America Faces No Greater Threat Than Joe Biden and the Democrat Party. Their Assault to Our Borders Is As Great As Their Assault to Free Speech and Free Elections
Wednesday, July 15, 2020
BLACK LIVES MATTER - BLACK LIVES MURDER
Why BLM Yawns at Police-Shooting Statistics
“Eternal war” doesn't give a damn about facts.
John Perazzo
Something monumentally significant happened at a Black Lives Matter conference in Cleveland on July 24, 2015 – almost exactly five years ago. Beginning at 2:30 that afternoon, BLM presented a workshop for aspiring and seasoned radical agitators alike, titled There’s A Method To The Movement: Examining Community Organizing Methods and Methodologies. Those in attendance were instructed, that day, in the tactics and philosophy of the late Saul Alinsky. Known as the godfather of “community organizing” – a term that serves as a euphemism for fomenting public discontent and violence – Alinsky was a communist fellow traveler who laid out a set of basic strategies designed to help leftist radicals destroy their enemies and transform society into a socialist paradise. If such radicals were to be successful in remaking society, said Alinsky, they “must first rub raw the resentments of the people”[1] by identifying a particular “personification” of evil and “publicly attack[ing]” it as a “dangerous enemy” of all that is decent.[2] The chief “personification” in BLM’s cross hairs today, of course, is the white police officer. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it,” Alinsky taught,[3] asserting that the primary task of radicals is to cultivate, in people’s hearts, a visceral revulsion to the mere sight of the target’s face. “The organizer who forgets the significance of personal identification,” said Alinsky, “will attempt to answer all objections on the basis of logic and merit. With few exceptions this is a futile procedure.”[4] That is why BLM and its apologists invariably avoid addressing even the most glaring errors in the anti-police, anti-white narratives they seek to advance, and why they turn a deaf ear to anyone who tries to engage them with logic, reason, or empirical data. Indeed, when confronted with incontrovertible statistical evidence proving, beyond any doubt, that their assertions about police racism are nothing more than a pack of monstrous lies, BLMers invariably respond with the intellectual equivalent of a collective belch. Alinsky taught that in order to cast themselves as noble defenders of high moral principles, radical activists should take pains to react dramatically – with greatly exaggerated displays of “shock, horror, and moral outrage” – whenever their targeted enemy erred, or could be depicted as having erred, in any way at all.[5] Thus, even though American police officers annually have some 375 million civilian contacts in which they act entirely within the bounds of legality and ethics, BLM chooses to magnify – with choreographed indignation – the significance of a tiny handful of questionable cases, and to characterize them as emblems of supposedly widespread police misconduct. Alinsky advised radical activists to avoid the temptation to concede that their opponents are not “100 percent devil,” or that they may possess certain admirable qualities. Such concessions, he said, would “dilut[e] the impact of the attack” and thus amount to “political idiocy.”[6] That's why we never hear BLM praising the police for anything, ever. Instead, it is 100% attack, 100% of the time, against a 100% devil. Given that the enemy is to be portrayed as the very personification of evil – against whom any and all tactics are fair game – Alinsky taught that an effective radical activist should never give the appearance of being satisfied with any compromise proposed by the opposition. After all, any bargain with the “devil” is, by definition, morally tainted. The ultimate goal, said Alinsky, is not to arrive at peaceful coexistence, but rather, to completely “crush the opposition” by remaining vigilantly “dedicated to eternal war.”[7] “A war is not an intellectual debate,” Alinsky elaborated, “and in the war against social evils there are no rules of fair play.… When you have war, it means that neither side can agree on anything…. [T]here can be no compromise. It is life or death.”[8] Alinsky advised the radical activist to be ever on guard against the possibility that the enemy might someday propose “a constructive alternative” aimed at resolving some particular conflict. “You cannot risk being trapped by the enemy in his sudden agreement with your demand,”[9] said Alinsky, for such a turn of events would have the effect of diffusing the righteous indignation of the radical, whose very identity is inextricably woven into the “struggle” for long-denied justice. If the perceived oppressor extends a hand of friendship in an effort to end the conflict, the crusade of the radical is jeopardized. This cannot be permitted, because “eternal war,” by definition, must never end. Alinsky also exhorted radical activists to be entirely unpredictable and unmistakably willing – for the sake of their crusade – to plunge society at large into chaos and anarchy. They must be prepared, Alinsky explained, to “go into a state of complete confusion and draw [their] opponent into the vortex of the same confusion.”[10] One way in which radicals and their disciples could broadcast their preparedness for this possibility, Alinsky taught, was by staging loud, angry, massive demonstrations denouncing their political adversaries. Such events – like the BLM protests and riots of recent weeks – can give onlookers the impression that a mass movement is shifting into an even higher gear. A “mass impression,” said Alinsky, can be lasting and intimidating: “Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.”[11] “The threat,” he added, “is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”[12] Putting it yet another way, Alinsky advised: “Wherever possible, go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.”[13] “Confusion, fear, and retreat.” That is exactly what we have witnessed recently in city after city where political leaders have made concessions to BLM, introduced legislative initiatives demanded by BLM, and lauded BLM as a movement dedicated to “social justice.” Corporations from coast to coast have likewise turned appeasement and racial virtue-signaling into high art forms. Patrisse Cullors spoke the truth when she famously described herself and her fellow BLM co-founder, Alicia Garza, as “trained Marxists” who are “super versed on ideological theories.” Cullors also revealed that for more than a decade she was a protégé of Eric Mann, a communist revolutionary and domestic terrorist from the 1960s and ’70s. And quite obviously, BLM's intellectual debt to Saul Alinsky is every bit as significant. Alinsky's call for relentless, uncompromising “perpetual war” – geared toward the destruction of America and the creation of a Marxist utopia – is the spirit that beats in the very heart of the BLM movement.
This evidence is pretty compelling in suggesting that the BLM movement presents itself as a Marxist philosophy pushing organization with characteristics of a terrorist entity.This seems like such a strange way to strengthen race relations and advocate for the human and legal rights of U.S. citizens.
ViacomCBS Severs Ties with Nick Cannon After Antisemitic Remarks
ViacomCBS severed ties with rapper and TV personality Nick Cannonon Tuesday after he refused to apologize for antisemitic remarks the Masked Singer host made last month.
During a June episode of his Cannon’s Class podcast, Cannon told former Public Enemy member Richard “Professor Griff” Griffin that “the Semitic people are Black people.”
“You can’t be anti-Semitic when we are the Semitic people,” Nick Cannon claimed. “When we are the same people they want to be. That’s our birthright,” he then said, before he added that African-Americans are the “true Hebrews.”
Watch below:
Nick Cannon says white people are "a little less," "closer to animals," "the true savages," "acting out of a deficiency so the only way they can act is evil." When does he get canceled? pic.twitter.com/vK3TBDW9i8
Cannon also alleged that “African Americans and the people of the Jewish community have partnered to create some of the best, most revolutionary work we know today.”
“While we support ongoing education and dialogue in the fight against bigotry, we are deeply troubled that Nick has failed to acknowledge or apologize for perpetuating anti-Semitism, and we are terminating our relationship with him,” ViacomCBS said in a statement.
Cannon was named chairman of Nickelodeon’s TeenNick cable channel at 26-years-old.
Cannon also made derogatory statements about Caucasians and praised the notorious antisemite and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.
“The people that don’t have [melanin] are a little less,” Cannon said, adding that “when they were sent to the mountains of Caucasus … The sun then started to deteriorate them so then, they’re acting out of fear, they’re acting out of low self-esteem, they’re acting out of a deficiency.”
“So, therefore, the only way that they can act is evil. They have to rob, steal, rape, kill in order to survive. So then, these people that didn’t have what we have — and when I say we, I speak of the melanated people — they had to be savages … They’re acting as animals so they’re the ones that are actually closer to animals. They’re the ones that are actually the true savages,” Cannon added.
The MTV’s Wild ‘n Out host’s comments sparked a massive backlash, prompting him to address his matter in a social media post.
“Anyone who knows me knows that I have no hate in my heart nor malice intentions,” Cannon wrote on Facebook. “I do not condone hate speech nor the spread of hateful rhetoric. We are living in a time when it is more important than ever to promote unity and understanding.”
Yet, Cannon refused to apologize: “To me apologies are empty … What we need is healing. What we need is discussion. Correct me. I don’t tell my children to say, ‘I’m sorry.’ I want them to understand where they need to be corrected. And then that’s how we grow.”
This evidence is pretty compelling in suggesting that the BLM movement presents itself as a Marxist philosophy pushing organization with characteristics of a terrorist entity.
Based on the research I've conducted, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) organization/movement is likely not what most people think it is. Here are a few verified ideas to consider.
One may think of the BLM movement as a "grassroots" movement. According to the BLM website, BLM is a "global organization active in US, UK, and Canada." The website, Influence Watch, points out that George Soros, a Hungarian-born liberal with a net worth of $25.2 billion, is a major contributor to BLM, having donated "at least $33 million." The same website states that since 2013, groups associated with the BLM movement have taken in $133 million.
On another point, it appears that BLM is rooted in Marxist philosophy. From the New York Post (06/25/20), Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors describes herself and her co-organizer of BLM as "a trained Marxist." The article goes on to say Cullors was a protégé of Eric Mann and that she "spent years" with him "absorbing the Marxist-Leninist ideology that shaped her worldview."
Consider what this might mean for the USA if BLM pushes its agenda and platform. According to Investopedia, Marxism argues for a worker revolution to overturn capitalism in favor of communism. Furthermore, Marxism is against the nuclear family in that it teaches a hierarchical system and keeps money within groups (families), opposed to distributed wealth. The website ReviseSociology explains, "Marxists argue that the nuclear family performs ideological functions for Capitalism — the family acts as a unit of consumption and teaches passive acceptance of hierarchy. It is also the institution through which the wealthy pass down their private property to their children, thus reproducing class inequality." Furthermore, the website Brainscape points out, "[Marxists] dispute the idea that the way families are organized benefits everyone. The website goes on to say, "[R]ather [Marxism] argue[s] that the family like many other institutions in capitalist societies, serves to maintain the power of those with wealth and preserve the existing economic system."
BLM is anti–nuclear family. The following quote was taken directly from the BLM website: "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and 'villages' that collectively care for one another[.]" More Marxist philosophy from the BLM Platform itself: BLM argues for a reformed tax code "at the local, state, and federal level to ensure a radical and substantial redistribution of wealth."
The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85). The New York Post (06/25/20) reported that Hawk Newsome, president of Greater New York Black Lives Matter (BLM website denies this title), stated, "If this country doesn't give us what we want, then we will burn down this system and replace it. All right? And I could be speaking figuratively. I could be speaking literally. It's a matter of interpretation." Also stated by Newsome, "I just want black liberation, and black sovereignty. By any means necessary."
This evidence is pretty compelling in suggesting that the BLM movement presents itself as a Marxist philosophy pushing organization with characteristics of a terrorist entity.This seems like such a strange way to strengthen race relations and advocate for the human and legal rights of U.S. citizens.
The demonization of the commonsense expression "all lives matter" has reached the point of lethal violence against those who utter it, if an eyewitness account of a murder in Indianapolis is true. This deeply distressing story of an incident on Independence Day weekend had received zero coverage in the mainstream media until Fox News picked it up a few hours ago. Bradford Betz writes for Fox:
An Indiana woman was fatally shot earlier this month following an alleged argument between her family and a group of Black Lives Matter supporters, her family says.
The woman, 24-year-old Jessica Doty Whitaker, was walking along Indianapolis Canal Walk with her fiancé, Jose Ramirez, and two other people around 3 a.m. on July 5 when someone in their group used a racial slur, Fox 59 reported.
A group of nearby strangers overheard the comment and confronted Whitaker's group, according to the station.
Ramirez alleged that the group shouted "Black Lives Matter," to which either Whitaker or someone else in their group reportedly responded with, "All Lives Matter."
A brief argument ensued until both sides separated after realizing the other was armed, Fox 59 reported. Ramirez claimed that both sides managed to resolve the argument before separating.
But minutes later, someone reportedly opened fire from a nearby bridge, striking Whitaker, before running away, the station said.
"It was squashed, and they went up the hill and left we thought, but they were sitting on St. Clair waiting for us to come under the bridge and that's when she got shot," Ramirez said.
Ramirez admitted to returning fire but did not hit anyone. He told Fox 59 that he has had to explain what happened to Whitaker's 3-year-old son.
Early accounts of the incident in local Indianapolis media did not mention the expression "all lives matter" as a trigger, but then Cassandra Fairbanks of Gateway Pundit reported on Saturday:
Her father, Robert Doty, told the Gateway Pundit that the BLM supporters had walked by her and her fiance and said "Black Lives Matter," to which Jessica responded that "All Lives Matter"….
The U.S. conservative blogosphere started to pick up on the story, followed by the U.K. Sun and then the Daily Mail, and now Fox News. The story has already gained enough traction that a GoFundMe account established for Jessica's family has already raised more than five times the goal of $10,000, with the story now breaking wider on a Monday morning.
If anything good can be salvaged from this awful killing, it would be a pushback against the demonization of "all lives matter." Claims that those three words are racist are self-evidently ridiculous. If it is untrue that all lives matter because "black lives matter" is trendy and being pushed heavily, then some lives logically do not matter. Because of race. That position is abhorrent. And it may have led to murder.
Black Lives Matter has just learned the hard way that police bodycams are there not just to protect civilians and suspects from bad cops, they are there to protect good cops from suspects and their supporters, including BLM, who falsely accuse cops of excessive use of force. Hakim Littleton was recently shot dead an instant before he could make a "pig" "oink his last," and BLM is apparently sorry that the cop is not dead in Hakim's place. The video on this Detroit News page shows clearly that Littleton pulled a handgun from his left pocket, aimed at a cop's head, and fired the weapon at close range. Littleton was fortunately a bad shot or we would now have "end of watch" for another police officer.
A prosecutor would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the cop's use of deadly force was unlawful to convict him of murder or manslaughter. The bodycam video proves instead that the shooting was justified, and also that the police department should investigate further to determine whether the shooter should be commended for saving another officer's life. This did not stop numerous protesters, and the Detroit News picture gallery shows many in BLM attire, from chanting "Justice for Hakim Littleton! Fire and jail the killer cop!" Another video on the Detroit News page shows a mob yelling "Black Lives Matter" along with "No justice, no peace" while throwing bottles and bricks at the police. One demonstrator yells the N word, apparently at a black law enforcement officer, while another menaces a reporter. The Black Lives Matter movement comes in loud and clear; Hakim Littleton had the right to kill an officer and the "pig" and his partner did not even have the right of self-defense as prescribed by Michigan state law and common sense.
The Blaze meanwhile reported that two police officers, whose Hispanic lives clearly do not matter to Black Lives Matter, were ambushed and murdered on July 11. The daughter of one of the fallen officers posted a tribute to her father which the BLM community greeted with remarks like "Well at least your pops is a good cop now, 6 feet in the dirt where he cant hurt nobody" and"Rip to ur daddy!!! But one cop down many more to go," along with the all-time favorite ACAB (All Cops Are Bastards).
We Deserve Better than BLM and We Can Do Better
There can be zero tolerance in a civilized society for a movement that says it is okay to aim a firearm at a police officer's head and the officer (or his partner) does not have the basic human right of self-defense. It is past time to demand that the Democratic Party, corporate enablers like Starbucks, and universities repudiate their support for this repugnant movement. The best way to send BLM the way of those Confederate statues is to offer the country something a lot better, and I have done my best with a computer artwork program. Please feel free to copy and distribute or improve on my admittedly amateur work.
Civis Americanus is the pen name of an American Thinker contributor who remembers the lessons of history and wants to ensure that our country never needs to learn those lessons again the hard way.
Identity Politics, Oppression and Aversion to the White Man
Victimhood is the fuel for the Progressive, Socialist revolution.
Christine Douglass-Williams
Editors’ note: Identity politics has become a hallmark of Progressive ideology and has even leaked into the domain of conservatism. Central to identity politics is the notion of racial victimhood. For that to exist, there must be an oppressor, and that oppressor is collectively the white race, particularly white men. Thus, according to Progressive ideology, all lives do not matter equally; oppressed lives matter more. That is why the Left doesn’t care that Islamic supremacists still enslave black Africans or that a genocide against Christians is taking place in Africa and the Middle East.The paradigm that matters is oppressor versus oppressed, white versus non-white, and to disagree is to provoke the wrath of the woke mob.
Deeply concerned about the precipitous slide of our northern neighbor toward authoritarianism, especially with regard to free speech about the alarming influence of the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood and the broader global Islamic Movement on Canadians’ ability to enjoy the intrinsic human rights guaranteed to them in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Center for Security Policy asked Christine Douglass-Williams to document her experiences. This monograph, Fired by the Canadian Government for Criticizing Islam - Multicultural Canada: A Weak Link for Islamization, is her deeply personal account—but it is also something much more important. For while the arbitrary and discriminatory treatment of an individual Canadian citizen is a story worth telling in its own right, it is the broader implications for the future of free expression, free speech, and all other individual rights intrinsic to human beings everywhere, that makes Douglass-Williams’ work here so valuable.
Below is an excerpt from Christine Douglass-Williams’ book:
***
The Use of Victimology and Identity Politics by Civilizational Jihadists
The major thrust of this section is that Islamic supremacist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood have exploited victimology in their manipulation of multiculturalism, the anti-racism industry, diversity drives, Muslim populations, and the socialist-left leadership of many Western nations.
It is important to grasp that keeping people oppressed or otherwise “helping” them to embrace an identity of oppression enables totalitarian agendas. Some points to note about this modus operandi: i) education among “oppressed” groups is discouraged, as knowledge enlightens. Because knowledge is empowering, the oppressor’s power is diminished as the oppressed becomes enlightened. ii) oppressed groups can be manipulated to revolution in support of their corrupt leaders’ indoctrinated vision, ideology, and goals. iii) oppressed populations are relatively easy to control via leadership propaganda, due to their lack of education, their poverty, and dependence on their corrupt, but venerated leaders. Oppressed populations also permit a convenient enlarging of power distances between them and their leaders, so that their leaders lead, and they follow in obedient trust, whether or not those leaders are worthy of that trust.
In Western societies, two phenomena can be observed among the united socialist left, which benefits the victimology narrative: the first is a bigotry of low expectations, which instills the detrimental idea that brown people and black people are to be pitied forever because they have been nearly irreparably broken by white people. They are therefore deemed to be at least partially justified in any unlawful or harmful act they commit of which the same behavior is regarded as unacceptable in white society.
Embedded in this lenience of expectation toward brown and black people is a presumption of their inferiority, although it is never presented that way. For example, it is overlooked that Arabs hold black slaves, that women are sold into sex slavery by Muslims, that child brides are being sentenced to torturous marriages in Islam.
In this view, ethnic people do not need to abide by the same rules of human rights that white people are expected to observe because they are deemed to be inept, incapable of overcoming and of achieving. In this view, it is peculiar that it is generally unrecognized—or at least seldom articulated—that Islam has been engaging in such practices for 1400 years, because one need look no further than the white man.
It is always and must always be the white man’s fault to maintain the very status quo that its enablers pretend to reject: i.e., the bigotry of low expectations. The same victimhood mentality applies to blacks. Although there are significant differences in the history of non-Muslim blacks and Muslims, and reasons why these groups retain the status of oppressed groups, the reasons put forth by their socialist and Islamic supremacist leaders are: white privilege, white oppression, white supremacy.
All the while, when members of these groups victimize others, it is ignored. The victimization within these groups is also ignored. Secondly, this system allows for a guarantee that leaders of the publicly and privately funded “anti-racism” industry are well-off, while their client “victims” remain ghettoized.
Of course, there are those in the anti-racism industry who are sincere, who assist in the healing of past wounds, who aid in the practicalities of individual and group development, and who cultivate unity, true diversity, pluralism, and a strong national identity, but these represent a struggling minority within the industry.
The anti-racism industry as a whole has been hijacked by powerful, known lobbies such as Muslim Brotherhood offshoots and Black Lives Matter, in which those two lobbies have now managed to converge. The victimhood status quo also enables the expansion of a totalitarian agenda, in which big government is needed to “help” the people who are unable to help themselves.
In this scenario, selling “compassion” for the so-called oppressed is a marketing tool, whereby “experts” and government political leaders line their pockets as the self-proclaimed protectors of the wretchedly oppressed. In this scenario, there must be a villain, i.e., the group doing the oppressing and this group must be controlled, silenced or both. This villainous group constitutes the specter of the masters of oppression from the days of colonialism and slavery. Their victims regrettably remain in shackles, the cycle of the bigotry of low expectations continues, and the oppressed remain stunted. Western societies have evolved to become diverse and immigrant friendly.
This is not to say that racism, intolerance, xenophobia, and bigotry do not exist. They do, but they are not exclusive to white people but are also found among various groups of immigrants. Western constitutions permit all citizens to scrutinize and criticize government and various ideologies, to dialogue and debate openly, and to hold one another accountable. This makes for the continuance and preservation of democratic freedoms.
The hallmark of democracy is freedom of speech, while totalitarianism is marked by little to no freedom of expression.
Victimhood Indoctrination as a Home-Base for Revolution
Following its first black presidency, America is more polarized than ever. Rather than celebrate the advancement of blacks while continuing to progress toward unity and peaceful dialogue, along comes the Black Lives Matter Movement to foment violence against the front-line protectors of our societies.
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan indoctrinates hatred against police into his followers using cases of blacks who have been killed by white policemen in shootouts. Farrakhan cultivates the belief that racism is so deeply entrenched in the white community that blacks are being unfairly hunted and murdered by white policemen.
The concept of fanning the flames of perpetual victimhood and revolution to acquire and sustain power is nothing new. Lenin, Stalin, and Mao well understood the need to keep pushing the us-versus-them mentality to distract populations from the truth and the harsh reality of day-to- day living. Their unscrupulousness paid off.
The one question the revolutionaries never want to address publicly is their end vision for Western society, because they don’t have one that they wish to reveal. That is the secret they guard and hide as they manipulate people and foment rage and violence among their own followers. Their end goal is not desirable, credible, or useful, but comes down to ultimately advancing their own lust for personal power.
Many among the white segment of the so-called “anti-racism” industry have aided these revolutionary movements, such as the Nation of Islam and Black Lives Matter, by justifying their rage, thereby exposing their own bigotry of low expectations and thus assisting to block the black community from escaping the chains of past slavery and victimhood.
Yet the biggest oppressors of the black community have become their own hate-filled leaders who exploit the community and cause members to keep their eyes focused on the chains of slavery as the community moves through generations of poverty, family breakdown, black-on-black crime and lack of education. They are rendered unable to escape a ghettoized existence.
The oppressed black community has now teamed up with Islamic supremacists and the two are working toward cultivation of goals to indoctrinate and incite revolution against the non-Muslim white society.
All the while, peace-loving black and brown people who know and proclaim what these indoctrinators are up to are firmly dismissed as “uncle Toms,” “sell-outs,” or are ignored. Those who oppose the condescending victimology narrative have also become targets of rage by the profiteers of the anti-racism business, by those indoctrinated by it, and even those who have personally embraced the victim identity.
Farrakhan has called for the murder of police and he did it in the name of “righteousness,” “human rights,” “justice,” and religion as he invoked the Quran. He openly declared:
"Death is sweeter than to continue to live and bury our children, while white folks give the killer hamburgers.
Death is sweeter, than watching us slaughter each other, to the joy of a 400-year-old enemy. Yes, death is sweeter.
The Quran teaches persecution is worse than slaughter. Then it says, ‘Retaliation is prescribed in matters of the slain.’ Retaliation is a prescription from God, to calm the breast of those whose children have been slain.
So if the federal government will not intercede in our affairs, then we must rise up and kill those who kill us. Stalk them and kill them and let them feel the pain of death that we are feeling."
There is no systemic stalking of blacks in America or Canada. Farrakhan is a stark example of the power that leaders possess to indoctrinate their followers and turn them against authorities of the state, who are there to maintain order and the rule of law. His blatant incitement should have led to his arrest, but the bigotry of low expectations gives him reprieve.
Hatred and incitement to violence and murder against Jews and whites that is deemed to be justified have deep implications for the direction of the West in general. Had a white person proclaimed the violence as Farrakhan did against blacks and Muslims, that person would be punished, and should be.
The Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi also appealed for white and black men to join hands in unity and so-called “equality” in the name of Allah:
"It is a state where the Arab and non-Arab, the white man and black man, the easterner and westerner are all brothers,” he said—an appeal aimed at broadening his support base beyond the Middle East. "Muslims, rush to your state. Yes, it is your state. Rush, because Syria is not for the Syrians, and Iraq is not for the Iraqis. The earth is Allah’s."
There is a problem in the black community stemming from a history of abuse, and this history is now being further abused and exploited by many leaders such as Farrakhan within the black community. Most of them will not brazenly issue an open call to violence and murder as Farrakhan has done, but their silence in the face of such calls, along with the size of Farrakhan’s following and influence is revealing.
Another example of the alliance between Black Lives Matter and Islam in the U.S.: in a speech delivered to the Annual Muslim American Society (MAS) and Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) Convention in December 2015, Nihad Awad, the Executive Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), urged Muslim Americans to take up the cause of Black Lives Matter. “Black Lives Matter is our matter,” he said; “Black Lives Matter is our campaign.”
There are clear links between Canada and the United States. Both countries share a continent, therefore, when one sneezes, the other risks catching the cold. To provide some examples: the Black Lives Movement first gained prominence in America before making its way into Canada. Also CAIR, which began in the States, found its way into Canada, as CAIR-CAN and subsequently the NCCM; but in 2018, when President Trump announced his temporary immigration ban on five majority-Muslim countries plus North Korea and Venezuela (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen), Prime Minister Trudeau responded by tweeting out an open welcome to refugees. The ramifications are discussed in the Section “America’s National Security Strategy and Why Canada is a Threat: Trudeau, Obama and Trump.”
The Blaze meanwhile reported that two police officers, whose Hispanic lives clearly do not matter to Black Lives Matter, were ambushed and murdered on July 11. The daughter of one of the fallen officers posted a tribute to her father which the BLM community greeted with remarks like "Well at least your pops is a good cop now, 6 feet in the dirt where he cant hurt nobody" and"Rip to ur daddy!!! But one cop down many more to go," along with the all-time favorite ACAB (All Cops Are Bastards).
No comments:
Post a Comment