A smattering of black lives matter

Back in January this year, the Washington Times had a great article written by Kelly Rendell that described the long connected tentacles of Soros’ money within the Left, to these coordinated, seemingly rogue, organizations. An excellent piece of investigative journalism. Now that money, around 33 million documented just in the span of a year, in the article is instrumental in promoting these far left radicals and the protest movement’s combination of riots, civil disobedience activism, rabble rousing, harassing politicians and calling for killing cops.(sort of like OWS)

In May, Washington Times reported: (cut the check, please)

FrontPage Magazine reports that Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment (MORE) has been paying protesters $5,000 a month to demonstrate in Ferguson. Last week, hired protesters who haven’t been paid held a sit-in at MORE’s offices and posted a demand letter online.

MORE is the re-branded Missouri branch of ACORN, which filed for bankruptcy in late 2010, FrontPage reported. MORE and other groups supporting the Black Lives Matter movement have received millions of dollars from billionaire financier George Soros.

It used to be radicals were on the fringe. The Weather Underground was considered fairly fringe even back in its hay day. The larger than life Bill Ayers was still underground as a fugitive as were others. Of course, the justice department then was investigating them. They were taken serious. And they were also considered terrorists.

But unlike then, today they have made radical groups mainstream and considered as just another voice of the Left. They are welcomed political allies.And they very much influence public dialogue and events. Like Black Lives Matter. It has used the same inflammatory rhetoric as terrorists and radicals in the past. But today that rhetoric is considered mainstream on the Left.

So in an act of endorsement,the DNC summer meeting approved a resolution in support of Black Lives Matter, apparently for its contributions. But then in a twist of irony, the BLM group denounced the DNC’s vote of support, in true radical style, issuing a statement that said in part:

“True change requires real struggle, and that struggle will be in the streets and led by the people, not by a political party.”

One could see Bill Ayers or maybe Rev Wright doing a similar dissing to the DNC to make a political point. Mostly because, in their view, progressives and the DNC are not far enough Left for them.

Along in that January investigative piece was a sort of disclaimer that the parent and funding organization does not control the protesters’ actions. In other words, retains a faux deniability when the going gets rough, even though they make payments to rent-a-protestors in the movement.

“The incidents, whether in Staten Island, Cleveland or Ferguson, were spontaneous protests — we don’t have the ability to control or dictate what others say or choose to say,” Mr. Zimmerman said. “But these circumstances focused people’s attention — and it became increasingly evident to the social justice groups involved that what a particular incident like Ferguson represents is a lack of accountability and a lack of democratic participation.”

Other Soros-funded groups made it their job to remotely monitor and exploit anything related to the incident that they could portray as a conservative misstep, and to develop academic research and editorials to disseminate to the news media to keep the story alive.

These groups would be perfect recruit mechanisms for ex-cons or those with lengthy records.But it cannot be denied that they are Soros funded and sponsored. Now we have celebrities and other wealthy liberals donating to the Black Lives Matter cause, presumably by donating to the parent organization, and praised for it.

The Millennial Activists United put out a letter backing those pay complaints in May

In the last few days, Bill O’Reilly went on a tear about BLM, formerly branding them a hate group in view of rhetoric in their latest marches and the cop execution in Texas. He declared to some who would not go that far, “I’m going to put them out of business.” So does that mean he is now at war with Soros? Drive them out of business, does he even realize what all that involves? It’s nice to know your enemies too.

Some sources: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/19/hired-black-lives-matter-protesters-start-cutthech/
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/257130/ferguson-rent-mobs-exposed-matthew-vadum
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/14/george-soros-funds-ferguson-protests-hopes-theo-spur/?page=all

Iran deal causing fractures

So at the summer DNC meeting it was noted Obama could not even shore up support for his Iran deal. So what was in it for Obama?

CNN reports

The Democratic National Committee’s summer meeting is over, and there is something you won’t find in the official minutes: a resolution supporting President Obama’s Iran nuclear agreement.

The deal has divided the [Democrat] party, to the point where the chairwoman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, has not made her position clear as yet. As the President heads into a veto battle with Congress on the issue, he needs every Democratic vote he can muster. But Jonathan Martin of The New York Times noted he couldn’t get help from the party he leads.

“The Obama-controlled DNC could not pass a resolution this weekend expressing support for President Obama’s Iran deal,” said Martin. “It’s a bit of an embarrassment for the administration, seeing as how it’s his party. He appointed Debbie Wasserman Schultz.”

More at http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/30/politics/ip-obama-trump-jeb–romney/index.html

So Debbie is playing her cards close to her hairspray, eh? Wow that little deal is causing lots of headaches even at the DNC anti-Israel Party.I wonder if she is suffering from a case of crazyitis too? Or she could be one of those Iranian hardliner allies we hear about?

Why hasn’t she jumped to the head of the line and proudly endorsed Obama’s nuclear deal for Iran? Probably ol’ Debbie does not want to make her endorsement, of Obama’s deal, public as she’d have to explain it. She doesn’t do well on explaining things, or answering questions.

Am I to interpret that family feuds are now fashionable in the DNC?