Is Fundamental Transformation Sealed by Marxist Anarchy?


John R. Houk

© August 22, 2017

 

Antifa Revisionist Historical Monument

 

I just read an interesting post at Freedom Outpost. The post informs Freedom Outpost readers that a group of Communist rabble rousers under the moniker “Refuse Fascism” is meeting in various major metropolitan areas on November 4, 2017 to plan riots against the Executive Branch operated by the Trump Administration.

 

If you read any of my recent posts, you can probably guess any anarcho-Marxist organization which the stated purpose is to defeat fascism in America is dedicated to using fascist/Communist tactics to wreak havoc against Constitutional government.

 

The American Left has been fueling violent chaos which the Alt-Left Commies have been more than happy to take up the mantle of societal violence. The pretext for Leftist violence is the White Supremacist organizations joining Americans who appreciate the American history that has led to the greatest Republic of Liberty the world has ever known.

 

The Left has now stepped up its war on American history by not only targeting Southern Confederate heroes but also now including the Founding Fathers that established this great nation. I have no doubt that President Trump is viewed as such a threat to the Obama fundamental transformation of America, the American Left is willing to toss out American history to create Obama’s new America of which government enters every single person’s life to tell them what is acceptable morality, acceptable religion, acceptable thought and so on that conforms to all things acceptable to the Obama new American culture and government.

 

VIDEO: Obama: We Are 5 Days From Fundamentally Transforming America

 

The Daily Caller interviewed Agustin Blazquez expatriate (now U.S. citizen) in April 2016. The subject matter was about how Obama and the Dems are carrying out that fundamental transformation that resulted from that ill-fated election after the November 2008 vote:

 

As the “fundamental transformation of America” continues under Obama’s governance, Blazquez warns that elites in America are in a precarious situation. Their privileges, rights and property could evaporate fast with America’s trend towards erosion of liberties. “Wake up, America!” the Cuban-American proclaims. (quote taken from the blog Absolute Truth from the Word of God which borrowed from the Daily Caller)

 

The blog Absolute Truth goes on to provide a link to a post to a post from 2015 listing some Communist goals for America. See how applicable 2015 is to today’s current events in the USA (Bold text and info-links are Editor’s idea of current relevant events):

 

Here are some of the 45 goals of Communism named in this book:

 

  1. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If the U.N. charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one world government with its own independent armed forces.

 

  1. Capture one or both political parties in the United States. (In David Horowitz’s book The Shadow Party, he shows how the Democratic Party is now under the control of what he calls the Shadow Party of Socialist-Communist influences [The book-link is by the Editor. Youtube lecture series – David Horowitz, Shadow Party, Part 1 of 6].)

 

  1. Get Control of the Schools. Use them as transmission belts for Socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the Party line in textbooks.

 

  1. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

 

  1. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

 

  1. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. Eliminate all good sculptures from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.

 

  1. Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.

 

  1. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.

 

  1. Break down culture standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and TV.

 

  1. Present homo-sexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

 

  1. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”

 

  1. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.” (A.C.L.U. lawyers accomplished this goal in a very short 4 years from publication of the book “The Naked Communist.” [Book-link by Editor])

 

  1. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a world-wide basis. (In 2012, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsberg and A.C.L.U. member said exactly this while visiting Cairo, Egypt.)

 

  1. Discredit the American founding fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”

 

  1. Belittle all forms of American culture, and discourage the teaching of American history on the grounds that it was only a minor part of “the big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

 

  1. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture, education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

 

  1. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

 

  1. Infiltrate and gain control of big business. (Then move the jobs overseas, to stifle the American economy. Import goods from other countries, to create an imbalance of trade.)

 

  1. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

 

  1. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influences of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of the parents.

 

  1. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use “united force” to solve economic, political or social problems. (Occupy Wall Street is being organized by the Communist Party.)

 

  1. Repeal the Connally Reservation [PDF-link by Editor – Explains how the Connally Reservation protects American sovereign from international political bodies such as the UN or World Court] so the U.S. cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike. [1] (The Communist Goals to Take Over America Are Almost Complete; By GERI UNGUREAN; Absolute Truth from the Word of God; 11/21/15)

 

While looking for source links for Ungurean’s post I discovered that these 45 Communist goals for the USA was entered into the Congressional Record by Congressman Albert S. Herlong Jr. on 1/10/1963 based on the Cleon Skousen book “The Naked Communist.” Here is that PDF of the entire 45 goals.

 

The chaotic anarchy America views and reads in the MSM is nothing less than the promotion of the overthrow of the legacy founded by America’s Founding Fathers. If the American Left is successful, all is lost because ALL knowledge of the past will be erased or rewritten to fit the narrative the Marxist Obama Transformists want YOU the PEOPLE to believe.

 

JRH 8/22/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

“Refuse Fascism” Communists Meet to Plan November Sedition, Riots to End Trump-Pence “Regime”

 

By DAISY LUTHER

AUGUST 20, 2017

Freedom Outpost

 

Sometimes, you don’t need a crystal ball to see the future. Sometimes, the future says, “Hey, I’m planning for all hell to break loose on this date.” And then you know. The future is telling us right now that on November 4th, there will be sedition and riots across the country to end the Trump-Pence “regime.” Theguardian.com

 

Refuse fascism

Today, groups of people with communist leanings who intend to overthrow the United States government will be meeting in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Austin for “regional conferences,” which makes it sound like they’re a bunch of dentists of something.

 

But they’re not. The group, called Refuse Fascism, plans to use any means necessary to end the Trump-Pence “regime.” They flatly refuse to try and find middle ground, criticizing both Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders for doing so:

 

After the election, Obama said of Trump: “We are now all rooting for his success.” NO! If Trump succeeds, humanity loses. Bernie Sanders has said that he will work with Trump on jobs or where they agree.  NO! If you work with fascists you normalize the road to horror. (source)

 

I’m not sure how a bunch of communists “refusing fascism” escapes them, but somehow it does. There are branches of Refuse Fascism in numerous locations across the nation.

 

Who’s funding this?

 

Refuse Fascism is a project of the Alliance for Global Justice. This is noted on their website where they ask for donations. (Obviously, I’m not recommending you donate. I’m just quoting this to show you where their bread gets buttered.)

 

To support our educational activities and make a tax-deductible donation by mail, make your check out to Alliance for Global Justice” (our fiscal sponsor; you can use the abbreviation AFGJ), designate Refuse Fascism in the memo and mail to the address above. RefuseFascism.org is a fiscally sponsored project of the Alliance for Global Justice, a registered 501(c)3. (source)

 

According to The Daily Caller:

 

…the benefactors of the Alliance for Global Justice — and Refuse Fascism — are listed online.

 

According to its most recent 990 tax form, Alliance for Global Justice (AfGJ) received $2.2 million in funding for the fiscal year ending in March 2016.

 

One of the group’s biggest donors is the Tides Foundation, a non-profit funded by billionaire progressive philanthropist George Soros. Tides gave AfGJ $50,000.

 

The United Steel Workers labor union also contributed $5,000. The city of Tucson is also listed in AfGJ’s 990 as a donor, but a city official says that the city acted merely as a pass-through for a Native American tribe that provided a grant to the activist group. The city official said that no city money went to AfGJ. (source)

 

Raise your hand if you’re surprised to see George Soros linked to this. Hello?  Anyone?

 

For further reference, here’s a link to a PDF of their tax form with a list of all their donors.  Interesting reading.

 

 

Their plan is unrelenting chaos in the streets.

 

Today’s meeting is meant to organize the most massive protest across the country that has ever been seen in our history, forgetting that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Their plan is to see anywhere from thousands to millions of people rioting protesting in the streets on November 4th.

 

“Over the summer and into the Fall we must ACT, AGITATE and ORGANIZE and build the capacity and the momentum “working with all our creativity and determination toward the time when millions of people can be moved to fill the streets of cities and towns day after day and night after night, declaring this whole regime illegitimate – Demanding, and Not Stopping, Until the Trump/Pence Regime Is Driven from Power.” (source)

 

Of course, the thing they seem to be missing is that Trump and Pence are in office due to an election in which they won the vote across most of the country. The folks who are mad are the ones in large, liberal cities like the ones listed above. Just as a quick refresher: Red is Trump, Blue is Clinton. This, of course, means that the “Regime” is not actually “illegitimate” based on our Constitution.

 

U.S. Map of Trump Electoral College Victory

 

But, the opinions of the American heartland and the South don’t matter to the ironically named Stop Fascism group. Months after Trump has been sworn into office, they still intend to overthrow the results of the election.

 

This, by definition, is sedition.

 

Now, I’m not an attorney, but according to my understanding of the law, this is called “sedition.” It’s specifically described in the U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 115 › § 2384:

 

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both. (source)

 

So, now that we’re clear on this, they have plans to commit sedition in November and today’s meeting is about organizing those crimes to end what they call the Trump-Pence “regime.”

 

NOVEMBER 4, 2017

Take To The Streets And Public Squares

 

in cities and towns across the country continuing day after day and night after night—not stopping—until our DEMAND is met:

 

This Nightmare Must End:

 

The Trump/Pence Regime Must Go!

 

In the Name of Humanity,


We REFUSE to Accept a Fascist America!

 

Print Leaflet for August 19 Conferences

Time, Place, and Contact info:

New York City 12:00 pm – 6:00 pm LGBT Center 208 West 13th Street NYC
646-851-6785, NYC@refusefascism.org

Facebook

Austin TX 11:00 am – 5:00 pm (Location information will be sent upon registration.)

Austin@refusefascism.org, Texas@refusefascism.org

Chicago 10:00 am – 5:00 pm Trinity Episcopal Church 125 E. 26th Street Chicago

312-933-9586, Chicago@refusefascism.org,

Facebook Event

Los Angeles  1:00 pm – 7:00 pm (Location information will be sent upon registration.)
323-946-1742, SoCal@refusefascism.org,

Facebook

San Francisco 11:00 am – 5:00 pm Saturday, Aug. 19, 11am-5pm at the Mission Cultural Center for the Latino Arts, 2868 Mission St. (1 block from 24th St. BART station), San Francisco.
510-253-5551, norcal@refusefascism.org

Facebook

 

(source)

 

This is not going to be good. If this group succeeds in getting the numbers out there that they’re talking about, it will effectively shut down commerce in protest locations. Military, national guard, and police will step in. Counter-protests should be expected, and it will only be a matter of time until true violence like we haven’t seen in centuries, erupts in our city streets.

 

Martial law in this situation will be a given.

 

They seem to want to replace this perceived “fascism” with communism.

 

And this is about more than simply a hatred for Trump and Pence. It’s about a hatred for a whole LOT of different people. It’s about replacing a constitutional republic with something else, and based on a speech by Andy Zee, a co-initiator of Refuse Fascism, it looks like that replacement may be communism. In his speech, he cited a Communist author and quoted the Revolutionary Communist Party.

 

The Democrats, along with the New York Times and the Washington Post, etc., are seeking to resolve the crisis with the Trump presidency on the terms of this system, and in the interests of the ruling class of this system, which they represent. We, the masses of people, must go all out, and mobilize ourselves in the millions, to resolve this in our interests, in the interests of humanity, which are fundamentally different from and opposed to those of the ruling class. (source)

 

So yeah, he actually talks about Communism like it’s a good thing. By definition:

 

Communism is a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs. (source)

 

And another definition:

 

  1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.

  1. (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party. (source)

 

While I have no love for big government, being screwed over by wealthy bankers, or being taxed to death, I refuse to watch America become a Communist country. If you think we have a lot to complain about now, can you imagine what a communist society would bring?

 

No private property. No freedom to get ahead. No more American dream. No motivation to create wonderful things or share ideas.

 

But, with their fiery rhetoric, they’ll lure in the ignorant who have absolutely no idea what they’re actually advocating for.

 

My friend, A. American, (the author of my bar-none FAVORITE prepper fiction series) is the person who brought this to my attention. His Facebook post is definitely worth reading. (And if you’re on social media, you can follow the page here.)

 

Remember, remember!
The fifth of November,
The Gunpowder treason and plot;
I know of no reason
Why the Gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot!
Guy Fawkes and his companions
Did the scheme contrive,
To blow the King and Parliament
All up alive.

 

Last night in my post I said there would soon have to be an event along the lines of Charlottesville where the shooting will start. Today I come across this: http://investmentwatchblog.com/antifa-communists-meet-tomo…/

 

I find the date rather telling, as it relates to the poem above…

 

 

I know I’ve used Ukraine many times as an example of what’s coming. But it’s for good reason. The Maidan protests were orchestrated by the Obama administration and the Clinton State Department. The very same folks behind the current violent movement here.

 

So I will go out on a limb here and make a prediction. Should this event begin and should they get the thousands they are expecting in the streets, expect the shooting to start. And just like in Maidan they will probably shoot a few of their own, then blame it on the Right just kick off the show.

 

I know this sounds crazy and it would be, if it hadn’t already happened in several other countries. They have perfected this playbook through several evolutions and now it’s time for the home game. (source)

 

We’ve been warned.

 

Will things truly get ugly?

 

I hope not. But you’d damn sure better be ready because if it does, people are going to die. There will be a government crack-down the likes of which most of us alive have never seen in response to this. You will want to be prepared with foodwater, and most vitally, a serious defense plan.

 

I may not be personally thrilled with everything the Trump-Pence “regime” has to offer, but it’s a far sight better than this vision of Communist Amerika.

 

Article posted with permission from Daisy Luther

___________________

Is Fundamental Transformation Sealed by Marxist Anarchy?

John R. Houk

© August 22, 2017

_________________

“Refuse Fascism” Communists Meet to Plan November Sedition, Riots to End Trump-Pence “Regime”

 

About Daisy Luther

 

Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor. Her website, The Organic Prepper, offers information on healthy prepping, including premium nutritional choices, general wellness and non-tech solutions. You can follow Daisy on Facebook and Twitter, and you can email her at daisy@theorganicprepper.ca

 

Copyright © 2017 FreedomOutpost.com

 

A Communist Cleansing of America


Justin Smith looks at Leftist historical cleansing and the Communism inherent in Antifa and Black Lives Matter.

 

JRH 8/20/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

A Communist Cleansing of America

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 8/19/2017 9:10 PM

 

With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.” — Jeri Taylor/ Star Trek script

 

Americans witnessed more violence, yet again, on August 12th 2017, in Charlottesville, Virginia, during a Unite the Right free speech rally, that also hoped to stop the removal of Confederate General Robert E Lee’s statue from Emancipation Park. While an unknown number of counter-protesters who truly see Confederate monuments as painful reminders, of a time of bondage in America’s past, were there, many were simply good and decent conservatives, who understand that America cannot allow Her history to be re-written and eradicated.

 

Unfortunately, the roots of violence in Charlottesville, that ended Heather Heyer’s life, is the same sort of violence America witnessed in the 1960s and more recently in Ferguson, Baltimore, Dallas and Baton Rouge and now dozens of other cities across America, but its cause goes far deeper than a few Confederate monuments. Removing the monuments will solve nothing.

 

It’s hard to imagine that the hard-core left of Antifa and Black Lives Matter had any noble purposes, once one discovers they came prepared with clubs and urine and feces filled bottles and balloons; and, it is even more telling that Charlottesville Vice-Mayor Wes Bellamy is a black supremacist racist and a member of the New Black Panthers, who tweeted, “I don’t like whit[e] people so I hate snow” on December 20th 2009, and “I hate seeing white people in Orangeburg”, on February 13th 2011.

 

The violence soon started, once a state of emergency was declared at 11:06 A.M. and law enforcement called the event an “unlawful assembly” at 11:36 AM. Law enforcement forced conservatives, Nazis and KKK alike out of Emancipation Park and directly into the violent hordes of waiting Antifa, who hurled their urine filled containers. And in essence, the police failed to maintain order; it’s been suggested by ACLU  investigators that the police were given a “stand down” order.

 

Swastikas, Antifa black flags and Hammer and Sickles flew in despicable fashion over America’s horizon in Charlottesville, and the Nazis and Antifa Marxists engaged in hand to hand combat. At the height of the violence, Sheryl Gay Stolberg (NYT) wrote, “The hard left seemed as hate-filled as the alt-right. I saw club-wielding Antifa beating white nationalists …”, but she then corrected her report to cover for Antifa’s evil, writing, “Should have said violent, not hate-filled. They were standing up to hate.”

 

One cannot ascribe varying degrees of blame to the radical groups in Charlottesville. The Neo-Nazis’ venomous racism is no more or less contemptible than Antifa and BLM’s belief that offensive speech, other than their own, must be banned at any cost, as they endeavor to destroy our republic. These young fascists and communists have far more in common with each other, than they do with decent conservative and classical liberal thinkers and patriotic Americans, which is always true of violent radicals and totalitarian minded petty tyrants.

 

If we are to survive as a republic, we must condemn the violence and evil philosophy of those members of the Neo-Nazi and KKK groups; we must condemn the violence of Antifa, Black Lives Matter, the New Black Panthers, and La Raza and their communist ideology. We must also stop allowing the mainstream media to falsely label all conservatives as bigots and racists and all left-wing activists as moral crusaders. Otherwise, with our honesty as a society in question at the moment, America will soon cease being a free society.

 

It is important to note that the radical Far Left has grown enormously, since the 1960s, and even more over the last decade, Their most recent violence was witnessed in Oakland 2009, Pittsburgh 2009, Akron 2009, Oakland 2010, Los Angeles 2010, Oakland 2011, Anaheim 2012, Brooklyn 2013, Ferguson 2014, New York 2014, Baltimore 2015, Oakland 2016, Portland 2016, Washington D.C. 2017, Olympia 2017, Portland 2017 and Berkeley on three separate occasions this year, along with massive property damage, injured citizens and hundreds of hurled Molotov cocktails.

 

There isn’t any comparable list of Neo-Nazi or “alt-right” protests. There have not been many in recent years, and it is a factual error to call the entire alt-right movement “racist”; it started as an organization that noted one could be white, or any color, and be proud of one’s race without hating other races, and that one need not apologize to people of color for their ancestor’s sins of slavery or for being white.

 

However, heavily laden with Leftist propaganda mouthpieces, the mainstream media is unwilling to take an honest look at Antifa and the evil it perpetrates, because that would not advance their false narrative of America and people of color still being victimized by conservative groups. America’s media provides cover for the anarchists and communists, who hide behind self-proclaimed righteousness to commit criminal acts of violence.

 

Now, the media castigates President Donald Trump for not condemning the Nazis and white supremacists harshly enough, after it gave President Barack Obama a pass, when Black Lives Matter, other communists and anarchists and ISIS sympathizers tore Ferguson. Missouri and Baltimore, Maryland apart. this is typical Leftist media hypocrisy, but to hear it from a number of Republicans, like former presidential candidate Mitt Romney and Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) is inexcusable. Where were these Republicans, when black thugs posing as “activists” were destroying U.S. cities and attacking white people?

 

In Durham N.C. shortly after Charlottesville’s violence, our own Taliban smashed a statue of a Confederate soldier. Near the entrance of Duke University Chapel, a statue of Lee was defaced, the nose broken off.

 

Takiya Thompson, 22, was the young lady who helped tear down the Confederate monument in Durham, identified through on-site video. She was soon arrested after addressing a press conference of the Worker’s World Party, a Marxist mélange that stuck with the Soviets through all their human rights abuses.

 

On August 16th, Baltimore carried out a cultural cleansing by taking down statues of Lee and Maryland Chief Justice Roger Taney, who wrote the Dred Scott decision and opposed Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus. Approximately 100 other statues from Chattanooga to Murfreesboro and Franklin to Tampa, Dallas and Houston are facing the same fate.

 

If America starts tearing down all the statues of Confederate heroes, like Robert E. Lee, “Stonewall” Jackson and Nathan Bedford Forrest, why stop there? What about the nine presidents of the United States who owned slaves? [Blog Editor: History.com – 12 Presidents & Wikipedia – 18 Presidents]

 

Laura Ingraham, renowned talk radio host, along with President Trump, myself and many others, is right to ask, “What else will be subjected to their eradication and denunciation”, further noting, “This is not about racial healing. This is about the control of the narrative and the destruction of historical recognition.”

 

Perhaps the Left will start purging their own Democratic Party, as good communists often do, of displays that honor racist Democrats. There’s a statue of former Senator Robert Byrd (D-WVA), a Grand Kleagle in the KKK, in West Virginia’s state capitol. There also exists approximately 56 buildings, bridges, highways and centers that are named after Byrd. Do they need to be renamed or destroyed now?

 

What about Senator J. William Fulbright (D-MO)? Fulbright was a segregationist who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and 1964, and he opposed implementing the Court’s ruling in Brown v. Board of Education.

 

Should statues of NAACP co-founder, W.E.B. Du Bois, be toppled? Du Bois was kicked out of the NAACP (now far-left), because he supported segregation. He became a communist, renounced his U.S. citizenship and praised mass murderers Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-Tung as great leaders.

 

If the Jefferson Memorial or the Washington Monument was blown up today, who would America blame — the Islamic jihadists or the Antifa fascists?

 

This is precisely what the Left intends on accomplishing, because at the core of their evil little hearts, these Antifa and Black Lives Matter types are outright communists. They will burn America’s biographies and histories and write new texts aimed at abolishing eternal truths and all religion and morality. They will “cleanse” our modern society to prepare for the “classless society” where what was and is no longer exists. And finally, they will indoctrinate our children and demand that they tear down and destroy what their fathers cherished.

 

America is in a fight for Her very life, because the “protests” by the radicals of Antifa, Black Lives Matter and other communist backed groups are focused on taking down Our Republic by any means necessary. America is under assault by communists and anarchists bent on defining our rights through the state communist “elite”, more than they have any real concern over “white supremacy”, and in order to succeed, they must undermine and destroy the U.S. Constitution and complete the “fundamental transformation” of America into an authoritarian socialist state.

 

Every American, who loves America so well, must fight in the halls of state legislatures and the U.S. Congress, and the streets of America if necessary, to protect America. We must demand that our leaders properly use the tools of the Constitution and America and guide America back towards American traditions and the Western and Judeo-Christian principles and ethos, that have always defined America’s free society, in order that America’s Children and Her Children’s Children will continue to live, under the rule of law, free for all eternity.

 

Justin O. Smith

________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Any text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor. Source links are by Justin Smith with contributions by John R. Houk, Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Charlottesville Violent Participants Pt TWO


By John R. Houk

© August 17, 2017

 

On Wednesday 8/16/17, I posted Part ONE which I took a look at the racist participants of the Charlottesville rumble of Neo-Nazis, KKK and White Supremacist Nationalists spewing their odious ideology using the excuse of preserve the American history embodied by the Confederacy.

 

Clearly these White Supremacist racists were more interested in odious propaganda than in preserving history. Check out the racist sloganeering a couple of days before the Charlottesville VA rumble at nearby University of Virginia:

 

VIDEO: 8/12/17 White NEO-NAZI March at University of Virginia Chanting Nazi Slogans

 

Posted by GrimReaperNextDoor

Published on Aug 12, 2017

 

A group of white nationalists sparked outrage on a college campus in Virginia on Friday after the marched with torches across campus while chanting Nazi expressions.

The demonstrators marched on the campus grounds at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville late Friday as precursor to a Saturday protest planned to publicly oppose the removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee.

Marches could be heard chanting slogans including “white lives matter” and “you will not replace us.” Others could be heard chanting “blood and soil,” a well-known Nazi rallying cry. Police eventually declared the protest an unlawful assembly and both protesters and counter protesters reported being pepper sprayed.

Some videos captured at the scene appeared to show counter protesters clashing with the white nationalists.

University of Virginia president Teresa A. Sullivan condemned the READ THE REST

 

Ergo, the racist march at U of V seems like incitement practice in Charlottesville.

 

AND YET, the Left-Wing Counter-Protesters were at best infiltrated by violent Antifa/Black Lives Matter rumblers or at worst were the leaders of the rumbling Left.

 

In any case Leftist rumblers came just as armed as the racist White Supremacists. So, let’s look at Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM).

 

Antifa

 

VIDEO: Antifa Exposed – Newly Press

 

Posted by John Houk

Published on Aug 17, 2017

 

I found this exposé of Antifa on the Facebook page called “Newly Press”. (http://tinyurl.com/y754ycpp)

 

The undercover narrator is Joey Salads (sounds like it could be a pseudonym). With the one-sided reporting on the Charlottesville Rumble just looking at racist White Supremacists, it is good to remember that Communist anarchists were engaging in violence as well.

 

Racism is evil! BUT Communism is evil too!

 

From the New American:

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Police across the United States are being forced to deal with a new hard-Left, communist-derived movement organized under the code word “Antifa,” standing for “Anti-Fascist.”

 

The violent, confrontational nature of Antifa anarchists presents a challenge to U.S. law enforcement that is unprecedented; they reject the free speech principles upon which civil discourse depends, while seeking to achieve the demise of the U.S. Constitution, as it holds as illegitimate any compromise with their communist worldview.

 

The Antifa movement roots in Weimar Republic Germany

 

While the Antifa movement is anarchic in nature, it owes its birth to the Communist Party’s opposition to the Nazi fascist movement in post-World War I Germany.

 

1930s fascism is best explained by Jonah Goldberg. In his 2008 book Liberal Fascism, he points out that fascism is a phenomenon of the political Left, in that communists and fascists were “closely related, historical competitors for the same constituents.” In a key paragraph applying these principles to American fascism, Goldberg wrote:

 

Much like the Nazi movement, liberal fascism had two faces: the street radicals and the establishment radicals. In Germany, the two groups worked in tandem to weaken middle-class resistance to the Nazis’ agenda. In the previous chapter we saw how the liberal fascists of the SDS and the Black Panther movements rose up to terrorize the American middle class. In the remainder of this chapter — and the next — we will explain how the “suit-and-tie radicals” of the 1960s, people like Hillary Clinton and her friends, use this terror to expand the power and scope of the state and above all to change the public attitude toward the state as the agent of social progress and universal caring and compassion.

The Antifa movement in the U.S. is a return to the communist paramilitary riot tactics developed to fight the Brownshirts of the Weimar Republic. The goal was to terrorize middle-class Germans into rejecting the Nazis who had embraced the social-welfare programs of prior regimes.

 

 

In what was branded as a “DisruptJ20” protest, some 1,000 Antifa thugs broke windows at Starbucks, McDonald’s, and Bank of America, as well as in commercial buildings in downtown Washington. Antifa rioters flooded streets, blocked traffic, burned trash in the streets, and broke windshields of passing cars. They threatened to attack inauguration attendees on the streets, while shouting a continuous flow of angry, vulgar, and confrontational in-your-face insults.

 

 

The militant or radical Left as described by Lennard has little — if anything — in common with the traditional liberal politics of Democrats such as John F. Kennedy and Hubert H. Humphrey in the 1960s. She [i.e. Natasha Lennard] continued:

 

As organizers from anti-fascist research and news site Antifa NYC told The Nation: “Antifa combines radical left-wing and anarchist politics, revulsion at racists, sexists, homophobes, anti-Semites, and Islamophobes, with the international anti-fascist culture of taking to the streets and physically confronting the brownshirts of white supremacy, whoever they may be.” As with fascisms, not all anti-fascisms are the same, but the essential feature is that anti-fascism does not tolerate fascism; it would give it no platform for debate.

 

 

Lennard made it clear that Antifa radicals are READ ENTIRETY (How the Violent Hard-Left “Antifa” Movement Copies Communists in Weimar Republic Germany; By Jerome R. Corsi; New American; 8/15/17)

 

Ben Shapiro on Antifa:

 

… Antifa is a loosely connected band of anti-capitalist protesters generally on the far left who dub themselves “anti-fascist” after their compatriots in Europe. They’ve been around in the United States since the 1990s, protesting globalization and burning trash cans at World Trade Organization meetings. But they’ve kicked into high gear over the past two years: They engaged in vandalism in violence, forcing the cancelation of a speech by alt-right popularizer Milo Yiannopoulos at the University of California, Berkeley; a few months later, they attacked alt-right demonstrators in Berkeley; they attacked alt-right demonstrators in Sacramento, California, leading to a bloody street fight; they threw projectiles at police during President Trump’s inauguration; they attacked pro-Trump free-speech demonstrators in Seattle last weekend. They always label their opponents “fascists” in order to justify their violence.

 

In Charlottesville, Antifa engaged in street violence with the alt-right racists. As in Weimar, Germany, fascists flying the swastika engaged in hand-to-hand combat with Antifa members flying the communist red. And yet, the media declared that any negative coverage granted to Antifa would detract from the obvious evils of the alt-right. Sheryl Gay Stolberg of The New York Times tweeted in the midst of the violence, “The hard left seemed as hate-filled as alt-right. I saw club-wielding ‘antifa’ beating white nationalists being led out of the park.” After receiving blowback from the left, Stolberg then corrected herself. She said: “Rethinking this. Should have said violent, not hate-filled. They were standing up to hate.”

 

Or perhaps Antifa is a hateful group itself. But that wouldn’t fit the convenient narrative Antifa promotes and the media buy: that the sole threat to the republic comes from the racist right. Perhaps that’s why the media ignored the events in Sacramento and Berkeley and Seattle — to point out the evils of Antifa might detract from the evils of the alt-right.

 

 

Here’s the moral solution, as always: Condemn violence and evil wherever it occurs. The racist philosophy of the alt-right is evil. The violence of the alt-right is evil. The communist philosophy of Antifa is evil. So is the violence of Antifa. If we are to survive as a republic, we must call out Nazis but not punch them; we must stop providing cover to anarchists and communists who seek to hide behind self-proclaimed righteousness to participate in violence. Otherwise, we won’t be an honest or a free society. READ ENTIRETY (The Group That Got Ignored in Charlottesville; By Ben Shapiro; Creators.com; 8/16/17)

 

CSC Media Group looks a bit closer at Antifa ideology:

 

 

“Anti-fascism” became the official ideology of Stalinist parties, although anarchists, and migrant activists have also continued to identify as anti-fascists. The movement would continue through the end of World War II and right on through the Cold War.

 

The Resurgence

 

It would have an almost rebirth, or resurgence in the 1990s after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Once again the communists would fight against what they saw as right-wing fascist groups. Keep in mind, although these groups were fighting fascism, it wasn’t fighting fascism for freedom. Rather they wanted to replace it with communism.

 

 

The End Game

 

Now, the communist and the anarchists don’t have the same goals, other than fighting the powers that hold them back. They’ve decided that they will fight one enemy at a time. When that one is defeated they will fight the other ones standing next to them. They will continue to fight until only one is left standing.

 

 

… One of these groups is known as “Bamn” “By any means necessary.” One of their leaders is a school teacher in California. This is possibly why so many of the protests have been concentrated along the west coast.

 

 

… There are slogans like “antifascism means attack” not only against neonazis but also against the civil and capitalist system.

 

READ ENTIRETY (“Antifa” Anti-Fascists With Pro-Communist Roots; By Dominick Luckette; CSC Media Group; 4/28/17)

 

Here are two articles worth looking at to understand the evil and un-American the Antifa Communists are to Liberty and Freedom:

 

 

 

Black Lives Matter (BLM)

From Accuracy in Media:

 

The Black Lives Matter movement (BLM) casts itself as a spontaneous uprising born of inner city frustration, but is, in fact, the latest and most dangerous face of a web of well-funded communist/socialist organizations that have been agitating against America for decades. Its agitation has provoked police killings and other violence, lawlessness and unrest in minority communities throughout the U.S. If allowed to continue, that agitation could devolve into anarchy and civil war. The BLM crowd appears to be spoiling for just such an outcome.

 

 

Leftist Origins

 

Exploiting blacks to promote Marxist revolution is an old tactic. … Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn regarded Barack Obama, whose political career they sponsored, as a tool—a puppet—to use against white America. Obama’s legacy at home will certainly include more racial division.

 

[BLM Founder Photo not a part of AIM article]

 

Garza, Cullors and Tometi all work for front groups of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), one of the four largest radical Left organizations in the country. The others are the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS). Nelini Stamp’s ACORN—now rebranded under a variety of different names—works with all four organizations, and Dream Defenders is backed by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center and others.

 

FRSO is a hereditary descendant of the New Communist Movement, which was inspired by Mao and the many communist revolutions throughout the world in the 1960s and 1970s. FRSO split into two separate groups in 1999, FRSO/Fight Back and FRSO/OSCL (Freedom Road Socialist Organization/Organizaci?n Socialista del Camino para la Libertad). Black Lives Matter and its founders are allied with the latter group. Future references to FRSO in this article refer to FRSO/OSCL.

 

 

BLM is one of many projects undertaken by the FRSO. Except for the website, blacklivesmatter.com, there is no actual organization. The website implicitly acknowledges this, describing #BlackLivesMatter as “an online forum intended to build connections between Black people and our allies to fight anti-Black racism, to spark dialogue among Black people, and to facilitate the types of connections necessary to encourage social action and engagement.”

 

FRSO membership is disproportionately represented by blacks, gays and women, and self-consciously emphasizes those issues. Garza, who penned a “Herstory” of BLM, is a “queer,” black veteran activist involved in …

 

 

Cullors describes herself as a “working class, queer, black woman.” …

 

Cullors was trained by Eric Mann, a former Weather Underground leader who exhorts followers to become “anti-racist, anti-imperialist” activists. Mann runs another FRSO front, the Labor/Community Strategy Center. Like most professional leftists, he makes good money—over $225,000 annually—living in “the system” he advocates destroying.

 

Tometi is the daughter of illegal aliens from Nigeria. While in college, she worked for the ACLU defending illegal aliens against “vigilantes” opposed to illegal immigration. She is currently the executive director of Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI).

 

 

Mainstream funders have helped fund BLM as well. For example, United Way has partnered with A&E and iHeartMedia to create Shining the Light Advisors, a committee of “nationally known experts and leaders in racial and social justice,” to oversee grant disbursements. These “advisors” include such radicals as Van Jones, Advancement Project co-director Judith Browne Dianis, and Rinku Sen, president of the Applied Research Center (ARC).

 

 

Its wide network of affiliates and partner organizations like CPUSA and ACORN allows BLM to turn out large crowds. Many participate simply to protest, commit violence, loot or all three.

 

 

Fithian echoes Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven—creators of the infamous Cloward/Piven Crisis Strategy—who spent decades attempting to provoke ghetto blacks to riot, because “Poor people can advance only when ‘the rest of society is afraid of them.’” …

 

 

Islamist organizations have also jumped on the BLM bandwagon, reminding us of the unholy alliance that exists –

between them and the radical Left. In September 2015, the Muslim Brotherhood front-group Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) joined BLM activists in storming California Governor Jerry Brown’s office. CAIR also participated in the Ferguson protests. Meanwhile ISIS is recruiting American blacks for its cause. 

 

Intellectual Genealogy of Black Lives Matter

 

We must be ready to employ trickery, deceit, law-breaking, withholding and concealing truth… We can and must write in a language which sows among the masses hate, revulsion, and scorn toward those who disagree with us.”—Vladimir Lenin

 

That quote from the Soviet Union’s first leader captures the entire essence of the Left’s strategy. No matter what the issue, no matter what the facts, the Left advances a relentless, hate-filled narrative that America is irredeemably evil and must be destroyed as soon as possible. The BLM movement is only the latest but perhaps most dangerous variant on this divisive theme.

 

 

Obama’s favorite Harvard professor Derrick Bell devised Critical Race Theory, which exemplifies Lenin’s strategy as applied to race. According to Discover the Networks:

 

“Critical race theory contends that America is permanently racist to its core, and that consequently the nation’s legal structures are, by definition, racist and invalid … members of “oppressed” racial groups are entitled—in fact obligated—to determine for themselves which laws and traditions have merit and are worth observing…”

 

Bell’s theory is in turn an innovation of Critical Theory—developed by philosophers of the communist Frankfurt School. …

 

 

The “White Skin Privilege” idea was created in 1967 by Noel Ignatiev, an acolyte of Bell and professor at Harvard’s W.E.B. Du Bois Institute (Du Bois was a Communist black leader who helped found the NAACP). Ignatiev was a member of CPUSA’s most radical wing, the Maoist/Stalinist Provisional Organizing Committee to Reconstitute the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party (POC). POC was the intellectual forerunner to FRSO.

 

 

But do not be confused; “White” does not mean white. “White” in radical construction means anyone of any race, creed, nationality, color, sex, or sexual preference who embraces capitalism, free markets, limited government and American traditional culture and values. By definition, these beliefs are irredeemably evil and anyone who aligns with them is “white” in spirit and thus equally guilty of “white crimes.” Ignatiev still teaches, now at the Massachusetts College of Art.

 

The Black Lives Matter movement carries this narrative to unprecedented heights, claiming that only whites can be racists. And while justifying violence to achieve “social justice,” the movement’s goal is to overthrow our society to replace it with a Marxist one. Many members of the black community would be shocked to learn that the intellectual godfathers of this movement are mostly white Communists, “queers” and leftist Democrats, intent on making blacks into cannon fodder for the revolution. READ INTIRETY (Reds Exploiting Blacks: The Roots of Black Lives Matter; By James Simpson; Accuracy in Media; 1/12/16)

 

When President Trump in a news conference had essentially what next lauding American history will be taken down:

 

Trump said that “this week… it’s Robert E. Lee. And, I heard Stonewall Jackson is coming down.”

 

“Is George Washington [coming down] next week. And, is it Thomas Jefferson the week after?” Trump said, noting both American icons were slaveholders in Virginia. (‘Is It George Washington Next Week?’: Trump Blasts Monument Removals as ‘Changing History’; Fox News; 8/15/17 4:58pm)

 

The New Zeal blog reports American historical monuments that had nothing to do with the Confederacy are being defaced:

 

Well, that didn’t take long. I predicted when all of this racist crap started that the lefty communists would move quickly from confederate statues onto other targets and here we go. The Lincoln Memorial was defaced yesterday with the ‘F’ word and other graffiti. Then, so-called Social Justice Warriors set their sights on the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. Hundreds demanded that a “racist” statue of former President Theodore Roosevelt be taken down. I strongly suggest they don’t do that. And the communists and radicals won’t stop there… they have a huge list of targets across the nation, including anything to do with the Founding Fathers.

 

READ THE REST (Communists And Black Lives Matter Radicals Demand NY Museum Remove Statue Of ‘Racist’ Theodore Roosevelt; Submitted by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton; New Zeal; 8/16/17 9:06 am EST)

 

One of the BLM founders – Alicia Garza – is paraphrased as stipulating at Mizzou U on 2/18/16:

 

“The goal of the Constitution was to make an agreement between factions known as states, which were built on the backs of black slaves.” She described constitutionalism as racist, saying: “The people vowing to protect the Constitution are vowing to protect white supremacy and genocide.” (The Real Agenda Behind Black Lives Matter; By  GERALD FLURRY; The Trumpet; 5/2016)

 

The influence of Marxists Cloward and Piven on Black Lives Matter:

 

In 1966, sociologists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven called for the overloading of the U.S. welfare system to force the potential collapse of our Democratic Republic government and end poverty by the government “guaranteeing an annual income for all Americans.”  This is Communism–a godless human government where the state is the ultimate entity to be worshiped and obeyed.

 

Fifty years later, are we seeing Cloward and Piven’s dream become reality?  Our nation is being divided and overwhelmed economically and socially, and some feel we are on the brink of becoming a Marxist state.

 

Cloward-Piven believed in forcing political change through orchestrated crisis and not surprisingly, they were both members of the Democratic Socialists of America. The two were also involved in the birthing of radical organizations such as ACORN, which has branched out into several organizations including some in support of Black Lives Matter, according to journalist, James Simpson.

 

 

This report examines in detail, for the first time, how communist groups have manipulated the cause of Black Lives Matter, and how money from liberal foundations has made it all possible.

 

 

…The radical Left model is based on alliances of many organizations that are working on separate issues but dedicated ultimately to the same thing: overthrowing our society in order to replace it with a hardcore socialist (read communist) one.

 

The goal is to present the appearance of a formidable mass of organizations. Some are large, but many are little more than a website or Facebook page. When necessary, they can all come together to promote the cause du jour. The deaths of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and others were mere pretexts for socialist agitation. The real enemy is “the system.” This is why the BLM crowd denies the facts of those cases. As Stamp has said, “we are actually trying to change the capitalist system we have today because it’s not working for any of us.”

 

READ ENTIRETY (BLACK LIVES MATTER, CAPITALISM, AND COMMUNISM IN AMERICA; Posted by Stand Up For The Truth; StandUpForTheTruth.com; 7/18/16)

 

Here is an interesting insight from a blogger that has been inactive since April 2017:

 

[I]t isn’t surprising that Black Lives Matter is a communist organization—but the type of communism they subscribe to is. They are conservative communists attempting to fold the progressive movement back into traditional Marxism.

 

… BLM is rebirthing the traditional class struggle, reframing it in terms of black and white.

 

The policy platform proposed by BLM in August did nothing to hide this traditionalism. Its calls for collective ownership of resources, banks, and businesses, a highly progressive income tax, a guaranteed minimum income, and government jobs are lifted straight from the pages of Karl Marx’s “Communist Manifesto.” Here are two excerpts for comparison:

 

“Communist Manifesto”: Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

 

 

Black vs. White Is the New Proletariat vs. Bourgeoisie

 

But more important is BLM’s use of the black versus white dichotomy. While race has a long history as a wedge issue, BLM incorporates nearly all forms of modern marginalization—“including but not limited to those who are women, queer, trans, femmes, gender nonconforming, Muslim, formerly and currently incarcerated, cash poor and working class, differently-abled, undocumented, and immigrant”—into blackness. Conversely, whiteness represents all forms of privilege (economic, social, and legal) throughout the platform.

 

BLM has simply substituted Marx’s class conflict between the proletariat and bourgeoisie for class conflict between blackness and whiteness. …

 

The black vs. white dichotomy creates a permanent enemy class, to which defection is always incomplete. And unlike the proletariat class consciousness, race consciousness already exists, making mobilization easier. …

 

Why Black Lives Matter Rejects Intersectionality

 

Where Marxism prioritizes the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat (or between black and white), the modern theory of intersectionality prioritizes differences between identity politic groups. It posits that while white women face marginalization for their sex, they gain privilege from their race. Conversely, black men gain privilege from their sex while facing marginalization because of their race. Black women experience “double jeopardy,” suffering from both sex and race. This creates a hierarchy of oppression that is in constant flux as new forms of marginalization are recognized. Intersectional theory fractures the class conflict from two opposed groups into an unlimited number of conflicts within the hierarchy of oppression.

 

 

BLM treats intersectional conflicts and “non-black people of color” much the same way Marx treated the reserve army of labor and petty bourgeoisie: as auxiliaries to the proletariat and bourgeoisie conflict. In their glossary, BLM defines the term “non-black people of color” as intended “to provide greater context to the distinct and unique oppression imposed on Black people, while recognizing the struggles of other people of color.” Which is to say that while intersectional conflicts exist, the Black vs. White conflict takes priority.

 

READ ENTIRETY (How Black Lives Matter Is Bringing Back Traditional Marxism; I Have A Dream; 9/29/16)

 

Currently Antifa Communists and BLM Communists seem to have linked their agendas together fomenting violent revolution through race baiting. I have to wonder if the Obama Administration clandestinely empowered these anarchist revolutionaries. Many Conservatives have used this moniker for Barack Hussein Obama: Race-Baiter-in-Chief.

 

I also have to wonder if Obama’s Organizing for Action Deep State group (See Also HERE) has some clandestine linkage to BLM or even Antifa for that matter.

 

It is clear the American Left pulling out all the unConstitutional stops to destroy the Liberty and Freedom our Founding Fathers enabled during and after the Revolutionary War to form the greatest Republic the world has seen. If the Left has its way – Antifa and BLM are Marxist tools – the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution will be ripped up and placed on the forgotten ash heap of history.

 

JRH 8/17/17

Please Support NCCR

Religion & Government-


No Government Influence, but Plenty of Religious People Influence Toward Government

John R. Houk

© August 8, 2017

 

Interesting thoughts from “christine andme” at the G+ Community The United States Of America – 2ND REVOLUTION on my post ‘The Fallacy of “Separation of Church and State”’ posted at the NCCR blog.

 

Her thoughts are based on a 12/2016 video essay by the Youtube channel Call of Duty Goddess. The video title is “How America Passed a Law to Ban Islam”.

 

To the Shores of Tripoli

 

The Call of Duty Goddess outlines very coherently how Islam is incompatible with American Constitutional Law. She brings President Jefferson into her line of thinking based on the first Barbary Pirate was that occurred during Jefferson’s Administration. You should take the time to Google the two Barbary Pirate wars on which Jefferson failed to bring a total victory for the USA. Jefferson’s military action was successful but instead of forcing a complete capitulation from the Muslim pirates, Jefferson tried a diplomatic mission thinking like a Westerner and tried a peace that attempted a mutual common good. Meaning Jefferson gave cash and more to the Muslims and in return the U.S. received some freed American slaves (as in White people captured) and American prisoners. Jefferson’s largesse only temporarily placated the Muslim pirates because they upped their raids of American ship again including making crew and passengers slaves and/or prisoners.

 

The video’s is a bit misleading because there was no 1786 law prohibiting the practice of Islam on American shores. Rather the Call of Duty Goddess using an experience that Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter of a meeting between then Ambassadors Thomas Jefferson and John Adams had with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adj, Tripoli’s ambassador to Britain to fellow Ambassador John Jay. Jefferson quotes the Tripoli Ambassador informing:

 

“Was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Qur’an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.” (Obama Could Learn From Thomas Jefferson’s 1801 Response to Muslims During the Barbary Coast War; By Steve Straub; The Federalist Papers; 10/14/14)

 

The Call of Duty Goddess (and apparently several other historical pieces I have perused) believes this early experience with Islam was the push that the later President Jefferson to take military action against the Barbary Pirates.

 

After outlining the incompatibility of Islam with the American Constitution coupled with Jefferson’s presumed mindset on Islam, the Call of Duty Goddess this is the reasoning there is a Separation of Church and State in the Constitution.

 

I can only concur with the Call of Duty Goddess ONLY in the sense that government is separated from religion, BUT religion is not separate from being an influence on government. AND since a significant majority of the Founding Fathers (yes even American Deists like Jefferson) were quite amiable to Judeo-Christian morality, this was the influence expected to keep America good.

 

Since christine mentions Slovakia banning Islam in her post, I thought I’d provide a bit of an update on the Slovakia law. It is true such a ban was passed by the Slovakian legislature on 11/30/16. However, Slovakia’s President Andrej Kiska vetoed the Slovakian legislature on 12/20/16. Fox News reports on 1/31/17 that the Slovakian legislature overrode Kiska’s veto.

 

JRH 8/8/17

Please Support NCCR

*********************

Agreeing with Main Point- ‘Fallacy of Church/State Separation’

 

By christine andme

August 7, 2017

The United States of America – 2nd Revolution

 

I totally agree with the main point of that message.

I want to mention one interesting notion regarding ‘separation of church and state’. The creator of the below video believes it was meant to protect Americans from religions such as Islam. That became law in 1786, which was the same year Thomas Jefferson met with ‘barbaric pirates’ to discuss the jizya (tax that infidels had to pay to Muslims) which was as large as 6% of total budget then. Jefferson studied Koran and figured Islam is intertwined with politics because it comes with Sharia law, and that pushed founding fathers to establish the law to ‘separate church and state’. The video publisher says that is her opinion, and actually that notion is the supporting argument of hers to ultimately assert ‘U.S. passed a law in 1786 to ban Islam from being registered as a religion’ ‘just as Slovakia recently did’.

I have heard that ‘separation of church and state’ is meant that churches wanted to make sure that government would not interfere with churches, which I believed. I also agree that what ACLU etc. is trying to do is simply wrong based on their misinterpretation of the 1st amendment. I don’t know why the factor of Islam has not been discussed by more scholars (well, I think I know: it is the same reason why the fact that Jihad killed 270 million people has not been taught in the US History textbooks…) Anyway, I thought ‘Islam’ being one reason for the ‘separation of church and state’ was interesting perspective.
VIDEO: How America Passed a Law to Ban Islam

 

Posted by  Call of Duty Goddess

Published on Dec 3, 2016
Slovakia Passes Law to BAN ISLAM from Being Registered as a Religion
http://freedomoutpost.com/slovakia-passes-law-to-ban-islam-from-being-registered-as-a-religion/

Islam: Governing Under Sharia
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/islam-governing-under-sharia

Islam 101 – 7 – Sharia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdKSgIwK_6U

Understanding Islamic Law
http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.org/understanding-islam/legal-rulings/52-understanding-islamic-law.html

Muslims Want Sharia Law in Non-Muslim Countries Robert Spencer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0FpDCZdvHk [Blog Editor: This Youtube account was terminated by Youtube]

YOUR RIGHT TO RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
https://www.aclu.org/other/your-right-religious-freedom [Blog Editor: Always be wary of ACLU hatred of Christianity]

Religion and the Founding of the American Republic
https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel01.html

Religion and the Founding of the American Republic [Pt 2]
https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel01-2.html

Cornerstone Documents in Virginia and American History: An Act for Establishing Religious Freedom
https://youtu.be/KwAxl701RUo

THE TRUTH OF THE MARINE CORP ANTHEM AND THE UNITED STATES WAR WITH RADICAL ISLAM
https://whtwolf74.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/the-truth-of-the-marine-corp-anthem-and-the-united-states-war-with-radical-islam/

Image 2 of American Peace Commissioners to John Jay, March 28, 1786
https://www.loc.gov/resource/mtj1.005_0430_0433/?sp=2

When Thomas Jefferson Read the Qur’an
http://www.libertylawsite.org/2015/03/26/when-thomas-jefferson-read-the-quran/

 

___________________

Religion & Government-

No Government Influence, but Plenty of Religious People Influence Toward Government

John R. Houk

© August 8, 2017

__________________

Agreeing with Main Point- ‘Fallacy of Church/State Separation’

 

Blog Editor: The title is by the Editor. Christine’s post is edited. Text and links in the video quoted material enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

The Fallacy of “Separation of Church and State”


The best intro to this essay submission from Justin Smith can be summed up from an excerpt:

 

Any attack against Christianity and Judaism in America using the fallacy of “separation of Church and State” is simply an attempt to further undermine, not only Our U.S. Constitution and Religious Liberty, but Our entire traditional American way of life. Do not accept the Fallacy.

 

JRH 8/6/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

The Fallacy of “Separation of Church and State”

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 8/5/2017 3:36 PM

 

The Founding Fathers believed that government’s role in religion should be limited. We cannot discount that the First Amendment begins “Congress shall make no law” either establishing a state religion or prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Rather than articulate an affirmative responsibility for government to protect religion, the Founding Fathers felt it was enough to keep the government out. If nothing else, the language of the First Amendment makes it clear the goal was to restrain government when it came to religion. There is no suggestion the Founders felt the establishment clause and the free exercise clause were in any way competing. Otherwise, why would the Founders include the two clauses together?

 

The point was to keep government out of both realms. Both clauses were needed because it was not sufficient to restrain government from establishing a state religion; government also had to be restrained from any attempt to interfere with religious practices and beliefs. The negative language of the First Amendment does not prohibit Congress from passing a law that promotes religion, provided the judgement does not promote one religion over others.

Before the bad law and judicial activism that started with the abuse of the Constitution by Justice Hugo Black in Everson v Board of Education (1947), the states were not prohibited under the First Amendment from establishing religion, and nowhere in the debate on freedom of religion in the first Congress is there any mention of “separation of church and state.” Our Founders own writings clearly show that they never intended for public officials to check their convictions and beliefs at the door to their offices. They would have been shocked by the Court’s excessively broad interpretation of the First Amendment, given the language the Founders crafted with the belief it would protect open expression of religious beliefs in America.

 

The Founders most certainly would have rebelled against the idea of an absolute “separation of church and state” and the use of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to eradicate all Judeo-Christian references to God from the public square, because these ideas are incompatible with the Original Intent and unalienable rights granted to each of us by our Creator, thus making them erroneous and historically unsupportable.

 

[Blog Editor: Here’s an interesting thought on how the Left and Activist Judges misused the 14th Amendment to rob the Original Intent of the First Amendment:

 

When did things change?

 

Charles Darwin theory’s that species could evolve inspired a political theorist named Herbert Spencer to suggest that laws could evolve. This influenced Harvard Law Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell to develop the “case precedent” method of practicing law, which influenced his student, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.

 

This occurred near the same time the 14th Amendment was passed in 1868, introduced by Republicans in Congress to guarantee rights to freed slaves in the Democrat South. The evolutionary “case-precedent” method provided a way to side-step the Constitutional means of changing the Constitution through the Amendment process.

 

Activist Justices began to creatively use the 14th Amendment to take jurisdiction away from the states over issues such as unions, strikes, railroads, farming, polygamy, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly.

 

Freedom of religion was still under each individual state’s jurisdiction until Franklin D. Roosevelt.

 

 

In 1937, FDR nominated Justice Hugo Black to the Supreme Court, who also concentrated power by writing decisions taking jurisdiction away from the states in the area of religion. He did this by simply inserting the phrase “Neither a state” in his 1947 Everson v Board of Education decision: “The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another.” READ ENTIRE ARTICLE (THIS IS HOW ATHEISM BECAME OUR OFFICIAL ‘RELIGION’; By BILL FEDERER; WND; 1/15/16 9:01 PM)

 

Now I can’t vouch for this being Justin Smith’s thought on the 14th Amendment, but using the effect of Darwinism in the development of Case Law to have more authority than Original Intent is enlightening to me.]

On New Year’s Day 1802, Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists to assuage their fear that the federal government might one day attempt to condition religious freedom as a right granted by the state. Jefferson, an anti-Federalist [Blog Editor: Federalist/Anti-Federalist Perspectives – HERE, HERE & HERE], clearly stated his intention to keep government out of religious affairs rather than empower it to remove religion from the public arena: “Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in the behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural rights in opposition to his social duties.”

The First Amendment compels government not to eradicate religion from the public arena. If the expression of religious beliefs is an inherent God-designed part of human nature, as the Declaration of Independence proclaimed, then government acting to remove religion from the public sphere would have seemed to Our Founding Fathers to be acting in a manner antithetical to Our Founding Principles.

It is almost as if Justice Black decided the First Amendment was equivalent to the biblical admonition to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s, under the assumption that a discernible distinction could be made without conflict between what was Caesar’s and what was God’s. The whole point of the First Amendment’s attempt to protect freedom of religion is that over time Caesar tends to intrude upon God.

 

In 1948, the Supreme Court ruled in McCollom v Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948) that religious education provided by churches on public school grounds in Illinois during the school day was unconstitutional. Then in 1952, in Zorach v Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952), the Supreme Court found that allowing New York students to leave school grounds for religious education was constitutional. Dissenting in Zorach, Justice Black wrote, “I see no significant difference between the invalid Illinois system and that of New York here sustained.” If Justice Black, the author of the court’s majority opinion in Everson, could not distinguish these cases, how could state, county, city or municipal school officials be expected to make the distinction reliably?

 

A Godless public square could not be more antithetical to what Our Founding Fathers thought they were achieving when drafting the First Amendment, and the Courts distort precedent whenever they use the Establishment Clause to crush all things religious Ironically, the very language crafted to protect religious freedom has now reached the point at which Americans can only be assured freedom from religion in all places within this nation, with the possible exceptions of prayer confined to church and free expression of religion confined to the privacy of one’s home.

Jefferson made a poignant remark in Notes on the State of Virginia, which clarifies his thinking: “And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have lost the only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?[Blog Editor’s Emphasis]

 

Why didn’t the Supreme Court choose this text for their ruling? [Blog Editor’s Emphasis] Or his use of “natural rights” in other documents? Justice Clarence Thomas once stated: “… this Court’s nebulous Establishment Clause analyses, turn on little more than “judicial predilections … It should be noted that the extent to which traditional Judeo-Christian religion is removed from the public square and the public schools, it is replaced by other religions, including Secular Humanism, which is specifically recognized as a religion by the Supreme Court.”
In order to combat this assault on religious freedom and religious liberty, to date, twenty-one states have enacted Religious Freedom Restoration Acts since 1993. Currently, ten states [5/4/17 – 9 States] are considering legislation on the topic this year, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Virginia amended their state RFRA, but otherwise no states have passed their legislation.
For eight decades, the ACLU has been America’s leading religious censor, waging a largely uncontested war, until recently, against America’s core values, utilizing every fallacy, piece of misinformation and outright LIE imaginable in its war against religious liberty, with the support of much of the current Marxist media; both are intent on destroying traditional America, including the nuclear family. We now live in a country where our traditional Christian and Jewish faith and religion — civilizing forces in any society — are openly mocked and increasingly pushed to the margins, and our weapon to stop them is the Founding Fathers’ own words and their Original Intent regarding the U.S. Constitution.
Ultimately, two very diverse thinkers, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams concluded, that without virtue based on a solid belief in God, Liberty was inevitably lost. In other words, if the Supreme Court, through the efforts of Communists, atheists and fools and ACLU prompting, succeeds in removing the Judeo-Christian God from American public life, a foundation pillar upon which American liberty has depended will have been removed, perhaps irretrievably. Without the open expression of religious freedom so fundamental to American liberty that it is written into the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, American Liberty will not long persist.

 

Americans cannot and must not allow the Communists and atheists of this nation and the ACLU to secularize America to the point where our tolerance is turned into silencing and punishing religious speech. Life is valuable; marriage is a God-ordained institution between one man and one woman, and families are comprised of a male father and a female mother with any number of children. Any attack against Christianity and Judaism in America using the fallacy of “separation of Church and State” is simply an attempt to further undermine, not only Our U.S. Constitution and Religious Liberty, but Our entire traditional American way of life. Do not accept the Fallacy.

 

By Justin O. Smith

__________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All links and any text embraced by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Robert Spencer Defends the West…


In America both the Left and the Right cherish Free Speech enshrined in the First Amendment. Or at least the First Amendment is cherished in the political spectrum’s right to criticize each other, but the Left questions the Free Speech ability of the Right to expose the truth of totalitarian issues supported by the Left. Why? Our Republic was established in rebelling against a totalitarian King between 1776 (actually battles fought in 1775 but Independence declared in 1776) and 1783 (Treaty of Paris). The Left pretends to be the Party of the People but supports Big Government control of society from top to bottom, aka totalitarianism.

 

With this all in mind, I think you will find Andrew Bostom’s book review of Robert Spencer’s “The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies)” interesting. It Points out that Islam is no friend of Free Speech and the irony of the Left trying to protect Islam from criticism.

 

JRH 8/2/17

Please Support NCCR

**************

Robert Spencer Defends the West: ‘The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech’

 

By ANDREW G. BOSTOM

JULY 31, 2017

PJ Media

 

FILE – DECEMBER 25, 2013: The Egyptian interim government [sic] has declared the Mohammed Morsi led ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ a terrorist organisation. The action was taken in response to the bombing of the police station in Mansoura earlier this week, which the government has stated was the responsibility of the Brotherhood, despite denials from the group itself. CAIRO, EGYPT – DECEMBER 14: Supporters of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi and members of the Muslim Brotherhood chant slogans during a rally on December 14, 2012 in Cairo, Egypt. Opponents and supporters of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi staged final rallies in Cairo ahead of tomorrow’s referendum vote on the country’s draft constitution that was rushed through parliament in an overnight session on November 29. The country’s new draft constitution, passed by a constitutional assembly dominated by Islamists, will go to a referendum vote on December 15. (Photo by Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)

 

A review of The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies), by Robert Spencer, Regnery Publishing, 2017, 274 pp.

 

———-

 

Twenty-four years ago, the late Mervyn Hiskett, renowned British scholar of the history of jihad and Islamization in sub-Saharan Africa, turned his attention to the looming impact of Islam on his own Britain and Western societies more broadly, including the United States. In his 1993 Some to Mecca Turn To Pray, he articulated presciently the Islamic conundrum now enveloping us, which requires an immediate response if we still cherish individual liberty:

 

As is so often the case when considering Islam, one has to concede the power of certain of its ideas. But when it comes to having these ideas advocated within our own shores, and as alternatives to our own insti­tutions, one must then ask oneself: Which does one prefer? Western secular, pluralist institutions, imperfect as these are? Or the Islamic theo­cratic alternative?

 

And if one decides in favor of one’s own institutions, warts and all, one then has to ask again: How far may the advocacy of Islamic alternatives go, before this becomes downright subversive? And at that point, what should be done about it? Finally, do liberal, demo­cratic politicians have the political and moral guts to do what is needed, or will they simply give way, bit by bit and point by point, to insistent and sustained pressure from the Muslim “Parliament” and other Muslim special-interest lobbies like it?

 

Robert Spencer’s concise, lucid analysis, The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies), validates Hiskett’s gravest concerns about Islamic subversion: the relentless campaign to abrogate our most basic, unique Western liberty — free expression. With characteristic erudition, attention to detail, and wit (see text box on p. 28, “Did Any Of Them Have Eating Disorders? Those Can Make You Crazy,” from this video), Spencer chronicles how free speech in Western societies has been dangerously eroded by what Hiskett aptly termed “the Muslim ‘Parliament’ and other Muslim special interest lobbies,” in full collaboration with statist Left cultural relativists.

 

The grotesque harmonic convergence between mainstream, totalitarian Islam — epitomized by Sharia “blasphemy” law — and the “democratic” totalitarianism of the Left, derived from Robespierre and the Jacobins through Communist ideologues and leaders Marx, Lenin, and Stalin, is an underlying, recurrent theme of Spencer’s urgent presentation. Indeed the latter, “Dr. Crankley’s Children” (per Whittaker Chambers’ acid 1948 discussion of the Communist legacy on the 100th anniversary of the publication of Marx’s manifesto), and their “softer” statist minions of our era, bear at least as much responsibility for the erosion of Western free speech as institutional Islam and its pious Muslim votaries. Spencer elucidates how, despite superficial appearances of being oddly conjoined:

 

… endeavoring to weaken and destroy the freedom of speech, leftists in the United States have found ready allies in the Muslim community. Many observers have remarked that the Left and Islamic supremacists make strange bedfellows: the former advocate a moral libertinism; the latter are attempting to impose a repressive moral code. What binds these unlikely allies is a shared taste for authoritarianism. Both parties want to stifle dissent, and in doing so both find themselves fighting the same foes. Why not join forces?

 

All 13 of Spencer’s carefully arranged, remarkably compendious chapters have germane (even pathognomonic!) titles, including 10 epigrams:

 

Chapter 1, “Just Stay Quiet and You’ll Be Okay”

Chapter 2, “Tailored in an Appropriate Way”: Can Free Speech Really Be Restricted in the United States?

Chapter 3, “Now Obviously This is a Country That is Based on Free Speech, but…,”: The U.S. Government vs. Free Speech

Chapter 4, The “Hate Speech” Scam

Chapter 5, “Peer Pressure and Shaming” to Rein in Free Speech

Chapter 6, “Is That Being Racist?”: Americans Learn Self-Censorship

Chapter 7, “Irresponsibly Provocative”: The Erosion of Free Speech From Rushdie to Geller

Chapter 8, “Can’t We Talk about This?”: The Death of Free Speech in Europe

Chapter 9, Catholics Against Free Speech

Chapter 10, “Not Conducive to the Public Good”: Free Speech Dies in Britain and Canada

Chapter 11, The New Brownshirts

Chapter 12, “The University Prides Itself on Diversity”: Administrators vs. Free Speech Chapter 13, “Facing the New Totalitarianism”: Fighting Back for the Freedom of Speech

 

Spencer traces the living Islamic law imperative to brook no criticism of the Muslim faith, or its prophet founder, to both canonical traditions of Muhammad and the Koran (9:14-15) itself, which exhorts Muslims to wage jihad to punish the “offending” infidels. Muhammad in effect created his own “Dead Poets Society” comprised of victims (men and women, elderly and young) slain at his behest by his most ardent early Muslim followers, for perceived “insults” to Islam’s prophet. Citing the contemporary example of the Islamic State of Pakistan (and the plight of Pakistani Christian, Asia Bibi), Spencer asks: to assure a “future free of offense to Islam,” what exactions will “our leftist politicians, media elites, and much of the Western intelligentsia” be willing to impose upon their own citizens?

 

For saying, “I believe in Jesus Christ who died on the cross for the sins of mankind. What did your prophet Muhammad ever do to save mankind?”, a Christian woman named Asia Bibi is on death row in Pakistan, where “wounding [Muslims’] religious feelings” is a crime and blaspheming Muhammad is punishable by death. Pakistan doesn’t have the First Amendment. Americans in the United States are in no danger of execution for testifying to their religious beliefs. But the Asia Bibi case illustrates the utter futility of attempting to keep Muslims from ever being offended — unless we are willing to give up our right to freedom of speech entirely.

 

Americans should not be complacent about First Amendment protections. Reminding readers that the divide separating “treasonous and seditious speech and speech that is simply unwelcome to the government” has proven controversial throughout U.S. history, Spencer avers:

 

The Sedition Act [of 1791] and the Espionage Act [of 1917] demonstrate the U.S. government has placed severe restrictions on the First Amendment’s protection of the freedom of speech in the past, and indicate that it could do so again in the future. This history also shows that the First Amendment protections of free speech are most likely to be curtailed in a time of serious and imminent threats to the nation. That time may be upon us now.

 

Spencer emphasizes one particularly alarming Obama administration reaction to the 9/11/2012 jihad massacre at Benghazi — “scapegoating a video [and subsequently the videographer] criticizing Muhammad” — which illustrates such curtailment, “placing the onus on freedom of speech.” He adds: “The unmistakable implication was that if only Americans would not criticize Muhammad, attacks of this kind wouldn’t happen.” Worse still, two days following Barack Obama’s surreal Islamic blasphemy law-compliant pronouncement to the United Nations General Assembly on September 25, 2012, that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” America’s first Sharia blasphemy law victim, Egyptian Coptic Christian Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, producer of the Innocence of Muslims video, was arrested, declared a “danger to the community,” and imprisoned without bail. He was incarcerated for 12 months.

 

Devoid of First Amendment equivalent laws, governed by Left statists marinated for decades in cultural relativist claptrap ideology, and subject to the same forces of Islamization by Muslim immigrant populations, Western Europe, as Spencer demonstrates, including Britain as well as Canada, is even further along the trajectory towards self-inflicted full compliance with Sharia blasphemy law.

 

Perhaps the most illuminating and disheartening chapter of The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies) chronicles progressive Western supplication to Islam since Ayatollah Khomeini’s February 14, 1989 fatwa condemning novelist Salman Rushdie to death for his The Satanic Verses, and its perceived insults to the Muslim creed and Islam’s prophet. Spencer provides an especially astute observation regarding a follow-up Khomeini fatwa denying Rushdie any leniency for repenting, and offering a reward for any non-Muslim willing to execute the beleaguered author:

 

The invitation to non-Muslims to murder Rushdie was significant: Khomeini was inviting non-Muslims to share Muslim sensibilities regarding Rushdie’s alleged offense, and trying to induce them to do so by the prospect of financial reward. It would take years for this invitation and foreigners and non-Muslims to kill Rushdie to evolve into the “shaming,” as Hillary Clinton would put it, of those who dared to decline to participate in the de facto implementation of Islamic blasphemy laws. Clinton’s “peer pressure an shaming” imperative demonstrated that, in the two decades between the Rushdie fatwa and her endorsement of UNHRC 16/18 [i.e., the United Nations Human Rights Commission’s “defamation of religion” resolution which riveted upon Islam and was aggressively lobbied for by the UN’s Muslims nation members], non-Muslims had become the principal enforcers of Sharia blasphemy law in the West.

 

Drawing upon his shared experience with journalist and activist Pamela Geller in the wake of the May 3, 2015 Garland, Texas, jihadist attack on a staid exhibit of historical and contemporary depictions of Muhammad, Spencer concludes:

 

It is not an offensive act, but ultimately an act in defense of Western civilization to show Islamic jihadists that their violent threats will not cow me and that I will not allow violent intimidation to rule the day, and that I will not offend them in any larger sense by treating them as if they were demented children who cannot control their actions and must necessarily kill in the face of being offended. It was the murderous jihadis who made drawing Muhammad the flash point of the defense of free speech, not Pamela Geller, and I.

 

It is they who, by their determination to murder non-Muslims who violate their religious law on this point, have made it imperative that free people signal that they will not submit to them. If we give in to that demand that we conform to this Sharia principle, there will be further demands that we adhere to additional Sharia principles. It is ultimately a question of whether we will submit to Sharia or stand up for freedom. At Garland we were standing. In the aftermath, it is clear a huge segment of the Western political and media elites are ready, if not eager to kneel, daring not to “provoked” their new masters.

 

A quarter century after Hiskett’s Cassandra-like warning about the liberty-crushing peril of acquiescing to Islam within Western societies, Robert Spencer has meticulously documented its most dire consequences: de facto elimination of free speech criticism of the Muslim creed — and, ultimately, free expression, overall. Spencer’s courageous and irrefragable analysis is simultaneously a tocsin of imminent calamity, and a clarion call to action in defense of free speech, our most fundamental, keystone liberty. Western freedom-loving citizens must help bring his message to American political and religious leaders before our liberties are transmogrified by the global Muslim “umma,” seeking unabashedly (since 1981) to impose “The Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights,” i.e., Sharia totalitarianism.

___________________

Copyright © 2005-2017 PJ Media All Rights Reserved.

 

About PJ Media

 

For media inquiries, please contact communications@pjmedia.com

 

Since its inception in 2005, PJ Media has been focused on the news that matters — from the insightful commentary provided by our all-star lineup of columnists to our writers’ quick takes on breaking news and trending stories. The media company’s founders — Academy Award Nominee Roger L. Simon, Charles Johnson (Little Green Footballs) and Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit) — brought together a tightly knit band of bloggers into an integrated website that has evolved into a reliable source for original, unique, and cutting-edge political news and analysis.

 

We’ve been there through primaries and general elections; the U.S. border crisis; doctored climate change data; the gunrunners’ scandal; Department of Justice voter fraud and the Ground Zero mosque — stories that others in the media initially passed by.

 

As a company, we’ve always felt a special connection to the values which make America special, as well as a dedication to keeping America great for our children and our children’s children. That’s why our main focus is on the three main areas that will have the most impact on the future of America: politics, parenting and lifestyle.

 

READ THE REST

 

Faux 28th Amendment, Yet Still Need Convention


John R. Houk

© July 25, 2017

 

I became a recipient of a Chain Email that has been circulating for some years. The Leftist fact checkers who have I have little trust for have debunking posts circa 2011. As far as the Conservative perspective goes I trust TruthORFiction.com. Truth or Fiction purposely presents their website in a retro format for reasons I am unclear.

 

The purpose of the Chain Email I received is to promote a 28th Amendment that makes members of Congress accountable to the same rule of law as every American citizen is. Before a reading of a single paragraph of this 28th Amendment the email provides examples of alleged improprieties that members of Congress and their families receive that Americans do not receive.

 

According to Truth Or Fiction the Chain Email is total poppycock. Here is a debunking excerpt:

 

Summary of eRumor: 

 

A chain email says that children of members of Congress and their staffers have their student loans forgiven.

The email also says that 35 governors have sued for a 28th amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would limit federal power.

 

The Truth: 

 

Both of these claims are false.

There is a Student Loan Repayment Program in place to help attract and retain federal employees, but it does not extend to family members. Elected officials, uniform service members and other government employees are eligible under the law.

 

Federal employees can have up to $10,000 in federally insured student loans repaid each year, and up to $60,000 repaid over their career, the Office of Personnel Management reports.

 

And the federal government does not forgive these loans, as the eRumor claims. The loans are repaid. That’s important because it means federal employees have to pay taxes on loan payments just like the rest of their salaries.

 

In 2013, $52.9 million in student loan repayments were made for 7,314 federal employees, the Office of Personnel and Management reports.

 

The email’s claim that 35 governors had sued the U.S. government for a 28th amendment is also false. The email says that the proposed 28th amendment would state:

 

“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators, Representatives of Congress; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States

 

That same language was used in an eRumor that TruthorFiction.com found to be false in 2013. Click here for that story.

 

Both versions of the eRumor said that 35 governors had signed onto a petition for a constitutional convention to create the 28th amendment, but that’s not true.

 

At last count, three states had tried to force a constitutional convention. Resolutions in Kansas, Georgia and Indiana sought to balance state and federal power, the Huffington Post reports.

 

And under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, 34 states have to pass a resolution on the same subject to force a constitutional convention — not 38 states, as the eRumor claims.

 

READ THE REST (Children of Congress Members Don’t Pay Back Student Loans-Fiction! 35 Governors Have Sued the Federal Government to Create 28th Amendment-Fiction!)

 

And yet there are actual special benefits for members of Congress that the rest of us American citizens are not privy to. All the perks of the chain email simply don’t exist especially in 2017. Even though members of Congress make less than the private sector with more responsibilities, retirement benefits kick in according to time served and when reach a certain age:

 

Members of Congress are not eligible for a pension until they reach the age of 50, but only if they’ve completed 20 years of service. Members are eligible at any age after completing 25 years of service or after they reach the age of 62. Please also note that Members of Congress have to serve at least 5 years to even receive a pension.

 

The amount of a congressperson’s pension depends on the years of service and the average of the highest 3 years of his or her salary. By law, the starting amount of a Member’s retirement annuity may not exceed 80% of his or her final salary. (Salaries and Benefits of US Congress Members: The Truth; By Robert Longley; ThoughtCo.com; Updated 3/12/17)

 

As of 2014 members of Congress are tied into the same Obamacare health insurance rules as all of us according to Thoughtco.com (Ibid.). Read the CNN explanation of how Obamacare insurance exchanges works for Congress and their staff: How do Congress’ lawmakers get health care? By Ashley Killough; CNN [aka Communist News Network]; 7/18/17 Updated 7:19 AM ET)

 

Too bad the chain email didn’t address actual Congressional perks that We the People do not receive.

 

Senate Expense Account

 

 The Senators’ Official Personnel and Office Expense Account (SOPOEA) is available to assist Senators in their official and representational duties. The allowance is provided for the fiscal year. The preliminary list of SOPOEA levels contained in the Senate report accompanying the FY2017 legislative branch appropriations bill shows an average allowance $3,306,570 per Senator. (Screw Obamacare, ‘We the People’ Want Everything Congress Has; By Lori; GlenBeck.com; 7/25/17)

 

Senate Furniture Expense

 

Each Senator is authorized $40,000 for state office furniture and furnishings for one or more offices, if the aggregate square footage of office space does not exceed 5,000 square feet. The base authorization is increased by $1,000 for each authorized additional incremental increase in office space of 200 square feet. (Ibid.)

 

House Personnel and Office Expense

 

$1,200,000.00

 

Members of the House receive a $250,000 budget for travel and office expenses. (Ibid.)

 

Special Class Beneficial Treatment

 

Members of Congress have long been treated as a special class with lifelong access to members-only parking spaces, elevators, dining rooms and exercise facilities (unless they become a lobbyist).

 

Grooming and Fitness Amenities

 

  • Taxpayer-funded, members-only gym

 

  • Taxpayer-funded, members-only salon

 

  • Taxpayer-funded, members-only barbershop

 

  • Taxpayer-funded, members-only tennis court (Ibid.)

Travel Privileges

 

Staff schedulers often times make reservations for members of Congress via dedicated phone lines that Delta and other major airlines have reportedly set up for Capitol Hill customers. Airlines also permit members to reserve seats on multiple flights but only pay for the trips they take.

Free parking at the two Washington-area airports (At a rate of $22 per day, that represents almost $740,000 in forgone revenue annually for Reagan National). (Ibid.)

 

If Congress Member dies, Family Benefit

 

Family members of those in Congress who die, typically receive a full year’s salary as compensation ($174K). (Ibid.)

 

As to the 28th Amendment in the Chain Email, no such Amendment has even proposed in Congress nor has any State every tried to suggest a convened Constitutional Convention on the matter of equalizing Congressional benefits with American citizen benefits.

 

Some discerning Conservatives believe the Federal usurpation of power has exceeded the design of the Framers of the Constitution. These Conservatives believe Congress is too hamstringed to reverse the despotism of excessive Federal power over the We the People where the Founding Fathers believed power should reside. In this view the best Constitutional method of restoring power to the people is based in Article 5 of the Constitution:

 

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

 

– Article V, U.S. Constitution (From ConventionOfStates.com/Solution)

 

I as well lean toward a Constitutional Convention. But there is no surprise the American Left is not in big favor of a Convention. There are also Conservatives that fear a Convention not because they don’t recognize the problem of excessive Federal Power, rather these Conservatives fear an out of control Convention which the American Left may prevail potentially making the threat to American Liberty worse than the Dems and Leftist activist Courts already have.

 

This excerpt relays the fears:

 

Many people have voiced concern over the convention method of amending the Constitution. Our only experience with a national constitutional convention took place 200 years ago. At that time the delegates took it upon themselves to ignore the reason for calling the convention, which was merely to improve the Articles of Confederation. The Founding Fathers also violated the procedure for changing the Articles of Confederation. Instead of requiring approval of all the state legislatures, the signers of the Constitution called for ratification by elected state conventions in only nine of the 13 states.

 

Another point of anxiety is that Article V of the Constitution says nothing about what a convention may or may not do. If a convention is held, must it deal with only one proposed amendment? Or could the delegates vote on any number of amendments that were introduced? The Constitution itself provides no answers to these questions.

 

Howard Jarvis, the late leader of the conservative tax revolt in California during the 1970s, opposed a convention. He stated that a convention “would put the Constitution back on the drawing board, where every radical crackpot or special interest group would have the chance to write the supreme law of the land.”

 

Others, like Republican Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, disagree with this viewpoint. Senator Hatch has said it is ironic when the people attempt to engage in “participatory democracy set forth by the Constitution, we are subject to doomsday rhetoric and dire predictions of domestic and international disaster.”

 

Of course, any amendments produced by a convention would still have to be ratified by three-fourths of the states. We may soon see how this never-used method works if the balanced budget people swing two more states over to their side. (Do We Need a New Constitutional Convention; Constitutional Rights Foundation)

 

Here is the Convention of States rebuttal to the fears:

 

Much of the opposition to an Article V convention hinges on fears of a “runaway convention.” Convention opponents frequently argue that a convention is inherently unlimited and once it convenes it cannot be restricted in any way. …

 

The text of the Constitution itself clearly indicates that a convention can be limited in at least some ways. For instance, a convention under Article V is limited to “proposing amendments.” It is essentially a recommendatory body: it cannot ratify its own proposals. Thus, even an “unlimited” convention is limited in this critical respect, which prevents rash or unpopular amendments from becoming part of the Constitution.

 

Further, Article V specifies that certain topics are off-limits for a convention (and for Congress) to consider. The last portion of the article takes certain provisions relating to the import of slaves off the table until 1808, and forbids any amendment that deprives the states of equal representation in the Senate. There can be no question that certain topics are off-limits for a convention, since Article V itself imposes those limitations. That states legislatures may further limit the authority of a convention is shown by the historical practice and purpose behind Article V.

 

 

In short, the text of Article V, the history and purpose behind it, plus Congress’s own inaction, all indicate that an Article V convention can be limited to a particular topic or set of topics. Our Founders knew what they were doing when they voted unanimously to put the convention provision in Article V.10 A convention is not some all-powerful body with authority to unilaterally scrap our Constitution, though convention opponents often represent it in that light. It is a limited-purpose committee intended to give the states the ability to propose particular amendments that Congress never would. As such, the state legislatures can impose binding subject-matter restraints on the convention to ensure that it does not run away. (A Single-Subject Convention; By Robert Kelly, J.D.1 [1. Mr. Kelly is a practicing attorney and a member of the California Bar. He currently serves as General Counsel for Citizens for Self-Governance.]; Convention of States pdf)

 

Frankly I can think of some more important issues for the 28th Amendment of the Chain Email. The Left must submit to what made America great. The Left has done such an effective job of propagandizing their agenda that most Americans are not even aware of the Liberty and Freedom our Founding Fathers fought for against the British Crown despotism of the 1760s and 1770s. The witless supporters of the American Left have been slowly restoring Americans to the same despotism that led Thirteen British Colonies to demand Independence that eventually led to the U.S. Constitution of laws of We the People.

For those interested in the debunked Chain Email on the faux 28th Amendment, it is below.

 

JRH 7/25/17

Please Support NCCR

****************

Proposed 28th Amendment and Congress

Chain Email

Editor Received 7/25/17

 

Please read 28th amendment

 

Please Read, and forward.   This will only take 1 minute to read!

28th Amendment, 35 States and Counting.

 

It will take you less than a minute to read this. If you agree, please pass it on. It’s an idea whose time has come to deal with this self-serving situation:

 

OUR PRESENT SITUATION!

 

Children of Congress members do not have to pay back their college student loans.

 

Staffers of Congress family members are also exempt from having to pay back student loans.

 

Members of Congress can retire at full pay after only one term.

 

Members of Congress have exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed, under which ordinary citizens must live.

For example, they are exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment.

 

And as the latest example, they have exempted themselves from Healthcare Reform, in all of its aspects.

 

We must not tolerate an elite class of such people, elected as public servants and then putting themselves above the law.

 

I truly don’t care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent, or whatever. The self-serving must stop.

 

Governors of 35 states have filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon their states. It only takes 38 (of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention.

 

IF???

 

Each person that receives this will forward it on to 20 people, in three days most people in The United States of America will have the message.

 

Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

 

Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the Citizens of the United States …

 

You are one of my 20.