News Blog for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. Content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this "Blog" - no paid ads - no payments for articles.Fair Use Doctrine is posted & used. Blogger/Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Contact: editor@arranewsservice.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home PageFollow @arra
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
(429-347 BC)
Friday, January 12, 2018
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Challenge to Our America
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
by Newt Gingrich: On Monday, as we celebrate the birthday and life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., it would be powerful if every American would remember the heart of his “I Have a Dream” speech.
It is one of the most powerful and inspirational speeches in American history. Delivered on August 28, 1963 to more than 200,000 people while standing in front of the Lincoln Memorial, Dr. King personalized his dream, saying, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
Today, almost 55 years later, we are still all too far from achieving Dr. King’s dream.
It is important to remember the tragic history of African Americans.
When people question why African Americans should be considered differently than other immigrant groups, they miss the whole point of the African American experience.
Sold as slaves, shipped in cruel and inhuman conditions, totally dominated by white owners, having only as much family stability as their white owners permitted; the first two centuries of African American life in America violated every ideal to which America is committed.
Despite these conditions, individuals began to rise from the system of slavery. Frederick Douglass was the most famous Black orator of the 19th century and spoke passionately for the liberation of slaves. Throughout the North, before the Civil War, there were more and more free African Americans (as there also were in New Orleans for historic reasons).
Americans fought their bloodiest war over slavery. More Americans died in the Civil War than all our other wars combined, through part of the Vietnam War.
President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, freeing the slaves in Confederate states that had not yet surrendered to the Union. Constitutional Amendments were adopted at the end of the war, ending slavery and guaranteeing freedom nationwide. For a few brief years, America moved toward genuine freedom, with the United States Army enforcing desegregation in the South – something it would do again a century later.
However, decades of pressure from anti-Black political muscle in the South gradually reasserted legal segregation to minimize African American rights and opportunities.
Despite the betrayal of Lincoln’s vision, a substantial number of African Americans began rising in education, economics, and status. Then, mobilization of the work force for World War II created vast new opportunities as southern Blacks migrated to Detroit and elsewhere to work in industries which had lost workers to the war effort. Furthermore, a substantial number of African Americans served in the military. Finally, the revulsion against Nazi racism began to delegitimize and undermine racism in America.
As African Americans yearned for true equality, a young minister emerged as their most powerful voice. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. brilliantly combined great rhetorical skill with a deep understanding of the Bible and of the essence of America’s best ideals, as articulated in the Declaration of Independence and in the speeches and writings of Thomas Jefferson and President Lincoln.
Unfortunately, we have not yet attained the America for which Dr. King called. We still have far too much racial feeling among all ethnic groups. We still tolerate poor children being crushed by incompetent and corrupt bureaucracies, which take huge amounts of money but fail to educate. We still allow far too many young men to languish in prison without hope, when we should be offering them second chances. We still have too many people without jobs because crime keeps small businesses from being opened in neglected neighborhoods.
Faced with these failures, some Americans have given up on Dr. King’s dream and have begun to advocate a form of toxic identity politics which abandons color-blindness as an ideal.
All of us should take this holiday to reflect on Dr. King’s dream, the obligation all of us have to turn this dream into reality, and the responsibility we bear to ensure that America always strives to live up to its ideals.
This is the response Dr. King would have wanted for his birthday.
---------------------- Newt Gingrich is a former Georgia Congressman and Speaker of the U.S. House. He co-authored and was the chief architect of the "Contract with America" and a major leader in the Republican victory in the 1994 congressional elections. He is noted speaker and writer. The above commentary was shared via Gingrich Productions. Tags:Newt Gingrich, commentary, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Challenge to Our AmericaTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Lloyd Marcus: The American left’s Oprah-mania about her running for president in 2020 is truly absurd. What on Earth qualifies Oprah to run our country? I do not consider myself White House material. But if Oprah qualifies, I am a far superior candidate.
Years ago, when Oprah became a national phenomenon, I coined the phrase “the Oprah-izaton of America.” It seemed as though Oprah had seduced many Americans into placing feelings above facts and logic.
Fake news media and most politicians have become Oprah-ized, behaving as though feelings trump everything. For example, rather than honestly dealing with the negative consequences of illegals invading our country, leftists and politicians are most concerned with the emotional side of the issue. God forbid we hurt the feelings or harm the self-esteem of illegals who do not give a rat’s derrière about our country or assimilating.
So now the American left is giddy over the thought of Oprah becoming our first queen. We’ve seen this horror movie before, titled Eight Years of Obama. Fake news media and wimpy Republicans would allow Oprah to behave as queen, free to overrule the Constitution, given free rein to cram extreme liberalism down our throats. Opposing or disagreeing with Oprah would be deemed racist and sexist.
In 2008, over 90% of my fellow black voters were hypnotized by Obama’s skin color. I tried to warn black family and friends that Obama was not black in terms of being one of us. Obama was first and foremost a liberal Trojan Horse disguised in black skin, totally focused on furthering the liberal agenda rather than dealing with issues plaguing black Americans.
Oprah’s presidency would be a continuation of Obama’s, with more touchy-feely, mindless, emotion-driven, stupid punish-America policies. Our ultra-Oprah-ized America would give away everything to everybody, confiscating the earnings of achievers to spread to deadbeats.
In 1976, I worked with Oprah at WJZ-TV in Baltimore. As a graphic designer in the art department, I provided graphics for our morning talk show, People Are Talking, which Oprah co-hosted with Richard Sher.
Psychic Jeanne Dixon was a guest on People Are Talking. After the show, Oprah and Ms. Dixon, along with other staffers and me, were gathered, chatting. Ms. Dixon took Oprah’s hand and enthusiastically predicted that Oprah would achieve huge success. I am not saying I believe in psychics. I am simply reporting what happened.
Oprah’s rise to fame was truly remarkable – evidence of the good heart of the American people. From her early days of co-hosting People Are Talking, I thought Oprah’s gift was an ability to be herself on camera. In those days, blacks on TV seemed overly concerned with convincing white America that they were intelligent. Oprah was simply herself, and viewers related to her, an average-looking, overweight, dark-skinned black woman.
Blacks are only 12% of the U.S. population. Therefore, it is obvious that white America made Oprah a billionaire. And yet, on several occasions, Oprah has passionately helped her fellow America-hating leftists sell their lie that America is a hell-hole for blacks.
While promoting her movie, Selma, Oprah despicably claimed that blacks are still suffering the same persecution today as they did in the 1950s.
Clearly, selling movie tickets and furthering the leftist America-sucks narrative trumped the truth about how truly far we have come regarding race and being fair to the country that has practically worshiped her.
Oprah no more belongs in our Oval Office than Donald Duck. The idea is totally absurd. We all know how fake news media would treat Democrat presidential candidate Oprah Winfrey. Every word out of her mouth would be deemed the height of brilliance, wisdom, fairness, and compassion. Fake news media would brand the Republican presidential nominee the secret head of the KKK, a white supremacist, and a sexual predator.
Make no mistake about this, folks. Along with changing America by flooding it with a tsunami of illegals, leftists are obsessed with furthering their sexual revolution, making deviancy normal. Oprah would surely champion her fellow leftists’ government-mandated sexual transformation of America.
A lot of American voters would once again be hypnotized, this time by Oprah’s skin color and fake news media hype, ignoring Oprah’s instincts to punish America. I pray that a majority of American voters have or will learn from their prior mistake of electing extreme leftist Obama solely because of his skin color.
-------------- Lloyd Marcus (@LloydMarcus) is an "Unhyphenated American" and an internationally renowned conservative columnist, singer/songwriter and author. He is Chairman of the Conservative Campaign Committee Political Action Committee. He is a prominent voice of the American Tea Party movement and the singer/songwriter of the ”American Tea Party Anthem.” Marcus has been on Fox News, CNN, PJTV and more. Tags:Lloyd Marcus, Further Oprah-izing of America, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Warning Parents! Alarming Trend: Teens Are Eating Laundry Detergent in 'Tide Pod Challenge'
Image via YouTube
by Tyler O'Neil: Teenagers have started eating laundry detergent in the "Tide Pod Challenge."
"I cannot believe I'm about to do what I'm gonna do," YouTuber Marc Pagan said before sinking his teeth into a Tide Pod. "I'm just bored, so I'm doing something right now that is completely stupid."
"I know I shouldn't do it and I don't want to do it, but I'm doing it," the 19-year-old said. He ate the pod on a dare, and immediately had to wash out his mouth.
Detergent pods include various toxic ingredients, including ethanol, hydrogen peroxide, and polymers. These toxins clean clothes effectively, but provide the opposite of nutritional value. Indeed, ten deaths have been linked to the ingestion of these kinds of pods. Two toddlers died this way, and eight seniors with dementia perished after consuming detergent, CBS News reported.
Ann Marie Buerkle, acting chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, expressed worry about the trend. "This is what started out as a joke on the internet and now it's just gone too far," she said.
In this case, people know it's stupid and dangerous, but they're doing it anyway. No regulation will prevent an idiot from harming himself. In various videos, teens expressed their knowledge of the health risks involved before undertaking the activity.
The police in Lawrence, Kansas, had a perfect response. "How is it 2018 and we have to warn people to not eat laundry detergent? OK, here goes.... Kids, don't eat laundry detergent. Also, don't smoke meth," the department tweeted.
How is it 2018 and we have to warn people to not eat laundry detergent? OK, here goes... Kids, don't eat laundry detergent. Also, don't smoke meth. https://t.co/QoiB698W0L
A note to teenagers: For the sake of your own sanity, your parents' health, and doctors everywhere, feel free to use Photoshop and potato chips and lay off the Tide. Otherwise, some bureaucrat in Washington will come up with yet another stupid and worthless regulation.
-------------------- Tyler O'Neil is Assistant Editor of PJ Media, Tyler O'Neil is a conservative fundraiser and commentator. He has written for numerous publications. Tags:PJ Media, Tyler O'Neil, 2018, health, social media, stupid, teenagers, alarming trend, teens, eating, laundry detergent,'Tide Pod ChallengeTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: Now That's Pathetic - House Democrat Leader Nancy Pelosi is the gift that keeps on giving. As we reported yesterday, Pelosi decried the Republican tax cut law as "Armageddon" and suggested that it was going to "adversely affect" the American people. But as we noted, millions of American workers are getting pay raises and bonuses as a result of that law.
For the record, Nancy Pelosi is one of the wealthiest members of Congress. Perhaps a few extra dollars per hour is "insignificant" to her. But to the millions of Americans who live paycheck to paycheck, it is anything but "insignificant."
No doubt a $1,000 bonus seems like "crumbs" to Ms. Pelosi. That's probably just a nice dinner at a fancy San Francisco restaurant for her and a few friends. But to millions of Americans who would struggle to pay for a $400 emergency, that $1,000 bonus is anything but "crumbs."
Pelosi spends so much time flying back and forth from the D.C. Swamp to the San Francisco zoo that she has no idea how the typical family lives in "flyover country" or the American heartland. Now that's pathetic!
Focus, Please - The left-wing media became completely unhinged last night (again) over something Donald Trump allegedly said. I don't know what the president's exact words were. I wasn't in the room when this gang of senators presented their immigration deal.
What I do know is that the president denies using that language but does admit to being angry over the deal they were offering him, which he blasted as "a big step backward." He also suggested that he might have to record future meetings so his remarks cannot be distorted.
This episode is just another Rorschach test for the media and the progressive left. If you hate Donald Trump and Mike Pence and have convinced yourself that they are bigots and neo-Nazis, then that is exactly how you will interpret accounts of the story.
If you think Trump is a fundamentally decent man, while perhaps a bit rough around the edges, you will probably be inclined to overlook it given all the other important things happening right now, such as: Another North Korean missile test.
Multiple police officers being shot. (Here and here.)
A new inspector general's report suggesting the Obama Administration failed to fully vet dozens of immigrants with suspected ties to terrorism.
Or mounting evidence that key government agencies were weaponized to influence the election.The president's language pales in importance compared to these issues, but the left is trying to distract you from the issues.
Don't miss the substantive point, my friends: There are multiple countries in the world that frankly fit the definition of what the president allegedly said. They are places where wages are a dollar a day, places without the rule of law, where corruption is the norm, where the concept of human rights is unheard of.
Yesterday, President Trump was presented with a deal that represented more of the same, business as usual. And he got mad. He confronted the politicians in the Oval Office and demanded to know when they were going to put the American taxpayer first.
There are 7 billion people in the world. Many of them live in what we used to call "Third world nations." The debate in the Oval Office yesterday was over how many of these people are we supposed to take in before it becomes a burden on our society.
Durbin's Double Standard - Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) is making headlines today for disputing the president's denial and insisting that he used "vile and vulgar comments." Of course, the media will never give Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt, but why should we believe Dick Durbin?
After all, he once compared our military personnel guarding the Islamofascist thugs at Gitmo to "Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others."
As usual, there is a double standard at work here.
When we temporarily bring in people from Haiti and El Salvador, we do so because everyone agrees that these are terrible places because of corruption, civil war, natural disasters, etc. When it is time to send them back, we are told, "We can't send them back to these horrible, corrupt countries."
So when Trump asked the liberal politicians in the Oval Office yesterday, "Why do you only want to bring in people from these terrible countries," he is accused of racism, but the progressives are the ones arguing that these countries are "hellholes" in order to justify bringing them here in the first place.
No Justice - We have reported before on the shocking news that Barack Obama shut down a major investigation into Hezbollah's drug-running activities. Incredibly, it seems Obama also allowed one of the worst Iranian terror leaders to escape justice.
According to Middle East media reports, Israel was prepared to assassinate Qassem Soleimani three years ago. Soleimani is an Iranian general and commander of the Revolutionary Guards' elite Quds Force, which is responsible for carrying out foreign terrorist attacks.
Incredibly, however, the Obama Administration, hoping to secure a nuclear deal with the ayatollah, reportedly told Tehran about the Israeli operation to take out Soleimani. This seems hard to believe, but it wouldn't be the first time that the Obama Administration betrayed Israel. Why Did the Administration Leak the Israel-Azerbaijan Story?
Obama’s Parting Betrayal of Israel.)
Moreover, former Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor almost seemed to confirm the report when he defended Soleimani as an "Iranian political leader." Soleimani is anything but a political leader. He is the ayatollah's hitman, a terrorist, whose hands are soaked with the blood of innocents.
------------------- Gary Bauer is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families Tags:Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, Now That's Pathetic, Focus Please, No JusticeTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Plan To Shift Oversight Of Gun Exports Kicks Up Firestorm
by Tom Knighton: The Trump administration has a plan to shift the regulatory burden for the exportation of firearms away from the State Department and over to the Department of Commerce. It makes a certain kind of sense. After all, the State Department is for dealing with foreign governments and being the official face of the United States government outside of the presidency, and the Commerce Department is for, well…commerce.
The Trump administration’s expected plan to transfer the licensing of gun exports from the State Department to the Commerce Department has Democratic lawmakers and foreign policy advocates readying for a fight.
The proposal under review by the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) has yet to be made public, but experts fear it will lead to less oversight of commercial sales of assault weapons like submachine guns and flame throwers to foreign buyers.
Less oversight, they warn, could make it easier for deadly weapons to end up in the hands of terrorists and drug cartels.
“It’s a major change,” said Colby Goodman, director of the Security Assistance Monitor program at the Center for International Policy.
“It’s opening up a lot more risk and a lot more opportunity for illegal and illicit trafficking.”
. . . Under the proposed rules, an administration official told The Hill, firearms and related articles that are uniquely military or that are not otherwise widely available for commercial sale would remain under State Department export licensing controls.
In shifting oversight, exporters and manufacturers, including small gunsmiths, would no longer have to register with the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls and pay the $2,250 annual registration fee.
But experts say if exporters aren’t forced to register with the federal government, there will be no way to track and no one to prosecute when weapons end up in the wrong hands.
“There are plenty of cases when in regular processes weapons have been lost,” said Jeff Abramson, a nonresident senior fellow at the Arms Control Association, adding that these are the weapons often used in human rights abuses.
Democrats are particularly upset with one potential change in the proposal.
…
“As you are aware, combat firearms and ammunition are uniquely lethal; they are easily spread and easily modified, and are the primary means of injury, death and destruction in civil and military conflicts throughout the world,” Sens. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote in a letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in September opposing the planned move.
“As such, they should be subject to more — not less — rigorous export controls and oversight.”
In the House, Rep. Norma Torres (D-Calif.) planned to introduce legislation Wednesday to block President Trump from transferring oversight of “significant military equipment” like automatic firearms and sniper rifles; their parts, accessories and components; flame throwers; and attachments or devices for launching ordnance to the Commerce Department.The rule change will only impact commercial items in Categories I, II, and III on the U.S. Munitions List.
While Democrats are, unsurprisingly, freaking out over weapon sales, they forget that there’s been no shortage of firearms being sold in war zones and to petty warlords and tinpot dictators. The rules that are in place haven’t done much of anything to stem the flow of violence in the world.
And no one is saying U.S. companies should be selling to them instead. All that’s happening is a reduction in the regulatory burden that makes it difficult for smaller companies to compete in the global marketplace.
We know Democrats are anti-gun and anti-business, so none of this is overly surprising. It’s normal for them to throw around doom and gloom rhetoric any time either issue comes up, so it’s to be expected that they’d do the same when the two are slammed together.
However, for right now, they’re kvetching about nothing and hoping the American people are dumb enough to believe them.
--------------- Tom Knighton is a Navy veteran, a former newspaperman, a novelist, and a blogger at Bearing Arms. He lives with his family in Southwest Georgia and contributes to PJ Media. Tags:Tom Knighton, Bearing Arms, Trump administration, plan to shift, regulatory burden, exportation of firearms, away from, State Department, over Department of CommerceTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
. . . How the original DREAM act was designed to cover 90% of the illegal alien population in the US.
by Michael Cutler: Today DACA (Deferred Action-Childhood Arrivals) is a major issue for the Trump administration, with politicians from both parties attempting to persuade President Trump to provide lawful status for the illegal aliens who had been granted temporary lawful status in an ill-conceived and, indeed, illegal program that had been implemented by President Obama, a politically adept manipulator of language and a master of deception.
On December 18th, I participated in an interview on Fox News to discuss DACA and the fact that according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) legalizing the estimated population of “Dreamers” would cost an estimated $26 billion.
On January 9th President Trump conducted a bi-partisan White House meeting to consider a compromise that would provide lawful immigration status for the approximately 800,000 illegal aliens who enrolled in DACA. As the San Francisco Chronicle reported, Trump seeks a "bill of love" from Congress for "Dreamers"
The “deal” would require funding a border wall, ending “chain migration” and perhaps, making E-Verify mandatory. Of course without an adequate number of ICE agents, mandatory E-Verify would be of limited value since unscrupulous employers could simply hire illegal aliens “off the books” and without agents to conduct field investigations these criminally deceptive employment practices would not be discovered.
President Trump’s previous call for hiring an additional 10,000 ICE agents was not mentioned by the participants in the meeting. This is extremely worrisome.
A lack of effective interior enforcement of our immigration laws, has for decades, undermined the integrity of the immigration system. In fact the 9/11 Commission cited the lack of interior enforcement as a key vulnerability that terrorists, and not only the 9/11 hijackers, had exploited to embed themselves in the U.S. in preparation to carrying out deadly attacks.
DACA was a travesty foisted on America and Americans by the Obama administration, from its inception, was a scam based on lies and false suppositions. Legalizing these 800,000 illegal aliens would, in point of fact, legitimize Obama’s illegal action.
Obama claimed that he was invoking “prosecutorial discretion” when he stood in the White House Rose Garden on June 15, 2012 and announced that “since Congress failed to act” (to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform) he was going to act by creating DACA. But in reality Congress did act: it voted down legislation known as Comprehension Immigration Reform and, in so doing, took an action that is consistent with the role of Congress as established by the U.S. Constitution that created the system of “checks and balances.”
For Mr. Obama, however, the problem was that Congress did not act the way he wanted it to act.
Two days after that speech in 2012, I wrote an Op-Ed, “Obama Invokes Prosecutorial Discretion to Circumvent Constitution and Congress,” in which I noted that what Obama had referred to as “Prosecutorial Discretion” should, in reality, be referred to as “Prosecutorial Deception.”
Legitimate use of prosecutorial discretion can provide a pragmatic solution to real-world limitations of law enforcement resources in a manner comparable to a triage. For example, law enforcement officers frequently ignore relatively minor violations of law so that those limited resources can be available to address more serious violations of law. Consider, for example, the police officer operating speed radar who ignores cars that exceed the speed limit by a small margin, but are being otherwise driven in a safe manner. This enables the police officer to focus on vehicles that are being driven dangerously.
Under DACA, however, illegal aliens were not ignored to conserve limited resources. In fact, limited resources were not conserved but were squandered to provide temporary lawful status to a huge number of illegal aliens without legal authority or justification.
Moreover, DACA constituted the de facto creation of law without the legislative process, but by unconstitutional executive fiat.
Let’s now consider the notion of “deferred action,” the foundation upon which DACA was purportedly created. There are legitimate provisions in the immigration system to provide aliens with “deferred action” when it is a matter of compassion, for humanitarian purposes. The key word is “deferred.” What is deferred is the ultimate required departure of non-immigrant aliens.
For example, if a family from another country lawfully came to the United States as non-immigrants for a temporary visit with friends or relatives in the United States and one of the members of the family was injured in an accident or became ill, those aliens could apply for deferred action so that they would not have to leave the United States until the family crisis was resolved.
As an INS agent I dealt with such cases. Generally the doctor who was treating the injured or ill family member would provide documentation to immigration authorities to verify the medical situation, with periodic updates.
As an INS special agent I was responsible for conducting investigations to make certain that applications were not fraudulent.
Generally these aliens would not be granted employment authorization except under the most extraordinary of circumstances if they needed to remain in the United States for a protracted period of time. However, DACA essentially “dropped a net” over 800,000 illegal aliens, not out of humanitarian concerns because of an unforeseen emergency but as a means of achieving a political objective.
Obama claimed that his action was to help young people who were brought to the United States by their parents and, consequently, were the victims of their parents’ actions over which they had no control.
Obama was counting on the fact that Americans are among the most compassionate people in the world, especially where children are concerned. Media reports furthered this narrative and, to this day, many ill-informed Americans believe that all aliens who participated in DACA were teenagers. But in fact, the age cutoff was actually 31. These aliens simply needed to claim that they had been brought to the United States prior to their 16th birthdays. Those aliens today might now be as old as 36 years of age. DACA should have been called DACCA (Deferred Action- Claimed Childhood Arrivals).
There were virtually no interviews or field investigations to verify any information or claims contained in the applications.
(The DREAM Act would have allowed aliens as old as 35 years of age to apply to participate in the amnesty that would have been created had the legislation passed.)
It is vital to note that even the term DREAM Act and the derivative term “Dreamers” is hypocritical. Ever since the administration of Jimmy Carter, the term “Alien” has been eradicated from the immigration debate, not out of supposed “political correctness” but as a means of Orwellian thought control and Newspeak.
However, the “DREAM Act” is an acronym for Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act. It is maddening that when the imagery of the “American Dream” can be exploited, the term “alien” becomes palatable -- but only when used in conjunction with this bit of Orwellian deception.
If the purpose of the DREAM Act was to help young illegal aliens, why did the politicians and “Gang of Eight” not simply limit it to aliens who had not yet attained the age of 21 and who could provide immigration authorities with their current school transcripts and report cards to verify their status as students in good standing?
What was never discussed in the mainstream media is that the whole point to the DREAM Act, pushed by some members of Congress and particularly the “Gang of Eight,” was to construct a legislated immigration “Trojan Horse.”
The DREAM Act established 35 years of age as the cutoff age for this amnesty because it would have covered an estimated 90% of the illegal alien population in the United States. Furthermore, without the ability to conduct interviews, let alone field investigations, aliens could easily lie about their identities, their dates of birth and even their dates of entry into the United States.
There would be no way for adjuration officers to refute the claims of the aliens who participated in the program.
The DREAM Act was a carefully disguised version of failed legislation known as Comprehensive Immigration Reform.
In 2007, after I testified about Comprehensive Immigration Reform before several hearings in the House and Senate, I wrote an Op-Ed for the Washington Times, Immigration bill a ‘No Go' in which I suggested that the legislative disaster be renamed the “Terrorist Assistance and Facilitation Act” because under that legislation, millions of illegal aliens who had entered the United States surreptitiously and without inspection, would have been provided with lawful status and official identity documents.
This would have violated the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony.
I was gratified when then-Senator Jeff Sessions quoted my Op-Ed from the floor of the U.S. Senate during the contentious floor debate on Comprehensive Immigration Reform on three separate days, in which he shared my concerns and my proposed new name for that legislation.
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) created a massive amnesty program that ultimately led to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. It has been said that insanity is doing the same things the same way and expecting a different outcome.
As a highly successful real estate magnate, President Trump must especially understand that just as it is unwise to erect a building on a swamp, legislation must be constructed on morally and legally solid ground.
---------------- Michael Cutler is a retired Senior Special Agent of the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service). He served as an Immigration Inspector, Immigration Adjudications Officer and spent 26 years as an agent with half of his career in the Drug Task Force. He has testified before mover a dozen congressional hearings and provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission. His website is michaelcutler.net. He writes for FrontPage Mag, a publication of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. David Horowitz is a Contributing Author of the ARRA News Service Tags:Michael Cutler, FrontPage Mag, DACA, Immigration Trojan Horse, DREAM act, to cover 90%, illegal alien population, US To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Patrick Buchanan: After a year in which he tested a hydrogen bomb and an ICBM, threatened to destroy the United States, and called President Trump “a dotard,” Kim Jong Un, at the gracious invitation of the president of South Korea, will be sending a skating team to the “Peace Olympics.”
An impressive year for Little Rocket Man.
Thus the most serious nuclear crisis since Nikita Khrushchev put missiles in Cuba appears to have abated. Welcome news, even if the confrontation with Pyongyang has probably only been postponed.
Still, we have been given an opportunity to reassess the 65-year-old Cold War treaty that obligates us to go to war if the North attacks Seoul, and drove us to the brink of war today.
2017 demonstrated that we need a reassessment. For the potential cost of carrying out our commitment is rising exponentially.
Two decades ago, a war on the Korean Peninsula, given the massed Northern artillery on the DMZ, meant thousands of U.S. dead.
Today, with Pyongyang’s growing arsenal of nuclear weapons, American cities could face Hiroshima-sized strikes, if war breaks out.
What vital U.S. interest is there on the Korean Peninsula that justifies accepting in perpetuity such a risk to our homeland?
We are told that Kim’s diplomacy is designed to split South Korea off from the Americans. And this is undeniably true.
For South Korean President Moon Jae-in is first and foremost responsible for his own people, half of whom are in artillery range of the DMZ. In any new Korean war, his country would suffer most.
And while he surely welcomes the U.S. commitment to fight the North on his country’s behalf as an insurance policy, Moon does not want a second Korean war, and he does not want President Trump making the decision as to whether there shall be one.
Understandably so. He is looking out for South Korea first.
Yet Moon rightly credits Trump with bringing the North Koreans to the table: “I give President Trump huge credit for bringing about the inter-Korean talks, and I’d like to thank him for that.”
But again, what are the U.S. interests there that we should be willing to put at risk of nuclear attack tens of thousands of U.S. troops in Korea and our bases in Asia, and even our great cities, in a war that would otherwise be confined to the Korean Peninsula?
China shares a border with the North, but is not treaty-bound to fight on the North’s behalf. Russia, too, has a border with North Korea, and, with China, was indispensable to saving the North in the 1950-53 war. But Russia is not committed by any treaty to fight for the North.
Why, then, are Americans obligated to be among the first to die in a second Korean War? Why is the defense of the South, with 40 times the economy and twice the population of the North, our eternal duty?
Kim’s drive for a nuclear deterrent is propelled by both fear and calculation. The fear is that the Americans who detest him will do to him and his regime and country what they did to Saddam Hussein.
The calculation is that what Americans fear most, and the one thing that deters them, is nuclear weapons. Once Soviet Russia and Communist China acquired nukes, the Americans never attacked them.
If he can put nuclear weapons on U.S. troops in Korea, U.S. bases in Japan, and U.S. cities, Kim reasons, the Americans will not launch a war on him. Have not recent events proven him right?
Iran has no nuclear weapons and some Americans clamor daily for “regime change” in Tehran. But because Kim has nukes, the Americans appear more anxious to talk. His policy is succeeding.
What he is saying with his nuclear arsenal is: As you Americans have put my regime and country at risk of annihilation, I am going to put your cities at risk. If we go down in your nuclear “fire and fury,” so, too, will millions of Americans.
The whole world is watching how this plays out.
For the American Imperium, our system of alliances, is held together by a credible commitment: If you attack any of our scores of allies, you are at war with the United States.
From the Baltic to the Black Sea to the Persian Gulf, from the South China Sea to Korea and Japan today, the costs and the risks of maintaining the imperium are growing.
With all these promissory notes out there — guarantees to go to war for other nations — one is inevitably going to be called.
And this generation of Americans, unaware of what their grandfathers obligated them to do, will demand to know, as they did in Iraq and Afghanistan: What are we over doing there, on the other side of the world?
America First is more than a slogan.
-------------------- Patrick Buchanan is currently a conservative columnist, political analyst, chairman of The American Cause foundation and an editor of The American Conservative. He has been a senior advisor to three Presidents, a two-time candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, and was the presidential nominee of the Reform Party in 2000. He blogs at the Patrick J. Buchanan. Tags:Patrick Buchanan, conservative, commentary, North Korea, Kim Jong Un, Little Rocket Man, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Conservative Lawmaker Explains Why the Embassy Move to Jerusalem Matters
by Rachel del Guidice: President Donald Trump’s administration is working to build peace in the Middle East, and a big part of that process is the administration’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, one lawmaker says.
“In the Arab world, if you are acting swiftly and with strength, that is something that makes a big impression on a lot of those leaders, even if you are acting against those interests,” Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., said in a speech Thursday at The Heritage Foundation, adding: If you are the strong horse, that is something they respect. When you show yourself to be backing down and be a weak horse, even if you are doing it in a way and taking a position that they agree with, that causes them to wonder whether you can keep your word or not, and so I think for Trump’s personal prestige, it was important. I also think it was good for the country.DeSantis, who chairs the House subcommittee on national security said Trump’s Dec. 6 reaffirmation recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and his order to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem showed a resolve to leaders of countries in the Middle East not seen before.
President Donald Trump’s administration is working to build peace in the Middle East, and a big part of that process is the administration’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, one lawmaker says.
“In the Arab world, if you are acting swiftly and with strength, that is something that makes a big impression on a lot of those leaders, even if you are acting against those interests,” Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., said in a speech Thursday at The Heritage Foundation, adding:
If you are the strong horse, that is something they respect. When you show yourself to be backing down and be a weak horse, even if you are doing it in a way and taking a position that they agree with, that causes them to wonder whether you can keep your word or not, and so I think for Trump’s personal prestige, it was important. I also think it was good for the country.
DeSantis, who chairs the House subcommittee on national security said Trump’s Dec. 6 reaffirmation recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and his order to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem showed a resolve to leaders of countries in the Middle East not seen before.
Speaking about the embassy move, DeSantis noted that Trump isn’t the first president to commit to it. “Bush promised it and didn’t do it, Clinton promised it and didn’t do it, Obama—although I find it hard to believe he actually meant it when he promised it, … he obviously was never going to move the embassy to Jerusalem or recognize it.”
In March, DeSantis went to tour possible embassy sites in Jerusalem, expecting that the president would make good on his campaign promise to move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
“We identified all the sites, potential sites where you could establish an American embassy,” the Florida lawmaker said. “And I am engaged in this now about what sites they are choosing and I think that we might find out very, very soon some very positive news about one of the sites we profiled.”
DeSantis said he thinks Trump’s leadership will inspire other Middle Eastern countries to work with the United States toward stabilization in the region.
“This is a president who understands the threat posed by Iran and posed by the Iran nuclear deal,” DeSantis said, adding: That is music to the ears of the gulf states, places like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, they fear Iran’s influence … Do they want our embassy moved to Jerusalem? No. But are they going to cry a river over that when they need to work with us, and work with Israel, to combat Iranian influence? Of course not. Their interests are to align with the United States and with Israel to combat the Iranian threat.
Elliot Abrams, senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, spoke on a panel after DeSantis’ remarks and said he thinks the road to stability in the Middle East is often misrepresented.
“Frequently, the question is asked is, how do we get to the two-state solution? And that is not the right question,” Abrams said. “The right question is how do we get to peace, the two-state question is a derivative of [it]. If it helps peace, it is a good thing. If not, it needs to be rethought.”
Daniel Pipes, president of the Middle East Forum, joined Abrams on the panel discussion and said bringing peace to the Middle East will be a process of changing hearts.
“By my analysis over the past century, 80 percent of Palestinians have been rejectionists, and 20 percent have accepted Israel, and the goal must be to expand that 20 percent to 40-60 percent,” Pipes said. “My goal is encourage an increasing number of Palestinians to recognize that the conflict is over, I am less focused on leaders … I think [if] you want a change of heart, you want a people to recognize that it is no longer worth their while to engage in, say, suicide attacks, because it is futile.”
---------------- Rachel del Guidice (@LRacheldG)is a reporter for The Daily Signal. She is a graduate of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Forge Leadership Network, and The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. Tags:Rachel del Guidice, The Daily Signal, Conservative Lawmaker, Embassy Move to Jerusalem MattersTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Jeff Bezos Is the Richest Person in History: “The Amazon CEO’s net worth reached $105.1 billion Monday, according to Bloomberg’s billionaire tracker. That eclipses the record previously held by Microsoft founder Bill Gates.”
#1 All-Time – is pretty good.
To be clear: This is not a criticism of Bezos achieving the previously unachieved. I like money. I agree with actor Christopher Plummer’s screen-written portrayal of J. Paul Getty in the movie “All the Money in the World.” The real Getty was then the richest person in the world. And in the flick, the fictitious Getty is asked how much money it would take to make him feel secure. His answer: “More.”
Exactly.
But there is a crucial difference between Getty then and Bezos now is – the size of government. At every level – federal, state and local.
Just about every single government in America is – adjusted for inflation, etc. – demonstrably much larger now.
And as government increases – government cronyism increases. And rich people – are the ones who can purchase the cronyism.
Bezos has at his disposal governments at all levels of incredible and sweeping size and power. The likes of which Getty I am sure never even contemplated.
And Bezos is taking maximum advantage – at every conceivable government level.
Let us first contemplate just some of the federal government assistance Bezos enjoys.
Why The Post Office Gives Amazon A $1.46 Subsidy On Each Box: “An April analysis from Citigroup estimates that if costs were fairly allocated, on average parcels would cost $1.46 more to deliver. It is as if every Amazon box comes with a dollar or two stapled to the packing slip—a gift card from Uncle Sam….Amazon enjoys low rates unavailable to its competitors. My analysis of available data suggests that around two-thirds of Amazon’s domestic deliveries are made by the Postal Service. It’s as if Amazon gets a subsidized space on every mail truck.”
Think that’s fair to UPS, Federal Express (FedEx) and other private sector delivery services – trying to compete for Amazon’s massive business? Hint: It ain’t:
“According the (shipping industry watcher and money manager Josh) Sandbulte, Congress has barred USPS from setting its parcel prices below its costs, to keep it from unfairly undercutting competitors like FedEx and UPS. But the formula for calculating those costs, set in 2006, hasn’t kept pace as packages have come to make up a higher and higher percentage of USPS volume. The law set the share of infrastructure costs associated with packages at 5.5%, but boxes now make up around 25% of Postal Service revenue.”
So until The Feds fix the law – the government Post Office is free to fix things for Bezos.
Then there was the Barack Obama Administration’s unilateral massive government imposition of the Leftist Internet fairy tale known as Network Neutrality. Which the Trump Administration just undid.
FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules: Who Benefits the Most?: “Internet-based tech giants and content developers are the major beneficiaries of Net Neutrality rules. Netflix Inc., Google of Alphabet Inc., Amazon.com Inc., Hulu, Facebook Inc. and Twitter Inc. are a few of the companies in the same league.”
And how do these Silicon Valley giants – like Amazon – benefit?:
“Amongst Net Neutrality’s overflowing basket of deplorables is the fact that bandwidth hog companies like Netflix, Google and Amazon get to use unlimited amounts of bandwidth – absolutely free of charge.
“Which is a bit of a problem. 70% of all U.S. bandwidth – is consumed by video streaming. Netflix all by itself – uses 37%. Netflix and YouTube-owning-Google all by themselves – use 50%. And Amazon – in addition to their inordinately busy online shopping mega-mall – offers video-content-streaming Amazon Prime.”
Of course.
And that’s just The Feds.
One highly annoying thing We the Taxpayers have to witness is when billionaire sports team owners get massive state and/or local government money giveaways – to attract their teams or build their stadiums.
The National Football League (NFL)’s Seattle Seahawks’ All-Pro cornerback Richard Sherman – gets the horrific joke:
“‘I’d stop spending billions of taxpayer dollars on stadiums…and maybe make the billionaires who actually benefit from the stadiums pay for them. That kind of seems like a system that would work for me.’”
Works for We the Taxpayers too.
You know for whom that sort of state and municipal sanity doesn’t work? Bezos.
Local Governments Won’t Say What They’re Offering Amazon: “State and local governments have been more than happy to play up the amenities they think make their locations the best choice for Amazon’s second headquarters. But many of them will not disclose the tax breaks or other financial incentives they are offering the online giant.
“More than 15 states and cities, including Chicago, Cleveland and Las Vegas, refused requests from The Associated Press to detail the promises they made to try to lure the company.”
Well isn’t that special.
If you’d like to hazard some guesses as to just how much of these many governments’ money is being poured onto Amazon’s table – here’s some history to consider:
And Amazon now – is exponentially bigger than Amazon then.
Thereby wielding exponentially more government-influencing clout now – than then.
So they’ll get even more government money.
Which makes them even more powerful.
Which means they’ll get even more government money.
Which will make them even more powerful.
Which means they’ll get…..
Lather, rinse, repeat. And repeat. And repeat again. And….
---------------- Seton Motley is the President of Less Government and he contributes to ARRA News Service. Please feel free to follow him him on Twitter / Facebook. Tags:Seton Motley, Less Government, Amazon, Jeff Bezos, World’s Richest Man, Government CronyismTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Kerby Anderson, Contributing Author: The media elite and political elite in this country are disconnected in many ways from the average American citizen. One illustration of this occurred as the final vote was taken in December on the tax reform bill.
Many of these elites were scoffing at the fact that the tax cut to middle class Americans might only be $1000 per year. Moreover, they mocked that it amounted to only $18-19 per week. They don’t understand how an additional $1000 per year can make a profound difference in many families.
Before we get to the impact $1000 could make, let’s turn the issue around. Imagine a bill before Congress that would reduce the income to families by a $1000 a year. Would those same people say, it is only a $1000 reduction? Of course they would not.
Would $1000 a year make a difference to many Americans? In a previous commentary, I talked about the survey done by the Federal Reserve. They found that 47 percent of respondents said they could not pay for a $400 emergency without borrowing money or selling one of their possessions. Would an additional $1000 make a difference to those people? I think we know the answer.
By the way, the percentage goes from 47 percent to 59 percent when asked if they have resources to cover a $1000 emergency. Nearly six in ten Americans do not have $1000 laying around for an emergency expenditure. Having an additional $1000 would make a difference to them.
These statistics illustrate the striking difference between many of the elites in this country and average Americans. The elite class in this country could probably spend $1000 at a restaurant or a weekend trip and not even feel the financial effect. The tax cut for average Americans might make a profound difference that the elites simply don’t seem to understand.
-------------- Kerby Anderson is a radio talk show host heard on numerous stations via the Point of View Network endorsed by Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, ARRA News Service Tags:Extra Cash, tax cut,o middle class, Kerby Anderson, Viewpoints, Point of View To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: With President Trump endorsing a return to earmarks, House Republicans too are >reportedly “reconsidering” their usefulness and pondering “how they might ease back into the practice.” Lawmakers fret that they have lost too much power by giving up this instrument of corruption. (Not their characterization.)
Wikipedia defines “earmark” as a budgetary provision that “directs funds to a specific recipient while circumventing the merit-based or [competitive] allocation process.” An earmark is a taxpayer-funded goodie bestowed on a congressman’s constituent, the sort of crony willing to contribute to the bestower’s next election campaign in return.
Quid pro quo, pay-for-play, bribery. Whatever you call it, there’s darn good reason why political leaders who fight corruption have fought to end earmarks.
Congressional Republicans imposed a ban on earmarks in 2011 to show that they were anti-corruption. So why relapse? Well, “the time is right,” according to GOP Representative John Culberson, for Congress to prove it can use earmarks responsibly. His bad argument is that the “excesses” of a decade ago were committed by “knuckleheads [who] went overboard.”
Somebody alert Culberson to the fact that many of the same knuckleheads are still in office. Ahem. Congress is not yet term-limited, remember?
The more basic point is that earmarks are by nature corrosive of sound government. President Trump’s only metric is apparently “getting [things] done” as opposed to obstructionism, preferring “the great friendliness” when we had earmarks. Sure, stuff got done — a lot more spending, a lot more bad stuff.
To the extent they’re gone, earmarks should stay gone. The only appropriate action is to make it even harder to bring them back.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
------------------ Paul Jacob is author of Common Sense which provides daily commentary about the issues impacting America and about the citizens who are doing something about them. He is also President of the Liberty Initiative Fund (LIFe) as well as Citizens in Charge Foundation. Jacobs is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service. Tags:Earmark, This Bad Argument, Paul Jacob, Common SenseTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Pelosi Called Tax Reform-Inspired Bonuses 'Crumbs' . . .
. . . Here's What She Said About $40 Six Years Ago
by Virginia Kruta: Within hours of the passage of the Republican-led Tax Cuts and Jobs Act — despite the Democrats' insistence on calling it a “tax scam” — multiple corporations announced increases in hiring and wages. Some even offered one-time bonuses to thousands of employees.
Democrats have been critical of those bonuses, saying they're not enough. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, in her weekly address, called the bonuses and salary increases “pathetic,” saying the American people would hardly notice the “crumbs” being tossed their way.
The Daily Caller reported her comments Thursday:"In terms of the bonus that corporate America receives versus the crumbs they are giving to workers to put the schmooze on is so pathetic. And I would hope with their big advantage of bringing home at a very low rate that they would invest in infrastructure but our experience has been they will seek dividends and buy-backs. It is insignificant.”But it wasn't that long ago that Pelosi was happily singing the praises of what arguably was a much smaller bump in the average person's paycheck — the difference being that it was a tax cut pushed by then-President Barack Obama:
Today's agreement is a victory for the American people-they spoke out clearly & #40dollars each paycheck will make a difference.
The apparent lapse in memory is not limited to Pelosi, either. Most of the Democrats criticizing the tax cuts seem to have forgotten what Obama said about them at the time:
Interesting.
----------------- Virginia Kruta (@VAKruta) Virginia holds a dual BS in Political Science and HIstory, and is a 10 year Army veteran (medic and radiology tech). She has previously written analysis and commentary for Dana Loesch, and was published at Breitbart and Independent Journal Review (IJR). Tags:Virginia Kruta, Independent Journal Review, Nancy Pelosi, tax reform, bonuses, crumbs To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
215 Million Christians Persecuted in 50 Countries. Will Media Report?
by Katie Yoder: The broadcast networks regularly shy away from the word “genocide” when reporting on Christian persecution around the world. But that doesn’t mean one isn’t happening.
Roughly 215 million Christians “experience high levels of persecution” in 50 countries for their beliefs, according to the 2018 World Watch List recently released by the non-profit Open Doors USA. That’s one in 12 Christians worldwide.
Released in January, the list relies on data from Open Doors field workers and external experts. Since 1992, Open Doors has released these reports to identify “global persecution of Christians” while “ranking the top 50 countries” where Christians are targeted for their faith.
For the ranking, Open Doors measured the violence and the pressure Christians face in church life, national life, community life, family life and private life.
Among other findings, the report revealed that during the 2018 reporting period, “3,066 Christians were killed; 1,252 were abducted; 1,020 were raped or sexually harassed; and 793 churches were attacked.”
Open Doors also stressed that “Islamic Oppression fuels persecution in 8 of the top 10 countries” on the list.
“Islamic oppression is one of the most widely recognized sources of persecution for Christians in the world today—and it continues to spread—aiming to bring many parts of the world under Sharia law,” the report later urged. “The movement, which often results in Islamic militancy and persecution of Christians, is expanding in Asia (Philippines, Bangladesh, Indonesia) and Africa (Egypt, Nigeria, Somalia).”
The list called out 11 of the 50 countries for fostering “extreme persecution”:
North Korea
Afghanistan
Somalia
Sudan
Pakistan
Eritrea
Libya
Iraq
Yemen
Iran
India
The rest of the countries fell under the categories of “high persecution” and “very high persecution.”
This year, the report identified three “major trends in Christian persecution”: “spread of radical Islam,” “the rise of religious nationalism” and “intense persecution in Central Asia” in countries like Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan.
While Christian media reported on the watch list Jan. 10, many major media outlets have yet to do so.
In August 2016, the MRC found that, in the past two-and-half years, the evening news shows reported on the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, Africa and South Asia only 60 times. And of those 60 reports, just six used the word “genocide.” The networks continued that trend through 2017.
Testimonies of Persecuted Christians
To support its numbers, the report included testimonies [edited for brevity] of persecuted Christians around the world who later received aid from Open Doors USA.
Hannah from North Korea: My mother only taught me one prayer. But I still pray it every day, for my family and for my country: ‘Hanonim, Hanonim! Lord, Lord, please help!’
It is a prayer that has sustained Hannah Cho throughout unimaginable hardship in North Korea. In the nation where Christians experience the widest extent of persecution in the world, Hannah and her husband endured horrific torture for their faith in a labor camp, ultimately leading to his death. Two of her six children died young, and Hannah has spent years separated from her family, wondering if they are alive after fleeing to neighboring countries for safety.Rohan and Neha from India:Late one night, Pastor Rohan and his wife, Neha, heard a knock at the door—but they weren’t expecting visitors.
When they looked outside, they saw a crowd of people gathered, sticks in hand. The people accused the couple of evangelizing a young boy in their village. The leaders in the community wanted Rohan and his family out—at any cost.
He remembers the night of terror: ‘They began to beat my wife and me until we bled … and then they picked up our baby and threw him against a heap of stones. The trauma was so much that my wife lost the baby she was carrying in her womb.’Yakubu from Nigeria:Yakubu awoke to the sound of Boko Haram militants (a group of Nigerian Islamic extremists) breaking down his door in Yobe State, Nigeria. He knew what was coming next. After looting everything, they made their announcement: They were going to kill him. They sliced the back of his neck and cut the front of his neck twice before leaving him on the ground to die.
Miraculously, Yakubu survived, but his injuries and scars continue to plague him. He has a circular slash mark below his right eye. A deep scar runs from the corner of his mouth halfway to his left ear. Several linear scars on his back join in a gnarled mound. It has now been five years since the attack, and these scars still serve as painful reminders of the night he nearly lost his life for his faith.-------------------- Katie Yoder is Associate Culture Editor, the Joe and Betty Anderlik Fellow at Media Research Center a 501c3 non-profit. Tags:215 Million Christians, Persecuted in 50 Countries, Will Media Report, Katie Youder, Newsbusters, Media Reserach CenterTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru - @arra
#Christian Conservative; Retired USAF & Grad Professor. Constitution NRA ProLife schoolchoice fairtax - Editor ARRA NEWS SERVICE. THANKS FOR FOLLOWING!
To Exchange Links - Email: editor@arranewsservice.com!
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting principles & beleifs beliefs of other organizations, this blog/site is soley controlled and supported by the editor. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
