Saturday, November 3, 2018
Friday, November 2, 2018
"Your Pet Will Be Confiscated!": A Shocking Glimpse Inside China's New Social Credit System
Your consumer dollars hard at work, for "cheap, imported goods."
Doing the jobs Americans won't do.
Zerohedge
Tyler Durden, Nov 2, 2018
Citizens in one Chinese provincial capital can now be permanently blacklisted by China's Orwellian digital panopticon 'social credit system' for simply failing to clean up after their pets.
It's but the latest manifestation of the recently implemented, though long in development, nationwide social scoring credit system where people are ranked and punished or rewarded for their behavior, via The Telegraph:
Chinese cities are launching a scoring system for dog owners where anyone found failing to care for their pets could be forced to pay a fine - or even have their dog confiscated.
The credit system is already being enforced in the Chinese city of Jinan, and requires anyone with a dog to register with the police - with only one dog permitted per person.
The license starts with a dozen points and is embedded as a QR code on a dog’s collar. Points are then deducted for various infractions, such as walking a dog without a leash or tag, not cleaning up poo, or being reported for a disturbance. Owners are docked three points if dogs are walked without a leash, for example, which must be less than 1.5 metres in length and under the control of someone at least 18 years of age.
The system is now undergoing piecemeal implementation across various major cities and is now invading people's lives in all kinds of extreme ways from public transportation to dog-walking to flagging pedestrians for crossing the street in an unsafe manner .
The system is currently far from being universally in place; however, the country's communist government has plans to rank every citizen — all 1.4 billion of them — by 2020.
But various bizarre and rigid policies are already being felt and reported in different parts of China - from the state confiscating pets to dire recorded audio warnings threatening reprisal should commuters on a bullet train not bide by the rules.
China's electronic "social scoring" utilizes vast networks of surveillance cameras, facial recognition software, A.I. digital monitoring, and extensive databases, was first announced in 2014 and aims to reinforce the idea that "keeping trust is glorious and breaking trust is disgraceful," according to a government document — though we're not sure if forgetting a pooper-scooper while taking the dog out warrants being digitally blacklisted by an all-seeing digital eye.
As scary as the whole program sounded when it first began receiving more media attention a year ago, to see it in action in the form of deterrent warnings to citizens is absolutely terrifying.
In one particularly jarring example a journalist traveling by bullet train from Beijing to Shanghai recorded an ominous audio message which blared loudly to passengers. The message was issued in Chinese and English, and takes the form of the kind of "safety and procedures" type message that airlines typically present after take-off , but this is the stuff of dystopian nightmare made reality.
A female voice can be heard on an intercom threatening people not to misbehave or else their "behavior will be recorded in individual credit information system."
Here's a dystopian vision of the future: A real announcement I recorded on the Beijing-Shanghai bullet train. (I've subtitled it so you can watch in silence.) pic.twitter.com/ZoRWtdcSMy — James O'Malley (@Psythor) October 29, 2018
The chilling announcement as the commute was in progress reveals the reality that people are already living in fear of the nationwide social credit system. The voice warns that such infractions as travelling without a ticket or people who "behave disorderly" — like smoking in public places — would be "punished according to regulations, and the behavior will be recorded in individual credit information system."
The punishments are not defined in the audio message, but the reference to the credit information system means that even minor behavior infractions will be recorded permanently as part of a violator's permanent electronic record.
There are already a number of recent reports out of China of people either being punished and rewarded based on their social credit. For example earlier in the year student was denied his spot at university because his father was blacklisted for failing to pay off a 200,000-yuan ($28,700) bank loan. More commonly, people are now routinely barred from taking trains of public transport due to their low score.
But perhaps the most shocking aspect of the message recorded on the bullet train is just how seemingly banal it all sounds in the moment: one can easily imagine this kind of thing being rolled out in the West, which some analysts have been warning about.
Thank You Mr Durden and Zerohedge.
Doing the jobs Americans won't do.
Zerohedge
Tyler Durden, Nov 2, 2018
Citizens in one Chinese provincial capital can now be permanently blacklisted by China's Orwellian digital panopticon 'social credit system' for simply failing to clean up after their pets.
It's but the latest manifestation of the recently implemented, though long in development, nationwide social scoring credit system where people are ranked and punished or rewarded for their behavior, via The Telegraph:
Chinese cities are launching a scoring system for dog owners where anyone found failing to care for their pets could be forced to pay a fine - or even have their dog confiscated.
The credit system is already being enforced in the Chinese city of Jinan, and requires anyone with a dog to register with the police - with only one dog permitted per person.
The license starts with a dozen points and is embedded as a QR code on a dog’s collar. Points are then deducted for various infractions, such as walking a dog without a leash or tag, not cleaning up poo, or being reported for a disturbance. Owners are docked three points if dogs are walked without a leash, for example, which must be less than 1.5 metres in length and under the control of someone at least 18 years of age.
The system is now undergoing piecemeal implementation across various major cities and is now invading people's lives in all kinds of extreme ways from public transportation to dog-walking to flagging pedestrians for crossing the street in an unsafe manner .
The system is currently far from being universally in place; however, the country's communist government has plans to rank every citizen — all 1.4 billion of them — by 2020.
But various bizarre and rigid policies are already being felt and reported in different parts of China - from the state confiscating pets to dire recorded audio warnings threatening reprisal should commuters on a bullet train not bide by the rules.
China's electronic "social scoring" utilizes vast networks of surveillance cameras, facial recognition software, A.I. digital monitoring, and extensive databases, was first announced in 2014 and aims to reinforce the idea that "keeping trust is glorious and breaking trust is disgraceful," according to a government document — though we're not sure if forgetting a pooper-scooper while taking the dog out warrants being digitally blacklisted by an all-seeing digital eye.
As scary as the whole program sounded when it first began receiving more media attention a year ago, to see it in action in the form of deterrent warnings to citizens is absolutely terrifying.
In one particularly jarring example a journalist traveling by bullet train from Beijing to Shanghai recorded an ominous audio message which blared loudly to passengers. The message was issued in Chinese and English, and takes the form of the kind of "safety and procedures" type message that airlines typically present after take-off , but this is the stuff of dystopian nightmare made reality.
A female voice can be heard on an intercom threatening people not to misbehave or else their "behavior will be recorded in individual credit information system."
Here's a dystopian vision of the future: A real announcement I recorded on the Beijing-Shanghai bullet train. (I've subtitled it so you can watch in silence.) pic.twitter.com/ZoRWtdcSMy — James O'Malley (@Psythor) October 29, 2018
The chilling announcement as the commute was in progress reveals the reality that people are already living in fear of the nationwide social credit system. The voice warns that such infractions as travelling without a ticket or people who "behave disorderly" — like smoking in public places — would be "punished according to regulations, and the behavior will be recorded in individual credit information system."
The punishments are not defined in the audio message, but the reference to the credit information system means that even minor behavior infractions will be recorded permanently as part of a violator's permanent electronic record.
There are already a number of recent reports out of China of people either being punished and rewarded based on their social credit. For example earlier in the year student was denied his spot at university because his father was blacklisted for failing to pay off a 200,000-yuan ($28,700) bank loan. More commonly, people are now routinely barred from taking trains of public transport due to their low score.
But perhaps the most shocking aspect of the message recorded on the bullet train is just how seemingly banal it all sounds in the moment: one can easily imagine this kind of thing being rolled out in the West, which some analysts have been warning about.
Thank You Mr Durden and Zerohedge.
Judiciary Committee Refers Another Kavanugh Accuser For Criminal Investigation
weaselzippers
11/02/18
It was another one of the obviously false allegations. Best line? “left-wing activist and decades older than Judge Kavanaugh.” Here’s what the Judiciary Committee letter said in pertinent part.
Via Senate Judiciary:
11/02/18
It was another one of the obviously false allegations. Best line? “left-wing activist and decades older than Judge Kavanaugh.” Here’s what the Judiciary Committee letter said in pertinent part.
Via Senate Judiciary:
Then, on October 3, 2018, Committee staff received an email from a Ms. Judy Munro- Leighton with a subject line claiming: “I am Jane Doe from Oceanside CA — Kavanaugh raped me.”6 Ms. Munro-Leighton wrote that she was “sharing with you the story of the night that Brett Kavanaugh and his friend sexually assaulted and raped me in his car” and referred to “the letter that I sent to Sen. Kamala Harris on Sept. 19 with details of this vicious assault.” She continued: “I know that [‘]Jane Doe[’] will get no media attention, but I am deathly afraid of revealing any information about myself or my family.” She then included a typed version of the Jane Doe letter.
Committee investigators began investigating Ms. Munro-Leighton’s allegations. Given her relatively unique name, Committee investigators were able to use open-source research to locate Ms. Munro-Leighton and determine that she: (1) is a left-wing activist; (2) is decades older than Judge Kavanaugh; and (3) lives in neither the Washington DC area nor California, but in Kentucky. In order to investigate her sexual-assault claims, Committee investigators first attempted to reach her by phone on October 3, 2018, but were unsuccessful. On October 29, Committee investigators again attempted contact, leaving a voicemail. In response, Ms. Munro-Leighton left Committee investigators a voicemail on November 1, 2018.
Keep reading…
Election Day: The Clear-Cut Choice Americans Face
frontpagemag
Bruce Thornton
The stark contrast between the two parties.
November 2, 2018
Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
This year’s midterm election offers the starkest contrast between the two parties in recent memory, making the choice of which to vote for obvious. We have reached a critical point in the long-developing transformation of our country from a democratic republic to the concentrated power and “soft despotism” of a technocratic elite. This year’s vote will determine whether Donald Trump’s pushback against that transformation will continue, or whether it will stall.
Democrats, of course, have been the main engine of that transformation. For over a century their politics and policies have relentlessly shifted further and further toward the progressive left. They have embraced and institutionalized the doctrines of technocracy based on a rejection of the Constitutional order and its philosophical assumptions that common sense, practical experience, virtue, and traditional wisdom are sufficient to make people capable of self-rule.
Democrats also rejected the Founders’ deep-seated fear of concentrated and centralized power, a lesson taught on every page of political history for 2500 years: No amount of technical training or knowledge can change a flawed human nature and its permanent vulnerability to the lust for power that always ends in tyranny. Hence the Founders’ separation and dispersal of power among the sovereign states and the three branches of the federal government. Protected by divided powers, the liberty of self-reliant and self-governing citizens became the bulwark against the self-aggrandizement of power by elites, and the tyranny that follows.
The more the Democrat Party moved toward progressive technocracy, the more it abandoned ordered liberty as the most important reason for government to exist in the first place. Instead it endorsed the grand narrative of modernity: The inevitable progress and improvement of people and society, based on “human sciences” presumably as successful as physics and mathematics at effecting improving changes, would create the brave new world that avoided the miseries and sufferings of the benighted past. Technological progress became the model for this dream, its success in the material world now to be achieved in the human, social, and political realm. Of course, such a regime required “experts” to be installed in the centralized bureaus and agencies of the federal government, and to be given the power over policy once the purview of the representatives elected by the sovereign people and accountable to them at the ballot box. Now divided and balanced power was scorned as an 18th century anachronism and systematically degraded.
Accelerating under Franklin D. Roosevelt, this ideological program relentlessly moved forward, bringing along many Republicans who accepted the inevitability of the technocratic, redistributive state, and found that the centralization of power and privilege served their own interests as well. They embraced the Democrats’ underlying technocratic assumptions, and ceded their legislative authority to the cadres of unelected, unaccountable federal workers, and to the federal courts, especially the Supreme Court, which now essentially legislate laws, enforce them, and determine their legitimacy.
Eventually, this bipartisan progressive paradigm provided the foundations of the “ruling center” in which Democrats set the bounds of acceptable policy and political discourse, and Republicans practice the “preemptive cringe” in the face of Democrat overreach. This dynamic is lauded as “bipartisanship,” the preferred method of progressive rule by political technicians, who see citizens as their wards and clients, and dismiss the Constitution’s separation and balancing of power and factions as inefficient “partisanship” that keep us from “solving problems.”
What accelerated this long-developing transformation of the political order and brought us to this momentous choice was Barack Obama. Exploiting our dysfunctional racial narrative of indelible white racism and guilt, Obama was twice elected on the hope of racial redemption on the cheap, and the promise of technocratic expertise and “science-based” government. All voters had to do was ignore his public record of leftist progressivism, and whites would be forgiven. Then the races could start coexisting like human beings in a world with “no white Americans, no black Americans,” rather than remain trapped in an eternal racial melodrama in which whites always have to pay.
But the Democrats’ true intensions soon became clear. Racial reconciliation was a pipe-dream, as Obama and his Attorney General interfered in racial conflicts and stoked the fires. Policies like Obamacare well beyond the progressive-lite center began to emerge. Crackpot ideas of the cultural left escaped from the universities and began an all-out assault on the Bill of Rights in service to an illiberal identity politics. Political correctness, imposed on the country and enforced by the technocratic federal overlords, grew ever more intrusive and totalitarian. Citizens who resisted their patronizing tutelage were insulted as “bitter clingers to guns and religion,” “deplorables,” or “wacko-birds,” as the Dems’ favorite conservative John McCain called them. Protesting the admission of nearly two million poorly vetted immigrants a year was decried as “xenophobia” and “racism.” Patriotism and national pride were demonized, and American sovereignty subordinated to the global technocratic elite and its “rules-based order” alleged to be superior to a toxic American exceptionalism.
But typical of all tyrants, the Democrats overreached. Obamacare, growth-killing regulations, and higher taxes at home; and a foreign policy of retreat, “leading from behind,” and apology for America’s sins abroad marked the progressives’ hubristic certainty that they could ride roughshod over the bipartisan consensus that at least had checked some of the left’s ambitions by reminding them––in 1968 1972, and 1980–– that the US remained a center-right country most of whose citizens self-identified as conservatives or moderates. The political success of “New Democrat” Bill Clinton followed his recognition of this truth, which he brilliantly exploited as a “Third Way” and more cynically, as “triangulation.”
The Dems’ arrogance at ignoring Clinton’s strategy during the Obama years was punished with the loss of the House and then the Senate, along with most of the state governments. A sluggish recovery and foreign policy debacles like Benghazi, the rise of ISIS, and the catastrophic Iran deal showed starkly the failure of the technocratic elite when its utopian delusions and ideological pretensions met the stern taskmaster of a world of hard, cruel men who respected only brutal force. The wages of progressive statism––more intrusive federal power, illiberal policies backed by executive fiat and the courts, the corruption of federal agencies by partisan interests, and a worsening of race relations–– had earlier fueled the Tea Party, which galvanized the discontent and helped the Republicans take the House in 2010.
Then came Donald Trump.
Trump launched an all-fronts assault on the bipartisan consensus. The establishment Republicans, who used the Tea Party for electoral gain but didn’t address the larger discontents it gave voice to, revealed with some exceptions their fealty to the social and cultural shibboleths that marked the elite apart from the middling classes and non-college educated working class of flyover country. In contrast, Trump spoke in the direct, earthy, and at times vulgar idiom that has been part of American folkways since the Republic’s beginning. His disdain both for totalitarian censorship by politically correct commissars, and for the illiberal neo-tribalism of identity politics, captured the citizens’ anger at the double-standards and hypocrisy of the holier-than-thou nomenklatura virtue-signaling as it grubbed for more privilege and power. The progressives helped stoke the anger even more with their eternal media savaging of the president that culminated in the still festering Russia collusion show-trial and the shameful slandering of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Equally important, on issues such as hyper-regulation of the economy, the relentlessly metastasizing federal bureaucracy, the addiction to high taxes, the excesses of activist federal courts, and the dysfunctions of our immigration policies, Trump expressed the common sense that many ordinary people used to understand just how much our government has failed the people.
And, so far, his policies have worked. Trump is reshaping the courts, appointing 84 federal judges, including two Supreme Court Justices, who promise to rein in for decades the judicial activism the progressives have relied on to implement their policy preference without having to face the voting citizens. On the economic front, wages and salaries have the highest year-to-year gain, 3.1%, in a decade. Economic growth has reached 3.5% this quarter, a rise that progressive economic savants had announced impossible. Unemployment is the lowest in decades, and more new jobs have been created than people available to fill them. Consumer confidence is at an 18-year high. Tax reform has put more money in people’s pockets. Repatriated corporate taxes have fueled investment in the domestic economy rather than abroad.
Finally, Trump has returned common sense to our foreign policy. He has backed out of multinational treaties like the Paris Climate Accords, and the disastrous agreement to bribe Iran into delaying for less than a decade its development of nuclear weapons. Both were manifestations of the long failure of the decrepit “rules-based international order” that served mainly the transnational global elites at the expense of national sovereignty and the people. He has moved our country closer to the traditional mission of foreign policy, which is to serve the interests and security of American citizens and put them first, not the interests of some fantasy “global community” or the “cosmopolitan” functionaries of transnational institutions. This credo of putting America first, and his full-throated expression of this sentiment has revived and celebrated the patriotism and national pride that progressives and Davos Man have long scorned and slandered as the nursery of fascism rather than of democratic freedom for distinct and diverse national identities.
On Tuesday we will face the choice: continue to push back against the progressive agenda to “fundamentally transform America,” or continue to feed the progressive Leviathan at the cost of our freedom, autonomy, sovereignty, and national identity of a people who have never been perfect, but have advanced and inspired prosperity and freedom more than any other country in history.
Common sense tells us the choice is obvious. Vote for freedom, and vote for America.
Tags: Election
Thank You Mr Thornton and FPM.
Bruce Thornton
The stark contrast between the two parties.
November 2, 2018
Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
This year’s midterm election offers the starkest contrast between the two parties in recent memory, making the choice of which to vote for obvious. We have reached a critical point in the long-developing transformation of our country from a democratic republic to the concentrated power and “soft despotism” of a technocratic elite. This year’s vote will determine whether Donald Trump’s pushback against that transformation will continue, or whether it will stall.
Democrats, of course, have been the main engine of that transformation. For over a century their politics and policies have relentlessly shifted further and further toward the progressive left. They have embraced and institutionalized the doctrines of technocracy based on a rejection of the Constitutional order and its philosophical assumptions that common sense, practical experience, virtue, and traditional wisdom are sufficient to make people capable of self-rule.
Democrats also rejected the Founders’ deep-seated fear of concentrated and centralized power, a lesson taught on every page of political history for 2500 years: No amount of technical training or knowledge can change a flawed human nature and its permanent vulnerability to the lust for power that always ends in tyranny. Hence the Founders’ separation and dispersal of power among the sovereign states and the three branches of the federal government. Protected by divided powers, the liberty of self-reliant and self-governing citizens became the bulwark against the self-aggrandizement of power by elites, and the tyranny that follows.
The more the Democrat Party moved toward progressive technocracy, the more it abandoned ordered liberty as the most important reason for government to exist in the first place. Instead it endorsed the grand narrative of modernity: The inevitable progress and improvement of people and society, based on “human sciences” presumably as successful as physics and mathematics at effecting improving changes, would create the brave new world that avoided the miseries and sufferings of the benighted past. Technological progress became the model for this dream, its success in the material world now to be achieved in the human, social, and political realm. Of course, such a regime required “experts” to be installed in the centralized bureaus and agencies of the federal government, and to be given the power over policy once the purview of the representatives elected by the sovereign people and accountable to them at the ballot box. Now divided and balanced power was scorned as an 18th century anachronism and systematically degraded.
Accelerating under Franklin D. Roosevelt, this ideological program relentlessly moved forward, bringing along many Republicans who accepted the inevitability of the technocratic, redistributive state, and found that the centralization of power and privilege served their own interests as well. They embraced the Democrats’ underlying technocratic assumptions, and ceded their legislative authority to the cadres of unelected, unaccountable federal workers, and to the federal courts, especially the Supreme Court, which now essentially legislate laws, enforce them, and determine their legitimacy.
Eventually, this bipartisan progressive paradigm provided the foundations of the “ruling center” in which Democrats set the bounds of acceptable policy and political discourse, and Republicans practice the “preemptive cringe” in the face of Democrat overreach. This dynamic is lauded as “bipartisanship,” the preferred method of progressive rule by political technicians, who see citizens as their wards and clients, and dismiss the Constitution’s separation and balancing of power and factions as inefficient “partisanship” that keep us from “solving problems.”
What accelerated this long-developing transformation of the political order and brought us to this momentous choice was Barack Obama. Exploiting our dysfunctional racial narrative of indelible white racism and guilt, Obama was twice elected on the hope of racial redemption on the cheap, and the promise of technocratic expertise and “science-based” government. All voters had to do was ignore his public record of leftist progressivism, and whites would be forgiven. Then the races could start coexisting like human beings in a world with “no white Americans, no black Americans,” rather than remain trapped in an eternal racial melodrama in which whites always have to pay.
But the Democrats’ true intensions soon became clear. Racial reconciliation was a pipe-dream, as Obama and his Attorney General interfered in racial conflicts and stoked the fires. Policies like Obamacare well beyond the progressive-lite center began to emerge. Crackpot ideas of the cultural left escaped from the universities and began an all-out assault on the Bill of Rights in service to an illiberal identity politics. Political correctness, imposed on the country and enforced by the technocratic federal overlords, grew ever more intrusive and totalitarian. Citizens who resisted their patronizing tutelage were insulted as “bitter clingers to guns and religion,” “deplorables,” or “wacko-birds,” as the Dems’ favorite conservative John McCain called them. Protesting the admission of nearly two million poorly vetted immigrants a year was decried as “xenophobia” and “racism.” Patriotism and national pride were demonized, and American sovereignty subordinated to the global technocratic elite and its “rules-based order” alleged to be superior to a toxic American exceptionalism.
But typical of all tyrants, the Democrats overreached. Obamacare, growth-killing regulations, and higher taxes at home; and a foreign policy of retreat, “leading from behind,” and apology for America’s sins abroad marked the progressives’ hubristic certainty that they could ride roughshod over the bipartisan consensus that at least had checked some of the left’s ambitions by reminding them––in 1968 1972, and 1980–– that the US remained a center-right country most of whose citizens self-identified as conservatives or moderates. The political success of “New Democrat” Bill Clinton followed his recognition of this truth, which he brilliantly exploited as a “Third Way” and more cynically, as “triangulation.”
The Dems’ arrogance at ignoring Clinton’s strategy during the Obama years was punished with the loss of the House and then the Senate, along with most of the state governments. A sluggish recovery and foreign policy debacles like Benghazi, the rise of ISIS, and the catastrophic Iran deal showed starkly the failure of the technocratic elite when its utopian delusions and ideological pretensions met the stern taskmaster of a world of hard, cruel men who respected only brutal force. The wages of progressive statism––more intrusive federal power, illiberal policies backed by executive fiat and the courts, the corruption of federal agencies by partisan interests, and a worsening of race relations–– had earlier fueled the Tea Party, which galvanized the discontent and helped the Republicans take the House in 2010.
Then came Donald Trump.
Trump launched an all-fronts assault on the bipartisan consensus. The establishment Republicans, who used the Tea Party for electoral gain but didn’t address the larger discontents it gave voice to, revealed with some exceptions their fealty to the social and cultural shibboleths that marked the elite apart from the middling classes and non-college educated working class of flyover country. In contrast, Trump spoke in the direct, earthy, and at times vulgar idiom that has been part of American folkways since the Republic’s beginning. His disdain both for totalitarian censorship by politically correct commissars, and for the illiberal neo-tribalism of identity politics, captured the citizens’ anger at the double-standards and hypocrisy of the holier-than-thou nomenklatura virtue-signaling as it grubbed for more privilege and power. The progressives helped stoke the anger even more with their eternal media savaging of the president that culminated in the still festering Russia collusion show-trial and the shameful slandering of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Equally important, on issues such as hyper-regulation of the economy, the relentlessly metastasizing federal bureaucracy, the addiction to high taxes, the excesses of activist federal courts, and the dysfunctions of our immigration policies, Trump expressed the common sense that many ordinary people used to understand just how much our government has failed the people.
And, so far, his policies have worked. Trump is reshaping the courts, appointing 84 federal judges, including two Supreme Court Justices, who promise to rein in for decades the judicial activism the progressives have relied on to implement their policy preference without having to face the voting citizens. On the economic front, wages and salaries have the highest year-to-year gain, 3.1%, in a decade. Economic growth has reached 3.5% this quarter, a rise that progressive economic savants had announced impossible. Unemployment is the lowest in decades, and more new jobs have been created than people available to fill them. Consumer confidence is at an 18-year high. Tax reform has put more money in people’s pockets. Repatriated corporate taxes have fueled investment in the domestic economy rather than abroad.
Finally, Trump has returned common sense to our foreign policy. He has backed out of multinational treaties like the Paris Climate Accords, and the disastrous agreement to bribe Iran into delaying for less than a decade its development of nuclear weapons. Both were manifestations of the long failure of the decrepit “rules-based international order” that served mainly the transnational global elites at the expense of national sovereignty and the people. He has moved our country closer to the traditional mission of foreign policy, which is to serve the interests and security of American citizens and put them first, not the interests of some fantasy “global community” or the “cosmopolitan” functionaries of transnational institutions. This credo of putting America first, and his full-throated expression of this sentiment has revived and celebrated the patriotism and national pride that progressives and Davos Man have long scorned and slandered as the nursery of fascism rather than of democratic freedom for distinct and diverse national identities.
On Tuesday we will face the choice: continue to push back against the progressive agenda to “fundamentally transform America,” or continue to feed the progressive Leviathan at the cost of our freedom, autonomy, sovereignty, and national identity of a people who have never been perfect, but have advanced and inspired prosperity and freedom more than any other country in history.
Common sense tells us the choice is obvious. Vote for freedom, and vote for America.
Tags: Election
Thank You Mr Thornton and FPM.
Thursday, November 1, 2018
Trump on Migrant Caravan: U.S. Military Will Consider Throwing Rocks ‘a Firearm’
CNSNews
Melanie Arter | November 1, 2018 | 11:17 PM EDT
(CNSNews.com) - If any migrants from the caravan that’s headed for the United States throw rocks at the U.S. military, the United States will consider that a firearm, President Donald Trump warned Thursday in remarks on the immigration crisis.
When asked whether he envisions the military firing upon any of the migrants, Trump said, “I hope not.”
“It's the military. I hope -- I hope there won't be that, but I will tell you this: Anybody throwing stones, rocks -- like they did to Mexico and the Mexican military, Mexican police, where they badly hurt police and soldiers of Mexico -- we will consider that a firearm,” the president said.
“Because there's not much difference, where you get hit in the face with a rock -- which, as you know, it was very violent a few days ago -- very, very violent -- that break-in. It was a break-in of a country. They broke into Mexico,” he said.
“And you look at what's happening in Guatemala, just to mention Guatemala, along with El Salvador and Honduras. It's disgraceful that those countries aren’t able to stop this, because they should be able to stop it before it starts, and the United States pays them a fortune, and we're looking at not doing that anymore. Because why should we be doing that when they do nothing for us?” Trump said.
As CNSNews.com previously reported, Trump is sending more than 5,000 U.S. troops to the border to help with border security.
"Due to the large size of the potential caravans that may arrive at the border, however, the Department of Homeland Security has further requested the support of the Department of Defense. This is in addition to the 2,000 National Guard personnel already augmenting operations," U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan said Tuesday.
DOD will provide "significant air and ground transportation and logistics support" to move CBP personnel and equipment to areas where they're needed, as well as engineering capabilities, medical support units, mobile housing for CBP personnel and planning support.
Thank You President Trump, Ms Arter and CNS
Melanie Arter | November 1, 2018 | 11:17 PM EDT
(CNSNews.com) - If any migrants from the caravan that’s headed for the United States throw rocks at the U.S. military, the United States will consider that a firearm, President Donald Trump warned Thursday in remarks on the immigration crisis.
When asked whether he envisions the military firing upon any of the migrants, Trump said, “I hope not.”
“It's the military. I hope -- I hope there won't be that, but I will tell you this: Anybody throwing stones, rocks -- like they did to Mexico and the Mexican military, Mexican police, where they badly hurt police and soldiers of Mexico -- we will consider that a firearm,” the president said.
“Because there's not much difference, where you get hit in the face with a rock -- which, as you know, it was very violent a few days ago -- very, very violent -- that break-in. It was a break-in of a country. They broke into Mexico,” he said.
“And you look at what's happening in Guatemala, just to mention Guatemala, along with El Salvador and Honduras. It's disgraceful that those countries aren’t able to stop this, because they should be able to stop it before it starts, and the United States pays them a fortune, and we're looking at not doing that anymore. Because why should we be doing that when they do nothing for us?” Trump said.
As CNSNews.com previously reported, Trump is sending more than 5,000 U.S. troops to the border to help with border security.
"Due to the large size of the potential caravans that may arrive at the border, however, the Department of Homeland Security has further requested the support of the Department of Defense. This is in addition to the 2,000 National Guard personnel already augmenting operations," U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan said Tuesday.
DOD will provide "significant air and ground transportation and logistics support" to move CBP personnel and equipment to areas where they're needed, as well as engineering capabilities, medical support units, mobile housing for CBP personnel and planning support.
Thank You President Trump, Ms Arter and CNS
Trump: ‘Asylum Is Not a Program for Those Living in Poverty’
CNSNews
Melanie Arter | November 2, 2018 | 12:00 AM EDT
(CNSNews.com) - Many members of the migrant caravans headed for the United States have turned down offers for asylum, jobs, education and medical care from Mexico, which proves they are “not legitimate asylum-seekers, President Donald Trump said Thursday in remarks on the immigration crisis.
“The government of Mexico has generously offered asylum, jobs, education, and medical care for people within the caravan, but many members of the caravan have refused these offers, which demonstrate that these migrants are not legitimate asylum-seekers. They're not looking for protection. Because if they were, they'd be able to get it from Mexico,” he said.
“Mexico has agreed to take them in and encouraged them to stay, but they don’t want to stay. They want to come into the United States. So this is no longer safety, and asylum is about safety,” Trump said. “Asylum is not a program for those living in poverty.
“There are billions of people in the world living at the poverty level. The United States cannot possibly absorb them all. Asylum is a very special protection intended only for those fleeing government persecution based on race, religion, and other protected status,” the president said.
Trump warned migrants to turn back and “apply to come into our country.” He said the United States wants them to come here to fill jobs from all the companies that are coming to the U.S.
“We want them to come into our country very much. We need people to help us, with all of these companies that are coming in.
We've never had anything like this. We have car companies coming in. We have Foxconn -- so involved with the manufacturing of Apple products -- coming in in Wisconsin,” the president said.
“We have a lot of companies coming in, but they have to apply, and they have to be wonderful people that are going to love our country and work hard,” he said.
Thank You Ms Arter and CNS.
Melanie Arter | November 2, 2018 | 12:00 AM EDT
(CNSNews.com) - Many members of the migrant caravans headed for the United States have turned down offers for asylum, jobs, education and medical care from Mexico, which proves they are “not legitimate asylum-seekers, President Donald Trump said Thursday in remarks on the immigration crisis.
“The government of Mexico has generously offered asylum, jobs, education, and medical care for people within the caravan, but many members of the caravan have refused these offers, which demonstrate that these migrants are not legitimate asylum-seekers. They're not looking for protection. Because if they were, they'd be able to get it from Mexico,” he said.
“Mexico has agreed to take them in and encouraged them to stay, but they don’t want to stay. They want to come into the United States. So this is no longer safety, and asylum is about safety,” Trump said. “Asylum is not a program for those living in poverty.
“There are billions of people in the world living at the poverty level. The United States cannot possibly absorb them all. Asylum is a very special protection intended only for those fleeing government persecution based on race, religion, and other protected status,” the president said.
Trump warned migrants to turn back and “apply to come into our country.” He said the United States wants them to come here to fill jobs from all the companies that are coming to the U.S.
“We want them to come into our country very much. We need people to help us, with all of these companies that are coming in.
We've never had anything like this. We have car companies coming in. We have Foxconn -- so involved with the manufacturing of Apple products -- coming in in Wisconsin,” the president said.
“We have a lot of companies coming in, but they have to apply, and they have to be wonderful people that are going to love our country and work hard,” he said.
Thank You Ms Arter and CNS.
Trump: Democrats Encouraging Illegals to Break Our Laws So They Can Sign Up for Welfare and the Right to Vote
CNSNews
Melanie Arter | November 1, 2018 | 3:31 PM EDT
(CNSNews.com) – During a rally in Estero, Fla., President Donald Trump accused the Democrat Party of “openly encouraging millions of illegal aliens to break our laws” and violate the U.S. border, because they want to sign them up for free welfare, health care, education and the right to vote.
He said a win for Democrats will send “a bright flashing invitation to traffickers, smugglers, and gang members all over the world” to come to the United States.
“The Democrat Party is openly encouraging millions of illegal aliens to break our laws, violate our borders – you see what’s happening right now, because they won’t give us any votes on border security – and overwhelm our country, and they want to sign them up for free health care, free welfare, free education, and the right to vote,” the president said.
While illegal immigrants are not allowed to vote in national U.S. elections, some jurisdictions in the state of Maryland for instance, allow noncitizens to vote in local elections.
According to a Sept. 16, 2017 Washington Post article, “Unlike most other states, Maryland allows towns and cities to decide who can vote in local elections. In recent years, Hyattsville, Mount Rainier, Takoma Park and several smaller towns have extended that privilege to noncitizens.”
Trump also touched on the issue of birthright citizenship, which has been given the children of illegal aliens automatic U.S. citizenship the second they’re born in America. He said the Constitution does not actually allow for it and that former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) even recognized that “no sane country” would give automatic citizenship to the children of illegals.
“And the Democrats want to continue giving automatic birthright citizenship to every child born to an illegal alien even if they’ve been on our soil for only a matter of seconds,” the president said.
“Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrant children are made automatic citizens every year because of this crazy policy, and they are all made instantly eligible for every privilege and benefit of American citizenship at a cost of billions of dollars a year. That’s what it cost – billion,” he said.
“Back before the Democrat Party went crazy, they also opposed this practice. Harry Reid said, ‘No sane country would grant automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.’ That’s what he said. That’s before he went crazy. Under this policy, anyone who breaks into this country and has a child, the very next moment that child would be made a citizen for life,” Trump said.
The Washington Post reported Wednesday that in a speech on the Senate floor in 1993, Reid made the statement to which Trump was referring. “He regrets it again,” the Post reported.
Trump said the birthright citizenship policy has “created an entire
industry of birth tourism … where pregnant mothers travel to America to
make their children instant American citizens.”
“Congress has never passed a law requiring birthright citizenship for illegal aliens, and the Constitution does not – I say that to the media – does not require it - read it – because illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,” the president explained.
“Democrats also support the insane policy of catch and release, which has created our border crisis, or it certainly helped. A Democrat victory on Election Day would be a bright flashing invitation to traffickers, smugglers, and gang members all over the world – come on in. That’s what you say. Republicans believe our country should be a sanctuary for law-abiding Americans, not for criminal aliens,” he said.
“And the Republican Party will always stand proudly with the heroes – that’s what they are – heroes of ICE, Border Patrol, and law enforcement, and I saw that yesterday in Pittsburgh. And yes, we will finish the wall,” Trump added.
Thank You Ms Arter and CNS.
Melanie Arter | November 1, 2018 | 3:31 PM EDT
(CNSNews.com) – During a rally in Estero, Fla., President Donald Trump accused the Democrat Party of “openly encouraging millions of illegal aliens to break our laws” and violate the U.S. border, because they want to sign them up for free welfare, health care, education and the right to vote.
He said a win for Democrats will send “a bright flashing invitation to traffickers, smugglers, and gang members all over the world” to come to the United States.
“The Democrat Party is openly encouraging millions of illegal aliens to break our laws, violate our borders – you see what’s happening right now, because they won’t give us any votes on border security – and overwhelm our country, and they want to sign them up for free health care, free welfare, free education, and the right to vote,” the president said.
While illegal immigrants are not allowed to vote in national U.S. elections, some jurisdictions in the state of Maryland for instance, allow noncitizens to vote in local elections.
According to a Sept. 16, 2017 Washington Post article, “Unlike most other states, Maryland allows towns and cities to decide who can vote in local elections. In recent years, Hyattsville, Mount Rainier, Takoma Park and several smaller towns have extended that privilege to noncitizens.”
Trump also touched on the issue of birthright citizenship, which has been given the children of illegal aliens automatic U.S. citizenship the second they’re born in America. He said the Constitution does not actually allow for it and that former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) even recognized that “no sane country” would give automatic citizenship to the children of illegals.
“And the Democrats want to continue giving automatic birthright citizenship to every child born to an illegal alien even if they’ve been on our soil for only a matter of seconds,” the president said.
“Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrant children are made automatic citizens every year because of this crazy policy, and they are all made instantly eligible for every privilege and benefit of American citizenship at a cost of billions of dollars a year. That’s what it cost – billion,” he said.
“Back before the Democrat Party went crazy, they also opposed this practice. Harry Reid said, ‘No sane country would grant automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.’ That’s what he said. That’s before he went crazy. Under this policy, anyone who breaks into this country and has a child, the very next moment that child would be made a citizen for life,” Trump said.
The Washington Post reported Wednesday that in a speech on the Senate floor in 1993, Reid made the statement to which Trump was referring. “He regrets it again,” the Post reported.
The then-Nevada senator had recently introduced the Immigration Stabilization Act of 1993, which challenged the clause in the 14th Amendment that grants automatic citizenship to any child born within U.S. borders.
“If making it easy to be an illegal alien isn’t enough, how about offering a reward to be an illegal immigrant. No sane country would do that, right?" Reid, a Democrat, asked his peers on Sept. 20, 1993. "Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee a full access to all public and social services this society provides — and that’s a lot of services.”
“Congress has never passed a law requiring birthright citizenship for illegal aliens, and the Constitution does not – I say that to the media – does not require it - read it – because illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,” the president explained.
“Democrats also support the insane policy of catch and release, which has created our border crisis, or it certainly helped. A Democrat victory on Election Day would be a bright flashing invitation to traffickers, smugglers, and gang members all over the world – come on in. That’s what you say. Republicans believe our country should be a sanctuary for law-abiding Americans, not for criminal aliens,” he said.
“And the Republican Party will always stand proudly with the heroes – that’s what they are – heroes of ICE, Border Patrol, and law enforcement, and I saw that yesterday in Pittsburgh. And yes, we will finish the wall,” Trump added.
Thank You Ms Arter and CNS.
Brazil's New President is Pro-Life, Pro-Family, and Strong Supporter of Israel
CNSNews
By Michael W. Chapman | November 1, 2018 | 2:54 PM EDT
Jair Bolsonaro, the newly elected president of Brazil -- his four-year term starts in January 2019 -- is a Catholic married to an evangelical Christian and he is a strong supporter of Israel.
During his victory speech on Oct. 28, broadcast from his home, there was a Jewish menora in the background. Bolsonaro's middle name, Messias, is the Arabic word for messiah.
Bolsonaro once declared, "My heart is green, yellow, blue and white," a reference to the colors of the Brazilian flag and the Israeli flag, reported the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA).
Bolsonaro supporters on election night, Oct. 28, 2018. (Getty Images.)
Bolsonaro "has declared he will move the Brazilian embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv," said the JTA. "His first international trip as president, he said, will be to Israel, with which he will seek to broaden the dialogue. And he promised to close the Palestinian embassy in Brasilia."
“Is Palestine a country?" said Bolsonaro several weeks ago. "Palestine is not a country, so there should be no embassy here. You do not negotiate with terrorists.”
Osias Wurman, Israel's honorary consul in Rio de Janeiro, told JTA: “Bolsonaro stood out among the many candidates for including the State of Israel in the major speeches he made during the campaign. He is a lover of the people and the State of Israel.”
After an assassination attempt in early September, Bolsonaro declined to be treated at the prestigious Syrian-Lebanese Hospital and was instead taken to the Jewish-led Albert Einstein Hospital. According to the JTA, three of Bolsonaro's sons have been "photographed wearing T-shirts with messages in Hebrew." Bolsonaro has four sons and one daughter.
According to Haaretz, Bolsonaro spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Oct. 29, who told him, "I am confident that your election will lead to a great friendship between the two peoples and to the strengthening of ties between Brazil and Israel. We await your visit to Israel."
As for the Brazil, Bolsonaro has said, "God above everything. There is no such thing as this secular state. The state is Christian and the minority will have to change, if they can. The minorities will have to adapt to the position of the majority."
He has also said, "Brazil before everything, and God above all."
Jair Bolsonaro is a former military officer and he has served in Brazil's Chamber of Deputies since 1991. Bolsonaro's politics in general are those of a traditional, right-wing conservative.
He does not consider himself "far right" but simply "right wing," according to Estado.com. He is pro-life, pro-family, and he opposes gay marriage, homosexuality, affirmative action and secularism.
Thank You Mr Chapman and CNS.
By Michael W. Chapman | November 1, 2018 | 2:54 PM EDT
Jair Bolsonaro, the newly elected president of Brazil -- his four-year term starts in January 2019 -- is a Catholic married to an evangelical Christian and he is a strong supporter of Israel.
During his victory speech on Oct. 28, broadcast from his home, there was a Jewish menora in the background. Bolsonaro's middle name, Messias, is the Arabic word for messiah.
Bolsonaro once declared, "My heart is green, yellow, blue and white," a reference to the colors of the Brazilian flag and the Israeli flag, reported the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA).
Bolsonaro supporters on election night, Oct. 28, 2018. (Getty Images.)
Bolsonaro "has declared he will move the Brazilian embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv," said the JTA. "His first international trip as president, he said, will be to Israel, with which he will seek to broaden the dialogue. And he promised to close the Palestinian embassy in Brasilia."
“Is Palestine a country?" said Bolsonaro several weeks ago. "Palestine is not a country, so there should be no embassy here. You do not negotiate with terrorists.”
Osias Wurman, Israel's honorary consul in Rio de Janeiro, told JTA: “Bolsonaro stood out among the many candidates for including the State of Israel in the major speeches he made during the campaign. He is a lover of the people and the State of Israel.”
After an assassination attempt in early September, Bolsonaro declined to be treated at the prestigious Syrian-Lebanese Hospital and was instead taken to the Jewish-led Albert Einstein Hospital. According to the JTA, three of Bolsonaro's sons have been "photographed wearing T-shirts with messages in Hebrew." Bolsonaro has four sons and one daughter.
According to Haaretz, Bolsonaro spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Oct. 29, who told him, "I am confident that your election will lead to a great friendship between the two peoples and to the strengthening of ties between Brazil and Israel. We await your visit to Israel."
As for the Brazil, Bolsonaro has said, "God above everything. There is no such thing as this secular state. The state is Christian and the minority will have to change, if they can. The minorities will have to adapt to the position of the majority."
He has also said, "Brazil before everything, and God above all."
Jair Bolsonaro is a former military officer and he has served in Brazil's Chamber of Deputies since 1991. Bolsonaro's politics in general are those of a traditional, right-wing conservative.
He does not consider himself "far right" but simply "right wing," according to Estado.com. He is pro-life, pro-family, and he opposes gay marriage, homosexuality, affirmative action and secularism.
Thank You Mr Chapman and CNS.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)