FBI’s Terror Watch List Ruled Unconstitutional

Swell eh? This case was brought into Federal court by the Muslim ‘civil rights’ group CAIR, Council for American Islamic Relations.

The watchlist is disseminated to a variety of governmental departments, foreign governments and police agencies. Among the defendants named in the lawsuit were the heads of the Terrorist Screening Center, the FBI, the National Counterterrorism Center, the TSA, and CBP.

The judge said he was seeking additional legal briefs before deciding what remedy to impose, and wanted both sides to explain “what kind of remedy can be fashioned to adequately protect a citizen’s constitutional rights while not unduly compromising public safety or national security.”

The plaintiffs said that they were wrongly placed on the list, and that the government’s process for adding names is overbroad and riddled with errors.

The FBI declined comment on the ruling. More here.

 

Terror Watchlist Opinion by Law&Crime on Scribd

It is important to note there are flaws associated with the list, yet it is not meant to be a permanent list, in fact people are removed. The list is a guidance document requiring all associated agencies to review, investigate and amend as required.

It is a security tool and as for traveling and being detained, there are remedies as noted below”

The Department of Homeland Security Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP) is a single point of contact for individuals who have inquiries or seek resolution regarding difficulties they experienced during their travel screening at transportation hubs – like airports – or crossing U.S. borders.

This includes:

  • watch list issues
  • screening problems at ports of entry
  • situations where travelers believe they have been unfairly or incorrectly delayed, denied boarding or identified for additional screening at our nation’s transportation hubs

We cannot overlook the historical facts of militant Islam and the condition that the United States is still at war with terror factions. Further, the U.S. Justice system still prosecutes and applies prison terms to those that are found guilty of proven ties to terrorism, human trafficking, foreign criminal cases and more.

For reference the Watchlisting Guidance is below for reference. It is unknown whether this is the most current iteration of guidance, but it is good for reference. Gotta wonder if this Federal judge was presented with details, context, cases and background.

 

2013 Watchlist Guidance by juan_de_herat on Scribd

 

 

5 Senators Threaten the Supreme Court

In a case where the National Rifle Association is suing the City of New York, 5 U.S. Senators decide to put their signatures to a letter to the Supreme Court telling the entire panel of judges they are not well and have become too political.

In what is know in legal terms as an Amicus brief, consisting of 25 pages, SENATORS SHELDON WHITEHOUSE,MAZIE HIRONO,RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, RICHARD DURBIN, AND KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND essentially write out this diatribe.

So, we have a legislative branch essentially threatening the Supreme Court. Consider the implications here and read on. Maybe even take notes.

These senators state the court itself needs to heal.

In part: With bare partisan majorities, the Court has influenced sensitive areas like voting rights, partisan gerrymandering, dark money, union power, regulation of pollution, corporate liability, and access to federal court, particularly regarding civil rights and discrimination in the workplace.

Yet this is precisely—and explicitly—what petitioner’s ask the Court to do in this case, in the wake of a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign to shape this Court’s composition, no less, and an industrial-strength influence campaign aimed at this Court.Indeed, petitioners and their allies have made perfectly clear that they seek a partner in a“project”to expand the Second Amendment and thwart gun-safety regulations. Particularly in an environment where a growing majority of Americans believes this Court is “motivated mainly by politics,” rather than by adherence to the law, the Court should resist petitioners’ invitation

Every single time, the corporate and Republican political interests prevailed. The pattern of outcomes is striking; and so is the frequency with which these 5-4 majorities disregarded“conservative” judicial principles like judicial restraint, originalism, stare decisis, and even federalism. Today, fifty-five percent of Americans believe the Supreme Court is “mainly motivated by politics”(up five percent from last year);fifty-nine percent believe the Court is “too influenced by politics”;and a majority now believes the “Supreme Court should be restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.”Quinnipiac Poll, supranote 2. To have the public believe that the Court’s pattern of outcomes is the stuff of chance(or “the requirements of the law,”The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be “restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.”Particularly on the urgent issue of gun control, a nation desperately needs it to heal.

CONCLUSION:

For the foregoing reasons, the Court should vacate and remand with instructions to dismiss. Respectfully submitted,

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse

Conservative Blog & Conservative News Source for Right of ...

Defamation Laws v. President Trump

The El Paso shooter left a 4 page manifesto laying out his political and society position(s) on several topics including the Hispanic invasion. He also addressed fake news and that Trump did not have anything to do with his evil decisions to go on a killing rampage. So, Cloudflare fired one of it’s customers, 8Chan. The shooter’s manifesto was posted on 8Chan. A cyber site known as ZDNet among others reporting the termination of 8Chan had it the subtitle the following: “8Chan has harbored a community of hate” (in part). No argument there.

Okay, yet consider the words ‘harbored a community of hate’. In a review of media and politicians, it is beyond dispute that they too have harbored a community of hate.

Image result for victims of mass shootings

Senator and presidential candidate Kamala Harris often has called President Trump a ‘predator‘.

Senator Cory Booker declared on Meet the Press that Trump is responsible for El Paso shooting.

Mayor Pete Buttigeig along with Elizabeth Warren and Julian Castro and others have said the same thing.  These politicians created the phrase ‘white nationalism’ to describe Trump and Trump supporters.

Bernie Sanders too? Yes.

While being one of the moderators of the Democrat debate, Don Lemon of CNN twice called Trump a racist. Not to be left out is the New York Times and for sure the Washington Post.

So we have yet another ‘community of hate’ and is anyone challenging these politicians or media to look inward and ask if they are complicit is all this?

So, what about defamation laws? Glad you asked. Consider the following:

What is Defamation?

Defamation is a common law tort, governed by state law, in which an individual makes a “publication” of a defamatory statement of and concerning the plaintiff that damages the reputation of the plaintiff. Defamation comes in two forms: slander and libel. Slander involves the oral “publication” of a defamatory remark that is heard by another, which injures the subject’s reputation or character. Libel is the written “publication” of a defamatory remark that has the tendency to injure another’s reputation or character.

What are the elements of a cause of action for defamation?

The elements of a defamation suit; whether slander or libel, are:

1. A defamatory statement;

2. Published to a third party;

3. Which the speaker knew or should have known was false;

4. That causes injury to the subject of the communication

So, just how many are really creating more hate and division and the manifestation of this into the full landscape of domestic tranquility or the that matter even when it comes to global relations between the United States and countries across the world?

Active shooters and deadly ambushes on soft targets where very innocent people die is the result of all this high octane rhetoric by some many. Evil pulled the trigger(s). Evil is a form of mental defect. See something say something? Okay, that does often work when it comes to public safety and nabbing criminals. Great. Yet here is another suggestion for a layered approach. How about the cyber wing of our government, suggesting the NSA create a search algorithm that searches online sites including dark parts of the web like that of 8Chan to flush out evil as spelled out in the El Paso shooter’s manifesto? Google, Facebook and Twitter all created and apply these kinds of software tactics. Suggesting the NRA is to blame is without basis, suggesting Trump is to blame is without basis, suggesting that white nationalism is to blame is without basis.

There is no single cure to this community of hate. There must be a layered approach, so having a cogent summit and plan is suggested. After the Parkland shooting, the Trump White House did host a summit and several approaches were suggested including a state by state Red Flag law system to keep schools safe.

How do you legislate away hate that may turn deadly? You don’t but politicians and media must become introspective in this community of hate.

For more consideration is the recent item published by the LA Times. In part:

For two years, we’ve been studying the life histories of mass shooters in the United States for a project funded by the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. We’ve built a database dating back to 1966 of every mass shooter who shot and killed four or more people in a public place, and every shooting incident at schools, workplaces, and places of worship since 1999. We’ve interviewed incarcerated perpetrators and their families, shooting survivors and first responders. We’ve read media and social media, manifestos, suicide notes, trial transcripts and medical records.

Our goal has been to find new, data-driven pathways for preventing such shootings. Although we haven’t found that mass shooters are all alike, our data do reveal four commonalities among the perpetrators of nearly all the mass shootings we studied.

First, the vast majority of mass shooters in our study experienced early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a young age. The nature of their exposure included parental suicide, physical or sexual abuse, neglect, domestic violence, and/or severe bullying. The trauma was often a precursor to mental health concerns, including depression, anxiety, thought disorders or suicidality.

Second, practically every mass shooter we studied had reached an identifiable crisis point in the weeks or months leading up to the shooting. They often had become angry and despondent because of a specific grievance. For workplace shooters, a change in job status was frequently the trigger. For shooters in other contexts, relationship rejection or loss often played a role. Such crises were, in many cases, communicated to others through a marked change in behavior, an expression of suicidal thoughts or plans, or specific threats of violence.

Third, most of the shooters had studied the actions of other shooters and sought validation for their motives. People in crisis have always existed. But in the age of 24-hour rolling news and social media, there are scripts to follow that promise notoriety in death. Societal fear and fascination with mass shootings partly drives the motivation to commit them. Hence, as we have seen in the last week, mass shootings tend to come in clusters. They are socially contagious. Perpetrators study other perpetrators and model their acts after previous shootings. Many are radicalized online in their search for validation from others that their will to murder is justified.

Fourth, the shooters all had the means to carry out their plans. Once someone decides life is no longer worth living and that murdering others would be a proper revenge, only means and opportunity stand in the way of another mass shooting. Is an appropriate shooting site accessible? Can the would-be shooter obtain firearms? In 80% of school shootings, perpetrators got their weapons from family members, according to our data. Workplace shooters tended to use handguns they legally owned. Other public shooters were more likely to acquire them illegally. Go here for the full article.

Socialism Conference Plays out in Democrat Policy

Primer: One of the breakout sessions was titled ‘Can we Organize Amazon’. Could it be that this was part of the Amazon walkout crowd too?

Consider a few of these other breakout sessions. Just a sample day.

So……While you were enjoying your Fourth of July weekend, I was attending a national conference on socialism, Jarrett Stepman that is…..

Why? Because socialism is having its moment on the left.

Since there’s often confusion as to what socialism really is, I decided to attend the Socialism 2019 conference at the Hyatt Hotel in Chicago over the Fourth of July weekend.

The conference, which had the tag line “No Borders, No Bosses, No Binaries,” contained a cross-section of the most pertinent hard-left thought in America. Among the sponsors were the Democratic Socialists of America and Jacobin, a quarterly socialist magazine.

The walls of the various conference rooms were adorned with posters of Karl Marx and various depictions of socialist thinkers and causes.

Most of the conference attendees appeared to be white, but identity politics were a major theme throughout—especially in regard to gender.

At the registration desk, attendees were given the option of attaching a “preferred pronoun” sticker on their name tags.

In addition, the multiple-occupancy men’s and women’s restrooms were relabeled as “gender neutral,” and men and women were using both. Interestingly enough, the signs above the doors were still labeled with the traditional “men’s” and “women’s” signs until they were covered over with home-made labels.

One of the paper labels read: “This bathroom has been liberated from the gender binary!”

While the panelists and attendees were certainly radical, and often expressed contempt for the Democratic Party establishment, it was nevertheless clear how seamlessly they blended traditional Marxist thought with the agenda of what’s becoming the mainstream left.

They did so by weaving their views with the identity politics that now dominate on college campuses and in the media and popular entertainment. The culture war is being used as a launching point for genuinely socialist ideas, many of which are re-emerging in the 21st century.

Here are six takeaways from the conference:

1. Serious About Socialism

A common line from those on the modern left is that they embrace “democratic socialism,” rather than the brutal, totalitarian socialism of the former Soviet Union or modern North Korea and Venezuela. Sweden is usually cited as their guide for what it means in practice, though the reality is that these best-case situations show the limits of socialism, not its success.

It’s odd, too, for those who insist that “diversity is our strength” to point to the culturally homogenous Nordic countries as ideal models anyway.

It’s clear, however, that while many socialists insist that their ideas don’t align with or condone authoritarian societies, their actual ideology—certainly that of those speaking at the conference—is in no sense distinct.

Of the panels I attended, all featured speakers who made paeans to traditional communist theories quoted Marx, and bought into the ideology that formed the basis of those regimes.

Mainstream politicians may dance around the meaning of the word “socialist,” but the intellectuals and activists who attended Socialism 2019 could have few doubts about the fact that Marxism formed the core of their beliefs.

Some sought to dodge the issue. One was David Duhalde, the former political director of Our Revolution, an activist group that supports Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and that was an offshoot of Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign.

Duhalde said that Sanders is a creation of the socialist movement—having had direct ties to the Socialist Party of America in his youth—but hasn’t maintained an official connection to socialist political organizations throughout his political career.

Sanders’ position, according to Duhalde, is “anti-totalitarian” and that he favors a model based on “neither Moscow, nor the United States, at least in this formation.”

It’s a convenient way of condemning capitalist-oriented societies while avoiding connections to obviously tyrannical ones.

It was also difficult to mistake the sea of red shirts and posters of Marx that adorned the walls at the conference—or the occasional use of the word “comrades”—as anything other than an embrace of genuine socialism, but with a uniquely modern twist.

2. Gender and Identity Politics Are Ascendant

Transgenderism, gender nonconformity, and abolishing traditional family structures were huge issues at Socialism 2019.

One panel, “Social Reproduction Theory and Gender Liberation,” addressed how the traditional family structure reinforced capitalism and contended that the answer was to simply abolish families.

Corrie Westing, a self-described “queer socialist feminist activist based in Chicago working as a home-birth midwife,” argued that traditional family structures propped up oppression and that the modern transgender movement plays a critical part in achieving true “reproductive justice.”

Society is in a moment of “tremendous political crisis,” one that “really demands a Marxism that’s up to the par of explaining why our socialist project is leading to ending oppression,” she said, “and we need a Marxism that can win generations of folks that can be radicalized by this moment.”

That has broad implications for feminism, according to Westing, who said that it’s important to fight for transgender rights as essential to the whole feminist project—seemingly in a direct shot at transgender-exclusionary radical feminists, who at a Heritage Foundation event in January argued that sex is biological, not a societal construct, and that transgenderism is at odds with a genuine feminism.

She contended that economics is the basis of what she called “heteronormativity.”

Pregnancy becomes a tool of oppression, she said, as women who get pregnant and then engage in child rearing are taken out of the workforce at prime productive ages and then are taken care of by an economic provider.

Thus, the gender binary is reinforced, Westing said.

She insisted that the answer to such problems is to “abolish the family.” The way to get to that point, she said, is by “getting rid of capitalism” and reorganizing society around what she called “queer social reproduction.”

“When we’re talking about revolution, we’re really connecting the issues of gender justice as integral to economic and social justice,” Westing said.

She then quoted a writer, Sophie Lewis, who in a new book, “Full Surrogacy Now: Feminism Against Family,” embraced “open-sourced, fully collaborative gestation.”

3. Open Borders Is Becoming a Litmus Test

It’s perhaps not surprising that socialists embrace open borders. After all, that’s becoming a much more mainstream position on the left in general.

The AFL-CIO used to support immigration restrictions until it flipped in 2000 and called for illegal immigrants to be granted citizenship.

As recently as 2015, Sanders rejected the idea of open borders as a ploy to impoverish Americans.

But Justin Akers-Chacon, a socialist activist, argued on a panel, “A Socialist Case for Open Borders,” that open borders are not only a socialist idea, but vital to the movement.

Akers-Chacon said that while capital has moved freely between the United States and Central and South America, labor has been contained and restricted.

He said that while working-class people have difficulty moving across borders, high-skilled labor and “the 1%” are able to move freely to other countries.

South of the border, especially in Mexico and Honduras, Akers-Chacon said, there’s a stronger “class-consciousness, as part of cultural and historical memory exists in the working class.”

“My experiences in Mexico and my experiences working with immigrant workers, and my experiences with people from different parts of this region, socialist politics are much more deeply rooted,” he said.

That has implications for the labor movement.

Despite past attempts to exclude immigrants, Akers-Chacon said, it’s important for organized labor to embrace them. He didn’t distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants.

For instance, he said one of the biggest benefits of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was that there was a brief boost in union membership amid a more general decline in unionism.

Besides simply boosting unions, the influx “changed the whole AFL-CIO position on immigrants, [which was] still backwards, restrictive, anti-immigrant,” Akers-Chacon said.

“So, there’s a correlation between expanding rights for immigrants and the growth, and confidence, and militancy of the labor movement as a whole,” he said.

4. ‘Clickbait’ Communism Is Being Used to Propagandize Young Americans

The magazine Teen Vogue has come under fire recently for flattering profiles of Karl Marx and promoting prostitution as a career choice, among other controversial pieces.

It would be easy to write these articles off as mere “clickbait,” but it’s clear that the far-left nature of its editorials—and its attempt to reach young people with these views—is genuine.

Teen Vogue hosted a panel at Socialism 2019, “System Change, Not Climate Change: Youth Climate Activists in Conversation with Teen Vogue.”

The panel moderator was Lucy Diavolo, news and politics editor at the publication, who is transgender.

“I know there’s maybe a contradiction in inviting Teen Vogue to a socialism conference … especially because the youth spinoff brand is a magazine so associated with capitalist excess,” Diavolo said. “If you’re not familiar with our work, I encourage you to read Teen Vogue’s coverage of social justice issues, capitalism, revolutionary theory, and Karl Marx, or you can check out the right-wing op-eds that accuse me of ‘clickbait communism’ and teaching your daughters Marxism and revolution.”

The panel attendees responded enthusiastically.

“Suffice to say, the barbarians are beyond the gates. We are in the tower,” Diavolo boasted.

5. The Green Movement Is Red

It’s perhaps no surprise that an openly socialist member of Congress is pushing for the Green New Deal—which would essentially turn the U.S. into a command-and-control economy reminiscent of the Soviet Union.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti recently said, according to The Washington Post: “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all.”

“Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti asked Sam Ricketts, climate director for Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who is running for president in the Democratic primary. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”

Economic transformation barely disguised as a way to address environmental concerns appears to be the main point.

One of the speakers on the Teen Vogue climate panel, Sally Taylor, is a member of the Sunrise Movement, a youth-oriented environmental activist group that made headlines in February when several elementary school-age members of the group confronted Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., about her lack of support for the Green New Deal.

The other speaker on the Teen Vogue climate panel was Haven Coleman, a 13-year-old environmental activist who has received favorable coverage for leading the U.S. Youth Climate Strike in March. She was open about the system change she was aiming for to address climate change.

She noted during her remarks that she was receiving cues from her mother, who she said was in attendance.

Haven said the answer to the climate change problem was moving on from our “capitalistic society” to something “other than capitalism.”

Interestingly, none of the glowing media profiles of Haven or the Climate Strike mentioned a link to socialism or abolishing capitalism.

6. Socialism Can’t Be Ignored as a Rising Ethos on the Left

According to a recent Gallup survey, 4 in 10 Americans have a positive view of socialism. Support among Democrats is even higher than among the general population, with a majority of Democrats saying they prefer socialism to capitalism.

But many who say they want socialism rather than capitalism struggle to define what those terms mean and change their views once asked about specific policies.

As another Gallup poll from 2018 indicated, many associate socialism with vague notions of “equality,” rather than as government control over the means of production in the economy.

What’s clear from my observations at Socialism 2019 is that traditional Marxists have successfully melded their ideology with the identity politics and culture war issues that animate modern liberalism—despite still being quite far from the beliefs of the average citizen.

Socialists at the conference focused more on social change, rather than electoral politics, but there were still many core public policy issues that animated them; notably, “Medicare for All” and government run-health care, some kind of Green New Deal to stop global warming (and more importantly, abolish capitalism), open borders to increase class consciousness and promote transnational solidarity, removing all restrictions on—and publicly funding—abortion, and breaking down social and legal distinctions between the sexes.

They were particularly able to weave their issues together through the thread of “oppressor versus oppressed” class conflict—for instance, supporting government-run health care meant also unquestioningly supporting unfettered abortion and transgender rights.

Though their analyses typically leaned more heavily on economic class struggle and determinism than what one would expect from more mainstream progressives, there wasn’t a wide gap between what was being discussed at Socialism 2019 and the ideas emerging from a growing segment of the American left.

Obama’s Aunt Ordered Deported, Remember?

Auntie Zeituni was ordered to leave the country in 2003, but she stayed. Later that year, she tried to stay again. But she lost the appeal, and an immigration judge ordered her deported in October 2004.

Instead, Onyango remained in Boston and lived in state and federal public housing. Critics have denounced her for defying deportation and for living in public housing while scores of families are on waiting lists.

Her lawyers successfully argued to reopen her case, and she was granted asylum in 2010.

Or how about in 2018 when ICE had the case of the Nazi labor camp guard?

Jakiw Palij, a former Nazi labor camp guard in German-occupied Poland and a postwar resident of Queens, New York, has been removed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to Germany. Former Nazi labor camp guard Jakiw Palij removed to Germany

So, to Juan Williams, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Congresswam Jayapal or Senator Hirono, when a judge orders any consequence or punishment such as deportation, is it okay to defy those decisions? A judge or jury decides the sentence is 35 years for armed robbery or el Chapo Guzman to life, but never mind, just kidding? C’mon really?

The operations by ICE to begin aggressive deportations are for only cases that are judge ordered and are listed as fugitives and a public safety threat. These cases include MS-13 members, armed robbers, rapists, terrorists, aggravated homicides and human traffickers to list a few. So Juan or Nancy, you okay with Jose Raul Iraheta from El Salvador staying in the United States for aggravated murder? Or Darrick Bell, otherwise known in the underworld as ‘Tone’ hanging around Detroit for his 9 count indictment of forced labor, money laundering, extortion and a massive human trafficking operation where there is even a reward offered for his capture?

Under this upcoming ICE deportation, arrests would not include those such as Auntie Zeituni, who is now deceased by the way, but rather those Jose Medina Orlando Gonzalez of El Salvador.

One has to ask Chuck, Hillary or Senator Hirono their thoughts of the victims of illegal criminals (read Angel families). Would these Democrats approval of Alan Jacob Mogollon-Anaya of staying in Kenner, Louisana, his last known location? He is wanted for DUI vehicular homicide. He was ordered removed in November of 2017 but fled from Tennessee to Louisiana.

What about those visa-overstays? Should all these people be allowed to remain in the United States when their respective visas become null and void for violating visa conditions? This population is a growing trend as published in a study performed by Center for Immigration Studies.

All these progressives have returned to a pre-911 attitude. There is a specific chapter in the 9/11 Commission Report dedicated to immigration. All the attackers entered the United States on temporary tourist visas. There were overstays and during that time, they were able to obtain a drivers license in Florida, Virginia, New Jersey and California. What would Juan Williams have to say about Hani Hasan Hanjour? Image result for hani hanjour

The Pentagon Plane (AA Flight 77, Dulles to Los Angeles)
Hani Hasan Hanjour (26) — Saudi Arabian — pilot

First came to U.S. in Oct. 1991 to study English in Tucson, Arizona.
Had been in U.S. in April 1996, when he lived in Oakland, Cal. where he studied English, and later received flight training in Scottsdale, Arizona. He left in Nov. 1996 and returned again in Nov. 1997 while he obtained a FAA commercial pilot certificate. He left again in April 1999.
Obtained student visa (F-1) in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia in Sept. 2000 after an initial refusal. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, Hanjour failed to reveal in his visa application that he had previously traveled to the United States.
Returned Dec. 2000 to study English at Holy Names College (Oakland CA) but never showed up at the school. In illegal status because he did not enroll, and his entry permit had expired at the time of the attack.
Lived in San Diego, Phoenix and Mesa, Ariz. (with Nawaf al-Hamzi), and later in Northern Virginia.
Had a Virginia driver’s license.

So, to the reader, you have some real facts now for a viable argument on public safety and national security threat deportations.