- Christian Group Sues SPLC And Amazon After Being Labeled A "Hate Group"
Last week D. James Kennedy Ministries (DJKM), a Christian-based missionary ministry based in Florida, filed a lawsuit against the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and Amazon after being added to the SPLC’s list of “hate groups” and excluded from Amazon’s charitable donation program, Amazon Smile. Apparently, at least in the SPLC’s estimation, verbally expressing a religously-based opposition to same-sex marriage and transgenerism is enough to get yourself labeled an “Anti-LGBT hate group.” Per PJ Media:
“We embarked today on a journey to right a terrible wrong,” Dr. Frank Wright, president and CEO at DJKM, said in a statement Tuesday. “Those who knowingly label Christian ministries as ‘hate’ groups, solely for subscribing to the historic Christian faith, are either woefully uninformed or willfully deceitful. In the case of the Southern Poverty Law Center, our lawsuit alleges the latter.”
The SPLC has labeled DJKM an “anti-LGBT hate group” for its opposition to same-sex marriage and transgenderism. “These false and illegal characterizations have a chilling effect on the free exercise of religion and on religious free speech for all people of faith,” Wright declared.
“After having given the SPLC an opportunity to retract, we have undertaken this legal action, seeking a trial by a jury of our peers, to preserve our own rights under the law and to defend the religious free speech rights of all Americans,” the DJKM president concluded.
The lawsuit laid out charges against the SPLC, GuideStar, and Amazon. “SPLC acted knowingly, intentionally, and with actual malice in publishing the Hate Map that included the Ministry and in publishing the SPLC Transmissions to GuideStar that included the ministry,” the suit alleged. “SPLC’s conduct in making these publications was beyond the reckless disregard for the truth standard required by Alabama law for punitive damages.”
Of course, given that “same-sex marriage and transgenderism” generally do not comport with the views of most religious entities, it’s unclear exactly how/why all churches, mosques and synagogues in the U.S. managed to avoid being added the SPLC’s list…maybe DJKM just got lucky?
In all, the SPLC says there are 917 “hate groups” in the United States which they divvy up into the following categories:
- Anti-Immigrant
- Anti-LGBT
- Anti-Muslim
- Black Separatist
- Christian Indentity
- General Hate
- Hate Music
- Holocaust Denial
- KKK
- Neo-Confederate
- Neo-Nazi
- Racist Skinhead
- Radical Traditional Catholocism
- White Nationalist
Only in the U.S. can a peaceful Christian group end up on a “hate” list with “Neo-Nazis” and the “KKK”. Be that as it may, here is where the SPLC says the “hate groups” of America are located (click here for an interactive version of the map).
Among other things, DJKM’s lawsuit alleges that SPLC’s “hate group” designation has prevented them from being added to Amazon’s charitable registry.
In early January of this year, a DJKM employee attempted to register the ministry with AmazonSmile, but was denied after multiple attempts. The program made clear, “We rely on the Southern Poverty Law Center to determine which charities are in ineligible categories,” and explained that DJKM was listed as ineligible.
AmazonSmile support also noted that they “rely on GuideStar to send us information from the IRS,” and that GuideStar’s automated feed included the “hate” designation from the SPLC.
AmazonSmile’s eligibility requirements exclude organizations that “engage in, support, encourage, or promote intolerance, hate, terrorism, violence, money laundering, or other illegal activities,” none of which DJKM engages in, the lawsuit argued.
Meanwhile, not that it matters because it’s just a silly little fact, the 2015 Supreme court decision that legalized same-sex marriage specifically found that “religious based opposition to same-sex marriage and the homosexual agenda is not hate speech”…but what does SCOTUS know about laws anyway?
But the lawsuit quoted Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who in the 2015 case which legalized same-sex marriage wrote, “Many who deem same-sex marriage to be wrong reach that conclusion based on decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises, and neither they nor their beliefs are disparaged here.”
“Therefore, as a matter of law, religious based opposition to same-sex marriage and the homosexual agenda is not hate speech, but rather is a position that the U.S. Supreme Court has labeled ‘decent and honorable,'” the suit explained.
“Because the Ministry’s position on ‘LGBT’ issues is inextricably intertwined and connected to the Ministry’s religious theology, and because SPLC and GuideStar have declared the ministry to be a Hate Group due to the Ministry’s stand on LGBT issues, what occurred here is that SPLC and GuideStar have discriminated against the Ministry because of its … religious beliefs.”
Not surprisingly, the mainstream media has embraced, without question, the SPLC’s list of “hate groups” with CNN publishing their map earlier this month. Meanwhile, Apple pledged to donate $2 million to the SPLC and Anti-Degamation League in the wake of the Charlottesville attack.
Here is DJKM’s President Dr. Frank Wright discussing the lawsuit on Fox News:
Oddly, we didn’t see any mention of AntiFa groups on SPLC’s map…
- How The Deep State Ties Down Trump
Authored by Alastair Crooke via ConsortiumNews.com,
America’s Deep State players have tied down President Trump on Russian sanctions and other foreign and economic policies but that doesn’t mean the struggle is over…
President Trump has had his foreign policy hands and feet tied by the Russia (and Iran) Sanctions Act.
He now has been rendered “helpless”: in respect to détente with Russia — gulliverized, spitefully, by his own party, working with the Democrats, to empty Trump’s constitutional prerogatives in foreign policy – and to seize them for Congress.
President Donald Trump announces the selection of Gen. H.R. McMaster as his new National Security Adviser on Feb. 20, 2017. (Screen shot from Whitehouse.gov)
And in a further humiliation, Trump has been “rolled” by his military minders (Generals James Mattis, H.R. McMaster and John Kelly) on his Afghan policy: he has relinquished civilian oversight of this military expedition in Afghanistan to McMaster and Mattis — the former being the presumed author of the “new” Afghan policy. The President was “rolled” on his foreign military prerogatives too – as Commander in Chief – by his triumvirate of military minders in the White House. The “civilian” leadership has given place to the “military.”
The question is whether these humiliating concessions will appease his opponents sufficiently to allow the President to “live on,” albeit as an incapacitated President, or is this just the hors d’oeuvre? It seems that the entrée may be being planned as the complete discrediting of Trump’s base – ordinary Republicans being lashed to the Trump “Titanic” – to be sunk along with its captain – as “white-supremacists, white bigots and Nazis.”
Professor Walter Russell Mead – and he should know – tells us that “President Trump’s highest officials remain committed, one way or another, to defending the global order the U.S. has been building since the Truman era. That includes [Secretary of State RexTillerson, Mattis, Kelly and McMaster]: These men share a disdain for the Obama administration’s retrenchment and retreat. … They want to check the ambitions of America’s rivals, while restoring the foundations, both military and economic, of U.S. world power.”
Ok – that is clear: they want to “grasp” America as world order. They have been trying that for some time now, but have not yet succeeded in seizing “her.” With all “her” allure and riches, their quarry remains frustratingly elusive, and her very unattainability seems to madden “ego” even more – so that which cannot be “had,” must be despoiled.
What else accounts for the new Afghan plan? Almost nobody (outside of the U.S. élites) believes it will do other than prolong an unwinnable war (or worse, push Pakistan and India into confrontation). Yet the further despoliation of Afghanistan must go on, for the sake of the myth of this America – of Trump’s “highest officials” – that America is always victorious, if only it wills it sufficiently, and is persistent – “defeat” as heresy.
It is a familiar story of inflated ego. But the sense of power and wanting to “grasp at something unattainable” is so compelling, that the U.S. élites desire both to crush the “infuriating” Trump, and his “deplorables” – to thrust them down into the irrecoverable depths – while weakening any external rival that might hinder the way to their “having” America, as world order.
A Frenzied Deep State
It seems that the American deep state is so frenzied in this way that its inhabitants can no longer see straight: they are ready to risk despoiling not just the “recalcitrant” abroad, but America herself. And the way they are going about trying to “have her,” may well ruin the deep state too, as collateral damage.
Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with U.S. President Donald Trump at the G-20 summit in Hamburg, Germany, on July 7, 2017. (Screen shot from Whitehouse.gov)
The Russia Sanctions Act may have been conceived both to paralyze President Trump, and to validate the “Putin-stole-the-Election” narrative, but it precisely removes any chance of Messrs Mattis, McMaster, Kelly and Tillerson to succeed with seizing America as world proconsul.
Russia, China and Iran, now linked by again being threatened by sanctions, are now firmly embedded into a strategic coalition – and they are determined to resist.
Incredibly, as one commentator put it: “During the ramp up to new UN sanctions on North Korea, the Trump administration threatened to sanction China if it did not commit to further pressure [on N. Korea] … Trump himself implied that he was willing for a quid pro quo: ‘If China helps us, I feel a lot differently toward trade, a lot differently toward trade’, [Trump] told reporters …
“A deal was made, and the UN Resolution 2371 passed … China did its part of the deal: It helped pass the UN resolution against North Korea – and it immediately implemented it, even though that caused a significant loss for Chinese companies which trade with North Korea. [But …]
“Now Trump is back at sanctioning Chinese (and Russian) companies: The Trump administration on Tuesday imposed sanctions on 16 mainly Chinese and Russian companies and people for assisting North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs and helping the North make money to support those programs …
“Among those sanctioned are six Chinese companies, including three coal companies; two Singapore-based companies that sell oil to North Korea and three Russians that work with them; a Russian company that deals in North Korean metals and its Russian director; a construction company based in Namibia; a second Namibia-based company, and its North Korean director, that supplies North Korean workers to build statues overseas to generate income for the North.
“These are ‘secondary sanctions’ which block financial transactions and make it nearly impossible for those companies and people to run an international business. Moreover – China had already banned all coal imports from North Korea. It had sent back North Korean coal ships, and instead bought coal from the United States. [And] now, Chinese companies are getting sanctioned over North Korean coal that they no longer buy? Furthermore, selling fuel oil to North Korea is explicitly allowed under the new UN sanctions…”
The alliance of these three states and their “partner forces” no longer believe that America is capable of serious diplomacy, or that it enjoys any real capacity to “seize” the world. On the contrary, they see Europe drifting away from the U.S., the Gulf Cooperation Council in disarray, and even Israel is despairing of its Washington ally. They do remain concerned about North Korea, but the fear of U.S. pre-emptive military action against North Korea is tempered by the knowledge that North Korea effectively holds 30,000 U.S. servicemen hostage in the de-militarized zone.
The primary focus is now shifting to how these states might protect themselves, if the two sides in the U.S. internal conflict succeed in each despoiling one another, and thereby throw the world into financial turmoil (hence the flurry of activity in arranging local currency contracts and currency swaps):
“When Steve Bannon was ejected from the White House, last week,” the New Yorker quotes Bannon as citing “his frustrations with the coming tax bill, as one of the reasons he believed that the Trump nationalist agenda had been hijacked by the so-called globalists, such as Cohn and the other members of the Big Six.”
Yes, Trump has been “rolled” in the economic sphere, too: The “big six” consist of four members of Congress (including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan), plus economic adviser Gary Cohn and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin – both of Goldman Sachs.
“They’re not populists, they’re not nationalists, they had no interest in his [i.e. Trump’s] program – Zero”, Bannon told the Weekly Standard, “On what element of Trump’s program, besides tax cuts — which is going to be the standard marginal tax cut — where have they rallied to Trump’s cause? They haven’t.”
The Power of Cohn
“In the Bannon-era, factionalized Trump White House, Cohn was not just the head of the National Economic Council but the leader of the group of officials whom Bannon derided as ‘New York.’ (Breitbart stories called Cohn and his companions at the N.E.C. ‘Globalist Swampsters’)”, notes the New Yorker.
White House economic adviser Gary Cohn.
Cohn, who is 56, was brought into the Administration by Jared Kushner, the President’s son-in-law, who once interned for Cohn at Goldman Sachs. Cohn is a long-time donor to Democratic candidates.
So, Trump’s “reflation trade” is being “normalized” by the “big six” – more of the usual D.C. politics.
But, why be concerned if the U.S. stock market is hitting new highs every day? Indeed, the “market” has ridden an “ascending curve for 101 months since March 2009, during which the S&P 500 rose by 270% and rarely dropped by more than 2-4%, without [its members] coming to believe that nothing mattered except hitting the bid [button] during the more than 50 intervals when the stock market momentarily faltered. Virtually without exception, each shallow dip was accompanied by easy money ‘buy’ signals from the central banks, or selective ‘green shoots’ [releases] among the in-coming data.”
As David Stockman writes:
“After 101 months of dip buying … the headline reading algos [robot computer traders] have become programmed in a completely asymmetrical manner. They are triggered to ‘buy’ on economic/policy good news (because it implies more profits); but also to ‘buy’ on bad news (because it means more [liquidity] accommodation, and market-support/price keeping actions by the Fed and other central banks.
“But this beneficent arrangement also encourages even prudent gamblers to minimize the amount of downside hedging insurance they purchase to protect their often heavily leveraged (through options and derivatives) book of longs.”
Stockman is warning that markets already are trading at historic highs, and that no one is paying attention to these extreme valuations or the economic or political fundamentals – simply because the latter has become utterly irrelevant, if every small market dip, is immediately followed by the unbroken elevation of all asset classes (thanks to Central Bank interventions).
“That is, the gamblers and robo-machines have become so hard-wired to the expectation that the central banking and fiscal branches of the state will do ‘whatever it takes’ to keep the stock averages rising, that it has become irrational to waste time and resources on parsing ‘whatever is going on,’” Instead, writes Stockman, “it’s all about the chart points, money flows, next in rotation sectors, ETF buying power, momentum trades and technical arbitrages, such as embodied in the currently massive risk parity trades.”
In short, all sensibility to risk (political or credit or any other) has been expunged by the determination of the Central Banks to keep asset prices inflating higher. The financial system precisely is looking the other way — intent on making money “when the going is easy” – and consequently, any crisis now will create a disproportionate impact on those levered asset values, magnified by the trades today being all one-way.
A Zombiefied Trump
Here is the point: Will the political zombiefication of President Trump satisfy the two party Establishments? Are they mollified enough, to come together to agree on a budget and a new “clean” debt ceiling (the “ceiling” arrives on Sept. 29)? And, even if achieved, will so-called “normalization” of Trump policies really take the U.S. back to the nirvana of “how things used to be”?
The Wall Street bull statue by Arturo Di Modica
Ostensibly, “normalization” of Trump’s economic policy should be manageable: Ryan and McConnell would need only to line up a modest number of Democratic votes (together with Republican foot-soldiers), to enact a debt ceiling increase. But it may be more complicated – much more complicated than that: Should the Democrats cooperate (and they will want to appear that they are co-operating in order to avoid blame for any subsequent Federal shut-down), it will be only on the basis of “an onerous quid pro quo that requires Trump to give up the Mexican Wall; tax cuts for the wealthy; his proposed deep domestic spending cuts, and also to fund the insurance company bailouts that are needed to forestall drastic premium increases and coverage cancellations during the 2018 insurance (and election) year.”
Certainly, the Democrats will present a public face of co-operation, but such is the angry temper of Washington today (with both sides looking for a fight), that almost certainly they will require their revenge pound of flesh cut from Trump’s side. The Freedom Caucus group of Republicans (which is linked to Bannon) might then jump ship, leaving the Big Six with either “no ceiling deal” or a “Democratic”-shaped budget.
Trump tweeted: “I requested that Mitch M & Paul R tie the Debt Ceiling legislation into the popular V.A. Bill (which just passed) for easy approval. They didn’t do it so now we have a big deal with Dems holding them up (as usual) on Debt Ceiling approval. Could have been so easy-now a mess!”
Axios reports that “top White House and GOP leadership officials tell us [Axios], the chances of a market-rattling government shutdown are rising by the day — and were [such] even before Trump threatened at his raucous Phoenix rally on Tuesday night, to use a shutdown as leverage to get funding for the [Mexican] border wall.”
Quoting a “top Republican source” who puts the chance as high as 75 percent, Axios adds that “the peculiar part is that almost everyone I talk to on the Hill, agrees that it is more likely than not.”
The Democrats seem determined to remove any provision for “the wall,” and Trump seems to be spoiling for a fight with the Democrats (and Ryan and McConnell) on this issue. He has had to acquiesce to being “rolled” in foreign and defense policy — might he turn, and dig in his heels? He is already channeling the blame onto the Republican Establishment leadership.
If so, what price the continuation of a market historic “high” and brimming with complacency?
Russia and China are right to be thinking “worst case” and how to minimize their exposure to any American cataclysmic descent into political turmoil – and possible violence.
- China Is Planning ICO Crackdown, Threatens Life In Prison For Crypto Fund Fraud
Earlier this year, Chinese digital currency exchanges temporarily halted customer withdrawals to upgrade their AML controls at the behest of financial regulators. The halt, which lasted for months, caused a temporary chill in the local bitcoin market, causing China to forfeit its position as the world’s largest bitcoin market. Now, Chinese regulators have signaled that they intend to stage a similar crackdown on initial coin offerings, the latest blockchain-related investing craze.
According to CoinDesk, draft legislation meant to curb so-called "illegal fundraising" includes a provision that targets ICOs.
Here’s more from CoinDesk (translation theirs).
"If the department overseeing illegal fundraising activities found a fundraising without proper permission, or a fundraising that violates the relevant provisions of the State, and if one of the following circumstances is found, the department shall launch an administrative investigation. Other relevant departments shall cooperate with the investigation.
…
(2) to raise funds in the name of issuing or transferring equity, raising funds, selling insurance, or engaging in asset management activities, virtual currency, leasing, credit cooperation and mutual funds…"
According to CoinDesk, the draft would require the government to establish an interdepartmental committee to combat illegal fundraising. It also clarified that participants of illegal fundraising would be responsible for their own losses. The release of the draft legislation follows widespread outrage directed at cryptocurrency-related scams. Last month, several college graduates in Tianjin, China were found dead after being imprisoned and assaulted by members of a pyramid-selling organization.
Two Chinese laws presently govern how criminal courts handle unlawful fundraising. According to CoinTelegraph, the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits carries a maximum penalty of 10 years of imprisonment. The crime of fund fraud, meanwhile, carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.
Now the question is, if such heavy-handed penalties are tied to the law currently under consideration, will the law have a chilling effect on the ICO market? Or will it successfully eliminate fraud and abuse?
According to a team of analysts at Pitchbook, ICO have raised more than $1 billion this year, and are expected to raise as much as $1.7 billion. Earlier this month, the SEC ruled that tokens produced in ICOs meet the definition of a security, and therefore must be registered with the commission. Though exactly how ICOs will be regulated in the US remains somewhat vague.
- South Korea Releases Footage Of Ballistic Missile Test Capable Of "Mass Retaliation"
Just hours after North Korea fired a ballistic missile across Japan, South Korea has released footage of its testing of a new ballistic missile, in a show of “overwhelming force.”
While The White House has yet to respond to North Korea’s provocation, South Korea’s Blue House has stated that:
“We are considering the development of strategic assets in the US and we will consult with the United States.”
US strategic weapons include B-1B strategic bombers, B-52 long-range nuclear bombers, stealth fighters, Aegis destroyers, and nuclear propulsion submarines.
But not wanting to rely solely on Trump, Yonhap reports the release of the following 86-second-long video clip showing the test-firing of a 500-kilometer-range ballistic missile with improved warhead power and that of another one with a range of 800 km.
The footage shows the missile being fired and accurately hitting mock targets on the ground and in the water.
It was released by the state-run Agency for Defense Development (ADD)…
“We conducted the last flight test on the 24th to deploy the new 500-km ballistic missile and the 800-km ballistic missile, which are being developed under the leadership of the National Defense Science Institute.”
“We are building a Korean three-axis system to respond to North Korea’s threats. To achieve this, we have developed a new ballistic missile (BM) with increased range and increased accuracy through diversification of warheads and improved accuracy. “
The 500-kilometer ballistic missile is “a new type of ballistic missile capable of accurately penetrating and destroying all of North Korea’s core facilities and is a key force in mass retaliation.”
- Paul Craig Roberts On "The Weaponization Of History And Journalism"
Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,
"…we don’t need no stinkin’ facts…"
In the United States, facts, an important element of truth, are not important. They are not important in the media, politics, universities, historical explanations, or the courtroom. Non-factual explanations of the collapse of three World Trade Center buildings are served up as the official explanation. Facts have been politicized, emotionalized, weaponized and simply ignored. As David Irving has shown, Anglo-American histories of World War 2 are, for the most part, feel-good histories, as are “civil war” histories as Thomas DiLorenzo and others have demonstrated. Of course, they are feel good only for the victors. Their emotional purpose means that inconvenient facts are unpalatable and ignored.
Writing the truth is no way to succeed as an author. Only a small percentage of readers are interested in the truth. Most want their biases or brainwashing vindicated. They want to read what they already believe. It is comforting, reassuring. When their ignorance is confronted, they become angry. The way to be successful as a writer is to pick a group and give them what they want. There is always a market for romance novels and for histories that uphold a country’s myths. On the Internet successful sites are those that play to one ideology or another, to one emotion or the other, or to one interest group or another. The single rule for success is to confine truth to what the readership group you serve believes.
Keep this in mind when you receive shortly my September quarterly request for your support of this website. There are not many like it. This site does not represent an interest group, an ideology, a hate group, an ethnic group or any cause other than truth. This is not to say that this site is proof against error. It is only to say that truth is its purpose.
Karl Marx said that there were only class truths.
Today we have a large variety of truths: truths for feminists, truths for blacks, Muslims, Hispanics, homosexuals, transgendered, truths for the foreign policy community that serves the military/security complex, truths for the neocons, truths for the One Percent that control the economy and the economists who serve them, truths for “white supremacists,” itself a truth term for their opponents. You can add to the list. The “truth” in these “truths” is that they are self-serving of the group that expresses them. Their actual relation to truth is of no consequence to those espousing the “truths.”
Woe to you if you don’t go along with someone’s or some group’s truth. Not even famous film-maker Oliver Stone is immune. Recently, Stone expressed his frustration with the “False Flag War Against Russia.” Little doubt that Stone is frustrated with taunts and accusations from completely ignorant media talking heads in response to his documentary, Putin, based on many hours of interviews over two years. Stone came under fire, because instead of demonizing Putin and Russia, thus confirming the official story, he showed us glimpses of the truth.
The organization, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, published a report that completely destroyed the false accusations about Trump/Russian hacking of the US presidential election. The Nation published an objective article about the report and was assaulted by writers, contributors, and readers for publishing information that weakens the case, which the liberal/progressive/left in conjunction with the military/security complex, is orchestrating against Trump. The magazine’s audience felt that the magazine had an obligation not to truth but to getting Trump out of office. Reportedly, the editor is considering whether to recall the article.
So here we have left-leaning Oliver Stone and leftwing magazine, The Nation, under fire for making information available that is out of step with the self-serving “truth” to which the liberal/progressive/left and their ally, the military/security complex, are committed.
When a country has a population among whom there are no truths except group-specific truths, the country is so divided as to be over and done with. “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” The white liberal/progressive/left leaders of divisive Identity Politics have little, if any, comprehension of where the movement they think they lead is headed. At the moment the hate is focused on the “alt-right,” which has become “white nationalists,” which has become “white supremacists.” These “white supremacists” have become epitomized by statues of Confederate soldiers and generals. All over the South, if local governments are not removing the statues, violent crazed thugs consumed by hate attempt to destroy them. In New Orleans someone with money bused in thugs from outside flying banners that apparently are derived from a communist flag to confront locals protesting the departure of their history down the Orwellian Memory Hole.
What happens when all the monuments are gone? Where does the hate turn next? Once non-whites are taught to hate whites, not even self-hating whites are safe. How do those taught hate tell a good white from a bad white? They can’t and they won’t. By definition by Identity Politics, whites, for now white heterosexual males, are the victimizers and everyone else is their victim. The absurdity of this concept is apparent, yet the concept is unshaken by its absurdity. White heterosexual males are the only ones without the privilege of quotas. They and only they can be put at the back of the bus for university admissions, employment, promotion, and only their speech is regulated. They, and only they, can be fired for using “gender specific terms,” for using race specific terms, for unknowingly offending some preferred group member by using a word that is no longer permissible. They can be called every name in the book, beginning with racist, misogynist, and escalating, and no one is punished for the offense.
Recently, a professor in the business school of a major university told me that he used the word, girls, in a marketing discussion. A young womyn was offended. The result was he received a dressing down from the dean. Another professor told me that at his university there was a growing list of blacklisted words. It wasn’t clear whether the list was official or unofficial, simply professors trying to stay up with Identity Politics and avoid words that could lead to their dismissal. Power, they tell me, is elsewhere than in the white male, the true victimized class.
For years commentators have recognized the shrinking arena of free speech in the United States. Any speech that offends anyone but a white male can be curtailed by punishment. Recently, John Whitehead, constitutional attorney who heads the Rutherford Institute, wrote that it is now dangerous just to defend free speech. Reference to the First Amendment suffices to bring denunciation and threats of violence. Ron Unz notes that any website that can be demonized as “controversial” can find itself disappeared by Internet companies and PayPal. They simply terminate free speech by cutting off service.
It must be difficult to teach some subjects, such as the “civil war” for example. How would it be possible to describe the actual facts? For example, for decades prior to the Union’s invasion of the Confederacy North/South political conflict was over tariffs, not over slavery.
The fight over which new states created from former “Indian” territories would be “slave” and which “free” was a fight over keeping the protectionist (North) vs. free trade (South) balance in Congress equal so that the budding industrial north could not impose a tariff regime. Two days before Lincoln’s inaugural address, a stiff tariff was signed into law. That same day in an effort to have the South accept the tariff and remain in or return to the Union—some southern states had seceded, some had not—Congress passed the Corwin amendment that provided constitutional protection to slavery. The amendment prohibited the federal government from abolishing slavery.
Two days later in his inaugural address, which seems to be aimed at the South, Lincoln said: “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”
Lincoln’s beef with the South was not over slavery or the Fugitive Slave Act. Lincoln did not accept the secessions and still intended to collect the tariff that now was law. Under the Constitution slavery was up to the states, but the Constitution gave the federal government to right to levy a tariff. Lincoln said that “there needs to be no bloodshed or violence” over collecting the tariff. Lincoln said he will use the government’s power only “to collect the duties and imposts,” and that “there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.”
Here is Lincoln, “the Great Emancipator,” telling the South that they can have slavery if they will pay the duties and imposts on imports. How many black students and whites brainwashed by Identity Politics are going to sit there and listen to such a tale and not strongly protest the racist professor justifying white supremacy and slavery?
So what happens to history when you can’t tell it as it is, but instead have to refashion it to fit the preconceived beliefs formed by Identity Politics? The so-called “civil war,” of course, is far from the only example.
In its document of secession, South Carolina made a case that the Constitutional contract had been broken by some of the northern states breaking faith with Article IV of the Constitution. This is true. However, it is also true that the Southern states had no inclination to abide by Section 8 of Article I, which says that “Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises.” So, also the South by not accepting the tariff was not constitutionally pure.
Before history became politicized, historians understood that the North intended for the South to bear costs of the North’s development of industry and manufacturing. The agricultural South preferred the lower priced goods from England. The South understood that a tariff on British goods would push import prices above the high northern prices and lower the South’s living standards in the interest of raising living standards in the North. The conflict was entirely economic and had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery, which also had existed in the North. Indeed, some northern states had “exclusion ordinances” and anti-immigration provisions in their state constitutions that prohibited the immigration of blacks into northern states.
If freeing slaves were important to the North and avoiding tariffs was important to the South, one can imagine some possible compromises. For example, the North could have committed to building factories in the South. As the South became industrialized, new centers of wealth would arise independently from the agricultural plantations that produced cotton exports. The labor force would adjust with the economy, and slavery would have evolved into free labor.
Unfortunately, there were too many hot heads. And so, too, today.
In America there is nothing on the horizon but hate. Everywhere you look in America you see nothing but hate. Putin is hated. Russia is hated. Muslims are hated. Venezuela is hated. Assad is hated. Iran is hated. Julian Assange is hated. Edward Snowden is hated. White heterosexual males are hated. Confederate monuments are hated. Truth-tellers are hated. “Conspiracy theorists” are hated. No one escapes being hated.
Hate groups are proliferating, especially on the liberal/progressive/left. For example, RootsAction has discovered a statue of Robert E. Lee in the U.S. Capitol and urges all good people to demand its removal. Whether the level of ignorance that RootsAction personifies is real or just a fund-raising ploy, I do not know. But clearly RootsAction is relying on public ignorance in order to get the response that they want. In former times when the US had an educated population, everyone understood that there was a great effort to reconcile the North and South and that reconciliation would not come from the kind of hate-mongering that now infects RootsAction and most of the action groups and websites of the liberal/progressive/left.
Today our country is far more divided that it was in 1860.
Identity Politics has taught Americans to hate each other, but, nevertheless, the zionist neoconservatives assure us that we are “the indispensable, exceptional people.” We, a totally divided people, are said to have the right to rule the world and to bomb every country that doesn’t accept our will into the stone age.
In turn the world hates America. Washington has told too many lies about other countries and used those lies to destroy them. Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, Somalia, and large chunks of Syria and Pakistan are in ruins. Washington intends yet more ruin with Venezuela currently in the cross hairs.
Eleven years ago Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez resonated with many peoples when he said in his UN speech: “Yesterday at this very podium stood Satan himself [Bush], speaking as if he owned the world; you can still smell the sulphur.”
It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that America is a font for hatred both at home and abroad.
- Bankrupting Terror: Blocking the Saudi Aramco IPO
Background here.
By Kristen Breitweiser, one of the four 9/11 widows – known as the “Jersey Girls” – instrumental in forcing the government to form the 9/11 Commission to investigate the 2001 attacks. Follow Kristen Breitweiser on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kdbreitweiser.
Who’s the most reviled person you know? David Duke? Bernie Madoff? Vlad Putin? Kim Jong Un? Well, whomever it is, just imagine how you would feel if they weren’t held accountable for their bad acts? Worse, what if they were not held accountable, but actually rewarded and enabled to continue to do more of their bad acts. Worse still, if they were not held accountable, rewarded and enabled to continue their bad acts—by your very own family and friends. How would that make you feel?
That’s kind of what has happened to the 9/11 Families with regard to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during the past 16 years since the September 11th attacks. Our most reviled entity, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, who we want to see held accountable for their alleged financial and logistical role in the mass murder of 3,000 on September 11th seems to continually evade accountability, get rewarded for its bad behavior, and encouraged to continue its bad acts with the help of the very same people who should be holding the Saudis accountable and protecting Americans.
Yet, maddeningly, it seems that many leaders in the United States would prefer to reward and enable the Kingdom so it can continue to carry out its bad acts that are far too often connected to lethal terrorism.
Whether its Congress signing off on $100 billion weapons deals that give Saudis a stockpile of weapons and machinery to be used against innocent people in places like Yemen and Syria. Or, giving Saudi officials CIA Medals of Honor for their dubious counterterrorism achievements. Or, giving a seat to the Kingdom to serve on the UN Commission on the Status of Women and a second seat to serve on the UN Human Rights Council. Or continuing to let Saudi Royals off the hook for crimes they commit because of diplomatic and/or sovereign immunity. Or, the most recent example of Wall Street Executives and others bending over backwards to try and win the Saudi Aramco IPO. Why do such intelligent individuals, agencies, or entities seemingly continue to kowtow to the Kingdom? How can they overlook the Saudis track record of human rights abuses, funding of Sunni radical terror groups, horrific treatment and oppression of women, and alleged participatory role in the 9/11 attacks.
Within the next 6 months or so, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will choose the venue for its Aramco IPO. Stock exchanges around the globe are jockeying, wooing, and coddling the Saudis to try and win this business. Admittedly, because of the size of Aramco, this IPO will be one of the largest in history. This explains why the exchanges in Hong Kong, London, and the U.S. are vying to win the deal. Yet, as someone whose husband worked on Wall Street until he was killed on September 11th while working at his desk on the 94th floor of Tower 2, WTC, I find the collective fervor of these stock exchanges disappointing; and those of the American exchange particularly appalling. Et tu Brute? Nothing like inviting criminals back to the scene of the crime to gloat, cash in and make a cool trillion. So much for hallowed ground.
So while Wall Street head honchos like Jamie Dimon are likely dropping to their knees drooling for such a whale of a Saudi deal, a few blocks away the 9/11 Families (16 years out from the 9/11 attacks) are still in federal court trying to hold the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia accountable for its alleged role in the 9/11 attacks that killed our loved ones—many of whom worked on Wall Street. When you are a family member of a U.S. victim of terrorism, you must live within the short blocks of such incongruities and disloyalties. And, learn to be patient in your pursuit of justice.
Indeed, we are now on our third U.S. President since the 9/11 attacks and not one of these Presidents (or any of the ones before them for that matter) has seen fit to hold the Kingdom accountable for their participatory role in Sunni radical terrorism, in general, or the 9/11 attacks, in particular.
How does President after President give speech after speech continuing to take us into foreign land after foreign land to fight terrorists from al Qaeda, the Taliban, and ISIS, yet never crack down on the one country in the world that is constantly and consistently the biggest benefactor of those very same terror groups—year in and year out. Indeed, think–tank, after think–tank, after think–tank, and report, after report, after report after report and classified cable, after classified cable, reveal that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia continues to fund and logistically support the very terror groups that our U.S. military has been fighting against for nearly two decades. Our leaders talk about their mistakes of relying on bad intelligence; believing in nation building and the false promise of spreading democracy; and/or accidentally creating power vacuums. Yet, not one of these men seems to have the principled realism to see and acknowledge the one constant connected to terrorism decade after decade: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its oil dollars.
Truly, without Saudi flowing dollars, where would terrorism be? Which brings us back to the Saudi Aramco IPO and my bewilderment as to why anyone is supporting it.
The Saudis need the Aramco IPO because they are running extremely short on cash; they’re in a cash crunch. Indeed, several reports have indicated that the Saudis are behind on payments, and being forced to instill austerity upon their people since they can no longer afford to pay such large subsidies to their citizens. The result of this belt tightening is an increasingly disgruntled Saudi population that had grown accustomed to large government handouts. In short, the natives are restless and that’s never a good thing especially for a Monarchy full of Royals who rule because god says so.
Some would say that in situations like this, cash goes a long way to snuff out those flames of discord and discontent. Yet, without the cash raised by its impending Saudi Aramco IPO, the Saudis wouldn’t be able to pay their way out of their current situation. Again, would that be such a bad thing? What would happen if the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia went broke and its Saudi citizens were less able to give such large amounts of money to zakat? Would it break the cycle of Saudi funding to Sunni radical terror groups? Bankrupt and no longer flush with cash, it’s fair to assume that most Saudi donations earmarked to fund and logistically support radical Sunni Islam would dry up and ultimately come to an end—undoubtedly going a long way in making the world a safer place.
When President Trump gave his speech on Afghanistan last week, he mentioned that our foreign policy must take on a more principled realism. I don’t know how much more real and principled you can get than centering a “pillar” of our national security on the bankrupting of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in order to stop Sunni radical terrorism.
Without the influx of Saudi funds, Sunni mosques and madrassahs would not likely get built and supported; textbooks that spew hate and violence would not likely get written and distributed around the world to brainwash disciples; websites, chat rooms, and social media accounts would likely quickly go dark and quiet; and training camps in places like Afghanistan would likely be abandoned, as well. Gee, that sounds like a net win. And, not one American soldier’s life would be lost in the process.
The facts are clear. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia funds and logistically supports terrorists that are killing us around the globe in places like London, Paris, Belgium, Finland, Spain, and the United States. Our banking executives and governmental officials should ward against financially propping up the Kingdom merely so it can survive another day to continue to fund terror and radical Sunni terrorist groups that wreak havoc upon us. Doing so is in our direct national security interests since the Saudi Aramco IPO is nothing short of a crowd-funding campaign for jihad. And none of us should invest a dime.
Moreover, isn’t blocking the Saudi Aramco IPO merely giving the Saudis a potent dose of their own medicine particularly given the Saudis recent embargo and sanctioning of Qatar because Qatar funds and supports terrorism? As reported by Reuters, “Saudi foreign minister Adel al Jubeir said there would be no negotiations over demands by the Kingdom and other Arab states for Qatar to stop supporting terrorism. Jubeir said, ‘We made our point, we took our steps, and now it is up to the Qataris to amend their behavior and once they do things will be worked out but if they don’t they will remain isolated.’” I wish our U.S. leaders and ‘ministers’ of finance would share a similar “cut and dry” approach towards accountability and terror funding. Additionally, I’d suggest Mr. Jubeir take a good hard look in the mirror and hold his own Kingdom to the same standards he sets for Qatar. Because Adel, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
To me, anyone who looks to host the Saudi Aramco IPO is akin to being an accomplice before the fact of any future terrorist attack that is carried out by Sunni radical terror groups. Just like any individual investor looking to become a shareholder of Saudi Aramco should be made aware that they’re also knowingly buying a share of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and are, therefore, financially propping up and morally tied to all of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s Sunni radical policies and ideologies that contribute to the death and destruction of human lives. Indeed, as a Saudi Aramco shareholder you are financially supporting: the horrific oppression of women; the trafficking and slavery of human beings; the draconian doctrine of Sharia law with its canings, beheadings, eye-gougings, stonings, and torture; and most likely the continued funding of Sunni radical terror groups like ISIS, al Qaeda, and the Taliban that may someday kill someone you love.
Why would anyone ever want to buy into a share of that?
Do Jamie Dimon, Ken Moelis, and Michael Klein like terrorist attacks? Do they realize that hosting the Saudi Aramco IPO is akin to “signing off” and supporting terrorism? Do these three Americans condone people like my husband Ron getting slaughtered and blown to bits by radical Sunni terrorists? And groups like ISIS, al Qaeda, and the Taliban continuing to get infused with their Saudi funded life-blood so they can continue to chop off more “infidel” heads? Does the collective greed of these three men and their Wall Street brethren truly eclipse our entire nation’s right to be safe from terrorists? I think not.
Why do we all have to suffer the carnage of their greed?
- Trump's Presidential Approval Rating In Context
Presidential job approval is a simple, yet powerful, measure of the public's view of the president's job performance at a particular time. Approval ratings for Presidents Obama and Trump shown in the Presidential Job Approval Center are based on weekly Gallup Daily tracking averages.
From Truman to Trump…
On day 212 in office, President Trump has a 37% approval rating.
President Truman holds the record for lowest approval rating (for now) at 22% on day 2499 in office.
President George 'W' Bush holds the record for the highest approval rating at 89% on day 267 in office
- A Full-Blown Civil War Is Materializing: "Nobody Will Be Able To Retreat To A Neutral Corner"
At the rate things are going, a full-blown civil war appears to be materializing.
Colin Kaepernick began it all with “taking a knee” in protest of the National Anthem.
Fast-forward one year later, and read this, released by Yahoo Sports for just how far it has gone:
“The Colin Kaepernick story has gotten seemingly endless attention because its reach goes far beyond football.
A pretty good reminder of that came Saturday afternoon in New York City, which is far removed from Kaepernick’s former NFL home of San Francisco. At a rally in Brooklyn, dozens of current and former New York police officers wore shirts that said “#WeStandWithKap” and at the end of the rally they took a knee and raised their fist, according to the New York Daily News.
Kaepernick became a household name when he took a knee for the national anthem last season to bring attention to racial injustice, including police brutality. It also appears to be one reason he has not been signed by any NFL team this offseason.
The police officers noted to the Daily News that they were speaking out against their belief that NFL teams aren’t signing Kaepernick as punishment for his protest.
“What Colin Kaepernick did is try to bring awareness that this nation unfortunately has ignored for far too long,” said NYPD Sgt. Edwin Raymond, an organizer of the rally, according to the Daily News. “And that’s the issue of racism in America and policing in America. We decided to gather here today because of the way he’s being railroaded for speaking the obvious truth.”
So, now the New York City Police Department weighs in on this. They claim Kaepernick is being “railroaded,” eh? Funny: He didn’t do it the year he went to the Super Bowl with the 49ers and a billion people were watching. He didn’t stand for anything then, and he stands for nothing now. That flag and that anthem represent something…and many died to keep the nation flying that flag and playing that anthem intact. The sad irony of rights under the Constitution is that Kaepernick has the right to protest…a right that was enabled for him to exercise by his betters. Look up the pictures of him and his buddies holding up automatic rifles, standing for nothing except themselves: perfect symbols of a decayed society and a dying empire.
The country is committing suicide as we speak. The push for revision and redaction in all the history books has been on for some time. Now we’re seeing actual mobs of demonstrators surrounding these historical statues. The push is on. On August 19, demonstrators in Detroit gathered to protest and demand removal of a statue of Christopher Columbus. In all the major cities, the push to remove these statues along with protests continues.
It’s not going to stop here. Now that Bannon is gone, a letter was sent to the President by more than a dozen conservative groups asking for him to not move toward a more moderate stance. Indeed, over the weekend he “Tweeted” the Boston Police Department commending them on the way they handled the protests there. The President has also adopted this “wishy-washy” stance of “we all need to heal the wounds” in the U.S., as if any of these protests had any relevance to any injustices happening today.
Seriously, this is all out of Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.” Go back and review the Glenn Beck programs of 2012-2014…when he presented some very good information on the Weather Underground (particularly Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers), as well as Cloward and Piven, and all the “outstanding” work by Van Jones to topple the system. I’m not a personal fan of Beck’s, but back then he used to have very comprehensive layouts that were easily referenced and noted that concerned these Marxists and Communists marching under the banner and guise of “social justice.” All that stuff that Van Jones had planned back then, with funding from Acorn and George Soros…it is manifesting itself here and now.
There is a civil war coming, as it is the domestic initiative that must be pursued to bring the United States down to the canvas…rendering her ineffective when the foreign initiative…an attack comes…to give the final count. In both battles, nobody will be able to retreat to a neutral corner. If the U.S. stays intact, then the NWO loses, and vice-versa. These protestors (paid and genuine) are but a sampling of the platter to be served…a buffet right out of Pandora’s box.
- South Korea Orders Show Of "Overwhelming Force", Conducts "Live Bombing" Drill As Kospi Tumbles
While we await Donald Trump’s response to the second consecutive North Korean provocation in four days, both on twitter and elsewhere, South Korean President Moon Jae-in has already ordered his troops to demonstrate their capability for “strong retaliation” and put on a show of “overwhelming force”, after his office convened a National Security Council session.
According to Yonhap, President Moon ordered his country’s military to display its capabilities that can “overwhelm” North Korea should the communist state decide to attack, the presidential office The show of overwhelming force involved the dropping of eight Mark 84 or MK84 multipurpose bombs by four F15K fighter jets at a shooting range near the inter-Korean border in Taebaek, Moon’s chief press secretary, Yoon Young-chan, told reporters.
“The NSC standing committee denounced North Korea for violating the U.N. Security Council resolutions by again launching ballistic missiles despite stern warnings,” Yoon told a press briefing.
Yoon also said that in a telephone conversation that also took place shortly after the latest North Korean missile provocation, South Korean Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha and her U.S. counterpart Rex Tillerson agreed to push for additional sanctions by the U.N. Security Council.
Futhermore, Gen. Jeong Kyeong-doo, chairman of South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, and his American counterpart Gen. Joseph Dunford agreed to take related measures at the earliest possible date, which apparently include the temporary dispatch of U.S. strategic assets like long-range bombers to Korea.
“We are considering the development of strategic assets in the US and we will consult with the United States.” US strategic weapons include B-1B strategic bombers, B-52 long-range nuclear bombers, stealth fighters, Aegis destroyers, and nuclear propulsion submarines, Yonhap reported.
Chung Eui-yong, Moon’s top security adviser, also held a telephone conversation with the White House’s National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster to discuss the allies’ joint measures against the North’s latest missile provocation. “McMaster said President Donald Trump fully supported President Moon’s North Korea policy and the South Korean government’s measures against North Korean provocations,” Yoon said.
As Yonhap concludes, “it’s quite unusual for the secretive nation to fire a ballistic missile from its capital, another sign that it’s diversifying launch areas to dodge external surveillance and a possible pre-emptive strike.”
Meanwhile, unlike previous launch instances, so far the S.Korean Kospi stock index has failed to rebound (yet), and was down 1.3% at last check…
… while the Kospi VIX, along with most Asian stock vol indicators, spiked in early trading.
Meanwhile, the Korean Won, which has become quite immune to Apocalyptic outcomes, sat near sessions lows, if well above where it was just ten days ago.
Discussing the resilience of the South Korean currency, Koon How Heng, head of markets strategy at United Overseas Bank Group said the won is “failing to properly price in risks surrounding North Korea and trade talks with the U.S.” He added that “risk remains that KRW will weaken and lift USD/KRW back towards the top end of the trading range” although it remains to be seen just what event – clearly a North Korean violation of Japanese airspace is not quiet “it” – will be sufficient to dislodge the currency from its perch.
Finally, in a curious tangent, while certainly not in Kim’s field of sight, Australian stocks just went negative for the year.
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...