Tech giant Google removes its “diversity” chief because he’s a bigot, as he proved in a wildly anti-Semitic 2007 blog post

BY J.D. HEYES

SEE: https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-06-23-tech-giant-google-fires-diversity-chief-massive-antisemite.html;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

(Natural News) For four years we heard the Democrat left lie to the country about how President Donald Trump was a racist, a bigot and an anti-Semite, all of which were easily disproven by the man’s acts, if not his words.

He hired and appointed persons of color to his administration; he kept his word to Israel and moved the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem (like every one of his predecessors dating back to Bill Clinton promised to do but didn’t); his administration struck historic peace deals between Israel and its Arab neighbors; even his daughter, Ivanka, is Jewish.

No, Donald Trump is no anti-Semite or bigot, but boy, many of his left-wing detractors sure are, as the tech giant Google just proved again.

The company recently was forced to dismiss its diversity chief over a 2007 blog post demonstrating massive anti-Semitism, Israel365 News reports:

Kamau Bobb “will no longer be part of our diversity team going forward,” tech giant Google announced Wednesday, after the surfacing of an antisemitic blog post its Global Lead for Diversity, Strategy and Research wrote in 2007. …

In the 2007 post, first reported on by the Washington Free Beacon, Bobb, then a research associate at Georgia Tech, shared his views on how Jews people should view the conflict in the Middle East.

“We unequivocally condemn the past writings by a member of our diversity team that are causing deep offense and pain to members of our Jewish community and our LGBTQ+ community. These writings are unquestionably hurtful. The author acknowledges this and has apologized. He will no longer be part of our diversity team going forward and will focus on his STEM [Science Technology Engineering Math] work,” Google said in a statement. “This has come at a time where we’ve seen an alarming increase in antisemitic attacks. Antisemitism is a vile prejudice that has given rise to unfathomable acts. It has no place in society and we stand with our Jewish community in condemning it.”

And yet…the company hired Bobb without checking his background? Come on.

In 2007, Bobb claimed that Jews have an “insatiable appetite for war” and an “insensitivity to the suffering [of] others” — failing to mention, of course, that Israel is constantly under attack and did not start any of the three major wars it has fought with its neighbors since coming into existence in 1947.

He went on to rip the Israeli government, which, at the time, was led by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, adding that Jews everywhere should be “tormented” by Israel’s actions.

“If I were a Jew today, my sensibilities would be tormented. I would find it increasingly difficult to reconcile the long cycles of oppression that Jewish people have endured and the insatiable appetite for vengeful violence that Israel, my homeland, has now acquired,” he wrote.

“If I were a Jew I would be concerned about my insatiable appetite for war and killing in defense of myself,” he wrote. “Self-defense is undoubtedly an instinct, but I would be afraid of my increasing insensitivity to the suffering [of] others.”

He went on to make highly disturbing comments about the Holocaust — because of course.

He said that as a Jew, his reflections on “Kristallnacht,” also known as the “Night of Broken Glass” in Nazi Germany, which preceded the Holocaust, “would lead me to feel that these are precisely the human sentiments that I as Jew would understand; that I ought to understand and feel compelled to help alleviate.”

“It cannot be that the sum total of a history of suffering and slaughter places such a premium on my identity that I would be willing to damn others in defense of it,” Bobb wrote.

As a Jew, he continued, “I wouldn’t understand the notion of collective punishment, cutting off gas, electricity, and water from residents in Gaza because they are attacking Israel who is fighting against them. It would be unconscionable to me to watch Israeli tanks donning the Star of David rumbling through Ramallah, destroying buildings and breaking the glass.”

It’s incredibly ironic that the company which perfected the search engine couldn’t be bothered to look up its ‘diversity’ choice and learn more about him before putting him on the payroll.

Sources include:

Israel365News.com

EndGame.news

Governor DeSantis Wins Major Victory to Protect Florida’s Cruise Industry

SEE: https://www.flgov.com/2021/06/18/governor-desantis-wins-major-victory-to-protect-floridas-cruise-industry/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Today, the federal district court in Tampa delivered a major victory for Governor Ron DeSantis against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and its obstructionist No Sail Orders that have flatlined Florida’s cruise industry for over a year. Ruling in favor of Florida’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Judge Steven Merryday concluded the CDC’s restrictions are likely unconstitutional and overstepping their legal authority. The Cruise Industry will soon be permitted to set sail again thanks to the lawsuit brought by Governor DeSantis and Attorney General Moody. The state fought on behalf of the cruise industry in Florida to secure the ability to resume operations without overly burdensome requirements that discriminate against children, leave most of the ships sitting in port, and disregard the freedom of Floridians to make decisions for their families.

Beginning July 18, the CDC’s orders will become mere “guidance,” and cruise ships will hit the open waters once again free from the CDC. As Florida continues to thrive while open for business, the return of the cruise industry marks an important milestone in the fight for freedom.

“The CDC has been wrong all along, and they knew it,” said Governor Ron DeSantis. “The CDC and the Biden Administration concocted a plan to sink the cruise industry, hiding behind bureaucratic delay and lawsuits. Today, we are securing this victory for Florida families, for the cruise industry, and for every state that wants to preserve its rights in the face of unprecedented federal overreach.”

Included in the ruling, the Middle District Court of Florida found that:

  • The CDC cannot discriminately keep children and families from cruising;
  • Neither the CDC, nor any federal agency, can require a vaccine passport; and
  • The CDC must create an actual framework for businesses to resume operations, rather than forcing them to conduct burdensome and bureaucratic tests without any standard by which to be measured.

In its ruling, the court says “Never has CDC (or a predecessor) detained a vessel for more than fifteen months; never has CDC implemented a widespread or industry-wide detention of a fleet of vessels in American waters; never has CDC condition pratique as extensively and burdensomely as the conditional sailing order; and never has CDC imposed restrictions that have summarily dismissed the effectiveness of state regulation and halted for an extended time an entire multi-billion dollar industry nationwide. In a word, never has CDC implemented measures as extensive, disabling and exclusive as those under review in this action.

Judge Merryday also cites a previous ruling stating, “When an agency claims to discover in a long-extant statute an unheralded power to regulate ‘a significant portion of the American economy,’ we typically greet its announcement with a measure of skepticism.”

Find the full ruling here.

Orban Stands Firm, Defends Hungary’s Ban on Pro-Trans Propaganda Aimed at Minors

Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán Stands Firm, Defends Country’s Ban on Pro-trans Propaganda Aimed at Minors

BY LUIS MIGUEL

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/hungarian-prime-minister-orban-stands-firm-defends-countrys-ban-on-pro-trans-propaganda-aimed-at-minors/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Faced with pressure from pro-LGBT entities around the world over his new anti-pedophile laws that ban the promotion of homosexualiy and transgenderism to minors, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has nevertheless stood by the legislation, defending it as a mechanism to protect parental rights related to their children’s education.

Among those criticizing the Hungarian legislation is Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), which is funded by the U.S. government. 

In defending the recent anti-pedophile laws, Orbán maintains that “education in schools must not be in conflict with the will of parents; it must at most be supplementary, its form and content must be clearly defined and it must be subject to parental consent” and that “parents also rightly expect that on platforms used by our children, pornography, sexuality for its own sake, homosexuality and gender reassignment programs should not be available.”

He pointed out that the laws do not interfere with the private practices of consenting adults but are only aimed at protecting children, affirming that “in Hungary, no one has a say in how adults live their lives” and that “a free adult should not have to give an account of his life in front of any secular authority — only before God when the time comes.”

The new laws do not apply “to the lives and sexual practices of adults over 18, nor to what they are exposed to as an adult in the public realm,” Orbán emphasized.

The Hungarian prime minister also took aim at the mainstream media and the political left, asserting that “European mainstream media exclude, neglect and ban thoughts which are not compatible with the worldview they relay day in day out.”

“Let’s face it, this movement is eternal, and its new slogan is no longer ‘Proletarians of the world, unite!’ but ‘Liberals of the world, unite!’ This, of course, reinforces the Central European conviction that today’s liberals are in fact communists with degrees,” Orbán added.

In further defense of the new laws, Hungarian government spokesman Zoltán Kovács emphasized that the restrictions on LGBT content aimed at children are not the main focus of the legislation. Rather, the laws are meant to create a tougher stance against pedophiles by, among other measures, making the penal code “stricter in the case of sexual offenders, with penalties increasing and no statute of limitation for the most serious crimes.”

One aspect of the legislation is the creation of a searchable photographic register of child predators, along with language banning them from many jobs where they might come into contact with children.

It also establishes that children cannot be shown any content encouraging gender change or homosexuality. This ban extends to advertising.

David Vig, director of Amnesty International in Hungary, fired back at the legislation, claiming that it “appears to be a deliberate attempt by the Hungarian government to conflate pedophilia with LGBTI people.”

Critics have compared the Hungarian laws to the 2013 Russian legislation “for the Purpose of Protecting Children from Information Advocating for a Denial of Traditional Family Values,” often referred to as the “gay propaganda law.”

The Russian law targets “propaganda on nontraditional sexual relations.”

These moves in Europe come as parents in American schools become increasingly concerned about sexual content and pro-LGBT messaging in the nation’s classrooms.

In a recent example, a presenter at a Manhattan prep school gave juniors a lesson on “porn literacy.” The New York Post reported that in addition to showing pictures of partially-nude women (some in bondage), “one slide cited various porn genres such as ‘incest-themed,’ consensual or ‘vanilla,’ ‘barely legal,’ and ‘kink and BDSM’ (which included ‘waterboard electro’ torture porn as an example).”

Then there’s the Black Lives Matter at school program being implemented on campuses across America for children as young as kindergarten age. The program teaches students to be transgender and “queer-affirming.”

While U.S. state and local governments have not directly tackled LGBT propaganda as Hungary has, a number have taken action on related issues, such as banning boys from participating in girls’ sports. 

In April, Arkansas became the first state to outlaw transgender sex change therapy for minors, with the state’s legislature overriding Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson’s veto to do so. Tennessee followed a month later.

Biden’s “New Atlantic Charter” Advances Globalist World Order

Biden’s “New Atlantic Charter” Advances Globalist World Order

BY ALEX NEWMAN

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/bidens-new-atlantic-charter-advances-globalist-world-order/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The longtime globalist dream of merging the United States with the nations of Europe under an unaccountable transatlantic regime got a big boost this month, with a controversial “New Atlantic Charter” being signed by Joe Biden and U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

The document advances a dizzying array of internationalist Big Government schemes, including “sustainable development,” entangling military alliances, man-made global-warming alarmism, and the so-called rules-based international order.

But none of it is new. The historical record shows Deep State globalists have been obsessed with the plot for almost a century. The goal is a radical transformation on par with the unprecedented expansion of government under FDR, with a nod to globalist George Soros’ favorite “open societies” language.

The unconstitutional agreement, which has not been ratified by the U.S. Senate as required for all treaties, actually plays on the original Atlantic Charter inked by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill in 1941.

That controversial 80-year-old document vowed to seek the disarmament of nations and build a “new world order,” as the Washington Post put it, after the quashing of National Socialist (Nazi) tyranny in Europe.

The 1941 document came before the U.S. government even formally joined the war effort. But it set the stage for FDR to break his campaign promises and get America involved in World War II, while building up the barbarous Soviet war machine and laying the foundations for the United Nations. For perspective, consider that the Soviet Union endorsed the original “Atlantic Charter” in 1942.

The new document signed on the sidelines of the G7 meeting in Cornwall, England, this month reeks of brazen globalism, too. For instance, under the guise of creating a “peaceful and prosperous future,” the two rulers said they “intend to strengthen the institutions, laws, and norms that sustain international co-operation to adapt them to meet the new challenges of the 21st century, and guard against those that would undermine them.”

In other words, the institutions of “global governance” will be strengthened and further empowered over nations and peoples, while efforts to undermine critics will be stepped up. “We will work through the rules-based international order to tackle global challenges together,” the duo added, using standard globalist rhetoric.

The critical military component of the globalist agenda is also laid out for all to see. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a UN subsidiary that is and has always been at the disposal of the UN to enforce globalist aims at the barrel of a gun, is touted as key to the new order. “Our NATO Allies and partners will always be able to count on us,” the document states, purporting to commit the nations involved to “collective security and international stability.”

They also pledged to help develop global rules for “responsible State behavior” — in other words, global laws for nations — on everything from the Internet to weapons. Even “health threats” were addressed in the document. Considering the way Biden and Johnson dealt with COVID by usurping unprecedented powers, that is an ominous sign.

Globalists were pleased with the document. For instance, Council on Foreign Relations “Global Governance” bigwig Stewart Patrick noted that the original Atlantic Charter “influenced planning for the major multilateral institutions that would come to govern the postwar world.” Think UN, IMF, World Bank, and so on.

“The New Atlantic Charter aspires to something similar,” declares the CFR globalist, saying Biden and Johnson both view themselves as “‘wartime’ leaders” and that the agreement “repudiates” Donald Trump’s pro-sovereignty “America First” foreign-policy doctrines. Biden once joked that he “worked for” CFR boss Richard Haass, so his doing the globalist organization’s bidding is hardly surprising.

Alleged man-made “climate change” and “sustainable development” are also key to the globalist new deal, both domestically and on the international stage. For instance, Johnson and Biden promised to impose “an inclusive, fair, climate-friendly, sustainable, rules-based global economy for the 21st century” on humanity and their own nations, though Communist China will almost certainly continue to be exempt as Western governments destroy their own economies.

In a throwback to 1941, the two also vowed to develop new global “labour and environmental standards” while working to foster “sustainable global development.” All of that rhetoric, of course, comes straight from UN Agenda 21 and the UN Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, international agreements aimed at creating a socialistic world authority.

Like the original Atlantic Charter, the new one, aside from being packed with globalist platitudes, lays the groundwork for massive government intervention in the lives of citizens and the economy. Under various pretexts, updated for the 21st century, Biden and Johnson promise to make the state far more active across the board.

Indeed, establishment mouthpieces openly trumpeted the fact that Biden (or his handlers), like FDR 80 years ago, is hoping the Charter will “propel his own New Deal domestically.” The New Deal represented the most dramatic expansion of federal power in history, something Biden and radical congressional leaders are hoping to build upon.

None of this globalist Big Government mongering from Biden was unexpected. During the campaign, he constantly parroted catchy slogans such as “Build Back Better,” a marketing term for Big Government globalism developed by the UN and embraced by Johnson and other leaders ready to sell out their nations. Indeed, Biden’s support for Green New Deal-type extremism masquerading as “environmentalism” was a dead giveaway about the direction he would go.

In February, meanwhile, Biden declared that “the transatlantic alliance is back.” Further evidence of Biden’s leanings comes from his time as vice president. In fact, the Atlantic Charter scheme appears to be an effort to resurrect the ideas behind the Obama-backed globalist scheme known as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which would have laid the groundwork for eventually merging the United States and the European Union under a supranational regime similar to the one ruling the EU.

Even before his campaign, going back to the 1970s, Biden was affiliated with “Members of Congress for Peace Through Law,” an avowedly globalist organization of lawmakers that ruthlessly demonized anti-communist U.S. allies such as Rhodesia and South Africa while offering cover to murderous communist regimes and promoting the idea of global law to achieve “peace.”

A key strategy for building that world federalist system was to first unite the nations of Europe under a single regime, then merge that with the United States under a trans-Atlantic government dubbed an “Atlantic Union.” And globalist operatives from the Council on Foreign Relations and others within the U.S. government have been diligently working toward that goal since at least the end of World War II.

From presidents to congressional leaders, the idea of an Atlantic Union was all the rage. Among the most important reasons why so many globalists in the United States and Europe felt the unification of European nations under a single regime was so crucial to imposing an Atlantic Union: Many Europeans, especially those from smaller nations, were worried about being dominated politically and economically by the overwhelming power of the post-World War II United States.

In the mid-1960s, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs John M. Leddy summed up the reason for promoting an EU-style regime in very explicit terms. “The simple, but decisive, fact is that our Atlantic allies do not wish to move forward any type of federal political relationship with the United States, even as an objective,” he said.

“The fundamental reason why there is little European interest in federal union with us at this time is, I think, self-evident,” he continued. “It is that Europe fears that it would be swallowed by a more powerful United States.”

A single regime for all Europe might change that, even though, ironically, many Europeans were duped into surrendering their sovereignty under the guise of being able to more successfully stand up to America. The CIA helped fund the phony grassroots movement advocating the surrender of sovereignty to what eventually became the EU super-state.

Other senior U.S. officials also acknowledged the goal of support for European integration. On September 20, 1966, for example, then-Under Secretary of State George Ball, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), testified before Congress on the State Department’s view on forming an “Atlantic Community,” essentially merging the United States with Europe.

“I find little evidence of any strong interest among Europeans for any immediate move toward greater political unity with the United States,” he explained. “They fear the overwhelming weight of U.S. power and influence in our common councils…. We believe that so long as Europe remains merely a continent of medium- and small-sized states there are definite limits to the degree of political unity we can achieve across the ocean.”

The end goal of unifying Europe under a single regime, then, was to eventually build a transatlantic union merging the United States with the European superstate. In fact, that is the very same agenda envisioned in Obama’s extraordinarily unpopular “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership,” or TTIP, with the EU. If approved by the U.S. Congress and European officials, the transatlantic regime created under the TTIP would have served as the nucleus of a future EU-style “Atlantic Union” government to rule over both the United States and the EU.

And that was the idea all along. “Whatever power they can achieve as two separate unions — a United States of Europe and a United States of America — they can achieve far better by forming one union,” explained influential globalist Clarence Streit in testimony before the U.S. Congress’ House Committee on Foreign Affairs in 1948. The eventual goal, though, was to continue strengthening the UN until the various “unions” could be merged into a single global government, Streit explained. Back then, globalists were often more open about their agenda.

And for decades, that was hardly a fringe idea. On July 4, 1962, for example, President John F. Kennedy called publicly for a “Declaration of Interdependence.” “I will say here and now, on this Day of Independence, that the United States will be ready for a Declaration of Interdependence, that we will be prepared to discuss with a united Europe the ways and means of forming a concrete Atlantic partnership, a mutually beneficial partnership between the new union now emerging in Europe and the old American Union,” he said.

This would go on to become a global federation, the president continued. “For the Atlantic partnership of which I speak would not look inward only, preoccupied with its own welfare and advancement,” he said. “It must look outward to cooperate with all nations in meeting their common concern. It would serve as a nucleus for the eventual union of all free men — those who are now free and those who are vowing that someday they will be free.”

Even as far back as the 1940s, the globalist-influenced U.S. government was pursuing the subjugation of Europe under a single, ultra-powerful regime controlled by globalist interests. In 1947, then-U.S. Secretary of State George Marshall (CFR) — a key player in handing China to Chairman Mao’s murderous communists, and perhaps mass-murdering dictator Joseph Stalin’s most important ally in the world — strongly suggested in a speech that European “economic cooperation” was a precondition for the desperately needed American aid after the war. The scheme eventually became known as the “Marshall Plan.”

“It is already evident that, before the United States Government can proceed much further in its efforts to alleviate the situation and help start the European world on its way to recovery, there must be some agreement among the countries of Europe as to the requirements of the situation and the part those countries themselves will take in order to give proper effect to whatever action might be undertaken by this Government,” said Marshall, the man after whom the scheme was named.

Marshall, who betrayed free peoples and U.S. allies around the world into communist slavery, was adamant. “The role of this country should consist of friendly aid in the drafting of a European program and of later support of such a program so far as it may be practical for us to do so,” he said, vowing to use American taxpayer money to promote an EU. “The program should be a joint one, agreed to by a number, if not all European nations.”

The Committee of European Economic Cooperation, chaired by then-British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, officially responded with a major report that was ultimately transmitted approvingly by the U.S. State Department to President Harry Truman. Signed by government representatives from Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and more, the committee outlined efforts to create a customs union that could eventually lead to even further “cooperation.” U.S. officials were pleased.

Members of Congress, especially Representative Walter Judd (R-Minn.), even tried to get language in the statement of purpose for the original Marshall Plan bill of 1948 explicitly declaring that it was the policy of the United States to encourage the economic unification and the political federation of Europe. In the end, language calling for the development of economic cooperation was included instead.

The next year, the “political federation” amendment was pursued again, with the result being the addition of the sentence: “It is further declared to be the policy of the people of the United States to encourage the unification of Europe.” By 1951, Congress finally came out and said it openly, with a clause included in the 1951 Mutual Security Act stating that the goal was “to further encourage the economic unification and the political federation of Europe.”

The U.S. government has similarly supported integration in Africa, Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, and beyond. The eventual goal remains the same: merging all of the regional superstates into a single global system often referred to by globalists in both parties and all around the globe as the “New World Order.”

Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger spelled it out clearly in his new book World Order. “The contemporary quest for world order [world government] will require a coherent strategy to establish a concept of order [regional government] within the various regions and to relate these regional orders [governments] to one another,” he wrote.

Contrasting the current Republican Party with internationalist-minded GOP candidate presidential candidate Wendell Willkie in the early 1940s, establishment analysts are already warning that a Republican Party dominated by Donald Trump and America first would be a death blow for the Deep State’s effort to resurrect American globalism through Biden. Republicans must stand firm.

Pope Francis: ‘Tear Down the Walls’ Against Islam!

BY RAYMOND IBRAHIM

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/columns/raymond-ibrahim/2021/06/23/pope-francis-tear-down-the-walls-against-islam-n1456537;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Pope Francis wants any and all walls, real or figurative, that stand between the West and Islam broken down immediately — or so he’s constantly saying.

Most recently, on Sunday, June 13, 2021, he called for the “growth of a more supportive humanity that tears down the wall of indifference.”  This was spoken in the context of urging Europeans to take in more illegally-arrived Muslim migrants.

Earlier, in March 2019, when asked “a question about migration in general and about U.S. President Donald Trump’s then-threat to shut down the southern border with Mexico,” the pope pontificated in platitudes. “Builders of walls,” he said, “be they made of razor wire or bricks, will end up becoming prisoners of the walls they build. … With fear, we will not move forward, with walls, we will remain closed within these walls.”

Less than a week before that, Francis lectured the mayor of Rome about the need to be more welcoming to Muslim migrants. “Rome,” he declared, “a hospitable city, is called to face this epochal challenge [floods of Muslim migrants demanding entry] in the wake of its noble history; to use its energies to welcome and integrate, to transform tensions and problems into opportunities for meeting and growth.”

“Rome,” he exulted, “city of bridges, never walls!”

The grand irony of all this is that Pope Francis lives in the only state to be surrounded by walls — Vatican City — and most of these bastions were erected to ward off ongoing Islamic invasions.

In 846, for example, a Muslim fleet from North Africa consisting of 73 ships and 11,000 Muslims, landed in Ostia near Rome. Muslim merchants who frequently visited Italy had provided them with precise intelligence that made the raid a success. Although they were unable to breach the pre-existing walls of the Eternal City, they sacked and despoiled the surrounding countryside, including — to the consternation of Christendom — the venerated and centuries-old basilicas of St. Peter and St. Paul. The Muslim invaders desecrated the tombs of the revered apostles and stripped them of all their treasures.

Pope Leo IV (847-855) responded by building many more walls, including fifteen bastions along the right bank of the Tiber River, the mouth of which was forthwith closed with a chain to protect the sacred sites from further Muslim raids and desecrations. Completed by 852, the walls were in places 40 feet high and 12 feet thick.

Further anticipating the crusades against Islam by over two centuries — and thus showing how they were a long time coming — Pope Leo (and after him Pope John VIII) offered the remission of sins for those Christians who died fighting Islamic invaders. Such was the existential and ongoing danger Muslims referred to in contemporary sources as “Sons of Satan,” caused for Europe — more than two centuries before the First Crusade was launched in 1095.

Indeed, just three years after the initial Muslim invasion of Rome, “in 849 the Muslims attempted a new landing at Ostia; then, every year from around 857 on, they threatened the Roman seaboard,” explains French medieval historian C. E. Dufourcq:

In order to get rid of them, Pope John VIII  decided in 878 to promise them an annual payment [or jizya] of several thousand gold pieces; but this tribute of the Holy See to Islam seems to have been paid for only two years; and from time to time until the beginning of the tenth century, the Muslims reappeared at the mouth of the Tiber or along the coast nearby.

Today, many Muslims, not just of the ISIS variety, continue to boast that Islam will conquer Rome, the only one of five ancient apostolic sees never to have been subjugated by jihad (unlike Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Constantinople).

Similarly, many Muslims all throughout Europe continue exhibiting the same hostility and contempt for all things and persons non-Islamic, whether by vandalizing churches and breaking crosses or by raping “infidel” women as theirs by right.

And that is the point that Pope Francis — whose own ancient city would never have lasted to the present if not for walls — misses: walls should go down and bridges should be extended only when both parties are willing to live in amicable peace.  Otherwise, they serve only to make the destructive work of those who have for centuries been trying to conquer and destroy in the name of Islam that much easier.

For more on how walls saved Western civilization, see Raymond Ibrahim’s Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West.

Raymond Ibrahim

Raymond Ibrahim, an expert in Islamic history and doctrine, is author of Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West (2018); Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (2013); and The Al Qaeda Reader (2007). He has appeared on C-SPAN, Al-Jazeera, CNN, NPR, and PBS, and been published by the New York Times SyndicateLos Angeles TimesWashington PostFinancial TimesWeekly StandardChronicle of Higher Education, and Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst. Formerly an Arabic linguist at the Library of Congress, Ibrahim has guest lectured at many universities, including the U.S. Army War College, briefed governmental agencies such as U.S. Strategic Command, and testified before Congress. He has been a visiting fellow/scholar at a variety of Institutes—from the Hoover Institution to the National Intelligence University—and is currently a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a Judith Friedman Rosen Fellow at the Middle East Forum, and a Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute. His full biography is available here.  Follow Raymond at Twitter and Facebook.

For media inquiries, please contact communications@pjmedia.com

IRS Denies Tax Exemption to Texas Religious Group Because Prayer, Bible Reading Boost the Republican Party

SEE: https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/irs-denies-tax-exemption-to-texas-religious-group-because-prayer-bible-reading-boost-the-republican-party_3861757.html

EXCERPT: An IRS official denied tax-exempt status to a Texas group that encourages church members to pray for state and national leaders, regardless of their party affiliation, because it benefits “the private interests of the [Republican] Party.”

The ‘Conservative’ Supreme Court’s Love-Affair With Obamacare

Giving the Left’s healthcare scam a thumbs-up.

BY MATTHEW VADUM

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/why-does-conservative-supreme-court-love-obamacare-matthew-vadum/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Conservatives across America have to be asking themselves why they put so much time, money, and energy into electing Republicans when the supposedly conservative Supreme Court justices who follow side with the Left in important cases.

The latest jurisprudential atrocity is the high court’s dreadful but not altogether unexpected betrayal of the U.S. Constitution in California v. Texas, a challenge to the Obamacare redistribution statute lodged by Texas and 17 other states that had been backed by the former Trump administration.

“It’s never been a proper role for the federal government to regulate health care and health insurance,” Robert Henneke of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, who represented two individual plaintiffs, said after winning at the trial court level. “It is a proper role for the states.”

There are 6 conservative justices and 3 liberal justices on the Supreme Court, or so the conventional wisdom goes.

Yet instead of dealing with the legal controversy head-on, a majority of the court chickened out, failing for a third time to mete out a richly deserved death blow to the flagrantly unconstitutional, un-American monstrosity that is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). By a vote of 7–2 on June 17, the Supreme Court cavalierly brushed aside questions of the law’s constitutional validity by finding that those challenging it lacked the required legal standing to do so.

Of the three Trump appointees, two –Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett— voted to protect the ACA. Even the most brilliant member of the court, conservative stalwart Justice Clarence Thomas, bought into this cowardly nonsense, siding with the majority on standing.

This ruling should disabuse Americans once and for all of the claim, repeated ad nauseam by the Left, that the Supreme Court, which momentarily is dominated by Republican appointees, is somehow “conservative” or “right-wing.”

It also demonstrates that threatening to pack the court, as Democrats vow to do, is an effective way of making sure the court fails to do its job.

After all, the Supreme Court does what it wants to do. In controversial cases, it sometimes adheres to the Constitution, as its members are sworn to do; other times it just makes stuff up, issuing incoherent decisions written to justify a predetermined conclusion. Invoking standing is a tried and true method of copping out.

After the court opinion in California v. Texas was released, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said what needed to be said.

“Obamacare was sold on a lie to the American people,” the Republican wrote on Twitter

“Its crown jewel —the individual mandate— was unconstitutional when it was enacted and it is still unconstitutional. Yet, seven justices decided to avoid the question of constitutionality by limiting their decision to a ruling on standing. If the government is allowed to mislead its citizens, pass a massive government takeover of health care, and yet still survive after Supreme Court review, this spells doom for the principles of federalism and limited government.”

“The failed Obamacare system will stagger on as a result of this decision,” said Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), a physician who has worked to repeal the law. “Every American’s health care has been harmed by Obamacare.”

Recall that in the 2008 campaign, then-candidate Barack Hussein Obama lied to voters, claiming that his health care scheme would drive annual premiums down by $2,500 and that patients would not see their health care arrangements disrupted. Even left-leaning PolitiFact deemed Obama’s mantra, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,” its “Lie of the Year” in 2013.

After BHO conned his way into the Oval Office, the law was enacted in 2010 without a single Republican vote in Congress on final passage. Later, Obamacare “architect” and MIT economist Jonathan Gruber said lying was essential to getting it done. It was “the stupidity of the American voter” that made it important to conceal Obamacare’s true costs from the public. “That was really, really critical for the thing to pass,” he said.

Insurance premiums have shot up since then. The Kaiser Family Foundation reports that the total cost of the average employer-sponsored family health insurance premium increased to $20,576 in 2019, up from $13,375 in 2009, a 54 percent increase. In individual markets, premiums rose from an average of $2,640 ($220 per month) in 2011 to $6,960 ($580 per month) in 2019, a 164 percent increase. Many consumers haven’t been able to afford premiums and have lost their insurance.

Finally, the case of California v. Texas came along, affording the Supreme Court a wonderful opportunity to at long last drive a stake through Obamacare’s heart.

Congress teed up the case by making the ACA’s individual mandate disappear in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 by reducing the tax penalty for not purchasing insurance to zero. Those fighting the statute in the current case argued that the revised law ran afoul of the Constitution because the individual mandate was so integral to the law that Obamacare couldn’t function without it.

At the end of 2018, Texas-based federal Judge Reed O’Connor sided with the challengers, ruling they had standing and that the Obamacare law was unconstitutional in its entirety.

In 2017, Congress “sawed off the last leg [Obamacare] stood on,” wrote O’Connor, who was appointed by President George W. Bush. The “mandate ‘is essential to’ and inseverable from ‘the other provisions of’” the law, he wrote.

But the Supreme Court had no interest in doing the right thing.

The majority opinion in California v. Texas was written by liberal Justice Stephen Breyer, though it reads like something written by the weaselly virtue-signaling fake conservative Chief Justice John Roberts. Roberts, along with conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, joined the majority opinion. Naturally, liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan also joined it.

Roberts, who wrote the NFIB v. Sebelius decision, had said during oral arguments November 10, 2020, that the Supreme Court had no business striking down unconstitutional statutes.

“On the severance question, I think it’s hard for you to argue that Congress intended the entire Act to fall if the mandate were struck down when the same Congress that lowered the penalty to zero did not even try to repeal the rest of the Act,” Roberts told Texas Solicitor General Kyle D. Hawkins.

“I think, frankly, that they wanted the Court to do that. But that’s not our job,” Roberts said in an assertion that would no doubt surprise his predecessor John Marshall, who invented judicial review in 1803 in the seminal Marbury v. Madison ruling.

Roberts was in fact wrong when he said Congress did not try to repeal the Obamacare law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that zeroed out the mandate-related penalty came out of the 115th Congress (2017–2018). In fact, lawmakers voted on several bills in that Congress that would have repealed Obamacare.

Returning to the case at hand, Breyer wrote that the 18 states argued that without the penalty the law’s “minimum essential coverage requirement,” as he put it in pleasant-sounding language, was unconstitutional.

They said “neither the Commerce Clause nor the Tax Clause (nor any other enumerated power) grants Congress the power to enact it,” Breyer wrote. “They also argue that the minimum essential coverage requirement is not severable from the rest of the Act. Hence, they believe the Act as a whole is invalid.”

Then Breyer began the excuse-making.

But the Supreme Court does “not reach these questions of the Act’s validity” because “Texas and the other plaintiffs in this suit lack the standing necessary to raise them.”

Article III of the Constitution “gives federal courts the power to adjudicate only genuine ‘Cases’ and ‘Controversies[,]’ … [and] includes the requirement that litigants have standing,” Breyer wrote.

A “plaintiff has standing only if he can ‘allege personal injury fairly traceable to the defendant’s allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.’”

Citing two precedents, he stated fatuously that, “Neither the individual nor the state plaintiffs have shown that the injury they will suffer or have suffered is ‘fairly traceable’ to the ‘allegedly unlawful conduct’ of which they complain.”

Come again?

Another way of putting this is to say that the Supreme Court didn’t care about the needless hardship and suffering Obamacare has imposed on Americans without controlling costs, which keep rising and rising.

The court lacked the resolve to do the right thing and actually interpret the Constitution, so, as it has done many times before, the court chose the result it wanted and then after the fact threw together yet another poorly reasoned written opinion to justify the desired outcome.

“Standing, after all, is not a complicated concept,” Andrea Widburg wrote at American Thinker, citing Whitmore v. Arkansas (1990).

It requires a litigant to clearly demonstrate he has suffered an “injury in fact,” which “must be concrete in both a qualitative and temporal sense.” The litigant must allege an injury to himself that is “distinct and palpable,” not merely “abstract … and the alleged harm must be actual or imminent, not ‘conjectural’ or ‘hypothetical.’” The litigant must also show the injury “fairly can be traced to the challenged action” and “is likely to be redressed by a favorable decision.”

So what would it take to demonstrate an “injury in fact”? Surging health care cost-related bankruptcies? Reduced hiring by employers because health insurance is unaffordable? An increase in morbidity rates because patients can’t afford to go to the doctor? Rising suicide rates resulting from sick patients killing themselves because they can’t get the care they need?Dead bodies overflowing from morgues?

If the Supreme Court doesn’t want to rule on the merits of a case, the standing excuse is an easy out.

Justice Samuel Alito used sarcasm to slam his colleagues for engaging in legal sophistry because they didn’t want to do the right thing.

“Today’s decision is the third installment in our epic Affordable Care Act trilogy, and it follows the same pattern as installments one and two,” Alito wrote in a dissenting opinion that was joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch.

“In all three episodes, with the Affordable Care Act facing a serious threat, the Court has pulled off an improbable rescue.”

Let’s go over the other two constituent parts of the trilogy.

In NFIB v. Sebelius (2012), the Supreme Court upheld the statute 5–4, on the theory that the individual mandate—which compelled Americans to buy health insurance even if they didn’t want it—was somehow a valid exercise of Congress’s power to tax.

The court again threw a lifeline to Obamacare in King v. Burwell(2015), finding 6–3 that even though the law provides that Congress makes tax credits available only on an “Exchange established by the State,” the latter phrase actually means on an “Exchange established by the State or the Federal Government,” as the justifiably angry late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in his dissenting opinion.

In his dissent in California v. Texas, Alito wrote, “No one can fail to be impressed by the lengths to which this Court has been willing to go to defend the ACA against all threats.”

“A penalty is a tax. The United States is a State. And 18 States who bear costly burdens under the ACA cannot even get a foot in the door to raise a constitutional challenge. So a tax that does not tax is allowed to stand and support one of the biggest Government programs in our Nation’s history. Fans of judicial inventiveness will applaud once again. But I must respectfully dissent.”

Perhaps Justice Thomas’s conscience bothered him so instead of doing the right thing he slammed his colleagues for wrongly deciding NFIB v. Sebelius and King v. Burwell.

“But, whatever the Act’s dubious history in this Court, we must assess the current suit on its own terms. And, here, there is a fundamental problem with the arguments advanced by the plaintiffs in attacking the Act—they have not identified any unlawful action that has injured them,” he wrote in an opinion concurring with the majority.

Tedious stuff.

And although Gorsuch may have done the right thing in this case, his brief tenure on the court does not inspire confidence.

With Gorsuch’s majority opinion last year in the 6-3 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, the justice used the court as a national super-legislature and amended a law without involving actually elected lawmakers. (Roberts was the only other conservative in the majority.) Gorsuch stretched the meaning of the word “sex” in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include sexual orientation and gender identity, something nobody thought it meant in 1964. As then-Solicitor General Noel Francisco said during oral arguments, “Sex means whether you’re male or female, not whether you’re gay or straight.”

“Many will applaud today’s decision because they agree on policy grounds with the Court’s updating of Title VII,” Alito wrote in a dissenting opinion.

“But the question in these cases is not whether discrimination because of sexual orientation or gender identity should be outlawed. The question is whether Congress did that in 1964. It indisputably did not.”

But I digress, sort of.

Over the past year the Supreme Court has left the American people at the mercy of radical leftists. 

Power-mad governors and mayors inspired by swamp creature Anthony Fauci and fed bogus data by lying, monomaniacal epidemiologists, declared war on the American people as they combated the Chinese virus that causes COVID-19. 

The Supreme Court stood by for the most part and allowed the Left’s ongoing experiment in social control to proceed unimpeded. Ditto for the election-related challenges brought by President Donald Trump and Republicans, which seem more and more justified with each passing day as post-election audits and investigations continue.

There was so much justice to be done, but the Supreme Court refused to do it.

As it turns out, what seemed true before the ruling has only come into sharper focus after it: good, patriotic people who believe in the American idea cannot count on the Supreme Court, which has long enjoyed reverence it does not deserve, to save America.

We will have to do it ourselves.

Racist MINNEAPOLIS Mayor: Jacob Frey~10th in a series.

BY BRUCE BAWER

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/racist-mayor-jacob-frey-bruce-bawer/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Editor's note: This is the 10th part in Frontpage Mag's new series on Racist Mayors. (See previous parts below this article). Stay tuned for more installments.

If you want to be thorough about the matter, of course, you can’t talk about the ongoing destruction of the city of Minneapolis under the auspices of its callow, hapless young mayor, Jacob Frey – aptly described by New York Post columnist Miranda Devine as a “soy boy,” a “man-child,” and a “half-price Justin Trudeau” (they’re both cute in the same doe-eyed, dumb-looking way) – without also taking into account the pernicious contributions of Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, whose mantra, since the death of George Floyd on May 25, 2020, has been “systemic racism”; Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan, who, with breathtaking mendacity, blamed last year’s Antifa and BLM mayhem on “white supremacists”; the state’s Hamas-linked, Jew-hating Attorney General Keith Ellison, a serial girlfriend abuser and longtime Farrakhan acolyte who boasts continually of his efforts toward “social transformation”; and radical-left City Council President Lisa Bender, who, when challenged (by CNN, no less!) on her ridiculous call for “a future without police,” dismissed public concerns about armed home burglaries as coming from “a place of privilege.”

But although each of these reprehensible characters has played a significant role in Minneapolis’s current tragedy, Frey, who turns forty in July, is without question the star of the show. His big moment came on June 6 of last year, when, in what Devine characterized as “a scene reminiscent of a Maoist struggle session,” the masked, t-shirted mayor inanely confessed to a restive crowd of black radicals that he was “coming to grips with my own brokenness.” Yet even this wince-inducing display of abject contrition wasn’t enough for them: when he told them he wouldn’t defund the police (although, as he assured the New York Times, he believes fervently in “deep structural reform of a racist system”), they jeered at him, and Frey, looking for all the world like a teenager being sent to bed without dinner by his parents, meekly obeyed the rabble’s command to go home. Did it count for nothing with this mob that two days earlier, in an almost equally pathetic tableau, Frey had abased himself at a memorial service for George Floyd, sobbing hysterically for over a minute, his entire body trembling and heaving, as he knelt by the creep’s casket? Or did the June 6 horde, having observed this embarrassing spectacle, figure that if this wuss could be brought so low, so fast, so easily, then perhaps, with just a little more humiliation, he might not only shutter the police department but offer to put every last cop in front of a firing squad?

These scenes of well-nigh unprecedented public debasement, as it happens, came after several days during which Frey, not previously known for a preoccupation with race relations, privately strove, in the wake of Floyd’s demise, to play catch-up, holding mawkish phone calls with black staffers and colleagues and activists and clergy, attending what the Star-Tribune called a “listening session hosted by Black media outlets,” reading a book about “the long-lasting psychological damage of racism,” and essentially apologizing for his whiteness to pretty much everyone in town with a melanin count higher than his own. So eager was he to ingratiate himself with the canaille - justice be damned - that before the verdict came in at the Derek Chauvin trial, he declared, disgracefully: “Regardless of the decision made by the jury, there is one true reality, which is that George Floyd was killed at the hands of police.” And this in a burg that was once famous mainly for being safe, clean, and dull – identified in the American mind with wholesome Seventies sitcom heroine Mary Richards and with the hard-working, law-abiding Scandinavian-Americans who called it home.

Indeed, while racial unrest is old news in places like Baltimore, Detroit, St.Louis, and Los Angeles, it’s new to Minneapolis – and to Minnesota generally, where, as Powerline’s John Hinderaker noted recently, the “population was barely 1 percent African-American” until 1980 or so; in the decades since, the growth in the non-white population has been the result mostly of mass welfare migration and a tsunami of Somali refugees. If black people consider Minneapolis a white supremacist hellhole, they sure have an odd way of showing it. Yet Frey would have you believe that his city has for generations been a locus of world-class tensions between oppressive whites and tyrannized blacks, that the Chauvin trial was part of a “global reckoning” after “centuries-long inequities and racial injustice.” And what was Frey’s own contribution to this momentous “reckoning”? Unforgivably, and to what we may hope will be his everlasting infamy, he decided to let criminal gangs run riot in the streets, laying waste to homes, banks, stores, libraries; faced with a decision either to send in the police to protect lives and property or to virtue signal by caving to a barbaric mob, he chose the latter, even instructing police to abandon a precinct house to the mindless jackals. After all, Frey pronounced, the havoc wrought by black rioters was the result of “400 years” of “built-up anger and sadness” and was thus “not only understandable” but “right.”

Among the victims of all this “understandable” violence have been several black Minneapolis children. On April 30 of this year, Ladavionne Garrett Jr., 10, was shot in the head in his parents’ car; he had brain surgery and slipped into a coma, but so far has managed to cling to life. On May 15, Trinity Ottoson-Smith, 9, was struck by a stray bullet at a birthday party and rushed to a hospital by police; when she died twelve days later, Frey tweeted tritely: “No parent should ever have to say goodbye to their child.” On May 17, Aniya Allen, 6, was shot by a stray bullet while eating a Happy Meal in a car outside her home; when she died two days later, Frey tweeted: “Aniya’s life mattered. Ladavionne and Trinity’s lives matter. We owe it to them and their families to help get answers.” Answers? The answers were obvious. Savages given carte blanche by Frey to go on shooting rampages had slaughtered innocent children. In all likelihood, these savages were black males – career criminals, probably, like Floyd, whom Frey had mourned so ostentatiously. But Frey, naturally, made no mention of this detail. (Nor, when he lamented, on March 17, the growing number of assaults on Asian-Americans, did he acknowledge that most of the perpetrators were black, and that these assaults were simply part of an overall rise in black crime; instead, he attributed them to “[h]ateful rhetoric,” presumably by white racists.)

The deaths of Trinity and Aniya, and the ordeal of Ladavionne, taught Frey nothing. His tweets about them came off as perfunctory. Only when white cops kill black hooligans does he seem to break out the Kleenex. This was demonstrated on April 11, when a police officer in the Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Center killed Daunte Wright, a black man resisting arrest on a weapons warrant; it was demonstrated again on June 3, when another black man, Winston Boogie Smith (was his mother an Orwell fan?), died during an exchange of gunfire with U.S. Marshals trying to arrest him for murder. Like Floyd’s death, but not those of Ladavionne or Trinity or Aniya, the deaths of Wright and Smith sparked new rounds of civil unrest in the Twin Cities – and more tearful hand-wringing by the reflexively repentant boy mayor: “The anguish in Katie Wright’s voice after losing her son echoes in my mind and across our entire state this morning….Minneapolis stands firmly with the people of Brooklyn Center in seeking justice for Daunte Wright and peace in our cities.” 

Even when he isn’t weeping convulsively over dead hoodlums, Frey engages in an over-the-top brand of racial pandering that self-respecting black Minneapolitans must surely find condescending. Every time he stands at a lectern (invariably coming off like a kid who’s been cast as a mayor in a school play), he repeats the same absurd hyperbole about the “400 years of injustice” that are now hitting the black community “like a tidal wave”; about how he’s “building a new and inclusive community as we speak”; about the urgent need to transform the intersection of 38th Street and Chicago Avenue, where Floyd died, into a “permanent memorial to George Floyd and everything that he stood for [!] in his life”; and about how the black citizens of Minneapolis should henceforth be the “key beneficiaries” of municipal largesse. Post-Floyd, pretty much every issue, in Frey’s anything-but-colorblind mind, seems to have become tinged with race: for example, he recently applauded a push in the Minnesota statehouse to legalize recreational pot use as an “encouraging step for racial justice.” You can’t make this stuff up.

As much as he’s genuflected toward blacks, moreover, Frey hasn’t neglected to fawn impressively over other non-whites. On April 12 (two days after tweeting that a newly opened Muslim eatery offered “the best goat I’ve ever had”), he bragged about having “granted a noise permit to Dar Al-Hijrah for Cedar-Riverside to broadcast the call to prayer for the holy month of Ramadan”; on May 13, he tweeted: “As this Holy Month comes to a close, I’m wishing all our Muslim friends and neighbors who observed Ramadan a happy and healthy Eid al-Fitr.” Note that while Frey, a Reform Jew, twice referred to Ramadan as “holy,” he failed, last fall, to tweet so much as a word about Rosh Hashanah or Yom Kippur. As for the two major Christian holidays in 2020-21, he contented himself with a brief, breezy “Merry Christmas to those celebrating” and “Happy Easter, Minneapolis.” And this man who called Ramadan “holy” made no mention of God in his Thanksgiving tweet (“Our family couldn’t be more grateful for the frontline workers, healthcare heroes,” etc.), which, in any case, was considerably less enthusiastic than his tweet, a week later, about Native American Heritage Day: “Love seeing Indigenous voices lifted up & celebrated….Leaders like Autumn Dillie [of the American Indian Community Development Association] are working year-round to make MPLS a better place.”

And, alas, his actions match his contemptible words. Repeatedly, he’s given the thumbs-up to special treatment for blacks at the expense of whites. In February he touted the Minneapolis Climate Action and Racial Equity Fund, which, in the name of pursuing an “inclusive” approach to climate change, distributes public funds exclusively to BIPOC- and immigrant-owned businesses; in March he promoted another initiative, this one administered by the Metropolitan Economic Development Association, that also enriches only black firms. The goal of Minneapolis’s post-COVID recovery, he explains, “has never been to return to the way things were. A more equitable economy means specifically lifting Black businesses.” Some might decry this policy as blatantly racist; but Frey calls it “inclusive recovery and transformation,” boasting that “equity has been the driving force behind allocating the limited funding we have.” Yes, not equality but equity – meaning systematic discrimination to address “systemic racism.” For if your city is emerging from a pandemic-induced economic crisis that was made even worse by a concomitant epidemic of black vandalism, arson, and looting, how to handle the recovery justly other than by throwing money at blacks and freezing out whites? On Martin Luther King Day, Frey proclaimed that he was “in awe of [King’s] legacy of championing meaningful change”; but virtually everything that this nincompoop has said and done during the last year has been utterly, and dangerously, at odds with King’s noble proposition that it’s character - not skin color - that counts. 

Previous Parts of the Series:

Part I: Chicago's Lori Lightfoot.
Part 2: LA's Eric Garcetti.
Part 3: DC's Muriel Bowser.
Part 4: KC's Quinton Lucas.
Part 5: SF's London Breed.
Part 6: Philly's Jim Kenney.
Part 7: St. Louis' Tishaura Jones.
Part 8: 
Jackson's Chokwe Antar Lumumba.
Part 9:
 Seattle's Jenny Durkan.

Biden DOJ Opposing West Virginia Law That Prohibits Biological Boys From Playing on Girls’ Teams

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2021/06/22/biden-doj-opposing-west-virginia-law-that-prohibits-biological-boys-from-playing-on-girls-teams/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

(Christian Headlines) — Last week, the Biden Department of Justice filed a brief in federal court opposing a West Virginia law that prohibits biological boys from playing on girls’ teams, saying it violates federal law and the U.S. Constitution.

The law, H.B. 3293, prohibits high school and college sports teams that are “designated for female[s]” from being open to the male sex. The bill says that “classification of teams according to biological sex is necessary to promote equal athletic opportunities for the female sex.”

But in a Statement of Interest brief filed in federal court, the Department of Justice opposed the law. The DOJ sided with an 11-year-old biological male who identifies as female and who wants to compete on middle school girls’ cross-country and track teams. The 11-year-old athlete “is a girl, not a boy,” the DOJ brief says.

Continue reading this story >>

Pastors Should Lead Fight Against Evil Deep State

Rumble — Pastors, ministry leaders and the Church should be on the frontlines of the fight against the diabolical Deep State and its evil agenda, says The New American magazine Senior Editor Alex Newman in this episode of Behind The Deep State after returning from the Liberty Pastors Summit. Alex begins by talking about the Black Robe Regiment, the American pastors who helped lead the War for Independence against the tyrannical British regime. At the Liberty Pastors Summit, hundreds of pastors and their wives were educated from a biblical perspective about globalism, the Deep State, medicine, history, climate, law, Critical Race Theory, education, and so much more. This is hopefully the start of a new Black Robe Regiment against the wicked forces working to undermine God, the Bible, America, and liberty.

White House Doc Shows Plan To Use Threat of “Domestic Terrorism” For Gun Control

Anonymous Snitch Group to Dox ‘Domestic Terrorist’ Trump Voters

BY JOHN CRUMP

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/white-house-doc-shows-plan-to-use-threat-of-domestic-terrorism-for-gun-control/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

White House Doc Shows Plan To Use Threat of “Domestic Terrorism” For Gun Control, iStock-1267413669

WASHINGTON, D.C. –-(Ammoland.com)- Is the White House using the threat of “domestic terrorism” to institute gun control? According to a White House document titled the “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism,” gun control is a crucial component of Joe Biden’s plan.

The document says there is a rise in domestic violet extremists (DVE). It highlights the biases against minority populations as one factor of the growth of DVEs. It also states that those that believe that the Federal government is overreaching its power are at risk for becoming extremist, and the “perceived government overreach will almost certainly continue to drive DVE radicalization and mobilization to violence.”

While left-wing groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter are not mentioned in the document, patriot groups are referred to as militia violent extremist (MVEs). Last summer, left-wing riots caused havoc across the country, causing millions of dollars of damage to properties and cost several people their lives.

According to the document, the idea of fraud in the recent general election led to the January 6th breach at the Capitol. It also claims that COVID-19 conspiracy theories also have led people down the path of extremism. It lays down the idea that not trusting the government leads to violent domestic extremism. It claims that this plan is something all Americans can get behind. Many gun owners would disagree with President Biden’s statement.

The document breaks up the plan into four strategic pillars, and one pillar should be very concerning for gun owners. The Biden administration is using the threat of domestic terrorism to infringe on the right to bear arms.

The document reads:

Strategic Goal 2.1: Strengthen domestic terrorism prevention resources and services.

While those who break the law in furtherance of domestic terrorism must face investigation and prosecution for their crimes, it is equally important that the Federal Government engage in efforts to prevent individuals from being drawn into the grip of domestic terrorism in the first instance. That means reducing both supply and demand of recruitment materials by limiting widespread availability online and bolstering resilience to it by those who nonetheless encounter it, among other measures. It also means reducing access to assault weapons and high–capacity magazines and enforcing legal prohibitions that keep firearms out of dangerous hands. Such prevention efforts must be pursued while safeguarding civil rights and civil liberties, including privacy protections, and while avoiding discrimination, bias, and stereotyping.

The document wants to restrict access to modern sporting rifles. The AR15 is included in this category. The AR 15 is the most popular rifle in the country. Americans of all walks of life own these rifles, and people like Stephen Willeford have used an AR15 to defend their community from a crazed murderer. One pregnant woman even used an AR15 to protect her family against home invaders. According to the document, the Biden administration wants to make it harder for Americans to defend themselves with the rifle that has been called the modern musket.

The document also states the White House wants to use the threat of domestic extremism to reduce access to standard compacity magazines. It does not say how it will accomplish that goal, but people like Biden’s ATF director nominee, David Chipman, want to add standard capacity magazines to the NFA. Chipman went as far as comparing detachable magazines to machine guns.

It also talks about using “legal prohibitions” to prevent firearms from falling into “dangerous hands.” The document never mentions what prohibitions it will use. Gun rights advocates are worried that this move could be an excuse to push for new gun control restrictions. The Biden administration, in the past months, has launched attacks on the right to bears arms. These attacks include going after homemade firearms and pistol braces.

The White House did not return AmmoLand’s request for comment.


About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

John Crump

BUSTED: High-level Chinese defector has DIRT on US officials, including Joe and Hunter Biden

Image: BUSTED: High-level Chinese defector has DIRT on US officials, including Joe and Hunter Biden

BY J.D. HEYES

SEE: https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-06-22-busted-high-level-chinese-defector-dirt-covid-us-bidens.html;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

(Natural News) When then-President Donald Trump first suggested early in the COVID-19 pandemic that the Wuhan coronavirus ‘may’ have originated in a lab in that city, it immediately made sense.

First and foremost, Trump has seldom been proven wrong about the things he says, despite the fact that his usual detractors in the hate-stream media and the hater Democrat Party reflexively discount him because they are hapless partisans. Never mind how many times those fools have been proven wrong.

With that in mind, it’s interesting to see how many of those same people are now changing their tune about the lab-leak “theory” Trump espoused early on, just as details begin to leak about a high-level Chinese defector who is now in U.S. custody and is allegedly spilling the beans about COVID’s true origins, along with details about a host of other bioweapons programs being pursued by Beijing’s military.

“He alleges that the current pandemic was caused by a lab leak, and that bats were the real cover-up story. The defector alleges that while the lab leak was an accident, it was allowed to spread,” Townhall reported.

In addition, according to the most recent developments, the identity of the defector has been confirmed: He’s definitely a high-ranking Chinese counterintelligence official, so what he has to say is being taken very seriously.

According to Matthew Brazil and Jeff Stein at “Spy Talk“:

Chinese-language anti-communist media and Twitter are abuzz this week with rumors that a vice minister of State Security, Dong Jingwei defected in mid-February, flying from Hong Kong to the United States with his daughter, Dong Yang.

Dong is, or was, a longtime official in China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS), also known as the Guoanbu. His publicly available background indicates that he was responsible for the Ministry’s counterintelligence efforts in China, i.e., spy-catching, since being promoted to vice minister in April 2018. If the stories are true, Dong would be the highest-level defector in the history of the People’s Republic of China.

Red State has since confirmed the reporting with its own sources, so the guy is legitimate. And here’s what he has reportedly divulged to U.S. intelligence officials thus far:

— Info about early pathogenic studies of the COVID-19 virus

— Models of how the virus would spread, damaging the U.S. and the rest of the world

— Financial records showing which organizations and governments funded COVID-19 research as well as work on additional biowarfare research (Dr. Anthony Fauci, beware?)

— The names of U.S. citizens who are giving China intelligence (this is huge)

— Names and records of U.S. business leaders and public officials who have gotten ChiCom money

— Details surrounding meetings that U.S. government officials had, maybe unwittingly, with spies from China and Russia

— Details about how China got access to a highly secretive CIA communications system that led to the death of dozens of Chinese citizens who were working for our premier spy agency

There’s more, and it directly relates to our current leadership.

“Dong also has provided DIA with copies of the contents of the hard drive on Hunter Biden’s laptop, showing the information the Chinese government has about Hunter’s pornography problem and about his (and Joe’s) business dealings with Chinese entities,” Jen Van Laar of Red State noted.

“Some of the files on Dong have proven to shine a light on just how it was that the sale of Henniges Automotive (and their stealth technology) to Chinese military manufacturer AVIC Auto was approved,” she added, citing highly classified technology that aided Beijing’s stealth fighter technology.

In September, a new film titled, “Riding the Dragon: The Bidens’ Chinese Secrets,” detailed a number of business deals Hunter Biden did “as a board member of the Beijing-based BHR Partners investment firm,” the New York Post reported at the time.

The deals “served the ‘strategic interests’ of the country’s communist government and military — and may have imperiled American national security,” The Post added.

Sounds like our new Chinese counterintelligence friend has confirmed that. Now — what’s going to come of it?

Sources include:

NYPost.com

RedState.com

NaturalNews.com

Nearly 4,000 Bay Staters Get COVID-19 After Being Fully Vaccinated

Nearly 4,000 Bay Staters Get COVID-19 After Being Fully Vaccinated

BY VERONIKA KYRYLENKO

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/nearly-4000-bay-staters-get-covid-19-after-being-fully-vaccinated/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

As of June 12 in Massachusetts, there have been 3,791 people fully vaccinated for COVID-19 who have tested positive for the virus.

According to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, these breakthrough cases make up 0.1 percent of the 3,720,037 fully vaccinated people in the state, the Boston Herald reported.

“Testing to identify current infection remains critical to control of COVID-19,” a DPH spokeswoman told the paper. “People with current infection can spread the virus to others and isolation of cases and identification of close contacts (individuals who may have been exposed) is a foundation of public health response.”

Health officials also warned about the contagious “Delta variant,” seen in some areas in the United States. Todd Ellerin, director of infectious diseases at South Shore Health, expressed the need to get as many people vaccinated due to the highly contagious variants.

Boston University infectious diseases specialist Davidson Hamer noted, “We’re learning that many of the breakthrough infections are asymptomatic or they’re very mild and brief in duration. The viral load is not very high.”

“Breakthroughs are expected, and we need to better understand who’s at risk and whether people who have a breakthrough can transmit the virus to others,” Hamer added. “In some cases, they’ll be shedding such low levels of the virus and won’t be transmitting to others.”

The phenomenon of “shedding,” or transmission of the spike protein from people inoculated with mRNA vaccines to unvaccinated people, has been dubbed “the latest COVID-19 vaccine misinformation,” and “fact-checked” as having “no scientific basis.” But in reality, it does happen.

Writes Dr. Lee D. Merritt,

Recently, a paper written by the FDA in 2015 surfaced, titled “Design and Analysis of Shedding Studies for Virus or Bacteria-Based Gene Therapy and Oncolytic Products — Guidance for Industry.” The paper, which was written for pharmaceutical researchers, states in the introduction, “Shedding raises the possibility of transmission of VBGT or oncolytic products from treated to untreated individuals (e.g., close contacts and healthcare professionals).” 

Dr. Merritt says the FDA suggests pre-clinical data on shedding may be requested if “humans have not been previously exposed to the product and the route of administration differs from the natural route of exposure /infection,” which certainly applies to the COVID shots. It is noted that the FDA recommends these studies be done prior to licensure, specifically in Stage I testing. Currently, America, and the whole world, is now at Phase IV of the vaccine-approval process, but no official information on shedding is provided.

In the meantime, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) pacifies the public, saying breakthrough cases are normal. “COVID-19 vaccines are effective and are a critical tool to bring the pandemic under control. However, no vaccines are 100 percent effective at preventing illness. There will be a small percentage of people who are fully vaccinated who still get sick, are hospitalized, or die from COVID-19,” states the agency.

The CDC said last month that through April 30, 10,262 breakthrough infections were reported from 46 U.S. states and territories to the agency. Of the cases, more than six in 10 occurred in females, with the median patient age being 58, according to a new report from the CDC, which stopped counting breakthrough infections as of May 1, except for those that cause hospitalization or death. Approximately 10 percent of the patients required hospital care, and 160, or about 1.5 percent, died.

“Part of what’s at play here is that each person’s immune response to a vaccine will be different, in the same way that each person’s response to contracting COVID-19 has been different,” says Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. 

He says it is also important to consider that a virus’s incubation period, or the time between a person being infected with the virus and when that person shows symptoms, can vary widely between viruses. The shorter the incubation period, the more the virus is able to spread before the body’s immune response gets going. 

But all these factors, indeed, should have been evaluated during the medical trials. According to John Hopkins University, a typical vaccine development timeline takes five to 10 years, and sometimes longer, to assess whether the vaccine is safe and efficacious in clinical trials, complete the regulatory approval processes, and manufacture a sufficient quantity of vaccine doses for widespread distribution. But due to “pandemic and urgent need,” the timeline for COVID-19 vaccines was accelerated. The CDC claims it did not affect their safety and efficacy, and recommends them to adolescents, and “pregnant or breastfeeding people” (yes, the CDC uses a “woke” language to refer to mothers-to-be and breastfeeding women), even though “there are currently limited data on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant people,” and “Clinical trials for the COVID-19 vaccines … did not include people who are breastfeeding.”

The concerns over vaccines’ safety are constantly resurfacing, but all those “unfortunate” cases of deaths and severe side effects, and now COVID-19 infections, are shrugged off by the “expert” community and mainstream media as “statistical errors” that “are expected.”

According to the CDC, 317 million doses of COVID-19 vaccine have been given in the United States from December 14, 2020, through June 21, 2021.

President Biden declared June a “national month of action” and introduced a slew of incentives to vaccinate 70 percent of Americans by the Fourth of July.

The world’s biggest genetic experiment on the population continues.

A Parent’s Summary of the Spread of Critical Race Theory At Gordon College

BY MANNY SILVA

SEE: https://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/newsletters/2021/newsletter20210623.htm;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

LTRJ Note: The following summary is written by Manny Silva, the founder of Concerned Nazarenes (a watchdog group that began several years ago when the Nazarene denomination began to be heavily indoctrinated with the emerging church). Recently, his son was a student at Gordon College. Please do not think that the problems described below are within the confines of Gordon College. Many Christian colleges and universities are going down the same path. For an explanation of Critical Race Theory, read our July 2020 report and also S is for Social Justice The Language of Today’s Cultural “Revolution.” If you have children or grandchildren attending or about to attend any college or university in this country, please help equip them before they enter. Otherwise, you could end up witnessing a disastrous transformation in your young people. Worth noting, Gordon College has been on the Lighthouse Trails contemplative college list for several years. There is a connection between contemplative spirituality and the current “social justice” paradigm shift (one led to the next).

August 2020 to May 2021

Manny Silva

By Manny Silva
In late August of 2020, just before classes started, a racially charged incident occurred, although the actual perpetrator to this day has not been found. During the course of the semester, two more incidents occurred, but no one was ever found to be responsible.

The first incident: A black student leader had used tape in a dorm hallway to spell out
BLM.” Later that morning, it was discovered that it was changed to say “ALM” (for all lives matter apparently). The very next day, Saturday, about 100 students marched to the President’s personal residence to protest. All this triggered a host of other activities, such as BLM signs posted all over the campus, as well as student sit-ins and protests, with demands for justice for people of color.

Even before these incidents, there were already a number of activities scheduled that were themed with
Black Lives Matter ideas. Dance parties, “educational” meetings, and seminars with speakers who had
backgrounds in Critical Race Theory.

The administration moved quickly to condemn acts of racism towards people of color. But the rest
of the semester would result in the very same social-justice warriors becoming the intimidators of
white students, or students of color who rejected the BLM movement. The administration was almost
completely silent about this particular problem.

Two other incidents happened that were made prominent. Some words were written on the wall next to
an Asian student with racist comments. And then later in the semester, a t-shirt with a BLM-type
slogan was defaced with a racist slur.

Again, to this day, the culprits have never been apprehended. But an interesting note: the same student
leader whose sign was defaced in the first incident, is the same black student who posted a violent and
racist rant against students and anyone else who supported President Trump. He also used profanity in
describing them. That student, months later, was depicted in an official Gordon College post as a model
Christian student.

The atmosphere in the first semester was one of racial tension. Chapel services deteriorated to being
platforms for social justice and rants against “white privilege.” Students looking for uplifting and
biblical messages were seeing very little of that and have been thoroughly discouraged.

Concerned Gordon Parents and the Letter to the Trustees

Finally, after conversations with various parents, I helped to form a group called Concerned Gordon
College Parents on November 7, 2020. In a few days, we had over 150 members. We strategized and
shared information for several months. During the first semester, various parents sent letters of concern
to President Lindsay. Others sent letters or met personally with Dan Tymann, Director of Student Life. I
met with Dan Tymann during the semester. Finally, a preliminary letter was drafted, and after other
parents edited and finalized it, we sent it to the Board of Trustees on February 2, 2021. (The Chairman
sent a response to the parents, which is one of the documents I have provided [see document links at bottom of this post].

The second semester began, and it was worse than the first semester, as far as guest chapel and convocation
speakers. February was National Black History month, and it was a constant parade of CRT-type
speakers, culminating in some of the worst proponents of CRT ideology. These speakers included 2—
Marla Fredericks and Jemar Tisby. Another document that I’ve included is a review of Tisby’s ideology.
Not one speaker throughout the semester was ever invited who was a strong opponent of Critical
Race Theory. This was one of our major concerns, that Gordon College is actively promoting the
CRT ideology, not just allowing for discussion and scholarly debate.

The following 5 links are some related information:

  1. This is a letter to the editor I wrote that is at Lighthouse Trails Research website.
    https://www.1iuhthousetrailsresearch.com/blow/?P=33078

2. Video of Student sit-in at Admin Building, with various students expressing themselves.
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CHGqLN3lov9/?igshid=b1sf5ttbrru3&fbclid=IwAR 0rpdzddC1rjQradcu-BNAgfDkGxUJ58g7cvf4M-h2 vZDu-0fkrryHbE

3. Marla Fredericks, convocation speaker, Feb. 21, 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MqafnyG_R0

4. More of Marla Fredericks: highlights from the Impact Movement Zoom conference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgWu4u7ilRM

5. Jemar Tisby, convocation speaker, Feb. 26, 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw_CDQKQ5zM

Here is a post by the official Gordon College FaceBook page, where they decried racism, using
a BLM sign. The conversations are enlightening and show the great divide between different
parents and supporters of the college.
https://www.facebook.com/GordonCollege/photos/a.282385650634/10163995500 075635

And four more:

  1. President Lindsay’s response to the Nov. T-shirt Incident: https://www.gordon.edu/nov1response

2. Gordon College Shalom Plan 2021 (note various recommendations which are race-based)
https://www.gordon.edu/shalomplan

3. The AFRO Hamwe Instagram Page:
https://www.instagram.com/gc_afrohamwe/?hl=en

4. Pastor Marvin Daniels (** A very encouraging chapel message—one of the few good ones)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyRd-R_EHuY3

Other Issues to Be Concerned About

Please note that there are other concerning problems that have been on the rise for some time now, including the
LGBT activism on campus becoming a serious problem. At this writing, there is at least one current professor
who is a promoter of LGBT ideas. The homosexuality activism was also noted in the letter to the Board of
Trustees. It included reference to very inappropriate plays performed on campus in 2019, including a play that
depicted lesbian relationships. Another play included very profane language. The following two links are relevant:

  1. Spiritual and Sexuality Project: Christy Gardner, professor at Gordon College
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNy7MPrVWk8

2. The LGBTQ+ Instagram Page (Not an Official Gordon College site)
https://www.instagram.com/lgbtqplusatgordon/?hl=en

What to Look for This Upcoming 2021-22 College Year at Gordon

President Michael Lindsay has moved on to become President of Taylor University. In an interesting twist, the
Provost of Taylor University, Dr. Michael Hammond, has been appointed President of Gordon College. We are
already concerned with this appointment, and in our limited research, many of us believe that Dr. Hammond
may be more “woke” than President Lindsay. Time will tell, and I am sure we will find out more of his plans for
the coming year—although he must be aware by now of the Shalom Plan and all the issues that have occurred in
the past year. The following article may be of interest, and it references Dr. Hammond’s involvement in the
firing of a veteran professor at Taylor University.: Taylor University Fires Tenured Professor Over Little Hitler Video:
https://thecollegepost.com/taylor-university-little-hitler-video/

Manny Silva’s attached documents:

#1 Letter_Pres Lindsay_TO_Parents_01_26_2021

#2 Letter_Parents_TO_Board of Trustees_02_02_21

#3 Letter_Chairman Smith_TO_Parents_02_06_2021

#4 Shalom Plan 2021 Gordon College

#5 Tartan Article On Gordon Parents Letter_02_06_2021

(photo: wikipedia - Gordon College)

Francis Chan’s Dangerous Path to “Unity” and a Eucharistic Christ

BY L. SHARP

SEE: https://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/newsletters/2021/newsletter20210623.htm;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

I am writing to address two related topics:

1)    Francis Chan’s new book released 4/1/21 titled Until Unity

2)    Francis Chan’s conversation with Hank Hanegraaff and KP Yohannan regarding Chan’s changing views on the so-called “Eucharist” (Aug. 2020 video on Hank Hanegraaff’s program).

I.  Francis Chan’s website about his new book Until Unity

Francis Chan released his new book in April 2021 titled Until Unity. Why does this matter? Sadly, there is growing evidence that Chan has slowly turned away from the Bible as the source of truth and doctrine to church tradition, the opinions of men, and experiences to reformulate his theology.

Francis Chan’s own website explains his new book (see https://untilunitybook.com/):

CHURCH UNITY IS NOT OPTIONAL

. . . New York Times–bestselling author Francis Chan challenges us to see what keeps us from being unified as Christians across denominations and cultural differences—and why it needs to change.

. . . It’s clear from Scripture that God desires unity for His Church. Unity is what Jesus prays for, what He commands, and what He says will be the chief argument for unbelieving people coming to know God.

But if unity is that important to the heart of God, and that critical to the mission of the church, then why isn’t it something the Church fiercely fights for and passionately pursues?

We divide easily because we love shallowly.

. . . Francis Chan [says] doctrine is not at the root of most division [emphasis added].

The main problem is the shallowness or non-existence of our love for each other . . . Those who are believers will hear the call and be eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit. This will be messy and painful, but we cannot allow this to discourage us from giving everything we have to the pursuit of a unified, restored Bride.

My comments:

Chan sidesteps the issue of doctrine (in the issue of “unity”) and claims the main problem is “the shallowness or non-existence of our love for each other,” so he can base his whole argument for “unity” solely on his “love” (or lack thereof) premise. If he would admit that doctrine does divide, then in his attempt to tell us how “unity” is achieved, he would have to deal with doctrine at some level. Yet, he dismisses doctrine from the start so he can talk about “love” or lack thereof and its role in achieving or not achieving “unity” and skip discussing specific doctrines(s) altogether.

What does the Bible say about the importance of doctrine?

2 Timothy 3:16 – All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Titus 2:1 – But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:

1 John 4:1 – Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

Hebrews 13:9 – Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.

Ephesians 4:14 – That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

Titus 1:9 – Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

2 Timothy 2:15 – Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Further Comment on Chan’s new book:

The dedication of Chan’s book reads: “This book is dedicated to the followers of Jesus from various denominations who have forgiven me for my arrogance and divisiveness over the years.”

II. Francis Chan’s March 11, 2021 YouTube video about his new book Until Unity

On Francis Chan’s Mar.11, 2021 short YouTube video advertising his new book, he talks about the need for unity, and at the very end, he quotes Eph.4:11-13, but he leaves out the next 3 verses (vs.14-16), which defines what unity is!

Here is the full context of how the Bible defines “unity” in Ephesians 4:1-16:

1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,

2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;

3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.

8 Wherefore he saith, ‘When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.

9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?

10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)’

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Here are the verses Francis Chan left out in his video–Vs.14-16—

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:

16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

Here are some observations about “unity” from Eph.4:13-15 (left out by Francis Chan):

1)    According to verses 13 and 14, the goal of biblical unity is so we would “be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;”

2)    According to verse 15, biblical unity/”unity of the faith, involves “speaking the truth in love,” not just to “love” (in an experiential sense). “Speaking the truth in love,” the verse goes on, so that we may “grow up into him in all things.” Biblical unity involves “speaking the truth in love,” and by this, we grow up spiritually. Love without truth is not biblical love. And truth is about what the Bible teaches (i.e. doctrine).

III. Francis Chan, Hank Hanegraaff, KP Yohannan and the “Eucharist”

An Aug.18, 2020 video titled, “Is Christ Present in the Eucharist” reveals more of Francis Chan’s slide away from the truth of the Bible and his associations with men who have also turned away from the Bible.

At the urging of Hank Hanegraaff and KP Yohannan, Chan was challenged to reevaluate his view of church history and of communion (their meaning – Eucharist) verified in the video.

In the video, Francis Chan talks about reevaluating his view of communion, or the so-called Eucharist, and Hank Hanegraaff and KP Yohannan briefly discuss how they themselves formulated their current views about the Eucharist. Before discussing the contents of this Aug.18, 2020 video, I wanted to familiarize you with Hank Hanegraaff and KP Yohannan.

1)Hank Hanegraaff

Hank Hanegraaff is known to millions through his former radio program, “The Bible Answer Man.” He converted to Eastern Orthodoxy in April of 2017 in the Saint Nektarios Greek Orthodox Church in Charlotte, North Carolina. His former radio program “The Bible Answer Man” has now been changed to “Hank Unplugged,” and in his latest book (released in 2019 by Thomas Nelson Publishers) titled Truth Matters, Life Matters More, he explains his Eastern Orthodox conversion (see link: https://www.thomasnelson.com/9780785216063/truth-matters-life-matters-more/).

The list of those who endorsed Hanegraaff’s book include Catholics, Eastern Orthodox folks, and most notably, Scott Hahn, Ph.D., Chair of Biblical Theology and the New Evangelization at Franciscan University of Steubenville. [Hahn, who converted from Protestantism to Catholicism, is discussed in Roger Oakland’s book, Another Jesus: The eucharist Christ and the new evangelization.]

The buzzword: “New Evangelization” is defined by Lighthouse Trails writer Kevin Reeves as: “A program by the Catholic Church designed to win the world to Christ [the Catholic Eucharistic christ, that is], with the Eucharist as the focal point.”

Please see Lighthouse Trails booklet by Roger Oakland titled: The New Evangelization From Rome

2)KP Yohannan

He is the founder and director of Gospel for Asia (GFA). According to his own website (see link: https://kpyohannan.org/about-kp-yohannan/), he has written over 200 books in Asia, and 11 in the U.S.

Lighthouse Trails has confirmed KP Yohannan’s slide into contemplative spirituality (a spiritual outlook that incorporates a New Age style mystical meditation) via his 2020 book: Never Give Up.

That book, by the way, was also endorsed by Hank Hanegraaff.

IV.  August 18, 2020 YouTube video: “Is Christ Present in the Eucharist?” With Francis Chan, Hank Hanegraaff, and KP Yohannan

The Aug.18, 2020 video “Is Christ Present in the Eucharist” reveals just how much Chan has turned away from the Bible he claims he believes in to church tradition and the opinions of men. Also, this trio together are contributing to the demonic momentum toward the movement of biblical Christians into an unbiblical view of communion (what is being called the Eucharist).

1)    “Eucharist”? Why is Francis Chan even calling the communion “the Eucharist”?

Kevin Reeves, in his booklet: C is for Catholicism, defines Eucharist as: “the sacrament of the partaking of the Communion wafer and wine consecrated by the priest during the [Catholic] Mass. Believed to impart special grace, because the recipient is said to be eating and drinking the actual body and blood of Christ.”

At the urging of Hank Hanegraaff and KP Yohannan, Chan was challenged to reevaluate his view of church history and of communion (i..e., the Eucharist).

2)What did the August 2020  video reveal?

Francis Chan on the so-called “Eucharist”

He seems to think he has misjudged folks who believe in “transubstantiation.” What is transubstantiation? Kevin Reeves defines “transubstantiation” as: “The doctrine that asserts that during the Mass, the Host (the communion wafer) and the communion wine are transformed miraculously into the literal body and blood of Christ.”

Chan ends up opening the door about his view on the Eucharist and admits: “[I] don’t know where I land yet” (23:26 minute mark). He states that he “used to” (keywords are “used to”) view those who believed in transubstantiation as “almost silly” or “heretical” (2:07-2:26 minute mark) but not anymore apparently.

*Note: on p. 101 of his new book: Until Unity, Chan states: “I am currently 90 percent sure that I have been wrong about my belief that Christ is not present in the Eucharist” [emphasis added]

3)    Final thoughts about Francis Chan, the “Eucharist” and his new book: Until Unity:

May we pray for Francis Chan, that God would open his eyes to the Enemy’s deceptions. And, may God help rescue those sheep who are following Francis Chan and being led down a deceptive path of the Enemy.

God is Faithful and True, and His Word is true,


(photo (l-r): Francis Chan, Hank Hanegraaff, K.P. Yohanon, from a 2-second video clip from YouTube; used in accordance with the U.S. Fair Use Act)

Related Information:

Catholic Priest Believes Francis Chan Heading Into Catholic Church Based on Eucharistic Sermon

False Revival Kick-Started by Francis Chan, Rodney Howard Browne, Benny Hinn, Bill Johnson, and Todd White

Francis Chan Warns Those Who Criticize Christian Leaders: “God Will Destroy You”

DRESS REHEARSAL FOR A FALSE REVIVAL? – Evangelical, Charismatic, Emerging Leaders, & Pope Francis Unite for “Together 2016” in Washington, DC

 

Senate Democrats Rally Behind Critical Race Theory Promoter, Kamala Breaks the Tie

BY TYLER O'NEIL

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2021/06/22/breaking-kamala-harris-breaks-tie-to-confirm-opm-chief-with-crt-ties-n1456280;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On Wednesday, Vice President Kamala Harris broke a tie in the Senate to advance the nomination of Kiran Ahuja, President Joe Biden’s nominee to lead the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Ahuja has troubling ties to Marxist critical race theory (CRT).

The Senate voted 50-50 along party lines on cloture for the nomination, moving to vote on Ahuja’s nomination. Harris broke the tie.

Republicans opposed Ahuja’s nomination, citing her ties to critical race theory. Ahuja hosted critical race theory and “anti-racism” activist Ibram X. Kendi for an event with her nonprofit organization Philanthropy Northwest, Fox News reported. She also shared an article in which Kendi claimed that former President Donald Trump’s election was an example of white supremacy.

RecommendedBlack Mother Reveals Critical Race Theory’s Hidden Anti-Black Racism

“What we cannot allow is our federal government to affirm and sanction and advocate this critical race theory. We cannot allow the United States of America, the greatest nation on earth, to legitimize a new era of racial engineering,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) declared in a floor speech opposing Ahuja’s nomination on Tuesday.

“I’m concerned that Ms. Ahija is a disciple of radical critical theorists. She has frequently promoted Dr. Kendi. She called him a thought leader,” Hawley explained. “She declared that we must do everything in our collective power to realize Dr. Kendi’s vision for America.”

Hawley noted that, as OPM head, Ahuja would set HR and personnel policy for the entire U.S. government. She could use her position to advocate CRT-based employee training of the sort that preaches the evils of “whiteness.”

“This is the position responsible for making hiring, payroll and training decisions that affect millions of federal employees,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) explained. “The president’s nominee has made statements expressing sympathy for the discredited, ahistorical claims about our nation’s origins that form the backbone of so-called ‘critical race theory.'”

Marxist thinkers invented critical race theory in order to upend society by claiming that hidden racism pervades American institutions. CRT teaches people to seize on any racial disparity as ipso facto proof of racial discrimination, despite the clear prohibitions on racial discrimination in federal law. Advocates claim that the American status quo is racist — if not “white supremacist” — so extreme measures to reverse historic injustices are the only “anti-racist” option.

Since American society must be secretly racist, CRT advocates attribute various aspects of society to the nefarious impact of “whiteness.” The Smithsonian briefly published a “teaching tool” infographic on “whiteness.” That infographic claimed that the nuclear family, science, capitalism, the Judeo-Christian tradition, individualism, “objective, rational linear thinking,” and even values such as “be polite” are aspects of oppressive whiteness. The Smithsonian rightly removed the graphic after facing criticism, but this incident illustrates just how mainstream CRT has become.

CRT is wreaking havoc on society, leading teachers and politicians to demonize white people for the color of their skin and creating new racial preferences and discrimination. It has sparked a civil war in education, with parents revolting, teachers resigning, and school districts introducing racism in the name of “anti-racism.”

While Republicans have sounded the alarm about critical race theory, Democrats have obfuscated the issue, claiming that concern about CRT is a “conspiracy theory” or even a manifestation of white “privilege.” Such claims effectively erase the black parentsblack teachers, and Asian organizations that have rightly condemned CRT.

“CRT is not ‘racial sensitivity’ or simply teaching unfavorable American history or teaching Jim Crow history. CRT is deeper and more dangerous than that,” a black mother in Florida explained. “CRT, in its outworking today, is a teaching that there is a hierarchy in society where white, male, heterosexual, able-bodied people are deemed the oppressor and anyone else outside of that status is oppressed. That’s why we see corporations like Coca-Cola asking their employees to be ‘less white,’ which is ridiculous.”

“Telling my child or any child that they are in a permanent oppressed status in America because they are black is racist and saying that white people are automatically above me, my children, or any child, is racist, as well,” King added. “This is not something that we can stand for in our country.”

RecommendedDon Lemon Erases the Blacks and Asians Who Oppose the Evils of Critical Race Theory

Yet Democrats came together to support Ahuja, whom the White House hailed as “a qualified, experienced and dedicated public servant who we are looking forward to leading the Office of Personnel Management in its work protecting the safety of the workforce, empowering federal employees, and building a federal workforce that looks like America.”

______________________________________________________________

SEE OUR PREVIOUS POSTS:

https://ratherexposethem.org/2021/06/22/petition-to-remove-admiral-michael-gilday-as-chief-of-naval-operations/

https://ratherexposethem.org/2021/06/21/a-racist-training-program-for-the-u-s-navy/

DOJ Warns States About Second Amendment Sanctuaries~Meanwhile immigration sanctuary policies are lauded and emulated

BY MICHAEL CUTLER

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/doj-hypocritically-warns-states-about-second-michael-cutler/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On June 17, 2021 AOL published an Associated Press report under the title, Justice Dept.: Missouri governor can't void federal gun laws.  This report began with this excerpt:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is warning Missouri officials that the state cant ignore federal law after the governor signed a bill last week that bans police from enforcing federal gun rules.

In a letter sent Wednesday night and obtained by The Associated Press, Justice officials said the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause outweighs the measure that Gov. Mike Parson signed into law Saturday. The new rules penalize local police departments if their officers enforce federal gun laws.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton said the law threatens to disrupt the working relationship between federal and local authorities, they said in the letter, noting that Missouri receives federal grants and technical assistance.

The public safety of the people of the United States and citizens of Missouri is paramount,” Boynton wrote in the letter.

The DOJ did not have to wait long for a response.  Just hours later, as reported by ABC News, Missouri responds defiantly to Justice Dept. over gun law, which noted, in part:

Similar bills were introduced in more than a dozen other states this year, including Alabama, Arkansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Wyoming, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, West Virginia and Iowa. In Texas, the governor has called for the state to become a so-called Second Amendment sanctuary.

Wow!  A new form of “Sanctuary policies” enacted by state governments and the federal government under Mr. Biden’s “leadership” is upset!

Having uttered the magic word “Sanctuary”, we cannot ignore that over the past several decades a growing number of cities and states, almost invariably led by radical leftists, have implemented so-called “sanctuary policies” that, to varying degrees, hamper cooperation between local and state police and federal immigration law enforcement authorities.

Certainly, our nation’s immigration laws are serious laws that were enacted to protect national security, public safety, public health and the jobs and wages of Americans.

Frequently these sanctuary policies have increased to the point where detainees lodged by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) personnel have been blatantly ignored so that aliens who have serious criminal histories were released from custody rather than be turned over to ICE so that could be deported from the United States.

A few of these cases received attention from the media, but in reality, a huge number of such criminal aliens who should have been removed (deported) from the United States were permitted to roam freely in towns and cities across the United States, all too frequently, with tragic results.

Consider the horrific case of 32-year-old Kate Steinle who was shot to death by Jose Ines Garcia-Zarate, a citizen of Mexico who was illegally present in the United States and had an extensive criminal history in the United States.  He had been previously deported from the United States five times so that his mere presence in the United States constituted a felony under a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA): 8 U.S. Code § 1326.

On December 1, 2017, Business Insider published a report about this case, Kate Steinle's death at the hands of a Mexican national became a flashpoint in the immigration debate — here's the story behind her killing.  Here is an excerpt from this report:

At the time of Steinle's death, Garcia Zarate had been convicted of nonviolent drug crimes and deported five times since the early 1990s.

He faced a sixth deportation in 2015 and was in Justice Department (DOJ) custody that March after serving 46 months in prison for a felony re-entry into the US, but instead of transferring him into the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for deportation, the department transferred him to the San Francisco County Jail for prosecution of a 1995 marijuana charge.

San Francisco prosecutors, who had long ago deprioritized marijuana charges, dismissed the decades-old charge and released Garcia Zarate on April 15, 2015. Due to San Francisco's policy of limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities — which some refer to as a "sanctuary" policy — the city did not inform ICE when they released Garcia Zarate.

There is a huge number of similar cases around the United States, where "sanctuary policies” that contradict federal immigration law has resulted in the death and injury of thousands of victims at the hands of aliens who were illegal in the United States, subject to deportation but were shielded, aided and abetted by the jurisdictions who declared themselves to be “sanctuaries” for illegal aliens, in apparent violations of a number of laws, beginning with 8 U.S. Code § 1324 that begins with the following:

(a) Criminal penalties

            (1)

(A) Any person who—

(i) knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien;

(ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;

(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or

(v)

(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or

(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,

When President Trump acted to end sanctuary policies that harbor and shield illegal aliens, out of his well-founded concerns about public safety and national security, he was rebuffed in the courts and by globalists who complained that his efforts were based on xenophobia” and God knows what else!

Did the bipartisan 9/11 Commission that we keep so much about by Nancy Pelosi suffer from racism and xenophobia?  Pelosi has repeatedly called for a “9/11-style commission” to investigate the events at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Back on December 21, 2004, the Congressional Research Service issued a wide-ranging report that must be made mandatory reading for every political leader of the United States.  The title of the report was: 9/11 Commission: Legislative Action Concerning U.S. Immigration Law and Policy in the 108th Congress Updated December 21, 2004.

Here is the summary of this report began:

Summary

Reforming the enforcement of immigration law is a core component of the recommendations made by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission). The 19 hijackers responsible for the 9/11 attacks were foreign nationals, many of whom were able to obtain visas to enter the United States through the use of forged documents. Incomplete intelligence and screening enabled many of the hijackers to enter the United States despite flaws in their entry documents or suspicions regarding their past associations. According to the Commission, up to 15 of the hijackers could have been intercepted or deported through more diligent enforcement of immigration laws.

The 9/11 Commissions immigration-related recommendations focused primarily on targeting terrorist travel through an intelligence and security strategy based on reliable identification systems and effective, integrated information-sharing. As Congress has considered these recommendations, however, possible legislative responses have broadened to include significant and possibly far-reaching changes in the substantive law governing immigration and how that law is enforced, both at the border and in the interior of the United States.

The next time Nancy or her disciples invoke the 9/11 Commission, they need to be pointedly asked if they read the 9/11 Commission Report and how they and the Biden administration can blithely ignore the clear and present danger the Biden administration’s immigration policies (actions and lack of action) create for America and Americans.

Our nation’s Constitution and laws are not a menu from which picky eaters can decide what to order or not order.  It is hypercritical and beyond outrageous that the DOJ would attack Sanctuary policies regarding the Second Amendment while not only sanctioning immigration sanctuary policies but actually emulating those extremely dangerous policies in clear violation of standing federal law and in direct opposition to the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Petition to Remove Admiral Michael Gilday as Chief of Naval Operations

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/petition-remove-admiral-michael-gilday-chief-naval-frontpagemagcom/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Our military is under attack by “anti-racism” activists whose message is that white America is racist.

“Critical Race Theory” is the academic discipline that is used to justify the attack. Critical Race Theory is a hateful Marxist fiction that maintains America is evil because the majority of its citizens are white, and that its Constitution is evil because it was written by white people. The agents of this dogma, including those lecturing at the Naval War College, teach that white people - from the Founding Fathers to the 200 million white people in the country today - are oppressors, who are an internal enemy,

Critical Race Theory began by destroying the moral integrity of colleges and corporations. Now its target is the U.S. Navy.

Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Gilday has told the third of a million naval personnel that they should be reading and learning from Ibram X. Kendi, a mediocre, fact-challenged university professor who has become the go-to “anti-racism” expert for America’s woke elites.

In a congressional hearing, Admiral Gilday was asked by Representative Jim Banks to denounce Kendi’s view that white people criminals - that they created the AIDS virus to kill black people. The Admiral refused to do so, dismissing it as a “cherry-picked” quote about which he had no other opinion.

By adding Ibram X. Kendi's book - How To Be An Anti-Racist - to the Navy’s Professional Reading Program, Gilday put the weight of the U.S. Navy behind Kendi’s hatred of white America and all white people as the allegedly racist oppressors of blacks.

That’s why I hope you’ll join me, and demand the Removal of Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Gilday.

Kendi defines anti-racism as opposition to America’s “systemic racism.” Systemic racism was outlawed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If it were an actual problem there would be a tsunami of lawsuits and a tsunami of judgments awarding millions of dollars in penalties to the victims. There are no such tsunamis because systemic racism is a myth manufactured by leftists to disarm their critics and force their retreat. In Kendi’s dogma, the only way not to be a racist is to agree with him that racism is in America’s DNA, and white people are racists because they are white.

In Kendi’s own words: “There is no such thing as a not-racist idea, only racist ideas and antiracist ideas.” Either you agree with Kendi’s leftwing politics, or you’re a racist.

Gilday was not only endorsing Kendi's racism, but also his politically partisan agenda, which claims ridiculously that dissent from the left is racist even when it comes to global warming.

“Do-nothing climate policy is racist policy,” Kendi argues, “since the predominantly non-White global south is being victimized by climate change more than the Whiter global north.”

But the world’s greatest polluters are China, India, and Pakistan . – countries that are not white, and that refuse to implement the Paris Climate Accords.

Gilday’s support for Kendi is part of his effort to divide and weaken the Navy by imposing Critical Race Theory and radical Identity Politics on the men and women who defend us. 

Last year Gilday promoted “conversations” that endorsed Black Lives Matter’s view that all whites are racists and encouraged recruits and naval officers to believe that, like America, the navy is systemically racist – no evidence required. According to Gilday-Kendi, life for black people is miserable in America, and white people have to be “transformed” by atoning for their white skin privilege. “White Skin Privilege is, in fact, a term invented by the Weather Underground: a notorious terrorist group which bombed the Pentagon in the 1970s.

An official Navy video introduced by Gilday featured a black aviation tech complaining that, “being African-American in America is not fun;” a black lieutenant commander who claimed that he had experienced "systemic racism" and "implicit bias", and a white female musician confessing her “privilege as a white person” and attacking America over unfounded claims of "systemic racism"

The video of Navy personnel putting down America, blaming their problems on systemic racism, and reciting Marxist talking points was the centerpiece of what Gilday called vital “conversations” about racism. Usually, a conversation has more than one side. But not in today’s U.S. Navy which has become a Critical Race Theory echo chamber.

While the theme of Gilday’s racial crusade is, "One Team, One Navy”, its real message is that there are two navies and two Americas: white and non-white. The goal of the admiral’s new “diversity and inclusion” mandate is for the victimized non-white Navy to defeat the oppressive and racist white Navy. Or as one crew member in the video declares, "Tomorrow's Navy will finally stand on the right side of history when we realize that black lives matter." Considering that the latest ethnic genocide, involving millions of Uighur Muslims, is taking place in a non-white nation, China, today, it would be interesting to know what “the right side of history” is, or whether history has a side.

An official video sponsored by Gilday broadcasts the anti-American claim that the 245-year-old Navy has been on the wrong side of history, that John Paul Jones, who fought the British, Stephen Decatur, who fought Islamic pirates, and the men who fought on the USS Kearsarge to end slavery during the Civil War, were all on the “wrong side” of history until Gilday and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez came along to set them straight.

Please add your name to this petition right away, and demand the Senate remove Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Gilday.

Under Gilday’s leadership, minority members of the Navy are being told that it’s okay to question whether they should be serving their country. They’re being encouraged to view all of their interactions with white personnel as racist because all white people are inherently racist. Including their commanding officers and their comrades in arms.

Communist China could not be damaging the Navy’s readiness any more than Gilday is with his divisive accusations about the racism of the majority of his troops.

In the two years since Gilday took over as Chief of Naval Operations, morale is down, and instead of preparing them to fight America’s enemies, he has set off a civil war within his own ranks. China doesn’t need to fire a single shot if Gilday is successful in destroying our military’s cohesion, morale and will to defend the country.

Biden is slashing the Navy’s shipbuilding budget even as the People’s Republic of China is building more ships than the U.S. Navy. The United States is losing the command of the seas. While Biden is undermining the physical infrastructure of the Navy, Gilday is waging a relentless war against the moral infrastructure of the servicemen and women under his command.

Gilday and other military leaders are replacing military readiness with military radicalism. Admiral Bill Moran, Gilday’s predecessor and President Trump’s choice, had a reputation for standing up for his people. America First was his guide. Gilday has focused instead on political wokeness and demonizing those who resist his new order.

Gilday – a vice-admiral - was unqualified for his promotion to Chief of Naval Operations in the first place. He got his job through a political coup.

His predecessor, Admiral Moran was forced out over a fake scandal generated by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. Gilday, a vice admiral, should not have been in line to be Chief of Naval Operations, but Democrat politicians and bureaucrats were determined to purge as many of President Trump’s appointments as they could. Their goal was to undermine his America First policies. They were so successful that no one qualified to be Chief of Naval Operations actually wanted it.

As Chief, Gilday quickly showed why the same people who persecuted Moran left him alone. The men and women of the Navy can rely on Gilday to promote Black Lives Matter agendas, but they can’t count on him to watch their backs.

Using race as the measure of all things, Gilday unleashed a political indoctrination campaign as the Black Lives Matter riots got underway. Video confessions of white privilege and condemnations of America are the heart and soul of that campaign. He initiated the Task Force One Navy whose report called for reinventing the Navy to fight "racism, sexism, ableism and other structural and interpersonal biases" – perfect Marxist slang for their war on America.

White members of the Navy are being told to check their white privilege, to believe that they didn’t earn their ranks, but were awarded them because of systemic racism and that the more they achieve, the guiltier they are of getting ahead at the expense of disadvantaged minorities.

Officers are being told to stop thinking about ability and merit – racist categories - and to focus on meeting racial and gender quotas when it comes to mentoring and promotions. They’re being warned that their judgement is racially biased and that any decision they make will be racist. There is talk of using computer programs to achieve racial quotas for personnel and of subjecting officers to “implicit bias” training which is based on the hateful idea that whites are racists by virtue of their skin color.

These are the same poisonous attitudes that destroyed American achievement on college campuses so that China’s educational system now outperforms our own, and racist mediocrities like Ibram X. Kendi become intellectual celebrities. Gilday and his allies are hard at work trying to reward activism over ability and sow doubt about the merits of any sailor who is white.

The Chief of Naval Operations is dividing the men and women of the Navy by skin color and turning them against each other. When you are a 19-year-old deciding whether to risk your young life for your country how does being told by your military commanders that America is a 400-year-old cesspool of white racist oppression help you to make the decision to fulfill your oath to defend that country and its Constitution?

Gilday is undermining military readiness in the face of a possible naval conflict with enemies of the United States, especially the increasingly aggressive regime in Communist China.

Gilday’s indoctrination program is already a threat to national security and must be terminated before it’s too late. And the best way to do that is for him to resign or be forced to step down.

Our national security is at stake. Sign this petition and take a stand against Gilday’s destruction of the U.S. Navy.

Sign this petition and take a stand against Gilday’s destruction of the U.S. Navy.

Sincerely, 

David Horowitz

David Horowitz

_______________________________________________________________

SEE OUR PREVIOUS POST: 

https://ratherexposethem.org/2021/06/21/a-racist-training-program-for-the-u-s-navy/

AFL PRESIDENT STEPHEN MILLER REACTS TO PRESIDENT BIDEN’S OPERATION CENTRAL AMERICAN AIRLIFT FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS’ RELATIVES

BY STEPHEN MILLER

SEE: https://www.aflegal.org/news/afl-president-stephen-miller-reacts-to-president-bidens-operation-central-american-airlift-for-illegal-aliens-relatives;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

WASHINGTON, DC – On Tuesday evening, AFL President Stephen Miller reacted to the announcement that the Departments of Homeland Security and State are jointly expanding the blatantly unlawful Central American Minors (CAM) Program–originally created under the Obama Administration and ended under the Trump Administration–effectively creating a new chain migration program for illegal aliens.  CAM was already illegal, as Congress never created, nor authorized it.  Under the newly announced expansion of the program, millions of illegal aliens and non-citizens living in the United States are now eligible to formally petition to have the U.S. government transport their relatives to the United States on the taxpayer’s dime.

Read AFL President Stephen Miller’s full statement:

“The Biden Administration’s war on national sovereignty has reached unimaginable new depths. Unsatisfied with simply melting the border through nationwide catch-and-release, they have announced a new program to find and recruit the relatives of illegal aliens and fly them into the United States.  The new program is a colossal airlift operation for the relatives of illegal aliens now living in the United States.  Under this preposterous and plainly unlawful program, illegal aliens now residing inside the United States — including recipients of deferred action and those who have merely applied for asylum — can petition the government to ‘parole’ their children into the United States, or any other relative over whom they assert guardian status,” Stephen Miller said. “A larger magnet for illegal immigration could not be envisioned: sneak across the border, gain a foothold in the United States, and then the government will then bring in the rest of your family.  We are conscripting career Homeland Security and Department of State officials into providing a global taxi service for illegal aliens and their families.  This massive, government-fueled surge of both illegal and low-skilled migration will place enormous burdens on the already burdened shoulders of the U.S. workers and taxpayers. What the Biden Administration has announced is illegal, unconstitutional, and unconscionable.”

To schedule an engagement with American First Legal, please email info@athospr.com.

Islamic Republic of Iran’s new president ordered thousands killed in mass executions and tortured pregnant women

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/06/islamic-republic-of-irans-new-president-ordered-thousands-killed-in-mass-executions-and-tortured-pregnant-women;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

And Biden’s handlers are in the process of giving him billions and a green light for a nuclear weapons program. What could possibly go wrong? America is back!

“Ultraconservative ‘Butcher’ Ebrahim Raisi who ordered thousands killed in mass executions and tortured pregnant women wins Iranian presidential election,” by Gemma Parry, MailOnline, June 19, 2021:

Ebrahim Raisi has been named Iran’s next president, after his rivals conceded before official results were even announced in the country’s lowest ever election turnout for a presidential election.

Raisi is known as ‘the butcher’ for disappearing and executing thousands of opposition prisoners in 1988 while serving as Tehran’s deputy prosecutor and allegedly ordering pregnant woman tortured.

It is thought that at least several thousand and possibly more than 30,000 activists were put to death – hanged by construction cranes in batches of 10 – during the purge.

Iranian political prisoners who were interrogated, tortured and sentenced to die by Raisi have recently told of their horrifying experiences.

Farideh Goudarzi, who was jailed for being part of a banned political group, told MailOnline how Raisi watched guards drop her baby on the floor as part of one brutal interrogation – after she was tortured while pregnant and forced to give birth in jail.

Similarly Mahmoud Royaee, another political prisoner interrogated by Raisi during the 1988 executions, said he once handed down a death sentence to an inmate who was in the midst of an epileptic fit.

Amnesty International have said that Raisi should be investigated for alleged crimes against humanity for his role on the ‘Death Commission’.

‘That Ebrahim Raisi has risen to the presidency instead of being investigated for the crimes against humanity of murder, enforced disappearance and torture, is a grim reminder that impunity reigns supreme in Iran,’ Amnesty said in a statement.

Raisi won 62 per cent of the votes with 90 per cent counted so far. Turnout figures of just under 50 per cent were recorded after voting was extended by two hours amid fears that turnout would be lower than 50 per cent.

Exiled opposition groups said that the majority of voters shunned the presidential elections, hailing the boycott which they urged voters to take part in as a blow to the country’s theocratic system.

Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), said the ‘nationwide boycott’ was the ‘greatest political and social blow’ to the system led by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

‘The boycott proved and showed the world that the Iranian people’s only vote is to overthrow this mediaeval regime,’ she was quoted by the NCRI as saying.

The People’s Mujahedin Organisation of Iran (MEK/PMOI) whose political wing is the NCRI believe the actual turnout was 10 percent and the authorities have inflated it by a factor of five in an ‘astronomical fabrication’, the NCRI said….

Texas Governor Abbott Signs Bill That Would Ban Almost All Abortions in the State

BY JAMES MURPHY

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/texas-governor-abbott-signs-bill-that-would-ban-almost-all-abortions-in-the-state/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On June 16, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed legislation that would almost completely ban abortions in the state should the Supreme Court ever invalidate the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which allows for abortion in the United States. House Bill 1280, also known as the Human Life Protection Act, will take effect if the Supreme Court “wholly or partly” overrules Roe v. Wade or if a constitutional amendment ever allows states to ban abortions.

The law is what is known as a “trigger bill,” and would go into effect 30 days after a ruling invalidating Roe v. Wade or constitutional amendment allowing abortion bans triggers the new law.

Exceptions are in place if there are risks to the mother’s life or if there could be a “substantial impairment of major bodily function.”

The new law would make it a second-degree felony to attempt to perform an abortion. If the abortion is successful and the baby dies the penalty would rise to a first-degree felony, which could potentially lead to a life sentence. Besides the possible jail time, Abortionists could lose any medical license they might have and be subject to fines of up to $100,000.

Women who seek abortions are immune from prosecution under the terms of the law.

Since a constitutional amendment allowing states to ban abortion seems unlikely, the most likely way for the bill to become law is if the Supreme Court invalidates all or part of Roe v. Wade. In May, the high court agreed to hear the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. That case involves a Mississippi law which forbids abortion after 15 weeks gestation. Roe v. Wade is at the heart of the case and all or parts of it could be overturned.

Many court watchers consider Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.

“A favorable ruling would make Texas one of the first states to end abortions,” the bill’s author, state Rep. Giovanni Capriglione (R-Tarrant County) said.

Pro-life advocates were predictibly happy with the new law.

“We are extremely pleased at the passage of HB 1280,” said Dr. Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life when the legislation was passed in May. “To whatever extent the Supreme Court allows states to protect unborn babies from abortion — whether at 15 weeks, six weeks, or at conception — the Human Life Protection Act will go into effect to the same extent.”

“The passage of the Human Life Protection Act is especially significant in light of the recent announcement of the United States Supreme Court to consider the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case,” Pojman said.

Pro-abortion forces were typically outraged by Abbott’s signature on the bill.

“HB 1280 is different from and more extreme than most trigger bans — and goes against the majority of Texans’ support for safe, legal abortion. The bill would allow a total abortion ban to go into effect in Texas if the Supreme Court ‘partly’ overruled Roe or if the Court ‘partly’ gave the state the authority to prohibit abortion,” said Dyana Limon-Mercado, the executive director of Planned Parenthood Texas Votes, in a statement.

Limon-Mercado chastised the state legislature for focusing on abortion instead of other problems in the state saying, “members of the Texas Legislature prioritized abortion bans, attacks on trans kids, permitless carry and voter suppression bills. The people of Texas deserve better.”

Abbott and the Texas Legislature have been busy on the abortion front, having signed the Texas Heartbeat Act in May, which effectively bans abortions in the state as soon as a fetal heartbeat can be detected — which is often as early as four weeks into a pregnancy. That law is set to take effect at the beginning of September, although the bill is expected to face multiple legal challenges prior to its implementation.

In addition to the State of Texas taking action on abortion, several localities in the state — including Lubbock, a city of 260,000 residents — have acted to curtail abortion within their city limits. Lubbock has declared itself a “sanctuary city for the unborn.”

With the federal government currently held hostage by far-left ideologues, this is how the fight against the killing of the unborn looks for the time being. Yet there is a game-changer stratagem that the pro-life movement could start employing in a big way in its decades-long fight to end the barbarism of abortion. That stratagem is for states to recognize that Roe v. Wade is an unconstitutional overreach on the part of the Supreme Court, and to declare Roe unconstitutional within their state borders on the basis of nullification.

A report by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institue released in April shows the palpable angst among the pro-abortion crowd. “2021 is on track to become the most devastating anti-abortion state legislative session in decades,” said Elizabeth Nash and Lauren Cross of the Guttmacher Insititute.

From their mouths to God’s ears.

Trevor Loudon: A Primer on America’s Largest Marxist Organization

Rumble — This video is a part of an article that can be found at the following link: https://rairfoundation.com/exclusive-communism-expert-trevor-loudon-provides-rair-with-list-of-dsa-marxists-holding-office-in-america/

Author and filmmaker Trevor Loudon explains how America's largest Marxist organization, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is incredibly dangerous for America.

Also here: https://rairfoundation.com/trevor-loudon-a-primer-on-americas-largest-marxist-organization-watch/

BY RENEE NAL

SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/trevor-loudon-a-primer-on-americas-largest-marxist-organization-watch/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

“DSA is a communist organization with strong ties to hostile foreign communist organizations…”

Author and filmmaker Trevor Loudon addressed America’s largest Marxist organization, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) in the latest episode of his Epoch Times show Counterpunch on June 19th.

Loudon previously provided RAIR Foundation USA with an overview of the subversive group, as well as a list of DSA members holding office, which has only grown since then.

 

Note that the list provided does not include DSA-friendly elected officials, only those who are card-carrying, dues paying members of the Marxist organization.

The description at the Epoch Times reads:

DSA has several members in the US congress and well over a hundred in state and local government. In Nevada DSA has taken over the state Democratic party and is in process of doing so in Florida, New York, Texas and several others…Maybe there would be more outcry about this state of affairs if more people realized that DSA is a communist organization with strong ties to hostile foreign communist organizations. Trevor Loudon begins an outline of the true nature and influence of America’s largest Marxist organization.

In this latest episode of CounterPunch, Loudon gives a powerful, short history and background of DSA:

 

Read more of RAIR’s coverage on the Democratic Socialists of America:

Racist Mayor OF SEATTLE: Jenny Durkan

9th in a series.

BY JOSEPH KLEIN

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/racist-mayor-jenny-durkan-joseph-klein/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Editor's note: This is the 9th part in Frontpage Mag's new series on Racist Mayors. (See previous parts below this article). Stay tuned for more installments.

On June 12, 2020, the city of Seattle held an online training session on racial bias, entitled “Internalized Racial Superiority,” to which only "city employees who identify as white” were invited to participate. The city of Seattle also offered a separate training class for "city employees who identify as a person of color."

On the same day the online whites-only training session was held, Seattle’s Mayor Jenny Durkan declared that the infamous Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone occupation outside the Seattle Police Department's abandoned East Precinct, organized by Black Lives Matter activists, “could be a summer of love.” Durkan took about ten days to begin bringing the occupation to an end, when she finally realized that her fantasy of “a summer of love” was turning into the reality of nights of violence. Yet Durkan did not budge in defending her city’s racially segregated training.

Durkan attacked the Trump administration for raising concerns that the segregated training was potentially a violation of federal civil rights laws. She claimed that separating training sessions for city employees by race was somehow anti-racist. “In the midst of a nationwide reckoning with systemic racism and police violence, (the administration) is considering suing the City of Seattle for a training we provide that specifically seeks to combat racism and advance equity," Durkan said.

The content of the training materials that Durkan defended did not combat racism. They did the opposite. They exacerbated racial division.

The e-mail inviting "city employees who identify as white” to their own separate training session said, “We’ll examine our complicity in the system of white supremacy . . . and begin to cultivate practices that enable us to interrupt racism in ways that are accountable to Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC)."

The separate training session for "city employees who identify as a person of color" was focused on how "American conditioning, socialization and history leads People of Color to internalize radicalized beliefs, ideas and behaviors about themselves, undergirding the power of White Supremacy."

The training material categorized whites and people of color into two separate amalgams of personality characteristics that members of each race have supposedly internalized solely because of their respective races. Whites have internalized a set of personality characteristics from their standpoint of privilege that feed their sense of racial superiority, according to this exercise in critical race theory. By the same token, people of color, especially blacks, have internalized a separate set of personality characteristics from their standpoint of alleged dehumanization that feed their sense of racial inferiority.

For example, one of the powerpoints used for a city employee training session was entitled “Internalized Racial Oppression.” Individualism was among the twelve racial attributes listed under a column labeled "Internalized Racial Superiority.” Employees in Mayor Durkan’s City Hall were being indoctrinated to believe that wanting to be free to express one’s individualism, a core value in America’s founding documents, is one of the defining characteristics of a white supremacist. Other racial characteristics listed in the racial superiority column include perfectionism, arrogance, silence, intellectualism, control, and comfort. Violence is also listed in the “Internalized Racial Superiority” column.

Another column in the powerpoint is labeled “Internal Racial Inferiority.” Evidently, according to the racists who developed this training material, people of color – not whites - have internalized addictive personalities, as well as feelings connoting an inferiority complex such as shame, self-doubt, self-hate, and apathy. Rage is also listed in the “Internal Racial Inferiority” column. 

But wait - there may be some hope for white persons who follow the training materials’ path of redemption. Whites are instructed how to interrupt their “whiteness.” They must first come to understand their “complicity in racism” and then take on the responsibility to serve as “social justice advocates and organizers.”  This includes bringing other unenlightened white people “into racial justice.”

Seattle is engaged in an ideological battle against what its political leaders see as the systemic effects of white supremacism. This battle is being fought under Mayor Durkan’s leadership throughout the city’s bureaucracy. And Durkan has a plan to begin undoing the accumulated harms allegedly suffered by blacks especially, for which whites as a race are collectively guilty according to Durkan and other leftwing progressive racists.

Durkan wrote an article published by the South Seattle Emerald on September 25, 2020 in which she described her plan to use taxpayers’ money for multimillion-dollar investments solely to benefit black, indigenous and people of color (BIPOC). Durkan concluded her article by declaring that “We can show the country what it means to invest in Black Lives Matter and embark on something big together.” There’s nothing like investing taxpayers’ hard-earned money in a Marxist, anti-nuclear family, racist hate movement, led by people who have spent donors' money on their own personal luxuries.

Mayor Durkan’s original $100 million proposal was cut to $30 million by the Seattle City Council. Working with this special reserve designated solely for black, indigenous and people of color communities, Durkan convened the Equitable Communities Initiative Task Force last October for the purpose of recommending how to make exclusive investments in these communities. On June 3, 2021, after a series of meetings closed to the public, the task force submitted its investment recommendations to Durkan “to build an equitable society.”

Undoing past discrimination and its lingering effects by excluding whites today from publicly funded benefits because of the color of their skin is racist. Some of the money used to fund Seattle’s BIPOC community investment programs is being taken from other city departments working on behalf of all Seattle residents, including millions of dollars from the Seattle Police Department.

Seattle experienced a dramatic increase in homicides during 2020 – its highest in 26 years. Seattle has one of the highest crime rates overall in the country. It is reportedly safer than only 4% of U.S. cities. To her credit, Mayor Durkan did not want to go as far as the more radical City Council in seeking to defund the Seattle Police Department. However, she did issue an executive order in 2020 “ordering City departments to support the citywide, community-led process to reimagine policing and community safety by centering the voices of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color communities.” Durkan has accused the police department of “police violence” and has irresponsibly restrained the police’s ability to stop the real violence in the streets.

Seattle is yet another city run into the ground by a far-left progressive mayor. Mayor Durkan has put critical race theory ideology above her responsibility to manage her city for the benefit of all the people of Seattle. Durkan has decided not to run for re-election. The bad news is that the next mayor of Seattle is likely to be an even more extreme leftwing progressive racist who wants to dismantle the Seattle Police Department and expand the racialized community investment programs.

Photo credit: Sage Ross

Part I: Chicago's Lori Lightfoot.
Part 2: LA's Eric Garcetti.
Part 3: DC's Muriel Bowser.
Part 4: KC's Quinton Lucas.
Part 5: SF's London Breed.
Part 6: Philly's Jim Kenney.
Part 7: St. Louis' Tishaura Jones.
Part 8: 
Jackson's Chokwe Antar Lumumba.

A Racist Training Program for the U.S. Navy

Forget fighting China, confess your white privilege.

BY DANIEL GREENFIELD

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/racist-training-program-us-navy-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.

As he assumed the office of Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Michael Gilday announced that he wanted to change the Navy. While the title of his remarks in the video you see here below was: "One Team, One Navy," its actual message was racist and divisive. His bottom line: only "conversations" about race would help. The “conversations” he referred to were in fact a lecture from America’s most popular and fact-challenged racist du jour, Ibram X. Kendi.

The “conversation" included "shared" videos of naval personnel claiming that America was racist and that they were angry. “Being African-American in America is not fun,” an aviation technician claimed, especially no doubt for a two-term African-American president who pocketed $100 million for the skillful exploitation of his public office.

There was no word on whether being African in Somalia, Sudan, and Nigeria is any more “fun” than being black in America or whether being a Somalian hater of Jews and America might put you on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and get you protected by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the leadership of the Democrat Party.

In keeping with Gilday’s efforts to divide the Navy by race, an official Navy video endorsed the Marxist organization Black Lives Matter and denounced police for the death of drug-dealer-accomplice Breonna Taylor, who was shot resisting arrest when her boyfriend triggered a hailstorm of bullets after shooting and wounding a police officer doing his job. Bottom line of the video: naval recruits and officers need to hate their “white supremacist” country and question their service.

In the video, a lieutenant commander claimed that he had experienced "systemic racism" and "implicit bias" – note, not actual bias. A white corpsman urged that "we can stand up for change" and then, mouthing the standard Marxist line, declared that "tomorrow's Navy will finally stand on the right side of history when we realize that black lives matter."

"I have become very aware of my privilege as a white person," a female musician confessed. Then she claimed that "this country has a history of systemic racism." [FACT: systemic racism was outlawed nearly 60 years ago by the Civil Rights Act]. She called for creating a "country that is more equitable and just." How this was to be accomplished by repeating racist tropes about white people – guilty because of their skin color -- she didn’t bother to explain.

The video closed with Gilday vowing to eliminate “systemic racism” with a new task force.

This dangerous farce wasn’t taking place under the Obama or Biden administrations. No one from above was forcing Gilday to undermine national security or attack the foundations of this country. The year was 2020 and the Chief of Naval Operations was doing it entirely of his own accord.

Gilday, a naval mediocrity, got to his position at the top of the Navy leadership because a new political environment made better men fearful of taking it.

Normally, it’s not a job for vice admirals. The virtually unprecedented promotion happened after President Trump’s original nominee, Admiral Bill Moran, was kneecapped by a politically-motivated, phony scandal.

Moran, a talented leader, was pushed out and forced to retire because he had emailed a former staff officer who had been accused of misbehaving at a Christmas party back in 2016.

The Pentagon probe pushed by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand ended Moran’s career.

Navy Secretary Richard Spencer claimed that Moran maintaining a friendship with a former officer who had misbehaved, "caused me to call his judgment into question" and suggested it was at odds with treating "every person with dignity and respect."

Moran’s purge wasn’t isolated. Democrat politicians, the media, and Pentagon bureaucrats had made a point of coming after virtually any Trump nominee. Their agenda was to cripple the administration and cancel its America First policies. These tactics endangered national security and weakened the military, and carried on the political agendas of the Obama-Biden administration. Under this onslaught, few leaders wanted to take a top job because they risked being destroyed on the thinnest pretext.

Navy Secretary Richard Spencer would later be fired over the witch-hunt against Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher, after which he denounced President Trump and endorsed Democrat presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg. Spencer had already shown that he wouldn’t stand behind a Chief of Naval Operations under leftist attack. So Gilday, a vice admiral, was suddenly given a job no one qualified wanted.

This was bad news for the Navy and for America’s security.

Gilday was nominated because he was “progressive” enough or could play that part. He would not be a candidate for a witch-hunt. While Admiral Moran had stood up for his people, Gilday began pushing racial campaigns before Biden occupied the White House.

In the summer of 2020, Gilday began mandating his "conversations" about race, which insisted that the Navy was racist. The infamous video was one of the most public of these “conversations.”

Rear Admiral Alvin Holsey, one of the few black admirals, headed Task Force One Navy whose report swapped out traditional naval tradition for fighting "racism, sexism, ableism and other structural and interpersonal biases." TF1N members vowed to advocate for "all lived experiences and intersectional identities of every sailor."

Officers were told that it was their job to “advocate for change.”

The new “One Navy” was a college campus whose focus wasn’t fending off China, but recruiting activists for leftist causes. Its guidelines drew heavily on “white privilege” materials, warning officers to “actively listen and do not be defensive.” In other words, if you criticize the racist propaganda we offer that in itself proves you’re a racist.

The report also proposed fighting “systemic racism” by removing “problematic” language. It  dismantled uniform and grooming standards. Even the term "good taste" was banned.

But there were more ominous proposals like including bias awareness training or so-called “implicit bias” (and what might that be?) which would force Navy leadership into critical race theory sessions.

Gilday was overseeing the transformation of the Navy into a leftist indoctrination machine.

The same month that the report was released, Gilday had a whole new list of reading materials for the fleet. While Gilday has since tried to portray the Professional Reading Program as an optional hobby, it’s understood that these books convey the thinking of the brass. Reading and absorbing their concepts makes officers a good fit for the culture and helps their careers.

While these books had been generally about the military with a focus on leadership, the list sharply diverged with The New Jim Crow which claimed preposterously that America is based on a "racial caste" system (tell that to Barack and Michelle Obama), and Ibram X. Kendi's How To Be An Anti-Racist.

The leftist texts not only violated the military’s non-partisan role in protecting a diverse democratic society, they were racist texts that divided people by color and undermined the Navy’s mission and morale.

Kendi's anti-racism message is that you either agree with his political “solutions” -- or you’re a racist.

“There is no such thing as a not-racist idea, only racist ideas and antiracist ideas,” he preaches. The title of this text Gilday is recommending is a thesis that you’re either a left-wing activist or a racist. Either you support and will work to achieve Kendi’s leftist political objectives or you’re a bigot.

According to Kendi, discrimination can be a good thing. “If discrimination is creating equity [like giving benefits to people who are not white], then it is antiracist. If discrimination is creating inequity [for anyone but white people], then it is racist.”

To Kendi everything is transmuted into racism. Even the weather. “Do-nothing climate policy is racist policy,” he argues, “since the predominantly non-White global south is being victimized by climate change more than the Whiter global north.” But of course, the chief global polluters, China, Pakistan, and India, are nations “of color” who have refused to change their climate policies, while the biggest pusher of climate change alarmism is the long-time white racist now-president of the “white supremacist” United States.

Kendi’s is not your garden variety racism. It’s argued on the same level as the sermons of the long-defeated Ku Klux Klan – in reverse. In college, Kendi wrote that "Europeans are simply a different breed of human” who are "facing extinction" because of their "recessive genes" and are trying to "level the playing field with the AIDS virus." His presentation since then has grown slicker without varying from the same premise that white people are innately racist and the aggressors in an endless struggle to suppress black people.

This racist worldview, promoted by Gilday and the Democrat leadership, and funded by Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, is fundamentally no different from Louis Farrakhan’s blue-eyed-devil explanation of everything that’s wrong with Western history and its civilization. Forget the fact that there is still black slavery in Africa and brown slavery in China, and that America and the British Empire led the world in freeing black slaves.

Kendi sees everything through the lens of racial hatred. He even denounced Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett as a "white colonizer" because she adopted two Haitian children. This is the Navy’s new race guide.

The oath of enlistment for naval recruits pledges them to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States" and its elected officials. But its race guru Ibram Kendi wants to replace all of that with a Department of Anti-racism (DOA) that would have total authority over all "local, state and federal public policies" and given "disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.”

Forget the oath of enlistment; this attack on the Constitution is what Chief of Naval Operations Gilday has twisted the Navy into endorsing.

Rep. Jim Banks, a Navy reservist who served in Afghanistan, asked Gilday at a hearing about his endorsement for Kendi's racist views. Instead of condemning Kendi's racist idea that white people aren't human and created AIDS to kill black people, Gilday argued that these were "cherry-picked quotes” and went on defending the legitimacy of pushing Kendi’s noxious agendas.

“What this is really about is trying to paint the United States military, and in this case, the United States Navy as weak, as woke,” Gilday complained. “We are not weak.”

Sorry but the Navy is on a path to becoming as weak as it is woke.

If Gilday weren’t weak, he wouldn’t be occupying his current position over the heads of more qualified admirals. And if those admirals had shown a willingness to stand up to the purgers, then the entire Navy wouldn’t be subjected to woke witch-hunts and what the Chinese Communists refer to as “struggle sessions.”

Even before the Navy confronts Communist China or Jihadist Iran, it’s under attack from their anti-American leftist allies in this country. The enemy is inside the military and waging psychological war on its own country.

Gilday, like the rest of the woke military leaders, is a pathetic figure who has dispensed with his oath of allegiance and has sworn a woke oath to anti-white race theory. He has pledged his service to racist ideas, like those of Ibram X. Kendi, who will forever despise him on account of his skin color.

And as a reward for his treason, he hopes to be left alone long enough to retire as a lobbyist.

1 302 303 304 305 306 415