Methodology of Leftist NGO’s and Their Enablers

 

Some are amazed at the apparent support that exists for the farthest leftist causes and how they inundate companies resulting in sufficient influential force to have these companies alter their business practices. The greatest example of this has been the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanction) efforts against Israel. Such charities as Oxfam have been pressured to forcing a choice upon their chosen international representative, Scarlett Johansson. The problem is that the well-known actress, Scarlett Johansson, was also in advertisements for the company SodaStream, which at the time had a factory in the Shomron which many claim is rightfully belonging to the Arab Palestinians. Scarlett Johansson chose to remain the representative for SodaStream and stepped down from Oxfam. There is a further development on this story. When SodaStream built a new factory, they also bent to the pressures and built the new factory within the Green Line. This resulted in hundreds of Arab Palestinians losing their jobs. That BDS pressure sure is helping these Arab workers, but they are just collateral damage in the war to destroy Israel. Destroying the Jewish State by claiming to assist Arab Palestinians more often than not harms these very same people causing them to become unemployed from Jobs which paid higher wages than any other including Palestinian Authority positions including their Security Forces. The only higher paying jobs for these people are to become terrorists and murder Israelis in order to gain an early retirement income from the Palestinian Authority. Perhaps this is the real reason for the BDS Movement; force Arab Palestinians into unemployment until they become so desperate they are willing to kill innocent Israelis in order to generate a permanent income for them and their families.

 

The latest target of the BDS Movement has been the real estate listing service, Airbnb. They have censored their listings removing those beyond the Green Line which belong to Jews as well as those in the Golan Heights. We would like to quote NGO Watch found in the article titled, “The New Israel Fund encouraged the Airbnb boycott of Israel.” NGO Watch noted:

“This change in policy was a clear result of a coordinated and well-financed campaign targeting the company by NGOs involved in BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanctions) campaigns against Israel, led by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), in concert with the UN Human Rights Council (HRC), at least three Israeli groups, and the Palestinian Authority. The funders responsible for this campaign include a number of European governments as well as the US-based Rockefeller Brothers Fund.”

The above-mentioned article contains other references for any interested in finding any additional information.

 

So, this is how these numerous groups on the far left can organize to apply so much pressure on companies, governments, charities and other organizations including international organizations. This amount of organization is impressive and gives the appearance that these groups have hundreds, thousands and far more in some instances. Their tactic is to inundate their target with e-mails, snail mail, phone calls directly to top officials’ numbers when they are able to procure them and press releases to every media source on the planet castigating their target for their obvious questionable actions, support, locations or political leanings. Their tactics actually use their most active and dedicated members to assume numerous identities in order to magnify their pressure. This can be accomplished through simple subterfuge. One easily adopted methodology is for members to apply for numerous e-mail accounts using different names from the many numerous free e-mail services. By attaining a second e-mail address, one can then apply to another service using both of these e-mails as identification. Then they can use three of these e-mails to gain three additional addresses from their first e-mail provider. Now they have seven with which to get additional addresses all under different names and one can see how with the numerous free e-mail providers, one can accumulate a great number of e-mails all under separate names identifying the sender. Then, when they need to pressure anything which has crossed the targeting of their NGO or organization, they send a single e-mail from each of the addresses amassed with a different message. These messages do not need to be elaborate, though a small number will be more fervent than the rest, and send these to the targeted entity which will soon get the feeling that they are facing a massive populist movement with potentially millions of supporters. These NGOs who master this ploy maximizing their effectiveness are rewarded with additional funding from government and the numerous arms of the United Nations and other supportive groups, as noted in the above NGO Watch quotation.

 

Do not even bother to ask whether this is proper or legal, as such is of little concern when there is a cause to support and force upon some unsuspecting victims. It is the cause and only the cause and whatever it takes is all fair in love of cause and the war to impose it upon the public. Unfortunately, the laws which might be applied would be a stretch as they would need to apply racketeering laws, fraudulent representation or some related or similar laws. The people would play the innocent victim of the state attempting to intimidate them in their efforts to make changes in the world and make it a far better place. Any such attempt would result in a media feeding frenzy which would only serve to further amplify the efforts by these dedicated leftists. Well, don’t rightist groups also use these tactics? Even if this was so, there is a huge difference between most right wing groups and the left wing groups, especially the ones on the far left, and that is a little thing called intersectionality. Intersectionality is a very interesting idea which further amplifies the voice of leftist groups because of the way it links them all into mutual support. Even finding a group of right wing people who share sufficient ideas to form a group is difficult, as we found when attempting to put together a campaign for office. The difference between right and left can be simply described. For two right wing groups to coordinate, they will be required to go through every last political position and should they not agree in total, then they will split and each go their separate way and not coordinate or only loosely coordinate. This does not lead to right wing groups working together and part of why there are so few right wing large demonstrations; you just cannot herd that many right wing groups together and have them play well together. Intersectionality is a weapon which works mostly on the left.

 

There are some exclusionary properties to intersectionality. It normally is used in order to enlarge demonstrations by bringing in supporters from varied groups to support one another and to make every demonstration appear to be more highly active and supported than it is in reality. This also works when supporting political candidates. Take the Women’s March as an example. They were also supported fully by BLM (Black Lives Matter), anti-fa, Amnesty International USA, an SEIU chapter, the Mothers of the Movement, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, the National Organization for Women (NOW), the National Domestic Workers Alliance, and the Muslim Women’s Alliance for starters. In the end it was reported that there were over four-hundred supporting groups filling the ranks of the march to highly impressive numbers. But there are some lines which must not be crossed, and anything outside of those lines is shunned and often banned from supporting these preferred movements and from receiving support from this core group included under intersectionality. The shining examples of such ostracized groups are any which support Israel. With groups such as the BDS Movement, BLM, Muslim Women’s Alliance and numerous other ardently pro-Palestinian Arab groups along with others which simply denigrate Israel as the greatest oppressor in all of history, eclipsing the empires of the past from the Babylonians to the British, there is no room for any Jewish group which has not sworn to the destruction of the Jewish State. This came to a head in the 2017 Chicago Dyke March where a group who displayed multi-colored flags with a Star of David was denied permission to participate in the parade. That was topped this year with numerous Palestinian Flags being displayed and, of course, the Jews denied again participation. Israel has received a permanent black spot as far as the inclusive intersectionality leftists are concerned.

 

Multi-Colored Flags with a Star of David

 

This has become a major incident concerning the Women’s Movement as Teresa Shook, one of the original co-founders of the Women’s Movement, has declared her ire at the anti-Semitic leanings of the new leadership and demanded they step down as they have been completely ineffective in preventing hate from seeping into the movement. Teresa Shook took to Facebook and stated:

“As Founder of the Women’s March, my original vision and intent was to show the capacity of human beings to stand in solidarity and love against the hateful rhetoric that had become a part of the political landscape in the U.S. and around the world. I wanted us to prove that the majority of us are decent people who want a world that is fair, just and inclusive of Women and All people. We proved that on January 21, 2017 (and in the U.S. this past midterm with a diverse electorate).

Bob Bland, Tamika Mallory, Linda Sarsour and Carmen Perez of Women’s March, Inc. have steered the Movement away from its true course. I have waited, hoping they would right the ship. But they have not. In opposition to our Unity Principles, they have allowed anti-Semitism, anti- LBGTQIA sentiment and hateful, racist rhetoric to become a part of the platform by their refusal to separate themselves from groups that espouse these racist, hateful beliefs. I call for the current Co-Chairs to step down and to let others lead who can restore faith in the Movement and its original intent. I stand in Solidarity with all the Sister March Organizations, to bring the Movement back to its authentic purpose. As Women’s March founder, I am stepping up to bring focus back to the Unity Principles on which our movement began, and with the support of all of those who marched and have continued to march, I pledge to support grassroots, decentralized leadership promoting a safe, worldwide community devoid of hate speech, bigotry and racism.”

The results of this should be interesting but we hold out little hope for Teresa Shook to regain control over the movement she helped to birth as the new leftists represented by Women’s March organizers, from left to right, Bob Bland, Linda Sarsour, Carmen Perez and Tamika Mallory are going to simply push her aside as inconsequential and blame it on her support for Israel when their real reason is that she is a proud Jew.

 

Teresa Shook takes on the New Leftist Gang
Bob Bland, Linda Sarsour, Carmen Perez and Tamika

 

Control of the future of the Women’s Movement and the face-off mentioned above will be a telling result which will indicate whether or not the Jews have any future on the left. There is far more at stake than demonstration rights and inclusion with the intersectionality group, also at stake is the future and control of the Democrat Party which is rapidly falling into the hands of others just the same as the new leadership in the Women’s Movement. This has been a long time building and was obvious to any observer whose eyes were open and they were not sleeping at the wheel. The left has become weaponized and their sites are currently merely on Israel, but from there it will be a short hop, without even requiring a skip or a jump, to anti-Semitism. The reality is their singular targeting of Israel and no other nation for harming the rights of supposed minorities, despite recognizing that Israel supports the LBGTQ rights, claiming this is merely to hide their sins against the Arab Palestinians which Israel does not rule or have any legal influence upon, is a form of anti-Semitism. They do not even require the hop; they just need be honest which is something we expect to surface in the very near future. The Jews living in the United States reside in a fool’s paradise and are blithely unaware of the target which is being place on their heads. We have seen this exact playbook almost to the letter in too many historical settings to miss seeing the future and the difficulty which will soon start to become even more evident as the Jews start to become confused because none of what will happen will make sense to them. They will claim that they mean those other Jews and will live on in denial until, once again, it is too late. There is another side to these coming realities, and that is that Israel has to wean herself from all United States aid and start producing all her weapons and munitions within her own borders and do so with some urgency. Dark clouds are on the horizon.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Was Andrew Napolitano Correct?

 

Was Andrew Napolitano Correct when on “Fox & Friends” he claimed that British intelligence officials had helped former President Barack Obama spy on Donald Trump? We know one thing, he was definitely wrong to have said so without having run the idea past Fox News’s law department, the “Fox & Friends” show’s writers, any managers related to both the “Fox & Friends” show and those responsible for Judge Napolitano and perhaps anyone else he could have found even to include the people behind each of the three cameras shooting the show and perhaps the microphone grip just for good measure. Apparently he also needed to include our friends, the British, into the mix of the Trump accusation his phones in Trump Tower were tapped by the Obama Administration. Of course any allegation which includes the Russians with the election victory by Donald Trump is perfectly within bounds as with the Russian allegations the target is President Trump and with Judge Napolitano’s British accusation the target is President Obama. The difference is more than obvious, it is also very revealing. In American media, even the presumed conservative darling Fox News, any accusation against President Trump can spread guilt to any target and still be acceptable while accusations against President Obama may not apply guilt to other targets because expressing potential for guilt of President Obama is what was not permissible and thus also the British. But perhaps delving deeper might be an interesting exercise and be quite revealing.

 

Judge Andrew Napolitano

 

We need to go back to the era of PRISM or before that Echelon as well as whatever the code name was back to the mid-1950’s which was finally revealed to the public in the mid-2000’s and was simply the latest data gathering system used by the National Security Agency (NSA) in coordination with the data collection abilities of the other Anglo-nations, Great Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand with the United States in order to be capable of collecting, through coordination, the maximized capabilities of their systems. Their coordinating their systems meant that they could prevent duplicating each other’s efforts. In order to guarantee that each nation would still have access to whatever data they needed there was an agreement. The initial agreement was called the UKUSA Agreement, or the United Kingdom – United States of America Agreement. The actual agreement upon full ratification included all the Anglo-nations mentioned above. This agreement also permitted each nation to have total access to the information of the other nations. Now as it was easiest for each member nation to collect complete and total accumulation and compilation of their own population’s data, each nation was assigned with the collection of all electronic communication including phones of all varieties, internet, wireless and any other variety of communication which lent to interception. Obviously ground mail was still safe from this collection processes though e-mail was not and was also collected along with all else.

 

The fact that each nation in the group, the United States, Great Britain, New Zealand, Australia and Canada all have laws which do not permit spying on their own citizens without first having a judge issue a warrant; this made it such a tedious and limiting requirement that each country desired some means of getting around this nasty limitation. Unsurprisingly, leaks revealed that they found just the means by which to collect what was their hearts, and snooping, desires without the needless waste of finding some judge to issue a warrant, even after the The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) and the accompanying FISA Courts where warrants could be granted in complete and total secrecy. But what if your target was somebody who you did not believe that even a FISA Court would issue a warrant? Well, one could always resort to the “old school” method for such situations. The five nations which finally entered the UKUSA Agreement agreed that when any one deemed they required intercepting, read bugging, anyone of their own citizens, something universally illegal under several laws, they would simply request a surveillance report covering the individuals phone numbers, their internet e-mail address and internet entrance and other electronic identifiers using all the direct alpha-numeric identifiers such that no names were ever exchanged. The nation receiving the request would then query all five nations’ data collection systems and compile their report simply listing all communications by the target accounts and thus the individual of interest. This report was then presented to the nation unable to actually collect such information themselves legally without making legal requests at some level. This was the method, as we pointed out, back in the day. Now, all those out there who believe that this method of data acquisition has fallen by the wayside and is no longer accessible, raise your hands. Let’s see, OK George, put your hand down, not funny. So, we all believe that if somebody from the political, law enforcement, foreign intelligence collection group or domestic intelligence group desired to gain such information, they could simply contact somebody they could trust from one of the other nations and have all the information they might desire and all without anybody being all the wiser.

 

So, what is the most important concept behind all of this spy vs. spy scenario? Well, it has to be the part that nobody would be any the wiser. Would it be possible for somebody in the government, say the President, or more likely a subordinate, a trusted subordinate with contacts across a border in say New Zealand or perhaps Canada to gather a compiled report which includes all the communications, or simply phone conversations, from a specific set of alphanumerics representing a person of interest even daily? The obvious answer is an obvious “Yes” and all without anybody in either government actually believing anything untoward had taken place. Are such requests made currently? Probably, though nowhere near in the numbers which were likely back twenty or so years ago. Still, this polite gentlemen’s agreement was put in place for just the reason that listening to then candidate Trump’s phone calls was made to produce. Did President Obama actually order or just request such a report from the British? The truth is it is unlikely but did he actually mention that he was wondering what Trump was up to, very likely. Might an overeager subordinate have then issued such a request hoping to have something interesting he or she could then report to the President? You tell me and if you have a name and proof, that would be appreciated as well. We promise not to use such information, well, not without giving you the credit if you desire such as we would not desire taking the heat alone. What is obvious is that the scenario is not beyond possibility.

 

What must be added to this entire scenario is that the new NSA data collection systems currently are capable of collecting every single last piece of electronic data from the United States plus probably Europe and a select dozen additional nations just for fun without taxing their systems which are tied into world-wide communications networks at their sources. Further, when gathering data using the numerical address the actual target remains unidentified in almost every situation as numerical identifiers can be used which disguise the actual target from those collecting the data. Thus, simply using such identifiers one can draw up all the information from any identifier for any period simply by entering a query into the huge data storage complex outside Reno, Nevada. This could even be done directly out of virtually any office of a Congressperson and nothing untoward would ever be suspected. From the White House, well, that might raise some suspicions, but from any agency which is assigned to gather information, nobody would ever suspect anything. Even those who are responsible for guarding that all data acquisition is done all legal and above boards have so much to review that it is very possible that many requests get through never being reviewed as review is probably reserved for such demands made by courts and other persons having a purpose to request such reviews. This means that even had Trump had his file accessed, nobody is likely to have been the wiser and it is entirely possible that the old UKUSA Agreement system of scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours could have been used to make tracing all the more difficult. Whatever the actual situation, Judge Napolitano was hired to give commentary, his best assessments and legal advice. His commentary if presented as fact might have been a bit overly pretentious, but was not entirely out of line. If he presented it as theory, then it was within the assigned duties of a commentator. Whatever the situation proves forth, should the Judge need a part-time, non-paying position, we can always use another commentator here at BTC whose views might be appreciated by our readers and who would add to our broad views of what is, what may be and what we wish would be.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Russian Interference in the American Elections

 

The Washington Post released the “secret” discovery that American intelligence agencies have concluded with “high confidence” that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald J. Trump, according to senior administration officials. Wonderful thing that intelligence secret research and discoveries are plastered on the front page top of the fold of the Washington Post. Wonder what “secrets” we will see next and in which left-leaning mainstream print media and whether the broadcast mainstream media will be next to enter the “secret” intelligence discoveries. There was more information that the Russians also cracked the Republican National Committee (RNC) computers but did not release any sensitive information they gleaned. The Russians released the secrets from Hillary Clinton’s computers and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) because they desired to have Donald Trump as President. This is a very interesting conclusion and may be missing some vitally important piece of possible information. Perhaps almost everything they gleaned from the RNC was mostly public and discussed mostly debate points and policy discussions. Meanwhile the DNC and Hillary’s e-mails had secrets, many secrets, and they were damning secrets at that which were not known in the public and revealed actions which would have been prosecutable had these facts been about the Republicans instead of the Democrats. So the Republican computers had run of the mill data and research for the election and polling and records of donations and other records which are required by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) which is very boring stuff and would not have been of any real interest. While on the other computers they found records of cheating and pay for play of the Clinton Foundation and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and shared debate questions and the entire attack plan to deny Bernie Sanders a fair and even run for the nomination favoring Hillary Clinton while crippling Bernie Sanders’s opportunities and any chance of winning the nomination.

 

Which information would be important in a free society anyway? Would it be polling data, contribution records and policy statements defining the platform or cheating, bribery and criminal activities? The answer is obvious. The Russians did not release the information gleaned from the RNC because most of it was already public knowledge or was filed with the FEC or other government agencies as required by law thus mostly position data, platform positions and basic data and information which was filed already with the government and available to the public. The DNC, Hillary’s e-mails, well, now we know what was found there whether it was Russia or Wikileaks who cracked these computer systems as it was made public. So the RNC information was already public while the DNC and Hillary’s e-mails were secret and the Democrats were going to great extremes to continue hiding what was on their computers. Which information had you gotten would you believe might be of interest to the people, the already public information or deep secrets being hidden fearing public reactions if these bits of information would become known. Secrets are the only thing which people care to hear and simple data which are already publically available is totally uninteresting. So of course whoever had secret information would believe releasing such information might be of interest and might be useful information for the voters. So it was secrets which were found interesting and thus released.

 

Computer Secrets Revealed

 

Americans were actually served well by the releasing of this information as democracy works best when there are no secrets. Secrets are poison to democracy, always was, always will be. Democracy is served best when all secrets from all sides are aired rather than hidden and concealed from the people, the voters. The squirming on the left is that they were found out and their secrets and sins were revealed and the left firmly believes that only the right has secrets, the left has valued information which must remain concealed because only the selected few may be permitted to know the secrets. Conservatives are secretive and thus the Republicans must have had more secrets than Hillary or the DNC could ever have hidden because the Democrats, the leftists are the holders of truth and the only holders of truth even if most of that truth must be kept from the public because they could never understand these things they must hold secret because the other side has even deeper and more evil secrets. The Russians or Wikileaks released secrets and damning information about the Democrats because they wanted Trump to win the Presidency. They were out to destroy Hillary. The fact is that Hillary had played loose with morality while as Secretary of State using her position to enrich herself and her husband while Trump was running his companies and the Republicans were working their way through seventeen candidates. While the Republicans were trying to figure their way through debates the DNC was receiving debate questions to feed Hillary but not Bernie. Which would be of interest to the American voters, the Republican debate schedule or the fact that one Democrat candidate was receiving debate questions through a DNC operative working for CNN.

 

But all other considerations aside, there is actually a reason that the revelations by Wikileaks, wherever they originated, were a good thing for the election. First is they probably did not sway more than a few thousand voters from Hillary to Donald Trump in the entire company as those who were going to vote for Hillary would commit suicide before voting for Trump. Democracy works best when the voters have all of the information possible and are making reasoned and intelligent decisions in the voting booths. Unfortunately there will always be secrets and there will be secrets with both parties. Most of the secrets are how they plan on formulating their campaigns and which states they believe are in play and where they are not bothering to put up a fight. Those are tactics and none of that information from the DNC was released. None of the RNC tactics were released either. Hillary and the DNC had lots of hidden information while Trump had tweets which are rarely secret. Hillary was running while attempting to conceal much of her past from the FBI as well as the voters while Trump Tweeted every thought which crossed his mind and often his Tweets contradicted earlier Tweets proving even he did not know all of his positions. Hillary was running under a dark cloud of secrets, deep and dark secrets. Trump ran as open a campaign as humanly possible and his Tweets proved one thing, that he will need many advisors to mold his thoughts through providing information, one can only hope truthful information. The reason that secrets were released about the Hillary Clinton campaign and not the Donald Trump campaign was simple, Trump has a totally public campaign and everything the media could possibly find to report derogatory about Trump, it would be repeated ad-nauseum until even the least news observant American could repeat that piece of news verbatim. Hillary’s and the DNC’s secrets would have remained as deep, dark secrets and the voters would have never known any of the crooked and potentially illegal actions and secrets which were ensconced on those hard drives. The truth is that the released secrets might have served the American public well and perhaps had an influence by pushing many who were debating on whether to vote Trump or stay home to actually go vote. If these releases of secrets allowed more Americans to cast votes and have their opinions represented in the election, is that not a good thing. Is not the lack of voting Americans in election cycle after cycle not one of the reasons given by the political theorists that the democratic voting part of the American Republic as something dangerous that threatens the governance? If that is the case, then was not the American Republic Governance helped of these releases sent more people to the polls? If your answer is that it depends who these additional voters were voting for then that is a partisan answer. Whenever more people express their opinion the closer the government will represent the people, which is the purpose of the governance.

 

Beyond the Cusp