The 9th Court Usurps Power!


Richard Clifton, Michelle Friedland, and William Canby.
Richard Clifton, Michelle Friedland, and William Canby.

9th Circuit Appellate Justices Richard Clifton, Michelle Friedland, and William Canby.

 

Justin Smith reasoning demonstrates the hypocrisy and idiocy of the American Left’s rabid reaction to President Trump temporarily banning immigration and refugees from seven nations that Islamic terrorism is a hotbed of death.

 

JRH 2/14/17

Please Support NCCR

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

The 9th Court Usurps Power!

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 2/13/2017 7:19 AM

 

President Trump doesn’t need to issue any new travel ban order, that may or may not please the anti-American activist judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal or other supporters of Islam and Sharia law (see Justice Elena Kagan’s tenure at Harvard University), open borders and international communism in the Supreme Court and within America’s own population. His original order was well within the U.S. Constitution and the law, and, in order to stop this current intrusion on the President’s authority in areas of foreign policy and national security, a usurpation of power and a judicial coup d’état, President Trump should defy the 9th Court and set to work with the Republican majority and any agreeable Democrats to limit the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction under Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution and reclaim stolen legislative powers for Congress.

 

It has universally been acknowledged for over 230 years that the President, the United States Commander-in-Chief, has broad authority and great leeway in all matters of immigration and foreign policy and national security [Judge Napolitano & NRO], which places the recent ruling of leftist activist judges Michelle Friedland (Obama appointee) and William Canby Jr. (Carter appointee) on par with an act of treason. These two judges are so willing to give President Trump a political black eye, allowing Trump’s “Muslim ban” campaign statements to be used in the evaluation of his executive order, that they have ignored the law, circumvented the Constitution and violated the separation of powers clause between coequal branches of government; and, they have blatantly dismissed the reality  of refugees, who can’t prove who they are and whether or not they have any ties to Islamic terrorist groups, while allowing district judge James Robart, another leftist activist judge (notwithstanding being a Bush appointee), to absurdly overrule the President of the United States on border security during wartime.

 

There is not any manner of violation against the U.S. Constitution and the 1965 Immigration Act in President Trump’s travel ban. Trump isn’t discriminating against anyone, but rather, he is looking at seven nations from a security threat assessment, which were already determined to be state sponsors of terror by former President Obama and his advisors, addressed in Section 1187 (a) (12) of an Obama-era provision of the immigration law.

 

And also in his executive order, President Trump expressly cites 1182 (f), enacted in 1952, which states: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such time as he may deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants … “. [Blog Editor: bold-italics is Editor’s]

 

In 1893, America was detaining approximately 20 percent of all hopeful immigrants reaching Ellis Island, due to sickness and disabilities, and anarchists and the insane were automatically rejected [Blog Editor: History.com point 4-  Immigrants were subject to physical and mental exams to ensure they were fit for admittance to the United States]. About two percent of these immigrants were judged unfit to become U.S. citizens and sent home on the next ship. By the 1920s, our government established quotas based on nationality and skill. And the majority of Americans have always understood that just like anyone has the right to decide who enters their home, so too, our nation has that same sovereign right.

 

No “moral obligation” to these refugees exists that can compel us to allow them to enter without knowing for certain who they are. The moral obligation to open our doors, often mentioned by the Leftists and International Communists, doesn’t mean America must throw reason and caution to the wind.

 

People who do not share our values — Islamofascists seeking to reach America’s shores and murder Americans — and anti-American “refugees” seeking to transform America into a Balkanized hell are not welcome here.

 

Why weren’t all of these anti-American leftist judges evoking Emma Lazarus and Lady Liberty lifting her lamp “beside the golden door” when President Clinton sent little 6 year old Elian Gonzalez back to a communist dictatorship in Cuba, under the executive branch’s broad power? Or when President Obama turned away real refugees fleeing Castro’s oppression “yearning to breathe free“? [Blog Editor: See Also Breitbart & 100% Fed Up]

 

America doesn’t have to destroy its cultural identity by helping foreigners, but this is precisely what Democrat commie bastards such as President Johnson and Senator Ted Kennedy intended to accomplish through the 1965 Immigration Act. This one law has eroded our cultural identity severely and created extremely detrimental demographic changes over time. And most recently, former President Obama specifically brought in one million immigrants from Muslim majority countries like Kosovo, Somalia, Yemen, Afghanistan and Pakistan, even though these countries were the origin of terrorists that have already attacked America.

 

Many of America’s “progressive” Leftists consider the destruction of America, as we know it, to be a desirable goal, however, most Americans reject their fundamental change. Americans who love this country want a strong America, that will be able to defeat the dangerous ideologies currently threatening Western Civilization.

 

Rebuke the disingenuous pious progressives who decry those of us supporting the President’s executive order as anti-immigrant and issue flowery utterances on sanctuary, when sanctuary is for the truly persecuted innocents, like the Christians in the Middle East. Exercising our first responsibility to protect ourselves and Our Beloved America bears no shame.

 

Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ala) stated that Trump’s executive order was “plainly legal” under both statute and the Constitution, adding: “No foreigner has a constitutional right to enter the United States and courts ought not second-guess sensitive national security decisions of the President. This misguided ruling is from the 9th Circuit, the most notoriously left-wing court in America and the most reversed court at the Supreme Court.

 

Representative Mo Brooks (R-Ala) said, “Unfortunately, American lives are at risk until this unfounded and reckless [9th Court restraining] order is reversed by the Supreme Court.”

 

How can Americans trust unreliable and corrupt courts with our national security? The Supreme Court ruled Obamacare to be both constitutional and a tax, after Obama called it a “penalty” for years. The courts have overturned the will of ‘We the People’ in numerous referendums and centuries of traditions and hundreds of state and federal laws, so that they could manufacture non-existent rights to abortion and deviant, perverse homosexual “marriage” [coupling], rights that cannot and never will be found in Madison’s Constitution.

 

Judges and justices are not empowered by the Constitution to make U.S. law or govern the nation. Those duties fall solely to Congress and the President.

 

Pat Buchanan observed on February 10th that President Andrew Jackson defied Chief Justice John Marshall’s “prohibition” against moving the Cherokee Indians across the Mississippi and to the western frontier. He also noted President Lincoln considered sending U.S. troops to arrest Chief Justice Roger Taney, when Taney declared Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus unconstitutional.

 

President Trump must simply defy U.S. District Judge Robart’s overly broad and illegal restraining order, upheld by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal. He must order Homeland Security and his State Department and Justice Department to continue executing his executive order which is in accordance with the U.S. Constitution and existing law, because his act is a rare and righteous moment in this war against terrorism, the Islamofascists, the Radical Left of America and the International Communists, who seek our demise. And a Constitutional crisis is much preferred over more murdered innocent Americans.

 

By Justin O. Smith

_____________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text embraced by brackets and source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

On Defining Religion


nonie-darwish-2-i-will-not-submit

Ex-Muslim Nonie Darwish explains the reasons that Islam has absolutely NO harmony with the Western perception of values and religious freedom. The last sentence of this essay Darwish asks:

 

Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

 

JRH 2/13/17

Please Support NCCR

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

On Defining Religion

 

By Nonie Darwish

February 12, 2017 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam and that Muslims must, sooner or later, demand to live under an Islamic government.

 

  • The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader.

 

  • Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book” — Jews and Christians — but to replace them, after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible.

 

  • Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and it relies on government enforcement to do so.

 

  • Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

 

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) said that President Donald Trump’s 90-day ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries is “a religiously based ban,” and “if they can ban Muslims, why can’t they ban Mormons.” This has become the position of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, which has influenced not only the American public but has convinced the majority of the world that America is “bad.” How can we blame the world, and even a good segment of American citizens, for hating America when such disingenuous and misleading claims are aired to the world from US officials and broadcast by American television channels?

 

The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump Administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader, rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader. He ran as a Republican; meanwhile, Democrats and the mainstream media refuse to engage in respectful and legitimate debate on the most vital threat to Western civilization in the twenty-first century: Islam. Truth has become irrelevant; people seem to prefer a political game of tug-of-war to sway public opinion against the Trump Administration, and, presumably, to elect Democrats forever. That is how the system is set up.

 

Political discussions on television have become extremely frustrating; they have turned into shouting matches and name-calling at the least informative levels. Television hosts often become instigators and participants in the shouting matches. The thinking is apparently that the louder they get, the more attractive the program will be. Meanwhile everyone is talking at once; the viewer cannot hear anyone, so the program could not be more boring.

 

Under the US Constitution, freedom of religion is protected. and Islam has been welcomed inside the West on that basis as one of the three Abrahamic religions. According to Western values and the Western understanding of the word, “religion” is supposed to be a personal relationship with God, where free will is of utmost importance; the believer has authority only over himself or herself when it comes to religious laws or punishing sins (such as leaving the religion or committing adultery) — quite different from criminal laws intended to protect society. Western values also allow followers of a religion the freedom to proselytize, but never by resorting to government enforcement.

 

Bottom line, the Western definition of religion is in harmony with the Biblical values of the human rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that all human beings are created equal under the law. It is considered a basic Western value to view God, family and country as a top priority.

 

Now let us compare these values to Islamic values:

 

  • Muslim citizens have the right to punish other citizens with humiliating, severe, cruel and unusual punishments such as death, flogging and amputation, for sinning against Allah, the Quran or Islam. Those “crimes” include leaving Islam, being a homosexual, or committing adultery. And if the Islamic government does not enforce such punishments, any Muslim on the street has the right to apply the punishment against another Muslim and not be prosecuted. That is why apostates, such as myself, cannot visit any Muslim county; the fear is not only from Islamic governments but from anyone on the street.

 

  • Being a Muslim is not a personal relationship with God, as it is under the Bible, but is enforced by the state at birth. When a child is born in Egypt to a Muslim father, the birth certificate is stamped “Muslim” and all government-issued documents as well. A child must learn Islamic studies in school and practice Islam throughout his life. In Egypt, the twin sons of a Christian divorced mother were forced to take Islamic studies and become Muslim just because their originally-Christian father converted to Islam. Today, in Egypt, I am still considered Muslim and such a status could never change if I ever lived there again.

 

  • Islamic law and leaders rely on government enforcement — under penalty of death — to keep Muslims within Islam and to convert the minority Christian population into Islam. Islamic sharia law, obliges Islamic states to enforce religious law, and if the Muslim head of state refuses to follow religious law, sharia permits the public to use force to remove the head of state from office.

 

  • Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book,” Jews and Christians, but to replace them — after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible. Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and relies on government enforcement to do so.

 

The tenets above are just a few of the differences in values between Islam, the Bible and the Western concept of religion. What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam, and Muslims must demand to live under an Islamic government sooner or later. That might explain the reason for the eternal violence in nearly all Muslim countries, between government being in the hands of a religious theocracy or of the military. Islam, as it is practiced today, has violated all Western definitions of religion and values.

 

Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

 

THE FIRST AMENDMENT

1st-amendment-image-source-brent-payne-flickr

 

___________________

Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of “Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values.”

 

© 2017 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute. [Blog Editor: I did not ask for permission to re-blog this essay from the Gatestone Institute. If requested I will remove the post.]

 

About Gatestone Institute

 

“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.” — John Adams

 

Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

 

  • Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;

 

  • Human Rights

 

  • A free and strong economy

 

  • A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world

 

  • Energy independence

 

  • Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

 

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

 

Gatestone Institute will be publishing books, and continues to publish an online daily report, www.gatestoneinstitute.org, that features topics such as military and diplomatic threats to the United States and our allies; events in the Middle East and READ THE REST

 

Obama’s Insidious CVE


catastrophic-failure-islamic-terrrism

John R. Houk

© February 9, 2017

 

Americans that have not been brainwashed by eight years of the Obama Administration in collusion with the Leftist MSM, should not be surprised at the Dems and media excoriating President Trump’s protection of American from Islamic terrorism.

 

Obama and the Southern Poverty Law Center (More specifics on the SPLC from the Social Contract Press) were fairly successful in purging Law Enforcement of knowledgeable Counter Terrorism experts. Then proceeded to label Conservative organizations, Traditional Values Christian organizations and Counterjihad organizations as bigoted, hate-inspiring, and Islamophobic American right wing terrorists.

 

Check this out:

 

Unreal… Obama’s DHS Continues to Target Conservatives & Liberty Lovers As Terrorists (Video)

 

It’s an Obama bizarro world
The Obama administration holds peace talks with Taliban killers but treats patriotic Americans as terrorists.
Go figure.

 

The Department of Homeland Security is continuing to target patriotic Americans and conservatives who “believe that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack” as terrorists.  They even have this listed in their latest report.
This is unbelievable.

 

VIDEO: DHS continues to target conservatives and ignore Islamists


 

[Not part of Gateway Pundit article but important] Posted by usACTIONnews

Published on Jul 9, 2012

“Groups that believe that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent.” describes potential terrorists? WTH? DHS is using left wing hate groups and even Islamic groups with ties to terrorism as consultants to determine who are threats.

From a Jan, 2011 article “How Dept. of Homeland Security identifies ‘right wing extremists’:

The radical leftist group Southern Poverty Law Center has partnered with the Department of Homeland Security in a ‘Working Group’ called Countering violent Extremism to paint conservatives as hate groups and extremists.

Former Attorney General Edwin Meese says it is “despicable” for the Southern Poverty Law Center to classify the Family Research Council and a dozen other top conservative organizations as “hate groups” similar to the Ku Klux Klan.

The SPLC has a history of targeting conservatives and conservative groups as racist, homophobic, or extremist if they disagree with the radical left positions of the SPLC on any number of issues. An article at Discover the Networks.org says “What makes the Southern Poverty Law Center particularly odious is its habit of taking legitimate conservatives and jumbling them with genuine hate groups (the Klan, Aryan Nation, skinheads, etc.), to make it appear that there’s a logical relationship between say opposing affirmative action and lynching, or demands for an end to government services for illegal aliens and attacks on dark-skinned immigrants. The late novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand called this “the broad-brush smear.””

…..
The SPLC has joined the Department of Homeland Security in a ‘Working Group’ called Countering violent Extremism. John Cohen, President and CEO of SPLC is listed as a member and Laurie Wood, Analyst, Southern Poverty Law Center/Instructor, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center is listed as an ‘expert in subject matter’. The members of the group also include three from Muslim organizations but we don’t see any conservatives. (see the list at the end of the report)

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) which has been determined by the courts to be a terrorist support group proudly points out on their Facebook page that its Michigan members ‘participated a Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Working Group meeting with law enforcement officials and community advocates in Dearborn, Mich.'[ibid].

So we have the Southern Poverty Law Center, also known as The Church of Morris Dees, which calls groups and individuals like the Family Research Council, Eagle Forum, the Heritage Foundation, Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Rep. Steve King (R-IA), and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) ‘right wing extremists’ and the Council on American-Islamic Relations which the FBI has proven to be linked to a terrorist organization teaming up with the US Department of Homeland Security to determine what groups in America should be categorized as ‘extremist’ and potentially violent.

Now you can see why the DHS came out with its Rightwing Extremism report in April of 2009 that warned of potential violence by people against illegal immigration and gun control, and returning military veterans. Now that’s change.

[The rest of the Gateway Pundit article is an excerpt of above info] (Unreal… Obama’s DHS Continues to Target Conservatives & Liberty Lovers As Terrorists (Video); By Jim Hoft; Gateway Pundit; 7/11/12 4:45 am)

 

If you want to see the idiotic SPLC list of legitimate Counterjihadists labelled as dangerous right wing hatemongers, you can go to this one of many titles (this one 10/25/16): “A Journalist’s Manual: Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists”.

 

Here is an excerpt pointing to the Obama purge of anything Islamic from training manuals and official reports:

 

 

In another example of the administration’s ability to make key words disappear, a 2013 Judicial Watch report revealed that the FBI scrubbed its law enforcement training material of any language that might be deemed “offensive” to Muslims. Per those guidelines, hundreds of references to “Muslim,” “Islam” or “jihad” were removed from the 2004 9/11 commission report.

 

U.S. Government Terrorism Terminology References

 

The witnesses provided more evidence to corroborate these findings. Mr. Philip Haney, a retired Customs and Border Protection Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, revealed that the CIA has scrubbed more than 800 law enforcement records that were almost all connected to the Muslim brotherhood.

 

The first “great purge,” he said, was in 2009. Yet, in 2012 they didn’t just modify the records, they eliminated them out of the system, which, he noted, bypasses security protocol in Homeland Security. READ ENTIRETY (Cruz Hearing Exposes the Obama Admin’s History of Purging References to Islamic Terror; By Cortney O’Brien; Townhall; 6/29/16 9:15 AM)

 

More details on the Obama purge by Patrick Poole 3/26/14: “A detailed look at ‘the purge’ of U.S. counter-terrorism training by the Obama administration”.

 

So, why the heck am I rehashing Obama’s treacherous history after a majority of States elected Trump over Crooked Hillary? BECAUSE America’s Left is doing everything from lying, Fake News, civil disturbances, and questionable legal procedures to prevent President Trump from following through on his campaign promises.

 

I was alerted by email via Counterjihadist writer Paul Sutliff, that the Donald is going undo Obama’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) agenda which focused on White Supremacists. Please recall from above, that the Obama Administration lumped Conservatives, Christian Values and Counterjihadists with right wing extremists.

 

The new agenda focus will be Islamic terrorism. Paul Sutliff’s email alerts the reader he has been writing about the CVE agenda for some time:

 

Last night I was about to go to sleep and a friend called full of excitement saying did you see what Trump just did? He ended CVE! CVE is Countering Violent Extremism. I have written a few articles exposing their friendliness with the Muslim Brotherhood and the granting of special privileges for members of the Muslim Brotherhood. I wrote Why is Heritage Foundation Promoting Countering Violent Extremism (CVE)? (Part 1 of 3) on May 13, 2016, I wrote My What Strange Bedfellows the Heritage Foundation Has! on May 26, 2016 which further exposed the CVE and on July 5, 2016 I wrote Countering Violent Extremism: A Ghost Buster Solution to a Real World Problem. These articles earned me an interview with Vlad Tepes of TheRebel.media. Maybe Trump is reading my stuff, but I think it is more likely that he has hired good people!

 

SO imagine my excitement with that news! All I can say now is thank you Mr. President. You have earned my prayers and respect.

 

Get informed on Obama’s CVE in Paul’s articles linked above. For your convenience, I am cross posting the Tepes-Sutliff interview from The Rebel linked above.

 

JRH 2/9/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Paul Sutliff interview (Part II): “Countering Violent Extremism” strategy is anything but

 

Posted by VICTOR LASZLO

REBEL COMMENTATOR

July 16, 2016

The Rebel

 

This is the second part of the interview with Paul Sutliff. Paul explains the US Government’s use of the office of Countering Violent Extremism to assist the Muslim Brotherhood, and of all things, fund mosques.

 

VIDEO: Paul Sutliff interview Part II The CVE


 

Posted by Vlad Tepes

Published on Jul 16, 2016

 

The first part of the interview can be seen here at The Rebel. 

 

His books can be purchased at Amazon.com

Civilization Jihad and the Myth of Moderate Islam

and Stealth Jihad two: American Colleges. 

 

Paul’s website is here.

 

At the end of the interview, Paul mentions Stephen Coughlin, the retired Maj. who was in Army intelligence. His website is hereand an interview he did for the Rebel can be seen here.

 

+++

Blog Editor: Here is a cross post from PJ Media by Patrick Poole CVE:

******

Trump Seeks to End Obama’s ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ Scam

 

By PATRICK POOLE

FEBRUARY 5, 2017

PJ Media

 

Among the litany of Obama administration disasters, the rapid collapse of his “Countering Violent Extremism” (CVE) agenda is among the most consequential.

 

But groups in line to receive federal CVE grants announced just days before the end of the Obama era are now whining as the Trump administration seeks to put an end to the CVE scam.

 

Driven directly from the White House, the Obama administration’s CVE agenda was a replacement following a purge of counter-terrorism training across the federal government during 2011-2012 in response to a targeted series of reports by far-Left bloggers and reporters claiming widespread bias and “Islamophobia.”

 

Many of those claims were later debunked, but with the damage done the administration’s purge pressed ahead as it implemented CVE at the demand of Islamic groups, some of whom were directly involved in the formation of the administration’s CVE policies.

 

But as it became apparent that terror recruitment was escalating rapidly at nearly the same time that CVE was being imposed on agencies and departments across the board, the inability of CVE to actually countering any “extremists” was exposed. The same Islamic groups that urged the imposition of CVE then turned against the efforts when they realized that CVE was still primarily directed at the growing threat of Islamic recruitment, and not towards stigmatizing the administration’s perceived domestic political enemies.

 

By January 2015, Politico was already declaring that CVE was a complete flop:

 

POLITICO

@politico

 

No answer for homegrown terrorism? Obama’s plan to combat radicalization is a flop, critics say.

POLITICO Twitter Photo

 

No answer for homegrown terrorism?

Obama’s plan to combat radicalism is a flop critics say.

politico.com

 

The CVE pilot programs in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and Boston were already so unsuccessful that the media had to announce they were off to a “slow start” a year ago:

 

WTOP

@WTOP

 

Effort in 3 US cities to combat extremism off to slow start https://t.co/4DMrdthiUn 

 

8:30 AM – 24 Mar 2016

 

The failures of the program were so pronounced that NPR conceded the point, claiming that even if the CVE programs were not effective they still somehow helped the communities.

 

NPR Popular 

@nprpopular

 

Whether It Works Or Not, U.S. Anti-Radicalization Plan Can Benefit Communities https://t.co/Xn34FdLc4N 

 

7:15 AM – 3 Apr 2016

 

As I noted in an assessment of Obama’s CVE policies here at PJ Media last year, and in a separate monographmeasuring Obama’s policies by his own stated White House goals, the CVE program was proven to be a complete failure in the very three areas it was intended to support: community engagement, training, and counter-propaganda.

 

It’s no surprise then that one of the first moves by the Trump administration will be to shut down the failed CVE program, as reported by Reuters:

 

Reuters Top News

@Reuters

 

Exclusive: Trump to focus counter-extremism program solely on Islam – sources https://t.co/9wHw9pKAn6 

 

Trump – CVE

 

7:11 PM – 1 Feb 2017

 

That decision in turn set off a wave of complaints by groups that were hoping to receive federal CVE grants that were rushed out by the Obama administration in its last few days in office:

 

CVE Community 

@CVEcommunity

 

Statement by @DHSgov‘s Jeh Johnson Announcing 1st Round of Countering Violent Extremism Grants

 

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/01/13/statement-secretary-jeh-johnson-announcing-first-round-dhss-countering-violent #CVE #PVE

 

2:58 PM – 13 Jan 2017

 

Those would-be federal grant recipients are now turning to the media to air their complaints:

 

Adam Goldman

@adamgoldmanNYT

 

Pointing to Trump, Groups Reject U.S. Aid to Fight Extremism w/@mattapuzzo https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/us/politics/trump-muslim-groups-aid-extremism.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share 

 

5:09 PM – 2 Feb 2017

 

One of the first groups that took to the media was the Twin Cities-based Ka Joog (which in Somali means “stay away”). Ka Joog had already been one of the groups to receive $300,000 in federal money and another $250,000 appropriated by the state of Minnesota, and was in line to receive another $500,000 federal grant from Homeland Security.

 

Star Tribune 

@StarTribune

 

Citing “unofficial war on Muslim-Americans” launched by Trump, Minneapolis nonprofit rejects $500,000 federal grant https://t.co/lIlfSIw5j5 

 

12:25 AM – 2 Feb 2017

 

AVE 

@ave_org

 

Somali nonprofits get federal grants to counter extremism, Minneapolis #CVE https://t.co/obtvf32BuV 

 

7:30 AM – 19 Jan 2017

 

Ka Joog has been one of the premier programs that CVE defenders have pointed to in calling for additional funding for the CVE program.

 

And yet in one of the group’s most visible failuresthe nephew of the organization’s executive director was recruited by the Islamic State and eventually tried and convicted in federal court.

 

Another Twin Cities groups, Heartland Democracy, was scheduled to receive $165,000.

 

That group had been among the first to participate in a pet “deradicalization” project by the chief federal judge in Minnesota who tried many of the Islamic State recruiting cases.

 

But court documents exposed that Heartland Democracy had no experience in “jihadi rehab,” and its curriculum was described as “more high school civics course than religious deprogramming.”

 

The Daily Beast

@thedailybeast

 

Group With No Jihadi Experience Rehabs ISIS Recruit: http://t.co/8jWwAioziU 

 

8:35 AM – 25 Aug 2015

 

The Daily Beast reported on the regimen established for their first “deradicalization” client:

 

He and a Somali-American mentor began to work through an extensive reading list, which included Richard Wright’s Native Son, a novel about growing up poor and black in the 1930s, and an article by Native American author Sherman Alexie about how poetry freed him from the “reservation” of his mind.

 

McKinley would not say how often Yusuf met his mentor.

 

“We met with him regularly, I don’t know the number of times a week,” she said. When pressed on whether they met weekly, biweekly, or at a different pace, McKinley would not clarify. “We met with him regularly.”

 

Court documents also reference Yusuf meeting with religious leaders, but McKinley wasn’t sure about that.

 

“I don’t know if he’s met with any religious leaders,” she said in response to a question about meeting with imams. “I mean, he’s an adult, he can get any visitor he wants.”

 

That first client was sent back to jail after a search of his room at a halfway house found a box cutter.

 

The Obama administration’s CVE programs have a lengthy history of failure:

 

  • As I reported here at PJ Media just a few days ago, an Associated Press investigation into the Pentagon’s $500 million WebOps program to counter Islamic State propaganda found widespread incompetence and corruption. According to whistleblowers, civilian Arabic specialists with no understanding of Islam tried to defeat complex religious justifications for terrorism, resulting in the program becoming a laughingstock in jihadist circles.

 

  • In December 2014, the New York Times reported that the then-head of Special Operations Command, Major Gen. Michael Nagata, convened a series of conference calls with outside experts attempting to understand why the message of the Islamic State had grown so dangerous. But after the Obama administration’s counter-terror training purge, Gen. Nagata was forced to admit that “we do not understand the movement, and until we do, we are not going to defeat it….We have not defeated the idea. We do not even understand the idea.

 

  • In September 2011, Obama signed an executive order creating the State Department’s Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications (CSCC).One of their early failures was a graphic video produced called “Welcome to ISIS Land,” targeting would-be Islamic State recruits. The center’s director was quickly replaced. Then a Twitter campaign, “Think Again Turn Away,” was largely panned by terror experts who claimed the effort was largely ineffective and was actually legitimizing the terrorist narrative. A panel of outside experts convened by the State Department agreed, finding that the CSCC was so counterproductive to its mission that they questioned whether the U.S. government should be involved in counter-propaganda at all. The center was promptly closed.

 

  • One of the first CVE guidelines produced by the Department of Homeland Security in 2011 was to instruct federal agencies to avoid using “trainers who are self-professed ‘Muslim Reformers,'” and yet documents uncovered regarding meetings with DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano show the agency soliciting advice from known extremist groups and controversial Islamic leaders. Some of these extremist leaders even held official positions advising DHS. Last June, when the DHS Countering Violent Extremism Subcommittee released its recommendations urging $100 million in new CVE funding, it urged banning the use of “jihad” or “sharia” in training — two very common terms used by terrorist recruiters. One of the subcommittee members, a Syrian immigrant, had previously said that the 9/11 terror attacks had “changed the world for good.” And in DecemberDHS teamed up with the State Department to bring in the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an organization that the Justice Department had argued in federal court had supported terrorism, to teach a CVE course for French officials. Even though the State Department programs have been universally panned, it was reported last August that they had tripled the budget.

 

  • In implementing the Obama administration’s CVE agenda, the FBI had conducted a wide-scale purge of its terrorism training curriculum at the request of Islamic groups claiming it was biased. In a move questioned by members of Congress, the FBI classified the identities of the outside experts brought in to censor the material. A subsequent review of the censored terror-training material discovered suspect and inconsistent standards in purging the curriculum. More recently, a FBI website and video game (“Don’t Be a Puppet”) intended to target youth vulnerable to terrorist recruitment was launched, and then suspended after just a day in response to complaints of Islamic groups, terror experts, and even teachers unions that the effort was biased, ineffective, and encouraged students to inform on each other. Some of the criticism came from the FBI’s own Muslim outreach partners that were brought in to advise the bureau on its CVE policies.

 

So it’s no great mystery why the incoming Trump administration began discussions about scaling back and ending Obama’s CVE program.

 

Others contend that the CVE grants were political payoffs to groups to enlist their aid in scuttling counter-terror programs and to silence any possible criticism of the Obama national security and foreign policy agenda.

 

The chairman of one group that was scheduled to receive a $400,000 CVE grant, Life After Hate, has publicly launched attacks on the incoming Trump administration and even called for the violent removal of President Trump one day after his inauguration.

 

Meanwhile in Minneapolis, as Ka Joog declines the $500,000 in announced DHS CVE grants the group has quickly transitioned from attempting to deradicalizing area Somali youth to publicly declaring that President Trump is engaged in “an official war against Islam” — parroting a standard terrorist narrative.

 

But as mentioned previously, the nephew of the executive director who had participated in Ka Joog programs was still recruited to join the Islamic State.

 

In another instance, an Islamic State recruit from Alexandria, Virginia, later captured by Kurdish troops and currently facing federal charges, lived less than 50 yards from one of the Obama administration’s top go-to CVE experts.

 

If these so-called CVE “experts” can’t prevent their closest relatives or neighbors from joining terrorist groups, why should the Trump administration continue to entrust them with our national security?

 

Despite all the media hand-wringing, it seems that questioning the effectiveness of Obama’s CVE program is entirely in order given its constant track record of failure.

 

Yet in light of the current media climate, the new administration should expect that it will come under fire for whatever they eventually replace the failed CVE agenda with. And the Islamic State and other terrorist groups continue to recruit and encourage supporters to conduct attacks inside the homeland.

 

Ending the CVE scam would be a good first step in reversing the corrosive policies established by the Obama administration that have hampered and sometimes punished our law enforcement and national security professionals for doing their job.

___________________

Obama’s Insidious CVE

John R. Houk

© February 9, 2017

_________________

 

Paul Sutliff interview (Part II): “Countering Violent Extremism” strategy is anything but

 

Copyright © TheRebel.media. Some rights reserved.

 

___________________

Trump Seeks to End Obama’s ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ Scam

 

Copyright © 2005-2017 PJ Media All Rights Reserved.

 

 

ONLY Refugees that Support U.S. Constitution


want-muslim-refugees-next-door

John R. Houk

© January 30, 2017

 

Leo Hohmann has typed an article warning that Homeland chaos is on the way to confront Trump’s campaign promises on illegal immigrants and Muslim refugees. To be honest the article is also a WND promo for Hohmann’s book “STEALTH INVASION: MUSLIM CONQUEST THROUGH IMMIGRATION AND RESETTLEMENT JIHAD”. If the stealth-invasion-bk-jkbook is as informative as the Hohmann article, it is a must to get a hold of.

 

I pray political correctness does not pressure President Trump to cave in on his campaign promises on vetting Muslim Refugees. I have noticed the MSM has gone out of its way to highlight so-called peaceful Muslims out of the USA doing business yet now are not allowed back in to see their families residing on American soil.

 

Off the top of my head (no pun intended), a Muslim Ethiopian who is a British citizen has resided in Oregon for ten years. He communicated to his family in Oregon he may not be back to see them in Oregon for some time because he is a Muslim.

 

This is an example of crap news coming from the American Left.

 

ONE: The Trump EO refers to refugees from seven particular nations. NOT Muslims!

TWO: If the Ethiopian is a British citizen residing in Oregon already for ten years, he is not subject to the 7-nation refugee moratorium – HE’S A BRIT.

 

These kinds of stories are pure poppycock.

 

On the other hand, I do realize there are already unvetted Muslim refugees on American soil largely due to Obama’s Multiculturalist agenda. These refugees may have expected some family members from the 7-nation refugee moratorium and now there is a freeze for at least 90 days. That doesn’t mean those family members have a radical Muslim agenda against the USA. IT DOES MEAN those family members must be vetted to insure they have no hatred of America or any nefarious designs based on potential hatred. So, protest all you want. The USA has no need for foreign American-hating Muslims that feel they are on a divine Quranic mission.

 

Yesterday I blogged on some AWESOME vetting technology that President Trump could employ to make the vetting process move faster. The technology is called “COGITO”.

 

Now back to the Hohmann article.

 

Hohmann believes there are what he calls three flashpoints that will inspire the “global Islamic movement and its allies on the political left” to “confront” Trump’s policies:

 

  • Moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem

 

  • Declaring the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization

 

  • Restricting Islamic immigration into the U.S.

 

Trump confront back and I believe he will. BUT – If for some reason the American Left hamstrings President Trump, there is a Second Amendment option for private citizens to organize and confront back on American soil. Begin with confrontational peaceful protest. Then if the American Left and/or Muslims supporting Islamic Salafist ideology ups the ante with violence, be prepared to ante up ourselves.

 

JRH 1/30/17

Please Support NCCR

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

3 ‘TRIGGERS’ FOR ISLAMIC UPRISING UNDER TRUMP PRESIDENCY

Airport protests just the start of ‘chaos’ planned by Muslim Brotherhood

 

By LEO HOHMANN

Updated: 01/29/2017 at 10:52 PM

WND

 

airport-protests-led-by-cair-per-trump-immigration-eo

Major airports saw protests led by CAIR and other groups in defense of continued, unrestricted immigration from seven countries President Donald Trump says are harboring terrorists.

 

A former Homeland Security officer who spent years screening Muslim immigrants points to three “triggers” of confrontation between the new administration of Donald Trump and the global Islamic movement.

 

These three issues will spawn a violent backlash in response to Trump as he attempts to implement what many believe are long-overdue reforms.

 

And Trump has already bumped head-on into one of the hot-button issues – Muslim immigration.

 

Philip B. Haneyphilip-haney

 

According to Phillip Haney, a founding member of the Homeland Security Department and author of the book “See Something Say Nothing,” the stars are lining up for a major confrontation with the global Islamic movement and its allies on the political left.

 

The “flashpoints” to watch going forward are these:

 

  • Moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem

 

  • Declaring the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization

 

  • Restricting Islamic immigration into the U.S.

 

Trump’s executive orders slapping a 120-day moratorium on refugee resettlement and a 30-day ban on those entering on visas from seven terror-sponsoring countries has been met with protests Sunday at airports in New York, Chicago, Atlanta, Detroit and Minneapolis.

 

In Hamtramck, Michigan, the nation’s first city to elect a Muslim-majority city council, protesters descended on City Hall Sunday with signs that included “Ban Bannon” and “We are all Immigrants.”

 

There were no such protests when former President Obama restricted Christian refugees from entering the U.S. from Syria, Egypt, Pakistan and other Muslim countries.

 

As Trump tries to rein in concessions given to the Muslim Brotherhood by the previous administrations of Clinton, Bush and Obama, he should expect the Brotherhood and its allies on the left to push back with hell’s fury, Haney said.

 

There will be lawsuits, ugly protests, and an all-out effort to create chaos in the streets of U.S. cities, he predicts.

 

What do YOU think? Are you concerned about an Islamic backlash to Trump? Sound off in the WND Poll!

 

The reason is simple. This isn’t 1968 or even 1978, when Islam in America consisted primarily of a few thousand Nation of Islam and Black Panther activists.

 

Islam, particularly the Salafist brand of Sunni Islam promoted by the Muslim Brotherhood, whose stated goal is to spread Shariah throughout the world, has been allowed to establish a major foothold in America.

 

More than 300 U.S. cities and towns have been stacked with Sharia-compliant Muslims through refugee resettlement and myriad other visa programs that have been expanding for four decades.

 

Meanwhile, groups that agitate for Muslim “civil rights,” which tend to manifest as special privileges not afforded to Christians, have been empowered. Thanks to the expanded immigration, the U.S. Muslim population has exploded to 3.3 million, the number of mosques has grown exponentially and the Council on American Islamic Relations or CAIR is now a force to be reckoned with despite its ties to extremist organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, Haney said.

 

“There’s this concept of the observant Muslim base, it’s a global observant base, and that’s what the Muslim Brotherhood has done here in America since the 1960s is build up that observant Muslim base,” Haney said.

 

America is on the same suicidal path as Europe but is it too late for Donald Trump to fix the problem? Get all the facts in Leo Hohmann’s brand-new investigative book “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and Resettlement Jihad.”

 

In a document seized by the FBI and presented at a terror-financing trial in Texas in 2007, the Brotherhood referred to this process as building “settlements” in the U.S. that would eventually subjugate all other religions.  Doubters can read the Brotherhood’s strategy in the Brotherhood’s own words in a document titled the “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.”

 

Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Russia have all banned the Muslim Brotherhood for its terrorist connections and seditious strategies.

 

A bill on Congress, the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act, would do the same thing, declaring CAIR and other Brotherhood-affiliated group as terrorists.

 

“Now the U.S. has a new president who is considering doing the same thing and CAIR is crying about Islamophobia,” Haney said. “And that’s why they need to be designated as terrorists.”

 

Trump is already showing a pattern, a trend of behaviors, which indicates he plans to follow through with campaign promises related to Israel, terrorism and immigration, Haney said.

 

The main school of Islamic jurisprudence in North America, the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America or AMJA, issued a fatwa which it called a “roadmap” for Muslim reaction in the wake of Trump’s election victory.

 

“They are expecting him to actually do what he said, so the AMJA steps in and provides a Shariah-compliant roadmap on the way that they should respond,” Haney said. “They have set the parameters of the acceptable response based on Shariah law. They included not only 32 Quranic verses woven into the roadmap but several other references to the hadith.

 

“The AMJA put this statement out and mobilized the observant Muslim base calling on them to be prepared to respond.”

 

And it’s not just Muslims who will join in this monumental push back against Trump.

 

As seen at protests in major U.S. airports Sunday, the radical left is eager to take up the crusade of Muslim activism. Haney says it’s not just American Muslims who will join this fight, either, but global Islamic extremists who are invested in destroying Israel, propping up the Muslim Brotherhood, and continuing the flow of Shariah-compliant Muslims from the Middle East into Western democracies.

 

“These three points will trigger conflict between the global Islamic community and the Trump administration,” he told WND. “There aren’t any other issues that have the volatility to precipitate actions up to and including violence.”

 

Haney said the three trigger points will affect three different areas: The Israel policy will affect the political arena, the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist declaration will affect law enforcement, and the immigration issue will affect the fabric of American society, halting the process of Islamization and civilization jihad that has been steadily occurring for the last 35 years and which was placed into overdrive under Barack Obama.

 

“It’s not about Trump. It’s about America,” Haney said. “America has had the audacity to pick someone different from what the world wanted, which was someone who would not be submissive to the global Islamic movement. So America is now going to become the focus of this backlash.”

 

In fact, the hardcore Islamic extremists affiliated with the Brotherhood and their allies among the hardcore left are already mobilizing a pushback for the cause of Shariah law. These troops have enjoyed complete cooperation from the U.S. government over the last eight years, Haney said, and to an extent for the last 20 years going back to the Bushes and Clintons. All of these administrations reached out to the Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations for advice and counsel, inviting them to the White House, the State Department, and the departments of Homeland Security and Justice.

 

Trump has signaled a different approach by talking about moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, declaring the Brotherhood a terrorist organization and restricting Muslim immigration while shifting the government’s focus to rescuing Christian refugees. These were three untouchables under previous U.S. administrations and by even talking about these actions Trump must be prepared for a strong reaction, both foreign and domestic, Haney says.

 

The Brotherhood’s self-avowed goal is to spread Shariah around the globe. In the U.S., it works through a network of alphabet-soup organization that include CAIR, the Muslim Student Association or MSA, the Islamic Society of North America or ISNA, the Islamic Circle of North America or ICNA, and the Muslim American Society or MAS.

 

These Brotherhood-linked groups work to infiltrate and influence America’s critical institutions –government and law enforcement, the educational system and the nation’s churches and synagogues. The overall goal of this three-pronged attack is to wear down these institutions’ defenses to Shariah concepts, such as the idea that criticism of Islam or its prophet is off limits and makes one an “Islamophobe” worthy of second-class status. Criticism of Christianity continues to be popular sport in American society but criticism of Islam is socially unacceptable in the media, pop culture, business, academia or law enforcement. This is essentially a voluntary implementation of the Islamic blasphemy law – which is the beginning of Shariah – Haney says.

 

The most important Islamic voice to watch in America is the AMJA – the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America. This is the group of scholars that Muslim clerics look to for guidance on what to teach in America’s mosques, more than 75 percent of which have been funded by Saudi Arabia and 85 percent of which are led by foreign-born imams.

 

The AMJA issued a fatwa following Trump’s election, offering a “roadmap” forward on how U.S. Muslims should react to the changes Trump might try to implement. This roadmap informed the U.S. Muslim community that the rise of Trump held the potential to be a “calamity” for their future in this country.

 

While urging them not to panic, the AMJA then dropped the bombshell that the “worst of the worst” in America were those who try to destroy Muslim civil rights organizations, a direct reference to CAIR, ISNA, MSA and their overarching sponsor, the Muslim Brotherhood. The fatwa went on to warn Muslims that they may have to take drastic actions that they don’t want to take but which will please Allah, quoting almost word for word from the Quran.

 

America is on the same suicidal path as Europe but is it too late for Donald Trump to fix the problem? Get all the facts in Leo Hohmann’s brand-new investigative book “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and Resettlement Jihad.”

 

“It’s all intertwined,” said Haney. “It’s all coming together as we predicted.”

 

Watch video trailer for “Stealth Invasion,” which former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is calling “the must-read book of 2017.”

 

VIDEO: Stealth Invasion – Official Trailer

 

Posted by WNDTV

Published on Dec 21, 2016

 

Use the PROMO CODE Stealth25 when you order Stealth Invasion from the WND Superstore and you’ll receive 25% off your purchase: http://superstore.wnd.com/Stealth-Invasion-Muslim-Conquest-Through-Immigration-and-Resettlement-Jihad-Hardcover

Civilization jihad calls for changing a nation by changing its people and its values—gradually, over time.

Stealth Invasion blows the lid off a corrupt, fraudulent program that has been secretly dumping Third World refugees, many of them radical, on American cities for three decades.

Americans have been kept largely in the dark about the radical plans to permanently transform their nation. Until now.

 

After Trump announced the first round of his border security and immigration crackdowns Wednesday, CAIR Director Nihad Awad immediately ramped up his rhetoric. He denounced the administration’s actions as “Islamophobic” and compared refusing Muslim refugees to previous U.S. policies of “slavery” and denying women the vote.

 

These are fighting words, Haney said, and sure enough CAIR’s chapters in New York and Dallas responded with their own press conferences, tweets and rallies denouncing Trump.

 

CAIR was also front and center in the protests at American airports Sunday.

 

This is just the beginning of what will be an ongoing battle of wills between Trump’s administration and the Shariah-supportive Muslim community that feels emboldened by its allies in the media and among what are mainly Marxist and left-leaning professors, lawyers and community organizers, Haney said.

 

Haney, who co-authored the whistleblower book “See Something Say Nothing” upon leaving DHS, says to watch the three trigger points going forward.

 

Any one of those three issues will be viewed as part of the “calamity” that the AMJA roadmap fatwa warned was coming under a Trump administration.

 

Trump will be challenged to find some Muslims who are not affiliated with Brotherhood organizations and give them a voice that offers an alternative to the intolerance and extremism put forth by CAIR, which has direct ties to Hamas and has had nearly a dozen of its current and former leaders investigated and charged with terrorist-related crimes.

 

See WND’S Rogue’s gallery of terror-tied CAIR officials

 

Trump comments about moving the embassy to Jerusalem reverberated all the way to the slums of Sadr City in Iraq, where Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr said a U.S. Jerusalem embassy would be tantamount to an all-out war against Islam.

 

“Just the fact that our ambassador said he will move his residence to Jerusalem is provocative enough,” Haney said. “It’s a declaration of war against the USA, and Sadr is saying the Shia will fill in the void if Sunnis don’t do what they’re supposed to do.”

 

On the immigration front, Trump said he plans to restrict visa permits for 30 days from seven Islamic countries, Somalia, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sudan and Libya, while pausing all refugee resettlements for four months or until “extreme vetting” practices can be developed.

 

These would seem to be rather mild responses to the uptick in Islamic terrorism both in Europe and the United States over the last three years. Jihadist attacks on U.S. soil have included the Boston Marathon bombing, the knife attacks at a mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota, and at Ohio State University, the Orlando nightclub mass shooting, the Chattanooga shooting at a Navy recruitment center, the pipe bombing in Manhattan, and the San Bernardino shooting. All of these attacks were carried out by Muslim immigrants or sons of Muslim immigrants.

 

But the Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations know the importance of the Islamic principle of al hijra, the Arabic term for “migration.” Their prophet, Muhammad, used it to perfection in his conquering of Medina back in the seventh century and it has been a favorite tactic of Shariah-adherent Muslims ever since.

 

The prayer by Imam Mohamed Magid at Trump’s inaugural prayer service in the National Cathedral last Saturday amounted to a “a signal flag,” to the Muslim community, Haney said. “The context of the verse he quoted from the Quran just happens to be related to the AMJA roadmap fatwa, so what he did was he waved a signal flag and told the Islamic community, here I am, I’m making a declaration that we should stand up and oppose the calamity of the Trump administration.”

 

Magid’s Muslim Brotherhood credentials are impressive. He’s past-president of ISNA, he served on Obama’s CVE or “countering violent extremism” steering committee and he is imam of the ADAMS mosque that was at one time under investigation by the federal government for ties to Hamas. And if that’ snot enough, he’s listed on the AMJA website as a shake and a fatwa expert. A shake in Islam is higher than imam.

 

“That means he’s a trained Shariah specialist,” Haney said. “But here he is at the National Cathedral in Washington delivering an inauguration prayer.”

 

Haney goes back to the allegory Trump used of draining the water out of the swamp.

 

“Your work really begins after the water is taken out,” he said. “You have to see what is actually buried down in the muck and mire. And if Trump has experts who are qualified to go in and conduct a forensic analysis, they’re going to find all kinds of stuff there and it will set in motion a whole sequence of events, if they can catch their breath and take a look at it. It will set off a sequence of events that will allow law enforcement and immigration officials to honestly evaluate the status of our current immigration policies and they’re going to find that there are a lot of problems with it, whether it’s the State Department issuing visas to folks they shouldn’t be, the way the USCS process people coming into the country on visas and green cards, all the way to the United Nations itself and how it does the initial selection and vetting of the refugees.

 

“So this examination, if it is thorough, is going to set off a lot of events that are going to expose the methods of the Obama administration as providing no oversight or protection whatsoever.”

__________________

ONLY Refugees that Support U.S. Constitution

John R. Houk

© January 30, 2017

_________________

3 ‘TRIGGERS’ FOR ISLAMIC UPRISING UNDER TRUMP PRESIDENCY

 

© Copyright 1997-2017. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

Terrorism and COGITO


cogito

John R. Houk

© January 29, 2017

Rachel Ehrenfeld writes about the extreme vetting process that President Trump could use to quickly detect if a person has terrorist designs against the United States. Ehrenfeld has an idea based on some technology created in Israel yet commissioned by the United States Department of Homeland Security.

Check out this quote from Ehrenfeld on the technology:

An effective way to find out the applicant’s intentions would be screening through an efficient, unbiased, and non-intrusive system.  Such a system was developed by an Israeli company with a grant from the Department of Homeland Security, which the Obama administration refused to utilize.

 

The Suspect Detection System (SDS) has developed counter-terrorist and insider threat detection technology named COGITO.  This technology enables law enforcement agencies to rapidly investigate U.S. visa applicants (and other travelers) entering the country, insider threats among employees, etc.

 

COGITO technology is an automated interrogation system that can determine in 5-7 minutes if an individual is harboring hostile intent.  The system interviews the examinee with up to 36 questions while measuring the psychophysical signals of the human body.  The system has 95% accuracy and has helped security agencies globally to catch terrorists and solve crimes.

I did a little looking into this COGITO technology. My impression is the concept was initially developed for companies to use to vet their new employees with something more efficiency than a lengthy lie detector test. Evidently the COGITO technology can be streamlined for many psych detection purposes including terrorism.

In the process of investigating “COGITO” I discovered it is not an acronym for some scientific gizmo, rather it is an actual word. Here is an interesting definition for “cogito”:

1: the philosophical principle that one’s existence is demonstrated by the fact that one thinks

2: the intellectual processes of the self or ego

Origin and Etymology of cogito

New Latin cogito, ergo sum, literally, I think, therefore I am, principle stated by René Descartes
First Known Use: 1838 (Definition of cogito; Merriam-Webster)

Apparently SDS technology has taken a philosophical and retrofitted it to a psychological examination of discovering – so-to-speak – who a person is.

Here is the short version of the SDS COGITO technology that can be employed:

Suspect Detection Systems Inc.’s Cogito Data Center (Cogito DC) is a central knowledgebase and control server that serves as a complete analytical back office to the Cogito Rapid Interrogation System. Cogito DC will enable SDS customers to create a central storage base of all examinee data. The interrogation system collects an vast amount of data with each examination beginning with a scan of the examinees passport or identification card. The system then scans unique biometric identification information including fingerprint and iris (eye) imaging, and voice signature. The Cogito DC knowledgebase then aggregates and analyzes the interrogation results of all examinees. The system compares test results of potential suspects from common backgrounds, which then enables interrogators to perform intelligence analysis over the entire scope of collected metadata. (Cogito Data Center; SUSPECT DETECTION SYSTEMS INC.)

And here is an excerpt from the longer version of the technology behind COGITO:

General

The COGITO system is a technology-based concept and solution for the detection of suspects harboring malicious intent serves for detection of “Internal Threat” (employees of governmental agencies and enterprises that have destructive intents), Police interrogations and border security. The COGITO concept is derived from extensive interdisciplinary know-how in security, polygraph testing and field-proven security-related interrogation techniques.

The COGITO core technology is based on proprietary software – an “expert system” that emulates an investigator’s Modus Operandi by incorporating “soft decision-making” algorithms such as “Neural Networks” and “Fuzzy Logic”. All hardware elements are best-of-breed off-the-shelf third-party components. The technical solution is comprised of a front-end, the ‘Test Station’, and a back-office where multiple-station and multiple-site data is stored, managed and distributed.

COGITO presents a significant conceptual breakthrough that can assist international aviation and homeland security authorities in responding to increasingly sophisticated means of international terrorism. This concept is based on several well-established paradigms and assumptions.

Intent vs. Means

The COGITO concept focuses on detecting terrorist (malicious) intent as opposed to detecting the means (i.e. explosives or weapons). The value of detecting intent is based on several well-founded and proven assumptions. As proven in the 9/11 and many other terrorist attacks when entering a country, terrorists will not necessarily carry weapons or devices on their person. This has been well demonstrated in several international terror attacks. Moreover, terrorists with intent of perpetrating a chemical, biological or atomic terrorist attack are all the more not likely to carry such devices on their person while entering the United States through an official checkpoint or border crossing.

Stimulated Psycho Physical Reaction (SPPR)

The COGITO method is based on stimulating examinees with specific terrorism-related triggers using a “direct contact, interaction, conscious, portal” approach:

The COGITO method postulates that specific words or questions can force terrorist to generate a SPPR that is identifiably different than that of a non-terrorist’s SPPR to the same words or questions. Based on extensive field experience accumulated by Israeli security agencies, the only common characteristic to all suicide bombers and “effective terrorists” is their desire not to be caught by security authorities. The terrorist’s fundamental motivation to successfully perform the terrorist act and not be caught by security authorities clearly differentiates him from the innocent person not harboring such intent. This identifiable motivation is known as the “terrorist hunting–hunted syndrome” (THHS). In order to identify and isolate the terrorist, one needs to READ THE REST ([COGITO] TECHNOLOGY; Suspect Detection Systems: Human Psychophysiology Behavour Analysis)

On a personal level and at least a palpable negative argument for this rather quick vetting process, I think this is something President Trump should seriously take a look at! ESPECIALLY since President Barack Hussein Obama rejected this technology as a foreign immigrant vetting process.

Now for the Rachel Ehrenfeld article.

JRH 1/29/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Protecting America from ill-intended refugees

 

By Rachel Ehrenfeld @ American Thinker

January 28th, 2017 2:17PM

American Center for Democracy (ACD)

This is an updated version of the article on American ThinkerProtecting America from ill-intended refugees – 

President Donald Trump’s executive order on “Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks by Foreign Nationals,” has been met, as anticipated, with alarm by opponents at home and abroad. Some resent the new American president and his actions to protect the country, as he promised to do. Others, like the Muslim Brotherhood’s affiliated Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), protest the suspension of U.S. visas to Muslim refugees and travelers from the radical -Islamic-terrorist prone countries Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, and Somalia.

His executive order proclaims (emphasis added): “The United States must be vigilant during the visa issuance process to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism. In order to protect Americans, we must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes towards our country and its founding principles. Section 2 of the active order states that the policy of the U.S. is “(a) protect our citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States; and (b) prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes.”

To prevent such individuals from entering the U.S., the executive order requests the development of a uniform screening program, which in fact would reinforce requirements that have been deliberately ignored by the Obama administration.

However, radical-Islamic terrorists are not limited to the countries list by the EO. There are unknown numbers of ISIS volunteers who returned to Europe and other Western nations, which the new EO exempts. But even if the screening is done by the book, and all necessary documentation has been obtained and verified, and the applicant declares he holds no ill intentions toward America and Americans, nothing available to the screeners today would easily reveal that he or she is lying.

An effective way to find out the applicant’s intentions would be screening through an efficient, unbiased, and non-intrusive system.  Such a system was developed by an Israeli company with a grant from the Department of Homeland Security, which the Obama administration refused to utilize.

The Suspect Detection System (SDS) has developed counter-terrorist and insider threat detection technology named COGITO.  This technology enables law enforcement agencies to rapidly investigate U.S. visa applicants (and other travelers) entering the country, insider threats among employees, etc.

COGITO technology is an automated interrogation system that can determine in 5-7 minutes if an individual is harboring hostile intent.  The system interviews the examinee with up to 36 questions while measuring the psychophysical signals of the human body.  The system has 95% accuracy and has helped security agencies globally to catch terrorists and solve crimes.

According to the company’s website, the SDS allows the screening of a large number of people in a short time. It “does not require operator training. One operator can handle simultaneously ten stations.  It has a central management and database system that allows storing all tests results, analysis, and data mining, and is deployed and integrated with governmental agencies.”  Using this system would eliminate the need to use often biased U.S. Consulate employees.  Moreover, the SDS uses an automated decision-making system, which is “adaptable to a variety of different questioning contexts, different cultures, and languages. The examination lasts 5 minutes when there are no indications of harmful intent, and 7 minutes to ascertain it (with only 4% false positive, and 10% false negative).”

The COGITO is used in 15 countries including Israel, Singapore, China, India, and Mexico.  U.S. airlines operating in Latin America are using COGITO to check their employees.

But last year DHS refused to use the SDS, claiming that it “would constitute an intrusion on the privacy of those screened by the system” and “[i]t may reflect on VISA applicants or Immigrant’s civil rights.”  However, foreigners applying for a U.S. visa are not protected by American laws.

SDS capability to detect intent seems to fit President Trump’s promise of “extreme vetting” of Muslim refugees from high-risk regions.  This and other similarly objective systems would not only assist in making America safer but also be in keeping its policy and tradition of accepting refugees who do not wish us harm.

~~~

*This is an updated version of the article on American ThinkerProtecting America from ill-intended refugees

____________________

Terrorism and COGITO

John R. Houk

© January 29, 2017

_________________

Protecting America from ill-intended refugees

 

Copyright © 2013 | The American Center for Democracy is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. Your contribution is tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law.

 

Support the ACD

 

About ACD

 

OUR MISSION

 

The ACD is dedicated to exposing threats to our free speech rights, political and economic freedoms and national security.

 

ACD is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization. All contributions are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law.

 

OUR DISTINCTION

 

ACD fills an important gap created by inadequate risk assessments of our cyberspace, GPS & UTC. We use our Threatcon programs, our multidimensional Terrorist Finance Network Tracker (TFNT), and our experts to better inform government, public and private sectors’ policy makers.

 

CONNECTING THE DOTS

 

  • ACD’s synergistic approach to connect the dots on emerging threats is facilitated by extensive multidisciplinary global research in various languages. We publish our knowledge-based analysis and use the information to offer special tools to help prevent and mitigate such threats.

 

  • ACD’s Threatcon, offersindividually tailored programs of briefing and scenario gaming to encourage government, public and private sectors to cooperate in preventing and mitigating the risks to our political and economic freedoms and to our national security.

 

  • ACD’s Terrorist Finance Network Tracker (TFNT), a unique anti money laundering (AML) system, is using a multidimensional approach to build and regularly update a comprehensive database identifying operational and financial networks of transnational radical Islamic groups.

 

“Lean and agile, ACD/EWI is always ahead of the next threat: cyber attacks, market manipulation , the use of legal structures to inhibit free speech and stifle debate”- Richard Perle, former Assistant Secretary of Defense

 

OUR IMPACT

 

ACD Initiatives: READ THE REST

 

Examining Linda Sarsour Real News


hamas-finance-terrorism

John R. Houk

© January 28, 2017

 

It’s time to spread the word against Islamic Supremacists and Leftists spewing bigoted hate toward those ONLY telling the truth about what is in the Quran, Hadith and Sira of Islam.

 

For those who have Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram, we ask that you show your support for Brigitte and Ayaan, by using the hashtag #IStandWithBrigitteAndAyaan, which was started by Dave Rubin, host of The Rubin Report and an open-minded ally of true human rights.

 

 

One Islamic Supremacist to look at is Linda Sarsour. She is a Palestinian-American that grew up in Brooklyn New York. Because of heritage she is fully supportive of Jew-hating Palestinians who would rather destroy Israel and rename the whole area Palestine. A name created by the Romans to dishonor Jews and a word roughly created by the League of Nations after WWI that was an area of land formerly occupied by Turkey to create a Jewish Homeland. The League gave the British the Mandate to make that happen. Instead the British carved out a large eastern portion to reward the Hashemite Clan aid to defeat the Turks in WWI. The Hashemites called the carved out Palestinian land Transjordan. When the Hashemites joined the surrounding Arab nations to destroy Israel at its birth in 1948, the Transjordanian army (called the Arab Legion) was the only invader that came out substantially ahead.

 

The Transjordan monarch stole more Palestinian land designated for Jews and called it the West Bank because it was west of the Jordan River. The Hashemite King then officially incorporated his conquered land into his Kingdom renaming the nation Jordan.

 

The irony of the Jordanian conquest of the land called Judea and Samaria by Israel, is that British Officers ran the Arab Legion thus providing British military strategy for the Jordanian army to conquer land designated for a Jewish Homeland to Jordan. Essentially abandoning the British Mandate’s purpose.

 

But I digress.

 

The Arabs that call themselves Palestinians whom Linda Sarsour supports are essentially under the management of a group of Islamic terrorists. The larger group of terrorists is recognized by the USA as the Palestinian Authority (PA); however, the real governing entity is the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) which is a union of Arab terrorists dominated by the Fatah terrorists. Another Islamic terrorist organization called Hamas is the effectual governing entity of what a map will tell you is the Gaza Strip. Hamas doesn’t pretend to seek peace with Israel as the PLO dominated PA does, but calls for the bloody death of all Jews and the total destruction of Israel.

 

Linda Sarsour defends and promotes the concepts of a Palestine sovereign nation on Jewish land. Also as a true Muslim Apologist she makes deceptive statements to non-Muslim Americans implying Islam is peace and Sharia is the best form of law.

 

Ironically Fox News has come to Sarsour’s aid by calling her Counterjihad critics producers of Fake News:

 

 

In the days since she helped organize the massive Women’s March on Washington, the Brooklyn-born, hijab-wearing activist has been targeted on the internet by false reports that she supports Islamic State militants and favors replacing the U.S. legal system with Islamic religious law.

 

On social media, critics have circulated a photo of her holding up one finger, like a sports fan celebrating a championship, and claimed she’s giving “the ISIS one-fingered salute.” In fact, she is on record as calling the Islamic State a global cancer.

 

Other posts have falsely claimed that she supports the imposition of Islamic law on the U.S., citing, as evidence, a sarcastic tweet she made in 2015 that was actually intended to ridicule conspiracy theories about secret Muslim plots to take over the American legal system.

 

Bloggers and conservative websites also circulated a picture of her at a convention of Muslim civic leaders, standing with a group of people that included a Milwaukee activist whose brother was arrested in Israel in 1998 and convicted of giving $40,000 to a Hamas leader. The photo, they said, was proof of “ties” to Hamas.

 

“Ludicrous,” said Sarsour, who was out rallying again Wednesday night in her hometown of New York City, …

 

The online attacks, Sarsour said, were the work of “fake news purveyors” and “right-wing media outlets recirculating false information.” READ ENTIRETY (Attacks target Muslim-American activist after DC march; Deepti Hajela; Fox News; 1/26/17)

 

So, is it actually Fake News that Sarsour wants Sharia in America and is supportive of Islamic terrorists? The website The Secular Brownie examines some Sarsour tweets. Those tweets do not explicitly call for Sharia and the support of Islamic terrorism, BUT she either uses deceptive qualifiers or does not condemn Islamic terrorist attacks. The tweets expose Linda Sarsour’s true allegiance:

 

Linda Sarsour was the head of the Women’s March in the United States.  There is a great irony and contradiction in letting someone who deflects criticism from the misogynistic Saudi Arabia lead the Women’s March.  Let’s examine some tweets.

 

saraour-tweet1

 

She’s basically saying “women not having the right to drive in Saudi Arabia shouldn’t be a big deal because they get 10 weeks paid maternity leave.”  Do you not realize she’s talking about a place where the culture only values women as mothers and wives?  If the culture favored women as solely housewives/mothers don’t you think incentives for pregnancy would exist?

 

saraour-tweet-2

 

In this tweet she attempts to deflect criticism from the headscarf and women’s covering by trivializing it as a social issue. … This is for a woman to have the right to choose.  If the government is so invasive of women’s bodily expressions, wouldn’t you call that misogynistic, sexist, etc.?  As a “feminist”, how do you fail to see this?

 

saraour-tweet-3

 

… It’s similar to saying “racism doesn’t exist in the United States because Barack Obama was president.”  In some of these countries there is honor violence, and even sharia courts that punishes rape victims.  But of course, they have women leaders, therefore “no sexism.”

 

saraour-tweet-4

 

She is basically defending Sharia Law in this tweet.  Does she not realize that as an apostate, I would be subject to capital punishment in Saudi Arabia and homosexuals would be punished in some way? … Women who complained about rape needed the testimony of four witnesses in Sharia court, which they could not find, making them subject to public stoning.  Of course despite all this, Linda brags about the interest free loans in Sharia and ignores who would be marginalized in that system.

 

 

Of course Linda had to spin the narrative.

 

saraour-tweet-5

 

She’s basically saying her haters don’t want to see her succeed because she’s Arab. …

 

… Through her wording she made it seem like she was under danger and the left needed to unite against these “right wingers” (just for challenging someone’s feminist convictions.) READ ENTIRETY (Linda Sarsour’s Awkward Defensiveness Over Saudi Oppression That The Left Seems To Ignore; The Secular Brownie; 1/24/17)

 

And finally, FrontPageMag has sniffed out Linda Sarsour’s support of Islamic terrorism and Sharia either directly or by association (e.g. her husband):

 

In 2004, Sarsour acknowledged that a friend of hers as well as a cousin were both serving long sentences in Israeli jails because of their efforts to recruit jihadists to murder Jews. Moreover, she revealed that her brother-in-law was serving a 12-year prison term because of his affiliation with Hamas.

Speaking of creepy realtives, Sarsour’s husband, Maher Judeh, mourned the 1998 death of the Hamas “master terrorists” Adel and Imad Awadallah; he praised the heroism of a Palestinian Authority police officer who had carried out a shooting attack at a checkpoint in Israel; he has expressed support for the terrorist organization Fatah; and he has lauded the founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a Marxist-Leninist revolutionary organization.

 

 

In May 2012 Sarsour tweeted that the so-called “underwear bomber,” an Al-Qaeda operative who in 2009 had tried to blow up a Detroit-bound passenger jet in mid-flight, was actually a CIA agent participating in America’s “war on Islam.”

 

In November 2012 in Baltimore, Sarsour—ever eager to peddle her woeful tale of Islamic victimhood—spoke at a Muslim Public Affairs Council conference titled “Facing Race: Xenophobic Hate Crimes.” This is the same Council that views the murderous Jew-haters of Hezbollah as members of “a liberation movement” that is “fighting for freedom.”

 

 

In August 2015 Sarsour spoke out in support of the incarcerated Palestinian Islamic Jihad member Muhammad Allan, a known recruiter of suicide bombers.

According to CounterJihad.com, Sarsour has attended and spoken at numerous rallies sponsored by Al-Awda, a group that views Israel as a terrorist, genocidal state whose very creation was a “catastrophe” for Arab peoples.

Sarsour has also solicited donations for the Hamas-affiliated Palestine Children’s Relief Fund.

 

 

In November 2015, Sarsour was a featured speaker at the 21st anniversary banquet of the Council on American-Islamic Relations‘ [CAIR’s] San Francisco chapter. Further, she is presently scheduled to speak at upcoming CAIR banquets in February and March. Terrorism expert Steven Emerson has accurately described CAIR as “a radical fundamentalist front group for Hamas.”

Last June, Sarsour spoke at a Virginia fundraising dinner sponsored by Islamic Relief USA, whose parent group has provided financial aid to Hamas.
In September, Sarsour was a featured speaker at the annual convention of the Islamic Society of North America, a Muslim Brotherhood front group that promotes Sharia Law and Islamic supremacism. The Brotherhood, it should be noted, is the parent group of both Hamas and Al-Qaeda.

In October, Sarsour spoke at an event sponsored by a chapter of the Muslim Students Association, whose national umbrella group is an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood, and whose conferences routinely feature inflammatory speeches by raging anti-Semites.

 

In November, Sarsour spoke at the annual conference of American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), where she lauded Muslims who “unequivocally support” the Hamas-inspired BDS campaign. AMP is a major BDS promoter, and several of its leading board members and officials were formerly members and/or supporters of Islamic extremist groups that promoted and funded the agendas of Hamas.

In December 2016 in Chicago, Sarsour spoke at the annual (jointly held) convention of the Muslim American Society (whose agendas are dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood) and the Islamic Circle of North America (which, according to Steven Emerson, “openly supports militant Islamic fundamentalist organizations, praises terror attacks, issues incendiary attacks on western values and policies, and supports the imposition of Sharia”). At that convention, Linda Sarsour posed for a picture with Salah Sarsour (no known relation), who was jailed by Israel in the 1990s because of his fundraising activities on behalf of Hamas. READ ENTIRETY (THE ANTI-SEMITE WHO ORGANIZED THE ‘WOMEN’S MARCH ON WASHINGTON’; By John Perazzo; FrontPageMag; 1/23/17)

 

Sarsour on Sharia Law:

 

Sarsour has openly supported Sharia law, a legal system that treats women much differently than men and punishes lawbreakers with flogging, amputation, and stoning.

 

In 2011, Sarsour referred to Sharia as “reasonable,” tweeting: “once u read into the details it makes a lot of sense.”

 

sarsour-on-sharia-tweet-1

 

Last April, Sarsour again took to Twitter to defend Sharia as being “misunderstood,” and “pushed as some evil Muslim agenda.”

 

sarsour-on-sharia-tweet-2

 

She has even promoted Sharia as a means of financial benefit, tweeting: “If you are still paying interest than Sharia Law hasn’t taken over America. #justsaying. READ ENTIRETY (Women’s March National Co-Chair: Sharia Law is ‘Reasonable’ ,’ Misunderstood’; By Andrew Eicher; CNSNews.com; 1/25/17 5:27 PM EST)

 

I pray you now understand the nefarious hypocrisy Linda Sarsour when she calls people like Brigitte Gabriel and Ayaan Hirsi Ali wicked names and threatening with violence and removal of their vaginas.

 

Below is an email from ACT for America exposing the Islamic cruelty of Linda Sarsour.

 

JRH 1/28/17

Please Support NCCR

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

True Hatred Exposed

Sent by ACT for America

Sent 1/27/2017 1:18 PM

 

linda-sarsour-at-feminist-womens-march-1-21-17

Linda Sarsour at Feminist Women’s March 1-21-17

 

We regret to inform you of a shocking verbal attack launched against our Founder Brigitte Gabriel, and the courageous Ayaan Hirsi Ali, by an Islamic extremist named Linda Sarsour.

Although Sarsour’s disgusting verbal assault took place back in 2011, it has only now been brought to light, given her active and particularly ironic involvement in the supposed women’s rights march, which took place last weekend in Washington, D.C.

WARNING: The language and content of these comments are extremely offensive.

sarsour-vulgarity-toward-b-gabriel-ayaan-hirsi-ali-tweetSarsour vulgarity toward B. Gabriel & Ayaan Hirsi Ali Tweet

 

These comments are all the more appalling when one considers that Ayaan Hirsi Ali was a victim of Female Genital Mutilation.

Sarsour’s comments, reprehensible as they are, do not surprise anyone who knows the truth about her radical ties.

Ms. Sarsour has been an open advocate for Sharia law, and has connections to terror groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and ISIS.

In fact, Sarsour has three known relatives who have been arrested for terrorist activity!

Sarsour had come under fire for her radical ties before a spotlight was recently shined on her jaw dropping comments about Gabriel and Ali.

 

act-email-of-sarsour-tweet-on-sharia

ACT Email of Sarsour Tweet on Sharia

As usual, the anti-American fringe defended her, and mainstream media refused to cover the truth behind Sarsour’s extremist connections.

 

act-email-of-sarsour-tweet-on-sharia-2

ACT Email of Sarsour Tweet on Sharia 2

 

Here’s what the anti-American Southern Poverty Law had to say about their darling Sarsour:

 

“Islamophobes have been attacking #WomensMarch organizer @lsarsour. We stand with her against this type of hate and bigotry. #IMarchWithLinda”

 

So, what does this story tell you about groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center and other anti-American outlets who attack ACT for America as a “hate group?”

It tells you that they are the true haters. They are the bigots who cower under the cloak of political correctness, and seek to enable even the most dangerous radicals.

More to it, this uncovers the nefarious alliance between the far-left and radical Islam, and shows any rational citizen that the SPLC and other anti-American groups are not genuinely interested in human rights.

Rather, they are interested in the destruction of Western Judeo-Christian civilization, and willing to align with anyone who shares their devious vision.

Here are two survivors of Islamic extremism, Brigitte Gabriel, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, fighting for true women’s rights, and this Sharia sympathizing extremist attacks them with the most vile and hateful comments imaginable.

So now the question remains, will the mainstream media cover this abomination, or sweep it under the rug to continue their politically correct narrative about radical Islam?

For those who have Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram, we ask that you show your support for Brigitte and Ayaan, by using the hashtag #IStandWithBrigitteAndAyaan, which was started by Dave Rubin, host of The Rubin Report and an open-minded ally of true human rights.

Please check our social media pages and share with us why you stand with Brigitte and Ayaan against true hatred and radicalism.

 

For Freedom,
ACT for America

__________________

Examining Linda Sarsour Real News

John R. Houk

© January 28, 2017

_____________________

True Hatred Exposed

 

ACT for America · 869 Lynnhaven Pkwy, Suite 113, #411, Virginia Beach, VA 23452, United States

Obama Military Conspiracy up to Lt. Clint Lorance


bho-purged-military-for-disagreeing

John R. Houk

© January 20, 2017

 

You should be aware that the Obama Administration has taken a hard line toward military servicemen from private to general for minor infractions, made-up infractions or policy direction opposite to the worst President in U.S. history.

 

Sgt. Gary Stein

 

The Marine sergeant facing discharge because of critical comments about President Obama says the board that recommended his dismissal ignored the law and instead relied on “personal opinion.”

 

 

Stein, 26, a nine-year veteran including deployment to Iraq, had been recommended for dismissal and an other-than-honorable discharge by his commander for comments posted on four Facebook pages.

 

In his postings, Stein called Obama a coward and an enemy, vowed not to salute him and called for his defeat in this year’s election. One of the websites was an Armed Forces Tea Party page on Facebook that was created by Stein. READ ENTIRETY (Marine who criticized Obama says hearing board ignored law; Posted by NewsEditor; USIF.net; 4/11/12)

 

Lt. Michael Behenna

 

On March 20th, 2009, Army Ranger 1st Lieutenant Michael Behenna was sentenced to 25 years in prison for killing Ali Mansur, a known Al Qaeda operative while serving in Iraq. Mansur was known to be a member of an Al Qaeda cell operating in the lieutenant’s area of operation and Army intelligence believed he organized an attack on Lt. Behenna’s platoon in April 2008 which killed two U.S. soldiers and injured two more. Army intelligence ordered the release of Mansur and Lt. Behenna was ordered to return the terrorist to his home.

 

During the return of Mansur, Lt. Behenna again questioned the Al Qaeda member for information about other members of the terrorist cell, and financial supporters. During this interrogation, Mansur attacked Lt. Behenna, who killed the terrorist in self-defense. The government subsequently prosecuted Lt. Behenna for premeditated murder.

 

Not only is this a miscarriage of justice on the behalf of Lt. Behenna, who was acting to prevent further loss of life in his platoon, it is demoralizing to the U.S. troops who continue to fight on behalf of the freedom and security of our nation. READ ENTIRETY (MILITARY PROSECUTORS WITHHOLD EVIDENCE; ARMY RANGER GOES TO PRISON FOR 25 YEARS FOR SHOOTING AL QAEDA OPERATIVE; DefendMichael.com)

 

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal

 

McKiernan was succeeded by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who was in turn assigned to undertake his own 60-day assessment. But when word spread that McChrystal intended to propose a substantial new increase in forces, which Pentagon gossip initially put as high as 80,000 additional troops, waves of dismay spread through the White House. In late September 2009, a copy of McChrystal’s assessment was leaked to the Washington Post. Its bottom line was clear: If the United States did not pour significant additional resources into Afghanistan, and fast, the likely result would be “mission failure.”

 

… Furious at the leak—which they blamed on the Pentagon—and reluctant to accept McChrystal’s grim conclusions, senior White House aides engaged in strategic counter-leaks. In their version, McChrystal and the Pentagon were trying to box in the president by pushing to deploy tens of thousands more troops and refusing to consider other approaches.

 

 

… And less than a year later, McChrystal was forced to resign after a Rolling Stone profile quoted his top military aides mocking several senior civilian officials, including Eikenberry and Vice President Joe Biden. READ ENTIRETY (Obama vs. the Generals; By ROSA BROOKS; POLITICO; 11/2013)

 

General David Petraeus

 

Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter is now thinking of retroactively taking away one or two of Petraeus’s four stars. The potential demotion in rank, opposed by the Army, is intended as further punishment for the misdemeanor to which he pleaded guilty last year. Petraeus accepted two years of probation and paid a $100,000 fine for allowing his mistress, Paula Broadwell, to read classified information for research on the biography she was writing about Petraeus.

Carter apparently wants to ensure that Petraeus is treated in the same fashion as other miscreant generals and admirals who have lost rank. Yet there is no evidence that Broadwell (who enjoyed a military security clearance of her own) ever shared the classified information with anyone or disclosed it in the biography.

That does not excuse the bad judgment of Petraeus. But it does invite an obvious comparison with former secretary of state Hillary Clinton. She not only sent classified information over her unsecured e-mail to several individuals but remains untruthful about that fact. READ ENTIRETY (The Obama Administration Needs to Abandon Its Petraeus Obsession; By VICTOR DAVIS HANSON; National Review; 1/28/16 12:00)

 

General James Mattis, USMC

 

… Mattis wanted to strike Iran in retaliation for killing U.S. troops in Iraq in 2011; however, President Obama refused to grant permission.

 

Iranian-supplied rockets killed as many as 15 U.S. troops per month in Iraq in the summer of 2011, and Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis had a plan to retaliate. I personally recall from my years of duty in Casualty Affairs at Dover Air Force Base during this same time period, that, along with the casualties from IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices with “shaped charges” provided by Iran that could penetrate our armored vehicles) the rockets killed many U.S. troops.  We were receiving the bodies of U.S. service members virtually every day, along with thousands of family members who came to Dover for the ceremonies honoring their loved ones.

 

Six U.S. soldiers were killed in a single such attack in early June of 2011, with another three killed days later. Mattis, then the commander of U.S. Central Command, had enough and decided the U.S. must retaliate before the Iranian rockets and IEDs caused further casualties. Coordinating with then Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey, Mattis proposed an attack inside Iran.

 

 

The White House received the strike proposal and subsequently denied it. President Barack Obama believed such a strike would infuriate the Iranians, possibly escalating the need for U.S. troops in Iraq, something he was trying so desperately to end. Some Administration insiders feared the plan would start a war with Iran, a country with which President Obama wanted to improve relations.

 

Of course, now we know President Obama had another reason to deny the strike request, though it was not publicly known.  At the time, the Obama Administration was secretly negotiating with Iran on its growing nuclear weapons program. READ ENTIRETY (What You Need to Know About General Mattis; By Wesley Smith; ACLJ; 1/12/17)

 

I haven’t found reliable confirmation, but some conspiracy site claim:

 

Was Fired After He Refused To Take Up Arms Against U.S. Citizens by Dave Gibson 02/17/2015. READ ENTIRETY (Obama purging top brass from the military; Posted by JS; Independence Day; 10/26/15)

 

Here is an article from FrontPageMag that lists several Generals and Admirals that paints a suspicious picture of an Obama purge of the military of Officers that may have found reasons to disagree with Obama’s military vision.

 

President Obama hasn’t just been hollowing out the military since taking office, he’s been gutting it, purging it of ideologically hostile personnel, and fundamentally transforming it into something other than a war-fighting force, military experts say.

 

Although few with military ties are willing to say it openly, it seems the administration is leading an orchestrated effort to seriously undermine the readiness of the military. Some reports indicate that Obama has purged 197 senior military officers since moving into the White House and that many of the retired officers have been harassed at their new civilian jobs for criticizing the president’s policies. The effects of these purges will be felt long after Obama leaves office. READ ENTIRETY (PURGING AND TRANSFORMING OUR MILITARY; By Matthew Vadum; FrontPageMag; 11/7/13)

 

Here is a list of the high-level Officers mentioned in the FrontPageMag article:

 

 

  • David McKiernan

 

  • Stanley McChrystal

 

  • David Petraeus

 

  • John Allen

 

  • Carter Ham

 

  • Admiral David Gaurette

 

  • Marine Gen. James Cartwright

 

  • Vice Admiral Tim Giardina

 

  • Major Gen. Michael Carey

 

The American Left will tell you these generals served their time and retired or were caught in unethical or illegal activities and were forced to resign or retire. The unethical/illegal dismissals appear suspicious to me because these guys became generals or admirals because of military smarts. This insinuates sophomoric actions that tarnishes credibility is way out of the ordinary, especially if their stars were earned in combat situations that led to command reliability. One general says this about the apparent Obama military purge:

 

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady told WND that President Obama has forced out so many military leaders who have doubts about his policies that the nation’s armed forces no longer feel prepared to fight or to try to win armed conflicts. (Ibid.)

 

By this point if I were you, I’d be wondering why I am thinking about the Obama purge story which has been around for most of Obama’s two terms of Office.

 

I received an email from the mother of a Lieutenant convicted of murder while on active duty in Afghanistan. The email is quite compelling and knowing how Obama has been ripping the military apart, my first thought was to jump on the sympathetic train.

lt-lorance-setenced-20-yrs-prison

Before I jumped on board, I decided to check some other sources to see the military’s case against the Lieutenant. AND WHOAH! There are two conflicting stories that makes the difference between truth and lies because those who testified against the Lieutenant were there and followed orders. And another issue for me is this. Perhaps the story told by the Lieutenant’s soldiers is accurate about the Lieutenant’s character and actions, BUT the military prosecutors obviously withheld exculpatory evidence that make the Lieutenant less of a murderer and more of a taking the enemy combatants out.

 

So, I am going to cross post the mother’s email and then at least an excerpt of the military’s case. And you can see what I mean.

 

JRH 1/20/16

Please Support NCCR

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

My Son Deserves his Freedom

By Mr. Anna Lorance

Sent 1/17/2017 7:44 AM

anna-lorance-mom-lt-clint-lorance

I know we have never met. But if you have children of your own, you’ll understand why I’m writing you today.

You see, the young handsome man in this photo is my son, Lt. Clint Lorance of the U.S. Army.

Like any mother, I was so scared that Clint would be hurt – or even killed – after he was deployed to Afghanistan.

Then on July 2, 2012, it almost happened.

Clint was sent to a “hot zone” on a dangerous mission to replace a lieutenant who had been injured when the Taliban attacked his platoon just days earlier.

He was warned to look for multiple riders on red motorcycles – known as “spotters” who alert the Taliban when they see U.S. troops. And every soldier was on edge. They all knew about the earlier ambush – and that just days before a U.S. soldier had been shot in the neck in this very village.

Suddenly a U.S. helicopter radioed in to Clint that a group of motorcycle riders was sitting outside of the village near a road that was used only by the Taliban.

As Clint confirmed a clear description of the enemy, a motorcycle charged toward the platoon so one of the soldiers asked permission to fire a warning shot. Clint said, “yes.”

But the riders did not stop. Instead, they continued riding and broke through the troop’s formation, jumped off the motorcycle, and headed right toward our troops. With only a split-second to make a decision, Clint ordered his marksman to fire. Two of the riders were killed. The other was captured in the village.

Meanwhile, two other Taliban members were killed by Clint’s platoon and a second man captured trying to leave the village.

When Clint and his men arrived back at base, Clint ordered both of the prisoners to be tested for explosives residue. BOTH tested positive for residue on their hands, confirming Clint’s suspicions that the motorcycle riders posed a threat.

Yet instead of imprisoning and interrogating these men, military intelligence at Brigade Headquarters released the men back into the wild.

Then they fired Clint as platoon leader.

And one year later, Clint was sitting in a military courtroom on trial for murder.

Five other members of Clint’s platoon were also charged, including the marksman who had actually shot and killed the terrorists.

But all five were promised immunity if they would agree to testify against Clint.

Every one of the statements from these five soldiers changed from their initial statements. That’s right, not one of their stories was the same as the account they gave on the day of the attack.

But Clint’s account did not change.

And when asked for his only statement during the trial, he looked into the eyes of the jury and said, “I totally take all responsibility for my actions. I gave the order because I was the leader on the ground and perceived a hostile intent.”

My friend, I’m proud that my son gave that order.

Because only weeks after the ambush on Clint’s platoon, a motorcycle with two riders rode into a village where U.S. soldiers were patrolling and detonated explosives strapped to their cycle. That leader did not react as my son did – and American soldiers died.

But none of this mattered to the military court. Even though Clint never fired his weapon, he was found “guilty” and sentenced to 20 years in Fort Leavenworth Prison.

As soon as the verdict was read, Clint turned to us. He told his brother, “Be strong and promise me that you will take care of my Momma and Dad.”

Then he took me by the shoulders and said, “Momma I can’t leave here without knowing that you are okay.”

It took every bit of strength I had to not cry. I did not want Clint to see me in tears as they took him from the courtroom. Instead I told him, “We will get through this. God loves to walk the dark hills with us.”

Now, over three years later, I’m seeing just how much God is walking with us through this terrible time thanks to Major Bill Donahue of the United American Patriots. UAP helps provide legal defenses for soldiers like Clint who have been unjustly accused of crimes for making split-second decisions in the heat of combat.

Maj. Donahue is a Marine who survived three tours of duty in Vietnam – so he knows what it’s like to make decisions behind enemy lines. And he knows you can’t second-guess our young soldiers who have been trained to defend themselves in combat.

UAP is fighting to help Clint mount an appeal, a motion for mistrial AND secure a presidential pardon. But it’s a costly process – and money our son doesn’t have.

Clint was stripped of all pay when he was indicted. He was forced to sell his house. And he lost all 10 years of his Army pension.

All we can do now is rely on UAP and the big hearts of American patriots like you who support them and their mission.

UAP is a non-profit organization. They don’t receive a dime of federal funding. And Maj. Donahue doesn’t even take a salary for his work. He just wants to help soldiers.

If you can help with a tax-deductible gift of any amount, won’t you please send it to UAP today to help them fight for my son?

While politically correct government officials are going to extreme measures to protect the “civil rights” of terrorists who want to destroy our country, soldiers like my son are sitting in prison for protecting our nation from these terrorists!

On behalf of every mother of a U.S. soldier, thank you for taking the time to read my letter and for whatever support you can send today.

Sincerely,
Mrs. Anna Lorance

P.S. During a break in the trial, I walked outside to catch some air. The last soldier who had testified against Clint was standing on the sidewalk with tears running down his face. When he looked up at me he quickly dropped his head in shame. Clearly, he knows he helped the Obama Administration send an innocent soldier to prison. Thank you for helping UAP fight to bring him home!

 

+++

Hero or murderer? Soldiers divided in 1LT Lorance case

By Michelle Tan

January 12, 2015

Army Times

 

Shortly after the soldiers from 4th Squadron, 73rd Cavalry Regiment set out on patrol from Strong Point Payenzai, Afghanistan, a motorcycle carrying three Afghan men came into view.

 

Pfc. James Skelton reported the sighting to 1st Lt. Clint Lorance, his new platoon leader.

 

“He told me to engage,” Skelton said, according to the transcript from Lorance’s court-martial.

 

Skelton fired two shots. He missed. The motorcycle came to a stop, the men climbed off and began walking towards the Afghan National Army soldiers who were at the front of the U.S.-Afghan patrol.

 

“The ANA started telling them to go back, waving to them to return towards the motorcycle, to stay away,” Skelton testified. “They turned around and went back towards the motorcycle.”

 

Within seconds, two of them were dead. The third man ran away.

 

A gun truck that was accompanying the soldiers on foot had opened fire with its M240B machine gun.

 

“He was told to engage by Lieutenant Lorance when they had a visual,” Skelton testified.

 

“Did he ask the vehicle what the men were doing?” the prosecutor asked.

 

“No,” Skelton said.

 

“He just told them to engage?” the prosecutor asked.

 

“Yes,” Skelton said.

 

One year after that fateful July 2, 2012, patrol, in a case that has been controversial from the start, Lorance was convicted of two counts of murder and one count of attempted murder.

 

Lorance, now 30, is serving a 19-year prison sentence at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, but his case is far from over. Across the nation, thousands are rallying in hopes the baby-faced soldier can regain his freedom. They see him as a patriot, unfairly punished for actions taken to protect his fellow soldiers.

 

His own soldiers, however, paint a much different picture: They claim their platoon leader was ignorant, overzealous and out of control. That he hated the Afghan people and that he had spent recent days tormenting the locals and issuing death threats.

 

 

But as the fight for the young officer’s freedom has gained traction online and on social media, Lorance’s own soldiers are pushing back, they say, to make sure their side of the story is told.

 

Two sides of Clint Lorance

 

“All these petitioners need to be shown what kind of man [Lorance] really is,” said a soldier who served as a team leader in Lorance’s platoon, who asked to speak on background because he is still on active duty. “This isn’t a soldier that went to war and gone done wrong. This is a soldier that had a taste for blood and wanted to have that fulfilled. And he did, but in the wrong way.”

 

Todd Fitzgerald, a former specialist and infantryman in Lorance’s platoon, said he felt betrayed by the lieutenant.

 

“I don’t believe that he really understood what he was getting into,” he said.

 

Fitzgerald testified during Lorance’s court-martial.

 

“Us testifying against him, it wasn’t a matter of not liking him, it wasn’t a matter of any type of grudge or coercion,” he said. “It was simply we knew that his actions, based on our experience, having operated in that area for months, were going to breed further insurgency. If you kill local citizens, they’re no longer willing to help you.”

 

Testimony from these solders is in stark contrast to how Lorance’s mother, Anna, describes her son.

 

 

Fight for a new trial

 

Maher said he is disappointed in Clarke’s decision regarding clemency. He also said his client has grounds for a new trial.

 

“The defense has now identified information linking five of seven Afghan military-aged males on the field that day with terror,” Maher said. “Because the government has always had that information and did not disclose it to the command or the trial defense counsel, examining 1st Lt. Lorance’s decision-making takes a back seat. We never get to that question.”

 

Basically, the government is obligated to disclose evidence that could negate guilt, reduce the degree of guilt or reduce the punishment for the accused, Maher said, citing the Rule for Courts-Martial.

 

“The first day at the Army JAG school, we’re taught you turn over everything,” said Maher, who also is a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve.

 

The government made a “serious legal error” by not turning over exonerating and/or mitigating evidence contained in government computer databases, Maher said.

 

“Before the government can take away any soldier’s liberty, freedom, career, income, retirement, educational benefits, and full ability to get a job, the government must follow the rules,” he said. “Here, it did not.”

 

If that information had been turned over, the defense might have taken a different approach, or the case may not even have made it to trial, said Maher, who points out Lorance never fired his weapon that day.

 

“Clint did not initiate this, nor did he engage anybody directly,” he said.

 

Though he didn’t fire the weapon, he was convicted of making the call. He was also convicted of threatening a local Afghan; firing an M14 rifle into a village and trying to have one of his soldiers lie about receiving incoming fire; and obstructing justice by making a false radio report after the two men on the motorcycle were killed.

 

 

“Over about a three-day period, Lieutenant Lorance … committed crimes of violence and crimes of dishonesty,” said Capt. Kirk Otto, who prosecuted the case for the government, according to a transcript of the court-martial.

 

First, on June 30, 2012, Lorance threatened to kill an Afghan man and his family, Otto said in his opening statement.

 

The man, a farmer, and his child, who was about 4 years old, were at the gate to talk to the Americans about the concertina wire that was blocking access to his farm field, Otto said.

 

“He said, ‘You move the c-wire, I’ll have somebody kill you,'” Spc. James Twist, who was at the scene, testified during the court-martial.

 

Lorance then tried to have the Afghan turn in IEDs to the Americans, Twist testified.

 

“He was like, ‘You bring us IEDs or we’ll have the ANA kill your family,'” Twist said. “And Lieutenant Lorance was like, ‘Well, if we ever come onto your land and we step on an IED or we find an IED, I’ll have the ANA come and kill your family.’ And he pointed to the kid and said, ‘Do you want to see your child grow up?'”

 

The next day, Lorance directed one of the platoon’s squad designated marksmen to fire his M14 rifle from one of the Strong Point’s guard towers into the neighboring village of Sarenzai, Otto said.

 

“He directs harassing fire — illegal harassing fire — at villagers,” Otto said.

 

Lorance directed his soldier to shoot near groups of people, as well as at walls and vehicles, he said. The soldier, Spc. Matthew Rush, refused to shoot when Lorance directed him to fire near a group of children, Otto said.

 

“These villagers were not doing anything,” Otto said. “There was no demonstrated hostile intent. No one heard incoming shots.”

 

The soldier who served as a team leader in the platoon, who spoke to Army Times on background, said he has pictures of Lorance on the rooftop.

 

“He was out of control,” the soldier said. “We told him, ‘Sir, I don’t think it’s a good idea.’ He was like, ‘Oh, it’s a great idea. We’re going to scare these guys so they actually attend our shura, and we won’t lose anymore guys.”

 

Lorance later tried to have Sgt. Daniel Williams, who was in the tactical operations center, falsely report that the Strong Point received incoming potshots, Otto said.

 

“He told me to report up that they had taken potshots from the village,” Williams testified. “I told him that I wouldn’t … because it’s a false report. At least I thought so, sir.”

 

Williams also testified that Lorance said “he didn’t really care about upsetting them too much because he f**king hated them.”

 

‘Why isn’t anybody firing yet?’

 

The next day, as the soldiers prepared to head out on a patrol, a small group of three or four Afghan men met them at the gate.

 

The men were upset. They wanted to know why the Americans shot into their village the day before.

 

Lorance told them that if they had a problem, they could attend the shura, or meeting, he planned to have later in the week, according to testimony. The Afghans refused to budge.

 

“He told them to get out of there,” Skelton said in his testimony. “He started very aggressively yelling at them, and he started counting, and he pulled back the charging handle on his weapon and chambered a round.”

 

As the soldiers’ interpreter “panicked,” one of the other soldiers testified, the Afghans turned away and left.

 

The Americans and a squad of Afghan National Army soldiers began walking out on their patrol.

 

Just moments into the patrol, Skelton opened fire on the motorcycle and then Pvt. David Shilo, operating the M240B machine gunon the truck, killed the two Afghans.

 

Fitzgerald, who left the Army in August, said he was standing near Lorance when the men on the motorcycle were hit.

 

“I remember him asking, ‘Why isn’t anybody firing yet?'” Fitzgerald said, adding that Lorance then took the radio and ordered the soldiers in the gun truck to open fire.

 

The men on the motorcycle stopped when Skelton first opened fire, Fitzgerald said.

 

“At that point, they were definitely not any type of threat,” he said. “They weren’t coming at us.”

 

The patrol then pushed on into the village, where the bodies were quickly surrounded by crying and upset villagers.

 

First, Lorance prevented Skelton, who’s trained to conduct battle damage assessments, including READ ENTIRETY

 

+++

The Case Of 1st Lt. Clint Lorance

December 8, 2016

Military Votes Count

 

 

The Case Against Clint Lorance –

 

His own men testified against him. They said the guys on the motorcycles were not a threat. At first, they refused to fire, but Clint ordered them to open fire. They also claimed that Lt. Lorance threatened a local farmer that he and his son would be killed if the Taliban planted an I.E.D. (improvised explosive device) on their farm land.

 

If your own troops testify against you, that has to be given heavy weight; however, that four of the six troops were granted immunity places shade on their testimony.

 

The Case In Favor of Clint Lorance –

 

Clint Lorance was sent into a heavy Taliban-invested area to replace another leuitent that had been wounded. At the trial the government may not have disclosed that the men who were killed were Taliban IED terrorists. Following the trial, this evidence came out (and here). Clint also had information that his troops did not from overhead surveillance which indicated Taliban were closing in on his position.

 

 

The Takeaway –

 

If the government withheld exculpatory evidence, then the military prosecutors should be charged. I don’t know that they did that, but if they did.

 

There are two versions of this story. In one version Clint is a blood thirsty 1st Lt. who is out of control, who is killing the very people our troops were sent there to protect. In the other version, the people he killed were the enemy, and the government knew they were the enemy. In this second version, 1st Lt. Clint Lorance had good reason to believe they were the enemy.

 

There is READ ENTIRETY

 

Supporters of Lt. Clint Lorance that send email alerts:

 

Lt. Col. Allen West

 

TruthRevolt.org

 

United American Patriots (UAP)

 

UAP Petition (to Obama – hopefully changing to President Trump)

 

UAP Donation for Lt. Clint Lorance

_______________

Obama Military Conspiracy up to Lt. Clint Lorance

John R. Houk

© January 20, 2017

_____________

My Son Deserves his Freedom

SUPPORT CLINT LORANCE

 

United American Patriots is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. All donations are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

Mailing Address: 121-F Shields Park Drive, Kernersville, NC 27284

© Copyright 2016, UnitedPatriots.org

___________

Hero or murderer? Soldiers divided in 1LT Lorance case

 

© 2017 Sightline Media Group Site

 

About Army Times

_________________

The Case Of 1st Lt. Clint Lorance

 

Copyright © 2017 Military Votes Count.

 

About Military Votes Count