NARCISSIST SOCIAL JUSTICE “CHRISTIAN” LEADERS EXPOSED~FREAK OUT OVER DOCUMENTARY CITING THEIR “OWN WORDS”

SEE DOCUMENTARY TRAILER AT:
QUOTE FROM ABOVE WEBPAGE:
“In 1979 the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) formally entered into the “Battle for the Bible” that was raging within North American evangelicalism. Over the next 15 years, the SBC was returned to its historic commitments on the inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture. Many of those who resisted this conservative resurgence were driven by religiously progressive convictions.
Their advocacy of ideals and positions that developed out of radical feminism and deviant sexualities were exposed and refuted by those holding to orthodox, Protestant and historic Baptist positions on the issues.
Now, 25 years after the clear success of the conservative resurgence, it seems like evangelicals, including Southern Baptists, are in danger of loosening their commitments to those basic, Christian commitments. Dangerous ideologies like Critical Theory and Intersectionality are gaining inroads into the thinking of some leaders, churches and organizations.
These ideologies are even being promoted among some evangelicals as reliable analytical tools that can assist our understandings and efforts in gospel ministry.
The result is that, in the name of social justice, many unbiblical agendas are being advanced under the guise of honoring and protecting women, promoting racial reconciliation, and showing love and compassion to people experiencing sexual dysphoria. 

By What Standard? God’s World, God’s Rules is a documentary that presses those questions by showing how godless ideologies are influencing evangelical thought and life.


Founders Ministries is producing this cinedoc to sound an alarm and issue a call for pastors and churches to stand firm against this onslaught by reaffirming the authority and sufficiency of God’s written Word. If we care about true justice—what God has revealed to be just—then we must stand against what is being promoted under social justice. If we care about the true gospel—the gospel revealed in the faith once-for-all-delivered to the saints—we must reject the agendas being promoted by godless ideologies.”
BIBLICAL DISCERNMENT REPLACED WITH 
GUILT & SHAME, COMPLIANCE, WORLDLINESS 
FOR CONGREGANTS
NARCISSIST SOCIAL JUSTICE “CHRISTIAN” LEADERS EXPOSED~FREAK OUT OVER DOCUMENTARY CITING THEIR “OWN WORDS” 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Southern Baptist leaders who are proponents of the leftist-oriented Social Justice Movement are absolutely irate at a 3.5-minute trailer for a new documentary citing their own words. Their behavior in social media after release of the trailer by Founders Ministries is best described as something halfway between sheer panic and an unbridled hissy fit.
The short trailer, giving insight into the documentary’s fuller content, shows fiery clips of Founder’s president, Tom Ascol – a Social Justice opponent – interlaced with video of SBC leaders who are widely recognized as Social Justice proponents.
THE CONTEXT
The documentary, called By What Standard, details the current skirmish over Social Justice, an ideology rooted in Marxism and tailored-fit for theists in the Western Hemisphere by Jesuits during the build-up to the First International Congress on World Evangelization in Lausanne, Switzerland in 1974. The wedding of Marxist principles tweaked at the Frankfurt School and western evangelicals was bolstered at that event mostly by the participation of John Stott and Billy Graham, two non-Catholics at the event. Both Stott and Graham used the World Council of Churches to promote the newly founded ideology of “Social Justice.”  However, America’s conservative evangelicals rejected those efforts to Christianize Marxist principles until – so it seems – Tim Keller took part in the Third International Congress of World Evangelization in Cape Town, South Africa in 2010. Keller’s influence in Reformed evangelicalism has been sizable, especially since he founded The Gospel Coalition (TGC) in 2005. From its beginning, TGC’s left-of-center tentacles spread over the evangelical landscape, to include the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) of the Southern Baptist Convention. As that SBC entity and Keller’s TGC melded into a singular organization (they largely share council members, writers, speakers, and contributors), the ideology of Social Justice has spread far and wide in what was once America’s most conservative denomination. Soon, TGC council members would include the SBC’s most prominent names and entity heads, like Southern Seminary’s Albert Mohler, Southeastern Seminary’s Danny Akin, 9Marx’ Mark Dever, and others. Through these key leaders, the Southern Baptist Convention got ‘woke.’

THE CONTROVERSY

As SBC institutions – especially Southeastern Seminary – began to explicitly teach (and promote) the work of Black Liberation Theologian James Cone, promote Critical Race Theory and Identity Politics (inventions of Marxists inspired by Frankfurt School ideology that developed inside America’s law schools in the 1980s), speak in terms of “sexual minorities” and other identity-driven language, and promote gender egalitarianism – it caught the attention of conservative Southern Baptists, many of whom (but not all) are Calvinists, but of the more traditional or Confessional variety than those associated with TGC or the ERLC who are better called New Calvinists.

These concerned conservatives drafted and promoted The Dallas Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel, which sought to distinguish between Social Justice and the Good News as preached in the Bible. Largely, that statement has proven to be a practical failure (or at least, unproven), as – thus far – the drafters of The Dallas Statement have refused to make Social Justice an issue large enough to divide over, even as they deride it as being toxically dangerous.
Two prominent Calvinist conferences – Shepherd’s Conference and G3 – hosted TGC board members as guest speakers, in spite of the fact that they are the de facto heads of the Social Justice Movement among Reformed evangelicals. Both made attempts to address Social Justice (G3 at a pre-conference event and Shepherd’s Conference with a Q&A). Both events failed to provoke fruitful interaction with Social Justice proponents, with the Shepherd’s Conference attempt at discussion going so poorly that its moderator, Phil Johnson, publicly apologized for its fruitlessness.
When the Dallas Statement was circulated, Albert Mohler said he disagreed with its content, but was not specific regarding with what he took exception. However, Mohler claimed that the statement would allow the opportunity for “fruitful discussion,” but it was a discussion he clearly was not willing to have at the Shepherd’s Conference or at any time, any place, or any occasion since the document’s publishing. Other TGC council members and SBC leaders like Mark Dever and Danny Akin have been equally slippery about where they stand on the issue. The closest point of clarity yet presented was by Albert Mohler, when he said at the Shepherd’s Conference Q&A that “Who I platform speaks for where I stand on the subject,” and given that Mohler platforms the most radical proponents of Social Justice in evangelicalism at both his seminary and at TGC, his position should be evident even in his silence.

THE CONFLICT

From the brief 3.5-minute-trailer, it appears that By What Standard seeks to clarify the position of Social Justice proponents in the SBC and contrast them with Social Justice opponents. The trailer was to-the-point, direct, and clear. If it’s any indication of the film itself, it will (we hope) pull no punches.

However, after the release of the trailer (which at this time cannot be embedded, so you will need to click the hyperlinks we provided above), the squirmy, squishy, Social Justice leaders of the SBC blew a proverbial gasket.

Daniel Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary – which is rightfully perceived as the most radical Social Justice entity in the SBC – took to Twitter to condemn the film. Inexplicably, Akin made accusations about the film from assumptions not knowable from the trailer itself.
You may have to click and expand this to read it, if you’re viewing it from a mobile device.
Akin claimed that the trailer contained “edited footage,” which of course it did because it was 3.5-minutes-long. Akin also claimed – without any explanation whatsoever – that the trailer “misrepresented important issues and what leaders in the SBC actually affirm.” We find it interesting that after Akin was suckered into doing a promotional video for an atheist organization, he voiced no such regret in social media even after discovering he accidentally endorsed an anti-Christian ad campaign.
It’s unknown how Akin knows that the documentary misrepresented what leaders in the SBC affirm, who those SBC leaders are, or how their **own words on video** somehow misrepresented them. Akin is only present in a very brief portion of the trailer.
Albert Mohler also leaped in with an attack on Founders and its By What Standard documentary.
Again, the documentary trailer was 3.5-minutes-long and contained actual video footage of the “respected SBC leaders.” Mohler has not seen the full documentary, although he was present for interviews which he voluntarily engaged in and spoke candidly on the subject of Social Justice (which no doubt he regrets).
It should be pointed out that while Mohler said via Twitter that “we expect and deserve a respectful and honest exchange of ideas” that he has had more than a year to give us the “fruitful discussion” he promised us was coming from The Dallas Statement.
Mohler has not made a single attempt thus far to have an open and honest dialogue on the subject. The last time (and only time) he publicly spoke about the issue, he angrily snapped at Phil Johnson and refused to give his honest position on the subject.
One would argue that the Founders’ documentary is an attempt to honestly and respectfully exchange ideas on the subject, and Mohler is deriding it.
Even Kyle J. Howard, a radical racialist and leftist political activist who manufactured a false life story of victimization, got in on the documentary-bashing, denouncing whatever footage of him might be used in its production.
During one part of the documentary, Owen Strachan – who has vocally opposed Beth Moore’s attempts to change Southern Baptist views on women in church leadership – was speaking about their ideological opponents while background footage seemed to show a blurry image of Rachel Denhollander, a woman who suffered abuse at the hands of predator, Larry Nassar. Denhollander’s husband, Jacob, has largely capitalized on Denhollander’s abuse and turned her victimization into his own cottage industry, and made a virtual career of it. In doing so, Denhollander has taken questionable positions on a number of issues that intersect with Social Justice.
It is not known the intention of including Denhollander’s image during Strachan’s speech, but Mr. Denhollander began to wage an attack on Founders’ Ministries this afternoon (again, with whom he is already a staunch ideological opponent).
You may to need to click on this image and stretch it to view it if you’re using a mobile device.
Dwight McKissic, whose footage from a debate in which he advocated for female preachers was used in the trailer, was also outraged his own words were used to convey his own positions.
Founders’ has been repeatedly attacked in Social Media today by the proponents of ‘woke evangelicalism,’ incensed that the short trailer would seem to indicate that the documentary will use the words and videos of Social Justice proponents to adequately state their positions. Marxism and all of its ideological subsets require subtlety, secrecy, and subversiveness. Clarity is their enemy. It should be no surprise these Social Justice advocates are angry their positions will be clarified using their own words.

THE CHAOS TO FOLLOW

Reports are coming into Pulpit & Pen that certain Social Justice proponents highlighted in the film – some mentioned above – are threatening civil action against the documentary makers for including their own words, from both public videos and in interviews they knew they were being conducted (which were not seen in the trailer, but are planned for use in the documentary itself).
Founders Ministries is bracing for legal action by Social Justice proponents who desperately don’t want footage of their own words to be made public. Sadly, those Social Justice proponents may turn to litigation to get the footage concealed, Canerized, and canned.
Pulpit & Pen would like assurances from Founders Ministries that they will not cave to such pressure and bullying tactics from the Social Justice Guild and Latte Mafia. People need to know the truth as to where these leaders stand (as though Pulpit & Pen has not been documenting it for years).
If Founders will stand firm in their effort to provide a truthful, accurate, and honest documentary without kneeling to threats by elitist bullies, they will find a helpful and faithful ally in the discernment community.
_____________________________________________________________

SBC and Social Justice: A List of Links To Prove 

the Agenda is Real

SEE: https://pulpitandpen.org/2019/07/26/sbc-and-social-justice-a-list-of-links-to-prove-the-agenda-is-real/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
This post is designed to provide an extensive but not comprehensive list of articles from Pulpit & Pen documenting SBC leaders pushing so-called “Social Justice” upon its membership. It is designed to be simple and straight-forward.  The Problem: Social Justice is a term invented by South American Roman Catholic Priests and the churches affiliated with the World Council of Churches, combining Marxist ideology with Christian theology. It does not simply imply “doing justice.” It is a politically-loaded term with a well-established history and non-conspiratorial and verified founding in deeply unChristian ideas.  The Claim: We assert that Southern Baptists would never have been promoting the type of leftist ideology they are now promoting if it weren’t for a fundamental shift in focus away from the Gospel and toward cultural appeasement. We believe this movement has been lead by SBC entity heads and “influencers” who are enamored with worldliness.
The Solution: The solution is for Southern Baptists to focus on preaching the Gospel, wrapped in a Biblical worldview. Idealogues and the propaganda being pushed by Southern Baptist elites must be rejected by believers in the pew. SBC churches need to leave (or stop cooperating) with the SBC until its leaders come to repentance.
The following links provide the evidence of how far leftward the SBC has gone politically, and how they have fully embraced Social Justice ideas that come from “vain philosophy and empty deceit” that the Apostle Paul warned us about.
Every link goes to a P&P article, and every P&P article contains hyperlinks to original and primary sources that substantiate our claims. Where necessary, screenshots are provided.  Critics might say, “These all go back to Pulpit & Pen. I want a different source.” We cannot emphasize enough to click on the links provided in each article, and they will take you to an outside primary source. All it will take is a few clicks of your mouse. This research is being handed to you on a silver platter. You just need to click.
Titles may be changed for the sake of brevity or clarity.
Also, please keep in mind these links are not comprehensive. There are far, far more in the archives of Pulpit & Pen.
Finally, not all links may be about a Southern Baptist leader. Some may take you to articles about leaders of other organizations, like The Gospel Coalition. Please understand the connection between these organizations. like the mutual boards, contributors, speakers, and writers between TGC and the Southern Baptist Convention’s ERLC. Or, the article might be provided because its content addresses Southern Baptists, even if the title does not.

DOCUMENTING THE SBC PUSH FOR POLITICAL LEFTISM AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

If you have any questions about any individual in particular, please type their name in the search function of P&P. If you would like to help us fight Social Justice, click here.
____________________________________________________________________

PRAGER U VIDEO: WAS JESUS A SOCIALIST?

Dissecting one of the secular Left's favorite arguments.

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/274401/prager-u-video-was-jesus-socialist-prager-universityrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Did Jesus support socialism? Do the teachings of Jesus Christ condemn the accumulation of wealth while pushing for the equal distribution of resources? In the latest video from Prager University, Lawrence Reed, president of the Foundation for Economic Education, explains the misconceptions surrounding one of history’s greatest figures. Check out the short video below:

WATCH HOUSE REPUBLICANS TEAR MUELLER APART AT HEARING~FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL COULDN’T REMEMBER DETAILS, DEFLECTED QUESTIONS, APPEARED LOST

DRUNK OR DRUGGED? OR SENILITY, HEARING LOSS, DEMENTIA, ALZHEIMERS SETTING IN?

White House: It’s clear Mueller was not in charge of investigation

LATEST ARTICLES:

Highlights: Watch House Republicans Tear Mueller Apart At Hearing
WATCH HOUSE REPUBLICANS TEAR MUELLER APART AT HEARING~FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL COULDN’T REMEMBER DETAILS, DEFLECTED QUESTIONS,  APPEARED LOST 
Former FBI Special Counsel Robert Mueller testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday over the findings of his report into so-called “Russian collusion,” and Republicans took him to the woodshed.
Throughout the hearing, Republican members of the committee exposed Mueller’s inconsistencies, including his refusal to investigate the origins of the FBI probe into Trump and Russia, his decision to hire over a dozen Hillary-supporting Democrat investigators, and the double standard he used when indicting certain individuals but ignoring others for lying.
Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) first exposed Mueller’s backward standard of due process, noting that prosecutors don’t “exonerate” subjects of investigations.
Rep. Jim Jordan pointed out that Mueller refused to charge Joseph Mifsud – the individual who sparked the entire FBI probe – for lying to the FBI while indicting others like Gen. Michael Flynn and Michael Cohen for committing the same crime.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Florida) also pointed out Mueller’s double standard of justice.
Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) noted that Mueller did not seek to find out the origins of the Steele Dossier, despite its use in obtaining FISA warrants against Trump associates in 2016.
Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.) highlighted Mueller’s decision to hire all Hillary Clinton-supporting Democrats and zero Republicans onto his investigative team.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) criticized Mueller’s appearance of bias by his hiring anti-Trump lawyers and his handling of lead agent Peter Strzok’s anti-Trump text messages, saying he “perpetuated injustice.”
Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) criticized Mueller’s witch hunt, noting his report tried to paint President Trump as a criminal despite him finding no evidence of collusion with Russia or obstruction of the phony investigation.
Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) tore into Mueller’s findings, calling Volume II of the report “regurgitated press stories” containing nothing the average American couldn’t find in the New York Times or watch on cable news.
Watch Mueller’s full testimony before the House Judiciary Committee below:

DID MUELLER LIE ABOUT WHY HE DIDN’T INDICT TRUMP?

Special counsel caught fibbing, walks back comments

Did Mueller Lie About Why He Didn't Indict Trump?

MUMBLING MUELLER RUINS DEMS’ LAST-DITCH EFFORT TO IMPEACH TRUMP

Highly-anticipated testimony flubbed by former FBI Director

ISIS CHILDREN: “WE WILL CRUSH THE HEADS OF THE APOSTATES. BY THE WILL OF ALLAH, ISLAMIC STATE CALIPHATE REMAINS”

ISIS CHILDREN: “WE WILL CRUSH THE HEADS OF THE APOSTATES. BY THE WILL OF ALLAH, ISLAMIC STATE CALIPHATE REMAINS” 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

This is what Islamic State children are learning. Meanwhile, our children are learning that the U.S. is a racist, colonialist, imperialist extension of white privilege and white supremacy, guilty before the world. What will happen when these two groups meet?

“Refugee children praise ISIS, vow to ‘crush’ apostates, videos from Syrian camps show,” by Hollie McKay, Fox News, July 22, 2019:
In a disturbing new video, children purportedly at the al-Hol refugee camp in Syria are singing in praise of ISIS. The video is being circulated on pro-ISIS Telegram channels, and comes on the heels of two other videos which surfaced last week from al-Hol, featuring a group of black burqa-clad women beside an ISIS flag.
Children born to wives and fighters of the crumpled ISIS caliphate who are now left to fend for themselves in wretched refugee camps throughout Syria are being radicalized at increasingly younger ages, an ominous trend that’s emerged as the newest front in the ongoing battle to stop terror from taking root in new generations.
At the al-Hol camp in Syria’s northeast Rojava region, the problem is on full display.
“We will stand on the heads of the apostates and crush them one by one. By the will of Allah, Islamic State caliphate remains,” five young boys and one little girl chant confidently with fingers waving, an ISIS signature, from inside a tent purportedly at al-Hol.
The disturbing new video, obtained this week by jihadist monitoring service Jihadoscope after being circulated on pro-ISIS Telegram channels, comes on the heels of two other videos which surfaced last week from al-Hol, featuring a group of black burqa-clad women beside an ISIS flag.
“The sun arose on the Islamic State; believers have come from all corners of the world in order to join the glory of jihad. However, the non-believers did not stand down and gathered their forces under the banner of the malicious coalition to kill the Mujahedeen,” the women say, referencing ISIS militants as freedom fighters. “The mujahedeen proved courageous and legendary… We are living in terrible conditions. We see them walking around freely in their (infidel) ways… We are longing to return to the land of (the Caliphate).”
The women also offer a shout-out to their “brothers in the prisons,” insisting they remain both “faithful” and “pure” and are now “more fierce than the lioness when she feels a threat coming.” They also speak to ISIS’ mysterious sought-after leader.
“Our last message is to our dear, our crown, Abu Bakr the Khalifa, we say to you: stay on this righteous path,” they say. “There is no life here with these pigs and apes, and living under their bombs and machine guns… We’d rather die than live among them. And to you enemies of God, do you really think you will get away with what you did in Baghouz? We are like a ticking bomb. You wait and see what will happen to you.”
Most of the wives and children – many of whom are of Syrian and Iraqi origin – arrived at the camp in open-cattle trucks before and after the U.S-backed Syrian Democratic Forces took over the final ISIS stronghold of Baghouz in late March.
“During the height of the ISIS caliphate, there were literally thousands of children being radicalized by ISIS. Dubbed ‘cubs of the caliphate,’ many of these boys and young teen would often appear in segments focusing on training camps where children were readied for combat,” Raphael Gluck, founding partner of Jihadoscope, told Fox News. “And now there is severe infighting in the camp, with a very vocal element loyal to ISIS. The women also made note of the fact that they are raising the ‘cubs,’ the next generation of ISIS fighters.”
Indeed, many of the children in al-Hol are still in the care of their mothers, who also may be radicalized, and there is little in the way of professional help or programs designed to de-radicalize.
“Though relief agencies are trying to get children into educational environments and get them other necessary care, they remain surrounded by ISIS members – both widows and fighters who have embedded themselves among the refugees,” said David Ibsen, Director of the Counter Extremism Project. “They still believe the ideology and are dedicated to promulgating it, which means they are going to do whatever they can to reinforce the ideology in the children.”
According to a May report from the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, approximately 11,000 children at the camp between the ages of 6 and 18 have not been to school at all in the past five years, thus as Ibsen underscored, “these children haven’t known much else other than life under ISIS.”
Steven Stalinsky, executive director of the Middle East Research Institute underscored that continued use of children in ISIS propaganda. Last week, the terrorist outfit released a video titled “Victory is to the Most Pious” featuring armed boys sitting and studying the Quran, and weeks earlier disseminated a poster of a boy in fatigues with the text “London, stay tuned for the invasion of the Caliphate Cubs!”
That same week, boys at the al-Hol camp could be seen in footage raising their own homemade ISIS flag, Stalinsky said….
“ISIS women are sometimes painted as innocent victims, but many of these women played a crucial role in indoctrinating their children through formal education and indoctrination in the home,” observed Thomas McClure, a researcher for the Rojava Information Center. “This indoctrination is ongoing, as ISIS women organize ideological training for their children in tents, out of sight of the camp authorities.”…

OHIO MEDICAL BOARD TO DISCIPLINE MUSLIM DR. LARA KOLLAB WHO TWEETED ABOUT GIVING JEWS THE WRONG MEDICINES

“I’ll purposely give Jews the wrong meds”

  
OHIO MEDICAL BOARD TO DISCIPLINE 
MUSLIM DR. LARA KOLLAB WHO TWEETED ABOUT GIVING JEWS THE WRONG MEDICINES
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Back in January I wrote an article calling for Dr. Lara Kollab’s medical license to be revoked. It’s good that the State Medical Board of Ohio is planning “to impose disciplinary action on her – ranging from limiting her license to permanent suspension as well as the potential for fines.” There should be no question that she should get a permanent suspension, and her medical license revoked. She joked about giving her Jewish patients the wrong medicine. What if she has a patient whose political views she dislikes? Does the Ohio medical board think that she will drop her Islamic Jew-hatred after a temporary suspension?
“Ohio medical board to discipline Dr. Lara Kollab,” by Jane Kaufman, Canadian Jewish News, July 19, 2019 (thanks to the Geller Report):
The State Medical Board of Ohio has issued a citation to Dr. Lara Kollab that it intends to impose disciplinary action on her – ranging from limiting her license to permanent suspension as well as the potential for fines.
Kollab’s anti-Semitic tweets were publicized by Canary Mission, which exposes anti-Semitic posts on social media, resulting in her dismissal from her residency at Cleveland Clinic.
“Although you asserted in your June 2019 deposition that you now feel ashamed of your discriminatory comments, when asked if your tweets reflect good moral character, you admitted that they do not,” Dr. Kim G. Rothermel, secretary of the medical board, wrote in a July 10 letter to Kollab. “Further, for any violations that occurred on or after September 29, 2015, the board may impose a civil penalty in an amount that shall not exceed $20,000.”
Kollab has the right to request a hearing within 30 days of the notice prior to the state medical board’s action.
“We issue a citation which is basically putting one of our licensees or training certificate holders on notice that they are going to face discipline from the medical board,” said Tessie Pollock, director of communication for the State Medical Board of Ohio. “They have a right to a hearing. So they can request a hearing or we can proceed without one. I can check and see if we’ve gotten that request for hearing yet. And then it’ll be a hearing usually between that person, their attorneys, and then our hearing officers will review all the information and then they offer a report and recommendation to the board. … Then they’ll take formal action on that individual.”
As of July 22, Kollab had not requested a hearing, Pollock said. Kollab’s Cleveland lawyer, Ziad Tayeh, said on July 22 he would not discuss her situation.
Kollab admitted at the deposition that she posted two tweets in 2011, five in 2012 and four in 2013 that were anti-Semitic.
This tweet, included in the four-page letter and dating to May 4, 2013, reads, “’Studying for my med micro final, came across this. Clearly I pay attention in class and write useful notes. People who support Israel should have their immune cells killed so they can see how it feels to not be able to defend yourself from foreign invaders.’”
Kollab graduated from John Carroll University in University Heights on May 19, 2013, according to the letter, and she told the state medical board that all of the offensive tweets were written when she was an undergraduate student.
Three of the tweets, Rosenthal, pointed out were posted subsequent to her graduation, including this one, from Sept. 13, 2013, also listed in the letter: “’Norm. Jewish. Constantly remind ppl of the Holocaust, relate those who did 9/11 to Nazis, justify Israel’s bloodlust. Disgusting.’”
Kollab graduated from Touro Osteopathic Medical School in New York City in June 2018, “which you described as ‘a deeply rooted in the Jewish tradition,’” the letter reads. Kollab admitted in her deposition to deleting the anti-Semitic tweets and “acknowledged that if Touro had known of your anti-Semitic tweets they probably would not have admitted you as an osteopathic medical student.”
Oct. 18, 2018, Kollab resigned in lieu of termination from Cleveland Clinic, according to the letter…
______________________________________________________________
SEE OUR PREVIOUS POST:
https://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2019/01/medical-jihad-ohio-hospital
-fires.html 

REP. ILHAN OMAR BERATES MUSLIM QUESTIONER FOR ASKING HER TO CONDEMN FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION

Judicial Watch Files House Ethics Complaint Asking For Investigation Into Rep. Ilhan Omar
REP. ILHAN OMAR BERATES MUSLIM QUESTIONER 
FOR ASKING HER TO CONDEMN 
FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
She decried what she called “assumptions about what our value basis might be because of where we might come from, and who we pray to.”
That’s all very well, and Omar did support a bill in the Minnesota House making female genital mutilation a felony. But in light of that, how hard would it have been for her to say “Certainly I condemn it”? The questioner was not some “Islamophobe,” but the president of a group called Muslims for Progressive Values. The questioner’s point was correct, that FGM is a big problem in the Detroit area, and so to have a Muslim Representative come out strongly against it could well make a difference.
Questions also arise about Omar’s stand on this because she obviously adheres to Sharia, as is evidenced by her hijab, and FGM is mandated in Islamic law: “Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) (by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male, but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the bazr ‘clitoris’ [this is called khufaadh ‘female circumcision’]).” — Umdat al-Salik e4.3, translated by Mark Durie, The Third Choice, p. 64
Why is it obligatory? Because Muhammad is held to have said so: “Abu al- Malih ibn Usama’s father relates that the Prophet said: ‘Circumcision is a law for men and a preservation of honour for women.’” — Ahmad Ibn Hanbal 5:75
“Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah: A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her: ‘Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.’” — Abu Dawud 41:5251
That hadith is classified as weak, but this one is classified as sahih (reliable): “Aishah narrated: ‘When the circumcised meets the circumcised, then indeed Ghusl is required. Myself and Allah’s Messenger did that, so we performed Ghusl.’” — Jami` at-Tirmidhi 108
If Muhammad had the genitals of his favorite wife, Aisha, mutilated, that is a strong endorsement of the practice from the man who is an “excellent example” (Qur’an 33:21) for Muslims.
Why does it matter whether or not FGM is Islamic? Because the practice will never be eradicated if its root causes are not confronted. As long as those Muslims continue to believe that Allah and Muhammad want it done, for some that will override all other considerations.
“Rep. Omar Berates Questioner for Asking Her to Condemn Female Genital Mutilation,” by Patrick Goodenough, CNS News, July 24, 2019:
(CNSNews.com) – Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) became agitated when asked at an event in D.C. this week if she and fellow Muslim congresswoman Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) would condemn female genital mutilation.
She decried what she called “assumptions about what our value basis might be because of where we might come from, and who we pray to.”
Awkwardly, the question came from Ani Zonneveld, president of Muslims for Progressive Values and also a featured speaker on the Muslim Caucus Collective for Equitable Democracy event, where the exchange took place.
Zonneveld drew attention to a Detroit judge’s ruling last November that a 22-year-old federal law making female genital mutilation (FGM) a crime was unconstitutional. As a result, charges against nine people accused of subjecting nine young girls to FGM were dismissed.
“Would you be able to make a statement against FGM because that’s an issue in Detroit,” Zonneveld asked Omar. “And it would be really powerful if the two Muslim congresswomen, yourself and Rashida, would make a statement on this issue.”
Omar described the question as “appalling.”
“Because I always feel like there are bills that we vote on, bills we sponsor, many statements we put out, and then we’re in a panel like this and the question is posed, ‘Could you and Rashida do this?’”
Omar went on to ask whether she needs to “make a schedule” to ensure she makes statements regularly condemning al-Qaeda, condemning FGM, or condemning Hamas.
“It’s a very frustrating question,” she continued. “It comes up – you can look at my record. I voted for bills doing exactly what you’re asking me to do.”
“And so I am, I think, quite disgusted – really to be honest – that as Muslim legislators we are constantly being asked to waste our time speaking to issues that other people are not asked to speak to, because the assumption exists that we somehow support, and are for – right? No, there is an assumption.”
Omar said what she was looking for was that people did not have “assumptions about what our value basis might be because of where we might come from, and who we pray to.”
Omar was born in Somalia, a country that according to the United Nations children’s agency UNICEF has the highest rates of FGM in the world – an estimated 98 percent prevalence.
FGM, which involves the partial or entire removal of the female genitalia, is a practice that experts say predates Islam, but is most prevalent today in Islamic countries.
After Somalia, the next countries identified by UNICEF with high prevalence levels are Guinea (96 percent), Djibouti (93 percent), Egypt (91 percent), Eritrea (89 percent), Mali (89 percent), Sierra Leone (88 percent), and Sudan (88 percent). Except for Eritrea, those are all Muslim-majority countries.
(The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the bloc of Muslim-majority states, has rejected claims of a link between Islam and FGM. During a U.N. Commission on the Status of Women session in 2013, the OIC called FGM a “cultural” practice that is “disguised as part of religious tradition.”)
Voting record
In her remarks on Tuesday, Omar referred to her past votes on measures opposing FGM:
Before she was elected to Congress, Omar was a member of the Minnesota House when in 2017 it considered a bill authored by a Republican, Rep. Mary Franson, seeking to make it a felony for parents to subject their daughters to FGM.
When the state’s House voted on the bill, Omar joined the bipartisan majority in supporting it, and it passed by 124-4 votes.
Prior to the vote, however, Omar suggested that the bill’s proponents may be seeking media attention.
“What I don’t want us to do is to try to create laws because we want to be able to get in the media,” Omar said during committee consideration of the legislation….
_____________________________________________________________

JUDICIAL WATCH FILES HOUSE ETHICS COMPLAINT ASKING FOR INVESTIGATION INTO REP. ILHAN OMAR

Watchdog asks for probe into congresswoman’s potentially criminal wrongdoing

BY ADAN SALAZAR
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Watchdog group Judicial Watch has filed a complaint asking the Office of Congressional Ethics to probe “potentially criminal” allegations concerning Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).
In a press release Tuesday, Judicial Watch announced they’d hand delivered the complaint to House Congressional Ethics Chairman David Skaggs, highlighting “serious allegations of wrongdoing by Rep. Omar,” according to Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
“The evidence is overwhelming Rep. Omar may have violated the law and House rules,” Fitton said in a statement. “The House of Representatives must urgently investigate and resolve the serious allegations of wrongdoing by Rep. Omar. We encourage Americans to share their views on Rep. Omar’s apparent misconduct with their congressmen.”
Judicial Watch’s complaint asks the committee to investigate evidence Omar may have committed various state and federal crimes including: “perjury, immigration fraud, marriage fraud, state and federal tax fraud, and federal student loan fraud.”
The complaint quotes journalist David Steinberg describing Omar’s situation as “perhaps the most extensive spree of illegal misconduct committed by a House member in American history.”
The federal complaint comes as Rep. Omar and three other freshmen House Democrats have become the new faces of the progressive left, pushing open borders, Marxist ideology and the overthrow of America.
Meanwhile, a White House petition calling for Congress to open an immediate investigation into Omar’s background has generated over 12 thousand signatures.
Read Judicial Watch’s entire complaint below:
Ethics Complaint Against Rep. Ilhan Omar Concerning Possible Violations of Federal and State Law
Dear Chairman Skaggs,
Judicial Watch is a non-profit, non-partisan educational foundation, promoting transparency, accountability and integrity in government and fidelity to the rule of law. We regularly monitor congressional ethics issues as part of our anti-corruption mission.
This letter serves as an official complaint with the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE).
Substantial, compelling and, to date, unrefuted evidence has been uncovered that Rep. Ilhan Omar may have committed the following crimes in violation of both federal law and Minnesota state law: perjury, immigration fraud, marriage fraud, state and federal tax fraud, and federal student loan fraud.
Such violations would also breach the Code of Ethics for Government Service, to which all federal officeholders are subject, “Any person in Government service should uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.”) Rep. Omar actions in this suspected immigration fraud, marriage fraud, perjurious statements on her Minnesota divorce filings, and falsifications on her tax returns, merit your immediate investigation.
In the words of investigative reporter David Steinberg: “The facts describe perhaps the most extensive spree of illegal misconduct committed by a House member in American history.”
The evidence developed against Rep. Omar was the result of a three-year-long investigation in both the United States and the United Kingdom by Mr. Steinberg and his investigative reporter colleagues Preya Samsundar and Scott Johnson. It is supported by information gathered from public records, social media postings, genealogy databases, computer forensic analysis, unaltered digital photographs, discussions between the investigative reporters and the subjects of the investigation themselves, and information supplied by confidential sources within the Somali-American community.
Documented-based reporting by Steinberg, et al. has developed the following information: Rep. Ilhan Abdullahi Omar, a citizen of the United States, married her biological brother, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, a citizen of the United Kingdom, in 2009, presumably as part of an immigration fraud scheme. The couple legally divorced in 2017. In the course of that divorce, Ms. Omar submitted an “Application for an Order for Service by Alternate Means” to the State of Minnesota on August 2, 2017 and claimed, among other things, that she had had no contact with Ahmed Nur Said Elmi after June 2011. She also claimed that she did not know where to find him. The evidence developed by Mr. Steinberg and his colleagues demonstrates with a high degree of certainty that Ms. Omar not only had contact with Mr. Elmi, but actually met up with him in London in 2015, which is supported by photographic evidence. Ms. Omar signed the “Application for an Order for Service by Alternate Means” under penalty of perjury. The very document that Ilham Omar signed on August 2, 2017 bears the following notation directly above her signature: “I declare under penalty of perjury that everything I have stated in this document is true and correct. Minn. Stat. § 358.116.”
Of particular importance are archived photographs taken during a widely reported trip by Ilhan Omar to London in 2015, posted to her own Instagram account under her nickname “hameey”, in which she poses with her husband/presumed brother, Ahmed Elmi. These photographs from 2015 are documentary evidence that in fact she met up with Mr. Elmi after June 2011 and before the date she signed the divorce document in August 2017, thereby calling into question the veracity of her claim that she had not seen Mr. Elmi since June 2011.
Rep. Omar’s potential crimes far exceed perjurious statements made in a Minnesota court filing.
Rep. Omar’s conduct may include immigration fraud. It appears that Rep. Omar married her brother in order to assist his emigration to the United States from the United Kingdom. The same immigration fraud scheme may have aided Mr. Elmi in obtaining federally-backed student loans for his attendance at North Dakota State University. Mr. Elmi and Rep. Omar simultaneously attended North Dakota State University and may have derived illicit benefits predicated on the immigration fraud scheme.
The State of Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board has already determined that Rep. Omar violated state campaign finance laws for improper use of campaign funds. She was forced to reimburse her campaign thousands of dollars. More significantly, the Board discovered that the federal tax returns submitted by Rep. Omar for 2014 and 2015 were filed as “joint” tax returns with a man who was not her husband, named Ahmed Hirsi, while she was actually married to Ahmed Elmi.
Under federal law, specifically, 26 U.S. Code & 7206.1, “Any person who willfully makes and subscribes any return, statement, or other document, which contains or is verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury, and which he does not believe to be true and correct as to every material matter … shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.”
Rep. Omar’s federal tax returns must be examined to determine whether any additional falsifications were made.
Mr. Steinberg, et al. have engaged in meticulous research and reporting over a period of years. They have demonstrated with a high degree of probability that Rep. Ilhan Omar has violated House Ethics Rules, federal and state laws.
We call upon the Office of Congressional Ethics to launch an investigation into Rep. Omar’s conduct immediately.
Sincerely,
Tom Fitton, President, Judicial Watch
_______________________________________________________

Ilhan Omar Says Americans Should Fear 'White Men'!!!

DR. STEVE TURLEY REPORTS
Ilhan Omar answers question on “jihadist terrorism” 
by saying Americans should be 
“more fearful of white men”
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/07/ilhan-omar-answers-question-
on-jihadist-terrorism-by-saying-americans-should-be-more-fearful-of-white-men;
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
It has become commonplace for Leftists to assert that “white nationalists” are a greater threat to Americans than Islamic jihadis. This is a myth that originated back in June 2015, the New America Foundation published a study that garnered enthusiastic international publicity, as it purported to demonstrate this idea that “right-wing extremists” and “white supremacists” were a larger threat to the U.S. than Islamic jihadis. The mainstream media was thrilled. Mediaite crowed: “White Americans Are Biggest Terror Threat in U.S.” The New York Times exulted: “Homegrown Extremists Tied to Deadlier Toll Than Jihadists in U.S. Since 9/11.” The Huffington Post cheered: “White Supremacists More Dangerous To America Than Foreign Terrorists, Study Says.” NPR rejoiced: “Right-Wing Extremists More Dangerous Than Islamic Terrorists In U.S.” TruthDig was thrilled: “White Right-Wing Terrorists Are Biggest Threat to Americans, Study Finds.” And on and on.
The media delight stemmed from the fact that the study confirmed its biases and relentless endeavor to downplay and deny the jihad threat. Thus the New York Times and NPR and the rest were not in the least interested in the fact that the New America Foundation study was obviously skewed, as it was based on the number of those killed by jihadis and by right-wing extremists since September 12, 2001, leaving  out 9/11. The study also ignored the many, many foiled jihad plots, and the fact that jihadis are part of an international movement that has killed many thousands of people, while right-wingers and white supremacists are not. It stated that right-wing extremists had killed 48 people from September 12, 2001 to June 2015, while Islamic jihadists had killed only 26 people in the U.S. in that span. If 9/11 had been added, the tally would have been 3,032 killed by Islamic jihadists and 48 by purported right-wing extremists.
But all right, let’s play by the New America Foundation’s rules. Counting the Orlando jihad massacre, which took place after the study was published, but leaving out 9/11 as the NAF study did, the death toll stood at 76 killed by Islamic jihadis, and 48 by purported right-wing extremists (I repeat “purported” because to get to its count of 48, the NAF counted as “right-wing” attacks killings that were perpetrated by people who were obviously deranged psychopaths devoid of any ideology).
Nonetheless, this false claim has become common currency, such that even the likes of Ilhan Omar now repeat it.
“In resurfaced interview, Ilhan Omar answers question on ‘jihadist terrorism’ by saying Americans should be ‘more fearful of white men,'” by Nick Givas, Fox News, July 24, 2019:
In a resurfaced interview from 2018, anti-Trump Democrat Ilhan Omar responded to a question about the “quote-unquote legitimate fears” some people have of “jihadist terrorism,” by saying Americans should be “more fearful of white men.”
In the interview, Al Jazeera host Medhi Hasan said some Americans feel justified in fearing Islam, not out of hate but for their own safety, before listing a number of radical Islamic terror attacks. Omar dismissed this suggestion immediately and laid the blame on white males instead, calling for the profiling and monitoring of caucasian men.
“I would say our country should be more fearful of white men across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country,” she replied.
“And so if fear was the driving force of policies to keep America safe — Americans safe inside of this country — we should be profiling, monitoring, and creating policies to fight the radicalization of white men.”..
________________________________________________________________ 
THE SQUAD AND DONALD TRUMP'S RESPONSE
SEE ALSO: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/07/ilhan-omar-we-must-make-sure-that- we-as-muslims-are-not-collectively-blamed-for-the-actions-of-terrorists 

GOOGLE ENGINEER WHISTLEBLOWER TELLS PROJECT VERITAS: TECH ‘DANGEROUS,’ ‘TAKING SIDES’

Google Engineer Whistleblower Tells Project Veritas: Tech 'Dangerous,' 'Taking Sides'

GOOGLE ENGINEER WHISTLEBLOWER TELLS PROJECT VERITAS: TECH ‘DANGEROUS,’ ‘TAKING SIDES’

‘I really don’t buy the idea that big tech is politically neutral,’ he says

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Senior Google engineer Greg Coppola has revealed to Project Veritas the political bias within Google’s culture, warning that it has compromised the integrity of its products and search engine.
“I’ve been coding since I was ten [years old.] I have a PhD, I have five years’ experience at Google and I just know how algorithms are. They don’t write themselves. We write them to do what we want them to do,” Coppola said.
“I think for a while we had tech that was politically neutral. Now we have tech that really, first of all is taking sides in a political contest, which I think, you know, anytime you have big corporate power merging with political parties can be dangerous. And I think more generally we have to just decide now that we kind of are seeing tech use its power to manipulate people. It’s a time to decide, you know, do we run the technology, does the technology run us?”
Coppola went on to say that Google started going political during the rise of Donald Trump in the 2016 election cycle.
“I started in 2014. 2014 was an amazing time to be at Google. We didn’t talk about politics. No one talked about politics. You know, it was just a chance to work with the best computer scientists in the world, the best facilities, the best computers and free food. I think as the election started to ramp up, the angle that the Democrats and the media took was that anyone who liked Donald Trump was a racist…And that got picked up everywhere. I mean, every tech company, everybody in New York, everybody in the field of computer science basically believed that. A small number of people do work on making sure that certain new sites are promoted. And in fact, I think it would only take a couple out of an organization of 100,000, you know, to make sure that the product is a certain way…”
Watch the entire interview and share this link with everybody you know to expose Google’s political bias to prevent them from stealing the 2020 election.
Dr. Robert Epstein, a Democrat supporter, testified before the senate to Google and other tech companies ability to manipulate the voting public.

EX FBI AGENT JOHN GUANDOLO: FEAR OF CONFLICT EQUALS DEFEAT

EX FBI AGENT JOHN GUANDOLO: 
FEAR OF CONFLICT EQUALS DEFEAT 
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research 
purposes from Jihad Watch:

In this new John Guandolo Moment, John affirms: Fear of Conflict Equals Defeat, explaining how you can’t win a war if you surrender.

Don’t miss it!
Please donate through our new Unified-4-People Campaign or via our Pay Pal account.
Subscribe to the Glazov Gang‘s YouTube Channel and follow us on Twitter: @JamieGlazov.