SANCTUARY CITIES AND ANARCHISM

(http://www.marshallfrank.com/articles/2018/04/sanctuary-cities-supporting-anarchism)

By Marshall
Frank On April 9,
2018 in General, Politics & Government

Sanctuary cities and states that are
advocating for the protection of criminal illegal aliens from federal
law enforcement, has nothing to do with compassion and/or pro-immigration viewpoints. 
It’s all about power.

Not long ago, leading Democrats and
Republicans shared concerns about “illegal” immigration while vowing to take
measures to control the border and dispatch law enforcement to deal with
“illegal” activities.

Many democrats of years passed have
called for stricter measures against illegal immigration and much stronger
border enforcement, even including expanding the wall along Mexico. 

In his 1995 speech to congress,
President Bill Clinton stated, “We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also
a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of
immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in
recent years, and we must do more to stop it.”

Sound familiar? President Clinton
actually initiated an enforcement campaign against employers who knowingly
hired illegal aliens for American jobs.

In 2010, President Obama made a speech,
stating, “The presence of so many illegal immigrants makes a mockery of all
those who are going through the process of immigrating legally. Indeed…the
legal immigration system is as broken as the borders.” 

In 1994, Senator Diane Feinstein, D-Ca)
ran a political ad which she promised to get tougher on illegals with “more
agents, fencing, lighting and other equipment.”

What’s changed?

Anyone can access Google to find
numerous examples how the tide has turned among prominent democrats, not only
by backing away from enforcement policies, some actually support the worst
immigration menace to America in which mayors and governors of states like
California, Illinois and New York openly call for laws to be broken. Officials
in “Sanctuary” cities and states thumb their noses at ICE, ATF and other
federal agencies by protecting criminals and breaking their oaths of office
including laws they swore to uphold.

Just last month, the mayor of Oakland,
California sent out an alert to hundreds of illegal immigrants in the Bay Area
warning them that ICE was about to embark on a series of law enforcement raids.
The head of ICE estimated that 800 or more subjects avoided arrest.  Most
targeted subjects have past criminal records.    

We are seeing the rise of anarchy in
America. Not only do some illegals break our criminal laws, they have allies
within government who aid and abet crime by preventing federal law enforcement
from doing their jobs.

How is that not an
obstruction of justice?

Sure, there are good and decent people
within the “illegal” community, but there are also too many drug dealers,
smugglers, gang members, thieves, sexual predators and yes, murderers, all of
whom are a threat to Americans. Authorities have enough problems dealing with a
homegrown criminal population, we certainly don’t need to protect foreign
criminals.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel made it clear
that Chicago will “always be a sanctuary city.” That sentiment, which has been
echoed by too many, is a recipe for a slippery slope that will forever
transform America from a nation of laws to a nation of lawlessness. In 2017,
California’s lawmakers passed a bill (SB54) designed to protect undocumented
immigrants by defying the federal government. If a government can endorse the
breaking of laws, then all laws can eventually become meaningless.

The question is why? Why would governors
like California’s Jerry Brown and mayors like Rahm Emanuel and so many others,
embark on supporting lawlessness?  These representatives take oaths to
defend the laws of our land.

There can only be one answer; the quest
for political power. The democratic hierarchy discovered a winning tactic. When
illegals from other countries are invited, supported, protected and even
embraced, democrat voters will be spawned by the millions for future
generations, swinging America into a one-sided power base forever. Add to that,
birth rates and the long range impact of chain migration, it’s only a matter of
time. Illegal aliens, criminal and non-criminal, will be forever grateful and
indebted to those who protected them, ergo, voting democrat forever.

It has nothing to do with compassion.
It’s simply a tactic to expand numbers, and with numbers, comes power.

It’s like farmers sowing seeds for the
future. The best way to do that, is keep those borders open, keep the flow
coming, protect illegal immigrants (criminal or not) and nurture the political
plantation to produce lifelong loyalists. 

This nullifies the taking of an oath
when assuming a seat in the political spectrum. Any violation of oaths such as
this is a clear warning that oaths are meaningless.

If government leaders can openly support
the breaking of laws, what’s next?

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

WAYS FOR IMPROVING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

by Marshall Frank on JANUARY 24, 2018 in POLITICS & GOVERNMENT

(This Op-Ed appears in Florida Today newspaper, January 24, 2018)

Here is a plan that would greatly improve our government process.

• Term and age limits: For U.S. senators, two 6-year terms, twelve years in office maximum. For the House, six terms maximum, two years each. Maximum age: 80.

America does not need career politicians. We need the most qualified and able who will work in the interests of the people. Going into office, politicians will know when they will be passing the baton to someone else. This also allows senators and Congress members time to work instead of constantly running for office. Term limits of 15 years and/or age restrictions should also be extended to federal judges and the U.S. Supreme Court. There are many reasons to support such laws, and few reasons to oppose them.

• This may require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but campaign contributions to candidates running for federal office, including the president, should be outlawed from private citizens, large corporations and special interest groups. No elected representative of the people should be beholden to financial paybacks.

When a cop takes money for favors, he goes to jail. When a politician takes money for favors, he goes to Washington. The system invites corruption. Congress members spend half their time running for the next election and attending fundraisers. Campaign budgets for federal officials can be financed by the taxpayer by assessing a modest fee in all income tax filings. With some 153 million taxes filed this year, according to the IRS, that would provide ample funds to run campaigns and establish honesty in government. It would also give voters a peek at how they manage a budget.

• Establish minimum standards for holding office. For every state and federal job in America, there are basic requirements for qualification, why not politicians? The standards for Senate, House and president are basically nil. The constitution was ratified when the population was less than 4 million and the problems of commerce, taxes, laws, immigration, and national security were far less complex than today. Politicians should be vetted by bi-partisan panels to ensure we are not voting for untrustworthy or incompetent representatives. This should be particularly strict for anyone running for president. Background matters. Achievements matter. Dishonesty matters. The FBI has a system for vetting applicants, why not use the same for federal politicians?


• Fire or impeach blatantly dishonest politicians. Systems should be designed whereby any senator, congressman or president who knowingly violates the public trust by overtly lying should be booted out of office. Politicians who lie about one issue will lie about anything. Blatant dishonesty in political ads should also disqualify a candidate. It’s time we stop joking about dishonest politicians and start holding them accountable.


• Keep media out of politics. We have had a number of influential people in the mainstream media who had close relatives, including spouses, employed by the White House or in government positions of high sensitivity. This compromises the integrity of government as well as media focus if and when they have special interests in government policy. That translates to skewing news and information by favoring with one side or the other.


• Special prosecutors assigned to investigate corruption or other scandals, should be appointed by a non-partisan panel and not by the president or the attorney general, especially when the focus is, in fact, on the president or the attorney general. Further, the attorney general should be an elected official answerable to the citizens and not a guardian of the president.  Ninety percent of states elect their attorneys general.


• Absolutely require photo identification for eligible voters at every election and establish rules and process that are the same in every state, particularly for federal elections. Voters should produce evidence of being qualified citizens. There is nothing racist or malicious about that. This would curtail ineligible voting, and prevent those who may vote more than once. If people can get their welfare I.D., they can get their voter I.D.

I know.  I’m not holding a breath.

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

NOVEMBER 4TH: CIVIL WAR?

(by Marshall Frank on OCTOBER 11, 2017 in CRIMINAL JUSTICE, GENERAL, POLITICS & GOVERNMENT)

Some are calling it the brink of a Civil War.

Watch November 4th. Those who saw what took place during the “Arab Spring” of the Middle East in 2011 will understand what America will be facing on November 4th. And, the fundamental goals of the insurgents then (and now), was to lay groundwork for a coup and change the leadership of government. In Egypt, that worked for a short while as the Muslim Brotherhood became the new rulers, with Morsi at the helm. That was short-lived because the people of Egypt took their country back from the Muslim Brotherhood who was installing strict Sharia throughout the land, while terrorizing Christian Coptics.

     For the USA, pay close attention to “Antifa” which is one of the primary organizations behind the movement, to be supported by, and tagged with, several other powerful, well-financed anti-American organizations whose sole purpose is to create chaos, instill fear and – most of all – bring down the Trump administration. The intended coup.

     Think George Soros.

     There are numerous sources and web sites which identify the grand plan set for November 4th which is to invade some of America’s largest cities to label themselves as “protesters” when in fact they will be assembling by the multi-thousands to generate hatred and disorder likely to erupt into mass violence that local police will be unable to control, or … be prevented from controlling.

     Some of our largest cities, such as Baltimore, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Washington D.C., etc., are led by local politicians who are extreme leftists, as was Baltimore in 2015 who ordered police to stand down and for insurgents to have their way, i.e. break laws. This has been done in past incidents where law abiding people watched while violence prevailed in the forms of arson, smashed windows, mass vandalism, destruction of police cars, looting and most likely, injuries to innocent people. Businesses in places like Ferguson, Baltimore and Berkley have been torched and closed in the face of powerless police causing merchants to close down.

     This is no secret. Google it all, and you will find plenty of information about the upcoming insurgency which – if it goes off as planned – will make Ferguson, L.A., Baltimore and other riot prone cities of yore look like a picnic.

     What other organizations?  Some are far left union organizations, others are representing anti-American agendas. Check Google-images and search for photos of other senseless demonstrations of violence in the last few years, mostly under the banner of fighting “Racism” and you will see many signs bearing “CPUSA”  (Communist Party USA) being held by scores of demonstrators.

     The primary emphasis of prospective “protesters” will be the  bandying of two infamous words which the left has relentlessly (and carelessly) attached to the Trump presidency “Racist” and “Fascist,” both false.

     Remember:  There are two powerful global entities – or representatives therein — who in their history, have vowed to destroy the United States, From Within. They being: Communism and Radical Islam. There are numerous documents and evidence to prove that to be so.   My recent book “Amerikastan: Conquest From Within” addresses this subject in detail. 

Click here: November 4, 2017 Protests: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

Click here: Antifa Plan Civil War To Overthrow the Government On Nov 4, 2017 – YouTube

Click here: Soros Money Behind Anti-Trump Resistance | The Daily Caller

Click here: America Is Under Attack by These 187 Groups Funded By George Soros — Steemit

Click here: Antifa: What is it and what does the movement want?

     I was initially made aware of this upcoming event by a very knowledgeable source, which I confirmed in my Google searches. The links above are but a few of those.

     What do we do? Recognize reality. These are people and organizations who are seizing the moment to lie, demonstrate and invoke fear in order to change government, including the abolishment of Free Speech and other freedoms within our constitution. It doesn’t matter if we are Republicans or Democrats, those of us who want no part of this kind of anti-Americanism and government coups, must speak out and not be fooled by terror and emotional manipulation.

     Our country is certainly imperfect, as are all of us within it. But we don’t want here what happened to Egypt in 2011, or for that matter, Germany in 1933.

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

SHAME ON THE NFL

by Marshall Frank on SEPTEMBER 29, 2017 in CRIMINAL JUSTICE, POLITICS & GOVERNMENT

Enough already!

     We have critical concerns all over the globe; National health care, immigration, threats of terrorism, violent crime, possible war with North Korea or even Iran. The best that professional football players can do for their country is defy the American flag and turn sour on the very nation that have made them wealthy?

     When sports icons use fame to disparage our nation, it makes me want to throw up. I am not alone, many millions feel the same, especially military veterans, disabled soldiers and their families, police and fire personnel, nurses and doctors and teachers, and many more who dedicate their lives to America.

     NFL Commissioner, Roger Goodell, is an example of a tail wagging the dog. He and some  owners are so intimidated by multi-million dollar athletes that they cave under pressure rather than having the guts to take a stand on behalf of a nation that has paved their way to become millionaires.

     Players are employees of organizations, as I was a cop for 30 years. Staff members work for organizations, not the other way around. I would never publicly denigrate or embarrass my employers, especially not while on duty. When players take the field and appear in uniform before eighty thousand people, they are representing their teams as employees. They are paid to perform athletics, not espouse politics. The organizations they work under should require compliance with rules and standards, or else find another job.

     If Roger Goodell truly cared about his country, he’d call a sacrificial moratorium for one week without football and send his 1,700 players to Puerto Rico to help save lives and provide necessities to grief-stricken human beings who are suffering immensely. That, is doing something meaningful. Yes, I know they write checks and donate. But that’s the easy way out.

     The players, led by millionaire quarterback, Colin Kaeperkick, are allegedly showing solidarity by protesting police brutality and discrimination toward black people. Really? This is a worn-out broken record, designed to spread Anti-American propaganda that is simply untrue.

     Yes, a cop goes rogue now and then. But to suggest there is a systemic wave of cop hatred toward blacks is utterly ridiculous.  I assert that with thirty years personal knowledge.

     In July of this year, a black police officer in Minneapolis, shot and killed a white woman in her pajamas trying to report a crime. Anyone hear about that?

     When Michael Brown, a black youth, was shot and killed by an officer in Ferguson in 2014, another shooting took place the next day in Utah, where a black cop shot and killed an unarmed white man. Anyone hear about that?

     Where is the sympathy and outrage over the five cops who were ambushed and killing in Dallas in 2016?  Or the two officers sitting in their patrol car in New York City in 2014, murdered. Thus far in 2017, 97 officers have died in the line of duty, thirty-three by gunfire.

     The real problem is blacks killing blacks by the thousands, in Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis and elsewhere, while the gutless mayors and governors of these arenas or murder try to redirect our attention elsewhere. Why aren’t the sports heroes of America joining forces in these crime riddled communities to establish education, skills, jobs, sports venues and music programs, and other avenues toward healthy living. They should be role models for kids, to save their lives, actually and figuratively. That would be meaningful, instead of making asses of themselves and calling it a “protest.”

     According to the Justice Department, between 1980 and 2008 blacks accounted for 52 percent of murders, while representing only 13 percent of the population.  93 percent of black murder victims are killed by other blacks. There’s the problem.

     Enough with the false propaganda. Let’s focus on real problems. If footballers refuse to publicly honor their country, they should be fired, immediately. It has nothing to do with free speech.

     Meanwhile, the fans will be the ultimate judge.

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

Victimizing Women: Islamic Laws vs. Multiculturalism

by Khadija Khan

(https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10968/women-islamic-law-multiculturalism)

• 
  The majority of the judges nevertheless determined that "triple talaq" was actually "against the basic tenets of the Holy Quran," and "what is bad in theology is bad in law as well." According to the decision, the practice was in violation of Article 14 of India's constitution, which guarantees the right to equality.
  
  


• 
  In Britain, abusive practices against Muslim women are still undertaken by Sharia Councils with impunity. In the West, the supposed dangers of multiculturalism are still regarded as more important than human rights. All Britain would need to do is enforce its own laws.
  
  


• 
  What supporters of this form of multiculturalism fail to realize -- or refuse to acknowledge -- is that the very existence of Sharia-compliant tribunals is not only a threat to modern justice, but necessarily abets the abuse of Muslim women, lack of equality, and the total lack of equal justice under law. In truth, justice is denied.
  
  

     In a recent landmark ruling, India's Supreme Court followed the lead of 22 Muslim countries -- including Pakistan and Bangladesh -- by outlawing the Islamic practice according to which a husband is able to divorce his wife instantly by uttering the word talaq (Arabic for "divorce") three times -- including by text or voice mail. The decision was not unanimous. A minority of the judges argued that banning "triple talaq" would be a violation of the Indian constitution, which protects religious freedom.

     The majority of the judges nevertheless determined that "triple talaq" was actually "against the basic tenets of the Holy Quran," and "what is bad in theology is bad in law as well." According to the decision, the practice was in violation of Article 14 of India's constitution, which guarantees the right to equality.

     The verdict was the result of a petition filed by five Muslim women whose "triple talaq" divorces left them destitute, all because of undue powers bestowed upon their husbands by radical clerics. The verdict was an enormous relief to them, and other women like them across India. Its broader message, however, needs to serve as a road map. And a warning. In the West, the supposed dangers of multiculturalism are still regarded as more important than human rights.

     In Britain, abusive practices against Muslim women are still undertaken by Sharia Councils with impunity. These practices include "triple talaq," halala (a ritual enabling a divorced Muslim woman to remarry her husband only by first wedding someone else, consummating the union, and then being divorced by him) and iddah, a mandatory waiting period of three menstrual cycles before a divorced woman is allowed to remarry.

     These Sharia Councils in the U.K. have been running unofficial parallel justice systems "everywhere in the country," performing weddings and decreeing divorces according to the strictest interpretation of Islam.

     In spite a liberal marriage contract issued in 2008 by the Muslim Institute, guaranteeing equal rights to British Muslim women (including the banning of forced marriages) -- which was endorsed by the Muslim Council of Britain, the Islamic Sharia Council and other prominent Islamic groups -- virtually nothing has changed. Britain's Forced Marriage Unit reported 1,428 cases of forced marriages in 2016 alone. All Britain would need to do is enforce its own laws.

     The U.K. is not the only Western country afflicted by and succumbing to such practices. In Australia, for instance, a self-appointed arbitration group called Sharia Mediation has been handling family disputes on issues covered by Australian law. In other words, as in Britain, Australia has a parallel Islamic legal system operating under its nose.

     In the United States, as well, a body was established in 2015 in Dallas, Texas to arbitrate disputes among the area's growing Muslim population. Although this Islamic "tribunal" is said to issue nonbinding decisions -- and is being likened to Jewish rabbinical courts and Catholic tribunals -- its opponents fear it will mimic Sharia courts in the Middle Eastern countries.

     In Canada, the practice has been going on for more than a decade. In 2004, the province of Ontario authorized the use of Sharia arbitration in matters of "property, marriage, divorce, custody and inheritance." The law enabling this -- the Arbitration Act -- was passed in 1991, to ease the "overloaded court system."

     What supporters of this form of multiculturalism fail to realize -- or refuse to acknowledge -- is that the very existence of Sharia-compliant tribunals is not only a threat to modern justice, but necessarily abets the abuse of Muslim women, lack of equality, and the total lack of equal justice under law.

     It is crucial for Western democracies to outlaw archaic practices that rob women and others of their rights, and to cease enabling these laws in the name of "religious freedom." In truth, justice is denied. India just took a stand in the right direction. Britain, Australia, the U.S. and Canada can and should follow.

Haitham al-Haddad is a British Sharia Council judge, and sits on the board of advisors for the Islamic Sharia Council. Regarding the handling of domestic violence cases, he stated in an interview, "A man should not be questioned why he hit his wife, because this is something between them. Leave them alone. They can sort their matters among themselves." 

.

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

Proof Beyond Doubt: No Bi-Party Solutions in Progressive Chicago Politics

Rahm Emanuel creates ‘Trump-free zone’ for students at Chicago schools



Chicago's Liberal Mayor Rahm Emanuel on Tuesday assured incoming high school students that they should not to worry about President Donald Trump ending the “Dreamers” program, saying Chicago Public Schools are a “Trump-free” sanctuary for all young illegal immigrants.

“To all the Dreamers that are here in this room and in the city of Chicago: You are welcome in the city of Chicago. This is your home. And you have nothing to worry about,” Mr. Emanuel told a group of freshman on the first day of classes at Solorio Academy High School, the Chicago Sun-Times reported.

“Chicago, our schools, our neighborhoods, our city, as it relates to what President Trump said, will be a Trump-free zone. You have nothing to worry about,” Mr. Emanuel said. “And I want you to know this, and I want your families to know this. And rest assured, I want you to come to school … and pursue your dreams.”

Chicago Public Schools CEO Forrest Claypool said the school system is a “sanctuary” for undocumented students.

“We do not allow federal agents on these grounds and in this building,” he said, the Sun-Times reported. “You are safe and secure here to learn, to grow and to pursue your dreams and we hope that you do so.”

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced Tuesday that the Trump administration is ending former President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA, which allowed illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children to be shielded from deportation.

This of course coming after a bloody Labor Day weekend in Chicago, a city being torn apart by violence, drugs and a lack of sound leadership

By Jessica Chasmar - The Washington Times - Tuesday, September 5, 2017

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

Londonistan: 500 closed churches, 423 new mosques

Arutz Sheva April 3, 2017 at 6:50 am 42News

SHARE!

• Facebook


• Tweet


• Google+


• Tumblr


• Pinterest

“London is more Islamic than many Muslim countries put together,” says London Islamic preacher Maulana Syed Raza Rizvi.

The city of London – dubbed “Londonistan” by outspoken journalist Melanie Phillips – now has 423 new mosques, which are “built on the sad ruins of English Christianity.” So writes Italian journalist and writer, Arutz Sheva columniist Giulio Meotti in an article written for Gatestone Institute reported here.

The Hyatt United Church, for instance, on Hamilton Road, was purchased by the Egyptian community and is being converted into a mosque. St Peter’s Church is now the Madina Mosque, and the Brick Lane Mosque used to be a Methodist church. Not only buildings are converted, writes Meotti, but also people: “The number of converts to Islam [in London] has doubled; often they embrace radical Islam, as with Khalid Masood, the terrorist who struck Westminster.”

“Given the current trends,” he predicts, “Christianity in England is becoming a relic, while Islam will be the religion of the future.”

It is estimated that by 2020, the number of Muslims attending prayers will top the number of Christians attending weekly Mass, 683,000 to 679,000. Within a generation, the number of churchgoers will be three times lower than that of Muslims who go regularly to mosque on Friday.

Meotti cites a Wall Street Journal report stating that 500 London churches of all denominations had been turned into private homes.

Demographically, Britain has been acquiring an increasingly Islamic face in many cities. A study carried out in 2015 showed that the most common name in England was none other than Mohammed and variations thereof.

Birmingham, England’s 2nd largest city, has a population that is 21.8% Muslim; Manchester, #6, stands at 15.8% Muslim, and Bradford, with well over 300,000 people, is a quarter Muslim, including half its children. In Leicester, too, Britain’s 10th largest city, half the children are Muslim.

Meotti cites a report in The Spectator according to which only two of the 1,700 mosques in Britain follow the modernist interpretation of Islam, compared with 56% in the United States.

But possibly most telling is the presence in London of no fewer than 100 sharia (Islamic law) courts, according to official statistics; there are likely many more. “The advent of this parallel judicial system has been made possible thanks to the British Arbitration Act and the system of Alternative Dispute Resolution,” according to Giotti. “These new courts are based on the rejection of the inviolability of human rights: the values of freedom and equality that are the basis of English Common Law.”

One of Britain’s leading judges, Sir James Munby, said that courts must be more “multicultural” – an allusion to “Islamic.” Leading personalities such as former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and Chief Justice Lord Phillips have suggested that British law should “incorporate” elements of sharia law.

Analysts continue to observe and report on the trend, and invariably conclude by asking: “Is anyone doing anything to stop it?”

(c) 2017 Arutz Sheva, All Rights Reserved. Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).

reade more... Résuméabuiyad