Connect with us

Red Pill

News

Regime change NGO, National Endowment for Democracy, is pissed off Russia will not allow it to destroy the country and sow chaos

Washington Post op-ed by National Endowment for Democracy President Carl Gershman would like readers to believe that the NED is a charitable, NGO spreading democracy and peace…it’s not. The NED is a CIA backed terror organisation in the activity of overthrowing governments and toppling democratically elected leaders.

Published

on

0 Views

Perhaps this comment from an Information Clearing House user says it best…

NED…has nothing to do with promoting democracy. .horse shit..They topple governments.

Now the original post from investigative journalist Robert Parry:

The Washington Post’s descent into the depths of neoconservative propaganda – willfully misleading its readers on matters of grave importance – apparently knows no bounds as was demonstrated with two deceptive articles regarding Russian President Vladimir Putin and why his government is cracking down on “foreign agents.”

If you read the Post’s editorial on Wednesday and a companion op-ed by National Endowment for Democracy President Carl Gershman, you would have been led to believe that Putin is delusional, paranoid and “power mad” in his concern that outside money funneled into non-governmental organizations represents a threat to Russian sovereignty.

The Post and Gershman were especially outraged that the Russians have enacted laws requiring NGOs financed from abroad and seeking to influence Russian policies to register as “foreign agents” – and that one of the first funding operations to fall prey to these tightened rules was Gershman’s NED.

The Post’s editors wrote that Putin’s “latest move, announced Tuesday, is to declare the NED an ‘undesirable’ organization under the terms of a law that Mr. Putin signed in May. The law bans groups from abroad who are deemed a ‘threat to the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation, its defense capabilities and its national security.’

“The charge against the NED is patently ridiculous. The NED’s grantees in Russia last year ran the gamut of civil society. They advocated transparency in public affairs, fought corruption and promoted human rights, freedom of information and freedom of association, among other things. All these activities make for a healthy democracy but are seen as threatening from the Kremlin’s ramparts. …

“The new law on ‘undesirables’ comes in addition to one signed in 2012 that gave authorities the power to declare organizations ‘foreign agents’ if they engaged in any kind of politics and receive money from abroad. The designation, from the Stalin era, implies espionage.”

But there are several salient facts that the Post’s editors surely know but don’t want you to know. The first is that NED is a U.S. government-funded organization created in 1983 to do what the Central Intelligence Agency previously had done in financing organizations inside target countries to advance U.S. policy interests and, if needed, help in “regime change.”

The secret hand behind NED’s creation was CIA Director William J. Casey who worked with senior CIA covert operation specialist Walter Raymond Jr. to establish NED in 1983. Casey – from the CIA – and Raymond – from his assignment inside President Ronald Reagan’s National Security Council – focused on creating a funding mechanism to support groups inside foreign countries that would engage in propaganda and political action that the CIA had historically organized and paid for covertly. To partially replace that CIA role, the idea emerged for a congressionally funded entity that would serve as a conduit for this money.

But Casey recognized the need to hide the strings being pulled by the CIA. “Obviously we here [at CIA] should not get out front in the development of such an organization, nor should we appear to be a sponsor or advocate,” Casey said in one undated letter to then-White House counselor Edwin Meese III – as Casey urged creation of a “National Endowment.”

NED Is Born

The National Endowment for Democracy took shape in late 1983 as Congress decided to also set aside pots of money — within NED — for the Republican and Democratic parties and for organized labor, creating enough bipartisan largesse that passage was assured. But some in Congress thought it was important to wall the NED off from any association with the CIA, so a provision was included to bar the participation of any current or former CIA official, according to one congressional aide who helped write the legislation.

This aide told me that one night late in the 1983 session, as the bill was about to go to the House floor, the CIA’s congressional liaison came pounding at the door to the office of Rep. Dante Fascell, a senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and a chief sponsor of the bill. The frantic CIA official conveyed a single message from CIA Director Casey: the language barring the participation of CIA personnel must be struck from the bill, the aide recalled, noting that Fascell consented, not fully recognizing the significance of the demand.

The aide said Fascell also consented to the Reagan administration’s choice of Carl Gershman to head the National Endowment for Democracy, again not recognizing how this decision would affect the future of the new entity and American foreign policy. Gershman, who had followed the classic neoconservative path from youthful socialism to fierce anticommunism, became NED’s first (and, to this day, only) president.

Though NED is technically independent of U.S. foreign policy, Gershman in the early years coordinated decisions on grants with Raymond at the NSC. For instance, on Jan. 2, 1985, Raymond wrote to two NSC Asian experts that “Carl Gershman has called concerning a possible grant to the Chinese Alliance for Democracy (CAD). I am concerned about the political dimension to this request. We should not find ourselves in a position where we have to respond to pressure, but this request poses a real problem to Carl.”

Currently, Gershman’s NED dispenses more than $100 million a year in U.S. government funds to various NGOs, media outlets and activists around the world. The NED also has found itself in the middle of political destabilization campaigns against governments that have gotten on the wrong side of U.S. foreign policy. For instance, prior to the February 2014 coup in Ukraine, overthrowing elected President Viktor Yanukovych and installing an anti-Russian regime in Kiev, NED was funding scores of projects.

A second point left out of the Post’s editorial was the fact that Gershman took a personal hand in the Ukraine crisis and recognized it as an interim step toward regime change in Moscow. On Sept. 26, 2013, Gershman published an op-ed in the Washington Post that called Ukraine “the biggest prize” and explained how pulling it into the Western camp could contribute to the ultimate defeat of Russian President Putin.

“Ukraine’s choice to join Europe will accelerate the demise of the ideology of Russian imperialism that Putin represents,” Gershman wrote. “Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.” In other words, NED is a U.S. government-financed entity that has set its sights on ousting Russia’s current government.

A third point that the Post ignored is that the Russian law requiring outside-funded political organizations to register as “foreign agents” was modeled on a U.S. law, the Foreign Agent Registration Act. In other words, the U.S. government also requires individuals and entities working for foreign interests and seeking to influence U.S. policies to disclose those relationships with the U.S. Justice Department or face prison.

If the Post’s editors had included any or all of these three relevant factors, you would have come away with a more balanced understanding of why Russia is acting as it is. You might still object but at least you would be aware of the full story. By concealing all three points, the Post’s editors were tricking you and other readers into accepting a propagandistic viewpoint – that the Russian actions were crazy and that Putin was, according to the Post’s headline, “power mad.”

Gershman’s Op-Ed

But you might think that Gershman would at least acknowledge some of these points in his Post op-ed, surely admitting that NED is financed by the U.S. government. But Gershman didn’t. He simply portrayed Russia’s actions as despicable and desperate.

“Russia’s newest anti-NGO law, under which the National Endowment for Democracy on Tuesday was declared an “undesirable organization” prohibited from operating in Russia, is the latest evidence that the regime of President Vladimir Putin faces a worsening crisis of political legitimacy,” Gershman wrote, adding:

“This is the context in which Russia has passed the law prohibiting Russian democrats from getting any international assistance to promote freedom of expression, the rule of law and a democratic political system. Significantly, democrats have not backed down. They have not been deterred by the criminal penalties contained in the ‘foreign agents’ law and other repressive laws. They know that these laws contradict international law, which allows for such aid, and that the laws are meant to block a better future for Russia.”

The reference to how a “foreign agents” registration law conflicts with international law might have been a good place for Gershman to explain why what is good for the goose in the United States isn’t good for the gander in Russia. But hypocrisy is a hard thing to rationalize and would have undermined the propagandistic impact of the op-ed.

So would an acknowledgement of where NED’s money comes from. How many governments would allow a hostile foreign power to sponsor politicians and civic organizations whose mission is to undermine and overthrow the existing government and put in someone who would be compliant to that foreign power?

Not surprisingly, Gershman couldn’t find the space to include any balance in his op-ed – and the Post’s editors didn’t insist on any.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.

References:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article42515.htm

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
37 Comments

37
Leave a Reply

avatar
6 Comment threads
31 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
2 Comment authors
xfwmrt5gzngfw5wtrjfgxe85mrwfqdcm59x4ctxckw54mtdfsgw9j5nwmtxm845wctfkdijtfdhskdsftrg83yrer3nvb54wnxd5cbvbecnv5ev75bcccn2785xdnwdc5bwedsj4wsndb Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

What’s the difference between NED and our ZioNazi jooo infested lame-stream media? Nothing, as they both pass off false information to the Goy masses!

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

The usual anti-semitic drivel from a Putin parrot. Yawn.

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

For your pathetic response to be valid, you would first have to semitic fool!

You filthy inbreeding reptilian parasites are Khazarian fake jooos that hijacked Judaism long ago and have caused the world to hate your subhuman race!

Tell your ZioNazi Hasbara brigade leader that you failed miserably!

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Thank you for your quick response. Who could doubt the efficiency of the Russian troll factory? Your post would not be out of place in Mein Kampf. How about you print it out and wipe your Russian arse with it?

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

Sorry to burst your filthy Khazarian fake jooo ars bubble, but I’m nowhere near being Russian! You failed boobie, try again! LOL

Ooh, and you idiots have cornered the market on Hasbara trolling! LOL

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

You should not be ashamed to admit being a Russian. After all, hatred of non-Russians is an important part of your Russian tradition. Why are you afraid to wear your racial hatred with Russian pride? Maybe a good Russian psychiatrist could help you…but first make sure he is not a ZioNazi!

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

And you should not be ashamed of being a perverted ZioNazi Khazarian fake jooo! Be proud fool!

Tell us Goys how a Mohel rabbi loves to suck kosher weewees? Do tell boychick!

And tell us Goys that to keep all the wealth in the family, the filthy jooo has been inbreeding for thousands of years? Do tell boobie!

Ooh, and because of the perverted inbreeding, you reptiles have specialized diseases that no one else has, do tell boychick! LOL

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

You are doing too much copying and pasting! Please, only new rants are acceptable. I will have to contact your brigade leader if you do not obey this order!

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

Hasbara Troll attributes

1) Supreme point of view
2) The Hasbara troll knows best
3) Condescending & Patronising
4) Socialist (Smart and ‘caring’)
5) Do not have to be Jewish but Pro-Israel
6) Internet experts
7) Narcissistic
8) Provocative
9) Dis-ruptive
10) Like to ask the questions, not answer questions
11) Control freaks
12) Inflamed by anyone being critical of Israel
13) ‘Moral’ Guardians
14) Classic insults: Anti-semite, Neo- Nazi, White Supremacist, Holocaust denier
15) Adept with social networks well trained on IT

Hey boobie, you fit this profile like a glove fool! But you do need to work on some them boychick! LOL

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

I apologise for so much copying and pasting. My ZioNazi brigade leader won’t be happy but here goes… Russian Troll attributes 1) Supreme point of view 2) The Russian troll knows best 3) Condescending & Patronising 4) Stalinist(Smug and ‘patriotic’) 5) Do not have to be Russian but Pro-Russia 6) Internet experts 7) Narcissistic 8) Provocative 9) Dis-ruptive 10) Like to ask the questions, not answer questions 11) Control freaks 12) Inflamed by anyone being critical of Russia 13) ‘Moral’ Guardians 14) Classic insults: filthy Khazarian fake jooo ars, ZioNazi, filthy inbreeding reptilian parasites, subhuman race, ZioNazi jooo infested lame-stream… Read more »

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

Yeah, your Hasbara leader just called me to tell you to go straight to your Mohel rabbi, pronto! He misses your dearly and needs another suck fest session! Go straight there, ok fool!

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Seems like I have well and truly got under your thin Russian skin. You are so funny in a unique and pathetic Russian way..I never have laughed so much at a Russian troll’s comical postings. At least I am helping you to achieve your quota today!

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

No fool, the pleasure is all mine as I know I got under your thin reptilian skin!

Remember to go over that Hasbara troll attributes list and polish up your weak points!

Ooh, and say hello to your professional weewee sucking rabbi for me and don’t forget to bring him some mouth watering latkes so he can soak up your weewee spew!

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Just when I thought you had stopped your comedy routine you wind youself up again! It seems you have an obsession with, in your words, “weewee sucking”. Excuse my ignorance, maybe this one of your great Russian traditions? After all you have many fine Russian traditions like pogroms, famines, genocides, murdering political opponents, occupying neighbouring contries etc. Comrade, the people are laughing…not with you but at you.

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

What the fuk are you kikes doing on RedPillTimes anyway fool? Go back to Jew York Times site as they need more Hasbara troll reinforcement pronto! Take your reptilian hook nose and get going fool! Ooh and not to bust your bubble, but communism was invented and run by the filthy Tulmudic jooo scum such as yourself boobie! Ooh, and the filthy reptilian jooo money-changing Rothschilds always fund both sides of every war! You really must be a very proud reptilian jooo to be related to this ilk boobie! Ooh, and everybody I know are laughing at you fool, so… Read more »

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Good morning. I see the Kremlin troll factory is open for business once again. Maybe you are right – RedPill Times is only for intelligent Russians who use terms like “filthy Tulmudic jooo scum”. Maybe we should communicate by Skype so you can see my “reptilian hook nose”??

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

I see the perverted Hasbara trolls are up early to bother the Goys.

A wise man told me long ago that evey evil event that happens around the world, a filthy Tulmudic jooo is involved if you dig deep enough! Maybe that is why your ilk has been butchered and kickout of almost every country know to man for thousands of years! You must be very proud of this record, huh fool? LOL

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Sounds like you have overdosed on The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Maybe that is your favourite text, after Mein Kampf? Thank you in advance for your next rant!

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

Here is some more tid bits for the young impressionable Goys out there.

http://www.ae911truth.org

Thanks for the stage boobie! Like I said, if I only wake up a few Goys from there “blue” pill stupor, I did my job! Thanks again fool! Keep it up as I got more info to spread!!!

Ooh, and do you like my new avatar boobie? ¿LOL

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Well, you sure like to live in your own dopey and lonely little world don’t you? 911truth is strictly for the feeble minded who prefer to inhabit the lunatic fringe…no conspiracy theory is too outrageous for them, and all the better if they can add some anti-Semitic angle. I’m sure you have got more “info” to spread… we can’t wait!

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

I take it you have no scientific, technical or engineering skills what’s so ever, this is clear!

But why the 6hr delay fool?

Ooh I get it, you were busy with your perverted Tulmudic rabbi on a 6hr suck fest! LOL

But don’t be ashamed that the Goys know your dirty little secret, be proud of your perverted parasitic culture fool! LOL

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

I apologise for my delay in replying to you. You see, I ran out of toilet paper but luckily I was able to print out your posts so I could wipe my, to use your delightful expression, “filthy Khazarian fake jooo ars” – I had not heard this term previously, maybe it is part of your great Russian cultural tradition?

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

Wipe your the jiz of your mouth first, but you are excused for your suck fest delay.

Next time tell your perverted Tulmudic rabbi to take it easy on you as the delays make you look like a sloppy Hasbara troll!

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Oy vey! What do with you? I was hoping for some more links to web sites of truth but none in sight. Just keep waiting I suppose…

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

But you never answered any of my questions, why?

Do you want me to relist them in a nice order? Maybe spoon feed them to you, no?

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Because your “questions” are not questions at all, just dopey drivel you believe or are fed by your equally dopey handlers. There you go – I have answered your question. Now get your act together and hit us with more anti-Semitic trash. Pronto little boy (or is that goy?)!

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

Don’t worry fool, as history always repeats itself and as history has shown, it never end well for your parasitic kind! Too bad Hitler (the ultimate self-hating jooo) didn’t finished the job!

Now fuk off as I am done with your reptilian ass! Be gone!

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Klieg, Klieg, Klieg-Du bist a Nar. If you were twice as smart you would be an idiot. Mazel Tov!

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

האָן איר איד!

See l knew you were a Tulmudic Khazarian fake jooo! Bravo fool, bravo!

You idiots said the same time about the Germans but well, they turned your parasitic corpses in to useful soap and lampshades!! Be careful what you wish for boobie! LOL

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

See how clever you are? A real kolboynick! And all this time I thought you were just a Russian schmendrik. Yishar koach!

357 Mag
Guest
357 Mag

I see your Tulmudic joooness is finally revealed! That explains why you never wanted to answer my embarrassing questions! It all makes sense now! Bravo, I know you were a Hasbara troll all along! So there is no need for futher blogging with, move along now!

Roosak
Guest
Roosak

Your Russian shtick drek brain already has the answers programmed. The trouble is, if you put your brain inside a bird it would start flying backwards. Mazel Tov!

trackback

ccn2785xdnwdc5bwedsj4wsndb

[…]very handful of websites that transpire to become in depth below, from our point of view are undoubtedly effectively really worth checking out[…]

trackback

3nvb54wnxd5cbvbecnv5ev75bc

[…]we came across a cool web site that you could get pleasure from. Take a look should you want[…]

trackback

Title

[…]always a massive fan of linking to bloggers that I adore but don’t get lots of link like from[…]

trackback

Title

[…]please check out the websites we follow, including this 1, because it represents our picks through the web[…]

trackback

Title

[…]here are some hyperlinks to internet sites that we link to simply because we feel they may be worth visiting[…]

Latest

“This is America” reveals a shocking vision of the United States

The Grammy Award winning Song and Record of the Year feature the very darkest vision of what America has become.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

The Grammy Awards are the second of the three most significant musical achievement awards in the United States. Two of the anticipated awards that many fans of this event look forward to learning are the Song of the Year and the Record of the Year.

The Song of the Year is awarded to the songwriters of a given song, where the Record of the Year goes to the artists, producers and engineers involved in crafting the recording (the “record”) of a song. Both categories are huge and both usually go to an artist or organization responsible for a pop song.

It also happens to be that usually the song that is picked is beautiful and in most cases, reflects the character of beauty (whether in music or lyrics or both) for that year.

This year was quite different. Both awards went to Donald Glover, a.k.a. “Childish Gambino” for his song This is America.

This song features a radically different tone than previous winners going back for many years. Though rap remixes are usually less musical, the Grammy winners among these mixes have nevertheless retained some relatively positive, or at least attractive, aspect.

This is America is very different, especially when watched with its video.

Musically, it is genius, though the genius appears to have gone mad. Glover paints a picture of some very positive segments in American life, but then destroys it with his audible form and message that says absolutely nothing positive, but even more so – it doesn’t make sense unless one knows the context.

That context is revealed in the video with frightening images: someone getting their brains blown out (we see the blood fly), a gospel choir shot up with an automatic rifle while they were singing, and cannabis, front and center, being smoked by the artist himself.

This is America?

For Glover, this song and others on his album do seem to reflect that point of view.  Feels like Summer, one of Glover’s other recent songs, also reflects this sense of hopelessness, though it is far more musically consistent. The video gives the most clear contextual information that one could ask for, and while the video is not violent, it features degradation in society, even though the people depicted appear to be trying to make the best of their life situations.

The image Mr. Glover paints of America is a far cry from that which was known to most Americans only twenty years ago, and in fact, in many parts of the country where cannabis is still illegal there is a corresponding sense of positivity in life that is absent in Childish Gambino’s California-esque view of life.

There is a massive change that is taking place in American society. Our music and art reflects this change, and it sometimes even helps drive that change.

The United States of today is at a crossroads.

How many times have we read or heard THAT statement before?  But does it not seem so now? The attempt of identity politics to separate our nation into groups that must somehow fight for their own relevance against other groups is not the vision of the United States only twenty years ago.

Further, the normalization of themes such as drug-use and racism, the perpetuation of one in reality and the other as a mythological representation of how life “really is” in the US is radically bizarre.

In discussions with people who do not live in the United States, we found that sometimes they believed that white-on-black racism really was happening in America, because the media in the US pumps this information out in a constant stream, often with people like Donald Trump as the scapegoat.

But it is not true. Anyone in America’s new “accused class” of white, Christian, European-descent males (and some women who are not feminists), will note that they are not racist, and in fact, they feel persecuted for their existence under the new mantra of “white privilege.”

But it does not matter what they say. The media pumps the message it wants to, and with such coverage it is easy to get to halfway believing it: I know I am not this way, but I guess things are getting pretty bad elsewhere because all of those people seem to be getting this way…

This is the narrative the press promulgates, but upon conversations with people in “those places” we find that it is not true for them, either, and that they may in fact be thinking this is true about us.

Made in America is a visionary song and video. However, the vision is not a dream; it is nothing that anyone in the country would sincerely hope for. Even in Donald Glover’s case – as one of Hollywood’s hottest actors, and as a big success in music, he is far from being one of the “boys in the ‘hood.” In fact, Time Magazine in 2017 named him one of the world’s 100 most influential people.

Certainly his musical work creates a powerful influence, but it also must raise questions, with the main ones being:

  • Are we really like this?
  • Is this what we really want to be as a country?
  • Is this the kind of image we want our children in the US to adopt?

In fact, if Mr. Glover’s work was viewed with care (rather than just as something that is “cool” because the media says it is), it might help us steer away from the cliff that many Americans are in fact heading towards.

We have elected not to link to the video because it is too disturbing for children. It is even too disturbing for many adults. For that reason we are not making it one-click-easy to get to.

Parents reading this opinion piece would do well to screen the video by themselves without the kids around first, before deciding what they want to do. Even though the video is probably something that they have already seen, the parents still stand as the guides and guardians for their children through all the perils of growing up.

These times call for great guardians indeed.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Horrifying New York abortion law marks big Democrat push in US

New Mexico, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont and Washington also wish to expand abortion access to truly barbaric proportions.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

To some nations in the world, the United States may appear to be overly “conservative” or “backwards” regarding its general position on abortion. Russia, China, Canada, and Australia all allow this practice in generally unrestricted terms. Europeans are generally allowing of first trimester abortions. Social attitudes about the practice vary, with Sweden being the most permissive in terms of attitude, but Russia being the place where a woman is most likely to have had an abortion.

While the legal position in the United States on abortion is generally legal under all conditions as determined by the outcome of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision in the US Supreme Court, the social context of the practice is highly debated and generally disapproved of, even by those Americans who believe that the procedure should still be kept legal. One of the most emotionally satisfying statements in the US that actually summarized the attitudes of many “pro-choice” Americans was that of Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill Clinton’s statement that abortions should be “safe, legal and rare.”

In other words, the legality of the procedure is one thing, and the promotion of the procedure is quite another. It was summarized in this thought: We think that to be in the position of determining whether or not to abort a child is a horrifying and extremely serious matter. However, we believe it to be safer if this procedure is kept legal, lest it actually become dangerous because of inferior resources if it were banned, and done clandestinely.

This point of view was generally accepted as a secular compromise to a horrifying situation. Far from the ultraliberal attitudes of progressive Europe, the United States remained a relatively conservative country, socially guided by Christian attitudes concerning the sanctity of life, even that life which is yet unborn.

All this has changed.

Starting with the signing of New York State’s “Reproductive Health Act”, many states are now moving towards ensuring that abortion is legal under all conditions, to the full term of pregnancy, even to the point where perfectly viable, birthed babies may be killed after delivery if the mother so desires.

This report from New York was immediately followed up by this news item from Virginia’s own Legislature, in its attempt to pass a similar law, made even more clearly brutal by Governor Northam’s defense and explanation of the procedure post delivery in which a living baby would be subject to being deliberately killed at the wish of the mother. 

This law, like the New York constitutional amendment allows the unborn, or just-born (and alive even though “aborted”), no human rights.

There is really no way this action cannot be seen for what it is: infanticide, a very particularly cruel form of murder of the innocent, on no further grounds than that the baby exists and that the mother does not want it.

We covered in another news piece how this ability appears to be the prize “right” of feminist women, who were represented in Congress by the infamous Women in White, who sat stone-faced as President Donald Trump appealed for Congress to make and pass a law banning late-term abortions.

However, the President’s request was well-met by conservatives in the House chamber, and indeed, even some pro-choices were set off their guard by the New York and Virginia legislative moves. Virginia’s attempt failed.

Abortion is legal in the US, and it is legal at any point in the pregnancy in many states. This is not often reported, probably because abortion is not palatable to public discourse when a fully-formed, living baby is to be the subject of this procedure. The national discourse has for years been “safely” diverted to what appears to be more metaphysical debate about the unseen processes in pregnancy, such as “when does life really begin”, and even “when does the embryo receive a soul?”

This is probably by design to avoid the much harsher realities that were exposed in New York, Virginia and Massachusetts, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Washington and Vermont. All these states have either passed or are trying to pass laws that protect abortion rights, sometimes to similar extremes as New York’s law contains. However, many other states, such as Colorado, already allow full and late-term abortion procedures.

However, not every state in the US is trying to magnify abortion rights. Some are trying to limit this procedure, or even outlaw it entirely, should Roe v. Wade be overturned by the Supreme Court, a possibility that seems enhanced now with five “conservative” Justices on the US Supreme Court. States like Tennessee, South Carolina, Arkansas, and even the aforementioned Rhode Island are seeking passage of laws to sharply limit or completely outlaw the procedure in this event.

CDC graph showing abortion rates per 1,000 US women from 1969 to 2014. Courtesy: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Guttmacher Institute.

Interestingly, both the abortion rate and the actual number of abortions performed in the US has fallen drastically in the time period between 1980 and 2014. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention record that there were almost 1.3 million babies aborted in 1980, peaking at 1.43 million in 1990, before dropping again to 2015’s rate of 638,000. Numbers and counts vary by statistical poll, however, with 2017’s numbers showing 882,240 in this study. The common feature of declining numbers and rates is still evident.

Statistical sources on this issue were not able to explain the reason for the drop in both rate and number of abortions, but a speculation might be that some exposure to the reality of what abortion actually is has served to deter both unwanted pregnancy from even happening, and also to try to find a way to take care of human beings guilty of nothing more than their existence. Perhaps this is too generous an assessment, but it is one possibility.

President Trump was loud and clear on several occasions about his stance on the issue of abortion. His State of the Union speech featured his saying, “all children, born and unborn are made in the Holy image of God.” This was followed up by further comments at the National Prayer Breakfast, in which he continued to show a strong pro-life position.

Naturally, some pols dismiss this as nothing more than the President’s attempts to energize his base for the 2020 elections. To credit such opinions, it may indeed do this. But President Trump has really put his money where his mouth is in terms of governing as a conservative, or at least, common-sense oriented President.

The combination of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s legislation, the Virginian attempt and the March for Life, featuring its highly slurred story about Roman Catholic teenaged boys who were at the event, plus the President’s speech have made for a truly polarizing moment. To be sure, political winds in the US are so unruly now that longstanding position issues are now pushed aside in mere days, or even hours. However the mainstream media is hard-pressed to refute what happened here. The American Left tipped its hand, perhaps a little too much for even some who are ideologically liberal, and some of the harshest, most sinister aspects of their worldview were brought into focus.

This reaction extends even to both real-life and Internet commentary on such news pieces. Tucker Carlson took on uber-feminist Monica Klein on his program on January 30th, and their exchange, most notably Monica’s sheer fury, was a sign that the Left is energized on this subject, so much so that any sense of nicety has been discarded:

For Ms. Klein, this issue is a source of pure anger, as is clearly evident on her face. This was not a woman who was playing the ideological talking head for the news media hit; far from it. She really believes what she says, and has taken that fury to the point of irrationality.

Some comments on this issue appear in many publications that also reveal extremely fiery emotion on both sides. The rhetoric swings from “baby-killers” to “woman-haters” quite freely on this topic, and this is honestly a shame. Such emotional incendiary bombs are avoidances on both sides. While people call each other names, no one pays attention to the topic itself. This is, of course, by design.

When the real issue is looked at, as was shown so clearly in New York and Virginia, the topic of the value of human life shows its profound reality to everyone. If that happened often enough or long enough, it might change the substance of the conversation.

The result might then be a real change.

 

 

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Facebook: The Government’s Propaganda Arm?

The social media giant has a disturbing number of former Obama officials in key positions of authority over content.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Jeff Charles via Liberty Nation:


Imagine for a moment what it would look like if the federal government launched its own social media network. Every day, Americans could freely use the platform to express their views on everything from economic theory to the best tips for baking peanut butter cookies. They could even discuss their political views and debate the important issues of the day.

But what if the government were empowered to determine which political views are appropriate and which are too obscene for the American public? Well, it looks like this is already happening. Of course, the state has not created a social media network; they didn’t have to. It appears the government is using Facebook – the world’s largest social media company – to sway public opinion.

The Government’s Fingers In Facebook

The Free Thought Project recently published a report revealing that Facebook has some troubling ties to the federal government and that this connection could be enabling former state officials to influence the content displayed. The social media provider has partnered with various think tanks which receive state funding, while hiring an alarming number of individuals who have held prominent positions in the federal government.

Facebook recently announced their partnership with the Atlantic Council – which is partly funded by tax dollars – to ensure that users are presented with quality news stories. And by “quality,” it seems that they mean “progressive.” The council is well known for promoting far-left news sources, including the Xinhua News Agency, which was founded by the Communist Party of China. Well, that’s reassuring. What red-blooded American capitalist doesn’t want to get the news from a communist regime?

But there one aspect of this story is even more troubling: the government-to-Facebook pipeline. The company has employed a significant number of former officials in positions that grant them influence over what content is allowed on the platform.

Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebook’s Head of Cybersecurity Policy, prosecuted cybercrimes at the Department of Justice under President Obama. Now, he is responsible for determining who gets banned or suspended from the network. But that’s not the worst of it. He also spearheaded the company’s initiative to scrub anti-war content and “protest” movements. In a blog post, Gleicher wrote: “Some of the Pages frequently posted about topics like anti-NATO sentiment, protest movements, and anti-corruption.” He continued, “We are constantly working to detect and stop this type of activity because we don’t want our services to be used to manipulate people.”

The company has also hired others who served in key positions in the Obama administration. Some of these include:

  • Aneesh Raman: Former speechwriter
  • Joel Benenson: Top adviser
  • Meredith Carden: Office of the First Lady

To make things more interesting, Facebook has also hired neocons to help them determine the type of content that is being published. So if you happen to be a conservative that isn’t too crazy about interventionism, your views are not as welcome on the network as others. After all, how many times have you heard of people being banned for posting pro-war or socialist propaganda?

Are Private Companies Truly Private?

The notion that government officials could be using positions of power in the private industry to advance a statist agenda is disturbing, but the fact that most Americans are unaware of this is far worse. It would be inaccurate to argue that the government is controlling Facebook’s content, but the level of the state’s involvement in the world’s biggest social media company is a disturbing development.

This is not the only case of state officials becoming involved with certain industries. This trend is rampant in the certain industries in which individuals move back and forth between private organizations and the FDA. For example, Monsanto, an agricultural and agrochemical company, has been under scrutiny for its ties to the federal government.

It is not clear if there is anything that can be done to counteract inappropriate relations between the government and certain companies – especially organizations with the level of influence enjoyed by the likes of Facebook. But it essential that the public is made aware of these relations, otherwise the state will continue to exert influence over society – with Americans none the wiser.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending