Bill Lockwood: The Bible and Illegal Immigration

The Bible and Illegal Immigration  “…those that you let remain of them be as pricks in your eyes, and as thorns in your sides, and they shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell… “

by Bill Lockwood

As illegal immigration assists dragging our culture downward into a more godless, violent and confused society, it is shocking that many preachers, who should be reflecting biblical values, have taken the position that somehow the liberal multicultural goal of open borders is beneficial for evangelism. People are becoming confused as to whether or not America should even have boundaries and borders and whether it is godly to protect those borders.

First, God Himself established borders of nations. In Acts 17:26 Paul, speaking to Greeks in Athens, stated that “God has made of one, every nation of men to dwell on the face of the earth; having determined their appointed seasons, and bounds of their habitation.

Note the several elements of the passage. (1) God has made of every nation one—or He made from one every nation of mankind. This is in direct opposition to the then current Greek belief that their own origin was superior to other races. (2) God determined their appointed times, that is, their divinely appointed periods. Nations do not rise and fall without God. It is not a survival of the fittest. (3) Boundaries of nations are divinely fixed. However modern man wishes to understand the providence of God, Paul plainly states that God has a hand in national boundaries.

The classic Old Testament text on this subject is Deut. 32:8. “When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance; When he separated the children of men …” The last comment, about “separating” the children of men refers to God’s division between peoples at the Tower of Babel (Gen. 11:8).

Second, God demanded that Israel respect borders of other nations. As Israel came out of Egypt, the people were to by-pass some of the nations respecting their borders because God had given them that territory. One of those nations was Edom. “I have given Mt. Seir to Esau for a possession,” said the Lord, therefore, Israel was not to enter it (Deut. 2:5). He said the same regarding the country of Moab.

Later (Num. 20), when Israel, under the leadership of Moses, applied to Edom to pass through its territory on their way toward Canaan, Edom said no. After a second application and refusal Israel turned to go another way. A nation has the right to determine who comes into its territory and even God’s selected leader Moses could not violate that right.

On the other hand, God had prior appointed that the territory of the Amorite and Canaanite (Palestine) would be given to Israel (see Deut. 1). This was a divine judgment upon those Canaanite nations (see Gen. 15:15-16) because of their extreme wickedness including child sacrifice.

Consider also the fact that at one point in Genesis history Abraham, God’s chosen, immigrated to Egypt (Gen. 12). Abraham, however, lied about the status of his wife Sarah at one of the checkpoints. When his lie was discovered by the Egyptians he was deported! God did not step in and demand that Abraham and his family be protected at the expense of the Egyptian government.

Third, once settled in Canaan, the Israelites were sternly warned on multiple occasions to “drive the Canaanites out.” Even forty years previously, when Israel was still at Mt. Sinai, God had promised to drive out the inhabitants of the land (Exod. 33:2). Once Joshua took the leadership and conquered most of Canaan, he commanded the cooperation of the Israelites in “driving out” the Canaanites (e.g. Joshua 17:17-19).

The stated reason for driving out the nations that formerly inhabited Israel was to preserve the culture of Israel. The word “culture” itself refers to the religious presuppositions that lie beneath a society.

When you pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan, then ye shall drive out the inhabitants of the land before you, and destroy all their figured stones, and destroy all their molten images, and demolish all their high places [of idol worship], and ye shall take possession of the land …” (Num. 33:51,52)

Moses continued. “But if you will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then shall those that you let remain of them be as pricks in your eyes, and as thorns in your sides, and they shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell” (v. 55). That Israel did not drive out the Canaanite people from Israel is the theme of the book of Judges (see chapter 1). The rest of the book shows perfectly well what occurs when a culture is not preserved.

As one professor wisely told me, “marriage is not a reformatory school”—so also “open borders is not a missionary program.” It is a recipe for the disintegration and complete annihilation of what is left of America’s Christian culture.

After Israel’s settlement in Canaan each tribe had a sovereign boundary that was detailed in the sacred record (Joshua 15). Not only was tribal territory to be respected in Israel, but private property was considered sacred and one of the sins that was prosecuted was “moving boundary markers” of someone’s property—which is the same as stealing private land. In no text in Holy Writ does anyone find the concept that people are not to own private property or that there is no such thing as Israelite tribal territory or national boundaries.

Fourth, God forbade Israelites from making any personal and marital contracts with the pagan people that formerly inhabited the land. Deuteronomy 7:1-5 is emphatic. If individual Israelites mixed in marriage relationships with the idolaters and pagans known as the Canaanites, the pure religion of Israel would be eroded.

You shall make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them; neither shalt thou make marriages with them; … for he will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods …” For this reason, God instructed, “You shall break down their altars and dash in pieces their pillars, and hew down their Asherim, and burn their graven images with fire.”

God strictly warned the Israelites again through Joshua, the next generation leader: “For if you ever go back and cling to the rest of these nations, these which remain among you, and intermarry with them, so that you associate with them and they with you, The Lord will not continue to drive them out, but they will become a share and a trap for you; a whip on your sides and thorns in your eyes until you perish from the land” (Joshua 23:12,13).

The point here is not to recommend an induction program for those seeking citizenship in the United States, but to point out that biblically speaking, the concept of sovereign borders is paramount in Old Testament Israel. The idea therefore that America should have no borders, and thereby no border enforcement, is certainly not biblical. There is nothing ungodly about having borders or boundaries around a nation and having boundaries implies that those whose boundaries they are have the right to manage them. Less than this is confusion on the face of the deep.

John Locke pointed out that unless society can provide a code of fixed and enforceable laws, man might as well stayed in the jungle (Skousen, 5,000 Year Leap, 244).

To this end it is that men give up all their natural power to the society they enter into, and the community put the legislative power into such hands as they think fit, with this trust, that they shall be governed by declared laws, or else their peace, quiet, and property will still be at the same uncertainty as it was in the state of Nature.

Is America a sovereign nation? Many on the left apparently disdain that idea and are pushing for open borders. That may be their preference, but don’t come to the Bible with such an agenda.

Alex Newman: Facing Corruption Scandals, Communist Ex-UN Boss Gets Immunity

Facing Corruption Scandals, Communist Ex-UN Boss Gets Immunity –  “Bokova’s husband, Kalin Mitrev, is also a longtime communist operative with deep ties to international communism…  “

by Alex Newman

Another major scandal is brewing at the disgraced UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. With former UNESCO boss and longtime Communist Party bigwig Irina Bokova and her communist husband both accused of widespread corruption, the controversial new head of the UN “education” agency — herself a Socialist Party member — gave them both diplomatic immunity. The scheme, which appears designed to protect the communist duo from corruption allegations across multiple jurisdictions, includes a bizarre contract paying Bokova $1 that has drawn intense criticism and caused even more suspicion. But for now, archaic UN “diplomatic immunity” protections are likely to hamper any law-enforcement investigations or potential prosecutions.

The New American first became interested in Bokova amid investigations into UNESCO schemes to hijack and weaponize education worldwide. It very quickly became apparent that the longtime member of the Bulgarian Communist Party, which slaughtered hundreds of thousands of innocent people, was hoping to indoctrinate children into the UN-backed ideologies of globalism, humanism, and socialism. “We have the collective duty to empower every child and youth with the right foundations — knowledge, values and skills — to shape the future as responsible global citizens, [emphasis added]” she declared at a UN summit on education in South Korea, one of many public statements vowing to transform the attitudes and values of children worldwide.

It also very quickly became apparent that the frequent accusations of corruption and malfeasance being made by watchdogs and analysts deserved to be seriously examined. First, Bokova was caught lying on her CV. Then, her ownership of luxurious properties around the world — New York City, London, Paris — properties that investigators said her income could not account for — was exposed by the watchdog group Bivol. After that, scandals involving cronyism in her appointments of unqualified candidates to senior UN posts emerged. She was also widely accused of using public money to campaign for the UN secretary-general job while offering “awards” to potential supporters of her bid including Obama, Communist Chinese dictator Xi Jinping’s wife, and other key players.

That pattern of alleged corruption appears to have continued — and the benefits are still accruing. While Bokova was running UNESCO, a post she held until recently, the Rothschild-backed communist did more than a few major favors for Russian chemical giant PhosAgro, including forming a “partnership” between the UN agency she ran and the controversial company in 2011. On June 2, 2017, the Moscow-trained Bulgarian communist even gave a speech at the Kremlin-backed St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in which she showered praise on the conglomerate and its leadership.

We need chemistry to move forward the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” said Bokova, a reference to the totalitarian UN plan for humanity sometimes referred to as Agenda 2030 or the “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) which the Communist Chinese regime played a “crucial role” developing. “This is why our partnership with PhosAgro … is so important, to support the creativity and innovation of young scientists, guided by the Principles of Green Chemistry.” She also expressed “special gratitude” to PhosAgro boss and controversial Russian billionaire Andrey Guryev for the “leadership he brings to strengthening cooperation between PhosAgro and UNESCO.” And finally, she expressed confidence that the cooperation between the two “will continue to go from strength to strength.”

Unsurprisingly to those monitoring Bokova, she joined the board of directors for PhosAgro almost immediately after leaving UNESCO. While details of her compensation package are not public, sources within UNESCO said the numbers were believed to be extraordinary. The New Americanmagazine reached out to Bokova in March with a request for details about the relationship with PhosAgro, including financial arrangements. She did not respond. This magazine has offered her multiple opportunities to comment or respond to previous articles, but in each case, she has declined. In at least two cases while she was still running UNESCO, though, her deputies sent letters that they declined to post publicly in the comment section.

Bokova’s husband, Kalin Mitrev, is also a longtime communist operative with deep ties to international communism and the former Bulgarian regime’s mass-murdering “security” services. And Mitrev, who also joined the ranks of international bureaucracy by working at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, has been credibly accused of corruption, too. According to multiple news reports last September, Bulgarian authorities launched an investigation into Mitrev. Among other major concerns, Mitrev received about half a million U.S. dollars, part of it via Swiss bank accounts, as part of an alleged money-laundering and influence-buying scheme known as “Azerbaijani laundromat” tied to the brutal dictatorship ruling Azerbaijan. The prosecutor’s office has not provided any recent updates on the status of the investigation.

The case was opened after the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and other media exposed the allegedly shady dealings in major newspapers across Europe. Despite her well-known close ties to the brutal regime in Azerbaijan, Bokova denied knowledge of her husband’s schemes. “I am not privy to the details of my husband’s consulting business and equally, your questions about my opinion on Azerbaijan and its leadership are wholly misplaced,” she was quoted as saying in media reports surrounding the investigation into her husband. “I most vehemently deny any wrongdoing and will consider defamatory any publication of these totally unfounded conjectures on your part.”

It was not clear how extensive Bokova’s attempts at legal action against journalists have been, although at least one prominent reporter who reached out to The New American said that Bokova had targeted him. Several other embattled UN agency chiefs, including the chief of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), who is connected to a Latin American communist network, as well as the head of the UN World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), have been abusing European legal systems to silence and punish journalists for exposing corruption and crimes at their UN agencies. U.S. lawmakers have also expressed concerns over Bokova’s ties to the regime in Azerbaijan. READ MORE


Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe but has lived all over the world. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU or on Facebook. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com.


Jesse Lee Peterson: THE TRUTH ABOUT BOURDAIN, SPADE AND SUICIDE

THE TRUTH ABOUT BOURDAIN, SPADE AND SUICIDE– Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson trounces ‘experts’ giving wrong solutions

by Jesse Lee Peterson

Two celebrity suicides in the same week have put a spotlight on a growing problem in the U.S.

Celebrity chef Anthony Bourdain, 61, committed suicide by hanging last week. Bourdain was host of the award-winning series “Parts Unknown” on CNN, where he traveled the world telling stories over food and drinks. He is survived by his 11-year-old daughter.

New York Fashion designer, Kate Spade, 55, also committed suicide by hanging a few days earlier. She was found dead in her Park Avenue apartment. Spade is survived by her husband, Andy (brother of actor David Spade) and her 13-year-old daughter.

Bourdain and Spade’s deaths sparked a national conversation about suicide prevention, but most experts are missing the mark with their conclusions.

While celebrity suicides grab the public’s attention, according to the CDC (Center for Disease Control), Americans are taking their own lives at an alarming rate. The CDC study shows suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the U.S.; the rate has increased nearly 30 percent between 1999-2016. At least 123 people commit suicide every day. More than half of those who’ve died had no history of “mental health” problems. Troubled relationships, substance abuse, health issues, and job or financial woes and other challenges appear to contribute to suicides.

Outwardly, Bourdain and Spade appeared to be content: they were famous, rich and adored by their fans. Despite their popularity and material success, they had serious unresolved conflict within.

According to reports, Bourdain’s close friend, Eric Ripert, told Bourdain’s mother that Anthony had been in a “dark mood” before his death. He also had a grueling film schedule and was reportedly exhausted.

Known for his bad-boy persona, Bourdain has talked openly about his life. Even though his family was Catholic on his father’s side and Jewish on his mother’s, he said he was raised without religion. A self-acknowledged reformed addict of heroin and cocaine, Bourdain said he was surprised to have lived past 30.

Soon after his first marriage ended in 2005, Bourdain shared in his book “Medium Raw,” he was “aimless and regularly suicidal” during a stretch in the Caribbean. In 2017, he became a vocal advocate against sexual harassment after his girlfriend Asia Argento’s sexual abuse allegations against Harvey Weinstein went public.

CNN and other media outlets said Bourdain was an “inspiration,” but this is not the lifestyle that should inspire human beings. The focus needs to be on the character of the person, not on the celebrity status, worldly education or money.

A statement Andy Spade released to the New York Times said Kate Spade had “suffered from depression and anxiety for many years.” The statement also indicated the couple had been living separately for 10 months. “It was a complete shock,” he said of her sudden death. “And it clearly wasn’t her. There were personal demons she was battling.”

Kate Spade’s sister, Reta Saffo, told the media her suicide was “not unexpected.” She believed Kate had suffered from bipolar disorder throughout her life, aggravated by the fame and wealth she achieved in her 30s. Saffo suspected her sister had been contemplating suicide since actor Robin Williams hanged himself in 2014.

Most celebrities are miserable. These suicides prove that fame and fortune will never fulfill the void human beings have within. Yet people spend a lifetime trying to fill the emptiness with sex, money, drugs and seeking approval, but it doesn’t work.

In my 28 years of counseling with people, I’ve discovered the root cause of emptiness and depression which drives people to suicide is resentment and hatred toward our parents – usually anger toward the mother. When a person has anger – especially toward a parent – his/her soul is disconnected from God.

No matter how much money, fame and praise people get from the world, it’s never enough to fulfill the emptiness. The void can only be filled when we forgive our parents for failing us, and repent of the judgment and resentment that we’re harboring against them. Then we can reconnect with God, who will fill the emptiness with real love and inner peace. Nothing else will do.

Yet, “experts” are giving people wrong solutions. Instead of addressing the root problem, they blame the outer environment and over-prescribe medication which addicts people and makes matters worse.

Order Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson’s book, “The Antidote: Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, and Victimhood.”

Society has allowed the left to take the shame out of being wrong. They’ve convinced most people – especially the younger generation – there’s no wrong or right, to just go with what feels good. We need to put serious focus on reinforcing morality and stop blurring the lines between good and evil. We must rebuild families, and call out and shame bad behavior.

We also need to protect men and boys from the unparalleled attack against them by radical feminists who hate men. A growing number of men – especially white men – feel isolated and under attack just because they’re white males. This is impacting men and boys of all ages and it’s contributing to escalating suicides rates.

Join us on Saturday, June 16th at BOND’s 9th Annual Men’s Conference in Los Angeles. RSVP or become a sponsor.

If you or someone you know needs counseling, call us at 1-800-411-BOND (2663). If you need immediate help, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK

Read more at: http://www.wnd.com/2018/06/the-truth-about-bourdain-spade-and-suicide/#hrqTfKdVzyosHRW1.99

Read Jesse Lee Peterson’s Biography

Jesse Lee Peterson: ROSEANNE’S LYNCHING IS AN INSULT TO BLACKS

ROSEANNE’S LYNCHING IS AN INSULT TO BLACKS- Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson skewers leftist double-standards

by Jesse Lee Peterson

After Memorial Day, longtime actress and comedian Roseanne Barr was fired from her number-one hit TV show reboot “Roseanne.” ABC cancelled the entire program, reportedly pulled reruns of the sitcom and began considering an off-shoot show without Roseanne’s character.

Why such strong, sudden moves by elitist media giant ABC? Roseanne put out a funny tweet discussing a Wikileaks report about the corrupt Obama administration. Valerie Jarrett’s name came up – a wicked woman who was Barack Obama’s senior advisor. Roseanne wrote on Twitter in the early morning hours Tuesday: “muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj” – meaning Valerie Jarrett.

Many people, including Roseanne apparently, didn’t know that Valerie Jarrett is mixed-race “black.” People do know Jarrett wears short, straight hair not unlike a “Planet of the Apes” movie character. Many also know Jarrett was born in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The “Fallen Messiah” Barack Obama and his allies oppressed and marginalized Christians, but supported and covered for Muslims any time Jihadists committed terror attacks.

One of the stupidest, politically correct, media-enforced “rules” against free speech is you cannot compare black people (at least not liberal blacks) to monkeys or apes, either in jest or insult. Through lies and propaganda, people are brainwashed to see blacks as poor, helpless victims of so-called “racism” (which doesn’t even exist, and never has). It’s actually an insult to black people that whites are conditioned not to speak freely around them, and it only feeds black suspicion over white people’s true feelings. The left treat blacks like mentally handicapped children who can’t handle anything and can’t control themselves.

This mentality toward blacks enables them to continue their moral decline, having up to 77 percent of children out of wedlock, aborting a third of their pregnancies, complaining and lying about “racism,” faking hate crimes and falsely accusing whites and police, making excuses and blaming the system for their failure, begging for free stuff and “reparations,” continuing in unemployment double the national average, creating ghettoes, selling drugs and killing one another at a disproportionate rate.

The irony is that Roseanne Barr has a long history of trying to help black people, and being a pro-diversity, so-called “anti-racist” activist. She has a black godson, and pushed for a black granddaughter in her TV show’s revival. She once tweeted the purported home address of George Zimmerman, who shot the thug Trayvon Martin in self-defense – she apparently wanted a protest or citizen’s arrest of the Hispanic “white” man falsely accused of “racist” murder.

Order Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson’s book, “The Antidote: Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, and Victimhood.”

Roseanne is a bit all-over-the-place politically – somewhat like Kanye West, by the way. Like Kanye, her “unforgivable” sin against the children of the lie (the liberal media, Democratic Party, RINOs and Never Trumpers) is thinking for herself and being pro-Trump. She’s extremely socially liberal – formerly a supporter of the anti-capitalist Green Party and socialist “Peace and Freedom Party.” Her nixed TV show “Roseanne” featured a transgender grandson who dresses like a girl, promoting mental and spiritual illness as normal and right. But the left’s only problem was that Roseanne is a Trump supporter!

This is an unjust and un-American public lynching of Roseanne Barr, meant to shut white people up and put fear in them. The media made sure everybody called her funny tweet “racist,” overreacting and emotionalizing the situation to make it seem so important and “abhorrent.” Even normally down-to-earth conservatives called her tweet “racist.” Logically, her tweet was either fair or inappropriate – but it was not “racist,” and she had a right to say it. Shamefully, Roseanne apologized repeatedly and profusely. Stop apologizing to the children of the lie!

They don’t care when President Trump is called an “orangutan,” or when black conservatives are called monkeys. It is acceptable to hate whites and Trump supporters. It’s a double standard. They falsely labeled Republicans “Nazis” and the Tea Party “racists” and “terrorists.” The word “racist” is more dehumanizing and destructive to whites than the so-called “N-word” is to blacks. The only solution is for whites to drop their fear.

The left seeks to regain power through intimidation of white people, the people who most support truth and freedom in America.

Some years back they made a similar example of a “white person” in the lynching of L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling. He was recorded in private not wanting his “girlfriend” to take pictures in public with blacks. He had a right to express this. But the wicked lynch mob called him “racist” and took his team away from him!

This is pure evil – oppressing white people for expressing “incorrect” opinions.

The only man they have not been able to destroy is President Trump, whom I call the Great White Hope for all Americans. Donald Trump has God on his side. He tells the truth, speaks his mind and has no fear. And he shows love for all people. He does not apologize for doing and saying nothing wrong. If we want to save our country and make America great again, we must stand up for truth and freedom of speech without apology.

Read more at: http://www.wnd.com/2018/03/are-you-an-alpha-or-beta-male/#qukcj4XqHQRhzq7D.99

Read Jesse Lee Peterson’s Biography

Mass Shootings Spark Growing Interest in Homeschooling

Mass Shootings Spark Growing Interest in Homeschooling  “homeschooling in response to the evil that now permeates government “education”…  “

by Alex Newman

The perversion, lies, dumbing down, fake history, anti-God pseudo-science, and flagrant immorality promoted in government schools was apparently not enough to get parents to pay attention — but the consequences of that evil are waking people up in huge numbers. Amid an apparent wave of school shootings exploited by the press to attack gun rights, a growing number of parents are now exploring a much more sensible option: withdrawing their children entirely.

In fact, according to multiple news reports, it is clear that interest in homeschooling across America is surging in response to the perceived increase in shootings. On February 15, for example, the Miami Herald wrote an article under the headline: “In the wake of the Douglas High massacre, some parents ponder home schooling.” The article documents surging interest in home education among parents and explains how to legally remove children from school.

Similar headlines are appearing after each shooting. After a recent school shooting in Texas, more media outlets also began reporting on the trend. An ABC affiliate in Alabama, for instance, reported on the phenomenon under the headline: “Parents consider homeschooling kids after deadly school shootings.”

The Foundation for Economic Education picked up on the growing interest, too. And the writer, Kerry McDonald, ridiculed comments by a government-school teacher that leaving public schools is “running from reality.” “But that raises the question: Is compulsory mass schooling ‘reality’?” she asked. Of course not.

A deluge of social media posts make the growing interest in home education clear, as well. “Well, guess I am homeschooling my children,” wrote Juliet, a young mother, on Twitter after the Parkland shooting. “Wasn’t my plan, but I don’t need to wonder every day if my kids will come home from school.”

The next day, another mom posted a similar tweet. “I know I say in my tweets I’m considering homeschooling,” she wrote. “Researched it and I’ve decided it’s not something I’m gonna consider anymore. I’m 100 % DOING this.” Countless similar posts could be found on Twitter and other social media outlets.

Ironically, the Obama administration’s totalitarian-minded Education Secretary Arne Duncan has actually encouraged parents to keep their children home until Congress passes anti-gun legislation. Since that appears unlikely — especially considering the protections for gun-rights enshrined in the Second Amendment — they may be home for quite a while. At least we can hope.

School shootings were actually more common in the 1990s, and have been declining since then, according to research from picked up on the growing interestNortheastern University. But the fact is that, before God, prayer, morality, and common sense were expelled from school fifty years ago, school shootings and teen suicide were almost non-existent. Decreased parental involvement has also been cited as a factor.

But the increased interest in homeschooling in response to the evil that now permeates government “education” — the fruits of which include suicide, mass murder, promiscuity, abortion, and more — should be considered a welcome development. Hopefully the growing interest in homeschooling will turn into a mass exodus from government indoctrination centers in the years ahead.

While the school shootings are a horrific tragedy, they must be understood as the inevitable consequence of the lies and wickedness being pushed on children in government school. The solution is not gun control — after all, guns were far easier to access in the 1950s, and dozens of school children are massacred in knife attacks in Communist China to this day. The kids need protection not from guns or knives, but from the lies and indoctrination pushed at school that motivate people to kill.


Alex Newman is an American journalist and consultant who writes about economics, finance, banking, business, and politics for diverse publications in the United States and abroad. He studied journalism, economics and political science at the University of Florida. 

In addition to his own consulting firm, Alex has worked in market research, marketing, strategy, research, information gathering and consulting for international companies, non-profit organizations and various political campaigns. He is also the co-author of a book exposing some of the problems with today’s public education system.  Alex is also a regular contributor to The New American


Travel Bans, Stealth Jihad and the Islamization of America

Travel Bans, Stealth Jihad and the Islamization of America  “Changing the laws of the United States is the primary target. Stealth Jihad. “

by Bill Lockwood

Mark Miller, a senior attorney for Pacific Legal Foundation, writes in today’s The Hill regarding the recent Supreme Court ruling declaring unconstitutional an immigrant-deportation law defended by the Trump Administration. Now the High Court turns attention to an immigration-related case, Trump v. Hawaii, which has “bigger stakes,” according to Miller.

According to Miller, the “highest profile” question before the court is “does the travel ban violate the Constitution’s “Establishment Clause?” The challengers submit that the president’s “travel ban” amounts to “religious discrimination.” Oral arguments are underway this week.

The Establishment Clause refers to the first line of the First Amendment, of course, which forbade the federal government from establishing an official state religion in America.

Islam and Religion?

The fundamental error here, repeated daily in the press and in education, is that Islam is a religion. In truth, it is a political movement that has very little “religion” to it. Islam is nothing but communism that sails under a religious flag. Its goal is world domination by the edge of the sword. Global Islamic Rule.

Muslim leaders world-wide have been bold and blatant that their efforts are toward an Islamic-dominated world. Iranian leader Ahmadenejad declared it (2006); Leading Muslim cleric in the UK Anjem Choudary insisted that the Muslim flag will one day “fly over the White House;” the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) chair Omar Ahmad confessed in 1998 that the Islamic goal is “to become dominant worldwide;” and the Muslim Brotherhood has given us “The Project”—a 100 year-plan to establish “Islamic government on earth.”

The Muslim Brotherhood, created in Egypt in 1928 by Hasan al-Banna, claims to have more than 70 affiliated terrorist organizations throughout the world. It states that “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” Note that they define “jihad” for us. It involves “dying in the way of Allah.”

“Jihad” is the sacred obligation to impose Islam upon the entire world. This is not the creation of a few extremists or the hijacking of a peaceful religion by a handful of radicals. Jihad is mandated in the writings of the Quran, was practiced in bloody earnest by the false prophet Muhammad, and is overwhelmingly defined by classical theologians, jurists and traditionalists as a military concept of “waging war.”

According to the eminent scholar of Islamic history and culture at Princeton University, Bernard Lewis, and Cleveland Dodge, Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton, the “term ‘jihad’ has usually been understood as meaning ‘to wage war.’ The great collection of hadith all contain a section devoted to jihad in which the military meaning predominates. …According to Muslim teaching, jihad is one of the basic commandments of the faith, an obligation imposed upon all Muslims by God, through revelation … It must continue until the whole world has either accepted the Islamic faith or submitted to the power of the Islamic state.”

Muslim Brotherhood

This brings us back to the Muslim Brotherhood.  Their outlined strategies for western world takeover include the “appearance of moderation,” the “use of deception to mask good,” the “extensive usage of social networks,” and to “cultivate Islamist intellectual community;” “using Western institutions until they convert them into the service of Islam.” Changing the laws of the United States is the primary target. Stealth Jihad.  As Muslim Brotherhood leader Qaradowi stated, “jihad can be fought with the pen, then the sword.”

Muslim practitioners have no intention of following the Constitution of the United States. It is a devious political movement.

The great world –class scholar and former president John Quincy Adams warned America that Muhammad had poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. The essence of his doctrine was violence and lust: to exalt the brutal over the spiritual part of human nature. … Between these two religions [Islam and Christianity], a war of twelve hundred years has already waged. The war is yet flagrant … while the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motive to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.

Although Adams called Islam a “religion” himself, the essence of it, even by his own definition, is a political movement that presses physical war. If the High Court of the United States would recognize these simple facts Islam would be seen for what it is and travel bans would be not be challenged on the basis of “religious discrimination.”

American Division, Class Struggle and the Progressive Income Tax

American Division, Class Struggle and the Progressive Income Tax – “What has happened to us? Why has partisan animosity replaced thoughtful discussion and debate?”

by Bill Lockwood

America is arguably more divided now than ever in its history. Cleavages exist between races; whites, blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, American Indians; between political parties, Democrat versus Republican; between classes rich and poor, middle class supporting the welfare class.  We are daily fed a diet of radical divides between the police and minority communities; even variances between Californians, some of which are ready to splinter off and form their own state and others who are prepared to join Mexico again. Multiculturalists in the universities commonly celebrate foreign cultures while denigrating Americanism. The states are becoming even more balkanized than during the Civil War in which north and south soldiers still respected each other on the battlefield.

What has happened to us? Why has partisan animosity replaced thoughtful discussion and debate? Why is it that everyone who differs from me becomes either a xenophobe, homophobe, Islamaphobe, or some other phobe? Besides the obvious fact that our culture has retreated from God–which lies at the heart of our division–is the “class struggle” sponsored by Marxist philosophy. Deep wedges are being driven into our once-peaceful culture.

Anti-communist researcher James D. Bales wrote, “Class struggle is such an essential part of the Marxian philosophy that one cannot abandon it without abandoning Marxism.” A summary of Karl Marx’s views indicates that a class is made up of a group of individuals who sustain the same relationship to the ownership or the non-ownership of the means of production. The two basic classes are those who own the means of production and distribution (the bourgeois) and those who do not (proletariat).

Friedrich Engels, Marx’s partner in crime, explained that the great lever to effect social change is to divide society along “political, religious, philosophical or some other ideological” class. In this way, by driving these wedges, Marx produced the collision in society necessary for socialism. It is without argument that Marx’s class struggle has become tremendously successful in America. But how did these wedges get a foothold among our once united people?

The Income Tax

Granted, many divisions are natural, such as between races. But the primary method of exacerbating these natural divides and creating more class division is the Income Tax. Karl Marx knew this, therefore, after the abolition of private property, Marx’s second plank is: a “heavy, progressive income tax.”

Our founding fathers knew the dangers of progressive taxation as well. They warned against it, even writing into the Constitution: “All duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States” (Art. 1.8). But the so-called “Progressives” (read, socialists), taking their cues from Karl Marx instead of James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, inaugurated the Progressive Income Tax in 1913. America has been in the throes of class struggle ever since.

Some History

Twenty years prior to the infamous Income Tax of 1913, as Progressivism began to take hold, Congress had experimented with another income tax (1894) that was designed to tax only the top 2% of wealth holders. The Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional (Burton Fulsom, Founders on Taxation).

Stephen Field, a veteran of 30 years on the Court, was outraged that Congress would pass a bill to tax a small voting bloc and exempt the larger group of voter. At age 77, Field not only repudiated Congress’s actions he also penned a prophecy. A small progressive tax, he predicted, ‘will be but a stepping stone to others, larger and more sweeping, till our political contests will become a war of the poor against the rich.’

This is exactly what occurred. Under the influence of the Progressives at the turn of the last century liberal Republicans and Democrats both crafted bills in Congress designed to “soak the rich.” Conservatives who blocked the unconstitutional idea were labeled as favoring “the part of the rich.”

Class warfare had begun in earnest. Uniform taxation was a thing of the past and along with it equal protection under the law. The government, by nature, now became the aggressor to shake down the little man. By the time of Franklin Roosevelt votes were being bought and sold by means of the IRS code while on the flip side Roosevelt’s opponents were subjected to IRS investigations and continual government harassment.

Elliot Roosevelt, the president’s son, stated in 1975 that “my father may have been the originator of the concept of employing the IRS as a weapon of political retribution.” As Burton Fulsom points out, Elliot added, “each of his successors followed his lead.”

What is the point of this history? Barack Obama’s employment of the IRS to target conservatives while Lois Lerner headed the Exempt Organizations Unit is nothing new. Obama was featured on a major magazine as Roosevelt himself. Now other government agencies, including the entire Justice Department, is being revealed as a partisan player in power politics. Witness the disgrace of James Comey and the leadership of the FBI.

James Madison was right all along. “The spirit of party and faction” would prevail entirely in the United States if Congress could tax one group of citizens and confer benefits on another group. Our social unrest will continue until the Income Tax is repealed.

Natural Law

Natural Law– “All humans have impressed upon them from the beginning of creation the principles of Natural Law…”

by Bill Lockwood

Sir William Blackstone was an English jurist, judge and politician of eighteenth century England. His Commentaries on the Laws of England were a profound study of natural law and the founders of our nation carried Blackstone with them as a reference and guide. Even Abraham Lincoln loved Blackstone and studied him copiously.

One paramount principle which our founders loved was Blackstone’s explanation of Natural Law. Blackstone wrote in 1765:

This natural law, being as old as mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, from this original.

Note the following: (1) These laws are dictated by God himself. (2) They are binding to all men everywhere. (3) No human law that violates natural law is of any validity. One can hear echoes of this in the Declaration of Independence. Again, from Blackstone:

Thus when the Supreme Being formed the universe, and created matter out of nothing, He impressed certain principles upon that matter, from which it can never depart, and without which it would cease to be. When He put the matter into motion, He established certain laws of motion, to which all movable bodies must conform. And, to descend from the greatest operations to the smallest, when a workman forms a clock, or other piece of mechanism, he establishes at his own pleasure certain arbitrary laws for its direction; as that the hand shall describe a given space in a given time; to which law as long as the work conforms, so long it continues in perfection, and answers the end of its formation.

All humans have impressed upon them from the beginning of creation the principles of Natural Law—reasoning ability concerning right and wrong.

Even Cicero, whose full name was Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.), the greatest orator of the ancient Roman Republic, and was raised in a pagan society, recognized true law imbedded within the heart of each person to which each is responsible.

True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions….It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish it entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it. And there will not be different laws at Rome and at Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator, and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment.

One can hear in this echoes of Jefferson’s famous lines “the laws of nature and nature’s God.” Based upon this clear principle of natural law our founders disobeyed the unjust laws of King George.

Romans

Paul writes essentially the same thing in Romans 2:14-16, except Paul was inspired of God.

For when the Gentiles, that have not the law, do by nature the things of the law [OT revealed law, bl], these, not having the law, are a law unto themselves, in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their thoughts, one with another, accusing or else excusing them …

Here the apostle shows clearly that those without God’s written law have knowledge of the existence of a law within themselves. All humans instinctively have within them the understanding that some things will always be right and other things wrong.

For example, ABORTION. The forcible taking of innocent human life is wrong. The Roe v. Wade (1973) decision at the Supreme Court does not change this and one-half of our nation rightly continues to recognize it as murder. The depth of America’s sin can easily be gauged by this horrific transgression. Because our nation has been adrift for at least fifty to a hundred years or more does not mitigate our guilt.

Another illustration is, HOMOSEXUALITY. It matters not that the Supreme Court Obergefell (2015) decision dictates to states that same-sex couples may marry—it is still sinful activity and godly Americans will not simply accept it and move along. Nor should we. As Blackstone rightly said, these types of human laws “have no validity” before God nor with those who honor Him.

Kathleen Marquardt: THE DEFINITION OF “IS”

Kathleen Marquardt: THE DEFINITION OF “IS” – “I do not want to believe that Trump is just using blue smoke and mirrors…”

by Kathleen Marquardt

No, this has nothing (or very little) to do with Bill Clinton. My question is, ‘Is President Trump’ for or against Sustainable Development? He and his cabinet give mixed signals. Yes, Trump has done more positive things than any president in the last decade, that I can remember, anyway. But then there is this:

Oh, boy! Here we go. Actually, Zinke needs to go.

I emphasized the text in bold to indicate the usual farce of Agenda21/2030 that is going to be the destruction of Western Culture. Keep in mind that the usual disclaimer for A21/2030 is “strictly advisory” and “soft-law”, horse pocky! This piece brags that the Department of Interior will be blanketing all public lands with public/private partnerships, as if this is a good thing. They are painting with words so pretty to make you think Interior is the most patriotic of all departments, while what they are doing is so insidiously evil the devil will celebrate them if they pull this off. Zinke calls it Made in America, but instead it is the unmaking of America, the tearing apart of the Constitution. PPPs help SD destroy property rights – the bedrock of freedom.

As Tom describes PPPs in the link below this one: “It is little understood by the general public how Public/Private Partnerships are actually used, not as a way to diminish the size of government, but in fact, to increase government’s power. In truth, many PPPs are nothing more than government-sanctioned monopolies. These privileged few businesses are granted special favors like tax breaks, free use of eminent domain, non-compete clauses in government contracts, and specific guarantees of return on their investments. That means the companies, in partnership with the government, can fix their prices, charging beyond what the market demands. They can use their relationship with government to put competition out of business. This is not free enterprise, nor is it government controlled by the people.”

In other words, PPPs are fascism in disguise. And, hopefully, America has seen enough of Sustainable Development in any form – Public/Private/Partnerships, carbon footprints, Common Core, social justice, you name it. Let’s tell Zinke that we just say, NO to calling an Agenda 21/2030 scheme “Made in America” as if it were baseball or apple pie, instead of the anti-American pile of horse-pocky that it is.

Secretary Zinke announces Creation of the “Made in America” Recreation Advisory Committee

“ Today, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke announced the establishment of the “Made in America” Recreation Advisory Committee. The Committee will advise the Secretary of the Interior on public-private partnerships across all public lands, with the goal of expanding access to and improving infrastructure on public lands and waterways.

The duties of the Committee are strictly advisory and will consist of, but not be limited to, providing recommendations including:

Policies and programs that:

  • Expand and improve visitor infrastructure developed through public-private partnerships;
  • Implement sustainable operations embracing fair, efficient and convenient fee collection and strategic use of the collected fees;
  • Improve interpretation using technology;
  • Create better tools and/or opportunities for Americans to discover their lands and waters.”

For more information on public/private partnerships

Which will also lead you to a 3-part primer on PPPs.

After reading the above, one must question whose idea was this?

THE BIGGER PICTURE HIDDEN IN TRUMP’S CUTS TO CLINTON AND OBAMA LAND GRABS

Following up on an April executive order to have Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke review 27 “National Monuments,” Trump on Monday signed an order to cut back the Dec. 2016 Obama-created Bears Ears National Monument in Utah by eight percent (1.35 million acres to 201,876 acres). He also signed an order to cut the 1996 Clinton-created Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument – also in Utah — by nearly 50 percent (1.7 million to 1 million). The remainder of Clinton’s giant plaything will be broken into three separate areas: Grand Staircase National Monument, Kaiparowits National Monument, and Escalante Canyons National Monument.”

All of that leads to something I have been pondering.

Trump has done quite a few things to undo onerous regs and executive orders put in place by Obama, Clinton and Bush. Just today I read in The New American, “One of the very first actions of my administration was to impose at two-for-one rule on new federal regulations. We ordered that for every one new regulation, two old regulations must be eliminated … as a result, the never-ending growth of red tape in America has come to a sudden screeching and beautiful halt….

Within our first 11 months, we cancelled or delayed over 1,500 planned regulatory actions — more than any previous President by far….

And instead of eliminating two old regulations, for everyone new regulation we have eliminated 22 — 22. That’s a big difference. We aimed for two-for-one and, in 2017, we hit twenty-two-for one.”

Woohoo. That is wonderful. A great start. But . . .. But there is a gaping hole. Nothing has been done to stop the onslaught of Sustainable Development (SD) on property rights and the indoctrination of our children in the schools.

Betsy DeVos, the queen of Common Core is Secretary of Education. Our children are being brainwashed, dumbed-down, and turned into useful idiots, at best. Common Core is still going strong, our children are learning the five pillars of Islam, and there isn’t a single right from the Bill of Rights taught in the classrooms.

AFFH, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing is still alive and destroying property rights through the Department of Housing and Urban Development. People’s life savings and very lives are being destroyed by this as well as neighborhoods are being uprooted, whole classes of people are being dumped in neighborhoods not of their choosing just because of their race or their financial status. What most people do not understand is that AFFH is being embedded into every town, city, county and state the same way Sustainable Development was. When, like SD, AFFH has been put in place everywhere in this country, the name Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing will be dropped (just like SD), and AFFH will be an unnamed cancer eating away at our lives.

Also thanks to Sustainable Development, cities and counties are notifying their residents that they cannot even maintain their properties without getting permission from the planning commissions and abiding by the International Building Codes. Our codes, the best in the world, no longer are acceptable – because every city, county, berg, state in the world must now obey the same standards and rules; it is far easier for the global elite to control us that way.

Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, who loves Asset Forfeiture, is still the AG and is not reining in Asset Forfeiture. He has finally ordered an examination of the Bundy case, but should it have taken him the outrageous infractions exposed by the whistleblower to see there was malfeasance going on there?

There is a lot more, but I think the above shows that, unless things are in the works and will be unveiled soon, we might need to start putting pressure on Trump to do what he said he would do. A lot of the ‘Deplorables’ promised to keep his feet to the fire if he didn’t do the job he promised. If President Trump is to eliminate 20,000 more regulations, if they aren’t to stop Sustainable Development, they will be useless.

I do not want to believe that Trump is just using blue smoke and mirrors to keep us mollified by making all these other good moves while Sustainable Development continues on with no slow down, destroying the greatest country every built. And I am not exaggerating! Sustainable Development should be the first focus for the President right now. We are so close to the tipping point; in fact, we could already be there.

APC: https://americanpolicy.org/2018/01/16/the-definition-of-is/

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

Jesse Lee Peterson: Are you an alpha or beta male?

Are you an alpha or beta male?- Jesse Lee Peterson reveals trouble with boys assuming identities of mothers

by Jesse Lee Peterson

Men are not men today. With few exceptions, men are insecure, emotional, out-of-control women in male bodies.

Most boys take on the identity of their mothers. Through anger, impatience or worry, mothers impose their will on children, causing them to lose innocence. A mother who resents her own parents, or her child’s father, passes her angry spirit down to the child. Although she may try to teach “religion,” she does not truly live it. She may apologize for doing wrong, yet never change. Children grow angry and become controlled by what they hate. The symptoms manifest in myriad ways.

One boy may rebel, and another conform. Both hate their mother. One is just more open about it. One gets into sex, drugs and crime. Another becomes “educated” and compliant. One becomes a nice, “Christian” family man. Another turns out homosexual or transgender. Neither is truly happy, independent, or himself. They suffer from the same lost identity, and become female in nature. Girls suffer in much the same way – I’ve counseled with so many men and women, attracted to what they hate, who feel they married their mothers!

If fathers are not around, or if they have not overcome their emotions rooted in anger – children grow up unprotected. In many cases, fathers themselves operate from a female spirit and spoil or destroy their children.

The black community is tattered by generations of males faking masculinity, raised by women faking Christianity (or some other religion). Few of them know God. Most believe in government – socialism.

For 28 years at BOND, a nonprofit dedicated to Rebuilding the Family by Rebuilding the Man, I’ve worked with men and women from around the world – the decline of good men affects them all.

The very thing men must overcome is what the world encourages them to embrace: the female nature.

Liberal magazine the Hollywood Reporter photographed four male comedians and actors together for a recent cover, three of them with their hand in the pocket of the man in front of them and the headline “Triumph of the Beta Male.” The display illustrates a feminist reaction against men like President Trump, universally recognized as a forceful and fearless alpha male.

President Trump is everything the left hates: A straight, white, conservative, Christian man of power.

Lying leftists conflate real masculinity with the cruelty, violence and abuse by males raised by angry women who don’t love their fathers.

Order Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson’s book, “The Antidote: Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, and Victimhood.”

After the Florida school shooting by 19-year-old suspect Nikolas Cruz, whose adoptive father died when he was young, a girly, liberal comedian Michael Ian Black tweeted, “Boys are broken.” He encouraged males to express vulnerability and embrace feminism. NPR featured him in an interview. The New York Times published his op-ed. But he refused my interview invitation. When I tweeted about his cowardice, he called NewsMax TV “garbage” in a malicious tweet.

This week, Fox News host Tucker Carlson began a series for the month of March discussing the crisis facing men in America, featuring clinical psychologist and Toronto professor Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, whom I’ve also interviewed. Instead of applauding, as liberals did for male feminist Michael Ian Black, male “journalists” mocked Carlson and Peterson!

Liberals are very shallow. They won’t tell the truth because they’re spiritually blind. They are children of the lie who hate men and God. They don’t love women, but they cater to them. They are prideful people who despise President Trump because he does not live in their emotional-intellectual world. Rather, Donald Trump lives in reality, where men of action thrive.

This week, in an example of the president’s effectiveness, he agreed to meet with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. For decades, prior presidents failed to deal with North Korea’s growing nuclear threat – because none were men. Interestingly, none supported Trump, either. Barack Obama, the fallen messiah, proudly called himself a “feminist,” and Michelle his “boss” and “backbone.”

Obama inherited his mother’s disdain for America (especially white America – read “The Antidote“). He nearly brought the country to her knees in division and destruction, and left the world a more dangerous place. But now the Great White Hope may persuade Little Rocket Man to do right.

Real men, alpha men, are conservatives. Real women are conservatives. They love their fathers. No liberal is a real man (or woman). They hate men, and they don’t love their fathers.

Conservatives should observe the president, who loved his father. He appears to live without fear and work from a spirit of power, love and sound mind.

All human beings know that it’s an embarrassment for men to be “beta males.” Only a few will truly face reality and overcome the angry spirit of their mothers and grandmothers within them.

At my church at BOND, our theme this year is self-knowledge: Know thyself. I encourage every one of you to pray quietly and be honest with yourselves and with God. Then you might see the spirit of anger within you and recognize that you’re wrong. Go and forgive your parents where they failed, apologizing for hating them. Then go free as a real man (or woman), no longer a child of Satan, but of God.

Read more at: http://www.wnd.com/2018/03/are-you-an-alpha-or-beta-male/#qukcj4XqHQRhzq7D.99

Read Jesse Lee Peterson’s Biography

Tom DeWeese: A Challenge to The American Planning Association

A Challenge to The American Planning Association- 

“…it’s interesting to note that the American Planning Association is part of the Planners Network.”

by Tom DeWeese

In nearly every community of the nation the policy called Sustainable is the catch-all term for local planning programs, from water and energy controls to building codes and traffic planning. The term “sustainable” was first used in the 1987 report called “Our Common Future,’ issued by the United Nations Commission on Environment and Development (UNCED).  The term appeared in full force in 1992 in a United Nations initiative called Agenda 21.

According to proponents, the official definition of Sustainable Development is “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”  In 1993, the UN further described its purpose, saying, “Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced.” The most often used phrase to describe Sustainable policy is that it’s a “comprehensive blueprint for the reorganization of human society.”

These are strong pronouncements concerning our future. How could such ideas be imposed? Who could coordinate such an effort to reorganize our entire society? There are many private non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and government agencies involved in creating and implementing the national sustainable policy program on the state and local levels. But there is one that seems to stand in the center of them all.

The American Planning Association (APA) is the premier planning group operating across the nation. It has a long history in the development process, thus is trusted by elected officials to be a responsible force as they spread the gospel of “common sense” community planning to assure healthy, happy neighborhoods from which all may benefit. Above all, the APA strenuously denies any connection to the United Nations or any silly conspiracy theories like the so-called Agenda 21! Everything the APA promotes, they assure us, is based on local input for local solutions to local development planning. Here is a solid group you can trust!

So, it’s interesting to note that the American Planning Association is part of the Planners Network. The network is officially run by a group called the Organization of Progressive Planners. According to the Network’s website, it’s “an association of professionals, activists, academics, and students involved in physical, social, economic, and environmental planning in urban and rural areas, who promote fundamental change in our political and economic systems.”

On a visit to the website PlannersNetwork.org, one will find in its Statement of Principles this quote: “We believe planning should be a tool for allocating resources…and eliminating the great inequalities of wealth and power in our society … because the free market has proven incapable of doing this.”

That statement is advocating redistribution of wealth, social justice and even aspects of psychological manipulation, also called social engineering. That, then, is what nearly every planning group in nearly every community advocate in their planning programs. It is clearly the official policy of the American Planning Association. Still the APA insists that its planning has nothing to do with Agenda 21, even though APA’s planning goals are the exact goals of Agenda 21, and its undated version called the 2030Agenda.

Tactics used by the American Planning Association

Okay, let’s get down to the nitty-gritty. How do planning groups like the APA really control opinions and gain support for their planning ideas? How do they overcome the fears as they impose plans that destroy private property and change the entire structure of the community?

Here’s a recent example:

A few years ago, with great fanfare, the American Planning Association (APA) reported results of a survey the group had conducted, “Planning America: Perceptions and Priorities,” showing that the anti-Agenda 21 “crowd is slim.” Said the report, only 6% of those surveyed expressed opposition to Agenda 21, while 9% expressed support for Agenda 21 and 85%, “the vast majority of respondents, don’t know about Agenda 21/2030.”

Typically, APA is using the survey to formulate the image that opponents to Agenda 21/Sustainable Development are just a lunatic fringe with no standing and of no consequence in the “real” world. They continue to portray Agenda 21 as simply a 20- year-old idea, and just a suggestion that planners and local governments might consider.

However, a closer look at the full survey, plus additional APA reports reveal some interesting and, in some cases, astounding facts.

First the survey:

It was designed to show public support for “Planning.” This has become an obsession with the “planning community” because of the growing opposition to Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development.

According to the APA, the findings of the Survey reveal that: only one-third believe their communities are doing enough to address economic situations; it says that very few Americans believe that market forces alone (the free market) improve the economy or encourage job growth; 84 % feel that their community is getting worse or staying the same; community planning is seen as needed by a wide majority of all demographics.

Those are pretty astounding findings. It looks like these “honest” planners have their fingers on the pulse of the nation. Well, not so fast. Let’s look at the actual questions the APA asked to get these results.

For example, Finding #4: Community planning is seen as needed by a wide majority of all demographics (79% agree; 9% disagree; and 12% don’t know). Wow!

But here is the actual question that was asked: “Generally, do you agree or disagree that your community could benefit from a community plan as defined above?” The definition provided in order to answer the question was this: “Community planning is a process that seeks to engage all members of a community to create more prosperous, convenient, equitable, healthy and attractive places for present and future generations.”

Asking the question in that manner is akin to holding up a picture of a rent-a-wreck car,  along side one of a Ferrari and asking which one would they want to drive. Give me the pretty one please – say 79%. In fact, in some actual planning meetings they do just that – hold up a picture of the downtown area depicting decaying, dreary buildings versus one of a shining, beautiful utopia, and they literally say, “which one do you want?” If the answer is (of course) the pretty one, then, YES, the community supports planning!

It’s obvious that the APA is playing word games with its surveys and definitions of planning. No wonder such an overwhelming majority answer in the affirmative to such questions. And, yes, maybe a lot of Americans don’t know what Agenda 21 really is. However, if the APA asked real questions that gave a solid clue as to the planning they actually have in mind, it’s fairly certain they would get a much different response – whether the person answering had ever heard of Agenda 21 or not.

For example, listed below are some sample questions that could help the APA take the real pulse of the community – if they wanted to be honest. I challenge the American Planning Association to ask

THESE questions in their next survey:

10 Real Questions Planners Should Ask the Public

1. How do the citizens feel about planning policy that forces them to move from their single- family homes with the garage for the car/s and a backyard for the kids to play with the neighbor kids? Do they want to live in a high-rise where they have to take their kids down 12 flights of stairs and walk to the designated play park? Do they still support such “Planning?”

2. How do the citizens feel about planning with a goal to eventually ban cars? This will be accomplished by planning programs that will narrow or eliminate roads, making it harder to drive cars, then eliminates parking spaces, then forces cars to “share the road” with bicycles and foot traffic as regulations are put in place to make it illegal to even pass this slower traffic? Do they still support such “Planning?”

3. How do the citizens feel about planning that enforces the creation of light- rail public transportation with a limited number of riders – yet cost overruns could triple or quadruple their taxes so much that it would literally be cheaper to buy each potential rider a brand new Rolls Royce, and even throw in a chauffeur for good measure? Do they want to live without a car that would take them wherever they want to go, be it the grocery or the beach, on their schedule instead of a government created train or bus schedule? Do they still support such “Planning?”

4. How do the citizens feel about planning with today’s mandatory smart meters that can overcharge users by 284%? What if such planning forced you to buy all new appliances which can be controlled and even turned off by the utility company without warning – all to enforce energy-use levels as required by arbitrary and unsubstantiated “planning standards,” Do they still support such “Planning?”

5. How do the citizens feel about planning that forces taxpayers to pay for plug-in stations for electric cars that hardly anyone wants or uses, for the specific purpose of eventually forcing people to buy electric cars? Do they still support such “Planning?”

6. How do the citizens feel about planning that creates non-elected boards, councils, and regional governments to enforce their UN-inspired policies, which actually diminish (if not eliminate) the power of the local officials they elected, severely reducing citizen input into policy? Do they still support such “Planning?”

7. How do the citizens feel about planning that forces all housing to conform to specific government design, including projects of multi-family buildings that are forced into their neighborhoods, resulting in the reduction of property values and freedom of choice as to where and how each may live? Do they still support such “Planning?”

8. How do the citizens feel about planning that enforces international building codes and international electrical and plumbing codes designed to require major retrofitting in existing and new buildings to comply, including enforcing every building to look alike, have the same setbacks and even the same trees and shrubs. The result is the creation of a one size fits all society, ignoring local needs and desires of the residents? Do they still support “Planning?”

9. How do the citizens feel about planning that forces rental property owners and landlords to take in tenants that can’t afford their properties, so that they are forced to accept far less income for their investment, which will mean they cannot afford to maintain the property and earn their living,  thereby destroying the rental industry and reducing housing choices? Do they still support “Planning?”

10. How do the citizens feel about planning that uses the power of eminent domain to take property and destroy small, locally owned businesses from lower income and ethnic neighborhoods, forcing the former residents into federal housing programs where their only option is to rent rather than having the chance to build equity and personal wealth through home ownership in the American Dream? Do they still have compassion for such “Planning?”

These are the realities of Sustainable Development planning programs, usually under the term Smart Growth. These policies are taking over local governments across the nation and the victims are mounting. Yet the planners ignore these results as they get fat off the federal grants that enforce the Sustainable plans.

Challenge the American Planning Association to stop whitewashing their plans into sounding like innocent, non-intrusive local ideas for community development. Ask the questions so that they reflect the real consequences of the plans, and then see if the 85% now are so eager to ignore the effects of Sustainable Development. The number one truth about the Sustainable policies that the APA imposes on every community is that none of it is LOCAL!

There is only one right approach for a community to come together to discuss and solve common problems: open discussion, honest debates and votes, and above all, a full concentration on the protection of private property rights as the ultimate decider.

This article is taken from information included in Tom DeWeese’s new book, “Sustainable, The WAR on Free Enterprise, Private Property, and Individuals.” Book details and ordering may be found at www.sustainabledevelopment.com

APC: https://americanpolicy.org/2018/04/04/a-challenge-to-the-american-planning-association/?mc_cid=6366d56868&mc_eid=210870cea5

Read Tom Deweese’s Biography

Jesse Lee Peterson: How Sharpton exploits Stephon Clark’s death for political clout

How Sharpton exploits Stephon Clark’s death for political clout
Jesse Lee Peterson accuses ‘race hustler’ of inciting riots,’ seeking fame, money, power

by Jesse Lee Peterson

What happens when a race hustler is allowed to incite riots, destroy lives and is never held accountable? He continues to do it over and over again. Case in point:

Stephon Clark, 22, was shot and killed by Sacramento police responding to reports of a suspect attempting to break into a home and vehicles. A video shows police chasing Clark on foot. They repeatedly tell Clark to stop. Then officers shout, “Gun! Gun! Gun!” before shots are fired. The item Clark was holding turned out to be a cell phone. Clark was shot dead on March 18.

Order Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson’s book, “The Antidote: Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, and Victimhood.”

The Sacramento police chief is black, and one of the officers involved in the shooting is black, but Al Sharpton still rushed into town to make it about race. Sharpton spoke at Clark’s funeral, and, without knowing the facts, he blamed the officers.

Sharpton told reporters, “There is no way that we can understand why an unarmed young man in his grandmother’s backyard, five feet from where she sleeps, was shot at 20 times and killed.”

Sharpton said police could have knocked on the door or called for backup.

Why was the immediate thing to draw lethal force?” Sharpton asked.

Stephon Clark’s brother, Stevante Clark, has been everywhere in the days since his brother’s death. Along with Black Lives Matter activists, they’ve faced off with police and have created chaos in Sacramento.

Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg (another weak liberal Democrat) held a press conference saying policies can prevent shootings like this. Angry black protesters showed up at a Sacramento City Hall to protest Clark’s death. Stevante Clark interrupted the city hall meeting, rushed the city council’s dais and jumped on it, chanting “Stephon Clark!” The meeting erupted into chaos. When the mayor called for order, Stevante told him to “shut the f— up!” Protesters then marched on the streets and shut down major freeways and blocked Sacramento Kings fans from attending a game.

According to Clark family friend Jamilia Land, “Stevante has post-traumatic stress disorder.” Land said, “He has lost two of his brothers to violence … and he is starting to lose his mind. He needs help.”

We know! But this didn’t stop Sharpton from embracing this out-of-control thug. Sharpton said the shooting death of Stephon Clark has “brought us back” and this is a national issue.

Sharpton loves these cases. He has built his career exploiting racial tensions and inciting riots. He’s been waiting for an issue like this to catapult him back into the limelight.

But without a race-baiter like Barack Obama as president to help him, Sharpton is not getting the national attention he wants. The fake news media are doing their part to push the story, but Sharpton wants to drag President Donald Trump into this mess.

Read more at WND: http://www.wnd.com/2018/04/how-sharpton-exploits-stephon-clarks-death-for-political-clout/

Read Jesse Lee Peterson’s Biography

« Older Entries