRACY?~OR JUST EMPTY RHETORIC & WISHFUL SYMBOLISM?

THE MOST HISTORIC MOMENTS 
FROM THE KIM-MOON SUMMIT

Kim Jong Un becomes first North Korean leader to set foot in South Korea

BY MIKAEL THALEN
SEE: https://www.infowars.com/the-most-historic-moments-from-the-kim-moon-summit/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The Most Historic Moments from the Kim-Moon Summit
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in met at the Military Demarcation Line Friday for the two countries first summit in more than 10 years.
Kim, the first North Korean leader to enter South Korea since the 1950-53 Korean War, approached Moon with all smiles before the two shook hands on their respective sides.
“I was excited to meet at this historic place and it is really moving that you came all the way to the demarcation line to greet me in person,” Kim told Moon.
After stepping over to the South, Kim went off script and brought Moon back to the North, clutching the hand of his quasi-counterpart.
Twitter video is loading
The pair posed for photos as dozens of journalists looked on, frantically capturing the historic moment as it unfolded at Panmunjom.
Credit: Korea Summit Press Pool/Getty Images
The two leaders were then accompanied by a traditionally-dressed honor guard as they began towards the event’s opening ceremony.

Credit: Inter-Korean Summit Press Corps/Pool via Bloomberg
Kim was introduced to numerous members of Moon’s delegation before Moon was introduced to Kim’s.
Moon was saluted by North Korea’s top military men, clad in Soviet-era regalia.

Credit: Korea Summit Press Pool/Getty Images
Making their way to the newly-renovated Peace House, Kim entered and signed the guest book, a gesture reserved for all high-level visitors.
A photo of Kim’s message reads: “A new history begins now – at the starting point of history and the era of peace.”
Here’s a message Kim Jong Un wrote on the guestbook at the Peace House summit venue, which reads “A new history begins now – at the starting point of history and the era of peace.”
Upon finally reaching the negotiating table, Kim and Moon exchanged their opening remarks, both advocating for a long-sought peace in the divided region.
Amazing: live feed of Kim Jong Un making opening remarks at the start of inter-Korean talks, even making jokes about how far the cold noodles have had to come today
Halfway through the summit, the two took a break to plant a tree commemorating the unprecedented occasion.
After hours of deliberation and talks, the two leaders released a joint declaration. Among other things, the two countries promised to increase diplomatic relations and work towards the “denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.”
“The two leaders solemnly declared before the 80 million Korean people and the whole world that there will be no more war on the Korean Peninsula and thus a new era of peace has begun,” the declaration triumphantly announced.
To celebrate the accomplishment, the leaders of the DPRK and ROK sat down for a banquet, complete with traditional Korean music, celebratory toasts and small talk.
As darkness eventually fell on the Korean Peninsula, Kim stepped inside a limousine surrounded by security personnel and slipped back into the Hermit Kingdom.
Kim is now set to meet with U.S. President Donald Trump in late May or early June.
While analysts are skeptical North Korea will give up its nuclear weapons, the summit could fulfill some short term goals, including an official end to the Korean war and the release of U.S. hostages, as Trump and Kim lay out plans for the future.
In a series of tweets Friday, Trump congratulated the two Korean leaders on their landmark proceeding.
“After a furious year of missile launches and Nuclear testing, a historic meeting between North and South Korea is now taking place,” Trump said. “Good things are happening, but only time will tell!”
View some of the Kim-Moon Summit’s historic photos below:

Credit: Korea Summit Press Pool/Getty Images

Credit: Korea Summit Press Pool/Getty Images

Credit: Korea Summit Press Pool/Getty Images

Credit: Korea Summit Press Pool/Getty Images

Credit: Inter-Korean Summit / POOL/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images
Got a tip? Contact Mikael securely: keybase.io/mikaelthalen
_______________________________________________

KIM JONG UN WALKS INTO SOUTH KOREA AND AGREES TO ‘COMPLETE DENUCLEARISATION’

‘We are going to be one again’

BY DAILY MAIL
SEE: https://www.infowars.com/kim-jong-un-walks-into-south-korea-and-agrees-to-complete-denuclearisation/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Kim Jong Un Walks Into South Korea And Agrees To 'Complete Denuclearisation'
North and South Korea will seek a ‘peace regime’ to end the Korean War after 68 years as Kim Jong-un agreed to ‘complete denuclearisation’ during historic talks today.
Kim Jong-un became the first North Korean leader to step into the South for 65 years as he met with President Moon Jae-in for a peace summit today.
The two sworn enemies exchanged a warm greeting at the 38th parallel in the truce village of Panmunjom before Moon led Kim by the hand to cross into the South for the first time ever.
_______________________________________________
Peace Breaking Out With New Sheriff In Town:
DONALD TRUMP
North and South Korean Leaders Hold Historic Summit
Kim Jong-un crosses DMZ, welcomed by South Korea
In a historic meeting, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un crossed the demilitarized zone and was welcomed by South Korea President Moon Jae-in. It’s been over 10 years since the two countries’ leaders last met, and Kim’s eagerness to negotiate is sparking some optimism of a united Korea.

North
A p

LETTER TO SUPREME COURT: GLOBALIST U.S. CATHOLIC BISHOPS CALL TRUMP’S TRAVEL BAN “BLATANT RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION”~JUST ANOTHER ATTEMPT AT DEFEATING THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION & THE CONSTITUTION

LETTER TO SUPREME COURT: GLOBALIST U.S. CATHOLIC BISHOPS CALL TRUMP’S TRAVEL BAN “BLATANT RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION”~
JUST ANOTHER ATTEMPT AT DEFEATING 
THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION & 
THE CONSTITUTION
BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/us-catholic-bishops-call-trumps-travel-ban-blatant-religious-discriminationrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The U.S. Catholic bishops submitted a brief to the Supreme Court declaring that President Donald Trump’s ban on migration from five Muslim countries was “blatant religious discrimination.”
One learns from childhood to discriminate between what is harmful and what is benign. Trump’s ban was from “countries of concern” that were chosen by the Obama administration due to the security threats emanating from them, not because of anti-Muslim bigotry.
There is no discrimination against Muslims in America, based solely on faith. Muslims are free to practice their faith in peace, despite the fact that many Islamic preachers are spewing hatred against Christians, Jews and Zionism.
Attorney Neal Katyal referred to the bishops’ strongly worded friend-of-the-court brief as Justice Samuel Alito pressed him for evidence that a “reasonable person” would view Trump’s proclamation as discriminating against Muslims.
Any reasonable person should ask the question of why there is concern about Islam and none about Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, etc. No reasonable person has anything against a Muslim’s private faith if it is benign, but any reasonable person has concerns about jihad and the global Islamic war that has been declared against infidels.
The next question that comes to mind is this: what possible motive could the bishops have?
In the Fiscal Year 2016, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) received more than $91 million in government funding for refugee resettlement. Over the past nine years, the USCCB has received a total of $534,788,660 in taxpayer dollars for refugee resettlement programs
These bishops have abandoned persecuted Christians and abdicated their role as Christian leaders. They are unfit for their ecclesiastical duties.
“The Bishops’ Brief Against the Ban,” by Paul Moses, Commonweal, April 26, 2018:
The U.S. Catholic bishops submitted a brief to the Supreme Court declaring that President Donald Trump’s ban on migration from five Muslim countries was “blatant religious discrimination”—and the lawyer representing opponents of the measure reminded the justices of that line in oral arguments held Wednesday.
Attorney Neal Katyal referred to the bishops’ strongly worded friend-of-the-court brief as Justice Samuel Alito pressed him for evidence that a “reasonable person” would view Trump’s proclamation as discriminating against Muslims.
“This is a ban that really does fall almost exclusively on Muslims,” Katyal said. “…Look at the wide variety of amicus briefs filed in this case from every corner of society, representing millions and millions of people, from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which calls it, quote, ‘blatant religious discrimination’”—
He was cut off, but the point was made before a court with five Catholic justices and one Episcopalian who was raised Catholic, Neil Gorsuch. The bishops’ brief cited Trump’s anti-Muslim tweets as evidence that the president’s order “arises out of express hostility to Islam,” and violates the First Amendment’s free exercise clause.
“Such blatant religious discrimination is repugnant to the Catholic faith, core American values, and the United States Constitution. It poses a substantial threat to religious liberty that this Court has never tolerated before and should not tolerate now,” the brief says. “Having once borne the brunt of severe discriminatory treatment, particularly in the immigration context, the Catholic Church will not sit silent while others suffer on account of their religion.”
Much of the news coverage of the hearing took the justices’ questioning as evidence that the court’s five-member conservative majority would rule in Trump’s favor. On the face of it, the justices need to decide if the core element of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965—abolishing discriminatory national-origin quotas passed in the 1920s—is trumped by a paragraph in the same law that, if the Trump administration is right, gives the president unlimited power over who can enter the country.
Whether the religious discrimination argument will move the justices in this case remains to be seen—and it’s best not to speculate on a justice’s thinking based on his or her questions.
But however the court rules, the USCCB’s brief is important in staking out an authentic Catholic position on Islam and immigration at a time when many anti-Islam voices are able to find a platform in Catholic media and institutions. And it counters the bishops’ past failures to include discrimination against Muslims as a cause for their campaign for religious liberty, as seen in the statement “Our First, Most Cherished Liberty,” which was issued before the 2012 presidential election. With a few exceptions, Catholic institutions were slow to respond to the nativist strain in Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, and the first nativist president was elected with a majority of the white Catholic vote. More recently, the USCCB released a statement in February 2017 urging Trump to fulfill his promise to protect religious liberty—but without mentioning his plans for immigration or his anti-Muslim comments……

_______________________________________________________
SEE ALSO: 

U.S. Catholic bishops to Americans: Drop dead

BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/u-s-catholic-bishops-to-americans-drop-deadrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
As Jihad Watch reported Saturday, “The U.S. Catholic bishops submitted a brief to the Supreme Court declaring that President Donald Trump’s ban on migration from five Muslim countries was ‘blatant religious discrimination.’” Is it really?
And do the U.S. Catholic bishops feel any obligation to support measures that would protect Americans from jihad attacks? Apparently not. The message that the bishops are sending to Americans is simple: drop dead. The U.S. Catholic bishops appear to be absolutely unconcerned about the following facts: 
Somali Muslim migrant Mohammad Barry in February 2016 stabbed multiple patrons at a restaurant owned by an Israeli Arab Christian; Ahmad Khan Rahami, an Afghan Muslim migrant, in September 2016 set off bombs in New York City and New Jersey; Arcan Cetin, a Turkish Muslim migrant, in September 2016 murdered five people in a mall in Burlington, Washington; Dahir Adan, another Somali Muslim migrant, in October 2016 stabbed mall shoppersin St. Cloud while screaming “Allahu akbar”; and Abdul Razak Artan, yet another Somali Muslim migrant, in November 2016 injured nine people with car and knife attacks at Ohio State University. 72 jihad terrorists have come to the U.S. from the countries listed in Trump’s initial immigration ban.
What’s more, all of the jihadis who murdered 130 people in Paris in November 2015 had just entered Europe as refugees. In February 2015, the Islamic State boasted it would soon flood Europe with as many as 500,000 refugees. The Lebanese Education Minister said in September 2015 that there were 20,000 jihadis among the refugees in camps in his country. On May 10, 2016, Patrick Calvar, the head of France’s DGSI internal intelligence agency, said that the Islamic State was using migrant routes through the Balkans to get jihadis into Europe.
The bishops have never expressed any concern about any of this. They are completely in line with Pope Francis, who has claimed risibly that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.” This has become a super-dogma in the Catholic Church: if you don’t believe that Islam is a Religion of Peace, you will be ruthlessly harassed and silenced by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and the hierarchy elsewhere as well. The bishops of the Catholic Church are much more concerned that you believe that Islam is a religion of peace than that you believe in, say, the Nicene Creed. And so what possible reason could there be to be concerned about these “refugees”? It’s a religion of peace!
The bishops, of course, have 91 million reasons — indeed, 534 billion reasons — to turn against the truth and disregard the safety and security of the American people: “In the Fiscal Year 2016, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) received more than $91 million in government funding for refugee resettlement. Over the past nine years, the USCCB has received a total of $534,788,660 in taxpayer dollars for refugee resettlement programs.”
“Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)
It was not always thus. For centuries, in fact, as I detail in my forthcoming book The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS, the Catholic Church was at the forefront of efforts to resist jihad aggression in Europe. In it, you’ll discover:
  • The Pope who was a true precursor of Pope Francis: he was harshly criticized by the Romans for failing to keep them safe from jihad attacks;
  • The Pope who answered a Byzantine Emperor’s call for help against the jihadis not by scolding him about how Islam was peaceful, but by calling on the rulers of Europe to send troops;
  • The Medieval Pope who called Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, a “son of perdition,” and called for Christians to unite against the advancing jihad;
  • What happened when a Mongol ruler sent an emissary across Central Asia and into Europe to meet the Pope and seek an alliance with the Christians against the forces of jihad;
  • The Pope who haughtily refused to come to the aid of the Christian Byzantine Empire when it was mortally threatened by jihadis, because of doctrinal differences;
  • The Pope who took a solemn oath at his consecration to “extirpate the diabolical sect of the reprobate and faithless Mahomet”;
  • The Pope who touched off worldwide Muslim riots by noting that “God is not pleased by blood”;
  • Much more.
Click here to preorder The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS.

APOLOGIZING/GROVELLING IN FRONT OF MUSLIMS: TRUMP’S U.N. MIGRATION AGENCY PICK ASKS FORGIVENESS FOR COMMENTS DEEMED “OFFENSIVE” TO MUSLIMS

JELLYFISH SPINELESS COPYCAT OF OBAMA’S APOLOGIES TO MUSLIMS IS TRUMP’S PICK?
WHY?
APOLOGIZING/GROVELLING IN FRONT OF MUSLIMS: TRUMP’S U.N. MIGRATION AGENCY PICK ASKS FORGIVENESS FOR COMMENTS DEEMED “OFFENSIVE” TO MUSLIMS 
BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/trumps-un-migration-agency-pick-asks-forgiveness-for-comments-deemed-offensive-to-muslimsrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Ken Isaacs once proposed building a wall in the Alps to keep out migrants. Trump wants him to lead the world’s principal migration agency.
Some things should go without saying. One of them is that no one would ever leave their front, back, and side doors, and their windows, open to anyone who wishes to enter their homes.
Every productive, law-abiding immigrant who has been through the necessary process of vetting understands the reasoning behind the two-way street principle of immigration.
In the case of those claiming to be refugees, if they’re genuine refugees the emergency creates a different situation, but it is still basic prudence to consider the well-being of the citizens of the nation to which the refugees are arriving, and not just that of the refugees alone.
Groups such as the Islamic State and al Qaeda have already infiltrated the refugee stream. It is the the duty of authorities to protect their citizens against these “refugees.”
For the past few weeks, Isaacs has been traveling to foreign capitals in Europe and Africa in the company of White House and State Department escorts, seeking forgiveness.
Isaacs should not be apologizing for his prior concerns about public safety, given the flood of Muslim migrants into Europe and the subsequent well-documented ills that followed. Isaacs is unwittingly sending a message that leaders who care about their populations, and who have opted to try to curb or block the streams of unvetted refugees, are wrong or offensive for doing so — including President Trump, who has caused “offence” over his temporary Muslim ban from countries of concern for jihad activity.
Muslims are not being targeted worldwide, except by fellow Muslims. Over 11 million Muslims have been murdered since 1948 by their coreligionists. It is infidels and apostates who are being victimized by Muslims, not the other way around.
Responsible immigration policy is essential, and Isaacs should be advocating for it. Concern for the victims of Islamic supremacism and jihad is valid, no matter how loudly the media claims that such concern renders one evil. There is a systematic war being waged against free societies. The first step in effectively fighting it is to stand firm on Judeo-Christian values and genuine human rights for all people, including, of course, genuinely peaceful Muslims. No apologies are needed for protecting human rights and the free societies that protect those rights.
“A Trump U.N. Pick Tries to Make Up for Anti-Muslim Tweets,” by Colum Lynch, Foreign Policy, April 26, 2018:
If there were ever a candidate for Twitter purgatory, it would have to be Ken Isaacs, who upended his White House-backed campaign to lead the U.N. migration agency with a series of tweets denigrating Islam.
For the past few weeks, Isaacs has been traveling to foreign capitals in Europe and Africa in the company of White House and State Department escorts, seeking forgiveness as he tries to rescue his bid by persuading foreign dignitaries, including Pope Francis, that he is not the sum of his tweets and that he can be trusted to lead the International Organization for Migration (IOM) without religious bias. In a sign of the importance of his candidacy, Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, will host a reception on May 3 to introduce U.N. ambassadors to Isaacs in New York.
The State Department declined to make Isaacs available for an interview. But Isaacs agreed to respond to written questions.
“I have apologized publicly for social media comments that have caused hurt,” he writes. “I ask people to judge me on my professional record and the decades of work I have done to help people in need around the world.”
Despite persistent misgivings about the U.S. candidate’s temperament, Isaacs maintains the edge as the front-runner because key powers, particularly in Europe, are unwilling to challenge the Americans’ traditional hold on the job out of concern that it might provoke the United States to pull IOM funding or cost them Washington’s support for other national priorities, several diplomatic sources say.
The United States is the single largest donor to IOM, contributing more than 30 percent of the some $1 billion the organization receives in voluntary donations each year.
“We are not going to take the fight [to the United States] out of fear of pushing the U.S. away and [damaging] our bilateral relations,” one senior European diplomat says. That view, the diplomat says, is “fairly widely held” among European governments.
The nomination of such a controversial candidate will serve as a test of the United States’ ability to maintain its leadership position on the multilateral stage at a time when the White House has expressed disdain for international institutions from the International Criminal Court to the World Trade Organization. It will also determine whether the United States will be forced to pay a diplomatic cost for imposing sharp budget cuts on key agencies, including the U.N. Population Fund and the U.N. Relief and Works Agency…..

______________________________________________________
SEE ALSO:

Trump pick under fire from “CNN’s resident smear merchant” Andrew Kaczynski for retweeting Jihad Watch

EXCERPTS:
“The Trump administration’s pick to head the United Nations organization that coordinates assistance to migrants worldwide regularly pushed anti-Muslim sentiment, including claims that Muslims were trying to impose Sharia law in the US.”
“A CNN KFile review has turned up previously unreported tweets that reveal Ken Isaacs has an extensive history of sharing anti-Muslim sentiment. Isaacs pushed a conspiratorial view of Islam and promoted the fringe views from prominent anti-Muslim activists, the review shows….”
“Asked about the tweets in this story, the State Department sent CNN’s KFile a statement that spokeswoman Heather Nauert gave to the Post in February.”
““Mr. Isaacs has apologized for the comments he posted on his private social media account. We believe that was proper for him to do so,” Nauert said last month. “Mr. Isaacs is committed to helping refugees and has a long history of assisting those who are suffering. We believe that if chosen to lead IOM, he would treat people fairly and with the dignity and respect they deserve. I would refer you to Mr. Isaacs for any information on his statements.””

TEXAS: MUSLIM MIGRANT COUPLE KEPT WOMAN AS A SLAVE FOR 16 YEARS, STARTING WHEN SHE WAS FIVE YEARS OLD

“Mohamed is a supporter of Marxist Hugo Chavez
and his Socialist revolution.”

TEXAS: MUSLIM MIGRANT COUPLE KEPT WOMAN AS A SLAVE FOR 16 YEARS, STARTING WHEN SHE WAS FIVE YEARS OLD 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/texas-muslim-migrant-couple-kept-woman-as-a-slave-for-16-years-starting-when-she-was-five-years-oldrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Why not? Slavery is acceptable in Islam.
The Qur’an has Allah telling Muhammad that he has given him girls as sex slaves: “Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty.” (Qur’an 33:50)
Muhammad bought slaves: “Jabir (Allah be pleased with him) reported: There came a slave and pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) on migration; he (the Holy Prophet) did not know that he was a slave. Then there came his master and demanded him back, whereupon Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Sell him to me. And he bought him for two black slaves, and he did not afterwards take allegiance from anyone until he had asked him whether he was a slave (or a free man).” (Muslim 3901)
Muhammad took female Infidel captives as slaves: “Narrated Anas: The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.’ Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives. She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet. The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr.’” (Bukhari 5.59.512) Mahr is bride price: Muhammad freed her and married her. But he didn’t do this to all his slaves:
Muhammad owned slaves: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah’s Apostle was on a journey and he had a black slave called Anjasha, and he was driving the camels (very fast, and there were women riding on those camels). Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Waihaka (May Allah be merciful to you), O Anjasha! Drive slowly (the camels) with the glass vessels (women)!’” (Bukhari 8.73.182) There is no mention of Muhammad’s freeing Anjasha.
“Son of Guinea’s first president charged with forced labor in Texas,” by Laura Koran and Laura Jarrett, CNN, April 26, 2018 (thanks to Robert):
Washington (CNN)A Texas couple with deep political connections in the West African country of Guinea was charged Thursday with forced labor after a young woman they allegedly enslaved for more than 16 years managed to escape their home in Southlake with help from neighbors.
Mohamed Toure and Denise Cros-Toure, both 57, allegedly brought the victim from Guinea to Texas in 2000, when she was just 5 years old. She has not been named.
They allegedly then forced the girl to do housework and care for their children, subjecting her to emotional and physical abuse, the Department of Justice said in a press release.
“Although the victim was close in age to the children, the defendants denied her access to schooling and the other opportunities afforded to their children,” the department alleges.
The couple originally hail from Guinea, where Mohamed Toure is an influential figure and son of Guinea’s first President, Ahmed Sekou Toure.
The younger Toure was also a leader of the political opposition party in Guinea, although he has no diplomatic immunity or status, according to a source familiar with the matter.
Following his father’s death in 1984, Mohamed Toure was imprisoned along with other members of his family, according to the authors of Historical Dictionary of Guinea. He was later exiled to Morocco and Ivory Coast before settling in Texas with his wife and children.
He later returned to Guinea, where he was named secretary general of his father’s old political party.
Now, Toure and his wife face up to 20 years in prison on the forced labor charge.
“As part of their coercive scheme to compel the victim’s labor, the defendants took her documents and caused her to remain unlawfully in the United States after her visa expired,” the Justice Department alleges in its press release. “They further isolated her from her family and others and emotionally and physically abused her.”
In the criminal complaint against the Toure, the lead investigator alleges that the victim — referred to only as Female Victim 1 or FV-1 — was forced to sleep on the floor for years, and was only taken to see a medical professional once.
The complaint also alleges disturbing incidents of physical abuse by Cros-Toure, who allegedly beat the victim, sometimes with a belt or electrical cord. In one incident, the victim alleged an earring was pulled out of her ear by Cros-Toure with such force that it tore her earlobe, leaving a visible scar….

UK LEFTIST SOCIALIST GLOBALIST ATTACK: MAYOR FORCED TO RESIGN FOR FOLLOWING GEERT WILDERS, MARK STEYN & RAHEEM KASSAM ON SOCIAL MEDIA

UK GLOBALIST ATTACK: MAYOR FORCED TO RESIGN FOR FOLLOWING GEERT WILDERS, MARK STEYN & RAHEEM KASSAM ON SOCIAL MEDIA
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/uk-mayor-forced-to-resign-for-following-geert-wilders-mark-steyn-and-raheem-kassam-on-social-mediarepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
In the UK as in the US, only one political opinion is acceptable to the political and media elites. They blather on and on about “diversity,” but that just means they want people of many races, ethnicities and religions all saying the same thing.
“Small Town Mayor Forced to Quit for Following Kassam, Steyn, Wilders on Social Media,” by Oliver JJ Lane, Breitbart, April 26, 2018 (thanks to Inexion):
The mayor of a small British town quit his post for “personal reasons”, reportedly after a single complaint was made about his social media activity, including expressing concern about mass migration, and being subscribed to right-wing personalities on Facebook.
Councillor Peter Lucey stood down from his post as Mayor of Wokingham and resigned from the Conservative Party Wednesday after a fellow Councillor from the left-wing Labour Party wrote a letter of complaint about the Mayor’s online activity, reports the Wokingham Paper.
According to the report, the Mayor had expressed concern about mass migration and subscribed to right-wing personalities on Facebook, including Breitbart London Editor in Chief Raheem Kassam, Dutch populist Geert Wilders, and New York Times-bestselling Canadian author Mark Steyn, which the Wokingham Paper described as being “controversial” and holding “anti-Islamic views”.
The report also made specific mention of Kassam’s newly released book on mid-20th century conservative political giant Enoch Powell, Enoch Was Right: ‘Rivers of Blood’ 50 Years On in the context of Lucey’s resignation.
It is claimed in addition to the personalities followed by Lucey, he also followed the now largely dormant street-marching group the English Defence League, and think-tank the Gatestone Institute.
Speaking to local newspaper the Bracknell News, Labour councillor Andy Croy claimed the Mayor had made Islamophobic communications online, although the only message quoted by papers surrounding the now-deleted accounts specifically referenced immigration, not Islam. The politician said: “I saw the messages and wrote to The Wokingham Conservatives, pointing out that I thought it was islamophobic [sic] and that they needed to deal with it.
“I demanded his resignation. He posted something along the lines of ‘mass immigration has destroyed your future’.”…

________________________________________________________

ZUCKERBERG’S CENSORSHIP CONTINUES: FACEBOOK BLOCKS PAMELA GELLER (AGAIN) FOR REPORTING ACCURATELY ON ISLAMIC ANTI-SEMITISM IN GERMANY


FACEBOOK BLOCKS PAMELA GELLER (AGAIN) FOR REPORTING ACCURATELY ON ISLAMIC ANTI-SEMITISM IN GERMANY 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/facebook-blocks-pamela-geller-again-for-reporting-accurately-on-islamic-anti-semitism-in-germanyrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Pamela Geller posted an accurate news story, accompanied by a genuine photo of two niqab-wearing Muslimas carrying a sign saying “God Bless Hitler” — a vivid, and sickening, illustration of Islamic antisemitism. For doing this, she has been blocked from posting at Facebook yet again, in what is just the latest indication of the social media giant’s determination to silence all voices that dissent from its hard-Left agenda.
Mark Zuckerberg recently claimed, risibly, that Facebook’s censors had no political bias. He actually had the audacity to say this in a Congressional hearing. No one asked him why Facebook’s Vice President Joel Kaplan traveled to Pakistan in July 2017 to assure the Pakistani government that it would remove “anti-Islam” material. That endeavor had already started before Kaplan’s trip. In mid-February 2017, traffic to Jihad Watch from Facebook dropped suddenly by 90% and has never recovered. And there are so many other sites that have experienced a similar dropoff.
This was no accident. It has happened to counter-jihad sites and others that oppose the hard-Left agenda across the board. Either Zuckerberg perjured himself, or has no control over his company.
If Facebook is not broken up by anti-trust initiatives or stopped in some other way, the First Amendment freedom of speech will soon be a completely dead letter.

“Facebook Blocks Pamela Geller (Again!) for Reporting on Muslim Anti-Semitism in Germany,” by Allum Bokhari, Breitbart, April 27, 2018:
Days after Facebook, along with Google and Twitter, refused to attend a congressional hearing on social media censorship, the social network banned the account of author and free speech activist Pamela Geller for 30 days after she posted an article about Muslim anti-Semitism in Germany.
Geller’s article said that “thanks to the hijrah” [Jihad by immigration] “Islamic antisemitism will drive the Jews out of Europe, succeeding in achieving Hitler’s dream — a judenrein Europe.”
The rest of the post featured an Associated Press article about a German Jewish leader advising Jews in the country to avoid wearing skullcaps in cities due to anti-Semitic attacks in the country.
At the congressional hearing on social media censorship this week, Democrats on the Judiciary Committee accused conservatives of believing a “conspiracy theory” about social media censorship. They claimed there is no pattern of bias against conservatives on major tech platforms.
And yet, the targeting of major figures on the right continues. This is not the first time Geller has been banned by Facebook for political posts. After the Islamic terrorist attack in Orlando, Florida in 2016, the social network banned both her personal account and one of her organizations, Stop Islamization of America.
Freedom Defence Initiative, another conservative organization run by Geller, was also banned by PayPal, along with Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch, a site monitoring Islamic extremism. PayPal reversed their decision following a public backlash.
Finally, Twitter refused to enforce its content rules when Geller’s daughters were the targets of a vicious harassment campaign on the app. Many of the abusive tweets remain on their platform, their authors unpunished….

_______________________________________________________

Conservative Free Speech Suppressed On Social Media

Diamond and Silk went before congress to address conservative censorship on Facebook, a seemingly growing issue for conservatives on social media.

OBAMA’S ISLAMIC DECEIT & LIES: “ISLAM HAS A PROUD TRADITION OF TOLERANCE”~LET’S TEST HIS THEORY

OBAMA’S ISLAMIC DECEIT & LIES: 
“ISLAM HAS A PROUD TRADITION OF TOLERANCE”~LET’S TEST HIS THEORY 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/islam-has-a-proud-tradition-of-tolerance-said-barack-obama-lets-test-his-theoryrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
In his famous outreach speech to the Islamic world from Cairo on June 4, 2009, Barack Obama said: “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country.”
Let’s test his theory. Here are a few notable facts you will discover in my forthcoming book, The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS:
  • The Christian Patriarch who lamented that the Arab conquest of Jerusalem was characterized by “so much destruction and plunder” and “incessant outpourings of human blood”;
  • The Muslim leader who had the Colossus of Rhodes sold off as scrap metal because for him, it wasn’t a “wonder of the world,” it was just an artifact of jahiliyya, pre-Islamic ignorance;
  • The Muslim leader who wrote to the Byzantine Emperor, a Christian, demanding that he “renounce this Jesus and convert to the great God whom I serve. If not, how will this Jesus be able to save you from my hands?”;
  • The caliph who exhorted his governors not to lenient on the non-Muslims, saying: “The non-Muslims are nothing but dirt. Allah has created them to be partisans of Satan”;
  • The Muslim leader who gave ruthless orders to the Muslim invaders of India: “Kill anyone belonging to the combatants; arrest their sons and daughters for hostages and imprison them”;
  • How the Muslim Spain that Obama praised became a center of the Islamic slave trade, where Muslim buyers could purchase non-Muslim sex-slave girls as young as eleven years old, as well as slave boys for sex as well, or slave boys raised to become slave soldiers;
  • The Islamic warrior who fought without mercy against the Hindus in India: “the blood of the infidels flowed so copiously that the stream was discolored”;
  • The Islamic caliphate that made it a regular practice to seize the children of Christian families, convert them to Islam, and train them as slave soldiers;
  • The Muslim reformer who gained a large following among Muslims by personally stoning an accused adulteress to death;
  • The real story of how the Sphinx lost its nose (no, Napoleon’s troops did not shoot it off during target practice);
  • Much, much more.
“Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance” — Barack Obama is gone from the White House, but many people believe that to this day, and such assumptions influence public policy. Discover what really happened and get the whole truth in The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISISClick here to preorder now.

ALFIE EVANS, HOSPITALIZED TODDLER AT CENTER OF UK COURT BATTLE, DIES

Nigel Farage talks Alfie Evans and Britain’s medical system

ALFIE EVANS, HOSPITALIZED TODDLER AT CENTER OF UK COURT BATTLE, DIES 

BY HEATHER CLARK
SEE: https://christiannews.net/2018/04/28/alfie-evans-hospitalized-toddler-at-center-of-uk-court-battle-dies/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
LIVERPOOL — Alfie Evans, the 23-month-old boy whose parents fought in court to transfer him to another hospital for experimental treatment, has died.
“Our baby boy grew his wings tonight at 2:30 a.m. We are heartbroken. Thank you everyone for all your support,” wrote mother Kate James on Saturday.
“My gladiator lay down his shield and gained his wings at 02:30. Absolutely heartbroken. I LOVE YOU MY GUY,” also lamented father Thomas Evans.
As previously reported, Alfie was removed from life support on Monday evening, but had been breathing on his own for several days. Artificial ventilation was discontinued as all efforts in the courts to save his life were unsuccessful.
Justice Anthony Hayden ruled in February that while Alfie’s plight was “profoundly unfair,” he agreed with Alder Hey Children’s Hospital that treatment measures would be futile, and that the nearly two-year-old boy rather needs “good quality palliative care.” A court of appeals upheld the ruling last month.
Earlier this month, Hayden ordered the end-of-life plan to proceed, stating that while he understands the frustration of Alfie’s parents, he sees no chance of recovery and believes that Evans is hoping for an “entirely unrealistic solution.”
“On February 20, I gave a conclusion after six days of evidence after which Mr. Evans cross examined doctors with conspicuous skill and manifest sincerity,” he said. “But I came to the conclusion at the end of that hearing that Alfie’s brain had been so corrupted by mitochondrial disease that his life was futile.”
“By the time I came to conclude the case the terrible reality is that almost the entirety of Alfie’s brain had been eroded, leaving only water and spinal fluid,” Hayden stated. “Even at the end of February, the connective pathways within the brain had been obliterated. They were no longer even identifiable.”
As previously reported, Alfie, who was six months old at the time, was admitted to Alder Hey in December 2016 due to a chest infection. The child was born healthy by all indications, but began exhibiting unusual jerking movements months later.
While hospitalized, Alfie struggled to breathe due to a myoclonic jerking spasm, and was placed on life support. In January 2016, it was thought that Alfie would not make it, but he overcame the infection for a time and began to improve. However, the infant had to be intubated again after contracting another infection, and was stated to be in a semi-vegetative state.
In court proceedings, Alder Hey officials testified that they believed that Alfie’s brain was “entirely beyond recovery” and 70 percent damaged. They argued that it was in the child’s “best interests” to be withdrawn from life support.
However, Alfie’s parents wanted the boy to be transferred to another hospital to obtain experimental treatment—giving their son one more chance. They stated that they did not know specifically what was wrong with Alfie other than that he had a degenerative neurological condition.
Evans and James had also recorded their son opening his eyes, yawning and stretching, and believed it was evidence that they shouldn’t give up just yet.
The matter gained global attention, and a number of political leaders and other notable voices worldwide soon publicly backed the parents. Passionate supporters also gathered outside of Alder Hey Children’s Hospital to demand that the parents’ rights to their child’s treatment be respected. A helicopter was stated to be on standby to transport the boy to Italy.
On Thursday, after appeal efforts were again unsuccessful, Evans and James released a statement asking supporters to “return to their everyday lives” as they sought to “build a bridge” with the hospital. They had hoped that if matters settled down, they might be able to take their son home to obtain medical care there.
“In Alfie’s interests, we will work with his treating team on a plan that provides our boy with the dignity and comfort he needs,” the statement said.
The child died less than two days later.

The Culture of Death & Growing Totalitarianism

BY NEWT GINGRICH
SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2018/04/the-culture-of-death-growing-totalitarianism/#axzz5EFebsAc1republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

USA – (Ammoland.com)- The British government’s decisions to allow two critically ill babies to die in two years is a natural reflection of the culture of death and the steady increase in totalitarian tendencies among Western governments.
Last year, the British government ordered life support removed from Charlie Gard, ending his life when he was just 11 months old. Now, Alfie Evans – just 23 months old – has received what amounts to the same death sentence. On Monday, he was removed from life support by court order – against the wishes of his parents.

Then, something remarkable happened. The child confounded his doctors and refused to die.

As of the time I am writing this, Alfie Evans is still alive and is breathing unaided. This is despite the claim made by a medical professional during a court hearing that Alfie would die quickly – possibly in “minutes” – if taken off life support.
But even this display of the power of the human spirit to defy the expectations of the supposedly rational and objective state did nothing to sway the minds of the British courts and state-run medical apparatus.
On Wednesday, another legal appeal by the parents to be allowed to try and save their son’s life was denied.
The secular system has asserted its right to define what lives are worth living and is determined to prevent its authority from being questioned. Alfie Evans’ life – like Charlie Gard’s before him – has been determined to be limited by the standards of the secular state – and therefore without value.
These tragic government-imposed death sentences for innocent infants should frighten all of us about increasing secularism in society and the steady shift towards a totalitarian willingness to control our lives – down to and including ending them – on the government’s terms.
This is a direct assault on the core premise of the Declaration of Independence. We Americans asserted that we “are endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” In the American Revolution, in our fight against the British crown, we asserted that rights come from God not from government.
However, our secular, liberal culture increasingly dismisses the concept of God and asserts that our rights come from a rational contract enforced by government. In the original American model, we asserted our God-given rights against the power of a potentially tyrannical government. In the emerging left-wing secular order, since there is no God, our rights depend on a secular state controlling itself.

Britain is giving us a vivid, tragic sense of how dangerous and heartless government tyranny can be once God is rejected and there is nothing between us and the government.

Ironically, this latest decision was made the same year Stephen Hawking died 55 years after he was diagnosed with ALS (commonly known as Lou Gehrig’s disease) and told he had only two years to live. Apparently, the British government learned no lessons from Hawking’s remarkable lifetime of work and achievement, which he pursued despite having to battle an extraordinarily challenging illness. In fact, in 1985, Hawking contracted pneumonia while he was writing A Brief History of Time, and his wife was asked if his life should be terminated. She refused, and Hawking went on to live another 33 years and publish one of the most acclaimed books of the 20th century, which has since sold more than 10 million copies worldwide – all after it had been suggested he be taken off life support.
Hawking should be a permanent reminder that the human spirit is more important than the human body and that the will to live and achieve should not be destroyed by the state.
Yet, in the very country which produced and nurtured Hawking, the government still ordered the removal of life support from two babies. In both cases there has been an organized alternative to government-imposed death.
Charlie Gard’s condition was potentially treatable by an experimental process in the United States. An American hospital and other organizations were willing to treat him. Supporters gave more than 1.3 million pounds (about $1.8 million) to pay for the travel and treatment. His parents wanted him to have the chance to live. However, the British bureaucracy took time to consider if he could go. During that bureaucratic process, his condition worsened. Then, having allowed his condition to worsen by refusing to say yes, it was too late. During the bureaucratic deliberation, Charlie’s parents and those who wanted to try to save him were told they had no right to help their own child. The child belonged to the government, and the government would decide whether he had the right to live.
This year, Alfie Evans had international support for an opportunity to live. The “Pope’s hospital”, Bambino Gesù Pediatric Hospital, has offered to treat Alfie (as it did with Charlie), and Pope Francis has publicly appealed to the British government to allow the young child to be taken to Rome. An air ambulance was sent to Alfie’s hospital earlier this week to bring him to the doctors who wanted to try for a miraculous cure.

In a real sense: What better place is there to hope for a miracle than in the Pope’s pediatric hospital, which has helped many children with rare diseases?

This appeal for hope fell on the deaf ears of the state, which refused to allow Alfie’s parents to transfer their child to Rome. In fact, The Telegraph reported that despite a judge ruling that Alfie’s parents could “explore” taking the child home, doctors treating the child have been against this because they fear that “in the ‘worst case’ they would try to take the boy abroad.”
In other words, the “worst case” scenario would be for Alfie’s parents to seek medical help to save their child.
This is monstrous. It is difficult to understand the arrogance and coldness of British judges who prefer to order death rather than allow parents to fight for the lives of their children. Yet at least twice in two years we have seen a supposedly free country’s court system impose death on its most innocent citizens.
Some of this cruelty and inhumanity is a function of the growing culture of death and the expanding sense that secular values must drive religious values out of public life.
Some of it comes from a National Health Service which must bureaucratically define what is worth investing in and what is not. In a world of limited medical resources, little babies with rare conditions become expendable “for the greater good.” The fact that we are all diminished makes no difference to the atheist bureaucratic left.
Those who say they favor socialism must be made to confront this inhumanity, which is an integral part of socialist implementation. When the government controls everything, the government defines everything, and humanity is crushed beneath petty rules and petty rulers.
In America, we are watching the steady growth of intolerance and the totalitarian impulse. Look at the campuses which now seek to control speech. Look at the polls which show young people are being educated into support for censorship. Look at the California legislature which is considering legislation that, taken to its logical conclusion, will outlaw the sale and distribution of the Bible and the Koran (the secular society sees both as intolerant, dangerous documents).
When you read about these two babies being denied life support by a supposedly free government, remember what John Donne warned when he wrote “any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
In these two years, we have seen two babies effectively sentenced to death by a government we would once have considered humane. What will the next horror be?
Your Friend,
Newt

Newt GingrichNewt Gingrich

P.S. Copies of Callista’s new children’s book, Hail to the Chief, and my new book Understanding Trump are now available
About Newt Gingrich
Newt Gingrich is well-known as the architect of the “Contract with America” that led the Republican Party to victory in 1994 by capturing the majority in the U.S. House of Representatives for the first time in forty years. After he was elected Speaker, he disrupted the status quo by moving power out of Washington and back to the American people.
Gingrich Productions is a performance and production company featuring the work of Newt Gingrich and Callista Gingrich. Visit : www.gingrichproductions.com

DELAWARE TYRANNY: PROPOSED LAW WILL INSERT GOVERNMENT BETWEEN PARENTS & THEIR CHILDREN…AGAIN!

DELAWARE TYRANNY: PROPOSED LAW WILL INSERT GOVERNMENT BETWEEN PARENTS & THEIR CHILDREN…AGAIN! 
BY NICOLE THEIS
SEE: https://www.delawarefamilies.org/learn-sb65republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Senate Bill 65 (SB 65) is a proposed law in Delaware that says if your child develops confusion about his/her identity, the only licensed professional counseling your child may receive is that which promotes a homosexual or transgender identity. 
Once again, just like with Regulation 225, the state is stepping in between parents, their child, and qualified licensed therapists to say “WE KNOW BEST.”  

If SB 65 passed in Delaware, any discussion (even a conversation) between a licensed professional and a child that affirms his biological reality and helps him align with his faith and moral beliefs WILL BE BANNED (line 114).

Any licensed professional who helps a minor child in this way or refers a family for help outside of the state would have their professional license revoked (line 139). 

As many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.  

Instead of supporting a child’s biological sex through natural puberty, the only help the State of Delaware will allow through SB 65 is sending a gender-confused child down the path of chemical castration with puberty blockers followed by adding cross-sex hormones, which permanently sterilizes them and puts them at risk for heart disease, strokes, diabetes, and cancers and leads to minors making the decision to amputate healthy body parts (lines 83-93, 117-119).

This is ABUSE, not support!

The Delaware House is expected to vote on SB 65 at any time. If it passes the House, it will become law. Take 2 minutes right now to send your Representative an email opposing SB 65.
Additional concerns with SB 65:
  • SB65 not only interferes with a parent’s right to direct the upbringing of his/her child, it interferes with free speech and prevents clients from seeking their own self-determined goals. The bill demands therapists provide counseling according to the will of the government – or they may lose their professional license. Instead, we should advocate for a discussion that promotes therapy guided by a client’s self-determined goals NOT the will of the government!
  •  Many studies have shown a positive association between childhood sexual abuse and sexual confusion. Shouldn’t minors be given the opportunity to explore the idea that their sexuality/attractions may have been forced upon them by their abusers? The answer is “NO” if SB 65 passes.  
  •  Included in SB65 is language that prevents a teen who is experiencing sexual feelings toward a pre-pubescent child of the same sex (pedopheliac feelings), to receive therapy that would reduce or eliminate those feelings (line 116).
  •  SB 65, lines 83-93, says that gender confusion is not to be treated, even though there is ZERO scientific evidence connecting talk therapy to any kind of tangible harm. The American Psychological Association has concluded, “[t]here are no scientifically rigorous studies of recent that would enable us to make a definitive statement about whether recent sexual orientation change efforts is safe or harmful and for whom.”
  •  Therapy bans put patient confidentiality at risk. Who would review patient records and determine that a therapist has or has not complied with laws like the therapy bans being considered in Delaware?
  •   SB65 forbids even talk therapy, a discussion, that would affirm a child’s biological reality. SB65 positions parents and licensed professionals as abusers. This is how the premise of the bill language was expressed in Committee hearings by the bill sponsors. So-called conversion therapy does not exist in Delaware. 
More Resources:

About Author: Nicole Theis

Nicole Theis is a native of Delaware, and Founder and President of Delaware Family Policy Council established in 2008. Nicole, with her team, leads the Faith, Family, and Freedom effort in Delaware and works daily to equip and embolden Christ followers to courageously engage the culture. 

PATRIOTS & TRUMP SUPPORTERS DIAMOND & SILK OPENING STATEMENT & QUESTIONING AT HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING~DENY MAKING A “TON OF MONEY” WITH TRUMP’S BACKING


PATRIOTS & TRUMP SUPPORTERS DIAMOND & SILK OPENING STATEMENT & QUESTIONING AT HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING 
Diamond and Silk Go Off On Rep Sheila Jackson Lee: Don’t Try To Mix My Words 4/26/18
It seems pro-Trump bloggers Lynnette Hardaway and Rochelle Richardson (AKA Diamond & Silk) might’ve comat least once, possibly twice during their testimony before the House Judiciary Committee today. The dynamic duo are on Capitol Hill for a hearing on their claims that Facebook is censoring their content because of their conservative beliefs. Despite all the questions surrounding the vloggers’ as the proceeding got underway.
Hardaway (Diamond) says “We’ve never been paid by the Trump campaign” in response to Sheila Jackson Lee
Diamond & Silk blast Democratic tool Rep.Hank Johnson
“Let me tell you something: Facebook censored us for six months,” fired-back Diamond, whose real name is Lynette Hardaway. “You know what? We didn’t bash Facebook. We brought to the light how Facebook has been censoring conservative voices like ourselves.”
JOHNSON: “YOU’VE MADE A TON OF MONEY”
(WITH TRUMP’S BACKING)

Ex Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino: Attacks on Diamond and Silk Result of Left’s Identity Politics

“The attacks on black conservatives are an outgrowth of the left’s fascination with identity politics … if the color of your skin happens to be darker than mine and you happen to espouse a conservative thought or support this President, you’re to be crushed at every opportunity.” —Dan Bongino

Rep. Hank Johnson Gets Owned by Diamond and Silk

“Hank Johnson’s entire livelihood is lying to people up on Capitol Hill and manipulating them, making them believe liberal ideas are actually A-Okay. He gets paid what, a $175,000 dollars a year of your money and he’s knocking Diamond and Silk because people voluntarily pay to see some of their stuff on Facebook.”
Dan Bongino

Diamond And Silk Are Fighting For You!

Unlike Lord Zuckerberg …Conservative video bloggers Diamond and Silk were under oath. But that didn’t stop some on the Committee Hearing on Filtering Practices of Social Media from twisting the facts to paint Diamond and Silk as liars.


CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS PUSH BILLS TO CONTROL HOMESCHOOLERS~LESBIAN INTRODUCES BILL~ALEX NEWMAN & DR. DUKE PESTA DISCUSS

CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS PUSH BILLS 
TO CONTROL HOMESCHOOLERS~
ALEX NEWMAN & DR. DUKE PESTA DISCUSS 
Lawmakers in California are considering two bills that would trample homeschool freedom in an unprecedented way, threatening parental rights and educational liberty across the state and beyond. Even private schools would not be safe under the proposed schemes.

There are two pieces of legislation in particular that critics are working to expose and defeat. A rally in defense of educational freedom is set to take place in Sacramento on April 25, the day hearings in the Assembly Education Committee are scheduled for the bills. |

BILL INTRODUCED BY AN OPEN LESBIAN

Assemblymember Eggman: 

Marriage Equality Returned to California

(Sacramento) — Assemblymember Susan Talamantes-Eggman spoke at a State Capitol news conference with Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez and others following the announcement from the Supreme Court of its decision to overturn California’s Proposition 8. Assemblymember Eggman said it has been a long struggle for marriage equality, “All of the work that we’ve done is really coming together to change how we all look at each other and treat each other and our relationships with each other as good and loving Americans.” Here’s more from Assemblymember Eggman in this Assembly Access video. http://www.asmdc.org/eggman
“31 YEARS” IN A LESBIAN RELATIONSHIP WITH HER “FEMALE” PARTNER:
“FIRST ‘OUT’ PERSON TO BE ELECTED IN THE VALLEY”
California Lawmakers Say Homeschool is Child Abuse Dr. Duke Pesta
Dr. Duke Pesta examines a pending California law that would treat homeschool parents as child abusers.

NEVADA SCHOOL BANS STUDENT’S PRO GUN RIGHTS TEE SHIRT & FREE SPEECH

NEVADA SCHOOL BANS STUDENT’S PRO GUN RIGHTS TEE SHIRT & FREE SPEECH
BY DUNCAN JOHNSON
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Two civil rights groups back new First Amendment lawsuit challenging Washoe County School District’s ‘no weapons’ dress code as unconstitutional and overbroad, claims 8th-grade student was discriminated against based on his pro-Second Amendment viewpoint and tee-shirt.
Guardanapo v. Washoe County School District - Federal First Amendment civil rights challenge to the District's "no weapons" dress code and discrimination against pro-gun rights 8th grade studentGuardanapo v. Washoe County School District – Federal First Amendment civil rights challenge to the District's “no weapons” dress code and discrimination against pro-gun rights 8th grade student
RENO, NV -(Ammoland.com)- Less than one week after constitutional rights advocacy organizations Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF) and Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) published a new guide to help protect pro-gun rights students and their First Amendment free speech rights, the groups today announced a new federal civil rights lawsuit against a Reno, Nevada public school district and principal over what they believe are serious violations of an 8th grade student’s First Amendment right to peacefully and non-disruptively wear pro-Second Amendment political messages at his middle school. The complaint, which includes an image of the banned tee shirt, can be downloaded.
The lawsuit, filed this morning in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada in Reno, claims that boy was disciplined for engaging “in a respectful, silent, and peaceful expression of his political views” by wearing a Firearms Policy Coalition t-shirt to school. The shirt invokes the constitution and themes dating back to the American Revolution, with the words “Don’t Tread On Me” and a coiled rattlesnake (familiar elements of the Gadsden flag) flanked by references to the United States of America (“USA”) and the Second Amendment (“2A”). While it also includes the words “Firearms Policy Coalition,” there are no depictions of firearms or weapons of any kind on the shirt.
According to the plaintiffs, the student’s teacher, Brooke May, last month directed him to remove the FPC shirt, claiming that it violated the school’s dress code. She also said that he would be subject to further discipline, including a trip to the principal’s office, if he wore it again. In response, the 8th grader at Kendyl Depoali Middle School told her that it was his “right to express [himself] through how [he] dressed,” to which the teacher responded that he could have his “Second Amendment rights when he turns eighteen”—ignoring, and violating, his First Amendment rights in the process.
Mere days after the plaintiff was disciplined for wearing FPC’s pro-gun rights shirt, students at the school participated in the National School Walkout, a formal, organized protest calling for expansive new gun control measures.
“Public schools may not violate the civil rights of pro-gun rights students because they don’t like the Second Amendment or people who support the fundamental, individual human right to armed self-defense,” said FPF Chairman and FPC President Brandon Combs. “It is beyond outrageous that a friendly, peaceful young man was targeted and punished by the same school district that days later went out of its way to support gun control. This case will put the Washoe County School District and public schools across the country on notice that students’ peaceful, pro-Second Amendment speech is protected by the same constitution that protects their right to keep and bear arms.”
“The Supreme Court has affirmed since the era of Vietnam War protests that public school students have the right to express themselves so long as they don’t disrupt the educational process,” explained Bradley Benbrook, counsel for the plaintiff. “And the First Amendment violation is all the more apparent where, as alleged here, school administrators suppress unpopular speech while allowing more politically-correct speech.”
The student is represented through his parents Audrey Guardanapo, a local police dispatcher, and Shaun Guardanapo, veteran of the United States Marine Corps and former law enforcement officer, by Reno litigation attorney David O’Mara of the O’Mara Law Firm, Bradley Benbrook and Stephen Duvernay of Sacramento-based Benbrook Law Group, PC, and Eugene Volokh, a UCLA law professor who has written and taught extensively about the First and Second Amendments. Before joining the UCLA faculty 20 years ago, Volokh clerked for Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and Justice Sandra Day O’Connor of the U.S. Supreme Court. He also operates the popular legal blog “The Volokh Conspiracy,” now hosted at Reason.
If a student or parent believes they were discriminated against, threatened or disciplined for peacefully expressing their views, punished for refusing to participate in a gun control walkout or demonstration, or threatened with law enforcement action for their pro-gun speech, they can submit a report to the FPF/FPC Legal Action Hotline at www.firearmpolicy.org/hotline or by calling (855) 252-4510.
The FPF and FPC guide to pro-gun student speech, “K-12 Schools, Free Speech, and the Fundamental, Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms: A Guide to How Students Can Use Their First Amendment Rights to Defend and Promote Second Amendment Rights,” is available for free at www.k12speech.com. In addition to providing information and tools that parents and students can use to make sure they are not forced into participating in speech or demonstrations they disagree with, the guide contains materials that may help them plan counter-speech to gun control advocacy events or organize pro-gun rights demonstrations or expressive conduct. It also includes sample letters that parents could edit and use to notify schools of a student’s disagreement with a gun control event’s viewpoint, request information and policies, and help ensure that school officials respect the rights of all students.
About Firearms Policy Foundation
Firearms Policy Foundation (www.firearmsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 grassroots, non-profit public policy organization. FPF’s mission is to defend the Constitution of the United States and the People’s rights, privileges and immunities deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition, especially the inalienable, fundamental, and individual right to keep and bear arms. FPF conducts charitable programs including research, education, and legal action to protect and advance individual liberty.
About Firearms Policy CoalitionFirearms Policy Coalition
Firearms Policy Coalition (www.firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 grassroots, non-profit public policy organization. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially the fundamental, individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. FPC protects and promotes individual liberty through programs including legal action, direct and grassroots advocacy, legislation, government oversight, research, education, and outreach.
_______________________________________________________________
VIDEO: 

IMPERIAL JUDICIARY: ACTING UNCONSTITUTIONALLY, JUDGE ORDERS RESTART OF “DACA” TO LET ILLEGAL MIGRANT CHILDREN ENTER U.S.

IMPERIAL JUDICIARY: ACTING UNCONSTITUTIONALLY, JUDGE ORDERS RESTART OF “DACA” 
BY SELWYN DUKE
SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/28844-imperial-judiciary-acting-unconstitutionally-judge-orders-restart-of-dacarepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Another judge has signaled that he doesn’t like the law — so he’s just going to ignore it. On Tuesday, Judge John D. Bates of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia “ruled” that last year’s revocation of the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) was illegal and that the whole program must be restarted. It was the most radical decision yet among a series of judicial opinions that, ignoring constitutionally granted executive power, seek to hobble immigration enforcement.
The Washington Times reports on the story, writing that the usurpative opinion “goes beyond other judges, who had also ruled the phaseout illegal but had only ordered Homeland Security to accept renewal applications from people who’d already been awarded DACA before. Judge John D. Bates’s ruling would require a full restart, meaning even illegal immigrant ‘Dreamers’ who’d never been approved before would now be able to apply for DACA.”
“The judge imposed a 90-day delay on his own ruling to give the government a chance to reargue its case, but for now the ruling stands as the most severe blow yet to Mr. Trump’s phaseout,” the paper continued.
Outrageously, Judge Bates sang a republic-rending tune we’ve heard before, claiming that “the government never gave an adequate justification for revoking DACA, so its decision seemed ‘arbitrary and capricious,’” the Times further informs. This echoes the opinion earlier this year by Judge Nicholas Garaufis of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, who wrote that if President Trump wanted to end the program, he must provide what the court considers “adequate reasons for doing so.”
While the president has no obligation to provide justification for enforcing the law, the justification is plain: DACA illegals are just that — illegal. Yet it’s clear why this eluded Judge Bates. Telegraphing his biases, he wrote that he would use illegal-migrant activists’ politically correct term for illegals: “undocumented.” Of course, calling an illegal migrant an undocumented worker is like calling a rapist an undocumented husband.
Yet a justification for ending the program was also provided by what Judge Bates may consider an unimpeachable source. As The Heritage Foundation wrote last year in “DACA Is Unconstitutional, as Obama Admitted”:
Responding in October 2010 to demands that he implement immigration reforms unilaterally, Obama declared, “I am not king. I can’t do these things just by myself.” In March 2011, he said that with “respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case.” In May 2011, he acknowledged that he couldn’t “just bypass Congress and change the (immigration) law myself…. That’s not how a democracy works.”
Yet in 2012, he did it anyway. He put DACA in place to provide pseudo-legal status to illegal aliens brought to the U.S. as minors, including as teenagers. He promised them that they wouldn’t be deported and provided them with work authorizations and access to Social Security and other government benefits.
So the judges’ positions are staggering: What one president, Obama, instituted unconstitutionally (DACA) via executive order, his successor cannot undo via executive order. Note that Congress would never pass a DACA amnesty, despite Obama’s prodding of them to do so for years — it was never “law.”
It is the judges’ decisions that are “arbitrary and capricious,” “lacking even a thin veneer of law,” to quote late Justice Antonin Scalia. The notion that chief executives have to provide judges with “good reasons” to enforce the law is to trade the rule of law for the rule of lawyers. In fact, judges have even struck down presidential applications of law — Trump’s travel bans — under the pretext that the motives behind it were impure (alleged anti-Muslim sentiment expressed on the campaign trail).
Yet if this approach is valid, let’s apply it to other actions. Can Trump be prevented from placing tariffs on Chinese goods because he engaged in anti-China rhetoric on the campaign trail? Or, before prosecuting a bank robber, perhaps a district attorney should have to explain his reasoning. Can he show that the thief really didn’t need the money or didn’t have an upbringing that “destined him for a life of crime”?
Allowing judges to impose their own beliefs on the country through their rulings is not only subverting the rule of law but is also rendering elections meaningless. After all, what is the point of electing political candidates who promise to implement the conservative agenda, when activist judges can declare their agenda unconstitutional when they succeed?
But it is the activist judges who are behaving unconstitutionally, their claims to the contrary notwithstanding. Note that judicial supremacy — the idea that courts have the power to determine what law means and thus constrain not only their own branch, but the other two as well — is not in the Constitution. Rather, the power was unilaterally declared by the courts themselves, most notably in the Marbury v. Madison decision (1803).
And tolerating this extra-constitutional judicial supremacy has made the courts supremely dangerous. As I wrote last year:
Consider: As Dr. Alan Keyes explained in 2005, they have their judicial power. Yet if they can strike down laws, contrary to the legislature’s will, they’ve also arrogated to themselves the legislative power. And if they can tell the chief executive that an action must or mustn’t be executed, then they’ve arrogated to themselves the executive power as well. Now note what James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” said about having the executive, legislative, and judicial powers all in one entity’s hands: It is the very definition of tyranny.
This is why Founding Father Thomas Jefferson said that if the theory of judicial supremacy is valid, then indeed is our Constitution a felo de se — an act of suicide.
The shame of this, and Congress’ shame, is that its legislators could tame the courts but refuse to do so. As I also pointed out last year:
Under the Constitution’s Article III, Congress can eliminate any and every federal court, except for the Supreme Court; and can limit the appellate jurisdiction of the SCOTUS, meaning, SCOTUS’ ability to hear cases brought up through lower courts. It thus could mostly eliminate judicial review.
Why doesn’t Congress do this? Because it means taking a stand on contentious issues and possibly suffering electoral consequences. It’s far easier for legislators to just posture, puff up their chests, and then throw up their hands saying, “Hey, we tried. But the courts have ruled!” This brings no electoral consequences because most Americans don’t know civics and are never aware that Congress is shirking its power-balancing duty.
Of course, since judicial supremacy is extra-constitutional and enjoyed only at the pleasure of the other two branches, Trump could simply and lawfully ignore rogue court rulings. Sadly, though, today’s climate ensures that such a move would be used as a pretext for impeaching him.
Yet without pushback, judicial tyranny will be our lot. American Thinker’s Rick Moran, lamenting Judge Bates’ opinion, wrote, “I guess the federal courts don’t believe that the chief executive is in charge of the Executive Branch.” But their beliefs are irrelevant. They’re imposing their will for the oldest possible reason: because they can.
Expecting the courts to willingly stop stealing the people’s government is like expecting thieves to willingly stop stealing. The way it is, has been, and always will be is that only power negates power.
_______________________________________________________________

CFR’S GLOBALIST MAGAZINE “FOREIGN AFFAIRS” CALLS TRUMP RACIST, SEXIST & AUTHORITARIAN

SOME CONGRESS PERSONS ARE MEMBERS 
OF THE GLOBALIST CFR
GLOBALIST MAGAZINE “FOREIGN AFFAIRS” CALLS TRUMP RACIST, SEXIST & AUTHORITARIAN 
BY STEVE BYAS
SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/28923-globalist-magazine-foreign-affairs-calls-trump-racist-sexist-and-authoritarianrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The May/June 2018 edition of Foreign Affairs, the official publication of the globalist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), issued a series of articles themed “Is Democracy Dying?” While the authors of the articles do not reach any conclusion to their question, they do make it quite clear that they view President Donald Trump as an impediment to the type of society they want for our world.
The articles appear to contradict the mission statement found near the beginning of each magazine, in which the writers pledge to “tolerate wide differences of opinion,” and state that its articles “will not represent any consensus of belief.”
On the contrary, one can read Foreign Affairs on a regular basis and never see any articles expressing concern about the negative effects of open borders and multilateral trade agreements upon national sovereignty. In fact, what one gets from the magazine is a steady diet of globalism.
In the May/June 2018 issue of Foreign Affairs, two articles tackle the question, “Is Democracy Dying?” Of course, this presupposes that the form of government created by the U.S. Constitution is a “democracy,” and that “democracy” is a good thing. Actually, the constitutional framers crafted a federal republic, a system of limited government, with religious liberty and private property among those liberties placed beyond the reach of majorities. In other words, liberty trumps democracy. The purpose of government is to protect life, liberty, and property, not ensure that a majority can vote to strip the wealthier minority of their wealth, or to impose a particular religion, for example.
What is noteworthy about the tone of these articles is that the writers appear to think “democracy,” or government by the people, to be a good thing, just as long as the people favor the policies of the global elites. In fact, the overarching theme of the articles is that “the people” are not compliant enough in favoring those policies so dear to the global elites, such as open borders.
Perhaps no phrase is more despised by those who head the CFR and its publication than “America First.” The fact that Trump used that very phrase over and over during his campaign and since that time explains their animosity toward him. In a May/June 2018 article by Walter Russell Mead (the Global View columnist at the Wall Street Journal), he laments that there were no memorable diplomatic accomplishments “between the purchase of Alaska and the construction of the Panama Canal.”
Actually, during those years America was at peace, and it was growing to become the world’s largest economy. Our governmental leaders were conducting the foreign policy of Washington and Jefferson: no entanglement in the affairs of other countries. Only to globalists can such a period be described as a time of no accomplishment in diplomacy.
But in the early 20th century, beginning with the “Progressive Era,” Mead noted that the country began to have “successes.” Mead’s “successes” involved mostly the growth of government — the creation of the Federal Reserve System, the introduction of the income tax, and the rise of federal regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration.
Despite these supposed successes favored by the elites (it should be noted that to collectivists, “democracy” does not mean so much government by the people as government for the people, or what the elites believe is good for the people), Mead regrets the recent election returns in the United Kingdom (Brexit), Hungary, Poland, and Italy (with rising opposition to uncontrolled immigration and the consolidation of Europe) and the Trump administration, which seeks “to take U.S. policy in new directions.”
Ronald Inglehurt’s article in the April 16, 2018 issue of Foreign Affairs, “The Age of Insecurity,” is even more blunt: “Over the past decade, many marginally democratic countries have become increasingly authoritarian. And authoritarian, xenophobic populist movements have grown strong enough to threaten democracy’s long-term health in several rich, established democracies, including France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States.”
Inglehurt continued, “The world is experiencing the most severe democratic setback since the rise of fascism in the 1930s. The immediate cause of rising support for authoritarian, xenophobic populist movements is a reaction to immigration.” It would seem that Inglehurt is comparing the election of Donald Trump and other political leaders in Hungary and Poland to Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini! But neither Hitler nor Mussolini had much to say about immigration or multilateral trade agreements.
While Inglehurt insinuates that anti-immigration politicians in places such as Hungary, France, Italy, and Poland are only a step or two removed from Adolf Hitler, he reserves most of his salvos for Trump, declaring, “In the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the Republican candidate Donald Trump campaigned on a platform of xenophobia and sympathy toward authoritarianism.”
Inglehurt argues that Trump campaigned as “an openly racist, sexist, authoritarian, and xenophobic candidate,” who “ran against Hillary Clinton, a liberal.” One might recall that Hillary had a word for Trump’s supporters: “deplorables.”
Inglehurt places part of the blame for the rise of so-called authoritarian parties over the last few decades on a “rise in inequality” during that time period. And who was to blame for that? Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, Inglehurt claims, because they “weakened labor unions and sharply cut back state regulation.” Inglehurt did not add, though he could have, that Thatcher’s opposition to the creation of the European Union got her bounced from her position as prime minister, despite leading her Conservative Party to three consecutive national election victories. The global elites were not going to tolerate any impediment to their goal of one government for all of Europe — even from the Iron Lady.
What can be done about all this? Inglehurt’s solution is more government. “Whether this latest democratic setback proves permanent will depend on whether societies address these problems, which will require government intervention,” he asserted.
Unfortunately, in Inglehurt’s view, “powerful conservative interests are moving the United States in the opposite direction, sharply reducing taxes on the rich and cutting government spending.” One can only hope.
In short, Foreign Affairs, and its parent organization, the Council on Foreign Relations, is not only globalist, its articles promote Big Government here at home. Perhaps in the next issue, it will publish an article warning its readers of the dangers of Big Government, globalism, and unchecked immigration. But we sincerely doubt it.

DEMOCRATS & SOROS REORGANIZE IMMIGRANT INVASION OF U.S. SOUTHERN BORDER



DEMOCRATS & SOROS REORGANIZE IMMIGRANT INVASION 
OF U.S. SOUTHERN BORDER

The migrant caravan is back!

BY MILLIE WEAVER
SEE: https://www.infowars.com/dems-reorganize-immigrant-invasion-of-us-southern-boarder/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Infowars reporter Millie Weaver covers breaking news that the large group of Honduran immigrants, which were disbanded after Trump ordered the National Guard to help protect the border, have returned.
This group of immigrants, claiming to be seeking asylum and organized by the group ‘People Without Borders,’ have been reorganized by Democrat operatives and George Soros-funded NGOs.

HOMELAND CHIEF WARNS IMMIGRANT CARAVAN: ‘WE WILL ENFORCE THE IMMIGRATION LAWS’

‘If you enter our country illegally, you have broken the law and will be referred for prosecution’

BY MAX GREENWOOD
SEE: https://www.infowars.com/homeland-chief-warns-immigrant-caravan-we-will-enforce-the-immigration-laws/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen on Wednesday warned that the federal government is prepared to prosecute Central American migrants from a caravan planning to cross the U.S. border this weekend.
Nielsen said in a statement that the Homeland Security Department is monitoring the caravan’s movements, and “is doing everything within our authorities to secure our borders and enforce the law.”
“Let me be clear: We will enforce the immigration laws as set forth by Congress,” she said.
“If you enter our country illegally, you have broken the law and will be referred for prosecution. If you make a false immigration claim, you have broken the law and will be referred for prosecution. If you assist or coach an individual in making a false immigration claim, you have broken the law and will be referred for prosecution.”
______________________________________________

DHS secretary sends warning to illegal immigrant ‘caravan’

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen renews threat to prosecute ‘caravan’ of border-crossers; former ICE agent David Ward reacts on ‘Your World.’

ROYAL BABY VS ALFIE EVANS~DEATH PANEL MEDICINE-A TALE OF TWO BABIES~BRITISH HYPOCRISY, MORAL RELATIVISM, DENIAL OF NATURAL RIGHTS PERSISTS SINCE AMERICAN REVOLUTION

STATE SANCTIONED MURDER
UK SOCIALIST STATE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM-WHERE THE STATE DECIDES WHETHER YOU LIVE OR DIE

U.K.: WHY SOME LIVES ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN MOST IN A KINGDOM=THE MAIN REASON FOR AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE
ROYAL BABY VS ALFIE EVANS~DEATH PANEL MEDICINE-A TALE OF TWO BABIES~BRITISH HYPOCRISY, MORAL RELATIVISM, DENIAL OF NATURAL RIGHTS PERSISTS SINCE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
INHERENT INJUSTICE OF 
“SOCIAL JUSTICE, UNIVERSAL ACCESS HEALTHCARE” IN UK
THE INDISPENSABLE VS DISPENSABLE IN A COVERT CASTE SYSTEM

UK judge denies parents’ appeal 

for Alfie Evans

Taken Off Oxygen by Doctors; Parents Performing Mouth to Mouth 

Why Kate left the hospital so quickly 

after delivering royal baby

SEE ALSO: 

Parents of Alfie Evans Seek to ‘Build a Bridge’ 

With Hospital, Ask Supporters to 

‘Return to Everyday Lives’

TOM EVANS: WE WANT TO TAKE ALFIE HOME

Baby Alfie Evans Appeal Rejected By EU Death Panel

Following a rejected last minute appeal by his family. Alfie Evans, the 23 month old boy from the United Kingdom suffering from a rare degenerative brain disorder has could become yet another casualty to the socialist state healthcare system. Where the state decides whether you live or die. Even if the Vatican, with all of its resources offers to help you.

NOT WORTH SAVING?
The terminally ill toddler was taken off of life sustaining measures in Britain, but Alfie Evans is still fighting; reaction from the former Arkansas governor and Fox News contributor on ‘Fox News @ Night with Shannon Bream.’

COPS ACCOST, INTERROGATE, ABUSE PRO-2ND AMENDMENT PARKLAND STUDENT SURVIVOR OVER GUN RANGE PHOTOS, TIME WITH DAD AT RANGE~POLICE DISALLOWED RECORDING OF MEETING, PARENTAL CONSENT, LEGAL COUNSEL

STUDENT DENIED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS BY SCHOOL SECURITY & POLICE


Cops Accost Pro-2nd Amendment Parkland Survivor Over Gun Range Photos
COPS ACCOST PRO-2ND AMENDMENT PARKLAND SURVIVOR OVER GUN RANGE PHOTOS; POLICE PROHIBIT RECORDING OF INTERROGATION, DISALLOW PARENTAL APPROVAL, LEGAL COUNSEL

‘I was treated like a criminal for no reason other than having gone to the gun range’

BY ADAN SALAZAR
SEE: https://www.infowars.com/cops-accost-pro-2nd-amendment-parkland-survivor-over-gun-range-photos/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Parkland school shooting survivor Kyle Kashuv says he was aggressively interrogated by police after social media posts showed he visited a gun range.
On Friday, Kashuv – who does not prescribe to the anti-gun rhetoric of his fellow anti-Second Amendment #NeverAgain peers – wrote he was learning to fire a gun for the first time.

View image on TwitterView image on Twitter

It was great learning about our inalienable right of and how to properly use a gun. This was my first time ever touching a gun and it made me appreciate the even more. My instructor was very informative; I learnt a lot. is important and we need 2 preserve 2A

“It was great learning about our inalienable right of #2A and how to properly use a gun. This was my first time ever touching a gun and it made me appreciate the #Constitution even more,” he tweeted, indicating in other posts he was there with his father. “My instructor was very informative; I learnt a lot. #2A is important and we need 2 preserve 2A”.
Other posts showed Kashuv firing an AR-15 and an instructor teaching him how to fire.

When he returned to school Monday he was ordered to the principal’s office, where he was informed that other students “had been upset by his posts,” according to The Daily Wire.
In a statement to The Wire, Kashuv described meeting with the armed campus resource officer, being questioned aggressively by a member of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and said police repeatedly referred to him as “the pro-Second Amendment kid.”
Near the end of third period, my teacher got a call from the office saying I need to go down and see a Mr. Greenleaf. I didn’t know Mr. Greenleaf, but it turned out that he was an armed school resource officer. I went down and found him, and he escorted me to his office. Then a second security officer walked in and sat behind me. Both began questioning me intensely. First, they began berating my tweet, although neither of them had read it; then they began aggressively asking questions about who I went to the range with, whose gun we used, about my father, etc. They were incredibly condescending and rude.
Then a third officer from the Broward County Sheriff’s Office walked in, and began asking me the same questions again. At that point, I asked whether I could record the interview. They said no. I asked if I had done anything wrong. Again, they answered no. I asked why I was there. One said, “Don’t get snappy with me, do you not remember what happened here a few months ago?”
They continued to question me aggressively, though they could cite nothing I had done wrong. They kept calling me “the pro-Second Amendment kid.” I was shocked and honestly, scared. It definitely felt like they were attempting to intimidate me.
I was treated like a criminal for no reason other than having gone to the gun range and posted on social media about it.
The Broward County Sheriff’s office did not respond to Daily Wire’s request for comment.
INTERROGATION AT SCHOOL BY “SECURITY” & BROWARD COUNTY POLICE; STUDENT NOT ALLOWED TO RECORD ABUSIVE QUESTIONING

EXCERPTS: 

“For millions of Americans, this is normal and non-controversial. They would properly consider anyone upset by it to be either in need of therapy or a defiant rebuke. Or both.”

“He was attacked on Twitter by leftist ankle-biters accusing him of grandstanding for attention and intimidating Stoneman Douglas survivors. Other students, indoctrinated to be good little informants for the state, “complained” to the school, resulting in Kashuv being dragooned by armed “school resource officers” and grilled as if he were suspected of plotting the next massacre.”
““I didn’t know Mr. Greenleaf, but it turned out that he was an armed school resource officer. I went down and found him, and he escorted me to his office. Then a second security officer walked in and sat behind me. Both began questioning me intensely. First, they began berating my tweet, although neither of them had read it; then they began aggressively asking questions about who I went to the range with, whose gun we used, about my father, etc. They were incredibly condescending and rude.””
Kashuv reports he was isolated, interrogated and intimidated, and recounts he was not allowed to record the conversation. This was done without parental consent, and with no opportunity to solicit legal counsel.  It was done for no other apparent reasons than Kashuv disagreeing with prevailing “progressive” sentiment on guns. And for actually participating in a “gun culture” authorities and administrators are bent on eradicating.

POPE’S AGENT/GLOBALIST MACRON OF FRANCE TELLS TRUMP: ‘RESIST NATIONALISM’ THAT ‘DIVIDES WORLD’~PROMOTES PAPAL “EUR-AFRICA” CONCEPT OF BORDERLESS UNIVERSALISM; NEW WORLD (DIS)ORDER INSANITY

MACRON DESIRES JUST MORE ISLAMIC JIHAD TERRORISM
PAPAL BORDERLESS UNIVERSALISM; 
NEW WORLD (DIS)ORDER INSANITY
POPE’S AGENT/GLOBALIST MACRON TELLS TRUMP: ‘RESIST NATIONALISM’ 
THAT ‘DIVIDES WORLD’

French president new face of globalism in Europe

SEE: https://www.infowars.com/macron-tells-trump-resist-nationalism-that-divides-world/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
French President Emmanuel Macron told President Trump to surrender to the false song of globalism during a speech at the South Lawn of the White House on Tuesday.
“It is together that we can resist the rise of aggressive nationalisms that deny our history and divide the world,” Macron said in French.
“It is together that we will build a new, strong multilateralism that defends pluralism and democracy in the face of ill winds.”
BODY HUGS & EMBRACES: THE FRENCH WAY TO GET INTO TRUMP’S GOOD GRACES? BOTH LOOKING AT THE BIGGER PICTURE IN EUROPE & MIDDLE EAST?
MACRON “RESPECTS” SOVEREIGNTY OF MIDDLE EASTERN COUNTRIES, BUT NOT EUROPEAN?
“Our culture or identity has always been to work for all countries while aspiring to universality,” he added.
Last week, Macron said that Europe and Africa “share the same destiny,” and that Europe must accept hundreds of millions of African migrants over the next thirty years.
“The migratory phenomenon we are facing will be historic,” declared the French president in a television appearance last week, adding that “great poverty”, “climate change”, and “geopolitical conflicts” will see Africans flooding into Europe “for many years to come.”
______________________________________________
FRESH MUTUAL ADMIRATION & HISTORICAL FRIENDSHIPS WITH EUROPEAN SOCIALIST/GLOBALIST??? TOOTHY SMILES, GRINS, AND LOVE PATS BASED ON “COMMON HISTORY”
ARE THEY KIDDING US?

Trump: Denuclearization means North Korea gives up all their nukes

Trump’s French Kiss

Let’s hope that the BBF affections between Trump & Macron were just for show, because THIS is who Macron REALLY is…
THE LEGACY OF FRANCE IS NOT LIBERTY,
BUT A SOCIALIST REVOLUTION

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL SAYS CALIFORNIA’S SANCTUARY LAW CONFLICTS WITH CONSTITUTION~”TENT CITIES” FOR HOMELESS MIGRANTS PROTESTED

CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL SAYS CALIFORNIA’S SANCTUARY LAW CONFLICTS WITH CONSTITUTION 
BY WARREN MASS
SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/28824-laguna-niguel-says-california-sanctuary-law-conflicts-with-constitutionrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The city of Laguna Niguel, California, issued a press release on April 17, informing the public that the Laguna Niguel City Council had voted unanimously to condemn California Senate Bill 54, “which conflicts with Federal Law and the U.S. Constitution.”
SB 54, also known as the California Values Act, prohibits state and local agencies from enforcing immigration laws or working with immigration enforcement agencies.
The release stated that Laguna Niguel also unanimously voted to join the County of Orange and several other Orange County cities (at no cost to the taxpayers) in an amicus brief challenging the constitutionality of SB 54.
The release continued by saying:
Senate Bill 54, which was passed by the California State Legislature and signed into law by Governor Brown, prohibits Laguna Niguel’s law enforcement officers from working collaboratively with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency when a non-U.S. citizen is arrested for a serious felony such as domestic violence, assault or even homicide. The impact of the state’s new law could result in the release of accused criminals back into the community rather than turning them over to ICE for consideration of deportation.
“In Laguna Niguel our top priority is public safety,” the release stated, quoting Laguna Niguel Mayor Elaine Gennawey. “We support our police officers and the rule of law. We welcome immigrants of every race and creed. We are a compassionate community, but we will not take away our local police officers’ ability to work collaboratively with other law enforcement agencies to further protect the public safety of our residents. ‘Siloing’ law enforcement and limiting communications between public safety agencies can put our residents at risk.”
The Business Dictionary defines “Silo mentality” as: “A mindset present in some companies when certain departments or sectors do not wish to share information with others in the same company. This type of mentality will reduce the efficiency of the overall operation, reduce morale, and may contribute to the demise of a productive company culture.”
The city’s press release also noted another reason why Laguna Niguel should not comply with California’s sanctuary law:
Additionally, the City is required to comply with Federal law to receive Federal grants. If the City were to ignore the Federal government’s authority to enforce immigration law, community services for the disabled, elderly and at-risk homeless residents as well as street improvement projects could lose the federal funding that keeps those important programs viable.
The New American has published several articles recently about other cities in Orange County, as well as the county Board of Supervisors, that have either passed anti-sanctuary resolutions or have joined the federal lawsuit by the Trump administration against the state’s sanctuary laws. The Riverside County cities of Beaumont and Murrieta are also considering taking official stances against the state’s sanctuary laws, and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors is also considering joining the administration’s lawsuit against the state of California.
Related articles:
_____________________________________________________________

Homeless protestors clash outside supervisors meeting

Hundreds protested the homeless possibly moving into “tent cities” in Irvine, Laguna Niguel, and Huntington Beach, outside the Orange County Board of Supervisors meeting in Santa Ana.

OC Supervisors Rescind 3-City Tent Plan For Homeless

A proposal to erect large tents in Irvine, Huntington Beach and Laguna Niguel for transients who were cleared from the Santa Ana riverbed has been met with opposition from residents. Michele Gile reports.

BRAINWASHING TECHNOLOGY: PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CUSTOMIZES SOCIAL ENGINEERING FOR CHILDREN~HOW “SEX EDUCATION” DESTROYS PARENTAL RIGHTS

SOCIAL/EMOTIONAL LEARNING???
BRAINWASHING & INDOCTRINATION TECHNOLOGY THAT LIBERALS ARE USING 
ON KIDS
PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CUSTOMIZED SOCIAL ENGINEERING 
FOR CHILDREN 
A caller joins David Knight to warn parents about adaptive, personalized social engineering already being rolled out for children as textbooks are replaced by AI & interactive online curriculum.
UN & GOVERNMENTS ELIMINATING TEXTBOOKS IN FAVOR OF INTERNET CURRICULUMS THAT ARE CONSTANTLY CHANGING CONTENT.
ALGORITHMS & DATA COLLECTION FROM CHILDREN WITHOUT PARENTAL APPROVAL AND/OR INVOLVEMENT
How ‘Sex Ed’ Destroys Parental Rights
Recently, California enacted the Healthy Youth Act, which uses ‘Sex Education’ as a means of bypassing parental rights to indoctrinate school children with progressive ideology. According to the act, the parental right to opt-out one’s children from sex education “does not apply to instruction, materials or programming that discusses gender, gender identity, …sexual orientation”. The Orange County Board of Education went even further stating that parents who disagree with the instruction materials “may not excuse their children from instruction”. This has outraged parents concerned about the over sexualization of children in school. Parents and students have organized walkouts and boycotts of public schools spurring the ‘Sex Ed Sit Out’ movement. Infowars reporter Millie Weaver asks people what they think about sex education and how it relates to parental rights.


MAINE: HOUSE DEMOCRATS VOTE TO ALLOW FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION

ISLAMO-PANDERING
MAINE: HOUSE DEMOCRATS VOTE TO ALLOW FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/maine-house-democrats-vote-to-allow-female-genital-mutilationrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“By a final vote of 77-70, the House killed the FGM ban in a mostly party-line vote…Last week House Democrats passed a toothless bill that wouldn’t actually ban FGM.”
Why did they do this? Flagrant Islamopandering, trying to get the votes of Maine’s growing Somali Muslim community. FGM is mandated in Islamic law: “Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) (by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male, but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the bazr ‘clitoris’ [this is called khufaadh ‘female circumcision’]).” — ‘Umdat al-Salik e4.3, translated by Mark Durie, The Third Choice, p. 64
Why is it obligatory? Because Muhammad is held to have said so: “Abu al- Malih ibn Usama’s father relates that the Prophet said: ‘Circumcision is a law for men and a preservation of honour for women.’” — Ahmad Ibn Hanbal 5:75
“Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah: A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her: ‘Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.’” — Abu Dawud 41:5251
Unless and until its Islamic justifications, which everyone seems to want to cover up and deny, are addressed, FGM will never be eradicated. Anti-FGM movements will tell Muslim women (and men) about the health risks of FGM, and about how barbaric it is to work to deny women sexual pleasure and try to control them, and none of it will stop FGM. All that will wash over believers and what will be left will be the fact that it is justified in Islam — and that is the one thing the anti-FGM campaigners refuse to address. So they will, unfortunately, never succeed.
“Maine House Democrats Vote to Allow Female Genital Mutilation,” Maine First Media, April 19, 2018 (thanks to Creeping Sharia):
Following swift action from Maine House Democrats on the last day of the legislative session, there will be no Female Genital Mutilation ban in the Pine Tree State.
After months of pretending they wanted to stop the barbaric ritual child abuse of FGM, the Democrat caucus showed their true colors on the issue late Wednesday night.
By a final vote of 77-70, the House killed the FGM ban in a mostly party-line vote. Rep. Cathy Nadeau (D-Winslow) was the only Democrat who crossed the aisle to protect young daughters of immigrants in Maine from this brutal abuse.
You can see a full roll-call vote by clicking here.
Republican Rep. Heather Sirocki of Scarborough points out Democrats voted to kill an FGM Ban in April, which is Child Abuse Prevention Month. And in fact, they did it on the “Week of the Young Child.”
Rep. Sirocki says Maine House Democrats initially decided to table the bill with the intent of letting it cowardly die without the courtesy of a vote. However, supporters of the ban made their voices heard.
“Playing games with a child abuse bill is shameful,” Rep. Sirocki said. “Finally, after hours of phone calls from all over the country and state urging Speaker Gideon to relent, she brought the bill to the Floor at 10:30 pm. The Democrats like to talk about victims’ rights, women’s rights, child advocacy, human rights, and justice — but their votes on this horrific form of child abuse do not back up all of their talk.”
The same FGM Ban bill killed in the House, passed the State Senate 30-5, with only the most far-Left Senators voting against it.
Last week House Democrats passed a toothless bill that wouldn’t actually ban FGM. Rep. Karen Gerrish of Lebanon called the show-vote a sad state of affair for young, female Mainers.
“It was a feel-good vote that I suppose will make it appear that they voted to ban FGM — they did not,” Rep. Gerrish said.
But late Wednesday night the show was over….

PLANNED PARENTHOOD SPENDING $30 MILLION ON MIDTERM ELECTIONS

“According to a report by Roll Call, Executive Director Deidre Schifeling of Planned Parenthood Votes stated, “For people of color, young people, and women, everything is on the line in this election. The Trump-Pence administration has rolled out discriminatory rules and policies that undermine our basic rights and freedoms. To win in 2018, we need to channel the unprecedented energy and activism we’ve seen in response to these attacks towards winning at the ballot box.””
PLANNED PARENTHOOD SPENDING 
$30 MILLION ON MIDTERM ELECTIONS
BY JAMES DONLON
SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/28809-planned-parenthood-spending-30-million-on-mid-term-electionsrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Planned Parenthood is once again proving its hunger for powerful allies in government positions. GOP control of the Senate is narrow, and with the upcoming Senate races, the power balance could tip in favor of Democrat, pro-abortion advocates. Planned Parenthood knows this, of course, and will be pouring a reported $30 million into abortion advocacy through its political arm. This money will be spent on Senate and gubernatorial races in a number of states, including Arizona, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and will be used to fund TV and digital ads, direct-mail campaigns, and even advocacy in the public square.
It is appalling that an organization that receives taxpayer money from the government is spending $30 million to directly influence state and federal elections. Planned Parenthood ostensibly follows the law regarding this situation since the money is funneled through the affiliated Planned Parenthood Votes before lining the pockets of politicians. At any rate, the IRS has never been known to give the abortion provider trouble the likes of how it specifically targeted conservative political activist organizations by withholding tax-exempt status.
According to a report by Roll Call, Executive Director Deidre Schifeling of Planned Parenthood Votes stated, “For people of color, young people, and women, everything is on the line in this election. The Trump-Pence administration has rolled out discriminatory rules and policies that undermine our basic rights and freedoms. To win in 2018, we need to channel the unprecedented energy and activism we’ve seen in response to these attacks towards winning at the ballot box.”
So Planned Parenthood wants to ensure that babies can be murdered every day without any restrictions by getting pro-abortion politicians elected, but it order to do that, the organization needs to convince voters that the rights of minorities and young people are at stake if those “pro-choice” candidates aren’t elected. In other words, to vote in favor of Planned Parenthood-backed politicians is to vote for women’s rights, minority rights, and basic “freedoms.”
Notice how in Schifeling’s statement the word “abortion” was not used; instead, the terms are “basic rights” and “freedoms.” This serves to demonstrate how the pro-abortion movement continues to shy away from the actual use of the term “abortion,” or even “terminating a pregnancy.” It is pathetic that an organization advocating for a specific practice avoids, at all costs, using the actual terms that describe the practice they are seeking to defend. They know that they have to be careful, because pro-life sentiment in America is on the rise.
Regardless of Planned Parenthood’s seeming duplicity, the pro-life movement cannot afford to give the pro-abortion movement an inch in the coming months. If that organization is spending $30 million, the pro-life movement should spend millions on spreading the truth. Remember, Planned Parenthood is fighting an uphill battle at this point; pro-life politicians hold office in many states. As long as such pro-life politicians are held accountable and strong pressure is placed upon them to actually get things done, then Planned Parenthood will still be on the defensive. And hopefully, Planned Parenthood will be flushing that $30 million away, just like the $38 million the organization spent on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

BROOKLYN: IMAM ADVOCATES JIHAD VIOLENCE AGAINST ISRAEL IN ANTI-SEMITIC SERMON

BAY RIDGE, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK: 
IMAM ADVOCATES JIHAD VIOLENCE 
AGAINST ISRAEL IN ANTI-SEMITIC SERMON
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/brooklyn-imam-advocates-jihad-violence-against-israel-in-anti-semitic-sermonrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

No surprise here. The Qur’an depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the well-being of the Muslims. They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82); they fabricate things and falsely ascribe them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); they claim that Allah’s power is limited (5:64); they love to listen to lies (5:41); they disobey Allah and never observe his commands (5:13). They are disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more. They are under Allah’s curse (9:30), and Muslims should wage war against them and subjugate them under Islamic hegemony (9:29).
“IPT Exclusive: U.S.-based Imam Advocates Violence Against Israel in Anti-Semitic Sermon,” IPT News, April 20, 2018:
An extremist imam used his Friday prayer last week to call on Muslims and Palestinians to disavow non-violent protest against Israel. But the imam was not preaching from the West Bank or Gaza Strip. This imam was yet another spiritual leader espousing radical views from the United States, joining a long list of other U.S.-based Muslim leaders who have promoted anti-Semitism and incited violence against Jews and Israelis.
Mohamed Elbar – an imam at the Islamic Society of Bay Ridge (a.k.a. Masjid Musab) – delivered a sermon in Brooklyn April 13 that amounted to violent incitement.
Elbar was not trying to keep this view secret in a private setting of committed individuals. On the contrary, his sermon was live-streamed on the Islamic Society’s official Facebook page, broadcast publicly to its followers and translated by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT). It remained accessible as of this publication.
Elbar reserved harsh criticism for some unidentified imams and preachers who he said issued religious decrees (fatwas) calling for non-violence against Israel. According to the imam, these preachers only advocate direct confrontations if there is symmetry in power.
Too “many imams in our diverse Arab countries” are issuing fatwas that prohibit violent resistance against Israel, he said, “so long as the occupier or the aggressor [Israel] possesses more power than you [Palestinians] possess.”
“They [other imams] tell them [individuals in the Palestinian territories]: ‘You don’t have the kind of weaponry that the Zionist entity has, so it’s not right for you to stand up to the Zionist entity, because if you stand up to them and get killed by the Zionist entity, it’s as if you killed yourself,’” Elbar preached.
After denouncing non-violent protest, Elbar rhetorically asks his congregation: “So what should we do? How are we going to defend our land?”
By offering such passionate criticism, Elbar is encouraging violence and promoting terrorism among Palestinians to coerce concessions from Israel.
He warned that if Palestinians and Muslims “give up” the fight against Israel, then Israelis will destroy the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. He also engages in anti-Semitic historical revisionism by claiming that the Jews will re-build a “Temple of no value and no historical evidence” over the mosque’s ruins.
“It [Al Aqsa Mosque] will get demolished if we abandoned it and an alleged Temple of no value and no historical evidence of its existence would be built to replace it,” Elbar claims.
Propagating such a destructive scenario is a form of violent incitement, especially since previous false allegations of Israeli changes to the religious status quo in Jerusalem have led to outbreaks in Palestinian violence. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas espoused a similar view in the past, which encouraged a wave of Palestinian stabbing attacks and terrorism in Jerusalem and surrounding areas.
Elbar, who is also a professor of Islamic Studies at the Graduate Theological Foundation and teaches “Da’wah related courses” (proselytizing Islam) at the Manara Institute, has a history of making radical statements.
In a Dec. 8 sermon – following President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital –Elbar referred to Jerusalem “as a sole Islamic property,” denying any Jewish or Christian ties to the city. In the final prayer, Elbar prayed for “Allah to liberate Palestine from the occupiers [Jews].”
In 2014, the IPT covered a rally featuring Elbar as a speaker, organized by the Egyptian Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in front of the Saudi consulate in New York City. Protesters demanded that Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Morsi be reinstated as Egypt’s president. Elbar led chants accusing the Saudi king of “selling Egypt to the Jews” while members of the crowd chanted that Saudis were “dirtier than the Jews.”
Elbar’s history of anti-Semitic and radical Islamist preaching resembles extremist sentiment embraced by several other imams in the United States….

CANADA: MUSLIM STABS EX-GIRLFRIEND 40 TIMES, SLITS HER THROAT, SHOOTS HER FOR “TAKING OWNERSHIP OF HER LIFE”

Young man wanted on 1st-degree murder charge after woman found dead in backyard - Calgary - CBC News
CANADA: MUSLIM STABS EX-GIRLFRIEND 40 TIMES, SLITS HER THROAT, SHOOTS HER FOR “TAKING OWNERSHIP OF HER LIFE” 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/canada-muslim-stabs-ex-girlfriend-40-times-slits-her-throat-shoots-her-for-taking-ownership-of-her-liferepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Abderrahmane Bettahar was raised in a culture of violence that calls for the beating of disobedient women. The Qur’an says: “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.” (Qur’an 4:34)
And in a hadith, Aisha, Muhammad’s child bride, says that Muhammad “struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?” (Sahih Muslim 2127)
“Calgary woman killed by ex was stabbed 40 times, shot twice, police reveal,” by Carly Stagg, CBC News, April 18, 2018 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
A 22-year-old woman who died last month at the hands of her ex-boyfriend was stabbed 40 times and had her throat slit before being shot twice as she tried to escape her attacker, police say.
Nadia El-Dib’s body was found behind a home in northeast Calgary on March 25. Her killer, Abderrahmane Bettahar, 21, died four days later in a shootout with RCMP officers near Edmonton.
Because there will be no trial and the case is considered closed, Calgary police released details of El-Dib’s last moments Wednesday at the request of her family.
Police say they believe Bettahar and El-Dib left a downtown shisha bar together at around 3 a.m. on March 25. Despite having dated in late 2017, the two weren’t in a relationship at the time, police say.
Around 4 a.m., El-Dib contacted a friend to tell them Bettahar was refusing to take her back to her car.
Police say that fifteen minutes later, he parked behind a house in the 1000 block of Maitland Drive N.E., where Bettahar repeatedly stabbed El-Dib.
El-Dib managed to escape the vehicle, despite her injuries.
Bettahar followed and shot her twice with a semi-automatic rifle that police say he purchased legally two weeks before the attack.
Evidence showed El-Dib was on the ground when Bettahar fired the second shot.
El-Dib’s body wasn’t found until 9:30 a.m., despite several witnesses reporting hearing gunshots.
Her sister, Racha El-Dib, called Bettahar “a disturbed young man, who believed he had the right to murder her because she exercised her right of taking ownership of her life, body and soul, by saying no to a man who was persistent on being with her.”…

____________________________________________________
SEE ALSO: https://christiannews.net/2018/04/23/christian-woman-in-pakistan-dies-after-being-set-on-fire-for-refusing-to-convert-to-islam-marry-muslim/ 

1 2 3 5