(Article by Wayne Madsen from Strategic-culture.org)

There is very little difference between what McCarthy told the Ohio County Republican Women’s Club in Wheeling, West Virginia in 1950:

«I have here in my hand a list of 205 that were known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department».

In November 2016, a shadowy and anonymous group of self-described «nonpartisan» public policy wonks, computer scientists, and national security specialists calling themselves «PropOrNot» (Propaganda or Not) published a list of 200 websites cited as «peddlers of Russian propaganda during the election season, with combined audiences of at least 15 million Americans». The Washington Post, Associated Press, and other corporate-controlled media outlets dutifully reported this diatribe as «news». At least during the witch-hunting days of McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), those accused of being Communist agents knew who their accusers were and could face them down publicly.

Rather than condemn the modern-day witch-hunting by faux liberals and progressives, the American media has provided the accusers with maximum support. When CBS newsman Edward R. Murrow called out McCarthy for his bullying tactics on nationwide television, he received support from America’s major newspapers:

The conservative Washington Evening Star wrote: «everyone… resents and detests the bully boy tactics which Senator McCarthy so often employs.

The New York World Telegram: [describing McCarthy’s tactics] «Bamboozling, bludgeoning, distorting way».

The New York Times: [Condemned] «the unwarranted interference of a demagogue».

Today, The New York Times has been leading the charge against Trump and his transition team, citing an unfounded U.S. Intelligence Community report calling out the news network RT and Sputnik News for «interfering» in the U.S. election by pushing «fake news». The Times is engaged in a sort of demagoguery that Murrow, if he were alive today, would assuredly condemn. After exposing McCarthy before the nation as a dangerous demagogue, Murrow summed up his broadcast by issuing a stark warning the American public:

«We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world, but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home».

The list of 200 «pro-Russian» websites produced by an anonymous entity and endorsed by the corporate media also crept into the U.S. intelligence report on alleged Russian hacking of Democratic National Committee computers and private email of Clinton campaign officials. The U.S. Intelligence Community, which is well-known for marketing false intelligence on the former USSR, North Vietnam, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, Iran, Cuba, Muammar Qaddafi’s Libya, and Bashar al-Assad’s Syria, added its own opinionated «chapeau» on the intelligence report’s screed about RT and Sputnik: the election interference was all personally directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin! Just as the Central Intelligence Agency’s dirty hands were all over the «Prop or Not» list, as they were on McCarthy’s phony list of 205 State Department «Red» employees, they were also on the personal attack on Putin.

Just as a number leading «progressives» were wedded to CIA propaganda efforts during the McCarthy era, they also surfaced to defend the CIA’s «Russia» witch-hunt against Trump. Bill Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich was among the CIA sycophants. Acting like a left-wing version of old Joe McCarthy, Reich wrote on his blog:

• «[A] CIA assessment found that Russian operatives covertly interfered in the election campaign in an attempt to ensure the Republican candidate’s victory.

• Several of Trump’s key campaign aides have close ties to Putin — including his former campaign manager, Paul Manafort.

• Trump has picked for Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, CEO of ExxonMobil, who is also close to Putin.

• After becoming CEO, Exxon bet billions on Russia’s vast oil resources through a partnership with Russian oil giant Rosneft, owned partly by the Kremlin. Putin himself attended the 2011 signing ceremony for the deal».

Reich’s «list» is no different than the one Joe McCarthy waved in his hand while speaking to the old GOP biddies in Wheeling in 1950. Reich, in one fell swoop, netted all of his perceived Russian agents-of-influence: Trump, Putin, Manafort, Tillerson, ExxonMobil, and Rosneft. Former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid added another name to the neo-McCarthyite «list»:

• Trump adviser Carter Page, who had, before the election, committed the egregious infraction of visiting Moscow.

Two of Reid’s Senate Democratic colleagues, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, called for a full investigation of Trump’s national security adviser-designate, retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, during his time as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Blumenthal and Shaheen, mustering up their best signature Joe McCarthy tactics, all-but-accused Flynn of passing U.S. secrets to foreign actors. The senators did not limit their witch hunt to Flynn’s time leading DIA but widened it to include his entire Army career. Without a shred of evidence, Blumenthal and Shaheen charged that Flynn provided «highly sensitive compartmented information and code word classified information about the Haqqani terrorist network to Pakistan». This was classic McCarthyism: toss out a charge without proof and await the damage to the political opposition.

For the record, in 2010 Blumenthal lied about serving in the military in Vietnam. After receiving more than five draft deferments between 1965 and 1970, Blumenthal received a commission in the Marine Corps Reserve in Washington, DC, where he organized a Marine «Toys for Tots» campaign. Senator Shaheen’s husband, New Hampshire Lebanese-American Democratic political operative Bill Shaheen, may have more than passing acquaintances with Lebanese-American supporters of the Saudi-supported Future Movement party run by Prime Minister Saad Hariri.

During the McCarthy era, several leading lights of the progressive literati and glitterati class condemned the witch-hunting tactics of the right wing. Playwright Arthur Miller brought to the stage «The Crucible», a dramatic rendition of the 1692 Salem witchcraft trials in colonial Massachusetts. Miller’s intent was to show the American people that the anti-Communist hysteria of the late 1940s and early 1950s was no different than that displayed by the public during the Salem trials of the 17^th century. The familiar «Are you now or were you ever a Communist?» refrain posed to Hollywood performers and directors by congressional committees was roundly condemned by such well-known actors as Humphrey Bogart, Gene Kelly, Judy Garland, Burt Lancaster, Danny Kaye, and Edward G. Robinson. It is beyond shameful that many of their not-as-talented Hollywood successors, individuals such as Rob Reiner, Jessica Chastain, Andy Richter, Whoopi Goldberg, and Albert Brooks, are now leading the neo-McCarthyite «Russian agent» charges against Trump and his incoming administration from the altar of Twitter.

In her famous 1950 «Declaration of Conscience» speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate, Maine Republican Margaret Chase Smith hit out at the McCarthyites of her day. She said the scourge of McCarthyism «spread like cancerous tentacles of ‘know nothing, suspect everything’ attitudes». Today, it is not the right that is spreading its «cancerous tentacles» of suspicion, but the fake «progressive left».

Read more at: Strategic-culture.org

Before leaving the White House, Barack Obama released a final rule which lifts a burden on scientists working with human subjects, but has patient privacy advocates in an uproar over the decision. In a revision of the Common Rule, a proposal requiring researchers to obtain written consent from their patients prior to using any bio-specimens obtained during medical procedures, has been altered. When the HHS first issued the proposal in 2015, it drew mostly negative remarks.

Now, according to an HHS statement, a change to the final rule “does not require that consent be obtained in order to conduct such research.” When the Federal Register published the final revision of the Common Rule, the proposal was completely eliminated. The rule is a complex set of regulations which are designed to ensure federal funded research is conducted in an ethical manner on human subjects. When the revisions take effect in 2018, it will mark the first time in 26 years that the rule had been updated.

In order to avoid situations where a patient initially gave consent but later learned their specimen was used without their knowledge, federal regulators had suggested obtaining patient consent along every step of the research. Researchers argued that having to track patients would slow their progress. Small clinics and hospitals believe the change will likely prevent them from providing samples to researchers, due to the associated costs and necessary technologies. (RELATED: Stay up to date on more medical science news at Scientific.news)

Director of the HHS Office for Human Protections, Dr. Jerry Menikoff, said in general, that researchers can continue to use such bio-specimens the way they currently do. Menikoff is hopeful that changes to the Common Rule, which reduce unnecessary administrative burdens, will benefit both researchers and research participants. President and co-founder of the Citizens’ Council on Health Care, and privacy advocate, Twila Braise, is worried about the new Common Rule. “I don’t think they have protected the rights of people whose bio-specimens have been taken,” said Braise. Changes to the Common Rule don’t go into effect until next year, but the likelihood of the rules being followed is slim.

In 2016, Republicans in congress asked the administration not to release a final rule, but they did not get their wishes granted. The Obama administration addressed many privacy issues in its final days. Last week, HHS released another final rule which amended and eased consent requirements pertaining to 42 CFR Part 2, a privacy rule which covers the disclosure of healthcare records for patients in federally funded treatment programs for drug and alcohol abuse.

Braise, who is also a nurse, has been battling with public health officials in her home state of Minnesota. Braise was successful in forcing the state to halt the use of blood samples which were obtained from newborn babies. Secondary research on babies’ blood is now prohibited where parental consent is not obtained. Privacy advocates from other states have joined the fight, which led to a 2014 provision requiring parental consent for any health screenings that could be used in federally funded research.

The proposed rule from HHS contained provisions which would have extended consent requirements on non-federally funded research, but those requirements were removed from the final rule, which also dives into the unsettling territory of unidentified bio-specimens.

Genetic and privacy experts, along with Braise’s team, are questioning weather unidentified DNA will be clinically useful in the impending era of precision medicine. “By the look of it, they don’t consider bio-specimens as human subjects, even if we’re in the era of DNA,” said Braise.

Sources:

ModernHealthcare.com

Ktep.org

“How people think about the very nature of life and how people love and hate is likely to be challenged by major technological advances in understanding and efforts to manipulate human anatomy, which will spark strong divisions between people, country, and regions,” the report reads.

The National Intelligence Council provides long-term strategic analysis for the U.S. intelligence community and the Director of National Intelligence.

The more advanced the technologies of genetic engineering and human bodily modification become, the less likely that different nations will be able to find common ground, the report says.

Deciding for the world

A recent editorial by Gizmodo summarizes the problem like this: different countries and cultures have different values about the limits that should be placed on biotechnology. But it only takes one country to allow a technology into the world that others consider untested, dangerous, or morally repugnant.

“If modern science can … defy the boundaries of borders, who exactly should be charged with deciding what science to unleash upon the world?” Gizmodo asks.

The editorial cites two current examples of such controversies. The first concerns biotech company Oxitec, which has genetically engineered male mosquitoes to carry a gene that will kill all of their offspring. These mosquitoes have already been released into the wild in some countries, such as Brazil, in efforts to suppress the population of mosquitoes that transmit dengue fever.

Suppose, the editorial asks, Canada approves the GM mosquito and the United States does not? Eventually, mosquitoes from Canada will find their way into the United States, regulatory approval or not. Thus in this scenario, Canada’s regulators would have, de facto, overruled the U.S. decision.

Similarly, scientists worldwide have warned of the dangers of germline modification of human beings — that is, making modifications to human sperm, eggs, or embryos. Because these “germline” cells eventually differentiate into every cell in the body, changes to them can hypothetically affect any organ system, making it nearly impossible to predict their effects. These changes are then also passed on to future generations without their consent. (RELATED: Stay up to date on genetically modified foods at GMOs.news)

Critics also warn that germline modification begins a slippery slope toward “designer babies” or genetically engineered “superhumans,” ideas which have major social ramifications and are widely unpopular.

Scientists and ethicists have repeatedly called for a moratorium on germline modification research. But recently, the United Kingdom announced a framework for licensing clinics to perform a type of germline modification known as mitochondrial replacement, or three-parent IVF. This led Newsweek to suggest that British scientists are unilaterally “deciding the future of humanity.”

Is cooperation impossible?

The Gizmodo editorial suggests that perhaps an international legal framework is needed to regulate genetic engineering, but admits that this may be a pipe dream.

The major challenge is that different countries have dramatically different attitudes toward biotechnology. The US government is heavily pro-GMO, for example, while many European countries have banned GMO crops and require labeling of GMO foods.

“I’m skeptical about the ability of an international body to reflect the very different conditions and, more importantly, cultures of different countries,” Stanford bioethicist Hank Greely said.

“When countries want different things,” he said, “international bodies typically end up being ineffective, often with mandates sufficiently vague that everyone could agree to them but that no one will be particularly bound by them.”

This phenomenon was on display at a recent meeting of the United Nations Convention on Biodiversity. Activists had called for a global moratorium on a biotechnology technique known as gene drive, in which a genetic modification is designed to completely take over in a wild population. Despite the fact that bioethicists regularly raise warnings about the implications of gene drive and that a UN resolution would have been non-binding, the UN refused to issue a comment on the subject.

Likely this reluctance came, in part, from the influence of countries with powerful biotech industries.

Sources for this article include:

Gizmodo.co.uk

DNI.gov

DNI.gov

NaturalNews.com

(Article by Brandon Smith from Alt-market.com)

What I outlined, essentially, was a beginners course on 4^th Generation Warfare. This methodology is difficult to summarize, but here I will list what I believe are some of its core tenets.

Fourth Gen warfare is based on a primary lesson within Sun Tzu’s The Art Of War. Sun Tzu argues in the classical military tome that the greatest strategists win wars by NOT fighting, or at least, by not fighting their opponents openly and directly. That is to say, they win by convincing their opponents that fighting back is futile and that surrender is preferable, or, they convince their opponents to destroy themselves through internal conflict and psychological sabotage. Sun Tzu felt this method was far superior to engaging in direct combat in a real world battle space.

While this might sound bizarre to some, it is becoming more and more apparent (in my view) that 4^th Gen warfare is now the go-to weapon for globalists. Defeating the system established by the globalists, a system prevalent for decades, is an impossible task unless 4^th Gen warfare is understood.

A classic example of a tried and true form of 4^th Gen attack is to initiate a civil war within a target population, and in most cases, control the leadership on both sides of that conflict. Another method is to conjure an enemy, an outside threat which may be legitimate or entirely fabricated, and use that enemy to push a target population to unify under a particular banner that benefits the globalist cabal in the long run. Fourth Gen requires patience above all else.

In fact, I would say 4^th Gen is the weaponization of patience.

A 4^th Gen attack is not carried out over days, or months, but years. To find a comparable experience is difficult, but I would suggest people who have the tenacity set out to learn how military snipers operate. Can you train for years mastering long distance marksmanship, crawl for hours from an insertion point to an observation point, then sit in a hole in the ground (if you are lucky enough to have a hole in the ground) for days waiting to take just one shot, perhaps the only important shot you will ever take in combat, at a vital target, and do it with certainty that you will not miss?

The amount of planning, intense precision and foresight that goes into a sniper operation is much like the kind of effort and calm needed to complete a 4^th Gen psy-ops mission. This kind of warfare is dominated by the “think tanks”, and anyone hoping to counter such tactics should look into the history of one particular think tank — RAND Corporation, and their premier psy-ops tool — rational choice theory.

Whenever I hear someone argue that a conspiracy of globalists could not exist because “such plans would be too elaborate and require too much power to carry out in real life,” I have to laugh and bring up RAND, which has had almost limitless funding from globalist foundations like the Ford Foundation and was built specifically to develop not only next gen weapons, but 4^th Gen psychological warfare schemes. RAND’s influence is everywhere, from politics, to the social sciences, to military applications and even in Hollywood. After studying their efforts for many years now I can say that these people are indeed smart. Some of them may not be aware of the greater consequences as they war game ideas for dominating the public, and some of them are undoubtedly morally bankrupt, but they are still smart, and should not be underestimated.

Another reference point I would suggest to researchers would be a document called From Psyop To Mindwar: The Psychology Of Victory written by Michael Aquino and Paul Vallely for the Pentagon. In it, they make it clear that the methods of 4^th Generation warfare are not limited to foreign enemies. In fact, they are recommended for use by governments against their own populations. Again, the thrust of the methodology was to manipulate a target population into subduing itself, so that force was not necessary. Aquino and Vallely note that this would be a better outcome for everyone involved, because it would help to avoid the bloodshed of insurgency and counterinsurgency.

Read more at: Alt-market.com

Stay informed about defeating globalists like George Soros at Resist.news.

While President Trump is doing exactly what’s needed to protect America, root out the deep corruption of the bureaucracy and battle the incessant “fake news” lies of the media, the left-wing propagandists (who script every significant story in the mainstream media) have a sufficient number of blindly obedient followers to drive the nation into social chaos. (That’s their goal.)

Not only are the radical left-wingers attempting to subvert the Republic and foment a communist uprising to overthrow the legitimate U.S. government; they’re also hoping to murder as many whites as possible in the process. As revealed in this shocking Daily Caller article, a Black Lives Matter activist trained as a social justice warrior is now openly calling for the mass murder of whites. “We need to start killing people,” she says with a megaphone while wearing a Black Lives Matter shirt. “First off, we need to start killing the White House. The White House must die…” she continues, perfectly parroting the scripts taught to her by SJW front groups funded by George Soros.

She wraps it all up with a demand to take all the property and belongings of whites, just like the Nazis did to Jewish prisoners: “White people, give your f#cking money, your f#cking house, your f#cking property, we need it f#cking all…” while another crowd member screams, “Reparations!”

In my podcast exploring the extreme divide in America, I explain why continued escalation of hatred and violence by the “journo-terrorism” mainstream media may thrust America into kinetic violence where the explosion of unruly left-wing rioters leads to a Trump-ordered Martial Law and National Guard crackdown on the mindless mobs. This, in turn, will very likely accelerate the collapse of peaceful society.

Coincidentally, I am on the record predicting this exact outcome, telling Natural News readers in this January 3, 2017 article:

Even more astonishingly, realize that even you will beg for martial law because the violence, looting and social chaos being pursued by the lawless left will be so outrageously out of control that you’ll gladly give up more liberty in exchange for the promise of security.

Now, in a more up-to-date podcast, I give you the latest analysis that points toward mass social unrest and Martial Law in America’s near-term future. To stop all this, by the way, President Trump could declare a national emergency and halt the divisive propaganda of the left-wing media by decree, with a phased return to a free press after the communist subversives have been arrested and imprisoned. (This is precisely what former KGB propagandist Yuri Bezmenov says a free nation must do to reverse cultural subversion by communists.)

Click here to listen to the podcast at the Health Ranger Report website, or listen below:

A little over two years ago, Hal Stanley and his wife Michelle learned the hard way about how CPS views parents who defy the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) pharmaceutical mandate for treating sick children. When the couple was found to be harboring a dietary supplement known as miracle mineral solution, or MMS, in their home — MMS is not FDA-approved — armed law enforcement and CPS officials raided the home and kidnapped seven of the family’s home-schooled children.

For no other reason than simply to punish the family for possessing a substance that is known to cure serious conditions like AIDS and cancer — because the FDA hates natural cures, after all — state officials abducted the Stanley children at gunpoint and illegally held them for months on frivolous charges, this being the subject of the new lawsuit.

“At issue are allegations that the government agents violated several Constitutional rights, such as due process, familial association, and unlawful seizure, based on the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments, and that those involved with taking the children lied to the court, fabricated evidence, and suppressed exculpatory evidence,” reports Health Impact News.

A full report by Health Impact News on what happened to the Stanleys are where they are today is accessible HealthImpactNews.com.

Arkansas wasting millions in taxpayer dollars trying to defend its tyranny against the Stanleys

It is almost unfathomable to believe that such a scenario can even occur in the “land of the free,” but it happens all the time. In this case, the Stanleys did absolutely nothing other than raise their children mostly off the grid and mind their own business — which often makes one a target in a country like the U.S. that demands total compliance with pharmaceutical, vaccine, and other mandates. (RELATED: Visit Resist.news for daily updates on resisting government tyranny.)

While the Stanleys’ lawsuit stands a real chance at success, it is an uphill battle because the state of Arkansas refuses to relent or admit that it violated the law and committed egregious acts against this innocent family. The state has endless millions to apparently waste on trying to defend itself in court, but the Stanleys’ funds are limited.

This Christian family has been through so much trying to escape the clutches of an out-of-control government apparatus that is shamelessly eager to persecute anyone who veers too far from the fold of politically-correct living and beliefs. They need our help to fight the state and win this victory, which is why they have set up a fundraising page called “But We See Jesus” to see justice served.

“We are seeking redress because we are entitled under the law,” the family’s attorney, Joe Churchwell, wrote in a recent letter. “We will be seeking injunctive relief to force the government to recognize the Bill of Rights.”

“We’re not doing this because we want to or because we think we’re going to get rich,” the letter adds. “This isn’t simply a lawsuit, this is one part of the campaign for accountability and one step in the journey to take back our families’ right to be families.”

Stay informed about the rising police state at Police State News.

Sources for this article include:

HealthImpactNews.com

MedicalKidnap.com

Drive.Google.com

ButWeSeeJesus.com

What we are witnessing today is the complete collapse of civility and credibility across the political left, where people who consider themselves “tolerant” literally engage in violent attacks and assaults against those with whom they disagree.

This brings me to my new summation of the philosophy of the mindless, mentally ill Left:

Conformity is diversity

Hatred is tolerance

Consensus is fact

I will explore this new Orwellian motto of the mentally ill Left in an upcoming podcast. Until then, I have another podcast to share with you (below the following video) which shows the left-wing violence now being carried out against supporters of President Trump:

Health Ranger Podcast: Why the Left doesn’t believe in protecting America’s borders or national security

Listen and learn about the complete lunacy into which the political Left has now devolved. Click here for my Health Ranger Report podcast or listen below:

(Article by Chris Menahan from InformationLiberation.com)

Though the media is currently in a tizzy because Trump’s executive order held up around 300 people at airports, Obama’s bombings were reported as completely reasonable to bring about peace.

Out of the seven countries that were banned by President Trump last Friday, five were bombed by the Obama administration: Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya and Somalia.

Where were the George Soros funded organizations protesting the “nearly 100 attacks” that have occurred since 2009 in Yemen “resulting in the deaths of hundreds of militants, but also many civilians?”

Did Chuck Schumer shed a tear for the 62 Syrian troops killed and 100 more wounded that the Obama administration “accidentally bombed” in 2016?

Did Schumer openly weep when the Obama administration was “duped into attacking Somali troops” and killed 22 of them in an air strike late last year?

It’s fine for the Nobel Peace Prize winning President to bomb these people in their own countries, but for President Trump to temporarily prevent them from traveling to our country to keep America safe is “un-American” and “unconstitutional.”

Read more at: InformationLiberation.com

Find more news about the threat of terrorism at Terrorism.news.

The video, entitled, “The Prenatal Care Deception,” is the first of an investigative video series by Live Action. The series, which has been appropriately titled “Abortion Corporation” highlights Planned Parenthood’s very own employees saying that the organization’s primary focus is to give abortions, and not to provide women’s health care. Live Action plans on releasing their video series concurrently with Congress’ plans to redirect Medicaid dollars away from Planned Parenthood and instead direct the funds towards local health clinics, as well as the vote on the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.

Lila Rose, the president and founder of Live Action stated, “Planned Parenthood says it’s a champion of women’s health care, yet prenatal care, which is an essential service for expectant mothers, is virtually nonexistent.”

“Our investigators who wanted to keep their babies were turned away by 92 out of 97 Planned Parenthood centers. It’s clear that despite its claims, abortion is the priority and the only option for pregnant women that visit Planned Parenthood.”

The responses Live Action investigators received included some real gems. At a Planned Parenthood in Tempe, AZ, an investigator was told, “Planned Parenthood offers abortions, so they don’t offer prenatal care.”

At another location, in Merrillville, IN, another employee said, “No, we don’t do prenatal services. I mean, it’s called Planned Parenthood, I know it’s kind of deceiving.”

Live Action intends on investing $500,000 into its ad campaign to help millions of Americans see the series. Their plans for the future videos include exposing the overall lack of health care services provided by Planned Parentood, and will even feature testimonies from former managers.

During a media web conference about the investigation, Rose also revealed that her organization had examined Planned Parenthood’s own annual report of the services it provides to its clients. According to Rose, their analysis indicates Planned Parenthod “provides less than one percent of pap smear tests for women in our country every year,” and “less than two percent of clinical breast exams every year.”

Live Action reports that their findings suggest Planned Parenthood conducts practically zero mammograms and provides less than two percent of women’s cancer screenings across the states. And yet, Planned Parenthood’s figures on abortion are through the roof. The organization provides about 30 percent of America’s abortions, reaching upwards of 887 abortions performed every day. Last year alone, Planned Parenthood performed over 320,000 abortions. In fact, according to Live Action, the abortion corporation provides 160 abortions for every one mother and child that it refers for adoption.

Rose simply states,”Their focus as an organization is insincere.”

“It’s not women’s healthcare as they market themselves to be but, instead, their focus is their abortion practice and their abortion lobbying.”

Rose says that Planned Parenthood is an untrustworthy organization that blatantly lies to the public, like when Live Action exposed child sex trafficking 2011. Recently, Live Action has released public records that show Planned Parenthood’s failure to report child sex traffickers to local authorities. The organization claims to report such activities, and also claims it has trained thousands of its employees to identify victims and perpetrators in the sex trafficking industry. According to a former manager, however, Planned Parenthood actually used that training time to teach employees how to detect undercover journalists. (Related: Keep up with the latest lies at MediaFactWatch.com)

Planned Parenthood has been the subject of controversy for many years now. Even if you are pro-choice, the deceitful behavior of this organization simply should not be ignored.

Sources:

Breitbart.com

LiveAction.org

WashingtonTimes.com

Maybe it’s both. That helps explain why he would feign to suggest that, during his two terms in office, violent crime has actually gone down, when the opposite is so demonstrably true.

As reported by Breitbart, Obama used the Harvard Law Review to make his ridiculous claim that “there is no growing crime wave,” despite the actual crime wave that has left 1,500 Americans dead in 2015 and 2016.

He went on to claim that “crime remains near historic lows” throughout his tenure, and denies that there is any crime wave sweeping the country (and especially parts of his home town of Chicago) in his column.

Specifically, the president claims: “I have also used my clemency power to a degree unmatched in modern history to address unfairness in the federal system… I will be the first President in decades to leave office with a federal prison population lower than when I took office.”

Now, granted, it’s important to understand who the president is talking to: A bunch of law students at an Ivy League school who are being indoctrinated with Left-wing political methodology for understanding and dealing with criminal activity and behavior.

Which is to say, the victim is seldom a real “victim,” the perpetrator is a victim of an unjust system (particularly if they happen to be a minority), and the police are inherently racist and corrupt.

Obama claims that “criminal justice reform” has been a lifetime focus of his, which is to say, he has spent his formidable years as an activist for more leniency and less prison time for minorities who are guilty of committing crimes but who shouldn’t be held responsible for those crimes because the very social and economic liabilities they endure thanks to Left-wing Democrat policies.

Dependency on government, through various welfare and assistance programs, is what Obama has also worked to expand, and it is this socioeconomic model that has decimated generations of poor, minority Americans. He doesn’t advocate for personal responsibility and rugged individualism—two hallmarks of a free-market economy and a civil society—but instead preaches a top-down, heavy-handed, centralized governmental approach to society, which strangles innovation, thwarts opportunity and produces the kind of dead-end, high-crime cycle of failure Democrats own lock, stock and barrel.

As for Obama’s disdain and mistrust of police, that is summed up in this simple paragraph:

As a state legislator in Illinois, I worked with law enforcement and civil rights leaders to push for reduced sentences, videotaped police interrogations, and other reforms, including legislation in favor of second chances and against racial profiling.

As a candidate for President, I called for addressing unwarranted disparities in criminal sentencing, emphasized the harms of profiling, and set out new initiatives to help the formerly incarcerated earn second chances.

Notice how Obama creates the problem—“racial profiling”—then frames it as though it’s a proven fact and an ongoing problem that still hasn’t been addressed (despite a lack of any real evidence police racial profiling is pervasive and common).

“Videotaped police interrogations” is Obama stating as fact that cops’ interrogation methods are improper, unconstitutional and harmful, so they must be monitored.

There’s more. “Unwarranted disparities” is code for alleged mistreatment of minorities; Obama is saying here that minorities get harsher sentences not because of the crime they were found guilty of committing, but because of the color of their skin.

All of this effort to treat criminal justice as evidence of racial disparity has had an effect on our society. Even a Left-wing think tank, Brennan Center for Justice, is more honest with the people when it comes to reporting the spike in violent crime.

Obama is trying to stoke his legacy when he makes claims that are so obviously false. That’s what this is really about.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for Natural News and News Target, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources:

Breitbart.com

BrennanCenter.org

Collapse.news

NaturalNews.com