07/16/16

“Hope and Change” Becomes “Death and Destruction”

By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media

Hope

BLM PosterPresident Barack Obama laid the groundwork for the Black Lives Matter movement in his first term when he said that the Cambridge, Massachusetts police “acted stupidly” after an African-American professor was arrested in his own home. It turned out the white policeman was protecting the home from what he thought was a burglary. Although the policeman had an impeccable record and there was no evidence of racial bias, Obama found him guilty of racism and “stupidity.”

Obama was trained by his mentor, Communist Frank Marshall Davis, to consider white people guilty of racism. Davis told a young Barack that black people had “reason to hate.”

Frank_Marshall_DavisOn virtually every occasion involving a police confrontation with black people—except in Dallas when five police officers were shot and killed by a racist black—Obama has sided with the rioters and the mob against law enforcement.

Black Dallas Police Chief David Brown revealed on July 8, 2016 that the sniper who killed five officers and injured another seven “said he was upset about Black Lives Matter,” during the negotiations with police. He meant that the Black Lives Matter protest, which was being protected by police, had inspired him to take action.

“These murders are the predictable outcome of the ‘war on the police’ and the racial polarization that has been fostered in this country,” said former Republican Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore.

Gilmore pointed the finger at America’s first black President. He said, “President Obama’s statement this past Thursday, before the Dallas attack, on police shootings also helped set the stage. The President’s statement condemning the Dallas attack is too late to undo his terrible earlier statement implying that the police are targeting African Americans—an infamous lie.”

He was referring to the fact that, days before the murders, Obama had lectured the nation about “racial disparities that exist in our criminal justice system” and pushed for so-called criminal justice reform—legislation that could empty the prisons and put hardened criminals back on the streets.

When two killings of black men were caught on video and protests erupted throughout the country, Obama could have calmed the nation. Instead, he threw gasoline on the flames of discontent.

As a result, protests across the United States spread from coast-to-coast, not only in Minnesota and Louisiana but in Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Oakland, New York City, Ferguson, Atlanta, Jackson (Mississippi), Baltimore and finally, Dallas.

Obama’s Role in the Violence

Chicago Police Officer Martin Preib says that “…perhaps no president in the United States has politicized and then undermined the federal law enforcement agencies more than Barack Obama. It’s a truth many Americans are slowly realizing in the wake of the decision by the FBI not to indict Hillary Clinton for her illegal actions in the email scandal.”

“What is truly chilling,” he writes, “is how Obama has used federal law enforcement as an instrument of his intense anti-law enforcement ideology, an ideology utterly unique in the history of American presidents, revolutionary even.”

MartinPreibPreib said, “Obama’s knee-jerk response to blaming police in shootings around the country betray this willingness to vilify police, no matter how much evidence indicates the police acted legally and responsibly. It is a tactic by Obama that undermines local law enforcement and rallies public sentiment against the police…”

William Johnson, the executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations, said in an interview with Fox, “I think [the Obama’s administration] continued appeasements at the federal level with the Department of Justice, their appeasement of violent criminals, their refusal to condemn movements like Black Lives Matter, actively calling for the death of police officers, that type of thing, all the while blaming police for the problems in this country, has led directly to the climate that has made Dallas possible.”

Attorney General Loretta Lynch actually delivered a message to Black Lives Matters (BLM) activists, advising them to continue their protests: “Do not be discouraged by those who would use your lawful actions as a cover for their heinous violence.”

This wasn’t the first time that the Obama administration had encouraged anti-police protests. FBI Assistant Director and Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund President Ron Hosko noted that the Justice Department’s “ill-timed decision to launch a full investigation into the Ferguson Police Department at the height of racial tensions in that community” amounted to “throwing gasoline on a fire that was already burning.”

He added, “Many officers were disgusted by such a transparent political maneuver at a time when presidential and attorney general leadership could have calmed a truly chaotic situation.”

Nevertheless, we are seeing the pattern repeated, as the national political party conventions get ready to take place. It is as if the White House is screaming, “Burn Baby Burn.” It is their opportunity to paint Donald J. Trump and Republicans as racists.

The 2016 Democratic Party platform appears sympathetic to the agitators, saying, “…We will push for a societal transformation to make it clear that black lives matter and there is no place for racism in our country.”

Hillary ClintonIn addition, both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U. S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have sought support from the group in their respective campaigns for the Democratic nomination.

Earlier in the presidential campaign season, former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley backpedaled after declaring during a Democratic forum that “all lives matter.” Actor Justin Timberlake actually apologized to BLM for saying, “we’re all the same.”

Blood on Their Hands

The officers in Dallas were attacked in plain sight of the sniper because they were guarding and escorting 800 BLM protesters. The killer saw this as an opportunity to murder.

David BrownThat the demonstrations would turn violent—or inspire cop-killing—was to be expected.

Black Lives Matter, whose activists met with White House official Valerie Jarrett, is an organization that salutes convicted cop-killer Assata Shakur as a role model. A member of the Black Liberation Army (BLA), a group that worked with the communist terrorist Weather Underground, Assata Shakur, also known as Joanne Chesimard, killed New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster “execution style” by shooting him in the head as he lay wounded by gunfire, according to the State Troopers Association of New Jersey. She was convicted of murder and went to prison, but with the help of the Weather Underground, escaped to Cuba, where she is still being protected by the communist regime.

The BLM website features this quotation from Shakur: “It is our duty to fight for our freedom. It is our duty to win. We must love each other and support each other. We have nothing to lose but our chains.”

FBI photo file showing the different appearances of Assata Shakur.Shakur’s notion of “freedom” is to be found in Cuba, where there is no freedom and the dictatorship controls the movements and activities of its citizens. It is a regime that sponsored terrorism and cop-killing on American soil.

“Black Lives Matter, as far as I am concerned, is a radical hate group,” said El Paso County’s black Police Chief Greg Allen. “And for that purpose alone, I think the leadership of this country needs to look a little bit harder at that particular group. The consequences of what we saw in Dallas is due to their efforts.”

“Black Lives Matter, which I have renamed ‘Black Lies’ L-I-E-S Matter, it’s nothing more than an astroturf operation,” Milwaukee’s black Sheriff David A. Clarke told the American Journalism Center’s Alex Nitzberg. “It’s just the latest shallow disguised, confederation if you will, of community organizers and leftists that specialize in fostering disorganization and rebellion in ghettos and other struggling areas throughout the United States of America.”

David ClarkeIt may be astroturf, in the sense that it’s a political organization with shadowy big money backers, but the strings ultimately go right into the White House. After these activists met with Obama, there can be no doubt about that.

In his special AIM Report, “Reds Exploiting Blacks: The Roots of Black Lives Matter,” investigative reporter James Simpson examined the funding and backing of this organization. Back in January, Simpson predicted that the movement could “assist President Obama’s exploitation of racial divisions in society beyond his final term in office.”

It appears Obama couldn’t wait until he was out of office. Perhaps the Trump candidacy caused him to act sooner.

As Obama knows, the incitement of racial protest and unrest leading to the murders of police diverts the attention of the public and the news media from the real problem in black America—the breakdown of the African-American family. Obama’s own family was dysfunctional, as he was virtually deserted by his mother and turned over to his grandparents, who turned him over to his communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis.

At a time like this, Obama could have provided real leadership, convening a special summit to examine the crisis in black neighborhoods and among black families. Instead, he exploited racism for political purposes.

Into this void we see courageous individuals like black Puerto Rican Ismael Hernandez, founder and executive director of the Freedom & Virtue Institute, who says, “By portraying our present family problems as a legacy of slavery and perennial racism, we can relinquish responsibility for the crisis and place it in the hands of whites or in the hands of the state.”

Hernandez is a former member of the Puerto Rican Communist Party who converted to Christ and has written, Not Tragically Colored: Freedom, Personhood, and the Renewal of Black America.

He understands the Marxist agenda—to make blacks into wards of the state, subject to political manipulation and exploitation by Democratic Party politicians.

ismael hernandez 2016“I grew up hating the United States, hating capitalism, and blaming capitalism and America for the poverty we saw around us,” Hernandez said in an interview with Marvin Olasky of World magazine. “And I hated America for the bad marriage that my mom and my dad had, because my father was only interested in revolution.”

Obama grew up the same way, as a result of the influence of black racist Frank Marshall Davis. However, Obama, in his own biography and when he was running for office, didn’t even have the honesty and integrity to acknowledge the role that Davis had played in his own life. Davis was only “Frank” in his book, Dreams from My Father.Hence, Obama adopts the Marxist playbook of treating blacks as victims of white society. His knee-jerk reaction in police confrontations is to blame the police.

Dreams_from_my_fatherIn a story from October 2015, Obama defended the Black Lives Matter movement and claimed that the protests “are giving voice to a problem happening only in African-American communities.” He said, “We, as a society, particularly given our history, have to take this seriously,” thus blaming American history and slavery for current problems.

“I think everybody understands all lives matter,” Obama said. But he went on to defend the racist term, “Black Lives Matter,” saying, “I think the reason that the organizers used the phrase ‘Black Lives Matter’ was not because they were suggesting nobody else’s lives matter. Rather, what they were suggesting was there is a specific problem that’s happening in the African-American community that’s not happening in other communities.”

Obama added, “And that is a legitimate issue that we’ve got to address.”

Yet, in case after case, including the police killing in self-defense of black thug Michael Brown in Ferguson, the evidence (in that case from Obama’s own Department of Justice) vindicated the conduct of the police.

At a White House meeting with Black Lives Matter activists Brittany Packnett and DeRay Mckesson, Obama said they “are much better organizers” than he was at their age, and that he is “confident that they are going to take America to new heights.”

We saw those “new heights” in Dallas, where the sniper’s Facebook page showed him in a dashiki, holding a clenched fist in the air. Johnson’s cover photos are a black liberation flag and a black power fist.

Black Lives Matter marchThis was the inevitable result of the White House rolling out the red carpet to Black Lives Matter. The red turned out to be blood.

The black racist killer told police that he “was upset about the recent police shootings” and “wanted to kill white people, especially white officers.”

The bloody trail from the massacre in Dallas leads to the White House.

Another participant in that White House meeting was the Reverend Al Sharpton, who participated in the Tawana Brawley hoax back in 1987, in which a black girl made false and damaging charges of rape against a group of white men. Sharpton was found guilty of defamation and ordered to pay a financial fine in that case.

Obama consciously decided to treat him as an ally, despite Sharpton’s history of anti-white agitation.

All of this sends a message to black youth—go ahead and agitate and exploit racial differences. The President of the United States is with you, even if you “Blame Whitey” with no evidence.

Bill OReilly 2016A different message should be sent. When black churchgoers were massacred in Charleston, South Carolina, by a white racist, most blacks in the area, even families of the victims, reacted with a message of racial healing and forgiveness. It was a tender and touching moment that brought people of all races together. We have seen none of that from the White House.

Equally offensive, Hillary Clinton has pandered to the mob, begging forgiveness for her husband’s 1994 crime bill that put black “superpredators” in jail and more police on the streets.

As we noted in a column about one particular exhibit at the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Arkansas, both Mrs. Clinton and Senator Sanders “seem to believe that highlighting black crime is now considered racist, and that white racism is actually the real problem in black communities that have been devastated by black criminals.”

The “Making Communities Safer” exhibit of the Clinton Presidential Library highlights the tough-on-crime policies of the Clinton administration, including the building of prisons. Those policies, now considered racist by the Democrats, did far more to keep black families and their neighborhoods safe than the anti-police and racist rhetoric now gushing out of the White House.

The War on Police can only claim more lives.


Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected].View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.

02/28/16

What if they just stop Watching?

By: Nancy Salvato

In the beginning, what excited people most about traveling to the new world was freedom to practice their religion without persecution or being treated differently for not adhering to a state mandated religion.   As time passed, people were compelled by the idea that they could grab a piece of land and create their own wealth.   These two ideas best characterize the American dream, the freedom to have a set of beliefs and not be compelled to follow the group and the freedom to build wealth from a wing and a prayer.   Our governing system evolved from these two important rights.

Our country suffered 25,000 casualties, not to mention as many wounded in the revolution to gain our freedom from England.   Once we had tasted freedom, it was hard to imagine allowing ourselves to be ruled by a king and a parliament determined to wield their authority over colonies that had been essentially governing themselves independently for years.   To be told where goods could be sold and where they could trade, to be taxed indiscriminately, to be tried in courts without a jury of peers…these ideas were recognized as unjust and intolerable.

With freedom came wealth and power.   This is because in our country there was no built in ruling class or proletariat class.   In America, people were not seen as belonging to any particular class and it was a given that anyone could make it.   Andrew Jackson was the first president who exemplified that idea, having beat enormous odds.   He was not born of wealth and despite having lost both parents before he was fifteen, survived fighting (under age) in the American Revolution, being imprisoned, and smallpox.   Yet he managed to become a school teacher, and later a lawyer, before running for and being elected to the highest office in the land.

Continue reading

07/21/15

Why They Can’t Stop Trump

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

In a Sunday column in The Washington Post, “Stop laughing at Donald Trump,” a liberal analyst from the Brookings Institution tries to warn the Washington, D.C. beltway elites that they should take the businessman seriously because he has figured out how to win a national election—by taking the white vote. This is the “silent majority.”

While it is true that minorities and other groups helped elect President Obama twice, “the white portion of the electorate, which votes strongly Republican, underperformed in support of John McCain in 2008, and white turnout was down in 2012,” when Mitt Romney was the Republican presidential nominee, notes William H. Frey, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a population studies professor at the University of Michigan.

In other words, if McCain and Romney had only come across in a more conservative and assertive manner, and had appealed to more white voters, they probably would have won.

Frey comments that Trump “appeals to a vein of the U.S. electorate that will remain a significant voting bloc for several election cycles to come: older whites.”

Yet, GOP politicians and Fox News commentators such as George Will and Charles Krauthammer have been attacking Trump and his policy positions. McCain went further, smearing Trump supporters as “crazies,” before Trump fired back, in comments on McCain’s war record. Veteran reporter Sharyl Attkisson said Trump’s comments were taken out of context and distorted by The Washington Post.

It appears that the “crazies” include a lot of ordinary Americans who are sick and tired of politics as usual. Trump, in contrast to McCain and Romney, has figured out a way to fire them up and tap their anger and frustration.

A 2014 study by Professor Marisa Abrajano on the coming backlash to immigration policy not only explains the Donald Trump phenomenon, but also why the liberal media are so determined to destroy him. The media know that Trump’s appeal threatens the ability of the Democratic Party to continue to fool white voters into embracing liberal policies that destroy their own communities.

Her academic paper, published by the Brookings Institution, was clearly designed to warn liberals about how a “broad backlash” to immigration could damage the Democratic Party. She said a backlash could not only “shift the balance of power between Democrats and Republicans” but benefit “rightward leaning candidates throughout the country” who want to do something about it.

The paper was based on the book, White Backlash: Immigration, Race, and American Politics. co-authored with Zoltan L. Hajnal.

“Immigrants may be arriving in historically high numbers,” she noted, “but they account for only a relatively small fraction of the nation’s population. Native-born whites still represent 63 percent of the population and, perhaps more importantly, some 75 percent of its voters.”

Hence, the key to Democratic Party success lies in manipulating the minority groups and immigrants into voting for Democrats in overwhelming numbers, as they currently do, while also conning a significant number of whites into voting Democrat. This is a con because the Democratic Party has no interest in protecting the interests of white people as a political or special interest group.

The Abrajano report has some interesting comments about media coverage of the issue that may help explain the reaction to Donald Trump. It says, “At the aggregate level, we find that when media coverage of immigration uses the Latino threat narrative, the likelihood of whites identifying with the Democratic Party decreases, and the probability of favoring Republicans increases.”

Of course, the liberal media never use the “Latino threat narrative,” and the phrase is meant to suggest that concerns about immigration are somehow racist or improper. Our media have done their best to play down the problem, through such maneuvers as banning the term “illegal alien” and substituting “undocumented worker.”

What Trump has done is bring the issue to the fore, making it out to be the threat that it is. The Trump surge, plus the murder of a young American in San Francisco by a Mexican illegal alien and the prison escape in Mexico of a drug cartel leader, have put the dangers on the front pages of our newspapers in a manner that has garnered the attention of the nation. Our media have been forced to cover the issue in a way that captures the peril our nation currently faces. As a result, the Democrats and their liberal media allies fear that white voters have now been dramatically educated about the political stakes and may vote accordingly in favor of their own interests.

The media have no problem with blacks and Hispanics voting for Democrats in large numbers and affirming and protecting their own racial identities. But when whites do it, it suddenly becomes racism. That charge has carried a lot of sting in the past, but with illegals streaming across the border and Middle Eastern Muslims creating enclaves in places like Tennessee, it looks more and more like members of the “silent majority” are deciding to be silent no more. They are realizing that the lives of their family members and the cultural identity of their nation are at risk.

“Immigration and other factors appear increasingly to be pitting the declining white majority against the growing non-white minority,” she wrote. That majority may have found its voice in Trump, a man unafraid of the liberal media and the GOP establishment, which wants to continue the losing strategy of pandering to the minorities who overwhelmingly vote Democrat.

Abrajano also wrote, “The conventional view of pundits and prognosticators and maybe even most social scientists is that the dramatic growth of the minority population and its strong ties to the Democratic Party portend the demise of the Republican Party.” She adds, “That may be true in the long term. But that prediction ignores the white population and the possibility of a widespread white backlash in the short term.”

It appears that “short term” has now arrived. His name is Donald Trump.

Abrajano’s co-author, Hajnal, a professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego, recently wrote that Republicans’ “opposition to immigration reform actually represents a winning strategy, not a losing one.”

Of course, the term “immigration reform” is code for amnesty for illegals.

That aside, he acknowledges that “Republicans win or lose largely depending on white voters. Whites still make up the vast majority of voters—some 75 percent in 2014—and whites tend to favor the Republican Party by large margins. Republican congressional candidates garnered 60 percent of the white vote in 2014. All told, 89 percent of all Republican votes in 2014 came from white voters. Put simply, the Republican Party doesn’t really need the minority vote.”

Since the Republicans have a winning strategy, what holds them back from using it? It’s called political correctness, which holds that appealing to people based on their fears of immigration destroying their country is racist and wrong. Trump didn’t care what the media thought and decided to address the issue anyway. The response speaks for itself.

It’s not surprising that GOP presidential candidates like Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio would go after Trump. For whatever reason, perhaps because they want to appear “inclusive,” they are desperate to appeal to Hispanics, a voting bloc that is essentially owned by the Democrats.

This is not to say that some Hispanics do not agree with Trump.

Maria Espinoza launched the group America First Latinos, in order to “prove, once and for all, that the majority of Latino citizens are solidly behind the U.S. Constitution and a secured national border.” Espinoza also launched the Stolen Lives Quilt project, whose members appeared with Trump at his July 10 news conference. The group remembers the victims of illegal alien crimes in the U.S. and is coming to Washington, D.C. this week to press their case against criminal aliens coming across America’s open borders.