Tag Archives: educational indoctrination

"News Media", authoritarian swine, Culture, defense of others, Elsewhere, genocide, guns, hatred of Jews, Hollywood, Israel, Law, Media, Politics, Schools and campuses, Terrorism

Unexpected Allies and Well Known Enemies

January 30, 2024 Sheila Stokes

Let’s do the enemies first, and I’m guessing there will be no surprises as to whom they might be, but some of the actions might not be as well known. Gosh I don’t know why major media outlets aka #FakeNews are laying off people left and right…/sarcasm font.

While many nations around the world have stopped funding the antisemitic, anti-Israel UNRWA the Obiden crime junta actually has not. I list both, because one should remember, the goal of hamass is to kill Jews the world over, not just in Israel.

More Countries Suspend Aid To UNRWA After Allegations Employees Aided Attack On Israel

The United Kingdom and several other countries announced Saturday that they were suspending funding to the United Nations’ Relief and Works Agency for Palestine (UNRWA) after allegations that staff may have participated in the Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

Canada and the United States announced Friday that in the wake of the allegations they would temporarily pause funding to the agency, with the State Department saying that it was “extremely troubled by the allegations.” The U.K., Italy and Austria also followed suit this weekend and suspended their aid indefinitely, according to NBC News.

But not the terrorist funding Obiden junta, oh no. See, words don’t mean the same thing on the left as they do to normal people.

There’s a Major Catch to Biden’s ‘Pause’ on U.S. Aid to UNRWA After Terrorism Scandal

Similarly, you may have read that the Biden administration has frozen funds to UNRWA, the United Nations operation in Gaza, after explosive and credible allegations emerged that a dozen UNRWA employees were directly involved in the planning and execution of the October 7 Hamas massacre of Israeli civilians. The Trump administration stopped funding this deeply corrupt organization back in 2018, then Biden quickly restored the money upon taking office. Now that this move has blown up in his face, Biden has belatedly and apparently temporarily stopped the cash flow to UNRWA. But as we saw with the Houthis climbdown, there’s a catch:

Wow.@JerylBier discovered that the State Department saying they were pausing funding to UNRWA only applies to new commitments. They plan to continue to use US taxpayer money to fund current projects despite evidence of the group abetting terrorism. https://t.co/zXIfqouXVV

— AG (@AGHamilton29) January 28, 2024

On Friday, in response to allegations that employees of the UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees) had been involved in Hamas’s October 7 terrorist attack on Israel, the State Department announced that it had “temporarily paused additional funding” for the United Nations agency. The funding pause, however, applies only to new and additional funding, not funding already obligated before the pause went into effect on Wednesday, a State Department spokesperson told Pluribus. When asked for details on what obligations would and would not be affected by the pause, the spokesperson directed Pluribus to a fact sheet released by the State Department on January 16, 2024…The fact sheet reports that funding already committed or obligated to the UNRWA for fiscal 2024 for work in the West Bank and Gaza totaled $51 million as of January 16. Although the State Department did not directly answer questions about the amounts or the timing involved in distribution of funds, the spokesperson stated that “we are pausing any new or additional funding. Contributions to UNRWA that were not obligated as of January 24 are suspended, contributions to UNRWA obligated prior to this date remain in effect.”

Huh, color me shocked. It’s like the Obiden junta supports terrorism for both hamass and the Houthis…Course, it’s only money…taxpayer money, it’s not like it’s coming from the Biden crime family or anything.

Let’s have a closer look at UNRWA, there’s a video at the end of the source post as well.

1. UNRWA is a jihadist terror cult. For 70 years, it’s indoctrinated youth to hate, kill, and be disposable pawns in a battle to destroy Israel and beyond.

2. Thousands of it’s staff took part in or supported Oct 7th atrocities. This is a direct result of the billions in “aid” it spent on hate indoctrination and militarizing Gaza.

3. Instead of resettling its refugees, UNRWA forces them and all their descendants to be refugees forever. It indoctrinates kids to believe they must destroy Israel to ever have a home.

4. This perpetual refugee status is unprecedented and different than how all other refugees are treated – including the 100 million aided by UNHCR, the UN’s main refugee agency.

5. Israel is 0.3% of the Middle-East and is here to stay. The UNRWA jihad fantasy must end now. The rest of the region (10,000,000+ sq miles) should welcome its brethren.

6. In the past century, there were 1,000,000+ Jewish refugees from Arab countries. None are now seen as “refugees” or to have a “right to return”. They’ve all resettled in Israel or other countries.

7. Israel grants all Jews a “Law of Return” to their indigenous homeland. Most Arabs in Israeli territories came from Egypt or Jordan, which should offer them similar rights.

8. Funding UNRWA destroys the lives of Arab children who become indoctrinated with hate and violence for life. It destroys the societies where it operates, and brings forever conflicts to the region.

9. UNRWA is irredeemable. It’s aided and abetted the worst ideologies and atrocities for decades. Both Hamas and UNRWA must be eliminated for there to be a chance at real peace and stability.

Lousy organization correct? Not people you’d trust or want to be associated with, correct? Oh but if you’re the Obiden junta, they’re just the people you want.

I’m sure all Americans will be as safe with the NSC director as the Israelis were with Maher Bitar at UNRWA. Sure of it…..

https://twitter.com/i/status/1743450902755770497

But the threats to innocent Israelis comes not only from Gaza, but from Judea and Shomron (Samaria) as well as the arabs there are pining to have hamass move in and “govern” them as well. No, not for the elevated standard of living they brought to Gaza, but because their charter is all about killing Jews.

So America will help her ally, correct? There is a real threat in Judea and Shomron to the people living there.

The Palestinian Authority’s stealth attempt to take over Judea and Samaria. Believe me when I say the P.A. are not the peace partners the MSM aka #FakeNews pretends they are.

Diligently following a master plan worked out over 10 years ago, the Palestinian Authority is laying claim to large tracts of Israeli state land through illegal building. Resembling Potemkin villages, many structures stand empty, hollow, windowless, alone or clumped together. The land grab has been hugely successful because Israeli countermeasures have been so feeble, Jews living in the area tell JNS.

So the Jews living there need to be well armed to defend themselves and their towns. And the Obiden junta’s response?

Judea and Samaria leaders outraged as US sets conditions on rifle sales

Jerusalem reportedly “assured” the U.S. that 24,000 rifles destined for Israel would not go to volunteer defense forces in Judea and Samaria.

Biden Suspends Sale of 20K Rifles to ‘Violent Settlers’ following General Yehuda Fox’s ‘Secret Report’ <May he rot>

The Biden administration is once again holding up licenses for selling more than 20,000 US-made M16 rifles to Israel on the charge that they would be distributed to “violent extremist” settlers, Axios reported Wednesday night.

….

The sale is crucial not only to the settlers, who are only scantily armed and whose able-bodied men are serving, and dying, in Gaza. Israeli communities inside the Green Line, in the south, the north, but mostly in the center, are still vulnerable to terrorist attacks and deploy local standby response teams made up of local residents. They receive their weapons and training from the Police, and their need far outweighs the supply.

US said to delay shipment of weapons for security squads due to Ben Gvir’s conduct

The left, in Israel and America despise Ben Gvir, he loves Israel and Israelis! Oh shock! Oh horror of horrors!! He’s handing out rifles to people in Judea and Samaria!

I heard a great definition of “settler violence” recently. I think it’s a lot like “gun violence”. If a settler is walking down a road and sees an arab stealing a sheep and the Jew throws a rock at the thief, that’s “settler violence”. If the Jewish farmer (settler) is walking down the road and sees an arab stealing a sheep and the arab throws rocks at the Jewish farmer that is also “settler violence”. See how that works? In America if a concealed carry holder shoots the criminal that was trying to kidnap or assault them, that too is “gun violence”.

But, now onto the nicer part. Sometimes there are allies, people of moral courage that speak out when most of their industry has viciously attacked Israel. One such person is an actor, hopefully he still is anyway. He’s an American actor, Mark Pellegrino. ‘The rational people in the world support you’ | Actor’s message for the people of Israel

And honestly, there aren’t as many of those as one would have hoped….but coming from a Hollyweird actors, that took some courage.

‘You are fighting against forces of regression, that are anti-modernity, anti-western civilization, that are determined to throw back society to medieval times.’

Now this one will be a shocker, John Fetterman! The terrorist, murdering and raping supporters of hamass showed up apparently at Fetterman’s abode and started in with their indoctrinated chant. Fetterman (a non-Jewish member of the DNC) responded by going out on the roof of the building and waving the Israeli flag. I. AM. IN. SHOCK!! This required an extra cup of coffee to revive me.

And lastly, this very moving song comes from the group Five For Fighting, it’s called “OK”. This is not a Jewish group, this is a group that looked around at the moral decay that has been exposed in America by the acts of October 7^th and those around the world following it. October 7^th ripped the masks off many many things, and it has become a time for choosing. Apparently this member of the music industry sees things are not “ok”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDJXo2Gn-ww

Constitution, Law, mindset, Politics, Rights, Schools and campuses, SCOTUS, Voting

Defending the Constitution by Endorsing its Enemies?

October 19, 2022 Yitzhak Goldstein 3 Comments

How can one defend Constitutional integrity by endorsing the view of its enemies? How can one defend its meaning if ignorant of that meaning? The former is akin to an attorney telling the jury every word uttered by prosecutors with respect to his client’s guilt is true, but, find him not guilty anyway. The latter would be like a football team taking the field having spent zero time studying and learning their plays. Both are doomed to failure.

Chris Stigall is a conservative radio talk show host out in Kansas City, Missouri. The Pacific Legal Foundation, headquartered in Sacramento, California, is a conservative nonprofit defending American’s individual and property rights in Court against abuse by the federal government. I was able to pick up the Stigall Show on Monday 3 October 2022. He was interviewing an attorney for Pacific Legal about a pending case. During the discussion, she said, and Stigall agreed, under the Commerce Clause, the federal government has the authority to regulate anything that crosses state lines. Both are profoundly wrong. Prior to penning this refutation, I attempted to contact Stigall through several channels including his station manager, without success. That conservatives are ignorant of the Constitution to the point of endorsing interpretations counter to its meaning, is testament to public education’s success in teaching an imposter. The talk show host and attorney’s error possibly stem from a misapprehension with respect to America’s form of government, nature of delegated powers, state’s reserved powers, and meaning of the Commerce Clause.

America has a federal not national form of government. Although these terms are used interchangeably by teachers, they are, in fact, not at all the same. Under a national system, all power is consolidated in a central government and states comprise its regional subdivisions and have little or no autonomy. The central government makes all laws and applies them to states irrespective of local interests.¹ America has a federal system in which States created the general government and delegated to it finite powers. Its authority is limited to international relations, foreign trade, war, copyrights, and standardization of currency, weights and measures, and a postal system. States are not political subdivisions of the general government but retain independent authority within their boundaries.² They also have the right to take back powers they delegated to the federal government.³ States reserved all powers to themselves over domestic affairs. Federal and state power operate in separate autonomous spheres. Like trains, they run on parallel but separate tracks that do not intersect.⁴ States enumerated the federal government’s 18 powers in Article 1, Section 8. Any power not delegated is a power denied to the federal government. State’s exclusive authority over non-delegated powers is codified in the Tenth Amendment.⁵

The federal government may exercise only its enumerated powers and may not create implied from explicit ones. It may acquire new or expanded powers only through the amendment process. Only states may amend the Constitution. It cannot be amended by any branch of the federal government through interpretation. It may not make national laws as those operate on and within states which would violate the 10^th Amendment. How does this relate to the Commerce Clause?

The Clause reads;

“The Congress shall have Power: To regulate commerce with foreign Nations,

and among the several States, with the Indian Tribes” [capitalization in the

original].⁶

Through the Declaration of Independence (1776), Articles of Confederation (1781), and Treaty of Paris (1783), Britain’s 13 former North American colonies declared they were independent sovereign states (nations) and recognized as such by Great Britain and the world. Each possessed an autonomous government and constitution. To raise revenue and protect native industry and agriculture, states erected tariffs and tolls on goods crossing their borders, by land, sea, and river, from other states. They also disputed the boundaries of western lands won through the war.⁷ In addition, they made separate trade treaties with foreign powers without regard to whether or not it harmed the interests of other states.

For example, under its colonial charter, Maryland controlled the Potomac River right to Virginia’s shoreline. Both used this river to ship upstate and western goods to the coast. To gain access to the river, Virginia successfully negotiated a trade treaty with Maryland. James Madison and others believed similar arrangements might be expanded to include the other eleven states. This might unify them and lead to settlement of western land claims. They called for a Convention to meet in Annapolis, 1785. Some states sent delegates, some arrived too late, and others boycotted. Congress called for a second convention to meet in Philadelphia.⁸ They met from May through September, 1787, debating and working out a constitution to replace the Articles of Confederation. They faced many challenges. Chief among them were trade disputes.

If states created a trade system benefitting all and disadvantaging none, it would diffuse interstate conflicts and bolster their economic strength vis a vis Britain and Europe. A clause eliminating interstate barriers to trade and commerce was the solution. In time, this policy would transform the United States into the “largest area of free trade in the world”. The Commerce Clause would put an end to “mercantilistic systems” of trade.⁹

John Taylor, perhaps the most towering intellect of the Founding period, noted the power to regulate commerce states delegated to the federal government served two purposes, “to prevent foreign nations from obtaining unjust advantages over the United States” and “to prevent one state from making another tributary to itself”.¹⁰ However, and this is crucial, the Commerce Clause delegates to Congress power to regulate trade between the U.S. and three forms of “sovereign entities; the States, foreign nations, and the Indian Tribes”.¹¹ This refers to trade arrangements. It does not grant Congress power over commercial activities in or between states.¹² The Commerce Clause’s purpose is to create one voice with respect to foreign trade and to facilitate free trade between states. How is the latter accomplished? By eliminating interstate tariffs and tolls not to erect rules governing commercial activity within and or crossing state lines.

In Federalist 42, James Madison explained the Commerce Clause only delegated to the federal government authority over international trade but not over the commercial activities within states or crossing their borders.¹³ Under this clause, the federal government makes trade treaties with foreign nations. To argue it empowers a federal government to make national laws governing commercial activities within states is nonsensical. States created the federal government. Did they assign it the function of making trade treaties between it and individual states? Of course not, because states are not foreign nations and commercial activities fall under state’s reserved powers. For example, the federal government may make trade treaties with Indian tribes but it has no authority to make rules governing the manufacture and sale of goods by Indians or sold to non-Indians. It is crucial to keep in mind that commercial activities and trade are not the same.¹⁴

The federal government has no authority to make rules governing the manufacture and sale of goods, working conditions, wages, or rules for transportation by air, boat, train or truck, private or public, inter or intrastate. These are functions of state governments.¹⁵

Madison noted delegates to the federal convention used the term commerce 34 times during debate and discussion typically in reference to trade with foreign nations. They used the terms commerce and trade interchangeably. This was true for the 63 times authors of the Federalist Papers [Hamilton, Madison, and Jay] used the terms. No delegate to the federal and subsequent state ratifying conventions, used these terms to mean other than trade.¹⁶

In Federalist 45, Madison wrote;

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government

are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are

numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external

objects as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the

power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to

the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of

affairs concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal

order, improvement and prosperity of the State”.¹⁷

What about the word “regulate”? Does it not mean the federal government has authority to control commercial activity? Does not control necessarily imply authority to make rules governing such activities in states, especially if it crosses state lines?

Fortunately, we have a treasure trove of documents from the framers. They demonstrate the common usage of the word “regulate” with respect to the Commerce Clause did not mean authority to make rules governing commercial activity. On the contrary, it means “to keep moving” to make regular. The Clause’s purpose is to keep trade moving by, as noted, eliminating interstate tariffs and tolls. The federal government’s power is reactive. It may remove barriers to interstate trade but may make no rules governing commercial activity.

Article 1, section 9, clause 6 states;

“No preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue, to the

ports of one State over those of another; nor shall Vessels to or from one State, be

obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another [capitalization in the original].¹⁸

The Article is clear, Congress’s commerce power is to eliminate specific trade policies, employed by states, favoring their domestic industries and commercial activities at the expense of sister states.

Comparing the Constitution’s sections on commerce, with the dictionary extant at the time [1785 edition of Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language], it is clear commerce is defined as trade not the manufacture and sale of goods or any other gainful activity. This includes all phases of agricultural production and trade between individuals.¹⁹ Hence, the federal government has zero authority to make national laws governing the economic activities of private individuals, companies, or states within or crossing state borders.

Vice President John C. Calhoun, regrettably binned by modernity over his views on slavery, was correct in observing regulation of commerce applies to relations between the United States and foreign nations. Congress cannot “regulate” commercial activities within or between states because such power belongs only to a national form of government and the United States is constituted a federal republic. Calhoun noted the only time the clause would empower the federal government in relations with states would be if one chose to erect tariffs on goods from other states.²⁰

University Professor of Law and Government, Randy E. Barnett, notes in every case when the Constitution’s framers used the word “commerce”, the “narrowest” construction is employed. The phrase “among the states” referred to trade between states and “regulate” meant “to make regular”. Again, Congress has no authority to make rules governing economic activity in any state whether it crosses state lines or not.²¹

Professor St. George Tucker, an officer in the Virginia Militia during the War of Independence, and later law professor, wrote the Constitution never authorized the federal government to regulate or interfere with domestic commerce in any way. The Commerce Clause was designed to protect domestic commercial activity from federal interference. States never delegated Congress authority to make rules for any form of economic activity among people, businesses, and states.²² Yet, today, Congress and the Court interpret “to regulate” opposite of its meaning. Justice Clarence Thomas observes the “original meaning” (indicating the current one is in error) of commerce “was limited to the ‘trade and exchange’ of goods and transportation for this purpose”. Courts today have turned this meaning on its head by applying it to “any gainful activity”.²³

A common understanding of the Commerce Clause remained consistent throughout the founding era. There is “not a single example from the reports of these proceedings [drafting and ratifying the Constitution] that unambiguously used the broad meaning of commerce, and many instances where the context makes clear that the speaker intended a narrow meaning”.²⁴

Professor Brion McClanahan writes, since Chief Justice John Marshall, who was a strong proponent of a national as opposed to federal system, used Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) to create for Congress a “right to regulate interstate commerce”.²⁵ Marshall had access to founding documents and even spoke in favor of ratification at the Virginia Convention. He knew the meaning and intent of the Commerce Clause. He knew Congress has no authority to regulate private or public economic activities inter or intrastate. But he, like Alexander Hamilton, supported abolishing state governments by consolidating all power in a national government. He ruled, Congress could intervene and make rules for commerce “within a single state” if it affected trade with or in another state.²⁶ In so doing, he overturned the Constitution. From Marbury v. Madison (1803) McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) and subsequent cases, Marshall created from thin air, a new power for Congress rejected to it by the States and Constitution.

Marshall believed the framers meaning and intent for the Commerce Clause was “too narrow”. Congress should have the power to intervene in the economic affairs of state and people. He wrote, “The manner in which the Congress decides to regulate commerce is completely at the discretion of Congress”.²⁷ Of course, he did. Such power would go a long way toward transforming a federal into a national system and destroy state’s reserved powers. Subsequent Courts built precedent on Marshall’s invalid rulings.

For many years they were successfully opposed by Presidents and Governors but, with the passage of time, and for various reasons, Americans began to accept this rewriting of the Constitution and extralegal abolition of the 10^th Amendment. Federal Courts ruled Congress could now make laws governing all economic activities within and across state lines if such activities had a “substantial effect (determined by Congress and the Court), on other states. This is an open-ended grant of power because any “activity when taken in the aggregate, could be said to have a ‘substantial effect” on interstate trade. Marshall and subsequent courts eviscerated limits on Congress’s power.²⁸

States created a federal not national government. Through the Constitution, they delegated to it limited and defined powers. They include foreign relations, international trade, war, and standardization of currency, weights and measurements, copyrights, and a postal system. States did not surrender but reserved all other powers to themselves. No federal branch of government, legislative, executive, or judicial, was given the power of judicial review. None has the sole or final authority to interpret the Constitution’s meaning. That right belongs to the people. Consolidationists at the federal convention proposed granting this power to the federal court but delegates voted it down knowing full well States would never ratify the proposed constitution if it contained such a provision. Therefore, the Court has zero authority to rule on the constitutionality of any law, federal or state. The Commerce Clause was written to prohibit states from restricting the free flow of interstate goods through internal tariffs and tolls. Period. Congress has no authority to regulate the economic activities of people, businesses, private or public, within states or because they cross an imaginary line.

How can anyone defend what they know little or nothing about? This amounts to an inexcusable forfeiture on the battlefield. As one who taught government for more than two decades in the public high school system, I am well aware what they teach is an imposter in place of the real Constitution. This is no excuse for conservatives and those claiming to be originalists, to promote the same imposter. After all, I too was taught the false constitution. I took the time to find the real one and others should as well. You may be surprised to discover how far removed, the one taught in public schools, is from the Constitution ratified by the Thirteen States. Hint, no amendments were ever passed to change the intended, and now opposite, meaning of t

1¹ Richard J. Hardy, Government In America (Boston, Massachusetts, Houghton Mifflin Company, 192), 12.

2² Clarence B. Carson, Basic American Government (Wadley, Alabama, American Textbook Committee, 1996), 500.

3³ Yale Law School, Avalon Project, Ratification declarations by States, at https://www.avalon.yale.edu/18th-century/ratsc.ap.

4⁴ John Taylor of Caroline Virginia, New Views of the Constitution of the United States, James McClellan, editor (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 1823/2000), 7-8, 20-21, 27, 29, 42-43, 136, 203, 207-213.

5⁵ IBID. 1, 189-190, 255, 257-258, Carson, 40.

6⁶ Harold J. Spaeth & Edward Conrad Smith HarperCollins College Outline: The Constitution of the United States, 13^th Edition (New York, N.Y., HarperPerrenial A Division of Harper Collins Publishers, 1991), 202.

7⁷ Rebecca Brooks Gruver, An American History Volume 1 to 1877, Second Edition (Reading, Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1976), 165-174, 184.

8⁸ Ralph Ketcham, James Madison A Biography (Charlottesville, Virginia, University Press of Virginia, 1996), 169-171.

9⁹ Forrest McDonald, Novo Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution (Lawrence, Kansas, University Press of Kansas, 1998), 18, 266.

10¹⁰ Taylor, 328-329.

11¹¹ Edwin Meese III, Matthew Spalding, David Forte, The Heritage Guide to the Constitution (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2005), 107.

12¹² IBID. 100.

13¹³ James Madison, The Federalist Papers , Clinton Rossiter, editor (New York, N.Y., A Mentor Book from New American Library, 1961), 264-268.

14¹⁴ IBID. Federalists 42 and 45, 269-269, 293.

15¹⁵ Brion McClanahan, The Founding Father’s Guide to the Constitution (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2012), 34-56, 86.

16¹⁶ Randy Barnett, “The Original Meaning of the Commerce Clause”, The University of Chicago Law Review (Winter 2001), 113-114, at http://www.bu.edu/rbarnett/origins.html.

17¹⁷ Madison, 292-293.

18¹⁸ Spaeth & Smith, 203.

19¹⁹ Barnett, 13-114.

20²⁰ John C. Calhoun, Selected Writings and Speeches, H. Lee Cheek Jr., Editor, (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2003), 66-74, 113-114, 272.

21²¹ Barnett, 112-113, 114-116, 124-125, 142, 146-147.

22²² IBID. 135-136.

23²³ IBID. 101-102.

24²⁴ IBID. 112.

25²⁵ McClanahan, Founding Father’s Guide, 50. New York State granted to Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton a twenty-year monopoly over commercial shipping on rivers within the state. Aaron Ogden operated steam boats out of New Jersey and wanted a piece of the New York trade. He sued in federal court. See Gibbons v. Ogden, Oyez, LII, Supreme Court Resources, Justia, Supreme Court Center at http://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/22us1.

26²⁶ Thomas E. Woods Jr., and Kevin R.C. Gutzman, Who Killed the Constitution (New York, N.Y., Crown Forum, Random House, Inc., 2008), 106.

27²⁷ Meese, Spalding, and Forte, 101-102.

28²⁸ Woods, Gutzman, 138.

"News Media", authoritarian swine, Culture, Junk Science, Law, Media, mindset, Politics, So Much Stupid!

Corona Mad hatters and Viral Narcs

May 20, 2020 Yitzhak Goldstein 3 Comments

“There are currently no vaccines available to protect against human Coronaviruses…”¹

Won’t hurt a bit

I am fresh from my son’s orthodontist appointment where a stern faced dental hygienist, hidden behind a lab coat, oversized gauzy surgical mask, and opaque gloves confronted us before a locked door. As we began up the steps, she waved a spray bottle back and forth like a crazed gunman yelling something unintelligible. Seeing my lack of comprehension, she stabbed a Latex coated finger at a sign jutting from a flowerbed like an East German prison guard. Words in red letters ordered us to return to our car, telephone the orthodontist to announce our arrival, and then wait until we received a callback summons for my son to enter. Can I not tell you we are here, I asked. She shook her head and yelled “no”! We must follow the system. My response in English questioned the intelligence of this process but a phrase in French crossed my mind.

This is a polemic but not necessarily a dissertation on the science of Red China’s² virus. After all, what exactly is the science? Is it the proclamations of government mouthpieces or the opinions of scientists censored by Face Book and other social media platforms? Claims to having the “science” are like moles popping up from numerous holes, no two alike. Science? My high school’s government course included a required unit on AIDS. On the one hand, teachers were to scare the bejabbers out of kids over how easy it was to contract AIDS so they would practice “safe sex”. I was relieved no one asked me to differentiate safe from unsafe sex. I thought it had to do with rhinestone cowboy boots, a unicycle, a giant kite, and a rope bridge spanning an Andean gorge. On the other hand, teachers were to stress how difficult it was to get AIDS in order to relieve homosexuals of further stigma. Science? Yeah, public education. Regardless of what the “science” is, reactions by Americans to China’s virus has been a revelation.

From the nation’s experts: politicians, movie stars, entertainers, and professional athletes, comes the rallying cry, “We’re all in this together”! What a joke. Who is this “we”? How are they suffering? If anything, the frenzied manner in which greedy grubby fingered savages ravage store shelves, hogging up the product de jour, demonstrates it is really, every man for himself. And it’s not even Black Friday. Reaction by the Great Unwashed provide us a peek as to how they will react in the face of a greater crisis.

In the very early days of the Wuhan Pandemic, American officials raced breathlessly to microphones announcing the virus did not originate from a laboratory nor had Commie scientists biologically modified or weaponized an existing virus. These premature declarations reminded me of government officials, following an explosion, mass shooting, or rental truck mowing citizens down in a city center, racing before news cameras to announce, “It’s not terrorism” even before the names of the injured or suspects were known. Okay, what did they say was its origin? It came from Chinese raw bat eaters who coughed on Chinese raw baby Koala bear eaters in Wuhan, China. Make’s sense, doesn’t it? Like ripples from a rock thrown in a pond, Red China’s virus continues to have reverberating consequences.

Years as policeman and teacher left me with a lifelong need to decompress. Peace and quiet in the outdoors, far from Thomas Harding’s Madding Crowd, has proven the best medicament. I spend a fair amount of time in the wild especially winter, my favorite season. For any outdoorsman/woman, the attraction is nature’s beauty, aroma of wild flowering plants, animals, birds, and the sound of wind rushing through branches absent the strident cacophony of civilization. All was good until government lockdowns spawned disastrous levels of people practicing unprotected tourism in the woods and along once tranquil trails.

New to the outdoors, CoronaTourists tend to be loud, obnoxious, and display self-centered ignorance with respect to trail etiquette (yield trails to runners and the mountain bikers who built them). They don jackets, coats, hats, and mittens to brave frigid 60-degree temperatures. Millennial CoronaTourists seem to drag every vestige of civilization along with them. Blaring radios, clouds of marijuana, screaming children, tampons, fast foot wrappers, baby binkies, Big Gulp cups, Happy Meal toys, condoms, cigarettes, Band Aids, undergarments, and beer cans are now parts of the “regular” landscape. For Pete’s sake, shouldn’t these people be crowding into stores fighting over the last roll of toilet paper and box of 9mm ammunition? With respect to Touristbasms, winter has proven the only effective disinfectant to clean them out of the woods.

Following a recent hike, I crossed a rural road to the above shelter perched in a lonely field surrounded by woods. A sign announced the shelter is closed. The incongruity of closing an outdoor shelter, in the middle of nowhere, in the wind, fresh air, and sunlight, as opposed to people cooped up in homes, apartments, and buildings rebreathing the same air, is unfathomable. County officials cannot trust people to limit gatherings to ten or less so, they closed the shelter. One size fits all rules with no appeal to common sense permitted. Typical bureaucrats. Suppose more than ten people gather beneath the shelter to commemorate a War Veteran’s passing, a child’s birthday, or a teen’s graduation. Who would know out there, unless someone snitched? Probably liberals. Would the Coronastapo come and round up these malefactors? Prior to all this, I accepted lockdowns, quarantines, and that millions of us were going to die. However, these incongruities caused me to begin asking questions about the efficacy and legality of the government’s response to the viral outbreak.

If only two people are in a store, one healthy and one infected with the virus, and the latter coughs on the former, the healthy person is now likely infected. Suppose there are two hundred people in the same store, and none infected, and those with a dry throat cough on others, how many will be infected with the virus? None. Stay with me now. Healthy people cannot transmit what they do not have. Why quarantine masses of healthy people? Why is it “safe” for ten or less people to congregate but add one more, and now they are all doomed? It makes no sense. There is one possible explanation however implausible. The Wuhan virus is super-intelligent and someone has taught it arithmetic. Loathing humans, nevertheless, it can tolerate up to ten people but if one more comes along, Red China’s virus goes berserk.

I began asking more questions. Before long, I discovered many Americans have so fallen in line with the government’s talking points that to ask questions makes them go berserk.

I texted a friend about a humorous incident. I found a surgical mask on a trail that is no more than a sliver of dirt, boot width wide, bisecting a large field. Facing the woods from the gravel parking lot, the field extends approximately one hundred yards to the left and a half-mile to the right of the trail. It is always windy out there. Instead of seeing the humor in the situation, like bicyclers and people in cars wearing surgical masks, my friend was outraged. He denounced people who do not wear masks and practice social distancing as “disgusting”, lacking in “proper education” who had probably been “born and lived under a rock” and needed hit over the head by one. He was ecstatic that our governor, Maryland Republican Larry Hogan, had “taken the bull by the horns” implementing “strict enforceable guidelines” and thanked G-d we had a governor with “insight and fortitude”. Considering Hogan is a RHINO, called a “closet Democrat” by the ultra-liberal Baltimore Sun,³ I thought he was joking. I asked if this was sarcasm and he replied with an emphatic “no”. I replied, “I’m sorry to say, I see it a bit differently”. His demand to know why was more emphatic than his no. We had never discussed politics and, not wanting to step on toes, I tread lightly.

Instead of specific arguments, I listed categories; lockdowns based on debunked models, Constitutional problems, and the efficacy of quarantining entire populations. I observed it was remarkable Governors closed down gun stores and churches but deemed pot shops, liquor stores, and abortion mills essential. That was it. My friend’s responses came so rapid fire I could not keep up. I was answering question one but he was on number four. I tried to explain the government based its rationale for shutting down entire countries first on Neil Ferguson’s Imperial College-London computer model predicting two-million dead and then the University of Washington’s model claiming several hundred thousand dead by sometime in April. Reality and the subsequent work by scientists obviated the need for shutdowns when they debunked both models.⁴ Ignoring this, my friend declared medical emergencies superseded my “constitutional theory” adding that the Constitution had been amended many times. I noted the Constitution was the law of the land and superseded by nothing. Uncertain as to the relevance of counting amendments, I pointed out it has been amended only seventeen times since 1792. I added no amendment had abolished the Bill of Rights or principle of federalism. He became angry and told me to pass an amendment overruling the virus. I asked, what is the rationale for shutting the country down for three weeks, why not four, and why six as opposed to seven? I asked how long should we be in lockdown and what was the rationale for his answer. What should happen if, when the government lets Americans out again, there is a spike in viral infections? Do we all go back into lockdown? Refusing to answer my questions, he instead accused me of treating him like a student in one of my classes and called me a “pompous ass”. It went downhill from there. Hoping we could emerge still friends, I did not descend into ad hominin attacks. Had he not ended the conversation abruptly, I would have explained this; the Constitution is a contract between government and the people. It lists specifically what governments, state and federal, may or may not do. It bars the federal government from engaging in any activity not authorized by the Constitution. The Constitution is also a restraining order against government to protect the people’s rights from infringement. If people accept an “exception” to the law in but one case, it establishes precedent for future exceptions made by those in power. Exceptions to one’s Bill of Rights. Witness now how quickly people rush to snitch on those daring to exercise their Bill of Rights. Google how many states are hiring folks to execute contact tracing surveillance schemes. Will the government and schools create National Antiviral Zealous Informer Youth Leagues to Narc on people, even their own parents?

The President’s powers are found in Article II of the Constitution and comprise but three paragraphs. Other than exercise of military powers in time of war, appointing listed government officials, and granting pardons, his/her only other function is to ensure “the laws be faithfully executed”.⁵ No mention is made of executive orders. At most, one could argue presidents may issue an executive order in furtherance of a constitutionally legal law or bill passed by the Congress. However, no such order could create law, directives, regulations, restrictions, and so forth, as those are the sole functions of the legislative branch. The Constitution does not authorize the president to shut down commercial businesses, confine people to their homes, restrict any legal activity, dictate what people must wear in public, social-distancing, or send taxpayer’s money as bailouts to businesses and individuals. Therefore, these activities are illegal. If true, cannot Congress do all this?

The Constitution lists the powers of Congress in Article I, Section 8, known as the Enumerated Powers. Seven of the eighteen deal with the military. The others cover land set aside for the capital, laws regulating immigration, post offices, coining of money, creation of federal courts, copyrights, punishing pirates, trade, and taxing and borrowing money to fund the above.⁶ Congress has no power, under the Declaration or Constitution, to shut down commercial establishments, schools, or confine people to their residences. It has no authority to appropriate the wealth of Americans and transfer it to others for any purpose whatsoever. Nor do Governors. These are grotesque violations of the Constitution. Regardless of what people, mostly liberals, say, there are no “for the public safety” or “for the common good” exceptions to the Constitution. America’s Constitution is over the government. The subordinate cannot overrule its superior. Does anyone care? No doubt, enemies of the Constitution will argue the Commerce Clause grants Congress authority to engage in illegal activities.

At the time [1787] delegates meeting in Philadelphia drafted and debated the proposed Constitution, States had established trade barriers against sister states. They taxed goods crossing their borders. Coastal states with ports added additional tariffs on goods from abroad. This led to a great deal of conflict between states. Delegates wrote the Commerce Clause to deny states the power to restrict interstate commerce in any way. Liberals disguise and lie about Congress’s power to “regulate commerce”⁷ by ignoring its 18^th century common use meaning in favor of their redefinition. Regulate did not mean control, supervise, or make rules in any way. Regulate meant to keep “regular”. If states enacted taxes and tariffs restricting the flow of commerce across their borders, Congress had the power to knock them down. Congress has no authority to control any commercial activity simply because it crosses state lines. It has no authority to direct, regulate, restrict, or control commercial activity within any state whatsoever.⁸ American ignorance with respect to their own Constitution is appalling. Even a conservative Baptist preacher with whom I’m acquainted texted church members saying he had to obey the government’s order to close the church based on Romans 13: 1-2; (1) “Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from G-d. (2) “Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of G-d; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves”.⁹ I wanted to ask him what he would say to America’s Founding Fathers who rebelled against George III, King of England, King of the English Empire, King of the colonies, and Head of the Church of England. I held my peace.

Historian and theologian David Barton writes that the pastor’s opinion gave birth to the principle of “Divine Right of Kings”; the notion G-d selected every ruler who ruled, a principle eagerly embraced by monarchs and emperors. Regardless of how arbitrary, capricious, and tyrannical, people have to obey these rulers. French theologian Philippe du Plessis Mornay wrote in 1579 [Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos, A Defense of Liberty Against Tyrants] the government ordained by G-d referred to “the general institution of government” not each and every distinct form of government. G-d’s purpose expressed in Romans 13 was to oppose anarchy. Dissolution of society leads to lawlessness ending in rebellion against and ultimately rejection of G-d and His law. Therefore, G-d opposes rebellion if it leads to anarchy and chaos. Otherwise, people would have to obey the dictates of murderous Communist regimes.¹⁰ Another way to look at is this; if presidents, Congresses, and Governors violate their own Constitutions and state laws, are they preserving G-d’s order or provoking resistance? If the acts of political officials in violation of the law become so egregious, it sparks rebellion, whose actions then are leading toward anarchy, those of political leaders, or those of people attempting to restore the rule of law?

Red China unleashing yet another Coronavirus has revealed much. If government officials can scare enough people with claims a crisis menaces the United States, (global warming, murder hornets, viruses, etc.) then people will do what they are told without question even if to do so violates the Bill of Rights. If these officials can convince them it is their patriotic duty to obey, they will turn against their neighbors reporting those who do not comply. There is no longer a “we”. In a crisis, it is every man for himself. As Tucker Carlson would say, “I have to live in the same country as these people”? Finally, people who lust for power will always stoke fear, panic, and anarchy in order to promote their personal agenda that, throughout history, has always been to rule over others.

1¹ National Federation For Infectious Diseases, “Coronaviruses” at https://www.nfid.org/infectiousdiseases/coronaviruses/ There are approximately seven Coronaviruses. There are no vaccines for any of them.

2² As a high school government teacher, during a “discussion” with colleagues over certain countries hosting symposiums on education (Cuba, Communist Vietnam, and Communist China) Jenny, a liberal colleague at a sister high school, became incensed over my use of the term “Red China”. After all Jenny said with rage, she had adopted two children from China and that made me a racist. Why would adopting children negate the nature of their country’s government of origin? I have no idea. Jenny had a map in her classroom with South America at the top and North America at the bottom stating the current north/south designation was “racist”. She also had pro-Obama posters hanging prominently. A few years later, one of my government students was telling me about the District sponsored student trip to China. She revealed that Jenny had personally attacked me, in front of the students, in China. My student thought my reaction would be anger. On the contrary. I smiled the remainder of the day basking in the glory of having been trashed out, by name, in a Communist Country!

3³ Baltimore Sun, “Larry Hogan: Closet Democrat”? April 10 2018, at https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/editorial/bs-ed-0410-larry-hogan-20180409.story.html

4⁴ Douglas MacKinon, “What if the sky is falling Coronavirus models are wrong”? The Hill at https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/489962-what-if-the-sky-is-falling-coronavirus-models-are-simply-wrong/html.

5⁵ Richard J. Hardy, Government In America (Boston, Massachusetts, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1992), 122-23.

6⁶ IBID. 116-17.

7⁷ IBID. Clause 3, 117.

8⁸ Randy E. Barnett, “The Original Meaning of the Commerce Clause”, University of Chicago Law Review (Winter 2001), at http://www.law.edu/rbarnett/origins.html. See also Brion McClanahan, The Founding Father’s Guide to the Constitution, (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2012), 38, 50, 54-56, 86. James Madison, The Federalists #42 Clinton Rossiter, Editor (New York, N.Y., A Mentor Book, New American Library, 1961), 267-68. John Taylor of Caroline Virginia, James McClellan, Editor New Views of the Constitution of the United States (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 1823/2000), 328-30.

9⁹ Editors, New American Standard Bible (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1995), 1081.

10¹⁰ David Barton, “Was the American Revolution a Biblically Justified Act”? Wallbuilders, at http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detai.php?ResourceID=40

"News Media", gun control, gun grabbers, guns, Hollywood, hoplophobia, mindset, Politics, Schools and campuses, Sellouts and traitors, So Much Stupid!, You can't fix stupid

Addressing Myth and Misinformation Part II

June 14, 2019 Yitzhak Goldstein

Part 1

“Can we discuss the loss of rights of people going to a concert because of the lack of assault rifle regulations?”¹

Singer Sheryl Crow

“It sickens me the ease in which a TERRORIST can be sold a GUN. Is the ease really worth all these lives?! This needs to stop”² [capitalization and punctuation in the original] tweeting about Las Vegas.

Gigi Hadid, top fashion model

“It would be wise to ban assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and silencers. None of which is excessive.”³

Elizabeth Banks, Hollywood actress

“Gun control now. Enough already. Grow the f__k up. The average person doesn’t need a f__cking maching (sic) gun. Enough already.”⁴ [Misspelling in the original]

Billy Eichner, Comedian, actor, writer, television personality.

“We love the traditions, the history, the technology of firearms, and we grew up with the sense of deep responsibility owning guns brings. We gun owners have a deeply held belief in gun safety, instilled by our parents and our grandparents. Owning a gun means living by a set of sternly ingrained rules. Those rules belong to us. We live by them. And when someone breaks those rules, we feel betrayed, appalled, and angry.”⁵

Todd Woodward

Leftist singer Cheryl Crow, from Kennett, Missouri is worth approximately $41 million dollars. No doubt she and the celebrities cited above earn enough to preclude rubbing shoulders with the hoi polloi. They probably have bodyguards as well. Armed bodyguards. If Crow knows anything about firearms and gun-laws, she keeps this secret well hidden. If model Hadid knew the Las Vegas mass murderer was a terrorist (no one else did) then why didn’t she speak up or call the FBI before the massacre? Comedian Eichner demonstrates a psychosis peculiar to those on the left to wit; they believe anger, shouting, and profanity lend credence and strength to their argument. The more self-righteous sanctimony they can work up, like a sweaty lather, the more correct they are. Grow up? For real Billy? I heard that. Someone in the room said, “Who cares. I don’t go to the movies and never heard of these people anyway.” Do you know how many followers they have on social media? Remember this is the USSA (United States of Shallow Americans) wherein if people like an actor, singer, model, or entertainer, then whatever they say must be true. Affection determines truth. Mental exertion need not apply. Let’s play a game. Let’s pretend we’re in a large room and seated at our feet are pop-culture icons all eager to learn. They begin with questions like; aren’t people running amuck in streets blasting each other left and right like in the movies and video games we make? Shouldn’t the government ban guns before they hurt more people? Why is anyone allowed to buy military assault weapons? And they’re all ears and no mouth. I know, I know, but play along anyway.

With respect to actress Elizabeth Banks, there are no firearms classified “assault weapons.” Anything that can be used to hurt another; a rolled up magazine, pencil, ashtray, rock, fishing hook, hayfork, Hillary’s laugh (like a cross between a strangled goose and Bob Dylan singing), or a refrigerator hardened biscuit can be an “assault weapon.” Okay, I get it, you meant “assault rifle” like AR15s, AK47s, Ruger Minis, and any rifle with a collapsible stock and fore-end grip. Right? Wrong. For a rifle to be classified as an “assault rifle,” it must possess specific characteristics including: (1) shoulder fired, (2) capable of full automatic fire, and (3) chambered in a cartridge “intermediate between pistol and revolver, and rifle ammunition; i.e., carbine ammunition.”⁶ Some are capable of selective fire meaning they have a switch to set them on safe, semiautomatic, fully automatic, and back again. By definition this excludes semiautomatic rifles because there is no switch or capability for full automatic fire. Instead their triggers must be pressed, one at a time, for each round fired, a system more than a century old. Other than caliber, similarities between military and civilian rifles are cosmetic. The latter are incapable of selective or full-automatic fire. Liberals invented the term “assault-weapon” to confuse and scare non- gun owners into believing commercial AR15s are the same as military fully automatic assault rifles.⁷

Okay, maybe you’re right, a songstress replies, but can’t semiautomatics be modified to fire full-auto? In some cases, yes but it takes skill and proper tools to make alterations which typically are irreversible. This false claim, semiautomatics can easily, and apparently legally, be converted to fully automatic, came up at my school in the form of an ambush.

When I was a high school teacher, a colleague in the foreign language department told her students anyone could purchase the part(s) at gun shows to convert semiautomatic rifles to full-auto. Why this came up in a Spanish class, I have no idea. English, Science, Math, SocialIST Studies, and other departments were compartmentalized into their own hallways and, only in my 3^rd year, I’d met few teachers outside my own. Therefore, I was caught off guard when a teacher I’d never met (I had to ask a colleague her name) unleashed an attack on me in the teacher’s break room at lunch. Angry and emotional, she yelled at me in accusatory tones claiming anyone could buy the parts to convert semi into fully automatic firearms at gun shows. Collecting myself, I asked what the part was and how many gun shows had she attended? Her response was tempestuous insistence she spoke the truth and if I said otherwise, I was a liar. Why had she targeted me? An introvert in a department of belligerent very vocal leftists, I’d kept my views to myself from day one so her outburst was mystifying. I failed to grasp, until apprised later by the principal, what an intolerable scandal it was for an overwhelmingly liberal faculty to discover a conservative in their midst. And I was unaware to the degree which liberal teachers, who didn’t even know me, talked about me behind my back. MOTOWN’s The O’JAYS sang of my plight. The pattern was typical. Upon discovering a conservative colleague, liberals begin with mild teasing, then goading, next mockery and stepped up insults, and finally angry verbal attacks. When assigned to work with new teachers during faculty in-services, ultra-liberal union goon Mao ZeTodd was invariably lurking nearby. He’d rush over announcing in hysterical tones resembling an Atlanta CDC warning, I was the “school conservative” thus poisoning any chance to build a relationship before rumor, gossip, and lies reached their ears.

I’d attended many gun shows and never seen parts for sale to convert semi to a fully automatic rifles. Being no authority and wanting to get the facts straight, I contacted the local BATF. They said the Spanish teacher was wrong. Possession of any part permitting conversion of a firearm from semi to full-automatic is illegal and a felony. This is true even if one doesn’t possess a firearm. Members of local police departments and the BATF often visit gun shows ensuring everything is on the up and up. It is illegal to make, alter, or offer for sale, any part modifying the semiautomatic function of any firearm, pistol, shotgun, or rifle, to fully automatic. Kiss loved ones goodbye because you’re looking at up to 10 years in federal prison, a $250,000 dollar fine, and permanent revocation of the right to possess firearms and vote as well. Suppose you make the modification and take it to someone’s farm to try it out. A neighbor reports to authorities hearing automatic fire coming from this property. Based on probable cause the BATF secures and executes a search warrant finding the weapon(s). It gets very bad at that point. Altering firearms this way is something you should never have anything to do with. Don’t do it. Run from anyone doing this.⁸ Did I confront the Spanish teacher with the truth, the fact that she lied? No, it’s the whole introvert thing. Okay ask our glitterati, AR15s are not the same as M16s, but why does anyone need them anyway?

The right to keep and bear arms is recognized through the Declaration of Independence and Constitution as a G-d-given not man-created right from which individuals can’t be alienated [separated] by government. It has nothing to do with hunting or membership in the Military or “National” (sic) Guard and more importantly, is not dependent on notions of a “need.” Were this not so, those who rule, regardless of style of government from authoritarian to democratic, could define and redefine the “need” standard until it becomes an un-scalable wall. In response to mass shootings in the latter half of the 20^th century, Britain eliminated self-defense as a reason to “need” firearms essentially banning pistols, revolvers, rifles, and shotguns. Because registration had been implemented years before, the government knew who had what when confiscation began.⁹ An inalienable right cannot be altered, infringed upon, or abolished by a majority vote of one’s neighbors or by government. Okay, says a pop-star, instead of banning guns, couldn’t we save lives by limiting magazine capacity? Who really needs “high capacity” magazines holding 15 to 30 rounds?

High compared to what? The correct term is “full capacity.” I have a question for you; how many rounds does it take to stop an attacker? A 2008 Rand Corporation study found the NYPD averaged an 18% hit rate in shootouts with armed criminals and a 30% rate when the bad guys didn’t return fire¹⁰ translating into an approximate hit ratio of 1 to 3 rounds per 10 round magazine. Roughly the same percentage, sometimes worse, holds true for departments across America. Would you limit magazine capacity for the police? Okay maybe not cops but it’s different with civilians. It’s the cops that face armed bad guys a movie star shouts. Based on my experience, more than a few civilians are better trained and know their way around firearms than the average cop. Considering victims, by virtue of their status as the intended target, are first on the scene, why should they be hamstrung by limited capacity magazines when police, on the way if 911 is called, are not? Now toss into the mix an attacker full of murderous rage, under the influence of alcohol and or drugs, and running full speed at you with knife or gun in hand. Forget all this talk about bringing a knife to a gun fight, one-shot stops, and knock-down power, we’re dealing with the real world, not Hollywood. Lethal hits or not, how many rounds will it take to stop the attacker from taking your life before he expires? No one knows. Further, criminals may attack in pairs or groups, one asking for the time or bus fare, distracting the intended victim. Will felons, already barred from possessing the firearms they acquire, obey magazine capacity limits? They tend to keep shooting until their victims are dead.

I see your hand up in the front. Didn’t you sing at a Super Bowl halftime a few years back? Never saw a skirt so short before. What about gun registration to prevent violent crimes, she says, ignoring my observation. Wouldn’t it keep them out of the hands of criminals? Does it now, I reply. Registration is record keeping on who legally purchased and owns what. Since criminals, who typically obtain firearms through theft and burglary are disinclined to register them, what difference would registration make? Consider automobile registration and driver’s licensing requirements. License plates on stolen cars reveal who owns not who stole it. Same with guns. Like firearms, many laws regulate the purchase and operation of automobiles but here the analogy breaks down. Fines, restrictions on and revocation of driving privileges, and even prison to compel compliance with traffic laws has failed. People still text, speed, run stop signs and red lights, steer wheels with knees because a cigarette is in one hand and a triple-decker two-pound bacon burger is in the other, and drive under the influence. Each year they murder thousands of people and hurt, maim, and cripple millions more yet no one calls for the elimination of automobiles even “if it will save one life.” There is no analogue with firearm ownership. Considering approximately 124 million people own about 270 million guns,¹¹ and there were 505 deaths due to “accidental or negligent discharge of a firearm” in 2013,¹² and of “2,596,993 deaths in the U.S. for the same year, 1% were related to firearms (most suicides),”¹³ gun owners have a remarkable record for non-criminal safe handling of firearms. This is not the result of registration or gun control laws but rather, the nature of firearm owners going back to America’s founding. Gun registration schemes typically lead to confiscation as in the U.K., Australia, and California. Speaking of California, one of its denizens, not sure if male or female, raises, his, er, her hand, and asks; why not “reasonable” gun laws, can’t you compromise?

Lewis Dovland notes regardless of rhetoric, gun-controller’s “ultimate goal” remains “confiscation of all guns in America.” Each law passed moves closer to this goal. Take same-sex marriage for example and imagine a line forming a continuum running from ‘A’ to ‘Z.’

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Normal marriage is ‘A’ with ‘Z’ being same-sex marriage. Proponents of same-sex marriage knew demanding ‘Z’ was too much to ask for, so they demanded ‘N’ instead. This sparked debate and resistance. Attorneys challenged state laws against same-sex marriage in court while supporters fanned out across the land branding opponents bigots, haters, extremists, and “homophobes.” Schools were pressured to adopt same-sex friendly curriculum under the rubrics; “tolerance” and “diversity.” Hollywood films and television shows seeded positive depictions of same-sex marriage. Stories planted in the liberal media echoed these portrayals. Opponents were depicted as rabid backwoods Christian fundamentalists chomping at the bit to launch new waves of Salem witch trials. Although the demand for ‘N’ appeared a failure, (citizens in states that remember the 10^th Amendment still voted on the issue) in actuality proponents of same-sex “marriage” (sic) achieved ‘C,’ greater acceptance of and crumbling resistance to their agenda. The effort began anew only now, ‘C,’ is the new ‘A’ and there is no way to go back to the original ‘A.’ ‘N’ is again demanded and ‘C’ is again settled for but ‘C’ is now really ‘F.’ By constantly refining ‘A’ toward ‘Z,’ they ultimately got to ‘Z.’ In like manner, Confiscationists through so-called reasonable gun laws, hope to eliminate private possession of firearms in America.¹⁴

Gun control laws are predicated on the notion mere existence of firearms increases if not causes violent crime. The solution? Remove firearms from the equation and the problem is solved. This is why Confiscationists focus entirely on the means, i.e. guns, magazines, ammunition, and never on the criminal. But this notion has proven to be terribly flawed to the point of being false by criminologists and researchers from Gary Keck, David Kopel, Joyce Lee Malcom, to John R. Lott, Jr. If it was valid, in states and cities where obtaining firearms is almost impossible for the law-abiding, it would be even more so for criminals causing them to abandon their lives of crime becoming carpenters, waitresses, farmers, teachers, plumbers, nurses, and doctors. But this is not the case. Evil in the heart of malefactors causes evil deeds. Tools to implement evil will be found one way or another. As a policeman I transported criminals to court, jail, and prison. Recognizing some as return customers, I asked, why not turn away from their life of crime? Answer; it’s what they knew and what they liked. None sweated getting their hands on guns either. Fences (who trade in stolen property) and other criminals sell them or they could be acquired on the job during thefts and burglaries. Gun laws play no role in their calculations. “Reasonable” gun laws do nothing to transform wolves but instead, disarm the lambs. One cannot escape the fact that no greater deterrent to criminal assault and mass shootings exists than a public at large possessed of and trained in arms.

1¹ Kate Feldman, “Lady Gaga, Ariana Grande, Emmy Rossum and more call for gun control after Las Vegas shooting,” October 3, 2017 at http://www.nydailynews.com/amp/entertainment/celebrities-call-gun-control-las-vegas-shooting-article-1.3539734.

2² IBID.

3³ IBID.

4⁴ IBID.

5⁵ Todd Woodward, editor, “Down Range: After Las Vegas,” Gun Tests 11 (November 2017), 2.

6⁶ Todd Woodward, “Down Range: Assault Weapons Hoo-Hah,” Gun Tests 11 (November 2004), 2.

7⁷ The Truth About Assault Weapons, at http://www.assaultweapons.info/. See also, Frank Camp, “Why Progressives Use the Made-Up Term ‘Assault Weapon,” The Daily Wire at https://www.dailywire.com/news/20668/why-progressives-use-made-up-term-assault-weapon-frank-camp.

8⁸ Students told me what the Spanish teacher said. Some kids bragged in my class knowing someone’s dad or dad’s friend who was altering semiautomatic rifles to fire full-automatic. I told the class in no uncertain terms this was illegal, a felony, and the consequences when they were caught.

9⁹ David B. Kopel, The Samurai, The Mountie, And The Cowboy (Buffalo, New York, Prometheus Books, 1992), 70-95

10¹⁰ Nate Rawlings, “Ready, Fire, Aim: The Science Behind Police Shooting Bystanders, Time, at http://nation.time.com/2013/09/16/ready-fire-aim-the-science-behind-police-shooting-bystanders/ A New York Times study put the NYPD officer’s hit rate as high as 34%. See Al Baker, “11 Years of Police Gunfire, in Painstaking Detail,” New York Times, at http://www.newyorktimes.com. While I was at the Santa Clara PD range for annual qualification, our [not Santa Clara] new Chief walked in. The Range master said although I’d been waiting an hour, to let him go first. Later he told me the Chief showed up with revolver rounds in his shirt pocket, two different calibers, none matching his gun. I asked if the Chief had passed qualification. He made a funny face, rolled his eyes, and refused to answer on the basis that it might…

11¹¹ John R. Lott, Jr., More Guns Less Crime, Third Edition, (Chicago, Illinois, University of Chicago Press, 2010), 1.

12¹² http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/invsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf. Page 84, table 18.

13¹³ IBID. 5.

14¹⁴ Lewis Dovland, “Guns: The Left’s True Aim and How to Thwart It,” at http://www.american-thinker-com/2013/04-.

"News Media", Academics, Bump-Fire, gun control, gun grabbers, guns, hoplophobia, Law, Media, Politics, Rights, Schools and campuses, self defense, Sellouts and traitors, So Much Stupid!, Voting

Addressing Myth and Misinformation Part 1

March 22, 2019 Yitzhak Goldstein 1 Comment

“Imagine the deaths if the shooter [Las Vegas] had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get. Our grief isn’t enough. We can and must put politics aside, stand up to the NRA, and work together to try to stop this from happening again.”

Hillary Clinton¹

“Durn tootin’, great shootin’. Cool dude sertin’ he’s 2^nd Mendment rahts. Hell yeah! Every country has its psychopaths. In US they have guns.” [Mocking misspellings in the original].²

Richard Dawkins, author and famous atheist.

“The NRA, a vile organization with a sinister, deadly grip on America’s lawmakers, bought Trump’s silence when they backed him during the election campaign.”³

Piers Morgan

“After Sandy Hook and Las Vegas, what is the rationale for any civilian owning an assault rifle and high capacity magazine?”⁴

Barbara Streisand

“How long do we let gun violence tear families apart? Enough. Congress & the WH should act now to save lives. There’s no excuse for inaction.”⁵

Joe Biden, former Vice President

“I’m not an ordained minister; I’m not a theologian, but these guys [NRA] are going to hell.”⁶

Lily Eskelsen Garcia, sixth grade teacher, Utah, and Vice President National Education Association [NEA] the nation’s largest teacher’s union.

Television news reporters often refer to semiautomatic rifles as “assault weapons,” say guns “go off accidentally,” infer AR15s are capable of full-automatic fire, employ the phrase “gun violence,” and display background screen icons (Browning High Power for example) in reports on violent assaults even when the weapon used was a knife. If journalists are going to bang on authoritatively about something, shouldn’t they know what they’re talking about? Considering network news is for many people their sole source of information, isn’t it important for journalists use proper terminology? Improper use of terms can confuse and mislead the public with respect to laws, regulations, and the types of firearms owned by citizens. I’ve dropped notes to journalists apprising them of proper terms when they used them incorrectly and all responses were cordial. Scott Goldberg of ABC News who incorrectly claimed bump stocks turned semiautomatic rifles into machine guns, refused to respond. Chris, a reporter in the Kansas City news market, agreed that news reports employ biased terminology. He revealed when discussing firearms, incorrect terms are actually provided through press releases issued by Police Public Information Officers relative to a crime under investigation and in scripts written by producers. Journalists are also guided by playbooks listing approved vocabulary that reflect political bias. For example abortion supporters are called “Pro-Choice” even though the choice promoted is abortion and opponents, who call themselves Pro-Life, are instead labeled “Anti-Abortion” or “Anti-Choice” hardly neutral or objective. Chris revealed he was chastised by his boss for saying “illegal alien” instead of the approved term “undocumented immigrant.” Job security enforces compliance.⁷

Perhaps at no time in American history has the meaning of words mattered more. Consider how for the past 50+ years the Left’s agenda driven political ideology has shaped America. Their control over public education is monolithic, they own pop-culture, the movie, music, and entertainment industries, dominate print and broadcast journalism, influence Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish denominations, and have invaded professional sports. In public education, they write the narrative and point of view allowed to be taught to such a degree, classrooms are little more than indoctrination centers. As a teacher I came up against the Liberal’s hegemonic sway over what kids are taught and their ‘Edstapo’ goons on constant prowl for heretics and dissenters (especially true in SocialIST studies departments). There are ways of being burned at the stake without using fire. Spoon feeding a biased curriculum to an unknowing gullible captive audience is bad enough but perhaps worse is what they leave out. Political Correctness, invented by Stalin,⁸ dictates what kids are taught on every issue from global warming, immigration, economics, the Constitution, and gender bending, to the meaning of the 2^nd Amendment. Not taught the other side? They don’t even know one exists!

For years I’ve warned regardless of how many 2^nd Amendment victories are won, America is always a mass shooting and Supreme Court appointments away from losing everything. Fewer Americans than ever today grow up exposed to firearms whether through hunting, target practice, or competition. Their source for information on firearms comes from pop-culture, news and social media, and public education all dominated by liberals hostile to the 2^nd Amendment. At some point in their life, an individual is responsible for searching out the truth on any issue. But it doesn’t work that way. Americans are too intellectually lazy to bother. Rather than the rebuke so richly deserved for indolent self-inflicted ignorance, with patience and perseverance the great-unwashed must be educated. Hence this primer. Based on statements in the news and social media, to some degree non-gun owners seem to believe anyone can walk into a gun store, hand over cash, and walk out a few minutes later with a firearm. Is this true?

Only those legally eligible can purchase firearms and only in the state of their residence. Age requirements apply; 18 for rifles and shotguns, 21 for handguns, and they must present a valid drivers’ license. If expired, suspended, revoked, or they moved without updating the address on their license, purchase is denied. Everything is in order, can they now buy a gun? No. They must complete federal form 4473 providing identifying information; name; date and place of birth, social security number, and so forth. Next they’re required to answer a series of questions including who is the actual purchaser of the firearm. Buying it for someone else, a “straw-purchase,” is prohibited. Additional questions include; are they a convicted felon, under felony indictment, a fugitive from justice, drug user, dishonorably discharged from the military, renounced their citizenship, in the country illegally, not a U.S. citizen, subject to a restraining order, or if they have been convicted of domestic violence, misdemeanor or not. A yes answer to these questions means they cannot buy a firearm. An untruthful answer is a felony punishable by federal prison, fines, and loss of the right to own firearms, vote, and hold state or federal jobs…forever. Suppose they lie?

Once form 4473 is completed and signed by a customer, gun stores must call the F.B.I.’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Police agencies and the military are required by law to provide information on prohibited individuals to the F.B.I. who, in turn, enter it into a centralized data base. Upon receiving a request for authorization to sell a gun from a Federal Firearms License (FFL) holder, the F.B.I. searches its data base determining if the intended purchaser is not legally prohibited. It’s the F.B.I. who authorizes or denies sales. Suppose a buyer has no criminal record but is mentally unstable? Information on those adjudicated through a legal process as “mentally defective” or having been institutionalized, is also entered into the F.B.I.’s data base and they will be denied purchase. Can’t an FFL just skip all this?

Commercial gun sales can only be made by FFLs. Information on each firearm they receive through purchase, trade, and so forth, must be entered into a logbook along with information as to whom it is ultimately sold. Logbooks are subject to random inspection by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, and Firearms [BATF]. Whether storefront or homebased, FFLs must be able to account for every gun taken in and or sold. Data entry discrepancies may lead to revocation of the FFL and felony prosecution. If the business is sold or closes, logbooks and all 4473 forms are transferred to the BATF, a form of registration. If denied purchase at a gun store, can’t prohibited persons buy firearms at gun shows through some kind of “loophole?”

Gun show promoters lease venues for their events in turn renting space to FFLs, often gun stores. All laws and requirements with respect to buying and selling guns apply at gun shows. Private sales may occur but typically comprise hunting rifles, shotguns and relics. Police officers and AFT Agents are often on hand supervising compliance. Only a miniscule number of criminals purchase firearms at gun shows. Typically they obtain them through burglary and theft. But what about these machine guns we keep hearing about. Can’t anyone walk in and out of a gun store with machine guns?

In 1934, Congress passed the National Firearms Act [NFA] regulating various firearms and devices commonly known as “silencers,” but its main focus was submachine guns, those capable of firing continuously with one pull of the trigger. Submachine guns were not banned. Instead, owners paid a $200 stamp tax and registered the firearm with the federal government.⁹ The Gun Control Act [GCA] of 1968 was interpreted by the BATF to prohibit the importation of fully automatic firearms by civilians. In 1986, the GCA was amended by the Hughes Amendment (Representative Charles Hughes, Democrat New Jersey) prohibiting civilian possession of full-automatic firearms manufactured after 19 May, 1986. To sell and or purchase firearms covered by the GCA, individuals apply for and obtain a special license from and register the firearm with the federal government paying required fees.¹⁰ Title I FFL’s pay a Special Occupation Tax to sell full-automatic firearms. This elevates them to title III hence the common but inaccurate term “class III license.” GCA applicants must meet all legal requirements for ownership, submit to a 6 to 12 month BATF criminal background investigation, provide finger print cards and passport sized photos, pay a $200 stamp tax, and register the firearm with the BATF. Because no full-automatic guns produced after May of 1986 may be sold to civilians, their pool is extremely limited translating into stratospheric prices.¹¹ The idea, as my son says, that “some edgy teenager” can afford one is preposterous. Although not an edgy teenager, add me to the preposterous list.

Yes, the sear portion of an AR, and other semiautomatic rifles, can be cut and modified to allow for full automatic fire. But, there will be no selective fire option. It can now be fired only fully automatic. Anyone caught with such a modified weapon faces 10 years+ in a federal prison, loss of the right to ever be in possession, let alone own, firearms, loss of the right to vote, and hundreds of thousands in fines. May I make a recommendation to anyone considering this modification? Don’t. You will get caught. It’s possible to modify or buy an already modified sear. It’s a small piece of metal and, as long as it’s not installed in a rifle, no problem, right? Wrong. Mere possession of a sear, modified to allow fully automatic fire, is considered the same as possessing a fully automatic rifle with all the same penalties. You will get caught. Once again, don’t do it. If you must fire one, patronize a gun range that rents these rifles. They’re fun but you’ll probably leave realizing how impractical they are for self-defense. Sustained controlled accurate fire? Yeah, sure.

Not every gun owner in America supports let alone belongs to a pro-2^nd Amendment organization or gun club, not even close. Nevertheless, when the Left attacks and besmirches these organizations, they serve for liberals as surrogates for all gun-owners and that means you. The Left works off an old and well established ideology and doctrine; the will of the individual must be bent to and subordinated to will of the state. Private ownership of firearms has no place in such a world view and neither do inalienable rights. It’s our job to educate family, friends, and neighbors about the truth because it will not happen in tax payer financed public schools and universities.

1¹ at http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/20/02/hillary-clinton-blames-vegas-attack-nra/html.

2² Emily Zanotti, 2 October 2017, “Insane: The Worst Twitter Responses To The Tragedy in Las Vegas,” The Daily Wire, at www.dailywire.com/news/21/02/10/2017.

3³ Peter Hasson, The Daily Caller, “All-Out War Against The NRA Begins After Las Vegas Massacre, 2 October 2017, at http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/02/the-left-is-using-the-vegas-massacre-to-wage-all-out-war-against-the-nra/

4⁴ Breitbart.

5⁵ Alexander Kacala, “From Lady Gaga to Taylor Swift, Celebrities Respond to Yesterday’s Las Vegas Attack,” at http://hornetapp.com/stories/las-vegas-attack/amp/

6⁶ Todd Woodward, Editor, “Downrange: “Teacher, Leave Gun Guys Alone,” Gun Tests 8 (August, 2013), 2. Lily Eskelsen Garcia is the vice president of the National Education Association, America’s largest teacher’s union which is also a major donor and supporter of the Democrat Party. She was speaking before a Netroots Nation Conference attended by 3,000 “progressive activists” leaders in the drive to forge a Leftwing consensus in public education curriculum in the classroom and political activism without.

7⁷ Email from Chris, “AK-47 ‘Assault Rifle,” KCTV 5 News, 6 December, 2007 to the author.

8⁸ Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel, The VENONA Secrets (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2000), 58.

9⁹ David Higginbotham, “Gun Laws 101: Nations Firearms Act of 1934,” Guns.com at ww.guns.com/2013/01/03,

10¹⁰ NRA-ILA, “Fully Automatic Firearms” Thursday July 29, 1999, at http://www.nraila.org

11¹¹ NFA Class II Weapons at http://www.oldglorygunsandammo.com. A brief online check found average prices for used pre1986 Colt M16s going for $31,000 to $39,000 thousand dollars. Others were; Price On Request, Yeah, that’s right. Only The Best Guns at http://www.onlythebestfirearms.com/nfa1.html.

"News Media", gun grabbers, guns, Junk Science, Law, Media, Politics, Schools and campuses, Voting

Law and Order: Western Society under Siege Part IV

December 13, 2018 Yitzhak Goldstein 2 Comments

Experiences living in California’s Bay Area, as a public high school teacher later for more than two decades in the Midwest, and now witnessing what is transpiring in the body politc convinces me the Left will stoop to any fabrication, dirty trick, smear, and hypocritical double standard to advance their agenda regardless of who is destroyed. Their strategy requires identifying certain groups to be targeted and demonized. Nothing unifies people like a bogeyman. Trashed and bashed by pop-culture for years, Christians have long served as a Leftist fave. They afford ready-made props useful in riling up the ignorant, the superstitious and conspiracy addled, bitter middle-aged feminists, malcontents perpetually angry and bitter about their lives, radical nihilists, anyone with an axe to grind, and those who despise G-d’s natural order galvanizing them in support of various faux crusades. All too often these intellectual lumpen have no idea they are pawns advancing a greater political cause and destined not to sup at victory’s banquet table. Now Police officers have become the current sacrificial lamb offered up to the eye of the hoi polloi storm.

Unlike war, wherein soldiers typically face death only on the battlefield, men and women donning the uniform of a police officer step onto the battlefield every day they go to work. The enemy doesn’t wear uniforms and they have access to weapons, vehicles, supplies, and technology. They live in plain sight, undetected, on the battlefield be it urban, suburban or rural and always outnumber the good guys. Police officers don’t fight enemies in a foreign land but here, at home. Enemy soldiers can locate their residences attacking them and their families where they live, a la Mexico. Unlike portrayals on the silver screen, most work in single officer squad cars. Backup may be minutes or hours away or nonexistent. Instead of facing the enemy as part of a unit, they typically face the enemy alone. Instead of decompressing back at base camp with fellow soldiers before rotating back to the U.S., police officers go home to families who can’t possibly understand the distant gaze in the eyes of men and women who see and face too much death and suffering. Police officers can only engage the enemy after he has fired on them first. When executing search and arrest warrants on known violent murderers, officers can only use deadly force if they are first attacked by the enemy. The level of stress they face is manifested through unusually high rates of depression, alcohol abuse, divorce, and suicide. Citizenry seemed unconcerned with the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of hardened violent criminals lose on the streets and millions more in prison. If united, they would form an unstoppable army of rage, murder, rape, and destruction. This is why police officers are called the “Thin Blue Line,” a tiny army standing between humanity and the most blood-thirsty murderous army ever assembled. Who has their back? Lieutenants and captains whose only interest is climbing the promotional ladder? Police Chiefs who view their job as a public relations experience ready and willing to throw anyone under the bus who threatens their reputation or political aspirations? Or citizens who don’t want to see cops in their rear view mirrors when speeding but are furious they aren’t guarding their homes 24/7 from burglars? Although putting their lives on the line to protect them, the liberal Jihad has singled out police officers as props to promote their political agenda. This they do by promoting a false narrative that cops are the point of the white man’s spear in a war of genocide against the black race.

An agenda takes shape when one recognizes for Black Lives Matter (BLM) and their Leftist allies, the only blacks who “qualify” as victims of shootings are those killed by cops or whites. The enormously larger number of black homicide victims in “Chiraq” (gang slang for Chicago), 677 from January to March (2016) alone, consisted of black on black murder but BLM, the New Black Panthers, and the white liberal media refuse to recognize or address who is doing the killing.¹ Over its Fourth of July, Chicago experienced 11 people gunned down and another 50 wounded in one weekend. Many of the black children were what Millennials refer to as “collateral damage.” BLM’s website declares it’s working to create a world where blacks are no longer targeted for “demise” by whites and the police but, they make no mention of the epidemic of black on black violent crime and the blacks who have targeted each other for demise. Memphis, Tennessee, for example, is so bad that “98 percent of Tennessee’s other communities have a lower crime rate. In 2015, 74.5 percent of Memphis’ homicide victims were black and 68.3 percent were under the age of thirty-five” along with 435 children who were “shot at.” What have liberals, including the New York Times and BLM, said about the crisis in Memphis? Nothing. Not even a word that, in 2015, all 145 black murder victims were killed by other blacks.²

The New York Times, president Obama, and other liberals blamed the shooting of Michael Brown, (Ferguson, Missouri), on the racism of the city’s mostly white police force signaling to protestors they should express themselves which they did through looting, rioting, and assaults.³ As the size and threat of the roiling violent mob mushroomed out of control in Ferguson, the mayor pleaded with Missouri Governor, liberal Democrat Jay Nixon, to send the State Police and National (sic) Guard. But Nixon fiddled while this proverbial Rome burned.⁴ BLM, Obama, and the Liberal Media used Michael Brown to “prove” racism was endemic to white police officers but where were they and the New York Times when 9-year old Jamyla Brown was shot doing homework in her Ferguson, Missouri home? There were protests but they were in nearby St. Louis following the police shooting of eighteen year-old Mansur Ball-Bey during a drug raid (19 August 2015). The gun Bey pulled on police was stolen and officers retrieved 3 more guns and a quantity of crack cocaine in his possession. Demonstrators, the blind, the gullible, shrieking moms, and those seething with rage and racial hatred pushed the notion of police as the tip of the white race’s war of extinction against the black race. Soon rocks, bricks, and bottles filled the air, cars were set fire, buildings trashed, looted, and burned, and police, trying to save lives and restore order, were assaulted as well.⁵ In each riot, Ferguson and St. Louis, (and later, Baltimore) the police were prevented by government officials (liberal Democrats) from doing their job. White residents caught at the epicenter of these riots and found themselves targeted for assault by virtue of their skin color, and dialed 911, were told they were on their own. And yet the liberal media refused to call this violent savagery a riot instead employing the gonadophobic politically correct term “unrest.”⁶ I was a public high school teacher at the time and a liberal teacher (but, I repeat myself) chastised me for using the terms “riot” and “looters,” because they are “racist.” I asked, if he and other liberals automatically assumed “riot” and “looter” applied to blacks, who was being racist? And, if many if not most rioters and looters turn out to be one race or another, what benefit is there in lying about this? He said it didn’t matter. Those terms were forbidden. Does not this craven supine approach to addressing violent crime by the Left signal to criminals that, whatever they do, theft, burglary, rape, and violent rampages, it will be rationalized away and excused as long as committed by minorities? What justice then is promised to victims? Why does it seem as if the political leaders and media personalities most hair-pulling furious about racism in America are also the most lily white? Caucasians so white they’d disappear if they fell into a snowbank? These are the liberal whites whose income precludes contact with people of a darker hue unless staying in a hotel or ordering a meal. Isn’t that called “projection?”

Under no circumstances can Liberals admit the truth about race and crime. To do so would undermine what they are teaching America’s young in public schools, reinforced through their party propaganda organs, the liberal media, that blacks are numinous victims and whites, perennial oppressors. If white children grow up guilt ridden enough to accept this view, they will vote to purge their shame by supporting the Left’s political and social remedies…socialism and the end of individual liberty in America. Whipping up racial conflict advances the Left’s agenda. For example, the liberal New York Times trumpeted the ‘police war on blacks’ narrative declaring “the killing of young black men by police is a common feature of African-American life and a source of dread for black parents from coast to coast.” The Times also published a statistic from a 2014 study claiming “Black males are 21 times more likely to be shot dead by police than are young white males.” This is a lie. Killing of blacks by police is “rare” but black on black murder is commonplace. Even the Washington Post, marching orders for liberals, conceded of the 258 blacks shot and killed by police in 2015, most were committing serious assaults against the officer! In 2014, 6,095 blacks were victims of homicide, almost all killed by other blacks. Even if police shootings were eliminated, the impact on this statistic would be negligible. In reality, blacks “are responsible for a death rate ten times that of whites in urban areas.” Young black men commit homicides at a rate nearly ten times that of whites and Hispanics, combined. This “astronomically high homicide commission rate means that police officers are going to be sent to fight crime disproportionately in black neighborhoods, where they will more likely encounter armed shooting suspects.” And they will be shooting at the cops.⁷

Does it not make sense? Most crime, especially violent crime, occurs in black not Asian neighborhoods so, where should meager police resources be directed? To keep an eye on Japanese people? Armed “exchanges” between bad guys and cops will most often occur in high-crime neighborhoods, which means black neighborhoods because that’s where the armed bad guys live and “work.” In the study cited for its hit-piece, The New York Times’ “study” ignored this reality and that the study actually revealed 62 percent of those shot by police “were resisting arrest or assaulting a police officer” as was Michael Brown. Yet the New York Times insisted in claiming “many police officers see black males as expendable figures on the urban landscape, not quite human beings.”⁸ Perhaps blinded by a political bias that oozes from its pages, the Times has it backward. The cops are trying to halt the epidemic of violence in black neighborhoods. It’s the thugs and hoodlums, gunning down each other, moms, dads, and their kids who view each other as expendable.

Chicago’s nightmare of young black males gunning down each other has been visited upon other cities. Cleveland, Ohio, is a majority black city in which “more than ninety-one percent of the other communities have a lower crime rate than Cleveland.” Oakland, California, ranked by Forbes as the 3^rd most dangerous city in America, is majority-black and 99 percent of other cities in the state have lower violent crime rates. Baltimore, my old stomping ground, is also majority-black and has set records for homicides the past several years. Like other black majority cities, its Mayor, Chief of Police, City Council, and Board of Education are black yet the “Black Press,” and the National Association of Black Journalists racializes each shooting between black males and white cops. Even violent black criminals, who prey on their communities, are portrayed as victims. These hyper-racial stories generate “high web traffic which translates into job security” for black journalists. But black on black violence generates little interest in the black community including social media. Perhaps because it was struggling financially, Ebony, a black magazine, commenced a “Save Our Boys’ campaign as if blacks are being slaughtered.” Apparently blacks comprise Twitter’s largest demographic and they employ hash-tags “to make black topics go viral” creating in the process “martyrs of the movement and construct racial grievances.” Through Black Twitter, activists can quickly mobilize protests, backlashes, boycotts, and flash mobs. Movie producer Spike Lee used it to publish what he thought was George Zimmerman’s (Trayvon Martin case) address. It wasn’t and the people living there were under grave threat. Yet none of the outrage in the black community, legitimate or manufactured, address the problem that less than six-percent of America’s population, who are black, commit most of its murders and its victims are black.⁹

In order to indoctrinate, mold, and shape future voters to accept their vision of a world in which the will of the individual must be bent to the volition of the state, the Left must instill guilt for all racial crimes, past and present, into white children. These children, as young adults, must make restitution for the sins of the white race against all peoples of color by supporting the Left’s massive socialist agenda. They must look the other way with respect to black crime, blame victims not the bad guys, and not criticize the hate fest leading to the ambush and murder of the very police officers protecting their young liberal upper middleclass white lives.

1¹ Taleeb Starkes, Black Lies Matter: Why Lies Matter to the Race Grievance Industry (North Charleston, South Carolina, Createspace Independent Publishing Platform, 2016), 52-57.

2² IBID. 62-64.

3³ Heather McDonald, The War On Cops (New York, N.Y., Encounter Books, 2016), 8-9.

4⁴ David Carson, “Ferguson Mayor Asks Where National (sic) Guard Was,” Gov. Nixon Pledges More,” November 20, 2014, St. Louis Post Dispatch, at http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/ferguson-mayor-asks-where-national-guard-was-gov-nixon-pledges/article343a2224-Ad61-54fb-b5ac99957F7.amp.html.

5⁵ Starkes, 66-67.

6⁶ McDonald 11.

7⁷ IBID. 17.

8⁸ IBID. 17-18.

9⁹ Starkes, 68-73.

"News Media", authoritarian swine, gun control, gun grabbers, guns, hoplophobia, Law, Media, mindset, Political philosophy, Politics, Schools and campuses, self defense, Sellouts and traitors, So Much Stupid!

Law and Order: War on Western Society Part III

October 26, 2018 Yitzhak Goldstein 2 Comments

On my 91^st day of employment with Lockheed Missiles and Space, Sunnyvale, California, I became a member of Local 508, Machinist and Aerospace Workers’ Union, an AFL-CIO affiliate. How odd considering I hadn’t joined and, I’m not even a Democrat. When asked about this, my manager said union membership was a condition of employment. What? Who hired me, Lockheed or the Union? He answered; “Lockheed,” but “the contract negotiated between the company and union stipulates all non-managerial employees automatically become union members after 90 days. Dues are also deducted automatically from your paycheck.” But, I’m the one who found, pursued, and won this job with no help from anyone else, thank you, I protested. “If you quit the union, you’ll be fired” was his response. Well, if there’s no choice in the matter, why not attend the meetings? What an eye opener.

It could have been a B-grade movie; Clash of the Hillbillie Pig Roast Meets Angry Biker Bar. Venomous “Us versus them” class-warfare invective laced with hatred of management, the college educated, and rich people, were hurled back and forth like darts, each adding his own poison to the tips. So asinine and uneducated were the inflamed assertions and chanted slogans, they placed validity for each member’s high school diploma in jeopardy. It was eerily reminiscent of the simpleminded claptrap spouted by ignorant, backward, and gullible unionized Appalachian hillbillies, an area where once I had the misfortune to live. Superstitious and highly combustible with conspiratorial rumors,¹ they fought to keep wages up with threats of strikes even during President Carter’s wretched economy. They drove one business after another from the region ensuring it remained trapped in a quicksand-like poverty of their own making. At least Local 508 members could read, they had a newsletter.

It was a masterpiece organ of radical rage-filled propaganda; 100% pure liberal Democrat Party politics demonizing free markets and every Republican ever born. It wouldn’t have shocked me to find Vladimir Lenin, raised from the grave, passing out Hammer and Sickle armbands at meetings. My union brothers would’ve made Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini proud. Italy’s flamboyant dictator, fave among American intellectuals, adopted Georges Sorel’s Syndicalism which held revolutionaries could only achieve power through organizing and radicalizing trade-unions. Thereafter, “society could be divided by professional sectors of the economy” organized into guilds or unions.² On 7 August, 2018, Missourians, walking in the steps of Mussolini’s Fascists, took a giant step back from freedom toward that goal voting no on Prop A.

The very idea one’s neighbors could vote in the first place on conditions of employment, including union membership, using instrumentalities of government to force their will on others, is obnoxious to the very notion of liberty. Forced unionism is unconstitutional and as anti-freedom as it is anti-American. Above market union wages are sustained only by restricting other’s access to employment. It means limiting, not expanding jobs thus crushing the state economy. Clinging to a bankrupt and an anachronistic 1930s socialist economic model ensures Missouri will remain mired in longsuffering stagnant economic growth. It translates into thousands of lost jobs, a flat-line tax base, and few opportunities beyond the agricultural sector as companies, deciding it makes economic sense to avoid forced union states, go elsewhere. Seeking job opportunities, Missouri’s young will have to leave as well. To survive, businesses that remain will replace union workers with robots and illegal aliens. Way to go guys. Is it possible those voting “no” on Prop-A are so self-centered or such dolts they don’t realize union dues provide the major source of funding for the Democrat Party? The same party that elects politicians determined to abolish the 2^nd Amendment and outlaw the firearms you possess? I understand autoworker and bulldozer Bolsheviks may be too selfish to consider the rights of fellow Missourians and pesky ideas like freedom, but what happened to the rest of you? If you voted “no” on Prop A, don’t dare tell me you also support the 2^nd Amendment because the latter is a Constitutional right. No sir. You’re either ignorant or a hypocrite no different than Gun-Confiscationist liberals supporting only those parts of the Constitution furthering their agenda. How dare you claim support for liberty when you’re so willing to deny it to others. If you voted for forced unionism, don’t ask me to work with you on any cause from this day forward. You’ve disgraced yourselves and you’ve disgraced your state. Well, well, I see minimum wage (socialism) and medical marijuana (first step toward total legalization, like Potorado) are on the November ballot. Gee, I wonder how people will vote. At my age I’ve learned looking the other way with respect to even the smallest injury to liberty and compromising with fools only begets less liberty and more fools. Thank God we can still vote with our feet.

If not already busy with a coalition to Save Our Dime, by removing Constitution-hating FDR’s visage off its face, as well as the Committee to Re-Name Washington, D.C., because, after all, George shouldn’t be saddled with connection to that stinking crime scene on a hill, yet a new cause beckons.

With labor union and Democrat stronghold Baltimore at is epicenter, Maryland is unlikely to ever glow red instead of blue. Ironically, Ronald Reagan won my home state (Go TERPS!) in 1980 and again in 1984 with 52.51 to Mondale’s 47.02 percent of the vote. Although Reagan carried 22 of 23 counties (Prince Georges the lone reprobate), the election was still close.³ This demonstrates a perversion of representative democracy in which populous urban centers inhabiting tiny areas, dictate law and policy to geographically vastly larger surrounding suburban and rural areas possessing significantly different cultural, religious, social, and political values. America’s founding fathers would be appalled. They didn’t fight a long bloody war in order to reestablish a form of tyranny just overthrown. Regrettably the Reagan Revolution was followed by the equivalent of worn brakes; unable to stop and disinclined to slow government’s inexorable massive growth and leftward trajectory, known as the Bushes. Once residual Reaganites were rounded up and banished to the hinterlands, conservative ramparts were scaled and breached crumbling under enormous pressure from hordes of Liberal Northeastern Carpetbaggers swarming to the Old Line State swelling government in Washington, D.C. to corpulent Jabba the Hut size. The effect was that of parasites feeding on a helpless host imparting a fatal infection. We never had a chance. With stocks of conservative anti-biotic exhausted, parasites flung aside their drained and emaciated host oozing across the border into Virginia. Soon it too was stricken with the dread liberal infection brought by Carpetbaggers who understand they have but to outnumber natives by one vote in any district to win elections. Once in power, their policies soon led to a huge influx of illegal aliens who know for which party to vote, wink wink. And so the fever raged destroying a former bastion of liberty home to greats like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Robert E. Lee. Now the Carpetbaggers are on the move again heading further south into North Carolina. Callers to a recent radio program from Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina shared tales of woe wrought by what Liberal Carpetbaggers had done to their once fair and free states. Callers from Illinois and New York chimed in explaining most of their state’s counties were fairly conservative but, due to swollen population centers, Chicago, New York, and the liberal pustules inhabiting them, they live under a boot of tyranny holding in contempt their cultural, social, and religious values. Hence I’ve been asked to support LCBICA, the Liberal Carpet Bagger Immigration Control Act. For what’s left of free America to survive, people must unite, drive liberal Carpetbaggers from their states, and take power back from workshop socialist unions. It’s a matter of life and death. Watch your borders. Be vigilant. Watch your borders.

For the Left, everything is political. Nothing exists outside their ideology. Any cause they support, from abortion to minimum wage, is done to further the Great Project; bringing all aspects of human activity, social, economic, religious, and political under state control. And they are the state. For this to work, American government must be transformed from a federal into a national system. Check that one off the list. They must overturn the Constitution subordinating all local and state political activities to “federal”⁴ control. In order to trick Americans into accepting their vision for a Brave New World, Leftists teach false narratives to America’s youth filling their heads with lies about the nation’s founding principles, and censoring out anything undermining this indoctrination. Good guys become boogeymen and boogeymen become the good guys. The same holds true with the Left’s war on the police. It’s nothing personal, it’s an agenda.

Black Lives Matter (BLM) is one of the radical Left’s hammers against Western values. Created by Marxist Lesbians, BLM propagates the false narrative white America, acting through armed surrogates, the police, is waging a war of genocide against black America. They preach, and their stooges in the white liberal media repeat, the preposterous assertion the moment a black man steps from his residence, he must run for his life because he’s hunted by gun-slinging mad-dog white men driving pickup trucks adorned with Trump stickers and Confederate Battle Flags. Spitting tobacco juice and swilling Bud-Lite, these unshaven rednecks in BBQ stained ‘Wife-Beaters’ scour the highways and byways looking for black men to drag through the streets, chained to the back of their trucks or to shoot down as target practice. And dadgummit, if one should slip through their fingers, thank God for America’s racist white cops,⁵ they’ll get them, by Jiminy. This delusional fantasy is separated from reality as far as possible. For those accusing me of being hyperbolic, have you spent time on websites for groups like BLM, Pantifa, the New Black Panthers, and others? Were you ever a cop? Did you ever live in Baltimore or Philadelphia’s inner cities as I did? If so, you’d know who has to be scared stepping through their front door. Hint; it’s not who BLM says it is. Why is it so important for liberal teachers to fill the minds of young kids with guilt over being white? If they can be made to feel responsible for all that has gone wrong in minority communities, how much more amenable will they be to the radical socialist agenda when of age to vote? The ludicrous claim Trump’s, “Make America Great,” slogan is secret code promising followers a return to slavery⁶ has already had its intended effect among Millennials.

Liberals promised Barrack Obama’s election would bridge and transcend racial divides thus bringing about racial healing. Would that it were true. Born in Hawaii and growing up there and in Indonesia, Obama as president attempted to appropriate the American “Black experience,” which he was never part of, allowing him to cast critics of his socialist agenda as racists. His administration became “the most anti-law enforcement administration in memory.” From Milwaukee to Baltimore, crime sky-rocketed and “Homicides in the country’s 50 largest cities rose nearly 17 percent in 2015, the greatest surge in fatal violence in a quarter of a century” reversing a “two-decade long decline.”⁷ In addition, murders of police officers, by ambush and direct assault, spiked dramatically under Obama. “Root-cause liberals” who never shy from blaming everyone but themselves for failed government policies, naturally singled out poverty, unemployment, and racism, especially police oppression, to explain horrifying crime rates in America’s inner cities.⁸ And how did they explain the fearful spike in murder of police officers? Many on the left claim cops have it coming. When minorities kill cops, its self-defense, justifiable homicide.⁹ This attitude; cops deserve to be killed because they’re the bad guys who gun-down blacks in cold blood, continued unabated even after the facts about the execution style murder of two New York police officers became widely disseminated in the news and on social media.¹⁰ Liberal’s method to address root-cause solutions to crime, throwing billions of other people’s dollars at poverty and unemployment, failed. Inner-city crime remains epidemic.¹¹ They failed because they’re based on false premises refusing to address the fact 94 percent of blacks are killed by other blacks not whites or cops.¹²

Substantial political dividends accrue to liberals capable of enforcing Party (Democrat) discipline engendered through fear-mongering and lies. For leftists, including college professors and young Marxist revolutionaries, racial division stoked to red-hot hatred and violence is the vanguard of the long hoped for ignition of revolution in America. BLM and their white supporters claim incarceration of blacks represents a plot to put them in concentration camps. Through drug laws, whites are “re-enslaving black Americans.” Liberals especially target “discretionary policing” meaning stopping and checking out “suspicious looking people” (if you’re a cop, you know one when you see one), before they can commit crimes. New York City’s “stop and frisk” program drastically reduced crime under Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. But liberal court challenges and protests against “profiling,” forced cops to back off. Now crime is out of control again and “a blood bath ensued and its victims were virtually all black.” When police back off, its “black people themselves who pay the greatest price.”¹³ In addition if anyone tells the truth, the liberal media, Hollywood, and Leftist Pop-Culture, spring into action destroying critics with accusations of racism, the kiss of death these days. The media hounding Trump’s every step, never took Obama to task for his words and connection to subsequent racial violence in America.

Today white leftists push blacks to react with aggressive hostility and combativeness, including resisting arrest, when stopped by police. This makes the job much more dangerous for cops and increases the likelihood low-risk encounters explode into major scuffles. The type that lead to use of deadly force. But the left doesn’t care about the blacks it pushes to physically resist cops. They serve as props in the narrative white cops are waging war against blacks with revolution the only solution. Kind of reminds me of the 1960s. Fear and distrust have been promoted so heavily by the Left, it has spawned feelings of anger and resistance in black communities who now see all encounters with police as resulting from racism by whites attempting to control and suppress them. Anger against whites has birthed the “knock-out” game in which a black youth walks up to an unsuspecting white person punching him or her as hard as possible in the head trying to knock them out with one blow. Witnessed by many and broadcast throughout social media, nevertheless the white liberal media refuses to report on it because to do so would undermine the false narrative of a white war on blacks.¹⁴

For those arguing; but look at all the whites marching with BLM, keep in mind BLM views white liberals as individuals who have internalized and are blind to their racism. Conservatives, on the other hand, are openly and shamelessly racist. For blacks who believe all problems within their community are the result and fault of the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, “good and bad” whites are simply opposite sides of the same racist coin. The good ones are to be used and discarded.¹⁵ As for crimes committed by blacks, including O.J. Simpson, knock-out games, and violence in Kansas City’s Plaza,¹⁶ these are seen as collective acts of self-defense against an oppressive white society holding all the reins of power.¹⁷

In response to the Grand Jury’s decision not to indict officer Darren Wilson in the Ferguson, Missouri shooting of Michael Brown, President Obama said he understood the disappointment and anger in the black community. He made no mention of the rule of law or that a grand jury investigation ruled Wilson’s shooting was justifiable self-defense. Riots, looting, and assaults followed.¹⁸ Obama essentially declared the facts and forensic evidence didn’t matter. The white man was always guilty, no matter what, a view Obama had come to internalize as a youth.¹⁹ For example, Obama blamed Michael Brown’s shooting and riots on “lack of diversity” within the Ferguson Police Department, not the actions of Brown and those burning and looting.²⁰ At the time, Obama’s remarks seemed foolish and naïve. They weren’t. They express the same view as BLM; white people are born inherently racist and are the cause of all problems in all minority communities, thereby exculpating any crime committed by any black person no matter the circumstances. Without accepting that this is the point of view held by many in the debate on race and crime, it’s impossible to understand what is really driving the Left’s agenda.

1¹ It was a small town which I un-affectionately called “Dogpatch,” when, in 1972, while still in high school, I wrote an editorial in support of President Nixon’s reelection which was carried in a local newspaper. This sparked a meeting of outrage among town leaders as, they were almost all union Democrats. They concluded, no one my age could write such an editorial without help from dad. My parents had no idea I had written and submitted the letter. I concluded their level of astonishment was proportionate to their level of literacy. In 1974, my dad bought an Opel station wagon which was considered scandalous and led to meetings by the town’s movers and shakers. After all, the car was made in Germany. Had he bought a car made in Japan, the Witness Protection Program would have been the only option. Hatred of Asians was and is alive and well in parts of America.

2² Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, from Mussolini to the Politics of Change (New York, N.Y., Broadway Books, 2009), 36-37 (Paperback version).

3³ at http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik/United-States-presidential-election-maryland-1984.

4⁴ At this point, “Feral” government seems more apropos.

5⁵ In the BLM’s disturbed psyche, it you’re black and a cop, you’re still a white racist cop.

6⁶ Ralph Nader, “What Does Trump Mean By ‘Make America Great Again?” Huffington Post, December 15, 1017, at https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us5a341e29e4b02bd1c8c6066/amp.

7⁷ Heather McDonald, The War On Cops (New York, N.Y., Encounter Books, 2016), 1.

8⁸ IBID. 1.

9⁹ Jessica Chasmar, “Brooklyn Onlookers Cheered N.Y. Cop Killings at Murder Scene: They deserved it.” The Washington Times, Monday, 22 December, 2014, at http://www.washington.times.com/new/2014/dec/22/brooklyn-on-lookers-cheered-ny-cop-killings-at-murd/.

10¹⁰ Dave Urbanski, December 20, 2014, “NYPD Gets What They Deserve: Here’s How Some Celebrated the Shooting Deaths of Two Ambushed New York City Police Officers,” The Blaze, at http://www.theblaze.com/news/2014/12/20,nypd-gets-what-they-deserve-heres-how-some-celebrated-the-shooting-deaths-of-two-ambushed-new-york-city-police-officers/.

11¹¹ McDonald, 1-2.

12¹² Taleeb Starkes, Black Lies Matter: Why Lies Matter to the Race Grievance Industry (North Charleston, South Carolina, Createspace Independent Publishing Platform, 2016), 40-41.

13¹³ McDonald, 3.

14¹⁴ Starkes, 41-42.

15¹⁵ IBID. 42.

16¹⁶ Colin Flaherty, White Girl Bleed A Lot (Washington, D.C., WND Books, 2013), 164-166.

17¹⁷ Starkes, 45-46.

18¹⁸ McDonald, 3.

19¹⁹ Dinesh D’Souza, The Roots of Obama’s Rage (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2010), 57-126.

20²⁰ McDonald, 7-9.

"News Media", gun control, gun grabbers, hoplophobia, Law, Media, Politics, Schools and campuses, self defense, So Much Stupid!, Terrorism

War on Law and Order: Western Society under Siege Part II

October 14, 2018 Yitzhak Goldstein 1 Comment

ABBREVIATIONS AND VOCABULARY¹

BLM: Black Lives Matter NBP: New Black Panthers

RGI: Racial Grievance Industry SPLC: Southern Poverty Law Center

Before a drop of water fell from the skies, two outcomes were predictable with respect to recent hurricanes (Texas and Puerto Rico); looters would issue forth from the muck they inhabit and Leftists would grandstand commonplace weather events claiming manmade global warming as their cause. Now racism has been added to the mix. White journalist and author Sarah Jaffe declared on social media the Miami Police Department’s warning against looting demonstrates that; “The carceral (sic) [Spanish for jail or prison] state…is inseparable from white supremacy.”² Aren’t assumptions by liberals that looters are black racist? In any criminal investigation police ask who had a motive, how would they profit? Ever wonder why shrill proponents of man-made global warming typically are socialists and enemies of the 2^nd Amendment? Don’t see the connection? You should, they’re pounding this stuff into your kid’s heads at school. How would Leftists profit from American’s acceptance of manmade global warming? They say big problems require big government solutions but it’s really about surrendering individual liberty to the State and that mean’s them. Doesn’t anyone read anymore?³ The predictability of post-disaster looting these days is a sad commentary on societal degradation…like school shootings. After any major disaster, natural or manmade, can police protect people or are they on their own?⁴ Well, how are they doing now in the face of increasingly organized violence and riots? The Liberal Media, called “steno-pool typists for the Democrat Party” by radio talk show host Chris Plante, push narratives of police brutality against blacks causing inner-city “unrest” but are these narratives valid? In part one I began addressing whether or not it’s true the police, as charged, target black males for oppression and murder on behalf of the white race. This claim, dropped like napalm over inner-cities by the Left, ensures any encounter between police and blacks has the potential to explode into general violence and chaos.

Many in the Black community blame problems between races on the refusal of whites to even talk about race relations. Obama’s former Attorney General and international gun-runner Eric Holder (known in some circles as “Carlos the Jackass”) said America was a “nation of cowards” when it came to discussing race relations. Whites won’t discuss it. In addition, he claimed animus directed toward him and Obama was based on white racism.⁵ As a teacher, under a cloud of suspicion for being a, (cover your children’s ears) conservative, I was asked my opinion of Obama by students and colleagues. According to Holder, honesty and openness is the best way to promote race relations. Had I explained Obama, raised a communist, was waging a war against the principles contained in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, was deconstructing America’s Judeo-Christian foundations, hated the traditional family, and was dismantling economic policies that made America wealthy, wouldn’t my honesty have been a step toward “openness”? No, instead I’d have been branded a racist.⁶ For Holder and Leftists, the only acceptable starting point for discussions of race, crime, and the police is their perspective otherwise you’re automatically deemed a racist. Recall Obama’s claim lethal interactions between the police and black males stemmed from racism on the part of white officers? Was he right? Are police really the gravest threat to black males in America?

Consider the work of liberal University of Chicago and Yale professors Steven Levitt and John Donahue, respectively, whose national best seller, Freakonomics claims aborting black babies reduces crime. They argue unwanted and children born to single moms are typically black and more likely to grow up to become criminals. They conclude the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, (Roe v. Wade) is responsible for reducing crime in the 1990s because aborted black babies weren’t around to turn 18 in 1991 and commit crimes.⁷ M.I.T. professor Jonathan Grueber, Liberal mover and shaver behind Obama’s socialized national healthcare, reached the same conclusion.⁸ Levitt, Donahue, Grueber, and others within the population control movement, Leftists all, argue America can save itself a lot of trouble and money by ensuring black babies are never born. Liberals are the ones fanatically pushing abortion which typically takes the life of unborn black babies at a rate four times that of white babies. Nine hundred black babies are aborted every day in the U.S which comes out to 328,500 per year. Considering black women make up around 7% of the U.S. population, and have 35.6% of all abortions,⁹ one has to wonder why its angry bitter middle-aged liberal white women pushing abortion so hysterically. The ghosts of Sudan and Rwanda cry out. And then there is the inner-city homicide rate. By 26 July 2017, Baltimore, my old stomping ground,¹⁰ had reached 200 homicides¹¹ with 27 in a 30 day period between 11 August and 11 September, 2017.¹² They weren’t shot, stabbed, or bludgeoned to death by the police. So who then is waging war against blacks? BLM insists its cops acting as executioners on behalf of the white race.

According to Black journalist and author Taleeb Starkes, perhaps as detrimental to race relations as white indifference, if not worse, is the “Racial Grievance Industry.” This “industry,” consisting of BLM, NBP, SPLC, certain black politicians, and white dominated Left-wing organizations blame everything from black on black violence, poor education, and unemployment on white racism. Starkes asks; how can this can be true considering municipal governments, schools, police, and social programs in Baltimore, Detroit, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and other cities have been controlled not by whites but by black Democrats for decades? But BLM-RGI dismiss this fact claiming all problems afflicting the black community are the legacy and consequence of white racism. Starkes calls this the “Theory of Exploitivity”; any conflict between races is, always was, and always will be the result of white racism. Leftist mouthpieces for BLM-RGI; white college professors and the liberal media, assert “Racism is the end-all-be-all explanation” for problems in the black community therefore “no fact finding mission is necessary.” Any effort, study, and or investigation of problems within the black community whose starting point does not begin with the presumption of white racism as the root cause, is racist. End of discussion.¹³ For example, economist Thomas Sowell is black but his observation of a correlation between fatherless homes and Baltimore rioters and looters is considered racist if uttered by a white person¹⁴ and treasonous heresy if uttered by members of the black community.¹⁵ This echoes my experiences with liberals coast to coast; the only reason anyone could disagree with them is because they’re narrow-minded, racist, a Nazi, and stupid. Before dialogue on race relations is possible, promoters of the “Theory of Exploitivity” demand whites accept that they are inherently racist from birth and the cause of all problems between the races, then we’ll talk.¹⁶ In tandem with the RGI, white Liberals promote the notion simply being born a minority, race, sex, culture, or religion automatically renders one a victim of discrimination and racism by the dominant group, white males. Critical analysis of this presumption is taboo especially on college campuses where students enjoy an environment supportive of the free exchange of ideas.¹⁷ When debate on racial issues must begin with a stipulation of white guilt as the singular cause for all problems, is it any wonder BLM shrieks with outrage when others say; “all lives matter?”

Today, suburban middle class whites are told their comfortable gold-plated golf and tennis country-club lives are the result of slavery, exploitation, and colonial oppression of black and brown peoples. Indoctrination begins in grade school where little white children are taught they’re members of a privileged class who ensure their status atop the social and political hierarchy by denying participation in the good-life to all but members of their own race. This explains why whites want to build the “wall.” Playing on guilt instilled through brainwashing, this Marxist world-view is heavily promoted by Hollywood, by comedians, professional athletes, pop-singers, and reinforced by the Liberal Media and their handmaidens, Leftwing public school teachers. It takes little effort by college professors to administer the coup-de-grace teaching because white prosperity is built on racist exploitation, blacks are justified in rioting and looting. They are simply re-appropriating what was stolen from them in the first place. In addition, they teach, because whites control all institutions of political power, any problem in non-white communities must be the fault of whites.¹⁸ Your tax dollars at work.

Do not mistake BLM for a traditional civil rights organization. They’re not. They clash often with the old guard of the civil rights movement rejecting the non-violence of Dr. Martin Luther King in favor of belligerent confrontation and mob violence. Yusra Khogali, co-founder of the Toronto, Canada, BLM chapter declared the movement rejects the goals and tactics of the “old-guard” who led the civil rights movement in the 1960s. They reject equality, integration, and assimilation into mainstream American culture and life. Instead, they want revenge obtained through violence. Even Left-wing black “leaders” from Al Sharpton to Oprah Winfrey are denounced for not embracing violent revolution and vengeance against the white race.¹⁹ As for young (big surprise) whites seen marching with BLM, regardless of how much they sacrifice to the cause, they’re still considered racists by BLM and similar organizations. Being Caucasian means sharing collective guilt for any act of racism ever committed by any white person who ever lived, at any time in history. Therefore Caucasians are irredeemably racist.

Read BLM’s words for yourselves: “We are working to (re)build the Black Liberation movement.”²⁰ Liberation from what? During the 1960s, the “Black Power” movement and members of various “Black Liberation” organizations, led by Max Stanford, Stokely Carmichael, Jim Forman, Malcolm X, H. Rap Brown, Willie Ricks, Eldridge Cleaver, Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, and others broke away from Martin Luther King calling for violent confrontation and revolution against white power structures and rejected King’s notions of “universal brotherhood.” Living in Northwest Philly at the time, how could I forget their pernicious influence? Like BLM, they were black segregationists demanding nothing short of war, violence, revenge, and ultimate separation from the white race.²¹ In their minds because all aspects of American life; family, education, culture, law enforcement, and government comprise institutionalized racism, revolution and separation is the only answer to liberate and free the black race. The success, direction, and fate of black people must be wrested from the control of white hands.²² The goals of the Black Liberation movement, embraced by BLM and allies, are exclusive. Whites making common cause will be accepted, used, and discarded. No place exists for the white man in their brave new world.

BLM makes no bones about being at war with the white race. They declare their movement is an “ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically targeted for demise.”²³ Remarkably they are in a sense, correct. Black males are being targeted for extermination but, by other black males not the police or members of the white race! They claim Trayvon Martin’s “murder” (sic) by George Zimmerman was the catalyst for creation of BLM. Martin’s case was an example of police and white vigilantes on patrol looking for blacks to “murder.” BLM also attacks “black nationalism” and campaigns to “buy black” because it ignores “our sisters, queer and trans” blacks. They affirm “the lives of black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, black-undocumented folks” black felons and convicts, and blacks all “along the gender spectrum.”²⁴ Their worldview, seen through a Marxist-Lesbian lens, claim poverty in the black community is the consequence of genocide executed through a government controlled by whites. Blacks are in prison not because they’ve committed violent crimes you see, but are innocent victims rounded up by the state for internment in concentration camps. They assert “Black queer and trans folk bear a unique burden from a hetero-patriarchal society that disposes of us like garbage and simultaneously fetishizes us and profits off of us, and this is state violence.” Does this sound like people organized simply to ensure fair treatment from the police or does a much larger agenda emerge? Their societal model is a female-led communal village, rejection of the traditional Western family (pre-1980s..ish), and their slogan is “justice, liberation, and peace” identical to the slogan of Soviet inspired Communist guerrilla movements of Africa, Asia, Southeast Asia, and Latin America in the last century. They promise to dismantle “cis-gender privilege” and free black society from the grip of heterosexuality.²⁵ This is about Trayvon Martin?

Its clear reading BLM, NBP, and SPLC propaganda these movements aren’t about improving race relations or diffusing mistrust between blacks and the police. It’s about revolution. Communist revolution, baby. They want conflict, they want confrontation, and they want violent upheaval. Alleged white racism and police brutality are boogeyman myths effective in harnessing support in the black community, forming alliances with radical communist groups like Pantifa,²⁶ guilt ridden whites, and neutering opposition by menacing them with being damned a racist. Bitter fruit has already been harvested in the ambush and assassination of police officers by suspects high on BLM propaganda and hatred. But what of all the stories about cops shooting unarmed innocent blacks? Stay tuned.

1¹ To streamline the discussion and avoid ponderous repetition, please refer to these abbreviations.

2² Fox News, “Prestigious author compares arrests of looters to ‘white supremacy,’ 2017/09/11, at https://www.foxnews.com/prestigiousauthor. Jaffe is a Nation Institute [“think” tank sponsored by the far Leftist magazine The Nation] fellow, and writes on labor, “economic justice,” social movements, “gender” and other causes on the far Left. She writes for The Nation. The correct spelling is carcel.

3³ For scoffers, doubters, and the “Well you know Larry,” types, have you read: Environmental Overkill by Dixy Lee Ray and Lou Guzzo, Trashing the Planet by the same authors, The Satanic Gases by Patrick J. Michaels and Robert C. Balling, Jr., The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science by Tom Bethell, and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism by Christopher C. Horner? If not, get them, read them, free yourself from the lazy man’s brainwashing; pop culture. My acquaintance wouldn’t listen to me. After all, everyone says…

4⁴ Hurricane Katrina and George Bush’s role in causing it came up during a SocialIST studies department in-service at Lee’s Summit High School. A liberal colleague from another but “attached” to the SocialIST studies department, who I knew well, admonished me not to use the term “looter” because it was de facto racist. How so, I asked. He said it conjured images of black people looting. I responded, “You’re the one associating race with looting. I never mentioned race.” For the Left, truth does not matter.

5⁵ Terry Frieden, CNN at http://www.cnn.com.politics-holder-race-relations.

6⁶ I replied that Obama seemed like an intelligent, passionate, honest, and very likeable guy. I made no references to his politics nor did I ever criticize him. Ever. Massive prohibition on free speech for conservatives in public education forbade otherwise.

7⁷ “Did Steven Levitt, author of Freakonomics Get His Notorious Paper Wrong?” At http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/wp/wp2005/wp0515.pdf.

8⁸ Mona Charen, “Abortion-Distortion-and-Crime,” National Review (January 2, 2015) at http://www.nationalreview.com/article/395585/abortion-distortion-and-crime.htm.

9⁹ Abortion and Race at http://www.righttolifeofmichigan.org Most of those abortions occur among teen and pre-teen cohorts in the black community so it’s much worse; roughly 2% of black Americans having over 35% of all abortions.

10¹⁰ I attended Margaret Brent School #53, 100 East 26^th Street, Baltimore, Maryland, 21218.

11¹¹ Carrie Wells, “Baltimore Reaches 200 Homicide Mark for 2017,” The Baltimore Sun, at http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-200-homicides-20170726-story-htm.

12¹² “Baltimore Homicides: 27 homicides in the last 30 days,” Baltimore Sun, at http://www.baltimoresun.com/data.baltimoresun.com. The number had reached 242 by 5 September, 2017.

13¹³ Taleeb Starkes, Black Lies Matter: Why Lies Matter to the Racial Grievance Industry (Lexington, Kentucky, Createspace Independent Publishing Platform, 2016), 1-3.

14¹⁴ As part of the campaign to force me into retirement, because I “liked” a FB YouTube video of Professor Thomas Sowell making this statement, I was written up and accused of being racist. I was told my “like” was totally inappropriate and, because students could see it, I was in violation of a rather broad and vague (Union’s opinion) district policy. I had been on FB all of 3 weeks and was totally unfamiliar with how it worked. At issue was not the validity of Sowell’s observation. To paraphrase Tina Turner, With Liberals, what’s truth got to do with it, got to do with it? As an aside, the very white administrator who wrote me up never lived in Baltimore or Philadelphia’s inner city. I did…

15¹⁵ Thomas Sowell, “The Inconvenient Truth About Ghetto Communities’ Social Breakdown,” National Review, at http://nationalreveiew.com/articles/4178991/inconvenient-truth-about-ghetto-communities-social-breakdown-thomas-sowell.htm., May 15, 2015.

16¹⁶ Starkes, 3.

17¹⁷ Ann Coulter, Guilty: Liberal “Victims” And Their Assault On America (New York, N.Y., Crown Forum, a Division of Random House, 2008), 1-2, 8-9, 13.

18¹⁸ Perry Chiaramonte, “Black Lives’ leader defends looting in Yale lecture, 8 October, 2015, FOX NEWS, at; https://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/08/black-lives-leader-defends-looting-in-yale-lecture.html. See also: Dan McLaughlin, “The Ferguson Riots Are Nothing Like The Original Tea Party Protests,” The Federalist, at http://thefederalist.com/2014/08/the-ferguson-riots-are-nothing-like-the-original-tea-party-protests/. And: Jamaal Abdul-Alim, “Sociology Professor: Milwaukee Riots Not a Surprise,” Diverse Issues In Higher Education, at http://diverseducation.com/article/86025/.

19¹⁹ Starkes, 30-34.

20²⁰ At http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

21²¹ Daniel J. Boorstin and Brooks Mather Kelley, A History of the United States since 1861 (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc., 1990), 437-439. I grew up in the inner cities of Baltimore and Philadelphia during the 1960s and witnessed the Black Power movement and its consequences first hand.

22²² David Horowitz, Hating Whitey And Other Progressive Causes (Dallas, Texas, Spence Publishing Company, 1999), 82-83.

23²³ Black Lives Matter web page.

24²⁴ IBID. Its “sex,” not “gender” and there are only two; male and female. How far has mankind fallen that it is necessary to have to explain this?

25²⁵ IBID.

CIS-Gender refers to people who insist in identifying their sex with their anatomy. For example, a girl looks down, see’s “girl parts,” and concludes she’s a, well, girl…imagine that. Even in my former high school, kids were being pressured in using these terms, crafted by homosexuals, lesbians, and transvestites, to remove deserved stigma and opprobrium and transfer it instead to heterosexuals, God’s design for mankind. Black Liberation refers to armed struggle and revolution promoted by the former Black Panthers. They issued a call for black people to take up arms against white people to win liberation.

26²⁶ Antifa is the self-styled name of a radial collection of anarchists and communists, which began in Europe, opposing fascism by being fascists themselves. They are dedicated to overthrowing all vestiges of Judeo-Christian based Western Society and its philosophy of freedom. Violent and extreme, they wear panties over their faces to hide their identities hence the name Pantifa.

Thanks to my brother Mike for suggesting this topic, providing sources, and help for this article. We are both survivors of Baltimore’s inner-city as well as Philadelphia.

"News Media", gun control, gun grabbers, hoplophobia, Media, Politics, Schools and campuses, So Much Stupid!

So Penguin, about that book

April 26, 2018 Sheila Stokes 2 Comments

So little boss Hogg and his little Hogg sister are release a book to encourage taking rights, not privileges away from adults. Rights the little Hoggs are not even old enough to enjoy as they are still children. At least that’s how he referred to himself in his recent bullying session with Laura Ingraham.

The Hogg duo anxious to capitalize on their 27 seconds of fame have “written” a book. They must be paragons of organization. What with all the media appearance, school work and now managing to get a book released. All on their own. Amazing.

I received the following from a active TZP follower of facebook:

#NeverAgain has been the cry of the Jews for decades to remind people of the Holocaust under Nazi Germany.

Now, activist and high school student David Hogg is using the title “Never Again” for a book he is writing that will be published by Penguin Random House.

The book is about gun control. “A new generation has made it clear that problems previously deemed unsolvable due to powerful lobbies and political cowardice will be theirs to solve,” according to the preview of the upcoming book.

For anyone wishing to contact Penguin Random House about the title,

please call at 212-782-9000;

e-mail to: customerservice@penguinrandomhouse.com, RHAcademic@penguinrandomhouse.com, penguinpublicity@us.penguingroup.com, atrandompublicity@randomhouse.com, penguinpress@penguinrandomhouse.com

Should you wish to let Penguin books who have chosen to publish this know your opinion that’s how you can do so.

So thank you follower of TZP!!

Username

Password


Remember me

Forgot Password?
Join Us
Logged out successfully.

The Zelman Partisans