Tag Archives: Massachusetts

08/8/16

Weekly Featured Profile – Wilma Chan

KeyWiki.org

Wilma Chan

Wilma Chan (born October 5, 1949) in Boston,Massachusetts, serves on the Alameda County Board of Supervisors in the Bay Area. A leading Democrat, Chan served as the California State Assembly Majority Leader from 2002–2004. She also served as Assembly Majority Whip from 2001-2002. Chan was a resident of Oakland for more than 20 years; she now lives in Alameda.

Chan is also a teacher and the Legislator-in-Residence at theUniversity of California, Berkeley. She taught the course Cal-in-Sacramento in the Spring of 2007. She is currently working on “expanding healthcare in Oakland and Alameda County.”

Wilma has been one of California’s most left wing legislators. During her six years in the Assembly, she passed more than 70 bills and resolutions… and has been a reliable ally of the illegal immigrant amnesty movement.

Dave Brown

Wilma Chan was, for many years, a leader of the Maoist movement and was an organizer in the Chinese communities of Boston and San Francisco since 1969. She was in the early 1980s, the Chairperson of the National Asian Struggles Commission of the League of Revolutionary Struggle, at the time America’s largest pro-China communist organization.

Chan stayed with the organization until its dissolution in 1990, but continues to work with former comrades, many now in the Democratic Party, right up to today.

For instance, Wilma Chan‘s current Chief of Staff Dave Brown is also a former League of Revolutionary Strugglesupporter.

(Wilma Chan|more…)

11/13/15

SHARIAHVILLE, USA: CITIES ‘SURRENDER’ TO ISLAM

Listen Live
Monday 11/16 at 6 PM EASTERN
Leo Hohmann, WND News Editor
Dick1

will be interviewed by John McCulloch on:
Dick2

Dick3

Hohmann’s article describing the growing number of Shariahvilles in places like Michigan, Massachusetts and Minnesota will be discussed.

America’s first Muslim-majority city council was recently sworn in Hamtramck, Michigan. Governor Rick Snyder celebrated the event as he makes plans to accommodate thousands of unvettable Syrian Muslim refugees in a state where persecuted Christians from the Middle East are fearful of the behavior of their Sharia-practicing new neighbors.

Find out who are the likely winners and losers in the dangerous game of “chicken” being played by the progressive ruling class and the grassroots who are starting to resist due to economic and security concerns associated with the globalists’ secretive Refugee Resettlement Program.

Listen Live online – http://saleminteractivemedia.com/ListenLive/player/WDTKAM
Call-in to talk with Leo and John – 800-923-9385

09/2/15

Weekly Featured Profile – Eleanor LeCain

KeyWiki

Eleanor Mulloney LeCain

Eleanor LeCain is a Yale and Boalt Hall Massachusetts based specialist in “developing and implementing innovative policies that support sustainable development.”

Ms. LeCain led a team at Boston Edison to develop next generation energy efficiency programs (for all commercial, industrial and residential customers). She served as Massachusetts Assistant Secretary of State for Strategic Planning and previously as Executive Director of Blueprint 2000 for the state of Massachusetts.

Oprah Winfrey, Eleanor LeCain, Michelle Obama, 2008

Ms. LeCain has spoken widely on “Creating Jobs and Making Money While Healing the Planet,” including Kyoto, Japan, Harvard University, the International Association of Outplacement Counselors and Chattanooga, Tennessee. Her writings have been published in the New York Times, the Boston Business Journal and Positive Alternatives, to name a few.

In 1989, Eleanor LeCainserved on the Board of Directors of Women for a Meaningful Summit, a communist led conduit for Soviet “peace propaganda” to the West.

In 1993 LeCain was listed as a among “former Visiting Fellows and Visiting Scholars and current TransNational Institute Fellows” on the far left Institute for Policy Studies 30th Anniversary brochure.

In 1993, Eleanor LeCain wrote an obituary of German activist Petra Kelly for DSA’sDemocratic Left Jan./Feb. 1993 issue.

Boston Democratic Socialists of America presents awards annually in memory of Eugene V. Debs, Norman Thomas, Julius Bernstein and Michael Harrington.

The Awards Committee in 2001 consisted of:

Doug Butler, Kathy Casavant, Jack Clark, Harris Gruman, Julie Johnson, Eleanor LeCain, Marcia Peters, Mike Prokosch, Bruce Raynor, Bob Ross and Rep.Frank I. Smizik.

The Awards Committee in 2002 consisted of:

Barbara Ackerman, Doug Butler, Kathy Casavant, DSA Executive Board, Harris Gruman,Julie Johnson, Eleanor LeCain, Rep. Jim Marzilli, Judy Meredith, Marcia Peters, Ald.Denise Provost, Rep. Byron Rushing, Rep. Frank I. Smizik and Jim St. George

On June 12, 2001, Boston Democratic Socialists of America presented its annual award to “leaders who fight for democracy, here at home and around the world.” Ed Clark andDessima Williams received the Debs-Thomas-Bernstein Award; John Maher Leaders for Social Democracy at Home and Abroad: Ed Clark, Dessima Williams, John Maherreceived the Michael Harrington Lifetime Achievement Award. The reception took place at the home of Marcia Peters and David Karaus in Jamaica Plain.[1]

“Thanks to all who helped make this event a success, including Kathy Casavant of the AFL-CIO, Harris Gruman of Boston DSA, and civic activist Eleanor LeCain for their eloquent introductions of the awardees.”

The 2010 Debs-Thomas-Bernstein Awards, sponsored by Boston Democratic Socialists of America, took place Tuesday, June 13, 6:30—8:30 P.M., at the Jamaica plain home of environmentalist Marcia Peters and David Karaus.

2010 honorees were “two champions of social justice and grassroots democracy:Georgia Hollister Isman and Jack Clark.” Honorary Co-Chairs for the event were MA AFL-CIO President Robert Haynes and State Senator Patricia Jehlen (D-Somerville), with special guest Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz (D-Boston).

Others who attended or sponsored the event included Rep. Frank Smizik, Somerville Alderman Rebekah Gewirtz and recently elected President of the Washington, DC chapter of Red Sox Nation Eleanor LeCain, “our perennial MC, Julie Johnson“, Mike Schippani (UAW-Detroit); Shaw’s striker Juan Garcia and UFCW staffer Heysoll Rodriguez.[2]

According to Eleanor LeCain, writing in the The Yankee Radical, a “true progressive is running for state representative” in Boston/Cambridge — Jay Livingstone — in a special election being held on Tuesday, May 28th, 2013.

Livingstone is an experienced community leader with a proven record of hard work in advancing progressive ideals—let’s help him win by making some phone calls now, and helping on Election Day, May 28th.

A Massachusetts native, Livingstone teaches at Northeastern University and operates his own law practice, standing up against employer discrimination. He has been a key organizer in the campaigns of Rep. Ed Markey, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Gov. Deval Patrick. As a “State Rep. Jay will work hard for quality, affordable public education; increased funding for at-risk youth, the disabled and the elderly; improved public transportation; and sensible development that works for small businesses and preserves the quality of neighborhood life.”

He has been endorsed by Marty Walz and Paul Demakis, the two state reps who recently held this seat, the Boston Ward 5 Democratic Committee, Mass Alliance,Progressive Massachusetts, Massachusetts Peace Action, the Sierra Club, the ten Boston locals of AFSCME, the National Organization for Women (Mass NOW),Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts and Boston Democratic Socialists of America — among many others.

(more…)

07/22/15

The Media Love Affair with McCain

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

In the fight between Donald Trump and John McCain (R-AZ) over the senator’s military service, the liberal media have taken McCain’s side. But since when did the media get concerned about the noble cause of fighting communism in Vietnam?

Our media, led by CBS Evening News anchorman Walter Cronkite, who was then an influential media figure, protested the Vietnam War and prompted the U.S. withdrawal and communist takeover. His FBI file demonstrated Cronkite’s contacts with Soviet officials and how he was used as a dupe by the communists.

More than 58,000 Americans sacrificed and died to save that country from communism.

The liberal media never supported the war against communism in Vietnam. Yet they are now browbeating Trump over avoiding the war through deferments. Our media are full of hypocrites. They don’t admire McCain for fighting in Vietnam. They admire him because he is a “maverick” who frequently takes the liberal line, such as on “comprehensive immigration reform.”

If the liberals in the media are so enamored of McCain’s military service in Vietnam, let them revisit the history of the Vietnam War and express some outrage over the fact that it was a Democratic Congress that cut off aid to South Vietnam, leading to the communist takeover and the genocide in neighboring Cambodia.

What about some critical coverage of Obama’s recent meeting with Nguyen Phu Trong, the head of Vietnam’s Communist Party? Vietnam is one of the beneficiaries of Obama’s proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a trade agreement. If passed, it would benefit Vietnam’s communist rulers.

As we have pointed out, “Interestingly, Obama is trying to sell the agreement as a counter to China’s influence throughout the world. He wants us to believe that China and Vietnam somehow differ on their common objective of achieving world communism at the expense of America’s standing as the leader of what used to be the Free World. Both countries would gladly welcome the U.S. to help pay to accelerate the growth of their socialist economies and expand their markets.”

McCain supports the TPP; Trump does not.

We have pointed out that Vietnam is “a dictatorship with the blood of those Americans on its hands,” a reference to what the communists did to McCain and our soldiers, and “which has no respect for the human rights of its own people.”

A bipartisan congressional letter about Obama’s meeting with the Vietnamese communist reaffirmed this fact. It was signed by Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA), who represents one of the largest Vietnamese populations outside of Vietnam in the world, in Orange County, California. She said, “I am disappointed that the administration has chosen to host Nguyen Phu Trong, the General Secretary of the Vietnamese Communist Party. There continues to be egregious and systemic human rights abuses in Vietnam, including religious and political persecutions. As an advocate for human rights in Vietnam I cannot ignore the dismal state of freedom of the press and freedom of speech.”

This is precisely what McCain and tens of thousands of other Americans were fighting to prevent.

Yet, McCain issued a statement, saying that he “warmly” welcomed Trong’s “historic trip” to the United States. He added, “This visit demonstrates the growing strength of the U.S.-Vietnam partnership as we celebrate the 20th anniversary of the normalization of relations between our countries.”

Why is McCain celebrating a “partnership” with a dictatorship that he and thousands of Americans fought against?

What’s more, McCain says the U.S. “must further ease the prohibition on the sale of lethal military equipment to Vietnam…”  Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry had partially lifted a ban on lethal weapons sales to Vietnam in October of 2014.

If our media are so concerned about an American Vietnam veteran being the target of a perceived insult from Trump, why haven’t they put pressure on the Obama administration to clean up Vietnam’s human rights record before going ahead with another agreement to benefit that regime? After all, this is the same regime that captured and tortured Sen. McCain.

The answer is that our media are using the current McCain controversy to damage Trump, who has almost single-handedly made illegal immigration into a national issue. They don’t really care about McCain’s service in Vietnam.

When President Bill Clinton normalized relations with communist Vietnam in 1995, he thanked Senator McCain and then-Senator John Kerry (D-MA) for agreeing with the notion that America had to “move forward on Vietnam.”

What has happened in the meantime?

We pointed out 11 years ago that President Clinton’s lifting of the U.S. trade embargo on Vietnam in 1995 was followed by a bilateral trade agreement. Kerry and McCain supported that, too. The U.S. trade deficit with Vietnam has been consistently rising ever since, to the point where it was $19.6 billion in 2013.

In his statement on Trong’s visit to the United States, McCain said, “Since 1995, annual U.S.-Vietnam trade has increased from less than $500 million to $36 billion last year.” He conveniently ignored the trade deficits that have cost American jobs.  For example, the communist regime has been dumping shrimp products into the United States at artificially low prices, and has become the fourth largest shrimp supplier to the U.S. market, even though several shipments have been detected with banned antibiotics.

At the time he extended diplomatic relations, Clinton said, “Whatever we may think about the political decisions of the Vietnam era, the brave Americans who fought and died there had noble motives. They fought for the freedom and the independence of the Vietnamese people. Today the Vietnamese are independent, and we believe this step will help to extend the reach of freedom in Vietnam and, in so doing, to enable these fine veterans of Vietnam to keep working for that freedom.”

False. The Vietnamese people did not become independent. They became slaves of the communists.

Obama recently met with their slave master. But our media didn’t utter any tears for the victims of communism.

You may also recall that then-Senator Kerry ran a Senate investigation that brought the search for live American POWs from the war to a close. McCain was a member of the Kerry committee.

Since McCain has been in the news for his military service, this should have been a newsworthy topic for our media.

Roger Hall, A POW/MIA researcher, went to court, having sued the CIA for documents on missing or abandoned Vietnam POWs. Hall and many others are convinced that hundreds of American POWs were left behind in Vietnam.

Former Senator Bob Smith (R) of New Hampshire wrote the legislation creating the Senate Select Committee on POWs and MIAs in the early 1990s in order to get the truth released to the public.

“Despite the release of thousands of documents and the testimony of dozens of witnesses, I could not complete the job. Senator John Kerry, the chairman of the Select Committee, and Senator John McCain were more interested in establishing diplomatic relations and putting the war behind them than they were about finding the truth about our missing,” said Smith. “I fought them constantly to the point of exhaustion. It was a very sad chapter in American history.”

A YouTube video exposed McCain’s efforts to block access to POW information and examines his alleged cooperation with the North Vietnamese while he was in captivity. Senator Smith is one of those featured in the video.

Why don’t the media remind us of that? We have the answer. They are too busy bashing Trump and trying to look patriotic about the Vietnam War.

07/17/15

How the Republicans Plan to Lose to Hillary

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

A new survey from Univision, the pro-Mexico television network, demonstrates the utter folly of Republicans appealing to Hispanic voters. It finds that 68 percent have a favorable view of Hillary Clinton despite the scandals swirling around her. By contrast, only 36 percent have a favorable view of former Republican Governor Jeb Bush, who is married to a Mexican and speaks Spanish.

Bush “was the highest-rated of all the Republican candidates,” Univision reports, with Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), a one-time proponent of amnesty for illegals, coming in second with only a 35 percent approval rate.

What the poll demonstrates is that Hispanics are basically owned by the Democratic Party. The Democrats’ power grab for the Latino vote has been successful. However, ultimately the Democratic Party’s success in the presidential election depends on convincing Republicans to fruitlessly continue to appeal to Hispanics, while abandoning the GOP voter base of whites, conservatives and Christians.

Overall, in terms of political party affiliation, 57 percent of Hispanics identified themselves as Democrats and only 18 percent said they are Republicans. A total of 25 percent called themselves independent.

In another finding, 59 percent of Hispanic voters said they were satisfied with Barack Obama’s presidency after his six years in office. Clearly, most Hispanics have drunk the Kool-Aid. For them, it appears that federal benefits and legalization of border crossers are what matters. Most of them don’t bat an eye in regard to Obama’s lawless and traitorous conduct of domestic and foreign policy.

What the Republicans have left is to try to appeal to white, conservative and Christian voters. But that strategy, of course, runs the obvious risk of being depicted by the liberal media as racist. After all, whites are not supposed to have a “white identity,” as Jared Taylor’s book by that name describes.

Whites cannot have a racial identity, but Hispanics and blacks can. This is one aspect of political correctness. As communists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who are themselves white, put it in their book, it is a “race course against white supremacy.”

If Republicans pander to Hispanics, they will alienate their voter base, which has shown in their reaction to the Donald Trump candidacy that they want more—not less—action taken to control the border with Mexico. Republican Senator John McCain (AZ) calls the Trump supporters “crazies,” an indication that the GOP establishment would rather jettison these people than bring them into the Republican camp. Like McCain, former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has also attacked Trump, saying his remarks about criminal aliens are hurting the GOP. It’s amazing how a loser like Romney, who also threw in the towel on gay marriage when he was governor of Massachusetts, continues to generate press. What he is saying is what the liberal media want to hear.

Of course, the political correctness which dominates the national dialogue and debate also means that Republicans like Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are likely to continue to demonize Trump, thereby alienating many whites. As a result, the Republicans will get less of the conservative and Christian vote, further diminishing their chances of winning the White House. It will be a replay of the losing campaigns of John McCain and Mitt Romney. Republicans have already alienated many Christian voters by giving up the fight for traditional marriage. They had planned to abandon border control as an issue until Trump and “El Chapo” got in the way.

Meanwhile, in another amazing turnaround, Republicans on Capitol Hill are backing Obama’s call for “sentencing reform,” a strategy that will empty the prisons and increase the crime rate, thereby alienating GOP voters in favor of law and order.

As this scenario plays out, Mrs. Clinton is coming across on the Democratic side looking like a moderate, by virtue of the fact that an open socialist, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), is running “to her left” for the Democratic nomination.

The Clinton-Sanders show has all the earmarks of a carefully staged demonstration of the Marxist dialectic, an exercise designed to create the appearance of conflict in order to force even more radical change on the American people through Democratic Party rule.

Anybody who knows anything about Hillary, a student of Saul Alinsky, understands that her “moderation” is only a façade. Her thesis on Alinsky for Wellesley College was titled “There Is Only the Fight…” That is the Marxist strategy. It is the Alinsky version of the Marxist dialectic. It was also adopted by Obama, who was trained by Alinsky disciples working with the Catholic Church in Chicago.

In my column, “Study Marxism to Understand Hillary,” I noted that Barbara Olson had come to the conclusion while researching her book on Hillary that “she has a political ideology that has its roots in Marxism.” Olson noted, “In her formative years, Marxism was a very important part of her ideology…”

This means that Mrs. Clinton understands that the Sanders candidacy actually supports and does not undermine her own candidacy. It makes Hillary look like a moderate while she moves further to the left, a place she wants to be, in response to the left-wing Democratic base. Only the Marxist insiders seem to understand what is happening.

Some uninformed commentators refer to something called “Clintonism,” a supposed moderate brand of Democratic Party politics. If that ever existed, it applied to Bill Clinton and not Hillary.

The fact is that Sanders and Mrs. Clinton have associated with the same gang of communists and fellow travelers for many years. Sanders was an active collaborator with the Communist Party-sponsored U.S. Peace Council.

As for Hillary, Barbara Olson reported in her book Hell to Pay that Robert Borosage, who served as director of the Marxist Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), was “a colleague and close acquaintance” of Clinton. Olson wrote that Mrs. Clinton operated in the “reaches of the left including Robert Treuhaft and Jessica Mitford,” who had been “committed Communists” and “Stalinists.” Olson said that Hillary worked for Treuhaft and paved the way for Mitford to lobby then-Governor Bill Clinton on the death penalty issue.

Olson described Hillary as a “budding Leninist” who understood the Leninist concept of acquiring, accumulating and maintaining political power at any cost. She wrote that “Hillary has never repudiated her connection with the Communist movement in America or explained her relationship with two of its leading adherents. Of course, no one has pursued these questions with Hillary. She has shown that she will not answer hard questions about her past, and she has learned that she does not need to—remarkable in an age when political figures are allowed such little privacy.”

Researcher Carl Teichrib has provided me with a photo of a Hillary meeting with Cora Weiss from the May 2000 edition of “Peace Matters,” the newsletter of the Hague Appeal for Peace. Weiss, a major figure in the Institute for Policy Studies, gained notoriety for organizing anti-Vietnam War demonstrations and traveling to Hanoi to meet with communist leaders. In the photo, Hillary is shown fawning over a Hague Appeal for Peace gold logo pin that Weiss is wearing.

Teichrib, editor of Forcing Change, recalls being an observer at the 1999 World Federalist Association (WFA) conference, held in association with the Hague Appeal for Peace, during which everyone in attendance was given an honorary membership into the WFA. In addition to collaborating with the pro-Hanoi Hague Appeal for Peace, the WFA staged a “Mission to Moscow” and held several meetings with the Soviet Peace Committee for the purpose of “discussing the goal of general and complete disarmament” and “the strengthening of the United Nations.” Mrs. Clinton spoke to a WFA conference in a tribute to veteran newsman Walter Cronkite, a supporter of world government

In the WFA booklet, “The Genius of Federation: Why World Federation is the Answer to Global Problems,” the group described how a “world federation,” a euphemism for world government, could be achieved by advancing “step by step toward global governance,” mostly by enhancing the power and authority of U.N. agencies.

Obama’s Iran deal continues this strategy by placing enormous power in the hands of the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency.

At this stage in the campaign, even before the first Republican presidential debate, we can already see how the race is playing out. Hillary is counting on the Republicans nominating another loser with a losing strategy while she moves to the left and looks like a moderate.

Alinsky would be proud.

06/27/15

Weekly Featured Profile – Rev. David Carl Olson

KeyWiki

Rev. David Carl Olson

Rev. David Carl Olson

David Carl Olson is Minister of the First Unitarian Church of Baltimore, Maryland. Previously he served in churches in Flint, Michigan and Boston, Massachusetts.

In 1991, David Olson, while in Massachusetts, was one of several hundred Communist Party USA members to sign the a paper: “An initiative to Unite and Renew the Party” – most signatories left the Party after the December 1991 conference to found Committees of Correspondence.

At the Committees of Correspondence Conference on July 19th,1992, David Carl Olson was an unsuccessful candidate for the CoC National Coordinating Committee.

Rev. Olson apparently returned to the Communist Party soon after.

In May of 1995, the Communist Party USA newspaper Peoples Weekly World published a May Day supplement. Included was a page offering May Day greetings to Massachusetts’ Communists Lew Johnson, Laura Ross and Anne Timpson. Endorsers of the greeting included David Carl Olson.

The Anne Burlak Timpson Labor Forum is a creation of the Massachusetts’ Communist Party. It was established in honor of party member Anne Timpson, who died in 2002. Founding Committee members included Rev. David Carl Olson.

In 2004, Olson wrote an article for the Communist Party USA‘s Political Affairs on the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts.

He later moved to Maryland where he worked with Rep. Elijah Cummings on “jobs” issues in 2011.

In 2014, Rev. David Carl Olson served on the Steering Committee of the Maryland Coalition for Trans Equality.

(more…)

06/9/15

America’s See-No-Islam Problem Exposed With Boston Jihadism

By: Benjamin Weingarten
TheBlaze

The Boston Globe published a column in the wake of the shooting of an Islamic State-linked jihadist from Rosindale, Massachusetts that is a quintessential example of why the West is losing to Islamic supremacists.

In “Are Boston terrorism cases a trend?” two Globe authors reach out to several “antiterrorism specialists” and ask why it is that Boston appears to be so “vulnerable to violent extremism.”

Some submit that Boston’s “emergence as an international hub may leave it exposed to strains of radicalized behavior.”

Others find the existence of Boston-based jihadists curious given these jihadists “cannot be traced to one network, and individuals and groups do not appear to be connected.”

One such expert who has written on the Islamic State, J.M. Berger, acknowledges that “There is some degree of social network here that seems to be involved in radical thought.”

Halfway through the Globe article, the reader is left utterly unaware of any link between Boston jihadists and…jihadism. In fact, readers will not find the word “jihadist” in the column.

What readers do see is the lexicon of our see-no-Islam national security establishment, including euphemisms such as “violent extremism,” “homegrown terrorist,” and “radical presence.”

Somewhat closer to the mark are comments of James Forest, director of security studies at the University of Massachusetts Lowell’s Center for Terrorism and Security Studies, who says: “The ideology that motivates these kind of attacks, there are no geographical boundaries.”

What this “ideology” is, the reader is left to guess.

Usamma Rahim was wielding a knife when he was shot by Boston police. Rahim had planned to attack “boys in blue” according to his intercepted communications. (Source: WCVB-TV)

Next quoted in the piece is Farah Pandith, the first special representative to Muslim communities in then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s State Department.

Pandith asserts that Muslim millennials are “asking questions that parents aren’t answering. The loudest voices seducing these kids are extremists.”

Pandith notes that “extremism” is not so much a matter of geography as “what’s happening in virtual space around the world.”

As for the “seductive” “extremist” voices and the impact of social networks, of course the young and impressionable can be brainwashed, but what are they being brainwashed in, and who is doing the brainwashing? Should not these millennials and their parents be both rejecting as well as rooting out this ideology from their communities altogether?

Some experts seem to recognize an ideological component to what we have seen in Boston – an Islamic supremacist ideology that can proliferate wherever computers or cell phones are found, that thrives especially in tight-knit Muslim communities in free Western countries — yet they cannot bring themselves to define this ideology.

Coughlin Chart

Credit: Steven Coughlin

Juliette Kayyem, another Obama administration official who served as Assistant Secretary for Intergovernmental Affairs in the Department of Homeland Security, is next given the floor.

Kayyem believes that Boston — which the columnists describe as a “global city that is diverse, tolerant, and welcomes immigrants and students” – is “a breeding ground for the disaffected to either radicalize or hide.”

Kayyem asserts that “We are going to see this kind of radicalization in any urban area globally.”

But do global cities become “breeding grounds[s] for the disaffected to either radicalize or hide” in a vacuum?

Throughout world history, international locales have been free of the scourge of “violent extremism,” a politically correct term used to avoid offending Muslims while simultaneously drawing moral equivalence with and thereby smearing “right-wing” Americans.

One would think that modern, cosmopolitan, liberal urban areas by their very nature would consist of modern, cosmopolitan, liberal people.

Only to the degree to which these global cities invite in people with retrograde views antithetical to these ideals does their diversity and tolerance make them “breeding grounds” for jihadism.

It is hard to fault the piece’s authors for quoting “mainstream” “antiterror experts.” Yet these “experts” all seem to subscribe to the very see-no-Islam philosophy that paralyzes our national security establishment more broadly, rendering us unable to defeat our enemy.

Parenthetically, the idea of an “antiterror” expert should itself draw our ire, given that terror is a tactic, not the name of an ideologically-driven enemy. After all, during the Second World War we didn’t call upon anti-Blitzkrieg experts to define our enemies. We understood and were able to articulate that we were at war with a foe, not a fighting method.

Meanwhile, today there is nary a mention of Islamic religious tenets like jihad, abrogation and taqqiya, nor a discussion of Islam’s ultimate goal to create a global Ummah under which all submit to Shariah law.

This is not an issue of semantics. If we fail to be precise in how we describe our enemy and its ideology, it will defeat us.

How did we get to a point over a decade after Sept. 11, 2001 when columnists writing about Boston jihadists dance on egg shells around the Islamic supremacist ideology that by the jihadists’ own admission animates them?

While Nazism and Communism were political ideologies, jihadists subscribe to a theo-political ideology based in Islam’s core texts and modeled on the behaviors of Muhammad.

This offends the sensibilities of Americans either ignorant of Islam or uncomfortable with the idea that religion could be used to justify the slow motion worldwide slaughter of Jews, Christians, Hindus, infidel Muslims, gays, women, apostates, cartoonists and others.

In the case of the recently killed would-be jihadist Usamma Rahim, a simple set of Google searches regarding Rahim and the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB) might have provided the Globe columnists and the antiterror experts they quote an illuminating fact pattern worth investigating in response to their question, “Is Boston more vulnerable to violent extremism than other parts of the country?”

Below are some of those relevant data points:

  • Usamma Rahim had been a security guard at the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center (ISBCC) in Roxbury, Massachusetts, an affiliate of the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB)
  • The ISB’s executive director pulled the ISBCC out of President Barack Obama’s own Countering Violent Extremism Summit, essentially deeming the program Islamaphobic
  • Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev prayed at the ISB’s Cambridge, Massachusetts mosque
  • Notwithstanding ISB denials, Tsarnaev had been the latest in a long line of jihadists linked to the organization:
  • The ISB was founded by Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi, a supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah currently serving a 23 year prison sentence on terrorism charges
  • ISB’s Cambridge mosque is operated by the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Muslim American Society
    According to Discover the Networks, among other revelations:
  • “FBI surveillance documents show that two days before the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Suhaib Webb, Imam of ISB’s Boston mosque, joined al-Qaeda operative Anwar Awlaki in headlining a fundraiser on behalf of the Atlanta-based Muslim extremist Jamil al-Amin (formerly H. Rap Brown), who had recently murdered two police officers in Georgia.”
  • “Aafia Siddiqui, who occasionally prayed at ISB’s Cambridge mosque, was arrested in Afghanistan in 2008 while in possession of cyanide canisters and plans to carry out a chemical attack in New York City. Siddiqui subsequently tried to gun down some U.S. military officers and FBI agents, and is now serving an 86-year prison sentence for that offense.”
  • “Tarek Mehanna, who worshipped at ISB’s Cambridge mosque, received terrorist training in Yemen and plotted to use automatic weapons to inflict mass casualties in a suburban shopping mall just outside of Boston. In 2012 he was sentenced to 17 years in prison for conspiring to aid Al Qaeda.”
  • “Yasir Qadhi, who lectured at ISB’s Boston mosque in 2009 and again in 2012, advocates replacing American democracy with Sharia Law; characterizes Christians as “filthy” polytheists whose “life and prosperity … holds no value in the state of Jihad”; and accuses Jews of plotting to destroy Muslim peoples and societies. Further, Qadhi is an acolyte of Ali al-Timimi, a Virginia-based Imam who is currently serving life in prison for inciting jihad against U.S. troops in Afghanistan.”

The Boston Globe article is instructive because it represents the very line of thinking and questioning that is mandated in the halls of America’s national security institutions.

It is also instructive — in light of the facts about the ISB — that a see-no-Islam national security stance leads us to ignore the threats hiding in plain sight, to America’s great detriment.

Those who ignore the nature of the Islamic supremacist threat we face are doomed to submit to it.

05/5/15

Dreams from Obama’s Different Fathers

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

President Obama on Monday is celebrating his “My Brother’s Keeper” initiative, designed to create and expand “ladders of opportunity” for young blacks, many of whom have no fathers to guide them. But does President Obama have the credibility to deal with this crisis when he has failed to acknowledge as President the debt that he owes to his mentor and father figure, Communist Frank Marshall Davis?

What’s worse, Obama’s own half-brother, Malik Obama, is calling the President a con man who has failed to help members of his own poverty-stricken Kenyan family. Asked if President Obama has contributed to the foundation for his father, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., Malik told filmmaker Joel Gilbert, “No. No. Nothing.”

Perhaps the senior Obama isn’t Obama’s real father, after all.

The fatherhood crisis in black America was illustrated by the controversy over a black mother in Baltimore pulling her son off the streets when she caught him throwing rocks at the police during the riots. The mother, Toya Graham, has six children but no husband.

In addition to his initiatives on behalf of black fathers and their sons, Obama has unveiled a “fatherhood pledge,” which goes as follows:

“In response to President Obama’s call for a national conversation on responsible fatherhood and healthy families:

  • I pledge to renew my commitment to family and community.
  • I recognize the positive impact that fathers, mothers, mentors, and other responsible adults can have on our children and youth, and pledge to do all I can to provide children in my home and throughout my community the encouragement and support they need to fulfill their potential.”

Signers are told that “President Obama grew up without his dad, and has said that being a father is the most important job he has. That’s why the President is joining dads from across the nation in a fatherhood pledge—a pledge that we’ll do everything we can to be there for our children and for young people whose fathers are not around.”

In one of several stories expected to highlight Obama’s alleged commitment to the progress of black people, Yahoo! News describes Obama’s Monday launch of a new foundation to help black youth as part of his presidential legacy.

But in the blockbuster revelations that have been ignored by the pro-Obama “mainstream media,” Malik Obama, son of Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., told Joel Gilbert in an interview from Kenya that he feels disappointed in, used and betrayed by President Obama. “In the beginning, I didn’t think that he was a schemer,” Malik Obama said. “His real character, his real personality, the real him, is coming out now.” Malik says that after using his Kenyan family for political purposes to get elected, Obama has largely abandoned them.

Malik is so disillusioned that he wants his half-brother to take a DNA test to see if he is really related to him.

The version of Barack Obama’s family history that continues to be disseminated nationally is that he grew up without a dad after his father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., abandoned the family. The experience of not having a dad is said to have sparked Obama’s commitment to strengthen the black family through the “responsible fatherhood” initiative and the “My Brother’s Keeper” program. The foundation launched on Monday is an extension of the latter.

Gilbert asked Malik if he had approached Barack Obama about getting some funds to help bury their aunt, Zeituni Onyango, in Kenya after she died in Boston.  Malik responded, “Yes I did. I told him that she’s our aunt, she’s your father’s sister, she loved you very much and we need to do something for her. We need around $20,000 and he said that was too much and that it seemed like she deserved what she got. And I was saying in my mind, ‘what kind of person is this?’ And I told him, ‘you say you’re your brother’s keeper, I don’t feel it, and I don’t see you living up to what you say.’ She had really been good to him when he came. I felt really sad that he would just abandon her like that. I just left. She was stuck there for a month. People were trying to raise money and we finally got her back.”

“The White House had no comment on Onyango’s passing,” the Boston Globe reported at the time.

Malik’s statement to Obama, “you say you’re your brother’s keeper, I don’t feel it, and I don’t see you living up to what you say,” is just another indication that Barack Obama’s family history is questionable.

Obama’s claim to have been abandoned by his Kenyan father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., is usually combined with the story that he was raised by his white grandparents in Hawaii. However, this has been demonstrated to be a carefully concocted lie designed to hide the fact that his grandfather picked black Communist Frank Marshall Davis to be Obama’s childhood mentor in Hawaii.

According to Barack Obama’s book, Dreams from My Father, Davis, referred to as “Frank,” gave him advice on such topics as going to college and race relations, telling him that blacks “have reason to hate.” Davis’s true identity in the Obama book Dreams from My Father was obviously concealed because of his controversial background—which has been extensively documented by Accuracy in Media—as a suspected Soviet espionage agent, pornographer and pedophile.

It was communist historian Gerald Horne who initially disclosed “Frank” to be Davis at a 2007 event announcing that the archives of the Communist Party USA were being stored at New York University’s Tamiment Library. He had noted Davis’s influence over Obama and predicted in his remarks, “Rethinking the History and Future of the Communist Party,” that Obama would go down in history as a major and influential figure.

Despite Obama’s professed concern for the future of the dysfunctional black family, he has never been asked publicly by the media to explain his relationship with Davis, and he has avoided even mentioning the subject in public, except for one 1995 appearance that just recently surfaced on the Internet in a video. Obama said in that appearance that Davis had schooled him on the subject of white racism before he went off to college.

At one time, Malik Obama said, they were very close. Yet, Barack Obama has largely abandoned his family in Kenya. “He doesn’t want anything to do with me anymore,” Malik said. “I don’t understand how somebody who claims to be a relative or a brother can behave the way that he’s behaving, be so cold and ruthless, and just turn his back on the people he said were his family.”

Gilbert, the director of a film claiming Obama’s real father is Davis and not the Kenyan Obama, asked Malik if he thinks Barack Obama may be the child of Frank Marshall Davis rather than Barack Hussein Obama Sr. “There’s a great resemblance,” Malik replied. “I think Frank Marshall Davis and Barack, they look alike. Some kind of moles I see on his face and Frank, he has those too. There’s a resemblance.”

President Obama has promised to visit Kenya in July. White House Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz said, “he did not yet know whether the President would visit with members of his extended family,” CNN reported.

Gilbert asked Malik, “Do you expect when he comes to Kenya that he will come to see you?” He replied, “No, I don’t expect that. I don’t. He’s coming to Kenya right now. I’ve not been informed…An embarrassment and demeaning.”

We are two years into the second term of the presidency of Barack Obama and still serious questions are raised about the history and background of the President of the United States.

However, Gerald Horne and others on the left always have seemed secure in their knowledge of what this presidency represents.  “At some point in the future,” Horne had said, “a teacher will add to her syllabus Barack’s memoir and instruct her students to read it alongside Frank Marshall Davis’ equally affecting memoir, ‘Living the Blues’…”

At that point, perhaps, we will learn the complete truth about Barack Obama and Frank Marshall Davis.

12/30/14

Obama’s Anti-Cop Jihad

By: William Michael
misterchambers

The Protests were Organized for one Specific Purpose – Dead Cops

In December 2012, a respected Egyptian news magazine named six Obama administration officials who were in fact agents of the international terrorist organization, the Muslim Brotherhood. They claimed that these individuals had helped change the White House “from a position hostile to Islamic groups and organizations in the world to the largest and most important supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

One of these alleged agents was Imam Mohamed Magid, a Koranic scholar from Sudan. In the Obama administration, Magid was appointed to the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violence and Extremism working group in 2011. He is on the FBI’s Sikh, Muslim, and Arab advisory board (yes, we have one of those). He has trained and advised personnel affiliated with the FBI and other federal agencies.

Under Obama’s dictates since he entered the Oval Office, the United States government decided to publicly announce a softer approach to countering Islamic terrorism and the ideology behind jihad (i.e., war in the name of Islam). Imam Mohamed Magid has been a centerpiece in Obama’s show of tolerance (of violence) and diversity (of means of death), so much so that he and his organization have been “cited … as the primary means of outreach to the American Muslim community.”

It’s now known that Magid has a remarkable connection to the murderer of two NYPD officers this December.

***

Unlike his approach toward American Muslims, who apparently (at least based on policy since 2009) need the White House to reassure them that they are not “violent extremists,” Barack Hussein Obama’s attitude toward police officers has been hostile from the beginning. Multiple instances mar the six year old administration’s relationship with law enforcement.

The anti-police stance of the administration has been toxically mixed with anti-gun propaganda, and the blatant fanning of racial tensions that have resulted in violence, murder, and even city-wide chaos.

The first example came in July 2009, when Harvard Professor Henry Louis ‘Skip’ Gates was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct by the Cambridge Police department. Sgt. James Crowley saw Gates trying to break into a home, and, not realizing it was actually his own home, arrested Gates. The charges were later dropped by the police, but not before Obama said on national television that the police “acted stupidly,” and further insinuated that the arrest was racially motivated. To make everyone feel better, Obama later held a “beer summit” at the White House, hosting Gates and Crowley in what was presented as some great healing moment. (No word on whether pork or all beef hot dogs were served.)

In 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder, while noting that the number of officers killed in the line of duty jumped 13% that year, blamed the increase on illegal gun ownership. In 2013, Holder went on the record saying that he had to tell his son how to protect himself from the police, because, you guessed it, he’s black. Holder said this talk was family tradition.

For his part, Obama came out in support of the 2011 anti-cop and anarchist movement, Occupy Wall Street, who were not only occupying Wall Street, but terrorizing downtown Manhattan.

Then came the February 2012 shooting death of Trayvon Martin in Florida. Martin was shot by George Zimmerman, as he was being violently assaulted and threatened with death while on neighborhood patrol. In what has become a national tradition, Al Sharpton and Eric Holder descended to prey upon the citizens of a small community, calling for “justice.”

In fact, mob justice is what they were looking for.

The next stop for the Obama, Holder, and Sharpton anti-police racial mob circus was Ferguson, Missouri, following the death of Michael Brown by the gun of a police officer who he was attacking and threatening. The case is familiar and fresh enough in everyone’s minds not have to rehash in any detail. Once again, Obama and the administration issued thinly veiled attacks on the police and insinuated that the officers and the department were racially motivated haters.

The caustic and raw social tumult that ensued led to widespread looting, riots, arson (even by allegedly “peaceful” protestors), and even the murder of a friend one of the trial witnesses.

Obama’s, Holder’s, and Sharpton’s carnival of hate then went prime time, this time to the Big Apple. If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere. And, with a little help from the all-too-willing Mayor Bill DeBlasio, in the Staten Island death of Eric Garner, which was caused not by bullets but by a lung condition, the carnival got what they were looking for all along: the blood of police officers.

On December 20, 2014, five days before Christmas, Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu were assassinated by Ismaaiyl Abdullah Brinsley in their patrol car in Bedford-Stuyvesant in Brooklyn. After weeks of anti-police protests, which explicitly shouted for “dead cops,” Brinsley had bragged to pedestrians just prior to the shooting that he was going to satiate the protestors with their pound of flesh.

***

At this time, you may be asking what Mohamed Magid, the alleged Muslim Brotherhood agent, has to do with the assassination of two NYPD officers. This will be clear to you soon enough. But first it is necessary to understand that the supposedly grassroots protests, in Ferguson and in New York, were anything but organic.

Terresa Monroe-Hamilton at NoisyRoom.net has documented the nefarious players behind the protests, and has an incredible list of organizations involved in the protests. One of the most prominent organizing groups is ANSWER, which stands for Act Now to Stop War and End Racism. ANSWER is often found alongside Occupy Wall Street. A little digging into ANSWER’s coalition partners and speakers reveal their roots; groups such as the Muslim Students Association, Free Palestinian Alliance, National Council of Arab Americans, the Nicaragua Network, and Korea Truth Commission (you got me ?).

Furthermore, ANSWER is described by DiscoverTheNetworks as “a principal player in all anti-war and pro-Palestinian demonstrations… ANSWER was formed a few days after 9/11 as a ‘new anti-racism, anti-war, peace and justice’ group and led its first protest just weeks later against the impending US-led attack on Afghanistan.”

To be blunt about it, ANSWER is a pro-jihad front organization that was fully behind Hamas in this summer’s Gaza war. Hamas, it’s noted, is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood – the same Muslim Brotherhood that the Egyptian magazine claimed Mohamed Magid was a member of.

***

Isn’t it odd that a Muslim Brotherhood front group would lead protests in New York City over the accidental death of a black man in the course of an arrest? Last time I was there, Staten Island wasn’t a center of Israeli-Palestinian debate, and there are no public pictures of Eric Garner smoking hookah or riding camels in Giza. On the contrary, Garner was dealing single cigarettes, and tobacco is decisively haram (forbidden) according to Islamic sharia law.

Puzzling, perhaps, but the Facebook page of Ismaaiyl Abdullah Brinsley Muhammad ties the story’s loose ends together. According to his own biography on Facebook, Brinsely-Muhammad “Worked at: Islamic Society of North America.” The Islamic Society of North America, aka ISNA, is headquartered in Plainfield, Indiana. Hmm.

Killer's Facebook page: Obama and Magid are caught red-handed

Who is the President of ISNA, where the cop killer said he worked? That would be Imam Mohamed Magid, Obama’s advisor to DHS and the National Security Council.

Obama himself addressed ISNA’s annual convention in 2013. You can read about one of ISNA’s greatest influences, Pakistani radical Abul A’la Maududi, here.

Here are a few other facts to consider when contemplating that the Obama and Holder-inspired cop killer was, according to himself, employed at the organization of one of Obama’s most trusted security advisors, the Islamic Society of North America.

  • ISNA President and Obama advisor Imam Mohamed Magid was a lecturer at Howard University, teaching courses on the Koran.
  • The Trayvon Martin case only caught on after it was plucked from relative obscurity from a student at Howard University. This student, Kevin Cunningham, began a petition on the website change.org. Said Cunningham, a lawyer, “that’s how I think about life, is to be a social engineer.”
  • Cop killer Brinsley-Muhammad, who additionally may have attended a Brooklyn mosque associated with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, martyred himself by suicide in a subway station before being apprehended by police. He’s no longer with us to answer any questions.
  • In light of Obama’s recent embrace of Communist Cuba, it is worth noting that one of Castro’s last acts as a revolutionary leader was to order the targeted killing of Cuba’s police officers. Why? Police keep law and order on the streets, and because they’re uniformed, they’re easy targets for revolutionaries who thrive off anarchy.

Obama’s six yearlong anti-cop jihad has serious consequences. In 2014, there was an increase of 56% in police killed by guns – 50 officers, compared to 32 in 2013. Since the assassinations in New York, many infractions are going unpunished, as police are reluctant to engage with the community, fearing targeting by assassins and mobs. This is a very tenuous and delicate situation.

It might be worth mentioning, to the next person you bump into who still has a functioning brain, that Obama’s trusted advisor, Imam Mohamed Magid, had the NYPD cop killer as an employee of his nationwide Islamic organization. This, according to his own Facebook bio.

The circumstantial evidence presented above points to a deliberate plan by the administration and the Muslim Brotherhood to stoke violence that led to cop killings. These are revolutionary tactics, creating conditions that lead to chaos, anarchy, and eventually the total dissolution of societal trust. After that occurs, people beg for order, in whatever form it offers itself.

Is 2015 the year of the American Spring? In the New Year, several detailed reports will be published that point to deliberate, witting, and eager cooperation between the Obama administration and the Muslim Brotherhood aimed at precisely this end.