DELAWARE'S ATTACK ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT: YOU SNEAKY, DEVIOUS, THINK FOR YOURSELF PATRIOT!: ~A BAN ON MAKING YOUR OWN GUN

FIRST STATE; SMALL STATE; SMALL MINDS

LIBERAL TO THE CORE

DELAWARE'S ATTACK ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT: YOU SNEAKY, DEVIOUS, THINK FOR YOURSELF PATRIOT!: ~

A BAN ON MAKING YOUR OWN GUN

ALREADY HAS BANNED SUPPRESSORS 

FOR YEARS

BY DEAN WEINGARTEN

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2020/01/delawares-attack-on-2a-a-ban-on-making-your-own-gun/#axzz6CLP8HjcK; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research 

purposes:

Arizona -(Ammoland.com)- Individuals have been making their own firearms for the entire history of the United States and before. Homemade guns are not as popular as factory-made guns, because factory-made guns are easily and cheaply available in the United States. The Second Amendment has guaranteed that right.

It is a part of the right to keep and bear arms to be able to procure arms. A basic and fundamental way to procure arms is to make your own. Most home manufacture of firearms is for hobby or experimental purposes, although considerable homemade guns are produced in localities with extreme restrictions on the ownership of guns.

Delaware is in the process of passing a statute to make it illegal to make your own firearms or to even possess a piece of metal that is intended to be used to make a receiver. From the proposed statute, HB 277:


( ) “Unfinished firearm frame or receiver” means a firearm frame or receiver that requires further machining or molding in order to be used as part of a functional firearm, and which is designed and intended to be used in the assembly of a functional firearm.

( ) “Untraceable firearm” means an unlawfully manufactured firearm for which the sale or distribution chain from a licensed retailer to the point of its first retail sale cannot be traced by law enforcement officials.


The law makes it illegal to make your own firearms:


§ 1463 Untraceable firearms; Class E or D felony.

(a) A person is guilty of possessing an untraceable firearm when then person knowingly possesses an untraceable firearm.

(b) A person is guilty of manufacturing an untraceable firearm when the person knowingly manufactures, assembles, causes to be manufactured or assembled, sells, or transfers an untraceable firearm.

(c) A person is guilty of manufacturing or distributing a firearm using a three-dimensional printer when the person does any one of the following:

(1) Uses a three-dimensional printer or similar device to manufacture or produce a firearm, firearm frame or receiver, magazine, or major firearm component when not licensed as a manufacturer.

(2) Distributes by any means, including the internet, to a person who is not licensed as a manufacturer, instructions in the form of computer-aided design files or other code or instructions stored and displayed in electronic format as a digital model that may be used to program a three-dimensional printer to manufacture or produce a firearm, firearm frame or receiver, magazine, or major component of a firearm.

(d) Possession of a untraceable firearm is a Class E felony.

(e) Manufacturing an untraceable firearm or manufacturing or distributing a firearm using a three-dimensional printer is a Class D felony.


The law, if passed, will be challenged in court, on both First and Second Amendment grounds. The law applies to people without any criminal record. People with felonies are already forbidden from owning firearms. This law is to prevent people who are not criminals from making their own firearms.

It is a very new law to forbid law-abiding individuals from making firearms for their own use. Such a law has only been passed in the last two years, to my knowledge.

It is a direct violation of the First Amendment to forbid the transmission of knowledge on how to make firearms with digital code.

This sort of law is common in countries without a Bill of Rights to limit the power of the government. It is an easily followed path of logic. The government forbids most people from buying guns. The people start to make their own. Then the government forbids the buying of gun parts. Then it forbids the buying or transfer of information on how to make guns. It may forbid the ownership of machinery that can be used to make guns. Some raids in India, for example, show confiscated drills, welders, and files.


Nothing in the Second Amendment allows the government to create a registry of guns or to require them to be traced to the first retail sale. Such a thing is of virtually no use in solving crimes. Its sole purpose, it appears, is to pave the way for a registration system.


If Delaware passes this law, it will be following the steps of California (requires state serial number and following state manufacturing requirements), New Jersey (flat out ban), New York (firearm parts may only be sold to authorized buyers),  Washington (bans “undetectable” guns), Connecticut (requires a state-issued serial number). These five states, and Delaware, if it passes the law, are all treading new ground with laws passed in the last two years.

The Washington state law may not be precisely in this group, as the law bans “undetectable guns”. Almost all homemade guns are easily detectable.

I have yet to see any court challenge to these laws. There was a court challenge on the legal ability to make your own machine guns, in Arizona, in the 1990s. The Ninth Circuit upheld that right, and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. However, the case was complicated by other factors, and the Supreme Court had not yet decided Heller.

It is not surprising the five states above, sans Washington, all heavily infringe on the exercise of Second Amendment rights, by refusing to allow the legal carry of firearms by most of the population. They all have “may issue” laws, aggressively preventing most people from carrying firearms for self-defense.


About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30-year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

BACKDOOR ATTACK ON SECOND AMENDMENT THROUGH CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS

BACKDOOR ATTACK ON SECOND AMENDMENT THROUGH CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS

BY BOB ADELMANN

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/34730-backdoor-attack-on-second-amendment-through-credit-card-transactions;  

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research 

purposes:

Representative Jennifer Wexton (D-Va.) has devised another way to attack the rights of law-abiding gun owners: tracking their purchases of firearms using credit cards.

The core of her bill (H.R. 5132, the Gun Violence Prevention Through Financial Intelligence Act) seems, on the surface, innocuous enough:

To request information for financial institutions for the purpose of developing an advisory about the identification and reporting of suspicious activity … relating to how homegrown violent extremists and perpetrators of domestic terrorism procure firearms … for the purpose of carrying out “lone actor” or “lone wolf” acts of terror within the United States.

Said Wexton when introducing her bill:

Banks, credit card companies, and retailers have unique insight into the behavior and purchasing patterns that can help identify and prevent mass shootings. We know that financial intelligence can be an effective tool to combat gun violence in the same way it is for money laundering, human smuggling, and fentanyl trafficking.

Financial institutions have a legal obligation under the Bank Secrecy Act to have programs in place to detect and report suspicious financial activity, but they have to know what they are looking for, and FinCEN [the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] can be a valuable partner. The red flags are there — someone just needs to be paying attention.

Red flags are, indeed, raised when looking at Wexton’s background. She is one of several liberal House Democrats who replaced conservative pro-gun Republicans in Virginia in the 2018 mid-term elections. Her campaign against a pro-Second Amendment incumbent was largely financed by Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety. Her voting record in the House has earned her a rating of just 12 out of 100 in the Freedom Index — a measure of how closely her voting record hews to the limits of the U.S. Constitution, published by The John Birch Society.

The first question must be: Why would she want the government to have this sort of information? Terrorists generally don’t buy weaponry from retail gun stores using credit cards. And any “home-grown lone-wolf” planning an attack, once he learns that credit card issuers are likely to alert federal authorities, will use cash instead.

That leaves law-abiding gun owners as the primary target. And financial institutions such as banks and credit card companies would more than likely spread a wide net around anyone using credit to purchase firearms, just to be sure they don’t fall afoul of the feds’ new requirements if Wexton’s bill becomes law. Translation: Any gun owner making a purchase sufficiently large to arouse the suspicions of anonymous bureaucrats lurking in the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) will be targeted.

An additional consequence — perhaps intended by anti-gun Wexton — could be that banks and credit card companies will refuse to allow gun owners to use credit cards to purchase firearms or their accessories altogether.

As pernicious as Wexton’s bill is, it pales when compared to the infringements of personal privacy already taking place at FinCEN. Established in 1990 by order of the Secretary of the Treasury, it was made an agency of that department with passage of the PATRIOT Act after 911. The agency states that “the primary motive of criminals is financial gain, and they leave financial trails as they try to launder the proceeds of crimes or attempt to spend their ill-gotten profits.”

Since September 2012, FinCEN regularly generates four reports that offend the Fourth Amendment, including its “Suspicious Activity Report.” FinCEN shares that information with dozens of intelligence agencies including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) and the IRS. FinCEN does not disclose how many of those “Suspicious Activity Reports” result in investigations, indictments, or convictions, and no studies exist on how many innocents are ensnared in that report for merely exercising their freedoms. But the information is available to federal investigations without regard to niceties such as the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches.

What Wexton is doing is what politicians typically do when they don’t feel constrained by either their oaths of office or the Constitution they swore to uphold and defend. In the present case, her bill is a perfidious back door attack on Second Amendment rights guaranteed in the very document she promised to defend.

VIRGINIA DEMOCRATS PROPOSE BANNING CRITICISM OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS

VIRGINIA DEMOCRATS PROPOSE BANNING CRITICISM OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS

BY R. CORT KIRKWOOD

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/34729-virginia-democrats-propose-banning-criticism-of-government-officials;

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

Virginia’s hard-left Democrats are so terrified of the commonwealth’s conservatives, moderates, and sane liberals they want to criminalize criticism of anti-gun, pro-infanticide Governor Ralph Northam and other top officials.

The proposal to stamp out free speech is buried in a package of amendments to the state code that at first glance seems innocent enough, and would severely punish threats of death and physical harm to the governor, and, again, other state officials.

But the Democrats think more is required to protect themselves from the barrage of criticism they will surely get as they administer the state with a majority in the General Assembly and a governor for the first time in two decades.

Thus will they punish critics who they deem to be “harassing” them with “obscene” speech.

Shut Up and Do What You’re Told
The proposed “harassment by computer” law would punish those who exercise their constitutional right to protest the government.

It reads:

If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A violation of this section may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which the communication was made or received or in the City of Richmond if the person subjected to the act is one of the following officials or employees of the Commonwealth: the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

The question is who decides what constitutes using a computer to “coerce, intimidate, or harass any person,” or what constitutes “vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language.” And, again, one has to wonder what the Democrats would consider beyond the pale given their affinity for such language.

Anyway, the law will likely get a First Amendment challenge from either the leftist American Civil Liberties Union or a conservative legal outfit.

And a court will likely strike it down the first time someone lands in hot water for tweeting remarks about the rape allegations against Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax, or cracks wise on Facebook about Northam’s youthful shenanigans in blackface, or calls him an accomplice in mass murder because he zealously supports abortion-on-demand through birth, and after that, infanticide.

Why the Law?
The RedState website succinctly explained why the Democrats want to ban free speech.

“Virginia’s current leadership wants to be able to pass wildly unpopular, unconstitutional laws without getting any push back,” RedState writer Bonchie explained. “They don’t want people to organize online campaigns against them or express their displeasure in a way that may animate others to follow suit. This law would be used to harass anyone who steps out of line and it’s ironic that it’s spun as an anti-harassment law protecting high ranking state officials.”

Among those laws are the gun-control measures that inspired thousands of the state’s heavily armed gun owners to descend upon the capitol in Richmond, and before that, a vast majority of the state’s counties to declare themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries where the new unconstitutional gun laws will not be enforced.

The most dangerous and frightening of those laws is the totalitarian “red-flag” proposal that would allow the capricious seizure of guns from those deemed to be dangerous.

That law “creates a procedure by which any attorney for the Commonwealth or any law-enforcement officer may apply to a general district court, circuit court, or juvenile and domestic relations district court judge or magistrate for an emergency substantial risk order to prohibit a person who poses a substantial risk of injury to himself or others from purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm.”

Within 14 days, a court must convene a hearing to determine whether a substantial risk order should be issued that could disarm the individual for six months. Giving a gun to a disarmed person is a felony, and “the bill creates a computerized substantial risk order registry for the entry of orders issued pursuant to provisions in the bill.”

The red-flag confiscation bill and the other anti-gun laws will likely face court challenges.

PATRIOT NURSE: CHINESE WUHAN CORONAVIRUS-SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED?

PATRIOT NURSE: CHINESE WUHAN CORONAVIRUS-SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED?

In this informative video, Patriot Nurse discusses the emerging Chinese coronavirus. We will discuss practical tips for staying healthy in the midst of this season

PETE BUTTIGIEG, GAY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, MAKES IT CLEAR THAT PRO-LIFE VIEWS ARE NOT WELCOME IN THE DEMOCRAT PARTY

PETE BUTTIGIEG, GAY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, MAKES IT CLEAR THAT 

PRO-LIFE VIEWS ARE NOT WELCOME 

IN THE DEMOCRAT PARTY

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2020/01/27/gay-presidential-candidate-makes-it-clear-that-pro-life-views-are-not-welcome-in-democrat-party/; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research 

purposes:

Solidifying Reformation Charlotte’s official position that the Democratic Party is the party of Satan himself, Gay presidential candidate, Pete Buttigieg answers the question of a Democrat claiming to be pro-life and affirms the official Democrat position that abortion should be available up to nine months and that the government should pay for it.

While the Democrat Party insists that people who are pro-life have no place in their party, Reformation Charlotte argues that the Christian faith has no place for Democrats.



Let’s be clear: your political positions, activism, or support have no bearing on your salvation–zero. However, if you claim to be a Christian, transformed by the power of the Holy Spirit and bought by the blood of Jesus Christ, the Scriptures say that you will be given a new heart (Ezekiel 36:26) and you are being sanctified unto good works (Ephesians 2:10).

So let me spell this out for you. This means you cannot be a Christian while supporting the slaughter of innocent children, gay rights, gay propaganda, “gay Christianity,” theft (redistribution of wealth), lawlessness (i.e. open borders), a complete and total lack of individual responsibility (i.e. nanny state welfare system, single-payer insurance, etc.), or the endless sweeping away of our right to worship God freely. If you support this godless ideology or support candidates that do, don’t expect me to treat you as a fellow Christian.

In a nutshell, the Democrat party is the party of death, self-entitlement, self-aggrandizement, and self-idolatry. Democrats must be excommunicated from the Church.

SPANISH EVANGELICALS PUSH BACK AFTER EDUCATION MINISTER SAYS IT IS A "MISTAKE" TO THINK "CHILDREN BELONG TO THEIR PARENTS"

Isabel Celáa, Spanish Minister of Education, in the press conference that started the controversy. 

SPANISH EVANGELICALS PUSH BACK 

AFTER EDUCATION MINISTER SAYS 

IT IS A "MISTAKE" TO THINK 

"CHILDREN BELONG TO THEIR PARENTS"

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2020/01/27/spaniard-evangelicals-push-back-after-education-minister-says-it-is-mistake-to-think-children-belong-to-their-parents ;  

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research 

purposes:

(Evangelical Focus) — The issue of sex education in state schools was at the center of a week-long political storm that started after Education Minister Isabel Celáa said in a press conference that “no one should commit the mistake of thinking that children belong to their parents.”

In the first public appearance after the conformation of the new government, Social Democrat Celáa announced that the central Spanish government would bring the Region of Murcia (South-east Spain) to the courts after its regional government allowed parents to decide whether their children would attend talks and other special activities which could collide with their moral and ethical views.

This classes include sex education and workshops on LGBT issues given by external speakers. …

The Spanish Evangelical Alliance (AEE) denounced that “a code of values charged with ideology is being imposed on our children, which presents ideological dogmas as if they were absolute truths, creating a kind of ‘lay religion.’”

_________________________________________________________

Evangelicals respond to Spanish government: 

‘Parents have right to educate children 

according to their convictions’
SEE: http://evangelicalfocus.com/europe/5069/Evangelicals_respond

_to_Spanish_government_Parents_have_right_over_childrens_moral_

education; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational 

and research purposes:


The Education Minister creates a socio-political storm by saying that “children do not belong to their parents”. Three evangelical organisations join the debate about the LGBT workshops in state schools.
The issue of sex education in state schools was at the centre of a weeklong political storm that started after Education Minister Isabel Celáa said in a press conference that “no one should commit the mistake of thinking that children belong to their parents”. In the first public appearance after the conformation of the new government, Social Democrat Celáa announced that the central Spanish government would bring the Region of Murcia (South-east Spain) to the courts after its regional government allowed parents to decide whether their children would attend talks and other special activities which could collide with their moral and ethical views. These classes include sex education and workshops on LGBT issues given by external speakers. In September, the regional government of Murcia had announced that “families will be contacted with detailed information (…) provided to fathers and mothers at the beginning of the school year so that they can express their agreement or disagreement with the participation of their children in such activities”.  

 EQUALITY MINISTER: “HOMOPHOBIC PARENTS” 



Just after Celáa’s comments, the new Equality Minister Irene Montero, of leftists party Podemos, added that the measure adopted in Murcia was “censorship and sexism”, and went on to add: “The children of homophobic parents have the same right as all other children to be educated in the fact that they can love whoever they want to, and to be educated in freedom, feminism and equality”. The political parties of the opposition (conservative People’s Party and far-right Vox, who together lead the regional government in Murcia), denounced an “attack against freedom”, an effort of “indoctrinating of our children” in LGBT ideology, and told Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez to “take your hands out of our families”.   

EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE: “IDEOLOGICAL DOGMAS PRESENTED AS ABSOLUTE TRUTHS” 

As many as three different evangelical representative bodies reacted to the controversy in the following days. The Spanish Evangelical Alliance (AEE) denounced that “a code of values charged with ideology is being imposed on our children, which presents ideological dogmas as if they were absolute truths, creating a kind of ‘lay religion’”.   

Statement in Spanish of the AEE. 



/ AEE website In a statement, the AEE said the education of children was beyond the classic left-right political debate. With its approach, the government was showing troubling “authoritarian” signs, because “discrepancy is not permitted”. “In democracy, the areas of responsibility of family and civil society are respected”. “The government should me more careful”, the AEE added, because “liberties are being put at risk”. To prove it, the statement quoted several laws and international agreements which protect the rights of parents to educate their children in their own values and worldviews, such as Article 27.3 of the Spanish Constitution, Article 18.1 of the Convention of the Rights of children, clause 26.3 of the Human Rights Declaration, article 62 of the Memorandum of the European Convention against Racism and Intolerance, and the 2163 resolution of the Council of Europe.   

EVANGELICALS IN MURCIA: “CHILDREN ARE DIRECT RESPONSIBILITY OF THEIR PARENTS” 

Meanwhile, the Evangelical Council of the Region of Murcia, also expressed its “deep concern and disagreement” with Celáa’s words. The evangelical body in that region underlined that “parents have the right to educate children according to their ethical and moral convictions, this being a Constitutional right, which cannot be subject to changing policies or ideological proposals”.   

PROTESTANT FEDERATION: ‘DON’T SOW DISTRUST” 

Finally, the Federation of Evangelical Religious Entities of Spain (FEREDE), called to end what they believe to be “a false debate” because “it hurts us all, especially the children”. “Both Parents and the State should recognise each other as needed partners and collaborators for the satisfaction of the fundamental rights of children (…) Government and opposition should be careful not to sow mistrust between the schools and parents”.   

THE PRECEDENT OF THE PRO-LGBTI LAW 

This is not the first time evangelical Christians have raised their voice against what they see as an attempt to impose a view of sexuality and LGBT issues on children. The Spanish Evangelical Alliance and other Protestant bodies called in 2017 to stop a pro-LGBT draft law that, according to them, severely restricted freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. The new Spanish government has said passing such a law would be a priority in this political term.

PRESIDENT TRUMP SIGNS RIGHT TO PRAY IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS AS A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT

PRESIDENT TRUMP SIGNS RIGHT TO PRAY 

IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

AS A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT

President Donald Trump is taking steps to solidify his evangelical base by proposing easier access for religious organizations to federal programs and reaffirming students' rights to pray in public schools. Under orders from Trump, nine Cabinet departments are proposing rules intended to remove “regulatory burdens” on religious organizations that participate in federal programs.

COUNSEL JAY SEKULOW TEARS INTO DEMOCRATS' CASE ON PRESIDENT TRUMP IMPEACHMENT

COUNSEL JAY SEKULOW TEARS INTO DEMOCRATS' CASE ON PRESIDENT TRUMP IMPEACHMENT

TIME TO END THIS! 

President Trump told Fox News' "The Ingraham Angle" in an exclusive interview Friday that his defense team in the Senate impeachment trial merely has to "be honest" in laying out the case for why he shouldn't be removed from office before calling the proceedings a "fraud." "What my people have to do is just be honest, just tell the truth," Trump told Raymond Arroyo at the March for Life rally in Washington. "They’ve been testifying, the Democrats, they’ve been telling so many lies, so many fabrications, so much exaggeration. And this is not impeachable." The president’s team of lawyers, led by White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, have vowed to lay out an aggressive case in defense of the president when they begin their opening arguments Saturday morning. Democrats say Trump wrongfully sought to withhold military aid from Ukraine until the country's president announced an investigation into dealings involving natural gas company Burisma Holdings, where former Vice President Joe Biden's son, Hunter sat on the board. Trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in the matter. "I don’t even know how to determine this, but they say it’s not a crime, everybody says that," Trump said. "[Democrats] say, 'But it doesn’t have to be a crime.' Well, maybe it doesn’t have to be a crime, but can you imagine being impeached and you didn’t commit a crime?"

CURRENT SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS & GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION~THE LEGAL BATTLE HEATS UP

CURRENT SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS & 

GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION

Second Amendment Preservation Act Submitted in Missouri

West Virginia Submits Huge Pro 2A Bill

Virginia House Advances Gun Control Bills but that's Not All!

Virginia Now Looking To Revoke Reciprocity 

With Other States 

Virginia House advances gun control measures 

after protest

Democrats in the Virginia House are advancing a package of gun-control measures after tens of thousands of pro-gun advocates from around the country rallied at the state Capitol; Republican Sen. Amanda Chase weighs in.

John Birch Society's Duke Pesta on Virginia's Attack on the 2nd Amendment-

Constitution Corner

This week, Dr. Duke discusses the troubling implications of Virginia's Senate Bill 240. This bill will permit guns to be confiscated in the state of Virginia, based on the government’s discretion. Find out why SB240 could have negative effects on responsible gun owners that value the second amendment and the Constitution.

OKLAHOMA UNDER ATTACK

US GOVERNMENT HANDS OUT TENS OF MILLIONS TO MUSLIM ORGANIZATIONS LINKED TO HAMAS & MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD

US GOVERNMENT HANDS OUT TENS OF MILLIONS TO MUSLIM ORGANIZATIONS LINKED TO HAMAS & MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/01/us-government-hands-out-tens-of-millions-to-muslim-orgs-linked-to-hamas-and-muslim-brotherhood; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research 

purposes:

This is no doubt the work of swamp creatures, i.e., entrenched federal bureaucrats who are happy to defy the Trump’s administration’s agenda. The swamp needs draining, but is fighting back furiously.



“US Gov’t Hands Out Tens of Millions to Islamist Organizations,” Clarion Project, January 23, 2020:


The U.S. government under the Trump administration has handed out tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to Islamist organizations, according to research by Sam Westrop at Middle East Forum (MEF).

As MEF noted, “between 2017 and 2018, the amount of taxpayers’ money given to organizations either influenced or controlled by Islamist activists more than tripled from $4 million to $13.5 million. Under the Obama administration, the amount given to Islamist-linked organizations averaged a mere $1.7 million each year.”

Most recently, in October 2019, the government awarded the Muslim Brotherhood-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) with $100,000 in federal grant government money.

CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest-ever terror funding case in American history. The government officially ended all partnerships with the organization in 2009 because of CAIR’s connection to funding the Hamas terror group.

Yet, CAIR was recently the recipient of the $100,000 Department of Homeland Security grant as part of its DHS’s Nonprofit Security Grant Program.

In addition to monies given to CAIR, MEF found that the government  gave:

$57,000 to the Muslim American Society (MAS). In 2008, federal prosecutors said that “MAS was founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America. Last year, children from an MAS school recited poetry about the killing of Jews
$100,000 to Dar al-Hijrah, an extremist mosque in Virginia. A 2002 Customs and Border Protection document stated that DAH is “operating as a front for Hamas operatives in U.S.” A December 2007 document said DAH “has been linked to numerous individuals linked to terrorism financing.”  Al Qaeda leader Anwar Al-Awlaki was DAH’s imam from 2001 to 2002. Al-Awlaki’s sermons were attended by two of the 9/11 hijackers and Nidal Hassan, who later shot 13 soldiers to death in a jihadi attack at Fort Hood in 2009.
$41 million in federal grants to Islamist radicals since 2007 (not including grants given in the  last few months)….


_________________________________________________________________

SEE OUR PREVIOUS POST:

 https://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2020/01/dhs-approves-

100000-grant-of-taxpayers.html

AND:

https://cms.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/01/video-120-members

-congress-support-hamas-linked-frontpagemagcom