but we’re the extremists…
Unfortunately, Satan has them all in his fingertips. They are blinded and call us extremists. Just like what —
The Bible states this since we are living in the last days of our time.
Again, even if history treats Pres Trump like a buffoon, one of his enduring legacies will be that he exposed how evil, corrupt, hypocritical, apathetic, and anti-American the swamp is.
Yes. And the swamp is made up of Dems and the GOP. I just don’t get it.
When you have the media and institutions pushing that for years, it seems believable to the average joe. People are just too lazy to wake up and learn things on their own.
Now, Rep Cori Bush & Stacy Abrams who has shown the lack of honesty & lack of intelligence. They are in good company with the other misfits. All their evil ways they blame on us because the Sheep believes them.
They call everyone else — everything that they are.
Everything they do they blame republicans.
We will be persecuted for Christ Jesus, our Lord and King! For Not fighting good over evil.
For He reigns forever and ever!
Once we see TRUMP can not do it on his own….that will get us going.
We’ll go to any extreme to accomplish our mission, that will be,
that is, getting our country back…
Democrats’ calls to defund the police are dangerous.
BY Sen. Roger Marshall
Last fall, I was visiting my mother and father after a long bus tour across Kansas. My parents still live in the same home I was raised in, and as I was leaving that fall day, a scene of a riot was on the TV. I vividly remember my mother saying, “Why would any person want to go into law enforcement today?”
To understand the magnitude of that question, you’d have to know that my father was a chief of police for 25 years. Growing up, he taught us the importance of law and order. He taught us that two wrongs don’t make a right. And he instilled in us respect for our fellow man. So, you can imagine the shock on my face after hearing my mother say what she did. We were always so proud of my father. For 25 years, he represented and defined law and order for my hometown. My father was Kansas Officer of the Year and former president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police.
So, in his world, there was right and wrong. There was a law, and it was unambiguous. If you broke the law in El Dorado, Kansas, Vic Marshall was going to throw you in jail. He didn’t care who you were, where you came from, or how much money you made — he represented the law. As I walked out the door that night, I reflected on my father’s career. I thought about what my mother said, and it took me back to 2014.
When my father said that President Barack Obama didn’t have the backs of the men and women in blue. It reminded me as I was preparing my remarks for a live, televised debate that the central role of government at all levels is to maintain public safety. After all, the very first paragraph of the Constitution is all about public safety.
Like many of you, I sat with my jaw hanging when the Biden-Harris administration recently accused the GOP of defunding the police. It’s simply not factual. While the White House tried to trot out a false narrative that its latest partisan COVID-19 package would have boosted funding for law enforcement, not once did the president or any Democrat say the funds could be used to fund the police when they tried to sell the bill.
Now, after seeing a dramatic increase in violence across the country, they are saying that billions of dollars for state and local governments could be used to fund the police. Do they think people will fall for this? Certainly not after this past year, in which we saw numerous radical Democrats call to defund the police.
Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said, “Defunding police means defunding police. It does not mean budget tricks or funny math.” Her fellow Democratic Rep. Cori Bush underscored her point: “So yes, defund your butts. Defund you.” And leave it to Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib to take it one step further, saying, “No more policing, incarceration, and militarization. It can’t be reformed.”
We’ve seen these radical socialist views implemented in over a dozen major cities across the country by leaders who slashed funding from their police departments in 2020. Minneapolis cut $1.1 million out of its police budget and, in turn, has seen a 152% increase in homicides since 2019 and a 23% increase in all violent crimes in the same time frame. Atlanta had 157 homicides in 2020, the most in over 20 years. These views also contributed to the homicide rate in 20 major cities across the country rising 28% in the first three months of 2021 compared to 2020.
This past year of riots and disregard for law and order reminds me of growing up in the ’60s. Violence is up because of cultural changes created by turning heads away from violence, ignoring riots, and overlooking vandalism. And the uptick in violence is yet another crisis created by radical socialist policies and dangerous rhetoric. The bottom line? Socialist democrats created this crisis.
They defunded the police. They created the anti-police mobs. They turned their back on and, quite frankly, destroyed the integrity of the police. They turned their heads from violence and vandalism and even glorified them at times. And they opened the borders and continue to turn their heads from illegal immigrants.
It’s been just over five months since Joe Biden was sworn in as president.
In that time, people have seen crisis upon crisis — all self-inflicted and all completely preventable: the border crisis, cyberattacks, rising inflation, a labor shortage, and, of course, the crisis of violence in many cities nationwide.
As the son of a police chief, I know and respect the vital role law enforcement officers play in our communities, and I know the heroic sacrifices they and their families make. The recent rise in unfair criticisms of law enforcement officers is personal to me. It’s past time radical socialists look in the mirror, begin to understand the importance of law and order, respect their fellow man (including those serving in law enforcement), and realize that their calls to defund the police are dangerous and foolish. At a time of rising violent crime in cities across the country, we need more support for our front-line heroes, not less.
Barack Obama Muslim Brotherhood Tradition.
Sharia Law (/ʃəˈriːə/; Arabic: شَرِيعَة, romanized: šarīʿa [ʃaˈriːʕa]), Islamic law, is a religious law forming part of the Islamic tradition.
Its derived from the religious precepts of Islam, particularly the Quran and
the hadith. In Arabic, the term sharīʿah refers to God’s immutable divine law and is contrasted with fiqh, which refers to its human scholarly interpretations. The manner of its application in modern times has been a subject of dispute between Muslim fundamentalists and modernists.
The Sharia contains the rules by which a Muslim society is organized and governed, and it provides the means to resolve conflicts among individuals and between the individual and the state. There is no dispute among Muslims that the Qur’an is the basis of the Sharia and that its specific provisions are to be scrupulously observed.
Roger Marshall is Kansas’s junior U.S. senator.
China and the U.S. Are Talking Tough. Don’t Believe (Most of) It.
BY David Rothkopf
They see our unwillingness to fight back and know they got us. So Last week the Chinese Communist Party threw a party for itself. It celebrated 100 years since its founding. It characterized itself as the “savior” of China, the authors of the country’s current greatness. And yet, for all the over-the-top nationalism, you might well conclude much of the hoopla was for the benefit of a foreign audience, an American audience in particular.
For all the fluttering red flags and carefully orchestrated salutes to the country from Chinese astronauts in outer space, the centerpiece of the celebrations was a speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping. Xi enumerated the party’s accomplishments and laid out key goals, like ultimately reclaiming Taiwan, but the international headlines were made when Xi said, “We will not accept sanctimonious preaching from those who feel they have the right to lecture us. We have never bullied, oppressed or subjugated the people of any other country, and we never will.” (Give him credit here. The people who have been bullied, oppressed, and subjugated by the Chinese communists have been their own citizens.)
“By the same token,” he went on, “we will never allow anyone to bully, oppress or subjugate [China]. Anyone who tries will find them on a collision course with a steel wall forged by 1.4 billion people.” (Autocrats and their walls, am
I right?) Xi’s words were clearly meant for the United States, a country despite a dysfunctional, divided political system currently is home to deep, bipartisan unease about the rise of China.
During Joe Biden’s recent European trip, he made aligning other Western nations to stand up to Chinese threats to the international system one of his top priorities. During his first speech to a joint session of Congress, Biden made it clear he saw the competition with China as the central international challenge of our time. This was a view explicitly echoed by U.S.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken in his first major policy address.
If you listened to the rhetoric of the leaders of both countries you would
think we were on the verge of a new bipolar divide in the world. Us vs. them.
A Manichean contest between the forces of light and the forces of darkness.
But while both Xi and Biden no doubt believed their strong words about the threat posed by the other, the reality of the relationship is much more nuanced than the rhetoric that makes its way into your Twitter feed.
For example, although the Biden administration, to its disadvantage, does not have an ambassador in Beijing at the moment, it does have an Asia Czar in the White House in the person of Kurt Campbell. Sometimes characterized as a China hawk, he is more accurately described as a realist who has argued that engagement with China did not succeed in coaxing that country toward embracing international norms. Since taking office, Campbell has reiterated a point he made earlier in a Foreign Affairs article co-authored in 2019 with current National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, that the U.S. must prepare for a period of protracted competition with China. They warned against falling into the trap of seeking to replay the Cold War with our new rival. Instead, Campbell and Sullivan argued that the goal of U.S. policy should be to “establish favorable terms of co-existence with Beijing in four key competitive domains—military, economic, political, and global governance.”
This tough, clear-eyed, and balanced approach, defined by Secretary of State Blinken in a speech on March 3 of this year, “will be competitive when it should be, collaborative when it can be and adversarial when it must be.”
Early Biden administration policy moves have sought to establish parameters within the relationship. This has led to Biden, Blinken, Sullivan, and Campbell not only reiterating the core principles of their new policies but demonstrating that they will be tough when they need to be.
That has produced not only sharp rhetoric and even testy exchanges between leaders at the first encounters but also a focus on competition and containment at every level. Working with the Quad group of countries—an informal alliance consisting of the U.S., Japan, India, and Australia that has as its primary strategic focus counterbalancing China—has been prioritized. The threat posed by China has been cited in testimony before Congress by all of America’s top national security leaders as being a paramount focus.
Former diplomat on importance of preserving peace across Taiwan Strait (cnbc.com)
The U.S. has sought to engage more, notably on the trade front, with Taiwan, an independent nation since the PRC’s founding over which Beijing has nonetheless continued to assert its sovereignty. Economic policies are justified by saying they make the U.S. more competitive with China. Security investments from cyber to new weapons systems are all justified as necessary to maintain pace with the Chinese.
That said, Biden and his team and Xi and his know that the last thing either country needs is direct conflict with the other. It would be economically disastrous for the two deeply interlinked economies and a costly distraction from their greater priorities. Nonetheless, Biden and his team and Xi and his also know that the appearance of a competitive threat is helpful to them and motivation for their respective countries to continue to invest in growth, defense and the future.
In fact, unlike the zero-sum game of Cold War rivalry, these two competitors need each other every bit as much as they may also threaten each other—both as partners and, paradoxically, as rivals. That is in part why the experienced team in charge of Biden foreign policy very deliberately uses the language of competition rather than conflict. They understand that at no time in its history has China had the global domination ambitions of the former Soviet Union. They know China has from time to time had conflicts around its periphery, it has no history of aggressively projecting its military power in far away lands. Even today as China builds up its so-called “blue water” navy, it is primarily to protect trade flows with the rest of the world on which it depends. China’s Belt and Road Initiative is not a plan to conquer the world, it is an effort to make up for real resource shortages within China and to grow its economy fast enough to maintain stability at home.
Indeed, the Chinese Communist Party at 100 has one goal and that is to maintain its power within China. Under Xi, it has done so using both brutality—with the Uighurs and in violation of the rights promised to the citizens of Hong Kong—and economic diplomacy worldwide. In that respect, its goals echo those of the Biden administration.
The primary purpose of its foreign policy is to be just tough enough to reduce the likelihood of international problems that might distract it from its central domestic agenda. And in the case of China, it is to invoke that country’s growth and the competitive threat it poses whenever it can help support that domestic agenda—whether that means investment in infrastructure, research and development, green technologies in which China is now a leader or the military.
The bellicosity and braggadocio of the Chinese Communist Party celebrations masks the leadership’s real insecurities about its economy and its ability to maintain control over 1.4 billion citizens of the Internet Age. The tough-guy stance of the U.S. masks its mutual recognition of their interdependence. Indeed, contrary to what hawks in either country may say, the two countries may be more essential to each other’s future growth than they are threats to each other’s survival.
China Has a BIG Plan for Post-U.S. Afghanistan—and It’s Worth Billions
China actually needs to extend its Belt and Road program to Afghanistan is, ultimately, peace. Beijing has gone so far as to offer infrastructure and energy projects worth billions of dollars to the Taliban in return for peace in Afghanistan. China is poised to make an exclusive entry into post-U.S. Afghanistan with its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Speaking on condition of anonymity, a source close to government officials in Afghanistan told The Daily Beast that Kabul authorities are growing more intensively engaged with China on an extension of the $62 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)—the flagship project of BRI, which involves the construction of highways, railways and energy pipelines between Pakistan and China—to Afghanistan.
Opinion: The many US blunders that contributed to looming disaster in Afghanistan (msn.com)
The Chinese threat, 90 miles from America’s shores, poised to attack (commdiginews.com)
Biden Favorably Quotes Communist Dictator Whose Regime Killed Millions (thefederalist.com) China’s Xi throws down gauntlet to US (msn.com)