Opinion

Home Opinion Page 39

Biden Defense Department Tells Soldiers To Treat Pro-life Americans As Potential Terrorists

4
Washington D.C., USA - January 22, 2015; A Pro-Life woman clashes with a group of Pro-Choice demonstrators at the U.S. Supreme Court.

A group of United States senators and representatives are demanding answers after United States military servicemembers received anti-terrorism training that included instructions to consider pro-life Americans as potential terrorists.

It is unclear why the military would be training for combat against Americans on American soil.

Senators James Lankford (R-OK) and Ted Budd (R-NC), along with Representative Richard Hudson (R-NC) and their colleagues, “sent a letter to Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth demanding answers after an anti-terrorism training conducted at Fort Liberty, North Carolina depicted Pro-Life Americans as terrorists,” Lankford’s office reports.

“We write regarding social media reports that anti-terrorism training conducted at Ft. Liberty, North Carolina depicts Pro-Life Americans as terrorists. Specifically, the slides identify National Right to Life, ‘Choose Life’ license plate holders, and anyone who opposes the Supreme Court’s rightfully overturned decision in Roe v. Wade, which was rightfully overturned by the Supreme Court, as members of terrorist groups. Smearing Pro-Life Americans is despicable and emblematic of the ongoing politicization of the military under the Biden-Harris Administration,” the Members wrote.

The National Right to Life Committee is a peaceful mainstream conservative organization.  The training did not mention pro-abortion groups such as “Jane’s Revenge,” which have been engaged in a nationwide campaign of domestic terrorist attacks on pregnancy centers and Catholic churches.

“It is no wonder that the Army is struggling to recruit young men and women to join its ranks when it appears the service attacks their values and promotes a woke agenda rather than improving readiness and lethality…The American people deserve to be assured that these slides truly do not reflect the Army’s views, that a full investigation will be conducted, and that any offending employees will be properly held accountable. Finally, we must be assured that similar materials are not being utilized at other installations across the Army,” the Members continued.

Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC), John Barrasso (R-WY), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), Steve Daines (R-MT), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Todd Young (R-IN), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Eric Schmitt (R-MO), Mike Braun (R-IN), Jim Risch (R-ID), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Mike Crapo (R-ID), and Bill Hagerty (R-TN) also signed the letter. 

The letter is supported by Catholic Vote, National Right to Life Committee, Family Research Council, Americans United for Life, Concerned Women for America, Students for Life Action, SBA Pro-Life America, Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, and ACLJ Action.

The letter reads:

Dear Secretary Wormuth,

We write regarding social media reports that anti-terrorism training conducted at Ft. Liberty, North Carolina depicts Pro-Life Americans as terrorists. Specifically, the slides identify National Right to Life, “Choose Life” license plate holders, and anyone who opposes the Supreme Court’s rightfully overturned decision in Roe v. Wade,which was rightfully overturned by the Supreme Court, as members of terrorist groups. Smearing Pro-Life Americans is despicable and emblematic of the ongoing politicization of the military under the Biden-Harris Administration.

The American public expects the Department of Defense and its personnel to defend the homeland from actual terrorists, not Americans who seek protections for children in the womb. Labeling Pro-Life organizations as threats challenges servicemembers’ moral obligation to defend and protect even the smallest among us. In fact, around half of all Americans identify as Pro-Life. It is no wonder that the Army is struggling to recruit young men and women to join its ranks when it appears the service attacks their values and promotes a woke agenda rather than improving readiness and lethality.

We understand that the anti-terrorism slide was in fact briefed to a group of soldiers as recently as July 10th. What is unclear is how long these slides have been utilized at Ft. Liberty and whether similar briefings have been used at other installations. We also understand from a statement released by Ft. Liberty that these slides were not vetted by appropriate approval authorities.  

While Ft. Liberty’s statement asserts that the slides “do not reflect the views of the … US Army or the Department of Defense”, the American people are rightfully concerned that training of this kind is being disseminated in the first place and possibly at other military installations. The American people deserve to be assured that these slides truly do not reflect the Army’s views, that a full investigation will be conducted, and that any offending employees will be properly held accountable. Finally, we must be assured that similar materials are not being utilized at other installations across the Army. 

Therefore, we request responses to the following questions no later than July 29, 2024: 

Is it official Army policy to identify Pro-Life Americans and Pro-Life Organizations as “terrorist groups”?

How long have these slides been briefed to soldiers and how many soldiers have been briefed with these slides? 

What is the current process by which the Army reviews anti-terrorism training materials disseminated on Army bases? 

Who are the appropriate approval authorities charged with vetting training materials disseminated to soldiers across the Army?

What action is the Army taking to investigate the distribution of training materials depicting Pro-Life Americans as terrorists? 

What statutes or Army regulations were potentially violated and what action is the Army taking with regard to any offending employee? 

Will you commit to an installation-by-installation review to ensure that these or similar materials are not being disseminated elsewhere and that Army anti-terrorism training aligns with DoD anti-terrorism standard guidance and training? 

Will you commit, in writing, that these slides will no longer be used and all future training materials reviewed will align with current DoD anti-terrorism guidance?  

We look forward to your prompt attention and response.

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.


New Poll Reveals Democrats Are Losing All Hope

2

A new major poll finds most Americans are growing more optimistic about the nation’s future – but Democrats are plunging new depths of despair.

The Associated Press reports the latest AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds “overall, the public has become less pessimistic about the state of politics and the system of choosing leaders. In July 2024, 66% were pessimistic about the state of politics in the country. Now 59% of the public are pessimistic.  Forty percent are pessimistic about how the country’s leaders are chosen, down from 47% last July.”

“Republicans have grown slightly more optimistic about the future of the Republican Party than they were last summer. In July 2024, 47% said they were optimistic about their party. Now, three months into Donald Trump’s second term, 55% are hopeful about their party’s future,” the AP reports.

“While half of Republicans are pessimistic about the state of politics in the United States, that is down from 73% last July.  And they have grown slightly more optimistic about the way our leaders are chosen under the country’s political system,” the AP adds.

But not everyone is happy, with Democrats almost in total despair.

“In contrast, Democrats have become more pessimistic about their party’s future, the state of the country’s politics, and the country’s process for choosing political leaders. Only 35% of Democrats say they are optimistic about the future of the Democratic Party, down sharply from 57% in the July 2024 poll,” the AP reports.

“About 7 in 10 Democrats are pessimistic about the state of politics in this country, up from 60% last summer. And 55% of Democrats are pessimistic about the way our leaders are chosen under our political system, up from last summer when Joe Biden was still in the White House,” the AP adds.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.

Investigators Demand FBI Turn Over Memo Detailing Foreign Biden Bribe

13
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is in possession of a document in which a Bureau source details a scheme to bribe then-Vice-President Joe Biden in exchange for policy decisions – but the agency is refusing to turn it over to congressional investigators.

House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-KY), working with and Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley (R-IA), has subpoenaed the FBI to produce the unclassified record alleging a criminal scheme involving Biden and a foreign national.

“The document, an FBI-generated FD-1023 form, allegedly details an arrangement involving an exchange of money for policy decisions,” Comer’s office reports.  An FD-1023 form records the details of an interview with a source.

Comer subpoenaed the record on May 3, 2023 with a return date of May 10, 2023.  


The FBI has defied the subpoena, at a time when polls show a majority of Americans now view the FBI as steeped in partisan bias and working to defend Biden politically.

“It’s clear from the FBI’s response that the unclassified record the Oversight Committee subpoenaed exists, but they are refusing to provide it to the Committee,” said Comer in a statement.

“The FBI’s delay in producing a single, unclassified record is unacceptable,” said Comer. “The information provided by a whistleblower raises concerns that then-Vice President Biden allegedly engaged in a bribery scheme with a foreign national. The FBI must provide this record to Congress without further delay. The American people demand the truth and accountability for any wrongdoing. That starts with getting this record.”

“We’ve asked the FBI to not only provide this record, but to also inform us what it did to investigate these allegations. The FBI has failed to do both. The FBI’s position is ‘trust, but you aren’t allowed to verify.’ That is unacceptable,” Comer added.

“The FBI’s well-documented failures in politically sensitive investigations have eroded public confidence over the past few years. Just a few days ago, the Durham Report found that the FBI relied on unverified and inaccurate information as the foundation of its debunked Russia collusion probe. The FBI needs to take steps to restore public confidence. Flouting a legitimate congressional subpoena and dodging oversight is no way to rebuild the public trust. The FBI’s credibility is on the line, and their continued failure to cooperate will have long lasting consequences,” said Grassley.

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Amanda Head: ‘Clueless’ Star Bares All for Magic Mushrooms

2

“Clueless” star Alicia Silverstone stripped all the way down for another campaign for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).

Watch Amanda explain the latest controversy below.

Christianity is Dying in the West, and Islam May Be Taking Over the Rest

1
Photo via Pixabay free images

ANALYSIS – While many of us recently celebrated the birth of Jesus Christ, also known as the ‘Prince of Peace,’ 2023 brings a year of danger and turmoil, with multiple regional flash points that could lead to a major war.

But longer term, another global danger is brewing, more slowly, but inexorably.

This danger is mostly political, ideological, and religious.

And while it may take a couple of more decades to come to pass, this steady shift will have profound historic repercussions and will change the world mostly for the worse.

I am talking about the steady death of Christianity in the U.S. and Europe, and the global growth and potential dominance of Islam in large parts of the world. 

And this future looks bleak.

Symbolically, as we just celebrated Christmas, let’s begin with the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem. It is built above the site where Jesus was reportedly born on the West Bank of the Palestinian territories.

It still broadcasts beautiful Christmas Eve services worldwide on TV.

However, most who watched the service on TV aren’t aware that the Christian population of Bethlehem, the birthplace of Christianity, has been decimated under Muslim rule.

It has plummeted from 85% in 1947 to 15% today.

Christians worldwide aren’t faring too much better.

There are now 2.2 billion Christians in the world, at least nominally. But Islam has 1.97 billion followers, and rising. 

And Islam is growing in two ways – it is advancing by the sword and the cradle. 

Islamist extremist violence, terrorism, insurgency, and war, which in a major victory just recaptured Afghanistan, is spreading extremist Islam from the Middle East to Africa at a rapid pace.

Meanwhile, combined with the militant spread, a higher global Muslim fertility rate (2.9 children per woman, versus 2.6 for the rest of the world), means that by 2075, Islam will be the world’s dominant religion.

And where Islam is dominant as a religion it is also dominant politically and legally, as the Prophet Mohammed prescribed.

Of course, Islamist apologists, and Christian-hating leftists, will immediately denounce any criticism of Islam as racist or ‘Islamophobic.’ 

So let me quickly note that hundreds of thousands of Christian American soldiers have fought, and died, on multiple battlefields to defend Muslims, everywhere from Bosnia to Iraq and Syria to Afghanistan, and even Africa.

I personally served as a Marine Corps officer and military attache’ in Arab Muslim countries as well as in Bosnia where we were protecting Muslims.

I also spent many long days and nights during several months last year, remotely from Washington, DC trying to save hundreds, if not thousands of our Muslim brothers and sisters abandoned in Afghanistan by Joe Biden.

I also did what I could to help these worthy allies come and relocate to the U.S. when possible.

I did this due to my Christian values, my family’s experience being abandoned by another Democratic administration in another previously allied country (JFK and Cuba), as much as my sense of patriotic duty.

Sadly, we likely will never see the actions on a similar scale in reverse.

But the issue is far beyond whether individual Muslims are good, Christians are bad, or vice versa. The issue is what a world dominated by Muslim values, politics, and law – versus one which has been dominated by Christianity – will look like.

And based on what we see in too many Islamic-led countries today, that future will be far worse than what we have now.

Most, if not all, of our western liberal values the left hold so dear, and so do many conservatives, originate directly from Christianity, and indirectly from Judaism. 

Yes, Christianity, when wrongly wedded to the state during the Middle Ages, was often used by ruthless monarchs to justify war and intolerance.

But that history is long gone, along with the politically powerful royal families of Europe.

Since at least the reformation, Christianity, including my own Catholic Church, has been free of the state and has been (even if imperfectly) a bulwark of tolerance, peace, and positive social change.

Sadly, the same cannot be said of Islam.

Though many call Islam a religion of peace, Islam literally means submission, and bloody jihad has been integral to its core since Mohammed. 

And except when it has been effectively contained by the West, Islam has been an aggressive militant force.

And while Christianity during the past few centuries has firmly returned to its peaceful, almost pacifist, roots of Christ, its founder, Islam struggles with the fact that at its core and founding, Islam is violent and intolerant.

As was Mohammed – Islam’s founder – the warrior prophet.

And whereas in the West we have the separation of church and state, based in part on Jesus’ teaching of ‘give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and unto God what is God’s,’ in Islam it’s the opposite.

There is no similar separation in Islamic tradition. Islam is as much a political ideology and legal structure as it is a religion. 

And though the vast majority of individual Muslims are good, peaceful, tolerant, and loving people, Islam itself allows for officially sanctioned violence and intolerance. 

It all too often even rewards it.

And this is why to this day, a small but significant minority of Muslims openly support violence.

As Boston Herald columnist Don Feder writes in the Washington Times:

…worldwide, 8% of Muslims say suicide bombings are “sometimes” or “often” justified in the name of Islam. That 8% may not seem like much, but it means more than 100 million condone coldblooded murder to defend perceived attacks on Islam.

Feder adds: “Even in the West, many Muslims want to live under Islamic law (Sharia), where adulterers are stoned to death and converts to other faiths are murdered.”

To be more precise he notes: “In Russia, where Islam is expected to be the largest religion by 2050, 42% of Muslims support Sharia, as do 71% in Nigeria, 46% in France and 40% in the United Kingdom.”

Feder continues:

While Muslims in the West demand tolerance, Christians rarely get it under Islam. In Egypt, Coptic churches are bombed, congregants shot, and girls kidnapped and forced to convert. All over the Middle East, ancient communities have been uprooted.

Meanwhile, half the population growth worldwide between now and 2050 will be concentrated in Africa, including Congo, Nigeria, and Tanzania. 

The growth there is much more by the sword than the cradle, as all these countries have active violent Islamist insurgencies.

In Europe it is the opposite. Europeans are simply dying off by choice, and being replaced, often by Muslims.

Feder explains:

…the European fertility rate is 1.49, well below the replacement level of 2.1. Europe lost 1.1 million people last year. That’s the first rumbling of a coming earthquake. The fertility rate for European Muslims is 2.54. You don’t need to be a statistician to see which way the demographic winds are blowing.

It’s estimated that by 2085, 13 European countries will have Muslim majorities — this in a continent once known as Christendom. Christians are writing their own obituary by failing to heed the commandment to be fruitful and multiply.

And while in the United States, Islam has not yet become big enough to endanger our liberal western culture and legal system, there have been rumblings and testing of our resolve. 

This usually occurs at the local level where Muslims may dominate, and opportunistic ‘civic’ leaders may use that as leverage to try to force change in their favor.

However, the bigger threat in America is simply the loss of Christianity. And the moral and spiritual vacuum that this is creating. 

Christianity, the former bedrock of American society and the system it was built on, has rapidly declined in the U.S. from 91% as recently as 1976 to 73.7% in 2016, to 64% in 2022.

A third of the clueless Generation Z (or ‘Zoomers’) say they are unaffiliated with any religion or denomination.

According to a recent Pew Research study, Christians will be a minority of 47% in this country by 2050.

So, a belated Merry Christmas to all. We won’t be celebrating it as much in the not-too-distant future.

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Trump Plans to Dramatically Reverse Biden’s Open Border Lunacy

0
Trump at the border wall via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – While the left immediately claimed Donald Trump’s immigration plan for his potential second term is ‘draconian,’ and ‘extreme,’ it really isn’t. It’s essentially a needed dramatic reversal to Joe Biden’s extreme open border insanity.

It’s being referred to as a ‘bolting the hatches’ and ‘bomb the cartels’ strategy. And I’m all for it. 

Especially since what we have now is total third-world chaos and thoroughly unacceptable for America.

The New York Post recently reported that Joe Biden has now literally opened the floodgates at the border by welding open 114 gates in Arizona’s border wall near Tucson. 

The paper noted that in addition to endangered antelope being free to cross:

…the move is also letting an average of 1,400 migrants from as far away as China casually walk into the country daily — with overwhelmed and outnumbered border agents practically helpless to stop them.

“We thought the agents were going to tell us something,” one Ecuadorian migrant said. “But we just walked in.”

The Post added: “Smugglers are capitalizing on the floodgate blunder, driving migrants by the busload to the border and dropping them off as if they were casual tourists.”

And, unlike the mostly South American migrants who have been stopped crossing illegally into Texas, the immigrants coming to Arizona are from places as far as India, Egypt, and China.

Rather than the disheveled and exhausted South American migrants at the end of a long and arduous trek across Mexico, the migrants at Tucson now look more like folks on vacation.

The libertarian-leaning (generally not liberal) Reason outlet was also harshly critical of Trump’s new proposed immigration policies. But when I read their version of what they thought was horrible, I mostly applauded.

Trump’s plan includes:

Screening out Marxists as well as Communists – check.

Screening out potential terrorists from extremist countries – check.

Ending so-called birthright citizenship so that simply being born here from parents who entered illegally isn’t an option – check.

Quickly deporting criminal migrants – check.

Targeting Mexico’s deadly drug cartels as enemy combatants – check.

Generally making it harder to enter the United States legally (if you are willing to cross Mexico on foot, you can do more paperwork) – check.

I can easily stand behind every item noted above and below. 

According to Reason:

“Trump’s plan would involve waves of harsh new policies — and dust off old ones that rarely have been enforced, if ever,” writes Kight. One policy would “ramp up ideological screening” for would-be legal immigrants. U.S. immigration law already largely bars Communist Party–affiliated people from immigrating, but Trump would reportedly expand that to reject “Marxist” applicants. Another policy would expand the former president’s “Muslim ban” to “block more people from certain countries from entering the U.S.,” notes Axios. Trump’s platform would also include ending birthright citizenship and carrying out quick deportations of criminal migrants under “an obscure section of the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts.”

Other aspects of the plan would target drug cartels and smuggling. It would label cartels as “‘unlawful enemy combatants’ to allow the U.S. military to target them in Mexico,” Axios reports, the same designation the government has used “to justify long-term detentions of 9/11 suspects at Guantanamo Bay.” It would also authorize the Coast Guard and Navy to form a blockade in U.S. and Latin American waters to halt boats carrying drugs.

Certain aspects of the plan, if implemented, would likely run into legal challenges. One such aspect is Trump’s reported intent to use the Alien Enemies Act, signed by President John Adams in 1798, “to quickly remove smugglers and migrant criminals…without having to go through legal steps in [Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s] deportation process.” Other policies would put hopeful migrants—and even travelers—through invasive and costly procedures to enter the U.S., such as social media searches and paying bonds to come here.

Well, after four years of border violence and chaos, and an unprecedented wave of illegal immigrants being practically invited across an open border before being shuttled throughout the country and fed and housed at taxpayer expense, it is time for some cracking down.

Bolt the hatches and bomb away.

Dowdy Jill Biden Graces Cover Of Vogue, Supermodel Melania Trump Shunned

2

ANALYSIS – Totally tone deaf. Just a little reminder of how ridiculously biased, partisan and idiotic our mainstream media has become, including the fluffy fashion forums.

First Lady Jill Biden, the incredibly unstylish, power-hungry, social climbing, faux intellectual with an unserious Doctor of Education (EdD), has again graced the cover of Vogue magazine.

This, her third time, right before the upcoming election. (RELATED: Poor Sign Placement Haunts Jill Biden At Hunter High School)

The New York Post noted how remarkably out of touch the Biden White House is:

After Biden’s horrific debate performance on Thursday, much of the media world reluctantly conceded that our 46th president looks like a lost toddler.

And then there’s Vogue — which literally couldn’t stop the presses. The fashion-bible-turned-Dem-PR-machine was already rolling out its July issue, with cover model Jill Biden in a silk cream Ralph Lauren dress that retails for $4,990.

Office of the President of the United States, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

The magazine landed on the internet Monday morning with a resounding, wincing thud.

It was tone deaf. It was tacky — but this shoot and interview, conducted months ago, would have been messy even if the debate disaster had never happened.

Fox News host Jimmy Failla on X had this to say about the horrible caregiver of the elderly and frail Joe Biden:

Melania Trump is an actual super model who speaks 5 languages but she’s NEVER been on the cover of Vogue. Jill Biden commits vicious elder abuse on the world stage and now has two Vogue covers to show for it. Congrats Jill, you’ll be great in “The Devil Wears Depends.”

Newsweek noted the backlash:

Former NBC senior executive Mike Sington said, “First Lady Jill Biden appears on the cover of Vogue magazine, which seems like a good time to remind you that Melania Trump never appeared on the cover of Vogue when she was First Lady.”

C.J. Pearson, a co-chair of the GOP Youth Advisory Council, said: “Outside of how tone deaf this following Joe Biden‘s disastrous debate performance, it is even more absurd that Jill Biden somehow graced the cover of Vogue and @MELANIATRUMP was never given the opportunity. Asinine even.”

Another user on X noted: “She will NEVER be Melania.”

Dr. Jill, as she insists on being called, first appeared on a Vogue cover in 2021 right after Joe Biden was inaugurated. She later appeared on the cover of the digital Winter 2023 issue. 

Meanwhile, Melania Trump, an actual former supermodel who speaks several languages, and was exemplary, and always stylish and immaculately attired, as first lady is still shunned by the fashion world.

Back in 2005, when she was getting married to The Donald, and well before Trump became president, Melania did get her own Vogue cover as Trump’s new bride. But oddly, she never again got a cover for Vogue or any other fashion, or mainstream magazine. (RELATED: Melania Trump Addresses Jan. 6 for First Time)

Newsweek noted the backlash:

Former NBC senior executive Mike Sington said, “First Lady Jill Biden appears on the cover of Vogue magazine, which seems like a good time to remind you that Melania Trump never appeared on the cover of Vogue when she was First Lady.”

C.J. Pearson, a co-chair of the GOP Youth Advisory Council, said: “Outside of how tone deaf this following Joe Biden‘s disastrous debate performance, it is even more absurd that Jill Biden somehow graced the cover of Vogue and @MELANIATRUMP was never given the opportunity. Asinine even.”

Another user on X noted: “She will NEVER be Melania.”

The fact that she never landed a Vogue cover in her White House years was such a point of consternation that the former First Lady Trump criticized Wintour, who also serves as Condé Nast’s chief content officer, for it during a 2022 Fox News interview.

WWD reported:

As Jill Biden‘s role in encouraging President Joe Biden to stay in the presidential race — despite his lackluster performance in Thursday night’s debate with Donald Trump — continues to be hashed over in the media and around the globe, Vogue debuted its August issue with the first lady on its cover.

In this already deeply divided country, the Condé Nast fashion magazine — intentionally or not — has ratcheted up the public dispute about Biden’s full-steam-ahead plans. As of Monday afternoon, Vogue‘s post of the first lady’s cover had 51,960 likes and 5,286 comments. The first lady donned an ivory Ralph Lauren Collection dress for the Norman Jean Roy-shot cover that accompanied Maya Singer’s interview.

Of course, Vogue’s editorial direction is strongly liberal. WWD added:

Requests for comment from Vogue’s global editorial director Anna Wintour and Singer through a Vogue spokesperson were declined. The company spokesperson said, “It’s no secret that Anna has been a supporter of Democratic campaigns for decades. Our August cover story is a look at the tremendous work Dr. Biden has done, and the most urgent issues in 2024 and beyond.”

Meanwhile, a parting comment: Newsmax’s Rob Schmitt wrote, “Nice puff piece on the most valueless person in America and her bid to keep her corpse-like husband into the White House to stay relevant.”

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

Amanda Head: Huge Milestone for Conservative Films

0

Liberals aren’t happy about this…

The new movie “Sound of Freedom” is dominating the box office and Democrats are scratching their heads as to why…

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

France’s Riots are Like our BLM Riots – Not Really About the Police

5

ANALYSIS – Another summer of rage erupts in Paris, this time sparked by the police shooting several days ago of a 17-year-old Muslim man of North African origin. Many liken the fiery French riots to our own Black Lives Matter (BLM) riots of 2020. 

And in many ways, they are similar.

They both used the police killing of a man of color to justify violence, arson, looting, and spreading chaos. Their initial stated agenda was to highlight police brutality and police racism, then just racism. 

Then a bunch of other stuff.

In the United States, a lot of the BLM rioting was targeted at President Donald Trump. In France, some of the rage is directed at Jews. 

Meanwhile, both violent rampages were quickly co-opted, if not initially instigated, by extremist ideologies and agendas. In the U.S., BLM was run by the far left and often became dominated by issues totally unrelated to the police or even racism. 

In Paris, the riots are as much about a growing unassimilated Arab/North African Muslim minority bringing radical Islam to France, as it is about the police or race.

It’s also about being anti-Jewish, anti-Catholic, and anti-French.

Just as BLM often disparaged all of white America as being racist while targeting cops, many French Muslims see the entire French system as evil.

And part of that ruling system includes French Jews.

The Times of Israel reported that “perpetrators did vandalize a monument for Holocaust victims in Nanterre, the Paris suburb where the 17-year-old, identified in the French media only as Nahel M., was killed. The perpetrators spray-painted the words ‘Police scum’ on the monument.”

Antisemitic chants have also  been heard during the riots, “part of a well-documented sentiment among some Muslims who see Jews as part of an oppressive power structure.”

While Jews haven’t been attacked directly yet, these riots remind many French Jews of 2014, when Muslim rioters singled out Jewish-owned shops in a Paris suburb nicknamed “little Jerusalem” due to its large Jewish population.

That anti-Jewish violence, which also targeted several synagogues, was partly spurred by Muslim anger toward Jews amid the 2014 Gaza war between Israel and Hamas and other terrorist groups.

Today we have Israel engaged in a major military operation in the West Bank against Palestinian terrorists using the Jenin refugee camp as a base for attacks against Israelis. This operation began Monday, and we have yet to see its impact on the riots in France.

If the conflict extends in the West Bank, expect things to heat up more in Paris.

But as The Times of Israel also noted, this violent uprising in Paris is far more widespread than ever before. And might be a turning point for how the French view their suicidally insane immigration policies.

“In 2014, I was afraid as a Jew. This time, I’m afraid as a Frenchman,” said Jonathan C., noting that he does not have a Middle Eastern appearance.

The Times added:

Police and firefighters are common targets of violence by rioters whom many believe are acting out of resentment of French society, where the anti-immigration far right is the second-largest political force.

Other incidents are seen by some as reflecting a religious dimension of the riots, which are occurring in heavily Muslim areas.

On Thursday, two unidentified individuals beat up and robbed a priest in Saint-Etienne near Lyon. Disagreements exist on whether the assault, the second attack of a priest in the region in three weeks, was part of the riots.

Hate attacks against Christians are multiplying in France, where in 2021 the interior ministry recorded 1,052 anti-Christian hate crimes, nearly double the assaults on Jews. It meant that Christians were, in absolute numbers at least, the religious group that was most targeted that year.

This worries many in France. They see the huge number of antisemitic and anti-Christian attacks, as well as attacks against police, as part of a resurgence of radical Islam in unassimilated migrant communities.

Even if these riots subside, the bigger danger remains. And that should be a concern for not just Paris, but other major European cities as well.

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

State Department Hosted ‘Therapy Cry Sessions’ For Employees Following Trump Victory

7

Secretary of State Antony Blinken is facing backlash after reports surfaced that the State Department organized therapy sessions for employees distressed by President-elect Donald Trump‘s victory in the 2024 election. According to sources who spoke to The Washington Free Beacon, the Biden administration’s State Department hosted the sessions for its staff to help them cope with the emotional fallout from the election results raising concerns about professionalism and the Department’s competency.

An internal email sent out by the Department’s Bureau of Medical Services encouraged staff to attend a one-hour webinar on “managing stress during change.” The session offered “effective stress management techniques” to help participants navigate the uncertainty they felt in the wake of the election.

It then invited employees to join a discussion on how to handle their feelings about the outcome of the election. The focus of the session, according to the email, was to “provide tips and practical strategies for managing stress and maintaining your well-being.”

While the initiative was likely well-intentioned in its goal to support mental health, the idea of government workers receiving taxpayer-funded therapy to cope with a political defeat has sparked fierce criticism. Among the most vocal detractors is Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Issa called the sessions “unacceptable,” emphasizing that government employees should not expect to be “soothed” over the results of a democratic election, especially when their salaries are funded by American taxpayers.

Issa lambasted the State Department for tolerating what he described as a “personal meltdown” from its employees. In a letter to Blinken, Issa noted that the U.S. government champions free and fair elections around the world, and that it was “disturbing” to see U.S. government officials struggling to cope with the results of a legitimate, democratically held election. He went on to question the appropriateness of taxpayer-funded therapy sessions for civil servants who, according to Issa, should be able to handle political change without resorting to emotional support services.

“It is unacceptable that the Department accommodates this behavior and subsidizes it with taxpayer dollars,” Issa wrote. “The mental health of our foreign service personnel is important, but the Department has no obligation to indulge and promote the leftist political predilections of its employees and soothe their frayed nerves because of the good-faith votes of—and at the personal expense of—the American taxpayers.”

Issa’s letter raised broader concerns about the State Department’s ability to effectively carry out its duties in a time of political transition. Given the stark policy differences between the Biden administration and the incoming Trump administration, Issa questioned whether the personnel involved in these therapy sessions would be able to effectively implement the policy priorities of the new president.

“The mere fact that the Department is hosting these sessions raises significant questions about the willingness of its personnel to implement the lawful policy priorities that the American people elected President Trump to pursue,” Issa wrote.

The idea that a portion of the U.S. government workforce may struggle with accepting a Trump victory—despite the fact that elections are a regular and democratic part of American life—raises questions about the professional competence and political neutrality of federal employees.

The controversy over these therapy sessions underscores a growing sense of frustration among conservatives who believe that the federal government has become too politicized, particularly in agencies like the State Department, which often take progressive stances on global issues. Critics argue that such therapy sessions are emblematic of a broader trend within the federal bureaucracy, where employees may prioritize their personal political beliefs over their professional duties to serve the American people impartially.

Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News.