Saturday, July 24, 2021

Why are we bailing out the terrorism-supporting Palestinians? - Shoshana Bryen


by Shoshana Bryen

The government of Israel will make whatever decision it chooses to make on this, but as the U.S. government is heavily invested, it is appropriate to ask some questions.

Deputy assistant secretary of state Hady Amr, Biden administration envoy to Israel and the Palestinians, went on a mission to help Palestinians.  He asked Israel to take steps to alleviate "Palestinian suffering" and help the Palestinian economy.  What he really meant was to help Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority strongman.  The Biden administration sees Abbas as a partner in some future "peace process."  Amr told Israeli officials, "I have never seen the Palestinian Authority in a worse situation," comparing it to "a dry forest waiting to catch on fire," as reported by  The Times of Israel.  Amr proposed several unspecified measures the Israeli government could take to help the Palestinian economy and strengthen Ramallah's standing.

In addition, Israel's Haaretz reported, "Amr also sought collaboration to bring humanitarian relief to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, which is still reeling from the aftermath of the latest round of fighting with Israel in May."

The government of Israel will make whatever decision it chooses to make on this, but as the U.S. government is heavily invested, it is appropriate to ask some questions.

Why should Israel help Hamas-controlled Gaza?  Presumably, because Israel has more resources.  Then ask the question the other way: why might it decline to help?  Perhaps because the entire Palestinian political, economic, and social mess is the result of deliberate policies of the governments of the West Bank (Palestinian Authority) and Gaza (Hamas) to impoverish their own people and kill Israelis.

That's why.

The U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem said Amr's visit "was guided by the objective of the United States to advance equal measures of freedom, security, and prosperity for Israelis and Palestinians alike in ways that are tangible and achievable in the near term and beyond."  He discussed "issues ranging from human rights and the rule of law, economic development, energy, water and regional cooperation."  Israel doesn't need Amr to achieve those goals for citizens of the state of Israel, so this was directed at changing governance in Palestinian territories.

Why should Israel help? Presumably, because Israel has more resources.  Why might it decline to help?  Possibly because despite billions in aid and mountains of promises, neither Hamas nor Fatah acts to construct an open, economically successful society because both are fundamentally corrupt and totalitarian — not to mention terrorist and terrorist-supporting.  Outside economic and social support (whether Israeli, European, or American) allows both Hamas and Fatah to pursue their ultimate goal of eliminating Israel.

That's why.

Add to this the fact that the "latest round of fighting" did not, contrary to Haaretz, "break out" like a thunderstorm.  It was ginned, fanned, planned, and executed by both Hamas and Fatah.  The Washington Post claims that the war began on May 10, but the paper is late.  Beginning on April 2, Fatah engaged in a media campaign to incite violence against Israelis, calling for riots, stabbings, and general mayhem — which ensued.  At the end of April, Hamas began firing rockets into Israel from Gaza.  In May, Hamas fired ever greater numbers of rounds into Israel (4,300 in all, about 10% of which landed inside Gaza).  May 10 is just the date Israel began to fire back.  Eleven days later, there was a ceasefire, largely brokered by Egypt.

In the weeks since then, Hamas has been victory-dancing in Gaza.

Fatah has found itself in yet another political crisis brought on by its own malfeasance.  Palestinian people demonstrating over canceled elections, general repression, and lack of COVID treatment (particularly after the P.A. declined 700,000 vaccine doses that were eagerly taken by South Korea) have been severely attacked by Palestinian Authority police.  The death of Palestinian activist Nizar Banat while in P.A. custody increased the size and scope of demonstrations.  The level of police violence against unarmed protesters actually drew expressions of concern from the U.N. high commissioner for human rights and the U.S. State Department.

In addition, P.A. president Mahmoud Abbas poked his middle finger up at Israel and the United States.  He announced that the P.A. will continue its policy of paying stipends to those who commit acts of terror against Israelis without respect to Israeli or American laws that forbid either to pay into the P.A. while "pay for slay" continues.  He defended the P.A. policy to a group of American congresspeople as a form of welfare for their families.  The delegation's response was to ask whether the P.A. offers similar stipends to families after a parent dies of cancer.  Good question.

The Palestinian people are in a wretched situation brought on by a) their own leadership in both Hamas and Fatah and b) the perpetual call by the United States for Israel to do something about it.

Amr insists, but that U.S. policy will not be to twist arms, and "the sides will be expected to take their own initiative."  Unfortunately, it appears that U.S. policy also will not honestly assess the culpability of Palestinian leadership or find a way to navigate other than looking for more money to throw down the rathole.

Image via Pexels.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.


Shoshana Bryen


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Teaching School Children the Evil of Whiteness - Richard L. Cravatts


by Richard L. Cravatts

School books that promote a hatred of white people and police.


In a 1963 interview with Louis Lomax, Nation of Islam spokesman Malcolm X, commenting on white people, said that “The white devil’s time is up . . ,” and that “Anybody who rapes, and plunders, and enslaves, and steals, and drops hell bombs on people . . . anybody who does these things is nothing but a devil.” NOI’s Louis Farrakhan has often repeated the same slur about white people being satanic, and such language has long been part of the organization’s radical, anti-white discourse and ideology.

What is surprising, however, is that this same view—of whiteness being linked to the devil in a satanic pact through which white people are given supremacy, power, and wealth—has made its way into a children’s book used in school districts all over the country.

Written by a white woman, Anastasia Higginbotham, Not my Idea: A Book About Whiteness (Ordinary Terrible Things), at first appears to be an innocuous picture book about race, but its not-so-subtle “anti-whiteness” message is part of the race indoctrination being promoted in public schools as part of critical race theory (CRT) and the ideology which teaches children that white people are irredeemable racist oppressors and blacks are perpetual victims of that oppressive white supremacy and racism. Not My Idea tells the story of a white family in which the white parents shelter their child from the reality of police violence against black people, the suggestion being that white people turn a blind eye to this form of racial injustice and, in not standing up against it and teaching their children to do so also, they are complicit in that injustice and in perpetuating white supremacy.

Higginbotham (pictured above) clearly was inspired by her self-loathing at being white and presents her assumptions as facts for the young readers in her book. “Whiteness is the reason these killings by police happen,” she said in an interview, “the white cultural mindset that tells us white is good and innocent, while Black is bad and dangerous.”

She also has apparently bought into the false and dangerous view, promoted most notably by the Black Lives Matter movement, that white police officers frequently and maliciously kill unarmed black people because of systemic and prevalent racism, a belief, however, that is not actually supported by facts or reality. “Whiteness is the reason cops make split-second decisions to fire their weapons into the body of an unarmed person who is Black,” Higginbotham suggested, “while not even reaching for their weapon during interactions with armed and violent criminals who are white.”

CRT clearly has as its guiding intention to change what Higginbotham referred to as “the white cultural mindset that tells us white is good and innocent, while Black is bad and dangerous.” In fact, CRT and books like this one have as their express purpose to flip this paradigm on its head, so that children are now being indoctrinated with the idea that whiteness is essentially bad, negative, oppressive, cruel, and racist, and that blackness, because of its victim status and as a result of its oppression, is virtuous and innocent. CRT does not teach tolerance by urging school children to be kind to each other and treat each other as equals, which it purports to do, but instead elevates blackness by degrading whiteness, making white people seem to be regressive, intolerant, hateful, and perennially racist as part of their very nature. Thus, CRT is condemned by its critics for branding white children in this way while at the same time telegraphing to black children that they are perpetual victims in a society dominated by whites who are morally defective as a result of their racist core.

Not My Idea has found its way into classrooms and on reading lists of more than 30 school districts in 15 states around the country, and critics are particularly troubled by one section of the book in which a white character with the red pointed tail of the devil presents a Faustian bargain with the book’s main character with a "Contract Binding you to Whiteness." After announcing that “WHITENESS IS A BAD DEAL, It always was,” children read the satanic contract which, for the white recipient, promises offers of “stolen land,” “stolen riches” and “special favors,” presumably derived from, and to the detriment of, people of color. In exchange for “WHITENESS  [which] gets” “your soul,” the recipient is able “to mess endlessly with the lives of your friends, neighbors, loved ones and all fellow humans of COLOR” and, of course, “for the purpose of profit,” reinforced graphically with the image of a $20 bill blazoned behind the contract and flames of hell.

Documents for a lawsuit by the Southeastern Legal Foundation, Deemar v. Board of Education of the City of Evanston/Skokie (“District 65”), noted that “in 2020 and 2021, all teachers from Pre-K through fifth grade [in the ditsrict] were instructed to read aloud” from Not My Idea, including such views that “Racism is a white person’s problem and we are all caught up in it . . ;” “Even people you love may behave in ways that show they think they are the good ones . . ;” “In the United States of America, white people have committed outrageous crimes against Black people for four hundred years . . ;” and “White supremacy has been lying to kids for centuries.”

The lawsuit further revealed how teachers purposely use the book to indoctrinate students with the notion of the permanence and evil of white supremacy. “District 65,” the lawsuit read, “also instructed fifth grade teachers to repeat out loud to students, ‘The author says that grown ups hide scary things from kids because they are scared too. This is called burying the truth . . . It is something many White people do to ignore racism when they feel uncomfortable.’” Additionally, those same teachers were instructed “to repeat out loud to students, ‘Pretending not to see color is called color blindness. Color blindness helps racism. . . . Many White people use color blindness to ignore the problem of racism.’”

Imagine for a moment the paroxysms of outrage that would arise were the language of this book changed and the devil in the story had made a contract with another ethnic group, as it did here with white people, along with language that defined what characteristics that group would have. Would language be tolerated by teachers and school boards that described Muslims, for example, as perpetually engaged in jihad against infidels, who subjugate women and behead and stone unbelievers and apostates, who do not accommodate other faiths and demand that other religions live in dhimmitude, and who are the most frequent perpetrators of terrorism? What if the story was revised and instead of white people it was Jews making the contract with the devil, for which they were given control of the media, ownership of banks and great wealth, dual loyalty to the U.S. and Israel, and the ability to initiate and profit from all wars? Would educators notice that bigoted language?

Or, even more relevant to this discussion about race, if the devil had contracted with black people in this story and attributed to them behavior which included over-representation in prison populations and the commission of crimes, fatherless homes, high percentages of black children born out of wedlock, low academic achievement compared to other ethnic groups, and a breakdown of the nuclear family in black communities, how would teachers react to that list of ascribed characteristics and what is the likelihood that such a book would ever find its way onto a public school reading list in the first place? Of course, none of these alternate versions would ever be adopted by educators precisely because, even if some of the assertions are truthful, they are animated by toxic stereotypes and bigotry and would be immediately rejected by any schools, woke or otherwise.

Another children’s book, Something Happened in Our Town (A Child's Story About Racial Injustice) is being used by educators to promote the notion that white law enforcement is biased against black people and randomly and frequently murders black people without cause. In the book, children read about an unarmed black man who is shot by police accidentally, even though, as Michael Brown was alleged to have done, held his arms up to surrender. When a little girl asks, “why did the police shoot that man?” her father replies that “the police thought he had a gun.” But the girl’s sister contends that “It wasn’t a mistake.” “The cops shot him because he was Black.”

Moreover, according to the girl’s mother, although “shooting him was a mistake,” “It was a mistake that is part of a pattern.” And what is this pattern the book suggested guides law enforcement in its interaction with black people? The mother suggests that “this pattern is being nice to White people and mean to Black people. It’s an unfair pattern.” Further, the book suggested, “cops stick together and don’t like black people” and the victim who was shot and killed by the police in the story “wouldn’t even have been stopped if driver was white.”

Older children are introduced to another popular, though problematic book, Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You, co-authored by Jason Reynolds and the controversial “anti-racist” Ibram X. Kendi.  In theEducators Guide, Ages 12 and Up” for the book, teachers are instructed to push radical views onto students, including the idea that public education itself is racist and “Racist ideas rooted in legislation shape the institution of education and its outcomes for Black children, while the nation’s leaders assert that color blindness is the solution for racism.”

“In Stamped,” the guide continued in suggesting what the key themes are that should be taught in the classroom, “Reynolds exposes and debunks the myths of several master narrative themes such as: America is a meritocracy and anyone who works hard enough can succeed; truth and justice (or law and order) should be valued; people should be colorblind.” Even some of the core values and virtues which define the United States are attacked in the suggested lesson plans, including the notion in the book that “Racist ideas, along with economic greed, are central to the formation of this nation, its laws, policies, and practices. Meritocracy and the American Dream narrative are rooted in whiteness.”  

Virtue signaling teachers and school boards who select and use these types of books to divide children and make them more aware of the color of their skin, and more aware of what their peers think about them depending on whether they are black or white, are clearly not promoting tolerance or racial justice, as many of them purport to be doing.

In fact, they are violating both the intent and spirit of 14th Amendment protections which guarantee equal protection to all citizens. CRT divides the world into black and white, with specific and permanent characteristics assigned to each group of children depending on their skin color, exactly what the courts have found to be in violation of the law.

“Classifications of citizens based solely on race,” the Court found in a 1993 decision, “are by their nature odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon the doctrine of equality, because they threaten to stigmatize persons by reason of their membership in a racial group and to incite racial hostility,” something which, it would seem, would be antithetical to the mission and purpose of public education, especially in the pursuit of racial equity and social justice.  


Richard L. Cravatts, Ph.D., a Freedom Center Journalism Fellow in Academic Free Speech and President Emeritus of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, is the author of Dispatches From the Campus War Against Israel and Jews.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The White House Attack on Free Speech - Terence P. Jeffrey


by Terence P. Jeffrey

What type of speech will Biden ask Facebook to suppress next?


"They're killing people."

That was the simple declarative sentence President Joe Biden uttered in response to a question a reporter asked him as he left the White House on Friday.

"On COVID misinformation, what's your message to platforms like Facebook?" the reporter had shouted as the president was walking toward Marine One.

Biden turned and walked directly toward the reporter.

"They're killing people," he said.

"I mean, it really — look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated," he said. "And they're killing people."

At her regular briefing the day before, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki had explained how the administration was working with social media companies, including Facebook, in the hope of getting them to adopt what she called "a robust enforcement strategy" against COVID-19 misinformation.

"Can you talk a little bit more about this request for tech companies to be more aggressive in policing misinformation?" a reporter asked Psaki. "Has the administration been in touch with any of these companies? And are there any actions that the federal government can take to ensure their cooperation, because we've seen, from the start, there's not a lot of action on some of these platforms?"

"Sure," Psaki responded. "Well, first, we are in regular touch with these social media platforms, and those engagements typically happen through members of our senior staff, but also members of our COVID-19 team, given, as (Surgeon General Vivek) Murthy conveyed, this is a big issue of misinformation, specifically on the pandemic."

Then she made a very specific claim which is memorialized at 17 minutes and 30 seconds into C-SPAN's online video of the briefing.

"We're flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation," Psaki said.

Psaki went on to explain that the administration had "proposed changes" for Facebook and other social media companies.

"There are also proposed changes that we have made to social media platforms, including Facebook, and those specifically are four key steps," Psaki said.

The first one, she said, is "that they measure and publicly share the impact of misinformation on their platform. Facebook should provide, publicly and transparently, data on the reach of COVID vaccine misinformation."

The second change the White House proposed for Facebook and other social media companies was what Psaki called "a robust enforcement strategy" against those who engage in COVID-19 vaccine misinformation.

"Second, we have recommended — proposed that they create a robust enforcement strategy that bridges their properties and provides transparency about the rules," said Psaki.

"There's about 12 people who are producing 65% of anti-vaccine misinformation on social media platforms," Psaki said. "All of them remain active on Facebook, despite some even being banned on other platforms, including ones that Facebook owns."

Psaki did not name these 12 people.

The next thing the White House wanted, Psaki explained, was for Facebook and other social media companies "to move more quickly to remove" posts deemed "harmful."

"Third, it's important to take faster action against harmful posts," said Psaki. "As you all know, information travels quite quickly on social media platforms; sometimes it's not accurate. And Facebook needs to move more quickly to remove harmful, violative posts. Posts that will be within their policies for removal often remain up for days. That's too long. The information spreads too quickly."

The final thing the White House wants Facebook to do is "promote" what the White House calls "quality information."

"Finally, we have proposed they promote quality information sources in their feed algorithm," said Psaki. "Facebook has repeatedly shown that they have the leverage to promote quality information. We've seen them effectively do this in their algorithm over low-quality information and they've chosen not to use it in this case. And that's certainly an area that would have an impact.

"So, these are certainly the proposals," Psaki said. "We engage with them regularly and they certainly understand what our asks are."

Obviously, a person can make a true statement about a particular subject or a false one. They can also make a statement that presents a reasonable hypothesis based on facts, or that presents an unreasonable hypothesis based on the same facts.

Or they can make an unreasonable hypothesis based on no facts or on blatant falsehoods.

But whatever the merits or demerits of a person's thoughts and conclusions, when they express those thoughts and conclusions, they are invariably engaging in speech.

What does Biden want Facebook to do with speech related to COVID-19?

As summarized by Psaki last week, the administration is "flagging problematic posts for Facebook" that the administration believes are spreading "disinformation" and that "Facebook needs to move more quickly to remove."

Then, as Psaki put it: "We have proposed they promote quality information sources in their feed algorithm."

Now, put this in the context of a subject other than COVID-19 where human lives are also at risk.

In its latest annual report, Planned Parenthood said that in fiscal year 2019, its affiliates did 354,871 "abortion procedures."

In a 2012 vice presidential debate with former Rep. Paul Ryan, as this column has noted before, Biden presented a scientific fact as if it were a religious position.

"Life begins at conception," Biden said. "That's the church's judgment. I accept it in my personal life."

On its Facebook page, by contrast, Planned Parenthood presents abortion as a form of "health care" provided by "heroes."

"Abortion is an essential part of health care," Planned Parenthood said on Facebook on July 17.

"Abortion providers are heroes," it said in a March 11 posting.

Does Biden — who said life begins at conception — believe it is misinformation to call the deliberate taking of a human life "health care" and those who do that taking "heroes"?

Does he believe Facebook needs to take action "against harmful posts" that promote the taking of unborn lives?


Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor in chief of


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Monkey Business from China – COVID Part Two? - Brian C.Joondeph, MD


by Brian C.Joondeph, MD

Are we catching a glimpse of COVID history beginning to rhyme with itself?

Mark Twain is believed to have uttered this profundity about history, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” Are we catching a glimpse of COVID history beginning to rhyme with itself?

Today’s story is, “Veterinarian dies in China from rare monkey virus.” Substitute “ophthalmologist” for “veterinarian” and “bat” for “monkey” and see if you can hear the rhyme from early 2020.

A year and a half ago, in February 2020, shortly after President Trump banned travel to the US from China, we learned of this story: “Li Wenliang: Coronavirus kills Chinese whistleblower doctor.” He was a Wuhan hospital ophthalmologist who in December 2019 sent a message to fellow doctors through a chat group warning of seven cases he had seen of a virus causing symptoms resembling the SARS virus from 2003.

Four days later he was summoned to the Public Security Bureau, coerced into signing a letter of confession for “making false comments” that had “severely disturbed the social order.” A month later he was diagnosed with coronavirus and a week later he died. What a coincidence.

The next part of rhyming history is how his medical observations were treated by the state. China uses its “Public Security Bureau” while in the US we have Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Brian Stelter to determine truth. Credit China for being honest about state-sponsored censorship, unlike doublespeak from the American ruling class.

The Chinese veterinarian who recently died worked in, “A research institute that specialized in nonhuman primate breeding, the report from the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention said.” He was infected with Monkey B virus, a nasty pathogen with a 70 to 80 percent mortality rate in humans.

The good news is, “There has only been one known case where the Monkey B virus has been transmitted from human to human, in Florida in 1987.” That rhymes with what the World Health Organization assured us of at the same time the Chinese ophthalmologist was “disturbing the social order”.

The WHO tweeted in January 2020, “Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan.” How did that turn out?

YouTube screen grab

Was this only one case of monkeypox far away in China? No. A few days ago we learned that the CDC was investigating in Texas, “A case of an unusual virus called monkeypox in a traveler coming from Nigeria.” Just a coincidence? Maybe or maybe not.

Days later it is worse. The New York Post reports that the CDC is monitoring for monkeypox, 200 people in 27 states who were exposed to the Nigerian man.

Texas public health officials quickly decided this was nothing to be concerned over, saying "We have determined that there is very little risk to the general public." This statement has a familiar rhyme from last year.

In February 2020, when Dr, Fauci was beginning his never-ending media tour, he told a USA Today reporter, “Risk of coronavirus in USA is 'minuscule'; skip mask and wash hands.” How did that turn out?

There was a short-lived outbreak of monkeypox in the US in 2003, due to a shipment of animals from Ghana. Monkeypox is similar to the Ebola virus in that it is of high lethality but low transmissibility. Such viruses often kill their host before the virus can replicate and spread, making outbreaks short lived.

Smallpox vaccination is also 85 percent effective in preventing monkeypox. Routine smallpox vaccination ended in the US in 1972 with eradication declared in 1980, meaning many Americans are immune to both smallpox and monkeypox. Unless this is not your father’s monkeypox.

What if virology laboratories are playing with these pox viruses, research into transmission or vaccines, or gain of function research as was done with coronaviruses in the Wuhan Institute of Virology?

One intelligence report states, “Dozens of countries are conducting research involving animal pox viruses, according to a descriptive survey performed for the U.S. intelligence community’s Open Source Center.”

Dr. Fauci certainly understands this type of research. He was a co-author on a 2005 paper acknowledging, “The potential threat of the smallpox virus as a bioterror weapon has long been recognized, and the need for developing suitable countermeasures has become especially acute following the events of September 2001.”

Here is a video of Dr. Fauci discussing “gain of function research” back in 2013, research that he denied funding in recent Senate testimony.

Rumble Video screengrab

The Wuhan Institute of Virology is also no stranger to these viruses. One such example is a 2014 paper from that institute looking at “cell to cell spread of vaccinia virus”, a virus within the pox virus family.

Let me be clear that it is appropriate for public health officials like Dr. Fauci and virology institutes to study viruses to better treat and prevent future outbreaks. If the research, however, has a more nefarious purpose, or if adequate safeguards are not in place to prevent inadvertent release of these deadly agents, or if the responsible parties obfuscate or lie, complicating or delaying the response to such an outbreak, that is when the benefits of such research fly out the window.

An even more interesting rhyme is the timing of vaccine development and the pandemic treated by said vaccine. As reported in the Daily Mail, “Chinese military scientist filed a patent for a COVID-19 vaccine BEFORE the virus was declared a global pandemic.” Undoubtedly another coincidence.

In September 2019, the FDA approved a smallpox and monkeypox vaccine as, “The only currently FDA-approved vaccine for the prevention of monkeypox disease.” If smallpox is eradicated, that leaves only monkeypox. Why spend time and money developing a vaccine for a rare pathogen? Another coincidence. Another rhyme.

Hopefully, this monkeypox news is nothing, just a normal blip in the world of viruses. But given the track record of government officials and agencies in misleading at best, outright lying at worst, these news reports set off alarm bells, especially in a world recovering from a horrific viral pandemic and draconian government response.

Was COVID a fluke of nature? Or was it a controlled and managed pandemic? Was it simply a means of getting rid of President Trump and his agenda or was it part of a “great reset”? Is the pandemic still working or is it losing steam, in need of a “booster shot” of sorts?

Is it time for another scare? Could monkeypox be COVID part two, the booster shot? Hopefully not but time will tell.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.

Brian C.Joondeph, MD is a physician and writer.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Capitol Breacher Gets 8 Months - Matthew Vadum


by Matthew Vadum

Conservatives go to prison; leftists go home.


Paul Allard Hodgkins was sentenced to 8 months in prison this week after pleading guilty to felony-level obstruction of an official proceeding for supposedly interrupting the congressional count of Electoral College votes that took place during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on January 6 of this year.

Hodgkins’ is the first felony conviction to arise out of the events that the mainstream media insist on inaccurately describing as an “insurrection.”

Contrast the treatment of the non-violent Hodgkins with what happened when Islamist-socialist Linda Sarsour and her band of screaming protesters disrupted another official proceeding in 2018, in this case the confirmation hearing of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

“At least 227 demonstrators were arrested between the start of the nomination hearings on Tuesday and the end of testimony on Friday, according to the U.S. Capitol Police. Most of those charged this week with disorderly conduct, crowding or obstructing paid fines of $35 or $50,” NPR reported at the time.

The lesson here with this double standard on official proceeding-disrupting appears to be that conservatives who do it go to prison, but leftists who do it go home. Many of the people arrested in connection with January 6 are still rotting in jail awaiting trial.

Essentially, what Hodgkins did was trespass and demonstrate without permission on the Senate floor where he stood for 15 minutes waving a pro-Trump flag and taking selfies.

He did not wield a weapon, threaten anyone with injury, or intimidate anyone into abandoning the electoral vote count that was in progress when the breach began. He merely seized an opportunity to make a political statement in an abandoned Senate chamber after others had forced their way in.

Prosecutors openly acknowledged in their sentencing memorandum filed July 14, 2021, in United States of America v. Hodgkins, case 1:21-cr-00188 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, “that Hodgkins did not personally engage in or espouse violence or property destruction[.]”

Hodgkins deeply regretted what he did and confessed early in the process. “[H]e accepted responsibility early and in a fulsome manner, and he has taken significant steps toward his rehabilitation,” according to the memorandum.

According to USA Today, Hodgkins “said he had no plans to enter the Capitol when he traveled to Washington to attend Trump's rally earlier in the day, but he got swept up in the march along Pennsylvania Avenue. Once inside the Capitol, he said, he apologized to police officers for the trouble and he offered medical care to an injured rioter.”

“I can say without a shadow of a doubt that I am truly remorseful and regretful for my actions in Washington," Hodgkins reportedly told the court. “This was a foolish decision on my part that I take full responsibility for."

Sarsour, on the other hand, a co-founder of the Women’s March, reveled in the waves of adoring publicity she received from the mainstream media, acknowledging its role in advancing her cause, whatever that happened to be for the America-hating anti-Semite at that moment.

“Disrupting the hearings was a way for us to go directly into the homes of the American people to say, ‘We will not be silenced and you need to be as outraged as we are,’” she said.

Sarsour said “the women who have been arrested over the last few days” helped to generate “political will for Senate Democrats to show some moral courage.”

She took credit for Sen. Cory Booker’s (D-N.J.) decision to make public a memo on racial profiling drafted by Kavanaugh but labeled “Committee Confidential,” which meant it was not intended to be circulated outside senators on the committee.

“We believe the movement helped encourage that,” Sarsour said, according to NPR.

This kind of political messaging isn’t much different from what Hodgkins and most of the unauthorized visitors to the Capitol building hoped to achieve.

They wanted to draw attention to the Democrat-led presidential election theft that ultimately allowed the senile left-winger Joe Biden to be installed as placeholder president under the auspices of the U.S. military.

Sarsour’s scheme failed to prevent Kavanaugh from being confirmed to the Supreme Court. The actions by the uninvited Trump supporters on January 6 didn’t work, either – in fact they backfired rather spectacularly as frightened lawmakers dropped their objections to certifying the election results when Congress got back to business a few hours after it abruptly recessed.

Yet Hodgkins finds himself behind bars as Sarsour remains free. Also free are most of the Antifa-Black Lives Matters rioters and looters and arsonists from last year who used public outrage over the death in police custody of a drug-addled loser in Minneapolis to get away with causing an estimated $2 billion in damage across America.

It hardly seems fair.

Strangely, the Obama-appointed judge who sentenced him also ordered Hodgkins to pay $2,000 in restitution to the government for a portion of the damage to the Capitol building, even though prosecutors admitted he did not cause it.

Rioters “injured over a hundred law enforcement officers and terrified individuals on scene that day, leaving significant emotional scars. They destroyed over $1.4 million in property. This number understates the extent of the property damage, as it does not include the irreparable and unquantifiable damage to artwork, statues, and other artifacts that were stolen or damaged,” stated the sentencing memorandum.

It was as if a tax had been assessed against Hodgkins because others who happened to be present in the Capitol at the same time destroyed government property.

U.S. District Judge Randolph D. Moss of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, condemned Hodgkins as a threat to the republic, attaching a great deal of meaning to the breach of the Capitol.

As if Hodgkins had been adhering to some kind of an Americanized Führerprinzip instead of merely being a justifiably pissed off loyal American citizen, Moss said that waving a Trump flag showed Hodgkins was loyal to one person, then-President Donald Trump, instead of to the country.

“Although Mr. Hodgkins was only one member of a larger mob, he actively and intentionally participated in an event that threatened not only the security of the Capitol but democracy itself,” Moss said, as reported by USA Today. "That is chilling, for many reasons."

Moss was appointed in 2014 by then-President Barack Obama after barely being confirmed by the U.S. Senate on a vote of 54 to 45.

Moss struck down then-President Trump’s Proclamation 9822, which limited asylum claims to those entering the United States at an officially designated port of entry. The policy was aimed at curtailing the flow of Central American migrants coming to the United States, many in international caravans through Mexico.

So, given the judge’s apparent inclinations and the mass hysteria prevalent in official circles in the nation’s capital, people who actually seem to believe Donald Trump was plotting a coup, maybe 8 months in prison was the best deal Hodgkins could get.

At times, the government’s sentencing memorandum read like a CNN report.

“The defendant, Paul Hodgkins, participated in the January 6, 2021, attack on the United States Capitol—a violent attack that forced an interruption of the certification of the 2020 Electoral College vote count, threatened the peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 Presidential election, injured more than one hundred law enforcement officers, and resulted in more than a million dollars’ worth of property damage,” the document stated.

Except the “peaceful transfer of power” was never in jeopardy at the hands of random Trump supporters running around the Capitol. The most the few who really did want to interfere with the process could hope for was a few hours’ delay in certifying the presidential winner. The government of the United States of America, the most powerful country on earth, with millions of employees scattered across the fruited plain, cannot be overthrown simply by shutting down Congress briefly.

And that $1-million-plus in property damage is insignificant in the scheme of things. That’s how much damage Antifa and Black Lives Matter did to property every few minutes after the death of the left’s newest patron saint, George Floyd.

“The government recognizes that Hodgkins did not personally destroy property or engage in any violence against law enforcement officers,” the sentencing memorandum continued.

“But he was surrounded by others who were doing both, and he entered the Capitol as others had paved the way with destruction and violence. Time and time again, rather than turn around and retreat, Hodgkins pressed forward until he walked all the way down to the well of the Senate chamber. Hodgkins came to D.C. preparing to encounter violence around him. He was a rioter, not a protester, and his conduct shows that he was determined to interfere with the vote count and the peaceful transition of power in the 2020 Presidential election. Hodgkins entered the Senate chamber, where he joined the chanting and ranting at the dais. This was precisely where, only 40 minutes earlier, the Vice President had been sitting at the desk on the elevated platform, surrounded by Senators who were considering a procedural issue related to the certification of the Electoral College vote. In the end, Hodgkins, like each rioter, contributed to the collective threat to democracy, physical safety, emotional well-being, and property on January 6, 2021.”

For this sensationalized account of January 6, prosecutors wanted to put this man who had no criminal record behind bars for 18 months.

They did not succeed.

Prosecutors also failed to put official proceeding disrupter Linda Sarsour behind bars.

They never even tried.


Matthew Vadum


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iranian Regime Empowered: Violating US Sovereignty, Kidnapping on American Soil - Majid Rafizadeh


by Majid Rafizadeh

The Americans, it seems, want to reward the mullahs for taking over Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq, the Gaza Strip and soon possibly Jordan -- so, what incentive is there for the mullahs to stop?

  • Why is the Biden administration continuing to negotiate with the mullahs of Iran to revive the nuclear deal and lift sanctions placed against them -- an act that would hugely strengthen their regime -- after the country, during nuclear talks, was caught plotting to kidnap a US citizen in Brooklyn, New York?

  • The message for the Biden administration, which has frequently proclaimed its intention to defend pro-democracy dissidents, is that a diet of US groveling and appeasement evidently will not deter Iran and other foreign dictatorships from launching increasingly hostile acts.

  • The Americans, it seems, want to reward the mullahs for taking over Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq, the Gaza Strip and soon possibly Jordan -- so, what incentive is there for the mullahs to stop?

  • Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Tehran appears to have been attempting to become the dominant hegemon not only in the Middle East.... but around the world. At the same time, it is sending a warning to its population that any opposition to the political establishment will be dealt with harshly.

  • Will the Biden administration ever see that, to bring peace to the region and, by expansion, to the rest of the world, negotiations, concessions and offering incentive packages to the mullahs simply will not work?

Why is the Biden administration continuing to negotiate with the mullahs of Iran to revive the nuclear deal and lift sanctions placed against them, after the country, during nuclear talks, was caught plotting to kidnap Masih Alinejad, a US citizen in Brooklyn, New York? Pictured: Alinejad speaks at the Women in the World Summit, at Lincoln Center on April 12, 2019 in New York City. (Photo by Mike Coppola/Getty Images)

Why is the Biden administration continuing to negotiate with the mullahs of Iran to revive the nuclear deal and lift sanctions placed against them -- an act that would hugely strengthen their regime -- after the country, during nuclear talks, was caught plotting to kidnap a US citizen in Brooklyn, New York?

Even The Washington Post pointed out that the attempted kidnapping should be a serious warning to the Biden administration:

"The message for the Biden administration, which has frequently proclaimed its intention to defend pro-democracy dissidents, is that Iran and other foreign dictatorships won't shrink from launching attacks inside the United States unless deterred.... As Ms. Alinejad told the New York Times, the Iranians 'are not scared of America — they're scared of me.'"

Evidently a diet of US groveling and appeasement will not deter Iran and other foreign dictatorships from initiating increasingly hostile acts.

U.S. prosecutors have charged four Iranians, Alireza Shavaroghi Farahani, aka Vezerat Salimi/Haj Ali, 50; Mahmoud Khazein, 42; Kiya Sadeghi, 35; and Omid Noori, 45, who are believed to be intelligence operatives for the Iranian regime, with plotting to kidnap the journalist, Masih Alinejad, who has dual American-Iranian citizenship,

A fifth person, Niloufar Bahadorifar, a California resident, again originally from Iran, was charged with allegedly providing financial assistance for the plot, sanctions violations conspiracy, bank and wire fraud conspiracy, and money laundering conspiracy. Audrey Strauss, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said:

"As alleged, four of the defendants monitored and planned to kidnap a U.S. citizen of Iranian origin who has been critical of the regime's autocracy, and to forcibly take their intended victim to Iran, where the victim's fate would have been uncertain at best."

By attempting to kidnap an American citizen on American soil, Iran was actively violating US sovereignty. Nevertheless, the Biden administration not only remains silent about the incident but announced after the attempted kidnapping that it will still keep pushing ahead to revive the grotesque 2015 nuclear deal, which not only permits Iran to possess an unlimited nuclear weapons after the deal's expiration date, but also lifts sanctions that are currently hurting the mullahs' economy. The Americans, it seems, want to reward the mullahs for taking over Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq and soon possibly Jordan -- so, what incentive is there for the mullahs to stop?

It is also extremely concerning that Tehran evidently has agents inside the United States.

The Iranian regime reportedly hired private investigators in Manhattan to surveil Ms. Alinejad and were planning to send her to Venezuela by boat and then on to Iran. The Justice Department explained the operation in detail:

"As part of the kidnapping plot, the Farahani-led intelligence network also researched methods of transporting Victim-1 out of the United States for rendition to Iran. Sadeghi, for example, researched a service offering military-style speedboats for self-operated maritime evacuation out of New York City, and maritime travel from New York to Venezuela, a country whose de facto government has friendly relations with Iran. Khazein researched travel routes from Victim-1's residence to a waterfront neighborhood in Brooklyn; the location of Victim-1's residence relative to Venezuela; and the location of Victim-1's residence relative to Tehran."

The Iranian regime has a magnificent relationship with Venezuela and continues to expand its military, political and economic ties with it. The regime has, in fact, been using Venezuela for years to increase its influence -- and the presence of its proxies -- in Latin America and North America. Venezuela has granted thousands of passports to Iranians -- documents that can then be used for travel to North America or Europe.

The US, it seems, only a few years ago, became concerned about the presence of Iran's proxies in Venezuela. Ambassador Nathan Sales, Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the State Department, said a bit more than a year ago:

"We're concerned that Maduro has extended safe harbor to a number of terrorist groups, the ELN [National Liberation Army] in particular, but also FARC [Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia] dissidents who rejected the peace accord, as well as supporters and sympathizers of Hezbollah."

Although this current incident is the first time the Iranian regime has been caught trying to kidnap a dissident on the US soil, it is not the first time that Tehran has attempted to kidnap, or lure dissidents and journalists back to Iran, or silence freedom of expression. A well-known dissident was executed in late 2020 in Iran. Rouhollah Zam, a journalist who lived in exile in France, and ran an online news site, Amad News -- his channel on the messaging app Telegram reportedly had more than a million followers -- was reportedly kidnapped by operatives working for the Iranian regime shortly after he left for Iraq on October 11, 2019.

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Tehran appears to have been attempting to become the dominant hegemon not only in the Middle East -- by constant maneuvers to control Lebanon, Syria, Iraq , Yemen, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip -- but around the world. At the same time, it is sending a warning to its population that any opposition to the political establishment will be dealt with harshly. Now, even being in the US is not safe anymore.

In other cases, Iran has assassinated dissidents on foreign soil and attempted to carry out terror plots. In July 2018, a foiled a terrorist attack in Paris targeted a large convention attended by this author as well as high-level speakers including former Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird. A few months later, in October, an Iranian diplomat and several other individuals of Iranian origin were arrested in France, Belgium and Germany for what French intelligence officials concluded was a foiled bomb plot, sponsored by the Iranian regime.

Now, the Biden administration -- in its transparent eagerness to resume negotiations over the hopeless JCPOA agreement entrenching Iran's nuclear breakout capability -- appears simply to have has emboldened the Iranian regime. Will the Biden administration ever see that, to bring peace to the region and, by expansion, to the rest of the world, negotiations, concessions and offering incentive packages to the mullahs simply will not work?


Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a business strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US foreign policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Heterodox Liberal Thinkers: Please Stop Throwing Us Conservatives Under the Bus - Charles Love


by Charles Love

Perhaps if we move beyond the both sides approach, and stop calling those we disagree with adversaries, we can build that free society we have been striving for since our founding.

For a long time, the battle lines of our current culture war were clearly partisan. As identity politics took hold and went from a political tactic to the hegemonic liberal view, fighting against the idea that race and gender should be part of every calculation was something the right-of-center largely did alone. But recently, a growing number of liberal and centrist thinkers are coming forward to denounce this view of American life, and as a black conservative, it's heartening to see. Many like me have grown weary at the progressive obsession with race, putatively on our behalf, and we welcome these new fellow warriors. It's undeniably encouraging to see left-leaning people beginning to speak out against a radical movement tearing at the fabric of America and seeking to divide us.

But as these heterodox liberals begin to find their voices, I want to urge them to resist a tendency I've been noticing that I think harms our mutual cause. It's the tendency to find a conservative to throw under the bus while making their case. And it undermines the crucial work of their criticism.

Here's how it usual happens: A liberal challenging a radical argument they disagree with will first offer up a rebuke of a conservative who actually agrees with them on the issue but who is cast as an ideological opponent. "Just because I don't agree with radical Leftists on this doesn't mean I'm a deplorable like this guy," they seem to be saying. "I'm a good liberal like you."

You saw this at work in the much-discussed Harper's letter last summer, which in opposing the illiberal Left made a point of calling out the Right in even harsher terms as a foil. "The forces of illiberalism are gaining strength throughout the world and have a powerful ally in Donald Trump, who represents a real threat to democracy. But resistance must not be allowed to harden into its own brand of dogma or coercion—which right-wing demagogues are already exploiting," read the letter.

Of course, it's understandable why these thinkers use this approach. When it looks like you're siding with your political adversary, you have to make it clear that you are not "one of them." If you want to point out a flaw on the Left, you must first make the point that you are not some evil conservative. As Jodi Shaw, the courageous woman at the center of a Smith College discrimination suit, told me in a recent interview, "Pointing out that I'm a liberal is like the price of admission to the conversation."

But there are several problems with this approach. It weakens your argument if you cannot articulate your concerns without bringing up a scapegoat to attack, and it limits your audience. Most of the people who use this approach are liberals and it's apparent they are speaking to other liberals. But if the goal is truly to improve the union, it cannot be good to ostracize people who share your view on the topic. (And truth be told, the more extreme liberals will not support you regardless of your points about the other side.)

Liberals seeking to push back against cancel culture and a moral panic around race are crucial at this moment. But what they're doing when they scapegoat the conservatives who got there long before they did is further strengthening the very powers and pressures they are trying to oppose. In other words, saying the equivalent of "Don't cancel me, I'm not with him" is just feeding the flames of the cancel culture mob which, more often than not, is made up of liberals.

cancel culture

Take Persuasion, a publication I truly respect, as I do all the liberals who have gotten caught in this trap. Persuasion, a truly excellent new publication that emerged from the ashes of the last eighteen months, describes itself as "the community for those who believe that a free society is worth fighting for." In The Perils of 180ism, Yascha Mounk, Persuasion's founder, opens by discussing an old Colbert Report skit on "Truthiness." Mounk had recently re-watched the skit and "realized that it could now describe a much broader cross-section of the ideological spectrum than he originally intended. Yes, it did and still does describe much of conservative America," writes Mounk. "But there are also plenty of slogans that my own friends and colleagues on the left parrot, even though they do (or should) know that they are misleading."

Like the other examples in this genre, Mounk's words read as a not-so-subtle rebuke of the Right, the foil he is using to show how terrible the Left has become: "The Right is obviously wrong and now we've become like them" is the implication. Mounk admitted as much in his piece: "Let me be abundantly clear," he wrote. "I do not believe that the two sides in America's great political fight are morally equivalent."

I have no doubt that Mounk and other heterodox writers have the best intent for the country. But following every attack on a leftist idea with, "Don't get me wrong, conservatives are worse!" or constantly dredging up former President Trump's misdeeds cannot be the path to unity or a reversal of our decline.

Those adopting this approach will likely argue that it is necessary to point out the flaws of both sides to remain objective and not come off as condoning bad behavior. Unfortunately, it often comes off as an attack on a large portion of the population, negating much of the positive intent of the argument.

It also creates a binary of us vs. them that does not reflect the views most Americans have on these complicated topics. While the goal is unity and inclusion, the approach leaves the majority of Americans despondent about both sides, which will lead to apathy rather than encouragement.

Perhaps if we move beyond the both sides approach, and stop calling those we disagree with adversaries, we can build that free society we have been striving for since our founding.

The views in this article are the writer's own.


Charles Love is the executive director of Seeking Educational Excellence, host of The Charles Love Show, and the author of the upcoming book Race Crazy: BLM, 1619, and the Progressive Racism Movement.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden to campaign for McAuliffe, who received $650K from teachers' unions promoting critical race theory - Houston Keene


by Houston Keene

McAuliffe has called the anti-critical race theory movement a 'conspiracy' by Republicans

President Biden  traveled northern Virginia on Friday to stump for Democratic candidate for governor Terry McAuliffe, as the Biden administration faces backlash this week for promoting critical race theory (CRT) in a school guidance document, and McAuliffe's ties to CRT-backed education organizations are under scrutiny.

Biden  traveled to the Old Dominion to campaign for McAuliffe, who is in a contentious race against Republican candidate Glenn Youngkin.

McAuliffe and the president have a friendship spanning four decades and will be spending time in Arlington, Virginia, just outside of Washington, D.C.


The president’s visit will serve as a test to see if Biden’s electoral success from 2020 can help McAuliffe as the former governor fields criticism for flipping on his stance on right-to-work laws after taking $2.2 million from labor unions.

Among the labor unions McAuliffe received campaign donations from, McAuliffe accepted $650,000 from two prominent critical race theory-promoting teachers' unions.

The National Education Association (NEA) — the largest teachers' union in America that recently adopted a measure saying they will "research" opponents of critical race theory — gave McAuliffe $400,000.

Additionally, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) gave McAuliffe’s campaign $250,000. Randi Weingarten, the president of AFT, recently said the union would protect members who teach critical race theory.

"Terry McAuliffe is bringing his corrupt brand of politics back for Round 2. Not only are his days filled with lies, hypocrisies, and rhetorical flip-flops*, but they are also filled with cozying up to political special interests that he will owe favors to if he is elected," Virginia GOP Chairman Rich Anderson said in an emailed statement to Fox News.

The chairman noted the asterisk was for a day "filled with the beach type flip-flop" when McAuliffe was in Nantucket.

McAuliffe has also came under fire for calling the anti-CRT movement a "conspiracy" created by Republicans.

"That's another right-wing conspiracy. This is totally made up by Donald Trump and Glenn Youngkin. This is who they are. It's a conspiracy theory," said McAuliffe in audio obtained by Fox News.

When asked for comment, the White House pointed to press secretary Jen Psaki’s previous statement on critical race theory in schools from the briefing room.

"Well, first, I would say that, as we've said many times before, we don't dictate or recommend specific curriculum decisions from the federal government," Psaki said in response to Fox News’ Peter Doocy on Thursday regarding DOE's promotions of a CRT-backed radical group in school guidance documents.

"That is and will continue to be handled at the local level, and we believe that the American people trust teachers to make those decisions, not government," she continued.

McAuliffe’s campaign did not respond to Fox News’ request for comment.


Houston Keene is a reporter for Fox News Digital


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

There's Something Happening Here...' - Andrew W. Coy


by Andrew W. Coy

There is a real sense of physical threat by the progressive government against the people. And there is a real arrogance by the powerful government elite that the populist masses, including the patriots, just cannot do anything about progressive abuse of power.

Stephen Stills's brooding and foreshadowing lyrics to the song "For What It Is Worth" from 1966 seem to bear a great deal of relevance today. 

The band Buffalo Springfield sang this song as a challenge to the political power structure in the late '60s. Stills's words seem to be very relevant and timely in 2021 as the patriots are left out of the election process and isolated from power, denied power, and are now looking around. 

Many patriots are now thinking "There's Something Happening Here," but are just not clear on what it is, what is coming, and what the results will be.  There is an undercurrent going on that is felt but not seen at this time.  Stills's words expressed great dissatisfaction with the national government, the estrangement of government from the discontented, and a sense that the government is ignoring and does not care about the masses. 

There is a real sense of physical threat by the progressive government against the people.  And there is a real arrogance by the powerful government elite that the populist masses, including the patriots, just cannot do anything about progressive abuse of power.  A real sense of estrangement, isolation, and unfairness that the outsiders felt in the '60s, is what the patriots (conservatives/Christians/constitutionalists) feel today. 

There appear to be many events happening all at once and closely linked that give hope.  And the people are aware and noticing. Patriots aren't sure whether these are storm clouds of disaster or maybe the sun is starting to shine in as an illuminator to disinfect.  It's unclear, but something is happening here.

It has become clear that voter fraud actually happened in Arizona.  There appears to be without question, enough evidence of fraudulent votes to swing the presidential election in Arizona.  And that most likely Donald Trump won that state.

A state senator from Arizona has now called for the electors to come back and revote in Arizona for president.  If there is a revote in Arizona, it gets real really fast.

There is now a synergy of force, energy, credibility, and legitimacy which gives the states of Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and now maybe even Michigan, for these states to have their own professional forensic audits that verify who actually won their states.  History might show Arizona as the lynchpin to the tectonic shift in the electoral college votes.

As we look around to see what is happening, as it becomes more and more evident that there was certain election fraud in very important contested purple states...the China COVID virus seems to be getting worse. It appears as we look around, that the more people start to believe Trump actually won, the more there is a push from the Progressives and blue states to wear masks (even if already fully vaccinated) and that they will probably shut down businesses and schools again.  False flag?

As we look around, we notice three events are happening simultaneously.  Critical Race Theory is teaching students to hate others based on race, progressive historians are saying America started in 1619 (because of the slave trade) not 1776, and statues are being pulled down of our Founding Fathers and heroes of American history.  The only explanation for this is to get Americans to hate their past, to loathe their own history and heroes; and thus dramatically change the future for America in a very dark way.  And not in a democratic republic-type way, but in a totalitarian way.

It now has become clear that within the January 6 "Stop the Steal Rally," there were actual FBI agents and informants of the Deep State that not only participated but led and encouraged the masses on that day.  FBI agents did not just watch and observe, they encouraged and led Trump supporters.  Therefore the FBI agents "set up" the Trump supporters on J-6.  Entrapment.

It is now clear that the Deep State police during the J-6 "Stop the Steal Rally" opened the doors, removed the barricades, and helped patriots to get inside of the Capitol building. The capitol police helped the Trump supporters to just walk right in, peaceably, like a middle school field trip.  Entrapment.

Thus at least to a certain extent, J-6 was a false flag operation run by the enemies of Trump, patriots, and a free and fair election.  The patriots underestimated the Deep State.

We now know that the military, which refused to patrol our southern border and their commander-in-chief because they said keeping illegal immigrants out of our country was not their job...are now willing participants in helping to fly illegal immigrants around America.  The military is helping to place people who have come into our country illegally, into the American heartland.  General Milley does not think it's the military's role to keep America safe...but it is the military's role to settle illegal immigrants inside of America.  Is General Milley so woke he harms American interests?  The number of illegal immigrants coming into America since Biden assumed office is approaching one million illegals.  Is the military the actual fifth column against free and fair elections?

The NSA has not denied that they are spying on Tucker Carlson.  Therefore, the NSA which was created to spy on our foreign enemies, are now spying domestically on American citizens.   Within the First Amendment is the freedom of the press.  The NSA spying on the press creates a chill that reminds everyone of 1984.  Where is the ACLU when it comes to intelligence agencies spying on Bill of Rights-protected Americans? 

How long might it be before members of the press like Tucker Carlson, Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, and Glenn Greenwald are put into jail as political prisoners of the regime.  Put into jail for the charge of disseminating  "political disinformation."  It would not be hard at all for the NSA, CIA, or FBI to create false information and place it on their personal computers.  Other regimes do just this.  Chilling.  BTW...again, where is the ACLU? 

As we stop and look around and ponder; and have been told for more than a year to follow the science, follow the science, follow the science.  No one, absolutely no one has explained the science of needing to wear a mask after being fully vaccinated.  Why are we being told and forced and mocked for not wearing masks if we are fully vaccinated?  Either the vaccines don't work, or something worse is happening here.    

American citizens are noticing that Biden has created an open border on our southern border allowing illegal immigrants from any country who can get there.  This includes terrorists from the Middle East.  Yet, the Biden administration announced that freedom seekers from communist Cuba will not be allowed entry into America.  So Biden is saying that if you are trying to escape communism and wanting capitalism and freedom in America, you are persona non grata.  But if you are MS-13 or child traffickers...come on in.  WT*.

The D.C. police are keeping the J-6 "trespassers" in jail under solitary confinement as if they are political prisoners.  Possibly, the progressives believe anyone who disagrees with them are now political prisoners.  A Democrat legislator in Congress did exactly what the "trespassers" did on J-6, and she is already out of jail, within 24 hours. Meanwhile, six months later, patriots are still under solitary confinement.  Again, where is the ACLU?

Biden has gone there. He is starting to use the words "civil war."  Three times in fact.  He has compared the patriots to the Confederates.  When the president uses language that compares his political opponents to rebels and thus treasonous, it becomes very dangerous to dissent.  Let history record, Biden used the words "civil war" first.  Leftist revisionists of history will ignore this down the road.  One knows for certain what the reaction would have been last week if President Trump used the words "civil war."  The populists are noticing the hypocrisy.

Biden has always said the vaccines were voluntary.  But now he is sending workers house to house, as the Gestapo or Chinese soldiers, to "convince" Americans to "take the jab."  Why, if there is nothing wrong with the vaccine, does it take the strong arm of the government to go house-to-house to "convince" Americans to be vaccinated? 

Americans of goodwill are noticing the unfairness and bias between how the summer violent rioters have been treated by the judicial system, compared to how the patriots are being treated because of their political differences with the progressives' Deep State.

Some well-known Trump supporters are saying very big news and that extremely important events will be happening this summer.  They are implying that President Trump will be placed back in office where he was rightfully elected.  Possibly by Labor Day Weekend.  It is hard to see how this occurs, but we are looking around.

Patriots are saying out loud that by August 13, something dramatic happens that creates a tectonic shift in the White House.  The date August 13th is being tossed about freely.  Thus, Americans and especially patriots, need to be fully prepared for a progressive "false flag."  Progressives will not just sit back and say "you caught us" and "we give up."  They will be prepared, much like J-6. 

Once Patriots are convinced after Arizona, then Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin...that the election was stolen, they will not "Let It Be."  Because if they were to "Let It Be,"  meaning the 2020 election to go unchallenged, they know 2022 and 2024 will be the exact same sham.  Fraud to win.

There is a feeling, there is a tension, there is an electricity in the air that something is up. There is a feeling that a great deal is happening below the surface for which we can't see, but can feel.  To paraphrase Stephen Stills in his 1966 song classic; there is something happening here in America today, what it is I'm not clear.  There is a government with guns and jails over there.  And millions of citizens with guns and ammo over here.  (Biden is the one who brought up civil war.)  Everybody needs to stop and look around to see what's going down.  The "battle lines are being drawn" and "step out of line, the men come and take you away."  Stills' foreshadowing classic still resonates and relates especially today.  Maybe today more than in about 50 years.  As human nature and the lust for complete  power does not change, history thus repeats itself, again and again.  What is happening now, we're just not clear.  But be sure to look around, because most assuredly, something is happening now.  For What It's Worth. 

Image: Screen shot, RHINO video, via YouTube

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.


Andrew W. Coy


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter