Saturday, September 2, 2017

DOJ SUBPOENAS CHRISTIAN PASTOR'S VIEWS ON ISLAM Sessions urged to rein in 'raw abuse of power' by Obama holdovers

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2017/01/Culpeper-Virginia.jpg
Culpeper, Virginia
Culpeper, Virginia
In a sweeping defeat for Obama-era holdovers at the U.S. Department of Justice, a federal court has tossed out a case in which the department had subpoenaed a Christian pastor’s views on Islam.
The Islamic Center of Culpeper, Virginia, had already won a favorable settlement in its Obama-aided case against the city, which agreed to provide a permit for the mosque to pump sewage from a site where it wants to build a mosque, even though state environmental officials had said the site was not suitable for a septic system.
But that wasn’t enough for the lawyers who staff the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ. They wanted to make an example out of rural Culpeper County. How else to explain forcing a local pastor and other locals who spoke against the mosque at public hearings to turn over personal documents that would reveal their views on Islam?
image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2017/09/pastor-steve-harrelson-culpeper-va.jpg
Pastor Steve Harrelson of Culpeper, Virginia, was ordered by DOJ lawyers to turn over personal papers that might reveal his beliefs about Islam.
Pastor Steve Harrelson of Culpeper, Virginia, was ordered by DOJ lawyers to turn over personal papers that might reveal his beliefs about Islam.
Pastor Steve Harrelson of Mt. Lebanon Baptist Church was the main target in the sights of the DOJ, which sought to bring him before an inquisition-type hearing, forcing him to testify about his opinions on Islam and also deliver up to the government his personal papers and documents.
But U.S. District Court Judge Norman Moon put an end to the witch hunt for “Islamophobes” in this small northern Virginia town that was being perpetuated by Obama-appointed U.S. attorneys.
Moon ruled the case was moot because the mosque had already settled with Culpeper County, PJ Media reported.
Judge Moon wrote:
Taken together, the Government’s additional measures are marginal quibbles that overlook the forest for the trees. They are based on a presumption of bad faith by the County, a presumption supported by little more than bald assertions and which the County has overcome with compelling and unimpeached evidence.
Attorney Karen Lugo, author of “Mosques in America: A Guide to Accountable Permit Hearings and Continuing Citizen Oversight” and an expert on the Religious Land-Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, said the DOJ subpoena of the pastor’s papers represented a “raw abuse of power.”
“The DOJ tried to invade both the protected zones of belief and expression when it subpoenaed a pastor’s personal and private records. A concerned citizen was also served the same subpoena. Both were given just days to gather voluminous records before being grilled at a deposition. The entire raw abuse of power cannot be forgotten.”
Lugo recently penned an op-ed for American Greatness in which she argues the U.S. Justice Department has an ingrained policy of favoring mosques in disputes with local zoning boards and councils. She says the atmosphere of DOJ intimidation cannot be overstated.
“Alarmingly, these interventions reveal a pattern of generous settlements that benefit mosques while bypassing municipal laws and disregarding legitimate neighborhood concerns,” she wrote. “During the Obama presidency, DOJ lawyers ran roughshod over local officials, as long as the complaining party was a mosque. Trump’s Justice Department must reverse these tendencies.”
The DOJ has to learn that the public is aware of this overreach and will not tolerate it, said William Federer, an expert on American history. If the DOJ is not reined in by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Federer sees a bleak future ahead.
Federer, author of multiple books including “Backfired: A Nation Born for Religious Tolerance No Longer Tolerates Religion,” said the U.S. “is moving in the direction of Orwell’s thought police.”
“What is next, Torquemada’s Spanish Inquisition, the British Crown’s Star Chamber, Lenin’s Cheka?” he told WND in an email.
He said religious freedom and freedom of conscience were the primary reasons why settlers fled to America, “so they would not have to fear this type of government intimidation.”
“Is the DOJ going to subpoena imams to find their views on Christianity and Judaism?” he asks.
He said conservatives pushed through the Religious Freedom Restorations Act in 1993 with the intention of prohibiting government from this exact behavior.
“Do Trump and Sessions know this is going on? Certainly this cannot be their agenda?” he said. “If this is allowed now, what can we expect next?”
He also questioned the silence of GOP House Speaker Paul Ryan or Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.
“Shouldn’t they be calling for an investigation of this out-of-control branch of the DOJ?”
He cited Thomas Jefferson’s reply to the Danbury Baptists, Jan. 1, 1802:
“Religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions.”
Jefferson’s Bill for Religious Liberty Jan. 16, 1786 stated:
“No man shall be … molested … on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion.”
He said the federal government has come a long way since Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, who was appointed by James Madison, authored in 1840 “A Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States”:
“At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and of the Amendment to it now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the State so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience and the freedom of religious worship.
“An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation …
“The rights of conscience are, indeed, beyond the just reach of any human power. They are given by God, and cannot be encroached upon by human authority without a criminal disobedience of the precepts of natural as well as of revealed religion.
“The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance, much less to advance MOHAMMEDANISM, or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity, but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects.”
Copyright 2017 WND

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/09/doj-subpoenas-christian-pastors-views-on-islam/#KlBAkHrg4EIDLcbG.99

Average Detroit Teacher Missed 13 Days Of School Last Year District needs another 425 teachers to be fully staffed

Average Detroit Teacher Missed 13 Days Of School Last Year

District needs another 425 teachers to be fully staffed


The Detroit school district said in early August that it is 425 teachers short of having all the teachers it will need when classes start on Sept. 5. Records obtained from the district reveal that last year Detroit teachers missed 13.06 school days on average.
The 2,409 teachers employed by the state’s largest public school district missed a total of 31,472 days in the 2016-17 school. On average, 6.64 of those missed days were classified as sick days, 2.00 absences were “days on leave” and 1.48 were due to “personal emergency or personal business,” in the language used by the district.
The district breaks down the missed time into five categories: days on leave, religious observance, personal emergency or personal business, sick days, and jury duty. It did not provide any information on the number of days missed for professional conferences.
“Anytime a teacher is absent it affects student learning,” said Detroit Public Schools Community District Superintendent Nikolai Vitti in a statement. “At the same time, in the context of working conditions in DPS, we know that teachers have been battling a district environment that did not collectively and consistently respect them as the most important employees in the district. As we rebuild the district and work to improve teacher and staff morale, we believe that teacher absenteeism will improve.”

stayENGAGED

Receive our weekly emails!
Michigan Capitol Confidential is reviewing teacher absences on a district-by-district basis by submitting open records requests that ask for a reporting of teacher absences. The investigation was sparked by numerous claims in the media and by public school officials that schools face a shortage of teachers and substitute teachers.
Plymouth-Canton Community Schools was the first district Michigan Capitol Confidential reported on. The average teacher there missed 17.36 days last year.

Related Articles:

FBI and Homeland Security saw Antifa growing so violent they gave them this label

FBI and Homeland Security saw Antifa growing so violent they gave them this label

 
FBI and Homeland Security saw Antifa growing so violent they gave them this label
A report from Politico says that the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI have been warning local governments about the growing threat of "Antifa" leftist violence, and already designated their activities as "domestic terrorist violence." (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)
Politico reports that documents and reports they reviewed showed that Homeland Security and the FBI warned of the growing violence of “Antifa” groups, and even designated their activities as “domestic terrorist violence.” The report was published Friday.
Prior to the election, Homeland Security saw these “anarchist extremist” groups organizing against “the capitalist system,” racism and fascism. But after the election, the groups latched on to a new target – the supporters and allies of President Trump.
According to Politico, the “Antifa” groups, which is short for “anti-fascist,” focused on the white nationalist and racist elements that supported certain Trump campaign agenda items that fit with their worldview. These included the ban on Muslim immigration he promised during the campaign, and the ratcheting up of border enforcement.
The report claims that law enforcement officials saw Trump’s rhetoric as worsening the situation.
“In interviews, law enforcement authorities made clear that Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric and policies — first as a candidate and then as president — helped to create a situation that has escalated so quickly and extensively that they do not have a handle on it,” it read.
The report says officials saw both sides reacting in more extreme ways when their opponents grew violent. Now the situation appears out of control.
“Everybody is wondering, ‘What are we gonna do? How are we gonna deal with this?’” said one state law enforcement official. “Every time they have one of these protests where both sides are bringing guns, there are sphincters tightening in my world.”
“Emotions get high, and fingers get twitchy on the trigger,” he added.
Even Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) decried the violence from the “antifa” group in a statement released Tuesday.
Some conservatives have accused the media appears to whitewash or ignore violence from the left-wing Antifa, as when Reuters had to delete their description of them as “peaceful protesters” in Phoenix, Arizona.
Joe Scarborough Criticizes Antifa Movement
Inform

DOWN THE 'TUBEYouTube accused of CENSORSHIP over controversial new bid to ‘limit’ access to videos

DOWN THE 'TUBE

YouTube accused of CENSORSHIP over controversial new bid to ‘limit’ access to videos

Google-owned video site is taking steps to reduce the audience for content deemed 'inappropriate or offensive', but not illegal.
YOUTUBE has been accused of censorship after introducing a controversial new policy designed to reduce the audience for videos deemed to be "inappropriate or offensive to some audiences".
The Google-owned video site is now putting videos into a "limited state" if they are deemed controversial enough to be considered objectionable, but not hateful, pornographic or violent enough to be banned altogether.
 YouTube is by far the world's largest video publishing platform and streams one billion hours of footage every day
2
YouTube is by far the world's largest video publishing platform and streams one billion hours of footage every day
This policy was announced several months ago but has come into force in the past week, prompting anger among members of the YouTube community.
The Sun Online understands Google and YouTube staff refer to the tactic as "tougher treatment".
One prominent video-maker slammed the new scheme whilst WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange described the measures as "economic censorship".
However, YouTube sees it as a way of maintaining freedom of speech and allowing discussion of controversial issues without resorting to the wholesale banning of videos.
Videos which are put into a limited state cannot be embedded on other websites.
They also cannot be easily published on social media using the usual share buttons and other users cannot comment on them.
 This is the screen users are shown when they click on a video that has been 'limited'
2
This is the screen users are shown when they click on a video that has been 'limited'
Crucially, the person who made the video will no longer receive any payment.
Earlier this week, Julian Assange wrote: "'Controversial' but contract-legal videos [which break YouTube's terms and conditions] cannot be liked, embedded or earn [money from advertising revenue].
"What's interesting about the new method deployed is that it is a clear attempt at social engineering. It isn't just turning off the ads.
"It's turning off the comments, embeds, etc too.
"Everything possible to strangle the reach without deleting it."

THE ADPOCALYPSE How YouTube stars joined forces to fight advertising policy change that threatened to ‘tear the site apart’


Criticism of YouTube's policies is most acute among people on the right of the political spectrum, who fear that Silicon Valley is dominated by the left and determined to silence opposing voices - a claim denied by tech giants like Facebook and Google.
The new YouTube rules were highlighted this week by Paul Joseph Watson, a globally famous British right wing YouTuber and editor-at-large of Infowars, who spoke out after saying a guest on his online show had one of her videos removed after the appearance.
The black female YouTuber, who uses the name RedPillBlack, made a video entitled "WTF? Black Lives Matter Has A List of Demands for White People!" in response to a member of the activist's group calls for white people to "give up the home you own to a black or brown family".
The video was part of a series which features an offensive racial term in its name, which we have decided not to publish, and criticises the BLM member's statement point by point.
We watched her video and whilst it's clear that many people might disagree with the political point she is making, the actual video did not appear to be offensive or gratuitous.
"Some people might watch the video and think I'm speaking out against black people," she said in the video.
"But what I'm doing here is speaking up for black people."
The video was allegedly banned but later reinstated following a series of tweets from Watson, which you can see below.
On Twitter, the vlogger RedPillBlack wrote: "What does it mean when a company owned by rich white ppl begins censoring black people? Is this the white nationalism I should be scared of?"
She added: "They said it was for harassment and bullying. I literally just read the girl's list [of demands] out loud."
Reddit users are now building a record of all the videos which have been put into a limited state.
Many of the videos have clearly offensive.
Others discuss controversial, contested and highly inflammatory scientific theories about the link between race and intelligence.
Nazi videos featured heavily on the current list, with Hitler's speeches and even the Nazi national anthem being limited.
But amongst material that is clearly shocking and likely to cause grave offence are videos which discuss political issues such as the migrant crisis using non-extreme language.

You guide to YouTube's controversial new policy of 'limiting' access to videos

Here is what YouTube has to say about the scheme on its support page:
Our Community Guidelines prohibit hate speech that either promotes violence or has the primary purpose of inciting hatred against individuals or groups based on certain attributes.
YouTube also prohibits content intended to recruit for terrorist organisations, incite violence, celebrate terrorist attacks or otherwise promote acts of terrorism.
Some borderline videos, such as those containing inflammatory religious or supremacist content without a direct call to violence or a primary purpose of inciting hatred, may not cross these lines for removal.
Following user reports, if our review teams determine that a video is borderline under our policies, it may have some features disabled.
These videos will remain available on YouTube but will be placed behind a warning message and some features will be disabled, including comments, suggested videos and likes. These videos are also not eligible for ads.
If one of your videos has features disabled, we will send an email to notify you.
You can appeal the decision directly from a link in the email or by selecting the 'Appeal' link next to the video in Video Manager. Having features disabled on a video will not create a strike on your account.
You can tell a video has been put into a limited state because you have to click a button to watch it and are shown the words: "The following content has been identified by the YouTube community as inappropriate or offensive to some audiences.
"In response to user reports, we have disabled some features, such as comments, sharing and suggested videos, because this video contains content that may be inappropriate or offensive to some audiences."
The Sun Online has learned that Google has been in contact with members of religious communities to discuss getting the balance right between censorship and open discussion.
We understand that the editor of a prominent Jewish newspaper advised the tech giant against simply blocking videos discussing disturbing subjects, suggesting that the best way to combat these views is to debate and defeat them in the open.
The new YouTube policy allows videos to be seen whilst stopping their makers from earning money and preventing them from easily spreading their message or having it automatically shown to others through the site's "recommended videos" service.
It is understood that the intention of the new "limited state" policy is to target content which is objectionable, but not illegal.
Google uses a team of thousands of community moderators to police content and decide whether it should be banned or limited.
YouTube star Caspar Lee shares his story of battling Tourette's Syndrome
These teams are based at various sites around the world, a strategy intended to stop people from one side of the political spectrum coming together to dominate decisions and target specific content makers or groups.
Google does employ machine learning to target videos which are pornographic or depict extremist acts of violence.
This involves training computers to look for telltale signs of sex or violence, although Google does not publically reveal what its machine learning system is looking for.
Theoretically, a good way to root out porn would be to ask computers to look out for naked flesh or exaggerated groans, whilst machines could also be taught to recognise ISIS flags or look out for orange jumpsuits to target extremist vids.
Final decisions on whether to remove or limit content are taken by humans, who also investigate complaints from users about videos.
These staff members make their decisions using strict criteria set out by Google and YouTube.
However, the tech giant does not make these guidelines public - a strategy intended to stop people making videos designed to narrowly skirt its rules.
Anjem Choudary guilty of inviting support for ISIS on YouTube
The "tougher treatment" system is in its early stages and is likely to provoke more controversy in the coming months, particularly in an era where political debate online is highly polarised and extremely passionate.
Right-wingers on the internet believe Silicon Valley is dead set on censoring conservative websites and channels, taking its cue from over-sensitive members of Generation Snowflake who are known for taking offence too easily.
At the same time, left-wingers think the right is spreading hate and must be silenced for the good of society.
The "culture war" between these two sides shows no signs of abating - and YouTube is the frontline in this increasingly vicious battle of ideas.

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *