Intro to Sutliff ‘The Deceitful Misinformation that Created a TRO’
By Paul Sutliff
Intro by John R. Houk, Blog Editor
Posted 4/4/17
Does anyone notice that activist Judges and Dem Party House and Senate members cry that President Trump’s travel ban Executive Orders are unconstitutional BUT don’t actually cite where in the Constitution they base that accusation?
They CAN NOT because NO such citation will be found. When the Left screams unconstitutional it typically is based on Leftist ideology and a false premise that Leftist values are American values. For that matter, there is not one iota of Left Wing values that can be supported in the Original Intent of the Founding Fathers’ eventual ratified document called the U.S. Constitution or the first 10 Amendments labeled the Bill of Rights!
With this Living Constitution baloney in mind, Hawaiian US District Judge Derrick Watson amended his mid-March original Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against the latest Trump Executive Order (EO) to fit the Hawaiian Attorney General’s idiotic Living Constitution objections to extend the judicial order longer than the original:
HONOLULU — A federal judge in Hawaii decided Wednesday to extend his order blocking President Donald Trump’s travel ban.
US District Judge Derrick Watson issued the longer-lasting hold on the ban just hours after hearing arguments.
Hawaii says the policy discriminates against Muslims and hurts the state’s tourist-dependent economy. The implied message in the revised ban is like a “neon sign flashing ‘Muslim ban, Muslim ban'” that the government didn’t bother to turn off, state Attorney General Douglas Chin told the judge.
Extending the temporary order until the state’s lawsuit was resolved would … READ THE REST (Hawaii judge extends temporary restraining order against Trump’s revised travel ban; By Jennifer Sinco Kelleher, Associated Press; Business Insider; 3/29/17 11:14 PM)
Paul Sutliff believes the Hawaiian AG fed Judge Watson a pack of lies. That is significant because this Judge based his ruling on AG Chin’s information. Below is Paul’s analysis.
When evidence exists to prove a state attorney general purposefully misinformed a federal judge whether IN COURT or through paperwork as to what evidence exists to support a stand against the President of the United States what is this called? Is it perjury?
Hawaii AG Doug Chin was not under oath, but there is an expectation of professionalism and truthfulness when presenting before a judge whether through passing of papers OR standing and presenting a case! So why did he misinform Judge Derrick Watson about the statistics related to the University of Hawai’i.
AG Chin claimed that if Trump’s order restricting travel of those from 6 countries were to be enforced, the University of Hawai’i would suffer financially.
… that any prospective recruits who are without visas as of March 16, 2017 will not be able to travel to Hawaii to attend the University. As a result, the University will not be able to collect the tuition that those students would have paid. (http://www.hid.uscourts.gov/docs/orders/DKW_order.pdf)
So what are the actual statistics? I filed a FOIA request with the University of Hawai’i to find out.
According to the University of Hawai’i the entire University system has 13,352 students. Of those 13,352 students only, 43% of the student body as a whole were Iranian. One student came from Libya. One from Somalia and one from Yemen. In all 61 students at the University of Hawai’i would be effected through President Trump’s Executive Order. IF THEY WERE NOT ALREADY HERE!
Banned Countries by Trump EO
Total # of Students in UH System
Percentage of Student Body
Iran
58
0.43%
Libya
1
0.01
Somalia
1
0.01
Sudan
0
0.00
Syria
0
0
Yemen
1
.01
TOTAL
61
.46
Attorney General Douglass Chin made a claim that a drop in these students’ ability to attend classes would likely close the Persian Language, Linguistics and Culture Program courses. Only 52 students in total are enrolled in these courses taught by two professors. If AG Chin had a chance to find a negative effect against the University of Hawaii this was it. In all 4 students would be effected. Those four are from Iran, bringing the percentage of students effected of those that attend to 8%.
This brings us to asking simple and important questions. How could Hawaii State Attorney General not have access to this information? It took me one week to obtain it and I live in New York. This brings us back to, is it allowable for an attorney to purposefully withhold information for the purpose of misinforming a judge.
Attorneys Joel Cohen and Danielle Alfonso Walsman wrote about just this type of thing in the New York Law Journal on June 1, 2009 in an article entitled Asking for Trouble: When Lawyers Lie to Judges.
One of the first and most obvious things we learn as lawyers, and, indeed, the disciplinary rules make clear, is that lawyers must follow the same instructions given to clients in preparation for testimony: You cannot ever lie in court! And if a false representation is made to the court, even unintentionally, a lawyer who later realizes his error is affirmatively required to take reasonable measures to remedy the statement.
I do not know if Attorney General Douglass Chin considers his filing for a TRO against President Trump’s executive order a place he should be allowed to create misinformation to prove his point, but in either case these statistics prove that the TRO is at least partially established on false and misleading information. If the Judge had not bothered to pre-write his decision, he could have easily verified the information I am sharing and in so doing exposed AG Chin as not being wholly truthful in court.
The sad truth then is that this is likely evidence of collusion between the Hawaii AG and the Judge Derrick Watson. If Judge Derrick Watson had not come to the bench with a pre-judgment, he likely would have checked the statistical claims of the AG.
_____________
Edited by John R. Houk
About Paul Sutliff
I am writer and a teacher. Here is a link to my latest book portraying the truth aboutCivilization Jihad!
Paul Sutliff cites from Judge Watson’s TRO to demonstrate the injunction does not even come close to Constitutional mustard and thus should be disqualified immediately by SCOTUS. Sutliff goes further and demands that Judge Watson’s blatant politicization above the Constitution is grounds for impeachment from his Judiciary Office. For that matter, it should be grounds for impeachment of any Judge or Justice that cites non-constitutional circumstances above the U.S. Constitution.
As I read the Order Granting the Temporary Retraining Order (TRO) in STATE OF HAWAI‘I and ISMAIL ELSHIKH vs. Donald J. Trump, et. al., I began to wonder how this document was written with any assemblance of juris prudence professionalism. I say this knowing it is practically impossible for a judge to write a 42 page document excluding the title page which makes 43 in a matter of two hours. I took an extra step to verify this by talking to lawyers who had seen judges using their clerk’s assistance to complete maybe 12 pages in two hours due to needed discussion and citation verification not to mention proof reading.
I suggest every American read this ruling to discover what I did. Namely, that US District Court Judge Derrick Watson who awarded the TRO had the majority of the decision pre-written prior to entering the court! This TRO then becomes an example of unethical conduct of a judge.
The State of Hawaii presented a case claiming economic hardship should these six countries be banned. Among the claims of economic hardship was a statement that tourism declined by 100 persons from the Middle East. Notably absent is whether there was an increase or decrease in tourism for the month in question as compared to last year.
Yet, even Judge Derrick Watson admits in a FOOTNOTE:
Footnote 8: This data relates to the prior Executive Order No. 13,769. At this preliminary stage, the Court looks to the earlier order’s effect on tourism in order to gauge the economic impact of the new Executive Order, while understanding that the provisions of the two differ. Because the new Executive Order has yet to take effect, its precise economic impact cannot presently be determined.” (pgs. 20-21)
The State of Hawaii made the outlandish claim that the University of Hawai’i would suffer economical hardship. Absent is a statement of how many students from these six countries currently are enrolled and how many are generally recruited a year. Somewhat humorously, the state claimed:
… that any prospective recruits who are without visas as of March 16, 2017 will not be able to travel to Hawaii to attend the University. As a result, the University will not be able to collect the tuition that those students would have paid.
Oh, the insanity! The college can NOT collect from students who can NOT legally enter the United States is a hardship??? Well just how many students are we talking about? Better yet, are these foreign students being given state or federal grants that enable them to attend the University of Hawai’i?
The State of Hawaii went on and stated that if the ban goes into effect it will likely cause the closing of the Persian Language and Culture program. Oh the insanity in deleting a program that requires TWO instructors!!! Below is a screenshot pulled from their site listing their academic instructors! ALL TWO OF THEM!!!
Dr. Ismail Elshikh is listed as the co-litigant. Interestingly this name is misspelled possibly purposefully because his name is listed in news articles as “Ismail El Sheikh.” While it is not uncommon for Arabs to use various transliterations of English for their name, it is not acceptable for someone who has lived in America for some time to do this. I want to have this issue resolved and to understand the meaning behind the misspelling.
Dr. Ismail El-Sheikh claims that his children are suffering hardship because his mother-in-law is not able to come to America, though it was established that she is in the process of being able to come due to family being here.
Dr. Ismail El-Sheikh is quoted in the TRO as having stated:
… that the effects of the Executive Order are “devastating to me, my wife and children.” Elshikh Decl. ¶ 6, ECF No. 66-1.
“deeply saddened by the message that [both Executive Orders] convey—that a broad travel-ban is ‘needed’ to prevent people from certain Muslim countries from entering the United States.” Elshikh Decl. ¶ 1
“Because of my allegiance to America, and my deep belief in the American ideals of democracy and equality, I am deeply saddened by the passage of the Executive Order barring nationals from now-six Muslim majority countries from entering the United States.”; id. ¶ 3
[“My children] are deeply affected by the knowledge that the United States—their own country—would discriminate against individuals who are of the same ethnicity as them, including members of their own family, and who 25 hold the same religious beliefs. They do not fully understand why this is happening, but they feel hurt, confused, and sad.”
I am further at a loss when I read on page 23-24:
Vasquez v. Los Angeles Cty., 487 F.3d 1246, 1250 (9th Cir. 2007) (“The concept of a ‘concrete’ injury is particularly elusive in the Establishment Clause context.”). “The standing question, in plain English, is whether adherents to a religion have standing to challenge an official condemnation by their government of their religious views[.] Their ‘personal stake’ assures the ‘concrete adverseness’ 24 required.” Catholic League, 624 F.3d at 1048–49.
The TRO was awarded with the claim that it violates Dr. Ismail El-Sheikh’s First Amendment rights! Yet his rights have never been in violation! At no time, and in no place in the TRO does it state that his rights were in question!! Rather the statement is that NON-Citizens First Amendment rights are being violated!!!
The bill makes no illusions to religion at all. Even though they do quote an adviser to the president they do not provide proof that there is a ban on a religion. Which of course can be easily disproved by naming off Muslim countries that have no ban!
On Page 27 the ruling states:
(“Plaintiffs’ alleged injury is not based on speculation about a particular future prosecution or the defeat of a particular ballot question. . . . Here, the issue presented requires no further factual development, is largely a legal question, and chills allegedly protected First Amendment expression.”); see also Arizona Right to Life Political Action Comm. v. Bayless, 320 F.3d 1002, 1006 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[W]hen the threatened enforcement effort implicates First Amendment [free speech] rights, the inquiry tilts dramatically toward a finding of standing.”). The Court turns to the merits of Plaintiffs’ Motion for TRO.
The mentioning of freedom of speech makes no sense here! Is this evidence that Judge Derrick Watson could not find judicial reasoning to support his conclusion?? Can anyone see logic in this ruling?
The TRO decision states:
“Indeed, the Government defends the Executive Order principally because of its religiously neutral text —“[i]t applies to six countries that Congress and the prior Administration determined posed special risks of terrorism. [The Executive Order] applies to all individuals in those countries, regardless of their religion.” Gov’t. Mem. in Opp’n 40. The Government does not stop there. By its reading, the Executive Order could not have been religiously motivated because “the six countries represent only a small fraction of the world’s 50 Muslim-majority nations, and are home to less than 9% of the global Muslim population . . . [T]he suspension covers every national of those countries, including millions of non-Muslim individuals[.]” Gov’t. Mem. in Opp’n 42.
The illogic of the Government’s contentions is palpable. The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. The Court declines to relegate its Establishment 31 Clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise. See Aziz, 2017 WL 580855, at *9 (rejecting the argument that “the Court cannot infer an anti-Muslim animus because [Executive Order No. 13,769] does not affect all, or even most, Muslims,” because “the Supreme Court has never reduced its Establishment Clause jurisprudence to a mathematical exercise. It is a discriminatory purpose that matters, no matter how inefficient the execution” (citation omitted)). Equally flawed is the notion that the Executive Order cannot be found to have targeted Islam because it applies to all individuals in the six referenced countries. It is undisputed, using the primary source upon which the Government itself relies, that these six countries have overwhelmingly Muslim populations that range from 90.7% to 99.8%.12 It would therefore be no paradigmatic leap to conclude that targeting these countries likewise targets Islam. Certainly, it would be inappropriate to conclude, as the Government does, that it does not. (p. 30-31)
Interestingly, this statement quotes the last judge who ruled against President Trump’s Executive Order on immigration restrictions but tries to hide doing so in not revealing the citation:
the Supreme Court has never reduced its Establishment Clause jurisprudence to a mathematical exercise. It is a discriminatory purpose that matters, no matter how inefficient the execution.
Worse still is the lack in understanding that they are using math to justify their reasoning while stating that math should not be used for this purpose. This also demonstrates that the judgement was given prejudicially be not applying statistical analysis in math to examine why those six countries were deemed to be terrorist supporter countries. This provides a one-sided view. Something judges are not supposed to do.
CONCLUSION:
This TRO’s standing is based on a belief that people who are not American citizens are under the US Constitution! This is highly misleading, unethical and teem of nothing but judicial activism!
Where is the outrage? Why are the major media outlets not asking these questions? Because it would not fit their narrative?If Judge Derrick Watson is not removed for unethical and unConstitutional activism, all of America will suffer! Call your Senator ask for Judge Derrick Watson to be impeached today! The evidence is all in the TRO.
__________________
Edited by John R. Houk
About Paul Sutliff
I am writer and a teacher. Here is a link to my publisher and my latest book portraying the truth aboutCivilization Jiihad!
Intro to Sutliff ‘FOIA Reveals Shredding in FEMA or Worse!’
Intro by John R. Houk, Blog Editor
February 20, 2017
Paul Sutliff may have uncovered yet another Obama Administration scandal involving radical Islamic elements within the U.S. borders. The scandalous Obama behavior is not surprising. And yet you have to know that the Mainstream Media which is so intent to bring down President Trump will not report on another Obama scandal, right?
This is what Paul is looking into: He believes that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is granting Federal funding to American Muslim organizations that either linked to radical Islam or tied to Islamic terrorism. Here is a soundbite from a 2015 article on the subject from Paul Sutliff:
FEMA created the Non-Profit Security Program (NSGP) to provide assistance to non-profits targeted and/or threatened by terrorist organizations. The intent was to help targeted organizations in high threat areas of the country, it was not to provide funds for people who defend terrorists. (FEMA is Funding Muslims in America Who Support Terrorism; Paul Sutliff on Civilization Jihad; 9/14/15)
You’ll read below that Paul is still looking at FEMA and Islamic terrorist funding connections AND that FEMA is not cooperating with his FOIA requests which points to the potential Obama scandal.
The grant money comes under the aegis of NSGP. Here is a paragraph description of the FEMA program:
The Nonprofit Security Grant Program plays an important role in the implementation of the National Preparedness System by supporting the development and sustainment of core capabilities. Core capabilities are essential for the execution of each of the five mission areas outlined in the National Preparedness Goal (the Goal). (Nonprofit Security Grant Program)
I’ve got to ask: What the heck does a National Preparedness Goal have to do with Islamic-American organizations with ties to foreign Islamic organizations that favor the institution of a global Caliphate?
The National Preparedness Goal defines what it means for the whole community to be prepared for all types of disasters and emergencies. The goal itself is succinct:
“A secure and resilient nation with the capabilities required across the whole community to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk.”
These risks include events such as natural disasters, disease pandemics, chemical spills and other manmade hazards, terrorist attacks and cyber attacks.
To learn more about the commitment to whole community involvement, visit the whole community page on this site.
Hmm … FEMA is giving money to Muslim American organizations that support a Jihad Caliphate agenda quite contrary to the U.S. Constitution?
When Obi-won Kenobi of Star Wars comes to mind when you are trying to get information from the federal government something is wrong! I wrote a Freedom of Information Act request to FEMA on August 31, 2015 regarding the awarding of grants to these three entities under the Nonprofit Security Grant Program.
#
Name and Info
Amount
1
ISLAMIC SOCIETY OF BALTIMORE MD INC.
$74,675
2.
ISLAMIC CENTER OF SAN DIEGO, INCORPORATED
$71,250
3.
CAIR
$70,324
TOTAL:
$216,249
It took them over a year to fill my request. However, in saying they did fulfill the request they also denied my request. They simply sent me a print out from USA Spending.gov. Something you or I can access at home on the Internet. I reached out to the people in the FOIA office for FEMA explaining that I had received copies of applications before and that I had previously been sent a copy of the required confirmation of the claims. Which in the one case I received, was a police letter. This became an article on awarding a grant to those who support terrorism and an example of awarding a grant with confirmation of a threat.
So imagine my surprise when I received the following statement from the FOIA person working at FEMA on February 15, 2017:
After our discussion on the phone last week, as promised I did reach back out to the component within FEMA to double check that there was no additional information that was missing from your FOIA request. There was no applications found and so it cannot be provided to you. The program office is aware of the FOIA process and conducted multiple searches and no records were located regarding the applications.
To our knowledge on this Grant Program, FEMA would only consider the Grant applications (E.G. the four corners of the documents) and not any additional threat assessments or documents that may be provided by the non-profits.
After receiving this I called the FOIA Officer and informed her I was filing a complaint with the Inspector General. Which I did that day! To say that an organization that approves grants did not keep a copy of the application or the supporting material is either a lie or evidence of shredding federal documents!
Maybe I should apply for the $20,000 award for evidence of the Obama administration shredding offered by Wiki Leaks? While the cash is a great motivator I would rather have the Trump Administration do some heavy stomping in FEMA and shake the tree that is hiding this information!
One other possibility exists regarding this “missing information.” It is that FEMA under the Obama Administration was awarding NPSG funding to Islamic organizations without even receiving a grant. This is “misappropriation of funds.” How can I make such damning accusations that FEMA has to have this documentation? The answer is simple.
The FEMA site claims that groups filed out applications. I have received evidence of this also through past FOIA requests.
I even checked to see if there was a different way to file a FOIA for this information if the state FEMA awarded the funding. But as you can see below the state FEMA sites are federal sites and the FOIA requests go through DHS and more specifically FEMA.
Since 2013 this FEMA program has award $56,000,000 to nonprofits claiming to be under a terrorist threat. I have only scratched the surface here. What if the majority of the organizations awarded never had confirmation of a threat? This too is misappropriation of funds!
I do not know about you, but I for one am very concerned that organizations such as CAIR that have been directly linked to Hamas in federal courts would receive any federal funding. It gets worse when you consider some of our allies have placed CAIR on a terrorist list. Did we fund the enemy of our allies? Sadly the answer is yes.
What can we do as American citizens to stop this? My only suggestion is to email or call the White House and voice your concerns.
When the 9th Circuit Appeals Court upheld a Lower Court stay on President Trump’s Executive Order temporarily banning citizens, refugees, and immigrants from seven nations that are hotbeds of Islamic terrorism, it demonstrated how Leftist Activist Judges ignore the Constitution in favor of Leftist utopianism. The American Left might as rip up the Constitution and burn the scraps of paper.
Paul Sutliff demonstrates how the 9th circuit is torching the U.S. Constitution with misinformation to justify Multiculturalist utopian goals.
The New York Post wrote an article on February 9th that clearly shows the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, carefully choosing words for the purpose of creating misinformation for the media to share with their readers and viewers regarding their actions against President Trump’s Executive Order. According to that article the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals stated:
“The Government has pointed to no evidence that an alien of the countries named in the Order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States,” the three-member panel wrote.”
The terminology “perpetrated a terrorist attack” explicitly excludes all actions prevented or attempted that did not result in a terror attack. Why is this important? There are at least 38 terrorists who were killed or arrested as they worked to be supportive of the Islamic State AND who were also classified as immigrants/refugees at one time. In addition, there areat least 6 persons who were killed or arrested for attempting an act of terror who were second generation Americans refugees. I filed this information in a federally filed affidavit in September 2016 as an Expert Witness. You will notice people from countries other than the seven countries listed in Trump’s ban.
All the information in the graphs below originated in the Threat Knowledge Group last accessed in September 2016, whose site was disabled recently with President Trump’s appointment of Sebastian Gorka, with the exception of the information in the last column which I found. Actual sources for the information cited in the last column is provided in my Affidavit.
Americans that have not been brainwashed by eight years of the Obama Administration in collusion with the Leftist MSM, should not be surprised at the Dems and media excoriating President Trump’s protection of American from Islamic terrorism.
Obama and the Southern Poverty Law Center (More specifics on the SPLC from theSocial Contract Press) were fairly successful in purging Law Enforcement of knowledgeable Counter Terrorism experts. Then proceeded to label Conservative organizations, Traditional Values Christian organizations and Counterjihad organizations as bigoted, hate-inspiring, and Islamophobic American right wing terrorists.
Check this out:
Unreal… Obama’s DHS Continues to Target Conservatives & Liberty Lovers As Terrorists (Video)
It’s an Obama bizarro world…
The Obama administration holds peace talks with Taliban killers but treats patriotic Americans as terrorists.
Go figure.
The Department of Homeland Security is continuing to target patriotic Americans and conservatives who “believe that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack” as terrorists. They even have this listed in their latest report.
This is unbelievable.
[Not part of Gateway Pundit article but important] Posted by usACTIONnews
Published on Jul 9, 2012
“Groups that believe that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent.” describes potential terrorists? WTH? DHS is using left wing hate groups and even Islamic groups with ties to terrorism as consultants to determine who are threats.
From a Jan, 2011 article “How Dept. of Homeland Security identifies ‘right wing extremists’:
The radical leftist group Southern Poverty Law Center has partnered with the Department of Homeland Security in a ‘Working Group’ called Countering violent Extremism to paint conservatives as hate groups and extremists.
…
Former Attorney General Edwin Meese says it is “despicable” for the Southern Poverty Law Center to classify the Family Research Council and a dozen other top conservative organizations as “hate groups” similar to the Ku Klux Klan.
The SPLC has a history of targeting conservatives and conservative groups as racist, homophobic, or extremist if they disagree with the radical left positions of the SPLC on any number of issues. An article at Discover the Networks.org says “What makes the Southern Poverty Law Center particularly odious is its habit of taking legitimate conservatives and jumbling them with genuine hate groups (the Klan, Aryan Nation, skinheads, etc.), to make it appear that there’s a logical relationship between say opposing affirmative action and lynching, or demands for an end to government services for illegal aliens and attacks on dark-skinned immigrants. The late novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand called this “the broad-brush smear.””
…..
The SPLC has joined the Department of Homeland Security in a ‘Working Group’ called Countering violent Extremism. John Cohen, President and CEO of SPLC is listed as a member and Laurie Wood, Analyst, Southern Poverty Law Center/Instructor, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center is listed as an ‘expert in subject matter’. The members of the group also include three from Muslim organizations but we don’t see any conservatives. (see the list at the end of the report)
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) which has been determined by the courts to be a terrorist support group proudly points out on their Facebook page that its Michigan members ‘participated a Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Working Group meeting with law enforcement officials and community advocates in Dearborn, Mich.'[ibid].
So we have the Southern Poverty Law Center, also known as The Church of Morris Dees, which calls groups and individuals like the Family Research Council, Eagle Forum, the Heritage Foundation, Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Rep. Steve King (R-IA), and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) ‘right wing extremists’ and the Council on American-Islamic Relations which the FBI has proven to be linked to a terrorist organization teaming up with the US Department of Homeland Security to determine what groups in America should be categorized as ‘extremist’ and potentially violent.
Now you can see why the DHS came out with its Rightwing Extremism report in April of 2009 that warned of potential violence by people against illegal immigration and gun control, and returning military veterans. Now that’s change.
If you want to see the idiotic SPLC list of legitimate Counterjihadists labelled as dangerous right wing hatemongers, you can go to this one of many titles (this one 10/25/16): “A Journalist’s Manual: Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists”.
Here is an excerpt pointing to the Obama purge of anything Islamic from training manuals and official reports:
…
In another example of the administration’s ability to make key words disappear, a 2013 Judicial Watch report revealed that the FBI scrubbed its law enforcement training material of any language that might be deemed “offensive” to Muslims. Per those guidelines, hundreds of references to “Muslim,” “Islam” or “jihad” were removed from the 2004 9/11 commission report.
The witnesses provided more evidence to corroborate these findings. Mr. Philip Haney, a retired Customs and Border Protection Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, revealed that the CIA has scrubbed more than 800 law enforcement records that were almost all connected to the Muslim brotherhood.
The first “great purge,” he said, was in 2009. Yet, in 2012 they didn’t just modify the records, they eliminated them out of the system, which, he noted, bypasses security protocol in Homeland Security. … READ ENTIRETY (Cruz Hearing Exposes the Obama Admin’s History of Purging References to Islamic Terror; By Cortney O’Brien; Townhall; 6/29/16 9:15 AM)
So, why the heck am I rehashing Obama’s treacherous history after a majority of States elected Trump over Crooked Hillary? BECAUSE America’s Left is doing everything from lying, Fake News, civil disturbances, and questionable legal procedures to prevent President Trump from following through on his campaign promises.
I was alerted by email via Counterjihadist writer Paul Sutliff, that the Donald is going undo Obama’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) agenda which focused on White Supremacists. Please recall from above, that the Obama Administration lumped Conservatives, Christian Values and Counterjihadists with right wing extremists.
The new agenda focus will be Islamic terrorism. Paul Sutliff’s email alerts the reader he has been writing about the CVE agenda for some time:
SO imagine my excitement with that news! All I can say now is thank you Mr. President. You have earned my prayers and respect.
Get informed on Obama’s CVE in Paul’s articles linked above. For your convenience, I am cross posting the Tepes-Sutliff interview from The Rebel linked above.
This is the second part of the interview with Paul Sutliff. Paul explains the US Government’s use of the office of Countering Violent Extremism to assist the Muslim Brotherhood, and of all things, fund mosques.
Among the litany of Obama administration disasters, the rapid collapse of his “Countering Violent Extremism” (CVE) agenda is among the most consequential.
But groups in line to receive federal CVE grants announced just days before the end of the Obama era are now whining as the Trump administration seeks to put an end to the CVE scam.
Driven directly from the White House, the Obama administration’s CVE agenda was a replacement following a purge of counter-terrorism training across the federal government during 2011-2012 in response to a targeted series of reports by far-Left bloggers and reporters claiming widespread bias and “Islamophobia.”
Many of those claims were later debunked, but with the damage done the administration’s purge pressed ahead as it implemented CVE at the demand of Islamic groups, some of whom were directly involved in the formation of the administration’s CVE policies.
But as it became apparent that terror recruitment was escalating rapidly at nearly the same time that CVE was being imposed on agencies and departments across the board, the inability of CVE to actually countering any “extremists” was exposed. The same Islamic groups that urged the imposition of CVE then turned against the efforts when they realized that CVE was still primarily directed at the growing threat of Islamic recruitment, and not towards stigmatizing the administration’s perceived domestic political enemies.
By January 2015, Politico was already declaring that CVE was a complete flop:
Obama’s plan to combat radicalism is a flop critics say.
politico.com
The CVE pilot programs in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and Boston were already so unsuccessful that the media had to announce they were off to a “slow start” a year ago:
The failures of the program were so pronounced that NPR conceded the point, claiming that even if the CVE programs were not effective they still somehow helped the communities.
As I noted in an assessment of Obama’s CVE policies here at PJ Media last year, and in a separate monograph, measuring Obama’s policies by his own stated White House goals, the CVE program was proven to be a complete failure in the very three areas it was intended to support: community engagement, training, and counter-propaganda.
It’s no surprise then that one of the first moves by the Trump administration will be to shut down the failed CVE program, as reported by Reuters:
That decision in turn set off a wave of complaints by groups that were hoping to receive federal CVE grants that were rushed out by the Obama administration in its last few days in office:
One of the first groups that took to the media was the Twin Cities-based Ka Joog (which in Somali means “stay away”). Ka Joog had already been one of the groups to receive $300,000 in federal money and another $250,000 appropriated by the state of Minnesota, and was in line to receive another $500,000 federal grant from Homeland Security.
Ka Joog has been one of the premier programs that CVE defenders have pointed to in calling for additional funding for the CVE program.
And yet in one of the group’s most visible failures, the nephew of the organization’s executive director was recruited by the Islamic State and eventually tried and convicted in federal court.
Another Twin Cities groups, Heartland Democracy, was scheduled to receive $165,000.
That group had been among the first to participate in a pet “deradicalization” project by the chief federal judge in Minnesota who tried many of the Islamic State recruiting cases.
But court documents exposed that Heartland Democracy had no experience in “jihadi rehab,” and its curriculum was described as “more high school civics course than religious deprogramming.”
The Daily Beast reported on the regimen established for their first “deradicalization” client:
He and a Somali-American mentor began to work through an extensive reading list, which included Richard Wright’s Native Son, a novel about growing up poor and black in the 1930s, and an article by Native American author Sherman Alexie about how poetry freed him from the “reservation” of his mind.
McKinley would not say how often Yusuf met his mentor.
“We met with him regularly, I don’t know the number of times a week,” she said. When pressed on whether they met weekly, biweekly, or at a different pace, McKinley would not clarify. “We met with him regularly.”
Court documents also reference Yusuf meeting with religious leaders, but McKinley wasn’t sure about that.
“I don’t know if he’s met with any religious leaders,” she said in response to a question about meeting with imams. “I mean, he’s an adult, he can get any visitor he wants.”
That first client was sent back to jail after a search of his room at a halfway house found a box cutter.
The Obama administration’s CVE programs have a lengthy history of failure:
As I reported here at PJ Media just a few days ago, an Associated Press investigation into the Pentagon’s $500 million WebOps program to counter Islamic State propaganda found widespread incompetence and corruption. According to whistleblowers, civilian Arabic specialists with no understanding of Islam tried to defeat complex religious justifications for terrorism, resulting in the program becoming a laughingstock in jihadist circles.
In December 2014, the New York Times reported that the then-head of Special Operations Command, Major Gen. Michael Nagata, convened a series of conference calls with outside experts attempting to understand why the message of the Islamic State had grown so dangerous. But after the Obama administration’s counter-terror training purge, Gen. Nagata was forced to admit that “we do not understand the movement, and until we do, we are not going to defeat it….We have not defeated the idea. We do not even understand the idea.”
In September 2011, Obama signed an executive order creating the State Department’s Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications (CSCC).One of their early failures was a graphic video produced called “Welcome to ISIS Land,” targeting would-be Islamic State recruits. The center’s director was quickly replaced. Then a Twitter campaign, “Think Again Turn Away,” was largely panned by terror experts who claimed the effort was largely ineffective and was actually legitimizing the terrorist narrative. A panel of outside experts convened by the State Department agreed, finding that the CSCC was so counterproductive to its mission that they questioned whether the U.S. government should be involved in counter-propaganda at all. The center was promptly closed.
One of the first CVE guidelines produced by the Department of Homeland Security in 2011 was to instruct federal agencies to avoid using “trainers who are self-professed ‘Muslim Reformers,'” and yet documents uncovered regarding meetings with DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano show the agency soliciting advice from known extremist groups and controversial Islamic leaders. Some of these extremist leaders even held official positions advising DHS. Last June, when the DHS Countering Violent Extremism Subcommittee released its recommendations urging $100 million in new CVE funding, it urged banning the use of “jihad” or “sharia” in training — two very common terms used by terrorist recruiters. One of the subcommittee members, a Syrian immigrant, had previously said that the 9/11 terror attacks had “changed the world for good.” And in December, DHS teamed up with the State Department to bring in the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an organization that the Justice Department had argued in federal court had supported terrorism, to teach a CVE course for French officials. Even though the State Department programs have been universally panned, it was reported last August that they had tripled the budget.
In implementing the Obama administration’s CVE agenda, the FBI had conducted a wide-scale purge of its terrorism training curriculum at the request of Islamic groups claiming it was biased. In a move questioned by members of Congress, the FBI classified the identities of the outside experts brought in to censor the material. A subsequent review of the censored terror-training material discovered suspect and inconsistent standards in purging the curriculum. More recently, a FBI website and video game (“Don’t Be a Puppet”) intended to target youth vulnerable to terrorist recruitment was launched, and then suspended after just a day in response to complaints of Islamic groups, terror experts, and even teachers unions that the effort was biased, ineffective, and encouraged students to inform on each other. Some of the criticism came from the FBI’s own Muslim outreach partners that were brought in to advise the bureau on its CVE policies.
So it’s no great mystery why the incoming Trump administration began discussions about scaling back and ending Obama’s CVE program.
Others contend that the CVE grants were political payoffs to groups to enlist their aid in scuttling counter-terror programs and to silence any possible criticism of the Obama national security and foreign policy agenda.
The chairman of one group that was scheduled to receive a $400,000 CVE grant, Life After Hate, has publicly launched attacks on the incoming Trump administration and even called for the violent removal of President Trump one day after his inauguration.
Meanwhile in Minneapolis, as Ka Joog declines the $500,000 in announced DHS CVE grants the group has quickly transitioned from attempting to deradicalizing area Somali youth to publicly declaring that President Trump is engaged in “an official war against Islam” — parroting a standard terrorist narrative.
But as mentioned previously, the nephew of the executive director who had participated in Ka Joog programs was still recruited to join the Islamic State.
In another instance, an Islamic State recruit from Alexandria, Virginia, later captured by Kurdish troops and currently facing federal charges, lived less than 50 yards from one of the Obama administration’s top go-to CVE experts.
If these so-called CVE “experts” can’t prevent their closest relatives or neighbors from joining terrorist groups, why should the Trump administration continue to entrust them with our national security?
Despite all the media hand-wringing, it seems that questioning the effectiveness of Obama’s CVE program is entirely in order given its constant track record of failure.
Yet in light of the current media climate, the new administration should expect that it will come under fire for whatever they eventually replace the failed CVE agenda with. And the Islamic State and other terrorist groups continue to recruit and encourage supporters to conduct attacks inside the homeland.
Ending the CVE scam would be a good first step in reversing the corrosive policies established by the Obama administration that have hampered and sometimes punished our law enforcement and national security professionals for doing their job.
Paul Sutliff interviewed Jim Delaney on his Blog Talk Radio show entitled Civilization Jihad Awareness on January 4. The subject was on the dangers of Muslim Refugees entering America with a resettlement program.
Paul uploaded the interview to Youtube. The conversation is a bit lengthy bet well worth the listen. If time is an obstruction, you might want to bookmark the interview and come back to listen as time is more in your favor.
Just heads up Paul has an alteration of the old Beatles song “Imagine All the People” as a radio intro. If you are a Conservative, your first reaction might be something like, “What the heck is Paul using an ode to atheism and Communist zero-government utopianism in a Counterjihad broadcast?” Take a moment to listen to Paul’s version and I believe you will be pleasantly amused.
[Blog Editor UPDATE – 1/12/17: Paul Sutliff wanted me to make sure that readers knew that the “Imagine All the People” parody should be credited to the Youtube channel Clash Daily. Paul Sutliff sings on Clash DailyHERE.]
Civilization Jihad is the name of the war that was declared against North America in 1991 by the North American Muslim Brotherhood. Awareness is the best way to fight this war.
Tonight, we have Jim Delaney joining us. Jim Delaney is the former director of the Refugee Resettlement program through the Rochester, NY Diocese and Church World Services. Jim served in the Army as a Captain during Vietnam and went on to give back to his country by helping refugees in Southeast Asia find a home in America. Jim has moved from an avid supporter of the Refugee Resettlement Program to someone willing to aid the Refugee Resettlement Watch under Anne Corcoran. Jim is also the author of A PATRIOT’S CALL TO ACTION: Resisting Progressive Tyranny & Restoring Constitutional Order and has a blog at OpinerLog.blogspot.com.
Civilization Jihad is the name of the war that was declared against North America in 1991 by the North American Muslim Brotherhood. Awareness is the best way to fight this war.
[Blog Editor: This portion is an intro to the Jim Delaney segment which will probably disappear by the next radio show on a Wednesday.]
Feel free to call in if you have a question and press 1 so I know you want to join the discussion.
Tonight, we have Jim Delaney joining us. Jim Delaney is the former director of the Refugee Resettlement program through the Rochester, NY Diocese and Church World Services. Jim served in the Army as a Captain during Vietnam and went on to give back to his country by helping refugees in Southeast Asia find a home in America. Jim has moved from an avid supporter of the Refugee Resettlement Program to someone willing to aid the Refugee Resettlement Watch under Anne Corcoran. Jim is also the author ofA PATRIOT’S CALL TO ACTION: Resisting Progressive Tyranny & Restoring Constitutional Orderand has a blog atOpinerLog.blogspot.com.
Here’s a Paul Sutliff update from his Go Fund Me account designed to expose McDougal-Littell history text books portraying Islamic history in a favorable light. The exposé demonstrates that McDougal-Littell, at the very least, lies by omission glorifying Muhammad rather than tell the truth that the pseudo-prophet of Islam was a butcher, pillager, rapist, encouraged rape, pedophile (See Also HERE),slave trader (See Also HERE and Youtube video HERE) and undoubtedly more than I can recall at this moment.
Paul updates the Go Fund Me appealwith a 1:52 Vimeo video on the omissions.
The school year is starting and textbooks are filled with taqiyya (lies) to misinform your children and their teachers about what Islam teaches. Please help me to share the truth on this.
