10/11/20

A Judge Filled with Love for Humanity

By: Cliff Kincaid

A Christian wife and mother with pro-family views, federal Judge Amy Coney Barrett is an example of how light can survive the darkness of America’s descent into demonic corruption so deep that it includes the dismemberment of live babies to harvest their body parts. As long as America can produce women who love their families and children, there is hope. President Trump’s nomination of Judge Barrett to the Supreme Court is enough to consider his legacy one of true conservatism.  It’s now up to the Senate to confirm her.

Introducing Judge Barrett to the nation, Trump said, “Her family is a core part of who Amy is. She opened her home and her heart and adopted two beautiful children from Haiti. Her incredible bond with her youngest child, a son with down syndrome, is a true inspiration. If confirmed Justice Barrett will make history as the first mother of school-aged children ever to serve on the U.S Supreme Court. That’s good. To her children, Emma, Vivian, Tess, John Peter, Liam, Juliet, and Benjamin. Thank you for sharing your incredible mom with our country. Thank you very much. Amy Coney Barrett will decide cases based on the text of the constitution as written.”

There is no “right” to abortion in that constitution.

In response, we have seen the re-emergence of what columnist Marc H. Rudov once called the “fascist feminists.” These feminists detest women who assume roles as successful wives and mothers and defend the unborn.

The media, always determined to maximize damage to Trump and/or his nominees, have run stories suggesting Barrett is too religious. They cite her membership in a Christian group where women were called handmaidens.  Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, referred to herself as the “handmaid of the Lord,” also translated as “servant of the Lord.”

As the trusted voice of far-left fascist feminism in the nation’s capital, the Washington Post ran a story in 2016 about Trump’s decision to pick Indiana Governor Mike Pence as his running mate that said, “Trump had a problem with women voters. Pence could make it even worse.” What was Pence’s problem? Well, he “has endorsed controversial legislation on abortion and Planned Parenthood.”  That means he wanted to limit or eliminate government funding for both.

Post reporter Katie Zezima neglected to mention that Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, was founded by Margaret Sanger, a revolutionary socialist and anti-Christian activist. She reported Democrats “wasted no time pouncing on Pence, whom they described as extreme, anti-woman and anti-gay.” Anti-woman? Pence favors the right to life of unborn women. He supports traditional marriage and human life.

The fascist feminists, like the United Nations, regard abortion, the act of destroying an unborn child, as a human right.

At the debate with Senator Kamala Harris, Pence said, “I’m pro-life. I don’t apologize for it.” He added, “I couldn’t be more proud to serve as vice president to a president who stands without apology for the sanctity of human life.”

Harris has no children of her own but says of her two stepchildren, “They are my endless source of love and pure joy.” Yet, as California Attorney General, with backing from Planned Parenthood, she prosecuted the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) for exposing trafficking in aborted baby parts. Videos showed Planned Parenthood executives discussing how much money they charge for each human baby body part from their abortion victims.

“Kamala Harris colluded with Planned Parenthood to attack CMP’s speech and silence our reporting about fetal trafficking,” says David Daleiden of CMP. A video from Catholic Vote exposes how armed agents invaded Daleiden’s home to seize his cameras, computers, and videos.

This is not to say that the Trump Administration has done everything possible on the pro-life issue, or that this is a partisan issue.

Chanting “Hey Hey Ho Ho Fetal Dismemberment Has Got to Go,” Democrats for Life of America (DFLA) joined other pro-lifers in front of the Office of the U.S. Attorney General on October 8 “to protest the DOJ’s silence and lack of action on the documented trafficking of fetal parts.” The DFLA said, “Attorney General Bill Barr has been sitting on evidence of Planned Parenthood’s wrongdoing for far too long. This delay effectively advances the work of suppressing pro-life activism that Vice Presidential nominee, Kamala Harris, set out to do when she illegally seized CMP’s footage. In the meantime, the DOJ has instead prosecuted marginalized Native Americans for selling eagle body parts.”

One of the groups participating in the protest is called Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust.

That’s appropriate, since Ronald Reagan once said, “I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.” The death toll from abortion has surpassed 63 million.

One of those survivors, Nick Sandmann, is best known for having been smeared by CNN, the Washington Post, and other media, for wearing a “Make America Great Again” cap on the grounds of the Lincoln Memorial in 2019. Many forget he was there because he had been participating in the annual March for Life. His pro-life activism had a role in motivating the media hate towards him.

The media are filled with hate. Amy Coney Barrett is filled with love. She is an example for America and one of the great hopes for the survival of our nation.

*Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org.

10/11/20

Part 2: House of Lies – the Baseless Campaign to Smear Israeli Police Exchanges

By: IPT News | CCNS

Anti-Israel groups have spent years trying to end programs that take American police leaders to Israel to interact with counterparts there. But that effort, with disturbing anti-Semitic elements, took new root this summer during protests following George Floyd’s killing by a Minneapolis police officer. Speakers at protests throughout the country claimed that the programs directly lead to the deaths of Black people in America. The claims were blindly accepted by many, despite a lack of any evidence.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism examined the allegations, finding them rooted in an overall opposition to anything dealing with Israel than in any actual evidence the programs create harm. And we spoke with police chiefs who took the trips to learn first-hand about their experiences.

In the second part of our two-part series, we speak with four police chiefs about their travels to Israel. Contrary to the critics’ claims, none said the programs taught any restraint holds, crowd control tactics, or anything else. Rather, they came back with ideas that often went in the opposite direction.

For more information about GILEE, click here. For more information about JINSA’s Homeland Security Program, click here.

Copyright © 2020. Investigative Project on Terrorism. All rights reserved. Originally published at The Investigative Project on Terrorism.


10/11/20

IPT Video Investigation: House of Lies – The Baseless Campaign to Smear Israeli Police Exchanges

By: IPT News | CCNS

A disturbing anti-Semitic smear took new root this summer during protests following George Floyd’s killing by a Minneapolis police officer. At protests throughout the country, speakers claimed that programs that take police leaders to Israel to interact with their counterparts there directly lead to violence against Black people in America. The claims are accepted as a given by many, despite a lack of any evidence.

It’s not a new claim, and prominent voices including Linda Sarsour, Marc Lamont Hill, and Louis Farrakhan have promoted it.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism’s two-part video investigation, “House of Lies – the Baseless Campaign to Smear Israeli Police Exchanges,” shows that one of the main groups promoting this false narrative, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), warned in June that “Suggesting that Israel is the start or source of American police violence or racism … furthers an antisemitic ideology.”

But as viewers will, see that’s exactly what JVP did for three years, claiming that American police return from Israel more violent, leading to “extrajudicial executions, shoot-to-kill policies, police murders …” JVP hoped nobody would notice, but the IPT did.

The entire campaign is a lie. The IPT interviewed four police chiefs – two active and two now retired – who say their experiences couldn’t be more different from the anti-Israel narrative. There is no tactical training. Rather than discussing ways to oppress people, the chiefs all said they learned about the value of community policing and building relationships among diverse constituencies. They also learned how to best minimize the terrorist threat and to investigate in the aftermath of an attack.

No critic has produced a police official who says otherwise. Organizers of two police exchange programs say the opposition is rooted in anti-Israel bias, combined with an “intersectional” campaign to liken the Palestinian cause with the struggle for civil rights in America.

Jewish Voice for Peace Executive Director Stefanie Fox did not respond to a request for comment sent last month.

For more information about GILEE, click here. For more information about JINSA’s Homeland Security Program, click here.

Copyright © 2020. Investigative Project on Terrorism. All rights reserved. Originally published at The Investigative Project on Terrorism.


10/11/20

Race, Revolution, and the Chinese Communist Party

By: Clare Lopez | CCNS

“Every Communist must grasp the truth, ‘Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.’”—Mao Zedong, “Problems of War and Strategy” (Nov. 6, 1998), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 224.

During the 1960s and 1970s, when African-American revolutionaries launched street violence in cities across the United States, their close ideological and personal working relationship with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was very much out in the open. When Black Panther Party leaders Elaine Brown and Huey P. Newton or avowed militant revolutionaries such as Robert Williams visited Beijing in those days, it was often a photo op—sometimes with Mao Zedong himself.

On Aug. 8, 1963, the Peking Review published a statement that Chairman Mao issued at the direct request of Robert Williams, former president of the Monroe, North Carolina, chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and later affiliated with the Socialist Workers Party, the Workers World Party, and members of the Communist Party USA. Mao’s statement was entitled “Statement Supporting the American Negroes in Their Just Struggle Against Racial Discrimination by U.S. Imperialism.”

Mao’s words make reference to the “American Negroes’ struggle against racial discrimination,” and claim that “American Negroes are awakening and their resistance is growing stronger and stronger … [in a] continuous expansion of their mass struggle against racial discrimination and for freedom and equal rights.”

After citing some of the early developments of the U.S. civil rights movement in the early 1960s, Mao called upon “the workers, peasants, revolutionary intellectuals, enlightened elements of the bourgeoisie and other enlightened persons of all colors in the world … to unite to oppose the racial discrimination practiced by U.S. imperialism and support the American Negroes in their struggle against the racial discrimination.”

That sort of full-throated, public backing by the top levels of the CCP is absent for the revolution currently being led on America’s streets by the openly Marxist, pro-Maoist Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement and its allies among the equally communist Antifa and others. But that doesn’t mean that the ideological affiliation of Antifa and BLM leadership with communism and Beijing or even tangible CCP support for today’s communist street insurrection is absent. It’s just a little more discreet these days.

“We should support whatever the enemy opposes and oppose whatever the enemy supports.”—Mao Zedong, “Interview with Three Correspondents from the Central News Agency, the Sao Tang Pao and the Hsin Min Pao” (Sept. 16, 1939), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 272.

Clearly, the whole-hearted support of a totalitarian communist regime like Mao’s (with plenty of its own racial and other discriminatory issues) for America’s black revolutionaries was not really about individual liberty, government by consent of the governed, or equality before the law. It wasn’t then and it isn’t now.

Whether Newton, Williams, or any of today’s revolutionaries realized it or not, they were and still are being used by a revolutionary communist movement whose true objectives have less to do with the actual situation of blacks in American society than with its own imperative to overthrow the U.S. constitutional republic and replace it with a Marxist dictatorship.

The leaders at the top of both the CCP and the U.S. revolutionary movement have changed over the decades, but the mission remains the same: revolution; a revolution to overthrow the very foundational principles of America as we know it.

“Revolutions and revolutionary wards are inevitable in class society, and without them, it is impossible to accomplish any leap in social development and to overthrow the reactionary ruling classes and therefore impossible for the people to win political power.”—Mao Zedong, “On Contradiction” (August 1937), Selected Works, Vol. I, p. 344.

Then, as now, many have been drawn into revolutionary activism through a process of indoctrination that convinces them that America was founded in moral depravity, that no matter the lofty ideals of our foundational documents and over two centuries of striving to meet those ideals, this country remains a force for evil in the world.

Marxist infiltration of the U.S. educational system, the domination of teachers’ associations, the co-option of the media, and essential capture of the Democratic Party have convinced generations of Americans that only a violent revolution that overthrows the entire system can lead to the fantasy utopia they have been told will be theirs.

Visits to places such as Castro’s Cuba, Mao’s China, Stalin’s Russia, and the Chavez-Maduro wreckage of Venezuela were and are carefully managed to ensure the horrific magnitude of human suffering and death that are the inevitable result of a Marxist–Leninist–Maoist revolution are never seen.

As long ago as 1936, W.E.B. Du Bois, the African-American activist, historian, socialist, and writer, visited China. Returning there in 1959, he apparently saw enough of a transformation in the country that led him to think Mao’s communists would lead the world in a glorious revolution against capitalism, the free-market system, and the West in general. Other black radicals followed in Du Bois’ footsteps, likewise allowing themselves to be co-opted by the cynical forces of communism to the fanciful dream of a worldwide utopia.

As Manning Johnson, a former American communist, wrote in his 1958 pamphlet, “Color, Communism and Common Sense,” the plot to stir up bloody race and class conflict began with Moscow: “The plot to use the Negroes as the spearhead, or as expendables, was concocted by Stalin in 1928.” Maoism simply picked up where the Soviets left off, adapting Marxism-Leninism to the circumstances of the place and time.

Skipping ahead to the 1960s, it was some of that same Marxist literature that helped to indoctrinate African-American radicals like Huey Newton (who later would lead the Black Panther Party). Newton apparently became enamored of the Maoist revolution in China after reading the four-volume set of the “Selected Works of Mao Tse-Tung.”

Williams, mentioned above, sought to launch a violent revolution in the United States on the model of China and Cuba. Fleeing federal charges in the United States, Williams lived for a time in Cuba, where he wrote: “Negroes With Guns” in 1962. By 1966, however, Williams left Cuba and moved to China, where he was witness to the chaotic years of Mao’s Cultural Revolution (which he thought an inspiration for black urban uprisings in the United States), according to a 1999 article by Robin Kelley and Betsy Esch titled “Black Like Mao: Red China and Black Revolution” in the journal Souls.

Inspired by such black Maoist-inspired examples, black members of Students for a Democratic Society and other similar groups began to organize and in 1962 formed the Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM, originally Reform Action Movement). Branches sprang up in cities across the United States. Their cause was Marxism-Leninism through Maoist application to a black liberation movement, to be achieved through violent guerilla warfare on the Maoist model. RAM leaders thought of themselves “as an all-black version of Mao’s Red Army,” according to Kelley and Esch.

Other groups and leaders followed, but with the 1966 founding of the Black Panther Party for Self Defense in Oakland, California, by Newton and Bobby Seale, the direct relationships with Beijing and the top leadership of the CCP, as well as an explicit embrace of Marxist and Maoist thought, intensified.

Again, their idealization of Maoist ideology drew from the Chinese application of classic Marxism-Leninism to the circumstances of the local liberation movement there as well as in the United States. Even the Nixon-Kissinger opening to China in the early 1970s did not change these radicals’ determination to foment communist revolution in America. Mao’s Little Red Book was their inspiration and blueprint.

The original Black Panthers eventually fell apart amid internal conflicts, and Mao died in 1976. But that was not the end of the American black revolutionary movement or its association with the CCP.

Today’s Movement

Fast forward to July 13, 2013, the day that George Zimmerman was acquitted of the murder of Trayvon Martin: That’s when the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement began with the first use of the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter on social media. The following year, street riots erupted in Ferguson, Missouri, and the movement expanded into a decentralized cell network that spanned the country.

Founded by three African-American self-avowed Marxists—Alicia Garza, Opal Tometi, and Patrisse Cullors—BLM today espouses the same dedication to violent Marxist revolution as its ideological predecessors. The original 2016 platform of the Movement for Black Lives (M4BL) coalition, of which the Black Lives Matter movement is the most visible member, includes demonization of American society as racist, demands for defunding law enforcement in the United States, financial reparations, and an antisemitic characterization of the Jewish State of Israel.

The ideological model is the Marxism of “The Communist Manifesto,” but with the Hegelian dialectical conflict based on race instead of economic class. Their heroes are leaders of the Black Panthers, such as iconic communist Angela Davis, who was tutored by Herbert Marcuse and broadcast encouragement over the loudspeaker to the doomed occupants of the Jim Jones compound in Jonestown, Guyana.

That would be the same Angela Davis who appeared on RT (Russia TV), a Russian state-controlled television channel on July 14, 2020, to express her support for Vice President Joe Biden’s presidential candidacy and to urge people to vote for him.

Assata Shakur is another such hero to the BLM movement. A former member of the Black Liberation Army, she escaped prison and fled to communist Cuba after being sentenced to life for the murder of a State Trooper. BLM street protesters have been seen wearing clothing that says “Assata Taught Me.”

Today, the CCP connection and influence are more prominent than the original Marxist-Leninist ideology. The progenitor of the BLM movement is an openly Marxist, socialist, anti-Israel, pro-boycott–divestment–sanctions movement aligned with Palestinian terrorists in Gaza and Judea/Samaria called the Freedom Road Socialist Organization. Formed in 1985, Freedom Road has its roots in earlier Marxist-Leninist organizations of the 1980s that tended toward Maoist ideology. The group underwent a split in 1999, with Liberation Road separating from the original group that retained its founding name, Freedom Road Socialist Organization. It was from Liberation Road that BLM eventually emerged.

CCP Support

BLM today is directly supported by the CCP in various ways.

Propaganda plays a key role via the United Front Work Department (UFWD) of the CCP’s Central Committee. According to the U.S.–China Economic and Security Review Commission, the UFWD is responsible for co-opting and neutralizing “sources of potential opposition to the policies and authority of its ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP).”

That responsibility extends not just domestically throughout China itself, but abroad as well. Here in the United States, that means seeking to co-opt ethnic Chinese individuals and groups, academia, business, and social groups, but also by targeting host country media reporting.

The UFWD also is likely responsible for extensive attempted influence operations targeting the U.S. elections online and through traditional media sources. There’s the pro-China spam network called the “Spamouflage Dragon” that spews disinformation using fake social media accounts and videos that attack the Trump administration and attempts to stoke racial tension in support of BLM rioting.

In another example, following the late May 2020 death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, CCP mouthpiece China Daily led off with a headline claiming “Growing global support for US protests over killing by police,” on June 8, 2020. The report noted “Chinese in San Francisco give strong backing to demonstrators,” despite mentioning “looting and vandalism.” White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, speaking to CNBC in mid-August 2020, accused China of “recruiting and paying over a million citizens to monitor and influence the U.S. 2020 presidential election process,” according to investigative journalist Sara Carter.

The so-called “wu mao” (or 50-cent army), identified in 2016 by the Voice of America as a group of internet commentators, likely is yet another project of the UFWD.

It should also be noted that in July 2020, Freedom Road Socialist Organization claimed credit for sparking the BLM-led riots that have convulsed U.S. cities for months. Trevor Loudon, writing in The Epoch Times, said that there is “evidence that the Beijing-loyal FRSO was not just a catalyst for some of the most destructive civil unrest in U.S. history, but also laid the groundwork for and is playing an active role in maintaining momentum for the ongoing insurrection.”

Financially, too, there’s evidence that points to CCP support for the riots.

Black Futures Lab, founded in September 2018, is a venture of BLM co-founder Alicia Garza, who is listed as the group’s “principal” on its website. Clicking on the site’s “donate” button takes one to an organization called the Chinese Progressive Association (CPA). Black Futures Lab is identified there as a “fiscally sponsored project of the Chinese Progressive Association.”

The CPA was founded in San Francisco in 1972 as a pro-People’s Republic of China cultural organization that was then and remains today openly supportive of the Chinese Revolution and regime. There’s a CPA chapter in Boston, Massachusetts, too, wherein 2019, the raising of the PRC flag over Boston’s City Hall to honor the communist takeover of China was organized together with the Chinese consulate in New York City.

On top of the obvious influence operations emanating from the CCP, the connection of a group like Garza’s Black Futures Lab via the intermediary of the CPA to the CCP should raise an additional concern about just how deeply Beijing is involved in the BLM Global Network.

Despite the careful appearance of an organic, spontaneous movement, the BLM-led riots on the streets are anything but random. Even aside from the openly symbiotic alignment along Maoist lines, the level of coordination at both the local and national levels for what is clearly a communist insurrection bespeaks of extensive organization, preparation, as well as ongoing backing, funding, and support.

The evidence presented here only skims the surface of what increasingly looks like massive intrusion by a hostile foreign power into American society. That hostile foreign power is not Russia. It’s China.

This column was originally published in The Epoch Times.

10/11/20

Infidel – A Movie Review by Steven Emerson

By: Steve Emerson | CCNS

With the release of his spellbinding thriller and now leading box office hit “Infidel,” Cyrus Nowrasteh has now firmly established himself as one of the most talented, creative, and certainly the most politically courageous film directors –screenwriters in the United States. Nowrasteh has a mile-long list of film credits to his name but readers of the Investigative Project on Terrorism might especially remember a film of his, and his wife Betsy, that I reviewed in 2009 called, “The Stoning of Soroya M.”

It was based on a true story of a woman in Iran in the 1980s whose adulterous husband conspired with the local mullah and the male villagers to falsely accuse and convict the woman of her infidelity. I described the movie “as one of the most compelling, stirring, and riveting films I have ever seen,” a description that still holds today.

It was the first time in cinema that a stoning was re-created—and I believe the effect of having made that film finally shocked the world’s conscience at the time of the prevalence of such barbaric Islamist atrocities, and even put a halt—albeit only temporary—to the radical Islamist thugs who carried out such stonings of women in various areas of the Islamic world at the time.

In “Infidel,” Nowrasteh has also captured difficult but widespread and contemporary problems that many American “progressive” politicians, along with their mainstream media cohorts have preferred to shove under the carpet or worse: they would rather appease the Islamist bullies who perpetrate major acts of aggression, often hiding under the thinly-veiled shield of victimhood, a deception that has worked wonders for many Islamist groups and for Islamist regimes.

“Infidel” tells the gripping story of an American Christian blogger, played by Jim Caviezel, who is invited to speak at an interfaith dialogue conference in Cairo at the prestigious Al Azhar University. When the American professes his faith in Christ as God, he is immediately attacked by several Islamist hotheads who accuse him of “Islamophobia,” an artificially fabricated epithet, specifically designed to tar anyone who offends militant Islamists with the stench of racism toward Islam.

Accused of being an Islamophobe, the character played by Caviezel gets kidnapped by Hezbollah terrorists who smuggle him to Teheran where he is imprisoned, tortured, and arbitrarily sentenced to death on spurious charges of espionage by an Iranian mullah in scenes described by dissidents as nearly identical to the ones replicated by Nowrasteh. As in real life, the State Department bureaucrats don’t want to do lift a finger to help save the American blogger’s life lest they antagonize Iran, a sad but true replication of art imitating life, at least prior to 2016.

In the film, a fascinating subplot develops as a small covert but flourishing Christian movement, led by women (whose Christian husbands have all been jailed), comes to the American blogger’s rescue—again paralleling the historical and unprecedented emergence of an underground Christian movement in a fanatically anti-Christian Iran.

Nowrasteh deserves incredible credit for tackling all these hot button issues –revealing the Islamophobia accusation for the outrageous deceit for which it was created; portraying Hezbollah terrorists as the Islamist thugs they truly are rather than antiseptically describing them as a “political group” or as a simple “militia,” as some cowardly media outlets and European governments do; and not being afraid to represent the vicious murderous Mullahs in Iran as nothing more than Mafioso in turbans, rather than paying homage to policies espoused by politically correct apologists who still justify the horrific Khomeini Revolution and the tens of thousands of deaths it caused on the “interference” by the U.S. in 1953 in Iran in helping to overthrow the Marxist leader Mossadeq. As noted by Iran specialist Ray Takeyh in 2010, “… [R]esponsibility for the suffocation of the Iranian peoples’ democratic aspirations in the summer of 1953 lies primarily with those who went on to squash another democratic movement in the summer of 2009—the mullahs. It is they who should apologize to the Iranian people.”

If past is prologue, “Infidel” will of course likely be criticized by the high priests at the New York Times and Washington Post, whose entire “moral” compass on the Islamist spectrum—endorsing and propounding the deceit of Islamophobia, appeasing Iran, treating Hezbollah with the moral equivalence, even less, than it treats Israel, and refusing to pay any real attention to the plight of persecuted Christians in the Middle East—is totally torn asunder by “Infidel” or by Nowrasteh’s earlier works.

But beyond the politics, “Infidel” is simply great drama with pacing that will keep you on the edge of your seat or sofa. It grips you from the opening scene and doesn’t let you go, along with some wonderful acting, especially by the strangely charismatic British accented Hezbollah terrorist leader, played by Hal Ozsan. Caviezel delivers as always as only he could. Catch the film if you can while it still playing. Otherwise, be sure to watch it when it starts streaming VOD.


10/11/20

Trapper’s Quote Of The Week

By: Trapper Pettit

Having just reviewed the corporate structure, along with BLM’s mission statement, and the fact that the Biden/Harris ticket supports the radicals makes me glad that ISIS wasn’t as savvy.