Intro to ‘3 biggest lies about COVID-19 have all been exposed…’


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

Post by Leo Hohmann

Posted October 8, 2020

 

I am about to cross post a Leo Hohmann post highlighting three lies about COVID-19 pummeled upon the public by Globalist-Marxist control freaks to fearmonger public subservience. The American Democratic party is part and parcel to this fearmongering tactic. Toward the end of Hohmann’s post is the complicity of Roman Catholic Communist Pope Francis with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). I AM CERTAIN that Pope John Paul II – as much a credit as Ronald Reagan for the demise of the Communist Soviet Union – is rolling in his saintly grave. Here’s the reason I and many others call Francis the Communist Pope:

 

 

 

 

 

Just to be clear, I am not an anti-Catholic. As a Charismatic/Word of Faith Protestant I have received my share criticism for my faith. Indeed, Pope John Paul II is a person I’d have on a hero list. I find it quite astounding a Christian leader of any Denomination or Creed would have anything to do with atheistic Christian-hating Communism. Such people claiming Christian adherence are people infected with an anti-Christ spirit at the very least. God help us all if it’s the very worst.

 

And talking of infection, Leo Hohmann succinctly writes how COVID-lies have been used by New World Order/World Government Globalist/Marxists to control the lives of human beings.

 

JRH 10/8/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee, that includes immune boosting products.

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

3 biggest lies about COVID-19 have all been exposed: But here’s why globalist powerbrokers can’t let it die

 

Pope Francis

 

By Leo Hohmann

October 6, 2020

LeoHohmann.com

 

Since February, the U.S. media has been pounding Americans with non-stop reporting about COVID-19 coronavirus.

 

Eight months later, the data shows everything the media said about the virus was false. Yet, those posing as “journalists” continue to repeat the lies from February and March as if they are facts rooted in their quest to “follow the science.”

 

Every one of the BIG THREE lies seems designed to promote panic and an irrational response to the actual threat.

 

Anyone who even suggests that maybe the governments of the world have been overreacting to a virus that kills at about the same rate as the flu has been immediately shot down as stupid and not worth listening to.

 

Slowly but surely, however, everything we “conspiracy theorists” said back in March about COVID has since been borne out as not a conspiracy theory at all. It was 100 percent true.

 

So let’s look at the three biggest lies that are still being used to spread fear of COVID-19, keeping in mind that the media used these same lies to castigate President Trump when he was released from the hospital Oct. 5 and implored Americans in a tweet “Don’t let COVID-19 dominate your life.”

 

This virus is “not like the flu,” we are scolded. It’s much scarier than the flu because:

 

  1. COVID carries a very high, 3.4 percent, death rate [compared to a flu death rate of 0.10 percent].

 

This has now been debunked by none other than the United Nations World Health Organization, which the leftist globalists believe is the gold standard for information about COVID. The WHO came out with updated mortality rates this week showing that only 0.13 percent of those infected will die. That’s 26 times lower than WHO’s previously purported death rate of 3.4 percent. We already know that in the U.S. the average age of those who succumb to the virus is 78 and they have an average of 2.6 comorbidities. This 0.13 percent death rate is almost exactly the death rate for the common flu.

 

  1. COVID is spread by asymptomatic ‘super spreaders

 

This scares people to death every time they hear it, because it suggests that every human being you come in contact with can potentially infect you. This is absolute hogwash. Asymptomatic carriers have a very low viral load in their system, making it virtually impossible to pass the virus on to another person. Even in the rare cases that they might be able to pass it on, it is highly unlikely if they don’t have symptoms, meaning they are not coughing, sneezing or wheezing.

 

  1. COVID is untreatable.

 

Now that truly is scary! This lie provided the pretext for Bill Gates and Big Pharma to rush to market an unsafe and unproven vaccine, which could end up being mandated by various state governments and corporations. But this “no treatment” lie has been exposed over and over by the facts, most recently seen in the way President Trump was so effectively treated with a cocktail of supplements and drugs. Trump was treated with Remdesivir in combination with zinc, Vitamin D and melatonin. Another option available in some states is hydroxychloroquine.

 

These three lies were cleverly crafted to refute anyone who brings facts to the table to argue that the government has no business closing down churches, businesses or generally violating the civil liberties of any American.

 

The authorities say this coronavirus has killed 204,000 Americans but those numbers don’t reflect the fact that hospitals were directed by the CDC to be liberal in filling out death certificates. Some doctors were so liberal that they actually notched deaths from accidents, heart attacks and strokes as COVID related and therefore COVID caused. CDC estimates that only 6 percent of these 204,000 deaths have been caused by COVID alone.

 

While these are the three biggest lies, they are not the only lies the media has told and continues to tell. What about the risk to young people? A look at the data shows incontrovertible evidence that college-age students have virtually no risk of dying from COVID. The media knows this. That’s why they focus their hysteria on the number of “cases” on campuses, not the number of deaths.

 

According to a survey by the New York Times, published Sept. 25, at least 130,000 people on more than 1,600 campuses contracted COVID and 70 died, but “most” of those 70 deaths, the Times admits, were not students but rather college employees, who were likely much older. But even if we factor in those older employees, the rate of death on college campuses according to the Times’ own study is a paltry 0.054 percent. Stunning!

 

One would think that once these scurrilous lies were exposed, the media would be shouting from the housetops that the CDC, WHO, Drs. Fauci and Birks, Gates and the rest of the “experts” who they relied on for their information, and whose misinformation formed the basis for politicians to implement the economy-killing lockdowns, were completely wrong! Isn’t that what good, honest journalists do when they find out they’ve been played? Yes, they go back and correct the record.

 

But instead we see no corrections of their previous false reporting. No, they double down on the lies.

 

This is not news. This is the hallmark of a propaganda operation. Another name for it is information warfare.

 

If they corrected their false reports and began to prominently report the truth about COVID, this would put pressure on political leaders to end the destructive restrictions on human activity. Those leaders could then turn their focus to protecting the vulnerable, which are people over 65 with multiple serious pre-existing health issues.

 

But that would require an honest press – something that no longer exists in America. They will continue to repeat the same old lies, that COVID is a killer disease unlike any other faced by mankind; we must “not let our foot off the pedal” of containing it, people of all ages and conditions must stay masked up at all times, indoors or out, and we must stay separated and isolated from our loved ones.

 

The ‘Great Reset

 

Meanwhile, the real reason for locking people down, telling them they must stop traveling for non-essential trips, shuttering small businesses or bogging them down with irrational and arbitrary rules, goes unreported by the mainstream media. But it’s hiding in plain view for anyone with an ounce of curiosity.

 

The global power brokers at the United Nations, World Economic Forum, the British royal family, the International Monetary Fund and the Vatican have told us why COVID must be kept front and center in the human psyche for the foreseeable future: They’ve all identified it as the key to launching a Great Reset of the global economic and social order. See video below:

 

VIDEO: The Great Reset Launch | Highlights

 

[Posted by World Economic Forum

521K subscribers – Jun 5, 2020

 

“The Great Reset” will be the theme of a unique twin summit to be convened by the World Economic Forum in January 2021. In-person and virtual dialogues will address the need for a more fair, sustainable and resilient future, and a new social contract centred on human dignity, social justice and where societal progress does not fall behind economic development. MORE TO READ]

 

They want to do away with the post-World War II free-market capitalist system and replace it with a global technocratic surveillance state likely to include a new digital currency and digital ID system. This new system will be much more authoritarian than what Americans would choose to live under if we remained in normal times, so the technocrats had to create a “new normal” that grips people in fear. People are known to defer to their leaders in times of crisis and panic. They can be convinced to go along with almost anything in such times, when fear brings its twin cousins of chaos and confusion.

 

The new age pope

 

Pope Francis and the Vatican are also fully on board with the new socio-economic world order being prepared for us – just read his latest encyclical issued on Oct. 3 entitled Fratelli Tutti [translated as Brothers All]. In it, he blames capitalism for the world’s most pressing problems, derides the concept of private property, holds up collectivism as superior to the rights of the individual, and seems to call for open borders and a termination of national sovereignty.

 

The pope cites COVID-19 as the triggering event that will usher in a new age of man-based utopian groupthink.

 

“The Covid-19 pandemic momentarily revived the sense that we are a global community, all in the same boat, where one person’s problems are the problems of all. Once more we realize that no one is saved alone; we can only be saved together.”

 

COVID was simply a prop, a triggering mechanism, for what global elites refer to as the Great Reset, the New Economy, the Green Economy and Sustainable Development. Whatever they call it, those with discernment will recognize this as the end-times beast system, global in nature, which will seek to dominate every human life on the planet.

 

The re-election of Donald Trump can forestall the world’s march into this new Dark Age, where freedom of movement, assembly, speech and religion are all tightly monitored and controlled. Joe Biden will welcome it, as this was the path his former boss Barack Obama had set us on. Obama signed the UN 2030 Agenda in September 2015 and the UN’s New Urban Agenda for global cities, as well as the Strong Cities Network, which is the UN’s effort to globalize city and county police forces. He also signed on to the UN’s Paris Climate accords.

 

Global government will materialize. It’s only a matter of when. The Bible says the end times will be marked by the rise of an anti-Christ system that bullies and bludgeons its way to power over all humanity. The United Nations arrogantly affirms the biblical prophecies with its admonition that “no person will be left behind” by its 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

 

As Christians, we must prepare both physically and spiritually for persecution that will only grow more intense in the weeks, months and years ahead. We must resist ungodly government edicts that seek to silence our voice, shut down our religious practice and deprive us of our humanity.

 

Leo Hohmann is an independent journalist not beholden to advertisers or corporate sponsors. He relies on donations from readers to continue reporting the truth based on a biblical worldview and his experience of 30-plus years covering geopolitics, education and religion.

 

SERIOUSLY CONSIDER SUPPORTING LEO HOHMANN

______________________________

Intro to ‘3 biggest lies about COVID-19 have all been exposed…’

John R. Houk, Blog Editor

Posted October 8, 2020

_____________________________

3 biggest lies about COVID-19 have all been exposed: But here’s why globalist powerbrokers can’t let it die

 

Help spread the word about LeoHohmann.com

To help spread the word about what’s really going on in our cities, schools and churches as a result of the Stealth Invasion, please share our stories with your friends and family on social media.

 

Investigative reporting on refugees, global migration, Christianity, Islam, Judaism and where politics, culture and religion intersect.

 

Fox News Censoring Gingrich to Hide Soros Machinations?


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© September 19, 2020

 

On September 17 I blogged a Twitter video of a couple of Fox News hosts (Harris Faulkner and Melissa Francis) silencing the venerable former House Speaker Newt Gingrich sharing publicly verified and attainable information that billionaire George Soros has been financing campaigns of local Prosecutors, elected law enforcement and other elected Offices to perpetuate Leftist ideology on a local level.

 

The discovery of such censorship on Fox News really chapped my hide as my Grandad would have said. George Soros (in his 90s now) and his son are evil people trying to transform global culture into a Marxist-Humanist mindset for decades. That’s not theory, IT IS FACT!

 

With my HUGE disappointment in mind I am cross posting three recent informative stories on the Fox News hijacking of truth to favor the Left. I don’t know if you realize it, Justice Ginsberg’s recent demise means the likes of the Soros transformation machine will do ALL in its power to make sure President Trump does NOT get a Pro-Life Justice on the SCOTUS Bench. So with a Trump Nomination battle brewing, this Fox News censorship is still a dire issue you should be aware of on an ongoing basis.

 

JRH 9/19/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee, that includes immune boosting products.

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

“This Is Ludicrous” – Newt Gingrich Questions ‘The Soros Cover Up’

 

Posted by Tyler Durden

09/18/2020 – 15:55

Authored by Newt Gingrich, op-ed via The American Mind

ZeroHedge

 

Americans can’t let Twitter noise overwhelm political reality…

 

George Soros

 

I have been watching a truly curious phenomenon over the past few days.

 

It seems there is suddenly a movement in media to silence anyone who speaks out against George Soros – and, specifically, his funding of radical prosecutors seeking to change the criminal justice system by simply ignoring certain crimes.

 

This happened to me personally this week while I was being interviewed on Fox’s Outnumbered. When I brought up Soros’s plan to get pro-criminal, anti-police prosecutors elected across the country, two of the show’s participants interrupted me and forcefully asserted that Soros was not involved.

 

Harris Faulkner & Newt Gingrich on Outnumbered

 

Host Harris Faulkner, it seemed, was stunned by the interruptions, and did her part to move the show forward after some awkward silence. The next day, she addressed the strange moment during the show and condemned censorship.

 

Immediately after the show, Twitter and other social media went crazy. People were alleging that any criticism of Soros’s political involvement is automatically false, anti-Semitic, or both.

 

This is ludicrous.

 

Soros’s plan to elect these prosecutors has been well documented already – and it has nothing to do with his spiritual or ethnic background. The Los Angeles Timesthe New York TimesPoliticoUSA Todaythe Washington Postthe Wall Street Journalthe Associated PressCBSthe South Florida Sun-Sentinel – even Fox News itself, among others, have all thoroughly reported on it.

 

There are plenty of specific examples of Soros’s work in action.

 

Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot, who campaigned on the promise that he would not prosecute a host of crimes—including thefts—admitted his campaign was largely funded through Soros or his groups. He has been so dismissive of crime and police that Texas Governor Greg Abbott has had to send in the Texas State Patrol to police large swaths of Dallas.

 

Soros gave $333,000 to the Safety and Justice PAC in 2016 to support then-Cook County District Attorney candidate Kim Foxx in Illinois—who is currently presiding over terrible violence and mayhem in Chicago, where murders are twice what they were in 2019.

 

Soros and his organizations spent $1.7 million to help get Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner elected in 2018. Before being elected, Krasner earned a name for himself by suing the Philadelphia Police Department 75 times. Since he took office, dozens of experienced prosecutors have either been fired or resigned. Criminal prosecutions have plummeted and crime has risen. Philadelphia now has the second-highest murder rate among large cities in the country.

 

Former Hugo Chavez advisor and current San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin was also funded by Soros and his groups. Boudin has called prison “an act of violence” and has refused to prosecute a slew of illegal acts, from public urination to the public solicitation of sex, which he deems to be “quality of life crimes.” By the way, Boudin is the foster child of Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, of terrorist group Weather Underground fame. His birth parents were convicted and imprisoned for their involvement in an armed robbery-turned-homicide.

 

One of Soros’s favored PACs spent $402,000 to support a failed San Diego County District Attorney bid by Geneviéve Jones-Wright.

 

In 2016, a Soros-funded super PAC donated $107,000 to benefit Raul Torrez in his Bernalillo County District Attorney primary—which he won by a 2-to-1 margin. In fact, Soros’s huge funding prompted the Republican running to bow out because it was just too expensive to run against Torrez.

 

Soros-backed George Gascon is currently challenging Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey, who has been targeted and systematically harassed by Black Lives Matter supporters.

 

I’m not overly surprised to see the Twitter mob embrace a sudden, near-universal denial of these facts. I am alarmed to see that the force of this groupthink on social media appears to be strongly influencing professional media.

 

I think the heart of this mass denial is that Democrats and the Left are watching the terrible human cost of their misguided, pro-criminal, anti-police justice policies, and they are beginning to worry that the American people will realize who is responsible for them.

 

Rather than deal with something difficult—or admit they were wrong—the activists of the radical Left are trying to find some way to scream “racist” and get the media to follow suit.

 

America will suffer if our professional media continue to be overruled by our social media.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

Fox News goes Orwellian on mentioning one activist’s name and agenda; UPDATE

 

By J.E. Dyer

September 18, 2020

Liberty Unyielding

 

Harris Faulkner – The sound of silence on Fox News’s ‘Outnumbered.’ Fox News video via MRCTV

 

[See must-consider UPDATE at the bottom. – J.E.]

 

I didn’t see this live on Wednesday, but the clip, which I saw later on Twitter, is unsettling.

 

Newt Gingrich did nothing more than call out the same things Soros’s own institutions openly announce that they do; in this case, fund campaigns to turn local offices like D.A.s, sheriffs, and city and county governments (councils and commissions) as radically Left as possible.  There is simply no disputing that Soros puts money behind this.  It’s not a matter of theories or opinion.  It’s fact.  (Craig Bannister at CNSNews offers a Daily Caller link with background on it; we have published on it a number of times at LU.  See here, here, here, and here, for example.)  Soros and his activism enterprises at the Open Society Foundation make no bones about it.

 

Apparently Fox News has joined the mainstream media in wanting to draw a rigid iron curtain of silence over that.  Their determination to not have George Soros’s name spoken — “I’m not sure we need to bring George Soros into this,” says Melissa Francis — leads them to speak falsely, as if there is factual error in the reference Gingrich makes to what Soros has been funding.  Yet the information about it is all from public records.

 

People can of course debate the connection between Soros’s political funding and the conditions in American cities where riots have been especially rampant.  Gingrich’s point involves making that connection; it’s analysis as well as facts.  But you don’t debate analysis by silencing reference to facts.  The only thing you do by silencing reference to facts is lie.

 

Is this compulsory, aggressively mendacious silence imposed because social media will discriminate against Fox’s content if commentators are allowed to make such points?  That’s all I can figure.

 

Compare with this Fox News report from barely six weeks ago, on exactly the pattern of Soros activism Gingrich highlighted on Wednesday.  Fox was willing to report it then, on 30 July, and yet reacts as if it’s unspeakable blasphemy on 16 September.

 

If social media are indeed the concern — that Facebook, YouTube, Twitter will disfavor Fox News content because of editorial liberality — it’s an appalling example of information being censored by systematic collusion.  And it’s information the American people should have available, with a national election coming up on 3 November.

 

Soros isn’t the only big-money donor to be involved in such activities.  Tom Steyer, for example, on whom we’ve also published at LU, has been closely engaged in campaigns to flood voters with often-misleading “voter information” through mass mailings (e.g., here and here).  Michael Bloomberg is another deep-pocket activist for far-left causes.  But it’s perfectly legitimate to point out Soros’s singular prominence in campaigns to elect radical leftists to local offices across America.

 

The atmosphere got genuinely creepy as silence fell during the Outnumbered segment.  After Melissa Francis disqualified any reference to Soros, Marie Harf chimed in to agree.  Bannister transcribes what followed: “’Okay…So, it’s verboten?’ Gingrich asked as an awkward silence took over the broadcast.  After a long silence, Host Harris Falkner said: ‘Okay, we’re going to move on.’”

 

You can’t make real-life Orwellian silence, in the manner of Obiwan Kenobe hand-waving at the droids you’re not looking for, non-creepy.  It’s extremely disquieting.  A very little of it is too much.

 

*UPDATE*:  National Pulse, Raheem Kassam’s website, suggests another reason why Fox would censor mention of George Soros.  The concern is that local D.A.s, with Soros-backed officials prominent among them, will be directly involved in adjudicating the expected disputes over the vote after 3 November.  Those D.A.s can be pretty vindictive.

 

Offering an example of apparent retaliation, National Pulse writes (emphasis added):  “[A] Surf City DA recused himself after one of his prosecutors spoke at a candidate’s rally.  That candidate went on to face six felony charges, later reduced to just one misdemeanor regarding errors on past voter and campaign forms.”

 

So: mention Soros, the D.A. will ensure your voters and votes are disqualified – and you suffer the cost and inconvenience of law being weaponized against you.

 

Whether the threat is coming from Facebook or local D.A.s, Fox News’s response is to fear-grin.  Interesting question what those who aren’t faced with this choice would do.  Should Fox News potentially jeopardize GOP candidates and the vote itself by antagonizing one of the main backers of hostile local officials across America?  I know my own answer (the truth is its own protection), but institutions tend to lack boldness in such dilemmas.

 

J.E. Dyer is a retired Naval Intelligence officer who lives in Southern California, blogging as The Optimistic Conservative for domestic tranquility and world peace. Her articles have appeared at Hot Air, Commentary’s Contentions, Patheos, The Daily Caller, The Jewish Press, and The Weekly Standard.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

FOX NEWS is Now FOX NOISE: Don’t Count On Them for Fair and Balanced

 

Soros (screen capture)

 

By Geri Ungurean

September 19, 2020

Absolute Truth from the Word of God

 

After Shepard Smith left Fox News months ago, I breathed a sign of relief. I would get so angry at Smith’s Left leaning coverage of the news – invariable I would turn him off after occasionally throwing my slipper at the TV.  I thought that perhaps Fox was going to hire someone who would at least give us the news without commentary – you know, just report the news. What a novel idea!

 

I was sorely mistaken. Instead, they put Bill Hemmer in his place, which at first I thought was great. But then I was horrified when Hemmer began to follow in the footsteps of Shepard Smith. Not Bill Hemmer!  Yes, they must have told the man that if he didn’t come over to the dark side, he would be canned.

 

I try to get my news from conservative news sites now. I really like OANN.com (One American News Network). I still love Tucker Carlson from Fox, but I have a bad feeling that Tucker may not be on Fox much longer.

 

When I saw the clip from Fox where Newt Gingrich spoke of boogey-man (my words) George Soros, and his part in manipulating American politics, policies and events with his $Billions by pouring that money into the campaigns of Leftist DA’s across our land; and how Gingrich was silenced  – I was shocked.

 

VIDEO: When Newt Gingrich Mentions ‘George Soros,’ Fox News Hosts Go Silent, Refuse to Discuss

[Posted by أنس إبراهيم – Anas ibrahim

47.1K subscribers – Sep 17, 2020]

 

Newt told the TRUTH!! Soros has BOUGHT Leftwing DA’s across America.  Don’t tell THIS Jew that it’s anti Semitism to bring up Soros!  He is Jewish by birth but has the soul of Hitler.  Watch this clip and tell me if Soros is a real Jew:

 

VIDEO: SHOCKING: George Soros admits Nazi collaboration with no regrets

[Posted by Dinesh D’Souza

391K subscribers – Sep 1, 2017

 

George Soros, a chief financial supporter of Antifa, was himself a Nazi collaborator and to this day has no regrets—watch! MORE TO READ]

 

Soros is the stereotypical Self-Hating Jew. He loathes his own people and he took part in the Holocaust, helping Nazis to round up the Jews and get them on the death trains, after he confiscated their property to hand over to Hitler’s henchmen.

 

THIS is the real George Soros.

 

So the LYING media should just shut their mouths about George Soros and stop pointing fingers at those who speak the truth about him. Newt Gingrich did it and I am so proud of him!

 

From canadafreepress.com

 

Prosecute George Soros for Plotting Anarchy,  Violating U.S. Code § 2383 Rebellion or Insurrection

Silence fell at Fox News as Newt Gingrich asserted the main problem facing US riots was billionaire George Soros buying DA races. The  female hosts immediately howled to censure Gingrich, who said: “It’s verboten?!!” So is Fox beholden to Soros? Why? Meanwhile, crime skyrockets in liberal states and cities that elected Soros DAs. Soros is accused of plotting to control the globe through shadow officials in various countries. Soros and devotees offer a classic study of folie à deux, sharing the mad belief they’re called to convert the globe to Marxism.

Open Society

Soros started Open Society Foundation, donating $30 billion to “upgrade” world democracy, Soros is condemned in native Hungary, his university banned, and rejected for insisting mass illegal migrants be housed, Soros currently funds leftist US District Attorneys.  “The Soros groups dump large amounts of money in the final moments of the campaign. The Soros funds are only discovered after the election.”

Nonagenarian Soros Desperate to Transform America

90-year-old Marxist Soros oozes delusions of grandeur seeing himself a leader of world revolution, his leftist mania drives his American DA project. For years Soros regularly invested in DA races. Observe incompetent Kim Foxx & $2 million Soros funds, dismissing without comment Jesse Smollett’s case with overwhelming evidence of guilt. Such abuse of justice tells average citizens fairness is impossible.

US Liberal District Attorney Project

Investing in important DA races, Soros waits to inject last minute blasts of cash for liberal candidates. Over years, Soros spent millions in races like Chesa Boudin, San Francisco; Larry Krasner, Philadelphia; Houston’s Kim Ogg, and Diana Becton, Contra Costa County. All “Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commissions” idealists. Florida’s Soros financed State Attorney Aramis Ayala announced no death penalties would be sought for any case. Portland’s Mike Schmidt, Soros DA refuses to prosecute 110-day Portland rioters.

San Francisco, Liberal Hell

 

Boudin, the SF Public Defender, promised before his election: “We will not prosecute cases involving quality-of-life crimes, such as public camping, offering or soliciting sex, public urination, blocking a sidewalk, etc., should not and will not be prosecuted. We have a long way to go to decriminalize poverty and homelessness. There can be no justice when we utilize prison and jail as the solution to all of our problems.” Overall, Soros DAs have helped turn the biggest West Coast cities into third world countries as residents despair and flee.

Soros’ Mental Health & History

Jewish Soros diabolically admitted the zenith of his life was carting off innocent Jew’s property after dispatch to concentration camps. Is he a Sociopath or Psychopath? Why does Soros undermine American law? Marxists know an increasingly out-of-control a society begs for more government intervention. Liberal Soros Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner of St. Louis watched her city’s crime spike to highest in America.

Conclusion: DOJ Should Prosecute Soros for Bribery, Undue Influence & Undermining Constitution

Hungary’s PM Viktor Orbán likened Soros to Soviet propagandists: “We old warhorses recognize them by their smell.” The DOJ must prosecute the megalomaniac for attempting to overhaul the US Justice System. Soros is bribing candidates to follow his law-enforcement ideas in exchange for campaign funds and future support. If Soros’ groups break down society by organizing and funding treason, etc, they are violating U.S. Code § 2383. Rebellion or Insurrection, punishing anarchy undermining the law. It’s time Soros is finally stopped in his insane bid to castrate the US Constitution and supplant America’s justice system with devilish Marxism. source

 

My hat goes off to Canada Free Press once again. They invariably tell the Truth. They tell it fearlessly and unashamedly.

 

Brethren, PRAY for God’s will to be done in America. We may not like the outcome, but we will know that it is what our God allowed to happen.

 

HE IS IN CONTROL.

 

How Can I Be Saved?

Shalom b’Yeshua

MARANATHA!!

_______________________________

Fox News Censoring Gingrich to Hide Soros Machinations?

John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© September 19, 2020

______________________________

“This Is Ludicrous” – Newt Gingrich Questions ‘The Soros Cover Up’

 

Copyright ©2009-2020 ZeroHedge.com/ABC Media, LTD

_______________________________

Fox News goes Orwellian on mentioning one activist’s name and agenda; UPDATE

 

Copyright © 2020 Liberty Unyielding. All rights reserved.

_______________________________

FOX NEWS is Now FOX NOISE: Don’t Count On Them for Fair and Balanced

 

Absolute Truth from the Word of God

 

A MESSAGE TO MY (Geri Ungurean) READERS

 

The UN, Globalist Multiculturalism & Islam One World Despotism


John R. Houk

© July 11, 2019

 

After WWII the image of the United Nations was an international organization that the Allied victors would utilize to prevent another nation to pull any conquest objectives ala Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan. After the war and the public emerging of atrocities committed by Nazis and the Japanese war machine populations of Western nations breathed a sigh of relief that a UN would prevent global despotic atrocities.

 

The first dent in this relief was the Communist international revolutionary agenda of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR – essentially Russia) and Communist (Red) China. Those Communist giants used their satellite vassal yet officially independent nations to fill the UN with Marxist opposition to everything Western especially to the USA.

 

The USSR and Red China in their efforts to woo global Communism began to assist Third World nations willing to be anti-Western (with anti-Americanism as the focus) in their development. Hence Communist revolutionaries began to emerge in newly independent nations formerly dominated as Western Colonies primarily of European nations.

 

The Muslim world advanced despots as monarchs and dictators who nationalized the Western control of the oil industries managed by Multinational Corporations (MNC). Islam is inherently antagonistic to all things non-Muslim inspired by Islamic revered writings.

 

The USSR tried to use this Islamic antipathy to export Communist principles to the Muslim world. However, Islam-alone brainwashing ultimately meant the Muslim despots used the USSR support to offset the power of Western supported MNCs. Essentially Muslim despots played an international game of pitting the USA and the USSR against each other to shore up their own Islamic authoritarian regimes.

 

THEN the unthinkable according to Islamic doctrine occurred. Jews abused for centuries in the West gained sympathy due to Nazi genocide resulting in a gradual reclamation of the Jewish Homeland. A homeland that had been under one form or another of Islamic control due to conquest since the mid-600s AD.

 

A Jewish Homeland is unthinkable because in intolerant doctrine, once conquered by Islam a land must remain Islamic forever. The Islamic vision of conquest domination in three opinions:

 

 

 

 

Five Stages of Islamic Conquest

The absence of Communist satellite nations due to the collapse of the USSR led to the domination of two groups in the UN: Nations dominated by Leftist Globalist Multiculturalism and Nations dominated by Islamic Thought.

 

Since I’m not really an erudite writer let’s look at some quotes relating to Leftist (perhaps Marxist) Globalist Multiculturalism (all from essays or opinions that should be read in full at your leisure):

 

The Pox of Multiculturalism; By Bruce Walker; American Thinker; 5/19/18:

 

What the left calls “multiculturalism” is actually the systematic destruction of cultures and the replacement of these cultures by a synthetic, artificial, and meaningless global culture.  When the left talks about “diversity,” it really means the crushing of differences in thought, values, and art into a sort of baby food which neither nourishes the soul or elevates the mind.

 

 

Multiculturalism is an effort to destroy culture in the name of harmonizing cultures.  It is, at best, gross globalist imperialism.  It is, at worst, the Orwellian deconstruction of all societal values and beliefs.

 

Multiculturalism: As A Tool To Divide And Conquer – The Layman’s Primer; By Louis Beam; LouisBeam.com:

 

No nation is born multicultured. Multiculturalism is an unnatural as well as unhealthy condition that can only afflict states in national decline. A multicultural state carries in it’s [sic] geneses the seeds of eventual national destruction.

All multicultural nations will be found to be in a state of political, moral, economic and social decay. Greed and corruption will characterize the government coupled with oppressive measures directed against citizens. Lies and deceit will be stock and trade of media, politicians, and educational institutions. Such are the bellwethers of a multiculturalist advent.

In modern times multiculturalism is instituted from the top down as an elitist ruling class tool used to play one or more racial or ethnic groups against another. The ensuing cultural melee serves the political designs, economic goals and power needs of elitist rulers and their sponsors. This technique was developed by Marxist ideologues who used multiculturalism in Russia to divide and conquer resistance to the institution of a communist state. The end result of their successful takeover was the murder of thirty million humans in the Soviet Union alone. Many more elsewhere.

The same internationalist cabals who sponsored Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin as the multicultural leaders of the Soviet state from their banking houses in New York, similarly sponsor the multicultural leaders of the United States, Canada, and Europe today. An interlocking network of foundations such as Ford and Carnegie, international banking empires such as Rockefeller and Rothschild, and government agencies firmly in their control work in tandem with controlled propaganda outlets such as the New York Times, CBS, and Hollywood, to promote, foster, and institute multiculturalism today. While the examples used in this essay deal primarily with the United States the same process with the same methods is being employed elsewhere. This of itself is prima facie evidence of a cabal which promotes multiculturalism as a tool to achieve its objectives.

Multiculturalism is being used as a hammer to forge the compliant people who will compose the obedient states of the New World Order. As a weapon of post modern political warfare multiculturalism has few equals, which, thus explains its use currently against all of Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Deliberate fragmentation of these nations and the resultant loss of national identity and purpose into politically disharmonious units, serves as a stepping stone to world government. And who will compose that world government? A ruling class consisting of an “economic hierarchy” that replaces the philosophy of the nineteenth century “natural hierarchy.” A force that views countries and the people that live in them first as economic targets to be exploited, and second as military targets to be defeated if they resist.

 

 

Social instability, caused by a steady erosion of standards and values, coupled with a scramble over dwindling economic opportunities by conflicting ethnic groups, produces precisely the alienation and conflict needed to implement a multicultural state. Further, the lack of common standards and values leads to personal disorganization, resulting in unsociable behavior. This is the life support system of a multicultural state. In a word: anomie.

As a political tool multiculturalism has several applications. It is used to prevent a national consensus among the electorate. The confluence of divergent life views, cultures, beliefs, religions, ethnic habits, etc. insures a swirling river of discontent upon which the multiculturalist rides. It is a perfect method of ensuring that there can never in the future be accord, unity, and a common agreed upon destiny among those ruled. Multiculturalism represents a basic form of divide and conquer, to the benefit of corrupt government and its sponsors.

Multiculturalism is likewise a financial tool used to socially and economically level a targeted population. When implemented, it becomes in fact a battle over scarce resources and shrinking economic opportunities, with government weighing in on the side of cheap labour. A continual flow of impoverished workers is insured through immigration (both legal and illegal), who by working for less compensation continually drive wages down. For the vast majority of citizens the standard of living will not increase, but rather constantly decrease.

 

As a general rule:

 

The amount of multiculturalism in any society is directly proportional to the corruption at the top of a political system and inversely proportional to national unity.

This means: multiculturalism will have succeeded in so much as the country has failed.

 

Multiculturalism can further be used as “transitional tool” to take a targeted population from one form of government to another. When a political condition of greed, massive corruption, and diversity of objective is coupled to a social condition of drugs, violence, and discontent, therein exists the perfect environment for governmental change to a system that more closely serves long term interests of ruling elitists. Seeing that both the problem and solution are provided by the same people makes the CIA’s importation of some one hundred billion dollars worth of cocaine and other drugs into the United States understandable. While at the same time explaining FBI, ATF, and other, more secretive federal government agencies involvement in domestic terrorism or its cover-up. Suddenly, that which erroneously was previously thought to be unrelated events show their common thread and purpose.

Within the deleterious milieu of multiculturalism exists the propaganda opportunity for re-education of the people into a more malleable entity. A targeted population will be shaped mentally by new forms of public education in the schools, media indoctrination, and by elitist pronouncements. Thus placed in a crucible of economic necessity and social pressure, once free citizens become despondent masses, adjusting to and accepting fundamentally changing national circumstances as a matter of expedient survival. For the reticent, conformity by force will ensue in the form of legal penalties disguised as ant-drug, anti-terrorism, or anti-hate laws. All of this leading toward what George Orwell so aptly predicted in his book 1984:

 

“Almost certainly we are moving into an age of totalitarian dictatorships. An age in which freedom of thought will be at first a deadly sin and later on a meaningless abstraction.”

A society is being spawned where those with the most unsociable behavior, deviant lifestyle, or personal failures are given the most by government. This is TRUST ME READ ENTIRE ESSAY

 

The Globalism Threat – Socialism’s New World Order; By Jeff Carlson, CFA; TheMarketsWork.com; 2/24/17:

 

 

Globalism is often clad in free trade garb but in fact there is a hindrance of free trade with globalism. Globalism, through its attempt to erase national borders (and identities), applies a broad economic brush to varying problems and economic conditions of differing regions and as a result fails by definition. Globalism tends to exacerbate economic problems rather than fixing them, and hinders free trade by distorting market responses.

Globalism initiates with talk of open borders and free trade but inevitably leads to concentrated government and centralized planning. …

 

 

Although the terms are often used interchangeably, Globalization is NOT the same as Globalism. They are very different things. Globalization is a natural economic outgrowth of trade. Globalism is a political goal – plain and simple.

 

 

Globalism differs from Capitalism in several distinct aspects. Globalism promotes globally centralized control of laws, foreign policy and monetary policy. Unlike Capitalism, Globalism inherently blends rule of law with rule of man. Globalism comes into existence through the ownership of laws. And through the ownership of law, Globalism gains ownership of nations.

 

If you refer back to Gramsci, Alinsky and the Left, you will recall I introduced several concepts – Counter Hegemony, Critical Theory and Gradualism. Antonio Gramsci created the Theory of Cultural Hegemony – the way in which nations use cultural institutions to maintain power in capitalist societies. Gramsci felt that in order to change society, the entire value systems of Societal Institutions must be overturned. This would require the introduction of an entirely new set of values and beliefs – Counter Hegemony. Gradualism – along with Critical Theory – were the processes used to achieve Counter Hegemony. Marxist/Socialist philosophers – led by the Frankfurt School – picked up where Gramsci left off and brought these ideas to America. They refined Gramsci’s Marxist ideas – they reshaped them.

 

 

If Culture is the true source of Capitalism – how do you truly change Culture? You change it by removing the identities of Culture. As Theodor Adorno stated, you create a “genuine liberal” – an individual “free of all groups, including race, family and institutions”. A Global Citizen.

 

The tool used to accomplish this goal? Political Correctness – or “same thinking”. Raymond V. Raehn put it this way; “Political Correctness seeks to impose a uniformity of thought and behavior on all Americans and is therefore totalitarian in nature”. Political Correctness is Cultural Marxism – also known as multiculturalism. Political Correctness is the translation of Marxism from economic to cultural terms. And once you’ve changed the culture you can change the laws.

 

The end game of Political Correctness – its ultimate goal – is Globalism.

 

And it is here we must be careful. For Globalization has opened a pathway to Globalism. This is the very reason the two are so often presented as the same. An economic process – Globalization – has been altered and repackaged to further a goal of societal change. This is why Globalists so often dress Globalization as Globalism. Globalization is required for Globalism to become a reality. But Globalism is NOT a necessary prerequisite for Globalization.

 

 

… Just as Communists first seek to impose Socialism on their way to Communism, so do Globalists seek to turn Globalization into a stepping stone towards Globalism. Their goal is to convince citizens they are one and the same. Using Gradualism.

 

But there is a distinct difference – and an obstacle. Globalization can lead to benefits for all while still preserving the nation-state. Which means the concept of national identity stands firmly in the way of Globalism. In order to maintain national identity you must first maintain self-governance and full sovereignty. Globalism seeks to break national identity by subsuming national laws. Ultimately, preservation of national or sovereign law is the key to preventing Globalism.

 

In 1995, the Commission on Global Governance issued a report titled Our Global Neighborhood. The report advanced the view that nations are interdependent and called for a strengthened United Nations. The Commission made a standard definition of global governance stating that;

 

“Governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and cooperative action may be taken. It includes formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce compliance, as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either have agreed to or perceive to be in their interest…It is our firm conclusion that the United Nations must continue to play a central role in global governance.”

 

It was the U.N.’s first real published step towards World Governance. Towards Globalism.

 

 

… Of particular note is the UN’s focus and treatment of Israel. Since the creation of the UN’s Human Rights Council in 2006, there have been 121 condemnations of nations for human rights violations. Of these, 62 condemnations were of Israel. Condemnations for the rest of the world’s nations combined equaled 59.

 

Corruption, fraud and mismanagement in U.N. procurement have been ongoing since the organization’s creation.

 

 

How is “piercing the shell of state sovereignty” accomplished? It is done slowly and incrementally. It is done through division – by undermining society through created rifts. It is accomplished through the application of Political Correctness. Society is slowly fractured into divisions of class, race and gender. Sub-groups are created within these divisions to further enhance societal stress. By lessening national identity the process of usurping national sovereignty becomes easier. There is a reason why George Soros, the self-avowed billionaire globalist, funds 150 different progressive organizations through his Open Society Foundation. Groups like the ACLU, Black Lives Matter, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), Human Rights Campaign, La Raza and the Women’s March. More importantly, this is why Globalists are in favor of unlimited immigration – and the national strife and divisions it creates.

 

… THIS MAY SEEM A LONG QUOTE BUT THE ESSAY IS MUCH LONGER AND WORTHY TO BE READ

 

I used a lot of posting space to understand the influence of Leftist Globalist Multiculturalism in the United Nations. The other influence in the UN is from Muslim dominated nations committed to Islamic Thought.

 

A rational person would think or wonder: How in the world can Marxist oriented Globalist Multiculturalism and those committed to Islamic thought be on the same page?

 

The simplistic answer is both concepts seek a global New World Order by dismantling the Old World Order.

 

The Old World Order is currently dominated a Western Christian Heritage that has developed governing institutions related to various forms of Representative Democracy. For clarity: Not absolute Democracy which degenerates into mob rule which is its own form of despotism. At present, the American Republic form of governance is the best paradigm of Representative Democracy.

 

The American Republic is the ideological enemy Globalist Multiculturalism and Islamic Thought.

 

What in the essence of the traditional sovereign American Republic bugs the crap out of Islamic Thought? For brevity’s sake here is a quick (meaning not exhaustive) comparison between Islam and guarantees in the U.S. Constitution courtesy of Bill Federer at WND:

 

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the “free exercise” of religion, yet Mohammad said “Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.” (Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 84, No. 57). The Quran also states in Sura 4:89 “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.”

 

The First Amendment states Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech,” yet Islamic law enforces dhimmi status on non-Muslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, raising their voices during prayer, ringing church bells or say anything considered “insulting to Islam.” Islamic law relegates non-Muslims to “dhimmi” status, where they are not to propagate their customs among Muslims and cannot display a cross, Christmas decorations, or the Star of David.

 

The First Amendment states Congress cannot take away “the right of the people to peaceably assemble,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims cannot repair places of worship or build new ones, they must allow Muslims to participate in their private meetings, they cannot bring their dead near the graveyards of Muslims or mourn their dead loudly.

 

The First Amendment states Congress cannot take away the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility towards the Islamic state or give comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government.

 

The Second Amendment states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims cannot possess arms, swords or weapons of any kind.

 

The Third Amendment states one cannot be forced to “quarter” someone in their house, yet Islamic law states non-Muslims must entertain and feed for three days any Muslim who wants to stay in their home, and for a longer period if the Muslim falls ill, and they cannot prevent Muslim travelers from staying in their places of worship.

 

The Fourth Amendment guarantees “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures,” yet Islamic law states if a non-Muslim rides on a horse with a saddle and bridle, the horse can be taken away.

 

The Fifth Amendment states that “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime … without due process of law,” yet Mohammad said “No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).” (Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, No. 50).

 

The Sixth Amendment guarantees a “public trial by an impartial jury” and the Seventh Amendment states “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved,” yet Islamic law does not give non-Muslims equal legal standing with Muslims, even prohibiting them from testifying in court against Muslims.

 

The Eighth Amendment states there shall be no “cruel and unusual punishments inflicted,” yet the Quran states: “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah.” (Sura 5:38) A woman who has been raped is also punished “with a hundred stripes.” (Sura 24:2) Women can be beaten: “If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then (you may use negative incentives like) deserting them in bed, then you may (as a last alternative) beat them” (Sura 4:34). Honor killings of wives and daughters who have embarrassed their families have been reported by the United Nations in Muslim populations of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Yemen and increasing in Western nations.

 

The 13th Amendment states there shall be no “slavery or involuntary servitude,” yet the Quran accommodates slavery as Mohammad owned slaves.

 

The 14th Amendment guarantees citizens “equal protection of the laws,” yet the Quran does not consider Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims as equal to Muslims before the law. Referring to Jews as “the People of the Book,” Mohammad said: “They are those whom Allah has cursed; who have been under his wrath; some of whom were turned into apes and swine” (Sura 5:60, 7:166, 2:65).

 

The 15th Amendment guarantees “the right of the citizens … to vote shall not be denied … on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude,” yet strict interpretation of Islamic law does not allow voting, as democracy is considered people setting themselves in the place of Allah by making the laws.

 

The 16th Amendment has some similarities with Islamic law, as “Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from whatever source derived.” Mohammad said “Fight those who believe not in Allah … until they pay the jizya [tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Sura 9:29)

 

The 18th Amendment [Blog Editor: Repealed by 21st Amendment] has some similarities with Islamic law, as “the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors … for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.”

 

The 19th Amendment allows women to vote, yet in strict Islamic countries women cannot vote.

 

The 21st Amendment allows for the sale of liquor, yet Islamic law states non-Muslims are not to sell or drink wine and liquor openly. [Bold text by Blog Editor]

 

It is my humble opinion if the Globalist Multiculturalist Left and the Muslim World ended sovereignty nations, eradicated effective Representative Democracy and/or caused the demise of the American Republic; the Globalists and some kind of Muslim coalition would engage in a bloody war for global domination. You could count on genocides from both sides.

 

NOW! To the inspiration of these thoughts leading to global strife with unpredictable winners and losers. The Gatestone Institute has posted some news about how the United Nations intends to “War” on Free Speech at least as America knows it. Many UN speech restrictions have already affected Free Speech in the rest of the so-called Free World.

 

JRH 7/11/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

UN Launches All-out War on Free Speech

 

By Judith Bergman

July 10, 2019 at 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must therefore be shut down.

 

  • Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.

 

  • Except the UN most definitely seeks to prohibit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the UN Global Compact on Migration, in which it was explicitly stated that public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.

 

  • In contrast to the UN Global Migration compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech doescontain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible: “Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labelled “hate”.

 

  • The new action plan plays straight into the OIC’s decades-long attempts to ban criticism of Islam as ‘hate speech’. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See and the UN.

 

In January, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres commissioned “a global plan of action against hate speech and hate crimes on a fast-track basis,” and said that governments and institutions need “to mobilize solutions that respond to people’s fears and anxieties with answers…” One of those answers, Guterres appeared to suggest, is shutting down free speech. Pictured: Antonio Guterres. (Image source: Fiona Goodall/Getty Images)

 

In January, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, tasked his Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, to “present a global plan of action against hate speech and hate crimes on a fast-track basis”. Speaking at a press conference about the UN’s challenges for 2019, Guterres maintained, “The biggest challenge that governments and institutions face today is to show that we care — and to mobilize solutions that respond to people’s fears and anxieties with answers…”

 

One of those answers, Guterres appeared to suggest, is shutting down free speech.

 

“We need to enlist every segment of society in the battle for values that our world faces today – and, in particular, to tackle the rise of hate speech, xenophobia and intolerance. We hear troubling, hateful echoes of eras long past” Guterres said, “Poisonous views are penetrating political debates and polluting the mainstream. Let’s never forget the lessons of the 1930s. Hate speech and hate crimes are direct threats to human rights…”

 

Guterres added, “Words are not enough. We need to be effective in both asserting our universal values and in addressing the root causes of fear, mistrust, anxiety and anger. That is the key to bring people along in defence of those values that are under such grave threat today”.

 

In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must therefore be shut down. Not only that, but — disingenuously — the UN is comparing dissent from its agendas with the rise of fascism and Nazism in the 1930s.

 

Now the action plan that Guterres spoke of in January is ready. On June 18, Guterres presented the United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech:

 

“Hate speech is…an attack on tolerance, inclusion, diversity and the very essence of our human rights norms and principles,” Guterres said. He also wrote in an article on the subject, “To those who insist on using fear to divide communities, we must say: diversity is a richness, never a threat…We must never forget, after all, that each of us is an “other” to someone, somewhere”.

 

According to the action plan, “Hate is moving into the mainstream – in liberal democracies and authoritarian systems alike. And with each broken norm, the pillars of our common humanity are weakened”. The UN sees for itself a crucial role: “As a matter of principle, the United Nations must confront hate speech at every turn. Silence can signal indifference to bigotry and intolerance…”.

 

Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.

 

Except the UN most definitely seeks to limit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration in which it was explicitly stated that public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.

 

Whatever constitutes intolerance, xenophobia, racism or discrimination was naturally left undefined, making the provision a convenient catchall for governments who wish to defund media that dissent from current political orthodoxy on migration.[1]

 

In contrast to the UN Global Migration compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech does contain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible:

 

“Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labelled “hate”.

 

The action plan, “aims to give to the United Nations the room and the resources to address hate speech, which poses a threat to United Nations principles, values and programmes. Measures taken will be in line with international human rights norms and standards, in particular the right to freedom of opinion and expression. The objectives are twofold: Enhance UN efforts to address root causes and drivers of hate speech [and] enable effective UN responses to the impact of hate speech on societies”.

 

The UN makes it clear in the plan that it “will implement actions at global and country level, as well as enhance internal cooperation among relevant UN entities” to fight hate speech. It considers that “Tackling hate speech is the responsibility of all – governments, societies, the private sector” and it envisages “a new generation of digital citizens, empowered to recognize, reject and stand up to hate speech”. What a brave new world.

 

In the plan, the UN sets up a number of areas of priority. Initially, the UN will “need to know more to act effectively” and it will therefore let “relevant UN entities… recognize, monitor, collect data and analyze hate speech trends”. It will also seek to “adopt a common understanding of the root causes and drivers of hate speech in order to take relevant action to best address and/or mitigate its impact”. In addition, the UN will “identify and support actors who challenge hate speech”.

 

UN entities will also “implement human rights-centred measures which aim at countering retaliatory hate speech and escalation of violence” and “promote measures to ensure that the rights of victims are upheld, and their needs addressed, including through advocacy for remedies, access to justice and psychological counselling”.

 

Disturbingly, the UN plans to put pressure directly on media and influence children through education:

 

“The UN system should establish and strengthen partnerships with new and traditional media to address hate speech narratives and promote the values of tolerance, non-discrimination, pluralism, and freedom of opinion and expression” and “take action in formal and informal education to … promote the values and skills of Global Citizenship Education, and enhance Media and Information Literacy”.

 

The UN is acutely aware that it needs to leverage strategic partnerships with an array of global and local, governmental and private actors in order to reach its goal. “The UN should establish/strengthen partnerships with relevant stakeholders, including those working in the tech industry. Most of the meaningful action against hate speech will not be taken by the UN alone, but by governments, regional and multilateral organizations, private companies, media, religious and other civil society actors” the action plan notes. “UN entities,” it adds, “should also engage private sector actors, including social media companies, on steps they can take to support UN principles and action to address and counter hate speech, encouraging partnerships between government, industry and civil society”. The UN also says that, “upon request” it will “provide support to Member States in the field of capacity building and policy development to address hate speech.”

 

The action plan also reveals that the first concrete initiative is already planned. It is an “international conference on Education for Prevention with focus on addressing and countering Hate Speech which would involve Ministers of Education”.

 

The new action plan plays straight into the decades-long attempts of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to ban criticism of Islam. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See and the UN.

 

According to news reports, the plan was proposed by Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi at a session titled “Countering terrorism and other acts of violence based on religion or belief”.

 

“A particularly alarming development is the rise of Islamophobia which represents the recent manifestation of the age-old hatred that spawned anti-Semitism, racism, apartheid and many other forms of discrimination,” the ambassador said in her speech. She added, “My Prime Minister Imran Khan has recently again called for urgent action to counter Islamophobia, which is today the most prevalent expression of racism and hatred against ‘the other'”.

 

“We are fully committed to support the UN’s strategy on hate speech,” said the Pakistani ambassador, “This is a moment for all of us to come together to reverse the tide of hate and bigotry that threatens to undermine social solidarity and peaceful co-existence.”

 

In 2017, Facebook’s Vice President of Public Policy, Joel Kaplan, reportedly agreed to requests from Pakistan’s Interior Minister Nisar Ali Khan, to “remove fake accounts and explicit, hateful and provocative material that incites violence and terrorism” because “the entire Muslim Ummah was greatly disturbed and has serious concerns over the misuse of social media platforms to propagate blasphemous content”.

 

At the UN, Pakistan’s Ambassador Lodhi called for government interventions to fight hate speech, including national legislation, and reportedly “called for framing a more focused strategy to deal with the various expressions of Islamophobia. A ‘whole of government’ and a ‘whole of society’ approach was needed. In this regard, the Pakistani envoy urged the secretary-general to engage with a wide range of actors, including governments, civil society and social media companies to take action and stop social media users being funneled into online sources of radicalization”.

 

The UN’s all-out war on free speech is on.

 

Judith Bergman, a columnist, lawyer and political analyst, is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.

 

NOTES:

 

[1] According to Objective 17 of the UN Global Compact on migration, member states commit to: “Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media.” [Emphasis added.]

____________________

The UN, Globalist Multiculturalism & Islam One World Despotism

John R. Houk

© July 11, 2019

___________________

UN Launches All-out War on Free Speech

 

© 2019 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: Permission was not acquired to cross post. Upon request the cross post will be removed.]