CONGOLESE “MIGRANTS” ENTER U.S. AS CONGO EBOLA OUTBREAK DECLARED “EMERGENCY”

CONGOLESE “MIGRANTS” ENTER U.S. 
AS CONGO EBOLA OUTBREAK DECLARED “EMERGENCY” 
BY R. CORT KIRKWOOD
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The World Health Organization has declaredthe Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo an international health emergency.
The outbreak, which might have deadly consequences at the southwest border of the United States, has killed more than 2,500 people.
Hundreds of African migrants, some of them from the Congo, are crossing the border with Mexico. Any with Ebola might infect not only the illegal aliens tramping up from the Northern Triangle, but also the border agents and anyone else who must deal with them.
More than 30,000 Africans were headed for the border, The New American reported in early July, citing a report from the Center for Immigration Studies.
How many, if any, have the death-dealing virus is unknown, as is the number with Ebola who have crossed. We do know this: Ebola kills and kills fast.
WHO Report The declaration from WHO’s Emergency Committee for Ebola Virus Disease published yesterday.
“There are increased numbers of cases in Butembo and Mabalako; the epicentre has moved from Mabalako to Beni; and there is one imported case in Goma,” the committee reported.
Those cities are in the eastern part of the country, near Rwanda and Uganda.
The committee’s report describes the conditions that help spread the grim contagion, which sound similar to those in the detention facilities where federal immigration officials are housing the Africans and Central Americans.
“Factors affecting the outbreak include population movement in highly densely populated areas; weak infection and prevention control practices in many health facilities,” the committee reported.
Beni remains the epicentre of the outbreak, with 46% of the cases over the last 3 weeks. Mangina has 18% of the cases, and one new case in Goma came from Beni, with diagnosis confirmed within one hour of the patient’s arrival at a health facility. The patient, who was not known to be a contact, traveled to Goma with several other people in a bus. When the vehicle broke down, he went to a health facility via motorbike. He was transferred to an Ebola Treatment Centre, but later died. Response to the case in Goma took place within 72 hours. Contact tracing was performed, with 75 contacts vaccinated, as well as co-travellers, and family members are being monitored. Surveillance is being reinforced and readiness strengthened. 15,000 people cross the border from Goma to Rwanda every day, as Goma is an important centre of economic activities with Rwanda. Closing this border would strongly affect the population of Goma and have adverse implications for the response. There is a continuing need for increased awareness among the population on the outbreak situation and stronger engagement on health-seeking behaviours.
The committee reported that Ebola is infecting 80 people a week, and “the recent travel to and from Uganda of a local trader who later died of Ebola demonstrates that the risk remains high for bordering countries.”
In other words, border agents and other illegal aliens at the border are at risk of the deadly infection. State and federal health and immigration officials, along with local health, hospital, welfare, and public school authorities should consider themselves warned. Nosocomial transmission, or that occurring in a hospital, is a concern, the committee reported.
As of Tuesday, the committee confirmed 2,512 cases, including 136 health workers, 40 of whom died. The web page that tracks the outbreak put the figure at 2,522 cases, with 1698 deaths.
So more than 67 percent of those who have contracted the virus in the latest outbreak are dead.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, the seven-variety virus, which spreads in bodily fluids, causes a hemorrhagic fever that is often if not mostly fatal. The symptoms include fever, fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea, weakness, muscle pain, severe headache, stomach pain, and hemorrhaging.
Diseased Africans Headed to Your Town? As CIS explained in a startling report published July 1, 35,000 African “migrants” are traveling north through Panama and Central America. They hope, like the impoverished Central American “migrants” from the Northern Triangle, to cross the border, claim “asylum,” then stay in the United States.
The group includes Congolese, Ghanaians, and Cameroonians who might well carry the deadly virus. Like the Central American illegals, they know the radical leftists are stopping the president from closing the borders, and as well, the very long time required to assess an asylum claim.
The Africans also know what lies they must tell to make their asylum claims sound credible.

REP. OCASIO CORTEZ SUED BY FORMER N.Y. ASSEMBLYMAN

REP. OCASIO CORTEZ SUED BY FORMER 
N.Y. ASSEMBLYMAN
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals upholds the ruling that President Trump cannot block people from his Twitter account, and now Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is getting sued for doing the same thing. One America’s Ryan Girdusky sat down with former New York Assemblyman Dov Hikind and has the story.

REPUBLICAN REP. GAETZ SAYS FEDS DECLINED TO PURSUE DEATH THREAT AGAINST HIM & FAMILY

U.S. Attorney David Anderson
ABOVE: DAVID L. ANDERSON, U.S. ATTORNEY 
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SEE: https://www.law.com/therecorder/2018/08/16/trump-picks-sidley-partner-david-anderson-for-san-francisco-us-attorney-spot/?slreturn=20190618130338
REPUBLICAN REP. GAETZ SAYS FEDS DECLINED TO PURSUE DEATH THREAT AGAINST HIM & FAMILY
 Suggests he may have been blackballed over criticism of Russia witch hunt
BY DAN LYMAN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) says a federal prosecutor may have declined to investigate a brazen death threat against him in retaliation for his criticism of the Russia witch hunt.
In a profanity-laced voicemail left for Gaetz, a male voice threatens to ‘blow his head off,’ but despite the identity of the caller being determined by the FBI, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California deemed the issue a “non-threat” and opted not to pursue an investigation, according to Gaetz.
“Gaetz, you pathetic piece of s**t,” the caller can be heard saying. “Do you know that I could blow your f**king head clean off your shoulders from over a mile away? Watch your back, bitch. You pathetic little piece of s**t. You got your head so far up Trump’s ass, I could still take it off your shoulders. F**k you Gaetz. I’m coming after you, bitch.”
A staunch Trump ally, Gaetz has been highly critical the Mueller probe and corruption at federal law enforcement agencies.
“I received word late last week that the U.S. Attorney’s office where this individual lived had reviewed the information and had deemed these messages — and I’m quoting here: ‘a non-threat,’” Gaetz said during an interview with Tucker Carlson.
“I just wonder, is it the fact that I’ve been a critic of some of the senior officials at the FBI that maybe leads to different treatment for the people who threaten me, as opposed to the people who actually get arrested who have threatened Eric Swalwell, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib? Those people actually get arrested, whereas when people threaten conservatives — I hope there’s not a double standard.”
Gaetz says he has received a slew of similar threats, with some even targeting his family.
“Look, it’s been a crazy few weeks for me,” he said. “I mean, just a few weeks ago I had a member of Antifa — a stated member of Antifa — assault me at a town hall meeting and get arrested.”

GEORGIA MOSQUES TEACHING JIHAD, IMAM SAYS “THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANOTHER 9/11 IN AMERICA BECAUSE ISLAM IS WINNING”



GEORGIA MOSQUES TEACHING JIHAD, IMAM SAYS “THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANOTHER 9/11 IN AMERICA BECAUSE ISLAM IS WINNING” 
BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

It is no secret that Saudi Arabia has been funding the spread of Wahhabi ideology in mosques throughout the West. Just under four decades ago, “there were only a 150 or so [mosques] in America. Now there are approximately 3000.” Behind the walls of these mosques, jihad is being taught, as well as Islamic supremacism, and hatred and violence against Christians and Jews. Several studies have shown that such preaching is not an exception; at least 80% of mosques across the U.S. are spreading jihadist ideology.

Last July, Jihad Watch reported that the Turkish government was also using a network of US mosques and Islamic centers to spread “Islamist-nationalistic fervor.”
The New York Post has also reported about Islamic supremacist imams spreading their anti-Semitism from mosques in the US with impunity. This includes threatening the lives of Jews and inciting violence against them.
This alarming news should be enough to institute a government policy of mosque surveillance. Instead, a range of Islamic lobbies, most notably, Hamas-linked CAIR, push the “Islamophobia” subterfuge that stymies effective counter-jihad efforts. So independent investigations and studies continue to be the sole source of research on what is taught in mosques.
One such study is featured in a report which includes the sworn affidavit of a retired U.S. federal agent, counter-terrorism expert and Arabic linguist, Dave Gaubatz, author of the book Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld that’s Conspiring to Islamize America.
Gaubatz wrote this report for The United West after he embarked on a research project between June 26-30 to investigate what was happening inside the Islamic Center of Savannah, Georgia; the Statesboro Georgia Mosque, and Masjid-Jihad, Savannah, Georgia. Gaubatz is no novice at mosque investigations. He “has gone into 300+ mosques across America and over 150 internationally.” His most recent findings can be found in his July 8 sworn affidavit HERE, with special thanks to Mary Wierbicki, Social Media Director with The United West and Co-Founder of Sharia Crime Stoppers, who brought this affidavit to the attention of Jihad Watch.
“Georgia: Exposing The Ugly Truth Happening Inside Mosques,” by Mary Wierbicki, The United West, July 11, 2019:
Sun Tzu states, “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
Taking Sun Tzu’s words to heart, a research project was launched to learn what was happening in my community. A good friend, Dave Gaubatz, who has gone into 300+ mosques across America and over 150 internationally came into town to investigate and report on what he observed from within a couple mosques in the area. His research is very detailed, with a defined pattern of analysis as shown in the report below.
Dave is a great American, standing up for God, Country, and the U.S. Constitution, against an evil ideology, all encompassing system called Islamic Sharia!
What he found was not surprising, but it was hoped it wasn’t as bad as his report shows.  Please read and share this report across your community and send Dave a request to investigate your mosque by emailing him here:  davegaubatz@gmail.com [NOTE: The report below was notarized for legal validation and sworn by Dave Gaubatz for accuracy in reporting]
Report is shown below & in PDF form here:
To learn more, Dave was a guest on Sharia Crime Stoppers, Enemies Within the Community webinar and shared much of what he learned from this investigation and discussed many of his experiences in other mosques across America. The webinar included myself, Dick Manasseri, and David Bores, all Co-Founders of Sharia Crime Stoppers. David Bores is a retired Police Chief and retired Lt. Col in the Army who now trains Law Enforcement across the southeast on the threats of Sharia.
You can find the recorded webinar on the Sharia Crime Stoppers page and here.
Sworn Affidavit
Dave Gaubatz, USAF (retired), U.S. Federal Agent (retired),and American Patriot  (active)
8 July 2019
NOTE:  When I conduct counter-terrorism research in America it is my objective to expose Islam when Islam requires exposing, which is 24/7.  Anything I do or any materials I uncover are for public release.  It is my policy to provide the public my raw intelligence first before providing to all others.  Only the American public can protect America.  It is the responsibility of the public to insure politicians and our senior law enforcement do the job which they have sworn an oath to do, which is protect America and most importantly protect our children.  The public must also demand our media report the news based on facts and evidence and not their personal political agendas as is now the case by far in America.
Note:  The following 20 points are for credibility purposes to validate the counter-terrorism research I conducted in the Statesboro and Savannah Georgia region during the period 26 – 30 June 2019……………
ISLAMIC TERROR ALPHABET CRITERIA (ITAC)
(copyright 2019 by Dave Gaubatz) Dave Gaubatz encourages all to use the ITAC system as a tool and to share with others, but be professional and give credit to Dave Gaubatz for the development of this counter-terrorism tool.
Islamic Center of Savannah, Georgia
A:  Mosque location (neighborhood, strip mall, typical identifiable mosque structure, or Islamic Center) Keep in mind a mosque is defined as a place for Muslims to gather for prayer and strategic planning.  The place can be in the basement of a house, a garage, a room in a university, a small building structure or a mega structure) The IC of Savannah is an Islamic Center which is typical for a Sunni mosque.  The term Islamic Center is not typical for identifying Shia mosques.  They do not use this term.
B:  Number of members:  350 plus
C:  Sunni/Shia/Sufi:   This is a Sunni Wahhabi/Salafist mosque that primarily use the Hanbali Islamic school of thought.  There are four Sunni schools of thought. 1.  Hanafi 2. Maliki 3. Shafi’I 4. Hanbali.   Most counter-terrorism professionals agree the Hanbali school of thought is the most dangerous.  ISIS, Al Qaeda and other Sunni terrorist organizations follow the Hanbali school of thought.
D:  Material in mosque (such as Fiqh Us Sunnah, Riyadh Ul Salheen, Sahih Muslim, Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Sahih Bukkari, Reliance of the Traveler, Maududi or Qutb material, etc…)  Fiqh US Sunnah, Riyadh Ul Salheen, Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukkari were located in the prayer room available to all worshippers.  These manuals describe in detail for Muslims to carry out physical (fighting) Jihad,  Child marriages (authorized), Slavery (authorized),  the beating of women (authorized),  killing of non-Muslims and even Muslims  who are not Sharia compliant, informing Muslims to never take as friends Christians and Jews, killing of Apostates  of Islam (authorized  anywhere in the world), and  the describing the objective of Islam which is to establish an Islamic Ummah (nation)  worldwide and under Sharia law.  The objective can and must be established by warfare as needed.  Many other violent topics are discussed in the manuals.  Much of the material in the mosques is in Arabic.   For those Muslims who do not read Arabic they are encouraged to go online and read the materials in English which are readily available.
E:  Conversations with worshippers: Dave Gaubatz spoke with Islamic leaders and worshippers. Sunni/Salafist is the predominant ideology of this mosque that the Imam tries to instill. Copies of the Quran and two Islamic books were provided to Dave Gaubatz.  Halaco Market in Fairfax, VA, was mentioned as a source for Sunni /Salafist/Wahhabi material.  I have personally visited this Islamic market/bookstore on at least 25 occasions.   Very violent and dangerous materials are at this business.
F:  Sharia decorum in mosques (example: prayer rug/carpet) No Black Flag of jihad was observed.  The prayer rug did have the required lines on the rug for the ‘forming of the lines’.  The Wudu (cleansing of the body) was in the mosque.  The women were in a separate side away from the men.   There was a throne type seat in the front area of the prayer room.
G:  Any affiliation with CAIR, IIIT, MSA, ISNA, etc.  Brochures from IIIT and CAIR were observed.  CAIR does have an affiliation with this mosque.
H:  Sharia compliance of Islamic leaders:   The Imam and Islamic leaders Dave G. observed were Sharia compliant.
I:  How are women/children treated:  The women are not allowed contact with the men.  They are completely isolated from the men.  Children were observed in the men’s and women’s side of the prayer room.
J:  Mosque etiquette (forming of line during prayer, selling of material in mosque, etc..). The Imam paid close attention to the forming of the line before the prayer.  It is against Sharia law to openly sell materials in a mosque prayer room.  No sales were observed.
K:  Imam lecture (mention of Sharia, Jihad Qital, Punishment in the grave, Fiqh, etc…)  Sharia compliance was mentioned throughout the lecture.  Punishment in the Grave was also mentioned several times.
L:  Invited guests (out of town Islamic leaders, CAIR, etc.)  There was an Islamic leader from Chicago who was invited by the Imam to speak.  He was raising money for an Islamic school based in Chicago to prepare students to be Islamic scholars in America.  He stated thus far the program has graduated 50 students.  The program is for a period of 6 years.
M:  Sharia compliance of non-Islamic leaders:  Many of the worshippers were not Sharia compliant in their dress, but were complaint enough to be in the mosque.  20 plus men were 100% compliant and these are the ones likely to be involved in future violence toward innocent people and/or involved in acts of terrorism against our country.
N:  Business cards shared (internet sites, businesses, emails, etc…)  Business   cards were provided to Dave Gaubatz.  These can be used for future coordination/operations if deemed feasible.
O:  Confirmed Islamic terrorists have/had not visited mosque:  No known terrorist information has been made public pertaining to any visiting the Savannah mosque, but Muslims travelling from one mosque to another is quite common.
P:  Active duty military at mosque:  One U.S. marine and One U.S. Army member attended the mosque (males).
Q:  U.S. Govt. Civilians and/or politicians at mosque:  U.S. government stickers (passes) were observed on a few vehicles in the mosque parking lot.
R:  Local, State, Federal Law Enforcement presence:  Local city police officer conducting security.
S:  Is local govt. liberal or conservative:  Savannah govt. is predominately liberal
T:  Are U.S. military bases within 50 miles:  there are U.S. military installations within 50 miles of the mosque.
U:  Are Islamic businesses within 15 miles:   Yes, an Islamic market                and various small businesses (some medical)
V:  Is state liberal or conservative:  Georgia is a conservative state, but liberalism is increasing especially in the larger cities.
W:  Local media liberal or conservative:  Media in local area is considered liberal.
X:  Interfaith programs:  There is public information the mosque leadership are involved in interfaith activity with Christian and Jewish people/leaders.
Y:  How does mosque compare to mosques in U.S. with confirmed terrorist ties such as Dar Al Hijra mosque in Fairfax, VA):  Dave Gaubatz and his team of CT researchers have spent in excess of two weeks at Dar Al Hijra mosque in Virginia.  911 terrorists had visited the mosque.  The IC of Savannah is on the same scale as Dar Al Hijrah.  This would be a mosque that Islamic terrorists and their supporters who are travelling would feel comfortable attending.  They would be welcome at this mosque.  The Imam is Pakistani and is working to insure all aspects of Sharia are observed.
Z:  GUT feeling of qualified researcher (Very Important) This area is rated very high.  An explanation and analogy is required.   Every human and animal have internal systems fight or flight sensors that alert them to potential dangers.  This is how we survive.  Over years and years of life experiences our minds are able to fine tune this protective system.  Police officers use this safety mechanism each and every day to evaluate hundreds of potential danger signals in order to know how to respond in order to save their lives and the lives of innocent people.  In a shoot or don’t shoot situation officers sometimes have a few seconds or less to evaluate situations to best respond.  This is when their life experiences kick in and numerous things race through their mind when they are deciding to shoot (kill) or not shoot (not kill).
When evaluating the potential danger of an Islamic mosque Dave Gaubatz does the same thing as one of the 26 indicators to determine danger.  He bases over 35 years of travelling and working in Islamic based countries, visiting hundreds upon hundreds of mosques, interacting with good and bad people of the Islamic ideology, interviewing dozens of confirmed Muslim terrorists, their supporters, and reviewing thousands upon thousands of pages of their books and manuals, and in operating in dangers gang infested areas within America and in combat zones in Iraq.  Based on these experiences within a matter of minutes or less he is able to kick in his survival skills upon entering a mosque. His experiences have led him to accurately analyze and reason that all mosques are homes to potential danger, but at varying degrees.  When he worked gangs and narcotics in numerous major American cities there was little doubt a gang infested neighborhood posed likely dangers, again there were various levels of dangers based on other aspects of his experiences.  The same is true using the ITAC system.  A GUT feeling combined with 25 other important factors triggers an evaluation for danger.
Evaluation Rating: Dangerous, Very Dangerous, or Extremely Dangerous
Final Evaluation of Statesboro, Georgia Mosque:  Dangerous, but final evaluation pending.
Final Evaluation of Masjid Jihad, Savannah, Georgia:  Dangerous, but final evaluation pending
Final Evaluation of the Islamic Center of Savannah, Georgia: Extremely Dangerous (on a scale of 1-10 this mosque would be rated 9)
  1. Imam is Pakistani
  2. Sunni with a strong form of Salafist/Wahhabi influence
Analysis:  It is the determination of Dave Gaubatz that the IC of Savannah is the home for Islamic terrorists and their supporters and is used as a training base and regional HQ for developing the strategy for meeting the well-established and very open goal of forming an Islamic caliphate in America (and world) and under strict Sharia law.  The Islamic leaders will use two forms of Jihad defined as the ‘pen and tongue’ before they will use the violent form of the ‘sword’.  The pen form of Jihad are the writings of Muslims to alter non-Muslims into accepting and believing Islam is a religion, is peaceful, and is the solution to all of the worlds problems.  This form of Jihad also includes the use of the media.  The tongue form of Jihad is of course verbal communication through Interfaith programs, open mosques for non-Muslims, and most dangerously the infiltration of the Islamic ideology into our public schools to brainwash American children into accepting Islam as the answer to all personal and worldly problems.  It is the belief of Islamic scholars that American children are the future of America and the majority of their Dawa (education and spread of Islam) is directed toward them.  Islamic terrorist groups have literature sent to American schools and libraries which are very colorful to influence their young minds.
The last form of Jihad is the use of the sword which is Jihad Qital (physical).  Islamic leaders have informed Dave Gaubatz during his various undercover operations that right now in America they (Islam and its leaders) are winning and their strategy of an Islamic caliphate in America is on pace to succeed with limited violence.
One Imam informed Gaubatz, “there has not been another 911 such attack in America because Islam is winning and at this point another large scale attack would set their movement back 25 years.  When a large scale attack is required to further subdue Americans it will then be carried out.  The plans are already in place.  The Islamic leaders know there will be small scale terrorist attacks such as with Fort Hood, Texas, the Boston Bombings and others that will put fear into the hearts of the American people and its government. Islamic leaders realize the liberal leaders and politicians will label these attacks as ‘Lone Wolf” attacks and disassociate them from mainstream Islam”.
It is important for readers to understand that there is no such thing as a ‘Lone Wolf’ terrorist attack.  Muslim terrorists who conduct small scale attacks are doing so in the name of Islam, Allah, and to please their Prophet Mohammed.  The attacks are carried out because their Islamic training has taught them the sure way to reach Allah and Paradise is to fight for the goal of an Islamic caliphate. Jihad Qital is one such way to achieve this goal.
RECOMMENDATION:  Provide this report to the public in a mass distribution campaign.  Then and only then will America’s senior law enforcement and politicians do the job they have sworn an oath to do (protect America and our children). Do not be fearful of personal attacks or frivolous lawsuits or the name calling (Islamaphobe, haters, racists) that will without a doubt come about.  The protection of America, our Constitution and our children should and must be the ultimate goal of all Americans.
“Our American military and law enforcement officers have died by the thousands to protect our Country, Constitution, and Children (3 C’s).   They do not run from the enemy and American citizens must never run from the enemy, especially inside our great country.  To do so will result in an automatic defeat”.  Dave Gaubatz

S-400 RUSSIAN MISSILE SYSTEM DELIVERED TO TURKEY AGAINST U.S. WARNING; SANCTIONS MAY FOLLOW

S-400 RUSSIAN MISSILE SYSTEM DELIVERED TO TURKEY AGAINST U.S. WARNING; SANCTIONS MAY FOLLOW 
BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Tensions are rising between Turkey and the U.S. Last year Donald Trump acknowledged that “our relations with Turkey are not good at this time!”, stemming from “ disagreements over defense policy and the detention of American pastor Andrew Brunson,” who has now been freed, although that did not improve relations. Now, in complete disregard of American warnings, nine Russian planes “carrying components” of the Russian designed S-400 air-defense missile-defense system completed their first delivery to Turkey on Monday. Final delivery is scheduled for Spring 2020.
The S-400 “shoot down aircraft, cruise and ballistic missiles including medium-range missiles, it can also target ground systems,” and its “surface-to-air missiles can strike targets at altitudes of 10,000-27,000 m. and ballistic threats at altitudes of 2,000-25,000 m.”
The US has warned Turkey to pull back from the deal, “warning that it could face economic sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act and be removed from the F-35 project. A full partner in the F-35 program, Turkey has ordered 30 of the stealth fighter jets and sent pilots to the United States to train on the aircraft.”
Turkey should have long been expelled from NATO.  Its President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is aggressive and hostile to the West; his goal is a revived Ottoman Empire, making Turkey more of a threat to the NATO alliance than ally. Then there are Turkey’s increasingly warm relations with Russia, Iran and Qatar.
The latest 2.5-billion-dollar deal with Russia to purchase the S-400 systems will likely have “major ramifications” for the U.S.-Turkish relationship. A former Pentagon official, Michael Rubin, has warned that America should “no longer view Turkey as an ally,” but as a “liability.”
Turkey is an opponent of democracy, made obvious by its record. A few points:
  • Over the past couple of years, Turkey has experienced a rapid re-Islamization and the destruction of secularism.
  • In a breach of U.S. sovereignty, a spokesman for Erdogan announced that Turkish intel will continue “operations” against foes inside the US, with a focus on Fethullah Gulen.
  • Turkish imams have been acting as intel agents and violating sovereignty of Germany.
  • Turkey has a complicated relationship with the Islamic State, even aiding it actively.
  • Turkey pushes the Islamophobia subterfuge.
  • Erdogan declared that there would be a clash between the cross and the crescent over burqa bans in the EU.
  • A Turkish “human rights” committee visited Europe to investigate “Islamophobia.”
  • Erdogan has been indoctrinating Turkish youth with claims such as the one that “Jews in Israel kick women and children,” and has called for an Organization of Islamic Cooperation army to attack Israel.
A Middle East analyst, Diliman Abdulkader, has advised that the Trump administration should levy sanctions on Turkey that will “bring negative financial consequences for Turkey, which may be headed for an economic collapse similar to Venezuela, according to analysts.”
Turkey, Iran and other Muslim countries have long infiltrated free societies, spread dawah in them, promoted the hijrah globally, and allied with Leftists to curb the freedom of speech. The subversion of the U.S. was made easy by the Obama Administration. Now Trump is left with the fallout.
“Turkey’s Use of Russian S-400 System May Have ‘Major Ramifications’ for U.S., NATO,” by Jackson Richman, Jewish News Syndicate, July 15, 2019:
(July 12, 2019 / JNS) Turkey began to receive the S-400 air-defense missile-defense system on Friday despite U.S. warnings not to do so. The move by Turkey is likely to have “major ramifications” for the U.S.-Turkish relationship, according to Aykan Erdemir, a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
“Turkey will no longer be able to receive F-35 stealth jets and Turkish companies removed from the F-35 supply chain will lose $12 billion of revenue. Also, the United States is likely to impose CAATSA sanctions against Turkey, which will further undermine U.S.-Turkish trade and defense cooperation,” he told JNS. The move could also bring negative financial consequences for Turkey, which may be headed for an economic collapse similar to Venezuela, according to analysts.
“The F-35 move could prove to be a costly mistake for [Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan, especially during Turkey’s ongoing economic downturn. Expected U.S. sanctions will undermine investor confidence at home and abroad, and exacerbate the country’s economic woes by triggering a new wave of capital flight,” said Erdemir.
According to the Turkish Defense Ministry, materials arrived at the Murted Air Base. A second shipment of equipment is expected to arrive in the near future, reported Russian state-run TASS news agency, citing a military diplomatic source.
The source said that a third delivery, consisting of more than “120 anti-aircraft missiles of various types” will arrive in Turkey “tentatively at the end of the summer, by sea.”
CNN reported that “TASS also quoted the source saying that Turkish S-400 operators will travel to Russia for training in July and August. About 20 Turkish servicemen underwent training at a Russian training center in May and June, according to the source.”
‘Defying repeated warnings’ from the U.S.
Turkey went through with the acquisition, defying repeated warnings from the United States, which has blocked the sale of the F-35 fighter jet in response, in addition to threatening sanctions on Ankara.
Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon official, told JNS that Washington should no longer view Turkey as an ally.
“Erdoğan pulled the trigger but that’s fine: Turkey is more a liability than an ally. Now it’s imperative that policy makers recognize Turkey is no ally. It’s essential to calibrate U.S. policy to reality rather than wishful thinking,” said Rubin.
Similarly, Diliman Abdulkader, director of external relations at Allegiance Strategies, LLC, and a Middle East analyst, told JNS that the Trump administration should levy sanctions on Turkey.
“After numerous attempts by the United States to convince Turkey from purchasing and delivering the Russian S-400 missiles, Erdoğan decided to take his own path….
___________________________________________________________
SEE ALSO:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/07/memo-to-erdogan-you-can-have-
the-s-400-or-you-can-have-the-f-35-but-you-cant-have-both 

GOOGLE EXECUTIVE SAYS INFOWARS & ALEX JONES WILL SOON BE UNSEARCHABLE ON YOUTUBE

Google Executive Admits They Actively Censor Individuals They Disagree With

Speaking during a Senate hearing on Tuesday over its censorship practices, Google’s VP for Government Affairs & Public Policy Karan Bhatia assured known Alex Jones-hater Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) that the company was doing everything in its power to remove all content related to the Infowars host Alex Jones.

GOOGLE EXECUTIVE SAYS INFOWARS & ALEX JONES WILL SOON BE UNSEARCHABLE ON YOUTUBE 

Sen. Blumenthal had demanded to know why tech giant hasn’t censored 100% of videos related to Jones

BY JAMIE WHITE
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
UPDATE: Read Infowars attorney Norm Pattis’ response to this censorship effort in a letter to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).
A Google executive claimed that Alex Jones and Infowars would soon be completely eradicated from its video platform YouTube.
Speaking during a Senate hearing on Tuesday over its censorship practices, Google’s VP for Government Affairs & Public Policy Karan Bhatia assured known Alex Jones-hater Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) that the company was doing everything in its power to remove all content related to the Infowars host after the senator invoked Sandy Hook.
“These lies were more than just false – they were malicious they were cruel, they incited harassment, physical threats, they forced his family literally every day to relive their loss,” Blumenthal said.
“This stuff is not speech it’s incitement, harassment, defamation. I respectfully suggest whatever your machines are, they’re not working, would you agree?”
Bhatia responded that Google was using not only its algorithms but also human assets to identify and remove any videos related to Alex Jones.
“We believe that hoax videos of the kind that you reference, and he had to experience, have no place on any of our platforms,” Bhatia said.
“And we have taken the challenge, the need to address that very seriously, including most recently amending our policies earlier this year – our community guidelines – to make clear that any such video that comes up will be taken down immediately.”
“Given the quantity of video that gets uploaded at any point in time, we have to depend on tools – on machines – to try and spot those videos,” Bhatia continued.
“We constantly are trying to improve them — and they are improving. Where we miss something and it gets caught by a viewer, we then take action against it.”
Blumenthal, dissatisfied with Google’s already draconian methods, didn’t think the tech giant was going far enough to completely censor all traces of Jones and Infowars from the internet.
“These kinds of policies, guidelines – forgive me – platitudes are no substitute for effective enforcement,” Blumenthal fumed. “You can’t simply unleash the monster and say it’s too big to control.”
Bhatia responded that despite Google’s desire to rid the world of Alex Jones content, the sheer number of videos uploaded by fans presents a significant challenge for the company’s AI detection systems to censor Infowars 100%.
“We don’t want these kinds of videos up,” Bhatia said. “It’s certainly not conducive to the kind of community we’re looking to build at YouTube. It is, given the sheer quantity that gets uploaded, it is a tough computer science challenge.”
Peter Thiel is attempting to warn the public as he calls for an investigation into Google for treason against the US.

SUPREME COURT CASE REPEALS FOURTH & TENTH AMENDMENTS, REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT

SUPREME COURT CASE REPEALS FOURTH & TENTH AMENDMENTS, REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
An opinion recently handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court was a direct assault on the Fourth and 10th Amendments, making these key provisions of the Bill of Rights all but obsolete and buttressing the high court’s long-held position of ultimate lawmaker for all 50 states and all those who reside in them.
The latest case being used by the five of the nine black-robed oligarchs to consolidate all power in their hands is Mitchell v. Wisconsin. Here’s the summary of the case, as published in the official opinion:
Gerald Mitchell was arrested for operating a vehicle while intoxicated after a preliminary breath test registered a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) that was triple Wisconsin’s legal limit for driving. 
As is standard practice, the arresting officer drove Mitchell to a police station for a more reliable breath test using evidence-grade equipment. By the time Mitchell reached the station, he was too lethargic for a breath test, so the officer drove him to a nearby hospital for a blood test. 
Mitchell was unconscious by the time he arrived at the hospital, but his blood was drawn anyway under a state law that presumes that a person incapable of withdrawing implied consent to BAC testing has not done so. 
The blood analysis showed Mitchell’s BAC to be above the legal limit, and he was charged with violating two drunk-driving laws. 
Mitchell moved to suppress the results of the blood test on the ground that it violated his Fourth Amendment right against “unreasonable searches” because it was conducted without a warrant. 
The trial court denied the motion, and Mitchell was convicted. On certification from the intermediate appellate court, the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the lawfulness of Mitchell’s blood test.
Of all the many constitutionally questionable behaviors on the part of law enforcement and judges, the U.S. Supreme Court’s majority opinion focused on the narrow issue of whether the drawing of Mitchell’s blood while he was unconscious violated his right “to be secure in [his] persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” as set out in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Writing for four of the five justices who joined in the majority (Justice Thomas wrote his own concurring opinion), Justice Sam Alito admitted that the Fourth Amendment protects a person from an unwarranted seizure, but in some cases, Alito wrote, “there are well-defined exceptions to this rule, including the ‘exigent circumstances’ exception, which allows warrantless searches ‘to prevent the imminent destruction of evidence.’”
In other words, the Fourth Amendment expressly prohibits what the police did to Gerald Mitchell, but sometimes the Constitution just doesn’t matter.
This sidestep of the Bill of Rights — the so-called “exigent circumstances” exception — is allowed, Alito declared, when there is a “compelling need” to suspend the person’s rights.
A majority of these justices found that in Mitchell’s case there was a “compelling need” to ignore constitutional protections against warrantless searches and seizures. I would argue, however, that there is an even more “compelling need” to force the federal beast back inside its constitutional cage!
The decision in the Mitchell case will, of course, be afforded the power of law by all 50 states and the will of the people in any of those states will be sacrificed on the altar of obedience to the potentates on the Potomac. It shouldn’t be that way. The Founders didn’t intend such power to be put in the hands of the only branch of the federal government completely unaccountable to the people.
In a letter to Spencer Roane written in 1819, Thomas Jefferson called out the courts, observing, “we find the judiciary on every occasion, still driving us into consolidation.”
Jefferson continued his take on judicial tyranny:
In denying the right they usurp of exclusively explaining the constitution, I go further than you do, if I understand rightly your quotation from the Federalist, of an opinion that "the judiciary is the last resort in relation to the other departments of the government, but not in relation to the rights of the parties to the compact under which the judiciary is derived." If this opinion be sound, then indeed is our constitution a complete felo de se. For intending to establish three departments, co-ordinate and independent, that they might check and balance one another, it has given, according to this opinion, to one of them alone, the right to prescribe rules for the government of the others, and to that one too, which is unelected by, and independent of the nation.
Sound familiar?
The felo de se Jefferson speaks of is Latin for “felon of himself,” in other words, suicide. Under English common law, suicide was a felony. 
So, Jefferson tells Roane that if the other two branches of the general government allow the third, the judiciary, to enthrone itself as the ultimate lawgiver, then they’ve killed the Constitution and the protections it was proposed to provide to the rights of the people.
In his one-paragraph dissenting opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch called out his colleagues’ shoe-horning of the Mitchell decision into an “exigent circumstances” question. Gorsuch wrote that “the application of the exigent circumstances doctrine in this area poses complex and difficult questions that neither the parties nor the courts below discussed. Rather than proceeding solely by self-direction, I would have dismissed this case as improvidently granted and waited for a case presenting the exigent circumstances question.”
In other words, in its decision, the majority disregarded the issue that was brought before them and chose to focus on a question that wasn’t argued. 
Furthermore, in this opinion, as in so many others, the court claimed for itself power to make law for Wisconsin, regardless of the laws enacted by the representatives of the people of Wisconsin.
That’s called “consolidation,” and it was the fear of so many of the Founding Generation who foresaw such a future under the Constitution proposed in 1787.
Finally, referring back to Thomas Jefferson’s letter, he quotes Roane’s letter to him wherein the latter reiterates that the federal judiciary is not the “last resort” for states, “the parties to the compact under which the judiciary is derived.”
Notwithstanding the opinions of Jefferson, Roane, and reason herself, the Supreme Court’s opinion in Mitchell v. Wisconsin is in fact a felony: it kills the Fourth and 10th Amendments and leaves over 320 million Americans at the mercy of five unelected judges, hardly the hallmark of a republic.

HOUSE CONDEMNS TRUMP IN RESOLUTION THAT DECLARES OPEN BORDERS

HOUSE CONDEMNS TRUMP IN RESOLUTION 
THAT DECLARES OPEN BORDERS
BY R. CORT KIRKWOOD
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The House of Representatives condemned President Trump as a racist yesterday and a Democrat from Texas yet again introduced articles of impeachment.
This time, Trump took to Twitter to attack “progressive” Democrat congresswomen who are given to anti-American, anti-Semitic comments and smear anyone who disagrees with them as a “racist.”
Which is exactly what the House did when it passed 240-187, a toothless exercise in moral preening that likely helped Trump and hurt them. Once again, the Democrats gave Americans a good look at what the party has become.
The Resolution The measure, which passed 240-187, opens with the usual whereas clauses, most of which quote dreaded white males the radical Left is busily erasing from American history by wrecking murals and canceling holidays in their honor.
The resolution falsely claims the “Founders conceived America as a haven of refuge for people fleeing from religious and political persecution,” and, again falsely, that “all Americans, except for the descendants of Native people and enslaved African Americans, are immigrants or descendants of immigrants.”
It quotes Ronald Reagan for good measure, and then gets down to the real business: condemning Trump, but not before letting Americans know the border will remain open for future Democrat voters.
The resolution says the House “is committed to keeping America open to those lawfully seeking refuge and asylum from violence and oppression, and those who are willing to work hard to live the American Dream, no matter their race, ethnicity, faith, or country of origin.”
Then comes the shot at Trump:
[The House] strongly condemns President Donald Trump’s racist comments that have legitimized and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color by saying that our fellow Americans who are immigrants, and those who may look to the President like immigrants, should “go back” to other countries, by referring to immigrants and asylum seekers as “invaders,” and by saying that Members of Congress who are immigrants (or those of our colleagues who are wrongly assumed to be immigrants) do not belong in Congress or in the United States of America.
Trump’s Twitter Remarks The Tweet storm that invited the resolution observed the obvious, although it didn’t name the four congresswomen: Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.
On Sunday, Trump tweeted some advice:
So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly......
....and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how....
....it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough.
Only Omar, an anti-Semitic Muslim refugee who likely married her brother to commit immigration fraud and calls opponents racist, is actually a foreigner, while Tlaib, the radical who said “we’re gonna impeach the motherf***er,” is the angry, ungrateful child of Palestinian immigrants. Pressley, who says “we don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice,” and Ocasio-Cortez, who would impose totalitarian socialism, are Americans by accident of birth. All would abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Trump wasn’t likely speaking literally, but the tweets elicited the usual caterwauling, to which Trump replied the next day:
When will the Radical Left Congresswomen apologize to our Country, the people of Israel and even to the Office of the President, for the foul language they have used, and the terrible things they have said. So many people are angry at them & their horrible & disgusting actions!
Then yesterday, before the Democrats dipped into their bottomless well of indignation, Trump offered these two:
Those Tweets were NOT Racist. I don’t have a Racist bone in my body! The so-called vote to be taken is a Democrat con game. Republicans should not show “weakness” and fall into their trap. This should be a vote on the filthy language, statements and lies told by the Democrat.....
.....Congresswomen, who I truly believe, based on their actions, hate our Country.
Telling that truth, of course is Trump’s real crime. He has stigmatized the Left, and made four socialist radicals the face of the Democratic Party.
Concluded Trump: “Get a list of the HORRIBLE things they have said. Omar is polling at 8%, Cortez at 21%. Nancy Pelosi tried to push them away, but now they are forever wedded to the Democrat Party. See you in 2020!

NEW WHITE HOUSE PETITION DEMANDS CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION INTO SOMALI MUSLIM REP. ILHAN OMAR

DEMANDS CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION 
INTO SOMALI MUSLIM REP. ILHAN OMAR 
“Omar’s oath of loyalty to the United States of America 
is in serious doubt”
BY PAUL JOSEPH WATSON
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
A new petition uploaded to the WhiteHouse.gov site is demanding an immediate Congressional investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar.
President Trump is currently engaged in a war of rhetoric with Omar and three other Congresswomen after he asked, “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came?”
The petition is titled ‘Conduct an Immediate Congressional Investigation Into Rep. Ilhan Omar’ and reads as follows:
We ask the President to initiate a Congressional investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar’s background to determine if she should face expulsion from Congress.
Rep. Omar’s oath of loyalty to the United States of America is in serious doubt.
Omar made light of the September 11 terror attack by referring to the atrocity as “some people did something”.
Omar was recorded laughing about and making light of Islamic terrorism and the Al-Qaeda threat.
Omar refused to condemn the terrorist attack by a self-described Antifa member, who tried to firebomb an ICE facility in Washington State.
Omar also defended jihadists in her state who chose to join ISIS, saying they should get lighter punishments.
There are also severe allegations concerning the question of whether Omar married her own brother.
Article I, Section 5 of the United States Constitution details the measures necessary to initiate an expulsion of a sitting member of Congress, which requires the concurrence of two-thirds of the members.
Earlier today it was revealed that the House will pass a resolution condemning Trump’s “racist” tweets.
Those Tweets were NOT Racist. I don’t have a Racist bone in my body! The so-called vote to be taken is a Democrat con game,” Trump responded.
“Republicans should not show “weakness” and fall into their trap. This should be a vote on the filthy language, statements and lies told by the Democrat Congresswomen, who I truly believe, based on their actions, hate our Country,” he added.

SEVEN CHRISTIANS BEING PROSECUTED IN IRAN ON CHARGES OF “PROPAGANDA AGAINST THE REGIME”

CHRISTIANS BEING PROSECUTED IN IRAN 
ON CHARGES OF “PROPAGANDA AGAINST THE REGIME” 
BY MISSION NETWORK NEWS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Iran (Mission Network News)  Pressure is building in Iran as yet another group of believers pay for claiming the name of Christ. According to Miles Windsor of Middle East Concern, seven believers are in solitary confinement with no access to lawyers.
In a separate incident, five men accused of “propaganda against the regime” began serving prison sentences on July 6. Their sentences range from four to 14 months.
“They have done nothing to undermine the state or spread propaganda against the state at all,” Windsor emphasizes. “They’re being imprisoned because of their faith in the Lord Jesus. That’s true of the many Christians who face these kinds of charges.”
“It’s really important to be praying for our brothers and sisters [in Iran] to be strong in what is a very, very difficult context.”
CONTINUE READING HERE: 

FACEBOOK SLAPS JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY WITH “HATE SPEECH” VIOLATION OVER IMMIGRATION POST

FACEBOOK SLAPS JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY WITH 
“HATE SPEECH” VIOLATION OVER IMMIGRATION POST 
BY LUIS MIGUEL
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
It looks like Birchers are on Big Tech’s wrongthink radar.
The John Birch Society had a post censored and monetization of its videos suspended by Facebook last week for alleged violation of “hate speech” standards after the organization encouraged its social media followers to obtain a copy of The New American (TNA) magazine’s “Immigration Invasion” edition.
Facebook removed the post from public visibility on the grounds that it “goes against our Community standards on hate speech.”
FB Policy Issues 3
In addition, the Facebook team notified JBS that its ad breaks have been placed on a 30-day restriction.
Ad breaks are advertisements that publishers can choose to activate on videos over 10 minutes in order to make money from their content. With ad and other monetization methods on hold, JBS will lose a revenue stream for a month — and Facebook warned the restriction will be extended to three months if JBS has another Community Standards violation within 90 days.
FB Policy Issues 2
FB Policy Issues
The JBS post that prompted the crackdown was an announcement of TNA’s July 8 print issue (JBS publishes TNA through its American Opinion Publishing subsidiary).
InvasionTNAcover1080x10804
The issue’s cover story is entitled “Immigrant Invasion,” and provides the hard numbers and a deep analysis of the current border crisis.
Neither the article, the magazine cover, nor the promotional graphic posted to Facebook feature racial slurs or other demeaning language. The picture on TNA’s front cover is a real photograph of migrants climbing over the fence along America’s southern border.
Facebook’s Community Standards say the social network bans “hate speech” because “it creates an environment of intimidation and exclusion and in some cases may promote real-world violence.”
The platform defines “hate speech” as “a direct attack on people based on what [Facebook] call[s] protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability.”
“We also provide some protections for immigration status,” Facebook adds.
Per the terms, an “attack” is “violent or dehumanizing speech, statements of inferiority, or calls for exclusion or segregation.”
In an article on Facebook’s newsroom, the company’s vice president for EMEA public policy, Richard Allen, accepted that “there is no universally accepted answer for when something crosses the line.”
“In Germany, for example, laws forbid incitement to hatred; you could find yourself the subject of a police raid if you post such content online,” Allen notes. “In the US, on the other hand, even the most vile kinds of speech are legally protected under the US Constitution.”
Allen describes immigration specifically as an issue that has become the subject of “hate speech.”
“Often a policy debate becomes a debate over hate speech, as two sides adopt inflammatory language. This is often the case with the immigration debate, whether it’s about the Rohingya in South East Asia … or immigration in the US. This presents a unique dilemma: on the one hand, we don’t want to stifle important policy conversations about how countries decide who can and can’t cross their borders. At the same time, we know that the discussion is often hurtful and insulting.”
He goes on to say that Facebook investigated immigration discussion after refugees and migrants were allegedly being threatened.
“[We] decided to develop new guidelines to remove calls for violence against migrants or dehumanizing references to them — such as comparisons to animals, to filth or to trash. But we have left in place the ability for people to express their views on immigration itself. And we are deeply committed to making sure Facebook remains a place for legitimate debate.”
The Facebook VP states that Facebook is “committed to removing hate speech any time we become aware of it” and claims the platform deletes an average of 66,000 posts reported as hate speech per week.
The article also asserts Facebook is experimenting with ways to automatically filter “toxic” language and keep it from public eyes. However, the site still relies heavily on reporting by its users and enforcement by its team of 15,000 content reviewers.
“We then have our teams of reviewers, who have broad language expertise and work 24 hours a day across time zones, to apply our hate speech policies,” Allen writes.
JBS, like many publishers, was affected by changes to Facebook’s ad policies last year that now require users to verify their identities by providing photo identification in order to advertise content.
The social-media giant touted this update as a step toward combatting “fake news,” based on the belief that Russian agents used fake Facebook accounts to spread disinformation that contributed to the election of Donald Trump.
Facebook has also purged from its platform a number of personalities it considers “dangerous,” including right-wing commentators such as Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, Laura Loomer, Paul Joseph Watson, and Paul Nehlen.
Facebook carried out these purges in consultation with left-wing groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and the George Soros-funded Media Matters.
Ultimately, the censorship tactics are unsurprising to anyone acquainted with the techniques of totalitarians. Why debate dissenting opinion when it’s so much easier to silence it?

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCES MAJOR CRACKDOWN ON MIGRANT SURGE AT SOUTHERN BORDER~PRESIDENT MOVES TO END ASYLUM ENTITLEMENTS FOR MOST MIGRANTS

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCES MAJOR CRACKDOWN ON MIGRANT SURGE AT SOUTHERN BORDER~PRESIDENT MOVES TO END ASYLUM ENTITLEMENTS FOR MOST MIGRANTS
BY DAN LYMAN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The Trump administration has announced new asylum policies that would effectively end asylum entitlements for the vast majority of migrants reaching the southern border.
The “Third-Country Asylum Rule” issued in a bulletin by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) signals a major crackdown on asylum claims along the Mexican border.
The new rule to be published imminently in the Federal Register reads as follows:
“This IFR uses the authority delegated by Congress in section 208(b)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to enhance the integrity of the asylum process by placing further restrictions or limitations on eligibility for aliens who seek asylum in the United States. Specifically, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security are revising 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(c) and 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(c) to add a new bar to eligibility for asylum for an alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States across the southern border, but who did not apply for protection from persecution or torture where it was available in at least one third country outside the alien’s country of citizenship, nationality, or last lawful habitual residence through which he or she transited en route to the United States.”
Three key restrictions to the rule are explained as follows:
(1) an alien who demonstrates that he or she applied for protection from persecution or torture in at least one of the countries through which the alien transited en route to the United States, and the alien received a final judgment denying the alien protection in such country;
(2) an alien who demonstrates that he or she satisfies the definition of “victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons” provided in 8 C.F.R. § 214.11; or,
(3) an alien who has transited en route to the United States through only a country or countries that were not parties to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the 1967 Protocol, or the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Attorney General William Barr has acknowledged the full legality and necessity of the rule.
“This Rule is a lawful exercise of authority provided by Congress to restrict eligibility for asylum,” reads Barr’s statement in the bulletin. “The United States is a generous country but is being completely overwhelmed by the burdens associated with apprehending and processing hundreds of thousands of aliens along the southern border.”
“This Rule will decrease forum shopping by economic migrants and those who seek to exploit our asylum system to obtain entry to the United States—while ensuring that no one is removed from the United States who is more likely than not to be tortured or persecuted on account of a protected ground.”
The southern border continues to be inundated with hundreds of thousands of migrants from all over the world, including a surge from African countries such as the Congo, which is currently in the midst of a historic Ebola outbreak.

THINGS HAVEN’T ALWAYS BEEN THIS WAY

THINGS HAVEN’T ALWAYS BEEN THIS WAY
BY WALTER E. WILLIAMS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Here’s a suggestion. How about setting up some high school rifle clubs? Students would bring their own rifles to school, store them with the team coach and, after classes, collect them for practice. You say: “Williams, you must be crazy! To prevent gun violence, we must do all we can to keep guns out of the hands of kids.”
There’s a problem with this reasoning. Prior to the 1960s, many public high schools had shooting clubs. In New York City, shooting clubs were started at Boys, Curtis, Commercial, Manual Training and Stuyvesant high schools. Students carried their rifles to school on the subway and turned them over to their homeroom or gym teacher. Rifles were retrieved after school for target practice. In some rural areas across the nation, there was a long tradition of high school students hunting before classes and storing their rifles in the trunks of their cars, parked on school grounds, during the school day.
Today, any school principal permitting rifles clubs or allowing rifles on school grounds would be fired, possibly imprisoned. Here’s my question: Have .30-30 caliber Winchesters and .22 caliber rifles changed to become more violent? If indeed rifles have become more violent, what can be done to pacify them? Will rifle psychiatric counseling help to stop these weapons from committing gun violence? You say: “Williams, that’s lunacy! Guns are inanimate objects and as such cannot act.” You’re right. Only people can act. That means that we ought to abandon the phrase “gun violence” because guns cannot act and hence cannot be violent.
If guns haven’t changed, it must be that people, and what’s considered acceptable behavior, have changed. Violence with guns is just a tiny example. What explains a lot of what we see today is growing cultural deviancy. Twenty-nine percent of white children, 53% of Hispanic children and 73% of black children are born to unmarried women. The absence of a husband and father in the home is a strong contributing factor to poverty, school failure, crime, drug abuse, emotional disturbance and a host of other social problems. By the way, the low marriage rate among blacks is relatively new. Census data shows that a slightly higher percentage of black adults had married than white adults from 1890 to 1940. According to the 1938 Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, that year only 11% of black children and 3% of white children were born to unwed mothers.
In 1954, I graduated from Philadelphia’s Benjamin Franklin High School, the city’s poorest school. During those days, there were no school policemen. Today, close to 400 police patrol Philadelphia schools. According to federal education data, in the 2015-16 school year, 5.8% of the nation’s 3.8 million teachers were physically attacked by a student. Almost 10% were threatened with injury.
Other forms of cultural deviancy are found in the music accepted today that advocates murder, rape and other vile acts. In previous generations, people were held responsible for their behavior. Today, society at large pays for irresponsible behavior. Years ago, there was little tolerance for the crude behavior and language that are accepted today. To see men sitting while a woman was standing on a public conveyance was once unthinkable. Children addressing adults by their first name, and their use of foul language in the presence of, and often to, teachers and other adults was unacceptable.
A society’s first line of defense is not the law or the criminal justice system but customs, traditions and moral values. These behavioral norms, mostly imparted by example, word-of-mouth and religious teachings, represent a body of wisdom distilled over the ages through experience and trial and error. Police and laws can never replace these restraints on personal conduct. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Today’s true tragedy is that most people think what we see today has always been so. As such, today’s Americans accept behavior that our parents and grandparents never would have accepted.

THE SIEGE OF VIENNA AND EASTERN EUROPE’S ‘SUBCONSCIOUS FEAR’ OF ISLAM

THE SIEGE OF VIENNA AND EASTERN EUROPE’S ‘SUBCONSCIOUS FEAR’ OF ISLAM

How Islam’s history with Europe 

continues to color modern perceptions

BY RAYMOND IBRAHIM
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Raymond Ibrahim is a Freedom Center Shillman Fellow and the author of Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West.
“Austria acts against Muslims almost every day because of their subconscious fear of Turks,” writes Turkish historian Erhan Afyoncu.  “Austrians have not forgotten the fear and their emperor’s escape in the Battle of Vienna in 1683. When Turks were defeated in the Battle of Vienna, Europeans were so happy…”
This is true.  As such, a brief refresher on the Siege of Vienna—the anniversary of which is today—is in order:
The largest Islamic army ever to invade European territory—which is saying much considering that countless invasions preceded it since the eighth century—came and surrounded Vienna, then the heart of the Holy Roman Empire and longtime nemesis of Islam, on July 15, 1683.
Some 200,000 Muslim combatants, under the leadership of the Ottomans—the one state in nearly fourteen centuries of Islamic history most dedicated to and founded on the principles of jihad—invaded under the same rationale that so-called “radical” groups, such as the Islamic State, cite to justify their jihad on “infidels.”  Or, to quote the leader of the Muslim expedition, Grand Vizier Kara Mustafa, because Vienna was perceived as the head of the infidel snake, it needed to be laid low so that “all the Christians would obey the Ottomans.”
This was no idle boast; sources describe this Mustafa as “fanatically anti-Christian.” After capturing a Polish town in 1674 he ordered all the Christian prisoners to be skinned alive and their stuffed hides sent as trophies to Ottoman Sultan Muhammad IV. 
Such supremacist hate was standard and on display during the elaborate pre-jihad ceremony presaging the siege of Vienna.  Then, the sultan, “desiring him [Mustafa] to fight generously for the Mahometan faith,” to quote a contemporary European source, placed “the standard of the Prophet…into his hands for the extirpation of infidels, and the increase of Muslemen.”
Once the massive Muslim army reached and surrounded the walls of Vienna, Mustafa followed protocol. In 628, his prophet Muhammad had sent an ultimatum to Emperor Heraclius: aslam taslam, “submit [to Islam] and have peace.”  Heraclius rejected the summons, jihad was declared against Christendom (as enshrined in Koran 9:29), and in a few decades, two-thirds of the then Christian world—including Spain, all of North Africa, Egypt, and Greater Syria—were conquered.
Now, over a thousand years later, the same ultimatum of submission to Islam or death had reached the heart of Europe.  Although the Viennese commander did not bother to respond to the summons, graffiti inside the city—including “Muhammad, you dog, go home!”—seems to capture its mood.
So it would be war.  On the next day, Mustafa unleashed all hell against the city’s walls; and for two months, the holed-up and vastly outnumbered Viennese suffered plague, dysentery, starvation, and many casualties—including women and children—in the name of jihad.
Then, on September 12, when the city had reached its final extremity, and the Muslims were about to burst through, Vienna’s prayers were answered.  As an anonymous Englishman explained:
After a siege of sixty days, accompanied with a thousand difficulties, sicknesses, want of provisions, and great effusion of blood, after a million of cannon and musquet shot, bombs, granadoes, and all sorts of fireworks, which has changed the face of the fairest and most flourishing city in the world, disfigured and ruined [it] . . . heaven favorably heard the prayers and tears of a cast down and mournful people.
The formidable king of Poland, John Sobieski, had finally come at the head of 65,000 heavily-armored Poles, Austrians, and Germans—all hot to avenge the beleaguered city.  Arguing that “It is not a city alone that we have to save, but the whole of Christianity, of which the city of Vienna is the bulwark,” Sobieski led a thunderous cavalry charge—history’s largest—against and totally routed the Muslim besiegers.
Although a spectacular victory, the aftermath was gory: before fleeing, the Muslims ritually slaughtered some 30,000 Christian captives collected during their march to Vienna—raping the women beforehand.  On entering the relieved city, the liberators encountered piles of corpses, sewage, and rubble everywhere.
It is this history of Islamic aggression—beginning in the fourteenth century when Muslims first established a foothold in Eastern Europe (Thrace), and into the twentieth century when the Ottoman sultanate finally collapsed—that informs Eastern European views on Islam.  As one modern Pole, echoing the words of Sobieski, said, “A religious war between Christianity and Islam is once again underway in Europe, just like in the past.”
Whereas Western nations cite lack of integration, economic disparities, and grievances to explain away the exponential growth of terrorism, violence, and sexual assaults that come with living alongside large, resistant-to-assimilation Muslim populations, Eastern nations tend to see only a continuity of hostility.
Note: The above account is excerpted from Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West — a book that CAIR and its Islamist allies did everything they could to prevent the U.S. Army War College from learning about.

INTERFAITH CLERGY “BLESS” TEXAS ABORTION FACILITY, “INFUSE SPACE WITH ENERGY” FOR ABORTIVE MOTHERS

INTERFAITH CLERGY “BLESS” TEXAS ABORTION FACILITY, “INFUSE SPACE WITH ENERGY” 
FOR ABORTIVE MOTHERS
BY HEATHER CLARK
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
AUSTIN, Texas — A small interfaith “blessing” ceremony was conducted at a Texas abortion facility on Tuesday to ask for “safety, healing and peace” for women who have abortions there, as well as the staff members who help provide them.
According to reports, the ceremony at Whole Woman’s Health in Austin involved 10 clergy members who walked through the facility, presenting prayers, rituals, poetry and music. The event was the effort of the Texas Freedom Network and the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.
“As people of faith, it’s not that we think we’re bringing God to this place; we believe God is already present in that space,” Amelia Fulbright of Labyrinth Progressive Student Ministry told the Huffington Post. “But it’s to ask for prayers of safety, healing and peace, to infuse the space with an energy that is life-giving for women, a lot of whom are in an anxious time.”
Katey Zeh, the interim director of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice and an ordained Baptist minister, wrote about the ceremony for Religion News Service, asserting that “[r]eligious people can be pro-choice, not in spite of their faith but because of it.”
She noted that members of Presbyterian (USA), Episcopalian, Unitarian, United Church of Christ and Disciples of Christ assemblies are among those who “affirm [those] considering all options,” including abortion.
“Because our prophetic teachings emphasize caring for our neighbors, progressive faith communities are called to respond to pregnant people with compassion and affirmation. We know that making reproductive decisions can be hard work spiritually and emotionally, yet we believe God accepts the decisions of conscience each person makes,” Zeh claimed.
Zeh also opined that for those who have left “organized religion in part because of harsh teachings about sex and sexuality,” the ceremony “reflects that spirituality and reproductive freedom can coexist.”
As previously reported, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice has held “blessing” ceremonies at abortion facilities for years, including in 2015 when it sought to “bless” PreTerm in Cleveland, Ohio. The outlet Thinkprogress reported that the group hoped its efforts would protect the facility from “preachy protesters, as well as encourage the strength and bravery of those providing and relying on its services.”
Whole Woman’s Health, which has locations in Austin, Fort Worth, San Antonio and McAllen, had offered free abortions to those affected by Hurricane Harvey in 2017.
The Austin site had been fined $17,430 in 2011 for mislabeling boxes containing the remains of aborted babies, which were then collected by the medical waste company Stericycle and autoclaved before being dumped in a municipal solid waste landfill with household and commercial trash.
While the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice represent those religious entities who support abortion “rights,” throughout America’s history, abortion has been strongly condemned in the pulpit.
In his 1869 sermon entitled “Ante-Natal Infanticide,” E. Frank Howe, the pastor of the Congregational Church of Terre Haute, Indiana, said, “[I]t makes no matter that the victim cannot stretch out its hands in defense … It matters not that it … can utter no cry of pain or reproach. The sacred gift of human life is taken — is deliberately taken, and this constitutes the crime, and that crime is murder.”
He lamented that “men and women place their own ease and pleasure above God’s law” and that “public opinion is so corrupted there is no voice of reproach,” forthrightly declaring, “Put what face upon it the community will, disguise it under whatever name you please, you can make no more or less of it than simple murder.”
____________________________________________________________
SEE ALSO:

TRUMP DOUBLES DOWN ON TWEETS: “IF YOU’RE NOT HAPPY HERE, YOU CAN LEAVE!”~SLAMS THOSE WHO HATE AMERICA


TRUMP DOUBLES DOWN ON TWEETS: 
“IF YOU’RE NOT HAPPY HERE, YOU CAN LEAVE!” 
FED UP WITH THOSE WHO HATE AMERICA, 
INCLUDING THOSE SHARIA LOVING MUSLIMS
At an event at the White House this morning, President Trump took questions from reporters about his recent remarks on Twitter that appeared to be targeted at some of the more vocal progressive Democrats. Trump doubled down on his tweets and said, “If you’re not happy here, you can leave!”

THE REPS. RESPOND BY DUMPING ON TRUMP

Far-left ‘squad’ faces pushback for accusing 

President Trump of ‘racism’


SEE ALSO:

Unpopular socialists now the new face of Democratic Party

https://www.infowars.com/falling-into-trumps-trap-pelosi-pushes-house-resolution-to-condemn-president/

ILHAN OMAR BEGS JUDGE TO SHOW MERCY 

TO ISIS TERRORISTS

‘The self-declared Islamic State’ had a ‘radical approach to change-making,’ she says

https://www.infowars.com/flashback-ilhan-omar-begs-judge-to-show-mercy-to-isis-terrorists/


https://www.infowars.com/why-wont-the-squad-disavow-antifa-terror-attacks/

WHY WON’T THE SQUAD DISAVOW 

ANTIFA TERROR ATTACKS?

When given the chance, top Democrats refuse to answer basic question


MAXINE WATERS PICTURED WITH ANTIFA LEADER ARRESTED FOR BEATING 2 MARINES

Flashback: Maxine Waters Pictured With Antifa Leader Arrested for Beating 2 Marines

Waters asked to disavow attacker after Antifa firebomb attack on ICE facility

https://www.infowars.com/flashback-maxine-waters-pictured-with-antifa-leader-arrested-for-beating-2-marines/

REP. AL GREEN PROPOSES IMPEACHING TRUMP FOR “BIGOTRY”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/274315/rep-al-green-proposes-impeaching-trump-bigotry-daniel-greenfield

AMERICAN-HATING AMERICANS ARE THE ULTIMATE INGRATES AND HYPOCRITES

Once again, Trump stands up for Americans who love their country.

BY BRUCE THORTON
SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/274320/american-hating-americans-are-ultimate-ingrates-bruce-thorntonrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
With his usual flair for hyperbole and indifference to factual details, Donald Trump last week tweet-blasted the so-called “Squad” of female freshman Congressmen “of color” for slandering America as racist, sexist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, and numerous other empty epithets. Though Trump was careless for suggesting, “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime-infested places from which they came”––since only one, Ilhan Omar, was born abroad––his sentiment is still valid, and has been shared for decades by millions of Americans angry over their homeland being demonized by immigrants and fellow citizens alike.
This sentiment was memorably captured by country singer Merle Haggard in his hit “Fightin’ Side of Me.” Released in December 1969, the song expressed the anger of the “Silent Majority” that had just put Richard Nixon in the White House. And the lyrics identified who Americans were angry at: the free, comfortable New Leftists, college students, bougie hippies, and liberal elite fellow-travelers who burned the American Flag, slandered our soldiers as baby-killers, and called their country “AmeriKKKa.” Haggard especially targeted the antiwar activists who insulted our troops even as they were fighting and dying, and who “love our milk and honey” but “preach about some other way of livin’.” Sound familiar?
But it was one line in the chorus that summed up many Americans’ attitude: “If you don’t love it leave it.” This blunt phrase became that era’s ultimate “trigger” of leftist spluttering rage and hysterical spouting of the same question-begging epithets that today inundate the rhetoric of progressive politicians and pundits––exactly the response to Trump’s later suggestion to the “Squad,” “If you’re not happy here, then you can leave.” And like today, for self-proclaimed sophisticated cosmopolitans who fancied themselves too smart for patriotism, such a déclassé love of country was fit only for the xenophobic deplorables clinging to their guns and religion.
As usual, the common sense of the masses is smarter than the received wisdom of the credentialed elite. Haggard’s line “they love our milk and honey” exposed the moral idiocy of American anti-Americanism: its hypocrisy and shameless ingratitude. So too some immigrants today, whether first or second generation, are despicable hypocrites and ingrates. Their lives in their countries of origins would have been “nasty, brutish, and short,” as Hobbes put it. But after being welcomed into our country, they now enjoy freedom, opportunity, wealth, leisure, nutrition, and health care unprecedented in human history.
Omar, as do many anti-American Americans, tries to hide her failure of character and virtue by protesting that she is just criticizing the U.S. in order to help it achieve its noble ambitions for “social justice” and equality for all: “It [Trump’s charge] is that I am anti-American because I criticize the United States. I believe, as an immigrant, I probably love this country more than anyone that is naturally born and because I am ashamed of it continuing to live in its hypocrisy.”
In 1933 Winston Churchill had the answer to similar attacks by some Britons on their own country: “Our difficulties come from the mood of unwarrantable self-abasement into which we have been cast by a powerful section of our own intellectuals. They come from the acceptance of defeatist doctrines by a large proportion of our politicians. But what have they to offer but a vague internationalism and the promise of vague utopias?”
George Orwell, a socialist and internationalist, still understood that in the face of an evil, expansionist ideology like Nazism, denigrating and undermining patriotism weakened the morale and solidarity a people need to answer that threat. In 1941 Orwell wrote:
England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In left wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution.
In the Thirties, Orwell went on, “left-wingers were chipping away at English morale, trying to spread an outlook that was sometimes squashily pacifist, sometimes violently pro-Russian, but always anti-British.” Moreover, foreshadowing how today anti-Americanism has spread from the elite of intellectuals and professors to the curricula of grade schools, and as such is seen as decadence by our rivals and enemies, Orwell linked the way intellectuals sneered at ordinary, patriotic Englishmen––called “Blimps” after Colonel Blimp, a cartoon caricature of middle-class imperialists––to “systematic Blimp-baiting” which “affected even the Blimps themselves and made it harder than it had been before to get intelligent young men to enter the armed forces.” Indeed, if the British Empire, or America today, is so wicked and oppressive, why should any citizen fight and die for it?
This danger of weakening morale and civic identity is the main problem with American anti-Americanism, a potential danger evident in the disasters wrought by England’s and France’s collapse of morale and failure of nerve in the Thirties. No people can survive without the bedrock conviction of a critical mass of citizens that they deserve to survive because their way of life is superior to others–– not because they are superior people, but because the political principles of their government like unalienable rights, personal freedoms of speech, religion, and association, political freedom, and the right to choose their political leaders and hold them accountable, are superior to the alternatives and are open to all those who desire to enjoy those goods.
These principles and our history––with all its betrayals of those principles and convictions––are part of who we are, of what identifies us as Americans. To paraphrase the Greek orator Isocrates, the name “American” denotes not a race or ethnicity or tribe, but a way of thinking and living––as free men and women.
And those ideals, as well as freedom and economic opportunity, were (and still are) what have brought millions of immigrants to our country. Once here, most were free to honor their home country and its cultures, but there was no question that if they wanted their children to have the opportunities and political freedom of America, they had to assimilate to those principles, and abandon or relegate to civil society those customs and mores that contradicted the American way. They were expected to learn English and American history, including learning about their new country’s heroes and political principles. That was the price for full enjoyment of American freedom and opportunity. If one did not want to pay that price, one could return home, and indeed many did; between 1901 and 1920, half of Italian immigrants from that period returned to Italy.
Not my grandfather, Antonio Gigantiello. He came to America in 1906, an “illiterate peasant,” according to Ellis Island records. In America, he owned a little land and a grocery store in the rural San Joaquin Valley. When his two sons spoke Italian at grammar school, they were scolded and whacked with a ruler. He made his youngest, my mom, speak only English at home so he and my grandmother could learn it, though their English was broken and accented. When my grandmother offered meek praise for Italy, my West Texas father, who left home at 15 and came to California in a boxcar, would say, “If it’s so great, go back.” (Exactly what Californians told him when he praised Texas.) In the Fifties, my grandparents took the train to New York and crossed the Atlantic to visit their relatives in Italy. My grandfather cut his stay in half because he was homesick for America. When he got off the train in Fresno, he kissed the ground and thanked God.
That’s how immigration worked back in the day, before a specious “multiculturalism” and “diversity” turned assimilation into a betrayal of a superior identity and culture that immigrants had abandoned.  Now expecting loyalty to America and gratitude for its freedom and opportunities is xenophobic, nativist, and racist. Now it’s all about what America can do for me and my political tribe, rather than what we can do for America. Now some immigrants wave the flag of the dysfunctional country they escaped, and burn the flag of the free, prosperous country they voted for with their feet.
These criticisms don’t mean that the immigrant, like every American, doesn’t have the right to criticize his adopted country. But criticism without context, without realistic expectations, without acknowledgement that America’s sins are outweighed by its achievements and good deeds, without recognizing that equality of opportunity does not guarantee equal success–– without that mature realism, criticism is nothing but anti-Americanism, a spiteful ingratitude that bespeaks a lack of character, and a childish anger that one’s utopian expectations of “social justice” have not been met.
But freedom in America means being free to express your spite and flawed character in the public square, and to do so in whatever way you choose. Anti-American Americans are exercising their First Amendment right, and no matter how hypocritical, ignorant, incoherent, hateful, and insulting their speech, it is protected by law and legal precedent.
And this brings us to the final, most shameless hypocrisy. American anti-Americans freely indulge their First Amendment rights, but they and their social media tech-allies don’t want their opponents to have the same freedom. Thus their calls for “hate-speech” exclusions to the First Amendment, which as our universities have demonstrated for decades, mean censorship based on political ideology and standards of offense determined by the subjective or neurotic feelings of politically favored “victims.” Thus the barrage of question-begging epithets like “racist” and the rest, which by now are empty of meaning and function as verbal smog intended to shut people up and pollute political discourse with toxic emotionalism and bathos.
As for Trump, once again he has said what many Americans think, but seldom hear from the Republican elite. And he has stood up for those same Americans who love their country, not because it’s perfect, not because they think its history is sinless, but because it has in word and deed shown itself to be the “last best hope” we fallen mortals have in a tragic world. And most of all, we love America because it is who we are, its ideals the unum that allows the pluribus to become a people yet keep its diversity. There’s not much more we can expect from imperfect human beings.
_____________________________________________________________

THE ANTI-TRUMP HOUSE DEMOCRAT RESOLUTION


Democrats rally around the anti-American, Jew-hating squad

BY JOSEPH KLEIN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
House Democrats are rallying around the four far-left congresswomen who have collectively become known as the “squad.” The House Democrat majority has put aside legislative business to debate a resolution condemning President Trump for his allegedly “racist” tweets denouncing Reps. Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), nicknamed AOC, and Ilhan Omar (Minn.). Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who just last week was on the receiving end of the race card played so often by the squad, is now referring to these hate-mongers as “our sisters.” As President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning, “now they are forever wedded to the Democrat Party.”
Speaker Pelosi got so carried away defending her "sisters" and condemning the president's tweets as "racist" that she broke House protocol and sparked a floor fight. Her fellow Democrats saved her from a ruling that would have barred her from speaking the rest of the day. They also kept her "racist" reference to the president's tweets in the record. The final resolution, entitled "H. Res. 489 — Condemning President Trump’s racist comments directed at Members of Congress," passed along largely partisan lines by a vote of 240-187. All Democrats voted yes, along with only four Republicans.
The resolution begins by mythologizing the supposed unalloyed embrace of immigration by the founding fathers, citing Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison as examples. In truth, Jefferson, Hamilton and Madison all expressed reservations about opening the door too widely to foreigners. The resolution then cherry picks pro-immigration quotes by past presidents, including Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan, without acknowledging the limitations they sought to impose on immigrant entry into this country. On FDR’s watch, the U.S. government turned away thousands of Jewish refugees, claiming they were a potential security risk. Ronald Reagan did sign the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which provided immigrants who had entered the country illegally the opportunity to apply for legal residence if they met certain conditions. However, the law also contained provisions intended to deter future illegal entry, including criminal penalties to be imposed against anyone who “conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection” illegal aliens. The Trump administration has tried to enforce these provisions.
After the resolution’s build-up of the virtues of an open-door immigration policy, without acknowledging the challenges that even Barack Obama, the deporter in chief, recognized, the resolution proceeds to demonize President Trump with a series of gross distortions. The resolution falsely charges that “President Donald Trump’s racist comments have legitimized fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color.” It twists the president’s actual words to caricature him as an unredeemable nativist bigot who detests all people of color and thinks that, according to the resolution, “our fellow Americans who are immigrants, and those who may look to the President like immigrants, should ‘go back’ to other countries.”
President Trump was addressing only the four radicals who he correctly believes want to drastically transform for the worse the political, economic and legal systems of this country. He took them to task for their rhetoric constantly denigrating America and blaming it for the world's ills. As for his views on immigration, the president said during his last State of Union address that he wants “people to come into our country in the largest numbers ever, but they have to come in legally.” He added, “Legal immigrants enrich our nation and strengthen our society in countless ways.” These are not the words of a bigoted nativist. Rather, they are the words of a president sworn to faithfully execute the nation’s laws, including its immigration laws. 
By turning the resolution into a victim versus oppressor narrative on behalf of their “sisters,” the Democrats are letting the four radical squad leaders off the hook for their own hateful conduct. They should be held to account, as President Trump has tried to do, for fueling racial division, anti-Semitism, contempt for the rule of law in America, and incitement of hatred against immigration law enforcement agents that has put their lives in danger. The Democrats, on the other hand, are gutless in the face of real bigotry in their own ranks. Speaker Pelosi showed her cowardice, for example, by agreeing several months ago to water down a resolution intended originally to specifically condemn anti-Semitism in response to Rep. Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic tropes.
The Democrat-controlled House has another chance if it wants to pass a useful resolution. It could focus its ire on the terrorist acts of violence committed by members of Antifa, instead of playing spiteful partisan games. One such act of domestic terror was the firebombing of an immigration detention center in Tacoma, Washington last weekend by an Antifa member who used AOC’s "concentration camps" canard in his manifesto. Another resulted in the brutal beating of a journalist,
Andy Ngo, whose parents came to this country from Vietnam by boat in 1978. Antifa, which claims to be fighting fascism, is in fact a fascist organization that glorifies violence against anyone or any institution it believes deserves to be punished. “Wake up wake up, it's not too late. Burn down the masters house,” Chicago Antifa tweeted on July 13th. 
Nancy Pelosi herself has condemned Antifa violence in the past. Back in 2017, following the outbreak of violence at Berkeley, she said, “The violent actions of people calling themselves antifa [sic] in Berkeley this weekend deserve unequivocal condemnation, and the perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted.” All to no avail. Antifa has not gotten the message. The violence continues. Now, the Democrat leaders, including Speaker Pelosi, are looking the other way.
When asked by reporters whether they were willing to denounce the Antifa member’s attack on the Tacoma, Washington immigration detention center, AOC and Omar declined to answer. At the same time, AOC has no problem vilifying Republicans who choose not to condemn President Trump for his tweets against the squad.
“Until Republican officials denounce yesterday’s explicitly racist statements (which should be easy!), we sadly have no choice but to assume they condone it,” AOC tweeted. “It is extremely disturbing that the *entire* GOP caucus is silent. Is this their agenda?” 
What’s your agenda, AOC?  Allowing violence against an immigration detention facility you believe is akin to a “concentration camp” to become an acceptable form of “resistance”? Apparently so.
_______________________________________________________________

A RADICAL SQUAD'S JEW-HATE


The cancer of anti-Semitism takes firm root in the Democratic Party

BY ARI LIEBERMAN
SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/274324/radical-squads-jew-hate-ari-liebermanrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
This week’s brouhaha between Donald Trump and the radical left-wing of the Democratic Party or the so-called “Squad,” has exposed deep fissures within the Party itself, with centrist Democrats becoming an ever increasing rare breed. The Democratic Party is eating itself alive, the result of open warfare between moderates and radical progressives, and the extremists appear to have the upper hand. More troubling is the level of anti-Semitic rhetoric routinely spewed by the radicals and the deafening silence of Party leaders in response to this deleterious trend. The Democratic Party of today, with its Jew-hating, Israel-bashing rhetoric is sounding more and more like its Labour cousin across the Atlantic.
The British Labour Party itself has experienced some rough sailing these last few months. In May, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) announced it had launched an investigation into antisemitism in the Labour Party. It’s not every day that the EHRC opens an investigation of this type against a major British political party. In fact, it is unprecedented. Last week, three senior Labour lawmakers in the upper house of the parliament resignedfrom Labour because the Party’s failure to address its antisemitism problem.
The trio join a steady stream of Labour MPs who have resigned in disgust over what they termed as Labour's turning a blind eye to, or even encouraging antisemitism within the Party. One of the resignees, David Triesman, referred to Britain’s Labour Party as “institutionally anti-Semitic,” and further noted that UK Labour was “no longer a safe political environment for Jewish people.” Harsh words for a former hardcore Labour loyalist.
Last Wednesday, the BBC’s current affairs documentary program Panorama aired a damning exposé featuring a number of former Labour Party members who either experienced anti-Semitic attacks by fellow Labour members or witnessed attempts by Labour Party leaders to quash and suppress investigations into Labour antisemitism. Six of those who were interviewed braved non-disclosure agreements in an effort to draw attention to the seriousness of the situation.
Instead of addressing the problem, Labour is demanding that he BBC remove the Panorama documentary off iPlayer and is attacking the credibility of those interviewed. Rather than take responsibility for its hideous actions, Labour is attacking the messenger.
This tact by Labour is unsurprising. Its party boss, Jeremy Corbyn, is anti-Semitic to his core. He has referred to Hamas and Hezbollah as his friends. In September 2014 he laid a wreath over the graves of terrorists responsible for orchestrating the 1972 massacre of 11 Israeli athletes in Munich. He defended a mural depicting Jewish bankers (with grotesquely exaggerated facial features) exploiting minorities, and actively participated in Facebook groups in which anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and memes were casually tossed about. He offered praise for Raed Salah, a rabid Muslim preacher who referred to Jews as “germs” and claimed that Jews used the blood of non-Jewish children for ritualistic purposes.  After 16 Egyptian soldiers and policemen were killed in an ISIS ambush in Sinai, Corbyn, in an interview with an Iranian propaganda site, blamed Israel saying that the Israelis had most to gain from the deaths of Egyptians. He also offered praise and wrote the foreword for a reprint of a book whose author alleged that Jews control world economies through their domination of the financial and banking sectors.  
This is the mere tip of the iceberg for Corbyn. Unfortunately, Corbyn’s malign ideology has not only infected his Party, it has metastasized to the United States Democratic Party. The so-called progressive wing of the Democratic Party, led by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib have repeatedly engaged in anti-Semitic tropes, propagated ahistorical fiction and dabbled with Holocaust revisionism.
Omar and Tlaib are unapologetic anti-Semites who have couched their hatred for Jews in terms of anti-Zionism. Their constant demonization and delegitimization of Israel places them squarely within the State Department’s definition of antisemitism.
Omar, whose history and social media feed is replete with anti-Semitic invective, outraged Jews and supporters of Israel when she implied that support for Israel is driven by Jewish money and that Jews maintain divided loyalties. Even the left-leaning Anti-Defamation League condemned her remarks. But the Democrat-controlled congress, pressured from the radical left, could not bring itself to condemn her expressions of hate. Instead, it made do with passing a meaningless, watered down condemnation of antisemitism, which looped this insidious form of hate with “Islamophobia” and about a dozen or so other expressions of racism. It was a shameful, craven display of the workings of a political party wholly influenced by the Squad with its toxic agenda.
In June, AOC trivialized the horrors of the Shoah when she compared ICE detention facilities meant to house illegal aliens to the Nazi concentration camps. This comparison is beyond asinine and is a form of Holocaust denial. AOC is either ignorant of the horrors of the Holocaust or deliberately mendacious. I suspect it’s the latter as shortly after making the comparison, she refused an invitation by Holocaust survivor Edward Mosberg to tour a Nazi concentration camp.
I always feared that the potential existed for the Democratic Party to be subsumed by the radical agenda pushed by extremist socialists within their ranks but never imagined that the descent into Corbynism would be so swift and devastating. Democrats have a serious antisemitism problem that mirrors British Labour. If the current ideological trajectory continues, Democrats will not only face insurmountable odds in 2020, they will lose a vital constituency and cause irreparable harm to their Party.    

“AMAZING POLLY”: IN DEPTH RESEARCH OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN, HIS ASSOCIATES IN SCIENCE, AND THE PLANS TO DESTROY THE WEST

MAD SCIENCE COUPLED WITH PEDOPHILIA
“AMAZING POLLY”: IN DEPTH RESEARCH OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN, HIS ASSOCIATES IN SCIENCE, AND THE PLANS TO DESTROY THE WEST
In the 1st half I go over Epstein’s Foundation and its investments into genomics and mapping the brain for AI.

Next I look at Robert Maxwell – father of Ghislaine Maxwell – who allegedly partnered with Epstein in business. What are the other Maxwell children up to now?
All of this is viewed through the lens of medical ethics and the cultural subversion that happened in the US starting right before the breakout of the second world war.


CHICAGO MAYOR: WE’LL OBSTRUCT JUSTICE TO PROTECT ILLEGAL ALIENS FROM DEPORTATION

CHICAGO MAYOR: WE’LL OBSTRUCT JUSTICE TO PROTECT ILLEGAL ALIENS FROM DEPORTATION
BY R. CORT KIRKWOOD
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Chicago’s mayor has declared war on Immigration and Customs Enforcement and again vowed to hamstring raids to deport illegal aliens who have been ordered to leave the country.
The obstruction of justice Mayor Lori Lightfoot (shown) confessed at a press conference with “immigration advocates” on Wednesday reiterated what she said last month when Trump announced raids that he canceled.
Chicago officially stands for illegal-alien anarchy, and won’t help ICE enforce duly-passed immigration laws.
No Cooperation With ICE Lightfoot charged ICE with “terrorizing” and “traumatizing” immigrants, and said the city had “taken measures over the past few weeks to ensure the Chicago Police Department will not cooperate with ICE.”
In late June after Trump announced the raids, the Chicago Tribune reported, she “moved quickly ... to assure residents that the Chicago Police Department would not give federal immigration agents access to police data or participate in any raids amid news of potential immigration sweeps in Chicago and other major cities.”
Trump canceled the raids, but then rescheduled them to begin on Sunday. Thus did Lightfoot appear at a news conference with subversive open-borders advocates to assure illegal aliens she would not permit Chicago cops to help ICE to deport them.
“They will not team up with ICE to detain any resident. We have also cut off ICE access from any CPD databases and that will remain permanent,” the mayor vowed. “Chicago is and will always be a welcoming city that will never tolerate ICE tearing our families apart.”
Lightfoot, of course, conflated “immigrants” with illegal aliens, a typical leftist scare tactic.
Open-borders advocates don’t think she’s doing enough, the Tribune reported yesterday, and want Lightfoot to sign an executive order to officially block the cops from sharing information with ICE, an inadvertent admission that raids will target illegal-alien criminals in police databases.
“What we are working on is doing everything we can to push back against what the Trump administration is doing,” the mayor said.
Lightfoot, the Tribune reported, believes that “there are very few of us that have been actually naturally born here,” and thinks that Trump “targeted every single community that doesn’t stand for the same values that he has.”
Lightfoot also explained why she wants to subvert the law: “I’m a black lesbian married with a wife and child.... Every demographic that I am and that I care about has been under attack for the last 3½ years.”
Other Agencies The problem for Sanctuary Chicago is this: Although it might have blocked ICE from access to its databases, other federal agencies such as the FBI still have access and can share what they get with the federal immigration agency.
In June, when the raids were announced and Lightfoot promised to obstruct justice, a spokesman for the cops told the Tribune that ICE can still get what it wants.
“All other federal agencies still have access to these systems,” the spokesman wrote in an e-mail, “as sharing this information is crucial to active criminal investigations in which we are partnering with federal agencies along with intelligence sharing functions that are vital to national homeland security functions.”
Raids Begin Sunday The raids to begin Sunday will hit 10 cities and target 2,000 illegals who have been ordered to leave the country, the New York Times revealed yesterday.
Many of those targeted are “families” who jumped the border and enjoyed catch and release, but then failed to show for court proceedings to determine their eligibility to stay in the country. Thus, they were ordered removed in absentia.
About 30 percent of so-called families are fakes, DNA testing shows, which might explain why 90 percent of said “families” fail to show for court after immigration authorities release them.
But the administration won’t just have a problem with subversive leftists such as Lightfoot. As the Times noted, once the raids begin and the illegals are detained, leftist open-borders lawyers will immediately file lawsuits to appeal the deportation orders and likely delay removal indefinitely.
If that happens, Trump will have just one choice: ignore the courts and deport the illegals anyway.
NumbersAs for what the administration faces in terms of numbers, Customs and Border Protection reportedthis week that border agents apprehended 104,344 illegals in June, a 27.7-percent decrease from the 144,273 that crossed in May, but still more than crossed in March.
The June figure brings the official total of illegals who have jumped the border since October to a little less than 800,000, a figure likely reached after the first few days of July given the rate at which illegals are entering the country.
That figure is nearly 3,500 per day.

THE CANDACE OWEN SHOW WITH NIGEL FARAGE: BREXIT & BLEXIT; THEIR ORIGINS, SIMILARITIES, DIFFERENCES AND PROGRESS~NATIONALISM & POPULISM VS. GLOBALISM

THE CANDACE OWEN SHOW WITH NIGEL FARAGE: BREXIT & BLEXIT; THEIR ORIGINS, SIMILARITIES, DIFFERENCES AND PROGRESS
Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage and Candace Owens discuss why Brexit and the election of Donald Trump was a revolt against the global political establishment. They also examine the importance of the nation state, capitalism and the 2016 U.S. election. Don’t miss this special episode filmed in our London studio!
1 2 3 4 5 7