Wednesday, December 2, 2020

Where We Are - David Horowitz


​ by David Horowitz

And what we are facing.


[David Horowitz’s bestselling autobiography Radical Son has been republished, and it couldn’t have come at a more critical time. Order your copy HERE.]

My first political demonstration was a May Day parade in 1948. I was nine years old. We chanted in support of President Truman’s “Fair Employment Practices Commission” and his successful effort to integrate the civil service. The May Day parade was organized by the Communist Party USA, a conspiratorial organization working in league with Communist Russia to overthrow the United States government and create a “Soviet America.” Both my parents were members of the Party.

These two causes in a way defined the next seventy-odd years of my life: on the one hand, the fight for individual rights and equality; on the other a lifelong struggle for – and then against – a treasonous movement that set out to change the world for the better but ended up making it worse – much worse.

As a young man, I was present at the creation of the New Left, editing its largest magazine, Ramparts. The New Left was a socialist movement that began as an attempt to rescue the “Old” Communist Left from the “mistakes” it had made in serving masters who murdered more than 100 million people. In peace time. “Mistakes” was our weasel term for the epic crimes our fellow Marxists committed against ordinary human beings who refused to go along with their utopian schemes. Our goal was to revive the quest they had begun and finally create a world of “social justice.”

I soon discovered that there was no new Left fundamentally different from its predecessor. The evil the left did flowed directly from the noble ideal itself. You cannot create a world of perfect equality because people are not equal, and the attempt to make them so requires taking away the freedom of most for the benefit of what turns out to be a few. You cannot create a government that is socially “just” because the people who will run it are the same people whose lies, bigotries, selfishness and greed created the unjust world you are attempting to leave behind. The new rulers, corrupt as ever, will have more power than ever. You can only make things worse. Much worse.

I learned these truths first in my work with the Black Panther Party, a murderous street gang whom we regarded as “the vanguard of the revolution.” We did so because the Panthers were the only leftists with guns who were willing to use them. The Panthers preyed mainly on vulnerable blacks but also murdered a friend of mine who was white.

My second awakening came with the success of the New Left’s “antiwar movement,” which forced America out of Vietnam. The New Left’s claims to be “anti-war” in behalf of the Vietnamese were actually two dangerous lies. When the movement succeeded in forcing America’s withdrawal from Indo-China, the Communists proceeded to slaughter two and a half million peasants in Cambodia and Vietnam. There wasn't a single demonstration against the slaughter. Not one. I realized then that it was never an “anti-war” movement. It was an anti-American movement. The Left wanted the Communists to win and didn’t care how many innocent Asians were murdered in the process. I realized I was involved in a movement whose rhetoric was seductive and noble but whose deeds were evil. And I left.

The “social justice” radicals still have the best slogans. They call themselves progressives but are actually reactionaries. They call themselves liberals but are actually bigots. They say they’re for peace when they are organized for war. It is always the same war: to bring down the United States of America.

Thanks mainly to their growing influence, we live in extreme times, where things are not what they are made to seem, and monstrous accusations are leveled at individuals without restraint. As a result, we live in an atmosphere of intimidation, where people can lose their livelihoods, their careers and even their lives if they get on the wrong side of leftist crusaders. That is a terrible thing to have to say in this once free country, but it is something that has become too obvious to deny.

For 30 years before he descended the famous escalator in Trump Tower to declare his candidacy for the White House, Donald Trump was a well-known public figure. Everybody in America knew who he was. In all those 30 years, no one ever referred to him as “Donald Trump, host of ‘The Apprentice’ and white supremacist.” Nobody ever said “This is Donald Trump, New York builder and white nationalist.” That only happened when he ran against the Democrats.

In fact, all three of Trump’s predecessors as presidential candidates – Bush, McCain and even Romney were denounced as racists by the Democrats. Vice President Joe Biden told an audience that included many black Americans that if elected, Mitt Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan, “are gonna put y’all back in chains.”

Why do Democrats take such a low road as a matter of course? They do it because it is effective, and because the Democrat Party has a dirty secret to hide. Democrats control 100% of every major inner-city in America, and have for 50 to 100 years.  Every killing field -- Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis – is 100% in the hands of the Democrats. Every injustice in these inner cities – real or imagined – that policy can affect, Democrats are 100% responsible for. Every rotten school system, which year in and year out fails to provide mainly black and Hispanic kids with the basic tools they need to succeed is 100% controlled by the Democrat Party and its teacher unions who without exception put the interests of the adults in the system in front of the kids. Including keeping schools closed during the Covid-19 pandemic while demanding more money for themselves.

Trump represented a major threat to the Democrats’ corrupt inner-city empires and - worse – to their electoral power base. Consequently, when Trump asked inner city blacks “What do you have to lose by voting for me?” the Democrats lost no time in demonizing him. They did so in the most dehumanizing terms possible - launching an all-out war to destroy him as a white nationalist, white supremacist, Hitler. In this lethal atmosphere, which has lasted for four years, the first black President of the United States this week again called Trump – and by implication his seventy-three million supporters – racist.

Race is the Democrats’ nuclear weapon, deployed to destroy their critics and protect every corrupt urban Tammany Hall they have built and profited from over the last 100 years. This weapon was a gift from the radicals who successfully infiltrated the Democrat Party following their riot at the Convention in 1968. It is where the deep divisions that afflict us now began.

The absurd, racially poisonous term, “white skin privilege,” for example, was an invention of the hate America terrorists who called themselves, “Weathermen,” and whose leaders, Bill Ayers and Eric Mann, advised Barack Obama (Ayers actually ghosted his autobiography) and mentored the insurrectionary founders of Black Lives Matter. The stated goal of the Weathermen terrorists was to join what they saw as a global race war against “white supremacy,” and to join it as a fifth column against white America.

Democrats embraced racial politics opportunistically at first, because it was an effective political weapon. As a result of the radical ascendancy within the Democrat party and in the nation’s schools, the race card now features the ludicrous charge that white America is a white supremacist nation, and “racism is in its DNA.” This is a charge that is deadly because it will justify the most radical anti-American measures. As a result of the Democrats’ blitzkrieg against this imaginary scourge, large sections of the American public are now in the grips of a hysteria that has detached them from any semblance of reality. In this atmosphere, a lifelong liberal like Trump can be miraculously transformed into a raving Nazi. On the other end of the equation, black America is cast as a race of noble savages who can do no wrongs that are not attributable to “systemic racism” and white oppression.

In this fantasy world, black Americans are routinely portrayed as though they are a “marginal” and “under-represented” people in our society. This has become a required perspective for racially sensitive Americans eager to position themselves “on the right side of history.” And it is forced on millions of whites who are demonized by a multi-million-dollar industry of racist diversity trainers who lecture captive audiences in our universities, corporations, and even military academies, in the anti-white racism of “critical race theory,” a creed concocted by the hate America left.

The notion that black Americans are marginal, and under-represented, and therefore oppressed is transparently ridiculous. On the contrary, to anyone with eyes to see, Black America and its wounds are closer to being the center of the nation’s attention, and also the focus of its charitable largesse. Otherwise, how explain the complacency of the nation and its civic authorities towards the epic lawlessness and destruction inspired by Black Lives Matter vigilantes in 600 American cities last summer without a single instigator being held accountable, and even the arrested perpetrators being immediately released from jail? How explain how such criminal violence could be justified as opposing “police brutality” in advance of a single trial or even investigation of an allegedly brutal police officer?

Far from being marginal, under-represented, and oppressed, Black America is a community continually front and center in the nation’s consciousness. They are a powerful and often dominant force in American culture. Black athletes are the heroes of America’s youth. Black comedians, entertainers, musicians and actors fill America’s TV, theater and Internet screens, bringing their stories – their  lives, emotions, victories, losses – into America’s hearts . Far from being denied access to the American dream, most black Americans are now comfortably in the middle class and part of it.

Oprah Winfrey is a self-made billionaire, the richest woman in America, and she is joined by increasing numbers of other blacks who are also self-made, having amassed multi-million-dollar fortunes in a single lifetime. The reality is that far from oppressing black America. Americans have made blacks the recipients of a cornucopia of special privileges – of lavishly funded programs and benefits based on their skin color that are designed to give them a leg up in the world. And these privileges come at the expense of opportunities for white and Asian Americans who are denied places they have earned at elite universities, and in all walks of professional life, also because of their skin color. This is a systemic racism that Americans support because it benefits black Americans, and that self-anointed “anti-racists” will defend at all costs.

 If the majority of black Americans are comfortably in the middle class, what accounts for the failure of other members of the black community to lift themselves out of poverty? This is a question that is now politically incorrect to ask. It is “blaming the victim.” It is an affront to the skin privilege of an oppressed people. It is racist. In fact, it is an obvious sham, but the vast majority of Americans go along with it. The rest of America doesn’t ask blacks who have fallen behind why that is so. For example, absent fathers, rampant drug use and off the charts crime rates – to mention three obvious factors. Instead of holding these individuals in any way accountable for their plight, their failure is blamed on invisible white people, who are allegedly responsible for an always un-evidenced “systemic racism” against blacks.

Systemic racism is illegal under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. If it were actually a problem in police departments and corporate institutions, as organizations like Black Lives Matter claim, there would be massive lawsuits by legions of black (and white) attorneys, prosecutors and attorneys general. There aren’t such lawsuits because the problem is invented. Aside from affirmative action programs, the only systemic racism is to be found in the disgraceful inner-city public schools, whose oppression of black youngsters is protected by the Democrat Party and its teacher unions. They will fight to the death to prevent poor minority kids from having the same choices in education as the children of Democrat teacher union members.

Taken together, the anti-white hysteria and the hysteria of black victimhood have had terrible consequences for Americans both black and white. In the summer of 2020, Black Lives Matter set in motion the largest, most violent, most destructive lynch mob in American history. Arsonists, looters and street criminals laid siege to 633 cities, caused billions of dollars in damage, and killed scores of people, as it happens mainly black. According to studies, ninety-five percent of the violent demonstrations were led by Black Lives Matter, and their fascist Antifa allies.

Like classic lynch mobs, the Black Lives Matter attacks were inspired by demands for verdicts in advance of trials or even investigations. “No Justice, No Peace!” Thus, George Floyd’s death was called a racial murder in advance of the autopsy report, which showed there was no strangulation and that he died of a self-inflicted Fentanyl overdose. One of the four officers indicted for Floyd’s “murder,” under pressure from the lynch mob, was an African American who had joined the police force to help institute reforms. How was this even a racial incident?

The same lies endlessly repeated describe the vast majority of Black Lives Matters’ claims about racial injustices committed by police. These lies obscure the fact that these incidents routinely involved black criminals resisting arrest by law enforcement officials whose chiefs – as in the Floyd case – were more often than not black themselves - and Democrats. “Hands Up Don’t Shoot” an infamous Black Lives Matter lie that led to arson, destruction and general mayhem in Ferguson Missouri was the invention of a black criminal accomplice of Michael Brown. It was refuted before a grand jury by six black eyewitnesses who testified that Brown was actually charging the officer with his head down when he was shot.

Yet this lie is now part of the deadly folklore of the Black Lives Matter lynch mob and is featured in a new Netflix film based on the writings of the racist black author Ta-Nehisi Coates. Small wonder that the icon of the Black Lives Matter movement, Assata Shakur, is a cold-blooded cop killer. Shakur is also a fugitive taken in by the sadistic dictator Fidel Castro, a figure adored by Black Lives Matters’ Marxist founders.

Black Lives Matter leads a coalition of roughly fifty vigilante organizations claiming to be pursuing “social justice.” Vice-presidential candidate Kamala Harris who has raised bail funds for Black Lives Matter arsonists and street criminals calls them, “A Coalition of Conscience.” Hundreds of millions of dollars have been invested in its efforts by George Soros, the Ford Foundation and major U.S. corporations, helping to make it the most powerful political movement in America today.

The coalition has already presented its first legislative proposal, maliciously called “The Breathe Act” after two notorious Black Lives Matter lies claiming that Eric Garner and George Floyd were strangled by police. (The autopsy reports in both cases showed that neither man was strangled. Both were resisting arrest.) “The Breathe Act” is not about “choke holds” or other possible causes of strangulation. Its goals are to defund the police, abolish prisons, and eliminate border enforcement. In other words, to make America as vulnerable to domestic criminals and international enemies as possible.

Forty years ago, I left the left when I saw that it was a destructive force that would never change. Leftists do not tolerate dissenters in their ranks. They suppress politically incorrect ideas and cast out their perpetrators, demonizing them in the process. As a result, leftists never learn from their “mistakes” or take responsibility for their crimes. Thus, in every generation a new destructive crusade for “social justice” is launched, oblivious of the disasters previous radical campaigns left in their wakes.

The leaders of Black Lives Matter proclaim “We are trained Marxists,” as though that were a badge of honor rather than a confession of dangerous ignorance and a kiss of death. Every successful Marxist revolution without exception has established a ruthless police state, which more often than not conducts genocidal persecutions of ethnic minorities. In other words, social injustice on an epic scale. Yet that is the prospect we face in a reactionary left that has learned nothing from the past and is intent on destroying the most tolerant, inclusive, egalitarian society ever created. The good news is that a patriotic movement has risen, rededicated to the propositions that all men are created equal and endowed with God-given rights to life and liberty, and is prepared to defend them.


David Horowitz  


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump campaign to file Wisconsin lawsuit, claiming 'abuse' of absentee voting affected 220K ballots - Brooke Singman


​ by Brooke Singman


Campaign alleges tens of thousands of votes were cast 'well outside of the bounds of Wisconsin law'

 Trump slams judges’ election decisions

The Trump campaign is filing a lawsuit to the Wisconsin Supreme Court Tuesday -- alleging abuse around the process of absentee voting in the state, which they say affected approximately 220,000 ballots.

The lawsuit is expected to be filed Tuesday morning and comes after Wisconsin completed its partial recount — which maintained that Joe Biden won the presidential race in the state — and after Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers formally certified Biden’s victory Monday night.

The Trump campaign’s Wisconsin legal team, led by former Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge Jim Troupis, told Fox News that while the recount in the state did not flip in President Trump’s favor, it gave the campaign the “unique ability” to examine ballots.

“Exposing exactly how the election processes were abused in Wisconsin holds enormous value for this election beyond a victory for President Trump, but the fact is, our state’s electoral votes likely won’t change the overall outcome,” Troupis told Fox News. “Regardless, we’re demonstrating that the results of this election unequivocally ought to be questioned.”


The legal team also said  the suit highlights “a lack of transparency and credibility on part of local election officials and their willful disregard of the law on multiple occasions” and added that the state’s laws and processes gave it the “unique ability” to “illustrate this abuse with precision.”

The campaign claims officials on the Wisconsin Election Commission and the City Clerks of Milwaukee and Madison “willfully disregarded the current statute and made conscious efforts to circumvent Wisconsin election law,” resulting in tens of thousands of votes cast “well outside of the bounds of Wisconsin law.”

It also asserts the law was violated “on several occasions” through what it described as altered-certification absentee ballot envelopes, a lack of required absentee ballot applications, unlawful claims of indefinite confinement and voting events called “Democracy in the Park.”

Wisconsin law requires that written absentee ballot request forms must be submitted ahead of the voter casting their absentee ballot, but the Trump campaign claimed that election officials, instead, “accepted ballots without the required absentee applications on file.”


“The Wisconsin State Legislature has explicitly required an application,” a Trump campaign official told Fox News, saying it is “mandatory and any ballots without an application or with an incomplete application are not to be counted.”

The campaign said ballots cast without the initial absentee ballot applications on file “must be called into question.”

Next, the campaign pointed to Wisconsin law, which requires any ballots that are incorrectly filled out, missing information or damaged to be returned to the voter to correct and resubmit.

But the lawsuit alleges municipal clerks were “illegally altering ballot envelopes themselves.”

“In many instances, witness addresses were left off of the envelopes and clerks, using their own knowledge or searching in unknown databases, filled in the information themselves,” a campaign official told Fox News. “According to the statute, this is illegal.”


“If the certificate or envelope is missing a witness address, the ballot cannot be counted until the voter corrects the error — plain and simple,” the official added. “Instead, election officials decided to take the law into their own hands.”

The official added: “These ballots were fraudulently completed and counted, and the illegal ballots should not count toward the certified vote totals.”

The lawsuit also alleges voters were “fraudulently allowed by election officials” to circumvent voter ID laws by claiming absentee voting status that, under state law, was only to be used for voters who are “indefinitely confined.”

The status of “indefinite confinement” in Wisconsin is intended for voters who are “physically ill, infirm, elderly or disabled” and for those who are “unable to vote in person under those terms.”

The campaign claimed that due to the “confusion and misinformation from Democratic election officials” amid the coronavirus pandemic, many voters requested that status “even though they definitely were not confined.”

“This allowed voters abusing the status to vote without providing identification, as required by law,” the official explained.


The campaign said that in March, Democrat election officials “falsely told voters they could claim this status because of the pandemic” but said that was “later struck down by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.” The Trump campaign said that from 2016 to 2020, the number of indefinitely confined voters increased “dramatically” — nearly 600% in Dane County and about 500% in Milwaukee County.

The lawsuit also will claim that clerks “did not do their due diligence to remove voters fraudulently claiming” that status and “made no good faith effort to check publicly available information and remove indefinite confinement permissions from illegitimate voters.”

The lawsuit alleges that anyone who cast a ballot under the terms of indefinite confinement without meeting that criteria “did so fraudulently,” and therefore, their “illegal ballots must not be counted.”

Meanwhile, the campaign also alleged that the city of Madison created “unlawful polling locations at over 200 locations throughout the city’s Democracy in the Park voting events” and said the ballots accepted at the events “were illegally cast.”

The campaign claimed the polling locations were held outside of the county’s “approved polling locations and did not follow the state’s strict absentee voting requirements.”

“What’s truly alarming about these events is that not only did they not follow the law, but Joe Biden’s campaign encouraged this unlawful voting,” a campaign official told Fox News, claiming the Biden campaign “advertised these events as opportunities to vote, telling voters to bring their completed ballot to turn in or their incomplete ballot to have a so-called ‘poll worker’ serve as a witness before you fill it out and turn it in.”

“This highlights inappropriate coordination between the Biden campaign and the city’s election officials,” the official said, noting that voters “are not allowed to turn in their absentee ballots anywhere other than designated polling locations.”

A Trump campaign official told Fox News its lawsuit is to ensure that “legal voters are not being disenfranchised by ensuring only legal votes are counted,” adding that Democrat election officials' “motive is clear.”

“They want Joe Biden to win at all costs, regardless of whether the votes for him are legal or illegal,” the official said, adding that the “court must do the right thing and remove the illegal ballots from the certified vote total.”

Neither Evers, the Wisconsin Election Commission, nor the Biden campaign immediately responded to Fox News' request for comment. 

The Trump campaign’s Wisconsin legal team told Fox News it had more than 4,000 volunteers working throughout the recount in the state.

The lawsuit comes after Evers certified Wisconsin’s results for Biden.

“With Governor Evers’ premature certification, he is saying the President of the United States has no right to go to court in order to have illegal ballots examined,” Troupis told Fox News. “He’s not saying we have a frivolous lawsuit — he is saying we have no right to judicial review — that’s another level of bad.”

Troupis added: “The idea that great law firms and great lawyers would not get involved in cases like this because they’re afraid is the reason I took this case in the first instance.”

“I’ve been doing this for 40 years, representing plenty of Democrats and Republicans, and I will not back down when it comes to upholding the law or protecting the integrity of our elections,” Troupis told Fox News. “We, as good lawyers, don’t back down, and if we do, our republic is done.”

Trump has refused to concede to Biden, now more than three weeks after Fox News, the Associated Press and other news networks projected that Biden would win enough electoral votes to defeat him and become president-elect.

The president’s legal team, in other areas across the nation, filed a spate of lawsuits in many key battlegrounds in hopes of delaying the certification of the election, but the tactics have been unsuccessful to date.

The recount in Wisconsin, as well as the one requested by Trump in Georgia, also failed so far to alter Biden’s victories.

In his first interview since this month's election, Trump once again claimed the "election was a fraud; it was a rigged election.”

"We had glitches where they moved thousands of votes from my account to Biden's account," the president charged without backing up his claim in a conversation with FOX Business' Maria Bartiromo on "Sunday Morning Futures."

But Trump also appeared to acknowledge that his legal bid to overturn the election results "probably" wouldn't reach the U.S. Supreme Court, which has been the goal of his legal team.


Brooke Singman is a Politics Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter at @BrookeSingman.  


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

About those 'spike anomalies' in Pennsylvania … - Michael Iachetta


​ by Michael Iachetta

A bunch of votes that are dumped into the election results faster than they could have been processed by the voting machines, using the maximum possible speed as provided by the manufacturer of the machines.

Paul Kengor's recent article about the presidential election results got me thinking about what it would take to convince a friend of mine — or a Pennsylvania legislator or judge — that there really was something fishy going on in this election.  Kengor's piece focuses on an exchange between Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani and Ret. Col. Phil Waldren at last week's Senate Majority Policy Committee hearings in Pennsylvania, in which Giuliani established that if you add up the total number of votes for Biden and Trump in a series of what Waldren described as Biden "spike anomalies," you get around 570,000 votes for Biden and only around 3,200 for Trump.

What Walden means by a "spike anomaly" is a bunch of votes that are dumped into the election results faster than they could have been processed by the voting machines, using the maximum possible speed as provided by the manufacturer of the machines.  My friend, a Trump voter but ever the skeptic, doubted that Waldren's calculations were correct and insisted that in any case, Waldren was wrong to conclude that votes must be fraudulent simply because it looked as if too many of them were processed in too short a period of time.

YouTube screen grab.

But this is not what Waldren said. It is true that, in his answer to Giuliani's question, Waldren says a big spike is a "prime indicator of fraudulent voting."  But a few seconds before that (at 1:29:38 in the hearing), Waldren explains that he and his team understand the spikes not as evidence of fraud in and of themselves, but as red flags: "These spike anomalies in this chart really show where for us to look forensically to actually determine what happened with these votes."  And a few seconds before that (at 1:28:00), he says, "Really only a detailed forensic analysis of the actual machines and software will truly show how many Pennsylvania citizens have had their civil rights violated." 

So what this comes down to is not so much — or not only — the questions of whether there were in fact spike anomalies in Pennsylvania, and whether Giuliani can prove it, as my friend insisted to know.  The real question is whether President Trump's lawyer (or independent attorney Sidney Powell) will ask the appropriate judge to issue a warrant to seize "the actual machines and software" in Pennsylvania so the appropriate parties can conduct a "detailed forensic analysis" of them.  I have not seen any reports to that effect, but Waldren's testimony plus the recent court order in Georgia forbidding the state to scrub the machines of the election results suggests that the answer should be yes.  Surely, the anomalies Waldren identifies rise to the level of probable cause, and Americans deserve to know if these allegations are correct.


Michael Iachetta  


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Examining the Evidence for Democrats' 'No Evidence of Voter Fraud' Claim - Jon N. Hall


​ by Jon N. Hall

Liberal Harvard professor Laurence Tribe offers a case study in election obfuscation.

On November 14, the U.S. edition of The Guardian ran an article by Harvard Law professor Laurence H. Tribe headlined "Republicans are playing with fire.  And we all risk getting burned."  Tribe claimed that there is "no evidence" so far of systemic fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

The next day on FNC's Fox News Sunday, Mr. Tribe and Judge Kenneth Starr discussed the president's legal challenges to the election.  It's an interesting exchange, and one can watch it here and here.  In this writer's opinion, Mr. Starr was the more persuasive, for Tribe again claimed "there is nothing in his [Trump's] arguments and no evidence to back them."

Immediately after Tribe's claim, FNC's moderator quoted a November 12 joint statement put out by the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), a division of the DHS: "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised."  The CISA's statement is quite short, and it should be read with a jaundiced eye.  There are no links to web pages that explain its methodology and how it arrived at its conclusion that the 2020 election is "the most secure election in American history."  But that's not saying much, given America's long history of election fraud.

By employing the same "no evidence" rhetoric, both Tribe and the CISA attempt to shut down the debate.  The tacit implication is that they have examined all of the evidence and found none of it to hold water.  Also, by employing "no evidence" rhetoric, they expect us to accept them as the experts on these matters.

But this article isn't about rhetoric; it's about evidence, and there is "no evidence" that the vote counts in the 2020 presidential election are correct.  But then no one can produce evidence to demonstrate what the legitimate vote counts were in any presidential election, at least within any reasonable time constraints.  The changes to our voting systems in the 2020 elections were expressly designed so that there cannot be any evidence.  Professor Tribe should tell us what the evidence would consist of that would allow us to know what the correct vote counts are.

Larry Tribe may like to oraculate from on high as though he were some objective, disinterested analyst calling balls and strikes, but he's actually a highly partisan left-wing Democrat.  In the Guardian article, he touches on the possibility of state legislatures going rogue and appointing electors who would vote against the candidate the people (supposedly) voted for.  In disapproving of that, Tribe proves himself a hypocrite, for back in 2016, he was involved with Electors Trust and even wrote a letter "encouraging electors to vote against Trump."  In other words, Tribe was urging that they go rogue and become faithless electors.  Also, when President Trump fired FBI director James Comey, which was entirely within his purview, Tribe urged impeachment.  Tribe seems little better than the worthies on MSNBC and CNN who were hired precisely because they're willing to say anything.

Only a small portion of Tribe's article in The Guardian deals with vote counts.  It quickly gets past election issues and degenerates into yet another broadside against Republicans in general and Trump in particular, and it's wacky, repugnant stuff.  However, it can be read for its sociological value and for entertainment.

For Tribe to pooh-pooh the considerable evidence that has been brought forward is evidence of Tribe's bad faith.  Perhaps Larry Tribe is a fraud.  What kind of election systems would Tribe propose that would give Americans confidence in the vote count?

It was after the 37-day post-election brouhaha in 2000 when I started thinking about how to mend our broken election systems.  One of my aims was not only to make fraud detectable, which it currently isn't, but also to make fraud impossible to commit, or at least much more difficult.  Have any of the changes made to our election systems since 2000 tried to do that?  Of course not — the changes have all been geared to making registration and voting easier and easier.  Election integrity hasn't been the aim.

Larry Tribe would benefit from watching the opening to Mark Levin's FNC show of November 22, "What is the civil litigation process of 2020 election suits?"  He can find it here and here.  Not only will Tribe discover that there are tons of evidence, but he might also learn how to litigate a case.

Why shouldn't the Tribes of this world be required to prove that no fraud occurred?  For that matter, why shouldn't the boards of elections in the states be required to provide proof of the integrity of their elections?  Voters are expected to just accept that the election officials in the several states are competent and honest and wouldn't dream of breaking the law to throw an election to their candidate.

Whenever some self-appointed "expert" makes a claim of there being "no evidence" for something, insist that he produce the evidence for his claims.  Ask him: what evidence do you have that there is "no evidence"?

Because they haven't demanded that our election systems be fixed so that vote counts can be shown to be correct, the American people may deserve to have a frail, senile president and a braying, hebephrenic V.P.  More's the pity.

As of November 30, we were still counting votes for U.S. representatives.  If it weren't for the 20th Amendment, which moved Inauguration Day from March 4 to January 20, we'd have 43 more days to contest this election's fraud.  The U.S. Supreme Court needs to vacate the presidential elections in Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, Nevada, and especially Pennsylvania and order that new elections be held with more security.  The mountain of evidence of fraud demands a do-over.


Jon N. Hall of ULTRACON OPINION is a programmer from Kansas City.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Mahmoud Abbas Cheers Biden's Election - Joseph Puder


​ by Joseph Puder

The consequences for Israel -- and for the Palestinians themselves.


For Mahmoud Abbas, the apparent election of Joe Biden as the 46th president of the United States is sheer relief. As a result of his disagreement with President Donald Trump’s “Peace of the Century,” he severed his ties with the Trump administration, and in May, he suspended the security coordination with Israel. Abbas also, among other things, refused to accept tax money Israel collected from Palestinians working in Israel that is transferred to the Palestinian Authority (PA). This has just about emptied the PA’s coffers, and brought about the near collapse of the Palestinian economy.  

In the Sunni-Muslim Arab world, Abbas’ PA became more isolated as a number of Arab states normalized relations with Israel, including the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, and Sudan (Khartoum and Jerusalem have not yet formalized an agreement). Actually, a second term would more than likely have cemented Trump’s Middle East peace plan. While the U.S. elections seem to be tilting toward a Biden presidency, albeit, charges of serious irregularities have been leveled by the Trump campaign. Trump’s appeal of the results may end up in the Supreme Court, and it is the court that will ultimately determine the final result of the 2020 elections.

During his election campaign, Joe Biden vowed to revive the Two-State solution. He also promised to restore Washington’s relations with the Palestinians. It is quite apparent that Biden intends to reverse President Trump’s Middle East policies, including promises during the campaign to reopen the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) offices in Washington DC, and resume U.S. financial aid to the bankrupt PA. He has also promised to open the U.S. Consulate in East Jerusalem (serving Palestinians only), that Trump closed. In addition, it is expected that the Biden administration would once again fund the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which Trump defunded. The corruption within UNRWA, which enjoys significant western aid, while it is serving as an incubator for Palestinian terrorists, is unwarranted.

Salem Barahmeh, Executive Director of the Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy, writing for Foreign Policy magazine (November 20, 2020), observed that, “While President-elect Joe Biden’s win – or, rather Trump’s impending exit – offers Palestinians a brief reprieve, it also presents them with sobering reality which they must now contend. The Biden administration may prove less threatening to the Palestinians than its predecessor, but it is not likely to facilitate a path toward Palestinian freedom.”

Abbas will do well to remember that things have changed in the last four years, and that there is no going back to the previous status quo. Biden won’t be able to change the existing geopolitical situation. Perhaps in realization of reality, last week Abbas decided to resume the security coordination with Israel and accept the taxes collected by Israel.

For Israel, a Biden presidency will not have the intimacy and the coordinated moves it had with the Trump administration. At the same time, Biden’s presidency will not have the hostility the Obama administration displayed toward Israel. Biden’s designated Secretary of State, Tony Blinken, 58, when addressing the subject of the U.S. – Israeli relationship said that, “Biden has an ironclad commitment to Israel’s security.” Blinken, who reiterated Biden’s commitment of resuming aid to the Palestinians, added that Biden “would abide by congressional restrictions conditioning much of the aid to the PA  ending payments to Palestinians who have killed or wounded Americans and Israelis,” also known as “pay to slay.” Blinken also pointed out that Biden will not condition aid to Israel.

Biden is not going to aggressively pursue additional normalization deals between Arab states and Israel. He will focus more on a deal between the Ramallah based PA, and Israel. Biden’s declared intention to resume U.S. participation in the Iran nuclear deal, will serve to stimulate and strengthen the Arab-Israeli alliance against Iran, and it would probably bring additional Arab states to normalize relations with Israel. The likelihood that Biden will ease or end the sanctions on Iran worries Israel, and the moderate Sunni Arab world.  

The New York Times reported (November 17, 2020) that, “President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. has promised to move quickly to rejoin the nuclear deal with Iran so long as Iran also comes back into compliance. But that vow is easier said than done. Iran declared that it will demand compensation from the U.S. for the sanctions imposed by Washington. Tehran also wants the revocation of all sanctions, as a condition to engage with the U.S.  Iran’s support of terror against its neighbors and beyond, its development of long-range missiles with nuclear payloads that might reach the U.S., poses a threat to International peace and stability.

According to Fox News, Tony Blinken opposed designating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a foreign terrorist organization. At the same time though, Blinken is said to have pointed out that, “In the category of ‘never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity,’ I think a reminder to Palestinians that they can and should do better to deserve better, and that requires leadership: leadership to make clear the reality of the Jewish state; leadership to make clear the need to end incitement and violence; leadership to bring people along for the prospect of negotiating.”

Palestinian Arab-American, and Michigan Congresswoman, Rashida Tlaib, a vocal advocate of the Palestinian cause, reacted to Blinken being Biden’s choice for Secretary of State by saying that, “Just make sure he doesn’t try to silence me and suppress my first amendment right to speak out against Netanyahu’s racist and inhumane policies.”  Tlaib’s insulting and crude reference to Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu is not only inherently false and vicious, it is unbecoming of a U.S. Member of Congress toward a friendly ally, who treats Arab-Israelis far better than the PA or Hamas treat their own people.  The Democrat party should rightfully denounce her statement, and take disciplinary measures against her hateful speech.  

In September, Joe Biden condemned the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel in a platform he released, and aimed at Arab-Americans. At the same time, Biden said that he backed the free speech rights of the BDS movement. Except that the BDS “free speech” is actually unadulterated hate speech.

Biden opposes Israel’s annexation or more accurately, the extension of Israeli sovereignty to the Jewish communities in the Jordan Valley. In his platform, he said that, “He will work to ensure that Palestinians and Israelis enjoy equal measures of freedom, security, prosperity, and democracy.” Biden’s policy is grounded in his commitment to a two-state solution, where Israel and the future viable state of Palestine, will live together in peace, security, and mutual recognition. 

The verbiage used by Biden is commonly used by Democrats regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, if the Palestinians cannot make peace among themselves, how will they reconcile themselves to making peace with the Jewish state? For a century-long, they have poisoned the minds of generations of young people in mosques, media, and schools, with hatred toward Jews and the Jewish state.  Biden is na├»ve to believe that Abbas and company will accept a peace deal now, when Abbas rejected one in 2008, a deal that had far reaching Israeli concessions which made it possible for a solid opportunity to establish a sovereign Palestinian state. 

Conditions that Mahmoud Abbas demands, specifically the “Right of Return” of millions of Palestinian refugees to Israel, or more specifically their descendants, cannot be acceptable to Israel. Nor for that matter, is a militarized Palestinian state. Biden, with all his goodwill, won’t be able to break the impasse.


Joseph Puder  


 Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Can Sanctions Bring Down The Mullahs? - Michael Ledeen


​ by Michael Ledeen

Why the Iranian regime's days are numbered.


I don’t believe that sanctions against Iran are good enough, although, as I have written before, the Iranian regime is so hollow it could crash at any time. At my advanced age, I still don’t believe I have seen an oppressive regime fall simply because life in its land had become unbearable.   

Look around the world, and pick your favorite failed dictatorship. My short list runs from Pyongyang to Caracas, via Tehran and Havana. They are all under sanctions. Their people are miserable, and detest the regime. In some places, there are demonstrations, even huge ones. Yet, from North Korea to Venezuela, the regime isn’t headed for the exits. It cracks down. In some places, such as Venezuela and Iran, the people continue to demonstrate and call for regime change. I think the Islamic Republic of Iran is doomed, and this is pretty much demonstrated by the events of the past few weeks, culminating in the fiasco on Sunday. Successful evolutions require several things, including manifest failure of the regime, widespread contempt from the overwhelming majority of the people, and a palpable inability of the leaders to impose themselves on the country.   

Sunday provided a clear test of the strength of the regime and its supreme leader, Ali Khamenei. The occasion was the anniversary of the 1979 Revolution that overthrew the Shah and imposed a theological dictatorship. Khamenei, President Rouhani, and their henchmen were eager to demonstrate that the Iranian people actually support the regime, and that the widespread anti-regime demonstrations of the past month were the marginal consequences of foreign meddling, not genuine passion. Hence the mullahs called for monster rallies to celebrate the 39 years of Islamic Revolution. 

It didn’t work. Turnout was shockingly low, and in fact there were scores of anti-regime demonstrations. Speeches by regime supporters were interrupted, and women brandished hijabs in acts of defiance. A fiasco for the regime.   

The regime knows its days are numbered. You can see this by watching the relentless increase in the oppression of the Iranian people. Last time I checked, there were half again as many executions under Rouhani as there had been under Ahmadinejad, the former often described as “moderate,” while the latter was considered some kind of bloodthirsty murderer. Today Rouhani sits at the right hand of the chief tyrant, while Ahmadinejad is under house arrest, as are the leaders of the Green Movement who challenged his legitimacy after the phony elections of 2009. Rouhani is forever promising reform, but delivers only mayhem.   

The most recent horror is the “suicide” of a beloved environmentalist, Kavous Emami. He was arrested on January 24th, and was suicided within two weeks. Hardly anyone believes he killed himself; he was undoubtedly executed, as even the very cautious New York Times Iran correspondent made clear. And the Iran Sociology Association also spoke out: "The information published about him is not believable and we expect officials to respond and to provide the public with information concerning his death." 

Emami was one of many scientists warning of a nationwide water shortage that is one of many grotesque failures of the regime, reminding one of the similar ruination of the environment in the last days of the Soviet Union. Unsurprisingly, many of Emami’s colleagues have been arrested and still others are rumored to be in prison. Of late, political prisoners have been housed in safe houses run by the Revolutionary Guards instead of the infamous prisons such as Evin in Tehran, where they had routinely been incarcerated. The families of the new wave of political prisoners do not know where to go to find their loved ones, which is exactly what Khamenei et al desire. They fear protests in front of the jails. 

The Emami case is instructive, because he was hardly an anti-regime activist. He was a campaigner for a cleaner environment, and so far as I know was not involved in political protests. He was extremely popular, and his work was dangerous to the regime simply because it documented the failure of the system. 

As the tempo of oppression mounts, the regime is scrambling to find some way to “demonstrate” its “successes” and “popularity.” The anniversary celebrations were supposed to achieve just that, but instead showed the regime’s failure and unpopularity. If you can’t get a decent turnout for the Islamic Republic’s most important holiday, you’re in trouble. 

This is the background against which we need to evaluate recent events, one very public (the intrusion of an Iranian drone into Israeli territory) and one fairly low-key (the rumor of Khamenei’s death). I believe that the drone attack on Israel was conceived as a demonstration of Iranian power against the Israeli “little Satan.” It was to have been part of the celebration, but like the plans for monster rallies in support of the regime, it failed. Just as the holiday demonstrated the hollowness of Khamenei’s tyranny, the drone attack showed Iran’s vulnerability to Israeli power. And the subsequent demolition of, it is said, half of Syrian anti-aircraft forces (which is to say, Syrian-based Iranian anti-aircraft forces), drove home the point. 

The other event revolves around the health of the leader. Khamenei has had several medical emergencies over the years, and, starting a few days before the anniversary of the Revolution, well-sourced rumors began to circulate to the effect that he had died. He had not, but he did undergo a crisis, losing consciousness and passing into a coma for several hours. 

Under these circumstances, the War of the Persian Succession has intensified, and potential successors are openly attacking one another, jockeying for position should the next coma prove permanent. 

As it eventually will.   


Michael Ledeen  


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Palestinian Authority Deceives American Audiences - IPT News


​ by IPT News

Palestinians have no intentions of halting "pay for slay" support for convicted terrorists.

In an effort to appease the incoming Biden administration, the Palestinian Authority (PA) appears ready to revaluate two contentious roadblocks for reconciliation between Israel and the Palestinians: the PA's salary program for convicted terrorists and widespread incitement within Palestinian institutions.

However, recent evidence suggests that the PA has no intention of halting these practices. On the contrary, the PA is looking to expand efforts that encourage future generations to embrace terrorism.

PA officials are attempting to deceive Western audiences by claiming to seek reforms for a long-standing policy rooted in paying salaries to terrorists and their families based on a simple formula: the more brutal the attack or murder, the more money a Palestinian prisoner receives. Congress has outlawed this practice referred to as "pay for slay" after passing the Taylor Force Act.

Qadri Abu Bakr, who leads the PA's Commission of Prisoners' Affairs, told the New York Times earlier this month that the PA is considering paying families of terrorists "based on their financial need instead of how long they (the prisoners) are behind bars" in an article entitled "Seeking Restart With Biden, Palestinians Eye End to Prisoner Payments."

However, Palestinians have no intention of ending payments to prisoners or their families.

This new proposal is only meant to further legitimize the process behind paying individuals for attacking Israelis. Disguising terror payments as welfare stipends does nothing to address a systemic financial incentive which encourages Palestinians to wage terrorist attacks against Israelis.

Abu Bakr and other Palestinian officials are presenting themselves as moderate partners for peace through diplomatic channels and interviews in U.S. media, while doubling down on their hatred for Israel when speaking to their constituency.

Days after the Times story, Abu Bakr denied making his comments during an interview with the Palestinian news agency Wattan on Nov. 22, Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) reports. Two days later, he told an official PA daily that "there will be no bargaining over the prisoners' rights" and that reports in the Times article "are completely unfounded." The PMW has provided the Times with Abu Bakr's latest statements. However, the Times has yet to update its original article or issue a retraction.

Abu Bakr also revealed that the PA intends to launch a national Palestinian bank in January specifically meant to evade Israel's anti-terrorism financing laws and facilitate the transfer of salaries to terrorists and their families.

Other senior Palestinian leaders were quick to deny any change to the policy.

"In no way will any decision be made that detracts from any right (the prisoners) receive today. On the contrary - if we want to change it (the system), we will make it better to take care of them," said Fatah Central Committee secretary Jibril Rajoub while speaking to official PA TV on Nov. 23 and translated by PMW.

These statements reaffirm that Palestinians convicted of attacking Israelis take precedence over all sectors of Palestinian society. Terrorists and their families have historically received far higher payments than welfare recipients.

The PA's latest comments and mixed messaging are part of a wider Palestinian effort to curry favor with the incoming Biden administration.

The PA's foreign minister revealed last week that his government has indirectly communicated with Biden's transition team and signaled its willingness to re-start peace talks with Israel. Earlier this month, a close associate of PA President Mahmoud Abbas announced that the Palestinians would renew security coordination with Israel – relations that were unilaterally severed by Abbas since May.

While the restoration of security ties is welcome news, Palestinian refusal to coordinate with the Jewish state had prevented Palestinians from seeking emergency medical attention in Israel, leading to at least two reported deaths of Palestinian civilians. The PA had clearly prioritized its disdain for Israel and the Trump administration's peace proposal over the well-being of its population.

In a goodwill gesture to the next U.S. administration, the PA offered to delay joining international conventions and institutions as an independent state in recent communications with Western diplomats, according to a Nov. 20 report on Israel's Kan 11 News and the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center. The PA reportedly is also ready to reassess claims of widespread incitement in Palestinian textbooks in return for renewed U.S. aid and increased diplomatic engagement.

However, it is highly unlikely that the PA will abandon its long-standing approach to violent incitement. In fact, the PA continues its systematic campaign of demonizing Israelis. An official PA TV reporter said that Palestinian kids are "subjected to random summary executions" by Israel on Nov. 20, according to a PMW translation. The next day, the host of a popular children's program on official PA TV warned Palestinian kids that Israel is "deliberately killing" them.

As the Palestinian leadership works to restore relations with the United States and Israel, it is important to take stock of the PA's actual position on key issues that inhibit prospects to resolve the conflict. Despite the Palestinian efforts to present a more moderate face abroad, Palestinian incitement against Israel and the PA's salary program to convicted terrorists are not going away anytime soon.


IPT News  


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Biden Administration and the Mexican Border: Questions of Food Security, Drug Smuggling and Money Laundering - Chris Farrell


​ by Chris Farrell

You may be thinking (correctly) – "Hey, wait a minute! We have these threats... UNDER A TRUMP ADMINISTRATION?" Yes, we do. Now imagine what the "open borders" advocates within the Biden administration will demand in the way of public policy.

  • A number of corrupt officials along the way facilitate the transactions and perpetuate our 50+ year-long "War on Drugs" that we can never quite seem to win.

  • Mexican cattle crossing into Arizona cannot be traced once they enter the U.S. The cattle should be traceable all the way to the slaughterhouse. It is a question of disease. The sale, movement and slaughter of untraceable cattle are a means to smuggle drugs and a way for the Mexican cartels to launder money.... Drugs are hidden inside cattle.

  • You may be thinking (correctly) – "Hey, wait a minute! We have these threats... UNDER A TRUMP ADMINISTRATION?" Yes, we do. Now imagine what the "open borders" advocates within the Biden administration will demand in the way of public policy.

Mexican cattle crossing into Arizona cannot be traced once they enter the U.S. The cattle should be traceable all the way to the slaughterhouse. It is a question of disease. The sale, movement and slaughter of untraceable cattle are a means to smuggle drugs and a way for the Mexican cartels to launder money. Pictured: Cattle are brought through a gate in the border fence from Mexico into the United States on December 9, 2014 in Nogales, Arizona. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

When was the last time you wondered if your food was safe to eat? Sure, in the dystopian weirdness of 2020 "COVID world" – people enjoy "contactless delivery" and online shopping for groceries – but did you really question if your ground beef was contaminated? Get ready to do so. It is the most under-reported story you have never heard of.

There is an increasing food security threat to the beef industry and the American people. That threat is part of a mosaic of corruption and criminality involving modern-day cattle rustling, Mexican cartel drug smuggling and money laundering. All told, hundreds of millions of dollars are in play. A number of corrupt officials along the way facilitate the transactions and perpetuate our 50+ year-long "War on Drugs" that we can never quite seem to win. The public corruption angle to this story is the subject of a current, ongoing investigation by Judicial Watch.

In Arizona, state law enforcement and agriculture inspections at cattle crossing points at the Mexican border are a thing of the past. Federal Customs Officers are not agriculture, veterinary or firebrand inspectors. Mexican cattle crossing into Arizona cannot be traced once they enter the U.S. The cattle should be traceable all the way to the slaughterhouse. It is a question of disease. The sale, movement and slaughter of untraceable cattle are a means to smuggle drugs and a way for the Mexican cartels to launder money.

Drugs are hidden inside cattle. One's imagination is probably sufficient to explain the smuggler's technique. The money laundering part of the enterprise has to do with the cartel's use of drug money to purchase cattle and a financial interest in a "legitimate" cattle brokerage or business that gives them access to a means to "clean" their money through US banks. Rather than provide a detailed money laundering tutorial here (supporting the operations of a criminal enterprise) you can watch the popular Netflix television series, "Ozark."

Cattle rustling seems as if it should be something from the era of black-and-white western movies. Unfortunately, it is alive and well today. In the past, rustlers were brought to justice by law enforcement, who were usually assisted by the rancher suffering the loss. The application, recording, and ownership of firebrands was designed to help alleviate the questions of ownership and provided the ability for individuals to be prosecuted for stealing cattle across the west. Not anymore. Ranchers across the state of Arizona are becoming increasingly frustrated with the lack of importance placed upon cattle theft. Loss of cattle to theft creates financial ruin for ranchers and threatens the disruption of an American food source.

You may be thinking (correctly) – "Hey, wait a minute! We have these threats to the cattle industry, our food supply – and then the cartels smuggling drugs in cattle and laundering money UNDER A TRUMP ADMINISTRATION?" Yes, we do. Now imagine what the "open borders" advocates within the Biden administration will demand in the way of public policy. Last week, I detailed the policy changes a Biden administration would implement on the security and immigration controls for the border with Mexico. I also described the impact those changes would have on ordinary Americans living in border communities – as well as broader national security and crime issues. The two most obvious and immediate changes will be: 1. Termination of President Trump's signature 2016 campaign issue -- The Wall; and 2. Loosening of immigration restrictions.

A less secure border and national policies that lower our guard to all manner of border-related security measures -- from agriculture and livestock to banking transactions -- makes the United States less secure and places the general public at risk.


Chris Farrell is a former counterintelligence case officer. For the past 20 years, he has served as the Director of Investigations & Research for Judicial Watch. The views expressed are the author's alone, and not necessarily those of Judicial Watch.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

'Unrighteous Commerce': Our Responsibility for China's Barbaric Acts - Gordon G. Chang


​ by Gordon G. Chang

China's Communist Party is committing crimes against humanity. American companies are helping it do so.

  • Those who trade with China, invest in it, or promote ties with Beijing — in other words, strengthen or legitimize the ruling regime — have to know they are enabling the Party and are therefore complicit in its crimes against humanity.

  • "The world could have and would have been different if captains of industry as well as cultural and sports elites had acted differently in the 1930s, but they can act differently now." — Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center to Gatestone.

  • China's regime is able to engage in malevolent acts because businesses enrich it with trade and investment. Cut off the trade and investment, and Chinese leaders will have no cash for barbaric projects.

  • American companies and Americans are enabling Chinese atrocities. That has to end.

In China, at least a million — and perhaps more than three million — inhabitants of Xinjiang, for no reason other than their Uighur or Kazakh ethnicity or adherence to Islam, are being held in facilities meeting the definition of "concentration camps." Pictured: "The Artux City Vocational Skills Education Training Service Center," a facility where mostly Muslim ethnic minorities are detained, north of Kashgar in Xinjiang. (Photo by Greg Baker/AFP via Getty Images)

China's Communist Party is committing crimes against humanity. American companies are helping it do so.

It is, as explained below, no longer possible to "compartmentalize" China, so the White House and Congress should use their powers to end all trade, investment, and other business relationships.

In what the Chinese euphemistically call the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, the Party is relentlessly eliminating cultural and religious identity and implementing race-based policies reminiscent of those of the Third Reich, at least before the mass exterminations.

At least a million — and perhaps more than three million — Xinjiang inhabitants, for no reason other than their Uighur or Kazakh ethnicity or adherence to Islam, are being held in facilities meeting the definition of "concentration camps." Internees are dying in detention. Families are broken apart and children incarcerated in "orphanages."

The Chinese state implements genocidal policies in Xinjiang and has institutionalized rape of Muslim women. Tens of thousands of minorities work for domestic and foreign companies in state-run "forced labor" programs that can be described as "slavery." China may also be killing minorities to harvest their organs.

"The facts are well established," a friend, one of America's most renowned China watchers, told me late November, referring to China's control of the Uyghurs and others. "The evidence is overwhelming, beyond dispute."

It is. "The Chinese state is mutilating the whole of Xinjiang," wrote Bill Drexel, a researcher of China's surveillance state, in June in the Washington Post.

To mutilate Xinjiang, there is "the most sophisticated use of surveillance technology for minority repression in the world today," and it is not hard to figure out where the Chinese got the tech.

Foreign companies have participated in China's determined efforts to surveil and control minorities. For example, artificial intelligence researchers from Microsoft, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and Michigan State University gave keynote speeches at the Chinese Conference on Biometric Recognition in Xinjiang in August 2018 on facial recognition. Many suspect Microsoft of even deeper involvement in supplying artificial intelligence for social control.

Recently, some businesses — notably Amazon, IBM, and Microsoft — have "voluntarily restricted their facial recognition businesses" worldwide, as Drexel reported. "It's time," he wrote, "for others that are still contributing to China's repressive surveillance ecosystem to take a hard look at their policies."

That hard look should extend to corporate activities in all of the People's Republic of China, not just the Xinjiang region, especially as Chinese leaders begin to extend their unspeakable minority policies to Tibet and elsewhere.

There is only one regime in China. One cannot say "I deal only with Guangdong province" or "my only contact is with the State Administration of Foreign Exchange." The Chinese central government is unitary; there is no such thing as divided sovereignty, as in America's federal system.

Moreover, as Chinese ruler Xi Jinping has repeatedly demanded, the Communist Party must have absolute authority over all of society.

There are, of course, good people in China, but there are no good parts of the Chinese Communist Party. It is, as we can see by its actions in Xinjiang and other locations, evil.

Because the Party's crimes are so blatant and horrific, it is forcing people to make a moral choice.

Those who trade with China, invest in it, or promote ties with Beijing — in other words, strengthen or legitimize the ruling regime — have to know they are enabling the Party and are therefore complicit in its crimes against humanity.

Businesses now try to ignore their complicity, as they always have. IBM's Thomas Watson made "damnable choices," as the Atlantic's Jack Beatty tells us in his review of Edwin Black's books, IBM and the Holocaust.

Watson engaged in "unrighteous commerce" with the Third Reich as late as 1940, even after it had invaded France and during its bombing of England. IBM, for instance, helped Hitler count people by leasing Hollerith tabulating machines and punch cards, increasing Germany's ability to identify Jews and therefore round them up for extermination.

Watson was not the only corporate titan engaged in dubious dealings with Nazi Germany. "The world could have and would have been different if captains of industry as well as cultural and sports elites had acted differently in the 1930s, but they can act differently now," Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center told Gatestone.

As he pointed out, this year corporate America on its own supported racial equality and other social justice causes. Businesses should, Rabbi Cooper argues, also consider the consequences of their actions abroad, specifically in China.

Presidents have clout and powerful tools — the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 — to make American companies and others act. They can effectively order U.S. companies and others out of China or reduce the scope of their activities there, and they can clearly end trade with China.

Yet business leaders do not have to be told what to do. "They didn't wait for edicts from the White House or legislation from Congress," Cooper says, referring to their actions this year. "They should act on their own and do the right thing."

China's regime is able to engage in malevolent acts because businesses enrich it with trade and investment. Cut off the trade and investment, and Chinese leaders will have no cash for barbaric projects.

American companies and Americans are enabling Chinese atrocities. That has to end.


Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China, a Gatestone Institute Distinguished Senior Fellow, and a member of its Advisory Board. Follow him on Twitter and Parler @GordonGChang.


 Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter