Who Is Black Lives Matter?

8 08 2016


With Law Enforcement Officers dying in America’s streets, simply for wearing the uniform, we have entered a new era.  While it is reminiscent of the 1960’s-70’s radical revolutionary movement which paralleled, then infiltrated and co-opted a legitimate civil rights movement, this is even more serious, more deadly, and more dangerous than that.  More dangerous in that the radicals have been allowed to infiltrate every institution, and are now in the chief seats of power.  More serious because during the 50’s and 60’s there was legitimate need for civil rights reform in both American society and in government.  More deadly in that the stability of American society has been successfully fragmented over the last 40 years due to multi-culturalism and pluralism, and recently with unchecked immigration policies, and the great “melting pot” of American culture has become a TV dinner, divided, cold, and hardened to critical thinking and introspection.  Particularly, in matters of race relations, the election of our first black President, has resulted in deeper wedges being driven, and some of those by the President himself.  Mind you, it’s not simply because the man happens to have dark skin, but wholly as a result of his ideology which cannot be contained.

For anyone who doubts that ideology is supreme in today’s America, and racism is an over used word which has gotten lost in it’s wreckless and wanton use by demagogues in identity politics, just consider this.  When was the last time anyone in the mainstream media celebrated, or even took seriously, a black (or white for that matter) American man or woman in office or position of influence, who has taken a politically conservative or Christian based moral position on any issue?  Let me name a few: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Ambassador Alan Keyes,  Congressman Lt. Col. Alan West,  Congresswoman Mia Love, Senator Tim Scott, former Congressman J.C. Watts, US Appeals Court Judge Janice Rogers Brown (whom Democrats refused to confirm for 2 years), Professor, author, Thomas Sowell,  Journalist, Professor, author Walter E. Williams, politician and Former Secretary of State Condelleza Rice.   All great conservative Americans of African descent.  Out of the 10 names, I doubt the average person will recognize half of them.  These are all people of great influence due to either elected positions, or hard work and dedication to the betterment of all American society; not just one specific shade of color.  These are the kind of people who, if possible are ignored by media.

Conversely, you will recognize immediately names such as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Elijah Cummings, Oprah Winfrey, Louis Farrakhan,  and outlaws like Michael Brown and Freddie Gray.

The origin of Black Lives Matter

100px-Communist_star.svg#1)  The hashtag # Black Lives Matter movement was co-founded by Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi.  Garza is a Marxist political activist who’s heroes include the Marxist revolutionary, former Black Panther, and convicted cop-killer Assata Shakur for her contributions to the “Black Liberation Movement.” Garza is likewise a great admirer of Angela Davis  (Communist Party USA and former Black Panther).  Cullors has ties to the 60’s revolutionary terrorist group, Weather Underground, and led 600 Black Lives Matter protesters to Ferguson, MO in 2014 following the death of Michael Brown after he struggle with a police officer trying to take his weapon.  Those protests resulted in 400 arrests, 20 civilian injuries,  37 St. Louis County police officers injured, 12 civilian cars burned, 2 police cruisers burned, and 29 buildings burglarized or vandalized all totaling about $5 Million.

All three BLM founders share a Marxist ideology and work for front groups of the “Freedom Road Socialist Organization” (FRSO), a self proclaimed frsologorevolutionary socialist and Marxist-Leninist organization” which touts itself as a “new Communist movement” with its roots in the
60’s and 70’s revolutionary groups; groups like the League of Revolutionary Struggle, the Revolutionary Union, the Communist Labor Party, the October League, the Communist Workers Party, the Black Workers Congress, just to name a few.  The FRSO website is wide open about its intentions, nothing covert there, and touts Communist revolutionaries including Mao Zedong, arguably the worst mass murderer in history killing 70 million in his takeover of China.

#2) In BLM’s short history they have inspired riots in several US cities, and protests in many more with provocative chants such as “What do we want? -DEAD COPS!! When do we want it? -NOW!!”, and “Pigs in a Blanket, Fry ’em like Bacon!!”. “No Justice; No Peace”, just to hit the most popular ones. For 3 Years this has developed.

#3)  Every generation has its rebels, but these are being funded by people like George Soros, who has given over $7 Billion to other radical Leftist groups like: ACORN, Apollo Alliance, National Council of La Raza, Tides Foundation, Huffington Post, Southern Poverty Law Center, Soujourners, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, and the National Organization for Women, and Moveon.org.   Soro’s also funded the protesters in Ferguson, Missouri marching for #BLM, who burned those businesses, rioted and created havoc for the entire city, under the false narrative that Michael Brown was an innocent teenage boy who had his hands up and was gunned down in the street by a white racist cop.  Soros and his Progressive friends would like nothing better than to see massive civil unrest in America’s streets.  However, we cannot allow justification of terrorist activities from these revolutionaries any more than we can allow justification for Islamic terrorism. The desired culmination of these efforts will be bloody anarchy which will end in total and complete martial law, and the people will demand it.

#4) The protest in Dallas was indeed peaceful, up until the killing of 5 police officers and wounding 7 more, yet some of the protesters did, and one even confessed afterward on a call in radio program, that he and others had attempted to provoke police officers by various means of disrespectful behavior.

#5)  Just less than 4 hours before the Dallas shooting, Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam (an American black cult version of Islam) had posted a call for blacks to rise up in violence against whites saying, “…don’t let this white man tell you that violence is wrong.” “Every damn thing that he got, he got it by being violent — killing people, raping and robbing and murdering. He’s doing it as we speak, and then he has the nerve to come and tell us that violence and hatred won’t get it. Don’t buy that!…He is worthy to be hated.”

The Next Phase 

BLM has now just recently formed with 30 other member organizations a new, broader organization of groups, and endorsed by another nearly 40 such groups, to form “The Movement for Black Lives” or “M4BL”, which codified it’s platform in conjunction with the Democratic Party Convention in Philadelphia.  M4BL‘s platform reads like the Communist Manifesto demanding, among other things:  Reparations, consisting of not just full and free access to all public education facilities including colleges and universities, but make it a “Constitutional Right”, not just for American blacks but for “all undocumented” as well as “formerly and currently incarcerated” and full retroactive forgiveness of all student loans, and a “guaranteed minimal livable income”.

M4BL goes on in their demands to “Divest-Invest“, in which funds for policing/incarceration would be diverted to education/employment programs.  “Economic Justice” which demands “radical and sustainable redistribution of wealth” and a Communistic “End of exploitative privatization of natural resources” and demands “democratic control over how resources are preserved”.  Verbatim it reads:

  • Because land is treated as a commodity, a minority of wealthy corporations and families disproportionately owns land in the U.S. and the resources on top of it. 60 percent of land is privately owned, with the wealthiest half-a-percent owning 35.6 percent of this land and the wealthiest 10 percent owning nearly 80 percent of it.

The lost little fact among these stats is the United States Government owns/controls over 1/3 of the land mass of the United States.  That would, I think, fall under the category “democratically controlled”, according to the context of the statements hereto.  This demand is right out of the  Communist Manifesto’s 1st plank of abolishing private property ownership.

The M4BL ‘s “End the War on Black People” plank proclaims “We demand an end to the criminalization, incarceration, and killing of our people.”  This entails and end to capital punishment, “ending the use of past criminal history to determine eligibility for housing, education, licenses, voting, loans, employment, and other services and needs.”  It also requires the “repeal of the 1996 crime and immigration bills, an end to all deportations, immigrant detention, and Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) raids, and mandated legal representation in immigration court.”

The Progressive Left has successfully used America’s black citizen’s for years.  The BLM movement has been fully embraced by the Marxist Barack Obama.  His Marxist/Progressive party successor Hillary Clinton will continue to use these communities and continue to keep them in the bonds of “social justice”, marching and working on behalf of those slave-masters who benefit from the people’s own labor.  Every inner city disaster where the poor and oppressed black Americans are continuing to languish is, and has been run by these very Progressives for 50 years.  The Bolsheviks are in control here.  This entire movement has been initiated by them.

But alas, the answer to this entire problem is not political.  It is not finance, education, or government which holds the answer.  The answer to this problem is spiritual.  Until people, black, white, brown, or otherwise get a grasp on who God is and who we are before him, this problem will not find relief.  To the contrary, the very God has warned us that perilous times shall come.  He also warned that nation who does not live by His standard, the Bible, is doomed to fail.

I agree that our country is more corrupt than we would like to admit. We have sown to the wind; now we shall reap the whirlwind. Nothing short of national revival of Biblical proportions will stay this judgement we have brought upon ourselves.  But the people will not have it.

Guest Column: Khizr Khan specializes in visa programs accused of selling U.S. citizenship

2 08 2016

Freedom of Speech – The Continued Assault on America’s Most Precious Liberty

31 12 2015

ontheriseHouse Resolution 569 was introduced into the United States House of Representatives on December 17, 2015.  It will be part of the legislation reviewed by Congress in 2016.  Just to give you a peek at the language included, here is the introduction, right off the top of the bill:

“Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.”

Well, I think “violence” against anyone is already condemned and considered a crime under existing legislation across the land.  “Bigotry and hateful rhetoric” has been the target of lawsuits, city ordinances, statutory law, and social pressure for generations now.  So why do we need more legislation on the books condemning these behaviors and crimes against anyone?  Of any religion? Race? Creed?

The U. S. Dept of Justice defines “hate crimes” as:  “the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability.”  41 states and the District of Columbia have laws against “hate crimes” on their books.  These gist of these laws is that the penalty for committing a crime against a random victim is not as bad as for a crime against someone who has been targeted for one of the above reasons, which presupposes then the victim of a “hate crime” is hurt more than your average run of the mill victim.  Seriously, an assault victim bleeds just as much whether the perp has chosen them because of a “hate” reason or an economic one, or for for whatever reason.  A murder victim is just as dead whether chosen for the color of their skin or for the car they were driving, or the money in their pocket.  Dead is dead, and the murderer is still a murderer and will spend the rest of their miserable lives in prison or be executed.  As you can tell, I struggle with the logic of “hate crimes”.

Be that as it may, the fact remains there are plenty of laws on the books that address the issue for all victimized people, regardless of race, religion, etc.

But the point of this bill is this:  Muslims are a special class of people, worthy of much higher standards of protection than, say, Jews, Christians, or Buddhists, Sikhs, or atheists.

Rep. Don Beyer, 8th Dist VA. Via Wikipedia

So where does this idea come from?  Well, I can tell you this much.  It wasn’t the brainchild of Virginia Representative Don Beyer (D), sponsor of HR 569, who just happens to represent Virginia’s 8th Congressional District, which just happens to include the city of Falls Church, which just happens to be the location of the Dar al Hijra Islamic Center.  This is the mosque, you may remember, where several of the Sept 11th hijackers attended, where Anwar al-Alawki was the Imam (before he fled to Yemen where a US drone took him out), and Major Nidal Hassan attended prior to his Jihad on Fort Hood.  Dar al-Hijra just happens to be the mosque co-founded by Ismail Elbarasse, whose basement was a storage hold for a plethora of documents seized by the FBI in 2004, among which was the document known as the “Explanatory Memorandum for the Strategic Goal for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America”.  This was one of the documents entered as evidence in the largest terrorism funding trial in US history.  The mosque itself appears to have a long history of Islamic extremist  and terrorist ties.

But, yet, even so, the Dar al-Hijra (“Land of Migration“) mosque is not the origin of HR 569.

HR 569 is but a mirror image of UN Resolution 16/18, which was formerly known as the “Defamation of Religion”, or more accurately “The International Blasphemy” law.   The goal specifically in HR 569 is to stop any criticism of Islam or anyone or anything Islamic.  This has been the steady mantra in the Islamic groups ever since President Obama stated in the UN General Assembly “The future must not belong to those who would slander the prophet of Islam.”

Muslims encourage stifling of free speech

Muslims encourage stifling of free speech

That statement was like blood in the water for sharks.  It followed the White House propaganda line concerning the Benghazi affair where Ambassador Chris Stevens and 3 other Americans were murdered by Islamic Terrorists.  Muslim groups in the UN as well as around the country called for illegalizing criticism of Islam.  The Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City posted a link on its own website to a petition for a “law against insulting one’s religion”.

Obama was echoed by the likes of Pakistani President Zardari who said, “The international community must not become silent observers and should criminalize such acts that destroy the peace of the world and endanger world security by misusing freedom of expression.”  In other words, violence on the part of Muslims around the world must be expected when someone criticizes Islam or the prophet Muhammad, and it is the critic’s responsibility, not the violent Muslim’s.

That same chorus was joined by the newly elected Muslim Brotherhood President Morsi of Egypt, and then Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said it was time to put an end to the protection of Islamophobia masquerading as the freedom to speak freely.  Turkey’s President Erdogen called Islamophobia “a crime against humanity”.

These officials were inside the UN in New York promoting their speech killing rhetoric while outside on the street and around the nation protestors were echoing the same thing, demanding the criminalization of free speech.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton co-chaired an international conference in 2011, applauding the adoption of UN Resolution 16/18, and promised to apply pressure at home in the United States to suppress Islamophobia.

UN Resolution 16/18 is the work of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the largest special interest group in the world and second largest governance body compared to the UN itself.  OIC, funded largely by Saudi Arabia, represents 56 (Syria was 57) Islamic states throughout the world in their common interest of advancing the cause of Islam, which includes establishing the Sharia worldwide.  OIC has been a subject of previous posts on this blog. For more information on OIC click here.  The term “Islamophobia” was coined by OIC and propagated by CAIR, and has become part of the lexicon used to silence critics of Islam.  (OIC’s inferred definition of “Islamophobia” does not mean ‘fear of Islam‘ as the word suggests; rather ‘critical of, unaccepting or hostile to Islam in any way‘.)

Obviously then, the OIC, by way of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), is behind HR 569.

CAIR was at the forefront immediately following the recent San Bernardino jihad (which left 14 dead and 22 wounded) and, according to Investors Business Daily, “running interference” between investigators and witnesses and suspects”.

“As medics were still removing bodies from the mass shooting, CAIR rushed to assemble a bizarre press conference, letting the media ask questions of Farook’s brother-in-law before the FBI had a crack at him.” – (H/T IBD read more here)

CAIR remains on the FBI’s “bad boy list”, and has been denied delisting by Federal Court as an ‘unindicted co-conspirator’ in the largest terror funding trial in US history in 2008 – Un-indicted because the current administration suspended all previous indictments concerning that trial.  CAIR is a Muslim Brotherhood organization and has been proven to have direct connections to HAMAS.

CAIR was  proactive and led the narrative in the San Bernardino jihad about the concern of “backlash” against Muslims.  Less than 2 days later, the US Atty General was leading the charge on CAIR’s behalf stating her greatest fear was not terrorist attacks, but retaliatory acts of violence against Muslims.  She went on, while addressing a Muslim gathering, to include “rhetoric and bigoted actions” in her list of prosecutions under way.

CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood and all its affiliates are having great success formulating or perpetuating the narrative.  Something tells me that “rhetorical terrorism” is a term that will be used by more than those spoiled little socialistic college students on college campus’ this fall.  While they’ve been looking for a “safe space” from “impactful” words, the Islamists have been working to outlaw them.

Stephen Coughlin, expert in Sharia and Islamic terrorism, and past consultant to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Daily Caller this:

“Over the last few years, major left-wing and Islamists organizations have been working diligently to reframe free speech in an oppositional narrative that distinguishes sanctioned speech, designated free speech, from hate speech in a long-term campaign to brand nonconforming speech as hate speech that is at first to be ridiculed and then criminalized”. (Read more Daily Caller)

Read that again.  Major Coughlin has summarized the entire Progressive playbook into one paragraph.

HR 569 in the US Congress has little chance of passing even if it gets out of Judicial Committee.  And it’s a resolution, not statute (Not that resolutions are not important and formative).  However, the really scary thing is it does have 82 Co-Sponsors, all Democrats.  82.  [UPDATED 2/3/16:  HR569 now has 125 Democrat co-sponsors.  For more updated info see here.]

You can download the entirety of HR 569 here complete with sponsors names, or see the text below.  It’s not long and I promise it will raise your blood pressure!

RESOLUTION Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States. HRES 569– Whereas the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes and rhetoric have faced physical, verbal, and emotional abuse because they were Muslim or believed to be Muslim;

-Whereas the constitutional right to freedom of religious practice is a cherished United States value and violence or hate speech towards any United States community based on faith is in contravention of the Nation’s founding principles;

-Whereas there are millions of Muslims in the United States, a community made up of many diverse beliefs and cultures, and both immigrants and native-born citizens;

-Whereas this Muslim community is recognized as having made innumerable contributions to the cultural and economic fabric and well-being of United States society;

-Whereas hateful and intolerant acts against Muslims are contrary to the United States values of acceptance, welcoming, and fellowship with those of all faiths, beliefs, and cultures;

-Whereas these acts affect not only the individual victims but also their families, communities, and the entire group whose faith or beliefs were the motivation for the act;

-Whereas Muslim women who wear hijabs, headscarves, or other religious articles of clothing have been disproportionately targeted because of their religious clothing, articles, or observances; and

-Whereas the rise of hateful and anti-Muslim speech, violence, and cultural ignorance plays into the false narrative spread by terrorist groups of Western hatred of Islam, and can encourage certain individuals to react in extreme and violent ways:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives—  expresses its condolences for the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes; (2) steadfastly confirms its dedication to the rights and dignity of all its citizens of all faiths, beliefs, and cultures;
(3) denounces in the strongest terms the increase of hate speech, intimidation, violence, vandalism, arson, and other hate crimes targeted against mosques, Muslims, or those perceived to be Muslim;
(4) recognizes that the United States Muslim 12 community has made countless positive contributions to United States society;
(5) declares that the civil rights and civil liberties of all United States citizens, including Muslims in the United States, should be protected and preserved;
(6) urges local and Federal law enforcement authorities to work to prevent hate crimes; and to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those perpetrators of hate crimes; and
(7) reaffirms the inalienable right of every citizen to live without fear and intimidation, and to practice their freedom of faith.

Well…isn’t that special…?  I’m not even gonna unpack that sucker!!!

***For Updates on HR 569 click here.***

The Myth of “Self Radicalization” and the Fallacy of “Radical Islam”

4 12 2015

This article is a repost from 2 years ago.  I have edited and updated it slightly.  It is as much, if not more relevant today. -DTN

Media Trilobites and government officials continue to bump into each other, feeding on nonsensical buzz words that become trendy for a few weeks and are eventually absorbed into the pop culture lexicon.  These phrases or terms may lie dormant for ages until suddenly they’re on every television commentator’s lips.  If we can’t find a word in the English language to spin up to instant glory, we’ll borrow one from another language.  Al Gore did just that when he described himself as having “gravitas” during his run for the White House. Nearly instantaneously, every talking head in the country was using the heavy Latin word, until finally Chris Mathews commented that Barack Obama’s gravitas caused a tingle to run up his leg.  It kinda lost its punch after that.

But the real point here is the incessant blathering about “self radicalized” terrorists, specifically the brothers Tsarnaev, better known as the Boston Bombers, who were responsible for nearly 270 maimed, wounded, or dead, and now the “San Bernadino Terrorists”who have now been proven to be fundamentalist Muslims and are celebrated as “Shahid” (martyrs) around the globe.  They were not “violent extremists”.  They were Mujahideen, “soldiers of Allah”, on jihad.

Disregarding the obvious elephant in the room, both the government and the media, began hunting for fleas and swatting at gnats.  “Whatever could be the reason for this horrendous tragedy?”  In the Boston Bombing case the story line continued for hours into days that this had to be the work of some “right wing extremists”, and even the President floated a hint or two about April 15th being “tax day”, of course insinuating it was a right-wing tax protest, obviously connected to the Tea Party.

Even before the victims at San Bernadino were removed from the horrific scene of the attack, commentators, reporters and officials were forming a narrative of “3 White Males dressed in military fatigues and body armor“.  Many of the reporters were hoping they were White Supremist’s, not even holding out the possibility of a terrorist attack.  In fact, there seemed to be a refusal to even consider the possibility of the shooters having any ties to Islam, continuing, like CNN’s Harry Houck and law enforcement analyst Tom Fuentes, to speculate “right-wingers” were most likely the culprit; Fuentes surmising it to be “an anti-government domestic militia group”. [H/T Newsbusters]

After all, there have been so many “right wing” attacks – Like the first bombing of the World Trade Center back in ’93; no wait, that was Islamic jihad.  Oh, like the 911 attacks when Tea Party members flew passenger airliners into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, and were headed for the White House; oh…sorry, those were Islamic jihadist hijackers. Well, like the DC Snipers who terrorized the city for 3 weeks in 2002; no wait, they were Islamic also.  Well then there was the White Supremacist, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, who killed one soldier and wounded another in front of the recruiting office in Arkansas in 2009; sorry, again Islamic jihad.

Well…there are so many events that are known to have connections to “conservative right wing Christian radicals” such as: The Fort Hood Massacre when that Christian shooter yelled ‘Allahu Akbar’ as he gunned down 40 people, killing 13.  The 2009 Riverdale New York bomb plot planned by 4 radical Tea Party grandma’s, the Times Square Bomber who had his SUV full of propane tanks and fireworks (surely some redneck like Larry the Cable Guy), the “Fort Dix Six”, the “Underwear Bomber”, the “Shoe Bomber”, etcetera ad nauseam.

My, my, what could it be? What ever could it be that is initiating all these attacks and plots?

[According to this Congressional report, there have been well over 60 successful, attempted, or plotted Islamic Jihad Terrorist attacks on US soil between 9-11-2001 and Jan of 2013.]

Of course, most of these were played off as “Lone Wolf” scenarios where the terrorist was “self-radicalized”.

Listening to all the ‘crack investigative reporters and hard-hitting journalists’, one could come to the conclusion that these guys just must wake up one morning and “self-radicalize” deciding today is a good day to kill some people’.

This term is a copout for lazy journalists and downright deceiving when used by anyone.  A person cannot “self-radicalize” any more than “self-socialize”.  There must be a cause, a mentor, or an ideology that brings a person to the point that he is willing to, no, compelled to kill random people that he doesn’t even know.

That mentor, in many cases, is a spiritual leader.  That cause, or ideology, which is that rather enormous and obnoxious “elephant in the room” that none of the trilobites are willing to discuss?  Islam.

Forget Islam as a Religion

The sooner Americans refuse to continue accepting Islam as a viable and peaceful “religion” and begin to view it as the sociopolitical ideology that it truly is, the greater the possibility the America will survive its onslaught.

The root problem for America is not that Islam has come to colonize her, which it has, but the fact that we have allowed “multi-culturalism” (immigration without assimilation) and “pluralism” (all cultures, ideologies, realities are equal) to progress unchecked resulting in a “balkanized” or “tribal” society wherein competing ideologies are viewed as co-equal.  Not all ideologies are conducive to civilized society, nor are they consistent with the basic premise of freedom, as established in America’s founding documents.

If I were to try to convince you that Germany’s National Socialism (Nazism) is a peaceful ideology that was hijacked by a few “self radicalized” individuals, resulting in the holocaust, you’d laugh in my face.  Well, that’s a pretty good comparison: You have a ‘prophet’ by the name of Hitler who sought to consolidate power under a banner of a unified ideology by clearing the field of competing ideologies, and went to war in order to stoke the economy and gain control of more land area.  Had Muhammad access to German weapons of mass destruction he would certainly not have hesitated to use them.   Hitler’s Holocaust resulted in an estimated 11 Million deaths, many of which were communist (because Karl Marx was Jewish), mentally or physically handicapped, Jehovah’s Witness, homosexual, or Christian leaders such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer who refused to place their names upon the “Aryan Clause” and become “Reich Churches” to do the bidding of the “almighty Fuhrer”.   But his “Final Solution” for 6 million Jews had already been proven and prescribed by Islam’s prophet Muhammad in the Arabian Peninsula 1400 years prior in places with such names as Banu Quaraysa and Khaybar, where Muhammad slaughtered unarmed male prisoners and enslaved the girls, and women, finally appropriating all Jewish property to Muslims.

Both economies required perpetual war.  (The fundamental Islamic world view is “Dar al-Islam” or Dar al-Harb: The world is divided and you either dwell in the “House of Islam”, where Islam rules, or you dwell in the “House of War” and are subject to Jihad.)

Both ideologies have religious overtones (Hitler was worshipped and given a godlike status).  Both ‘prophets’ were consumed with power.  Both cultures fostered distrust and suspicion (Gestapo was everywhere and anyone who challenged the Prophet was dealt with harshly.)  Both Nazism and Islam are fundamentally racist.   Neither can compete philosophically with opposing values, absent of an oppressive legal system or war.

Consider the following argument:

“Well, you know those “Brown Shirts” are really not as bad as the SS or Gestapo.  Now those SS are some evil dudes.  SS are the real “radical” Nazi’s.  The Brownshirts might beat you up but those SS will kill you!  We really need to reach out to those individuals and find out why they hate us so much.  But most of the Nazi’s are moderate.  They aren’t violent at all.  Sure, they go to the rallies where Hitler is speaking, but they’re just normal folks like you and me!  They want the same for their families as we all want.  Yeah, Nazism is actually a very patriotic and peaceful ideology, it’s just been hijacked by some radicals who seek to politicize it, and destroy property and kill people and take their property in the name of this peaceful movement.” 

Well, as you can see this defense of Nazism just doesn’t fly!  Ironically, this is the exact apologetic defense that Islam gets from not only the American mainstream media, but from our government as well!

“Self Radicalization”

This term makes about as much sense as “Obamacare”.  An individual who is willing to commit a violent act of mass murder and mayhem in the name of his god, or any other cause, is soaked in an ideology which is taught or programmed into a person’s psyche.  That ideology doesn’t simply spawn in the mind of the perpetrator.  It comes from someone else, whether through print or other media; from a teacher, guide or mentor.  But the term “self radicalize” is specifically designed to deflect attention from that aforementioned ‘elephant’ sitting in the middle of the room.

Islam is that ideology and it can be taught by other people or the documents themselves, the Koran, Hadith, and countless commentaries and books of Islamic scholars (such asSeyyid Qutb) may be read and studied by the individual, even to the point of the student acting upon those teachings.  Tamerlan Tsarnaev did not “self-radicalize” anymore than Nidal Hasan or Osama bin Ladin.  He was taught.  He was taught the purest form of Islam, the Fundamentals of Islam. He believed it, he consumed it, and finally it consumed him.  His actions were based on his faith in his Scriptures (Koran), his prophet (Muhammad), and his god (Allah).

“We Love Death more than You Love Life”

The first victim of Islam is the Muslim.  Islam is, as I have pointed out before, a Great Black Beast.  It will consume everyone in its path if left unchecked, until finally there is no competing religion or ideology permitted.  There is a creed that surfaces occasionally when studying the Islamic culture which is so shaped by the obligatory act of jihad: “We love death more than you love life.” It has been a part of Islam since its earliest doctrines were formulated during that period immediately following Muhammad’s death in 632 (AD). This is that age of Islamic conquest the four “Rightly Guided Caliphs”, It is used by Hamas in their propaganda media.  It was recently used in a letter to the British government by six terrorists who pleaded guilty of planning an attack on the EDL last year.   It was repeated by the Madrid terrorists and actually earned a slide in a power point presentation by Nidal Hassan prior to his jihad attack which resulted in 13 dead and 32 wounded at Fort Hood, Texas. Islam is the largest death cult in the world. Those countries and regions where Islam rules unchecked are anything but bastions of freedom.

CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) came up with a new word in order to try to embarrass and defeat anyone who opposes Islam.  They have been quite successful in defining the Islamic narrative in the United States.  That word is “Islamophobia”. The goal is to paint opposition to Islam as bigoted, racist, and xenophobic.  It doesn’t stick.  Sorry CAIR, I am not afraid of Islam, I am not a racist, nor am I a bigot.   But I will tell you what true “Islamophobia” is.  Just as the word says, “Fear of Islam”.  But CAIR has misplaced the word.

Islamophobia is when a free press self-censors for fear of offending Muslims and consequential retribution from Islam.

Islamophobic is a government which refuses to name the enemy in a war which has been declared on the United States of America by the collective ideology called Islam, for fear of political influence of CAIR, ISNA, ICNA among Islamic organizations, and fear the Saudi’s will pull out of Wall Street and crash our economy.

Islamophobic is a White House which is more interested in “winning the hearts and minds” of a sworn enemy than defeating him, while Islamic groups like CAIR and the OIC (Organization of Islamic Conference) filter every training manual and terrorism report issued by the Pentagon.

Islamophobia is when a military acquiesces to the demands of that same sworn enemy to deny Christian or Jewish religious ministry to its own soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen on sovereign soil of our military bases in Afghanistan, but allows an Imam to pray over our dead SEAL’s at Baghram AFB, damning their souls in the name of Allah.

Islamophobic is a President who is more interested in punishing the producer of a two-bit video “slandering the prophet” than he is about punishing those who murdered 4Americans in Benghazi, Libya in a jihad attack, for fear that he will lose the upcoming election if he offends Muslims.

Islamophobia is an Attorney General who vows to prosecute those who say anything critical of Islam.  THAT, my friends is “Islamophobia”.

In the words of Billy Vaughn, father of Aaron Vaughn, one of 26 Navy Seals killed in the “Extorsion 17” helo crash in Wardok Province in 2012, “When you hide the truth, you become part of the lie.”

Americans must face the truth.  We have allowed our government and our media to hide the truth. We have hidden our own faces from the truth.  The ideology that is Islam is fundamentally, and diametrically opposed to America and all that she stands for.

Exchanging Freedom for Equality

30 11 2015

Lenin, Jefferson, Alinsky and Tocqueville

“The end of Socialism is Communism” – Vladimir Lenin

“Polyezniy Idiot” or “Useful Idiot”:  A term coined by Vladimir Lenin to describe Westerners who blindly support

The Utopian dream of “total equality” is the crux of Communism and the fuel of revolutions for time eternal.  It also totally discounts the fallen nature of mankind.

Image via Wikipedia

Image via Wikipedia

 Even if total political, social, and economic equality were possible to achieve, there would be those among us whose intellectual capacity, initiative and/or talents, overshadow the rest of us.  Total equality is not achievable.

Cries of “Social Justice” and “Black Lives Matter” echo in protests on college campuses and street protests around the country, largely emanating from “polyezniy idiots” who are not only ignorant to why they are protesting, but worse yet, ignorant to what the Great American Idea is; that being that all men are created equal before the law and are free to pursue a life of liberty and happiness.

“Pursue” that is.  It’s not guaranteed.  One’s own success depends upon his own desires, dreams, and abilities.  The role of the government, as originally established, is to guarantee that each individual is protected under the law so that he may be free to pursue his own place in society.  The success of the individual lies within his own limitations (everyone has them), abilities, and desires to overcome and/or apply those.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,…”- Declaration of Independence

All men are created equal being endowed by God with certain “unalienable rights”.  (Cannot be given or taken by any government, king, or tyrant.)  Among those rights are “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”. (No one has a right to deprive you of life, liberty, or things pursuant to your happiness (exploitation of ones own talents, legal/moral pursuance and acquisition of wealth and property- both physical and intellectual, living a life of liberty according to ones own choosing which does not infringe upon or require subsidization from ones neighbor.)  You are not guaranteed success in these endeavors.  You are a sovereign individual among fellow sovereign individuals, to pursue your own success.  You are also free to fail.  And most times failure precedes success.  Failure will aid success in the future if the individual learns from the experience.  But he must be allowed to fail.  (The same goes for businesses; no one is “too big to fail”.)

[Individualism as opposed to Egotism according to Tocqueville:  Individualism is a mature expression which disposes each member to sever himself from the masses into a smaller circle of family and friends leaving society at large to itself.  Egotism is a passionate and exaggerated love of self, which leads a man to connect everything with his own person, and to prefer himself to everything in the world.]

Are the militant demands for “Equality” that bombard us on every front today a natural result of liberty in the scheme of societal evolution?  As liberty is acquired and handed down, equality in everything becomes more and more desired, even when unattainable.  Do you really want “total equality”?

A friend recently turned me on to the French writer, political thinker, and historian, Alexis D’ Tocqueville who came to America in 1845 and studied the new nation for several months.  I’ve carelessly perused some of his quotes in the past, but never really read him. My loss.  He was a contemporary of Karl Marx.  His work “Democracy in America” is his observation of the American people, their virtues and faults, their strengths and weaknesses as well, and commentary on those concerning man in general.  His remarks about liberty compared to equality are worth considering (especially in the context of my last post about “Campus Capers”).  He writes:

“There is, in fact, a manly and lawful passion for equality that incites men to wish all to be powerful and honored. This passion tends to elevate the humble to the rank of the great; but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom … But liberty is not the chief and constant object of their desires; equality is their idol.” -[Democracy in America, 1847, Book 2, Ch. 1]

Saul Alinsky, via Wikipedia

It is my contention that most of these protesters are a product of a progressive/marxist education system which is designed, not to promote freedom and responsibility, but to incite a revolutionary mindset which demands “social justice” not to elevate those who “have not”, but to reduce those “haves” to a common misery, always assuming those who “have” gained by immoral means.  This is the practical result, and as Saul Alinsky wrote, “The issue is never the issue; the issue is always the Revolution.”

Again, Tocqueville:

“Democratic nations are at all times fond of equality, but there are certain epochs at which the passion they entertain for it swells to the height of fury. This occurs at the moment when the old social system, long menaced, completes its own destruction after a last intestine struggle, and when the barriers of rank are at length thrown down. At such times men pounce upon equality as their booty, and they cling to it as to some precious treasure which they fear to lose. The passion for equality penetrates on every side into men’s hearts, expands there, and fills them entirely. Tell them not that by this blind surrender of themselves to an exclusive passion they risk their dearest interests: they are deaf. Show them not freedom escaping from their grasp, whilst they are looking another way: they are blind – or rather, they can discern but one sole object to be desired in the universe…”

“I think that democratic communities have a natural taste for freedom: left to themselves, they will seek it, cherish it, and view any privation of it with regret. But for equality, their passion is ardent, insatiable, incessant, invincible: they call for equality in freedom; and if they cannot obtain that, they still call for equality in slavery. They will endure poverty, servitude, barbarism – but they will not endure aristocracy. This is true at all times, and especially true in our own. All men and all powers seeking to cope with this irresistible passion, will be overthrown and destroyed by it. In our age, freedom cannot be established without it, and despotism itself cannot reign without its support.” -[Ibid]

I am finding Tocqueville to be fascinating and quite prophetic.  His insight was incredible.  He called socialism a “new form of slavery” in 1848.  But my current pondering continues to be this startling matter of preferring equality to liberty.  Indeed, I believe it to be irrefutable.  The Bolsheviks are among us.  Dear God, we raised them…


Victory for Freedom of Speech

2 11 2015
On Wednesday, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals completely reversed a lower court’s decision and ruled in favor of Evangelical Christians who were arrested for disturbing the peace at the 2012 Arab Festival in Dearborn, Michigan.  The Christians had bottles, eggs, and other items hurled at them by Muslims for publicly preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  A short video of this episode can be found here.
During this festival, a group of Muslims approached the Christians and asked to hear about the Gospel. The Christians obliged and began sharing about the Bible, Jesus, and their faith.  Other Muslims became angry and assaulted the Christians for their speech.  The police ended up arresting the Christians, not the Muslims.
The case, Bible Believers v. Wayne County, was brought by the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) on behalf of the Christians.
On August 27, 2014, a divided, three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit dismissed the civil rights lawsuit, finding the violent response of the Muslim hecklers justified the Wayne County sheriffs’ order to the Christians they would be arrested for disorderly conduct if they did not leave the festival area.
Yesterday, the Sixth Circuit ruled in favor of the Christians on every issue, completely reversing the lower court opinion, and directing the court to enter judgment in the Christians’ favor.
In its decision, the Sixth Circuit ruled the County and the two Deputy Chief defendants were liable for violating the Christians’ First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion, and for depriving the Christians of the equal protection of the law. The court ruled the individual defendants did not enjoy qualified immunity, and the County was liable as a municipality for the constitutional violations.
In its opinion, the Sixth Circuit stated, in part:
“In a balance between two important interests-free speech on one hand, and the state’s power to maintain the peace on the other-the scale is heavily weighted in favor of the First Amendment. . . . Maintenance of the peace should not be achieved at the expense of the free speech. The freedom to espouse sincerely held religious, political, or philosophical beliefs, especially in the face of hostile opposition, is too important to our democratic institution for it to be abridged simply due to the hostility of reactionary listeners who may be offended by a speaker’s message. If the mere possibility of violence were allowed to dictate whether our views, when spoken aloud, are safeguarded by the Constitution, surely the myriad views that animate our discourse would be reduced to the standardization of ideas by the dominant political or community groups. Democracy cannot survive such a deplorable result.
“When a peaceful speaker, whose message is constitutionally protected, is confronted by a hostile crowd, the state may not silence the speaker as an expedient alternative to containing or snuffing out the lawless behavior of the rioting individuals. Nor can an officer sit idly on the sidelines-watching as the crowd imposes, through violence, a tyrannical majoritarian rule-only later to claim that the speaker’s removal was necessary for his or her own protection.”
In short, this was a complete victory for the Constitution and for all freedom-loving Americans who enjoy the protections of the First Amendment.
The AFLC is first and foremost a public interest litigation firm, which aggressively seeks to advance and defend America’s Judeo-Christian heritage in courts all across our Nation.  The AFLC’s mission is to fight for faith and freedom through litigation, education, and public policy programs.
A short video detailing AFLC’s mission and accomplishments can be seen here.
AFLC is comprised of attorney Robert Muise, a combat veteran Marine Officer and expert in Constitutional law, and attorney David Yerushalmi, one of the nation’s most knowledgeable attorneys on national security, Constitutional law, as well as Sharia (Islamic Law).
AFLC states on their website:  “The strength of our Nation lies in its commitment to a Judeo-Christian heritage and moral foundation and to an enduring faith and trust in God and His Providence. AFLC seeks a return to America’s founding commitment to receive God’s continued blessing to preserve the soul of this great Nation.”
This ruling demonstrates there are still bastions of sanity in the American judicial system where liberty under law still reigns in America, and where judges committed to justice win over the progressives trying to destroy our nation.
Let us celebrate this significant victory today and raise a glass to the courage of the Americans who withstood the attack, the AFLC for its work to defend our liberties, and the Court for doing what it should always do – rule judiciously.
John Guandolo, UTT

The Satanic Alliance: Marxism, Islam and Privileged Hatred

26 10 2015


Islamic Marxism, Islamic Socialism, seems to be a contradiction of terms.

Be NOT Deceived!  THIS has been an allied movement for a long time in the US and for generations around the world!

THIS is why the Progressives/Socialists/Marxists find kindred purpose with the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood groups such as CAIR, MSA, ICNA, ISNA, MPAC, and etc. ad nauseam.  Every “Social Justice” movement in the world has origins and common purpose in the destruction of Capitalism, the United States of America, and Western Society in general.  It is Anti-Christian, not Anti-Religion; Christianity focuses on the rights, liberties and value of the individual!  Individuals do NOT exist in this post-American World; Only the Collective!

Familiarize yourselves with “Sustainable Development”, “Sustainability”, “Sustainable Growth”; it is found in the UN (Marxist from its roots) agenda known as “Agenda 21”.  New buzz words encompassing this belief include, 20/20, 20/30, 20/50, “Smart Growth”, and “Smart Growth Corridors”, all coming to a city council near you!

In the following video, watch for phrases like: “Social Justice”, “Socialist”,  “Justice”.  This phraseology is straight out of the Communist Manifesto!

Pay Attention!  The world has already changed and America is now Ahmerikah!

(More on this subject to come)

%d bloggers like this: