Top Dem: Monitor U.S. citizens, not Muslim 'refugees'

 

U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss.

The top Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee has a history of making controversial statements.

He did it again Wednesday.

U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., led off a hearing on the security risks of Syrian refugees by saying the committee would be better served if it looked within at U.S.-born citizens for potential terrorists.

Thompson said the mass shooting at a black church in Charleston, South Carolina, last week illustrated America’s more pressing problems with “violent extremism.” He suggested that the threats posed by “domestic terrorism” were more acute than those posed by Muslim refugees being sent to the U.S. from Syria.

“Time and time again, I have urged this committee not to have a narrow view of violent extremism, which ignores violent extremist activity of domestic groups,” Thompson said.

“Regrettably, last week’s attacks at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston brought this issue into stark focus,” he continued. “Congress, the president, and the Department of Homeland Security need to come together with state and local governments to honestly acknowledge that domestic terrorism is a threat to the safety and security of the American homeland, including the refugees who resettle within our borders. We must move beyond the perceived fears of the unknown and focus on credible threat information and allow the security vetting systems we have in place (for refugees) to work.”

After Wednesday’s hearing on the security risks posed by Syrian refugees, Thompson sent a letter to Homeland Security Committee Chair Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, asking that he convene hearings on domestic terrorism in the United States.

Thompson criticized his colleagues on the committee who seemed more concerned about terrorists slipping into the ranks of Islamic refugees from war-torn Syria.

He urged them to focus more attention on Americans as the primary threat of launching terrorist attacks. The 70,000 United Nations-certified refugees coming to the U.S. each year should be welcomed, he said. He added that it was mostly U.S. citizens who were leaving the country to fight for ISIL, also called ISIS or the Islamic State. Syrians, he said, were fleeing ISIS and needed a safe haven in America.

“They are the most vulnerable to the violence and know first-hand the cruelty of ISIL and other groups that have brought harm upon their communities,” Thompson said. “These refugees, like most others that arrive in the U.S., are fleeing difficult, even life-threatening, situations. The idea that they would be met with suspicion and hate upon arrival in the United States is an affront to the values we uphold and promote.”

“In fact,” Thompson added, “the leading demographic of those seeking or joining ISIL in the U.S are U.S.-born citizens, including citizens with no ancestry from majority-Muslim countries.”

Congressman’s past rants stirred controversy

Thompson made news last year when he appeared on a New Nation of Islam radio show and said Clarence Thomas is an “Uncle Tom,” Mitch McConnell is a “racist,” and Republicans are only anti-big government and anti-Obamacare because President Obama is black.

In 2011, after a congressional hearing on Islamic radicalization, Thompson said the hearing could be used to inspire a new generation of suicide bombers, the Associated Press reported. He said Congress has a responsibility to make sure its words do not make the problems of Islamic terrorism worse.

Read Rep. Thompson’s entire statement before the House Homeland Security Committee Wednesday.

Thompson’s latest comments echoed the sentiments of Democrats in the Senate who have called for a more laissez-faire policy on refugees.

Last month 14 U.S. senators, all Democrats led by Richard Durbin of Illinois, Diane Feinstein of California and Al Franken of Minnesota, sent a letter to President Obama urging him to “dramatically increase” the number of Syrian refugees coming into the U.S. citing the brutal conditions from which they are fleeing and America’s proud tradition of offering itself as a beacon for the world’s poor and oppressed.

The same type of language was used last summer when tens of thousands of unaccompanied alien children, along with many families, surged at the U.S. southern border from Central America.

Children of immigrants at risk of radicalization

Security experts testified Wednesday that the children of Islamic refugees and immigrants tend to have a worse record for being radicalized than the refugees themselves. Such was the case with Hoda Muthana, the 20-year-old daughter of immigrants from Yemen who decided to leave the country late last year, to the surprise of her parents, and become an ISIS bride. Her parents emigrated from Yemen more than 20 years ago and lived peacefully in an upscale subdivision near Birmingham, Alabama. She became radicalized over the Internet, left for Syria via Turkey, and publicly renounced her parents on Twitter.

The Republicans on the committee took issue with Thompson’s open-doors approach to refugees, as did the expert witnesses called to testify before the committee.

“Refugees will continue to play a pivotal role in expanding the rich cultural diversity of America, but the risks may be higher due to the high number of fighters and more operatives heading to the West, and the potential for ISIS to use them to gain refugee status,” said Seth Jones, director of the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the Rand Corp. “I do think it’s worse in terms of data management for refugees, rescreening procedures, DNA checks and a few other issues. The U.S. does have a longstanding tradition of offering refuge to people fleeing persecution, but an integral factor is that we have a responsibility to assure they do not present a risk to the West. I think we’re after a balance here.”

The Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris, the attacks in Garland, Texas, Brussels, Belgium, Ottawa, Canada, at the Boston Marathon, and the 9/11 attacks were all cited by Jones as being committed by Islamic terrorists, as were the recent slaughter of 147 Christians in Kenya and 21 Coptic Christians in Libya. Many foiled operations have been connected to Middle Eastern or African terror groups, such as the arrests in April of four young Somali men from Minnesota who tried repeatedly to leave the country and join ISIS.

The U.S. has imported more than 100,000 Somalis as refugees since the early 1990s. Since 2005 dozens of the Somali refugees brought to the U.S. and children of the refugees have been arrested on charges of providing material support to overseas terrorist organizations.

No records to vet

Syria, like Somalia, has become a failed state where chaos reigns. The U.S. has no access to reliable data on the backgrounds of potential refugees, FBI counter-terrorism experts warned at a previous congressional hearing in February.

“Our human sources (in Syria) are minimal and we don’t have a government we can partner with (to vet the refugees) and that’s the key thing,” said Tom Fuentes, former FBI assistant director, at the June 24 hearing. “If these individuals were not on a database, that’s why they’re refugees. The children become a problem as well, as we saw in the Somali case, as in the Tsarnaev (Boston bombing) case, children grew up and became radicalized even as their parents were unaware. I know the FBI does not have the ability to really do an adequate vetting on this.”

Get the blockbuster “Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance,” by Pamela Geller, now in the WND Superstore.

Help refugees ‘where they are’

Rep. John Katko, R-N.Y.

Rep. John Katko, R-N.Y., asked the panel of experts to put aside for a moment any moral obligations the U.S. may have to take in foreign refugees fleeing violence. Strictly from a security standpoint, Katko asked “does anyone believe we should let the refugees in if we can’t vet them?”

No one on the panel – Fuentes, Jones, and Daveed Gartenstein, a senior fellow at Foundation for the Defense of Democracies – said that would be a good idea.

“We do have a moral imperative to help the refugees but we also have a moral imperative to protect U.S. citizens, and therein lies the rub,” Katko said. “So my next question is, can we help them somehow without bringing them here?”

Gartenstein said “actually addressing the situation over there is arguably getting more bank for our buck.”

There are nearly 4 million Syrian refugees displaced by the civil war. The U.S. is being asked to take in 65,000 over two years.

“So that is a drop in the bucket,” Gartenstein said. “Jobs here are scarce, they miss a year or more of schooling (as they learn language).”

He said more could be done to help the refugees where they are, particularly in Jordan because most of the refugees there are not in camps.

“Anything you can do over there is advantageous and may actually be, from a humanitarian perspective, the best use of our money,” Gartenstein said.

Fuentes agreed. “If you made the camps more livable, the length of time you would be doing those services would also provide an incentive against them becoming terrorists, if we did more for the refugees before they come here, they may be more loyal to the U.S.”

Jones said a long-term strategy for Syria is lacking and resettling a small percentage of the refugees falls far short of the humanitarian mark.

“We need to be finding, in addition to taking refugees, ways to wind down the war. Whatever administration comes next, as well as this one, I would encourage them to get a long-term strategy,” Jones said. “I would also note that this issue of vetting is significant in Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan and other places, not just Syria.”

Katko said the U.S. can’t have “people coming into this country who we’re not able to vet. And if there’s something we can do over there to help them maybe that’s the way forward and I hope we will look at that in the future.”

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., said there were “no easy answers” to the Syrian refugee situation.

“You can try to minimize the risks but there are still going to be considerable risks there.”

Yet, King said, he felt something needed to be done to relieve the refugee pressure building in Jordan, one of the America’s best allies in the region.

“I think we’ve raised issues today that there are no clear answers to. But it is in our national interests that something be done to alleviate pressure on Jordan. Now we have to find ways to do it,” he said, and that involves finding better ways of vetting the refugees.

King asked the panelists if the refugees could be “tailed” by the FBI once they arrive in the U.S. “Would that violate FBI procedures and are there resources for that?”

Fuentes said no such policy exists at the FBI. “There has to be some sort of criminal activity,” before that type of monitoring can be activated. “Right now they have active investigations in every single state,” he added. “You could be looking at tens of thousands of potential subjects that there’s a reason to follow them, so you have to prioritize, and so the practicality of that in a refugee vetting process I think just doesn’t exist.”

Rep. Louis Barletta, R-Pa., asked, “Does the U.S. accept risk by accepting refugees from a country that admittedly is an enemy?”

Fuentes said al-Qaida had a different strategy than ISIS. “They wanted the giant attack, but other groups like Hezbollah believe in a different philosophy, death by a thousand cuts, so they were willing to kill four or five at a time in Israel, but they were happy with that because they were able to kill four or five as they were doing everything things. So the average citizen hears about the attack on a bus stop or a café and says ‘wait a minute, I go to a café, I ride a bus.’ It generates fear. You can’t carry out a large one by courier or by remote control. Syrians are not going to be able to come in and launch a major attack but can they come in and do death by a smaller cut? I think we are much more likely to see that type of attack.”

The U.S. traditionally accepts the vast majority of the world’s displaced persons for permanent resettlement. But in the case of Syria, the U.S. has been slow to jump on board with the United Nations plan for resettlement. Of the more than 130,000 Syrians the U.N. wants to permanently resettle in outside countries, Germany has agreed to take the most at 30,000 followed by Canada with 11,000. The U.N. wants the U.S. to take 65,000 over the next two years but so far the U.S. State Department hasn’t committed to any specific number, saying only that it would take 2,000 this year and “many more” in following years.

The biggest question has been how to screen the Syrians for ties to the many terrorist organizations operating in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon. There is not only ISIS but al-Nusra Front, Free Syrian Army, and Hezbollah.

Gartenstein said the U.S. system of vetting is “antiquated.”

“The risk is greater with al-Nusra than ISIS because it’s not as overtly brutal. They’re brutal but they’re not tweeting out pictures of their beheadings and people they’ve burned alive. I would also point out that our vetting system is very antiquated,” he said. “One of the things that’s disturbing about our asylum process is it’s really difficult to tell if someone is lying. Someone can say ‘My family was massacred by al-Shabab.’ Well did that really happen? Does it actually match what was actually going on there on the ground at that particular time at a granular level? We need to use data that way. That’s something we should think about for the future because this will not be the last refugee crisis that we face and getting that on-the-ground level data will actually make us safer as a country.”

Watch Homeland Security Chair Rep. Michael McCaul’s response to the planned importation of 2,000 Syrians into U.S. cities and towns over the next year:

McCaul, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, said the U.S. “must not be naïve” when it comes to Syrian refugees. He said Congress may be forced to “consider additional steps” if the Obama administration doesn’t address the problem of vetting.

McCaul’s entire statement is transcribed below:

“We’ve been sounding the alarm for months on this issue and for good reason. America has a proud tradition of welcoming refugees and immigrants but we need to make sure the extremists don’t exploit this pathway to our country, especially from terrorist safe havens. Last year the administration announced plans to surge the admission of Syrian refugees into the United States, including plans to resettle 2,000 of them this year and thousands more next year. This is concerning for two reasons. First, terrorists have made it known they want to manipulate refugee programs to sneak operatives into the West. Second, top national security officials have admitted that intelligence gaps in Syria will make it hard to weed them out of refugee pools. Testifying before our committee in February, the director of the National Counter Terrorism Center called these refuges a ‘population of concern’ given the expansive presence of ISIS and al-Qaida in Syria. Testifying at the same hearing, the FBI’s assistant director, Michael Steinbach from counter-terrorism, argued that identifying potential operatives will be difficult because ‘our databases won’t have the information we need.’ Simply put, We cannot screen applicants confidently if we don’t have good intelligence on the ground. We can’t vet them properly if we don’t have the proper databases. In light of these concerns I sent a series of letters to the administration this year, highlighting the risk of accelerating Syrian refugee admissions and requesting greater assurances regarding the screening process. The responses were inadequate and the administration was vague in explaining how the screening process would overcome the intelligence gaps. I just wrote the president two weeks ago, again asking for answers in a classified briefing for members of this committee. We are still waiting for a serious response. I do not take this issue lightly. Terrorists are constantly probing our defenses and would not hesitate to exploit a program meant to save innocent people fleeing from violence for the purpose of attacking our homeland.

I remind you that members of al-Qaida in Iraq, the predecessor to ISIS, have already managed to sneak into our country through refugee resettlement programs. Two of these terrorists arrested in 2009 were responsible for killing four Pennsylvania National Guard soldiers in Iraq and yet they gained entry and were resettled in Bowling Green, Kentucky. And that was when we had far better intelligence on the ground in Iraq to vet refugees whereas in Syria we are dark. The situation today in Syria is even more chaotic, making it difficult to get the biometric, biographic and other information needed to ensure individuals being admitted into our country do not intend to do our people harm.

Since its founding America has welcomed refugees from conflict zones in the darkest corners of the globe. We will not abandon that tradition. It embodies the compassion of our people and represents our deepest values. But we must also not abandon our vigilance and we cannot be naïve. In Syrian we are witnessing largest convergence of Islamist terrorists in world history, and some of these fanatics want to turn our refugee programs into a Trojan horse to carry out attacks here at home. We cannot allow that to happen. And I hope the White House will do more to convince Congress and the American people that it is moving forward cautiously, appropriately, but most importantly with the security of the American people as the priority. If it does not we may need to consider taking additional steps here on Capitol Hill.

Top Dem: Monitor U.S. citizens, not Muslim 'refugees'
Leo Hohmann
Thu, 25 Jun 2015 00:32:47 GMT

Read More

Blumenthal offered Hillary Benghazi defense from Media Matters

 

Long-time Clinton confidante Sidney Blumenthal sent Hillary Clinton an email containing links to blog postings he helped to generate for the progressive activist group Media Matters allegedly “refuting” right-wing “smears” about the September 11, 2012, Benghazi attacks.

Blumenthal had suggested to Clinton that the State Department circulate the Media Matters postings on Benghazi.

Blumenthal serves as an on-and-off paid consultant for Media Matters. Since 2009, he also has been a paid employee for the Clintons’ non-profit, The Clinton Foundation.

Blumenthal had sent Clinton an email with the Media Matters links followed by a message reading, “H: Got all these done. Complete refutation on Libya smear. Philippe can circulate these links. Sid.”

Philippe was most likely a reference to Philippe I. Reines, who served as Clinton’s senior adviser and was later promoted to deputy assistant secretary of state under Clinton.

Reines is a founder and managing director of Beacon Global Strategies, a consulting firm that also employs former CIA deputy director Michael Morell, who was implicated in the Benghazi talking-points scandal.

“Hillary Unhinged” is a precious resource for Americans as the 2016 presidential campaign ramps up. It has all of her best quotes, such as she will not run for president, insisting she and Bill were dead broke when they left the White House, and much more. Included are QR codes to direct you to videos and audios.

Blumemthal’s email to Clinton containing the Media Matters links was sent October 10, 2012. The correspondence was part of 179 pages of newly released Blumenthal emails made public Monday by the House Select Committee on Benghazi. WND conducted a thorough review of all of the new emails.

Blumenthal’s employment at Media Matters has raised questions about the organization’s official non-profit status.

IRS rules for 501C3 nonprofits such as Media Matters specifically state:

“All section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”

Rules further restrict such nonprofits from taking political sides, but they may spend up to 20 percent of their operating budgets on so-called lobbying efforts if the organizations follows the rules of “non partisanship,” About.com adds.

Earlier this week, Media Matters founder David Brock wrote an op-ed published on his website that his organization specifically defends Hillary Clinton.

Wrote Brock: “By refusing to release the transcript, the Republicans want to hide the true nature of the Blumenthal deposition: Their partisan attempt to both chill Blumenthal’s right to freely express his own political views and more broadly to intimidate our organizations – organizations that have led the way in exposing the fraudulence of the Benghazi investigation itself. (Not to mention our role in specifically defending Hillary Clinton from the Republicans’ unfair attacks on the subject).”

Brock was also the co-author of an e-book entitled, “The Benghazi Hoax.” The work was largely a defense of Clinton’s actions regarding the Benghazi attacks.

Earlier this year, Brock, a known Clinton ally, abruptly resigned from the board of Priorities USA Action, a Super PAC that supported Clinton for the presidency.

Meanwhile, Blumenthal’s October 10, 2012, email to Clinton circulated five Media Matters articles on Benghazi.

The subjects include:

• “Right-Wing Media’s Libya Consulate Security Mythology Falls Apart”
• “Fox Favorite Jason Chaffetz And The Right-Wing Media’s Libya Hearings”
• “Myths And Facts About The Benghazi Attack And Protests In The Middle East”

Blumenthal offered Hillary Benghazi defense from Media Matters
-NO AUTHOR-
Thu, 25 Jun 2015 00:49:26 GMT

Read More

Bombshell report: U.S. fighting for Iranian militia in Iraq

 

WASHINGTON – “This is such an unbelievable betrayal of all those troops who were attacked, maimed and killed by these same Iran-backed Shi’ite terror militias in the 2000s.”

That was the reaction of Iran expert Clare Lopez to the news that U.S. forces in Iraq are now supporting Iranian militias.

The headline of a Bloomberg article Monday blared: “Iran’s Forces and U.S. Share a Base in Iraq.”

But buried within the story was an item that Lopez found significantly more alarming.

According to the report, U.S. troops are not just cohabitating with Iran’s Shiite militia units, “But the U.S. is flying close air support missions for those forces.”

Clare Lopez, vice president for research and analysis at the Center for Security Policy

“Fighting on the same side of anything that includes this jihadist Iranian regime ought to be unthinkable,” Lopez told WND.

“I guess not for this White House,” added the woman who manages the counter-jihad and Shariah programs at the Center for Security Policy, run by former Assistant Secretary of Defense Frank Gaffney.

“I’ve been to Bethesda to visit soldiers maimed for life, missing arms & legs, thanks to EFPs (explosively formed projectiles) and IEDs (improvised explosive devices) in Iraq that came from Iranian factories & were set by these Iranian terror proxies,” Lopez told WND.

“And now we’re co-locating (based at the same facility) with them, helping them fight ISIS, which is every bit as bad as the mullahs, but the only credible Sunni force fighting against them,” she added incredulously.

Lopez recently appeared on a Capitol Hill panel on Iran and was introduced by former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense and Pentagon spokeswoman KT McFarland as “a career CIA operations officer. You know that movie, ‘Zero Dark Thirty’? The woman who was the hero? Think Clare Lopez.”

Jessica Chastain as “Maya”in “Zero Dark Thirty”

Her insights are backed by an impressive array of credentials. In addition to spending two decades in the field as a CIA operations officer, Lopez was an instructor for military intelligence and special forces students; has been a consultant, intelligence analyst and researcher within the defense sector; and has published two books on Iran.

“We’ve really got no business getting in the middle of what is in fact an intra-Islamic sectarian struggle between Shiite jihadis who hate us and Sunni jihadis who hate us,” Lopez told WND.

But the American-Iranian cooperation in Iraq fits in perfectly with what Lopez told WND more than a year ago, that America has switched sides in the war on terror under President Obama.

An that Obama seeks to ally with Iran.

Lopez had told WND the Obama administration “consistently has engaged with this Iranian regime, pleaded with it to engage, and continue to engage, in obviously fruitless negotiations over their nuclear weapons program. The administration extended deadlines repeatedly, refused to hold Iran to account meaningfully for its terror support, including involvement in Sept. 11, lethal support to Iraqi militias in the 2000s and continuing harboring al-Qaida operations cell on its soil.”

In another interview with WND, Lopez explained what she thought was Obama’s real goal: Far from seeking the defeat of jihadism in the Mideast or globally, Obama preferred to let Sunni and Shiite jihadists each have their own spheres of influence in the Muslim world.

“The administration’s plan, I believe, is to remove American power and influence, including military forces, from Islamic lands,” Lopez asserted.

When WND remarked that was just what Osama bin Laden had demanded, Lopez pointed out that is the aim of all jihadis, “Because that is what Islam demands, that foreign forces be kicked out of Islamic lands.”

Does Obama think if we leave the Mideast the jihadis will then leave us alone?

“I don’t know,” she said. “I can just see the pattern that is enabling the rise of Islam, empowering the Muslim Brotherhood domestically and abroad, alienating and distancing ourselves from our friends and allies and debilitating the American military.”

Obama bows to Saudi King Abdullah, on April 1, 2009

Lopez doesn’t just think Obama wants to withdraw entirely from the Mideast.

She believes he wants to turn most of it over to Iran.

“I am convinced that this administration intends Iran to become the nuclear power hegemon of the entire Persian Gulf region – and that includes especially the oil-rich areas. This includes the east coast of Saudi Arabia as well as southern Iraq and Iran itself.”

And, she believes the Obama administration is, in fact, following a plan to let Iran become the dominant power in the Middle East, with the intention of turning the state that sponsors more terrorism than any other, into a security partner of the U.S.

“We pull all our forces out, which has been done, and we let them take over,” Lopez explained. “I think that’s already underway.”

“Its not in the United States’ best interests, but it is one way of getting us out of Muslim lands, which is what this administration wants done. They are trying to be even-handed between the Shiites and the Sunni, especially with the Muslim Brotherhood clamoring in their ear,” she said.

“So, what happens? Arab Spring. North Africa goes to the Sunnis: al-Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood. They should be happy with that: They get Tunisia, Libya and Egypt. The Persian Gulf region goes to Iran.”

And Iran is permitted to be a nuclear power.

Iran’s third test of its Sajjil-2 medium range ballistic missile in Dec. 2009

“I think it already is a nuclear power,” Lopez asserted.

“I think they have functioning warheads. They obviously have functioning missiles, including ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles). The Pentagon has published openly its estimate by next year, 2015, Iranian ICBMs will be capable of reaching the continental U.S. from Iran. This is open, unclassified, open-source publication.”

“So, the plan of this administration is to pull out of the Middle East, allow it to revert to Islamic control, as in the caliphates of old, or imamates, in the case of the Shiites. And to allow Islam to resurge, which is exactly what’s happening.”

WND asked, Obama’s plan is to take us back 1,300 years?

“Well, not us, but to let the Middle East do that,” she clarified.

Lopez noted a distinct peculiarity to keep in mind when negotiating with Iran: “Islamic law obligates Muslims to lie to non-Muslims. Why on earth would anyone expect Iran, a jihad and Shariah state, to negotiate with Westerners in good faith?”

Lopez does see “a tremendous naiveté about what jihad and Shariah really mean” on the part of the Obama administration.

She detects “an apparent trust that if the U.S. adopts a more accommodating attitude, well, then so will the Iranians. I’m not sure how Ivy League graduates could be so ignorant of world history. I cannot imagine they’d want to inflict the legacy of Islamic jihad on anyone if they knew what it has meant historically.”

Lopez cited the reasons Obama has decided to remove U.S. power and influence from the Middle East and North Africa:

• He has a worldview that sees America as influence for ill in the world; therefore, he must diminish that influence wherever and however possible.

• He has a worldview that sees Islam as suppressed and oppressed by Western (colonial) powers and the U.S. as the inheritor of that oppressive role.

• He has a desire to “rectify” what is viewed as “injustice” suffered by Islam at the hands of the West and has decided that best way to do that is for the U.S. to withdraw and allow and empower Islam to rise back up again to what is seen as its “rightful” place in the world.

The former CIA operative said, “as Israel fought enemies on all sides to remain free, secure and Jewish, America began to move away from Israel and toward its Muslim enemies. And, as Iran moved inexorably toward a deliverable nuclear weapons capability, America helped.”

Lopez reiterated many of those themes, and added some fresh insights, during her Capitol Hill appearance Friday on a panel of national security experts discussing the dangers of negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran.

“I don’t lose sleep because Britain has nukes or France has nukes,” Lopez told the audience.

Iran?

“That’s worrisome.”

She noted Iran is a signatory of the Cairo Declaration which was essentially a withdrawal from the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights and a pledge of allegiance to Islamic law, which allows amputations, beheadings and crucifixions.

Lopez said 500 Iranians have been executed just this year.

“Women are second-class citizens. They are literally unequal to men. They (morality police) roam the streets looking for people who are not wearing the right clothing.”

A mainstay of the Iranian regime’s ideology, she said, was “Jew hatred.”

“Jew hatred is intrinsic to the Quran but the genocidal threats have been nonstop. There is no way that Israel can look at this regime and listen to its daily threats of genocide, its dehumanization of Jewish people, calling them bacteria and cockroaches and other insects” and not feel its survival is at stake.

Lopez recalled how just in March, the commander of the Iranian forces said, during the middle of negotiations between Iranian diplomats and the U.S., that the “annihilation of Israel is non-negotiable.”

“That (Israel) is our number one ally and partner in the Middle East, standing between the barbarism of (Islamist) regimes and Western Civilization.”

“Why are we talking to these people?”

Follow Garth Kant @DCgarth

Bombshell report: U.S. fighting for Iranian militia in Iraq
Garth Kant
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 00:59:42 GMT

Read More

FBI investigations targeted Valerie Jarrett's family

 

President Obama and Valerie Jarrett

Valerie Jarrett has been one of Barack Obama’s closest advisers in the Oval Office and it’s no secret her family history is checkered with adherents to Communism, but a new report from Judicial Watch, the Washington watchdog group, reveals the FBI even investigated several of her relatives.

For example, files obtained by Judicial Watch and posted online show that her father, James Bowman, was in 1950 in communication with a “paid Soviet agent named Alfred Stern, who fled to Prague after getting charged with espionage.”

The files also reveal, JW reported, “Bowman was … a member of a Communist-sympathizing group called the Association of Internes and Medical Students.”

Another document in the files was a note from J. Edgar Hoover to FBI officials in Denver instructing them to investigate “James Edward Bowman” for his connections to other suspects.

“It is incumbent upon you to resolve the question which prompted CSC to refer instant case. It is also necessary to determine the degree of association between the applicant and any individual on whom the CSC has furnished derogatory information,” the note said.

Want to know more about Obama and just who is guiding him? It’s here, in “Leading from Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors who Decide for Him.”

It apparently was in connect with Bowman’s possible involvement with the “European Recovery Program and was dated 1955.

The document shows that Jarrett’s grandfather, Robert Taylor, was thought also to have been “in contact with Stern on a number of occasions.”

Bowman moved to Iran to work after his release from the Army Medical Corps in 1955.

The report explained, “According to Bowman’s government file the Association of Internes and Medical Students is an organization that ‘has long been a faithful follower of the Communist Party line’ and engages in un-American activities. Bowman was born in Washington, D.C., and had deep ties to Chicago, where he often collaborated with fellow Communists.”

“JW also obtained documents on Bowman from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) showing that the FBI was brought in to investigate him for his membership in a group that ‘follows the communist party line.’ The Jarrett family Communist ties also include a business partnership between Jarrett’s maternal grandpa, Robert Rochon Taylor, and Stern, the Soviet agent associated with her dad.”

Then, the files reveal, Jarrett’s father-in-law, Vernon Jarrett, “was also another big-time Chicago Communist.”

The files were obtained by Judicial Watch as part of its probe “into the Jarrett family’s Communist ties,” the group reported.

“For a period of time Vernon Jarrett appeared on the FBI’s Security Index and was considered a potential Communist saboteur who was to be arrested in the event of a conflict with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). His FBI file reveals that he was assigned to write propaganda for a Communist Party front group in Chicago that would ‘disseminate the Communist Party line among … the middle class,’” the report said.

Judicial Watch called Valerie Jarrett, “a liberal extremist who wields tremendous power in the White House. Faithful to her roots, she still has connections to many Communist and extremist groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood. Jarrett and her family also had strong ties to Frank Marshal Davis, a big Obama mentor and Community Party member with an extensive FBI file.”

She previously has been exposed for her role in the Department of Justice gun-running scandal called “Fast and Furious,” and also when she was, according to JW, a “key player in the effort to cover up that “Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress about the Fast and Furious.”

Under that program, the government let guns be smuggled illegally to drug cartels in Mexico. The purported goal was to trace the guns and their use, but the government simply lost track of them.

“In 2008 JW got documents linking Valerie Jarrett, who also served as co-chairman of Obama’s presidential transition team, to a series of real estate scandals, including several housing projects operated by convicted felon and Obama fundraiser/friend Antoin ‘Tony’ Rezko,” JW reported.

WND reported two years ago that a New York Times profile of Valerie Jarrett, “glossed over her family’s radical history.”

The profile, from September 2012, received another round of media attention when BuzzFeed.com reported the White House tried to defend Jarrett behind the scenes by circulating glowing talking points about her to other administration officials who were candidates to be interviewed for the Times piece.

The resulting piece essentially ignored much of her family’s history.

For example, regarding Jarrett’s mother, the Times said only that “her mother had a Chicago street named after her for her work in early childhood education.”

But WND was first to report, Jarrett’s mother, Barbara Taylor Bowman, founded an education initiative alongside the family of unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers’ that was funded by Ayers, Obama and ultimately the 2009 “stimulus” legislation.

The Chicago school, the Erikson Institute, focuses on training people who work in early childhood development.

WND also reported earlier Valerie Jarrett in 1987 got her start in politics, working for Washington as deputy corporation counsel for finance and development. She was deputy chief of staff for Mayor Richard Daley, during which time she hired Michelle Robinson, then engaged to Obama.

WND reported just recently that Obama critics have suspected that the president’s “tilt toward Iran” in negotiations over that rogue nation’s nuclear program is because of the influence of Valeria Jarrett, who was born there.

Retired Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin, former deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence under President George W. Bush, spotlighted Jarrett’s influence in a Fox News interview in February.

“There are many who are now saying that [Jarrett] is really the architect of this non-treaty with the Iranians,” he said, “which ultimately will result in the Iranians having a nuclear program, and America having to accept a nuclear-armed Iran.”

Stanley Kurtz, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, noted in a 2011 National Review article Jarrett was born and raised in Iran for the first five years of her life.

“In explaining how she first grew close to Obama, Jarrett says they traded stories of their youthful travels,” he wrote.

Kurtz said Jarrett has affirmed that she and Obama “reject traditional American exceptionalism.”

FBI investigations targeted Valerie Jarrett's family
Bob Unruh
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 01:10:08 GMT

Read More

Massive Planned Parenthood facility faces own abortion

 

A court in Illinois will have to determine now whether a massive Planned Parenthood abortion facility is legal and can continue to operate after an appeals court determined its neighbors had a valid concern that it was out of compliance with the city’s zoning requirements.

The ruling came from the Illinois Appellate Court, Second Judicial District, which reversed an earlier decision by the lower court to dismiss the complaint brought by the Fox Valley Families Against Planned Parenthood.

They are represented by lawyers with the the Thomas More Society of Chicago.

The plaintiffs argued that the mega-abortion operation, which was built eight years ago in Aurora, Illinois, was illegal since it was built on and remains located in a business development district – reserved exclusively for profit-making businesses.

Planned Parenthood has set itself up as a nonprofit.

Get “Abortion Free: Your Manual to Building a Pro-Life America One Community at a Time,” and start putting its recommendations into effect in your home town.

The appeals court ordered discovery and further proceedings in the lower court to address the neighbors’ main claim, that the zoning specifically bans nonprofits so Planned Parenthood is not allowed to be there.

Peter Breen, special counsel for the society, said, “This facility was built on a foundation of deception, and the appellate court’s ruling reaffirms that Planned Parenthood must obey Aurora’s zoning laws, just like any other resident of Aurora.”

He said, “Planned Parenthood built its abortion facility in Aurora under false pretenses and in blatant violation of the strictures of Aurora’s zoning code, which require a tax-paying for-profit use on that site.”

The society report said unless there are some further proceedings that move the case up to the Illinois Supreme Court, the case will return to the DuPage County Circuit Court for litigation over the conflict between Planned Parenthood and the city’s zoning.

According to the society, “Planned Parenthood boasted that it had been paying property taxes on the property from 2006 throughout the pendency of proceedings in the circuit court, and its attorneys argued that such payment of property taxes proved that it was lawfully operating as a for-profit entity. However, within a few months after the suit was dismissed by the circuit court, Planned Parenthood applied for and was granted property tax exemptions and a rebate of taxes paid for the prior three years, arguing that its use of the property was strictly charitable and non-profit. In 2007, Planned Parenthood also won $8.05 million in 501(c)(3) tax-free bond financing from the Illinois Finance Authority upon its promise that it would use the property for exclusively charitable purposes.”

The structure was constructed with Planned Parenthood hiding behind dummy “front” companies during the time the 21,000-square-foot building was permitted and built.

The Thomas More Society said, “Planned Parenthood withheld its true intended use and the resultant negative impact on its neighbors from the people and city of Aurora. After media revelations in July 2007 that the property was to house a massive Planned Parenthood abortion facility, intense public outcry resulted. But Aurora finally allowed the facility to open in October 2007.”

Aurora Mayor Thomas Weisner made the decision to allow the abortion facility to move forward, but then the city later argued that it was a legislative decision by the city that reached that conclusion.

“We conclude that no such decision was made. We also conclude that it was error to interpret plaintiff’s claim against the Planned Parenthood defendants as one for administrative review. … We reverse the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Planned Parenthood defendants on plaintiff’s claim that the ongoing use of the property violates the [zoning.]

“We also hold that it was error to limit discovery on this issue and to strike plaintiffs’ request for declaratory judgment relating to this issue.”

Planned Parenthood had built the building under the name of Gemini Office Development, GOD, which in turn was owned by 21st Century Office Development, which was controlled by Planned Parenthood.

At public meetings regarding the project, Planned Parenthood concealed its identity until it was outed by local reports. Officials were describing the project as a “medical office building.”

The plaintiffs also had suggested that surgical procedures such as abortions also were not allowed in an office building setting, and also that it required a special use permit, which was not obtained.

The original list of complaints also noted Planned Parenthood did not have the required parking availability or yard size. And they said Gemini did not seek variances or exceptions to those requirements.

The plaintiffs also explained that they had been unable to obtain voluntary statements pertinent to the case from the zoning administrator, mayor and city council “due to their hostility.” Under formal discovery, such statements could be required.

Related story

Pro-life organization ramps up work for 2016

Massive Planned Parenthood facility faces own abortion
Bob Unruh
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 01:29:50 GMT

Read More

Did ISIS give a clue about Jade Helm 15?

 

I’ve echoed in a recent column that I don’t think Jade Helm 15, the largest domestic military exercises involving every branch of service in seven states this summer, is a security risk to Texas. Even the Pentagon isn’t that stupid to mess with the Lone Star State. However, I have also said that I believe Jade Helm 15 is more than “just a training exercise,” and I think ISIS just gave us the clue.

The exact words in my past column about Jade Helm 15 were: “I do believe, in addition to the largest domestic military training, it is also a display of power (near the southern border) intended for deterrence of enemies like ISIS and other terrorists, whom the FBI has already said have tentacles in all 50 states.”

And guess who just released its intent to smuggle nuclear weapons across the U.S.-Mexico border? You guessed it. Granted, ISIS is a band of liars following the father of lies, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a nugget of truth in its propaganda, especially when experts agree. ISIS even has a nuclear plan.

The International Business Times reported: “The Islamic State group claims it could purchase a nuclear device from Pakistan and transport it to the United States through drug-smuggling channels. The group, also known as ISIS and ISIL, would transfer the nuclear weapon from Pakistan to Nigeria or Mexico, where it could be brought to South America and then up to the U.S., according to an op-ed allegedly written by kidnapped British photojournalist John Cantlie and published in Dabiq, the group’s propaganda magazine.”

Chuck Norris provides real solutions to our county’s problems and a way to reawaken the American dream in his best-seller, “Black Belt Patriotism.”

The Nigerian newspaper Premium Times further reported that Boko Haram, the Nigerian jihadist group that pledged its formal allegiance to ISIS in March, could carry out the nuclear bomb import into the U.S. as easy as smugglers use drug routes.

The ISIS op-ed piece explains the feasibility: “Let me throw a hypothetical operation onto the table. The Islamic State has billions of dollars in the bank, so they call on their wilāyah in Pakistan to purchase a nuclear device through weapons dealers with links to corrupt officials in the region.”

It went to explain, “The weapon is then transported overland until it makes it to Libya, where the mujāhidīn move it south to Nigeria. Drug shipments from Columbia bound for Europe pass through West Africa, so moving other types of contraband from East to West is just as possible.”

Then, “The nuke and accompanying mujāhidīn arrive on the shorelines of South America and are transported through the porous borders of Central America before arriving in Mexico and up to the border with the United States.”

Finally, “From there it’s just a quick hop through a smuggling tunnel and hey presto, they’re mingling with another 12 million ‘illegal’ aliens in America with a nuclear bomb in the trunk of their car.”

Say it’s preposterous? ISIS will never get the capability? Experts disagree.

Bloomberg reported that Indian Minister of State Defense Rao Inderjit Singh warned the crowd at the Shangri-La regional security conference in Singapore two weeks ago that “[w]ith the rise of ISIL in West Asia, one is afraid to an extent that perhaps they might get access to a nuclear arsenal from states like Pakistan.”

In September 2014, Joe Cirincione, president of Ploughshares Fund, a global security foundation, and author of “Nuclear Nightmares: Securing the World Before It Is Too Late,” wrote in the New York Daily News: “Its seizure of banks and oil fields gave it more than $2 billion in assets. If ISIS could make the right connection to corrupt officials in Russia or Pakistan, the group might be able to buy enough highly enriched uranium (about 50 pounds) and the technical help to build a crude nuclear device. Militants recruited from Europe or America could help smuggle it into their home nations.”

And what about a year ago on July 8, 2014, when Iraq’s United Nations ambassador Mohamed Ali Alhakim, following the seizure of 40 kilograms [88 pounds] of uranium compounds from Mosul University, wrote and warned the U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon that these materials “can be used in manufacturing weapons of mass destruction,” according to Reuters.

Alhakim went on to explain, “These nuclear materials, despite the limited amounts mentioned, can enable terrorist groups, with the availability of the required expertise, to use it separate or in combination with other materials in its terrorist acts.”

In December 2014, Hamayun Tariq, a British ISIS member now based in Syria claimed insider knowledge when he wrote on social media that the jihadist group “obtained the uranium from Mosul University and now possesses a ‘dirty bomb’ that it is now considering detonating in a public area,” according to the International Business Times.

Friends, I’m not falling for the trap of ISIS fear baiting or mongering. This isn’t fiction, fairytale or conspiracy. I’m talking about the U.S. government not sticking its heads in the sand or at least asking us to stick ours in it. Washington needs to quit downplaying or minimizing the nuclear risk, lest we find ourselves right back in the unprepared era of pre-9/11.

I don’t think that Jade Helm 15 is a risk to Texas or any other state. I think ISIS is, as the FBI admitted in February. The sooner we send every last one of its members to Mars, the better off America and this world will be. Now, there’s a covert action the military should implement: ISIS mission to Mars!

Lastly, now look at the official military map for Jade Helm 15 and how those military exercises’ locations in five of the seven states are a buttress against the entire length of the southern border:

Is it a coincidence that the Pentagon chose locations stretching from the southern most point of Southern California all the way over to New Mexico and Texas, just above El Paso and over to San Antonio near the Gulf of Mexico?

Whether or not you believe the intelligence sources of Judicial Watch and WND about ISIS collaborating with Mexican drug cartels and the existence of ISIS terror camps just eight miles from the Texas border town of El Paso, is it a coincidence that Jade Helm 15 exercises are just a stone’s throw away from that border crossing?

Is it also a coincidence that ISIS just happened to share publicly with the world that it vows to smuggle nukes through the southern border of the U.S.?

It is also a coincidence that Jade Helm 15 is incorporating the largest scale “unconventional warfare” exercises at those southern points with Special Forces from all branches of the military?”

Is it also a coincidence that Jade Helm 15 runs from July 15 through Sept 15, just a few days past the key terrorist date of 9/11?

I’m back to the words of Franklin Roosevelt, who said, “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”

Receive Chuck Norris' commentaries in your email

BONUS: By signing up for Chuck Norris' alerts, you will also be signed up for news and special offers from WND via email.

• Name*

  FirstLast

• Email*

  Where we will email your daily updates

• Postal code*

  A valid zip code or postal code is required

• Click the button below to sign up for Chuck Norris' commentaries by email, and keep up to date with special offers from WND. You may change your email preferences at any time.

Did ISIS give a clue about Jade Helm 15?
Chuck Norris
Sun, 07 Jun 2015 19:23:51 GMT

Read More

Bruce Will Always Be Bruce

The world is all abuzz with the Vanity Fair issue of "Call Me Caitlyn", where Bruce Jenner has his photo debut as a transgender woman. The entire fiasco is sad. He is a sick man and we should pray for him. Pray for all of them. Pray that they find peace through the love of Jesus Christ. They have no peace, not within themselves and not without.

Every transgender will always be what they were born as, either man or woman. To say that they are a man trapped in a woman's body or vice versa is to say that God made a mistake. Let me be perfectly clear... God does NOT make mistakes. Period.  All the turmoil Bruce is going through and coming out as a "woman" amounts to nothing; it is vanity. 

Think of it this way. If in 1 or 2 thousand years, some archaeologist comes along and finds his grave. Aside from a couple of perky saline pouches sitting on top of his rib cage, the bones will be those of a man. History will know him as a man, not a woman. My bones will be female. If his body were found in the woods and forensics were needed to determine gender, it would be male. No exceptions.

Bruce and every other transgender can call themselves whatever they wish but the facts are the facts. A man is a man and a woman is a woman. In the end, no one will care and it will all be for nothing. 

As for the petition to strip Jenner of his Olympic medals, I do not agree with that. He earned every single one of them and he was not pretending to be a woman in disguise when he got them. Let him have them. Perhaps he could be buried with them. Then maybe those archaeologists that find his male bones someday will be able to say, "Here lies Bruce Jenner. An Olympic Decathlon Champion." Let the rest of his story fade. It won't matter in the end.

Read More

'Operation Moonshine' joins long list of Obama scandals

 

Federal documents obtained by the government watchdog Judicial Watch confirm Secret Service agents were “covertly deployed” from the White House to the private home of an aide to the agency director to monitor what essentially was a neighborhood fight over noise.

The scandal is the latest to join a massive list of Obama administration scandals that include Obamacare, Benghazi, executive amnesty, Veterans Administration fraud, spying on reporters, and Fast and Furious.

WND recently compiled a big list of Obama scandals and already identified a number associated with the Secret Service that included serious security breaches at the White House, agents soliciting prostitutes before a presidential visit and alcohol abuse.

Read the story of a top-ranked Secret Service agent who walked away from it all, in Dan Bongino’s “Life Inside the Bubble.”

Now Judicial Watch has received records from the Secret Service “that shed light into a scandalous operation in which agents were covertly redeployed from the White House compound to protect a close friend of the agency’s director during a dispute with a neighbor.”

The Judicial Watch report said the friend, Lisa Chopey, was also the administrative assistant of former Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan.

Chopey “was embroiled in a discord with a neighbor in her rural community of La Plata, Maryland.”

“At Chopey’s request the agency opened a federal investigation into the neighbor, Mike Mulligan, and surreptitiously redeployed agents assigned to guard the White House to protect her, the records show. Chopey accused Mulligan of ‘disturbing the peace’ by riding noisy ‘four wheelers’ around the neighborhood.”

Her father allegedly was assaulted, too.

So the Secret Service jumped in, conducting undercover surveillance on Mulligan, harassing him and running database checks, the report said.

“The effort was variously referred to as ‘Operation Moonlight’ and ‘Operation Moonshine,’ which is amusing considering drunken Secret Service agents, including a member of President Obama’s protective detail, recently made headlines for crashing a car into a White House barricade following a late-night party,” Judicial Watch said.

The scandal came to light when a story broke that “agents in a special surveillance unit were pulled off duty for at least two months to go an hour’s drive to Chopey’s Maryland home.”

The federal documents, obtained by Judicial Watch under a Freedom of Information Act case, said officials in the Washington Field Office “decided to utilize the Secret Service’s ‘Prowler’ team to conduct visits to the employee’s home, located in rural Maryland.”

“The Prowler assignment consists of a rotating team of two special agents assigned to the Washington Field Office who respond to suspicious persons and situations in and around the White House and the National Capital Region. The Prowler team agents use unmarked, fully equipped Secret Service vehicles and wear civilian clothes without Secret Service identifiers.”

On at least one occasion, two different teams of agents were dispatched to check the home the same day, the documents reveal.

The results of a government investigation found the employee’s “position as working in the director’s office and her friendship with high-level Secret Service officials created the appearance that it was that relationship, rather than furthering official government functions, that motivated the assignment.”

“On at least two of the days … the president was in the White House at the same time that the Prowler team was engaged in welfare checks in rural Maryland, at least 50 minutes away,” the government documents confirmed.

'Operation Moonshine' joins long list of Obama scandals
Bob Unruh
Thu, 04 Jun 2015 01:50:27 GMT

Read More

Barney Frank's hubby: Give blacks watermelons

 

Former U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., with “husband,” James Ready

An independent undercover journalist has secretly filmed retired Rep. Barney Frank’s “husband,” James Ready, suggesting Democrats give blacks watermelons to keep their votes.

In the film posted at Barbwire.com, other Democrats and homosexual activists express their disgust for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who, they say, is “an Oreo cookie” and doesn’t know he’s black.

The undercover footage dated May 2, 2015, was posted by Ryan Sorba, chairman of the Young Conservatives of California and author of the forthcoming book, “The ‘Born Gay’ Hoax.”

The video also shows Frank’s husband accepting what appear to be marijuana joints and stuffing them into his pocket.

Sorba has created a GoFundMe account to raise $95,000 because, he says, he wants to “use my skills as an undercover journalist to fight for socially conservative public policy for one year by exposing the chicanery and lies of the left.”

The film shows Sorba engaged in the following exchange:

Sorba: “I think we need to keep the, you know, the food stamps and the welfare running strong because it keeps the blacks in our camp. I mean, it does.”

Ready (laughing): “And menthol cigarettes.”

Sorba: “And menthol cigarettes and EBT cards, you know what I’m saying?”

Ready (laughing): “And watermelon!”

Sorba: “You’ve got a lot of these black Baptist churches that vote right wing.”

Ready: “Oh my God, yeah. And they vote against themselves, really.”

Sorba: “Yeah.”

Ready: “I know, dude. I just can’t even deal sometimes with how ridiculous, like, our species is, how we can be so incredibly smart and then so incredibly ignorant.”

The film cuts to Ready and Frank.

Ready: “We’re gonna go over a …”

Frank: “We’re gonna go to the marijuana thing.”

Sorba: “You’re going to go to the marijuana thing?”

Frank nods in agreement and gives Sorba a “high” five.

Watch Sorba’s undercover video:

Later in the clip, Sorba restates Ready’s comments and says, “Gotta give watermelon to get the blacks to vote for us [gays]. Don’t you think?”

Ready, laughing, responds, “Shhhhh!”

Sorba replies, “You can’t say that.”

Ready says, “No, I know, not out loud.”

Ryan Sorba

A man identified as Richard Eastman, who is handing out what appears to be marijuana, declares, “Marijuana is not a crime, right. Take three of them!”

Sorba asks, “Are those real joints?”

Eastman says, “Yes they are.”

Sorba: “Wow!”

Ready says “thank you,” as the film shows him stuffing the items into his chest pocket.

Eastman says, “It’s a medical emergency. … And I’m one of the founders of medical marijuana, Richard Eastman, and I opened one of the first post shops in L.A.”

Ready turns to Eastman and says, “Thank you for your hard work.”

Sorba continues to interview various homosexual activists in the film.

He turns to California State Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin de Leon and asks: “On the question of the marriage issue, if we use watermelon, can we get Thomas to side with us on one case?”

De Leon laughs hysterically and turns to another man: “Hey, John, he’s got a good question right here!”

Sorba then encounters Greg Rodriguez, a gay activist and who is considering running for the 42nd state Assembly District in 2016.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas

Sorba asks, “What’s your take on Clarence Thomas, then?”

Rodriguez replies, “He’s married to a white woman. So I don’t, just, I don’t get it.”

The film cuts to an interview with a San Francisco State University professor emeritus, who says, “Does that count when you don’t know you’re black? I don’t think he knows he’s black. … Yeah, no, really, really, because he divorced his black wife, married, married a white gal, which is fine, ya know, married, ya know. And he lives in an all-white suburb. I mean, you start adding these things together and you go (shrugs) …”

The interviews continue with pro-gay activist Richard McIntyre calling Clarence Thomas “an Oreo cookie from the word go.”

Then Rep. Barney Frank – when the issue of Clarence Thomas arises – says, “Gotta wait for him to die.”

Then the clip shows several homosexual activists admitting that they’ve chosen to be gay, they were not born that way and they claim they were because it’s “the party line.”

On Barbwire.com, Sorba explains, “Last month, I went undercover and discovered that many homosexuals attribute their orientations to molestation or other traumatic life experiences.

“While I was investigating, I heard quite a few racist comments.”

Sorba said he then began exploring the issue of homosexuality and race.

“What I found once again was shocking,” he wrote. “Although the homosexual movement has attempted to link itself to the black civil rights movement, racism still runs rampant in a community that supposedly espouses equal treatment.”

Concerned individuals may contribute to Sorba’s GoFundMe campaign here.

Barney Frank's hubby: Give blacks watermelons
-NO AUTHOR-
Thu, 04 Jun 2015 01:04:25 GMT

Read More

U.S. rep.: Force gun owners to 'buy insurance or pay fine'

 

Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., is one of the most anti-gun members of Congress.

U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., has introduced a bill that would force gun owners to have liability insurance or face fines of up to $10,000.

According to Maloney. the Firearms Risk Protection Act would curb so-called “gun violence,” much like car insurance has lowered vehicle fatalities, she said, because gun owners would be more careful.

In a statement to the Hill, Maloney said:

“We require insurance to own a car, but no such requirement exists for guns. The results are clear: car fatalities have declined by 25 percent in the last decade, but gun fatalities continue to rise.”

Maloney said auto insurance carriers incentivize drivers to take precautions to reduce accidents, but no such incentives exist for firearm owners. She wants to change that.

“An insurance requirement would allow the free market to encourage cautious behavior and help save lives,” she said. “Adequate liability coverage would also ensure that the victims of gun violence are fairly compensated when crimes or accidents occur.”

This is the second time Maloney, who is one of the biggest gun control advocates in Congress, has introduced the legislation, according to the Hill. A few weeks ago she reintroduced legislation that would require sellers to obtain a background check for all guns sold at gun shows.

The Gun Show Loophole Closing Act, long championed by former Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., would subject anyone selling or transferring a gun to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System and require that transfers be reported to the attorney general.

Second Amendment advocates said the proposal sounds like a money-maker for insurance companies and lawyers while throwing law-abiding gun owners under the bus.

Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America

“If it were constitutional, which it is not, to require gun owners to buy liability insurance before they can own a gun, then politicians who support this kind of legislation should be required to buy liability insurance before they open their mouths and/or push legislation,” said Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America. “If any in the media support this, then they should also be asked to buy liability insurance.”

Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, said this isn’t the first time this idea has been floated.

“From time to time this proposal has been floated in various states,” he said. “Sometimes it has been supported by insurance company lobbyists as they could profit from the premiums.”

But the real intent, besides shoveling a windfall of cash to the insurance industry, is to make gun ownership more cost prohibitive for more people, Gottlieb said.

Alan Gottlieb is founder of the SAF.

“This is just one more infringement on Second Amendment rights that the gun prohibition lobby is pushing to make gun ownership more expensive so that less people can exercise their constitutional civil rights,” he said.

Check out “On the Firing Line: Essays on the Defense of Liberty” by Larry Pratt, leader of Gun Owners of American.

Mac Slavo, a blogger who writes on gun issues at SHTFPlan.com, brought further perspective to the issue of “incentivizing” gun safety.

“Rather than liability insurance to lower the rate of fatalities from criminal gun usage, Congress should look to the car industry for solutions. Improving the safety of citizens, for example, could be accomplished by giving them free access to body armor, as opposed to the nationwide ban proposed earlier this year,” Slavo writes.

“But that would just make too much sense. So, akin to stopping global warming with increased taxes and carbon credits, which do nothing but enrich carbon exchange management firms operated by people like climate change spokesperson and Internet-creator Al Gore, if you are a politician, especially in the liberal state of New York, the only possible solution would be to make people pay more money for the privilege of providing for their own personal defense.”

Slavo says the likelihood that insurance policies are responsible for the 25 percent drop in car fatalities is almost zero. “Rather, as noted by the Insurance Institute For Highway Safety and people with even a smidgen of common sense, it’s probably more likely that improved vehicle design and safety features are responsible for the large decrease:

“They found that vehicle changes — including improved structural designs, the addition of safety features and an evolving mix of vehicle types — were the main source of declining risk from 1993 through 2006.”

To suggest that gun owners are not already incentivized to be responsible with their firearms is “ridiculous on its face,” Slavo writes, “considering there are hundreds of laws on the books designed specifically for people who commit murder or even accidental manslaughter. The legal mechanisms for those acting criminally or negligently with a firearm already exist. If you kill or injure someone with malicious intent or by accident you face prison time and/or financial damages to be seized from your personal wealth to compensate victims.”

At every turn and on every level anti-gun politicians are desperately trying to supplant the U.S. Constitution, Slavo said. “They will use any excuse and take every opportunity – including but not limited to restrictions on popular ammunition and all out import bans on guns – in their effort to disarm the American people.”

U.S. rep.: Force gun owners to 'buy insurance or pay fine'
Leo Hohmann
Thu, 04 Jun 2015 01:25:55 GMT

Read More