Watch: Black Politician Issues Huge ‘Black Lives Matter’ Challenge To Obama EVERYONE Should See

A video featuring Joe Evans, the former vice-chairman and executive director of the Jefferson County Republican Party in Texas, calling on President Barack Obama to denounce the Black Lives Matter movement has gone viral. 

TheBlaze reports that Evans, who is running for county commissioner, posted the clip on Facebook on Saturday, after learning of the cold-blooded murder of Deputy Darren Goforth in nearby Harris County (Houston metro area) the previous night.

As he began his approximately minute-long video, Evans notes that many people will blame the deputy’s murder “on us not taking a serious approach to mental health, or we need stricter gun laws.” He demises that in this instance, stating: “I think we should start by denouncing the black lives movement.”

“I challenge every leader, starting with the president down to myself, to denounce the black lives matter movement,” he continues. “It’s a racist movement — racist to the core — and it will only cause more division and more hate among Americans.”

In his posting of the video on Facebook, Evans gave an even more pointed call to President Obama to take this step:

The President needs to come out and denounce the ‪#‎Blacklives‬ matter movement. The movement is racist to the core and in my opinion it has simultaneously led to a violent war between blacks and whites, and police and blacks.

The President is a former community organizer, and he knows that through organization many social outcomes can be manipulated, but this is wrong and has led to a nuclear uprising here in America. In fact all black leaders need to denounce that movement, and any other movement that separates people. My life is worth no more or less than anyone else’s life and I know that! On this day I denounce the ‪#‎BlackLivesMatter‬ movement.

Harris Country Sheriff Ron Hickman shared a similar sentiment to Evans at a press conference on Saturday following the murder of Deputy Goforth.

“When the rhetoric ramps up to the point where calculated, cold-blooded assassination of police officers happen, this rhetoric has gotten out of control,” Hickman said. “We’ve heard ‘Black Lives Matter,’ ‘All lives matter.’ Well, cops’ lives matter too. So why don’t we just drop the qualifier, and just say ‘Lives Matter,’ and take that to the bank.”

His sheriff’s department later posted that thought on its Twitter page on Saturday. 

Do you think Joe Evans and Sheriff Ron Hickman are right? Share your thoughts below. 

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Hillary’s ‘Grand Strategy’ For Mideast Brought Unnecessary Bloodbath

The current bloodbath in the Middle East is centered in formerly stable secular nations that the United States, over several presidential administrations, attempted to “democratize.” Under the Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton partnership, the destabilization was dramatically increased in an effort to find an overall fix, a grand strategy. That grand strategy was soon found in an all-encompassing plan to bring peace and prosperity to the Middle East via the Muslim Brotherhood.

The exact date the Muslim Brotherhood-White House relationship began is not known. However, the Wall Street Journal first reported on Secretary Hillary Clinton “reaching out” to the Muslim Brotherhood in 2011, shortly after the Egyptian government fell to protesters. The relationship must have actually begun much earlier. Clinton’s trusted aide, Huma Mahmood Abedin, had been steadily moving her toward the Muslim Brotherhood. How much will be revealed about Abedin in the “missing” emails on Hillary Clinton’s personal server used for State Department business has not yet been determined by the FBI.

Abedin at the time was U.S. deputy chief of staff at the State Department and had been a long time personal aide of Secretary Clinton. Abedin, whose mother and father were deeply involved in the Muslim Brotherhood leadership, convinced Clinton that to “control” the outcome of the Arab Spring and keep governments from falling into extremist hands, the United States must back “moderate” Islamist parties. Of course, her “moderate” solution was the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization that works for the same end result as the Islamic State but is willing to get there at a slower pace.

The Obama/Clinton grand strategy for the Middle East was dealt with in depth in a Wall Street Journal article by Walter Russell Mead in 2013. Describing the grand strategy he wrote:

The plan was simple but elegant: The U.S. would work with moderate Islamist groups like Turkey’s AK Party and Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood to make the Middle East more democratic. This would kill three birds with one stone. First, by aligning itself with these parties, the Obama administration would narrow the gap between the ‘moderate middle’ of the Muslim world and the U.S. Second, by showing Muslims that peaceful, moderate parties could achieve beneficial results, it would isolate the terrorists and radicals, further marginalizing them in the Islamic world. Finally, these groups with American support could bring democracy to more Middle Eastern countries, leading to improved economic and social conditions, gradually eradicating the ills and grievances that drove some people to fanatical and terroristic groups.

From the beginning of the Arab Spring, the Muslim Brotherhood was assisted by the Obama White House in taking over nations that had been secular leaning, including Tunisia and Egypt, under the guiding hand of Hillary Clinton. The attempts in Libya and Syria failed, but those nations are still bleeding as a result. The main victims of the Abedin/Clinton plan accepted by the Obama White House have been the actual moderates, who are secularists, and, of course, the Christians.

Currently, the only nation under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood is our NATO “ally,” Turkey, which is supporting violence against Egypt for casting off the Muslim Brotherhood in 2013 and voting in favor of a more secular government. Turkey also assisted tens of thousands of Sunni Islamist fighters to cross the border into Syria to war with the secular government there. Still, the Muslim Brotherhood has the full support of the Obama White House.

The delusional concept that having a “moderate” Muslim Brotherhood in control will somehow restrain “extremism” is alive and well at the White House. A blind eye is turned to the fact that 90 percent of the jihadists from all over the world going to fight jihad in Syria and Iraq have used Turkey as their entry point. With the Muslim Brotherhood as an ally, it is not possible for the White House to be critical of anything Muslim. This may explain Obama’s empty and duplicitous response to the beheading of 21 Coptic Christians on a beach in Libya by the ISIL.

President Obama could find no religious motivation for the killings at all! His White House issued a statement saying: “The United States condemns the despicable and cowardly murder of twenty-one Egyptian citizens in Libya by ISIL-affiliated terrorists. We offer our condolences to the families of the victims and our support to the Egyptian government and people as they grieve for their fellow citizens. ISIL’s barbarity knows no bounds. It is unconstrained by faith, sect, or ethnicity.”

Well, the Islamic State had tried to make the religious element as clear as they could. They even produced a polished production video showing the 21 Christian men, hands bound behind them, being led one-by-one along a beach to their brutal slaughter. They could be heard crying out “Ya Rabbi Yasou,” which translates as “Lord Jesus!” while others recited the Lord’s Prayer. The video, titled, “A Message Signed with BLOOD to the Nation of the Cross,” is indisputably and intensely religious. The entire production is full of references to the Quran and the Hadiths of Muhammad.                

In an article concerning the video production, theologian and scholar Dr. Mark Durie wrote: “The whole event was meticulously choreographed and rehearsed. The video’s obvious purpose is to humiliate and terrorize Christians, whom it derisively calls, ‘The Nation of the Cross.’” Still, Obama could not even bring himself to identify the victims as Christians, referring to them only as “citizens.”

Contrast this evasive response to the quick way he reacted a few days earlier when, during a neighborhood dispute over parking spaces, three Muslims were gunned down. Immediately, President Obama blamed their deaths on religious discrimination, saying: “No one in the United States of America should ever be targeted because of who they are, what they look like, or how they worship.” Had President Obama known then that the killer was an activist atheist and a far left “progressive” Obama fan, he probably wouldn’t have said anything.

In the case of the parking lot dispute in which the victims were Muslims, FBI agents were immediately ordered in by President Obama to investigate possible civil rights crimes. Yet, when Maj.Nidal Malik Hasan killed 13 fellow soldiers plus one unborn baby at Fort Hood in 2009 while shouting, “Allah Akbar,” President Obama saw the “crime” as “workplace violence.” Within hours, he asked the nation to be “constrained” and not blame Islam or Muslims for the death toll.

The White House will not even refer to the Islamic State by name and uses the initials ISIL in all official statements. To say the name that the organization calls itself is even taboo at the White House because the word “Islamic” is a part of that name.

The logic for this refusal was made clear by Obama Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson in a Fox News Sunday program on Feb. 22.

Johnson said, “To refer to ISIL as occupying any part of the Islamic theology is playing on a battlefield that they would like us to be on. I think that to call them some form of Islam gives the group more dignity than it deserves frankly.” Identifying Islamic terrorists as Islamic gives them “dignity” is the liberal logic.

But the Obama administration has no problem using the term “Christian” to identify terrorists, even if they are not Christian. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf on MSNBC must then have given “dignity” to Joseph Kony’s Lord’s Army when she called it a “Christian militant group.” In reality, Kony’s group is a strange mixture of religions, including animism. His recognition of Jesus is just about as authentic as is the Islamic version of Jesus. Even so, Kony’s army is at most responsible for one act of terror for every 10,000 acts of terror by Islamic groups in the world today; this is not to say that he should not be brought to justice quickly.

During his interview on Fox News, Secretary Johnson did let slip the real reason why the Obama administration does not use the word “Islamic” when describing terror, and where the term “violent extremism” came from. Muslim leaders in the United States don’t want the Obama administration to refer to Islamic terror as Islamic terror. Johnson said, “The thing I hear from leaders in the Muslim community in this country is, ‘ISIL is attempting to hijack my religion.’” This non-diplomatic translation of the remark would be, “The Muslim Brotherhood affiliate CAIR does not want the term Islamic used in a way detrimental.”

Because of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Obama administration is trying to fight the shadow of fundamentalist Islam, which is terror, without identifying what casts that shadow of terror on the world today. A people, a nation that refuses to identify its enemy cannot defeat that enemy. It is not possible to defeat a shadow; the figure that casts the shadow must be defeated. Until there is an administration in Washington, D.C., that is willing to identify and fight the enemy of Western civilization, there can be no lasting success.


About the author:  William J. Murray is the chairman of the Religious Freedom Coalition based in Washington, DC, and a long-time advocate for the defense of Christian minorities in the Middle East, and for ending American aid to Islamic “rebel” groups. The Religious Freedom Coalition is actively involved in providing humanitarian aid to Christian refugees from Syria and Iraq who have fled to Jordan and Lebanon. For more information, please go to  For information on the Christmas for Refugees program sponsored by the RFC, please see     

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Obama Just Announced A BIG Change To An Important American Location, And He’s Paying The Price

North America’s tallest mountain — its peak soaring more than 20,000 feet into the sky above Alaska — has just been renamed by order of President Barack Obama. Mount McKinley is no more — no longer does the mountain bear the name of the nation’s 25th president, a Republican from Ohio. Siding with lawmakers in the 49th state as well as Alaska’s indigenous peoples, the president has officially restored “Denali” as the name of the majestic mountain in all federal records.

Denali means “the great one” in the Athabaskan languages of the Alaska Natives living around the mountain.

The move comes as Obama starts a three-day presidential trip to the state where voters haven’t been too kind to Democrats in recent years. The focus of Obama’s trek to the north is his climate-change agenda, which he hopes will be boosted by his ending a 40-year battle over the name. Fox News reports that the state of Alaska has tried for decades to get the name change officially enacted.

But those efforts and legislation in Congress have been stymied by members of Ohio’s congressional delegation. Even when Mount McKinley National Park was renamed Denali National Park in 1980, the federal government retained Mount McKinley as the name of the actual peak….

Members of the congressional delegation from Ohio — President William McKinley’s home state — have vigorously protested the president’s order to change the mountain’s name. They claim that Obama has once again overstepped his constitutional authority, since it was an act of Congress that, nearly 100 years ago, named the mountain for the president from The Buckeye State.

Rep. Bob Gibbs, R-Ohio, released a statement slamming the presidential name change, according to Fox News:

“This political stunt is insulting to all Ohioans, and I will be working with the House Committee on Natural Resources to determine what can be done to prevent this action,” Gibbs said.

The Ohio delegation’s disappointment at the decision cut across party lines.

“We must retain this national landmark’s name in order to honor the legacy of this great American president and patriot,” Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan, whose district includes McKinley’s hometown of Niles, in eastern Ohio.

Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio also lit into Obama for his unilateral move to delete the name Mount McKinley from federal records. Even House Speaker John Boehner said he is “deeply disappointed in this decision,” reports Fox News.

In the state of Alaska itself — where Obama is slated to tour a receding glacier and meet people in remote communities supposedly threatened by rising ocean levels — GOP lawmakers say they’re appreciative of the president’s putting an end to the long-running conflict over the mountain’s official name.

Reuters reports: “The move elicited praise from Alaska Governor Bill Walker, a Republican turned independent, and Republican elected officials, who more typically are critical of an administration they see as hostile to the oil and gas interests of their state.”

For Obama critics who remain deeply cynical about the president’s every move, the changing of the tallest North American mountain’s name to a word that means “the great one” just might be seen as a self-serving testament to Barack Obama’s opinion of himself.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Federal Judge Makes Enormous Ruling That The Obama Admin And IRS Dreaded

Any role the Obama administration might have played in the IRS targeting of conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status could be exposed following a federal judge’s recent ruling.

According to reports, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Amy Berman Jackson determined that the IRS should be compelled to release data requests that came from the White House.

The ruling came after she heard testimony in a suit alleging former White House chief economist Austan Goolsbee obtained tax records for a corporation owned by conservative benefactors Charles and David Koch.

At the time of the alleged crime, the White House explained that Goolsbee only used Koch Industries “as an example” of companies that avoid paying corporate income taxes. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, however, analyzed the administration official’s “direct knowledge of Koch’s legal and tax status” to determine he appeared to be violating federal law.

Watchdog organization Cause of Action subsequently filed the lawsuit seeking access to tax information requested by the Obama White House.

Jackson threw out the IRS assertion that the requests should remain confidential. In fact, she concluded that one IRS argument served to bolster the opposition’s case. The agency reportedly sought refuge behind a post-Nixon law designed to protect Americans from governmental vengeance.

The judge wrote in her decision that she is “unwilling to stretch the statute so far” that it could be “used to shield the very misconduct it was enacted to prohibit.”

Cause of Action Executive Director Dan Epstein expressed support for Jackson’s ruling, explaining his organization has “said all along” that the Obama White House must not be permitted to cover up its actions.

“No administration is above the law,” he affirmed, “and we are pleased that the court has sided with us on this important point.”

Do you hope the truth about the IRS targeting of conservatives is finally revealed? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

OUCH: World Leader Shows Obama How To Deal With ISIS… Sends A Deadly Message

As Obama seems to dither on how to treat Islamic State terrorists, others are taking the lead as America “leads from behind.” Take the sentence an Egyptian court handed out to 12 members of ISIS for plotting attacks in the Land of the Pharaohs.

Agence France-Presse reported last week that 12 members of ISIS have been sentenced to death for their terror plans.

Six of the suspects have already been captured, and six more are at large; but Egyptian authorities determined that all 12 had joined a local ISIS cell.

This is only part of a crackdown on Islamic extremism that Egyptian President Abdel Fatah el-Sisi has undertaken in his country, a crackdown that included further pressure on the terror group The Muslim Brotherhood, the very organization that Obama’s government had tried to empower in Egypt back in 2012.

Unfortunately, Obama never stopped associating with people linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. Recently, Obama gave Rashad Hussain a top spot job in the U.S. State Department. Obama has given him this position despite the fact that Hussain has participated in events hosted by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Regardless, ISIS and other terror groups have been targeting Egypt with deadly attacks killing scores of people. Last year, for instance, among the many attacks there, militants killed 31 last October; 44 were killed in January in Sinai.

In another incident, the country’s chief prosecutor was killed in Cairo by a bomb blast only a few months ago.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth