After every terrorist attack, it’s only a matter of time until the media runs its expected, “Muslims fear backlash” stories.
The New York Times was one of the first media outlets out of the gate to claim that Sri Lankan Muslims are being terrorized by Christians.
“In the town of Negombo, where an attack on a church during Easter services killed more than 100 people, gangs of Christian men moved from house to house, smashing windows, breaking down doors, dragging people into the streets, punching them in the face and then threatening to kill them, dozens of residents said. No deaths were reported, but many Muslims fear it is only a matter of time,” the paper claims.
Then it admits that, “The country is about 7 percent Christian, 10 percent Muslim, 13 percent Hindu and 70 percent Buddhist.”
If we are to believe the Times, then the Christians, who make up only 7 percent of the country, are terrorizing Muslims who make up 10 percent of the country. And yet, are unable to fight back.
That sounds hard to believe. But it’s a convenient and familiar narrative.
The media is most comfortable with Christians as villains, rather than victims, and Muslims as victims rather than terrorists. And so it tells the story that conveniently fits its narrative of choice.
The attempt to transform Christians from victims to perpetrators so quickly after the Muslim church attacks is deeply shameful.
And deeply disturbing.
While Christians face genocide in Muslim countries, and even in countries with Muslim minorities, the media erases their stories and demonizes them. After ISIS concluded its bloody work, the media took over.
“The halls of power bowed to the pulse of the street. This moment marks a new future for American Muslims,” crowed a recent mass email from the Hamas-derived Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR’s executive director, Nihad Awad, had every reason to rejoice, for Democratic representatives had just transformed a congressional censure of antisemitism into a resolution that actually protected pro-jihad Muslim anti-Semites like him.
The CAIR email condemned the original intention of the resolution that Congress passed on March 8. In a “twisted logic, Democratic leadership planned to release a resolution condemning anti-Semitism as a public rebuke of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar,” who has consistently made anti-Semitic statements, as previously discussed. Adopting hackneyed arguments that Omar and others, including her Democratic colleague Rashida Tlaib, are merely legitimate critics of Israeli policies, the email celebrated an end to the “silencing of criticism of Israeli apartheid.”
While the resolution had its origins in national outrage over Omar’s years-long recidivist string of anti-Semitic remarks, the ultimate text did not mention her and buried antisemitism. As the prominent orthodox Rabbi Dov Fischerobserved, in the resolution the “Democrats will not name the Jew-hater,” but “condemn everything except for apple pie” in what the New York Post called a “meaningless…Pablum.” Yet his fellow rabbinical luminary, Shmuley Boteach, noted that this “milquetoast resolution condemning nearly every form of bigotry (anti-Christian prejudice was notably missing)” passed 407-23, including with her support. Condemnation of white supremacists like the Ku Klux Klan had a prominent textual place, while rampant antisemitismamong her Muslim coreligionists worldwide received no mention.
Instead, the text condemned “Islamophobia,” a late twentieth-century neologism that has consistently served its totalitarian purpose of suppressing any critical inquiry into the beliefs and behaviors of Muslims. Accordingly, the resolution cavalierly dismisses “unfair allegations that they sympathize with individuals who engage in violence or terror or support the oppression of women, Jews, and other vulnerable communities.” While Omar and Tlaib’s insinuations about divided Jewish loyalties had angered many, the resolution’s statement that “imputations of dual loyalty threaten American democracy” could equally encompass concerns about illiberal Islamic ideologies.
Unsurprisingly, CAIR celebrated the fact that the resolution “is the first piece of legislation mentioning Islamophobia to pass either chamber of Congress.” CAIR’s allies in the fight to change the resolution’s contents also touted their successful efforts. These included the anti-Semitic Muslim-American political activist Linda Sarsour and the anti-Israel US Campaign for Palestinian Rights, a supporter of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel.
Thus the Democrats “hijacked a condemnation of Jew-hatred and twisted it to make Muslims, not Jews, the victims,” noted this author’s colleague and anti-sharia activist, Deborah Weiss. Correspondingly, Mehdi Hasan, a BDS-whitewashing reporter for the Qatar-based television channel and fount of antisemitism Al Jazeera, decried the “Islamophobic and racist attacks” upon Omar in an interview with her. Tlaib likewise blamed “Islamophobia” for Omar’s public troubles.
Such statements reflected how Muslims such as Omar used religious identity to deflect criticism. “Many on the left believe that as a woman of color, a Muslim, and an immigrant, Omar cannot, by definition, be a purveyor of hate and prejudice,” conservative Jewish commentator Jonathan Tobin explaineed. Such “identity politics” means that “those who are considered oppressed receive immunity to do things that those considered more privileged cannot do.”
As one anonymous Democrat critic of Omar toldBreitbart, “Islamophobia has become the knee jerk reaction to anyone who dares criticize her.” An online open letter from Sarour’s Mpowerchange organization in support of Omar rejected any worries about Islamic antisemitism as an “Islamophobic stereotype that Muslims are inherently antisemitic.” Correspondingly, the anti-Semitic writer CJ Werlemandenounced the “phony and scurrilous charges of anti-Semitism” that” targeted “two Muslim women representatives,” Omar and Tlaib, “moral leaders in their party.” Conservative commentators such as FrontPage contributor Daniel Greenfield therefore noted Omar’s status as a “member of the Democrat’s protected victim class.”
Muslim reformer Shireen Qudosi observed the dangerous implications of such ideological untouchables. A week before the resolution’s passage, a political poster appeared in the West Virginia capitol building that juxtaposed Omar’s picture with an image of the September 11, 2001, Al Qaeda attacks upon New York’s World Trade Center. Contrary to the claims that this was a slanderous association of her with 9/11, Qudosi accurately saw thereby that with Omar and her allies the “ideology that goes ‘tick tick boom’ went from crashing into the Twin Towers to walking the halls of Congress.”
A March 6 confrontation outside of Tlaib’s congressional office between Qudosi’s fellow Muslim reformer Asra Nomani and Omar supporters following their Capitol Hill rally proved Qudosi’s point. As Nomani and others videoed, rally participants including Sarsour, CAIR national outreach manager Jinan Shbat, and former CAIR Connecticut chapter leader Mongi Dhaouadi conferred with Tlaib and/or prevented Nomani from entering Tlaib’s office. Her choice of consulting anti-Semitic, Israel-hating, pro-jihad individuals over Nomani clearly showed the political influencesthat so devastatingly distorted the congressional reaction to Omar.
As Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer has explained, the ability of the Democrats’ emerging radical political base to squash censure of Omar shows that she “stands victorious as the new master of the Democratic Party.” Especially the freshman congresswoman’s coveted position on the House Foreign Affairs Committee reveals that “open anti-Semitism has become mainstream and normalized on the Left today” and it is “not just mainstream, either: it’s the future.” On this committee she will have a “sort of bully pulpit that Israel-haters have lacked up until now,” Tobin has warned.
Spencer’s aghast summation is that Omar “has achieved the normalization of a paranoid Jew-hatred not seen in the political mainstream since the Third Reich.” “I don’t believe that anyone in the history of Congress has so openly and vilely attacked Jews and Israel,” Boteach has concurred, an assessment supported by factual evaluation of her many falsehoods. The congressional resolution has worked merely to “cement Omar’s criticism as on the kosher side of the line when it comes to what may constitute antisemitism,” analyzedJerusalem Post editor Seth Frantzman. Moreover, she showed little willingness to reform during a March 5 meeting of congressional Democrats where, among other things, she refused to endorse Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish national homeland.
Democrat leaders will most likely want to continue to ignore any of Omar’s offenses, as she has proven her undivided loyalty to the new red-green political alliance of Leftists and sharia supremacists. She has particularly offered no objection to “Pelvic Left” agendas so central to the modern Democratic Party’s “Sexual State,” even as individuals like Judge Jeanine Pirro speculateabout the significance of Omar’s hijab and Islamic modesty culture. Especially incongruous is the Left’s embrace of homosexuality while Muslims such as Siraj Wahhaj, her ally Sarsour’s mentor, espouse brutal Islamic orthodoxy towards gays.
Omar notably has recommended legal action against athletic organizations for not allowing “transgendered” biological males to compete against women. Thereby she absurdly argued that the “myth that trans women have a ‘direct competitive advantage’ is not supported by medical science.” Additionally, she evinces no concern about how “transgenderism” threatens females’ most intimate privacy, both Muslim and non-Muslim.
Thus anti-Semites such as Omar will remained ensconced in the Democratic Party. Her haughtiness towards the media likewise reflects that the press has previously shown little interest in substantial evidence that The Democratic Party’s “Progress” into Antisemitism (Part Two)she engaged in marriage fraud with her immigrant brother. This dire political arrangement raise critical questions for Jews, traditionally a stalwart Democratic constituency, as the last article in this series will examine.
Ticketing service Eventbrite blacklisted conservative organization ACT for America on Thursday over supposed violations of the platform’s “Community Guidelines.” The ban arrives just one week after a former Nancy Pelosi intern wrote a hit piece on the organization, relying on information provided by the discredited SPLC.
ACT for America (ACT) is a grassroots organization founded by Brigitte Gabriel and focused on a wide array of topics pertaining to national security, such as securing the United States border, defending constitutional rights, combating terrorism, and supporting Israel.
The organization had been utilizing Eventbrite for ticketing as ACT founder Brigitte Gabriel is set to embark on a book tour across the county for her latest release, Rise: In Defense of Judeo-Christian Values and Freedom.
On Wednesday, the organization’s National Grassroots Director, Thomas Hern, received an email from Eventbrite alerting him of the website’s “Community Guidelines,” as well as listing the titles of several events ACT had posted to the website, informing the director that the events had been “removed” for violating the guidelines.
All of ACT’s listings on Eventbrite had been the same, with the only difference being the event’s specific location for Gabriel’s upcoming book tour.
“Eventbrite does not permit on our platform content or organizations that promote or encourage hate, violence, or harassment towards others and/or oneself,” stated the email, adding that the website prohibits the promotion of hate or harassment based on “race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, nationality, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity.”
“We have determined that the events in question violate our Community Guidelines and are therefore not permitted on the Eventbrite platform,” added the ticketing website in its email, “As a result, your event listings have been removed.”
Hern told Breitbart News that after receiving the email, he logged into the organization’s Eventbrite account and edited the event listings to change any language that he thought could be misconstrued as a violation of “community guidelines” based on today’s increasingly ambiguous definition of “hate” among big tech companies.
“The first version of the event description said ‘Come hear Brigitte Gabriel speak about illegal immigration, the left’s culture war, and radical Islamic terrorism,’” said Hern to Breitbart News, “I took out those three talking points and changed it to ‘Come hear Birigttie Gabriel, as she calls on all patriotic Americans to rise in the defense of freedom.’”
“And at the end, I even added ‘Act for America has a strict zero tolerance policy for violence and discrimination’ and linked it to our policy on non-discrimination and anti-violence,” added the ACT director.
The following day, Hern received a second email informing him that the organization’s Eventbrite account had been banned from the platform altogether.
In its email, Eventbrite reiterated what it had initially stated in the first email, adding, “these events have been re-published multiple times since our initial removal, we have again unpublished them and your account has been suspended at this time.”
“Eventbrite didn’t delete the events or mention in the email that I couldn’t edit them,” said Hern to Breitbart News.
ACT has been banned from the event platform just one week after a former Nancy Pelosi intern released a Roll Call article accusing the organization of having ties with “Neo-Nazis” after ACT had called out Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) for her antisemitic statements.
In her article, the journalist relied heavily, if not solely, on information provided by the discredited SPLC.
Eventbrite did not clarify or explain in its email to ACT for America on what the organization had done or said to violate its community guidelines.
Although Eventbrite did not answer Breitbart News’ questions about the blacklisting, a spokesperson provided the following statement:
Our mission is to bring the world together through live experiences. We strive to provide a platform that enables people to gather for their chosen purpose and we support the representation of diverse viewpoints, so long as they don’t violate our Terms.
As a platform that gives rise to millions of events, we recognize the power of assembly and consider our role here very thoughtfully. We work hard to strike a balance between free expression of ideas and ensuring the real-life connections we’re facilitating are safe and respectful of the broader community. We do not permit events, content, or creators that promote or encourage hate, violence, or harassment towards others and/or oneself.
Our policy is to remove content that is in violation of our guidelines and after the team reviewed the events in question, we enforced it.
Breitbart News will continue to follow this story for updates.
Among the most foundational worldview differences between conservatives and progressives is the conservative position of family being the cornerstone of society vs the progressive position of the government being the cornerstone of society.
For conservatives, the monogamous union of man and woman is the vehicle for creating babies and raising them according to certain values. To progressives, the nuclear family is the single greatest bulwark against the growth of government power, hence the Marxist rallying cry for the “abolition of the family.” Marx and Engels knew that for the state to expand and establish the egalitarian utopia, the family order had to be broken down.
With that as a preface, let’s survey the national landscape as it relates to state regulation of the family.
Oregon and Washington are considering passing legislation which would mandate visits from state agents to the homes of all families with newborn children.OR SB526 states that its passage is “necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety,” and that the lack of government oversight of Oregon parents is an “emergency” that must be resolved by the end of 2019. OR SB526 has the backing of Governor Kate Brown. Washington Governor Jay Inslee is pushing for this legislation in his state as well.
But we have always said we couldn’t stop at basic education. For anyone who cares about equity in education, early learning is the best way to secure a strong start for every child, regardless of their family’s economic circumstances. #waleg— Governor Jay Inslee (@GovInslee) January 15, 2019
PJ Media columnist and homeschool advocate Paula Bolyard explains these laws from the perspective of someone who has dealt with ample state regulation of family life.
“As someone who has been involved in the homeschooling movement for more than 20 years, I have seen many attempts to increase the oversight of children taught at home by requiring home visits by a teacher or social worker. The basic premise behind these attempted power grabs is that parents cannot be trusted with the care of their own children — that an agent of the state is the only one qualified to ensure that children are being properly cared for. Without such surveillance, proponents argue, children are at risk for abuse and neglect, something they believe government agents can prevent, despite volumes of evidence to the contrary. In Oregon, in fact, children in the foster care system are abused at twice the national rate. One wonders how a state that can’t handle the children currently in its care could possibly manage to surveil an additional 40,000 children per year, let alone pay for such a program (answer: it can’t).
Anytime a state or locality has tried to draft legislation requiring home visits for homeschooled children, the immediate response has always been, “What are they going to do next, require inspections for children from birth until they enter school?” The answer to that, of course, is yes. That has been the plan all along. Universal preschool, universal health care, universal free lunches — the lot of it — is just a surreptitious way for the state to monitor its citizens and control their behavior by handing out freebies.”
Iowa Democrats are also attempting to gain oversight of families, specifically those of homeschoolers. IA HF272 would mandate quarterly “health and safety visits” to homeschool families by school district officials. The bill states that these visits would be with the consent of the parents but also specifies that parents can be overridden if a judge determines there is probable cause for home inspection. “The juvenile court or district court upon a showing of probable cause may authorize the person making the home visit to enter the home and interview or observe the child,” the bill states.
Red flags should be all the way up at this point. “Probable cause” is, of course, the legal designation for a situation where a judge determines that state agents have the authority to seize and search the property of a suspected criminal. With no explanation given as to what constitutes probably cause, the “crime” appears to be parents not wanting Big Brother monitoring their families.
Scott Woodruff of the Home School Legal Defense Foundation expressed dismay with the underlying assumptions made by the legislation in an interview with Caffeinated Thoughts.
“Rep. Mascher’s HF 272, in addition to resurrecting long-dead paperwork requirements for homeschool families, treats them all like criminals. Without explaining who is going to pay for it—with school and child protective personnel already stretched beyond the breaking point—she wants to command that state agents come into the homes of every single homeschool family in the state four times a year.
In what world do we waste money poking into the homes of thousands of people when there is not the slightest reason to believe an individual has done anything wrong? When people who believe that the government can, and should, solve all problems, this is the kind of utopian dream they dream. Dreams like that only get us closer to an Orwellian world.”
The objective of progressives is for the state to become the providers for and protectors of its citizens (who in such a society would not be citizens but serfs). As the state attempts to usurp these uniquely parental roles, conservatives should push back by rejecting oversight and clinging more tightly to our children.
As the Democrats become more and more open about their embrace of socialism, it’s important to remember that socialism is more than an economic theory; it’s a social theory too. The Green New Deal may seize much of our country’s means of production, but these bills in Iowa, Oregon, and Washington foreshadow the coming attempts to seize the family unit and the roles contained therein.
Democracy is indispensable to socialism. V.I. Lenin
Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx
The goal of socialism is communism. V.I. Lenin
Democratic Socialists of America’s Progressive Caucus of the U.S. House of Representatives
Taken verbatim from the Internet web site of the Democratic Socialists of America
“The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International (also in Francais and Espanol). DSA’s members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics…
“We invite you to support the campaign by adding your name to the list of signers of the Pledge for Economic Justice. In conjunction with the Campaign DSA is working with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a network of more than 50 progressive members of the US House of Representatives…
“The Progressive Caucus of the US House of Representatives is made up of 58 members of the House. The Caucus works to advance economic and social justice through sponsoring legislation that reflects its purpose. The Caucus also works with a coalition of organizations, called the Progressive Challenge, to bring new life to the progressive voice in US politics.”
Rep James A McDermott (WA-07) 2349 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 Phone: 202-225-3106, Fax: 202-225-2349 http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/
2019 List of Socialist’s in Congress and the U.S. Senate
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07) Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06) Vice Chairs Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33) Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18) Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02) Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10) Senate Members Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT) House Members Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01) Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02) Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31) Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL) Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01) Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03) Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08) Hon. André Carson (IN-07) Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL) Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11) Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01) Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05) Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09) Hon. John Conyers (MI-14) Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07) Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07) Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04) Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03) Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04) Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05) Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17) Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02) Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51) Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04) Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11) Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08) Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04) Hon. John Hall (NY-19) Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17) Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22) Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15) Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02) Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30) Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04) Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09) Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13) Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09) Hon. John Lewis (GA-05) Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02) Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3) Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14) Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07) Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07) Hon. James McGovern (MA-03) Hon. George Miller (CA-07) Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04) Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08) Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL) Hon. John Olver (MA-01) Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04) Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10) Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01) Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15) Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37) Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34) Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01) Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47) Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09) Hon. José Serrano (NY-16) Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28) Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13) Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02) Hon. John Tierney (MA-06) Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12) Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35) Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12) Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30) Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL) Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19) Source: Congressional Progressive Caucus
A: It is the worldwide organization of socialist, social democratic and labor parties. It currently brings together 131 political parties and organizations from all continents. Its origins go back to the early international organizations of the labor movement of the last century.* It has existed in its present form since 1951, when it was re-established at the Frankfurt Congress. They are now headquartered in London, England.
* In 1864, representatives of English and French industrial workers founded the International Workingmen’s Association in London. Karl Marx, who was living in London at the time, became the First International’s dominant figure. Marx’s doctrines were revived in the 20th century by Russian revolutionary Vladimir Ilich Lenin, who developed and applied them – and we all know that what was started as a labor movement ended up as the biggest totalitarian/communist state, i.e., the USSR.
Q: What is the Democratic Socialists of America [DSA]?
A: It is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. Their website is http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html
Q: What are seven principles behind what the DSA’s calls it’s “Progressive Challenge?”
Dignified Work Environmental Justice Economic Redistribution Democratic Participation Community Empowerment Global Non-Violence Social Justice.
Never mind their soothing-sounding leftist doublespeak like ‘Environmental Justice’ (whatever that is supposed to mean) or the soft & fuzzy ‘Global Non-Violence’ (a euphemism for unilateral disarmament) — the DSA’s self-declared principle of ‘Economic Redistribution’ clearly shows where these folks are coming from and exactly where they plan to take America.
Q: How many members of the U.S. Congress are also members of the DSA?
Q: How many of the DSA members sit on the Judiciary Committee?
A: Eleven: John Conyers [Chairman of the Judiciary Committee], Tammy Baldwin, Jerrold Nadler, Luis Gutierrez, Melvin Watt, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, Robert Wexler, Linda Sanchez [there are 23 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of which eleven, almost half, are now members of the DSA].