Rather Expose Them Christian News Blog
A WordPress Blog-THE CHURCH MILITANT Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse. ALL CONTENT FROM HTTPS://RATHEREXPOSETHEM.BLOGSPOT.COM MOVED TO THIS NEW BLOG, MAY 2020
Another week another hearing, please pray for the Judge to make the right decision. Will it be jail, house arrest, or more fines, God knows.
Pastor Henry Hildebrandt The Church of God Aylmer Ontario Canada
BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/05/blinken-to-ask-congress-for-75000000-to-help-palestinians-in-gaza;
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
That’s $75,000,000 of American taxpayer money to repair damage that was caused by Hamas in its jihad war against Israel. The White House announced a couple of days ago that Blinken was leaving for the Middle East to “rebuild ties” with the Palestinians; that is exactly what he is doing, lavishly. Meanwhile, Hamas is gloating, knowing full well that the next time it launches rockets at Israel and Israel defends itself, the Palestinians will suffer as nothing more than tools to utilize in its war against the state of Israel. Then America will come to the rescue.
Hamas has faced no consequences; instead, it has been rewarded for its rocket attacks against Israeli citizens, and for the fine job it has done in purveying propaganda.
“Blinken Announces New US Disaster Relief for Gaza,” by Nike Ching, VOA News, May 25, 2021:
RAMALLAH, WEST BANK – U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says he will ask Congress for $75 million in assistance for Palestinians in Gaza following the recent cease-fire that brought an end to the conflict between Israel and Hamas.
Blinken made the announcement after talks in Ramallah with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas Tuesday.
“We know that the last round of violence is symptomatic of a larger set of issues that we have to address if we’re going to prevent its recurrence and that’s what we talked about today,” Blinken said. “We welcome the cease-fire that continues to hold but that’s not enough, we have to build on the cease-fire and try to move things in a genuinely positive direction.”
Blinken also reiterated Tuesday that the Biden administration’s belief that a two-state solution “is the only way to truly assure Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state. And, of course, to give the Palestinians the state that they’re entitled to.”
The top U.S. diplomat said the U.S. would reopen its consulate in Jerusalem after the Trump administration closed it in 2019, provide $5.5 million in immediate disaster assistance and more than $32 million for a United Nations emergency humanitarian relief campaign.
Blinken said the consulate’s reopening is “an important way for our country to engage with and provide support to the Palestinian people.”
Of the U.S.-designated terror group that controls Gaza, Blinken said “We will work to ensure that Hamas doesn’t benefit from these reconstruction efforts.”
Earlier in the day, the secretary of state underscored Israel’s right to defend itself as he visited Jerusalem on Tuesday as part of an effort to build on a cease-fire.
Speaking alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Blinken said both Israel and the Palestinians experienced “profound” losses during the fighting, and that there is a lot of work ahead to restore hope, respect and trust.
“Casualties are often reduced to numbers, but behind every number is an individual human being — a daughter, a son, a father, a mother, a grandparent, a best friend,” said Blinken. “And as the Talmud teaches, to lose a life is to lose the whole world, whether that life is Palestinian or Israeli.”…
_______________________________________________________
SEE ALSO:
Secretary of State Blinken Meets with Supporter of Third Intifada
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/05/secretary-of-state-blinken-meets-with-supporter-of-third-intifada
🔵SUBSCRIBE to #EpochTV: http://epochtv.com/ATL
🔴Watch the FULL EPISODE: 👉👉👉 https://ept.ms/3hSx3pf
“When I started to think about what the Middle East looked like from Beijing, the place suddenly looked very different.”
The Chinese Communist Party is seeking to, step by step, dominate the Middle East, says Hudson Institute senior fellow Michael Doran—from building ports in strategic locations to expanding its naval presence in the region.
“They’re positioning themselves to be able to threaten the two major chokepoints for energy in the region,” Doran says. And they’re building a strategic alliance with Iran.
And while the world’s eyes are fixed on the Hamas-Israeli conflict, Iran is “piggybacking” on the conflict to weaken Israel, says Doran.
What is really going on in the Middle East?
#hamasisrael #iran #china
Why settle for helping Iran nuke America, when you can also help Al Qaeda nuke America?
Saifullah Paracha (pictured below) was a Pakistani businessman and New York travel agent with some big plans. The Gitmo inmate now being set loose by Biden wanted to “do something big against the US.”
BY DANIEL GREENFIELD
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
With inflation rising almost as fast as gas prices and the cost of a home, Joe Biden ain’t doing much for most Americans. But if you’re an Al Qaeda terrorist, he’s got your back.
Just ask three of Gitmo’s finest who are benefiting from Biden’s generosity.
Saifullah Paracha (pictured above) was a Pakistani businessman and New York travel agent with some big plans. The Gitmo inmate now being set loose by Biden wanted to “do something big against the US.”
9/11 was in Al Qaeda's rearview mirror and its mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, was plotting a sequel. The Gitmo dossier for Paracha first details a plan to use his “textile business to smuggle explosives into the US” and these "ready-made explosives, specifically C4" would go into shipping containers full of "women and children's clothing".
Shipping Al Qaeda’s C4 to America would be more lucrative than dumping sweatshop labor sweatpants because “if al-Qaida used detainee’s textile company for shipping explosives to the US, he would likely be paid additional money beyond the standard shipping fees”. No word on whether there would have been a bonus for every American blown up.
And then things escalated from there with testimony that Paracha allegedly claimed that he, “believed he could obtain unspecified chemicals from Chinese sources”. The fellow he was talking to about the unspecified chemicals, Ammar al-Baluchi, one of the few Gitmo Jihadis whom neither Obama nor Biden had managed to release yet, had helped out the 9/11 hijackers with flight simulators, and manuals, and allegedly chatted with Mohammed Atta.
After 9/11, Al-Baluchi was looking at all sorts of plans for crashing planes into things, like the American consulate in Karachi or London’s Heathrow airport, but there were other options on the table. The nature of the chemicals out of China was never specified, but the KSM lieutenant believed they were” chemical or biological agents” that could be used “as a weapon”.
Paracha reportedly advised Al Qaeda that “one should look for a similar-looking chemical and put it in between the good chemicals and it would be very easy to get [through] customs.” With his business experience, he could offer Al Qaeda tips on smuggling such as warning them about the “radiological sensors at ports or places of entry into the US” that would make it difficult to smuggle radioactive materials into the country”.
But Biden’s newest charity case wanted something bigger. The dossier describes the 9/11 mastermind's associate and Paracha chatting about Al Qaeda getting some "radiological or nuclear items several times" because Paracha wanted "to help al-Qaida 'do something big against the US.'”
Paracha "also discussed nuclear attacks and attacks against nuclear power plants" and had an idea for “al-Qaida to attack a nuclear power plant”.
So you can see why Joe Biden is letting him go.
Why settle for helping Iran nuke America when you can also help Al Qaeda nuke America?
The Pakistani graduate of the New York Institute of Technology “expressed strong anti-US sentiment” and allegedly “stated that nuclear weapons should be used against US troops, as thousands of the troops would be killed at once”.
The pro-terror lobby has spent all these years claiming that Paracha was an innocent victim of American imperialism who was never charged with anything and was smeared with confessions obtained by acts of horrifying torture like Barney songs played on a non-stop loop.
Curiously the dossier mentions that Paracha's diary had "references to military chemical warfare agents and their effects on humans" including Sarin nerve gas.
But what New York travel agent hasn't filled his diary with entries about the effects of nerve gas on humans along with the contact information for an alleged Al Qaeda anthrax operative?
You’d have to be an Islamophobe to find anything suspicious about that.
Sadly, none of these plans worked out. Instead, the agents of the Great Satan told Palacha that they wanted him to come to Thailand to discuss a deal with Kmart. When Palacha showed up to pitch Kmart reps on a blue light special that might or might not glow in the dark, they weren’t there to get a deal on some Pakistani underwear but offering a place off Cuba with a view.
Even Obama didn’t set Paracha loose, but Biden is determined to out-Obama him.
The media understandably doesn’t want to trouble Americans with any uncomfortable mentions of nuclear weapons and Chinese chemicals when explaining Biden’s latest gift to Al Qaeda.
The New York Times only mentions that Paracha is "a former businessman and longtime legal resident of New York" and that he has "heart disease, diabetes and high blood pressure".
Also some years ago a spiritual leader with a Buddhist symbol made famous by an Austrian house painter carved into his forehead died of colon cancer while one of California's oldest inmates. It’s almost as awful as when that elderly former house painter committed suicide after a long struggle with syphilis along with his new bride in a bunker that Biden would have envied.
The Hill plaintively whines that “Paracha was the oldest and reportedly among the sickest detainees held at Guantánamo Bay. He suffered from heart disease, diabetes, and high blood pressure.” Since Paracha is still alive and the description is in the past tense, we can only assume that being freed by Biden is a cure for heart disease, diabetes, and blood pressure.
If Biden really wants to cure cancer, he can drop all of that moonshot nonsense, all he needs to do is give all of Al Qaeda cancer, and then release them. If it doesn’t cure them, it’ll kill them.
Releasing Paracha might also be a concern for the Brits as the dossier also states that he had discussed with Al-Baluchi “how to smuggle explosives and chemicals into England”.
When Paracha wasn't exploring the exciting possibilities of nuclear weapons, he met Osama bin Laden on a trip to Afghanistan and "offered to let UBL and al-Qaida use his media broadcasting business to film and distribute propaganda and training films'' that would include "depicting UBL quoting Koranic verses". While a lot of Paracha's other plots were theoretical, the dossier indicates that Al Qaeda used Paracha's "video broadcasting facility" to make a movie featuring "a senior Saudi al-Qaida facilitator associated with a cell targeting Americans in Saudi Arabia."
But no doubt after all that time having to listen to Barney sing, “I Love You, You Love Me” on repeat at Gitmo, with nothing to read except the Koran and Harry Potter novels, Paracha has come around and now loves America. And from now on will commit to only shipping women’s and children’s clothing to Kmart without C4, Chinese chemicals, or nukes.
The other beneficiaries of Biden’s generosity are Uthman Abdul Rahim Mohammed Uthman, an alleged bodyguard for Osama bin Laden, and Abdul Rabbani, allegedly a member of an Al Qaeda cell plotting car bomb attacks against Americans.
Biden intends to continue Obama’s work of freeing all the Islamic terrorists of Gitmo.
Paracha had apparently told American investigators that "he did not think meeting with al-Qaida was a crime, just business".
Biden clearly doesn’t think aiding Islamic terrorists is a crime either. That’s why he’s doing it.
____________________________________________________
SEE ALSO: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/05/biden-frees-al-qaeda-ally-who-plotted-to-smuggle-nukes-into-us
BY BOB ADELMANN
SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/bidens-atf-nominee-david-chipman-to-ban-all-assault-type-weapons/;
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
During a Senate confirmation hearing on Monday, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) pressed Biden pick, David Chipman, who is poised to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), to explain his position on banning the popular semi-automatic AR-15 rifle. Asked Cruz, “The AR-15 is one of if not the most popular rifles in America. It’s not a machine gun, it’s a rifle. Your public opinion is that you want to ban AR-15s. Is that correct?”
Chipman was crystal clear: “With respect to the AR-15, I support a ban.”
He then expanded on his remark, calling the rifle “particularly lethal”:
The AR-15 is a gun I was issued on ATF’s S.W.A.T. team and it’s a particularly lethal weapon, and regulating it as other particularly lethal weapons, I have advocated for.
This was the first among many lies, distortions, and prevarications that punctuated the nominee’s responses to intense probing and questions by Republican senators. The lie: the firearm Chipman was issued was no doubt a fully automatic weapon, capable of firing many rounds rapidly with a single press of the trigger. This is a far cry from popular AR-15s now owned by an estimated 20 million law-abiding American citizens.
The second statement — that the AR-15 is a “particularly lethal weapon” — is even more chilling: it suggests that the mere ownership of the firearm provides sufficient proof that its owner is intent on committing mayhem and, it would follow, he should be banned for owning the weapon.
Chipman prevaricated when asked by Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) to define an “assault weapon”: “An assault weapon would be … what Congress defines it as,” trying to avoid the question.
Cotton pressed Chipman: “Can you tell me what is an assault weapon? How would you define it if you were the head of the ATF?” Chipman finally came up with an answer: “any semi-automatic rifle capable of accepting a detachable magazine above the caliber of .22, which would include the .223 which is largely, you know, the AR-15 round.”
Cotton leaped at his response: “I’m amazed … that might be the definition of an assault weapon … that would basically cover every single modern sporting rifle in America today!”
Cotton missed an opportunity: under Chipman’s definition nearly every semi-automatic weapon — rifles and handguns — would be banned if the nominee had his way. That would include the 9mm, 40 caliber, and popular .45 calibers for which most handguns are chambered to accept.
Senator Cotton was just getting warmed up:
On March 25, Politico reported that Hunter Biden, President Biden’s son, applied for a handgun that was later thrown in the trash and had to be recovered by Secret Service agents in 2018. Politico reported that Hunter Biden completed this background check and answered “no” to the question of whether he was an unlawful user or addicted to any drug.
Hunter Biden has since published a book and gone on a nation-wide book tour conducting numerous interviews stating that he was, in fact, very much addicted to drugs at the same time that he purchased this firearm. This would mean that by his own admission Hunter Biden lied on that form, and by your earlier testimony, committed a serious felony.
Should Hunter Biden be prosecuted for breaking the law?
Chipman’s effort to evade the question was revealing:
If I’m confirmed as ATF director, it will be my responsibility to enforce all federal laws without political favor. I do not know any factors in this particular case, but I am familiar with the press account of it.
His response was totally inadequate, and Cotton pressed Chipman again:
Can I get your commitment that if you are confirmed you will, in fact, look into this matter and refer it for prosecution if you find that Hunter Biden violated the law?
Chipman sidestepped the question once again:
I will ensure that all violations of law are investigated and referred to.
And then came the masterstroke that topped the lengthening list of Chipman’s double-speak prevarications:
I’m not sure that it has not been investigated.
For all intents and purposes, the confirmation was over and Chipman is history. Other senators peppered the nominee with questions about his comments that mocked new gun owners who have been setting records in acquiring firearms. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) summed them up: “It concerns me that you, as the nominee to be the director of the ATF, would have such a flippant and, if I may say so, utterly condescending attitude toward first-time gun owners in this country. Why would you choose to insult so many of your fellow Americans with a statement like this based on the fact that they purchased a gun?”
Other senators quizzed the nominee about his comments following the ATF’s attack on the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas, in 1993. Chipman said: “Cult members used two .50 caliber [automatic weapons] to shoot down two Texas National Guard helicopters.”
Again, the nominee waffled:
I could have done a better job be describing them as being “forced down” because of the gunfire, as opposed to shot down, which might have left the impression that they were blown out of the sky, which they were not.
I regret that confusion.
Chipman was one of the chief investigators into the Waco incident and so had to know his statement was a canard. It was only under public pressure brought by the senators that he even came close to apologizing, calling it a “confusion” that he “regrets.”
Chipman lied when he was pressed by Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas): “Is a law-abiding gun owner a threat to public safety, in your view?”
Chipman revealed his anti-gun, and anti-gun owner, ideology:
Thank you for that question, senator. If the term “law-abiding” means someone has lawfully possessed a gun, there are often occasions that that person then goes on to commit a violent crime.
Wrong. Very few of the horrific mass shootings Americans have witnessed and suffered involve a rifle; the vast majority involve handguns. Semi-automatic rifles are almost never involved.
Aidan Johnston, spokesman for Gun Owners of America (GOA), summed up Chipman’s performance:
Today clearly showed that David Chipman is too radical to lead an agency that should not exist in the first place. The tyrannical gun control advocated by Chipman will be totally ineffective to stop criminals.
That “tyrannical gun control” refers to the bill offered by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) in March. The proposed bill would ban more than 200 firearms, including the AR-15, the AK-47, and Uzi models.
But this bill has little chance of passage. Only 35 Senate Democrats have co-sponsored it, and it will take 60 votes for passage. A similar bill offered by anti-gun/anti-gun owner senators in 2013 received only 40 votes.
Chipman’s dismal performance could have lasting and favorable implications for worried gun owners. If he is confirmed, every gun owner in the country will know that the government has now officially declared war on his right to purchase, own, and use firearms, and they will remember come election time in November 2022. And they will continue to purchase them in record numbers.
If Chipman isn’t confirmed, the next in line to be nominated by Biden to head the ATF will face the same sharp questioning, providing Americans with still another opportunity to appreciate the lengths to which the Biden administration is prepared to go in its attempt to disarm them.
Related video and articles:
BY J. CHRISTIAN ADAMS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Newly confirmed Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Kristen Clarke is a thoroughly modern woman. She could never have been confirmed even during the Clinton administration because of her racially-soaked radical worldview.
But these are revolutionary times, where skin color has gained newfound importance in a way we haven’t seen since June 1964 when segregationists chased civil rights marchers down the streets of St. Augustine, Florida.
If you think the comparison doesn’t work, then you haven’t been paying attention, or you are watching too much MSNBC.
I suppose everything old is new again. Content of character is out. Color of skin is in.
And thus Clarke squeaked by this week on a 51-48 vote to manage the most powerful division of the Justice Department.
The Civil Rights Division has its tentacles in every single aspect of American life – schools, jails, elections, hotels, mortgages, movie theaters, church sermons, bathrooms, computer software, rent rates, service animals on planes, pool chair lifts, mental hospitals and forcing police departments to adopt radical policing policies. I left 100 other topics off the list.
And now, another racialist radical is in charge in the division where I was once an attorney.
Clarke is no ordinary racialist radical, though. She brings a reputation for being racially greedy. I have some personal experience with her on this point.
In 2007, I was working on what would become the Voting Rights Act case of United States v. Georgetown School Board. I was one of the lawyers who spent many days in South Carolina investigating violations of the Voting Rights Act. Georgetown had a voting-age black population of 34 percent but the at-large elections for school board resulted in no blacks ever being elected to the nine at-large seats. While there is no right to proportional representation, in theory, blacks could conceivably have won three of nine seats.
Regardless, they had none, and in a school district where the students were almost majority black, this created a system that stoked discontent and lack of responsiveness. No matter how you feel about these sorts of lawsuits, it was the law under the 1982 amendments to the Voting Rights Act—an amendment even Strom Thurmond voted for.
The plan adopted in a DOJ settlement agreement created three majority-black districts out of seven (two seats remained elected at large) where it was likely a black preferred candidate would be elected.
Back to Clarke’s racial greed. The DOJ team got wind that Clarke—representing the NAACP—was shadowing the DOJ lawyer interviews in the field with local African-American stakeholders, disrupting the progress the DOJ was making and urging locals to hold out for four or more black seats. Four seats out of seven (or nine) would have been well in excess of the general proportion of the black population. Clarke wanted more black seats than the law would allow and was willing to disrupt a settlement that created three black seats where none had existed before.
I highlight this instance of racial greed not as a mere anecdote, but rather as a warning.
Sometime, soon, the Justice Department Voting Section will be on the prowl looking for counties or school districts to sue. You might be a lawyer representing them (call me). In the past, even under Democrat leadership, the DOJ has largely been fair and sought only minority districts that could be supported by the law. Expect Clarke to jettison compliance with the law, because she takes it all personally, and it is all about skin color.
Attorney General Merrick Garland defended Clarke, calling her a “person of integrity” who has views in line with his own.
Garland hasn’t spent much time around her. Lawyers at the Voting Section who worked with her characterize her as a brutish and uncouth racial activist. She seethed racial animosity toward whites (who were not liberals) and Southerners. If there is any consolation, she is viewed as “no Tom Perez or Vanita Gupta” in the lawyering department. She’ll leave that to the hundreds of brighter lawyers who work in the Civil Rights Division.
The FBI made a serious mistake when it failed to interview her former husband prior to her confirmation. The police came to Clarke’s house no fewer than six times for domestic abuse. Had they done so, the Senate would have learned who made those 911 calls. (Don’t look for that story at Google because they are hiding it. Here’s a link.)
Much has been written about how Clarke invited black racist anti-Semites to speak at Harvard. Meow. That was indeed in college and she never disavowed it. I was more concerned about her criticism and sabotage of the Justice Department’s voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party, another case I worked on.
Clarke poked around the Voting Section, asking anyone who would listen about when the Panther case was going to be dismissed. Recall that the incoming Obama officials spiked most of the case. Clarke was pleased because she doesn’t want the Voting Rights Act to be used against black defendants.
Her opposition to the Panther lawsuit wasn’t an isolated event. Clarke also opposed the lawsuit by DOJ against Ike Brown, a black Democratic Party official who became the first African-American found liable for violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965. A court found that he manipulated and canceled the valid votes of white voters in Mississippi and allowed defective absentee ballot votes of black voters to be counted. He also engaged in a ballot-harvesting scheme that is documented page after page by the United States District Court and is required reading for anyone who actually wants to know what voter fraud looks like.
Clarke didn’t want anything to happen to Brown. She didn’t want the Justice Department to bring the case.
It’s even worse. Expect Clarke to give preferential treatment to liberal activist groups making FOIA requests to the Civil Rights Division. Why? Because she used to get the same express service herself. Don’t expect Judicial Watch to get the same treatment. As I documented in my book Injustice:
The NAACP’s Kristen Clarke made particularly revealing requests, such as the one she sent by email late on the afternoon of June 17, 2009. Hunting for whatever Louisiana was telling the DOJ about a submission under Section 5, she asked for “any information provided by the State of Louisiana in connection with Submission No. 2008-3512 between January 1, 2009 and this request.” She wanted to know Louisiana’s official views, particularly since the NAACP was so engaged in the matter. As Clarke reminded Justice, the “NAACP Legal Defense Fund submitted a Comment Letter in connection with this submission.” At 6:59 a.m. on June 19, Clarke got just what she wanted, by email no less.
One of the most lawless things that Clarke did at DOJ was cook up a crazy objection against Alabama. This should be a warning to Senators like Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) who want to return power to Clarke to reject state election changes.
Under a now-dormant portion of the Voting Rights Act, the bureaucrats at the Voting Section had power to reject or approve every election change in sixteen states. The Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder invalidated the triggers that decided which states were subject to this obligation. Nevertheless, when Clarke was there, the law was alive. Again, from Injustice.
[The DOJ Voting Section] sent a letter to Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor warning that Alabama could not enforce a 1994 law because it had not been submitted to the DOJ for preclearance under Section 5. The statute in question required felons to submit to a DNA test as a mandatory precondition to applying to the state’s Board of Pardons and Paroles for a restoration of civil rights, including the right to vote. Part of a nationwide effort to build up DNA databases, the program was facilitated by Congress through federal legislation and through DOJ-administrated federal grants to states.
Clarke was behind the Alabama shakedown, trying to stop the state from collecting DNA from prisoners, using a provision of the Voting Rights Act. Again, Injustice:
Only through the intervention of Hans von Spakovsky, then counsel at DOJ, was this lawless shakedown stopped.
Expect more shakedowns to come, and even more if the power to reject state election laws is returned to the Justice Department. Giving Kristen Clarke that power would be like giving a toddler a weapon.
Clarke also fought against DOJ deploying assistant United States Attorneys at the polls in the 2008 election, a bipartisan practice that occurred under both Clinton and Bush. This was designed to document problems, deter fraud, and ensure that voting rights were protected.
Clarke’s opposition to federal lawyers observing an election should serve as a warning that this thoroughly modern woman wants nothing to do with ensuring the integrity of our elections. She has other priorities, and it isn’t the content of your character.
BY
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Beijing has responded to President Joe Biden’s Wednesday announcement of a probe into COVID-19 origins by denouncing the “lab leak” hypothesis as a conspiracy theory and urging an investigation into secret U.S. bio-labs around the world.
On Thursday, the Chinese Embassy in the U.S. released a statement on the origin tracing of COVID-19, saying:
“Lately, some people have played the old trick of political hype on the origin tracing of COVID-19 in the world. Smear campaign and blame shifting are making a comeback, and the conspiracy theory of ‘lab leak’ is resurfacing.”
Without naming names, the statement implies that “some political forces have been fixated on political manipulation and blame game, while ignoring their people’s urgent need to fight the pandemic and the international demand for cooperation on this front,” something that has “caused a tragic loss of many lives.”
China is calling for international cooperation to trace the origins of Covid-19 “on the basis of respecting facts and science, with a view of better coping with unexpected epidemics in the future,” the statement said. Politicizing the probe will make it “hard to find the origin of the virus” but also “seriously hamper international cooperation on the pandemic.”
“Out of a sense of responsibility towards the health of mankind,” Beijing supports “a comprehensive study of all early cases of [COVID]-19 found worldwide and a thorough investigation into some secretive bases and biological laboratories all over the world,” the embassy said, which will be “full, transparent and evidence-based, and shall get to the bottom to make everything clear.”
While it’s become conventional wisdom in the United States to believe that the novel coronavirus first appeared in the Chinese city of Wuhan in late 2019 — with the only mystery being whether it was transmitted from animals to humans via the city’s filthy wet market or escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) lab — China has rejected both theories.
At a press conference in March 2020, Lijian Zhao, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry instead voiced his suspicion that it actually was the U.S. scientists who developed the virus. He claimed that the covert research took place in one of America's bioweapon laboratories and then was sent to China during the Wuhan military games in October that year.
Pointing to a video of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) director Robert Redfield apparently admitting several deaths from COVID-19 before they were able to test for it, Zhao also tweeted that the United States “owes us explanation:”
“It might be US army who brought the epidemic to Wuhan,” Zhao suggested, calling for the CDC — and the Americans in general — to “be transparent” and share what they know about where and when “Patient Zero” was first diagnosed.
In the video, Redfield acknowledged that some cases of coronavirus were misclassified as influenza as the medics did not have an accurate test for the new epidemic at the time. He did not elaborate on when these misdiagnosed cases first appeared — saying only that “some cases have been diagnosed that way.”
Chinese officials repeatedly called the U.S. to follow China’s lead and invite the WHO experts to Fort Detrick, a U.S. Army Futures Command installation that is believed to conduct medical and biological experiments, along with the American “200-plus” overseas bio-labs, and disclose the detailed data and information on the outbreaks of respiratory disease in northern Virginia in July 2019 and the EVALI (E-cigarette, or Vaping, Product Use-Associated Lung Injury) outbreak in Wisconsin.
U.S. officials from both Trump and Biden administrations have condemned China’s effort to pin the blame for the pandemic on America as “false, baseless, and unscientific claims.” They assert that the Chinese government worked for more than a year to thwart an independent investigation into the origins of the deadly virus, and both administrations cast doubt on the manner in which a joint WHO-China report released was conducted in early 2021. The study states that transmission of the virus from bats to humans through another animal is the most likely scenario and that a lab leak is “extremely unlikely.” Later, the WHO added to the confusion and suspicions, saying the report “was not extensive enough,” and that further investigation of the Wuhan lab is needed.
Then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced in January that U.S. officials had “reason to believe” that Wuhan lab staff contracted a virus that produced “symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses.”
The “lab leak” theory is gaining credibility among U.S. top federal officials. Naturally, the question about holding the entities responsible for the outbreak accountable is hanging in the air. As of today, the White House won’t say if China will be punished if the Wuhan “lab leak” is proven correct.
Professional journalist Kristi Leigh of KristiLeighTV.com joins The Alex Jones Show to expose how the MSM censored medical information at a time the public needed it the most.
SEE: https://www.youtube.com/c/KristiLeighTV/featured
Don’t miss:
BY PETER RYKOWSKI
SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/biden-infrastructure-plan-would-implement-great-reset/
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Joe Biden, his administration, and congressional Democrats are seeking to pass a radical “climate change” bill — disguised as an “infrastructure” bill — that would codify the Paris climate agreement and the Great Reset.
On March 31, 2021, the Biden White House unveiled its so-called American Jobs Plan. This plan is estimated to spend about $2.5 trillion and would raise an estimated $2.75 trillion through record tax increases. While advertised as an “infrastructure” plan, only five percent of the funds would actually go to roads and bridges, and even if one uses a generous definition of “infrastructure,” only 25 percent of the plan would fund such projects.
Where will the remaining 75 percent of the funds go? They will be used to advance a far-left environmental-Marxist agenda that would codify the Paris climate agreement and the Great Reset into U.S. federal law.
Environmentalists recognize the plan’s potential to implement their agenda. According to the left-wing Atlantic magazine:
If you want the United States to act at a national level to fight climate change, this bill is it. This is the climate bill.
“Infrastructure” Plan Provisions
First, the plan calls for “100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2035” and “net-zero emissions by 2050.” The plan’s provisions are all designed to meet these goals; to achieve this, a radical government-mandated restructuring of the American economy would occur. In other words, the Paris climate agreement would effectively become American law, and the United Nations would be in the driver’s seat of U.S. domestic policy.
Among other provisions, the plan would spend $10 billion to create a “Civilian Climate Corps,” which would implement the Biden administration’s climate projects and $35 billion for climate change “research.” It would spend another $174 billion on electric vehicles, including electrifying all federal vehicles and at least 20 percent of school buses. Additionally, the plan would spend $700 billion on subsidies and tax credits for “green” energy, even as it ends all subsidies for the so-called fossil fuel industry — thus rigging the U.S. economy in favor of environmentalist policies.
This climate-change agenda stretches into housing. Biden’s plan would spend “$213 billion to produce, preserve, and retrofit more than two million affordable and sustainable places to live.” It would also seek to abolish local zoning rules — including “minimum lot sizes” and “prohibitions on multifamily housing” — that preserve the quality of life in communities. In other words, Biden’s plan is consistent with the Great Reset’s goal of mass urbanization and driving individuals out of rural or low-density areas, along with his “30 by 30” federal land grab.
Implementing high-density housing goes hand-in-hand with implementing mass-transit programs. Biden’s plan does just that, with $85 billion going generally to mass-transit programs and an additional $80 billion to Amtrak specifically. According to a Heritage Foundation analysis, Biden’s plan “would spend nearly 50% more on trains and buses than on roads.”
Biden’s plan also calls for enacting the pro-labor union “PRO Act,” which would unconstitutionally abolish state “right-to-work” laws and help destroy American sovereignty by aligning its labor laws with the USMCA’s dictates. The plan’s call for a global minimum corporate tax — which the Treasury Department formally proposed — would further restrict national sovereignty while also hurting the economy.
The numerous other provisions in Biden’s plan include “$400 billion for care for the elderly and the disabled,” “$300 billion for business and manufacturing,” “$100 billion for school construction,” “$100 billion for workforce development programs,” and “$25 billion for child-care facilities.” As Charles Scaliger points out in The New American magazine, not only are these provisions enormously expensive, but they have absolutely no legal basis under the U.S. Constitution. Under the 10th Amendment, all of these areas are reserved to the states.
Status in Congress
Negotiations over the specifics of an “infrastructure” spending bill are ongoing and a bill number has not yet been assigned. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has announced that he will move on the bill in July regardless of whether negotiations succeed or not.
It makes no sense for congressional Republicans to compromise on such a radical and unconstitutional “climate-change” plan. Unfortunately, the Senate GOP is already negotiating with the Biden administration; it published a $568 billion counterproposal and is expected to release a subsequent $1 trillion plan. In addition to including multiple spending provisions that, again, violate the Constitution, the GOP plan would establish a national pilot program for a draconian “vehicle-miles-traveled” tax. Meanwhile, several Republican senators are working separately with Democrats on a “bipartisan” version.
Although the Biden administration has expressed pleasure at Senate Republicans’ cooperation with its spending proposals, it and congressional Democrats plan to unilaterally pass this bill if the GOP does not cave in to enough Biden Plan provisions. Even if this draconian plan passes, it will not satisfy the Left; the Biden administration is already working on another spending proposal on top of his current “infrastructure” plan.
If Congress respects the U.S. Constitution and individual freedom, it will fully reject Biden’s plan and the socialist provisions contained therein.
To urge your U.S. representative and senators to reject Biden’s socialist and unconstitutional “infrastructure” plan, visit The John Birch Society’s legislative alert here.
