PRAGER UNIVERSITY VIDEO: PREFERRED PRONOUNS OR PRISON

PRAGER UNIVERSITY VIDEO: 

PREFERRED PRONOUNS OR PRISON

Free speech dying

BY FRONTPAGE EDITORS

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/273763/prageru-video-preferred-pronouns-or-prison-frontpage-editors; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

“He.” “She.” “They.” Have you ever given a moment’s thought to your everyday 

use of these pronouns? It has probably never occurred to you that those words 

could be misused.Or that doing so could cost you your business or your job – or 

even your freedom. Journalist Abigail Shrier explains how this happened and why 

it's become a major free speech issue. Check out this video from PragerU below:

Transcript:


If you want to control people's thoughts, begin by controlling their words. That's totalitarian thinking. It was once completely foreign to America. Not anymore.

Increasingly, Americans are forced to use language against their will or even their conscience or be prepared to suffer the consequences. And those consequences can be dire.

Take, for example, the issue of transgenderism, the newest "civil rights battle" of our time. A decade ago, few people could even tell you what the word "transgender" meant. Today, expressing the "wrong opinion" on the issue can cost you your business or job – or both.

Consider recent state and local actions punishing those who decline to use an individual's pronouns of choice. In 2017, California Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation threatening jail time for health-care professionals who "willfully and repeatedly" refuse to use a patient's preferred pronouns.

Under guidelines issued in 2015 by New York City's Commission on Human Rights, employers, landlords and business owners who intentionally use the wrong pronoun with transgender workers and tenants face potential fines of as much as $250,000. That's a steep price for saying "he" instead of "she" or "she" instead of "he," or even "he" or "she" instead of "they."

What about the vast majority of citizens who hold the biology-based view that chromosomes determine your sex--male or female? Or those who have a deep-seated religious conviction that sex is both biological and binary – God's purposeful creation?

In December of 2018, Peter Vlaming was fired from his job as a French-language teacher in a Virginia school district because he refused to refer to a transgender student by the student's preferred pronouns. Vlaming's Christian belief prevented him from bowing before the notion that the student, who had been a "she" in his class the year before, was now suddenly a "he." Vlaming was willing to use the student's chosen new name, but he avoided using any pronouns when referring to this student. That wasn't good enough for the school district; they needed to hear him say the words.

You don't have to be religious to believe that one person can never be a "they." The Supreme Court has clearly decided that compelled speech is not free speech.

In West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), the Supreme Court upheld the students' right to refuse to salute an American flag. Justice Robert Jackson wrote, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, religion or other matters of opinion." And, Jackson went on to say, the state can't force people to say things they don't believe.

But this is precisely what's happening. People are forced to refer to others as "ze," or "co," or "thon" – yes those are now considered pronouns. What might otherwise be a courtesy now has criminal consequences.

In most contexts, I would have no problem addressing others in any manner they chose, and I'm sure most Americans feel the same. But the Constitution's protection of free speech neither begins nor ends with good manners. It extends all the way from rudeness to meekness, protecting those who hurl insults and those who would prefer to say nothing at all.

If the state can compel the use of certain words, it can force those who differ into silence. It can force its citizens to parrot beliefs they do not hold.

The Fairfax County School District in Virginia removed the phrase "biological gender" from its curriculum and replaced it with the phrase "sex assigned at birth." This is how the left legislates away the concept of biological sex without ever having to make the argument. Without ever having to convince anyone. They're trying to make "sex assigned at birth" as trivial and malleable as "name assigned at birth" – as if some doctor arbitrarily chose for you on the day you were born.

To the extent that the transgender movement seeks to promote compassion for those who struggle with their biological sex, we should be grateful for it. To the extent that it seeks to use government power to regulate our perspectives – commanding that we ignore biology and common sense – we should resist it.

This is no small issue. The Constitution guarantees freedom of speech so that political issues can be worked out in the public square. But the activist left doesn't want that conversation to occur. They want to force the adoption of their conclusions before the argument even begins. Compelled speech is the tactic they've chosen. It's unconstitutional. It's undemocratic. And it's wrong.

If gender activists prevail, we may be left with a world we neither recognize nor like very much. We won't be able to communicate our displeasure. We will have lost the words.

I'm Abigail Shrier for Prager University.

AMERICANS CLUELESS ABOUT BORDER INVASION; ILLEGALS DUMPED INTO THE HEARTLAND

AMERICANS CLUELESS ABOUT BORDER INVASION; ILLEGALS DUMPED INTO THE HEARTLAND 

BY R. CORT KIRKWOOD

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/32363-americans-clueless-about-border-invasion-illegals-dumped-into-the-heartland?vsmaid=4640&vcid=3987; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

One reason the illegal-alien invasion and colonization of the American southwest continues with no end in sight for either the besieged Border Patrol or the American taxpayers is that most Americans are unaware of the invasion’s magnitude or threat to their health and safety.

Just 13 percent of Americans are aware of the human tsunami at the border, Breitbart.com reported, citing a Harvard-Harris poll, a datum that helps explain why the open-borders Left and its Democrat allies on Capitol Hill have been able to keep the border open.

Americans likely don’t know the government is dumping thousands of impoverished, and sometimes diseased, “migrants” into their communities, or that local officials are diverting local tax dollars to help pay for it, as the governor of New Mexico did on Sunday.

Result: The invasion continues.

13 of 15 Clueless
The Harvard-Harris poll, Breitbart reported, found 13 of 15 Americans are clueless about the Camp-of-the-Saints invasion at the border: More than 100,000 in March and April each, data from Customs and Border Protection show, and more than half a million since the beginning of fiscal 2019 in October.

“In the Harvard/Harris Poll, though,” Breitbart reported, “less than two-in-15 American voters correctly said there are between 250,000 to 500,000 border apprehensions each year. Meanwhile, more than three-in-four Americans incorrectly said there are between zero to 250,000 border apprehensions a year.”

Even GOP conservatives don’t know what’s going on at the border: “A plurality of 35 percent incorrectly estimated that there are only 10,000 to 100,000 border apprehensions each year.”

Good news is, “when voters were told that there were more than 100,000 border apprehensions in the last month, the majority, about 52 percent, said they supported President Trump’s decision to declare a national emergency at the southern border to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Another 48 percent said they oppose the national emergency.”

Sixty percent of working- or lower-middle-class Americans supported the emergency declaration, along with 65 percent of rural Americans, Breitbart reported.



Moving Illegals Into the Heartland
Yet if Americans are that ignorant of the migrant invasion, they likely aren’t aware of the government’s role in encouraging the mass migration by continuing catch and release.

As The New American has reported, federal authorities have dumped more than 100,000 illegals into communities across the southwest. So inundated was Yuma, Arizona, the mayor declared an emergency because penniless “migrants” overwhelmed the city’s public and private social services.

New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, the Denver Post reported, spent $4,000 of public money to ship 55 Central American illegals to Denver.

Why ship them north?

Reported the Post:

The shelters in Las Cruces, N.M., have been inundated with migrants....

Because the shelters had reached capacity, border patrol agents were releasing asylum seekers to bus stations, giving them no way to contact their sponsors. The asylum seekers are individuals who, through sponsors, have applied for legal status in the United States to seek refuge from persecution and are waiting on a court to make a determination on their claims.

In Denver, the Post talked to a refugee sympathizer: “They are asylum seekers fleeing violence in Central America and Mexico. The numbers recently have been increasing so rapidly that shelters in Texas and New Mexico are overwhelmed.”

That, of course, isn’t true. Most of the “asylum seekers” are really looking for jobs and welfare, as they have repeatedly admitted, and 90 percent of asylum claims are bogus.

Diseased Illegals
Frighteningly, border agents can’t do their jobs at the border because they spend so much time dealing with the illegals, while the Trump administration’s refusal to stop catch and release is forcing immigration officials to expose Americans to the diseases many of these illegals carry.

The Washington Times reported yesterday that border agents spend less than 50 percent of their time guarding the border, a datum that comports with what Aaron Hull, chief of the El Paso border sector, admitted to CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo. Hull also confirmed that catch and release is inoculating America with highly contagious, viral, bacterial, and parasitic diseases.

“Agents join the Patrol to secure the border, to enforce the law,” he told Bartiromo, “but increasingly they’re being tasked with things that they never thought they would be doing — heating up baby bottles, literally changing diapers, caring for more and more sick people, because a lot of these aliens coming in are carrying contagious health conditions, things like chicken pox, scabies, tuberculosis, lice.”

In other words, every $4,000 shipment of illegals into the heartland is an injection, possibly, of fatal or debilitating disease.

But again, given the polling data, Americans don’t know it.

________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/32372-dhs-has-dumped-nearly-200k-illegals-across-country-1-000-a-month-headed-for-florida?vsmaid=4646&vcid=3987

MINNEAPOLIS MUSLIM COP WHO KILLED UNARMED WOMAN SEEKS TO OVERTURN GUILTY VERDICT

MINNEAPOLIS MUSLIM COP WHO KILLED UNARMED WOMAN SEEKS TO OVERTURN GUILTY VERDICT

BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/05/minneapolis-muslim-cop-who-killed-unarmed-woman-seeks-to-overturn-guilty-verdict; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Former Minneapolis Muslim police officer Mohamed Noor, “found guilty of murdering Australian life coach Justine Ruszczyk Damond claims he should be acquitted because he did not act “with a depraved heart” when he shot her dead.”

Noor appears to be acting with a “depraved heart” now. He has shown no remorse for murdering Damond and prosecutors already established that he “knew exactly what he was doing” and had “intent to kill”.

Robert Spencer previously noted about Noor:

His competence as a police officer was always secondary to his ethnicity and religion.

Thus he remained on the force even though there were three complaints against him in two years. A neighbor reported: “He is extremely nervous … he is a little jumpy … he doesn’t really respect women, the least thing you say to him can set him off.” When the neighbor heard that Noor was the cop who had shot an unarmed woman, he wasn’t surprised: “When they say a policeman shot an Australian lady I thought uh oh, but then when they said who it was, I was like, ‘OK.’”

Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges, despite Noor shooting an unarmed woman, pulled the “Islamophobia” canard….

Mayor Hodges is reassuring Muslims and warning against “Islamophobia,” as if a non-Muslim police officer had shot an unarmed Muslim woman. But that’s not what happened. And in issuing this warning, Hodges is only reinforcing the false premises that led to the killing of Justine Damond in the first place: the idea that Muslims are a victimized, persecuted community that needs special consideration, such that an incompetent Muslim police officer had to be hired. This just ensures that in the future, there will be more Justine Damonds.

Entitlement is a feature with Islamic supremacists, and so, the brazenness of Noor in seeking to overturn his guilty verdict is nothing brow-raising.



“Mohamed Noor seeks to overturn guilty verdict over Australian Justine Damond’s killing”, The Guardian, May 14, 2019:


The former Minneapolis police officer found guilty of murdering Australian life coach Justine Ruszczyk Damond claims he should be acquitted because he did not act “with a depraved heart” when he shot her dead.

Mohamed Noor’s lawyers filed a motion for judgment of acquittal in the district court in Minnesota on Tuesday.

A jury found Noor was guilty of third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter after a three-week trial in Minneapolis last month.

“The evidence at trial failed to support finding that Mr Noor acted with a depraved heart,” Noor’s lawyers wrote in the filing.

“When officer Noor fired that night he was not acting with depraved mind seething with wanton passion to cause mischief.”

Damond, 40, formerly of Sydney, was home alone in Minneapolis just before midnight on 15 July 2017 when she heard a woman’s screams.

She called 911 and when Noor’s police squad car arrived in the alley at the rear of her home she approached the vehicle….

UBER DRIVER IDENTIFIED AS SOMALI WAR CRIMINAL WHO BURNED MEN ALIVE, EXECUTED OTHERS APPROVED

UBER DRIVER IDENTIFIED AS SOMALI WAR CRIMINAL WHO BURNED MEN ALIVE, EXECUTED OTHERS APPROVED

BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/05/uber-driver-identified-as-somali-war-criminal-who-burned-men-alive-executed-others-approved; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Yusuf Abdi Ali, “an alleged Somali war criminal accused of burning men alive and shooting a captor five times at point-blank range”, yet still, “Uber and Lyft approved him to drive”.

There has been first hand accounts and media investigations authenticating the identity of Ali. His passengers were at serious risk because with that kind of background, no one knows what could provoke an unleashing.

The case of Ali, Uber and Lyft is an extraordinary embarrassment to the FBI and Transportation Security Administration who did background checks but no one in those organizations considered doing a simple online search.

Western criminals who have gone through the court system and convicted have actually committed far lesser atrocities than jihadists overall, but yet remain behind bars (as they should be). Unfortunately, jihadists are walking free among us.

While media accounts do not confirm specifically that Yusuf Abdi Ali was a jihadist, given the history and demographics of Somalia, it is safe to say that he is. Unique about Somalia is the fact that it was an Islamic country for the past 1,400 years and some 99% of the population is Muslim. It is also a country that has been savaged by civil wars for the better part of the last several decades. Yusuf Abdi Ali is described as a rebel in the late 80’s, of which Somalia was under the leadership of Mohamed Siad Barre. Barre was overthrown during a bloody civil war in 1991, a war that Ali was engaged in as a rebel. Barre represented a scientific socialism brand of Islam, which angered many Islamic splinter groups that deemed Barre’s Islam to be a breakaway from Islamic orthodoxy. One can now see the resulting deterioration of Somalia–which by the way is blamed on colonialism. Somalia is now a cesspool of of jihadist groups, seeking dominance.  The best known jihadi group is al-Shabaab, which declared allegiance to al-Qaeda in 2012.

An eyewitness account of jihadi Ali….

“He caught my brother. He tied him to a military vehicle and dragged him behind,” one witness to Ali’s alleged atrocities in Somalia said in a 1992 documentary produced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. “He shredded him into pieces.”  Another witness said, “Two men were caught, tied to a tree. Oil was poured on them and they were burnt alive. I saw it with my own eyes.”

Ali’s case represents the dilemma in identifying peaceful civilians from gross enemy combatants within Western borders, of which the latter is infiltrated by enemy combatants–a development unaddressed by the outdated Geneva Convention. It is disturbing to think that one’s Uber driver may well be a mass murderer and has tortured innocents. So-called populist countries such as Hungary and Italy have been responsible enough to secure their borders to keep out enemy combatants (jihadists) while globalists seek open borders, despite the threats to public safety and to their constitutions.



“Uber driver accused of being a Somali war criminal”, by Lia Eustachewich, New York Post, May 15, 2019:


He’s an alleged Somali war criminal accused of burning men alive and shooting a captor five times at point-blank range — and, until recently, he was driving for Uber.

Yusuf Abdi Ali, a military commander in Somalia’s brutal civil war during the 1980s, has racked up a stellar 4.89 “Uber Pro Diamond” rating while driving through the Virginia suburbs over the past 18 months, CNN reported on Wednesday.

“I do this full-time,” Ali told an undercover reporter from the network, before bragging about how easy it was to get the gig. “They just want your background check, that’s it.
“If you apply tonight, maybe after two days it will come.”

Ali, who also formerly drove for Lyft, apparently slipped through cracks in the ride-share giants’ screening system because he has never been convicted of a crime — but a cursory online search of his name would have revealed abundant information on his alleged dark past.

“He caught my brother. He tied him to a military vehicle and dragged him behind,” one witness to Ali’s alleged atrocities in Somalia said in a 1992 documentary produced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. “He shredded him into pieces.”

Another witness said, “Two men were caught, tied to a tree. Oil was poured on them and they were burnt alive. I saw it with my own eyes.”

Ali — also known as Colonel Tukeh, or “the crow” — is additionally now the defendant in a federal lawsuit filed in Virginia by one of his alleged surviving victims.

Farhan Warfaa claims in that filing that Ali and his men, armed with AK-47s, abducted him and others from their village in the dead of night in 1987 on suspicion of helping Somali rebels steal a water tanker.

Warfaa said he and his group were held in a windowless cell and tortured for months.

One night in 1988, Ali was again interrogating Warfaa when rebels raided the base, the suit claims.

Ali purportedly took out his pistol, shot Warfaa five times and, believing he was dead, ordered his bodyguards to bury him, court filings say. Only Warfaa survived, and his family bribed Ali’s henchmen to let him go, according to the suit.

Ali has consistently denied the heinous allegations against him — including in 2016, when CNN first found him working security at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, DC.

Ali, who is in the United States legally on a visa through his Somali wife’s citizenship, cleared an FBI background check and a Transportation Security Administration assessment to get the Dulles job but was sidelined in the wake of the CNN report….

VIDEO: JAMIE GLAZOV CONFRONTS CULTURAL MARXISTS & ISLAMIC SUPREMACISTS

VIDEO: JAMIE GLAZOV CONFRONTS CULTURAL MARXISTS & ISLAMIC SUPREMACISTS 

In this new video, I Confront Cultural Marxists and Islamic Supremacists — and I expose the tactics of our tyrannical foes.

Don’t miss it!

Order my new book: Jihadist Psychopath: How He Is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us.

Subscribe to the Glazov Gang‘s YouTube Channel and follow us on Twitter: @JamieGlazov.

Please donate through our Pay Pal account.

BIG TECH TYRANNY: FACEBOOK IS AT IT AGAIN, TRYING TO SWAY AN ELECTION

BIG TECH TYRANNY: FACEBOOK IS AT IT AGAIN, 

TRYING TO SWAY AN ELECTION

SEE: http://the-trumpet-online.com/big-tech-tyranny-facebook-trying-sway-election/; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

TheNewAmerican.com

Big tech companies absolutely can sway elections, warned an expert last year. And after suppressing conservative content during the 2018 election cycle, Facebook is now at it again. Just two weeks before the upcoming European elections, the “social media” behemoth has banned what Breitbart describes as “23 major populist Italian pages with 2.5 million followers.”

According to Voice of Europe (VOE), “The vast majority of the 23 pages … banned supported Italy’s currently governing coalition made up right and left wing populist parties.” Moreover, fully half were in support of rightist entities Lega (the League) and the 5-star movement, Italian website La Stampa reports.

Facebook justified the move by claiming the sites peddled “fake news,” “‘hate speech,’ and ‘divisive content’ regarding vaccines, immigrants, and Jewish people,” VOE relates. The site continues:

Apparently, the tech giant’s decision to ban these pages was informed by a report which was created by a leftist NGO by the name of Avaaz, which claims to focus on environmental campaigns and what they regard as ‘human rights’.

A [spokesman] from Facebook commented, saying, “We thank Avaaz for sharing its research so we could investigate…. We are committed to protecting the integrity of the EU elections and around the world. We have removed a series of false and duplicate accounts that violated our policies on the subject of authenticity, as well as several pages for violation of the policy on changing the name.”

“We have also taken action against some pages that have repeatedly spread misinformation. We will take further measures if we find other violations,” the [spokesman] added.



Moreover, “Facebook has also reportedly ‘weakened’ pages that spread … allegedly false news, presumably making them less visible to Facebook users,” informs Breitbart.

“Among the closed pages are ‘We want the 5-star Movement in government’, which had 129,000 followers and almost 700,000 interactions in three months, ‘Beppe Grillo for President’, ‘Lega Salvini Sulmona’ — which had 307,000 followers” [sic] — ‘Lega Salvini Premier Santa Teresa of Riva’, and ‘We Are 5 Stars,’” Breitbart continues.

“The most active page in support of the Lega party was among those closed, just as polls are showing that the Lega is currently the party with the most support among Italians for the upcoming elections.”

Yet this is just the iceberg’s tip vis-à-vis Facebook’s election manipulation. “According to the Italian daily La Repubblica, on May 2 Facebook opened a ‘war room’ in Dublin devoted full time to the European electoral campaign, with 40 teams of engineers, scientists, researchers, threat specialists, and experts for each country,” Breitbart further informs.

“There are 500 people working on the elections, with the assistance of 21 supposed ‘fact-checkers,’ operating in 14 different languages.”

Of course, while Facebook is reliably left-wing — statistically, the vast majority of tech workers are liberals — these actions also reflect pressure from statist foreign governments. As American Thinker reports today, starting from mid-2016, Big Tech companies “made content censorship and promotion obligations to the E.U. They are now effectively controlled by the E.U. through tax, copyright, content, privacy, and myriad other policies, and, consequently, they make many of their bans and content ranking decisions in the U.S. under the direction of the European Commission and certain E.U. member governments.  Thus, MotU [Big Tech] routinely act as agents of foreign governments.”

The issue is that since the United States has a First Amendment, GoogTwitFace (Big Tech), which has global interests and no loyalty to our country, doesn’t have to fear American-government coercion the way it has to fear foreign-government coercion. So whose bidding will it do?

This said, not just GoogTwitFace’s profits but also its passions dictate leftist action. For example, not wanting a repeat of the 2016 election — in which a “populist,” Donald Trump, unexpectedly won — GoogTwitFace actively suppressed conservative entities prior to the 2018 midterms. The New American’s experience reflects the result: Along with that of thousands of other conservative websites, our traffic dropped precipitously shortly before the midterms, partially as a result of Facebook manipulation.

Interestingly, GoogTwitFace relented post-election and TNA’s traffic recovered. Yet this … tells the tale.

After all, if suppressing a bad actor (i.e., us, supposedly) and not election manipulation really was the goal, why the post-election reprieve? How did TNA go from valid to “dangerous and fake” to valid again over the course of months when it never changed its editorial policies?

So while there certainly are bad Internet actors (and in print, too) — and while some of the suppressed Italian media may fit this bill — here’s what’s so insidious: If the pages in question truly violated Facebook’s terms of service — if they contained “hate speech” or “fake news” — why did Facebook wait until two weeks before election time to shut them down? This is a transparent example of attempting to sway an election, pandering to leftists who may be pressuring social media to do their bidding or, more likely, both.

Moreover, the reasons are too often rationalizations (if not outright lies). Consider the notion of “divisive content.” Since it takes two to tango, the “divisive” entity wouldn’t be divisive if everyone else agreed with it, would it? And should the “divisive” progenitors of germ theory have been suppressed? The onus belongs on those peddling lies, not those daring to utter unfashionable truths.

Next is “hate speech,” judgments of which are generally subjective and result in applying the label to what’s merely politically incorrect commentary — much of which relates those unfashionable truths. A good example is Dr. Ray Blanchard, who was recently suspended from Twitter merely for relating his scientific findings on “transgenderism” (talk about the new Lysenkoism).

Then there’s the matter of “fake news.” Everyone is guilty of peddling it at times (for what journalistic entity doesn’t occasionally make mistakes?). And just consider the viral picture of “kids in a cage” used last year to epitomize Trump’s immigration policies but which was actually from the Obama era. Should the leftists who disseminated it — many of whom no doubt didn’t know its pedigree — be suppressed based on that mistake?

You can bet leftists’ wouldn’t be, though, especially since GoogTwitFace doesn’t punish them even when they purposely deal in fake news. Case in point: The Counterfeit News Network (CNN) is considered a trusted source even after station figures were caught on hidden camera in 2017 admitting they were pushing the Trump/Russia/collusion hoax despite knowing it was false (video below).

GoogTwitFace’s power should not be underestimated. Social media and Google are today’s town square, and suppression by them amounts to banishment to Internet Siberia. As psychologist Robert Epstein told Fox News host Tucker Carlson last year after studying GoogTwitFace’s impact, “We should be extremely concerned. Content no longer matters. All that matters is the filtering and ordering of content”

Epstein, who emphasized that he’s not a conservative, also warned that Internet tech giants have the capacity to shift “upwards of 12 million votes” in an American election. This is more than enough to, over time, control our politics and raises an ominous question:

Will we soon have a government of Big Tech, by Big Tech, and for Big Tech?

15 CHURCHES HARASSED ACROSS CHINA

Authorities raid Renai Reformed Church
in Guiyang, Guizhou. (Photo: ChinaAid)

15 CHURCHES HARASSED ACROSS CHINA 

SEE: https://www.chinaaid.org/2019/05/15-churches-harassed-across-china.html; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

ChinaAid

(Guangzhou—May 15, 2019) At least 15 churches have been harassed in mainland China since Sunday in a nationwide crackdown on the faith.

At 9:30 a.m. on May 12, state security officers from the local religious management bureau invaded Jinxiangtan Church in Xiangtan, Hunan province, and stopped one of the church’s elders, a man surnamed Huang, while he was preaching. One of the bureau’s agents ordered the church to stop all evangelical events.

On the same day, Renai Reformed Church in Guiyang was also stormed by personnel from local government departments, including the religious affairs bureau, national security bureau, police officers, auxiliary police officers, and others, which have not been named.

Christians gathered there for worship said the officers requested the pastor stop preaching.

The pastor requested that they show us official papers, and the officials said they were being penalized for holding “illegal religious activities.”

Agents from the religious affairs bureau warned the church attendees not to film the incident and threatened legal consequences if they refused. Multiple Christians were detained and interrogated for several hours before being released, and the pastor’s computer was confiscated.

Additionally, two churches in Guangzhou were raided officials on Sunday, and a local Christian, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said some of the church members were taken away by the police, detained, interrogated, and then released.

The same source said churches in multiple regions of China were simultaneously invaded and asked to cease holding services. In total, 15 churches have been harassed since Sunday, indicating a nationwide crackdown on the faith. The anonymous informant speculated that it might be because the anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre is approaching on June 4. Typically, Chinese authorities suppress dissidents and religious individuals ahead of the anniversary, since the Communist Party considers it a sensitive event.

On social media, some individuals also speculated that these attacks might be part of a plan formalized by the Communist Party to eliminate Christianity, but ChinaAid has been unable to verify the existence of this plan.

ChinaAid exposes abuses in order to stand in solidarity with the persecuted and promote religious freedom, human rights, and rule of law. If you wish to partner with us in helping those persecuted by the Chinese government, please click the button below to make a charitable donation.

ChinaAid Media Team
Cell: +1 (432) 553-1080 | Office: +1 (432) 689-6985 | Other: +1 (888) 889-7757
Email: media@chinaaid.org 
For more information, click here

______________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://christiannews.net/2019/05/20/three-self-churches-ripped-apart-in-chinas-henan-province/, FROM: https://bitterwinter.org/three-self-churches-ripped-apart-in-henan-province/

THE EUROPEAN UNION IS AT A CROSSROADS

THE EUROPEAN UNION IS AT A CROSSROADS

BY DR. STEVE TURLEY 

CONSERVATIVE POPULIST SENATOR JOSH HAWLEY OF MISSOURI DELIVERS MAIDEN SPEECH

CONSERVATIVE POPULIST SENATOR 

JOSH HAWLEY OF MISSOURI 

DELIVERS MAIDEN SPEECH

IMAM TAWHIDI: REPS. OMAR & TLAIB ARE EXTREMISTS

IMAM TAWHIDI: REPS. OMAR & TLAIB ARE EXTREMISTS

Democrat House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is defending Rashida Tlaib's controversial remarks on the Holocaust. Hoyer is accusing the president and Republicans of taking her comments out of context, and has claimed they owe her an apology. Meanwhile, reformist Imam Tawhidiis is speaking out against Tlaib and Rep. Ilhan Omar. One America's Jack Posobiec has more from Washington.
IS TAWHIDI GENUINE? OR IS HE A BELIEVER IN
"WAR IS DECEPTION"?

Jamie Glazov Confronts Cultural Marxists and Islamic Supremacists From a Christian Point of View

"We Are Always Being Deceived" by Psychopaths, Whether Liberals or Jihadists