Despite the pressure brought to bear upon House Republicans during the recent DHS funding debate-in spite of the patently unconstitutional actions of this administration-over fifty of them refused to submit to the will of Obama’s factotum in the House of Representatives. Unsurprisingly, there are now rumors of a push by conservative, constitutionalist members to depose Speaker Boehner, which has already inspired a wave of fear among his deputies. The sad truth is that the Republican leadership has not learned anything over these past two years, which makes the battle for control heading into next year’s presidential election all the more vital. 

Will the GOP become the party of immigration patriots like Senator Jeff Sessions, or will it consign itself to permanent minority status by supporting a Bush restoration? Next week’s actions will be telling in this regard. America’s future depends upon the decisions being made right now.

The latest issue of Charlie Hebdo has finally hit the streets of France, no doubt displeasing genocidal Islamic sociopaths and their culturally Marxist, Islamophilic SJW sympathizers alike. The depth of fear of the poisonous, warped ideology which has paralyzed the gatekeepers of power is on full display, as the contemptible reaction of this Sky News anchor demonstrates. As James Kirkpatrick so succinctly puts it, this comes down to either identity or extinction.

It’s readily apparent which side the Kultursmog has chosen in this debate. One need look no further than a pathetic, cringing New York Times article praising the foresight of the overseers of the Appellate Division Courthouse, who removed a statue of Mohammed at the behest of a group of third world, Islamic backwaters during renovations in 1955. Reading that piece reminded me of nothing so much as the craven nature of the townsfolk in the classic episode of The Twilight Zone It’s A Good Life, who are cowered into submission to the will of a deranged, sadistic child with supernatural powers. 

Thankfully, the people who are bombarded by these messages have retained both their dignity and their hostility to an ideology responsible for a host of outrages both past and present. The most welcome development in this respect being the grassroots, spontaneous East German civic movement known as Pegida, which has drawn character assassinations from even the current chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany. Just like their slightly  more earthy counterparts in the anti-Islamization movement, these men and women are revolting against the totalitarian mindset which animates both Islam and the state-worshipping EUrocracy which has colonized public life on the European continent.

As exasperating and predictable as the reaction by the Mesozoic news media has been, we can’t ignore the organic, courageous response of individuals like those who comprise the membership of Pegida, or the steely determination of the writers and artists who continue to publish Charlie Hebdo, even as lickspittles and cowards who pose as journalists try to silence them. My faith in humanity dictates that these truth-tellers are the ones who are writing the first draft of history.

With the horrific ritual slaughter of yet another American journalist, it’s become clear that the Islamic State, after briefly pursuing the hearts and minds strategy, has reverted to form. Whether we call them ISIL, ISIS, Al Qaeda in Iraq, or the Combatant Vanguard, the essence of this group of sociopaths remains the same, i.e. a nullification of civilization. Which is why preventing any of these death cultists from entering-or returning to-the United States is of the utmost urgency. 

Of course, our government has shown no inclination to limit our exposure to future Islamic terror plots. To the contrary, it has repeatedly invited thousands of refugees from states which have served as assembly lines for ISIS, Hezbollah, and al-Shabaab jihadists to resettle inside of our country. To add insult to injury, the Department of Homeland Security has absolutely no clue where 6,000 foreign students who have overstayed their visas are at this moment. We can only hope they aren’t pursuing the same path as one of the more notorious foreign students to come to our shores.

Whether or not the battalions of the Islamic State have the capability of enacting a 9/11-style terrorist assault on this country remains to be seen. However, our immigration control system is the least of their worries, as the most recent terror alert makes abundantly clear. Kudos to Judicial Watch for bringing to light the unmitigated failure of this administration to protect the lives of American citizens. The fact that the President and his allies are more concerned about placating the ethnic grievance industry-and gleaning the votes it represents-than ensuring America’s security tells you all you need to know about this administration’s misplaced priorities.

Update: The Silent Majority No More has some great coverage of the May Day absurdity, which I urge you all to check out for yourselves!

One of the perennial problems faced by the left is the inclination to either devolve into myopic, sectarian bands, or to remain so diffuse and broad in its appeal that it doesn’t accomplish much of anything. The latter tendency can be seen in the evolution of movements like Occupy Wall Street, which never quite formulated a cogent agenda, despite rendering aid  to distressed victims of Hurricane Sandy this past year. Although, even this operation didn’t proceed quite as smoothly or as transparently as one would expect from an organization that ostensibly has no defined hierarchical structure. 

The message emblazoned upon the placard seen above-whether  born out of sincerity or a mischievous desire to troll Marxists-was probably the most succinct, coherent statement I encountered in Union Square this week, however ironic it must seem juxtaposed against a public celebration of the international labor movement. 

Nevertheless, supporters of OWS were plentiful during Wednesday’s festivities, even as open borders activists attempted to use May Day  to mobilize their supporters on behalf of millions of illegal aliens seeking amnesty. 

Aside from some conspicuous flag-waving, and manning a much smaller version of The People’s Library, there didn’t seem to be much activity among the occupiers, especially in comparison to last year, when the movement occupied the preeminent place among the day’s citywide rallies.  

To its credit, the illegal alien lobby  recognized the fleeting nature of this particular historical moment. Alas, it might be another two years before their benefactors in Congress attempt to foist an equally unpalatable deal upon a skeptical American public. That’s why they came out in force, albeit much reduced in number-in order to demand-their words, not mine-perpetual immunity from legal and political repercussions related to the laws they’ve violated. 

The focus, as always, was on the reunification of families-ones marked by severe genetic deformities, if these portraits are any guide-separated by the purportedly arbitrary, cruel immigration policies pursued by the American government. 

Although more focused than the generic leftists in attendance, the open borders enthusiasts did try to link to their opposition to immigration enforcement of any kind to a variety of other topical issues, including critiques of the military industrial complex. While some would opine that militarizing the border would be a far better use of American resources than some of the Defense Department’s current priorities, especially considering the empirical evidence validating this assertion, those gathered in Union Square beg to differ. Interestingly enough, they seem to share the views of the Cato Institute in this regard. 

The May 1st Coalition-a group created in the wake of  a uniformly ineffective 2006 boycott of American businesses and public schools by illegal aliens-was the chief organizer of this event, and was responsible for much of the publicity advertising the rally. 

Perhaps unsurprisingly, this group opposes the Gang of Eight giveaway in its current form because they view it as far too punitive to the poor, beleaguered migrants who simply want legislative immunity conferred upon them for trespassing our laws-both civil and criminal. I suppose a tax amnesty is too heavy a burden to ask them to bear in return for funding their  health care, welfare and unlimited access to legal counsel. 

As expected, organized labor-including our good friends from the SEIU-constituted a significant presence. After all, who else is going to replenish the declining ranks of union membership in this country’s private and public sectors? 

Having a portion of your paycheck confiscated and subsequently earmarked for the political ambitions of  union executives, is apparently a life-time affair. 

In addition to the open borders brigade-and its union auxiliaries-there were a host of Marxists; this being May Day, after all. No one has ever accused the reds of being reluctant to attach themselves to a more popular cause or party. In that vein, the  hoary Trotskyites of the Socialist Workers Party trundled out their pristine reading material-including copies of their flagship publication, The Militant-to generally disinterested passersby. 

They did manage to incorporate anti-enforcement buzz phrases into their otherwise predictable signage. It’s often said that politics make strange bedfellows, and immigration politics is perhaps the prime example of this cliche being grounded in truth. Very strange, in this case. Or perhaps not, when you view the proposed immigration law through the prism of a policy that guarantees a steady supply of cheap labor and cheap votes. Ostensibly, socialists oppose the former, but I suppose not when it imperils the latter.  

Nelson Mandela was chummy with one of the 20th century’s most ruthless, prolific totalitarian despots? You don’t say!? This sort of accusation might lead people to think he was a Communist! Well, I suppose the Trotskyists are good for something after all. 

Not to be outdone, the SWP’s arch-nemesis-the (Maoist) Workers World Party-was also there.  So coercive statists with an affection for genocidal Communists had a plethora of choices that day. 

Some of them were more enthusiastic in their appreciation for the Great Helmsman than others. Thankfully, the two sides didn’t come to blows. We all know how ugly these type of situations can get. 

The Spartacist League was on message. 

For the most part. 

Much like Kim Jong-Un himself, admirers of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea couldn’t help but plead for public attention. 

Ah yes, those dastardly warmongers. The nerve of them! 

I wonder what this appreciator of Juche thinks of Kenneth Bae’s recent arrest and conviction. 

One of the more interesting aspects of these sort of events-whose hallmark is the repetition of cliched phrases-is learning more about some often overlooked groups in the world of political activism. The organization referenced above, the National Alliance For Filipino Concerns, is one such group. Founded in San Jose, California, it bills itself as an advocacy organization for the Filipino diaspora, a large segment of which can be found within the United States. 

Despite the fact that there are over three and half million people of Filipino descent in this country-and over one and a half million Filipino immigrants-they have figured less than prominently in our nation’s periodic debates over immigration. Several hundred thousand Filipinos are also here illegally, but they too haven’t become a significant debating point in our national discussion of various amnesty proposals such as the DREAM Act. Juan Antonio Vargas-media darling and illegal alien scofflaw-seems to be the exception to the rule.

The maltreatment of domestic workers from The Philippines, especially those living and working in the Arabian Peninsula-but even for those who work in households on this continent-is notorious. The Saudi Arabian diplomatic compound that doubled as a modern-day slave pen is just one of the most startling examples of an epidemic that the Philippine Forum is attempting to highlight with that banner. Notwithstanding my disagreement with the political philosophy espoused by most of the protesters in Union Square-and opposition to their proposed solutions to our broken immigration system-I have to commend some of them for exposing a global moral blight that too few Americans are aware of. 

In addition to the individuals concerned about the flagrant abuse and exploitation of Filipino domestic workers, there was a large contingent of avowedly Communist political parties and Marxist organizations which are based in the Philippines itself. 

There were young Filipino Marxists. 

Older Filipino Marxists-standing next to a representative of the International Migrants Alliance.

The political coalition with which most of these organizations are affiliated. I’ll let you infer it’s ideological proclivities. 

For the life of me I couldn’t tell you what political current this woman’s philosophy represents, but chances are she’s Filipino. 

And finally, female Filipino Marxists. 

As most of you know, the vast majority of illegal immigrants come from Mexico-over sixty percent, according to the Department of Homeland Security. So it was not surprising that many of the participants in the May Day rally were Mexican nationals, including the woman seen above, who’s part of an international alliance of vendors. For those of you who aren’t fluent in Spanish, here’s a link to their English-language website.

There were also friends of Yo Soy 132, a Mexican political movement created in opposition to then PRI presidential candidate-now president-Enrique Pena Nieto and the perceived deficit in honest coverage of his presidential campaign, as well as its bitterly contested aftermath. Like its counterpart in the United States, the establishment press in Mexico is controlled by large media conglomerates, often indifferent to the concerns of ordinary citizens. As we’ve learned recently, what doesn’t get reported is often just as important as what is covered. 

There were also devout adherents to the philosophy of third-worldism-such as the International Women’s Alliance-at Union Square. Apparently, some people haven’t gotten the message. 

One curiosity was the apparent lack of any  Puerto Rican nationalists, which is a group that usually shows to events like these. I didn’t spot a single machetero or independista, and was despairing of finding any until I saw the man wearing the colorful t-shirt seen in the photo above. Bingo! 

In contrast to that lonely devotee of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party, there were a multitude of Communists willing to trod across the Flatiron District and Gramercy Park  in order to broadcast their innovative, youthful message of perpetual global enslavement, mass starvation and genocide, and statist terror. 

Despite its promising name, most of the individuals I saw bearing these signs seemed to have some tread on the tires. 

A few were in the Fidel Castro ballpark. 

While one man seemed to be giving Lenin himself a run for his money in the youthful vigor department. 

Luckily,  a few non-geriatric Communists did show up, including our favorite ginger-headed Kim Jong-il fanboy. 

 Even a stopped clock is right once a day.

In the second part of my May Day coverage, expect more Communists-as well as a patriotic counterpoint!

To live in New York is to be surrounded by people suffering from various pathologies, many of whom you encounter on a daily basis if-like most of us-you use public transportation. Living here also means being surrounded by Marxists of varying hues, including Maoists, Trotskyites, and-as the photograph above illustrates, supporters of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Most of the time, international supporters of the only communist hereditary dictatorship fly under the radar. Outside of the faltering consortium of ethnic Koreans living in Japan-whose own stability has been imperiled for obvious reasons-there are not many people willing to support a regime which has killed enough of its subjects to rank comfortably between Pol Pot and Mengistu Haile Mariam in the annals of historical, third world despotism.

The event which occasioned these paeans to The Great Leader was the opening night of Red Dawn, a 1984 action-adventure thriller involving a Soviet invasion of the mainland United States that-much to the chagrin of the director of the original film-is being remade into a would-be blockbuster where the main antagonists are North Korean shock troops. Being a state-barely-where an economy  doesn’t exist and ICBMs are too poorly designed to reach the shores of the United States appears to have its advantages, at least from the perspective of a Hollywood film producer.

However, those going out of their way to avoid controversy usually have it thrust upon them, whether it be in the form of racially insensitive tweets, or a counter-protest staged by a bedraggled band of true believers led by an SDS spokesman who resembles a more unkempt version of Eric Stoltz, ca. The Butterfly Effect.

You thought SDS had disappeared with the departure of the last Americans from the U.S. embassy in Saigon, South Vietnam? Alas, it’s still extant, as is the Workers World, which peddles old ideas from the new left slightly repackaged-emphasis on slightly-for the Internet Age. The bilingual edition of the latter no doubt aimed to appeal to emigres from that vast swathe of Latin America which is infatuated with socialism, notwithstanding its rather obvious shortcomings.

Whether the proclivity of newcomers to favor government management of the economy will translate into increased support for The Great, Dear, Omniscient Leader is a matter for future generations to decide, but the spirited crowd of approximately half a dozen devoted communists seemed to be solidly in the corner of Kim Jong-Un and opposed to the shameless political dwarfs behind the cinematic reincarnation of this motion picture.

One of the scheduled speakers was the man wearing the jaunty keffiyeh seen above, who hails from the workers’ paradise that is post-Batista Cuba. Apparently, Raul Castro’s tropical paradise is, like the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, another victim of malicious, patently false Western propaganda. You might be asking yourself why, if that’s the case, he is in New York City right now instead of Havana. Oh, you vile, imperialist cur.

There was also an unofficial spokesperson from Occupy Wall Street whose purpose I wasn’t able to readily discern, although perhaps it was intended to add ballast to a movement that has seen better days. Most recently, when the Soviet Union existed as more than a whimsical advertising campaign from Hershey’s.

In fact, one of the points emphasized by our Alexi Lalas look-alike was that North Korea had a thriving economy during the untainted, benevolent reign of the Soviet Empire. Aside from the fact that this is wholly inaccurate, this assertion is 100 percent true. Still, you wonder why a regime that prides itself on its rigid autarky would rely upon its two largest neighbors in order to survive.

One of my hopes for the anti-Red Dawn/pro-deranged, overtly racist, vaguely Confucian Communist junta demonstration was that its small number of participants would be dwarfed by a slightly larger group of trolls, a la Communists for Kerry or Bureaucrash during its heyday.

Alas, no such hilarity ensued. I did get the chance to capture an amusing confrontation between comrade Maupin and a friend of mine who was also there to record this historic event. I don’t recall what was said verbatim, but I’m sure it involved a denunciation of capitalist lickspittles and/or running dogs of imperialism. For those of you who are interested in watching this tete-a-tete for yourselves, you can view it in its entirety on Youtube, which I’m certain would have been created by North Korean engineers if their nation hadn’t been bombarded by Western disinformation campaigns.

Sarcasm aside, one of the most disturbing aspects of this rally was a brief speech delivered by an envoy from the America-Democratic Republic of Korea Friendship Committee, who parroted the same lies you find published regularly by North Korea’s official news service.

Like the useful idiots who traveled back from Moscow with nothing but praise for Joseph Stalin-even as he was in the process of liquidating class enemies within the Soviet state-this loathsome creature returned from Pyongyang in order to stand upon a soapbox-quite literally-and laud the achievements of  a state which is synonymous with indifference to human life and the ruthless suppression of anyone who dares to exercise his natural rights.

It’s sickening to think that such a creature walks among us, but like ignorance, disease, and hatred, he is a pestilence which has yet to be eradicated in a world where knowledge is at the fingertips of most of humanity. A sad yet ineluctable truth that we’ll have confront as plunge ahead into an era just as turbulent as the one which occasioned a cinematic classic of the Cold War.

Update: Breitbart coverage here.  Also, a write-up from North Korea News. Watch Adrian Hong’s speech Escape from North Korea. A much longer speech by a survivor of a North Korean concentration camp can be viewed here. Hat Tip: Todd Seavey.

One of the fascinating aspects of living in this city is that, for good or ill, you’re exposed to a whole raft of ideologies and political philosophies of which, but for location, you might have remained blissfully ignorant in perpetuity. Granted, some of us choose to remain mired in a state of ignorance notwithstanding the fact that we dwell in the cultural capital of the planet. Even so, those of us with a smidgen of intellectual curiosity find ourselves compelled to investigate  these esoteric political beliefs, if for no other reason than merely to satisfy the more quizzical side of our nature.

That’s what brought me down to Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, the site of multiple demonstrations against the current president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this past week. The largest faction of protesters came at the urging of the Mujahadeen-e-Khalq, otherwise known as the People’s Mujahadeen of Iran, otherwise known as the MKO, not to be confused with the National Council of Resistance in Iran, which serves as the MEK’s parliament-in-exile. Confused yet? Bear with me.

The banner you see above might look vaguely familiar, and that’s probably because you’ve seen it before-in New York City, no less! That’s right, it was part of the original Occupy Wall Street encampment at Zuccotti Park, which was eventually dispersed by the NYPD.

Despite its many permutations throughout the decades, one of the constants of the MEK has been its association, however attenuated, with the  left. So its decision to align itself with the staggeringly incoherent, yet incontestably leftist, OWS movement should not have come as a surprise. And just as you’ll find PMOI supporters at large gatherings of leftists, you’re more than likely to find a diverse array of leftists-with an interest in anti-IRI activism-at MEK rallies.

At the last MEK demonstration against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad I observed an informational booth manned by a member of the Worker-communist Party of Iran-in exile, of course- who stood behind a crimson red banner that resembled this flag. The irony of denouncing the world’s leading state sponsor of terror while venerating-seemingly-Russia’s first mass terrorist apparently being lost on him.

Large sections of this rally weren’t any more intellectually coherent, unfortunately. Case in point, a group of Western feminists protesting the Iranian state’s deplorable treatment of women, including the not infrequent executions of those who run afoul of its clerical leadership’s capricious enforcement of Islamic law.

Although the Iranian regime’s periodic bloodletting of its citizenry is deserving of universal condemnation, I can’t help but think that doing so while wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the image of one of the Western Hemisphere’s most notorious executioners-and a totalitarian, to boot-is a decidedly mixed message.

Even so, it can’t be disputed that the Iranian system of justice-including its hellish penal institutions-is barbaric even by the most narrow definition of human rights. As the poster above indicates, Iran is one of the few countries that still routinely sentences juveniles to death, more often than not carrying out those verdicts. This tragedy is made all the more horrific by the complicity of Western suppliers of construction equipment; equipment that is regularly utilized in one of the Iranian regime’s preferred methods of execution.

Even though this facet of capital punishment in Iran is rapidly changing due to grassroots political pressure, there are other more traditional methods of murdering unsatisfied citizens, as the picture above-and the story of Soraya M.-demonstrate.

Death and imminent danger were recurring themes throughout the rally, along with the threat posed by a potentially nuclear-armed IRI. Those executed by the Iranian state, before, during, and after the 2009 Green Revolution were highlighted at different points throughout the day.

Another issue promoted-in keeping with the depressingly repetitive news coming across the news wires-is the anti-Assad revolution within Syria. In addition to spotting some Syrians sporting hats with the logo of the Free Syrian Army-a group engaged in questionable  actions itself-there were dozens of men and women bearing the pre-Baathist flag of the Syrian Republic, which has become synonymous with the civil war which has ravaged Syria for the past year and a half.

The inextricable bond between that regime and its benefactors in the Iranian government was referenced throughout the rally. That the Syrian government would probably be unable to repulse its domestic opponents without the military assistance it receives from Iran is an inexorable truth.

So is, it would seem, the precarious nature of Bashar al-Assad’s decade-long reign, although making geopolitical predictions-as history tells us-is always a dicey proposition.

One of the intriguing elements of the anti-Assad faction within this demonstration was the attempt to cast a non-sectarian facade over their efforts. Even though the ecumenical sentiments of these opponents of Baathism were no doubt sincere, I’m not certain that Syrian Christians feel the same way, especially after witnessing the fate of their Assyrian and Catholic brethren in neighboring Iraq.

Though the Syrian regime’s persecution of religious and ethnic minorities is well documented, the prospect that Syria’s most imperiled minority will benefit from yet another Islamic awakening during this Arab Spring is doubtful. One need only look to the precedent established by the Islamic Revolution in Iran in order to see that non-Islamic faiths don’t always thrive in the aftermath of Middle Eastern regime change.

That said, those looking to depose the mullahs in Iran have a compelling argument to make. One that I hope to examine in my third and final post on this subject, in which I’ll continue to explore the history-and perhaps the future-of one of the most vocal and controversial Iranian opposition groups, the Mujahadeen-e-Khalq.

Note:  Video footage, including a rousing speech made by the legendary Pamela Geller, as well as a moving speech by 9/11 mother Nelly Braginskaya, at Atlas Shrugs. Also, additional photos and footage provided by the indefatigable photo-blogger Urban Infidel. 

If  there was a single, overarching theme to the first Stop the Islamization of Nations Congress, it was just that. Freedom. The freedom exercised by Rifqa Bary-the courageous young woman who converted to Christianity despite the wishes of her Muslim parents, and whose portrait you see emblazoned upon the poster above-as well as the freedom to engage in critical inquiry regarding any and all subjects-including Islam-are one and the same. For fundamentally, they both come down to the exercise of free will. Individual choice is something that is not highly valued in authentic Islamic culture, as the plight of the recently freed Iranian Christian pastor  Yousef Nardakani, and the fate which befell Arab journalists who republished the famous Jyllands Posten Mohammed cartoons, demonstrate.

I traveled to the UN Millennium Plaza Hotel on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 massacres in order to listen to a roster of speakers who would illuminate just how precarious the freedom we enjoy is, why it is imperiled-not only in the United States, but across the globe-by whom, and how we can resist the encroachment of those who would circumscribe, and ultimately, eliminate it.

Notwithstanding the passel of amiably grouped American and United Nations flags in that photo, the  values of the United States and those undergirding the United Nations could not be further removed from one another. Anyone who has read the aptly titled The UN Gang by Pedro Sanjuan, a career diplomat and Foreign Service officer-a book that , ironically enough, was stolen while I attended the conference-would recognize just how different our nation is from the anti-American swamp in Turtle Bay. Unfortunately, those in power today-particularly within this administration-seemingly want to emulate the rogue’s gallery of Islamic theocracies, tinhorn military dictatorships, and third world socialist backwaters that currently comprise its membership. At least, with respect to the citizen’s relationship to the state.

Although the words from the Old Testament prophet are laudable-if a bit confusing when juxtaposed against the United Nations general opinion of Jews-they in stark contrast to most of the actions undertaken by the UN, which range from supplication before the preeminent state sponsor of terror, to deploying “peacekeepers” whose chief recreational activity consists of terrorizing the people they were putatively sent to protect. However, the most insidious threat posed by the United Nations is its attempt to nullify our natural rights in order to preserve the edifice of Islam as a great religion.

In decades past, the free world-led by the United States-would have led the fight against criminalizing dissent. However, the position espoused by the American government has been changed dramatically. The instinctive reflex on the part of government officials is exemplified by the craven tweet-since deleted-by the United States embassy in Cairo issued shortly before it was assaulted by a salafi mob. A mob which included, it should be noted, both the younger brother of Al Qaeda’s current emir and members of the terrorist organization whose leader is responsible for the first World Trade Center bombing. Of course, now that the Arab Spring is in full bloom, we should keep in mind that yesterday’s terrorist might very well be today’s democrat.

The most significant aspect of this transformation is the State Department’s active encouragement of a UN resolution, crafted by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which would criminalize any substantive criticism of Islam. As Robert Spencer pointed out during the conference, this treaty would have the force of law, and there’s no reason to believe that the United States Supreme Court-McConnell vs. FEC made its cavalier attitude towards expressive speech plain-to honor our First Amendment rights any more than it has recognized those enshrined within the Second Amendment, or, I would add, the Fifth.

The institutionalization of this dhimmification of our legal system is occurring in our own backyard. State Senator David Storobin, who-regardless of any other criticism that can be leveled against him-should be congratulated for having the temerity to attend this conference, explained why this is such a pernicious development. A man whose family escaped from the Soviet Union-the largest totalitarian empire in world history-and whose relatives were slaughtered by Islamic separatists-Senator Storobin is perhaps uniquely qualified to speak to this issue. He denounced hate speech laws, which he correctly described as penalizing thought rather than criminal action, and averred that he believed in the principles of the Founders. “The founding fathers of America, not the Soviet Union. Madison, not Lenin.”

It’s a quote worth keeping in mind when the vanguards of the left insist upon adopting a policy of prior restraint against the only religion of global breadth they seemingly venerate.  What makes matters even more grave is the fact that those whose sensitivities will be preserved at the expense of our liberty, unlike the victims of other thought crimes-or perceived thought crimes-the left has sought to give protected status, these individuals have the propensity to vent their displeasure in ways much more colorful than public protests or civil disobedience. This fact was brought home to the audience during the speech of the man you see below, David Yerushalmi, founder of the American Freedom Law Center and tireless advocate for American civil liberties.

Mr. Yarushalmi’s speech focused on the nexus between the application of sharia law within Western societies and the inexorable diminishment of civil rights and liberties of citizens living in those societies. Contrary to the anodyne picture of sharia which has been painted by the press, academe, and assorted lapdogs of CAIR touted by our intellectual betters, the facets of Islamic law-provided we ever agree on a school of Islam to impose-which many have no trouble with in principle are diametrically opposed to the values we cherish as American citizens. A perfect illustration of this conflict in practice occurred earlier this year during an Arab American festival held in the city of Dearborn, Michigan.

Exercising their Constitutional right to peaceably assemble and voice their opinions, several Christian missionaries decided to demonstrate their profession of faith in Christ-and disbelief in the assertions found within the pages of the Koran-during this event. Doubting the claims of Mohammed-or his adherents-is a criminal offense-in Islam, not in the United States-which led to these men to being stoned by a frenzied mob of “Arab Americans.” Despite the fact that it was the peaceful protesters who were attacked-to the point of bloodshed-they were the ones told to vacate the premises, lest they be arrested.

The Orwellian revision of the facts by local and national media outlets-where the victims and aggressors were inverted-was not surprising. However, the willingness of a large municipal police department to enforce the legal code that contradicts the 1st Amendment is what led Mr. Yarushalmi to pursue a lawsuit against the officials responsible for this outrage.

While this incident might be interpreted as speaking to the depressing lack of respect for constitutional rights by those entrusted with the use of deadly force by the state, the tenacity with which this lawyer is seeking redress is what stands out in my mind. This determination to protect the sacred right of free speech can also be seen in the legal battle between the American Freedom Defense Initiative/Stop the Islamization of America and the New York Metropolitan Transit Authority over the content of the subway ad you see presented in the powerpoint presentation below.

Questioning the rationale behind the construction of a mosque within sight of Ground Zero, the ad was initially deemed unacceptable by MTA executives before a lawsuit reminded them that freedom of speech trumps the tender sensibilities of a teflon-coated religion. The same MTA was forced to back down again after a federal judge chastised it for refusing to consent to the display of another AFDI/SIOA ad which supported the state of Israel.

However, the most intriguing recent legal victory of Mr. Yarushalmi’s was the decision by the corresponding public transportation governing authority in the city of Detroit.

The poster you see above is nearly identical in content to billboards commissioned by atheist activists exhorting non-Muslim believers to abjure their faith. The only difference being that a the consequence for individuals who answer the question posed here in the affirmative is death. As the tragic fates of Jessica Mokdad…

…and Aqsa Parvez make clear.

It is precisely the willingness among adherents to the Koran to inflict often lethal violence upon its critics which leads governments to attempt to circumscribe the actions, and police the expression of thoughts, of the people whom they ostensibly serve. However, the complicity of almost every major media organ-both in print and on television-in the whitewashing of Islam’s intolerance of dissent-among other less than admirable traits-has as much to do with affinity for the ends-if not always the means-of its followers, as it does any craven abdication of responsibility linked to fear. We’ll examine the responsibility of the press for the current state of affairs in Part II of our coverage.

This is a fantastic interview of Congressman Steve King-conducted last month after the President’s unconstitutional administrative amnesty-which I urge you all to listen to. Rep. King is one of the few members of Congress willing to stand up to Barack Obama’s subversion of the legislative process. A dogged opponent of multiculturalism, King is exceptional in his willingness to resist the tide of political correctness in all its multifarious manifestations.

Show your support for a true patriot!

It’s difficult to gauge the ultimate impact of this past week’s Supreme Court decision invalidating much of Arizona’s landmark immigration enforcement law, with the exception of Section 2(b), i.e. the clause empowering local police to ascertain someone’s immigration status if  ”reasonable suspicion” exists when he or she is detained.  Even this seeming bright spot is obscured by Justice Kennedy’s muddled opinion, which seems to invite future litigation by the usual suspects, who will have their cases heard before the same judge who has thwarted the implementation of the bulk of SB 1070 for the past two years.

Heather Mac Donald, of the Manhattan Institute, wrote an incisive analysis of the decision for National Review Online, which merits reading by anyone who marveled at some of the flawed reasoning involved in overruling a state law that mirrors federal law in most regards. Her exploration of Justice Scalia’s bold dissent-which has earned universal scorn among the commentariat-is especially compelling. Because the current administration has invested its political capital in administrative amnesty and abandonment of immigration enforcement, it has fallen upon the states to do the work which the Supreme Court has deemed the exclusive province of the federal government. Since the current POTUS believes he must bribe Hispanic voters-who presumably favor amnesty-in order for he and his party to survive politically, he will use the perquisites of the  imperial presidency in order to thwart states-such as Arizona-which have the temerity to defend the territorial integrity of their borders.

That’s why the prospect of states reasserting their sovereignty-described so eloquently in Justice Scalia’s dissent-is so appealing. I disagree with the suggestion by some in the immigration reform movement that the Supreme Court’s refusal to preempt local and state enforcement constitutes a legal victory. Like Roy Beck, I believe that the most efficacious means of deterring illegal immigration-and of forcing illegal aliens currently living here to repatriate themselves-is cutting off access to jobs. Notwithstanding the majority’s decision to nix that portion of SB 1070 which criminalized illegal aliens seeking work, the fact that  during its last term the Supreme Court decided to uphold the Arizona Legal Workers’ Act indicates that there are tools available to counteract the damage done by the Obama administration’s quest for perpetual supplicants.

Even so, the courts’ decision to vitiate most of Arizona’s enforcement mechanisms leaves the ball in the court of the Obama administration, which has made its intentions with regard to this issue more than clear. Combined with its decision to wage class war against American citizens, the amount of leeway enjoyed by those who would enforce the laws American bureaucrats won’t has been reduced significantly. However, if individual states like Arizona begin to assert their rights under the Constitution-a path advocated by one of today’s most articulate advocates of liberty-then the power exercised by open borders proponents, and consequently, the damage inflicted upon Americans, can be mitigated. Although the prospect of nullification might appear dramatic in nature, it is a response less outrageous than the excesses of an unaccountable federal government with blood on its hands. Plus, the precedent has already been established.

We shouldn’t pin our hopes on an insipid standard-bearer for a national party that has equivocated and vacillated on one of the most important issues of our time. Nor should we  rely upon a federal government that has repeatedly betrayed a beleaguered American public. We need to trust ourselves enough to realize that the solution to this problem, like so many others, rests in our hands and in the wisdom of this country’s founders. A message particularly resonant on the 136th anniversary of the proclamation of the world’s most revolutionary charter of freedom.

Judicial intervention to restrain executive overreach seems highly unlikely, and the spigot for future illegal aliens continues to flow in the form of student and tourist visas, over 100,000 of them granted to our friends from Saudi Arabia-remember them-within a single week! Even so, there are ways of resisting the advances of those who would benefit from our country’s demise. As Peter Brimelow rightly points out in a timely post castigating Mitt Romney for his deplorable reaction to President Obama’s latest outrage, the ultimate power of decision-making in our representative republic rests with the American public. We are the ones who derailed the last abortive effort to enact the Dream Act during a lame duck session of Congress, and we are the people that thwarted the last major crusade for amnesty during the Bush administration.

And we can make our collective voice heard once again, thanks to the power of the Internet. A good first step is signing the online petition circulated by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, an indispensable ally in the struggle to reassert control of our borders and enact a sane, sensible immigration policy. I’d also recommend calling up your congressmen and senators and demanding that they follow the example of Congressman Steve King and Representative Diane Black, two of the only elected officials to speak out against and act to stop Barack Obama’s continued subversion of constitutional and immigration law. While you have your congressmen-or more likely, their staffers-on the line, ask them if they intend to support H.R. 5957, which would immediately halt Obamnesty in its tracks.

One of the unstated objectives of the President’s recent decision to flout the law-beyond the anticipated political windfall he hopes to receive from Hispanic voters in the upcoming presidential election-is to dispirit and depress those of us whom the open borders absolutists perceive as the enemy. This administration wants to eradicate what it views as an institutional obstruction to achieving its most cherished political goals. All the more reason for you to resist its brazen abuses of power, which have never been more apparent than at the present moment.