So, what's behind all this official "racism" these days?

Leftist SJWs are mindless entitled little babies who want to continue extorting free stuff from Daddy forever.

But their laziness isn't the real problem here - it's that they are encouraged by politician and media puppets.

Politicians in Western democracies are all equally corrupt, and therefore so are all their judicial employees.

Remember when propagandists encouraged all the women to enter the workforce, demanding equality; saying it was "unfair" and men were enslaving them?

That one scam garnered the business community double the number of available workers in their collective labour pool, and at half the former wages.

So what if suddenly Westerners had to have less children because all the potential mothers were at work with dad in stead of at home raising them? Divide and conquer always works out in the end for everyone, doesn't it?!

So well, as usual, they are again failing upwards: the lack of replaceable labour to keep their pension pyramid schemes afloat, means they now again "have to" import huge numbers of cheap-labour muslims from their 3rd-world slave-pens to replace us, again doubling the number of workers while halving our wages.

And their pet politicians & media who slander and shame us into Submitting to our replacement get promised big fat pension augments on their director boards.

Replacing their largest and most easily-cut cost - worker's salaries - is what's really behind the globalist corporazi oil-banksters "pity the migrants, you racists!" scam. Always follow the money. And of course the socialist labour union dupes, being in a symbiotic relationship with the globalists, support their own suicide, as of course do their mindless SJW minions.

Rinse and REPEAT endlessly!

Turdeau allows ISIS fighters back into Canada.

From here:

ISIS fighters are coming back to Canada. Are they a threat? It’s complicated: report

By Jesse Ferreras and Katie Dangerfield Global News

WATCH: Roughly 5,600 people have returned to their countries of origin after taking part in extremist groups – including ISIS – according to a recent report from the Soufan Center.

 A A 

Listen

Editor’s Note: This story has been updated to clarify the number of extremist fighters abroad, where they are from, which groups they were a part of, and how many alleged extremists have returned to Canada. 

As the Islamic State (ISIS) continues to lose ground in Syria and Iraq, a new report has found supporters of the militant group — and other terrorist organizations — have returned to their home countries.

It is estimated that 180 people with a nexus to Canada, headed to other countries as foreign fighters, were stopped on the way, or remained there and kept fighting over the past few years.

The government of Canada calls these people “extremist travellers” and are suspected of engaging in terrorism-related activities. They pose many security concerns.

Around 60 have returned to Canada.

This number includes Canadians, permanent residents and those who have visited Canada multiple times.

The recent report from the Soufan Center, a U.S.-based non-profit organization, said 33 countries have reported arrivals of at least 5,600 people extremist travellers. And those returns represent a “huge challenge for security and law enforcement entities.”

The report said that foreign ISIS fighters who are returning from the field have proven a more “manageable problem than initially anticipated.”

But a terrorist threat nevertheless remains in the form of ISIS supporters who didn’t go to to the front — and it’s one that “will remain real for many years to come,” whether influenced by returnees or not, the report added.

Coverage of the Islamic State on Globalnews.ca:

Islamic State claims responsibility for Kabul attack

Islamic State claims responsibility for Kabul attack

U.S. Army sergeant faces charges of trying to help Islamic State

U.S. forces help Philippines fight Islamic State

Trump approves arming Kurds to fight Islamic State ahead of meeting with Turkey

U.S. forces kill Islamic State militant linked to Turkey nightclub attack

And now the Great White North, like many other countries, is facing the arrival of individuals who may be vulnerable or dejected, and who may be targeted by people who contact them with the aim of maintaining ISIS influence abroad, the report said.

“It is highly likely that even as the territorial caliphate shrinks and is increasingly denied an overt presence, its leadership will look to supporters overseas, including returnees, to keep the brand alive,” the report said.

READ MORE: ISIS killed at least 128 people in Syrian town before army recaptured it, watchdog says

The returns come as ISIS has lost serious ground in its mission to establish a caliphate.

The organization proclaimed a caliphate in June 2014, attracting thousands of jihadists from across the world.

The group then conducted or inspired around 143 terrorist attacks in 29 countries, causing the death of over 2,000 people and injuring many more, according to the report.

Losing ground

But in the last year, the group lost several key battles in Iraq and Syria. Last week, a U.S.-backed alliance of Syrian Kurdish fighters said they had taken full control of Raqqa, ISIS’ de facto capital.

The loss of territory is driving ISIS to intensify its campaign of terrorist attacks abroad.

In the past, ISIS has staged or inspired attacks in numerous countries — and a number of them have been attributed to people who weren’t confirmed ISIS members, or who hadn’t gone to fight.

In 2014, Canada bore witness to two attacks that ISIS claimed to have inspired.

On Oct. 20, 2014, Martin Couture-Rouleau drove a car into and killed Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent in the parking lot of a shopping mall in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que. Another soldier was hit, but survived.

Then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper, left, and Justin Trudeau, then-prime minister-designate of Canada, place a wreath at a ceremonial service on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Thursday, Oct. 22, 2015 to commemorate the attack on and the lives of Corporal Nathan Cirillo and Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent.

THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick

Then, on Oct. 22, 2014, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau shot and killed Cpl. Nathan Cirillo at Ottawa’s War Memorial.

At the time, ISIS took credit for inspiring those attacks in an issue of Dabiq, a propaganda magazine, The National Post reported.

READ MORE: Michael Zehaf-Bibeau followed British Islam preacher convicted of inviting support for ISIS

There are two groups of people who are not ISIS returnees who could present a threat outside the battle lines.

One is individuals who were stopped on their way to Iraq or Syria. It’s a group that poses a “particular problem” because they became frustrated after they were fired up to join the caliphate.

“A sense of failure and resentment towards the authorities may increase the likelihood that they will seek other ways to achieve their objectives,” the report said.

It noted that one of the people involved in the attacks on the offices of the Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris had been prevented from travelling to Syria.

In this Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2015, file photo, a seller of newspapers stocks several Charlie Hebdo newspapers at a newsstand in Nice, France. Under armed security and a cloud of conflicted opinions and emotions, the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo was presented a freedom of expression award on Tuesday, May 5, 2015, in New York, from the PEN American Center.

AP Photo/ Lionel Cironneau, File)

“ISIS’ ideology is still all over the world,” Phil Gurski, a former CSIS analyst and current president of Borealis Threat and Risk Consulting said.

“The caliphate may be dead, but the terrorist ideology is still alive.”

Graham Fuller, an adjunct professor at SFU who served as CIA chief in Kabul from 1975 in 1978, told Global News that the appeal of a caliphate has likely died off with ISIS’ decline.

“I think the idea of resuscitating an Islamic State or caliphate is pretty well by the boards,” he said.

READ MORE: ISIS completely driven out of their Syrian capital Raqqa

As for foreign fighters returning from Syria and Iraq, Fuller said they’re likely to come back “disillusioned and mainly concerned with their own safety and their own future,” more than they’re worried about posing a threat.

Nevertheless, he said there’s a possibility that some will return to violence when they come home.

“I don’t think many of these people do constitute a threat,” Fuller said.

“But how many does it take?”

MultiCulturalism, Hate-Crimes, Diversity and Religions101

For multiculturalism to work, the hosts must abandon their own culture – thus negating the “multiculturalism!”

The leftopaths’ ideals of “Diversity” really only mean “divide and conquer:” Hey your already fully functional, cohesive, and integrated society needs to be “fixed” by making it LESS integrated! Their motto seems to be: “There’s No Money In Solutions! Whee!”

What is this constant “multiculturalism!” scam (and the implicit “you’re all racists!” slander) all about?

Who cares what spicy, exotic foods one eats, or what weird sartorial clothing choices one makes?!

There’s only two ‘cultures’ in nature, that of the law-abiding, civilized people who symbiotically band together and collaborate to solve mutual problems, and that of the criminal savages who always attack first by slanderously blaming their victims, in order to keep others on the defensive.

And crime is more of an anti-social anti-culture than “another” culture, even if only of a hypothetically “diversely opposite equal” variety.

And similarly, as for these delinquent libertine “liberal” criminals’ divine mantra of “DIVERSITY!” well:

Diversity =/= equality – in fact, quite the opposite!

“HATE” isn’t the problem, it’s a symptom they have to address to distract us from what they’re really trying to ban.

Since rational people get angry with criminals for their predatory choices, and criminals insist they have no choices because we’re all equally victims who should therefore tolerate the diverse differences between the kind of victim who attacks innocent others first, and those who don’t, they insist pity is always good and anger is always bad.

Since criminals expect that all is generally allowed unless and until it is very specifically disallowed in advance, the only real crime is trying to prevent them from doing whatever they want to do, to whomever they want to do it to, and whenever they want to do it. Such attempts are always seen by them as “mean!” or more recently, “HATEFUL!”

But as Robert Spencer noted:

Incitement to violence is easy to spot – but incitement to “hostility” is in the eye of the beholder; so all anti-free-speech initiatives conflate (anti-crime) free speech and even (what they call “hateful”) feelings with actual violent crimes; for instance trying to criminalize speech against a religion or race (say, against someone for their simply noticing that islam isn’t really a race or a religion, but is only a global crime-gang).

The whole notion of “hate-speech” and “hate-crimes” IS a crime! Having “hate” isn’t a criminal act, it’s EITHER the perfectly natural and neutral human response of perpetual anger towards ongoing injustices (like islam), OR it’s a victim-blaming slanderous HABIT; but either way, it’s only an effect, and not a cause of anything. I hate crimes & the criminals who commit them; so what?

“Hate crimes” are really only *thought*-crimes, which is a victim-blaming slanderous assertion made by criminals to deflect everyone’s attention away from their own crimes (since criminals are psycho-paths who hate thinking, of course to them nobody else should ever be allowed to indulge in potentially “dangerous” thinking, either) by asserting that anyone merely considering or feeling that one should dislike something bad – ANYTHING bad, aka crime and criminals – should be accused of committing the only “illegal crime” in itself: “Hate!”

“DIVERSITY” is where one has given up on using one’s angry energy to unite people, to stop them from being criminals, and so one decides in stead to pretend to PITY every one and every thing equally … in stead of caring enough to risk being angry.

so one then pretends to PITY them by using various less offensive and obvious synonyms for pity, such as “tolerance ,” “compassion,” and slanderous “inclusiveness” – as if some people had already been “excluded” just for being “different,” and are therefore victims – as opposed to having excluded them selves by choosing to be criminals.

So “diversity!” means a demand to embrace (pity; tolerate) the difference between self-determined criminals and their innocent victims, rather than get angry with and try to change them.

The real emphasis, in “Diversity!” is on “Tolerating” it – because why would anyone have to be told or ordered to tolerate that which was NOT dangerous to them (i.e: crime and criminals!)?!?

Claiming “Diversity is always Good!” is idolatry, because in reality, in some situations and circumstances, it’s good, and in some it’s bad – but it’s NOT always good! As with all idolatry, the dynamics have been extracted or “abstracted” – the diversity FROM what, and TO what, have been removed from our ability to think about them, by the criminals’ choice of focus words.

The purpose of idolatry is to hide and distract us from being able to see the implications of each statement: that rights only come with responsibilities, responsibilities with rights, causes with effects and effects with causes.

People who haven’t taken the time to thoroughly define their terms of reference can only fall back on unreliable vague and generalized feelings – which most often result in a contrarian and adversarial “Me Good, You Bad!” subjectively hypocritical stance of paranoid masochism.

Further, in regards to “DIVSERSITY:”

The leftopaths went from tolerating it, to celebrating it, and now to enforcing it on others.

Forcing others to accept one’s “difference” only confesses to one’s unique status as an extortive slaver – revealing, in one’s “diversity,” that the only real difference is a criminal one!

So, people who choose to celebrate the idol of “Diversity!” are all criminals! Because, while they say they really only want to be left alone (thus obeying the Golden Rule of Law) they are also determined to use pre-emptive violence to force others to do so – which decision, as it breaks that very same Golden Rule, reveals their criminal hypocrisy.

Endorsing Diversity means extorting tolerance for criminals because the cowards advocating for it don’t want to risk dealing with them. It’s the Stockholm Syndrome Christian version of islam!

Christians PITY victims, and criminals AS fellow victims! Muslims blame their victims for making them ANGRY, but neither approach solves the problem of crime.

So in this way, Muhammad was right in saying the Christians are closest to the muslims – the carrot to their stick. But in endorsing the god-idol, neither really believes in our free-will; ALL religion is slavery!

The Christian God is pitifully weak, in only pitying us but never correcting evil or solving our problems.

The Muslim God is pointlessly angry at the results of its own chosen actions (having deliberately created infidels for us to attack in order to prove our selves to it).

Both gods are personally impotent yet demand we do nothing to solve any problems – the Christian one endorses no attacks ever (not even in just and moral counter-attacks in defense or either one’s self and/or of innocent others) with its “Vengeance is the Lord’s ALONE!” and “Always Turn the Other Cheek!” and “Resist ye Not Evil Men!” commands, while islam’s always demands we attack everyone all the time, randomly, just as it seems to do.

Both approaches are literally and proudly illogical, irrational, senseless and idolatrous in that they demand the same mindless ritual approach to everything; both ignore the one or the other approaches – attacks and defenses – should be used, but only in response to different situational circumstances, not pre-emptively as attempts to PREVENT crimes.

Crime is defined as attacking thereby innocent others first.
Crime “prevention” is attacking thereby innocent others first.

Both creeds love emotions and hate thought.

In nature, animals’ emotions are their thoughts, and vice-versa – but unlike us, they can not usually divorce or “abstract” them from the dynamics of life; they don’t go from perception to conception and back again in as much detail nor for as extended periods of time as we do – their emotive thoughts are all based on external causes, not removed from them. When animals are hungry or otherwise in pain, their programmed instincts get them angry at the most likely causes of the pains, not at the pains themselves, nor at the fearful memories of past pains.

All religion is idolatry, and all god-idols are excuses for irresponsibility.

Even islam’s “allah” as the supposed all-powerful slaver, simply gets to negate our free-will choices and thus also guilt – it’s nothing more or less than an alibi created to excuse the muslims’ own criminal desires and actions – “I didn’t do it! The Allah Made Me Do It!”

Ditto for Jesus:

“All I have to do is say “Jesus is God!” and it negates all my bad and predatory criminal choices – because then he takes the blame, in more or less becoming the exact same slaver-God that “allah” was, the only difference being that I have to ask him to do so. Oh, wait – even allah demands the testimony (shahada) statement before he will admit to being my Master enslaver – which turns me from being a criminal into a victim.

The existence of ANY “god” is an implicit threat – implying that one not only *shouldn’t* act on one’s own, free-will choices, but also that, ultimately, one CAN’T.

They all remove responsibility and guilt. So they all also really only encourage excuse-making lies and irresponsibility.

To embrace any and all “God” idols is but a free will negating pretense.

FASCBOOK Pays Muslims to Enforce SHARIA On Us!

From here:

WONDER HOW SO MANY MUSLIMS EVEN NOTICED TO DELETE YOUR FB GROUPS?!

France: Facebook Islamists Hunt in Packs

by Yves Mamou
October 13, 2017 at 5:00 am

• The "moderating hubs" for France's social media are generally located in French-speaking countries with cheap labor, in North Africa and Madagascar. In France, rumors abound that Facebook's moderators are located in French-speaking Muslim countries such as Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco. Facebook never confirms or denies outsourcing its "moderation" work to companies employing cheap Muslim labor in North Africa.
• Notably, Muslim hate-speakers continue to proliferate on Facebook, while anti-Islamists face harassment and the loss of their accounts.
• These Facebook users, like dozens of others, seem to be the victims of Islamist "packs". Once the opinions and analyses of these Facebook users are noticed, they are denounced to Facebook as "racists" or "Islamophobes" and their accounts are deleted.

Fatiha Boudjalat, the co-founder of the secularist movement Viv(r)e la République, is a prominent figure of anti-Islamism in France. She is interviewed regularly on television and radio, and her op-eds are regularly published in Le Figaro. Recently, on Facebook, Boudjalat criticized strongly an Islamist government employee, Sonia Nour, for calling the Tunisian Islamist murderer of two women in Marseille, a "martyr". A few weeks after that, Boudjalat's Facebook account was deleted.

She is not alone in having been targeted by Islamists on Facebook. Leila Ourzik, an artist who lives in Grigny, a predominantly Muslim suburb not far from Paris, is a Muslim who eats and drinks openly during Ramadan and resists wearing the Islamic veil. Because of her un-Islamic behavior, she is openly insulted and threatened daily, as well as on social networks. On Facebook, Ourzik became a target. Islamists harassed her with insults and threats, posted her picture on pornography websites, and finally succeeded in obtaining the deletion of her account on Facebook. Suddenly, without warning, her Facebook account was shut. "Not once, many times" she says to Gatestone. Why? "I do not know, they never tell you. But one day, it is over, everything is deleted".

Olivier Aron, a dentist and former politician, was taken off Facebook for weeks. Aron is active in debates about Islam and Islamism. He is also not shy. On Facebook, he contradicts Islamists. Islamists, however, do not seem interested in debating. They seem interested in censoring. According to Aron, many of them complained to Facebook. "I suppose they accused me of being a racist and an Islamophobe" Aron said. "Intimidation is everyplace. A man I do not even know discovered my telephone number and all my contact details and sent them to his friends". Consequences were not long in coming. Aron's assistant at the dental office received a frightening phone call: "Tell doctor Aron that soon 'Kelkal' will hit him". Kelkal, an Algerian Islamist terrorist, was a member of the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) and responsible for the wave of attacks in France during the summer of 1995. Although Kelkal was killed by the police 20 years ago, for many radicalized Muslims, he remains the prototype of "modern" jihadist.

Last spring, Michel Renard, a history teacher in Saint Chamond, was also deleted from Facebook. "Without any warning, without any possibility of talking to someone, suddenly all my writings were gone," he told Gatestone. Renard had posted online extremely detailed analyses of Islamism. "But," he said, "Islamists are extremely active on Facebook. They insult you; they threaten you". Even though Renard refused to be "friended" on Facebook by his pupils, "their parents complained to the director of the school... Intimidation is everywhere, in real life and on the Net".

These Facebook users, like dozens of others, seem to be the victims of Islamist "packs". Once the opinions and analyses of these Facebook users are noticed, they are denounced to Facebook as "racists" or "Islamophobes" and their accounts are deleted.

In France, Facebook deletes thousands of accounts every year. It would be interesting to know how many among them were deleted because their owners questioned Islamism, but no one knows:

Facebook never communicates other than by bland boilerplate declarations that clearly seem intended to avoid explaining anything.

What we do know is that "Facebook has 4,500 'content moderators' and that it recently announced plans to hire another 3,000", according to The Guardian. 7,500 moderators for more than two billion Facebook users? That is ridiculous.

The Guardian continues: "There are moderating hubs around the world, but Facebook refuses to disclose their exact number or locations".

The question should be, in fact:

Does Facebook outsource content moderation to subcontractors, and if so, to which?

In France, three companies appear to be competing as subcontractors for moderating online content: Netino, Concileo and Atchik Services. The "moderating hubs" of these companies are generally located in French-speaking countries with cheap labor, in North Africa and Madagascar.

In France, rumors abound that Facebook's moderators are located in French-speaking Muslim countries such as Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco.

Facebook never confirms or denies outsourcing its "moderation" work to companies employing cheap Muslim labor in North Africa.

Notably, Muslim hate-speakers continue to proliferate on Facebook, while anti-Islamists face harassment and the loss of their accounts.

It is a symptom of the dominant denial in the French media that it keeps repeating -- despite massive evidence to the contrary -- that "Islamism is not at war with Western culture."

As a consequence, freedom of speech in France is now "moderated" by Muslims in Muslim countries.

Ironically, however, if Facebook were instead outsourcing its "moderation" work to companies in France or Belgium, the result would be the same.

Extremist Muslims hunt in packs, while anti-extremists are mainly individuals.

The French Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel, for example, France's regulating agency for radio and television, is overwhelmed by a storm of protests each time the French anti-Islamist journalist, Éric Zemmour, appears on television.

Zemmour is sued twice a year for "racism" -- simply because Islamist organizations such as the Collectif contre l'islamophobie en France ("Collective Against Islamophobia in France", CCIF) launch campaigns to urge French Muslims to protest against Zemmour's "Islamophobia".

Is the same system used for social networks?

Given the total lack of transparency of Facebook's decisions, it is possible.

Unfortunately, counter-attacks against these wolf-pack harassment campaigns are still "under construction."

Not only does Facebook censor content using undisclosed "moderators," but the company has also developed a law-enforcement response team that deals with requests from police and security agencies.

In France, such requests from courts and justice departments have increased from 3,208 in 2013 to 8,121 in 2016. According to Le Journal du Net, a news website dedicated to current events and media, in 2015, "following government requests, Facebook deleted 37,990 pages in France, compared to 30,126 for India, 6,574 for Turkey and only 85 pages in Russia" during the same period.

Were only Islamist and jihadi pages deleted? What else? Inconvenient history?

For governments in Europe, anti-jihadists are considered an even greater problem than jihadists.

In April 2017, Facebook published a report entitled, "Information Operations and Facebook". On page 9, one can read, "In France, for example, as of April 13, these improvements recently enabled us to take action against over 30,000 fake accounts". The "improvements" Facebook is talking about are related to new analytical techniques permitting Facebook to detect serial "fake news" accounts. These "fake" accounts were, unsurprisingly, especially active during France's presidential campaign in the spring of 2017.

For Facebook and for French officials, the big question does not seem to be: "Is Islamism at war with our freedom?", but only: "Is Vladimir Putin interfering with French politics?" Facebook pays attention to that.

Facebook cannot afford to ignore politicians' requests. In every country, the big advertising money for Facebook's platform is dependent on the goodwill of the government.

It is important to remember how, in 2015, at the height of the migration crisis, German chancellor Angela Merkel pressed Facebook's founder, Mark Zuckerberg, to remove the thousands of anti-mass-migration posts on Facebook. "Are you working on this?" Merkel asked in English, to which Zuckerberg replied "in the affirmative".

Two years later, artificial intelligence tools are on their way to bring temporary peace and quiet to governments in exchange for quick profits -- but not peace to the people.

Yves Mamou, author and journalist, based in France, worked for two decades as a journalist for Le Monde.

Berkeley TREASON!

Hello, Mexican Kamerades! Rest assured, we are and shall remain a part of Mexico, now!

;-)

From here:

U.S. Mayor Assures Mexican Consul His "Sanctuary City" Will Provide Safe Spaces for Illegal Aliens

Shortly after Donald Trump got elected president, a California mayor arranged a meeting with the Consul General of Mexico to assure the diplomat that his “sanctuary city” will continue providing safe spaces for illegal immigrants, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. The documents show that Berkeley Mayor Jesse Arreguin’s top aide, Stefan Elgstrand, sent an electronic mail to the Mexican Consul General in San Francisco, Gemi Jose Gonzalez Lopez, stating the following: “The recent events around Trump’s executive order reminded me to reach out to you. We are a sanctuary city and will continue to be. I imagine you are very busy dealing with the concerns and fears of many residents in the Bay Area, and we want to assist in providing safe spaces for them.”

Judicial Watch obtained the files as part of a California Public Records Act request for information surrounding riots by the radical leftist Antifa movement against President Trump and conservative personalities scheduled to speak at the University of California Berkeley. Media reported that fires were set, fences and windows broken, firebombs launched and commercial-grade fireworks thrown at police. A renowned, San Francisco-based pop culture magazine wrote that the uprising raised some big questions about the future of the free speech movement. Judicial Watch requested the files to shed light into how city, police and university officials handled the lawlessness, which received global news coverage. The request asked for records of communications between officials in the Berkeley mayor’s office and the Berkeley Police Department as well as records of communications between the mayor’s office and officials at UC Berkeley, one of the nation’s top public research universities.

The documents show a coordinated effort between Democratic city officials nationwide to “build the movement to resist Trump.” The operation is being financed by leftwing billionaire philanthropist George Soros through one of his groups called Center of Popular Democracy. Earlier this year Judicial Watch uncovered a scandal in which the U.S. government quietly gave millions of taxpayer dollars to destabilize the democratically elected, center-right government in Macedonia by colluding with Soros’ Open Society Foundation. The U.S. Ambassador to Macedonia, Jess L. Baily, worked behind the scenes with Open Society Foundation to funnel large sums of American dollars for the cause, constituting an interference of the U.S. Ambassador in domestic political affairs in violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The cash flowed through the State Department and the famously corrupt U.S. Agency of International Development (USAID) and Judicial Watch sued both agencies for records related to funding and political activities of the Open Society Foundation in Macedonia.

The Soros-backed, northern California movement includes a taxpayer-salaried physics professor at UC Berkeley who advises Mayor Arreguin on how to handle conservative protestors at a spring rally. The professor, James McFadden, tells the mayor in an electronic mail obtained by Judicial Watch to “create a corral” and ask the Trump supporters to “get in the corral.” He describes Trump supporters as “delusional and paranoid about the world around them” and says they’re “willing to use violence to impose that order on us, especially when they have the blessing of a narcissistic authoritarian president.” A professor at another California public university tells the Berkeley mayor that the arrest of Antifa leader/middle school teacher Yvette Felarca for assaulting a political opponent (captured on video) at a Sacramento rally, in which seven people were stabbed, was a “McCarthyist political persecution” and he condemned Felarca’s arrest and teaching suspension “in the strongest possible terms.”

Ironically, Berkeley’s official government website brags about being a bastion of the free speech movement. “In Alameda County alone, Berkeley is ranked fourth in population behind Oakland, Fremont, and Hayward,” the website states. “And yet, we are famous around the globe as a center for academic achievement, scientific exploration, free speech and the arts.” Indeed, Berkeley is renowned as the birthplace of the free speech movement in in the 1960s. An opinion piece in a California newspaper points out that the city’s free speech movement has gone full circle, however. “Nowadays, Berkeley is rapidly becoming famed as one of the least tolerant cities in the country — where any challenge to left-wing orthodoxy is met with terrorist threats and mob violence.”