MISSOURI VOTES TO BLOCK ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL GUN LAWS WITH SECOND AMENDMENT PRESERVATION ACT

MISSOURI VOTES TO BLOCK ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL GUN LAWS WITH SECOND AMENDMENT 
PRESERVATION ACT 
BY DEAN WEINGARTEN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Arizona -(Ammoland.com)- -In 2019, Missouri Senator Eric Burlison, Representative Jered Taylor, and representative Jeff Pogue have introduced versions of the Second Amendment Protection Act or SAPA.  Here is a link to SB 367 introduced by Senator Burlison.



The bill uses several legal and Constitutional strategies to protect Second Amendment rights from infringement by both the Federal government and various Missouri governments.



The principle Constitutional strategy is the anti-commandeering doctrine, which has been well established in Constitutional law and in the Supreme Court cases of New York v. United States (1992, decided 6-3) and Printz v. United States (1997) and  Independent Business v. Sebelous (2012).



These cases validate the doctrine that the Federal government has no power to force state agencies or officers to do what the Federal government orders them to do. The Federal government can require actions for the state to receive funds from the Federal government, but that is all.



Legislatively, the bill would protect Second Amendment rights by refusing to allow any state officers to enforce any Federal laws considered infringements on Second Amendment rights by the definitions of the bill.  Those include any taxes, stamps, or fees exclusively applied to firearms, accessories, or ammunition.  It applies to any registration or tracking of those items.



No person would have the authority, under the State of Missouri, to enforce those measures.



The proposed bill has teeth.

Text from MO SB 367, the MO Second Amendment Act Takes No PrisonersText from MO SB 367, the MO Second Amendment Act Takes No Prisoners

Anyone who deprives a citizen of Missouri of Second Amendment rights under color of law would be subject to lawsuit or other redresses. Sovereign, official or qualified immunity would not apply.  State officers who violate the law would be ineligible for employment by the state in any law enforcement or law enforcement supervisory capacity, or by any political subdivision of the state.





This is a very tough, very comprehensive bill.





It seems to nullify several existing federal statutes, such as the National Firearms Act of 1934, the Gun Control Act of 1968, and the Brady law. Such measures could be enforced by federal agents, but not by people employed by the State of Missouri or its political subdivisions.  Very few cases could be brought by Federal Agents alone.



This is not the first time SAPA has been pushed in Missouri.  In 2013, a very similar bill to SB 367 was passed by the House and the Senate. Governor Jay Nixon vetoed it. A veto override failed because two senators switched their votes.



In 2014, a similar bill had passed the House. It looked likely to pass the Senate, but legislative maneuvering by the House leader, John Diehl allowed for an amendment of the bill just minutes before the end of the session. According to mofirst.org:





John Diehl chose none of those options. Instead, he waited, and waited, until 5:40 pm when there was only 20 minutes left, to pass an amended HB 1439 and send it to the Senate. That made the bill an easy target for a liberal filibuster. HB 1439 was on the senate floor with ultra-liberal Sen. Jolie Justus filibustering it when the final bell rang on the last day of the year's legislative session..





The final entry on HB 1439's Action page tells the rest of the story: “Taken Up – Time expired pursuant to the Constitution.” John Diehl purposely killed the Second Amendment Preservation Act and tried to make it look like it was the Senate's fault.



Several of the key players who opposed SAPA in 2013 and 2014 are gone. John Diehl resigned over a sex and text scandal. Senators who opposed the bill have left.



Both the current Governor, Mike Parson, and Lt. Governor Mike Hehoe supported the bill previously.



Exactly what will happen if the bill passes is unknown.



If signed into law I am sure law enforcement officers in Missouri will not be sending people found with short barreled rifles or silencers to the BATFE for prosecution since under this law they would lose their jobs.





Exactly what else will happen remains to be seen.






Bonus Video Explanation of SB 367








About Dean Weingarten:



Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30-year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

_______________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/03/deadly-red-flag-bill-being-heard-in-u-s-senate-on-march-26/

TOP MILITARY OFFICIAL SLAMS GOOGLE WORKING WITH CHINA~SAYS COOPERATION HELPING COMMUNIST PARTY CONTROL ITS POPULATION

TOP MILITARY OFFICIAL SLAMS GOOGLE WORKING WITH CHINA~SAYS COOPERATION HELPING COMMUNIST PARTY CONTROL ITS POPULATION
BY INFOWARS.COM
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

America’s top military officer stressed that Google’s ventures in China are aiding its military and communist regime’s ability to control its people.



Companies doing business in China are required to have a cell of the Communist Party present, said Gen. Joseph Dunford during a forum at the Atlantic Council in D.C. Thursday.



“That will to lead to intellectual property from that company finding its way to the Chinese military,” said Dunford. “This is not about me and Google.”



“This is about us looking at the second and third-order effects of our business ventures in China, China’s form of government, and the impact that’s going to have on the United States’ ability to maintain a competitive military advantage and all that goes with it.”



Last year, Google drew the ire of politicians like Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) for refusing an artificial intelligence contract with the Pentagon less than a year after starting an AI research center in China.



“All of it will be shared with the military and with the repressive forces that are doing this,” said Rubio. “[Google] doesn’t want to give AI technology to the [U.S.] military because, God forbid, we may use it someday to target a terrorist or someone who wants to harm America. But [Google] has no problem opening up a center of AI in China, knowing full well how anything you do in China — if it’s a benefit to the military, they’re going to use it; if it’s a benefit to the security services, they’re going to use it.”



Correspondingly, Dunford further expressed his concern on how China is using developments in artificial intelligence to “control” the vast majority of its people, indirectly referring to the country’s Orwellian social creditsystem that blacklists people based on “trustworthiness.”



“My concern when you think about things like artificial intelligence… They’re gonna help an authoritarian government assert control over its own population,” said Dunford. “What China is able to do is identify patterns of behavior amongst people and determine who’s reliable and who’s not reliable.”



“There is no question in my mind that China will leverage technology to assist the 6% of the Chinese population in controlling the other 94%.”

SUPREMES: FEDS MUST ARREST, DETAIN CRIMINAL ALIENS, EVEN YEARS AFTER THEY’RE RELEASED FROM JAIL

SUPREMES: FEDS MUST ARREST, DETAIN CRIMINAL ALIENS, EVEN YEARS AFTER 
THEY’RE RELEASED FROM JAIL
BY R. CORT KIRKWOOD
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that the law means what it says.



The nut of its 5-4 ruling in Nielsen v. Preapis this: Pursuant to federal law, immigration authorities must detain, without the possibility of release on bond, a deportable criminal immigrant until his immigration status is settled. And no matter long how he was free from custody for the criminal offense, the government can lock him up again.



Those who don’t want to read the whole decision can skip down to Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s laconic concurring opinion.



The Case
Writing for the majority, Associate Justice Samuel J. Alito explained that the case involved plaintiffs who challenged the federal law, passed in 1996, that says criminal immigrants must be arrested “‘when [they are] released’ from custody on criminal charges and ... must be detained without a bond hearing until the question of their removal is resolved.”



The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law requires immigration authorities to arrest those criminal foreigners nearly the minute they are released, say, from jail. In other words, immigration cops can’t arrest a criminal immigrant a year after his release.



Alito wrote that “four other Circuits have rejected this interpretation of the statute, and we agree that the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation is wrong.”







The question the court had to settle, Alito wrote, was whether or not “the executive branch’s mandatory duty to detain a particular noncitizen when the noncitizen is released from criminal custody remains mandatory if the executive branch fails to immediately detain the noncitizen when the noncitizen is released from criminal custody.”



That, he wrote, can’t be, because Congress cannot have intended that immigration authorities lose their legal power to detain a criminal alien “if the executive branch fails to immediately detain the noncitizen because of resource constraints or because the executive branch cannot immediately locate and apprehend the individual in question.”



“Especially hard to swallow,” Alito continued, is the notion that “for an alien to be subject to mandatory detention ... the alien must be arrested on the day he walks out of jail (though respondents allow that it need not be at the jailhouse door — the ‘parking lot’ or ‘bus stop’ would do).”



Why is that hard to swallow?



Assessing the situation in realistic and practical terms, it is inevitable that respondents’ unsparing deadline will often be missed for reasons beyond the Federal Government’s control.... To give just one example, state and local officials sometimes rebuff the Government’s request that they give notice when a criminal alien will be released. Indeed, over a span of less than three years (from January 2014 to September 2016), the Government recorded “a total of 21,205 declined [requests] in 567 counties....



Under these circumstances, it is hard to believe that Congress made the Secretary’s mandatory-detention authority vanish at the stroke of midnight after an alien’s release.



Thus, Alito wrote, “an official’s crucial duties are better carried out late than never.”



Kavanaugh’s Opinion
In less than 600 words, Kavanaugh explained the “narrowness of the issue before us” and, in particular, to emphasize “what this case is not about.”



The case was not about the authority of the government to deport criminal immigrants, or “whether Congress may mandate that the Executive Branch detain noncitizens during removal proceedings or before removal, as opposed to merely giving the Executive Branch discretion to detain.”



Rather, Kavanaugh wrote, “the sole question” is whether immigration authorities’ “duty to detain a particular noncitizen when the noncitizen is released from criminal custody remains mandatory if the Executive Branch fails to immediately detain the noncitizen when the noncitizen is released from criminal custody.”



Noting that the question before the court was strictly statutory, not constitutional, with regard to the 1996 immigration law, Kavanaugh explained that “it would be odd [if the law] mandated detention of particular noncitizens because the noncitizens posed such a serious risk of danger or flight that they must be detained during their removal proceedings,” yet “allowed the noncitizens to remain free during their removal proceedings if the Executive Branch failed to immediately detain them upon their release from criminal custody.”



But the law “does not require such an odd result,” he continued. “On the contrary, the relevant text ... is relatively straightforward, as the Court explains. Interpreting that text, the Court correctly holds that the Executive Branch’s detention of the particular noncitizens here remained mandatory even though the Executive Branch did not immediately detain them.”

BIG: KENTUCKY GOVERNOR STANDS AGAINST FORCED VACCINATIONS

Big: Kentucky Governor Stands Against Forced Vaccinations
BIG: KENTUCKY GOVERNOR STANDS AGAINST 
FORCED VACCINATIONS

Republican attacked for naturally exposing his nine children to chickenpox

BY KELEN MCBREEN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Kentucky’s Republican Gov. Matt Bevin made headlines after revealing he purposely exposed his nine children to chickenpox during an interview with Bowling Green radio station WKCT on Tuesday.



“Every single one of my kids had the chickenpox. They got the chickenpox on purpose because we found a neighbor that had it and I went and made sure every one of my kids was exposed to it, and they got it. They had it as children,” Bevin said in the interview.



“Why are we forcing kids to get it?” he continued. “If you are worried about your child getting chickenpox or whatever else, vaccinate your child. … And in many instances, those vaccinations make great sense. But for some people, and for some parents, for some reason they choose otherwise.”



The governor addressed his stance on vaccinations as his home state of Kentucky is in the midst of a controversy about students being banned from school for being unvaccinated.



Click the screenshot below to read more about a Kentucky high schooler’s battle for religious freedom:







Governor Bevin and his wife, Glenna, have nine children, four of whom are adopted.



Despite the fact that most people alive today were naturally exposed to chickenpox as children, the establishment is pushing vaccination as a safer alternative while condemning those who choose not to.



Addressing parents who opt-out of the chickenpox vaccine, Dr. Robert Jacobson, a Mayo Clinic pediatrician, said, “I would never recommend or advise it. It’s just dangerous.”



Left-wing media outlets like Salon are criticizing the governor’s comments, saying he’s “setting a dangerous precedent.”







According to the CDC website, “chickenpox can be serious and can lead to severe complications and death, even in healthy children.”



Less than 100 people die from chickenpox every year in the United States, however, the number of vaccine-related deaths is unknown.



What is known is that a secret federal vaccine court has paid billions of dollars to victims of vaccine injuries.



Even Salon, the same leftist publication now pushing for mandated vaccinations, admitted just months ago that over 6,000 injury and death claims have been compensated since 1989.







The vaccination debate is heating up and Governor Bevin’s stance against forced vaccinations is sure to infuriate authoritarians who wish for them to be made mandatory.



Follow the author on Twitter: @Kelenmcbreen



______________________________________________________________



The Case Against Mandatory Vaccination



BY Peter T. Szymonik




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



Public policy in our country and state today is being driven by many dangerous elements and forces. Of substantial concern are policies, agendas and legislation being driven by claims of crises, which do not exist and are unsupported by reality, fact or science. It is dangerous when these claims are driven by the politics of fear mongering, hate and division. This is especially concerning when specific groups of people are targeted and attacked to incite fear and to promote misguided and harmful policies.



Our country’s system of checks and balances is being circumvented and ignored by those we have placed in positions of authority and accountability. Intelligent and rational debate have fallen victim to hysteria and the politics of misinformation and fear. It is precisely this kind of politics that is being used by legislators across the country to promote government mandated vaccination in response to a manufactured crisis—one based on dated or misleading information.



To be clear, I am not anti-vax. I have worked in the pharma industry and now work in the healthcare insurance industry. My family came here from a former communist country. We understand well what happens when government is allowed to deny individual liberties and personal freedoms. We know quite well what happens when the state considers its interests to be more important than protecting the rights of its citizens.



The scientific benefits of vaccination are not in dispute. However, concerns regarding vaccine injury, today’s vaccine schedule and our government’s much too close relationship with the vaccine industry—should also not be in dispute. When it is well documented, admitted and scientific fact that many children have been severely injured or even killed1 as a result of adverse vaccine reactions—then government has no right or authority of any kind to place parents in a situation where our government forces them to expose their children to admitted risk and risk they deem to be unacceptable.



Our system of modern medicine only works because it was founded on the concept of doing no harm and importance of informed consent. A person has a fundamental and protected right to control what happens to their own bodies. Parents have a fundamental right to the care, custody and control of their children and their family’s medical care. Not the state.



Once we hand over that control, where does it stop?



The solution to the vaccine issue is not government mandates and more draconian government infringement of parental rights and decision-making.



If our state and federal governments want people to vaccinate, the solution is better education and promoting informed consent. It would start promoting full disclosure. By addressing and responding to the valid concerns being expressed by concerned parents who are asking all of the right and legitimate questions. The answer is not by engaging in the politics of hate and fear. It is not found in labeling parents raising these issues as being “crazy,” “uninformed” or worse, to promote a political agenda.



A further serious concern is that the vaccine issue has made the recent headlines in some states not due to any crisis or emergency of any kind. A few dozen cases of measles in Washington state or 1,200 parents opting not to vaccine, or to vaccinate on a limited schedule in Connecticut, is not a medical crisis or threat to the national health. It certainly does not justify sensationalist news media headlines designed to scare people using words like “Outbreak!”



All of us should also be very concerned that some legislators are using this issue as a basis and justification to allow states to further infringe upon and deny parental rights and parental decision-making.



A very dangerous combination indeed.




Note: This article was reprinted with the author’s permission. 



This article or commentary provides referenced information and perspective on a topic related to vaccine science, policy, law or ethics being discussed in public forums and by U.S. lawmakers. The websites of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provide information and perspective of federal agencies responsible for vaccine research, development, regulation and policymaking.



References:





1 Health Resources & Services Administration. Data & Statistics. HRSA.gov.

MAINE GOP LEADER ATTACKED FOR OPPOSING OPEN BORDERS

MAINE GOP LEADER ATTACKED FOR OPPOSING 
OPEN BORDERS

Party vice chairman Nick Isgro is under fire 

for daring to be a conservative

BY MATTHEW VADUM
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

The vice chairman of the Maine Republican Party, Nick Isgro, is under fire for inveighing against open borders and the health problems that unvaccinated migrants from Third World countries are bringing with them to America.



This blowback against Isgro is part of the Left’s ongoing effort to stigmatize conservatives by presenting their views as abnormal, antisocial, racist, and xenophobic. Isgro hasn’t said anything millions of conservatives haven’t said before, but the open-borders movement and its attack dogs in both political parties are always on the lookout for new scalps.



Some Republicans like Maine Senate Minority Leader Dana Dow attack Isgro for standing up for America and American values, while others praise him for his principled stands. Isgro, who said he has received “a massive outcry of support,” is also mayor of Waterville, Maine. He survived a recall election in June.



Isgro said he wrote the controversial tweets “to open a dialogue concerning all of the things that are in play when affecting public health policy.”





As the father of five children, I know exactly what it's like to be a parent up in the middle of the night, with a child with high fever and wondering if things are going to be okay. It angers me to see families like mine attacked for simply wanting to do with [sic] they know what is best for their own children rather than the government. Families should be engaged and respected - not attacked. [M]y own family will always be my first priority and I will continue to defend the families of Maine and their freedoms.





Senate Republicans reportedly demanded that “swift action” be taken against Isgro. Dow said March 18 that he did not approve of Isgro’s statements and was “in the process of taking some actions.” Later that day, Isgro issued a statement in which he made it clear that his tweets, although published on the Maine Republican Party’s Twitter page, “came from me and not the GOP at large.”



A hatchet job of a report by Rachel Ohm in the Waterville-based Morning Sentinel attempts to turn Isgro into a caricature. She writes that Isgro “falsely blamed immigrants for outbreaks of infectious diseases.”



But there is more to the real story than Ohm’s simplistic telling of it.



Using the Maine Republican Party’s account, Isgro tweeted three times on March 14.



The first tweet reads:





We need a serious talk not only about vaccination but migration. Portland, & many US cities, have homeless crises driven by asylum claims & a record number of migrants crossing the border from countries lacking vaccinations. This causes certain diseases to return. 1/3 #mepolitics[.]





The second tweet reads:





.@GovJanetMills & far-left elites are reacting to this with demands for more vaccines for #Maine citizens and demands that Maine families relinquish their longstanding natural rights-despite the risk of over-vaccination-to please financial backers. Wrong policy. 2/3 #mepolitics[.]





The third tweet reads:





Even in states with strict vaccination laws, like California, near-extinct diseases are making a comeback. To protect Mainers & Americans, we need a pause on migration from countries that haven’t eradicated these diseases until we can figure out what is going on. 3/3 #mepolitics[.]





Isgro’s statements are well within the conservative mainstream and not much different from President Trump’s.



Trump has said a border wall is needed to prevent a “tremendous medical problem” related to the flow of migrants into the U.S.



“One of the problems that people don’t talk about, you have a tremendous medical problem coming into our country,” Trump said in December. “Tremendous problems. People don’t want to talk about it.”



Contrary to open-borders propaganda and mainstream media disinformation, these concerns are legitimate.



Andrew R. Arthur, Resident Fellow in Law and Policy at the nonpartisan Center for Immigration Studies who served eight years as an Immigration Judge, wrote in a report that Americans are right to be concerned about the importation of diseases.



In fiscal 2018 the Yuma Border Patrol Sector of the United States Border Patrol in Arizona apprehended 1,700 aliens who required medical care, Arthur wrote.



Aliens “show up sick, particularly children, some of whom are suffering from illnesses not generally seen in modern American society, including mumps, measles, and tuberculosis, as well as others with influenza, scabies, and other skin diseases.”



Arthur makes it clear he is opposed to border-busting caravans and unlawful entry into the United States, not to immigration in general.





None of this should be understood as a stigmatization of children or of migrants from Central America. Regular immigration, in which a foreign national obtains a visa from a U.S. consulate abroad and travels to this country through a port of entry, however, provides for the screening of foreign nationals before they arrive in this country and interact with the public, including other foreign nationals lawfully present.



Irregular migration, on the other hand, by which a foreign national enters the United States illegally between the ports of entry, does not provide any of those safeguards. Once they are here, they are here, regardless of whether they are apprehended and detained, or make their way to their final destinations without apprehension.





Arthur recounts an article by Peter Edelstein, M.D., in Psychology Today in January 2017.



Edelstein wrote:





In the end, it is hard to completely ignore the health risks posed by those whose entry into the country avoids medical examination and treatment. Whether you sit on the ‘build a wall’ end of the spectrum or the ‘they’re just seeking a better life’ end, accepting that treatable major health risks are freely entering into our general population is an unwise strategy, regardless of your political leaning (assuming those risks are meaningful, a debate we can have).





Few have considered the issues raised by Edelstein, Arthur writes.



“The danger posed by communicable diseases … is yet another reason to discourage a wave of aliens who are only apprehended after they have entered the United States, as we have seen in recent months. Especially from places that have recently been under ‘medical state[s] of emergency’ for contagious diseases.”



There is plenty of evidence that illegal aliens are bringing illnesses into America.



As of March 7, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had 2,287 detainees in quarantine for infectious diseases including mumps.



“The numbers of immigrants in custody with a contagious diseases [sic] has spiked in the past year,” CNN reports. “For the previous two years, the agency has not encountered a single case of mumps among its detainees.”



“In the past 12 months, there have been health investigations at 51 ICE detention facilities for mumps, chickenpox and influenza,” according to an ICE spokesman. “There have been 236 reported cases of mumps, with another 16 suspected cases during this time period.”



The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that “[t]ravelers with measles continue to bring the disease into the U.S.” So far this year the CDC has confirmed 268 individual cases of measles in 15 states, including three states that border Mexico (Arizona, California, and Texas).



Nick Isgro has the facts on his side, but when have facts ever mattered to leftists and open-borders fanatics?

PENNSYLVANIA STUDENT FILES COMPLAINT WITH DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AFTER ENCOUNTERING BOY IN GIRLS’ LOCKER ROOM

PENNSYLVANIA STUDENT FILES COMPLAINT WITH DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AFTER ENCOUNTERING 
BOY IN GIRLS’ LOCKER ROOM 
BY HEATHER CLARK
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
HONESDALE, Pa. — A high school student in Pennsylvania has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights after a male student who identifies as female was permitted to change his clothes in the girls’ locker room.
The unnamed female complainant, who attends Honesdale High School, outlined in a video posted to social media that she was changing her clothes before gym class in September 2018 when she heard a male voice, and turned to see the student, also partially undressed, looking at her.
“I glanced down and I could tell that he was wearing women’s underwear and what was underneath it,” she stated. “When I knew that a man was looking at me, I felt very violated and very scared, especially [since he was] looking at me while I am getting dressed.”
According to the complaint filed with the Department of Education, the male student is “female attracted” as he “has been seen at school events holding hands with girls.”
The girl told her parents what had occurred, who in turn called the principal and superintendent and were advised that the district attorney had counseled them to allow students to use the locker room that correlates with their gender identity.
However, officials sought to address the concern by approaching the male student and asking him to change behind a shower curtain. The female complainant was also permitted to wait outside of the locker room until after the male student exited.
Her attorney, Andrea Shaw of Carlisle, says that the arrangement did not completely assuage the concerns.
“This hardly remedied the girls’ right to privacy, because the female attracted male student can still view all of the girls while they are in various stages of undress [as he walks through the locker room],” the complaint reads.
“Second, … [w]hile she was no longer required to remove her clothing in front of a male student, her only option was to take refuge outside of the locker room, a place designated by state law to be used exclusively by her sex, while the male student used the girls’ locker room,” it states.
While the female student no longer has gym class with the male student, she does still have to share the locker room with him as both run cross country, and says that she has decided to “hide[] while she changes her clothes.”
Her attorney contends that the entire reason that there are separate male and female locker rooms and restrooms is so that girls and boys can feel that they have the privacy to undress without being in the presence of the opposite sex.
“All girls in the Wayne Highlands schools, once they learn of the school’s practice … will have reason to fear that they cannot participate in school life without being at risk of loss of their bodily privacy and without fear and apprehension of being confronted by a male in a private setting for girls,” the complaint reads. “The school’s practice thus creates a hostile environment for girls.”
Wayne Highlands School District Superintendent Gregory Frigoletto told local television station WNEP that he is not able to comment on the case, but stated that district policy is in consonance with a recent court ruling permitting students to use the facilities that correlate with their gender identity.
____________________________________________________________

Girl Finds “Transgender” Boy Staring at Her in Locker Room~

Told to Go OUTSIDE Until He Was Done

BY SELWYN DUKE
Proving again that “the eye altering alters all,” a Pennsylvania high-school girl recently found a boy’s lustful eye fixed upon her in her locker room — then was told her only recourse was to wait outside until he was done changing.
Of course, at issue is changing school policy that allows a boy who changes his so-called “gender identity” and claims girlhood status to use the girls’ facilities. As the Family Research Council reports:
There are at least 787 students at Pennsylvania’s Honesdale High — but only one of them seemed to know about a major change in the school’s rules. The others found out the most traumatic way possible: when they walked into the girls’ locker room and found a teenage boy in women’s underwear.
For at least one 15-year-old sophomore, the situation was terrifying. “It was first period,” she remembers, “and I had gym class. And I walked in [to change] with all my friends, and while I was putting on my pants, I heard a man’s voice. So I turned around, and he’s standing there on the opposite aisle looking at me. I glanced down, and I could tell that he was wearing women’s underwear and what was underneath it.” When the boy stared back at her — and the entire group of partially-dressed girls — she was horrified.
When she got home that afternoon, she told her mom and dad what happened. Turns out, the students weren’t the only ones who’d never been notified about the policy. Still in shock, they called the principal and Wayne County superintendent. Neither were particularly sorry about the girls’ experience. And to prove it, they refused to lift a finger to help. The girls’ only option was to wait outside the locker room — a place designated for them — until the boy inside was finished.
The girl’s family has since obtained legal representation and has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Civil Rights Division. Her lawyers have also “posted a video online [below] along with their complaint alleging the school’s policy on transgender use of locker rooms violated the girl’s civil rights,” informs WNEP.com.
“‘Opening up restrooms and locker rooms to members of the opposite sex is sexual harassment. Like most forms, the girls have little power over their situation,’ said attorney Andrea Shaw,” WNEP further informs.
“The Wayne Highlands superintendent says he’s not able to comment on this incident or complaint but does say the district’s policy is in keeping with a recent court decision allowing trans students to use the facilities of their choosing. Now, the Supreme Court is expected to take up that case,” the site continues.
It should first be said here that there’s no such thing as a “transgender” student, not any more than there could be a “trans-species” student who’d really become a cat (and there is a woman who thus masqueraded, by the way). As Australian Alan Finch, who’d once claimed trans status, put it in 2004, “You fundamentally can’t change sex…. Transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists.” 
Weighing in likewise just last year was philosopher Dr. Ryan T. Anderson, who wrote that “transgenderism” is delusion and just amounts to playing “pretend,” since sex change is biologically impossible. As I reported at the time:
“Modern science shows that our sexual organization begins with our DNA and development in the womb, and that sex differences manifest themselves in many bodily systems and organs, all the way down to the molecular level,” writes Anderson in his March 5 article, which was adapted from his new book, When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment.
“Cosmetic surgery and cross-sex hormones can’t change us into the opposite sex,” Anderson, a Heritage Foundation senior fellow, further explains. “They can affect appearances. They can stunt or damage some outward expressions of our reproductive organization. But they can’t transform it. They can’t turn us from one sex into the other.” They merely amount to the donning of “counterfeit sexual garb,” as Johns Hopkins University (JHU) psychiatrist Dr. Paul McHugh put it.
But what of the “transgender” diagnosis? It is made by actual people of medical science, but there’s nothing scientific about it.
Note that when a doctor diagnoses someone with “gender dysphoria” — the persistent sense that you’re a member of the opposite sex but are stuck in the wrong body — there’s no way for him to determine that at issue is a biological phenomenon as opposed to a psychological one. There is no brain-scan; genetic test; blood, urine or any other body-chemistry test for “biologically induced gender dysphoria.” The physician will make his diagnosis based only on feelings — strong feelings of “cross-gender identification” lasting for at least six months. On this basis alone he may ultimately recommend the patient undergo body-rending sex-mutilation surgery.
It’s as if you went to a cardiologist and said, “Doc, I’m certain I have heart disease! I can just feel it!” and he replied, without performing any diagnostic tests, “Oh, have the feelings been strong and persistent? Have they lasted for at least six months? Alright, then, I’ll cut open your chest and perform a bypass!” 
So while Professor Harold “Hal” Lewis said in 2016 that “the global warming scam” is the world’s “greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud,” the “transgender” scam may soon contend for that title.
This Made-up Sexual Status (MUSS) agenda’s unscientific nature raises another issue: Why are the feelings of a majority of people — e.g., the high-school students uncomfortable with having opposite-sex classmates invade their spaces — subordinated to the feelings of less than one percent of the population?
Answer: Because the feelings-based prejudices of pseudo-intellectual pseudo-elites are holding sway.
Meanwhile, Democrat-sponsored House bill “the Equality Act” would force even churches to allow faux (same-sex) weddings and MUSS people to use the opposite sex’s facilities, according to WND.com, and a British Catholic mother is being investigated by police for “misgendering” a MUSS individual.
So what’s really going on here? At bottom, this has nothing to do with compassion, equality, legitimate tolerance, or inclusiveness. Moreover, the problem with it isn’t mainly, as conservatives aver, that predators will use a MUSS ruse to access women’s private spaces (though this is an issue).
Rather, “This is about socially reengineering society — about changing hearts and minds — by legitimizing made-up sexual statuses,” as I wrote in 2016.
This is the real cause of the Bathroom Wars. It’s also why traditionalists shouldn’t budge an inch on this issue. If you can make people believe an objective reality such as sex is mere illusion, you can make them believe anything.

ITALY: MUSLIM MIGRANT BUS DRIVER RAMS BUS FULL OF CHILDREN INTO CARS ON HIGHWAY, SETS IT ON FIRE~CHILDREN ESCAPE UNHURT AFTER THEIR HANDS WERE BOUND

Driver hijacks school bus in Italy and sets it on fire, children escape unhurt


ITALY: MUSLIM MIGRANT BUS DRIVER RAMS BUS FULL OF CHILDREN INTO CARS ON HIGHWAY, 
SETS IT ON FIRE 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Bring in people who were raised in a culture of violence, you’re going to get this.



“Police said the suspect had a criminal record, with convictions for sexual molestation and driving while drunk. He obtained Italian citizenship in 2004. Mr Salvini, the interior minister and head of the anti-immigration League party, asked why a person with a criminal record was allowed to drive a school bus.”



Good question. Especially when the conviction is for sexual molestation. But that such a conviction is on Ousseynou Sy’s record is not surprising, given the widespread belief among Muslim migrants that infidel women are theirs for the taking, in accord with the Qur’an’s permission to have sexual relations with the “captives of the right hand” (4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30).



“Interior minister officials said they were studying the possibility of revoking the driver’s Italian citizenship.”



Great idea. This incident should lead to a large-scale reevaluation of the wisdom of importing massive numbers of Muslim migrants, but given Sy’s stated grievance, it will more likely lead to more pressure from the political and media elites to shut down all opposition to the migration project.







“Bus full of children in Italy set alight by angry driver ‘in retaliation’ for migrant drownings in Mediterranean,” by Nick Squires, Telegraph, March 20, 2019:





An Italian bus driver of Senegalese descent was arrested on Wednesday after hijacking his own vehicle and setting it on fire, allegedly threatening to kill more than 50 children on board whose hands he had bound.



The 47-year-old man said he was acting in revenge for the thousands of migrants, many of them African, who have drowned in the Mediterranean in recent years while trying to reach Europe from Libya.



“No one will survive,” he said, according to police.



“He shouted ‘Stop the deaths at sea, I’ll carry out a massacre’,” said Marco Palmieri, a police spokesman.



The man, named as Ousseynou Sy, was driving 51 children from their middle school near the city of Cremona to a sporting event when he started making threats, brandishing a knife.



In an ordeal that lasted around 40 minutes, he started driving towards nearby Milan.



He rammed the bus into cars on a busy highway before it came to a stop at a roadblock set up by police.



He then doused it in petrol and set it on fire.



Police smashed the windows of the vehicle to allow the children to escape.



Television footage showed thick black smoke and flames billowing from the bus, which was reduced to a burnt-out hulk…



One of the children told reporters that the driver had threatened to pour petrol on them and set them alight.



“He handcuffed us and threatened us. He said that if we moved he would pour out the petrol and set fire to it.



“He kept saying that people in Africa are dying and the fault is Di Maio and Salvini’s” – a reference to Luigi Di Maio and Matteo Salvini, the leaders of the two parties that make up the populist coalition.



Mobile phone footage taken by passing motorists showed dozens of children screaming in panic as they ran away from the vehicle.



At least 12 children were taken to hospital for bruises, smoke inhalation or because they were suffering from shock.



Police said the suspect had a criminal record, with convictions for sexual molestation and driving while drunk. He obtained Italian citizenship in 2004.



Mr Salvini, the interior minister and head of the anti-immigration League party, asked why a person with a criminal record was allowed to drive a school bus.



Interior minister officials said they were studying the possibility of revoking the driver’s Italian citizenship….

THE PUPPET MASTERS BEHIND ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (AOC)

THE PUPPET MASTERS BEHIND 
ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (AOC) 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Opinion
This article first appeared on WND News.

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- Freshman U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is a “puppet congresswoman,” and “the people controlling her are very dangerous.”



It sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory, acknowledges actor, writer and political commentator, Christopher Patrick Kohls. But the first-hand evidence is there for anyone to see, he contends in a youtube video produced under his Mr. Reagan moniker.





“Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not really the congresswoman of New York’s 14th Congressional District,” he says provocatively as he opens the video. “She is essentially an actress. She’s merely playing the part of a New York congresswoman.”





Kohls explains that in 2017, a progressive group that formed in response to Trump’s election called the Justice Democrats held “auditions” for potential congressional candidates to run on their platform.



As evidence, he runs a clip from a Justice Democrats video.





“Back in 2016, we put out a call for nominations,” says the group’s executive director, Alexandra Rojas. “We got over 10,000 nominations. Out of those 10,000 nominations, we found Alexandria.”





Ocasio-Cortez herself, in another video, says her brother nominated her.





“My brother told me that he had sent my nomination in the summer, but I was, like, literally working out of a restaurant then. And I was like, there’s no way,” she says.



Kohls comments: “A casting call. They had a casting call. They cast Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in the role of congresswoman. And they did this so they could promote their own agenda. Justice Democrats, on its website, (https://www.justicedemocrats.com/issues/) says it aims to reform the Democratic Party by running “a unified campaign to replace every corporate-backed member of Congress.”





In a feature on the group, the New York Times noted that in 2018, Justice Democrats endorsed 78 candidates and recruited 12 to run for office.



Of those 12, Ocasio-Cortez was the only one who won her general election.



However, six other endorsed candidates won, and among them are two other freshman House members who have joined Ocasio-Cortez in challenging the power of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: Muslim Reps. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.



Last week, their power was demonstrated when a House Democratic Party resolution originally intended to reprimand Omar for anti-Semitic remarks was watered down. Before it went to a vote, Omar’s name was omitted, and a long list of other forms of bigotry were added.



Meanwhile, two Justice Democrats tenets, “Medicare for all” and the Green New Deal have become litmus tests for Democratic presidential candidates.



Ocasio-Cortez and her former chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, one of the founders of Justice Democrats, are the targets of a Federal Elections Commission complaint by the National Legal and Policy Center alleging violations of campaign-finance laws.



________________________________________________________

DEMOCRAT MEETING ABOUT PARTY ANTI-SEMITISM FEATURES ANTI-SEMITIC JOKES~REP. ILHAN OMAR WON’T AFFIRM ISRAEL’S RIGHT TO EXIST

DEMOCRAT MEETING ABOUT PARTY ANTI-SEMITISM FEATURES ANTI-SEMITIC JOKES~
REP. ILHAN OMAR WON’T AFFIRM ISRAEL’S 
RIGHT TO EXIST 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

This meeting makes it clear that the Democrats are not going to be able to remove anti-Semitism from the party. Hatred of Jews and Israel, and uncritical acceptance of “Palestinian” jihad propaganda, is shared among too much of their base. And whenever they’re challenged, Omar and Tlaib claim victim status and cry “Islamophobia.” It has worked well for them so far, so expect much more of it.






“Dem Lawmakers Admit During Private Meeting They Don’t Know What Anti-Semitism Looks Like,” by Mikhael Smits, Washington Free Beacon, March 18, 2019:





A meeting of Democratic lawmakers about anti-Semitism in the party included anti-Semitic jokes and unapologetic members of Congress, the Washington Post reports.



In the wake of anti-Semitic comments from Rep. Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) and several closed-door conferences by Democrats to discuss related issues within the party, Rep. Andy Levin (D., Mich.), a former synagogue president, organized a meeting as “a more formal event that would focus on anti-Semitism.” The March 5 meeting of Muslim and Jewish lawmakers was a “moment meant to be about listening and learning” about the “raw experiences” of the elected officials, according to the Post….



During the meeting, some Democratic members “admitted they didn’t know what anti-Semitism looks like,” according to the Post.



To help manage the conversation, which was previously unreported, Levin invited Bend the Arc, a left-wing organization deeply critical of Israel and Republicans. In a recent tweet, the group called for Americans to “reject the Islamophobic policies our government is built on.”



When a Bend the Arc organizer in the room made a joke “about Jews and money,” Rep. Jahana Hayes (D., Conn.) questioned why the facilitator could talk like that when someone like Hayes could not. She later told the Post no one should be making comments of the sort.



“It’s not okay,” Hayes said when asked about the specific exchange. “These [sorts of jokes] are off-limits. It’s confusing for someone like me who is trying to learn.”



It took nearly two hours before a Democrat brought up the repeated anti-Semitism of Omar, the impetus for the entire conversation. The congresswoman, a member of the Progressive Caucus, has drawn scrutiny and condemnation since taking office in January for a series of anti-Semitic remarks.



Rep. Dean Phillips (D., Minn.), a Jew who represents a district neighboring Omar’s, told the room he considered her comments to be “tips of the arrow” of Jew hatred in America. According to “several participants” who spoke to the Post on the condition of anonymity, Phillips asked Omar to apologize and “publicly affirm Israel’s right to exist and protect itself.”











Phillips’s request that Omar support the right of Jews to exist in the Jewish state and in the United States “stunned the three Muslim Democrats in the room.”



Omar did not reply to the Jewish member’s request. Instead, one of her allies responded by changing the subject to the Palestinians. Tlaib “grew emotional and started to cry as she spoke of her grandmother’s suffering in the West Bank at the hands of Israelis,” according to the Post….



Tlaib defended Omar then, too. She claimed calls for Omar to leave the House Foreign Affairs Committee were a form of “Islamophobia,” not a proper response to anti-Semitism. Likewise, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D., Wash.) defended Omar, claiming the outrage, much of it voiced by American Jews, was really a scheme “designed to prevent us from taking on the question of our foreign policy toward Israel.”…











_________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/273223/house-dems-brought-soros-

group-fix-anti-semitism-daniel-greenfield 

MASSACHUSETTS PARENTS SUE PUBLIC SCHOOL OFFICIALS & TEACHERS FOR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST JEWS & ISRAELIS

The anti-Israel “Arab World Studies Notebook,” which has appeared in the public-school curriculum of Newton, Mass. Credit: Amazon.
The anti-Israel “Arab World Studies Notebook,” which has appeared in the public-school curriculum of Newton, Mass.
Aaron Shneider tells the Committee that pro-Islamic and Palestinian curriculum is not “balance.”
MASSACHUSETTS PARENTS SUE PUBLIC SCHOOL OFFICIALS & TEACHERS FOR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST JEWS & ISRAELIS
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Bravo. At last, some pushback against what is a nationwide problem.







“Newton Residents Sue City’s School Committee, Superintendent of Schools, Principals and Teachers For Discrimination Against Jews and Israelis,” Americans for Peace and Tolerance, March 19, 2019:





Ideological/Political Curriculum Teaches Propaganda Instead of Facts



NEWTON, MASSACHUSETTS. On March 12, 2019, Newton taxpayers filed a lawsuit in Middlesex Superior Court against the Newton School Committee, Superintendent of Schools David Fleishman, the principals of the Newton high schools, and certain high school history teachers. Plaintiffs are asking for a court order that would compel Newton school officials to stop indoctrinating students with anti-Semitism, bigotry against Israel, and Islamist religious dogma as part of the high school history curriculum. This suit was made necessary because the embattled school administration is shielding its teachers from scrutiny and refusing to supervise what is being taught in its classrooms. The taxpayers claim that Newton Public Schools (NPS) has deliberately failed and refused to comply with the Equal Rights Amendment of the Massachusetts Constitution, with the Massachusetts Student Anti-Discrimination Act, and with civil rights regulations that require schools, through their curricula, to encourage respect for the human and civil rights of all individuals regardless of race, identity, religion, color, sex, and national origin.



The extensively documented 469 page legal complaint, available here, details the lengthy history of Newton residents’ efforts to have NPS address and correct the factually flawed teaching. Plaintiffs and their attorney were provided with an enormous volume of factual documentation by Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT) Executive Director Ilya Feoktistov, whose investigations over the past several months formed the basis of this action.



“In looking for the sources of the anti-Semitic and anti-Israel bigotry in the Newton curriculum, we discovered a few bad apple teachers who view their teaching positions as giving them license to promote their personal political agendas,” said Mr. Feoktistov. “We are also looking closely at a common pattern with these politicized teachers – most, if not all, have taken professional development courses developed with foreign funding by the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia.”



“Newton history teachers and school administrators must think either that anti-discrimination laws do not apply to them, or that these laws do not protect their Jewish and Israeli students,” said the President of APT, Charles Jacobs. “There is no academic freedom to brainwash students with fake history and pro-Arab or anti-Semitic propaganda that is, these days, alarmingly too common on the left in America.”



Evidence described in the complaint shows how Newton teachers teach that Jews and Christians deliberately forged their holy texts to contradict the Muslim Quran; that Zionism has “little connection” to Jewish history in “Palestine;” that the Jews took advantage of the Holocaust to gain sympathy for Zionism at the expense of “Arab plight;” and that the Israelis treat the Palestinians like the Nazis treated the Jews. After being taught all this, students are asked to debate whether there should be a one or two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.



Karen Hurvitz, attorney for the taxpayers, stated that her clients are not asking for money damages, even though defendants have certainly caused years of incalculable damage by their insistence on teaching impressionable students materials that slander Israel and Jews. “This is the type of teaching that leads to anti-Semitism – and it has. The taxpayers here are merely asking NPS to perform their duties and obey the law, which requires that their curriculum encourage respect for all people. Education should be based on fact, not on stereotypes and propaganda.”

TRUMP VETOES CONGRESSIONAL EFFORT TO KILL THE BORDER EMERGENCY

TRUMP VETOES CONGRESSIONAL EFFORT 
TO KILL THE BORDER EMERGENCY

The president throws down the gauntlet against leftists, NeverTrumpers, and weak-kneed Republicans

BY MATTHEW VADUM
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

After Congress voted to overturn President Trump’s emergency declaration to divert federal funds to build a wall on the nation’s porous border with Mexico, the president issued the first-ever veto of his administration to keep the declaration intact.



The veto is Trump’s effort to defend the emergency he declared Feb. 15 under the National Emergencies Act of 1976.



Trump invoked the act as Congress gave final approval to a $333 billion omnibus spending bill. The legislation provides $1.375 billion for 55 miles of border barriers in Texas, well below the $5.7 billion Trump sought for a border wall and the $25 billion he originally said was needed. The emergency declaration moves around $6.7 billion in funding that was previously appropriated for other projects, largely for military construction. In his new fiscal 2020 budgetary blueprint provided to Congress March 11, the president is seeking another $8.6 billion to build the border wall.



On March 14 the Republican-dominated Senate approved a resolution 59-41 disapproving of Trump’s emergency declaration as 12 GOP senators joined Democrats. On Feb. 26 the Democrat-controlled House approved the disapproval resolution introduced by leftist Congressman Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) on a vote of 245 to 182.



The vetoed resolution now heads back to Congress where hostile lawmakers probably won’t be able to get the two-thirds supermajority in both chambers needed to override Trump’s veto and invalidate the emergency declaration.



But that won’t stop the open-borders crowd from trying.



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Friday the House will try to override the veto in a vote March 26. She accused Trump of a “lawless power grab” and said the House “will once again act to protect our Constitution and our democracy from the president’s emergency declaration.”



Trump rejects the specious reasoning of the Left and NeverTrumpers.



In federal law, statutes are presumed to be constitutional and no one appears to have challenged the National Emergencies Act before Trump became president.



Trump didn’t go against the will of Congress, as his critics claim –he acted in accordance with the express will of Congress which, when Gerald Ford was in the White House, gave presidents the power to declare emergencies within certain parameters. If lawmakers are uncomfortable with the president possessing the power to move appropriated monies around, they should repeal the law that Congress passed instead of hiding behind dishonest, dumb reasoning. According to media reports, lawmakers are now considering repealing or changing the law.



But Trump, grounded in reality, is dealing with the law as it currently exists.



“Consistent with the law and the legislative process designed by our Founders, today I am vetoing this resolution,” Trump said in the Oval Office on the Ides of March.



“Congress has the freedom to pass this resolution, and I have the duty to veto it. And I’m very proud to veto it.”



Trump continued:





As president, the protection of the nation is my highest duty. Yesterday, Congress passed a dangerous resolution that, if signed into law, would put countless Americans in danger — very grave danger. The Democrat-sponsored resolution would terminate vital border security operations by revoking the national emergency issued last month. It is definitely a national emergency. Rarely have we had such a national emergency.



Therefore, to defend the safety and security of all Americans, I will be signing and issuing a formal veto of this reckless resolution … Congress’s vote to deny the crisis on the southern border is a vote against reality. It’s against reality. It is a tremendous national emergency. It is a tremendous crisis.



Last month, more than 76,000 illegal migrants arrived at our border. We’re on track for a million illegal aliens to rush our borders. People hate the word ‘invasion,’ but that’s what it is. It’s an invasion of drugs and criminals and people. We have no idea who they are, but we capture them because border security is so good. But they’re put in a very bad position, and we’re bursting at the seams.





“There has been a nearly 2,000 percent increase in border-related asylum claims over the last decade,” Trump said. 



“Part of the reason is because our country is doing so well economically that people are coming up in droves. The vast majority are rejected, but smuggling organizations — making a tremendous amount of money, like they’ve never made before — are using these people to crash the system. Our immigration system is stretched beyond the breaking point.”



This “mass incursion of illegal aliens, deadly drugs, dangerous weapons, and criminal gang members across our borders has to end.”



Trump noted that presidents have declared 59 national emergencies, mainly dealing with foreign countries, since 1976, “yet Congress has not terminated any of them.”



But the “only emergency Congress voted to revoke was the one to protect our own country.”



Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen added “the fact that this is an emergency is undeniable.”



“The system is breaking. Security is at risk. And the very humanitarian protections that we hold dear in this country are at risk in terms of our ability to provide those to vulnerable populations.”



Attorney General William Barr told Trump his “declaration of an emergency on the southern border was clearly authorized under the law and consistent with past precedent.”



“What you’ve done from a legal standpoint is solidly grounded in law. And from the standpoint of protecting the American people, it’s imperative.”



Trump also issued a new executive order under the National Emergencies Act on March 15, titled an Executive Order on Taking Additional Steps to Address the National Emergency With Respect to Significant Transnational Criminal Organizations.



The new order amends President Obama’s Executive Order 13581 of July 24, 2011 blocking property of transnational criminal organizations “in view of the evolution of these organizations as well as the increasing sophistication of their activities, which threaten international political and economic systems and pose a direct threat to the safety and welfare of the United States and its citizens, and given the ability of these organizations to derive revenue through widespread illegal conduct…”



Obama issued his order to fight drug cartels, including Los Zetas in Mexico, according to Breitbart News.



Obama’s order allowed the U.S. to block the property of any group of persons that “engages in an ongoing pattern of serious criminal activity involving the jurisdictions of at least two foreign states.”



Trump’s new order expanded the definition to apply to a group, “involving the jurisdictions of at least two foreign states, or one foreign state and the United States.”



“It’s a very good emergency that he signed,” Trump said last month. “And we’re going to use parts of it on our dealings on cartels. So that would be a second national emergency. But in that case it’s already in place.”



There are also multiple lawsuits filed by George Soros-funded advocacy groups and Democrat-controlled states like the lawless California pending against the Feb. 15 emergency declaration.



If Trump’s enemies –leftists, NeverTrumpers, and weak-kneed Republicans— fail to halt the emergency declaration in Congress, there is a good chance their allies, the politicians in black robes, will do their bidding.



Using the courts is, after all, their favorite way of undermining America.

ROBERT SPENCER: SO LONG, EVERYBODY~IF HE’S SHUT OUT OF ALL PLATFORMS OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS, YOU’LL KNOW WHY

ROBERT SPENCER: SO LONG, EVERYBODY~IF I’M SHUT OUT OF ALL PLATFORMS OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS, YOU’LL KNOW WHY 
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

My friends, it could be time for me to be saying goodbye. Leftist and Islamic groups have been trying for years to silence all criticism of jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women and others, and in the New Zealand massacre they see the best chance in a long time to move in for the kill. I (along with other foes of jihad terror) could be banned from everything and rendered a non-person, a la Alex Jones, any day now.



This is no exaggeration. Meeting in Istanbul, the International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS) has called on non-Muslim countries to ban “Islamophobia,” which means criticism of Islam, including analysis of the motivating ideology fueling jihad terror. IUMS President Ahmed al-Raisouni said Friday: “IUMS calls on non-Muslim countries to ban the spread of hatred against Islam and Muslims.”



Since analysis of the motivating ideology behind jihad terror is routinely smeared as “hatred of Islam and Muslims,” this will likely outlaw all such analysis and make opposition to jihad terror effectively impossible.



And these bans are very likely coming. In America, they won’t take the form of actual laws forbidding criticism of Islam (although remember that Tom Perez, the current head of the Democratic National Committee, refused to rule out the implementation of such laws a few years ago, when he was Assistant Attorney General in the Obama administration). They’re more likely to take the form of a complete deplatforming. We will be able to speak, but no one will be able to hear us, as we won’t be allowed on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and the rest.



IUMS was not alone. Saudi King Salman tweeted: “The heinous massacre that targeted worshippers in the mosque in New Zealand is a terrorist act, and it reaffirms the responsibility of the international community in combating hate speech and terrorism that is not condoned by religions or the values of tolerance.” Apparently terrorism that is condoned by religions is fine with him, as in “strike terror in the enemies of Allah” (Qur’an 8:60). But by “hate speech” he almost certainly means honest discussion of how Islamic jihadis use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence.



Domestically, the call for censorship came from the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which has for years been trying to shut down all opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others. They have succeeded in fooling many people into thinking that it is “bigotry” and “racism” to oppose jihad terror, and have made those who discuss the motivating ideology behind jihad terror toxic in the public square. Now Hamas-linked CAIR is attempting to use the New Zealand massacre to achieve total victory: the complete closure of all media platforms to foes of jihad terror and Sharia oppression.



In its press conference on the New Zealand mosque shootings, CAIR top dog Nihad Awad (pictured above) named Donald Trump as responsible for the massacre, despite the fact that in the murderer’s insane “manifesto,” he asks himself: “Were/are you a supporter of Donald Trump?,” and answers: “As a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose? Sure. As a policy maker and leader? Dear god no.” The “symbol of renewed white identity” part is all that the media is quoting. He never says he was incited to violence by Trump, or says anything about Trump and Muslims at all.



Awad also named Pamela Geller and me: “Years ago when another terrorist attacked in Norway he quoted islamophobes like Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller.” Yes, he also quoted Barack Obama and John F. Kennedy and Charles Darwin and a host of others. He said he was inspired to violent actions by al-Qaeda. Awad does not, of course, say anything about that.



Anyway, CAIR’s press conference was a full-court press for censorship, and it painted, yet again, a large target on our backs for increasingly unhinged and violent Leftists, as well as jihadis. CAIR calls for a total silencing on all platforms of so-called “hate groups,” i.e., those who dare to note that jihad terrorists are inspired by Islamic texts and teachings. It is likely that the social media giants will comply; it will not be at all surprising if they succeed in getting us completely silenced.



Not surprisingly, it was in Britain that police moved most swiftly on this. The BBC reported Saturday that “a 24-year old from Oldham” was arrested for a social media post “making reference and support for the terrible events” in New Zealand. Approving of a massacre is disgusting, and if he was calling for or approving of violence then there is no justification for that. At the same time, the BBC report says: “Social media firms and some news outlets have been criticised for sharing livestream footage of the attack and failing to address far-right extremism on their platforms.”



Calling for or justifying a massacre of innocent people is one thing. But that "failing to address far-right extremism on their platforms" is quite another. For years now, Leftists and Islamic supremacists have insisted that opposing jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women and others constitutes "far-right extremism." So it is likely that those who will be shut down will not be limited solely to people such as this “24-year-old from Oldham” who was “making reference and support for the terrible events.” It will include foes of jihad terror.



If and when we are all silenced, however, the jihad will not stop. The multicultural paradise will not dawn on the planet; in fact, there will be more jihad violence and strife than ever. There just won’t be anyone around who dares to oppose it.



* * *



Photo capture from YouTube



Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

CATHOLIC BISHOPS ABANDON & BAN USE OF WORDS ADULTERY & HOMOSEXUALITY

CATHOLIC BISHOPS ABANDON & BAN 
USE OF WORDS ADULTERY & HOMOSEXUALITY
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational 
and research purposes:

[Sandro Magister | Lifesite News] It is a fact, not an opinion. The words “adultery” and “homosexuality” have both disappeared from the Magisterium of the Church, the highest, that which reports to the Roman pontiff.


About the first word this was already known. It disappeared completely just when it would have been most natural to say it, at the two synods on the family and shortly afterward, when Pope Francis settled the accounts in the exhortation “Amoris Laetitia.”







The disappearance of the second is more recent. And this too happened right at the moment at which it seemed impossible not to say it: at the February 21–24 summit at the Vatican on sexual abuse committed by priests and bishops, almost all of it against the young and very young of the same sex.



“It is known that when one wishes to marginalize or eliminate some truth, there is no need to contradict it openly; on the contrary, this would be the worst strategy, because it would prompt open reactions and draw attention. Much better, instead, to pass over it in silence, not talk about it anymore, to lock it up with the old junk in the attic or the basement, and over the span of some time all memory of it will be lost, and life will go on as if it were no longer there.”



This observation was made by Dom Giulio Meiattini, a Benedictine monk of the abbey of the Madonna della Scala in Noci, professor of theology at the Pontifical Athenaeum of St. Anselm in Rome, in the preface to the second edition of his book “Amoris laetitia? The sacraments reduced to morality.”



The preface can be read in its entirety on the blog of Aldo Maria Valli. But it is enough here to sample the passages most focused on the banning of these two words.



ADULTERY



Dom Meiattini writes:





The first change, which does not seem to have been grasped in its effective gravity because it has been dissembled, is the complete disappearance, not to say the banning, of the word ‘adultery.’ This is entirely absent from the two ‘Instrumenta laboris’ preceding the synods of 2014 and 2015, absent from the respective intermediate relations (‘Relationes post disceptationem’), never used by the two final documents submitted for the approval of the synod fathers, and finally definitively buried by ‘Amoris Laeitia.’ Not a detail of little account. The teaching of the Church, from the time of the Fathers, has always made unmistakable reference to the evangelical and New Testament texts relative to adultery as an essential part of its teaching on indissoluble marriage, with the relative consequences on pastoral practice and canonical discipline. In the aforementioned presynodal, synodal, and postsynodal documents, however, these passages are never expressly cited, apart from a couple of fragments of Mt 19:8-9, from which however is censored precisely the passage that makes explicit reference to adultery.





It is the passage in which Jesus says that “whoever repudiates his wife, except in case of concubinage, and marries another commits adultery.”







Dom Meiattini continues:





One must have the honesty to say it and to recognize it: already for some time in the Church there is very rarely any use of the word ‘adultery’ in preaching or in catechesis. Now instead, in deference to chapter 8 of ‘Amoris Laetitia,’ the preference is to use the neutral and innocuous term ‘frailty,’ which in most cases also replaces the very word ‘sin.’ Occasional conjugal infidelity or stable new unions subsequent to the sole marriage celebrated before God are no longer designated with the appropriate term with which Jesus and the Christian tradition define them: adultery. … In the two synods and in ‘Amoris Laetitia’ the sin of adultery has been erased not with a sponge stroke, but rather with a stroke of silence: it is simply no longer spoken of. And what has become of all of those New Testament passages, above all from the gospels, that speak of it openly? All that appears of them is a faded reference in parentheses, preceded by the initials ‘cf.’





HOMOSEXUALITY



The disappearance of the second word from the Church’s magisterium — Dom Meiattini points out — has happened more gradually — first with a change of meaning and therefore of judgment, and then with its total abandonment.



The key moment of the change of judgment on homosexuality can be seen in paragraphs 50, 51, and 52 of the “Relatio post disceptationem” made public halfway through the 2014 synod on the family.



When on Ocober 13, 2014 the “Relatio” was presented to the press, cardinal delegate Péter Erdő — who formally figured as the author of the document — dissociated himself from those three paragraphs and attributed their surreptitious composition to Bruno Forte, appointed by the pope as special secretary of the synod. And the next day another cardinal of the highest rank, the South African Wilfrid Napier, denounced the irreparable damage that had been done with that coup de main: “The message has gone out: This is what the synod is saying, this is what the Catholic church is saying. No matter how we try correcting that … there’s no way of retrieving it.”



What was written, in fact, in those three paragraphs? That homosexual behaviors must be “accepted” and that “mutual support to the point of sacrifice constitutes a valuable mainstay for the life of couples of the same sex,” better still if gladdened by children.



To continue reading click here 



[Editor’s Note: This article was written by Sandro Magister and first published at Lifesite News. This is not an endorsement of the theology of Lifesite News]

CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES FOUND NO ABUSE, NO MALTREATMENT, & NO EXPLOITATION OF 11 YEAR OLD “DRAG KID”

NEW YORK, NEW YORK - JANUARY 20: Desmond Napoles attends Derrick Barry Presents BRITNEY’S CIRCUS: The 10th Anniversary at Damrosch Park, Lincoln Center on January 20, 2019 in New York City.
CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES FOUND NO ABUSE, 
NO MALTREATMENT, & NO EXPLOITATION 
OF 11 YEAR OLD “DRAG KID” 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

[Amanda Prestigiacomo | Daily Wire] The parents of 11-year-old Desmond Napoles, a so-called “drag kid” known as “Desmond is Amazing,” have been investigated by authorities for alleged child abuse, confirmed mother Wendy Napoles via Instagram on Saturday.



As reported by The Daily Wire in December, Desmond, dressed in full drag, danced in a sexually suggestive manner on stage at a New York City-based gay bar called 3 Dollar Bill. As Desmond took off his jacket, howling men in the audience handed him dollar bills, as one might see at a strip club. The Daily Wire confirmed the existence of the disturbing “performance” but has chosen not to link to the exploitative footage.







Since the incident, authorities have been asked by concerned citizens to investigate the family for abuse. According to Life Site News, “Child Protective Services (CPS) investigated Desmond’s family, as did the New York City Administration for Child Services (ACS), the New York Police Department (NYPD), the Child Advocacy Center, the Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the Department of Labor, and the District Attorney’s Office.”



The boy’s mother said in a post that authorities have claimed the abuse allegations are “unfounded.” Wendy evidenced this with screenshots of such determinations via social media.



“We have been accused of child abuse, exploitation & maltreatment to the point that we have been backed into a corner trying to defend ourselves,” she said, fashioning herself the victim. “We have been under a microscope since early December. I never thought I would have to breach my own privacy & confidentiality to provide proof that has been demanded of us out of malice,” she added.

“ACS has investigated us thoroughly,” the mother continued. “Because of the number of reports they received, our case went all the way to the Governor’s office. We had announced visits & unannounced visits to our home nearly daily & at all hours & Desmond’s school. Our family was probed more intensely than any other case before. All allegations were ‘unfounded’. … On the plus side, ACS has been offering us many support services.”







“In addition, we were investigated by the NYPD, the Child Advocacy Center, the Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the Department of Labor, and the District Attorney’s office. No abuse or maltreatment was found. No regulations for child performers were broken. No illegal activity has occurred,” she said.



“We deal with hate crimes & death threats perpetuated by ‘concerned citizens’ & have been stalked,” claimed Wendy. “The NYPD is assisting us. Desmond has extra security measures in place at his school. All of this because we allow Desmond to be himself & do what he loves. We are a loving and supporting family. Anyone who knows us or met us can attest to that.”



During a 2018 interview with The Daily Beast, Desmond said he’s happy to help “the LGBTQ community fight for our rights” and noted that his parents “love” that he does drag.



To continue reading click here



[Editor’s Note: This article was written by Amanda Prestigiacomo and originally published at the Daily Wire. Title changed by P&P.]

SOUTHERN BAPTISTS ALIGN WITH GAY ANGLICAN PRIEST

SOUTHERN BAPTISTS ALIGN WITH 
GAY ANGLICAN PRIEST 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

If you didn’t think there would ever come a day that the Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination historically known for conservative values, would align with a gay Anglican priest, there’s bad news.



That day is today.







To be fair, this isn’t the first time that ultra-progressive Russell Moore has joined with the homosexual to advance a leftist agenda. Moore, the president of the SBC’s Ethics and Religous Liberty Commission, had previously partnered with the homosexual in a conference about the family, in which Allberry espoused his beliefs that the church should honor and respect “non-traditional” families. Allberry has also used his platform to encourage churches to endorse homosexuals adopting children. He has also encouraged homosexual men to have “intimate and physical” relationships with other homosexuals, so long as intercourse is not involved.



Allberry is popular among the Social Justice movement in Reformed evangelicalism, and is often highlighted at The Gospel Coalition, where he in an editor and writer. Sitting on TGC are men who were recently sitting on stage at John MacArthur’s Shepherd’s Conference, including H.B. Charles, Ligon Duncan, Albert Mohler, and Mark Dever. During the ShepCon Q&A, Mohler said that “those who I platform…speak for where I stand on [Social Justice]. In all of Mohler’s career, it is doubtful that he has ever ‘platformed’ someone more than Russell Moore, who is now joining with Allberry for “The Dignity Revolution Q&A,” an event in Indianapolis on April 2nd.



Other Southern Baptists speaking with the homosexual priest are Dan Darling (the VP of Communications at the ERLC) and Trillia Newbell (the Director for Community Outreach at the ERLC). Jasmine Holmes is the daughter of Voddie Baucham, a fierce opponent of Social Justice, but is the wife of fully-woke racialist, Phillip Holmes (a “content strategist” for Desiring God” and Director of Communications at the James Riady-funded Reformed Theological Seminary).







Allberry claims to be a celibate homosexual. He does not believe, and neither does he teach, that God will renew the mind and heart of homosexuals upon conversion to desire heterosexuality. Allberry has been pivotal in turning the tide of opinion against the sinfulness of Same-Sex Attraction, teaching instead that the desire to sodomize others and to be sodomized is not a sin unless acted upon.



The Dignity Revolution Q&A is just one of many initiatives participated in by the ERLC – an organization in partnership with George Soros – to slowly change the voting habits of evangelicals as a part of a political mission.



Like Jim Wallis of Sojourners (with whom Russell Moore serves on Soro’s Evangelical Immigration Table), Moore and the Southern Baptist leftists on this panel shroud gay rights, socialism and the redistribution of wealth, and illegal immigration under the banner of ‘human flourishing,’ ‘human dignity,’ and ‘justice.’



[Editor’s Note: Contributed by JD Hall]

________________________________________________________

SEE OUR PREVIOUS POSTS:

https://ratherexposethem.org/2018/10/gay-priest-speaks-at-southern-baptist.html

https://ratherexposethem.org/2019/02/sam-allberry-gay-anglican-priest-at.html

SAINT PATRICK THE PROTESTANT

SAINT PATRICK THE PROTESTANT 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Born in 385 in Roman Britannia in the town now known as Dumbarton, Scotland, Patrick is rightfully considered one of the greatest evangelists in Christian history. Considered a Catholic holiday by many, Protestants need not be afraid of taking part in the less-debaucherous festivities…so long as they’re wearing the right color.

Patrick begins his autobiography by writing these lines:









My name is Patrick. I am a sinner, a simple country person, and the least of all believers. I am looked down upon by many. My father was Calpornius. He was a deacon; his father was Potitus, a priest, who lived at Bannavem Taburniae. His home was near there, and that is where I was taken prisoner. I was about sixteen at the time.





Patrick’s father was a bishop (pastor) in the ancient ‘British’ Church (he was a Roman who came to Britain to govern the colony, and made his way to Scotland), long before the Roman Catholic church reconquered the West for paganism. He was taken captive by Irish pirates, who took him to Ireland and left him more than 200 miles inland, selling him as a slave. Patrick took upon himself to farm labor, tending sheep. Six years later, Patrick made a break for freedom and traveled back to the coast, where he caught a ride home.



During Patrick’s captivity, his faith grew, as it had to in order to give him the courage and will to survive. As he arrived home, his attention turned from mere survival to compassion for his former captors. He became a clergyman like his father before him, but longed to return to Ireland with the Gospel. Unlike his native home, Ireland was almost thoroughly pagan, with no Christian influence or had not undergone evangelism whatsoever.



Although certain of the details have been distorted by history and stretched by Romanists who later claimed him as one of their saints, we know that Patrick returned to Ireland with a Bible and with a dagger, in case he ran into trouble. It appears he first went back to his slave-master, and God converted him. Then, Patrick set his eyes upon the wicked king of Ireland, Loegaire.



Marching dramatically near the King’s castle with an army of newly converted Irishmen, Patrick refused to relent despite threats of death. Surrounded with the Gospel and the fearless Scotsman, Loegaire appears to have been legitimately converted by the Holy Spirit. By the time Patrick died in 461, Ireland had become thoroughly Christianized and Druidism was entirely absent.







Myths about Patrick range from fanciful to plausible. Patrick didn’t scare away the snakes of Ireland (they are not native to the Island nation, but may be a metaphor for the eradication of Druid priests). However, he probably did use the Shamrock as an object lesson about the Holy Trinity so that the pagans could understand the Triune God.



Ireland is now mixed between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism and is a battle that is as much political as it is spiritual. On festive occasions, the Romanists decorate with green. But the Protestants decorate with orange. Protestants in Ireland (and around the world) revere William of Orange, the Protestant King who brought religious toleration to Great Britain. It’s for this reason that Protestants in Ireland have typically been loyalists to Great Britain and the Catholics have been dissenters from their union.



Most of the Irish immigrants to the Americas were disgruntled and disenchanted with the British empire adopting Protestantism, and so they brought with them their Irish tradition and the color green. So then, a green “St. Paddy’s Day” is all most Americans know.



For Protestants, however, we wear the color orange. So grab that orange-colored garment and throw it on this St. Paddy’s Day. When people try to pinch you for not wearing green, explain you’re a Protestant…and you preach the Gospel back at them.



While it is true that Patrick wasn’t a Protestant to the extent that his tradition came from the Protestant Reformation (he lived more than a thousand years before), he was no Roman Catholic. He was what Ian Paisley (a famous and sound Irish preacher) would call a proto-Protestant. Listen to that sermon here.

BETH MOORE & BELLEVUE BAPTIST: A WOLF COMES TO MEMPHIS

BETH MOORE & BELLEVUE BAPTIST: 
A WOLF COMES TO MEMPHIS
BY SETH DUNN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

If you had the chance to meet Joel and Victoria Osteen, two of the world’s most prominent purveyors of the prosperity gospel, would you beg them to stop twisting God’s word for profit? If you were able to sit down with Brian and Bobbie Houston, the founders of the worldwide prosperity movement that is Hillsong, would you rebuke them? If you had the opportunity to go on television with Matt and Laurie Crouch, who broadcast heresy into nearly every household in America through their TBN network, would you beg them to stop fleecing shut-ins for “seed money?” Each of the parties mentioned above are ravenous wolves. They are the very type of people that the Apostle Paul warned Titus about when he wrote the following:





For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, 11 who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain.





Titus 1:10



Titus was under Paul’s instructions to appoint elders in local churches. Paul very clearly instructed Titus that he should appoint no elder who was fond of sordid gain. To the contrary, Titus was to appoint men to lead churches who could rebuke the kind of ravenous wolves who taught the type of false doctrines purveyed by the Osteens, Houstons, and Crouches. This rebuke was to be done out of a proper understanding of God’s word.



Beth Moore is perhaps the most popular Bible teacher in America. She is, being a woman, not eligible to hold the pastoral office. Nevertheless, she teaches the Scriptures to as many women, if not more, than any pastor in the country. Beth Moore should know how to handle heretics like the Osteens. Beth Moore should know what to do with wolves.



Beth Moore, I believe, is a wolf. Birds of a feather flock together, wolves run in packs, and bad company corrupts good morals. When Beth Moore literally embraces heretics like Brian Houston and the Osteens, what else can I think? Beth Moore is clearly in the God business, right along with the Crouches…and it is a profitable one. In the course of her business, Beth Moore is set to appear this month for one of her Living Proofconferences at the flagship church of the Southern Baptist Convention, Bellevue Baptist in Memphis. That church is pastored by former SBC President Steve Gaines, who was a member of the study committee that helped to draft the official confession of faith of America’s largest protestant denomination. That church was formerly pastored by the great Adrian Rogers, who chaired the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 Committeeand led the Southern Baptist Convention back from the brink of liberalism in the early 1980s.



Surely, Joel Osteen would never be allowed to host a conference or fill the pulpit at Bellevue Baptist Church…but Beth Moore is coming and being embraced with open arms. Is Steve Gaines letting a wolf in his pulpit? Sadly, that’s a moot point. Adrian Rogers’ old pulpit at Bellevue is already filled by a man who would preach prosperity theology. That man is Steve Gaines himself, who once warned his congregation that their children would get sick if they didn’t tithe (to his church).











Beth Moore isn’t someone to warn Bellevue Baptist members about, she is a judgement upon them. They already tolerate Steve Gaines. Surely the women there hunger to hear a speaker like Moore, and this March they will flock to her. God only knows if their kids, in the midst of allergy season in the south, will get runny noses.







*Please note that the preceding is my personal opinion. It is not necessarily the opinion of any entity by which I am employed, any church at which I am a member, any church which I attend, or the educational institution at which I am enrolled. Any copyrighted material displayed or referenced is done under the doctrine of fair use. I exhort you to read the powerful testimony of a pastor’s wife named Lauran who grew up at Bellevue and now seeks to warn other women about Beth Moore and her ilk. 

PENNSYLVANIA SUBMITS FIREARMS REGISTRATION BILL~TYRANNY IN PA

PENNSYLVANIA SUBMITS FIREARMS REGISTRATION BILL~TYRANNY IN PA 
BY JARED J. YANIS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Pennsylvania – -(AmmoLand.com)- Pennsylvania Submits Firearms Registration Bill.A new bill introduced in Pennsylvania, HB0768, would boldly establish a gun registry within the state. The Democrats that introduced the bill areMary Louise Isaacson (D), Angel Cruz (D), and Mary Jo Daley (D). The Pennsylvania General Assembly has referred the bill to the Committee on the Judiciary.



This bill would require gun owners in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to register their firearms ANNUALLY with the Pennsylvania State Police. Owners would have to provide the police with the make, model, and the serial numbers of all their guns as well as pay $10/gun…every year.



HB0768:



The title tells you everything you need to know it's known as the Firearms Registration Act. This governmental cash grab will cost $10 per-gun and gun owners will have to go through another background check for each individual firearm that they already own and you know they're gonna make you pay for that. Oh, and the background check is the same one you have to go through to purchase the gun in the first place.



So you went through a background check to purchase the gun and now you have to have the same background check to register the gun and continue ownership!?! Hmm now that's not all, you have to also give the Pennsylvania State Police your home address, your work address, your telephone number, your social security number, your date of birth, your age sex and citizenship…most of which they should already have anyway from the process of you getting your permit. This is all more information than you need to give to vote.



Now if the State Police are so bold to reject your application of the firearm you're already own lawfully and legally own, you have 10 days to appeal and yeah you know where that's going. If you are rejected you have three days to turn in your firearms to the State Police and you know if you don't do it they are gonna come knock on the door.



Now some of you might say, “Yeah I'll just sell my gun.” Well, you can't sell it if it's not registered, nor can you buy one and not register it. They've also made it illegal, under this bill, to have a gun and not know that it's not registered! AND it's also going to be illegal to have a gun at a shooting range that's not registered.



It gets worse guys!!! The gun owner must keep all firearms unloaded and disassembled, or bound by a trigger lock. If you don't do that you're gonna be guilty of a crime! This even applies to homes without children in them!!



Now if you happen to try to better yourself in life and get another job change your phone number or whatever it is you have 48 hours to tell the state police otherwise they're gonna come to get you.



Oh, did I mention in addition to $10 bucks per firearm, that registration is only good for one year you have to re-register every single year if this passes? I think you know what's coming! There is no mention on how they're going to enforce this by the way.



There is a lot going on in the last couple of days regarding the Second Amendment! Please, like this video and share it, and subscribe to the channel if you haven't already! This is where you will get news like this on the Second Amendment; good, bad or ugly…Only on Guns & Gadgets! Be safe, stay vigilant and carry a weapon.


Jared J YanisJared J. Yanis

About Jared J. Yanis & Guns & Gadgets



With over 20 years of experience in the law enforcement field, I have learned the numerous channels used by those who would love to see our 2nd Amendment rights stripped. Because of this, I am often able to bring you the news on new bills submitted at the local, state and federal levels that look to carry out those attacks. If you are new to the channel or want to stay up to date with the constant infringements on our Constitutional Right to Bear Arms, please subscribe to my YouTube Channel at www.youtube.com/GunsGadgets



GunsAndGadgets@charter.net
Guns & Gadgets
P. O. Box 940
Douglas, Massachusetts 01516


    

  • https://www.facebook.com/GunsGadgets
    • 

  • https://www.instagram.com/guns_and_gadgets
    • 

  • https://twitter.com/jyanis
    • 

  • https://gunstreamer.com/@Guns_and_Gadgets
    • 

  • https://videos.utahgunexchange.com/@Guns%20and%20Gadgets
    • 


_____________________________________________________________

Pennsylvania HB0768! Registration AND YOU Pay For IT!



Big City Legislators thinking up ways to keep Law Abiding Citizens from exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights by doing everything they can to make it More than Difficult to obtain firearms. This is a big flop and it is far too reaching. Required Personal Information, plus overworked State Police.  This is Not NJ

Official Website:  http://kb32tac.com/

Email:  kotaboy32@gmail.com

THE NEW ZEALAND SHOOTINGS–THE SATANIC CONNECTION

Mosque Attack, Who’s To Blame? Well Allow Me To Tell You!!!
VIDEO BY VETERAN DOUGLAS DUCOTE:

THE NEW ZEALAND SHOOTINGS-

THE SATANIC CONNECTION
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
new Zealand shooting Where was God? | Was brenton Tarrant a Christian?

The world has no doubt been rocked by the horrific news of the mass shooting by a White supremacist that killed dozens of Muslims who were worshiping in 2 mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. The racist attack shocked the normally quiet country and has sent the world reeling into mourning and much discussion of violence, gun control and politics. However, in all the anger, emotion and discussion about what motivated the killer to commit such an atrocity the spiritual clues and satanic influence behind this crime should not be ignored. 



ONE OF THE WORST MASS SHOOTINGS IN HISTORY

Locals in Christchurch are still reeling from the worst tragedy in the nation’s history.

According to reports:





“One suspect has been charged with murder after at least 49 people were killed and more than 40 others were injured in mass shootings at two mosques in New Zealand on Friday.



The attacks occurred while worshippers attended Friday prayers. The main attack happened at Masjid Al Noor in central Christchurch, the largest city on the country’s southern island, where 41 people were killed, police said. A second shooting took place at Linwood Masjid, in an eastern suburb of Christchurch, where seven people were killed. Another person died after being transported to a hospital.



A number of explosive devices attached to vehicles were reportedly defused after the attack.



Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern called the incident a “terrorist attack.”



A 28-year-old man, who authorities identified as Brenton Tarrant, charged with murder, appeared in Christchurch District Court briefly on Saturday. Two other people remained in police custody Saturday, after a total of four people — three men and one woman — were initially detained as suspects.” (source).





Tarrant, who livestreamed the murders on Facebook, twitter and Instagram (while also posting on YouTube) is a self-described white supremacist, racist and fascist who carried out the attacks in response to immigration by non-whites and revenge for Muslim terror attacks in Europe. His “manifesto” was a likely intentionally confusing rant on politics and society.  The alleged murderer referenced Norwegian white supremacist and mass murderer Anders Breivik who in 2011 killed 77 people at a youth camp in Norway and after posting a 1,500-page manifesto online. Tarrant also referred to himself as a “Knights Templar: invoking the name of the Crusaders as Breivik did in his own manifesto.



MURDER – THE ULTIMATE RESULT OF THE SIN NATURE

Where was God in the New Zealand shooting? | NRA Gun control and New Zealand “But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.” – Proverbs 8:36

The Bible is very clear that it is because of our fallen, sin nature, that humans can commit murder. It is also a downward spiral as one’s heart moves continually way from God and towards one’s own desire for evil and satanic influence. The Cain, the first son born in human history, was also tragically the first murderer – killing his own brother Abel. After God’s accepted the offering of Abel and rejected Cain’s, the wicked son plotted to murder his own family.  The Bible details the spirit operating within him:





“For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.” – 1 John 3:11-12



Bible verses to comfort after a tragedy | New Zealand shooterOne of the numerous wounded victims who suffered at the hands of anti-Muslim bigotry.

Cain was “of that wicked one” – meaning Satan. Once a person gets so deep into sinful rebellion against God, the limited influence of God all people have – the conscience, gets “seared” and all manner of evil becomes acceptable. This is Satan’s goal for all people – to abandon any thought or fear of God in their hearts.  Tarrant built his life around hatred for other people. Hatred for people of non-White races. Hatred for Muslims. Hatred for immigrants. This sinful lust in his heart soon grew into a desire to kill. The Bible speaks of this very descent:





“But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.” – James 1:14-15





Note once again that it is a process. Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, helping to frame The Lord and arrange His execution by Roman authorities, started off as a thief. But that sin soon led to helping to being complicit in murder. And to no surprise at the moment Judas prepared for the ultimate betrayal, Satan was involved:





“And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill [Jesus]; for they feared the people. Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them.” – Luke 22:2-4





Jesus Christ said of the Devil: “…He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” (John 8:44)



Therefore, putting your faith and trust in God, reading and understanding the Bible, praying to God and keeping love for Him in your heart, is so critical. Not only will it save your soul from eternal damnation, it gives the power to overcome sin and a desire to live for God, not rebel.



THE NEW ZEALAND SHOOTER’S SATANIC CONNECTION

New Zealand Shooting Brenton Tarrant Satanic Illuminati | MK Ultra New World Order The Crazy World of Arthur Brown – the heavy metal band whose music Brenton Tarrant was listening to as he carried out his murders.

After he returned in his car to head to the second mosque to find more victims, Tarrant played the song “Fire” by British rock band The Crazy World of Arthur Brown. The killer could be heard yelling the opening line of the song on his livestream: 





“I am the god of hell fire, and I bring you!
Fire, I’ll take you to burn.
Fire, I’ll take you to learn.
I’ll see you burn!” (source)





Arthur Brown, the lead singer is often credit as being the father of heavy metal music. He was renowned for his obsession with occult imagery and performed with a colander with a flame ignited on it. This was done in the same fashion of the Baphomet:

New Zealand Shooting Brenton Tarrant Satanic Illuminati Mind Control | Was the New Zealand shooter demon possessed?Left: Heavy Metal “forefather” Arthur Brown with flaming collander on his head. Right: The Baphomet, a symbol for Satan, with a flame on his head.

Here is another picture of Arthur Brown’s group mimicking the shape of the Baphomet sigil:

Brenton Tarrant demon possession | MK Ultra New world order mind control



The Baphomet Sigil



The Baphomet, a term originally coined by the Knights Templars, when they were on trial for heresy and confessed to worshiping an idol of that name. In describing the flame atop the head of the Baphomet, a researcher stated:





“Baphomet signifies Βαφη Μητεος, baptism of Metis, baptism of fire,[44] or the Gnostic baptism, an enlightening of the mind, which, however, was interpreted by the Ophites, in an obscene sense, as fleshly union .” (source).





And of course, as time progressed the Baphomet became synonymous with the Devil. In fact, the Church of Satan official adopted the Baphomet sigil symbol as their logo. Arthur Brown, who also had a song called “In The Devil’s Grip” was also renowned for using his rock concerts and music as a means to initiate an occult ritual. In an inteview, Peter Bebergal, author of Season of The Witch: How The Occult Saved Rock n’ Roll, he describes Arthur Brown’s beliefs:





“But for some, while they saw their music has having potential to work magic, they still saw themselves first and foremost as musicians. Arthur Brown, best known for his song “Fire” believed a rock concert could function as a shamanic rite. He used every element of the performance, from his makeup to the staging to the way he moved, as an attempt to channel and then release what he believed was magical energy. ” (source).











new Zealand Shooting Why did he do it? | Was the New Zealand shooter a Christian?Brown, in a freemasonic pose popularized by luciferian Aleister Crowley.



What spirit was moving in the New Zealand killer to play this particular song as he committed such horrific acts?  The same spirit that was working in Cain when he slew Abel, in Pharaoh wanting to kill the male babies in the days of Moses and Judas when he betrayed Christ. Do not be deceived.



PRAY FOR NEW ZEALAND

Where was God in the New Zealand shooting | Was the New Zealand shooter a Christian?The nation of New Zealand desperately needs prayer right now.



“But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” – 2 Corinthians 4:1-4





If you are a Christian, pray for New Zealand to heal in the wake of this unprecedented violence in their nation. Pray for the families of the Muslim victims to be comforted in this terrible time. Pray for the shooter, whose mind and heart were so twisted with sin and rejection of God that he could do this. And pray for the churches in Christchurch to live up to their city’s namesake and boldly and lovingly preach the Gospel to the many hurting people there.



Pray for the Gospel to shine in the hearts of the people in that nation. Christianity identifies the real problem in the world: sin. It is in the hearts of all people and there is nothing we can do on our own to stop it. But through faith in Jesus Christ, sin can be conquered. God wants to give all people a new spirit and heart that will seek to serve Him and do good, not evil:





“A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.  And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.” – Ezekiel 36:26-27





Racial and political strife feel like they are at an all-time high in society. Hatred is brewing all over social media. Families are divided. Workplaces are split in hostile anger. Brenton Tarrant’s agenda was right in light with the Devil’s: to sow discord, anger and more violence in society – all to drag as many people into true hellfire as possible.



This is not God’s way. This will not bring peace. True peace comes with being forgiven for your sins and reconciled with God. This is what Jesus died for. This is why Jesus rose from the grave after taking your punishment on the cross. If you are not a Christian, do not wait. This tragedy is yet another stark reminder that we do not know how long we have left on this Earth. Life like a vapor, can disappear in a moment. Believe the Gospel of free forgiveness of sins through faith in Jesus Christ and let your heart be filled with God’s love. The world could use a lot more of it right now.

JUDGE JEANINE PIRRO PULLED FROM TV: IS SHE THE LATEST CASUALTY OF THE NEW ZEALAND CARNAGE?

Glazov Moment: In Defense of Judge Jeanine


JUDGE JEANINE PIRRO PULLED FROM TV: IS SHE THE LATEST CASUALTY OF THE NEW ZEALAND CARNAGE? 
BY SELWYN DUKE
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Predictions were that the New Zealand shooting would be used as a pretext to further stifle critics of Islam. So perhaps it’s no coincidence that Judge Jeanine Pirro, under fire recently for criticizing Muslim congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), just had the Saturday edition of her show unceremoniously pulled off the air by Fox News.



While Fox hasn’t explained the move, the timing is uncanny. It was Saturday, 3/9 that Pirro made her remark, “Think about it — Omar wears a hijab. Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to Sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?” Yet it wasn’t till this past Saturday, 3/16 — the very day her show was set to air again — that we heard about the cancellation.



This also happened to be just two days after China-loving, anti-capitalist, self-described “eco-fascist” Brenton Tarrant perpetrated the horrible Christchurch, New Zealand, massacres, killing 50.



But this was predictable — and predicted. Chronicles magazine wrote Friday that Muslim activists and their Thought Police enablers would use the shooting as a pretext to stifle “‘Islamophobia,’ effectively defined as any form of meaningful debate of Islam, its scriptural message, historical practice, and current ambitions.”



And, sure enough, writes American Thinker’s Thomas Lifson, “New Zealand has changed the momentum of American politics, putting concerns about Jew-hatred in the back seat (or maybe the trunk), while ‘Islamophobia’ activists sit in the driver’s seat, turning us left.”







It doesn’t matter that, as I wrote Saturday, Muslim-on-Christian massacres are the norm in places such as Nigeria, that many thousands of Christians were thus killed in just the past year, and that a Christian is 143 times as likely to be killed for being Christian in a Muslim country as a Muslim is to be killed for being Muslim in a Western one. Perception isn’t reality, but it shapes policy — and isshaped by the media.



The mainstream media’s selective reporting means people don’t hear about massacred Christians, but it also gives us other double standards. For example, while it’s verboten for even a pundit to question Omar’s faith, senators Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) have in recent times suggested that certain judges may be too Catholic to sit on the bench, coming “close to imposing an unconstitutional ‘religious test’ upon [them],” as the Washington Examiner wrote last year. The Thought Police didn’t seem to mind, either.



Then there’s the headwear hustle. Pirro is a zero, supposedly, for questioning Omar’s hijab. But consider that Americans wearing MAGA hats have been attacked, and refused service in restaurants and elsewhere; also note that the poor Covington Catholic High School boys were targeted by activists and media for scorn, ostracism, and character assassination for wearing the caps.



Critics may say that MAGA hats represent something: ideas. But so does the hijab. These are symbols, which by definition are symbolic of something.



So the question is: What is it in the hijab’s case — and what, in particular, in Omar’s case?



American Thinker’s E. Jeffrey Ludwig weighed in on this yesterday, writing that Omar “poses an interesting case study in American cultural or civilizational consciousness. She is the first congressional representative to wear a scarf around her head, and that scarf is for some a symbol of the breadth and depth of our acceptance of others. For others, it is a symbol of alienation and rejection of the America she claims — simply by holding office — to represent. To those who see her this way, the hijab or head covering is seen as a hostile schmata (rag) whereby she is not merely carrying on one of her subculture’s customs, but, in essence, giving the finger to the country she now would participate in governing.”



If this seems a stretch, consider: The New York Times reported last year that Omar “became a citizen in 2000, when she was 17. After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, she decided to wear the hijab, as an open declaration of her identity.”



Striking. So Omar “put on the hijab after 9/11?” asks American Thinker editor Monica Showalter incredulously. “Back [when] most Americans were draping themselves in the American flag, flags flying like crazy, flag pins, flag boxes, flag everything, and back when Palestinians were dancing in the streets about it? Yes, that happened, there were horrible people in hijabs dancing with glee when that terrible event happened. How strange she chose that moment to put on the hijab. For her, it wasn’t even a religious motivation, it was, as she said, all about her identity, who[m] she identified with.”



“It goes against the response normally seen at such times,” Showalter continues. “Normally, people tend to want to assimilate with the injured party or with the nation itself when it's had war declared upon it.”



A case in point, Showalter points out, is when “Japanese-descent Americans responded to their nationality under fire after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor by volunteering in vast numbers to join the U.S. military to fight the Axis.” But that was a different time — and Omar is a different kind of immigrant.



It’s not just that, according to some sources, she has been implicated in multiple felonies, including fraud relating to immigration, healthcare, taxes, and the Free Application for Federal Student Aid program. It’s that she exudes bigotry and ingratitude.



Omar has accused the United States of being complicit in “genocide” in “Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua.” Moreover, reports the New York Times, from “‘the first day we arrived in America,’” Omar said, “she concluded that it was not the golden land that she had heard about.” (We really need to stop holding that gun to her head and keeping her here.)



Omar also tweeted in 2012 that “Israel has hypnotized the world, [sic] may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” In a 2018 tweet she called Israel an “apartheid regime,” and she has demanded an end to the “occupation” of East Jerusalem. These are typical jihadist passions.



To the point of Pirro’s statement, however, the “hijab is in many cases, if not most, indicative of adherence to Sharia,” explains Jihad Watch proprietor Robert Spencer, one of America’s foremost authorities on Islam. “Sharia does contradict Constitutional principles in numerous ways, including the denial of the freedom of speech and the denial of the equality of rights of women,” he continues.



Note, too, that “the Center for Security Policy released a 2015 poll of Muslims in the US showing that ‘a majority (51 percent) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah,”’” as I reported in 2017 (related video below concerning the part of Omar’s district dubbed “Little Mogadishu”). Given these facts, was Pirro’s question unjustified — or logical and necessary?







The deeper issue is that we always should — and should be able to — question our leaders’ motivations. If someone is a Marxist, is it wrong to wonder if his worldview contradicts his constitutional duties? If you think this isn’t analogous, consider that what differentiates ideologies from each other is that they involve different values.



Yet so do different religions.



Thus, not all religions can be morally equal unless all values are. This value-equivalency error, known as “moral relativism,” not only has as a corollary that all faiths are morally equal, but that all ideologies (and everything else) are, too. Do we really believe that Marxism, Nazism, conservatism, liberalism, and every other ism are equivalent?



Since our Constitution also expresses specific values, it follows that the values of certain other “belief systems” — whether called “religion,” “ideology,” “philosophy,” or something else — may conflict with it. It therefore is not just wise to wonder if a leader’s beliefs are compatible with the Constitution. It’s also an imperative of good citizenship.



While I won’t hold my breath waiting, I’d like to see a reporter ask Representative Omar, “Do you believe that Muslims in the United States should be allowed to govern themselves with Sharia rather than civil law?” and, “Do you believe Sharia law should be subordinated to our Constitution?”



Perhaps only Catholic judges can be thus grilled, but it would be interesting to see if Omar could give a straight answer.



_____________________________________________________________





Center for Security Policy blasts Fox News 



for dumping Judge Jeanine



Outrage is mounting in the wake of Judge Jeanine Pirro's suspension from Fox News. The Center for Security Policy is now voicing its anger with the news outlet. One America's Neil W. McCabe sat down with the group's president and has this from Washington.























SEE ALSO:

3,000 YAZIDI SEX SLAVES MISSING & FEARED DEAD

3,000 YAZIDI SEX SLAVES MISSING & FEARED DEAD
BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/03/3000-yazidi-sex-slaves-missing-and-feared-dead;  republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
3000 Yazidi sex slaves are lost and feared dead. This story should be in headlines everywhere. Is it? Are the lives of Yazidi girls and women so valueless in the eyes of the Western media? Add to that the fact that thousands of other Yazidi sex slaves who were tortured and murdered. Where also are the human rights activists? Why do they ignore these victims of jihad terror and abuse?
“LOST FOREVER ISIS’ 3,000 Yazidi sex slaves feared dead as hopes of finding any of them alive fade with collapse of evil ‘caliphate,’” by Tariq Tahir, Sun, March 12, 2019:
FEARS are mounting for thousands of Yazidi women who were captured and used as sex slaves by ISIS fighters.
Figures suggest almost 10,000 Yazidis have either been killed or kidnapped by ISIS and there are horrifying accounts of mass rape.
Many Yazidis have been able to flee the clutches of the terror group as it defends its final remaining stronghold in Baghouz, eastern Syria, from the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces.
One Yazidi woman held as a sex slave by ISIS burnt her veil after being freed from the town this week.
But families of around 3,000 others still missing fear they may never see their loved ones again.
“We have had the same number of missing for years now. The problem is, not many are coming back,” Ahmed Burjus, deputy executive director of Yazda, a Yazidi advocacy group told The Independent.
“We were hoping that many people would be liberated from Baghouz, but only 50-60 [Yazidis] have escaped.”
The Yazidis are a religious sect whose beliefs combine elements of several ancient Middle Eastern religions.
But ISIS considers them devil worshippers and its attacks on the group were condemned as a “genocide” by the United Nations.
Salwa Sayed al-Omar spent years as a prisoner of ISIS but she escaped its clutches this week.
She fled its last populated enclave in east Syria along with two Iraqi boys pretending to be her brothers.
RAPED BY JIHADIS
She said: “A woman was shifted from one man to another unless it was to one who had a bit of mercy… if she was in good condition, she would carry on.
“If not, she would get married to avoid being abused.”
Omar was eventually married to a Tajik jihadist but she escaped along with two Iraqi children, Mustafa and Dia, who had been her neighbours.
Dr Paul Stott, from the Henry Jackson Society think-tank, told The Sun Online: “At least 3,000 Yazidis are missing from this period. Many will be dead…..

SAUDI KING CALLS FOR “COMBATING HATE SPEECH & TERRORISM THAT IS NOT CONDONED BY RELIGIONS”~A REFLECTION OF POPE FRANCIS

SAUDI KING CALLS FOR “COMBATING HATE SPEECH & TERRORISM THAT IS NOT CONDONED BY RELIGIONS”
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/03/saudi-king-calls-for-combating-hate-speech-and-terrorism-that-is-not-condoned-by-religions; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Apparently, terrorism that is condoned by religions is fine with him, as in “strike terror in the enemies of Allah” (Qur’an 8:60).
And by “hate speech” he likely means honest discussion of how Islamic jihadis use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence.
“King Salman in tweet calls for combating hate speech, terrorism,” Al Arabiya, March 15, 2019:
Saudi Arabia’s King Salman reacting to the attacks on two mosques in New Zealand tweeted that it was a terrorist attack and called on the international community to combat hate speech and terrorism.
The tweet read: “The heinous massacre that targeted worshippers in the mosque in New Zealand is a terrorist act, and it reaffirms the responsibility of the international community in combating hate speech and terrorism that is not condoned by religions or the values of tolerance.”…
1 … 484 485 486 487 488 … 796