By Erik Rush
The recent protests against President Donald Trump and his policies pertaining to Muslim émigrés present a valuable object lesson regarding contrived popular misrepresentations of First Amendment liberties. Here, we are able to see examples of individuals and organizations engaging in seditious behavior that is commonly tolerated due to fallacious construals of the First Amendment advanced by American socialists.
Aspects of these interpretations have become conventional wisdom among our citizenry; disingenuously ignoring the error of such versions of constitutional law has been the job of agenda-driven legal experts and the press. Such things as court cases which successfully argued for the right to burn the American flag as a form of protected political expression legitimized the "America Sucks" culture, thereby paving the way for open sedition as an acceptable activity.
Peaceful protests on a large scale were employed to give rise to certain changes that needed to come about during the Civil Rights Movement. Since then, leftists have attempted to use them in their attempts to bring about all manner of malignant social and political change, hoping in each case to capture the same flavor of the 1960s protests and ascribe legitimacy to their causes. This is precisely what we are seeing at present, although the protests seldom remain peaceful.
We have learned that organizations tied to uber-socialist billionaire activist George Soros have had a hand in driving anti-Trump protests since his election, as have certain Islamist groups. The latter is certainly no surprise, since it reflects the 1400 year-old Islamic tradition of insidiously ingratiating Islam to host nations with one hand whilst preparing to slide the scimitar in with the other. All we need do is look to Europe to see how this develops just a little farther down the road we're on, with riots, no-go-zones, mass rapes, and demands for conversion to Islam having become commonplace.
Recently, the terrorism-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), helped launch demonstrations protesting Trump's recent executive orders concerning the entry of unvetted refugees from some Islamic nations into the United States. Leftists and the press have supported these efforts in their hyperbolic criticism of Trump's "Muslim ban," despite the fact that the President has only temporarily suspended unfettered access to the U.S. for citizens from seven highly-destabilized Islamic nations.
During the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama, Islamists had the most powerful friends in Washington, and made great headway in their efforts to establish policy and insinuate their operatives within our political infrastructure. In cases such as this, our tradition of religious tolerance has worked against us. Because Islam is considered a religion (though it is actually a pernicious, predatory social system with a religious component), it has enjoyed the benefits of a religion under the Constitution despite being diametrically opposed to the Constitution, as well as being at odds with Western civilization in general.
Factor in the fallacious belief held by some of our leaders that Islam is inherently peaceful, and we have the situation at hand. Prominent opponents of Trump's measures (Sen. Chuck Schumer and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright spring to mind) are currently proffering the same pro-Islam propaganda as did Barack Obama and his collaborators during the last administration.
As we have seen, this mass brainwashing can prove quite effective. There are Britons, Scandinavians, and European natives who continue to defend Islam in the manner of its American supporters despite the fact that Muslims have already transformed their nations into manifestly dangerous places.
It is highly unlikely that a real ban on Islam will become a reality anytime soon, but considering history and the empirical evidence at hand, President Trump could get away with criminalizing organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR (as some prudent nations have done), pointing to their actions and such phenomena as the jihadi training camps on our soil which the federal government has chosen to ignore to date, and of which the left and the establishment press simply deny existence.
In the case of George Soros, there are ample devices under the law that could be used to neutralize him if we moved away from the paradigm of tolerating the "America Sucks" culture. He has used his billions to institutionalize sedition on a variety of fronts, was instrumental in getting Obama elected to the presidency, and tried his level best to do the same for Hillary Clinton.
Soros became an American citizen in December of 1961, but the Hungarian-born former World War II Nazi collaborator could easily be stripped of his citizenship on any number of grounds and unceremoniously deposited back on Hungarian soil if our leaders found sufficient vertebral fortitude to initiate the requisite proceedings. Tying up his financial holdings and confounding the efforts of his shell organizations would put a stop to many detrimental processes that Soros has in place.
Rather than consciously engaging in sedition, a certain number of the protesters currently being engaged in these Islamophilic rallies are simply well-intentioned if profoundly ignorant and unaware of their own exploitation. Many more have been bought and paid for by the organizers however, who can and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Originally published in WorldNetDaily