BLM backs the Cuban regime. Will the NJ Legislature end its support of BLM?

By Rubashov

A Newsweek headline asks: Why Is Black Lives Matter Defending the Totalitarian Cuban Regime? Why indeed?

Newsweek continues:

The anti-government protests that have rocked Cuba in the last several days are the most dramatic expression of discontent seen on the island in six decades of communist rule. President Biden has sent a strongly worded message of solidarity with "the Cuban people and their clarion call for freedom" against "Cuba's authoritarian regime," praising the protesters' assertion of "fundamental and universal rights."

…Yet not everyone was united in condemnation.

Most prominent among these is the Black Lives Matter movement, whose statement posted yesterday blamed Cuba's economic troubles on the United States embargo and hailed the Cuban regime's "solidarity with oppressed peoples of African descent." According to the BLM statement, "The people of Cuba are being punished by the U.S. government because the country has maintained its commitment to sovereignty and self-determination. United States leaders have tried to crush this Revolution for decades." Preposterously, the statement also accuses the U.S. of "undermining Cubans' right to choose their own government."

The "choice," in this case, is a one-party system in which all candidates for political office must be vetted by Communist Party-controlled committees.

Wow. “All candidates for political office must be vetted by Communist Party-controlled committees?” Functions something like the county “line”.

The BLM Movement statement specifically mentioned Cuba’s support for a convicted cop-killer: “Cuba has historically demonstrated solidarity with oppressed peoples of African descent, from protecting Black revolutionaries like Assata Shakur through granting her asylum, to supporting Black liberation struggles in Angola, Mozambique, Guinea Bissau, and South Africa.”

An anti-(American) police organization that supports a foreign police state. An actual police state. The real thing. Not some academic Karen’s imaginings.

Here is some news coverage of BLM’s madness:

BLM… a Ponzi scheme?

A few days ago, a group of corrupt Democrat ward heelers, that included state legislators, put out a statement attacking Republican gubernatorial candidate Jack Ciattarelli for his support of the Cuban people in their push for democracy.  Perhaps, now we know why.
 
Last year, a chamber of the New Jersey Legislature passed a resolution explicitly supporting the same BLM (Black Lives Matter) Movement that has now formally lent its name and support to a totalitarian Communist dictatorship. In doing so, BLM has made it abundantly clear that they do not represent Black Americans who are not Communists or totalitarian or pro-dictatorship or anti-democracy.  In short, BLM hardly represents any Black Americans at all. 
 
May they now quickly consign their movement to the waste bin of history.
 
 

“It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so, and will follow it by suppressing opposition, subverting all education to seize early the minds of the young, and by killing, locking up, or driving underground all heretics.”

Robert A. Heinlein

Memo to Atlantic County GOP: Next time define the Women's March for what it is

There was this thing called the Women's March.

...And then it turned out that the leadership of the Women's March was calling for "jihad" against the elected government of the United States of America.

...And then the Women's March posted a birthday greeting on its Facebook page praising a terrorist who murdered a New Jersey State Trooper.  That terrorist cop-killer is on the FBI's "most wanted list" -- with a $2 million reward.

Even the New York Times gets it.

In an August 1st piece titled -- "When Progressives Embrace Hate" -- NY Times Editor Bari Weiss points out that the Women's March is connected to some very unsavory people but that groups like the NJEA (the state teachers' union) and those candidates they support don't seem to care.  Weiss wrote:

"The leaders of the Women’s March, arguably the most prominent feminists in the country, have some chilling ideas and associations. Far from erecting the big tent so many had hoped for, the movement they lead has embraced decidedly illiberal causes and cultivated a radical tenor that seems determined to alienate all but the most woke.

Start with Ms. Sarsour, by far the most visible of the quartet of organizers. It turns out that this 'homegirl in a hijab,' as one of many articles about her put it, has a history of disturbing views, as advertised by . . . Linda Sarsour.

There are comments on her Twitter feed of the anti-Zionist sort: 'Nothing is creepier than Zionism,' she wrote in 2012. And, oddly, given her status as a major feminist organizer, there are more than a few that seem to make common cause with anti-feminists, like this from 2015: 'You’ll know when you’re living under Shariah law if suddenly all your loans and credit cards become interest-free. Sound nice, doesn’t it?'  She has dismissed the anti-Islamist feminist Ayaan Hirsi Ali in the most crude and cruel terms, insisting she is 'not a real woman' and confessing that she wishes she could take away Ms. Ali’s vagina — this about a woman who suffered genital mutilation as a girl in Somalia."

Which brings us to the supporters of the Women's March who were just elected to office.  Those who have expressed personal support for the Women's March organization and have failed to even comment on the organization's "illiberal" and "radical" (according to the New York Times) leadership or the group's praise of a terrorist cop-killer.  Those who continue to embrace these "illiberal" radicals and who refuse to comment on the group's leadership's call for "jihad".

Have Democrats like Atlantic County's Ashley Bennett called out Linda Sarsour, the co-chair of the Women's March, and a self-proclaimed advocate of "jihad" against the democratically elected American government?  Now an elected official, she needs to be clear on this.

Yes, the co-chair of the Women's March actually called for "jihad" against the government of the United States of America.  And Democrats have remained politically-correct silent about it.  Instead, Democrat leaders have praised the Women's March and continue to do so -- lending their support to its leadership while American troops are in the field, engaged in a fight against jihadists.  Why have the Democrats and their candidates refused to comment on these threats of "jihad"?

Just a few months ago, Linda Sarsour -- a prominent Democrat Party activist and co-chair of the Women's March -- called for a "jihad" against the American government.  You can catch her act here:

Here's what she said:

"During a speech to the Islamic Society of North America convention in Chicago last weekend, Sarsour, a delegate to the 2016 Democratic National Convention who is an anti-Israel and pro-Sharia activist, made the startling call and also urged against 'assimilation.'  

'I hope that we when we stand up to those who oppress our communities that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad,' she said. 'That we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or in the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America, where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.'

'Our number one and top priority is to protect and defend our community, it is not to assimilate and please any other people and authority,' she said.

'Our obligation is to our young people, is to our women, to make sure our women are protected in our community. Our top priority and even higher than all those other priorities is to please Allah and only Allah,' she said."

Sarsour started off her call for "jihad" by praising Siraj Wahaj, who she described as her "favorite person in the room."  Wahaj is a controversial New York imam who has attracted the attention of American authorities for years.  Federal prosecutors included him on a 3½-page list of people they said "may be alleged as co-conspirators" in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, though he was never charged, the Associated Press reported.

Since the election of Donald Trump as President, some Democrats appear to have gone completely loopy.  We believe that dissent is an American right, but "dissent" isn't "jihad".  When did the democratic concept of a "loyal opposition" morph into "jihad" -- a "holy war" to be waged by all means necessary?  And why are Democrats and their candidates too afraid to talk about it?

And here is another thing that they are afraid to comment on.   It was reported extensively in the media last summer that the Women's March "honored" cop-killer Joanne Chesimard (aka Assata Shakur).  

Referring to the notorious cop-killer, who murdered a New Jersey State Trooper in cold blood, as a "revolutionary" whose words "inspire us to keep resisting", the far-left Women' March organization issued a statement "celebrating" Ms. Chesimard's birthday.
 

The Star-Ledger reported on this:

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2017/07/womens_march_wishes_nj_cop_killer_a_happy_birthday.html

So did the Save Jersey blog:

Joanne Chesimard, the Black Liberation Army member hiding in Cuba after murdering New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster on the New Jersey Turnpike in 1973, has long eluded American justice and vexed New Jersey public officials as well as the public at large.
Donald Trump made headlines in June by spiking the Obama-era Cuba deal and citing the case of Chesimard (a/k/a Assata Shakur) as one of the reasons.
Eyebrows were therefore raised on Sunday when the far-left Women’s March’s social media accounts CELEBRATED the notorious cop-killing fugitive’s birthday:
 “I think you guys accidentally left out the part where she shot a police officer in the face, escaped from prison, then fled to Cuba in this post,” responded one Facebook user.

We know where Republicans stand on cop-killer Joanne Chesimard (aka Assata Shakur).  They want her extradited back to the United States to face trial for the murder of a police officer.  They backed that up by sponsoring a legislative resolution (AR-111) to urge Congress and the Administration to make that happen.

Why haven't we heard from Atlantic County's Ashley Bennett about this?  Why has she remained silent?

Why don't some Democrats appear to mind associating with radicals calling for "jihad" and cop-killers?  Do they consider these legitimate forms of "dissent"?  We are very interested in hearing what Atlantic County's Ashley Bennett has to say about a group honoring a cop-killer.
 

The Clintons and tax cheat Marc Rich

The New York Times has been beating its partisan drum regarding Donald Trump's taxes.  But, as Sussex County citizen activist Harvey Roseff points out, there is an even larger tax story out there that "better deals with proper ethical behavior."

Roseff writes:

"Today's NY Times story is that Trump filed his taxes and it was proper. That's all that matters - nothing was avoided or illegal.  In fact, Trump filed to laws and regulations that Bill Clinton was in charge of.  Irrespective of if we are for or against Trump or Hillary, the story that taxes were 'avoided' is wrong - the government got what it wanted.

So let's look at Bill Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich.  A tax cheat who was on the FBI's most wanted list.  Rich undermined US sanctions and hugely profited. Rich was pardoned and many leading Democratic leaders (and of course Republican) denounced Clinton's act. So compared to the Trump tax story, here we have one person thwarting the will of the people's government.

And ever since, Rich's interests have taken care of the Clintons."

Roseff links to a story from the New York Post (January 17, 2016):

Bill Clinton’s pardon of fugitive Marc Rich continues to pay big

By Peter Schweizer

January 17, 2016 | 6:00am

Fifteen years ago this month, on Jan. 20, 2001, his last day in office, Bill Clinton issued a pardon for international fugitive Marc Rich. It would become perhaps the most condemned official act of Clinton’s political career. A New York Times editorial called it “a shocking abuse of presidential power.” The usually Clinton-friendly New Republic noted it “is often mentioned as Exhibit A of Clintonian sliminess.”

Congressman Barney Frank added, “It was a real betrayal by Bill Clinton of all who had been strongly supportive of him to do something this unjustified. It was contemptuous.”

Marc Rich was wanted for a list of charges going back decades. He had traded illegally with America’s enemies including Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iran, where he bought about $200 million worth of oil while revolutionaries allied with Khomeini held 53 American hostages in 1979.

Rich made a large part of his wealth, approximately $2 billion between 1979 and 1994, selling oil to the apartheid regime in South Africa when it faced a UN embargo. He did deals with Khadafy’s Libya, Milosevic’s Yugoslavia, Kim Il Sung’s North Korea, Communist dictatorships in Cuba and the Soviet Union itself. Little surprise that he was on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted List.

Facing prosecution by Rudy Giuliani in 1983, Rich fled to Switzerland and lived in exile...

Read the rest of the story here:

http://nypost.com/2016/01/17/after-pardoning-criminal-marc-rich-clintons-made-millions-off-friends/

Prieto puts P.C. before the lives of Americans

The Democrats' Speaker Prieto would rather add more photos to these victims of terror, than not be politically correct.

The boss of New Jersey's Assembly Democrats, Vincent "Limp Vinnie" Prieto, issued a public statement today (drafted by sometime journalist, sometime political hack, Tom "whatever pays" Hester) that was monstrous in its conceit.  It let the world know that Limp Vinnie Prieto is willing to sacrifice the lives of innocent Americans on the altar of political correctness.

In it, Speaker Prieto accused Governor Chris Christie of "xenophobia" for suggesting that America properly police its borders and hold off taking in new immigrants from Syria in light of the ongoing investigations into Syrian involvement in the terrorist killings of more than 120 people in France last Friday night.  Looks like another case of P.C. uber alles.

Ever notice that when they can't think of anything original to say, idiots like Prieto will use the term "phobia" to excuse themselves from having to make a rational argument?  Today it is "xenophobia" -- the fear of discussing our government's failure to secure its borders against narcotics smuggling, human trafficking, illegal firearms, and terrorism.  Tomorrow it will be "Mistressphobia" -- the fear of discussing how many jobs are held by people who have seen various Democrat legislators naked.  Whenever you don't want to discuss something, call it a "phobia", pull your shorts down around your ankles, and then hop away.

Speaker Prieto is the very worst kind of hypocrite -- supporting restrictions on Cuba that led to thousands trying to reach America by raft -- while weeping crocodile tears over those trying to reach Europe by raft.  Prieto tries to blame Governor Chris Christie for the drowning deaths in the attempt by Syrians to reach Europe, while he ignores the drowning deaths of Cubans trying to reach the United States. 

Speaker Prieto even attacked President Obama when he lifted restrictions on Cuba in 2014, telling the Hudson Reporter (December 21, 2014) that he "does not want the restrictions lifted."  So while he pretends concern for Syrian children, Speaker Prieto didn't give a damn about the children of Cuba who, according to United Nations reports, were harmed by the restrictions he supports. 

Under the restrictions that Prieto supports, Cuban children and their parents were denied access to technology, medicine, affordable food, and other goods.  According to a report commissioned by the American Association for World Health, under those restrictions, doctors in Cuba had access to less than 50 percent of the drugs on the world market.  The same report stated that food shortages led to a 33 percent decline in caloric intake between 1989 and 1993.  The report went on: "It is our expert medical opinion that the U.S. embargo has caused a significant rise in suffering-and even deaths-in Cuba." 

In 2011, Amnesty International reported: "Treatments for children and young people with bone cancer... [and] antiretroviral drugs used to treat children with HIV/AIDS" were not readily available with the restrictions in place because "they were commercialized under US patents."  And yet the same politician who supported these restrictions -- leader of the Assembly Democrats, Speaker Vincent "Limp Vinnie" Prieto, has the monstrous hypocrisy to call out Governor Christie for his prudent calls to restrict the flow of Syrian immigrants into the United States in the wake of the terrorist attacks in Paris that left hundreds of innocents killed and wounded. 

As Francois Hollande, the President of France said to his people:  "The Paris attacks were decided and planned in Syria, organized in Belgium and carried out in France." 

Only an uncaring fool would place the lives of Americans at risk in order to make a P.C. fashion statement.  Only an uncaring fool like Limp Vinnie Prieto.