Categories
Uncategorized

UN Pushing Govts to ‘Fully Comply’ with LGBT Agenda, Target Religious Whose Faith Contradict It

If there was any doubt that the UN is a bunch of hypocrites…

The UN wants to see this. But are they going to pressure Muslim groups to do the same? Of course not.

Religious beliefs that would contradict [the LGBT agenda] are not “justified.”

A man was sentenced to SIXTEEN years over burning a pride flag,

The United Nations is releasing a report in June regarding the “perceived contradictions” between religious freedom and sexual orientation and gender identity, or SOGI, laws and is looking to push governments to “fully comply with their obligations under international human rights law to protect and empower LGBT+ persons,” according to a U.N. announcement.

The U.N. closed a call for LGBT and religious freedom organizations to submit input to the report earlier this month and is scheduled to introduce its findings at the 53rd Human Rights Council meeting in June, according to the announcement.

The announcement explains that while there are “perceived contradictions” between the LGBT community and religious freedom, the report aims to find ways to “protect LGBT+ persons’ access to faith and spirituality” while also indicating that religious beliefs that would contradict this are not “justified” under the protection of human rights.

Religious and spiritual narratives have also historically been used to promote, enable, and condone institutional and personal violence and discrimination against individuals based on sexual orientation or gender identity (real or presumed); repress sexual and gender diversity; and promote cis-gendered and heteronormative norms of sexual orientation and gender identity,” the announcement read.
“These practices cannot be justified under the rubric of Freedom of Religious Beliefs, or indeed any other human right, to circumvent and defeat the rights of marginalized populations.”

he person in charge of the special report is Victor Madrigal-Borloz, an expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and a professor at Harvard Law School. Madrigal-Borloz has long been an LGBT advocate and recently welcomed Pope Francis’ declaration that homosexuality is “not a crime,” despite the pontiff’s further clarification that in religious circles it is still considered sinful.

Any organization that wished to comment for the inquiry was tasked with keeping their comments to a minimum of 2,5000 words and providing answers to 11 questions on religious freedom and the rights of the LGBT community, according to the announcement.

Respondents were asked whether or not any religious beliefs and LGBT rights were “mutually exclusive,” to point out policies that protect discriminatory religious practices and about the extent to which religious individuals have the right to a conscientious objection.

The U.N. didn’t disclose who commented ahead of the report’s release, but two organizations publicly published their comments for the inquiry, focusing on their concerns about the impact on the religious community. The Religious Freedom Institute and the Heritage Foundation’s comments worried that the special inquiry would “undermine” and result in the “politicization” of religious freedom as a human right.

“My biggest concern is the premise of the report which seems to suggest that freedom of religion and rights based on sexual orientation are the same,” Grace Melton, senior associate in the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Life, Religion, and Family at Heritage, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“But certainly as a function of international law, they are not the same. Freedom of religion or belief, or freedom of conscience, is an internationally protected human right. It’s codified in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which is a legally binding treaty.”

Melton further explained that she was “not terribly optimistic” that Madrigal-Borloz shared her views on the subject and warned that both domestic and international laws have become more and more antagonistic toward those who openly express their religious beliefs.

“Increasingly the U.S. has seen international law or U.N. opinions inform our own judicial opinions or even our own laws, regardless of whether or not that’s what the Founders intended,” Melton said. “So from the outset, to conflate those two things is concerning from somebody who is supposed to be a human rights expert.”

Andrea Picciotti-Bayer, a fellow for the Institute for Human Ecology at the Catholic University of America, told the DCNF that she had similar worries, calling the report a “bold attack” and an attempt to try and “walk back the special protection” afforded to those with sincerely held religious beliefs.

“Despite saying that we shouldn’t have these rights pitted against one another, but when you keep reading on you see that the author of the report really does see [rights and religion] as being in conflict,” Picciotti-Bayer said.

“I think it’s important that the foundation of the question of human rights is that these are universally shared rights, that we share not by nature of any affinities but because of our humanity and the right to religious freedom … that’s a right that each and every human being possesses.”

Picciotti-Bayer said that efforts like the one from the U.N. are based on a “narrative” that “religion is an oppressor and that religious freedom can be weaponized to harm others.”

“This narrative is not only harmful because it could make people doubt the importance of religion in their own lives and their communities, but it’s also harmful because it will undermine really important social protection. Religion and religious freedom is a stabilizing presence, and for the cases where religion is being misused to oppress, the answer isn’t to shut down religion entirely.”

 

 

Categories
Uncategorized

She was a true American sports hero. Played to win, not protest

Althea Neale Gibson. Not to many people would remember who she was and what she accomplished. She was hated by the race baiters of her day. A great tennis player who was black, but who rejected the black supremacist’s. She played for herself. not for a race.We have this from a book review in the WSJ.

A new stadium was opened in August 1997 in Flushing, N.Y., home of the U.S. Open tennis tournament. It was named for Arthur Ashe, the only black man to win the championship. He won it once (Althea won it twice), in 1968, winning Wimbledon and the Australian Open once as well. But while Ashe was worthy, surely, of such exalted honor, the stadium should have been named for Althea Gibson.

We don’t know what went through Gibson’s mind on the day the Arthur Ashe Stadium was inaugurated. She was just short of her 70th birthday, living alone and destitute in an apartment in East Orange, N.J. How could she not have wondered why the honor didn’t go to her, the very first black player—male or female—to play in the U.S. National Championships at Forest Hills, N.Y. (the amateur precursor of the U.S. Open)?

In 1957–58 she won the Wimbledon women’s singles and doubles titles and took the U.S. women’s singles championship at Forest Hills. She also won the U.S. mixed doubles and the Australian women’s doubles in 1957. That year Gibson was voted Female Athlete of the Year by the Associated Press.In all, Gibson powered her way to 56 singles and doubles championships

What’s sad is how the author of the book pretty much ignored the fact that Althea couldn’t care less about being a black athlete. She just wanted to be the best athlete.

For her part, however, Gibson downplayed her pioneering role. “I have never regarded myself as a crusader,” she states in her 1958 autobiography, I Always Wanted to Be Somebody. “I don’t consciously beat the drums for any cause, not even the negro in the United States.”

Categories
Uncategorized

How do we reward Tony the Fauch for the last three years? Life in prison.

The Fauch not directly, but indirectly he’s responsible for the death of millions worldwide. And if it is proven that he knew and participated in what was  created in the Chinese labs, forget the life in prison. He must get the death penalty.

The lies about masking, herd immunity, Vaccinated people don’t die, it never stops with him. Who can forget the lies under oath to congress. And all the misinformation.

Categories
Crime Daily Hits. Links from other news sources. Uncategorized

California Progressives rejoice. Rest of the population mourns. Their gun control laws only allowed one mass shooting this week.

California Progressives rejoice. Rest of the population mourns. Their gun control laws only allowed one mass shooting this week. Yes my friends it looks as if gun control is finally working in California. Only one mass shooting this past week.

A mass shooting took place Thursday in the wealthy Beverly Crest neighborhood of Los Angeles, killing three and wounding four people according to police. The shooting took place at a short term rental on the 2700 block of Ellison Dr. No suspect or motive has been identified as of yet but the public is not believed to be in danger. It has not been determined whether a party was taking place.

It’s working so well that California lawmakers are calling for even tougher laws. Oh they work so well. Don’t you think?

 

Categories
Links from other news sources. Reprints from others. Uncategorized

Putting this out there.Croatian President Calls Germany’s ‘We Are at War With Russia’ Comment Madness

Croatian President Calls Germany’s ‘We Are at War With Russia’ Comment Madness. Croatian President Zoran Milanovic responded to the German foreign minister saying “we are fighting a war against Russia” by calling the remark “madness” and wishing Germany better luck than with the last war they had with Russia 70 years ago.

Milanovic was responding to the bizarre and inflammatory statement made by German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock during the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on Tuesday.

Croatian President Zoran Milanovic responded to the German foreign minister saying “we are fighting a war against Russia” by calling the remark “madness” and wishing Germany better luck than with the last war they had with Russia 70 years ago.

“Do you want us to enter the war?” asked Milanovic during a visit to the port city of Split, adding that Croatia “should in no way help” Ukraine militarily.

The Croatian president expressed his amazement that such aggressive rhetoric was being spouted by a representative of the usually pacifist German Greens.

“If we are at war with Russia, then let’s see what we need to do. But we won’t ask Germany for its opinion,” Milanovic asserted. “Let them figure out who is the actual chancellor over there. I’ve been in politics for a long time, and our country has been through a lot, but I’ve never seen this kind of madness before.”

Milanovic condemned NATO powers for flooding the region with tanks and other weaponry in order to prolong the war.

“Those tanks may burn, or they may reach Crimea, but Croatia will have nothing to do with it,” he insisted.

As we previously highlighted, US weapons sales to other countries rose from $103.4 billion in 2021 to $153.7 billion in 2022, with Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon all making a killing out of the Ukraine conflict.

In a related development, the French Foreign Ministry claimed that the US, Germany and other countries sending battle tanks to Ukraine did not mean that NATO was at war with Russia.

“We are not at war with Russia and none of our partners are,” ministry spokeswoman Anne-Claire Legendre said.

Categories
Corruption Politics Uncategorized

Thanks to Joe Biden and the National Archives, President Trump walks.

Thanks to Joe Biden and the National Archives, President Trump walks. As you know, Biden carried on about how President Trump had top secret documents and how irresponsible it was. Well the National Archives jumps in and demands the missing documents back. Trump had the power to declassify. So what happens? Biden who doesn’t have that power has top secret documents for months and says nothing.

The National Archives says nothing cause they claim they didn’t know. Three more times documents are found with Biden. Again the National archives has no clue. So now what do they do?

National Archives asks all past Presidents and VP to look for top secret documents. No planned raids or FBI agents showing up guns drawn. The wives don’t have to worry about anyone going threw the panty drawer. Moral of the story? Trump walks.

 

Categories
Crime Links from other news sources. Uncategorized

California is number one in gun laws and number one in active shooters.

California is number one in gun laws and number one in active shooters. Yes my friends high crime and strict gun laws go hand and hand. Just ask the feds if you don’t believe me.

 FBI’s figures which show California was number one in “active shooter incidents” in 2021. Breitbart News pointed out that the FBI figures mean California was number one in gun control and number one in “active shooter incidents” at the same time.

 The city of Los Angeles alone witnessed 382 murders in 2022, according to Crosstown. Moreover, on July 12, 2022, ABC 7 explained that Los Angeles homicides “hit the highest level in over a decade” during the first six months of 2022.

So what does the WP write?

The Washington Post propped up California’s failed gun controls after a Saturday night shooting at a Lunar New Year celebration in Monterey Park resulted in ten deaths.

 

Categories
Corruption Crime Links from other news sources. Politics Reprints from others. Uncategorized

DOJ tells FBI to stand down. Justice Department Considered but Rejected Role in Biden Documents Search

President Joe Biden’s Justice Department reportedly permitted the president’s personal attorneys to search for classified documents in separate locations without security clearances or the FBI present. I wonder if they realize that the DOJ folks who made this decision will be called to testify, and Biden will have to hire outside lawyers if this goes to a trial. Maybe a sitting President can’t be charged, but Biden’s lawyers can be charged. Tampering with Evidence.

We want to thank the WSJ and Breitbart for this.

WASHINGTON—The Justice Department considered having FBI agents monitor a search by President Biden’s lawyers for classified documents at his homes but decided against it, both to avoid complicating later stages of the investigation and because Mr. Biden’s attorneys had quickly turned over a first batch and were cooperating, according to people familiar with the matter.

After Mr. Biden’s lawyers discovered documents marked as classified dating from his term as vice president at an office he used at a Washington-based think tank on Nov. 2, the Justice Department opened an inquiry into why and how they got there. Mr. Biden’s legal team prepared to search his other properties for any similar documents, and discussed with the Justice Department the prospect of having FBI agents present while Mr. Biden’s lawyers conducted the additional searches.

Instead, the two sides agreed that Mr. Biden’s personal attorneys would inspect the homes, notify the Justice Department as soon as they identified any other potentially classified records, and arrange for law-enforcement authorities to take them.

Those deliberations, which haven’t previously been reported, shed new light on how the Biden team’s efforts to cooperate with investigators have thus far helped it avoid more aggressive actions by law enforcement.

In the week since news reports first surfaced about the documents, the incident has drawn parallels to the discovery of a much larger number of documents at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Florida, which federal agents obtained a warrant to search in August after more than a year of negotiations between Mr. Trump’s lawyers, the National Archives and the Justice Department and after Mr. Trump’s lawyers said all documents had been returned.

Mr. Trump’s supporters have accused the Justice Department of a double standard in treatment; Mr. Biden’s supporters have pointed to the president’s legal team’s cooperation and swift moves to inform the Justice Department of the documents’ discovery as a key difference. Mr. Biden has said he doesn’t know what the documents are or how they wound up at his office at the Penn Biden Center or his Delaware home. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who was director of the Washington think tank from 2017 to 2019, told reporters on Tuesday that he was unaware that government documents had been stored there.

Biden ‘Cooperating Fully’ With DOJ as Garland Appoints Special Counsel

Biden ‘Cooperating Fully’ With DOJ as Garland Appoints Special CounselPlay video: Biden ‘Cooperating Fully’ With DOJ as Garland Appoints Special Counsel
President Biden said Thursday a “small number” of classified documents from his time as vice president were found at his home and in his personal library. Attorney General Merrick Garland outlined the decision to appoint a special counsel to investigate. Photo: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

The discussions and the Justice Department’s willingness to let the Biden lawyers do the searches unsupervised also suggest federal investigators are girding for a monthslong inquiry that could stretch well into Mr. Biden’s third year in office.

One reason not to involve the FBI at an early stage: That way the Justice Department would preserve the ability to take a tougher line, including executing a future search warrant, if negotiations ever turned hostile, current and former law-enforcement officials said.

Representatives of the FBI and Justice Department declined to comment. In a call to reporters about the investigation, White House spokesman Ian Sams said the president and his team were cooperating fully with the special counsel review “so that it can proceed swiftly and thoroughly.”

The White House revealed on two separate days last week that documents had been located at the president’s Delaware residence, as well as those found at a garage there in December. Part of the reason the new documents were revealed separately is that Mr. Biden’s personal attorneys don’t have security clearances to handle classified documents and had to set aside any material that could qualify as such. Richard Sauber, special counsel to Mr. Biden, who has that clearance, accompanied Justice Department personnel to retrieve documents, when they discovered additional pages with classification markings.

Attorney General Merrick Garland last week assigned a former top prosecutor in the Trump administration, Robert Hur, to serve as special counsel investigating the discovery of the documents in the locales associated with Mr. Biden. Justice Department officials were concerned that an FBI presence as the Biden team hunted for documents could complicate investigators’ ability to execute search warrants or subpoena documents as the investigation proceeds, some of the people said, in a sign that investigators are considering the possibility of a grand jury investigation into the matter.

Mr. Hur is expected to begin his job as special counsel by the end of the month, after he winds down his work as a defense lawyer at the law firm Gibson Dunn, people familiar with his appointment said.

Robert Hur has been appointed special counsel in the Biden documents investigation.PHOTO: MICHAEL MCCOY/REUTERS

Soon after the initial discovery in November, Mr. Garland tasked the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney in Chicago, John Lausch, with reviewing the documents, with an eye toward determining whether a special counsel should be appointed.

Mr. Lausch told Mr. Garland on Jan. 5 that he thought a special counsel was warranted given the many unanswered questions about the documents, and Mr. Garland quickly agreed, the people said.

Mr. Hur is expected to grapple with legally and politically thorny considerations that could be reminiscent of those from the last special counsel related to a sitting president, potentially including whether to pursue in-person testimony from Mr. Biden. During the 2017-19 special counsel inquiry led by Robert Mueller into Russia’s interference in the 2016 campaign and any links between that effort and the Trump campaign, investigators tried for more than a year to interview then-President Trump before ultimately settling for written testimony.

Mr. Sams declined to say whether Mr. Biden would sit for an interview with the special counsel if asked.

Legal experts said an open-book strategy could help shorten Mr. Hur’s inquiry and keep it from dragging out over Mr. Biden’s presidency.

“My goal would be to get everybody interviewed by Robert Hur as quickly as possible—not throw up roadblocks, not assert privileges, and get this thing over with,” said Neil Eggleston, who served as White House counsel in the Obama administration.

The Justice Department investigation into the Biden documents comes as another special counsel is already deep into a parallel inquiry into the classified documents at Mr. Trump’s Florida home.

Former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Florida was searched by FBI agents last year.PHOTO: MARCO BELLO/REUTERS

The FBI in August executed a search warrant at the property, believing more such documents remained there based on witness interviews and security-camera footage. They removed dozens of boxes containing additional documents, many of which were mixed in with clothing and news clippings. Prosecutors later disclosed they were investigating whether anyone sought to obstruct their inquiry, in addition to whether anyone should be prosecuted for mishandling the documents. Mr. Trump has called the Justice Department’s moves a witch hunt and said he did nothing wrong.

The Justice Department has sought to keep the two inquiries separate by assigning them to different teams, according to people familiar with the matter. The Biden White House has highlighted differences between the two inquiries, stressing in particular how their cooperative stance compares to the Trump team’s resistance to turn over records to the National Archives after repeated requests. Mr. Trump’s legal team later clashed with the Justice Department over the appointment of an outside arbiter, known as a special master, to review documents seized from Mar-a-Lago.

Yet the Biden team’s bumpy rollout of its discoveries—it only confirmed the document discoveries after news reports and has offered few new details—complicates its attempt to draw a hard distinction between Mr. Biden’s actions and those of Mr. Trump, said John Fishwick, who served as the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Virginia during the Obama administration.

“He is the sitting president, there’s no reason for him to hold back anything about this,” Mr. Fishwick said. “It makes it harder to say it’s apples and oranges, and it undercuts the argument that you were different.”

Sabrina Siddiqui contributed to this article.

Write to Aruna Viswanatha at aruna.viswanatha@wsj.com, Sadie Gurman at sadie.gurman@wsj.com and C. Ryan Barber at ryan.barber@wsj.com

Categories
Reprints from others. Uncategorized

An unlikely threat to popular democracy in California

Back in 1911, concerned that the Legislature was bowing to the special interests of the powerful railroad lobby, California voters heeded their governor’s call to take “the first step in our design to preserve and perpetuate popular government.”

They then took the historic act of enacting their right to bypass the Legislature by adopting the People’s right to enact legislation (the right to initiative), to approve statutes before they can take effect (the right to referendum), and to recall elected officers.

On Friday, a California court is expected to decide whether a state agency can nonetheless implement a law that is subject to a referendum before the voters have had an opportunity to approve it.

The law in question – Assembly Bill 257 – establishes a 10-member “Fast Food Council” which would have the authority to establish higher standards for wages, working hours, and working conditions for a select group of fast food restaurant workers.  Most significantly, the council could increase by 42% the minimum wage for certain fast food workers from the State’s current minimum wage of $15.50 per hour to $22 per hour in 2023, with further increases in subsequent years.

Such significant increases in minimum wages will necessarily raise the cost of fast food at many fast food restaurants to the detriment of all Californians solely to benefit the pocket books of some Californians.  And putting aside the Orwellian terminology of designating as a “minimum wage” a wage that far exceeds the minimum, a higher minimum wage for only some workers in the same community subject to the same cost of living as other workers constitutes political favoritism, not a solution.  Even the Governor’s own Department of Finance warned that the bill “could lead to a fragmented regulatory and legal environment for employers and raise long-term costs.”

In response to the new law, a coalition of restaurants timely collected over one million signatures in a referendum petition to suspend the law until Californians could vote on it.  That is over 60% more signatures than the amount necessary to trigger the right to a referendum.

Nonetheless, the director of the California Department of Industrial Relations, which will oversee the new council, said her department would implement the new law commencing January 1 while county election officials continue to verify the genuineness of the thousands of signatures on the referendum petition.

The director’s position conflicts with the very purpose of the People’s referendum power: to require that a law be approved by the voters before it takes effect.

Moreover, her position, if upheld, sets a dangerous precedent for the People’s right to hold a referendum on the hundreds of bills enacted at the end of each two-year legislative session on August 31 since signatures on a referendum petition are unlikely to be verified before the bills take effect on the following January 1.  That is because the governor has until September 30 to sign bills; referendum proponents then have 90 days to collect the required signatures (or as late as December 29); and those hundreds of thousands of signatures could never be verified as genuine by January 1.

Fortunately, neither the California Constitution nor its Elections Code requires the suspension of a statute to await the counties’ verification of the signatures, as argued by the director.  Under the California Constitution, the presentation of a referendum petition “certified” to be signed by the required number of voters suspends the statute. And the Constitution delegates to the Legislature “the manner in which a [referendum] petition shall be circulated, presented, and certified.”

 

The Legislature has specifically provided that the circulator of the referendum petition shall “certify” that “each signature is the genuine signature of the person whose name it purports to be,” and that the “Petitions so verified shall be prima facie evidence that the signatures are genuine and that the persons are qualified voters.”

 

In other words, once the California Secretary of State determined on December 9, 2022, that the referendum petition here had significantly more than the required number of signatures, it was presumed to contain the genuine signatures of qualified voters until demonstrated to the contrary, thereby suspending the legislation.

The director’s position fails to honor the People’s right to approve legislation before it becomes effective, and weakens their right to reject special-interest legislation.  If the director won’t change her position, the courts should stand up for popular democracy and require her to do so.

Daniel M. Kolkey, an attorney and a retired California judge, has advised four different state governors and chairs Pacific Research Institute’s California reform committee

Categories
Uncategorized

The Wokesters (try to) Strike Back after Virginia Tech loss in court

Former Virginia Tech women’s soccer player Kiersten Hening and coach Charles “Chugger” Adair

(This is a follow-up to Virginia Tech Soccer player benched for refusing to follow the coach’s woke orders…)

The First Amendment feud between a college soccer player and her school has only grown worse despite the fact that she won a large monetary settlement.

Former Virginia Tech women’s soccer player Kiersten Hening filed a lawsuit against head coach Charles “Chugger” Adair, saying that he verbally attacked her and decreased her playing time after she refused to kneel in support of the Black Lives Matter movement.

Adair tried to get the lawsuit dismissed, the judge disagreed

She eventually agreed to a monetary settlement of $100,000, which included no wrongdoing on the part of her or the coach. But although a settlement has been reached, the fighting seems to be far from over. In fact, it has only gotten worse.

On Monday, 76 current and former Virginia Tech women’s soccer players signed a statement in defense of Adair, claiming that the allegations against him were baseless and that Hening was lying.

Many of the players graduated before Hening was even on the team.

“We have spent countless hours training, traveling and playing under his leadership and are devastated and appalled to see his character and integrity severely impugned,” the statement reads.

“We firmly believe that these allegations are nothing more than a distorted representation of the facts.”

First of all, many of the players graduated before these events allegedly took place and before Hening was even on the team. How do they know what happened between her and Adair?

Also, this statement does not disprove Hening’s allegations; it just proves that these players have the same political beliefs as the coach. It seems likely that they just want Hening to face punishment for her politics.

Furthermore, if her claims were baseless as the statement claims, why did the university pay the $100,000 settlement? The fact that Virginia Tech agreed to dole out that amount of money suggests that the university believes the case was credible.

Adair, for his part, released a statement on Twitter after the settlement was reached, saying, “Today, we have the clarity that this case lacked any standing, and without evidence, the truth has prevailed.”

But Twitter was quick to put a context label under the tweet, noting that he had agreed to the settlement.

But: in reply to this tweet:

This sure looks like another example of someone in a progressive environment being bullied for not submitting to the woke mob.

We have seen that various sports have increasingly become a platform for woke athletes and celebrities to preach about leftist causes, while conservatives have been chased out and silenced.

It seems that in this case, though, people are being held accountable, and while the settlement did not include an admission of wrongdoing, it was an indication that the left can no longer just bully people into compliance.

Virginia Tech agreed to dole out $100,000. This at the very least suggests that the university believes the case was credible.

Q: How do the signers of that statement know what happened between Henning and Adair?

A: They DON’T!

The reasoning behind the answer above is left as an exercise for the reader.