A WordPress Blog-THE CHURCH MILITANT Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse. ALL CONTENT FROM HTTPS://RATHEREXPOSETHEM.BLOGSPOT.COM MOVED TO THIS NEW BLOG, MAY 2020
Alex Jones: Trump’s Betrayal Of Americans’ Rights Heartbreaking!
President Trump has not delivered on many of his core promises. Alex Jones calls in from the road to send a message and offer solutions directly to the president, but Trump must act now!
TRUMP PLAN TO FIGHT BIG TECH CENSORSHIP:
‘YOU FIGHT IT BY JUST BEING GOOD. YOU GOT TO BE REALLY GOOD’
In an interview with Breitbart News on Monday, President Trump came up short when asked whether he had any plans to fight Big Tech censorship in the 2020 election.
[Trump] sympathized with critics of the big tech companies like Facebook, Google, and Twitter who wanted to regulate the companies.
“I understand a lot of people wanting to look into it. I mean normally I’d like to say let it be free, let it all be free, but it’s not free,” Trump said. “It’s really run by a small number of people.”
The president also referred to reports from Breitbart News exposing tech bias against conservatives in companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google.
“Now we’ve seen it, now we’ve caught them. We’ve seen the speeches, we’ve seen the in-house little videos that somehow got released, to me, that’s a very big scandal,” he said.
Good rhetoric but zero serious policy proposals:
The president specifically criticized Twitter for blacklisting conservatives on their platform.
“Twitter’s horrible what they’re doing to people, they’re blanking them out … What’s going on with Twitter is terrible for conservatives,” he said.
Trump again pointed to a growing political movement around breaking up the big companies monopolizing tech and online speech.
“A lot of people are talking about breaking them up. They’re dishonest, there’s tremendous dishonesty,” he said. “And it’s really all steered toward the Republicans and the conservative movement. It’s a hundred percent steered against.”
When asked by Breitbart News reporter Charlie Spiering about how he planned to fight tech bias in the 2020 election, he replied, “You fight it by just being good. You got to be really good. It’s much harder for a conservative Republican to win than it is for a liberal Democrat.”
There was no indication he would use the power vested in him to demand an anti-trust investigation into these blatant monopolies, no indication he would sign an executive order on social media censorship (which he floated last year) and no indication he would use discrimination laws to go after PayPal and others who are blatantly discriminating against right-wingers for their First Amendment-protected political speech.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
USA – –(Ammoland.com)- Watch out. Capitol Hill and Silicon Valley have locked their sights on the next targets of a frightening free speech-squelching purge: independent citizens who dare to raise questions online about the safety and efficacy of vaccines.
I’m vaccinated. My children are up to date. There’s no dispute that vaccines have saved untold lives. But over the years, I’ve voiced my concerns about vaccine claims and government coercion in my newspaper columns and blog posts. These concerns include my objections to Gardasil mandates for schoolchildren in Texas and California; schools’ threatening parents with jail time for refusing chickenpox shots for their kids; ineffectiveness of the flu vaccine; contamination issues at vaccine plants abroad; lack of data on vaccines’ long-term and synergistic effects on children; and pharma-funded politicians’ financial conflicts of interest.
In 2004, I recounted my family’s firsthand experience with bully doctors who balked at even the mildest questioning of the wisdom of the newborn hepatitis B immunization. When my husband and I asked if we could simply delay this particular shot, as the vaccine is for a virus that is contracted mostly through intravenous drug use and sexual contact, my son’s pediatrician angrily kicked us out of her practice.
Does this informed skepticism make me and other like-minded parents public health menaces, as the World Health Organization has proclaimed? Are we “sociopaths,” as a journalist at The Atlantic once sneered? Apparently so.
At a Senate hearing on last Tuesday, Washington state’s public health secretary, John Wiesman, demanded that the feds launch a national campaign to counter “anti-vaccine” groups that are spreading what he condemned as “false information.” Weisman called for increased funding from the Centers for Disease Control to combat opponents of the state’s push to prevent parents from opting their children out of immunizations for personal or philosophical reasons. Health officials have blamed vaccine critics’ social media influence for recent measles outbreaks. So Wiesman further urged Twitter, Facebook and Google to “use whatever mechanism they have available to stop promoting pseudoscience.”
Let’s be clear: Misinformation of all kinds abounds on the internet. The world’s most influential “mainstream” media websites and celebrity social media accounts, for example, recklessly fanned the flames of the recent Covington Catholic High School and Jussie Smollett hate crime hoaxes. No one in Washington has called for the boycott of The Washington Post or TMZ over their false and misleading stories. But for some reason (hint: pharmaceutical big business), politicians and government bureaucrats are now hell-bent on de-platforming any and all dissenters who challenge mandatory vaccine regimens.
Under pressure from Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Amazon pulled the documentaries “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,” “Man Made Epidemic” and “Shoot ’em Up: The Truth About Vaccines” from its Prime Video streaming service. Last week, Google-owned YouTube moved to demonetize “anti-vaccine” channels, tweak algorithms to suppress vaccine “conspiracy” videos and combat “vaccine hesitancy.” Pinterest blocks users from using the search terms “vaccine,” “vaccinations” and “anti-vax,” no matter the quality of the results. Facebook plans to downgrade vaccine skeptics’ content on newsfeeds, recommended user groups and ads.
Is there junk science on the “anti-vaccine” side? Sure.
But you can’t address this issue without also addressing the problem with physicians and public health flacks who are unwilling to discuss the full risks of vaccines as well as their benefits; pro-vaccination groups that provide incorrect information about vaccines’ duration of protection; physicians who refuse to care for children who are not “fully” vaccinated; and the comparative risk-benefit ratios of different vaccines.
As for efficacy, consider this new data: A recent whooping cough outbreak at the private Harvard-Westlake School in Los Angeles last week resulted in 30 students contracting the illness, all of whom were vaccinated. Of 18 unvaccinated students, none caught the disease. Will pointing this out on my Facebook and Twitter accounts to bring down the Silicon Valley ban hammer?
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who happens to be a physician and parent himself, was the lone voice of dissent at the Senate hearing this week. While acknowledging that the benefits of vaccines generally outweigh their risks, he noted the plain truth that “it is wrong to say there are no risks to vaccines.” He added that over $4 billion has been paid by the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for adults and children who have been injured or died as a result of receiving federally recommended childhood vaccines.
Is it unacceptable fearmongering to raise that point? How about to share information on vaccine manufacturers’ astonishing exemption from product liability? Or to point parents to new research findings on brain injuries caused by vaccines, which can be found at VaccinePapers.org? Or to link them to a recent statement by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, which “strongly opposes federal interference in medical decisions, including mandated vaccines.”
When it comes to protecting our children, skepticism is always the best medicine. We need more free speech, not less. Those who seek to suppress debate and discussion in the name of the “public good” are the true health threats.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The House of Representatives recently passed legislation that would expand the national background check system to require almost everyone selling firearms, including private collectors who supplement their incomes by selling firearms at gun shows, to perform background checks on the potential buyers. The bill has a section purporting to bar creation of a national firearms registry. However, the expanded background check system will require the government to compile lists of those buying and selling guns. In other words, it creates a de facto national gun registry.
Similar to the experience with other types of prohibition, making it more difficult to legally buy a gun will enhance the firearms black market. Criminals, terrorists, and even deranged mass shooters will thus have no problem obtaining firearms.
It is no coincidence that the majority of mass shootings take place in “gun-free zones,” where shooters know their targets will be unarmed. This shows that any law making it more difficult for Americans to own and carry firearms makes us less safe. If Congress really wanted to reduce the incidence of gun violence, it would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act. This law leaves children easy prey for mass shooters by mandating that public schools be “gun-free zones.”
A nationwide system of gun registration could be a step toward national gun confiscation. However, antigun bureaucrats need not go that far to use the expanded background check system to abuse the rights of gun owners. Gun owners could find themselves subject to surveillance and even harassment, such as more intensive screening by the Transportation Security Administration, because they own “too many” firearms.
Republican control of the White House and the Senate does not mean our gun rights are safe. Republicans have a long history of supporting gun control. After the 1999 Columbine shooting, many Republicans, including many who campaigned as being pro-Second Amendment, eagerly cooperated with then-President Bill Clinton on gun control. Some supposedly pro-gun Republicans also tried to pass “compromise” gun control legislation after the Sandy Hook shooting.
Neoconservative Senator Marco Rubio has introduced legislation that uses tax dollars to bribe states to adopt red flag laws. Red flag laws allow government to violate an individual’s Second Amendment rights based on nothing more than a report that the individual could become violent. Red flag laws can allow an individual’s guns to be taken away without due process simply because an estranged spouse, angry neighbor, or disgruntled coworker tells police the individual threatened him or otherwise made him feel unsafe.
President Trump has joined Rubio in wanting the government to, in Trump’s words, “take the guns first, go through due process second.” During his confirmation hearing, President Trump’s new Attorney General William Barr expressed support for red flag laws. California Senator and leading gun control advocate Dianne Feinstein has expressed interest in working with Barr to deprive gun owners of due process. It would not be surprising to see left-wing authoritarians like Feinstein work with right-wing authoritarians like Barr and Rubio on “compromise” legislation containing both a national red flag law and expanded background checks.
My years in Congress taught me that few politicians can be counted on to protect our liberties. Most politicians must be pressured to stand up for freedom by informed and involved pro-liberty citizens That is why those of us who understand the benefits of liberty must remain vigilant against any attempt to erode respect for our rights, especially the right to defend ourselves against private crime and public tyranny.
Ron Paul is a former U.S. congressman from Texas. ______________________________________________________________
Firearms Registration Act Introduced in Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania state Democrats introduce HB0768, known as the Firearms Registration Act.
Harrisburg, PA –-(Ammoland.com)- A new bill introduced in Pennsylvania would establish a gun registry within the state.
HB0768 is known as the Firearms Registration Act. The Democrats that introduced the bill were Mary Louise Isaacson (D), Angel Cruz (D), and Mary Jo Daley (D). Last Friday, the General Assembly referred the bill to the committee on judiciary.
The bill would require gun owners in the Keystone State to register their firearms with the Pennsylvania State Police. Owners would have to provide the police with the make, model, and the serial numbers of all their guns.
Along with the application that the gun owner must swear to under oath, the gun owner would have to submit fingerprints, two photographs that are no older than 30 days and go through a background check for each firearm that they own. This background check is the same one that they must go through to purchase a gun.
In addition to this requirement, they must also provide the Pennsylvania State Police with their home and work address, telephone number, social security number, date of birth, age, sex, and citizenship. This requirement is more information than a person needs to vote.
If the State Police rejects the person's application, then they will have ten days to appeal the decision. The owner must turn their firearms into the State Police within three days of receiving notification of the rejection. If a person does not appeal the decision within ten days, their right is forfeit.
A gun owner cannot transfer any unregistered firearm. Anyone caught with an unregistered gun is guilty of a crime even if they are unaware of the firearm registration status. Also just holding an unregistered firearm at a range is a crime.
The gun owner must keep all firearms unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock. If a firearms owner doesn't secure their firearm that way, they would be guilty of a crime. This rule even applies to homes with no children.
The gun owner has 48 hours to update the State Police if they change jobs, phone numbers, addresses, or anything else on the application. If they do not update the State Police, then they could be prosecuted for violating the law.
The certificate which will cost $10 per firearm will expire after one year. The gun owner would have to start the process over again to renew their certification. This process must be done 60 days before the certificate expires. The procedure can get confusing for gun owners with large collections.
The bill makes no mention of how the state will enforce the law.
Other states that have tried gun registration and bans have seen limited success. New Jersey has had zero magazines turned in since their magazine ban went into effect.
New York saw nearly one million firearms owners defy the state law to register their “assault weapons.” The same thing played out in Connecticut when only 50,000 out of 350,000 registered their semi-automatic rifles.
Expanding a registry to all firearms will be impossible to enforce without conducting door to door searches of houses. It is unclear how these Democrats plan to deal with this reality.
None of the bill’s sponsor responded to our request for comment.
About John Crump
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%'ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or at www.crumpy.com.
In the wake of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic slurs, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi attempted to pass a resolution condemning anti-Semitism. But something went very awry.
Congresswoman Omar, Democrat from Minnesota, was born in Somalia and is one of the first two Muslim women to enter Congress. In recent weeks, she has unleashed a litany of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic comments including “Israel has hypnotized the world. May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel” (during an Israeli attack against terror organization Hamas in Gaza); “It’s all about the Benjamins, baby” (alluding to the concept that Jews rule through money); and accusations of “dual loyalty” (an old anti-Semitic trope implying that American Jews are more loyal to Israel).
Omar made a quintessential non-apology by stating that she was sorry for the hurt her words caused, but refused to retract her beliefs. She’s sorry “but”….
Prior to her run for Congress, Omar was on the Advisory Board of CAIR in Minnesota. CAIR is a Muslim Brotherhood front-group spawned out of Hamas and the Islamic Association of Palestine, both State Department-designated terrorist organizations. It is also an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial – the largest terror-financing trial in the history of the United States. Omar is scheduled to be the keynote speaker at a CAIR fundraiser in California on March 23, 2019. She will be speaking alongside Hassan Shibley, Director of CAIR-FL, who has praised both Hamas and Hezbollah and is representing the “ISIS bride’s family” in their quest to have her return to America after she called for the mass murder of Americans.
Ilhan Omar openly supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which seeks economic implosion of the State of Israel. Despite this, freshman Congresswoman Omar holds a coveted seat on the powerful and prestigious House Foreign Affairs Committee where her anti-Israel attitudes can have a real-world impact in terms of funding and U.S. foreign policy. Committee appointments are determined by House leadership. It was Nancy Pelosi who placed Omar on this committee. To quell the rash of criticism unleashed upon the freshman congresswoman, House Speaker Pelosi initially sought to pass a resolution singling out anti-Semitism for condemnation, but the rank and file Democrats simply wouldn’t have it.
The original drafting of the resolution started on Friday, March 1, 2017. The drafters who advocated for a bill that would focus solely on anti-Semitism consisted of three Jewish Democrats: Eliot Engel (D-NY), Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee; Ted Deutch (D-FL), whose father earned a purple heart fighting the Nazis; and Nita Lowey (D-NY), who seeks debate on issues without the injection of anti-Semitic slurs.
Despite the fact that the original purpose of the resolution was to condemn Omar’s hateful comments, the bill did not mention Omar by name. There was no censure, and House Leadership refused to remove Omar from the Foreign Affairs Committee. A resolution is simply words without real consequences. No actions are taken as a result. Despite this, the bill elicited complaints from several quarters within the Democrat Party. Zeroing in on condemnation of anti-Semitism was just too difficult a hurdle for the Democrats to manage, and the resolution was amended to include a broader range of “hate” and “phobias.”
Democrat factions pushed and tugged for an entire week regarding the language of the resolution and some even opposed having a resolution altogether. Even Nancy Pelosi was “taken aback” by the dissent and rancor that her party members exhibited.
Yet, revealing how far to the Left the party has gone, all the Democrats who have thrown their hats into the ring of running for President in 2020 opposed the initial resolution. Kamala Harris argued that calling out Ilhan Omar specifically would “put her at risk” of violence. Some Democrats contemplated requesting a special security detail for Omar at the U.S. Capitol. Senator Bernie Sanders expressed concern that a resolution would result in censorship of Israel debate more broadly. Eliot Engel, while condemning Omar’s comments, still dismissed suggestions that she should be removed from the Foreign Affairs Committee.
Additionally, members of the Congressional Black Caucus (of which Omar is a member), and members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus all opposed a resolution focusing on anti-Semitism. For the Black Caucus, any possible mention of Omar by name would have been a non-starter. Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (D-MS), a close friend of Omar and a member of both the CBC and the CPC, insisted “we need equity in our outrage… Islamophobia needs to be included in this. We need to denounce all forms of hate.”
External pressure groups such as CAIR and Jewish Voice for Peace (a radical anti-Israel organization that uses the Jewish heritage of its members to ward off claims of anti-Semitism), as well as Linda Sarsour, known anti-Semite and advocate for Sharia, were also pressuring members of congress to refrain from singling out anti-Semitism in a resolution. So much for “Jewish influence” in Congress.
Ironically, the resolution was sent to the House Foreign Affairs Committee (where Omar sits) for vetting. Finally, at 5:05 PM on Thursday, March 8, 2019, a vote was taken on the floor of the House and passed with an overwhelming majority. The watered-down resolution is so all-inclusive as to be almost meaningless. It was expanded to include condemnation of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and bigotry against all minorities including the LGBT community. It invoked the events of Charlottesville and condemned – yet again – white supremacists and neo-Nazis.
And while it had several statements condemning anti-Semitic libels, it also asserted that in the wake of 9/11, Muslims shouldn’t be associated with terrorism, and that it is “unfair,” “irrational,” and “prejudicial” to believe that [some] Muslims sympathize with terrorism or those who oppress women, Jews and minorities (thus denying Sharia’s ideology). The resolution also calls on law enforcement and government officials to refrain from “profiling.” Because this is the first congressional resolution condemning “anti-Muslim bigotry,” three Muslim Congressmen – Omar, Tlaib and Andre Carson (D-IN) – are claiming a victory in its passage.
Twenty-three Republican Congressmen, including Louie Gohmert from Texas and Liz Cheney from Wyoming, voted against the resolution because it wasn’t focused singularly on anti-Semitism. All of them supported the original version which singled out anti-Semitism.
Ilhan Omar insists that her comments were not anti-Semitic but either true or simply legitimate criticism of Israel. She asserts that the reason people are accusing her of anti-Semitism is because the comments are coming from a Muslim and those pointing the finger are “Islamophobic.” Like other Islamic supremacists, she has managed to turn everything upside down and backwards. If Islamists want to impose their religious views on you and you resist, then you are denying their right to “practice” their religion. If they want you to submit to their practices and you refuse, then you are “hostile” to their “religion.” And now, if you accuse a Muslim who openly expresses anti-Semitism, then you are targeting them due to Islamophobia.
This resolution was broadened to the point where it no longer serves its original intended purpose. In the recent past, Islamist groups have managed to put pressure on local governments and societal institutions to pass resolutions all across the country that condemn so-called Islamophobia, without any mention of “phobias” against other races, groups or belief systems. Democrats have gone along with it. Why now, are they totally unable, in the wake of hateful comments made by a member of their own party, to put forth a resolution focusing on condemnation of anti-Semitism?
The fiasco during the process of this resolution reveals a lack of moral clarity within the Democrat Party and the Left more broadly. If you vote Democrat and think you are voting for the party of JFK, of Martin Luther King’s colorblindness, or simply of equal pay for women, think again. That party is dead. You now belong to the party of Louis Farrakhan, Ilhan Omar, Linda Sarsour and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. You belong to a party that hijacked a condemnation of Jew-hatred and twisted it to make Muslims, not Jews, the victims. If you are Jewish and vote Democrat, there can be no clearer wakeup call.
The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives passed an outrageous legislative assault on fair elections and the First Amendment last week that would drive up the occurrence of the voter fraud Democrats increasingly rely on to win elections.
The House approved H.R. 1, dubbed the proposed “For the People Act,” on a strict party line vote of 234 to 193 on March 8. Conservatives quite correctly denounced the measure as a “voter fraud and election theft” wish list.
Even the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) trashed the bill, saying it would “unconstitutionally infringe on the speech and associational rights of many public interest organizations and American citizens.”
In a tweet, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) described H.R. 1 as the “Democrat Politician Protection Act,” after previously saying the measure was “a massive power grab.”
“What is the problem that we’re trying to solve here? We had the highest turnout last year since 1966 in an off-year election,” McConnell reportedly said March 6. “People are flooding to the polls … because they’re animated. They’re interested. This is a solution in search of a problem. What it really is, is designed to make it more likely that Democrats win more often.”
On the day the House passed the bill, McConnell repeated his vow never to allow the bill to move to the Senate floor for a vote. This means H.R. 1 will likely become a big issue for both parties on the campaign trail in 2020.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) tweeted: “Democrats did not design #HR1 to protect your vote. They designed it to put a thumb on the scale of every election in America and keep the Swamp swampy.”
At a leftist pep rally, Democrat lawmakers lied about the nation’s voting system, whining about how difficult it is for their poor bumbling voters to produce valid identification at the polls, even though presenting ID is now a requirement in our society to do virtually anything worth doing.
“For months, for years, really for decades, millions of Americans have been looking at Washington and feeling like they’ve been left behind,” said the principal author of the bill, Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.). “Too many Americans have faced this challenge where getting to the ballot box every two years is like getting through an obstacle course.”
“H.R. 1 restores the people’s faith that government works for the public interest, the people’s interests, not the special interests,” Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Friday in a rare moment of coherence.
We’ve been down this pothole-riddled road before.
Democrats used their newly won House majority to approve H.R. 1 with minimal public discussion of the measure, just as the newly inaugurated Bill Clinton rammed a massive overhaul of the electoral system through Congress a short time after taking office. Clinton acted at a time when voter participation was rising and there was no popularly expressed demand for reform. Clinton and Democratic lawmakers sandbagged the Republican opposition before lawmakers had much of a chance even to digest the sweeping legislation.
As John Fund wrote in his book, Stealing Elections:
Perhaps no piece of legislation in the last generation better captures the ‘incentivizing’ of fraud… than the 1993 National Voter Registration Act[.] … Examiners were under orders not to ask anyone for identification or proof of citizenship. States also had to permit mail-in voter registrations, which allowed anyone to register without any personal contact with a registrar or election official. Finally, states were limited in pruning ‘dead wood’ – people who had died, moved or been convicted of crimes – from their rolls. … Since its implementation, Motor Voter has worked in one sense: it has fueled an explosion of phantom voters.
And who pushed Motor Voter?
Small-c communists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven spearheaded the drive to pass the law. They believed that poor people and radical agitators had every moral right to game the electoral system in order to bring about change. Cloward didn’t worry about fraud, either. “It’s better to have a little bit of fraud than to leave people off the rolls who belong there,” he said. President Clinton gave a shout-out to Cloward and Piven at the bill-signing ceremony in 1993 that both attended.
Sentient Republicans knew the bill was an atrocity. On final passage, the Senate vote was 62 to 36, with only seven Republicans voting “yea.” The House vote was 259 to 164, with only 20 Republicans voting “yea.”
“Between 1994 and 1998, nearly 26 million names were added to the voter rolls nationwide, almost a 20 percent increase,” according to Fund. Motor Voter has “been registering illegal aliens, since anyone who receives a government benefit [including welfare] may also register to vote with no questions asked.”
H.R. 1 is even more ambitious than Motor Voter, according to a summary of the bill’s provisions in The Epoch Times.
It would make Election Day a federal holiday (actually, that’s not a terrible idea), mandate automatic voter registration and same-day voter registration, strip state legislatures of redistricting responsibilities and give those powers to independent commissions, forbid federal lawmakers from serving on corporate boards, and force U.S. presidents –wink, wink, President Trump— to release their tax returns.
“H.R. 1 expands access to voting in a number of ways, including forcing states to implement early voting, online voter registration, and ‘no-fault’ absentee balloting, or the issuance of absentee ballots without requiring a reason for their request,” according to the summary.
Christian Adams, a former Department of Justice civil rights attorney and president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, told lawmakers earlier this year that H.R. 1 is bound to boost fraud.
“The voter rolls are currently full of ineligible voters who have died or moved out of the jurisdiction where they are registered,” Adams said.
“H.R.1 would make the problem worse by stripping the power of states to manage their own voter rolls to keep them clean using well-established best practices, such as postal mailings and recurring inactivity of registrants in elections. H.R.1’s mandate that states stop using these tools is just bad public policy.”
According to the summary, “[t]he measure also requires eligible voters to be registered automatically through state driver’s license offices and welfare departments unless they affirmatively decline. Felons would be automatically registered upon release from prison, and prospective voters would be able to both register and vote on the same day, including on Election Day.”
The bill also “mandates federal funding to match small-dollar donations and would deposit the funding into campaign bank accounts. It further requires the disclosure of donors who give more than $10,000 to tax-exempt nonprofit organizations, such as 501(c)4 groups.”
Current tax law permits such so-called “dark money” donors to remain anonymous to shield them from political reprisals. The Supreme Court ruled in 1958 in NAACP v.
Alabama ex rel. Patterson that Alabama could not force the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People to hand over the names and addresses of all its members in that state.
But the Left is salivating at the prospect of using social media to hound conservative donors for daring to contribute to conservative causes.
Because terrorizing their adversaries is what leftists do.
DES MOINES, Iowa —The Iowa Supreme Court has unanimously upheld a lower court ruling that determined the State must allow “sex change” operations to be covered under Medicaid.
“[T]he history behind the rule supports our holding that the rule’s express bar on Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgical procedures discriminates against transgender Medicaid recipients in Iowa under the ICRA (Iowa Civil Rights Act),” wrote Justice Susan Christensen on behalf of the panel.
“After the DHS amended the rule to bar Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery, the legislature specifically made it clear that individuals cannot be discriminated against on the basis of gender identity under the ICRA,” she said.
“Given our holding that rule 441—78.1(4)’s exclusion of Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery violates the ICRA as amended by the legislature in 2007, we need not address the other issues raised on appeal.”
As previously reported, two men, who go by the names Carol Ann Beal and EerieAnna Good, had sued the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) in 2017 after their doctors were informed that Medicaid would not cover procedures to remove their male reproductive organs.
Under the Iowa Administrative Code, DHS prohibits coverage of cosmetic, reconstructive or plastic surgeries “primarily for psychological reasons or as a result of the aging process” or “for the purpose of sex reassignment.”
Beal and Good, with the aid of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the testimony of their doctors, argued that their surgeries were “medically necessary,” advising the court that they struggle with depression and anxiety due to their gender dysphoria.
“This surgery is not just something that I want. It’s something that I very much need to resolve the depression and anxiety I face because my outside fails to match who I know I am: a woman,” Good said in a statement at the time.
The ACLU also argued that the denial violated the Iowa Civil Rights Act and the Iowa Constitution, because “the same or substantially equivalent treatments” would be allowed for those who don’t have gender dysphoria. It cited the example of a mastectomy.
Last June, Gamble sided with the plaintiffs, stating that the DHS did not prove that its exclusion served a substantial government interest. He also denied a request from DHS to create criteria to determine whether or not to approve coverage for gender dysphoria-related surgeries in the future.
“The court is … perplexed by this request,” Chief District Judge Arthur Gamble stated. “DHS does not explain why the medical necessity of requests for sex reassignment surgeries could not simply be evaluated under the same criteria as other requested surgeries or treatment of non-transgender individuals.”
He therefore ordered the reversal of DHS’ denial of coverage for Beal and Good’s operations, and declared the state regulation to be in violation of the Iowa Constitution.
“[T]he language of Iowa Administrative Code rule 441-78.1(4) pertaining to the exclusion of coverage for sex reassignment surgery in connection to the treatment of transsexualism should be and is hereby held to violate the Iowa Civil Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the Iowa Constitution,” Gamble wrote.
“The language of the regulation excluding coverage for sex reassignment surgery for transsexualism shall be stricken from the regulation and the remaining language must be interpreted and applied in a manner allowing transgender individuals coverage under Iowa Medicaid for medically necessary gender affirming surgery for the treatment of Gender Dysphoria,” he ordered.
On Friday, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld Good’s decision, stating that the exclusion of coverage violates the Iowa Civil Rights Act.
“In 2007, the Iowa legislature amended the ICRA to add ‘gender identity’ to the list of protected groups,” Christensen wrote. “The ICRA’s gender identity classification encompasses transgender individuals—especially those who have gender dysphoria—because discrimination against these individuals is based on the nonconformity between their gender identity and biological sex.”
“This prohibition against denying coverage for Good’s and Beal’s gender-affirming surgical procedures extends to the director and staff of the DHS, as well as its agents, the MCOs.”
While Beal and Good cheered the decision, stating that the operations “save lives” since “[t]ransgender people are at such risk for suicide,” others said that cutting people’s bodies is not the answer to the pain and confusion they feel.
“We grieve to see measures that encourage—and now compel taxpayers to fund—others seeking fulfillment outside of God’s design,” Drew Zahn of The Family Leader told the Des Moines Register.
As previously reported, Walt Heyer, a man who identified as a woman for eight years until he became regenerated by the Spirit of God, similarly wrote an article in 2017 remarking that allowing those with gender dysphoria to conform their bodies to their psychology does not solve the underlying problem.
“Too many U.S. medical practitioners direct all gender-distressed people toward the extreme measures of conforming the body to the mind, rather than exploring the psychological issues that lie beneath the feelings,” he stated. “Giving powerful hormones and recommending radical surgeries without screening for psychological issues first causes great harm to the patients and their families.”
“Many people who are regretful and suicidal followed to the letter the generally accepted treatment protocol of doctor-prescribed hormone therapy and genital surgery,” Heyer, who now helps those with sex-change regret, outlined. “It is not homophobic, transphobic, or bigoted to look at the causes of dissatisfaction and suicide among the transgender population. Rather, it is a caring, heartfelt way to prevent dissatisfaction and suicides.”
Rita Bettis, legal director of the ACLU of Iowa, talks June 7, 2018, after Iowa’s Medicaid ban on transgender transition-related care was struck down. Luke Nozicka, lnozicka@dmreg.com
Aiden Vasquez needed more than an hour to collect himself before he could talk about Friday’s Iowa Supreme Court decision ruling that transgender people like himself could use Medicaid funds to pay for transition-related care, including surgeries.
Tears blurred his vision as he read the verdict over and over. Sobs caught his voice in his throat as the Davenport resident barely squeaked out to his wife what the court decided.
As a transgender man, the ruling’s stuffy language was so much more than legalese — these words were his ticket to being able to live fully as the man he knows he is.
“They are now finally acknowledging us as human beings,” he said. “They are finally acknowledging that this is not a plastic surgery or about what I look like. This is a matter of life and death.”
Transgender surgeries can range from $20,000 to $100,000, putting it out of reach of individuals who qualify for the assistance.
In affirming a district judge’s decision, Justice Susan Christensen wrote that the “express ban on Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgical procedures” contradicted the gender-identity protections in the Iowa Civil Rights Act.
Or, as Rita Bettis Austen, the ACLU of Iowa’s legal director, put it: “Any discriminatory ban on care — whether that’s from a medical provider, which is less likely, or it’s from an insurance provider, which is more likely — is illegal in Iowa.”
Buy Photo
Rita Bettis Austen, legal director of the ACLU of Iowa, speaks about the court ruling that struck down the Iowa Department of Human Services categorical ban on gender-affirming transgender care on Friday, March 8, 2019, in Des Moines. (Photo: Bryon Houlgrave, The Register)
Advocates believe the decision is the first by a state’s highest court to hold that transgender people have the right to use public money for transition-related surgeries. As issues of LGBT rights swirl nationally, the decision could help open the door for challenges to bans in other states, about half of which have language like Iowa’s in their administrative codes.
Gender identity — or the deeply held sense of who one is, which may differ from the sex organs with which one was born — and sexual orientation were added to the Iowa Civil Rights Act as protected classes in 2007.
Under that statute, transgender Iowans have legal protections against discrimination in education, employment, housing and public accommodations. Medicaid, a state and federally funded program, is considered a public accommodation.
But the court stopped short of ruling that this was a violation of the equal protection clause in the Iowa Constitution. Polk County Chief District Judge Arthur Gamble held in his June ruling that it did. Christensen said that question wasn’t necessary to decide to resolve this case.
That leaves the door open to legislators to change laws that would put Friday’s decision in the balance, said Sharon Malheiro, a Des Moines-based lawyer and LGBT advocate.
“It still leaves the question of transgender rights up in the air,” said Malheiro. “And the Iowa Civil Rights Act can be amended to remove gender identity, leaving those lives in fear that the rights they enjoy today may not be here tomorrow.”
Buy Photo
ACLU of Iowa Legal Director Rita Bettis, left, joins Carol Ann Beal, one of two transgender women suing Iowa over its ban on Medicaid coverage for transition-related medical services, during a news conference Thursday, Sept. 21, 2017, in Des Moines. (Photo: Zach Boyden-Holmes/The Register)
Two-year battle over medical necessity
The verdict ended an almost two-year legal battle that hinged on whether transition-related surgery was “medically necessary” or a procedure provided solely for psychological purposes.
After years of dealing with denials and headaches regarding their health coverage, Carol Ann Beal, 43, of northwest Iowa, and EerieAnna Good, 29, of southwest Iowa, sued the Department of Human Services in 2017. They alleged that the state’s blanket ban denying their use of public funds for doctor-prescribed surgery singled them out solely because of their gender identity.
Carol Ann Beal (Photo: Special to the Register)
When prescribed by a doctor, all forms of transition care, including surgeries, are recommended by most professional medical organizations, including the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association.
But not every transgender person is interested in surgery, Dr. Joe Freund, one of the most sought-after transition-care doctors in the state, previously told the Register.
Transitioning is a spectrum, and some patients find alignment simply by dressing in gender-specific clothing. Other patients may find hormone-replacement therapy enough while some may need surgery to make themselves whole, he said.
In the district court ruling, Gamble wrote that DHS did not “rebut the medical evidence that gender affirming surgery is medically necessary treatment” and that Good and Beal’s denials were issued “without regard to the law and facts,”
“The agency acted in the face of evidence upon which there is no room for difference of opinion among reasonable minds,” he wrote.
EerieAnna Good (Photo: Special to the Register)
The state appealed, arguing the ban is not discriminatory because the department denies all surgeries performed primarily for psychological reasons — which is how it has characterized transition-related surgeries.
“We are covering these surgeries in the same instances when the primary purpose is to address a non-psychological purpose,” Assistant Attorney General Matthew Gillespie said during oral arguments before the Supreme Court. “And we don’t cover surgeries in the same instance, regardless of gender identity, when the surgery is performed primarily for a psychological purpose.”
The Supreme Court didn’t agree. Christensen wrote that Beal and Good were “expressly denied” coverage because the procedures were “related to transsexualism.”
The court also noted that the department covers other procedures that serve psychological purposes, including the revision of scarring.
“As the ruling showed, this case presented a difficult question involving individual rights and the state’s interests,” said Lynn Hicks, spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office. “This issue was a first for Iowa’s courts, and we thank the court for its guidance and for resolving this issue.”
For next steps, Hicks directed the Register to the Department of Human Services, which through spokesman Matt Highland declined to comment.
Buy Photo
The Iowa Supreme Court building (Photo: Zach Boyden-Holmes/The Register)
Comes too late for some
Beal has known she was a woman despite being born with male genitalia since before she started kindergarten.
She began presenting as a girl at 10 and started taking hormones in her teens after being diagnosed with gender dysphoria, the medical term for feeling that one’s inner masculinity or femininity is incongruent with his or her biological sex.
Both her family and her spouse supported her decision to go through with this litigation, Beal said when the lawsuit was filed in 2017.
“You go through so many years transitioning, and now I hit a brick wall with Iowa’s discriminatory ban on Medicaid coverage for transition-related care,” Beal said in 2017. “It has caused me stress and depression and affects every aspect of my life.”
Overwhelming gender dysphoria also causes severe anxiety for Good, who has been living as a female for almost a decade. To align her body with her gender identity, she “wears a tight girdle and ‘tucks’ her male genitalia for up to 12 hours each day,” according to court documents.
After the ruling, Good said in a statement that this decision will “save lives.”
“Transgender people are at such risk for suicide,” she said. “And I’ve lost transgender friends to suicide. I hope this decision helps change that.”
Like Good and Beal, many of the patients at the award-winning University of Iowa LGBTQ Clinic are on Medicaid, co-founder Dr. Nicole Nisly previously told the Register. Some of them meet the medical criteria for surgical intervention and are in desperate need of that kind of care.
“When they are denied this care, it is heartbreaking for us and heartbreaking for them,” Nisly said. “Imagine it from their perspective: They have been on hormones and transitioned in every other way for a year, and then they find out they can’t take that extra step to fully become themselves.
“Some (of my patients) do become suicidal.”
Buy Photo
Dr. Nicole Nisly (left) smiles as she reads the card Aiden DeLathower gave her Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2016, at the University of Iowa LGBTQ Clinic in Iowa City. DeLathower said he credits Nisly and the LGBTQ clinic with saving his life as he transitions from female to male. (Photo: Michael Zamora/The Register)
For The Family Leader, a conservative, Christian advocacy group in Iowa, human sex and sexuality is immutable and determined by God.
“We grieve to see measures that encourage — and now compel taxpayers to fund — others seeking fulfillment outside of God’s design,” Drew Zahn, the group’s communications director, said in a written statement.
Tabulating the cost of transition is difficult because of the variation of care needed or desired, but the Philadelphia Center for Transgender Surgery prices the full suite of procedures for both transgender women and transgender men at about $100,000.
However, single surgeries cost much less. For example, a vaginoplasty, the creation of a vagina, or a phalloplasty, the creation of a penis, costs about $20,000.
Despite what could be considered high costs, transgender people make up a relativity small portion of the national population. One estimate found about 0.3 percent of the total population, or about 964,000 people nationally and 9,300 in Iowa, identify as transgender, according to the Williams Institute, a think tank at UCLA’s law school.
A smaller subset of that population would seek surgeries.
Vasquez, who was profiled in the Register’s Trans in Iowa series, couldn’t wait for approval for his top surgery — as a mastectomy for transgender men is commonly known — to wind its way through the Iowa Medicaid system. Instead, he took out a costly loan to have the procedure done.
Since being publicly viewed as a man has become easier, his depression has eased, suicidal thoughts subsided, and he has lost more than 100 pounds.
“It’s too late for me,” he said. “But it gives me hope for all the guys coming after me.”
He pauses, collecting his emotions one more time, “And I am just so happy for them.”
Aiden Vasquez holds up a pair of his pants from a few years ago. (Photo: Special to the Register)
Author of Ladies, Can We Talk, a book that inspires women to recognize our influence on our country’s future, through our power in the voting booth, and our increased participation in the national political conversation.
Since I was a kid, Jews have been married to the Democratic Party. Everyone in my Brooklyn neighborhood — primarily Jews, Irish, and blacks — voted straight Democratic. If you announced a deviation from the party line, they would look at you as though you were from outer space. It made a lot of sense. The Democratic Party of the 1950s was the party of the underdog. In contrast, today’s Democrats represent America’s social and cultural elites. “How is it possible,” asked author David Horowitz, “that Democrats can pose as defenders of minorities, the middle class, and the poor? Democratic policies,” he says, “have devastated all three.”
Yet the majority of today’s Jews still cling to the Donkey’s skirt. Exit polls indicate that 71% of American Jews voted for Hillary and 76% voted Democratic in the midterm elections. There are two main reasons: (1) Jews always have been afraid of conservative politicians; and (2) they don’t want to betray the values of their beloved parents. Most Jews don’t realize that the entire picture has flipped. The Democratic Party of their parents and grandparents is not the party of today. Ironically, the liberal Democrat of 1950 is today’s conservative Republican. I have the same worldview that I had in the 50s and 60s, yet I am now a conservative. So what the hell happened?
What happened is that the Democratic Party was hijacked by neo-Marxists who reject all American values. They militate for increased governmental control over every aspect of our lives; limitations on free speech and freedom of the press; replacement of capitalism with socialism; replacement of meritocracy with race-based criteria; and a dysfunctional version of social justice that promotes anti-Semitism. These are the values of Venezuela and Cuba. All of these items were part of the Democratic platform under President Obama. His negative attitude toward Jews was exposed by his attachment to Jew haters Reverend Wright and Louis Farrakhan.
The Jews’ fear of conservative politics has been misplaced. Their fear ought to be reserved for leftists. Since the 1960s, “hatred of Jews in America has moved from being primarily a prejudice of the right to being primarily a prejudice of the left,” says Mosaic. The Democrats have embraced “social justice” and “identity politics,” both of which are designed to divide the country into warring factions based on the idea that minority groups are oppressed by “racist white America.” And guess what—Jews, says author Victor Davis Hanson, are viewed as part of the oppressor class. The Democratic Party has used identity politics to inflame anti-Semitism.
The atmosphere for Jews in America, observes David Horowitz, is more hostile than at any time in the last 70 years. In 2017, for example, 60% of religiously motivated hate crimes in the U.S. were against Jews, who represent less than 2% of the population. “The continuing successes of front organizations such as Students for Justice in Palestine,” says Horowitz, “are ominous indicators of the dangers that confront us, and should be a wake-up call.”
The role of the Democratic Party in the rise of anti-Semitism cannot be denied. According to the Wall Street Journal, “The Democrats have an anti-Semitism problem, and it isn’t subtle.” Former Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison “accused the shifty Jews of running American foreign policy,” says the Detroit News. Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, the first two Muslim women to be elected to Congress, support boycotting, sanctioning and divesting from Israel. Omar recently tweeted that congressional support for Israel is “all about the Benjamins baby,” a slang term for $100 bills and an obvious anti-Semitic trope. “When you say that Jews have magical hypnotic powers to control other people, you’re an anti-Semite,” writes John Podhoretz in the New York Post. “When you say Jews control other people through money, you’re an anti-Semite. When you say Jews have conspired to force you to apologize for saying anti-Semitic things, you’re an anti-Semite. ¬Ilhan Omar is an anti-Semite.” Several Jewish lawmakers have denounced Omar and Tlaib, as have two Jewish groups affiliated with the Democratic Party.
But what about the party itself? The Democrats have been conspicuously reluctant to discipline the obvious anti-Semitism within their ranks. “None of the leaders of the Democratic Party,” David Harsanyi wrote in the New York Post, “has said anything about the activist wing pushing these age-old hatreds.” And what about the Democratic-controlled media? “The media,” said Harsanyi, “has a track record of tenaciously ignoring the anti-Semitism creeping into Democratic Party politics.”
Instead of demanding that Omar be removed from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, left-wing elements within the party, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, actually have defended the offensive comments made by Omar and Tlaib. Party leaders Bernie Sanders and Nancy Pelosi recently supported Omar’s anti-Semitic ravings by saying the equivalent of “she did not mean it that way.” The Washington Free Beacon put its finger on the problem: “The real Ilhan Omar scandal isn’t that a high-profile member of a powerful House committee hates Jews and Israel. The real scandal is that progressives don’t think her hate is a problem, and in fact they don’t even consider it hate. For many progressives today, bigotry against the right kind of people is a virtue.”
“Democrats need the votes of people who hate Israel,” observes the Jerusalem Post. “In doing so, politicians such as Nancy Pelosi within the Democratic establishment look the other way when certain viewpoints correlate to anti-Semitism.” Bret Stephens agrees in the New York Times: “If Pelosi can’t muster a powerful and unequivocal resolution condemning anti-Semitism, then Omar will have secured her political future and won a critical battle for the soul of the Democratic Party. At that point, the days when American Jews can live comfortably within the Democratic fold will be numbered.”
The majority of American Jews, who are largely secular and have been assimilated into American society, are stuck in their misplaced loyalty to the Democratic Party. In startling contrast, ultra-Orthodox Jews voted overwhelmingly for Trump. The folks with the beards and fur hats have large families and understand the threat to their way of life that is posed by the Democrats. Their secular cousins ought to take note.
Perhaps many secular Jews think the upsurge of Democratic Party anti-Semitism will go away. This is akin to what many German Jews believed in the 1930s. Wake up, my friends. The handwriting is on the wall.
Ed Brodow is a political commentator, negotiation expert, and author of seven books including his latest, Tyranny of the Minority: How the Left is Destroying America.
From one jihad-supporting country to the next: a gift of a million dollars, courtesy of the infidels:
Afghanistan, which claims it would collapse without assistance from its top international donor the United States….pledged $1 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) that provides assistance to Palestinian refugees while blasting President Donald Trump’s administration for suspending aid to the international body’s program.
Abdul Rahim Sayed, Afghanistan’s ambassador to Turkey, who presented the donation, also stated that “the Palestinian cause is a very noble cause for Afghan people. Whatever they could do for Palestinians, they will do it.”
Since the early 2000s, it has been known that the UNRWA has been using its operations “as a cover for Palestinian militants, using UN ambulances to smuggle weapons to fighters and hosting terrorist meetings in UN buildings.”
It’s not only Pakistan that we pay billions of dollars to for nothing,
but also many other countries, and others. As an example, we pay
the Palestinians HUNDRED OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS a year
and get no appreciation or respect. They don’t even want to
negotiate a long overdue…
“U.S.-Funded Afghanistan Gives $1 Million to U.N. Palestinian Program,” by Edwin Mora, Breitbart, March 4, 2019:
Afghanistan, which claims it would collapse without assistance from its top international donor the United States, on Sunday pledged $1 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) that provides assistance to Palestinian refugees while blasting President Donald Trump’s administration for suspending aid to the international body’s program.
It appears that despite President Trump’s decision last year to cut funding for UNRWA — the main U.N. program for Palestinian refugees — some American taxpayer funds may find their way to the agency after all through Afghanistan.
As Afghanistan’s top international donor, the United States spends an estimated $3 billion per month on Afghanistan.
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani — who has periodically thanked the American taxpayer for their contribution to his country — warned in early 2018 that the Afghan army and Kabul government would collapse if the United States were to withdraw its financial support.
Nevertheless, the Ghani administration managed to find an extra $1 million lying around to help the U.N. Palestinian refugee program.
Abdul Rahim Sayed, Afghanistan’s ambassador to Turkey, presented the donation on Sunday to a UNRWA head in an event held in Istanbul. Turkey welcomed the donation.
Notwithstanding the financial difficulties and challenges facing Afghanistan, “Our president decided to support by responding to the call by President [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan,” Abdul Rahim Sayed, Afghanistan’s ambassador to Turkey, told the state-run Anadolu Agency (AA), adding:
This is a humanitarian cause. Humanitarian assistance is something which is responsibility of all human beings. Especially, the Islamic world should do it. If Afghanistan can do it [granting aid] in such a difficult time, everybody can do it.
“The Palestinian cause is a very noble cause for Afghan people. Whatever they could do for Palestinians, they will do it,” he added.
Amb. Sayed condemned the Trump administration for suspending aid to the U.N. Palestinian refugee program last year.
“We should not cut any support for humanitarian assistance. Palestinian refugees, children, they need support, and we should do it. Everybody should do it,” the envoy stressed.
At a cost of $350 million annually, the United States had been the UNRWA’s largest contributor by far before Trump ended funding for the agency last year. His decision came as part of an effort to reduce the number of Palestinians considered refugees, recalculate U.S. aid to match the president’s policies, and compel Palestinian politicians to drop or reduce the demand for “right of return” to land contested by Israel.
The Afghan envoy urged the international community, particularly Muslim countries, to play a role in supporting Palestinians.
In January, the UNRWA noted in a statement that it needed additional funding to provide assistance to about 5.4 million Palestinian refugees across the Middle East and maintain the agency’s operations at last year’s levels…..
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
A popular evangelical leader and broadcaster, Laurie Cardoza-Moore, has had enough, like many who are witnessing the advance of the stealth jihad in Congress. Cardoza-Moore has launched a petition that being signed by tens of thousands of people, to have Ilhan Omar investigated by the Justice Department for connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. Omar’s ties to Hamas-linked CAIR are already well known.
Cardoza-Moore states of Omar: “While she has already established her credentials as a vehement anti-Semite, Ilhan Omar is far worse than that,” Cardoza-Moore said. “Omar may be in violation of a federal statute for fundraising for two Muslim Brotherhood charities that seek to destroy America.”
“Under 18 US Code § 2385, Advocating overthrow of Government” comes with a fine or imprisonment.
“Evangelical Leader: Ilhan Omar Violated Federal Statute Fundraising for Muslim Brotherhood Charities,” by David Israel, Jewish Press, March 7, 2019:
Evangelical leader Laurie Cardoza-Moore on Thursday called on the Justice Department to investigate Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) for possible connections to the radical Muslim Brotherhood.
Under 18 US Code § 2385, Advocating overthrow of Government, “whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof-Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned…”
Cardoza-Moore, president of Proclaiming Justice to The Nations (PJTN) and host of the Christian television program Focus On Israel, with a weekly audience of more than a billion viewers in 200 countries, has launched a nationwide campaign—and a petition—demanding Omar’s dismissal from Congress.
“While she has already established her credentials as a vehement anti-Semite, Ilhan Omar is far worse than that,” Cardoza-Moore said. “Omar may be in violation of a federal statute for fundraising for two Muslim Brotherhood charities that seek to destroy America.”
“We the people demand that the Justice Department conduct a full and thorough investigation into her possible connections with the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates. Omar’s anti-Semitic comments do not reflect the values of Americans,” Cardoza-Moore declared, pointing to the recent revelation of Omar’s participation as a keynote speaker at events for the Muslim Brotherhood affiliated groups IRUSA and CAIR, which suggests her support for subversive factions aligned to destroy America and Western civilization itself.
Omar was a keynote speaker for Islamic Relief USA in Tampa, FL last month and will be keynote speaker at an upcoming Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) fundraiser in Los Angeles.
CAIR is the American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, in addition to having close ties to Hamas and Hezbollah. CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist fundraising operation in the history of the United States known as the Holy Land Foundation Trial in 2009.
IRUSA is an arm of the largest Muslim fundraising group globally whose leaders have ties to terrorist groups.
The evangelical leader added: “American patriots have signed our petition in the tens of thousands. We won’t stop our national campaign until Ilhan Omar is fully investigated and justice is served….
March 8, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – A new report exposes the radical leftist courses offered at universities across the U.S., which range from “Sex and Socialism” to “Cowboys, Gangsters, and Drag Kings: Introduction to Critical Masculinity Studies” to the “Gendered Politics of Food.”
Young America’s Foundation (YAF) has produced this report, Comedy & Tragedy, every year since 1995 to “document the intellectual abuse and flat-out indoctrination happening by way of the appalling curriculum at our country’s most (so-called) prestigious institutions of higher education.”
YAF spokesman Spencer Brown told LifeSiteNews that he was particularly struck by the proliferation of courses on Marxism, “eco-feminism,” and “queer environmentalism.”
He was also critical of the inclusion of feminist and leftist themes in mainstream religion courses.
There are classes on “queering God or queering the Bible,” Brown explained. “Those courses go into how, throughout history, God has been seen as definitively masculine or male, but they ask, ‘or is He?’”
These courses, said Brown, “dive into how the actions and the word and the character of God might actually suggest that He is a She from a feminist theology perspective.”
A number of Catholic universities made the list. DePaul University offers a class called “Sexual Justice: Lesbians, Gays and the Law,” which “examines the historical and contemporary relationships between lesbians, gays, and the law in the U.S., focusing on the intersections of power, sexuality, and identity with issues of sexuality-based discrimination.”
Georgetown has a class called “The Breast: Image, Myth, Legend,” for which no description was offered; Seton Hall University students have the option of enrolling in “The Politics of Marriage,” a topic which “requires careful attention as many important voices here (women and queer individuals in particular) are historically marginalized.”
Columbia University teaches students about “Practicing Intersectionality” while Brown University offers a course called “Black Lavender: Black Gay/Lesbian Plays/Dramatic Constructions in the American Theatre.”
“Many of the courses and descriptions listed in this year’s report may seem comical at first glance, but the situation that continues to unfold on America’s campuses is hardly a laughing matter,” Brown wrote in the report’s introduction. “Beyond the inane, identity- and intersectionality-obsessed topics, these classes advance a liberal agenda, malign conservatives and their values, and shut out ideological diversity.”
The methodology of YAF’s report included examinations of online course catalogs for college and university institutions ranging from the Big 10 Conference, the Ivy League, Big East Conference, and the Southeastern Conference. YAF says it regularly reviews and audits course catalogs, textbook requirements, commencement speakers, and other metrics in order to reveal the state of higher education.
Arizona – –(AmmoLand.com)- Over the past year or so, extremist gun control laws have exploded in several states, primarily as a result of urban majorities riding roughshod over their rural neighbors.
Nowhere is this more evident than in Washington and Oregon, two states with historically liberal gun laws and low crime rates, that have been overwhelmed by a combination of growing urban populations and a sudden influx of cash from anti-rights billionaires.
Mike Bloomberg, with the help of Bill Gates and other ultra-wealthy Washingtonians, has funded a string of modest-sounding (but in reality extreme) gun control measures through Washington’s voter initiative process. The result: a once gun-friendly state suddenly in the running for the title of most firearm-restricted state in the country.
Oregon has gone a similar direction, but instead of initiatives, the assault on individual rights originated in that state’s Democrat-controlled legislature, again with the help of millions of dollars from Bloomberg and his pals. But the Northwest isn’t the only place the anti-gun ratchet has been turning. Illinois, where Chicago and its massive crime problem has long driven anti-gun efforts, is looking at statewide burdensome regulations on licensed dealers. New Mexico, and Nevada have also jumped on the gun control bandwagon with increasingly restrictive laws and legislative proposals.
Second Amendment Sanctuary Zones
In response, sheriffs, county commissioners, and city councils around the country have started passing “Second Amendment Sanctuary” resolutions, and declaring their intent to ignore and not enforce laws that violate the right to arms.
Unlike the “Sanctuary” designation adopted by cities, counties, and even states in opposition to enforcement of federal immigration laws, the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement isn’t pushing a local agenda over federal enforcement, but rather they are standing up for the supreme law of the land – the U.S. Constitution – over state laws that infringe on enumerated rights.
One of my favorite political commentators, Bill Whittle, recently voiced concern about the 2A Sanctuary movement on one of his Bill Whittle Now programs on YouTube.
His objection was that by using the “sanctuary” model, he feels that activists are falling into a trap by failing to take the fight to its source – the state legislature – to fix the problem, rather than be isolated and slowly walled off in smaller and smaller “rights enclaves.”
I would agree with him, if establishing small “freedom zones” were the final objective of the movement, but it’s not.
The 2A Sanctuary movement is not a final objective, but rather a tactic in the larger fight. The cities, towns, and counties take these positions, not as barricades to hide behind, but rather as declarations of war against their over-reaching legislators. They are rally points for lovers of freedom, where they can make plans for taking back their state legislatures and restoring the rule of the Constitution.
When an individual citizen stands up and declares “I will not comply” with laws they consider unconstitutional, that one small voice can be easily silenced. When many citizens band together and make the same declaration, they are a much louder voice that is much harder to silence. But when elected officials within a jurisdiction stand together with their fellow citizens and make the declaration on behalf of their constituents – and presumably with the support and approval of those constituents – it is a revolutionary statement that cannot be squelched or silenced. If these local politicians are indeed supported by their constituents, they will be reelected or elected to higher office, and the politicians who have pushed the unconstitutional laws will be turned out for their traitorous actions.
There’s no question that accepting unconstitutional laws as valid within the state, but not in some narrow jurisdiction, would be a serious mistake. Accepting evil for others, as long as rights are protected for me, is never acceptable. Drawing a line in the sand and declaring that creeping criminality shall not be tolerated beyond that line, and then pushing the line outward to encompass the entire state and nation, is exactly the right thing to do and is a noble effort. These local politicians – county board members, sheriffs, mayors and city council members, – are putting their careers, and in some cases their personal liberty, on the line in defense of what’s right, and they are leading the charge to rectify the wrong.
Nanny-state elitists and the sheeple who follow them in their high-rise apartment buildings and gated communities in Chicago, Seattle, Portland, and Las Vegas, must be turned out of office and their radical, anti-rights ideas rejected. That will only happen when large numbers of voters from across the states and nation stand up and take action – calling, writing, marching, and most importantly VOTING.
This is a war for liberty, and there is no neutral ground nor room for complacency. There is also no room for hiding behind “sanctuary” walls. The wrong must be thrown out and the right must prevail, and that is going to require active engagement on the part of all right-thinking Americans. We all must be willing to work toward better solutions, even when our options are limited and imperfect.
If you’re not familiar with Bill Whittle’s Firewall and Afterburner series, and his more recent Right Angel and Bill Whittle Now programs on YouTube, I highly recommend you check them out at BillWhittle.com
Jeff Knox
About Jeff Knox:
Jeff Knox is a second-generation political activist and director of The Firearms Coalition. His father Neal Knox led many of the early gun rights battles for your right to keep and bear arms. Read Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War.
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition has offices in Buckeye, Arizona and Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org
In response to the corporate decision by AIRBNB to discontinue the listings of vacation rentals in what it defines as “occupied territory” within the West Bank settlements, Proclaiming Justice to The Nations Founder and President Laurie Cardoza-Moore has today called for a boycott of the global provider’s rental destinations.
PJTN noted in a statement released November 26, 2018: “AIRBNB is the latest high profile business to cave to the egregious demands of the anti-Semitic BDS Movement targeting Israel. It’s open knowledge that Palestinian leaders had called for AIRBNB to remove the Israeli settlement listings three years ago –saying in a letter to the company –‘you are effectively promoting the illegal colonization of occupied land.’ Today, the PLO Secretary General called the listing removal ‘an initial positive step, adding, Israeli settlements are not just an obstacle to peace but defy the very definition of peace.’ Palestinian activists are jubilantly today declaring ‘Another Win for BDS’ on social media. Anti-Israel boycotts do not distinguish between the state of Israel and Judea and Samaria. As far as Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) proponents are concerned; the entire state of Israel has no right to exist. This is not about disputed territories as AIRBNB has listings in Moroccan occupied West Sahara, Turkish occupied Cyprus and more, it is only the Jewish properties in the Jewish homeland that are banned. Let’s call it what it is: anti-Semitism.”
PJTN is calling upon Christians, Jews, and people of conscience worldwide to omit AIRBNB properties from their existing and future travel destination plans. “There are other well-established businesses such as VRBO (Vacation Rentals By Owners) that can provide great accommodations globally if business is re-directed to them. In short –we need to send to message that support of the BDS Movement and the anti-Semitism that leads to BDS will not be supported or tolerated and will result in lost revenues.” _______________________________________________________________
Airbnb Caves to BDS
After pressure from BDS groups in the media, Airbnb caved and decided to remove its listings for Israeli settlement lodging in the West Bank. Heart of Israel Director Aaron Katsof discusses with host Jeff Smith.
Airbnb West Bank Withdrawal a Win for BDS?
Airbnb decided to withdraw its listings from the West Bank Palestinian territories, leaving Israeli settler businesses in the dust. Is this a win for BDS? Was it the right move? Former Peace Now Israel Director Yariv Oppenheimer and The Lawfare Project Founder Brooke Goldstein debate.
Ashton Kutcher Shuts Down BDS Anti-Israel Protester Ariel Gold at Airbnb Event
The U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee held a hearing on Mar. 5, 2019 titled “Vaccines Save Lives: What is Driving Preventable Disease Outbreaks?”
The very title of the hearing tips the committee’s hand. “Vaccines save lives” is a conclusive statement that preemptively answers the question that follows, making it clear there would be no divergent exploration of the question of what is driving preventable disease outbreaks. Even further, while it is true that some vaccines may save some lives, it is also true that vaccines are not studied for their unintended long- and short-term effects on the body, and that many people’s bodies respond to vaccines in ways that prove harmful to them.
The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has paid out more than $4 billion dollars for vaccine injuries since 1988.1 The passive reporting system for vaccine injuries, VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), which captures between one and 10 percent of all adverse reactions,2 receives thousands of reports of injury every year.
If vaccines are saving lives, they are also doing it at the expense of those who are injured or killed by those same vaccines. Where is the “greater good” in that?
The testimonies of those elected to give witness in the Senate hearing all beat a predictable drum: more mandates for more vaccines to be given to more people. There was a push to curtail parental rights and eliminate vaccine exemptions to those vaccines. Who will be allowed to speak in Congress to the issue of human rights, the ethic of medical informed consent, and the right to bodily integrity and autonomy when it comes to vaccine mandates? The United States has confronted and repudiated the ugliness that comes with eugenics, utilitarianism, and medical experimentation in the labs at Tuskegee and the courts of Nuremberg following the horrors of Nazi medical experimentation on human subjects.
It is a violation of human rights to use people as guinea pigs in the great vaccine experiment, and it is immoral for the government to collude with the pharmaceutical companies through the use of vaccine mandates.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now recommends 69 doses of 16 vaccines be given to children before age 18, with hundreds of vaccines in the pipeline. Many of these vaccines are fast-tracked for approval without adequate safety studies, and each carries both known and unknown risks. Although it is currently in fashion to think otherwise, the science is not settled on vaccines. There is not adequate testing on vaccines to make assurances of safety (new vaccines are usually tested against other vaccines, not inert placebos), and there has never been a true scientifically credible study of those who are vaccinated compared to those who are completely unvaccinated.
Vaccines are a medical intervention given to healthy people that carry a risk of death and serious or debilitating consequences for some individuals.Because of this risk, there must always be choice!
There was no one on the panel of witnesses at the Mar. 5 Senate hearing who gave a voice to that point of view. Why was Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), a longtime advocate of vaccine safety and an expert on vaccine policy and informed consent, not called to testify? Why was a high school student who has spoken with friends and done a bit of Google research asked to participate in a hearing of such serious magnitude when parents of vaccine injured children—people who vaccinated their children in good faith and paid a horrible price—have been left out of the conversation?
If we applaud this child’s right to make medical choices, shouldn’t the choice of informed parents who have come to a different conclusion also be included? Are we abandoning the fundamental American value of intelligent dissent in favor of totalitarianism?
It’s hard not to conclude that this hearing was set up as a one-sided, unfair and incomplete conversation with a pre-determined outcome. Shame.
I will close with the words of Dr. Christine Stabell Benn, a vaccine researcher and Professor of Global Health at the University of Southern Denmark. Dr. Benn’s opinion was published in The Times of London on Mar. 2, 2019 in response to a previous article about vaccine hesitancy…
As a vaccine researcher, I strongly oppose mandatory vaccination. The vaccines that are in use were only tested for effects on the vaccine-targeted disease and on side effects in relation to the vaccination. However, there is increasing evidence that vaccines also affect the immune system broadly, reducing or enhancing susceptibility to unrelated diseases. Hence, the vaccine skeptics have a right to point out that we do not know the full effects of vaccines on overall health. It should therefore be a human right to weigh pros, cons and unknowns to make one’s own decision.3
It is wrong to say that there are no risks to vaccines. Even the government admit that children are sometimes injured by vaccines. Since 1988, over $4 billion has been paid out from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Despite the government admitting to in paying $4 billion for vaccine injuries, no informed consent is used or required when you vaccinate your child. This may be the only medical procedure in today’s medical world where an informed consent is not required.
U.S. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky expressed his opposition to government mandates forcing people to vaccinate themselves and their children. At a hearing of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on Mar. 5, 2019, he was the only Senator or invited witness at the hearing who made a statement urging caution about the creation of vaccine laws that contain no personal belief exemptions.
Sen. Paul said, “As we contemplate forcing parents, I think it’s important to remember that force is not consistent with the American story. Nor is force consistent with the liberty our forefathers sought when they came to America.”12
Sen. Paul, who is a medical doctor, noted that vaccines come with some risk and that at least for that reason people should have a choice as to whether to be vaccinated. He noted, “It is wrong to say that there are no risks to vaccines. Even the government admits that children are sometimes injured by vaccines.” Since the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) created by Congress under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) began operating in 1988, more than $4 billion has been paid to vaccine victims by the government.12
Sen. Paul appeared concerned about the relative lack of informed consent accorded to parents when it comes to vaccinating their children. He said, “Despite the government admitting to paying $4 billion for vaccine injuries, no informed consent is used or required when you vaccinate your child. This may be the only medical procedure in today’s medical world where an informed consent is not required.”1
One of the problems Sen. Paul sees with government mandates with regard to childhood vaccines such as the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) is the precedence they set for other vaccines. “Are we to find that next we’ll be mandating flu vaccines?” asked Paul.”1 He warned:
I would guess that those who want to mandate measles [vaccine] will be after us on the flu next. Yet, the current science only allows for educated guessing when it comes to the flu vaccine. Each year, before that year’s flu strain is known, scientists put their best guess into that year’s vaccine. Some years it’s completely wrong. We vaccinate for the wrong strain of flu… Yet, five states already mandate flu vaccines. Is it really appropriate to mandate a vaccine that, more often than not, vaccinates for the wrong flu strain?1
Sen. Paul said he did not “favor giving up on liberty for a false sense of security.”12
Placing an op-ed piece in even a local newspaper is really hard. It’s not hard if you’re a leftist, but it’s an uphill struggle if you’re a conservative. Meanwhile, major papers will run any crazy, defamatory, hate-filled rant as long as it’s from the left attacking the right.
At a time when the Democrats are mainstreaming anti-Semitism, the Boston Globe decided to run a hit piece headlined, “A shocking number of Jews have become willing collaborators in white supremacy”.
The author, S.I. Rosenbaum, hates Israel, Jews and defends anti-Semitism. In a Twitter thread about her Boston Globe hate piece, she tweeted, “I was going to write about how light-skinned Jews can’t afford to break with allies of color over antisemitic microaggressions, because our only hope of survival as a people is ride-or-die coalition with other minority groups.”
S.I. Rosenbaum also thanked her editor for encouraging her to go all out on this. And go all out she did.
The deranged hate-filled rant by S.I. Rosenbaum accuses Jewish Trump supporters of being Nazis. And pretty much all Republicans.
“A shocking number of Jews have become willing collaborators in white supremacy — not only public bigots such as Ben Shapiro and David Horowitz, but kapos in the openly ethno-nationalist Trump regime, such as Stephen Miller or Jared Kushner,” S.I. Rosenbaum rants.
The accusations aimed at Horowitz and Shapiro are vile and disgusting. But the context is that, according to S.I. Rosenbaum, anyone who isn’t a member of a leftist anti-Semitic hate group, like Black Lives Matter or the PFLP, is a Nazi.
It’s the same propaganda that Soviet apologists used to justify Stalin’s mass murder of Jews while calling any Jewish opponents of Communism, Nazis. These are the same people who claimed that Communist anti-Semitic cartoons of hook-nosed Jews wrapped in stars of David were no big deal. Now they’re out in force defending Rep. Omar’s anti-Semitism.
If anyone is a Kapo, it’s leftists who insist on diverting money to the Muslim terrorists who are literally paid for every Jew they kill.
But S.I. Rosenbaum of course doesn’t stop until she reaches a defense of actual Stalinism, which was responsible or the mass murder of countless Jews in gulags.
“In doing so, Cohen was following in the footsteps of Roy Cohn, Trump’s old mentor. Cohn had been Joseph McCarthy’s right hand in the Red Scare witch hunt of the 1950s, the lawyer who helped send Julius and Ethel Rosenberg to the electric chair, a gay Jew who sold out Jews and homosexuals without a second thought,” S.I. Rosenbaum writes, celebrating two Communist spies serving an anti-Semitic regime whose actions helped bring the world closer to total destruction.
These are S.I. Rosenbaum’s heroes.
Then, because the Boston Globe has fewer standards than Tumblr or MSNBC, S.I. Rosenbaum accuses Justice Thomas and Ben Carson of being white supremacists.
“Other minorities make this bargain too, sometimes — look at Ben Carson and Clarence Thomas,” S.I. Rosenbaum rants.
So the Boston Globe finds it appropriate to run a piece falsely accusing Jews… and some of the most talented black men in this country, of being white supremacists with no evidence other than the author’s bad chemicals and worse ideology.
Stalinist nuclear spies are heroes. David Horowitz is a white supremacist. Just like Ben Carson.
Pravda had higher standards for its raving bigotry and anti-Semitism than the Boston Globe does.
An 84-year-old widow of a veteran is being threatened with eviction for hosting voluntary Bible studies, according to the Pacific Justice Institute.
The widow, Artis Breau, received a letter from the California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet) demanding that she cease hosting the Bible studies or else she will be thrown out of her veteran’s home.
“The home claims it needs to protect residents from this elderly widow, even though attendance at her Bible studies is entirely voluntary,” the institute stated. “Artis has explained to PJI that the real issue is that she is an evangelical Jewish believer in Jesus, which does not sit well with some of the chaplains.”
Breau, whose late husband served in the Korean War, initially took heat from the home last September over a discussion she had with another resident about Heaven and Hell which officials claimed had caused that resident to “lose sleep” and was thus “elder abuse.”
Breau was banned from volunteer work at the home over the complaint despite not yet being interviewed over the allegation, the institute stated.
“CalVet’s treatment of this widow is shameful,” PJI stated in a press release. “Throughout this process, we have been deeply disturbed not only by the lack of constitutional guidelines, ineptitude, and lack of due process in the investigation, but even more by the notion that discussing religious views on the eternal state of the soul is somehow elder abuse or emotional abuse.”
“Our client’s husband fought for his country to preserve the freedoms now being threatened by CalVet. Our veterans deserve better.”
Responding to the allegations, CalVet said that “the safety, security, and well-being of all of our residents is our top priority.”
“We are very proud of the religious services provided to all of our residents through our chaplaincy services,” said the deputy secretary of Women Veterans Affairs at CalVet, according to Fox News. “This investigation concerns the private conduct of an individual.”
“Beyond that, we are unable to comment on an ongoing investigation.”
Our do nothing Congress put on yet another spectacle of two sides butting heads over the undeniable crisis on the southern border.
The Democrats continued to spin their broken record, pulling at the heart strings of those outraged by the children of illegal immigrants being locked up and separated, to politicize or more appropriately weaponize their borg like zeal to criticize the Executive office and ultimately the intelligence of the American people.
Oddly enough, no one mentioned the ongoing rape of hundreds of American children by illegals on a monthly basis. But plenty of other horrors were brought to the fore by the opposition.
The growing question is, how does the left describe a crisis? Because the billions of taxpayer dollars spent on Illegals, the unnecessary traffic deaths and murders of Americans by illegals, the opioid epidemic fueled by the southern border and the rape of American children by illegals doesn’t seem to be any problem whatsoever.
Middle Eastern Women’s Coalition Calls for the Resignation of Rep. Ilhan Omar
Assyrian Woman Urges Ilhan Omar’s Supporters to Visit Her Minnesota District Nahren Anweya calls for Rep. Ilhan Omar to resign at Middle Eastern Women’s Coalition’s press conference in D.C. Wednesday.
Philadelphia Imam Abdelmohsen Abouhatab in Antisemitic Sermons: The Jews Are the Vilest People
HAMAS LINKED “CAIR” & PRO-PALESTINIAN JIHAD JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE RALLY FOR ILHAN OMAR BEFORE ANTI-SEMITISM VOTE IN DEMOCRAT HOUSE
Several anti-Israel, jihad-supporting groups are coming together to promote an event “in support of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), including a Muslim and a Jewish group that both have controversial records on terrorism.”
The groups include CAIR, with its associations with Hamas, a Muslim Brotherhood organization, and Jewish Voice for Peace, “a radical left-wing organization that hosted convicted Palestinian terrorist Rasmea Odeh at a conference in 2017 before she was deported for lying to U.S. immigration officials about her violent past.”
These groups have called the event “Coalition of Muslim, Jewish Groups” in an attempt to deceive Americans into thinking that they are exponents of Jewish-Muslim unity and dialogue. The truth about this sham event is that it is a clear demonstration in support of the Palestinian jihad.
While the article below refers to “anti-Israel extremist groups,” these groups are not just anti-Israel; they are also anti-West. They associate themselves with and defend the Palestinian jihad, despite the Palestinians’ “pay for slay” program to reward jihadists who murder Israeli civilians, including children. The Palestinian Authority agenda, which is supported by Ilan Omar et al, seeks to obliterate the State of Israel.
Last week, Laurie Cardoza-Moore, the founder of Proclaiming Justice to the Nations, called Omar “a Hamas plant” in Congress.
“Anti-Israel Extremist Groups to Show Support for Ilhan Omar Before Antisemitism Vote,” by Joel B Pollak, Breitbart, March 5, 2019:
Several anti-Israel extremist groups are planning an event Wednesday morning in support of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), including a Muslim and a Jewish group that both have controversial records on terrorism.
Omar’s most recent antisemitic remarks, accusing pro-Israel Americans of “allegiance” to a foreign power, came after she had been forced to apologize last month for other, similar remarks.
In response to criticism from Jewish groups, Democratic leaders have planned to hold a vote on a resolution condemning antisemitism on Wednesday.
But some on the left — including Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), who has made similar remarks — are backing Omar.
The event, a press conference to announce a letter of support for Omar, is billed as a “Coalition of Muslim, Jewish Groups,” and was announced Tuesday via a news release from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
CAIR has claimed in the past that American foreign policy is partly to blame for terrorism against Americans. In December 2015, the organization offered legal assistance to the family of the terrorists who killed 14 and wounded nearly two dozen other people in a terror attack on a holiday party in a local government office.
As Breitbart News has noted:
In 2007-8, CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the terror financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. That case, in turn, led the FBI to discontinue its work with the organization. In 2009, a federal judge ruled that the government “produced ample evidence to establish” the ties of CAIR with Hamas, the Palestinian terror organization. The United Arab Emirates labeled CAIR a terrorist organization in 2014 (a decision that the Obama administration opposed).
Another group involved in the press conference is Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), a radical left-wing organization that hosted convicted Palestinian terrorist Rasmea Odeh at a conference in 2017 before she was deported for lying to U.S. immigration officials about her violent past…..
The Democrat freshman Representative Ilhan Omar (D-Minn) has proven again and again her anti-Semitic bent. She continues to caricature American citizens who support the Jewish state of Israel, including such supporters serving in Congress, of harboring dual loyalties and “allegiance to a foreign country.” While some Democrat leaders in Congress have called her out for her remarks, none appear willing to discipline her. Unlike the Republicans’ actions in stripping Representative Steve King (R-Iowa) of his House committee seats after he made remarks that appeared to defend white nationalism, Congresswoman Omar is still a member of the influential House Foreign Affairs Committee, with no current intention by Democrat House leaders to remove her. Democratic House leaders also appear to be caving in to demands from Omar’s supporters that a clear-cut House resolution against anti-Semitism, which would not have called out Omar by name even in its original version, be even further watered down by adding generic condemnations of hatred in all forms, including of so-called Islamophobia.
Omar, a Somali-American, has regularly demonized Israel and sought to delegitimize it, hallmarks in themselves of her anti-Semitism. In the past, she has accused Israel of “evil doings” and of hypnotizing the world. Earlier this year, she compared Israel to the murderous, terrorist sponsoring Iranian regime and said she “almost chuckle[s]” when the Jewish state is described as a democracy. Omar criticized Israel for instituting laws that “recognize it as a Jewish state and does not recognize the other religions that are living in it.”
Israel, like the United States, is in fact, a pluralistic democracy that honors freedom of worship and religious tolerance. That’s certainly much more than can be said for Omar’s native Somalia, where Islam is the official religion and Islamic sharia is the basic source for national legislation. Employing a double standard when falsely accusing Israel of intolerant behavior that her own native country and other Islamic countries display is yet another hallmark of Omar’s anti-Semitism.
In castigating the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and its supposed influence in swaying U.S politicians to favor Israel, Omar claims she is holding fast to her stated position on “the problematic role of lobbyists in politics, whether it be AIPAC, the [National Rifle Association] or the fossil fuel industry.” Somehow, however, she is not worried about the role of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR representatives have regularly lobbied members of Congress and their staff, as well as having conducted closed door meetings with members of the Obama administration. Its agenda is not merely to protect American Muslims’ civil rights, as it claims. The group, like Omar, is stridently anti-Israel. It has accepted foreign donations from radical Muslim countries such as Qatar. CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad proclaimed two decades ago that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran … should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”
Omar will be speaking at a fund-raising event for CAIR later this month, hosted by CAIR-LA, whose chief executive director, Hussam Ayloush, has compared Israel to the Islamic State. This same CAIR leader claimed after the 2015 San Bernardino, California terrorist attack, in which Islamist terrorists had murdered 14 people and wounded 31 others, that the United States itself was partly to blame for the attack. He said, “let’s not forget that some of our own foreign policy as Americans, as the West, have fueled that extremism.”
This is the company that Omar keeps – her kind of lobbyists. She is not only an anti-Semite, who deserves at minimum to be kicked off the House Foreign Affairs Committee immediately and censured if she continues accusing her fellow representatives and others who support Israel of dual loyalties. Like the Islamist group she will be fund-raising for, Omar is an apologist for Islamic terrorism.
Shortly after four armed members of al-Shabab, the Somalian jihadist terrorist group, stormed the Westgate mall in Nairobi, Kenya in 2013, resulting in nearly 70 people dead and 200 wounded, Omar said that terrorist acts were the “byproducts of the actions of our involvement in other people’s affairs.” Is that how she justifies the slaughter by al Qaeda of thousands of innocent people who were going about their own business on 9/11?
In 2016, when Omar was serving as a Minnesota state representative, she pleaded for “compassion” in a letter she sent to a judge considering the sentences for a group of Minnesota men accused of trying to join the Islamic State. She blamed their attraction to the Islamic State and preparations to fight for the Islamist terrorists on the flimsy excuse of “systematic alienation.” Lets just show these would-be murders some “distributive justice,” she said, instead of the harsh prison sentences they deserve.
Finally, when it comes to complaining about “dual loyalties” and “foreign allegiances,” Representative Omar would do well to speak with her colleague, Palestinian-American Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich). Tlaib said that much of her “strength comes from being Palestinian.” To show where her real allegiance lies, she wore a Palestinian gown, said to be a symbol of Palestinian nationalism, at her swearing-in ceremony. She explained, “Throughout my career in public service, the residents I have had the privilege of fighting for have embraced who I am, especially my Palestinian roots.”
A double standard once again. And today’s Democrat Party is all in, bowing to its radical progressive base.
This is just weak and mealy-mouthed virtue-signaling, designed to cover for their endorsement of Omar and refusal to remove her from the Foreign Affairs Committee. Omar can even vote for this resolution as it stands, and probably will. “War is deceit,” said Muhammad.
“Democratic rebuke of Ilhan Omar won’t name her,” by Susan Ferrechio, Washington Examiner, March 5, 2019:
House Democrats will vote on a resolution Wednesday condemning anti-Semitism, but the measure will not name Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., whose comments prompted the rare condemnation from her fellow lawmakers.
The four-page resolution is sponsored by Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla., and “rejects anti-Semitism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values that define the people of the United States.”
The measure outlines the history of anti-Semitic attacks against Jews and addresses “the myth of dual loyalty, including allegations that Jews should be suspected of being disloyal neighbors or citizens.” Omar in a series of tweets raised the idea that Jewish members of Congress shouldn’t be loyal to Israel over America.
“[A]ccusing Jews of dual loyalty because they support Israel, whether out of a religious connection, a commitment to Jewish self-determination after millennia of persecution, or an appreciation for shared values and interests, suggests that Jews cannot be patriotic Americans and trusted neighbors, when Jews have served our Nation since its founding, whether in public life or military service,” the resolution said in rebuttal.
“Jewish people are subject to numerous other dangerous anti-Semitic myths as well, including that Jews control the banks, media, and the United States Government or seek world domination and that Jews are obsessed with money,” it added.
It concluded by saying the House “acknowledges the dangerous consequences of perpetuating anti-Semitic stereotypes,” and also “rejects anti-Semitism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values that define the people of the United States.”…
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
This became necessary because of the full-throated defenses of Omar from the Democrats’ far-Left anti-Semitic base. The Democrats don’t believe they can afford to alienate those people, so they’re watering down their already watery resolution with a mention of “anti-Muslim bias” that all too often amounts simply to honest analysis of the motivating ideology of jihad terrorism.
“The anti-Semitic gift that keeps on giving,” PJ Media Live Blog (scroll down), March 6, 2019:
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) cannot shut her Jew-hating yapper, so now the Democrats are forced to make some gestures to smooth over relations with an important and generous constituency: the Jewish community. After weighing the cost/benefit analysis of their intersectional bingo political strategy, a resolution to condemn anti-Semitism has been postponed.
The resolution will be updated to include anti-Muslim bias and other forms of bigotry, likely pushing a vote to Thursday, a day later than they had originally hoped, according to two Democratic aides. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told Democratic leaders about the change of plans Tuesday evening, one of the aides said.
And notably, the resolution does not name the anti-Semite in question, Omar.
Without mentioning Omar by name, the four-page resolution says her comment “suggests that Jews cannot be patriotic Americans and trusted neighbors.” She did not answer questions about her comments while leaving her Capitol Hill office Tuesday….
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Surprised? Don’t be. Linda Sarsour is a believing, Sharia-adherent Muslim. She is a devout believer in Islam, and the Qur’an demonizes the Jews in numerous ways. It 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).
“Linda Sarsour Attacks ‘White Feminist’ Nancy Pelosi Over Resolution Condemning Anti-Semitism,” by Peter Hasson, Daily Caller, March 5, 2019:
Women’s March co-chair Linda Sarsour attacked Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi Monday night as a “typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men,” in response to a House resolution condemning anti-Semitism.
House Democrats announced the resolution Monday after Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s latest anti-Israel comments, which critics — including other Democrats — have denounced as anti-Semitic.
“This is why we wanted Congresswoman Barbara Lee to be the Speaker of the House and ‘progressives’ were like ‘nah, Pelosi is a leader and omg you should see how she claps. What a clap!’” Sarsour wrote in a lengthy Facebook post.
“Nancy is a typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men. God forbid the men are upset – no worries, Nancy to the rescue to stroke their egos,” she wrote.
Sarsour accused Democratic leaders of responding more quickly to anti-Semitism than to anti-Muslim rhetoric, and claimed the resolution would only help Republicans.
“Democrats are playing in to the hands of the right. Dividing our base and reinforcing their narrative and giving them an easier path towards 2020,” Sarsour wrote.
“I reject this. I will speak out. I won’t be silent. I am not following this. They don’t speak for me as a Democrat. No more double standards.”…
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
America’s most talked about young Democrat, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has been caught spreading misinformation on Twitter while attacking Liberty University founder Jerry Falwell Jr.
“I always thought that if more good people had concealed carry permits, then we could end these Muslims before they [unintelligible]. This was just this weekend at CPAC, the conference attended by the President and members, to 1000s. Where’s the resolution against Islamophobia?” AOC wrote in a retweet of a far-left activist.
“I always thought that if more good people had concealed carry permits,then we could end these Muslims before they [unintelligible].”
This was just this weekend at CPAC, the conference attended by the President and members, to 1000s.
Where’s the resolution against Islamophobia?
Cortez left out the full context of the comments showing Falwell was specifically referring to the two Muslim terrorists who killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California.
Additionally, Falwell’s speech was given the day after the California terror attack in 2015, not at this weekend’s CPAC.
Falwell snapped back on Twitter, writing, “I thought @AOC was just dumb but she is a liar too. She claims this was @CPAC last week when it was actually in 2015 the day after the deadly CA attacks by radical Muslims (“those” Muslims I referenced) She also deleted the last part of my quote “before they walk in and kill us”.
I thought @AOC was just dumb but she is a liar too. She claims this was @CPAC last week when it was actually in 2015 the day after the deadly CA attacks by radical Muslims (“those” Muslims I referenced) She also deleted the last part of my quote “before they walk in and kill us”.
After being told the video was from 2015, Ocasio-Cortez tweeted a correction but continued to push for a resolution against Islamophobia and has yet to delete the original tweet.
“I always thought that if more good people had concealed carry permits,then we could end these Muslims before they [unintelligible].”
This was just this weekend at CPAC, the conference attended by the President and members, to 1000s.
Where’s the resolution against Islamophobia?
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Kimberly-Clark’s toilet paper brand Cottonelle is the latest to use homosexuality in promotional advertising, as one of the commercials in its recently-released “DownThereCare” series centers on advising a man to give himself a “confidence boost” in meeting his partner’s parents for the first time.
“Down there, because today you meet the parents,” the 15-second advertisement states. “So, before they sit you down, give your [bottom] a confidence boost with ripples that remove more at once for a superior clean, and make you feel like the kind of guy he takes home to mother.”
It then shows two young men smiling at each other.
The commercial, also posted to YouTube, has received 70K views as of press time, and has generated over 800 likes and more than 500 dislikes.
Cottonelle has disabled commenting for the video, but some have posted about the advertisement on Twitter—both positively and negatively.
“Thank you @cottonelle for supporting my community. You have a new customer,” one viewer wrote.
“I just went out and bought two jumbo packages and switched over to Cottonelle’s products. Thanks Cottonelle for a stance on diversity,” another stated.
“Stick to selling tp and leave the social issues alone,” a third urged.
“After 20+ years, I’m breaking up with @cottonelle. Too bad. Be aware what you embrace. Be more aware what you promote,” another wrote.
Cottonelle has replied to at least two commenters, telling one, “No matter a person’s orientation, gender or anything else, being clean impacts everyone. Here at Cottonelle brand, diversity is embraced in all aspects and we are proud to share a commercial that is representative of that.”
The group One Million Moms, a part of the American Family Association, has launched a petition calling upon the Kimberly-Clark Corporation to “clean up its advertising.”
It outlined in a site post on the matter that this is not the first time that the organization has taken issue with Cottonelle’s ads, as it also found its “Dare to Go Commando” campaign to be “ridiculous” and “inappropriate.”
“Cottonelle should go back to using cute puppies in their advertisements instead of focusing on controversial issues,” One Million Moms opined.
Kimberly-Clark is among a plethora of companies that have used homosexuality in its advertising in recent years.
As previously reported, the Bible teaches that all men are in the same predicament: All are born with the Adamic sin nature and are “by nature the children of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3), having various inherent inclinations that are contrary to the law of God and being utterly incapable of changing themselves.
It is why Jesus outlined in John 3:5-7 that men must be regenerated by the second birth, and be transformed from being in Adam to being in Christ, or they cannot see the kingdom of Heaven.
“Jesus answered and said unto him, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.’ Nicodemus saith unto him, ‘How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?’
Jesus answered, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, ‘Ye must be born again.’”
Romans 5:8-10 also teaches, “But God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more being reconciled we shall be saved by His life.”
New Jersey – -(AmmoLand.com)- Governor Phil Murphy released a budget proposal including another attempt to massively increase fees for gun permits, and to impose excise taxes of $1.4 million and $3.2 million respectively on firearms and ammunition sales.
A similar draconian increase in firearms permit fees was proposed by Governor Murphy last year but was not accepted by the legislature. Only time will tell whether that outcome will be repeated in 2019. Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs is closely monitoring the budget process as it unfolds and is prepared to take legal action to protect gun owners if necessary.
Said ANJRPC Executive Director Scott Bach: “Governor Murphy’s outrageous new proposal punishes law-abiding gun owners for the acts of criminals and madmen, chills the exercise of Second Amendment rights, and unfairly discriminates against lower-income populations. If the legislature doesn’t reject this proposal again, as it did last year, we are prepared to take legal action.”
Please watch for further updates on this developing situation.
Please forward this article to every gun owner you know, and if you don’t already receive alerts from Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, please subscribe to our free email alerts for the latest Second Amendment breaking news and action alerts.
About Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs:
The Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs is the official New Jersey affiliate of the NRA, and is New Jersey’s oldest, largest, and most effective Second Amendment advocacy organization. www.anjrpc.org
