NYC Just Did Something Astonishing For One Of America’s Most Infamous Traitors

Ethel Rosenberg was sentenced to death for treason in 1953 by the US, along with her husband, Julius Rosenberg. She was convicted of helping pass atomic secrets to the Soviet Union.

Now, she is being honored by the New York City Council.

Three council members praised Rosenberg, a Lower East Side resident, for “demonstrating great bravery” in her role in a 1935 strike against the National New York Packing and Supply Co. After she joined the workers’ union at that company, she became a supporter of the Communist Party.

The council members also said that she had been “wrongfully” executed by the United States.

Councilman Daniel Dromm, D-Queens, stated: “A lot of hysteria was created around anti-communism and how we had to defend our country, and these two people were traitors and we rushed to judgment and they were executed.”

Soviet spies such as the Rosenbergs were integral to Soviet efforts to build a bomb.

Because of their spying operations in the West, the Soviets knew of the Manhattan Project before even the FBI.

The Soviets ended up detonating their own atomic bomb in 1949, much earlier than expected.

At the peak of their arsenal in the 1980s, the Soviets had approximately 45,000 nuclear weapons in their stockpile.

What do you think of Ethel Rosenberg being praised by the New York City Council?

WATCH: It Takes Less Than 5 Minutes For Him To Explain Why Radical Islam Is The ‘World’s Most Dangerous Ideology’

Author Raymond Ibrahim claims that Islamism is the “world’s most dangerous ideology,” according to a new video for Prager University.

Ibrahim begins the video by detailing the historically most dangerous ideologies in his view, which includes Fascism (Mussolini’s Italy, Nazi Germany, and Imperial Japan) and Communism (including the USSR, Mao’s China, and more).

He states that Fascism was the most dangerous in the first half of the 20th century, and Communism was the most dangerous in the second half of the twentieth century.

According to Ibrahim, today’s “most dangerous ideology” is Islamism or radical Islam. He says: “Like fascism and communism, Islamism is totalitarian in nature. The state controls everything… Islamism is inherently expansionist.”

Ibrahim states what Islamism opposes- free speech, free enterprise, freedom to practice (or not to practice) any religion, freedom of assembly, free press, and fundamental human and civil rights.

He then describes how, rather than separating religion from the state, as Western governments do, Islamists believe that Islam should be unified with the state, and the state should be under Shariah law.

He then details what Islamists believe about Shariah law, including things such as “anyone born Muslim must remain Muslim and face execution if they convert” and that “adulterers must be stoned to death.” He also states that Islamists condone polygamy and child marriage.

Ibrahim argues that what Islamists want is nothing short of world domination, and they are “prepared to kill” those who disagree with their worldview.

Is Ibrahim right about Islamism? Is it the world’s “most dangerous ideology?”

Here’s The Pope’s Problem

I’ve been a Roman Catholic since 1954.

I have great respect for Pope Francis. When it comes to matters of faith and morals, what he says, goes.

But when it comes to politics and economics, the pope is about as far from infallible as anyone can get.

For example, he was in Cuba earlier this week, meeting informally with Fidel Castro and touring the island to say Masses and meet with priests.

Apparently, the pope was having such a good time he forgot that for more than half a century, Cuba has been a rotten communist prison camp–and his hosts Fidel, and his brother Raul, have been the wardens.

The people of Cuba have been denied every basic human freedom there is, plus they’ve been impoverished en masse and deprived of the simple blessings of modern life by the Castros’ brand of atheistic socialism.

Yet apparently, Pope Francis couldn’t see the barbed wire that still surrounds Fidel’s broken-down paradise.

His visit to Cuba was a perfect chance for him to throw his moral weight around and shame the Castro brothers before the whole world.

But unlike John Paul II, who went to Communist Poland to encourage the creation of Solidarity and meet with its brave leaders, Francis ignored the existence of Cuba’s political dissenters and prisoners of conscience.

How great would it have been if Pope Francis had stood in Havana Cathedral and delivered a “Mr. Castro, cut down that barbed wire” sermon?

Instead, in the poorest and least free dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere, he warned the people against letting riches rule your life.

Getting too rich and losing your spiritual values is the last thing the poor of Cuba need to fear right now.

I’m afraid Pope Francis wouldn’t get that joke because, unfortunately, he really does think capitalism and its love child, manmade climate change, are the world’s two biggest problems.

Not ISL taking territory and beheading people. Not terrorism. Not the Syrian refugees. Not a nuclear Iran. Not the civil wars in Ukraine or Yemen or Libya or Iraq. Not the poverty or lack of electricity or clean water for half of Africa. Not a hundred other things.

Global warming and capitalism. Seriously.

On Wednesday, one of the first things the pope did in Washington was call for a fight against climate change, which he said is a planetary crisis so serious it “can no longer be left to future generations.”

He didn’t explain how spending hundreds of billions of dollars to lower the global temperature a tenth of degree a hundred years from now will help the poor, because it’s unexplainable even for a pope.

Before he heads back to Rome, Francis will surely get around to scolding America for the inequalities of its capitalist economic system and the greed of Wall Street.

But like so many Americans of the liberal faith, he has capitalism and socialism backwards.

It’s capitalism that has made America the wealthiest and most generous country in the history of mankind and has brought forth everything we eat, use and enjoy.

It’s capitalism and freedom, not socialism and its chains, that have brought a much better life on Earth for billions of the poor souls the pope cares so much about.

Does the pope realize that 401(k)s and pension funds owe their good returns to the health of Wall Street and the stock market?

Or that most of the enormous wealth the Catholic Church has acquired over the centuries was generated by greedy immoral capitalism?

I bet not.

Pope Francis is rightly praised for caring deeply about the poor and the marginalized.

But he’ll never figure out how to actually help them until he understands what made America so wealthy and stops worrying about the wrong things.

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

A Well-Known Cuban-American Priest Just Asked Pope Francis The One Question On Everyone’s Mind

Papal condemnations of capitalism that also give godless communism a free pass from criticism are a sin, a prominent Cuban-American religious leader said this week.

“Why do you and other religion leaders condemn capitalism so strongly, and offer us a list of all the disasters that result from it on earth, but we never see an equally strong condemnation of atheist communism, which continues to cause the world so much harm?” Rev. Alberto Cutié, a former Catholic priest who is now an Episcopal priest, wrote in a column in the Miami Herald.

“Is it really more important to have diplomatic relations with a country that has not had free elections in 50 years, that abuses its people, that has a well-documented history of oppressing and robbing the Church–than to seek justice, the common good and freedom for all Cubans?” he asked Pope Francis, who met recently with Raul Castro and other Cuban leaders.

“I don’t understand–and don’t think I will ever begin to understand–why a man of God can meet with oppressors, but not the oppressed,” Rev. Cutie concluded.

Cutié echoed concerns expressed by members of the Ladies in White dissident group, made up of mostly Catholic female relatives of Cuba’s jailed political prisoners.

“The Holy Father visits Cuba as a missionary of mercy, but he has not spoken about human rights … without respect for human rights, nothing the Pope urged for in his homily can be achieved,” said Berta Soler, the leader of the Ladies in White.

In 2013, Pope Francis said that capitalism is “an economy of exclusion and inequality” and “such an economy kills.”

h/t: Breitbart

Bolshevik Bernie And The Communist Spy

In a 1,500-word article about the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, The Washington Post waited until the 25th paragraph to note that the self-declared socialist faces an “obstacle” to winning the presidency. The paper said that “…Sanders has not faced the kind of media scrutiny, let alone attacks from opponents, that leading candidates eventually experience.” The authors, Philip Rucker and James Wagner, added, “Sure to follow his summer surge is an autumn of investigations that could reveal new details about his personal background and record.”

What these investigations would find is that Sanders was a collaborator, if not a member, of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), the same group that backed Obama’s run for the presidency. DSA describes itself as the largest socialist organization in the United States and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International.

There is a video showing Obama campaigning for him when Sanders ran for the Senate. Interestingly, Sanders, who won his Senate seat in 2006, called Obama “one of the great leaders of the United States Senate,” even though Obama had only been in the body for about two years.

One of the more interesting members of the DSA is Kurt Stand, a communist spy for the Soviet Union (and then Russia) and East Germany who was sentenced to prison in 1998 and released in 2012. He served over 17 years. He was convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage, attempted espionage, and illegally obtaining national defense documents.

Where is he now? Thanks to the DSA, we know that Stand has returned to the organization, which is campaigning hard for Sanders for president. Indeed, DSA has posted photos of Stand and his comrades promoting “socialist values” and the Sanders campaign at the Greenbelt (Maryland) Labor Day Festival.

Stand has himself posted an article about how the group called Progressive Maryland is working hard to mobilize left-wing forces throughout the state.

According to the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Defense Intelligence Agency, Stand and his comrades, Therese Marie Squillacote and James Michael Clark, were on a mission “to cultivate other spies” in the Washington, D.C. area. Stand allegedly received $24,650 for his recruiting and coordinating efforts, according to a summary of the case. The summary says Stand and his comrades apparently became enamored with socialism when going to college: “Clark, Squillacote, and Stand attended the University of Wisconsin in the 1970s where they were affiliated with leftist groups, specifically the Progressive Student Forum and the Young Workers Liberation League, the youth arm of the Communist Party USA.”

It appears there is quite a bit of overlap between the various socialist, communist and progressive groups.

When he was in prison, Stand came out in strong support of Barack Obama for president, saying, “The conversations I’ve listened to and taken part in over these past months have made me a stronger supporter of Obama than I otherwise would have been; have strengthened my perception that his election could be a critical part of building a movement of resistance to our country’s current direction, could help provide the space or framework in which more radical alternatives are again spoken and heard.”

At the end of his letter, dated June 2008, Stand said that “radicals and progressives ought to join those—including those in prison—who have already decided to back Obama, see where the campaign can take us, see what can then be accomplished.”

Bernie is now his candidate.

In the same edition that carried the story about Sanders’ run for the Democratic presidential nomination, The Washington Post ran a story, “The Bernie Sanders of Britain,” about the Marxist who has taken over leadership of the British Labor Party. The online version carried the softer headline, “Leftist Jeremy Corbyn elected leader of Britain’s Labour Party.” Corbyn “has previously called for Britain to leave NATO, favors unilateral nuclear disarmament and champions the nationalization of vast sectors of the economy, including the railways and the energy industries,” the paper reported. Corbyn admires Russia’s Vladimir Putin and excuses the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Sanders, labeled by his critics as “Bolshevik Bernie,” told The Huffington Post that he was “delighted” to see that the British Labor Party had elected Corbyn as its new leader.

While Hillary Clinton has been sidetracked by her email scandal, Sanders has been popularizing socialism and expanding the Democratic Party base, noted Jeff Weaver, the Sanders campaign manager who was quoted in the Post. The unspoken assumption is that these new voters will turn out for whoever is the Democratic presidential nominee. This explains why Sanders has been spared media scrutiny. The media assume that he won’t get the nomination, but that he will bring more people to vote for the eventual Democratic nominee.

Bill Ayers, the former communist terrorist and Obama supporter, is hopeful about what Sanders can do for the far-left. “Certainly among the Sanders supporters there are many who will flock like liberal sheep to Hillary once the Bern burns out,” he writes. “However, I believe that among the Sanders supporters there are thousands who are dissatisfied, who are disgruntled, but who do not have a coherent left analysis, who therefore are open to our ideas as they weren’t before they got involved in the Sanders surge. These seekers will be open (certainly many of them) to ideas from the Left of Sanders.”

Ayers adds:

We must think as organizers. Yes, demonstrate, fight in the streets but spend some time and energy going to places where the Sanders campaign has gathered a crowd or a meeting but go not to disrupt, disrupting there would show how true we are to our knowledge, to our anger, to our need to show ‘them’ us… So I think that we should jump in the water. After all, the anti-war multitudes of the 60s and 70s were only disgruntled, dissatisfied people and without a coherent left analysis, yet we jumped in. Why? Because a movement can only be built on motion. Motion is people open, people leaving their normal placid acceptance if only a little, if only briefly. So, things swirled. Liberal anti-war marches. My collective would go, stand alongside the marchers with paper Viet Cong flags and pins, encouraging people to wear the flags. We gave maybe a thousand away. A good left action. We also had leaflets with our analysis of the war on Vietnam. Many people took those. Good. Better than if we had stayed home.

This is how a pro-communist message was inserted into the “anti-war” demonstrations that convinced a Democrat-controlled Congress to cut off aid to a non-communist South Vietnam, paving the way for a communist victory in Vietnam and the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia.

The Washington Post is correct that Sanders has a lot to explain.

Let’s take the USSR first. Sanders went on his honeymoon to the former USSR. He was a supporter of the communist Sandinista regime in Nicaragua. He was a collaborator with the U.S. Peace Council—a Communist Party front—against the Reagan military build-up. He worked with the Venezuelan regime of Hugo Chavez to distribute Venezuelan oil in the U.S.

The Post is right that Sanders deserves “media scrutiny” and “investigations that could reveal new details about his personal background and record.” So what accounts for the delay in the media doing their jobs? Would the results cast the Democratic Party in a bad light?

It’s no wonder, as we previously reported, that Sanders has been concerned that the NSA is conducting surveillance on links between American politicians and foreign regimes and movements. As I noted at the time, one of the NSA’s greatest successes was known as Venona, the code name given to the intercepted and deciphered KGB and GRU (Russian military intelligence) messages between Moscow and the Soviet espionage network in the United States. The project led to the apprehension of such spies as State Department official Alger Hiss.

Has the NSA been watching Bolshevik Bernie? This could make Hillary’s email scandal look mild by comparison.

Of course, Sanders would twist it against the NSA, arguing that he was just an innocent victim. The facts suggest otherwise.

Brought to you by 

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