A Globalist Anti-American Scheme


If you read my blog it is no secret I am a huge President Trump supporter and regard the leadership of the Democratic Party to be witting and maybe in some cases (though can’t think of any) unwitting transform-America Marxists. BUT I am not a registered Republican.

 

Why?

 

After President Reagan, GOP Presidents and nominees for President have been largely a disappointment to the Originalism of America’s Founding principles (that Dems so often LIE to defend). After McCain and Romney in varying degrees proved to be Republicans in Name Only (aka not loyal to Conservative Americans) losing to an obvious Marxist liar in Barack Hussein Obama (Old SlantRight blog posts on BHO Marxism: HERE, HERE, HERE & HERE) – more race-baiter than friend of Black-Americans, I became a registered Independent. My only regret with that move is in my State that means I cannot participate in Primary elections.

 

As you will recall or discover below, one of President Trump’s campaign issues for 2016 was an anti-NAFTA and anti-TPP stand as a bad deal. So, I’m a bit astounded to-date he is supportive of the equally egregious USMCA globalist/sovereignty robbing deal being pushed seemingly by equal manners in the GOP, the Dems and unsurprisingly by the MSM. Justin Smith exposes a glaringly BAD DEAL.

 

JRH 12/17/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.

 

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

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

A Globalist Anti-American Scheme

President Trump Has Been Duped

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 12/16/2019 9:44 PM

 

President Donald J. Trump, “the Great Negotiator”, is touting the worse “trade agreement” in U.S. history, after he and Democrats reached an agreement on the ** United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement [aka USMCA] on December 10th 2019, and if this globalist mess is the best he can do, something is dreadfully wrong within his administration. This agreement is the antithesis of America First and merges the worse parts of NAFTA and the Trans-Pacific Partnership [aka TPP] that was rejected in 2017, and President Trump has either inadvertently taken his eye off the process, as the globalist wolves entered the hen-house, or he is a willing and complicit actor in a process that destroys U.S. sovereignty.

 

In a morning tweet, on December 10th, President Trump hailed the prospect of completing one more campaign promise: “America’s great USMCA Trade Bill is looking good.”

 

Robert Lighthizer, the chief trade official leading negotiations for the U.S., stated: “We have created a deal that will benefit American workers, farmers, and ranchers for years to come. This will be the model for American trade deals going forward.”

 

This egregious piece of legislation is set to go to a vote on Thursday December 19th in the House of Representatives, unless something cancels the vote, according to one staffer in Representative Mark Green’s office, and it more than likely will pass, since, as of this writing, even some Republicans-In-Name-Only, such as Congressman Chuck Fleischmann (R-TN) — Tennessee 3rd District, are currently set to vote in favor of its passage. As an aside, I made sure to tell Rep. Fleischmann’s staffer that I would in fact travel to his area and work against him, if he votes for this deeply flawed, anti-American piece of ill-conceived crap.

 

Americans have continuously been told that this renegotiated deal is all about trade and improving life for all North Americans and Mexicans, but it is more than clear that it is really about control. This “deal” is about the total control of all things and all people that fall under its jurisdiction.

 

A page by page comparison of the 2325 page USMCA and the TPP reveals an extensive overlap. Nearly all the exact same problems inherent in the TPP also are found in the USMCA, in the manifest erosion of national sovereignty, the unrestricted movement of foreign nationals and the de facto facilitation of illegal immigration, collective bargaining for workers and measures to combat climate change.

 

According to ** this study — How much of the Transpacific Partnership is in the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement? (June 26th 2019) — conducted by researchers from the University at Ottawa, fifty-seven percent of the text of the USMCA is copied from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a treaty repeatedly described as a “horrible deal” by President Trump. Twenty-nine out of thirty chapters have equivalents in the USMCA and seventy-two percent of the matched USMCA chapters are found in both agreements. Many of the chapter titles are identical and so too are the various articles and clauses they each contain. And upon deep analysis, the textual similarity between the USMCA and the TPP reveal that have a great deal in common; they are of the same generation of treaties, and they do not mark a fundamental rupture in U.S. practices, despite President Trump’s rhetoric.

 

Within days of the release of the first text of the USMCA, Richard Haass, a globalist proponent of the New World Order and president of the Council on Foreign Relations, praised the USMCA due to its alignment with the TPP. According to Haass, “USMCA is NAFTA plus TPP plus a few tweaks”.

 

Take an in depth look at the agreement, and one will discover Chapter 30 establishes a new governing bureaucracy under a Free Trade Commission of unelected and unaccountable men and women overseeing various lower regional committees. Just as initially set forth in the TPP Commission, the Free Trade Commission can make changes to the USMCA without the consent of Congress, and this fact, in and of itself, completely undermines Article I Section 8 of the Constitution and Congressional authority and power to regulate trade with foreign nations.

 

The United States already has enough problems with an illegal alien invasion of between 22 to 40 million illegals without compounding it by relinquishing any sovereignty and decision making in this regard to an unelected Commission of the USMCA, which very well could be the consequence, if this treaty is ratified by the Senate, after the House passes it. Illegal immigration is certain to be further facilitated by Article 23.8 (Chapter 23) on Migrant Workers and a requirement to “ensure that migrant workers are protected under its (each respective nation’s) labor laws, whether they are nationals or non-nationals” (read “illegal aliens” and “foreign nationals”). This would serve to circumvent any determinations by our Congress and federal judiciary regarding the arrival of caravans of illegal aliens from Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua and El Salvador, as well as a final determination on DACA. And making it plain in language identical to language in the TPP, Article 15.5 of the USMCA states: “No party shall adopt or maintain … a measure that … imposes a limitation on … the total number of natural persons that may be employed in a particular financial service sector or that a financial institution or cross-border service supplier may employ … in the form of numerical quotas or the requirement of an economic needs test.” This opens the door for any number of people to be brought across the border for any reason deemed necessary by one or more Parties involved, flooding America with radical Central American socialists.

 

[Blog Editor: Interesting perspective on USMCA ending National Sovereignty –  USMCA “Trade Agreement”, the North American Union, an Article V convention, and Red Flag Laws: Connecting the Dots; Posted by TMH – By Publius Huldah; Noisy Room; 12/7/19]

 

Staying true to other globalist anti-American schemes, the USMCA also forces signatories to submit to international concerns, such as the International Labor Organization, the World Trade Organization and United Nations mandates like the Law of the Sea, that the United States refused to ratify in 1982, along with “sustainable development” — mentioned no less than nine times in the chapter on the environment — and International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives directives and edicts, that many of the U.S. states have fought to eradicate over the past decade, after experiencing years of their oppressive nature. [Blog Editor: All related to sovereignty robbing UN Agenda 21, Agenda 2030 et al]

 

Although the original NAFTA agreement did not contain any directive on the environment in 1994, the USMCA contains a thirty pages in Chapter 24 dedicated to the environment, that mentions “sustainable development” nine times. Page two of this chapter states: “The Parties recognize that a healthy environment is an integral element of sustainable development and recognize the contribution that trade makes to sustainable development.” Other similar points address “sustainable fisheries” and the “sustainable use of biodiversity”, both of which are aligned with and straight from the United Nation’s Agenda 2030; and, it also contains the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation among the Governments of the United States, Canada and the United Mexican States, that has a subsidiary called the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, quite like a supra-EPA for all of North America.

 

The purpose of the USMCA’s environment chapter, according to Article 24.2, is as follows [page 2 of PDF]: ” … to promote mutually supportive trade and environmental policies and practices; promote high levels of environmental protection and effective enforcement of environmental laws; and enhance the capacities of the Parties to address trade-related environmental issues, including through cooperation, in furtherance of sustainable development.”

 

So, the USMCA is essentially calling for the regulation and control over all the waters, lands and organisms across three countries, in much the same way President Obama sought to exert complete control over America through the Water Rules for the United States EPA regulation. The USMCA would strip the United States of control in these areas, through its control over three countries and multi-layers of government overseen and directed by regional government entities. This would effectively put all American lives — where they live, how they live and what jobs they may perform in any given region — in the hands of unelected bureaucrats, with little to no real oversight whatsoever.

 

As far back as the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan was intelligent enough and prescient to recognize the Law of the Sea Treaty as a thinly veiled attempt to force a lurch towards world government and the New World Order later described in glowing terms by President George H.W. Bush, a globalist “Republican”, and so Reagan refused to sign it, after Jeanne Kirkpatrick, U.S. Ambassador to the UN from 1981 to 1985, testified before the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, in fierce opposition to its ratification. And although Pres. Bush Jr urged its ratification in 2007 and it was once again supported in 2012 by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as of 2019, the U.S. Senate has still refused to ratify the UN convention.

 

However, in the USMCA’s Chapter 24, [Scroll to] Article 24.18, “Sustainable Fisheries Management”, the United States, Canada and Mexico are required to adhere to the Law of the Sea Treaty in regards to managing their fishing industries. In other words, the United States will essentially surrender its sovereignty over all its waterways and miles of coastal oceans to the jurisdiction of UN international law, which would be a national security nightmare on too many levels possible to entertain here, all in the name of protecting fish and marine life.

 

[Blog Editor: Of Interest – USMCA Sneaking UN Law of the Sea Treaty Through The Back Door? By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh; Canada Free Press; 11/15/18]

 

All of this opens a path towards a North American Union, as the USMCA seeks to merge the economies of these three countries into one. Think of it as similar to the authoritarian European Union on steroids, dashing madly along and trampling on each and every inalienable right and each item in our U.S. Bill of Rights along the way.

 

Is it any wonder that the anti-American Travelers, the Communists and the New World Order globalists are so ecstatic over the creation of this USMCA “New Deal”, the old made new?

 

According to the Huffington Post, “At least half of the men and women standing behind Trump during his Rose Garden ceremony praising the new deal were the same career service staff who negotiated nearly identical provisions in TPP, which Trump had railed against.” Trevor Kincaid, one of the group and the lead negotiator for TPP, observed, “It’s really the same with a new name.”

 

Doesn’t most of America remember just how bad TPP was proven to be? Don’t all of You recall how hard freedom loving Americans fought to defeat TPP?

 

All America must flood the White House and Congress with calls and letters demanding this treaty be completely eradicated and thrown in the trash where it belongs. Remind Trump how he felt about the TPP when he rejected it by executive order in 2017, and explain to him how disastrous the USMCA will be in practice. If he and representatives and senators look at this honestly with America’s best interests at heart, they will all take immediate action to terminate this ill-founded evil machination, designed by men who would destroy America.

 

Lincoln Bloomfield, a longtime State Department bureaucrat and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote a report in 1962, that was financed by the State Department. His report proposed that “ever-larger units evolve through customs unions, confederation, regionalism, etc., until ultimately the larger units coalesce under a global umbrella. America is now witnessing the culmination of those globalists’ efforts coming to fruition through the completion of one segment of the “global umbrella” — a globalist objective — by way of the USMCA.

 

Those who created the USMCA have no respect for U.S. sovereignty and the Constitution, no true love for America and no honor, and more than likely, President Trump has been duped by them, since no evidence exists that shows the President has ever supported globalism. More than that, President Trump failed to understand that the management of the entire United States is guided by approximately five pages and a single paged Bill of Rights, rather than over 2000 pages, or that a real free trade agreement keeping with American principles of Liberty would be noted for its absence of rules on trade; and, while it may be hard to move the President to disavow and kill this miserable treaty, he will do it and he must, if he truly decries world government and does not wish to be known as the progenitor of “the worst agreement ever negotiated”, akin to the one-worlders and the likes of the Rockefellers and Soros; and in the process, let us place our government back in the hands of “We the People” in 2020, as we hold people and organizations accountable for moving in such a reprehensible, ignoble manner to end our Republic and destroy our Constitution in pursuit of Marxist-Leninism and a global government, actions that most freedom and liberty loving Americans use to call treason.

 

By Justin O. Smith

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

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

_________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All text embraced by brackets are by the Editor. Unless indicated by ** source links are by the Editor. The Double Asterisks indicates the source is by Justin Smith.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

ILHAN CALLS FOR UN OCCUPATION OF US


Ilhan Omar demonstrates AGAIN she has no business representing ANY District in the U.S. to be a member of Congress. She actually advocates for the UN to be on the U.S. border to benefit ILLEGAL immigrants.

 

JRH 8/31/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.

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

ILHAN CALLS FOR UN OCCUPATION OF US

 

Ilhan Omar Superimposed on Chinese Appearing UN Soldiers

 

By Timothy Benton

August 30, 2019

Ocensor

 

We have heard enough of the four, seen their responses in ways that are anti-American, but the one thing we have never stood for was the occupation of our sovereign land, not Ilhan is asking for this by the UN.

 

Make no mistake, the UN is not the friend of the US, they want all nations controlled by this entity that is not in step with the values we as Americans show, is a wasted and bloated organization, yet she wants them to come here and occupy our land, thus giving up US sovereignty over some of our territory.

 

VIDEO: Omar Wants The UN To Handle The Migrant Crisis

 

[Posted by Daily Caller News Foundation

Published on Aug 29, 2019

 

Rep Omar expressed her desire for the US border and the illegal migrant crisis to be handled by the United Nations, rather than the Federal government.]

 

In a speech Ilhan said that we should do what other nations do, call the UN High Commissioner on Refugees, to allow the UN onto our southern border and control the borders.

 

She went on to say that our border security, not allowing illegals in is a gross violation of human rights. This was the reason she felt the UN should be called, they, not us, should be in control of our border, that we should step back and allow them to dictate to us our security.

 

The question I think one should ask, how has this worked out for Europe, not with enclaves that the authorities dare not enter, where people send out morality gangs that attack women they deem are misbehaving or dressed in an immoral way, at least according to their Islamic moral beliefs.

 

Ilhan Omar

 

This does not bring up the fact that more people have joined terrorist and other radical Islamic groups around the world than anyplace else in the US than from the area that Ilhan represents, but she wants to see this expanded.

 

What is more, now we see her embroiled in a host of corruption, marriage to family to give them visa’s, affairs outside of her marriage while lecturing us on her moral superiority, we have had enough.

 

Calling for the US to give up any sovereignty over any part of our nation is treasonous, not to mention the reaction places like Texas would have towards having foreign troops on our side of the US borders, would most likely quickly escalate into a shooting conflict, yet this is what Ilhan is calling for.

 

The question we need to ask is, “Do we want Chinese, Iranian, or any other nation’s soldiers under the UN flag ever placed on our sovereign territory?” It seems once more Ilhan has shown how little she understands the US, we value our sovereignty, trying to put troops on our own land would quickly escalate to violence. We must ask ourselves, “Is this really what the ultimate aim is, to bring in forces to control us since she can’t?”

 

Ilhan Omar is the best politician that we have ever seen to promote the GOP, just listening to her is driving people over to vote for anyone but the DNC. We should be thankful for her, Rashida, and AOC, they have aided more the GOP cause then all the money spent on commercials.

 

Ilhan Omar, What Was Minnesota Thinking?

What is also amazing is how little they have changed, the party that brought us the KKK, Jim Crow Laws, Segregation is now trying to reinstitute these laws. They changed the direction of their hate from the African American population to the whites, their sheets for Antifa and Black Lives Matter Shirts.

Ilhan After Screaming Racism Introduces Bill To Support BDS

Ilhan and friends, who we have had to sit and listen to lectures about racism and their great moral resolve, now are showing their true colors. Yesterday, after screaming about Trump’s racism introduced a bill to support the radical anti-Semitic movement BDS.

Now Ilhan Omar Calls To Overthrow Trump!

Ilhan Omar, the darling of the liberal left has now gone so far as to compare Trump to a dictator and say that she is 100% sure that they remove him as they have other dictators. One has to wonder, where are the leaders of the DNC?

____________________

Ocensor HOMEPAGE

 

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.]

 

 

The End of the Line


Justin Smith views warnings of an imminent economic crisis from billionaire investors. AND the so-called Green New Deal may make the predictions even worse.

JRH 2/10/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

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

The End of the Line

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 2/9/2019 5:00 PM

 

The United States’ economy has surpassed all normal ebbs and flows, corrections, by approximately five years, since on average in each past cycle it rose for 56 months before collapsing. We’re about five years past that point and our economy is only now “cooling”. We’re just about due for another economic recession, if not a collapse that makes 2008 look small. We’re at the end of the line.

The U.S. spends almost a third of its revenue on interest payments alone, and it doesn’t seem like it can afford to pay much more.

In the short decade since 2008, the national debt, ever on the rise, has jumped from $10.6 trillion to $22 trillion. It also comes with a deficit that’s currently over $1 trillion currently. The interest payments alone may be forming a “black hole” from which the U.S. may never escape.

These facts alone should raise concern in any interested observer.

 

And now we see twenty-nine year old Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a product of the Puerto Rican Enlightenment and a Bronx resident, and other red, radical socialists like her in the House of Representatives, promising Pie-In-The-Sky Utopia for everyone. This makes her a danger to herself, her constituents and the nation, since she believes there isn’t any problem that a government program cannot solve, and she is already advocating for Medicare for all, a job guarantee, free college tuition, a green infrastructure program, and a squeeze the rich tax plan (70% for those making over $10 million).

 

Most political pundits say, “It will never pass … it’s crazy … it will harm the economy.” But, crazy plans that hurt the economy just might stand a chance at passing, since just over half the population in its entirety, and 51% of all Millennials, now have an acceptable view of socialism, some even embracing communism.

 

When existing laws of the land cause bankruptcy and chaos, people seem to look to legislate even more absurd laws, which is precisely how the first New Deal was pushed through Congress, during the panic and despair of the 1932 elections. And the New Deal gave President Franklin D. Roosevelt carte blanche to enact a series of costly programs.

 

A good guess is that the next economic crisis will be severe and long-lasting, too, as stocks fall hard and the economy goes into a deep recession.

 

“How did we get here”, one young lady recently asked me. Short answer: America has been guided to this point, by the consequences of the Federal Reserve Act, centralized banking, regulations, currency manipulation, devaluing the U.S. dollar, socialist initiatives in Congress to fast-track globalism, unfunded debt, monetized debt and acts of anti-American national sovereignty on both sides of the aisle who are intent on tearing apart the Founders’ vision and U.S. sovereignty, in order to pave the way for the globalists and their vision of a “new world order”.

 

The enemies of America, both foreign and domestic, have been working towards this goal for the past 120 years, and they have been working tirelessly and consistently towards leveling America’s power and wealth to the point She can be managed and coerced or forced to submit to the global agenda of the few power elite, the oligarchs of the world,

 

Mainstream media almost never hype a financial crisis, so it’s significant when they do. But when billionaires are sounding the alarm, you might want to pay close attention.

At least two billionaires are doing just that, starting with Baupost Group’s Seth Klarman. Baupost Group is a $28 billion hedge fund, and Klarman normally positions himself out of the limelight. His fund is only open to private investors, so he has little incentive to promote his brand to the public.

But recently, he felt the need to write a warning to investors about the global debt, with specific reference to the U.S., according to Sovereign Man:

In a 22-page letter to his investors, Klarman warned that government debt levels, particularly in the US (where debt exceeds GDP), could lead to the next global financial crisis.

The seeds of the next major financial crisis (or the one after that) may well be found in today’s sovereign debt levels,” he wrote.

 

Even ignoring economic history, there are signs everywhere, as nearly every major asset class around the world, from stocks and bonds to real estate, is selling at nearly an all-time high at prices that defy common sense. This suggests the possibility of a big recession and market correction just before the 2020 election, giving the socialists a much needed crisis that could catapult them into a majority in both houses of Congress. And that’s why we should all be praying that if any coming recession must come, let it hit soon, so it can be properly addressed before it becomes a major election issue.

In the same letter, Klarman continued: “There is no way to know how much debt is too much, but America will inevitably reach an inflection point whereupon a suddenly more skeptical debt market will refuse to continue to lend to us at rates we can afford…

Since the U.S. spends almost a third of its revenue on interest payments alone, it doesn’t seem like it can afford to pay much more.

And Klarman isn’t the only billionaire expressing unease. At the World Economic Forum [Blog Editor: WEFORUM – Globalization 4.0; Breitbart-Pompeo-Nationalism; New American-Merkel-Communist China-Globalist Agenda; & TheGatewayPundit-Ted Malloch-Criticizing Davos] in Davos, Switzerland, Ray Dalio, founder of the world’s largest hedge fund, said that debt would be to blame for the next downturn, which he believes will be bigger than the Great Depression.

“The biggest issue is that there is only so much one can squeeze out of a debt cycle and most countries are approaching those limits”.

You might think the U.S. government would do everything to curb this problem, but Uncle Sam’s total debt is rapidly approaching $22 trillion, and according to the Congressional Budget Office’s latest ten-year projection, it will be more than $33 trillion by 2029, with $1 trillion annual deficits set to begin again and stay above that for as far as the fiscal eye can see.

Skyrocketing debt, check. Deficit to match, check. Or will it be checkmate?

Although I’ve stated this twice before in this piece. let me reiterate — The U.S. spends almost a third of its revenue on interest payments alone.  America and Her people cannot afford to pay much more.

WE’VE ARRIVED AT THE END OF THE LINE.

~ Justin O Smith

____________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

Criticizing Angela Merkel & EU


Yurki1000 doesn’t always leave comments appropriate to the post. Even so, those comments are either informative or amusing. A few days ago Yurki left a comment to “The Democratic Party Endangers America’s Cultural Heritage” post on my NCCR blog. Yurki’s comment had nothing to do with America’s cultural heritage, but was an amusing and correct criticism of Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel. To understand Yurki’s European heritage concerns, he is Finnish.

Let’s see if you agree.

 

JRH 1/26/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

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

Criticizing Angela Merkel & EU

 

Yurki1000

Posted January 22, 2019 at 3:12 PM

 

Angela Merkel – Mein Jihad

 

Could it be Merkel on Hitler’s lap

 

Merkel Perestroika Deception

 

 

GETTING ANXIOUS

 

– In a speech at the Paris Peace Forum (on Nov. 11, 2018) that was held to observe the 100th anniversary of the end of WW I, German Chancellor Angela Merkel attacked “nationalism” and “destructive isolationism.”

 

She was clearly attacking Pres. Trump and his “America First” policies.

 

She said, “We know that most of the challenges and threats of today can no longer be solved by one nation alone (by the U.S.), but only if we act together (as a world government). That’s why we have to stand up for this kind of collaboration” (why we have to oppose Pres. Trump’s “America First” policies).

 

She added, “Close international cooperation (globalism) on the basis of shared values (one-world religion) that are enshrined in the UN charters (included in the UN documents): This is the only way to overcome the horrors of the past and pave a new future” (their New Universal Agenda).

 

Also, in Nov. 2018, it was reported that the UN Human Rights Committee has drafted a memo that calls for abortion to be made a human right and all laws that oppose abortion to be declared illegal all over the world (global laws that supersede national laws). –

 

Please read more:

 

https://www.raptureready.com/2018/12/02/world-government-getting-anxious-daymond-duck/

 

– Angela Merkel was embarrassed when newspapers all over Europe published photos of her marching and smiling in the uniform of East Germany’s Young Communist Movement as a teenager. –

 

https://neveryetmelted.com/2016/07/20/angela-merkel-young-communist/

 

Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi

 

THE PAN-EUROPE

 

– Few people know that one of the main instigators of the process of European integration, was a man who also conceived the genocide of the peoples of Europe. He was a sinister individual whose existence is unknown to the masses of our people, but the political elites consider him as the founder of the European Union. His name is Richard von Coudenhove Kalergi (1894-1972). His father was an Austrian diplomat named Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi (with connections to the Byzantine family of the Kallergis), and his mother the Japanese Mitsu Aoyama.

 

Thanks to his close contacts with European aristocrats and politicians, and due to the network of relationships created by his nobleman-diplomat father, Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi was able to work unseen, away from the glare of publicity, and he managed to engage the co-operation of the most influential heads of state for his plan, making them supporters and collaborators for his “project of European integration”.

 

In 1922 he founded the “Pan-European” movement in Vienna, which aimed to create a New World Order, based on a federation of nations led by the United States. European integration would be just the first step in creating a world government. His earliest supporters included Czech politicians Tomáš Masaryk and Edvard Beneš, and the German Jewish banker Max Warburg, who invested the first 60,000 marks. The Austrian Chancellor Ignaz Seipel and the next president of Austria, Karl Renner, took early responsibility for leading the “Pan-European” movement and later, French politicians, such as Léon Blum, Aristide Briand, Alcide De Gasperi etc., offered their help.

 

With the rise of Fascism in Europe during the 1930s, the project of European integration was abandoned and the “Pan-European” movement was forced to dissolve. However, after the Second World War, and thanks to frantic and tireless activity and the support of Winston Churchill, the Jewish Masonic Lodge B’nai B’rith and major newspapers like the New York Times, Kalergi managed to gain acceptance for his plan by the United States Government and later the CIA became involved in driving the plan towards completion. –

 

Please read more:

 

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=138630

 

THE UNITED STATES OF EUROPE

 

– It was always the aim of the European project, from its very inception in 1951 with the Treaty of Paris, signed on 18th April 1951 between Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, France, Italy and West Germany to established the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) (which is traditionally regarded as the foundation of the EU because it led to political and economic integration to a certain degree in western Europe as well as providing the basis for the modern EU) and the March 25th 1957 signing of the Treaty of Rome to establish a fully integrated federal superstate called the United States of Europe in which the concept of individual national sovereignty for each member state is complexly destroyed and Europe becomes a single , centralised political entity ruled from Brussels. Ted Heath knew this full well when he conned the UK public into voting for entry into the then European Economic Community, supposedly just a free trading bloc and nothing else. He had been briefed by the Civil Service that membership would entail the eventual complete loss of the UK’s sovereignty and our eventual absorption into a European superstate. We were sold the European project on a tissue of lies (note well please, Anna Soubry.)

 

This deception continued in subsequent decades with politicians of all parties and political shades signing the UK up to various stages of integration into the EU. –

 

https://the-bnn-online.com/2018/10/28/the-eu-has-revealed-its-true-nature-a-federalist-monster-that-will-not-stop-until-nations-are-abolished/

 

THE PLAN

 

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Coudenhove-Kalergi+Plan

 

PLUS +

 

Let’s not forget. We live in a fallen World. THEY (The Hierarchy Enslaving You) work for satan. They control INFORMATION.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=six+corporations+own+the+media&tbm=isch

 

Is there hope? Yes.

 

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+10&version=NOG

 

[Blog Editor excerpts of Romans 10 Names of God Bible (NOG):

 

If You Believe You Will Be Saved

10 Brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer to God on behalf of the Jewish people is that they would be saved. I can assure you that they are deeply devoted to God, but they are misguided. They don’t understand how to receive God’s approval. So they try to set up their own way to get it, and they have not accepted God’s way for receiving his approval. Christ is the fulfillment of Moses’ Teachings so that everyone who has faith may receive God’s approval.

 

 

However, what else does it say? “This message is near you. It’s in your mouth and in your heart.” This is the message of faith that we spread. If you declare that Yeshua is Lord, and believe that God brought him back to life, you will be saved. 10 By believing you receive God’s approval, and by declaring your faith you are saved. 11 Scripture says, “Whoever believes in him will not be ashamed.”

 

12 There is no difference between Jews and Greeks. They all have the same Lord, who gives his riches to everyone who calls on him. 13 So then, “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

 

 

16 But not everyone has believed the Good News.

 

Isaiah asks, “Lord, who has believed our message?” 17 So faith comes from hearing the message, and the message that is heard is what Christ spoke.

 

 

20 Isaiah said very boldly, “I was found by those who weren’t looking for me. I was revealed to those who weren’t asking for me.” 21 Then Isaiah said about Israel, “All day long I have stretched out my hands to disobedient and rebellious people.”]

 

Blessings
Jyrki

jesus saves

Introducing UN’s Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration


Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © January 19, 2019

Since the MSM primary propaganda agenda is to publish as much fake news as possible hoping to lead to President Trump’s impeachment, you may not catch too much info on a United Nations globalist agenda.

 

The UN has spent the last half century doing all it can to undermine the sovereignty of successful Capitalist-minded UN member nations. This undermining is especially aimed at the sovereignty of the United States of America.

 

I used to pay attention to this UN Leftist-globalist agenda that smacks of a One-World -Government paradigm. You can brush up on this UN paradigm by searching for all thing Agenda 21. Be warned in your search on Agenda 21, much if not most of Left-Wing sources (too often government friendly sources) paint a utopian picture land management, food production and population management (which really is human depopulation).

 

In relation to National Sovereignty and a UN globalist paradigm, Claudia Rosett looks how the UN’s globalist migration policies threatens the U.S. rule of law with the attempt to make rules/international laws supersede U.S. sovereignty and by extension the supremacy of the U.S. Constitution within our national borders.

 

Points I found of interest I placed in bold text.

 

JRH 1/19/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

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

The UN is trying to grab control of worldwide immigration policies*

 

By Claudia Rosett*

January 18th, 2019 3:55PM

American Center for Democracy

 

UN GCM logo

 

While President Donald Trump seeks funding for a bordering! wall, the United Nations is seeking control of migration policies worldwide, with a campaign configured to undermine America’s sovereignty and control over its own borders. And, yes, if the U.N. has its way, America will help pay for it. [Bold text Blog Editor]

 

As with many of the U.N.’s turf grabs, this campaign to co-opt national migration policy has been years in the making. Incremental in its origins, and swaddled in U.N. jargon and procedure, it has largely escaped the U.S. headlines. But it’s now reached the stage of becoming dangerous.

 

The spearhead of this U.N. campaign is an international agreement with the high-minded name of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. That’s not remotely what this document boils down to. While proclaiming a utopian “unity of purpose” among the 193 highly diverse member states, this Global Compact would have the U.N.’s largely unaccountable, self-aggrandizing and often opaque bureaucracy, operating in service of its despot-infested collective of governments, set the terms for all.

 

The lengthy text reads like a template for setting up the world’s most politically correct welfare state, with a colossal menu of entitlements and central planning for migrants; never mind the cost to the pockets, rights and freedoms of the existing citizens. This “compact” does not restrict itself to refugees. It anoints the U.N. as arbiter of how to handle cross-border human mobility worldwide, meaning migrants, permanent or temporary, whatever their reasons for wanting to move. In this scheme of the universe, the U.N. proposes to become the overarching authority “addressing migration in all its dimensions.” [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

Coming from a United Nations that has yet to solve its own problems with peacekeeper rape of minors, that’s ambitious.

 

In a section on eliminating “all forms of discrimination,” this compact also aims to “shape perceptions of migration,” not least by smothering free speech and promoting gags and penalties for news coverage or debate that the U.N., in its collective majesty, deems unfriendly to migrants. [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

This compact was adopted without a vote at an international conference last month in Morocco, in which the U.S. declined to take part. The resulting draft was endorsed on Dec. 19 by the U.N. General Assembly in New York, over U.S. protests.

 

It is telling that among 193 member states, the 152 countries voting in favor of the compact included such brazen human-rights abusers as Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Myanmar and Iran. The five countries voting no were the U.S., Israel, Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. The remaining 36 member states either officially abstained or did nothing. [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

At the U.N., such big vote tallies in favor of U.N. turf grabs are business as usual. In practice, the Global Compact would entail virtually no costs for rogue, despotic or failing member states, which routinely vote for resolutions that they themselves ignore. The main costs would fall on the law-abiding, free countries that provide the most desirable destinations for migrants, and notably on the biggest single contributor to the U.N., the United States. [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

The U.S. Mission to the U.N. denounced the compact, accurately, as amounting to a bid “to advance global governance at the expense of the sovereign right of States to manage their immigration systems in accordance with their national laws, policies and interests.” A U.S. envoy warned that this compact could translate into a “long-term means of building customary international law or so-called ‘soft law’ in the area of migration,” and expressed particular concern that the term “compact” is an amorphous word in international law, “but implies legal obligation.” [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

The U.N.’s rejoinder has been that General Assembly resolutions are nonbinding; participation by member states is voluntary.

 

Which brings us to the real pressure tactics with which the UN is attempting an end-run around the United States. In concert with a vision outlined in 2017 by Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, the Compact itself calls for the U.N. to set up a sprawling “network on migration,” to embed, coordinate and promote the compact’s methods and goals throughout the U.N. system and around the globe. The UN Terms of Reference for this compact include a preliminary list of 38 U.N. entities already slated to promote this agenda.

 

The Compact further stipulates that the secretariat and coordinator of this migration network will be a U.N. agency called the International Organization for Migration. The IOM operates with a staff of more than 9,000, in some 150 countries, with a budget of more than $1.4 billion per year, the biggest slice of that contributed by the United States. [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

The kicker is that it was less than three years ago that the International Organization for Migration joined the U.N. For some 65 years before that, it was chiefly led, bankrolled and shaped by the U.S., and served as one of America’s most reliable partners in dealing with migration. Based in Geneva, the IOM was founded in 1951 as an intergovernmental agency — outside the U.N. system. The migration organization was not a policy shop. Its mission was primarily to help with logistics in resettling people displaced in Europe by World War II. That led to it helping migrant populations hit with both man-made and natural disasters, from the Soviet invasions of Eastern Europe, to the Vietnamese boat people, to victims of the Christmas tsunami of 2004, and so forth. The international migration group cooperated with the U.N., but in keeping with longstanding U.S. preferences, it did not join the U.N. The arrangement worked pretty well.

 

That all changed under President Barack Obama. During Obama’s final year in office, in 2016, with a nod from his administration, the IOM joined the U.N., which promptly declared plans to create a global plan for migration. For 2017, as a parting gift of the Obama administration, America’s $544 million contribution included $1.68 million earmarked for conferences and consultations supporting the creation of the Global Compact. [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

In late 2017, the Trump administration reversed that policy, announcing the U.S. would no longer support U.N. activities leading to the Global Compact. Ambassador Nikki Haley released a statement that: “America is proud of our immigrant heritage and our long-standing moral leadership in providing support to migrant and refugee populations across the globe,” but the U.N.’s global migration project, she said, “is simply not compatible with U.S. sovereignty.” [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

The U.N. pursued the compact regardless, with the IOM playing a major role in consultations and conferences around the globe, including a major preparatory conference in 2017 in Mexico and a culminating conference last month in Morocco. In early 2017, Guterres appointed as his special representative for migration a former U.N. human rights commissioner, Louise Arbour, who worked closely with the IOM to shepherd the Global Compact to fruition and presided at the Morocco conference, which Secretary-General Guterres also attended.

 

When the IOM elected a new director-general in 2018, the U.S. lost its longtime leadership of the organization to a Portuguese socialist, Antonio Vittorino. An old cohort of Guterres, Vittorino made a career as a member of Portugal’s Socialist Party, and in the 1990s, during Guterres’s tenure as Portugal’s prime minister, served a stint as his deputy. Now they are working together on what is basically a socialist vision for global migration. [Bold text Blog Editor’s]

 

According to the terms under which it joined the U.N., the IOM is not supposed to shape norms or prescribe policy. The agreement spells out that it “shall function as an independent, autonomous and non-normative international organization.” But that’s not how it’s working out. The precise arrangements within the IOM for its new role as secretariat and hub of the U.N.’s new systemwide migration network are still in flux, according to a spokesman reached by phone in Switzerland. But policymaking looms large, as confirmed by this spokesman: “The IOM is finally after 67 years setting up a policy shop.”

 

Last year the Trump administration cut off funding for IOM activities specifically related to the Global Compact. The idea was that these could be disentangled from the rest of the organization’s activities, for which a lot of U.S. money continues to flow, most of it voluntary. In 2018, according to IOM budget estimates, the U.S. contributed roughly $448 million in voluntary funds, all but $2 million of that project-dedicated, plus $12 million in assessed dues.

 

But with the International Organization for Migration now planning its own policy shop and serving as the hub and secretariat for a U.N. migration network to promote the Global Compact, it’s hard to see how any IOM project might escape being entwined with this campaign to undermine U.S. sovereignty. It’s looking ever more as if a good step toward enhancing U.S. border security would be to stop funding the migration organization and spend all those American tax dollars on projects and partners more dedicated to the genuine interests of both migrants and the U.S. itself.

 

*Claudia Rosett is a foreign policy fellow with the Washington-based Independent Women’s Forum.

 

*This column was first published in The Dallas Morning News, on January 18, 2019.

_____________________

Introducing UN’s Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © January 19, 2019

_____________________

The UN is trying to grab control of worldwide immigration policies

 

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.

 

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, offers individually 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

 

READ THE REST

 

Illegals Invading USA Waving Honduran and Mexican Flags


This Justin Smith post gleaned from a Facebook Group I own is similar to a post about illegal Alien invasion of America posted on 5/19/18. This is an update demonstrating the Open Borders Movement has not diminished but has grown.

 

LET’S BE CLEAR – THE OPEN BORDERS AGENDA IS A GLOBALIST AGENDA TO DESTROY AMERICA’S NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY AND CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM!

 

JRH 10/23/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

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

Illegals Invading USA Waving Honduran and Mexican Flags

 

AP Photo/Moises Castillo

 

By Justin O. Smith

Posted 10/22/18 7:14pm

Posted at Facebook Group Social Media Jail Conversations for Conservatives & Counterjihadists

 

Coming to America Waving Honduran and Mexican Flags, while THEY BURN THE AMERICAN FLAG because somehow they have arrived at the conclusion America is “a fascist nation”, and yet they continue marching towards America, as they vow to cross our border.

 

WHY ARE THEY COMING IF THEY HATE US SO MUCH? … TO PILLAGE AND PLUNDER!!!

 

… YEA … They’ve made a mess of their nations, just like hungry locusts ravage a wheat field, and now they want to bring their mess here and cart away as many of our resources, cash and benefits as they can … bringing their gangs and their drugs and whores and all the immoral ways that already exist here in too much abundance.

 

[“Central American migrants making their way to the U.S. in a large caravan wave a Mexican flag as they arrive to Tapachula, Mexico, after a truck driver gave them a free ride, Sunday, Oct. 21, 2018. Despite Mexican efforts to stop them at the Guatemala-Mexico border, about 5,000 Central American migrants resumed their advance toward the U.S. border Sunday in southern Mexico.

 

Can We not block their entry? Can We not say “NO — HELL NO — We Don’t Want the Cast Offs of Honduras and Mexico Who WOULD NOT FIGHT TO MAKE THEIR NATIONS BETTER. WE DO NOT WANT OR NEED ANOTHER WAVE OF UNEDUCATED ILLITERATE PEOPLE WHO WILL ONLY SERVE AS ANOTHER ANCHOR AROUND OUR REPUBLIC’S NECK”?!!???

 

What is so wrong with wanting to stop bringing in masses of people who will only serve as added strains on our infrastructure, our welfare system and every area of our resources? What is wrong with wanting an immigration system that seeks to fast track educated skilled workers who will help keep America ahead of the world with a thriving economy and the best technological and military advancements … as opposed to the poorest and most ignorant of Honduras, Guatemala and Mexico?!??!!!???

 

STOP THIS CARAVAN WITH DEADLY FORCE, IF NECESSARY, IN ORDER TO SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE THAT AMERICA WILL NOT BE BULLIED AND COERCED INTO TRASHING HER REPUBLIC BY OUR DEMOCRAT DOMESTIC ENEMIES AND THE COMMUNISTS OF THE WORLD, INCLUDING GEORGES SOROS and Pueblo Sin Fronteras [Translated as] (People Without Borders) [Blog Editor: See Joe for America & Conservapedia], a communist front group, alongside U.S. Leftstream Media and foreign media and U.S. lawyers and advocates, such as Heather Crone [Blog Editor: Justin writes “Crone” but “Cronk” shows more search results related to SURL] of ‘Show Up for Racial Justice’, who are paving the way for their crossing, as though these illegal aliens are entitled to enter America.

 

Go ahead … TRY TELLING ME THAT THIS ISN’T AN INVASION!!!

 

“New estimates cited by El Universal, a Mexican newspaper, say the caravan now has 14,000 people, many of them already in Mexico while others still wait”.

 

President Trump must have our U.S. Army in place on the border well in advance, with orders to issue three warnings to the first ILLEGAL ALIENS to approach the border fence. If they attempt to breach the fence in any manner, douse them heavily with Tear Gas.

 

President Trump should make clear that after ALL Peaceful attempts to stop this Horde of INVADERS have failed, His orders are to open fire on ANY ILLEGAL ALIEN TOPPING THE BORDER FENCE … two warning shots and then right between the eyes.

 

Maybe then this assault on Our National Sovereignty and Our Republic Will End and to hell with anything the Democrat Commies have to say in this matter, since they are in complete cahoots with the organizers and financiers of this mess.

 

~ Justin O Smith

________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text embraced by brackets as well as all source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Bolton: ‘Palestine’ is not a state


National Security Advisor John Bolton stated the obvious about the Arabs pretending to be Palestinians; viz., Palestine is not a State.

 

The remarks came at a White House presser announcing the USA is no longer a party to the world body International Court of Justice (ICJ). The move primarily asserts that the United States will not lose its National Sovereignty to a world government body. And secondly the remarks thumb a news at those who interfere in Israel’s National Sovereignty by telling the Jewish State where and where not it can place its Capital City within the (true) Nation’s national borders.

 

JRH 10/5/18 (Hat Tip: Ali H. of G+ Community United We Stand One Nation Under God)

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

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

Bolton: ‘Palestine’ is not a state

 

By Batya Jerenberg

October 4, 2018

World Israel News

 

US National Security Adviser John Bolton speaks during a briefing at the White House in Washington, Oct. 3, 2018. (AP/Susan Walsh)

 

It’s not a state now. It does not meet the customary international law test of statehood,” US National Security Adviser John Bolton stated.

 

US National Security Adviser John Bolton put the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) official status into perspective at a Wednesday press briefing when he announced that the United States would no longer be a signatory party to the United Nations’ International Court of Justice (ICJ).

 

“The president has decided that the United States will withdraw from the optional protocol and dispute resolution to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. This is in connection with a case brought by the so-called state of Palestine naming the United States as a defendant [in the ICJ], challenging our move of our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem,” Bolton said.

 

White House reporters immediately jumped on the adjective, asking whether calling the Palestinian Authority (PA) a “so-called state” was “productive,” considering that President Donald Trump had said he was working towards a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

 

Bolton’s answer was unequivocal.

 

“It’s not a state now. It does not meet the customary international law test of statehood,” he said. “It doesn’t control defined boundaries. It doesn’t fulfill the normal functions of government. There are a whole host of reasons why it’s not a state.”

 

“It could become a state, as the president said, but that requires diplomatic negotiations with Israel and others,” he added. “So calling it the ‘so-called state of Palestine’ defines exactly what it has been. [That’s] the position that the United States government has pursued uniformly since 1988, when the Palestinian Authority declared itself to be the State of Palestine.”

 

VIDEO: At White House presser, National Security Advisor Bolton insists Palestine has no claim to statehood

 

[Posted by Raw Story

Published on Oct 3, 2018]

 

Bolton might have been referring to the fact that 137 countries have recognized the PA as a state since that date. He reiterated the US rejection of this position on a bipartisan level.

 

“We don’t recognize it as a state… We have consistently, across Democratic and Republican administrations, opposed the admission of ‘Palestine’ to the UN as a state because it’s not a state.”

 

Although the PA is only a “non-member observer state” at the UN, it was allowed to formally join the International Criminal Court in 2015. Since the court’s decisions are binding, the US, by leaving the protocol, blocked the Palestinian case.

 

Bolton added that the withdrawal was part of a general effort by the Trump administration to protect US sovereignty from the reach of the international court.

 

“We will commence a review of all international agreements that may still expose the United States to purported binding jurisdiction dispute resolution in the International Court of Justice,” he said. “The United States will not sit idly by as baseless politicized claims are brought against us.”

________________________

World Israel News 

 

About WIN

 

World Israel News (WIN) is an online news outlet that presents
readers with important news from Israel and around the world.

 

Our audience consists of people who are concerned about Israel and
seek the truth. They want to know what’s really happening in Israel
and how these events can impact the world.

 

The goal of this website is to provide easy access to the latest news from Israel, presented in a truthful, honest way, with a focus on maximizing the user experience.

 

Constructive debate and exchange of ideas about the Jewish State is warmly welcomed.


We encourage our readers to participate openly and honestly.

 

It’s important to constantly improve the World Israel News website. Therefore, feedback and suggestions are greatly encouraged and appreciated!

 

Click here to contact us.

 

Arrogant and Defiant Illegal Aliens


Justin Smith expresses the opinion of Americans that elected President Trump to Office. Stop illegal alien immigration and move out the illegal aliens who refuse any path to E Pluribus Unum U.S. citizenship. E Pluribus Unum is a distinct contradiction to Leftist Multicultural Diversity. The American motto means we are a nation of immigrants that have ONE American culture. If any kind of immigrant refuses to assimilate into ONE nation, they must leave.

 

JRH 5/19/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Arrogant and Defiant Illegal Aliens

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 5/18/2018 12:35 AM

 

White hot anger danced across my mind at the sight of a horde of illegal alien invaders crossing the U.S. southern border, between April 27th and April 29th, as several climbed the border fence holding the Honduran flag, reminiscent of so many other incidents at the border when so-called “immigrants” waved Mexican and Guatemalan flags. This was an anger, a patriotic resentment, intensified by the sight of Pueblo Sin Fronteras (People Without Borders), a communist front group, alongside U.S. and foreign media and U.S. lawyers and advocates, such as Heather Cronk of ‘Show Up for Racial Justice’, who were paving the way for their crossing, as though these illegal aliens were entitled to enter America and the Americans themselves had no choice or say in the matter — a white hot anger that demands such “immigrants” be banned from America until Hell itself freezes over.

 

Most patriotic Americans feel the same flush of resentment, and that resentment is not softened by the sight of Mexican immigrants flying Mexican flags all across the nation at anti-President Trump and pro-illegal alien protests, especially when many Americans realize that there are many other nationalities, including Muslim majority countries, crossing with the Central American illegals. Neither does it help to ease that frustration once one understands that 800 different languages are now spoken in New York City and over a hundred are spoken in Los Angeles, and even though the United States spends billions of dollars on English classes for immigrant children, our country is reduced to pressing “1” for Spanish, “2” for English and “3” for Arabic.

 

These immigrants started out marching from the Honduran – Guatemala border in March and they trekked straight through Mexico, some two thousand at one point, to the U.S. border, primarily with approximately 1200 Hondurans, Guatemalans and Mexicans, along with a few other nationalities, where they sought to enter or actually crossed as “refugees” seeking asylum. The asylum ploy was well drilled into them by U.S. lawyers prior to them setting out on this journey, chanting and waving Honduran flags the entire way.

 

Despite their longing for a better life and wanting to escape the civil strife of Honduras and the wars of Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala, now fleeing organized crime and the gang violence of the infamous “northern triangle” region, it is hard not to fault them for not staying and fighting, with everything in themselves, in order to save their own countries. Americans did so during our War for Independence, because, for most of them, they had already fled intolerable situations, and America was the last stop.

 

Rush Limbaugh expressed best what all Americans were thinking when he stated: “What I can’t understand is the arrogance, the defiance of these people. I could comprehend someone wanting a better life, sneaking in, and, if caught, feeling apologetic. But these people are marching in front of cameras, in front of the whole world. They demand to be admitted here. Where does this sense of entitlement come from?”

 

Renown author, Ann Coulter recently wrote, “Why not be honest: Illegals are self-entitled lawbreakers and thieves, stealing jobs and government benefits meant for our own people.”

 

And what of those legal immigrants now residing here in America, who paid out many thousands of dollars on application, legal and expediting fees — what does this say to them?

 

Couldn’t these immigrants claim “refugee status” and protection in the first safe country they reach, meaning Mexico? They could, as noted by Secretary of Homeland Defense Kirstjen Nielsen. If Mexico feels no obligation to welcome these refugees, why should this obligation fall to America and Her people?

 

Attorney General Jeff Sessions called this caravan “a deliberate attempt to undermine our laws and overwhelm our system”.  And he was right.

 

Rather than waving the American flag out of reverence and respect for our country, the one they want to call their new home, these “immigrants”, who had yet to file the first scrap of paperwork starting the process, were waving every flag except the American flag — the flags of hellholes they supposedly wish to escape. These are not “refugees”; they are invaders.

 

This caravan was never about asylum or refugees, at least not for People Without Borders. It was a concerted and well-funded effort to advance the Communist globalist agenda of breaking down sovereign borders, especially in America. One may have noticed that these penniless refugees had glossy new Honduran flags and pre-printed signs. They are funded by the leftist, fascist billionaire George Soros, who seeks to erode America’s sovereignty and demonize Her.

 

On Wednesday May 2, 2018 Jeff Sessions also stated: “We are not going to let this country be overwhelmed. People are not going [to] … stampede our border. … People should wait their turn, ask to apply lawfully before they enter our country.”

 

Sessions later went on to direct U.S attorneys to prosecute every illegal entry that they could. This directive came not only in response to the caravan arrival, but it was also a response to the recent DHS report that documented a 203 percent increase in illegal border crossings, between March 2017 and March 2018; the report also revealed the single largest month-to-month increase since 2011, noting a thirty-seven percent increase between February and March of 2018.

 

But America can’t seem to get a break. If it’s not Democrat leftists in Nashville protesting the Tennessee State Legislature’s proposed HB-2315 that prevents sanctuary cities from forming in the state, ever in pursuit of the illegal alien vote, it’s Speaker Paul Ryan proposing an amnesty bill for DACA in the House, that pleases forty Big Business first Republican legislators, as they also move to block President Trump’s agenda regarding border security, the visa lottery and chain migration. In the former, the Democrats allege that HB-2315 is a mass deportation bill, and although it is not, it should be.

 

Let that white-hot anger loose on Congress and state legislators, America, as the 2018 election approaches, and demand a mass deportation operation to remove some 35 million illegal aliens from our country, and force Congress to stop allowing 500,000 to a million illegal aliens annually to jump our borders. Use your white-hot anger to force Congress to put Americans above all refugees and place thirteen million American children living in poverty at the top of their list, along with five million unemployed and a million homeless Americans: Deport every illegal alien in the country now — round them up —  and don’t allow anymore, not one more, of these illegal aliens to barge into America, as if they have any right, a right that does not exist.

 

By Justin O. Smith

___________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All Source links are by the Editor

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Editor Intro to ‘Illegal is Illegal’


Intro by John R. Houk

Intro date April 8, 2018

Post by Justin O. Smith

Can anyone provide me with valid legal reasoning – as opposed to bleeding heart globalist sympathetic transnationalism – why the U.S. government or actual American citizens can call an illegal alien a legal alien? If anyone to put together legalese justification, they would either be lying or be dependent on international laws not ratified by the U.S. Senate as required by the U.S. Constitution. In America, YOU CAN’T CREATE LAWS EX NIHILO! The U.S. is a Republic that is governed by the consent of the people as represented by elected legislators who deliberate laws. America is neither a mob democracy or a totalitarian nation ruled by a select oligarchy of elites.

 

That’s my two-cent introduction to some editorial thoughts by Justin Smith about illegal aliens forcing their way onto American soil will continue a process of Obama’s fundamental transformation of the USA into a nation lacking the foundations that have made America great via the individual ability to seek Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. This would be as opposed to the totalitarian State telling YOU what and how to live in an accepted way of life, restricted liberty and what happiness is.

 

Justin writes about the illegal movement of foreign aliens onto American soil. One aspect of the essay that caught my attention is the Leftist funding of a self-proclaimed humanitarian organization called Pueblo Sin Fronteras. Which translated is a globalist concept viz., People Without Borders.

 

This caught my attention because the American Left in league with George Soros desires the destruction of the guarantees in the Constitution and our reason to exist as a sovereign nation in the Declaration of Independence.

 

You probably won’t hear or read too much about Soros involvement, so I’m going to share a video from Glen Beck that over the Soros funding of Pueblo Sin Fronteras. (a video that I might not figure out how to embed on one of blogs in particular. Those folks will have to go to the Beck post, “Trump send troops to stop migrant ‘caravan’ headed for US — but here’s who’s funding the migrant”.)

Beck VIDEO:

http://content.jwplatform.com/players/ydZgHwN5-VYZGOsHs.html

Here is a list of demands from Leftist Pueblo Sin Fronteras on their Facebook page 3/23/18:

 

We demand of Mexico and the United States:

-That they respect our rights as refugees and our right to dignified work to be able to support our families
-That they open the borders to us because we are as much citizens as the people of the countries where we are and/or travel
-That deportations, which destroy families, come to an end
-No more abuses against us as migrants
-Dignity and justice
-That the US government not end TPS for those who need it
-That the US government stop massive funding for the Mexican government to detain Central American migrants and refugees and to deport them
-That these governments respect our rights under international law, including the right to free expression
-That the conventions on refugee rights not be empty rhetoric

 

Hmm… The only time a sovereign nation should have concerns about the Rights of refugees is when said refugees are sovereignly accepted on a nation’s soil. There is no global constitution the sovereign USA has accepted as the rule of law; hence foreign migrating refugees have zero Rights until the government gives it to them. Illegally crossing the border without granted asylum is a travesty to the American constitutional rule of law.
JRH 4/8/18

Please Support NCCR

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

Illegal Is Illegal

The Invasion of America

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 4/6/2018 11:05 PM

 

The Leftists Democrats, the socialists and anarchists, never seem to tire in their attempts to destroy our border integrity, what little of it remains, and ensure that the gates of Mexico continue flooding America with hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens annually; and, whether or not it was President Trump’s intention, his continued push to legalize 1.8 million Dreamers, in order to highlight Democrats’ refusal to cooperate on border security demands, has actually resulted in a two-hundred percent surge in illegal immigration, from last year. America is currently witnessing a caravan of some 1500 or more illegal aliens heading this way, after being organized and funded by the radical, transnational, leftist group of Pueblo Sin Fronteras (People Without Borders).

 

Many duplicitous elements are also at play, as just this February, America witnessed a proposal set forth by Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer and Republican Senator Susan Collins, by and large a RINO, that would halt all immigration enforcement against any illegal aliens who arrive before June 2018, in an egregious violation of the four pillars of immigration initially laid out by the president. Not only does this proposal ignore the lessons of 9/11, it increases the risk of crime and terrorism, and it has already ensured a new wave of illegal immigration, effectively turning the United States into a sanctuary nation where the rule of law holds no value.

 

In March of last year, President Trump’s initial tough stance on immigration seemed to have effectively put the brakes on illegal immigration, but as his stance appeared to soften so too did we see an uptick in movement across the southern border. According to Homeland Security statistics, over 16,000 illegal aliens were apprehended last March, but this March the number jumped to over 50,000, up from 37,000 in February.

 

President Trump has even suggested the possibility of a DACA deal, although he also called it “dead” in one breath, while he castigated Democrats for not making a deal in the next breath. This ambiguity has now attracted thousands of more illegal aliens, who are currently heading our way from all across Central America and Mexico, a documented fact. Look for many thousands more of young teens and unaccompanied “children” to start arriving again at our ports of entry, within the next few weeks, and perhaps several hundreds of thousands more by years end, but the leftists, Democrats and liberal Republicans don’t care, since MS-13 and other Mexican and Guatemalan drug cartels aren’t swarming through their neighborhoods.

 

Only in the past two decades has this country allowed the advocates of diversity and multicultural cosmopolitan-one world-order-Marxism to take a firm grip on the reins of our immigration policies. Many Democrats were actually espousing common sense border security as early as the 1990s.

 

In 1993, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) stated: “The day when America could be the welfare system for Mexico is gone. We simply can’t afford it.”

 

In ‘Lessons from 1986 Immigration Reform’ (February 4th, 2013), Senator Chuck Grassley noted that Democrat Senator Howard Metzenbaum stated in 1985: ” … there is only one realistic way that you can stop illegal immigration into this country, and that is by making it illegal and being tough enough that illegal immigrants cannot work in this country.”

 

Even the New York Times, ever more the mouthpiece for the transnationalists and Marxists across the globe, had more sense on this topic, as noted by journalist Ann Coulter and exhibited in an editorial from September 29, 1997, stating: “Fighting illegal immigration is an important and difficult job. But Congress should do it in a way that will deter illegal entry at the border.”

 

Now, just as lawyers working for the Obama Administration coached illegal aliens, who could not speak English, to keep repeating the phrase “credible fear”, so too are the Soros funded organizers using this same tactic. And illegal aliens will soon appear and claim that they face a “credible fear” in their country of origin, and before the first liberal crocodile tear can fall, they’ll be given a court date and “refugee” status, as they disappear into the homeland regions, only to reappear with driver’s licenses at our voting booths, welfare offices, and DACA protests, holding signs that read “No Bigots, No Borders” and waving Mexican flags alongside upside down American flags.

 

Many Americans and globalists scream that any attempt to stop this current wave of illegal aliens from crossing into the U.S. is illegal. The international court may agree, but we are still a sovereign nation, with all the rights and authority that it suggests, and as such, we as a people have every right to stop these folks at the border and make them apply in Mexico, if they are really refugees at all. Upon verifying their refugee status, our government can decide at that point, just how many to admit, if any.

 

In the meantime, illegal is illegal, whether an elected official wants them here for cheap labor or padding the voting rolls by legitimizing these illegals. The simplest answers, right in front of our leaders faces, if not for their own agendas, would include closing our borders tight to anyone without a visa or a passport, activating E-Verify, moving immediately to deport all 30 million plus illegal aliens, and placing a temporary halt — a moratorium — on all future immigration, until this current generation of immigrants, the illegals who manage to stay and legal alike, have had a long enough period to fully integrate and assimilate.

 

What will President Trump do, if and when the Democrats call his hand? Will he really follow through with his proposed amnesty, turning at least five more states blue/ Democrat and setting up an avenue for amnesty for 30 million of the other illegal aliens in America? We must not give this amnesty under any set of circumstances, since a very small minority of these illegal aliens have actually been here since being infants or toddlers, and even if they were, they’ve had decades to correct their status.

 

This invasion of America by illegal aliens represents a strategic threat to the United States’ sovereignty and our American way of life, but our leaders seem content to wallow in their own fatal incompetence, as they have abandoned America to “whatever will be will be”, failing to stand for American lives, property and liberty. These illegal aliens and their leftist supporters are attempting to devastate our moral heart and freeze our national will to defend our nation, and in this sense, Trump is playing a dangerous game on immigration, which, if not handled properly, will certainly be the final nail in the coffin of Our Republic, sending America into a full blown barely functional authoritarian socialist tyranny.

 

By Justin O. Smith

_________________________

Editor Intro to ‘Illegal is Illegal’

Intro by John R. Houk

Intro date April 8, 2018

_____________________

Illegal is Illegal

Edited by John R. Houk

All source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith