Friday, July 3, 2020

Exposing the Lies of Black Lives Matter - John Perazzo


by John Perazzo

Where black racism and Marxism are dressed up as “social justice.”





Black Lives Matter (BLM) was established in 2013 by a trio of self-identified Marxist revolutionaries. Striving to make white Americans “uncomfortable about institutional racism” and the “structural oppression” that allegedly “prevents so many [black people] from realizing their dreams,” BLM contends that blacks living under America's “white supremacist system” are routinely targeted for “extrajudicial killings … by police and vigilantes.” That claim has become an article of faith for the millions of American leftists who dutifully parrot BLM's talking points. The remainder of this article is dedicated to providing hard data which exposes BLM's worldview as nothing more than a mountain of malicious lies.
Debunking BLM's Claims About Police Use of Force
A major Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) report in 2001 examined incidents where police in the United States used deadly force to kill criminal suspects between 1976 and 1998. During that 23-year span, 42% of all suspects killed by police were black – a figure that comported precisely with the percentage of violent crimes committed by African Americans during that same period. This is enormously significant because we would expect that in police forces not plagued by systemic racism, officers would shoot suspects of various racial or ethnic backgrounds at rates closely resembling their respective involvement in the types of serious crimes most likely to elicit the use of force by police. And indeed, that is exactly what the evidence shows.

The same BJS report found that in nearly two-thirds of all justifiable homicides by police during 1976-98, the officer’s race and the suspect’s race were the same. When a white or Hispanic officer killed a suspect, that suspect was usually (63% of the time) white or Hispanic as well. And when a black officer killed a suspect, that suspect was usually black (81% of the time).

The BJS report also examined the rate at which officers killed suspects of other racial or ethnic backgrounds. In 1998, the “black-officer-kills-black-felon” rate was 32 per 100,000 black officers, more than double the rate at which white and Hispanic officers killed black felons (14 per 100,000). That same year, the rate at which white and Hispanic officers killed white or Hispanic felons (28 per 100,000) was much higher than the “black-officer-kills-white-or-Hispanic-felon” rate of 11 per 100,000.

In 1999, criminologists Geoffrey Alpert and Roger Dunham confirmed once again that police officers were more likely to use force against suspects of their own racial group, than against suspects from another racial group.

A 2011 BJS study which covered the period from 2003 to 2009 sheds further light on the issue of police use of force against people of various racial and ethnic backgrounds. Of all suspects who are known to have been killed by police during that 7-year time frame, 41.7% were white, 31.7% were black, and 20.3% were Hispanic. It is also worth noting that during the 2003-2009 period—when blacks were 31.7% of all suspects killed by an officer—blacks accounted for about 38.5% of all arrests for violent crimes, which are the types of crimes most likely to trigger potentially deadly confrontations with police. These numbers do not in any way suggest a lack of restraint by police in their dealings with black suspects. On the contrary, they strongly suggest exactly the opposite.[1]

In 2015, a Justice Department study of the Philadelphia Police Department found that black officers were 67 percent more likely than their white colleagues to mistakenly shoot an unarmed black suspect, and Hispanic officers were 145 percent more likely to do the same. That same year, a study of the New York Police Department by criminology professor Greg Ridgeway found that black officers were 3.3 times more likely than their white peers to discharge their guns in the course of their work. So much for the notion of trigger-happy white cops.

In any given year, a mere 0.6 percent of black men report that physical force of any kind – including mild actions like pushing and grabbing – is used against them by the police. The corresponding figure for white men is approximately 0.2 percent. Though both figures are infinitesimally small, critics of the police are quick to complain that the figure for blacks is three times higher than the figure for whites. But as National Review points out, that disparity is fully accounted for by the fact that “black men commit violent crimes at much higher rates than white men,” as evidenced by data from the annual National Crime Victimization Survey.

The available data indicate that a mere 0.08 percent of black men and white men alike are injured by police in any given year. This figure includes injuries sustained as a result of police actions that are legally justified, and often necessary, in order to thwart criminal behavior.

In a 2018 working paper titled “An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force,” Harvard economist Roland Fryer, who is African American, reported that police officers in Houston were nearly 24 percent less likely to shoot black suspects than white suspects. In a separate analysis of officer shootings in three Texas cities, six Florida counties, and the city of Los Angeles, Fryer found that: (a) officers were 47 percent less likely to discharge their weapon without first being attacked if the suspect was black, than if the suspect was white; (b) black and white individuals shot by police were equally likely to have been armed at the time of the shootings; (c) white officers were no more likely to shoot unarmed blacks than unarmed whites; (d) black officers were more likely to shoot unarmed whites than unarmed blacks; and (e) black officers were more likely than white officers to shoot unarmed whites. There is no evidence of anti-black racism in any of these findings, though some of them do seem to suggest an anti-white bias.

A 2019 study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that white officers are no more likely than black or Hispanic officers to shoot black civilians. “In fact,” writes Manhattan Institute scholar Heather Mac Donald, the study found that “if there is a bias in police shootings after crime rates are taken into account, it is against white civilians.” Specifically, Mac Donald adds, the authors of the study compiled a database of 917 officer-involved fatal shootings in 2015 and found that 55 percent of the victims were white, 27 percent were black, and 19 percent were Hispanic.

Each and every year, without exception, whites who are shot and killed by police officers in the U.S. far outnumber blacks and Hispanics who meet that same fate. In 2017, for instance, 457 whites, 223 blacks, and 179 Hispanics were killed by police officers in the line of duty. In 2018, the corresponding figures were 399 whites, 209 blacks, and 148 Hispanics. And in 2019, the totals were 370 whites, 235 blacks, and 158 Hispanics. There is not a hint of anti-black racism anywhere in these figures.
When we compare black rates of violent crime, with the rate at which blacks are shot and killed by police officers, we find that blacks are represented among those shooting victims at rates significantly lower than we would have expected in light of their crime rates. For example, in 2017, blacks were just 23.6% of all people shot dead by police, even though they were arrested for 37.5% of all violent crimes. The following year, blacks were 26.3% of those fatally shot by police, even as they were arrested for fully 37.4% of violent crimes.

According to Heather Mac Donald: “The per capita rate of officers being feloniously killed is 45 times higher than the rate at which unarmed black males are killed by cops. And an officer’s chance of getting killed by a black assailant is 18.5 times higher than the chance of an unarmed black getting killed by a cop.”
Debunking BLM's Claims About Interracial Crime Against Blacks
In 2012 and 2013, blacks in the U.S. committed an annual average of 560,600 violent crimes (excluding homicide) against whites, while whites committed a yearly average of 99,403 violent crimes against blacks. In other words, blacks were the attackers in about 85 percent of all violent crimes involving blacks and whites, while whites were the attackers in 15 percent.[2]

When white offenders committed crimes of violence (excluding homicide) against either whites or blacks in 2012-13, they targeted white victims 95.8 percent of the time, and they went after black victims a mere 4.1 percent of the time. By contrast, when black offenders committed crimes of violence against either whites or blacks in 2012-13, they targeted white victims a whopping 48.5 percent of the time, and they went after black victims 51.4 percent of the time.[3] If we factor into the equation the relative sizes of America's white and black populations, we find that, statistically, any given black person in 2012-13 was about 27 times more likely to attack a white, than vice versa.

In more recent years, the disproportionate prevalence of black-on-white crime has only gotten worse. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2018 there were 593,598 interracial violent victimizations (excluding homicide) between blacks and whites in the United States. Blacks committed 537,204 of those interracial felonies, or 90.4 percent, while whites committed 56,394 of them, or about 9.5 percent.

When white offenders committed crimes of violence against either whites or blacks in 2018, they targeted white victims 97.3 percent of the time, and they went after black victims 2.6 percent of the time. By contrast, when black offenders committed crimes of violence against either whites or blacks during that same year, they targeted white victims 58 percent of the time, and they went after black victims 42 percent of the time.[4]

City Journal reports that according to Justice Department data, blacks in 2018 were overrepresented among the perpetrators of offenses classified as “hate crimes” by a whopping 50 percent—while whites were underrepresented by 24 percent.
The facts presented above can lead us to only one possible conclusion: BLM's claim that African Americans are routinely targeted for “extrajudicial killings … by police and vigilantes” is a monstrous lie. The purpose of the lie is to cause Americans of all races to detest their own country, so as to promote a desire to raze the nation's traditions to the ground, and to then erect a new Marxist utopia upon its ruins.


NOTES
[1] The annual violent-crime arrest statistics for 2003-2009, broken down by race, can be found here: 200320042005200620072008, and 2009.
[2] Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2012-13, Special Tabulation, Table 10.

[3] Ibid.
[4] Bureau of Justice Statistics, Criminal Victimization, 2018, Table 14.



John Perazzo

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/07/exposing-lies-black-lives-matter-john-perazzo/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



'Uncle Tom,' the Movie - Larry Elder


by Larry Elder

"Why is there no respectful disagreement in the black community?"





On June 19, also known as Juneteenth, the celebration of the end of slavery in the United States, we released our film, "Uncle Tom." It follows a young, black, Christian contractor, Chad Jackson, who was a long-time Democrat until challenged by a fellow Christian to read the platforms of the Democratic and Republican parties.

He did.

Jackson was shocked to discover that his support for limited government, low taxes and school choice, and his opposition to abortion on demand, made him a ... Republican!

"Uncle Tom" explores the often-vicious blowback Jackson got from friends and family, let alone others, when he announced his conversion. Instead of Jackson's evolution sparking a healthy discussion about which party's policies better advance the interests of Blacks, Jackson found himself being called "Uncle Tom," a "sellout" and a "self-loather."

The film simply asks: "Why is there no respectful disagreement in the black community? Why are great black thinkers like Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams and Shelby Steele ignored or marginalized by the black and mainstream media?" Despite impressive, decades-long bodies of work — columns, books and speeches — Sowell, Williams and Steele are completely unknown to many Blacks, and not just young Blacks.

Black conservatives do not attribute every major problem in the Black community to slavery and Jim Crow. Black conservatives do not believe that racism remains a significant problem in American society. Black conservatives believe the welfare state has incentivized women to marry the government and has incentivized men to abandon their financial and moral responsibility, a far bigger problem in America than racism.

"Uncle Tom" asks, why can't these points of view be debated? Are Black conservatives any less interested in the advancement of the Black community than Black liberals? If not, why the vitriol? Why the derision?

The early reviews of "Uncle Tom" exceeded our wildest expectations. As of this writing, the movie site IMDb shows that over 350 viewers rated the film, giving it an overall rating of 9.7 out of 10. One hundred and thirteen posted written reviews, with all but one giving it 10 stars out of 10. (The one exception gave it a 9.)

Here are some:
"This may be the best documentary I've ever seen — I am a professional filmmaker. This is one of, if not the most important film of the 21st century. I do not say that lightly. Everyone has to see this. It's truly life changing. It's a film full of heart, victory, unity, truth, and true patriotism — You'll never be so proud to be an American. Don't pass on it."

"This movie is like an alarm clock — Some people might not like what they are hearing when they watch it but that doesn't change the fact that it is time to wake up. I applaud the courage, the genius, and the love and compassion that went into the making of this important film."

"Thank you for giving us the opportunity to watch a wonderful film that rejects the victim narrative that the Democrats try and push on the black community. This film is so powerful and deserves so much positive recognition. I had high expectations for this film, and it EXCEEDED my expectations!!"

"A clean, wonderfully informative production. I was aware of some of the notions put forward in this film but by no means whatsoever was I ready to be immersed with just so much factually unequivocal depth! Truly eye-opening and fantastic to see such a diverse array of characters, each with their own insights and anecdotes. A straightforward and rather in-your-face approach to demolishing the left's insistence on minority control. Superb production, cast and motive. Regardless of your political leaning, this no holds barred piece definitely gets the mind racing and questioning all that we are inundated with in the media."

"This honestly made me cry. I cannot believe I didnt know this!!! The denigration of the black family by liberal supremacy makes me sick. Arent these the same people who control all of Hollywood, 95% of the media, and big tech. They have used violence and trickery to gain their power ... my heart is aching!"

"A MASSIVE EYE OPENER! I'm a documentary junkie and this is one of the greatest I've seen. Extremely well put together, talking to some truly inspirational, intelligent, and motivated individuals who in my opinion holds the key to elevate Americans to the next level, regardless of race. Will be watching again."

To see "Uncle Tom," just go to UncleTom.com. Let me know what you think.


Larry Elder

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/07/uncle-tom-movie-larry-elder/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



'Incident' damages construction near Iranian nuclear site - News Agencies and ILH Staff


by News Agencies and ILH Staff

An "incident" damaged an under-construction building near the Natanz nuclear site, but no damage was caused to its centrifuge facility, Iranian spokesman says.


'Incident' damages construction near Iranian nuclear site

The Natanz nuclear site in Iran | Photo: Reuters




Centrifuge machines in the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in central Iran 
(Atomic Energy Organization of Iran via AP)
An "incident" damaged an under-construction building Thursday near Iran's underground Natanz nuclear enrichment facility, though it did not affect its centrifuge operations or cause any release of radiation, an Iranian spokesman said.

The affected building, described as an "industrial shed," was above ground and not part of the enrichment facility itself, said Behrouz Kamalvandi, a spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. The state-run Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Kamalvandi as saying there was "no need for concern" over the incident.

"There is no concern about the possibility of contamination as one of the sheds, which was inactive and under construction, was damaged and not the facility itself," Kamalvandi told IRNA.

However, there was no previously announced construction work at Natanz, a uranium enrichment center some 250 kilometers (155 miles) south of the capital, Tehran. Natanz includes underground facilities buried under some 7.6 meters (25 feet) of concrete, which offers protection from airstrikes.
Natanz is among the sites now monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency after Iran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers. The IAEA did not immediately respond to a request for comment over the incident.

Last week, a large explosion from an area in the mountains east of Tehran, which analysts believe hides an underground tunnel system and missile production sites, shook the Iranian capital.

Natanz, in Iran's central Isfahan province, hosts the country's main uranium enrichment facility. There, centrifuges rapidly spin uranium hexafluoride gas to enrich uranium. Currently, the IAEA says Iran enriches uranium to about 4.5% purity, above the terms of the nuclear deal, but far below weapons-grade levels of 90%.

The US under President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the nuclear deal in May 2018, setting up months of tensions between Tehran and Washington. Iran now is breaking all the production limits set by the deal, but still allows IAEA inspectors and cameras to watch its nuclear sites.

However, Natanz did become a point of controversy last year as Iranian officials refused to allow an IAEA inspector into the facility in October after allegedly testing positive for suspected traces of explosive nitrates. Nitrates are a common fertilizer. However, when mixed with proper amounts of fuel, the material can become an explosive as powerful as TNT. Swab tests, common at airports and other secure facilities, can detect its presence on the skin or objects.


News Agencies and ILH Staff

Source: https://www.israelhayom.com/2020/07/02/incident-damages-construction-near-iran-nuclear-site/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



National security law: facing disqualification, or worse, Hong Kong opposition groups head into uncertain election season - Natalie Wong


by Natalie Wong

Hopes for Legco triumph in September cloud over as new law introduces major potential hurdles for candidates from localist and pan-democrat camps


Veteran opposition politician Lee Cheuk-yan is surrounded by riot police during an illegal demonstration against Hong Kong’s new national security law on July 1. Photo: Sam Tsang

Veteran opposition politician Lee Cheuk-yan is surrounded by riot police during an illegal demonstration against Hong Kong’s new national security law on July 1. Photo: Sam Tsang
Hong Kong’s localist and pan-democrat politicians face an uncertain future ahead of September’s Legislative Council elections, as the newly passed national security law has effectively empowered authorities to disqualify candidates and halt their overseas activities.
Analysts warned that even if mainland authorities choose not to wield their sweeping power against candidates who fail to demonstrate loyalty to the regime, the law’s ambiguity could create a chilling effect on their campaigns all the same.

I cannot simply say what acts or speeches will disqualify a person. The most important thing is to act according to the law Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam


Localists, an emerging force in Hong Kong politics in recent years, suffered the first blow, as activist group Demosisto and seven other groups that had advocated for self-determination or independence disbanded local operations or shifted overseas before the law even took effect.


But that public step back cannot fully allay their concerns, as the stiffer-than-expected law covers not only activities in Hong Kong but actions outside the territory, including those taken by non-permanent residents, according to Article 38.
It was also unclear if their connections with foreign groups would put them afoul of Article 29, which states that anyone who “receives instructions, control, funding or other kinds of support from a foreign country or an institution” to commit collusion would be in violation of the law.
Activists Nathan Law Kwun-chung and Joshua Wong Chi-fung, who earlier vowed to run for September’s elections under the Demosisto umbrella, said their recent withdrawal from the group would not deter them from running as independent candidates.

Law said he believed Beijing had deliberately made the scope of offences “extremely broad” to threaten pro-democracy politicians, but that he would not step back from the “international battle line”.
Nathan Law (centre), seen with fellow activists Agnes Chow and Joshua Wong, testified via video conference for the US Congress’ House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday, an act that could put him afoul of the new national security law. Photo: K.Y. Cheng
Nathan Law (centre), seen with fellow activists Agnes Chow and Joshua Wong, testified via video conference for the US Congress’ House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday, an act that could put him afoul of the new national security law. Photo: K.Y. Cheng
Law and exiled activist Brian Leung Kai-ping testified via video conference before the United States Congress’ House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday night about the new security law’s implications, the first local political activists to address a high-profile foreign audience since the legislation took effect.
“Participating in the hearing at such a critical time carries certain risks. No matter how my acts comply with international standards and diplomatic logic, I’m not sure if my testimony will be considered as ‘evidence’ of national security law offences,” Law said on his Facebook page before attending the meeting.
While the opposition camp has never held a majority at Hong Kong’s Legislative Council, last year’s anti-government protests propelled them to a landslide victory in November’s district council elections, seeding hope they could do the same at Legco.
With less than three months before September’s polls, the picture of who will run is slowly coming into focus, with primaries in mid July to decide pro-democracy candidates for 35 races across the city’s five directly elected geographic constituencies.

With the nomination period approaching in the later half of this month, Civic Party lawmaker Tanya Chan said the opposition camp faced uncertainty given clauses in the new law that could strip candidates of their right to run for office.
According to Article 35, any resident convicted of security national offences will be banned from running in local elections, while lawmakers, government officials and public office holders will be immediately evicted from their posts if found guilty.
“Does it mean stripping political rights permanently? I dare not say,” Chan said.
Her ally Dennis Kwok, a lawmaker from the legal sector, earlier said he “expected to be ousted” from the legislature, after repeated attacks by Beijing officials who claimed he had violated his oath by stalling the election of the House Committee chairperson.
When asked if someone found guilty of a national security law offence would be disqualified from public office for life, Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng Yeuk-wah failed to give a definitive answer, but hinted it was possible, as the law states no time frame for the penalty.
The city leader, Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, also said that whether a candidate is disqualified from office for objecting to the new security law would be “determined case by case”, as the power to disqualify lies with the electoral officers.
“I cannot simply say what acts or speeches will disqualify a person. The most important thing is to act according to the law,” she said on Wednesday.
Pan-democratic lawmakers hold a press conference to condemn the new national security law for Hong Kong on July 1. Photo: May Tse
Pan-democratic lawmakers hold a press conference to condemn the new national security law for Hong Kong on July 1. Photo: May Tse
In 2016, six opposition lawmakers were disqualified from taking their seats after the High Court ruled they had taken their oaths improperly.
But even if allowed to run, the law’s ambiguity could influence would-be lawmakers’ campaign messages, according to Dixon Ming Sing, a political-science professor at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.
“They will have to act and speak very cautiously in public, especially concerning their stances about the national security law and other government policies, as the offences were defined very sweepingly,” he said.
“Provoking hatred by unlawful means” towards the Hong Kong or central governments could constitute collusion under Article 29, he noted, while “seriously interfering in, disrupting, or undermining” government activities could be subversion under Article 22.

Chinese University political scientist Ivan Choy Chi-keung said the disbandment of political groups advocating for independence and democratic self-determination will deprive some voters, particularly younger ones, of their favoured candidates.

“If [these groups] are suppressed and gone, young people will feel very frustrated,” Choy said, adding it was hard to gauge if the votes would go to others in the opposition.

Additional reporting by Sum Lok-kei and Lilian Cheng


Natalie Wong

Source: https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3091433/national-security-law-facing-disqualification-or-worse-hong

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Obama Judge Frees 'Palestinian' Al Qaeda Backer Who Recruited Dirty Bomb Terrorist - Daniel Greenfield


by Daniel Greenfield


To Judge Wolford, the terrorist isn’t a threat to Americans, but Americans are a threat to him.




Not long after 9/11, Adham Amin Hassoun, a Lebanese 'Palestinian' computer programmer, was arrested at a Florida traffic stop. The arrest had been a long time coming.

Hassoun had entered the United States on a student visa in 1989 and quickly got involved in Islamic terrorism. By the early 90s, the FBI had noticed Hassoun because of his conversations with the Blind Sheikh, the Islamic cleric at the center of the World Trade Center bombing and even larger terror plots targeting New York City landmarks.

The Blind Sheikh was the leader of Gamaa Islamiya or the Islamic Group, a Muslim Brotherhood splinter terrorist group responsible for horrifying atrocities like the brutal Luxor Massacre of foreign tourists, including women and children, where  the Islamists had tortured young girls, cut off ears and noses, and left a note praising Islam inside a disemboweled body.

Despite, or perhaps, because of their atrocities, the Islamic Group won the support of leftist advocates like Lynne Stewart: the National Lawyers Guild member who was convicted of helping the Blind Sheikh relay guidance to his terror group from prison.

"The FBI has identified Hassoun as a focal point for communications among persons associated with AGAI and with the international radical fundamentalist community. He has been a major fundraiser for extremist Muslim causes in Chechnya and Bosnia and, since as early as 1994, is believed to have recruited... 'mujahideen,' for those conflicts." the FBI's counterterrorism section chief had warned.

According to the FBI report, Hassoun had been a member of Gamaa Islamiya. By the second half of the decade, he had moved on to Al Qaeda acting as a registered agent for the Benevolence International Foundation. Despite its ‘benevolent’ name, BIF was a front for Al Qaeda and its name originated with an organization run by Bin Laden’s brother-in-law.

After the Saudis shut down BIF, it headed to Florida, where Hassoun helped out.

Hassoun had become quite fond of Osama bin Laden. “May Allah protect him,” he told one of his collaborators during a phone conversation after the Al Qaeda leader had threatened to carry out attacks against America in a CNN interview.

Experts at Hassoun’s trial later noted that the Islamist had called Bin Laden, “Abu Abdullah”, a name usually used by Al Qaeda members and close supporters.

"We have captured a known terrorist who was exploring a plan to build and explode a radiological dispersion device, or 'dirty bomb,' in the United States," Attorney General John Ashcroft announced in 2002.

The terrorist in question was Jose Padilla, a convert to Islam, and the man who recruited him  was Hassoun. When a top Bin Laden lieutenant exposed Padilla’s plans, the feds finally took down  Hassoun and the Islamic terror cell with its coded conversations about soccer matches in Somalia, tourism to conflict zones, and checks with memos for Kosovo or Chechnya.

Hassoun also owned an illegal handgun and had allegedly given an order to kill a woman.

Along with Padilla, and other associates, Hassoun was convicted of conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim persons in a foreign country, as well as conspiring and providing material support to terrorists.

By then, Hassoun had been living for nearly two decades in the United States, despite coming here on a student visa, and had spent much of that time involved with Islamist terror groups.

And the court sentenced him to 15 years in prison.

Hassoun’s prison term ended in 2017. The United States had already tried to deport him in 2002. It tried to deport him yet again, but Lebanon wouldn’t take him back because it doesn’t recognize its fellow Arab ‘Palestinians’ as citizens, even though he came from there and his family still lives there. Meanwhile the US has provided over $100 million in aid to Lebanon.

ICE has been stuck with Hassoun for three years because it can’t deport him or release him.
"You assumed a leadership role in a criminal conspiracy to recruit fighters and provide material support to terrorist groups, and because you remain a continuing threat of recruiting, planning, and providing material support for terrorist activity," an ICE letter to Hassoun noted.

Meanwhile, the Islamist has become a popular case for lefty allies of Islamic terrorists. The media chose to ignore Hassoun’s past while accusing President Trump of trying to permanently detain him. Its current stories about Hassoun portray him as a victim of Trump’s abuse of the Patriot Act while neglecting to mention his praise for Bin Laden, only support for “militants”.

Meanwhile his lawyer claimed that Hassoun just wanted to be with his family, even though his wife and children are living in Lebanon.

While the legal basis for detaining Hassoun is crystal clear, Judge Elizabeth A. Wolford, an Obama appointee, decided that the convicted conspirator couldn’t possibly be a threat.

"If he really is the person that is depicted in the FBI director's letter, the concept that the government just wants to send him to some other country and let him on the loose,” Judge Wolford argued. "It doesn't hold together."

That would be a better argument if her own boss hadn’t freed Taliban leaders and countless other Gitmo detainees, despite the risk they posed, because he wanted to close Gitmo.

Wolford isn’t that stupid. No one involved in the criminal justice system could be.

The FBI and other national security agencies frequently know a lot about an Islamic terrorist’s activities that they can’t bring into court or that would successfully lead to a conviction.

Jose Padilla, the terrorist Hassoun recruited, was accused of trying to assemble a dirty bomb, but the evidence could never be brought into court because it was taken from an Al Qaeda senior lieutenant through an interrogation process that isn’t legal in the United States.

Jailhouse informants have even suggested that Hassoun may still be up to his old tricks.

But the Obama judge chose to dismiss their statements as hearsay and to order ICE to release the convicted terror supporter by Thursday, while censoring the location where he will live in Florida to protect Hassoun from the American people, insisting that he poses no threat.

To Judge Wolford, Hassoun isn’t a threat to Americans, but Americans are a threat to him.

"The Court also is not persuaded that Petitioner’s criminal convictions show that there is a risk of irreparable harm," Wolford's decision sneers. "The underlying conduct that served as the basis for those convictions ended almost twenty years ago."

To whatever extent it ended, it did so because Hassoun was locked away behind bars. Now that will no longer be the case. The Lebanese immigrant spent much of his life as a free man in this country engaged in the promotion and support of Islamic terrorism. From his ties to the Islamic Group to his role in distributing Jihadist magazines and then his enthusiasm for Al Qaeda, his record has been consistent. Just as consistent as Obama’s record in enabling terrorism.

Wolford’s decision is yet another gift to Islamic terrorists from its biggest political backer.


Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/07/obama-judge-frees-palestinian-al-qaeda-backer-who-daniel-greenfield/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Black Lives Matter: "We Are Trained Marxists" - Part I - Soeren Kern


by Soeren Kern

Black Lives Matter is a Marxist revolutionary movement aimed at transforming the United States into a communist dystopia

  • Black Lives Matter is a Marxist revolutionary movement aimed at transforming the United States into a communist dystopia. BLM states that it wants to abolish the nuclear family, police, prisons and capitalism. BLM leaders have threatened to "burn down the system" if their demands are not met. They are also training militias.
  • "Cutting the LAPD budget means longer responses to 911 emergency calls, officers calling for backup won't get it, and rape, murder and assault investigations won't occur or will take forever to initiate, let alone complete." — Los Angeles Police Protective League, the city's police union.
  • "White people are so confused in America.... If there is systematic racism today it is a racism against white people, in the sense that white people are told that they are responsible for all the evils in the world...." — Dr. Carol M. Swain, university professor and advisory board member of Black Voices for Trump.
  • "We are all human beings in God's image. Black Lives Matter and Antifa and organizations like that will not help us transcend racism and classism and the 'isms' that they are concerned with. There are things that can be done in the black community, but the most important thing is helping people realize to how important their own attitudes are..." — Dr. Carol M. Swain.

Black Lives Matter is a Marxist revolutionary movement aimed at transforming the United States into a communist dystopia. BLM states that it wants to abolish the nuclear family, police, prisons and capitalism. BLM leaders have threatened to "burn down the system" if their demands are not met. They are also training militias. Pictured: A man carries and upside-down US flag with "BLM" written on it, at a protest march in Boston, Massachusetts on June 22, 2020. (Photo by Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images)

A recent survey by the Pew Research Center found that more than two-thirds of Americans support the Black Lives Matter movement. The high level of backing raises the question of how much the public knows about BLM.

On the surface, BLM presents itself as a grassroots movement dedicated to the noble tasks of fighting racism and police brutality. A deeper dive shows that BLM is a Marxist revolutionary movement aimed at transforming the United States — and the entire world — into a communist dystopia.

This is the first of a two-part series, which reveals:
  • BLM's founders openly admit to being Marxist ideologues. Their self-confessed mentors include former members of the Weather Underground, a radical "leftwing" terrorist group that sought to bring a communist revolution to the United States in the 1960s and 1970s. BLM is friendly with Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, whose socialist policies have brought economic collapse and untold misery to millions of people there.
  • BLM states that it wants to abolish: the nuclear family; police and prisons; heteronormativity; and capitalism. BLM and groups associated with it are demanding a moratorium on rent, mortgages and utilities, and reparations for a long list of grievances. BLM leaders have threatened to "burn down the system" if their demands are not met. They are also training militias based on the militant Black Panther movement of the 1960s.
  • BLM, which is not registered as a non-profit organization for tax purposes, has raised tens of millions of dollars in donations. BLM's finances are opaque. BLM's donations are collected by ActBlue, a fundraising platform linked to the Democratic Party and causes associated with it. Indeed, BLM leaders have confirmed that their immediate goal is to remove U.S. President Donald J. Trump from office.
  • Most importantly, the main premise of BLM is based on a lie — namely that the United States is "at war" with African Americans. Blacks are not being systematically targeted by whites. Fifty years after the signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, more than three in four Americans, including most whites and blacks, agreed that real progress has been made in getting rid of racial discrimination. Scholars have noted that BLM's inability to produce solid empirical evidence of systemic racism explains why its leaders continue to "broaden and deepen" the indictment to include the entire American social and political order.

BLM in its Own Words

"We actually do have an ideological frame. Myself and Alicia [Garza] in particular, we're trained organizers. We are trained Marxists. We are super versed on ideological theories." — BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors, July 22, 2015.

"If this country doesn't give us what we want, then we will burn down this system and replace it. All right? And I could be speaking figuratively. I could be speaking literally. It's a matter of interpretation.... I just want black liberation and black sovereignty, by any means necessary." — BLM activist Hank Newsome, June 25, 2020.

"Stay in the streets! The system is throwing every diversionary and de-mobilizing tactic at us. We are fighting to end policing and prisons as a system which necessitates fighting white supremacist capitalist heteropatriarchal imperialism. Vet your comrades and stay focused." — BLM Chicago, Twitter, June 16, 2020.

"There's no such thing as 'blue lives.' There is no hue of a blue life. Being a police officer is an occupation. It's a job. 'All lives matter'— it's like saying the sky is blue. I haven't heard how police are on the right side of history." — BLM co-founder Alicia Garza, ktvu.com, March 30, 2018.

"It's hundreds of years of generational oppression and trauma and infrastructural racism that impacts our bodies and makes our bodies more vulnerable to something like a COVID-19." — BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors, Hollywood Reporter, June 2, 2020.
"We say #DefundThePolice and #DefundDepOfCorrections because they work in tandem. The rise of mass incarceration occurred alongside the rise of militarized and mass policing. They must be abolished as a system." — BLM Chicago, June 13, 2020.

"We are anti-capitalist. We believe and understand that Black people will never achieve liberation under the current global racialized capitalist system." — Movement for Black Lives (M4BL), of which BLM is a part, June 5, 2020.

"'All Lives Matter,' is little more than a racist dog whistle that attempts to both delegitimize centuries of claims of global anti-Black oppression and position those who exhibit tremendous pride in their Blackness as enemies of the state. Well, we are enemies of any racist, sexist, classist, xenophobic state that sanctions brutality and murder against marginalized people who deserve to live as free people." — Feminista Jones, BLM activist.
"We stand with Palestinian civil society in calling for targeted sanctions in line with international law against Israel's colonial, apartheid regime." — BLM UK, June 28, 2020.
"We are an ABOLITIONIST movement. We do not believe in reforming the police, the state or the prison industrial complex." — BLM UK, June 21, 2020.

"Yes, I think the statues of the white European they claim is Jesus should also come down. They are a form of white supremacy. Always have been. In the Bible, when the family of Jesus wanted to hide, and blend in, guess where they went? EGYPT! Not Denmark. Tear them down." — BLM leader Shaun King, June 22, 2020.

"We are living in political moment where for the first time in a long time we are talking about alternatives to capitalism." — Alicia Garza, BLM co-founder, March 2015.
"Anti-racism is anti-capitalist, and vice versa. There are no two ways around it. To be an anti-racist must demand a complete rejection of business as usual. An end to racism demands transformation of the global political-economic setup." — Joshua Virasami, BLM UK, June 8, 2020.

Brief History

Black Lives Matter began in July 2013, when George Zimmerman, a 28-year-old neighborhood watch coordinator of Hispanic-German descent, was acquitted of homicide charges in the 2012 fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-old black high school student, in Sanford, Florida.

Alicia Garza, a black woman from Oakland, California, posted to Facebook what she described as a "love letter to black folks." She wrote: "I continue to be surprised at how little black lives matter. Black people. I love you. I love us. Our lives matter." Patrisse Cullors, a black woman from Los Angeles, California, then put Garza's Facebook post on Twitter, with the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter. After seeing the hashtag, Opal Tometi, a first-generation Nigerian American woman from Phoenix, Arizona, partnered with Garza and Cullors to establish an internet presence. Tometi purchased the domain name and built BLM's digital platform, including social media accounts, where they encouraged people to tell their stories.

The hashtag #BlackLivesMatter gained national attention in August 2014, after the fatal shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, by Darren Wilson, a white police officer. The hashtag was ubiquitous during riots in November 2014, when a grand jury decided not to indict Wilson. By 2018, the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter had been tweeted over 30 million times.

Since its beginnings seven years ago, Black Lives Matter has grown into a movement with nearly 40 chapters and thousands of activists in the United States, Canada and Great Britain. What began as an effort to seek justice for black people has become far more expansive — and more radical — in its demands.

What's the Agenda?

BLM's worldview is based on a mix of far-left theoretical frameworks, including critical race theory and intersectional theory. Critical race theory posits that racism is systemic, based on a system of white supremacy and therefore a permanent feature of American life. Intersectional theory asserts that people are often disadvantaged by multiple sources of oppression: their race, class, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, and other identity markers.
Black Lives Matter and other purveyors of critical race theory and intersectional theory reject individual accountability for behavior, criminal or otherwise, because, according to them, blacks are systemic and permanent victims of racism. Such racism, according to BLM, can only be defeated by completely dismantling the American economic, political and social system and rebuilding it from scratch — according to Marxist principles.
Black Lives Matter seeks to replace the foundational cornerstones of American society: 1) abolish the Judeo-Christian concept of the traditional nuclear family, the basic social unit in America; 2) abolish the police and dismantle the prison system; 3) mainstream transgenderism and delegitimize so-called heteronormativity (the belief that heterosexuality is the norm); and 4) abolish capitalism (a free economy) and replace it with communism (a government-controlled economy).

Abolish the Traditional Nuclear Family

In its policy agenda, Black Lives Matter states that it is committed to abolishing the traditional nuclear family:
"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and 'villages' that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable."
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels rejected the traditional family because, according to them, the nuclear family, as an economic unit, sustains the capitalist system. Engels wrote: "The care and education of the children becomes a public affair; society looks after all children alike, whether they are legitimate or not."


Many experts have noted that African Americans need stronger, not weaker, families. In March 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, then an Assistant Secretary of Labor under U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson, wrote a groundbreaking report, which focused on the roots of black poverty in the United States. The report linked the many problems plaguing African Americans — crime, joblessness, school failure, out-of-wedlock births — to the breakdown of the traditional nuclear family.

When the Moynihan Report was written in 1965, 25% of black children in the United States were born out of wedlock. Fifty years later, in 2015, more than 75% of black children were born out of wedlock, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

Twenty years after the Moynihan Report, Glenn Loury, the first black economist to earn tenure at Harvard University, lauded Moynihan as a prophet:
"The bottom stratum of the black community has compelling problems which can no longer be blamed solely on white racism, and which force us to confront fundamental failures in black society. The societal disorganization among poor blacks, the lagging academic performance of black students, the disturbingly high rate of black-on-black crime, and the alarming increase in early unwed pregnancies among blacks now loom as the primary obstacles to black progress."
Thomas Sowell, an African American economist and social theorist opined that the Moynihan Report of 1965 "may have been the last honest government report on race." By contrast, African American civil rights activists criticized Moynihan for "blaming the victim."

Abolish Police and Prisons

BLM states that it wants to "defund" and ultimately "abolish" police and prisons in the United States. Police officers would be replaced by educators, social workers, mental health experts and religious leaders, who, according to BLM, would bring down the levels of crime.

In an interview with Newsweek, BLM co-founder Cullors said:
"The freedom of mostly white affluent people is predicated on the unfreedom of black people. So, law enforcement is not actually used to keep black people safe. They're used to patrol, occupy, harass, abuse, often hunt and mostly, what we've seen is kill our communities.
"Policing and incarceration are part of a continuum. The policing is the first response and then incarceration is the last response. And these two systems rely on each other very, very deeply. We have to be working on getting rid of both systems."
In an interview with the Hollywood Reporter, Cullors explained that she is not merely an activist but a modern-day abolitionist:
"An abolitionist believes in a world where police and prisons are no longer weaponized as a tool for public safety."
BLM co-founder Opal Tometi, in an interview with The New Yorker, claimed that policing in America has its roots in managing slavery and therefore is systemically racist. She explained:
"We have been fighting and advocating to stop a war on black lives. And that is how we see it — this is a war on black life. And people understand that this system is filled with all sorts of inequality and injustice, and that implicit bias and just outright racism is embedded in the way that policing is done in this nation — and when you think about it historically, it was founded as a slave patrol. The evolution of policing was rooted in that...."
Washington, D.C. Police Chief Peter Newsham has warned that underfunding police departments could cause an increase in excess force by police officers:
"The number one thing that contributes to excessive force in any police agency is when you underfund it. If you underfund a police agency, it impacts training, it impacts hiring, it impacts your ability to develop good leaders."
The Los Angeles Police Protective League, the city's police union, said that budget cuts would be "extremely irresponsible":
"Cutting the LAPD budget means longer responses to 911 emergency calls, officers calling for backup won't get it, and rape, murder and assault investigations won't occur or will take forever to initiate, let alone complete."
Polls show that most Americans — including most blacks — do not share BLM's views on abolishing the police. A recent Rasmussen's report found that 63% of American adults "regard being a police officer as one of the most important jobs in our country today." Furthermore, 64% are concerned that the current anti-police sentiment will lead to fewer people willing to become police officers, and that it will "reduce public safety in the community where they live." Importantly, according to the Rasmussen report, "Blacks (67%) are the most concerned about public safety where they live, compared to 63% of whites and 65% of other minority Americans."

Abolish Heteronormativity

BLM's policy agenda states:
"We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender [a term for people whose gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth] privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence....
An academic study titled, "The 'Queering' of Black Lives Matter," describes in great detail how issues of sexual identity and gender orientation have taken priority over BLM's original focus on police brutality. The heavy focus on sexuality has led to accusations that BLM is "a gay movement masquerading as a black one."

Two of the three founders of BLM describe themselves as "black queer females." One, Alicia Garza, is married to a biracial transgender male. Patrice Cullors describes herself as "polyamorous." In interview after interview, Garza and Cullors raise the issue of "black trans and gender nonconforming people," often to the exclusion of police brutality.

In an interview with The New Yorker, Garza said that she is not interested in the American tradition of live and let live: "We want to make sure that people are not saying, 'Well, whatever you are, I don't care.' No, I want you to care. I want you to see all of me."

Abolish Capitalism and the "Patriarchal" System

BLM equates capitalism with racism in the same way that its Antifa cousins equate capitalism with fascism. BLM's views on capitalism are based on the concept of "racial capitalism," a term created by the late Cedric Robinson, who posited that capitalism and racism are two sides of the same coin: both are, according to Robinson, dependent on slavery, violence, imperialism, and genocide.

The British wing of Black Lives Matter UK states: "We're guided by a commitment to dismantle imperialism, capitalism, white-supremacy, patriarchy and the state structures that disproportionately harm black people in Britain and around the world."

The Movement for Black Lives (M4BL), an "ecosystem" of over 170 Black-led organizations, including BLM, states:
"We are anti-capitalist: We believe and understand that Black people will never achieve liberation under the current global racialized capitalist system."
M4BL demands "a reconstruction of the economy to ensure Black communities have collective ownership" and "a progressive restructuring of tax codes at the local, state, and federal levels to ensure a radical and sustainable redistribution of wealth."

M4BL also demands reparations for past and continuing harms:
"The government, responsible corporations and other institutions that have profited off of the harm they have inflicted on Black people — from colonialism to slavery through food and housing redlining, mass incarceration, and surveillance — must repair the harm done. This includes:
"Full and free access for all Black people (including undocumented and currently and formerly incarcerated people) to lifetime education; a guaranteed minimum livable income for all Black people; reparations for the wealth extracted from our communities through environmental racism, slavery, food apartheid, housing discrimination and racialized capitalism."
The demands of BLM and M4BL are similar to those found in the Communist Manifesto, which include:
"Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes; A heavy progressive or graduated income tax; Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan."

BLM's Immediate Demand

BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors recently confirmed that the immediate goal is to remove U.S. President Donald J. Trump from office:
"Trump not only needs to not be in office in November, but he should resign now. Trump needs to be out of office. He is not fit for office. And so, what we are going to push for is a move to get Trump out. While we're also going to continue to push and pressure Joe Biden around his policies and relationship to policing and criminalization. That's going to be important. But our goal is to get Trump out."

Evaluations of BLM's Agenda

In an interview with Chanel Rion of One America News Network, Dr. Carol M. Swain, a university professor, public intellectual, and advisory board member of Black Voices for Trump, said:
"It's very clear to me that the Black Lives Matter organization is about something much bigger than black people, that it really is pushing a socialist, Marxist agenda.
"White people are so confused in America. I hate to say it like that but I don't know any other way to say it: They want to signal to black people that they care and the only way they feel like they can do that is to agree with the slogan, which is a true statement, that black lives matter in the same way that all lives matter. White lives matter, brown lives matter, but they can't separate the slogan, which is a true statement, from an organization that has a goal that I believe is ultimately destructive to America.
"There is something very wrong when they argue that racism is permanent. If it's permanent, then there is nothing you can do about it. That white skin is property that means that people who just happen to have been born white they have property that gives them advantages over blacks.
"If there is systematic racism today it is a racism against white people, in the sense that white people are told that they are responsible for all the evils in the world, that racism is permanent, and the only way they can redeem themselves is by divesting themselves of their whiteness. It involves a shaming of young white people, if you have white skin you're supposed to have all these white privileges. I contend that there is black privilege, brown privilege, that it's really about social class. The sooner we get away from defining everything, even the police brutality, as racism, the sooner we can bring everyone together as Americans.
"We are all human beings in God's image. Black Lives Matter and Antifa and organizations like that will not help us transcend racism and classism and the isms that they are concerned with. There are things that can be done in the black community, but the most important thing is helping people realize to how important their own attitudes are. I would argue that a person's attitudes are more important than race, gender, social class in determining whether or not they are going to be successful."
Columnist Josh Hammer wrote that the American system of governance and way of life is under existential threat by groups such as BLM and Antifa:
"The modern left, in thrall to the anarchists of Antifa and the Marxists of Black Lives Matter, has positioned itself as a political movement that stands athwart the American regime. At an institutional level, Democratic Party leadership is increasingly a dog wagged by the tail that is Antifa and Black Lives Matter. And that tail, as is openly conceded in moments of candor, is resolutely opposed to the idea of America itself. There is no alternative way to comprehend the ardent desire of those insurrectionists who, channeling the very worst of Mao's Cultural Revolution, would deface and demolish societal tributes to the man who wrote the Declaration of Independence (Jefferson) and the man who brought to fruition its ideals (Lincoln). Could we ask for a more clarion demonstration of the dripping disdain with which the left views the entire American project?
"We are now in the midst of a cold civil war between Americanists, proud defenders and preservers of the American regime and way of life, and the civilizational arsonists who seek to burn that regime and way of life into the ether. Yes, we are in a fight for America's soul — but we are also in a fight for America itself."
Part II of this series will examine BLM's ideological influences, its activities and its sources of funding.


Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16181/black-lives-matter

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter