Trump Guns for NRA in White House Meeting on Gun Policy

Trump Guns for NRA in White House Meeting on Gun Policy



President Donald Trump took on the National Rifle Association (NRA) — and politicians who support it — in a free-wheeling, bipartisan, televised discussion on gun laws with members of Congress at the White House Wednesday.

Trump has held several such meetings since the beginning of the year, beginning with a meeting on immigration in January. The events are virtually unprecedented in showing Americans a civil and open exchange of views on contentious issues among leaders — and, occasionally, ordinary citizens — on both sides of the political divide.

This meeting was different, however, in that the president was not just listening, but driving policy in a particular direction.

And that direction — perhaps to the dismay of some of Trump’s core supporters — is toward gun control.

At one point, Trump dismissed a suggestion by House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) — who was wounded last summer in a mass shooting targeting Republicans — to allow national reciprocity for concealed carry permits.

Trump told Scalise bluntly: “I think that maybe that bill will someday pass but it should pass as a separate bill… You’ll never get this passed. If you add concealed carry to this you’ll never get it passed. Let it be a separate bill.”

Trump defended the idea of raising the minimum age to purchase a rifle — at least, the AR-15 used in the Parkland, Florida shooting earlier this month — to 21, pointing out that handguns already had such an age requirement, but that the shooter had still been able to buy the rifle he used.

Trump acknowledged that the NRA was opposed to the proposal. “I’m a fan of the NRA. There’s no bigger fan. I’m a big fan of the NRA … These are great people, these are great patriots,” he said. “They love our country. But that doesn’t mean we have to agree on everything.”

Then, in an exchange that captured the attention of the mainstream media, Trump told Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) that they were “afraid of the NRA” after they told him that their bipartisan bill to expand background checks had not included a provision to raise the minimum age to purchase a rifle.

Toomey responded by defending the view that adults over 18 should be able to own rifles: “My reservation about it, frankly, is that the vast majority of 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds in Pennsylvania who have a rifle or a shotgun — they’re not a threat to anyone. They’re law-abiding citizens. They have that because they want to use it for hunting or target shooting. And to deny them their Second Amendment right is not going to make anyone safer.”

The president acknowledged that argument, but went on to argue that Republicans should add Democrat ideas into one compromise bill. His emphasis was on expanding and improving background checks, but he was clearly open to more ambitious proposals — or at least wanted to be seen open to other ideas. He dismissed the idea of “gun-free zones,” describing them as dangerous — but he also wanted to push gun control legislation forward.

How much of Trump’s performance was theatre is anyone’s guess. When asked by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) whether he would actually sign a bill to raise the minimum age for purchasing a rifle, Trump dodged carefully: “I’ll tell you what: I’m going to give it a lot of consideration, and I’m the one bringing it up, and a lot of people don’t even want to bring it up, because they’re afraid to bring it up.”

It is possible that Trump simply wanted to be seen as fighting the NRA, while at the same time bringing out the NRA’s arguments — such as Toomey’s response — in the mouths of other people. That way, Trump could cast himself as a leader on the issue, without committing to legal changes that would alienate a core part of his base.

But conservatives will, no doubt, worry about his apparent concessions to Democrats — and how far they could go.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He was named to Forward’s 50 “most influential” Jews in 2017. He is the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com

Adam Schiff’s Latest Attack on Nunes’ FISA Memo Proves It’s Time to Declassify the FISA Applications

Adam Schiff’s Latest Attack on Nunes’ FISA Memo Proves It’s Time to Declassify the FISA Applications

President Trump lashed out at Sessions for asking the Inspector General to look into Obama era FISA abuse. Trump correctly states it “will take forever.”

Ranking member of the House Intel Committee Adam Schiff (D-CA) is desperate to stop any further investigations into Obama’s FISA abuse because it will put an end to Mueller’s sham investigation.

We have no Attorney General.
Jeff Sessions went AWOL the day after he was sworn in.
What the hell does the deep state have on him?

 

Adam Schiff responded to Trump’s tweet Wednesday afternoon showing he’s just a desperate political hack.

Schiff tweeted, “More important question: Why is the AG asking for a FISA investigation at all? DOJ and FBI already said the Nunes memo was inaccurate, misleading and extraordinarily reckless. With no evidence of abuse, only explanation is political pressure.”

If you read Adam Schiff’s tweet, he’s actually describing the Mueller witch hunt. This is a classic move by liberals like Schiff; they always project.

Mueller’s investigation is pressing on even though there is ZERO evidence of ‘Trump-Russia collusion’; it’s a political hit.

In contrast, we have massive amount of evidence that the FISA process was abused by Obama’s henchmen.

Chairman Nunes’ damning 4-page FISA memo clearly points out the FISA court was misled by Comey, Sally Yates, Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe.

GOP lawmakers such as Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) are calling for the FISA applications relating to the phony dossier be declassified.

On February 2nd Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the DOJ for the underlying documents regarding the FISA warrant application submitted to the FISC related to ‘Trump-Russia’.

It’s time to stop the bickering and dueling memos, declassify the FISA warrant applications and let the chips fall where they may.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Skipping school until gun control passes. What a concept!

You may have heard that some students and teachers are planning a walkout from school on March 24th (the anniversary of Columbine) which will last for seventeen minutes in honor of the seventeen students killed in Florida recently. And then there’s the case of some of the more hardcore activist students who claim they will not be returning to school at all until gun control legislation is passed. Can you spot the difference between these two plans?

Whether you agree with their goal or their motives or not, the first group is engaging in a well-organized protest, frequently involving the school administration and teaching staff, designed to make their voices heard. It’s of a reasonable length, doesn’t involve any destruction and won’t cause too much of a disruption to the school day. It will also, no doubt, attract tons of media attention.

The second plan is entirely different. Simply walking out on what is effectively “your job” at that age for what could easily turn into months or years (given the way Congress works) is just shooting yourself in the foot. In today’s edition of the Morning Jolt, Jim Geraghty of the National Review takes a less than kind look at this sort of self-defeating boycott and finds it lacking.

I wish I’d thought of that for every time I cut classes. “I’m not being lazy; I’m just making a bold and principled stand by refusing to do that thing I’m supposed to do.” Maybe I can refuse to clean out the gutters until we’ve wiped out the Taliban.

We can always find a good reason to be outraged about some injustice in the world, and we can always point to that injustice as to why we can no longer go about our daily routine. Never mind that attending school and getting an education is the process that’s supposed to equip us with the tools we need to bring about the changes that we want to see in the world.

We won’t go to class until Congress passes gun control; after that, we won’t go to class until they’ve solved homelessness. There’s always a good cause to stand for or something to protest. Under this philosophy, we will never have to actually show up and, you know, do what everybody else expects us to do.

When I was in middle school (I forget now whether it was seventh or eighth grade), a very popular teacher was fired. I’m not sure if we even knew why. But that very same day the word went round at lunchtime that some of our student council leaders were organizing something drastic. There would be a walkout following the next period’s classes after lunch. Demands would be made. Someone would go to the pay phone (we still had them in the 70s) and call the local newspaper. Our voices would be heard.

Right on schedule, everyone left their next class when the bell rang and rather than proceeding to the next scheduled lesson, almost all of the students walked out of the school, crossed the street to the basketball court and recreation area and sat down. For a little while nothing happened. No reporters ever showed up. Then the principal came out with a bullhorn and explained that they had heard our message, but the decision was made and everyone was to return to class.

Nobody budged.

One of the female teachers with some seniority (and apparently a history of being a hippie) came out and praised the students for their activism, but told us that we would still need to return to class and we could discuss the firing.

Nobody moved.

That’s when our social studies teacher came out. He was a great bear of a man who was also the coach for most of the boys sports teams. Without any praise or promises, he announced that if his sixth-period class wasn’t full in the next five minutes we are all off of the sports teams (for the year), the seasons would be canceled and, just for good measure, he was going to start “kicking some asses.”

Nearly all of us boys got up and went inside. The man wasn’t kidding and many of us had been on the receiving end of such ass-kickings in the past. (You could do that back then. And if it happened to me, when I got home my dad would give me more of the same and not criticize the teacher at all.) With the boys gone, the girls got up and went inside also. The fired teacher never came back. But we all managed to move on without a black mark on our scholastic records and the lion’s share of us graduated.

Is there a lesson there for you? I’m not sure. But I just know things worked differently back when I was growing up and we seemed to turn out okay, with the exception of a few ne’er do wells who went on to waste their lives in pursuit of careers as political pundits.

The post Skipping school until gun control passes. What a concept! appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://hotair.com

New poll reveals the American public isn’t too impressed with companies that split with the NRA

Several companies decided last week to publicly cut business ties with the NRA in the wake of the Parkland, Florida, high school shooting — but now many of them are paying a price in public opinion.

Anti-gun advocates launched a #BoycottNRA movement on social media and vowed boycotts of companies that had business relationships with the NRA. Several of the companies targeted chose to sever ties with the gun group in the face of economic threats.

According to a new Politico/Morning Consult poll conducted over the weekend, most companies that ended their relationships with the NRA saw their net favorability numbers fall when consumers heard the news.

First, how was the NRA viewed?

The survey data revealed that Americans’ net favorability of the NRA is +8: 44 percent of Americans view the NRA very or somewhat favorably, while 36 percent view the NRA very or somewhat unfavorably.

Also, Americans are slightly more likely to have a better opinion of a business that has a relationship with the NRA. When asked if they would be more or less favorable toward a company that is affiliated with the NRA, 36 percent said they’d be more favorable, while 34 percent said they’d be less favorable. Similarly, they said they are slightly more likely (33 percent to 32 percent) to do business with a company that is affiliated with the NRA.

In what was likely a bit of a disappointment to members of the #BoycottNRA movement, a majority of Americans (51 percent) are not on board with boycotting a company for being affiliated with the NRA. However, a sizable chunk (28 percent) of those polled did say they would consider such a boycott.

And while 35 percent said companies affiliated with the NRA should cut ties with the group if customers demand it, 39 percent said companies should not cut ties.

A plurality (42 percent) said the NRA supports policies that are “mostly good” for the U.S., while 30 percent said the policies are “mostly bad.”

So, how did companies that split with the NRA fare?

Every company polled save two had lower net favorability after respondents learned that the company had severed ties with the NRA.

Here’s how Americans viewed each business before and after they learned the company ended its business relationship with the gun group:

ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
● Before: +49 (Total favorable: 61; total unfavorable: 12)
● After: +25 (Total favorable: 50; Total unfavorable: 25)
● Change in net favorability: -24

NORTON ANTIVIRUS:
● Before: +38 (Total favorable: 54; total unfavorable: 16)
● After: +20 (Total favorable: 47; total unfavorable: 27)
● Change in net favorability: -18

LIFELOCK:
● Before: +35 (Total favorable: 47; total unfavorable: 12)
● After: +21 (Total favorable: 45; total unfavorable: 24)
● Change in net favorability: -14

METLIFE:
● Before: +33 (Total favorable: 45; total unfavorable: 12)
● After: +21 (Total favorable: 45; total unfavorable: 24)
● Change in net favorability: -12

ALAMO RENT A CAR:
● Before: +30 (Total favorable: 40; total unfavorable: 10)
● After: +19 (Total favorable: 43; total unfavorable: 24)
● Change in net favorability: -11

NATIONAL CAR RENTAL:
● Before: +29 (Total favorable: 40; total unfavorable: 11)
● After: +17 (Total favorable: 42; total unfavorable: 25)
● Change in net favorability: -12

SIMPLISAFE:
● Before: +15 (Total favorable: 21; total unfavorable: 6)
● After: +13 (Total favorable: 35; total unfavorable: 22)
● Change in net favorability: -2

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OMAHA:
● Before: +12 (Total favorable: 21; total unfavorable: 9)
● After: +14 (Total favorable: 37; total unfavorable: 23)
● Change in net favorability: +2

CHUBB:
● Before: +7 (Total favorable: 15; total unfavorable: 8)
● After: +10 (Total favorable: 31; total unfavorable: 21)
● Change in net favorability: +3

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.theblaze.com

ICE director: California mayor’s warning helped 800 illegal immigrants avoid deportation

At least 800 illegal immigrants avoided deportation thanks to the California mayor who warned her community about a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation that was scheduled to happen “within 24 hours” of her alert on social media.

Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf tweeted the alert on Saturday and assured illegal immigrants that police are “prohibited” from cooperating with federal immigration officials. California became a sanctuary state in 2018.

Acting ICE director Thomas Homan criticized Schaaf for her actions during an interview on Fox News Wednesday morning.

“What she did is no better than a gang lookout yelling ‘police’ when a police cruiser comes to the neighborhood except she did it to the entire community… This is beyond the pale,” Homan told Fox News.

The mayor’s actions are now under review by the Department of Justice, according to Homan.

“I’ve been doing this 34 years and this is a whole new low to intentionally warn criminals that law enforcement is coming,” he said during the interview. “I just can’t believe it happened.”

Homan said Schaaf put ICE agents in harm’s way.

“I think what she did was intentionally put law enforcement officers at risk. Look, being a law enforcement officer is dangerous enough. But to give criminals a head’s up we’re coming next 24 hours, increases that risk.”

At least 800 illegal immigrants who’ve been convicted of crimes and are a threat to public safety.

Holman mentioned Schaaf’s comment during a Sunday news conference, when she said, ” … my priority is safety, and that is safety for everyone.”

He said her warning did the opposite because 800 illegal aliens, who are convicted criminals, are still loose on the streets.

“That community is a lot less safe than it would have been,” he said.

Watch the latest video at <a href=”//video.foxnews.com”>video.foxnews.com</a><br><br>
<br data-mce-bogus=”1″>

What else?

Schaaf has not made any apologies for issuing the warning.

“I think it’s my responsibility as a person in power and privilege to share the information I have access to, to make sure people know what their rights are,” Schaaf told the Washington Post Tuesday.

She also posted another message on social media confirming her position.

“I do not regret sharing this information. It is Oakland’s legal right to be a sanctuary city and we have not broken any laws. We believe our community is safer when families stay together,” Schaaf tweeted Tuesday.

 

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.theblaze.com

Dirty Cop Mueller’s Latest Leak Shows His Desperation as Witch Hunt Turns Into National Joke

Dirty Cop Mueller’s Latest Leak Shows His Desperation as Witch Hunt Turns Into National Joke

In July 2016, Republican candidate Donald Trump joked at a campaign event that Russia should release Hillary Clinton’s stolen emails.

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.”

It was a joke.
The crowd loved it.

Trump was kidding.

Today Dirty Cop Robert Mueller leaked a report to their comrades in the liberal media that they are basing their witch hunt on this joke by Trump.

This is all they got.

The Mueller Witch Hunt officially turned the corner this week.
These crooked clowns are a joke.

Trump was right.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Trump Rejects Idea of Adding Concealed-Carry Reciprocity to Background Check Bill: ‘You’ll Never Get It Passed’

President Donald Trump on Wednesday rejected the idea of adding concealed-carry reciprocity to a bill that would bolster the country’s background check system for gun purchases.

Some lawmakers have proposed a concealed-carry reciprocity measure that would allow individuals with a valid concealed-carry permit issued by any state and a valid government-issued photo ID to be able to carry a concealed gun in any state, as long as they abide by that state’s gun laws.

Trump said during a bipartisan meeting with lawmakers at the White House that, while the measure may pass one day as its own bill, adding it to any bipartisan background check legislation would doom it to fail

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R., La.) first brought up the idea of putting a national reciprocity measure into a background check bill.

"If you look at the concealed carry population by and large, these are people helping us to stop crimes, go out there and help prevent crimes," Scalise said.

Scalise added that he hopes the idea is not immediately dismissed, but the president was not persuaded.

"You know I’m your biggest fan in the whole world," Trump told Scalise.

"I think that maybe that bill will someday pass, but it should pass as a separate [bill]," Trump said. "If you’re going to put concealed carry between states into this bill, we’re talking about a whole new ball game."

Trump said that he would support the bill as long as it is separate. But combining it with a background check bill, he argued, would prevent Congress from passing any legislation.

Florida Republican Rep. John Rutherford also pushed national reciprocity at the meeting.

Rutherford told Trump that, while background checks and laws about who can buy a gun are important, when the system breaks down, someone can go into a gun-free zone and kill defenseless people.

Trump appeared receptive to this point. Rutherford then explained that he concealed carries because he does not know where all the gun-free zones are.

After a brief cross-talk on gun free zones, Rutherford suggested looking back at national reciprocity. Trump maintained that would not be on the table for now.

"You’re not going to get concealed carry approved. Amy [Klobuchar], Dianne [Feinstein], and a lot of other people, they’re never going to consider it," Trump said.

"People may consider it, but they’re not going to consider it in this bill," he said.

The post Trump Rejects Idea of Adding Concealed-Carry Reciprocity to Background Check Bill: ‘You’ll Never Get It Passed’ appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://freebeacon.com

CNN Embarrassed While Trying to Give Viewers ‘Up-Close Look at AR-15′

With all the tumult over gun control after the shooting on Valentine’s Day at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida that killed 14 people, it comes as no surprise that hysteria levels at CNN would not only go through the roof, but they would try to promote the liberal view that guns are always deadly and often fatal.

However, CNN was so intent on slamming the AR-15 as a “full semi-automatic” rifle that a segment on Monday night’s Anderson Cooper 360 contained inaccuracies from both CNN correspondent Gary Tuchman and retired military officer/CNN military analyst Mark Hertling.

According to an article from The Daily Wire’s Ryan Saavedra, the men went to a shooting range for a demonstration of the weapon’s firing capacity.

After referring to the segment as “an embarrassing clip,” Saavedra stated:

Tuchman falsely asserted that a defining characteristic of the AR-15 is the “power of the bullet” that it fires.

This is a common lie spread by the media as the try to scare people into calling for AR-15s to be banned.

“Although that is akin to presenting a fully complete, partially finished home or totally full half-glass of water, they made their claims with straight faces,” Saavedra continued.

The staff writer then quoted Joseph Avery, who has more than 30 years of experience with the federal government in Army combat arms as an Air Force officer and in the Department of Defense:

A lot of people will buy this just because it’s cool, and they want to appear like soldiers. If you’re a gun collector or a gun aficionado and you want an AR-15, you can certainly buy one, and you should be able to buy one. The problem is when it gets in the hands of the wrong people.

In my personal opinion, you have to receive a whole lot of training to use this weapon. And this weapon in the wrong hands can be more dangerous than most weapons because of its capability to do a lot of damage in a short period of time and be irreversible.

“The M16 has had two problems in the past,” Avery continued, such as “a cartridge with a projectile that is far too small … and underpowered, and a weapon platform that is unreliable and prone to jamming because of basic design flaws.”

Back to the CNN segment, Hertling made this absurd clam to Tuchman: “Now those are single shots. If I wanted to fire this on full semi-automatic, all I do is keep firing.”

For those who actually know what they’re talking about concerning guns, one would know that there’s no such thing as a gun that’s “full semi-automatic.” Only later did Hertling acknowledge as much in some tweets.

Tuchman commented that these weapons can more easily be rented since no electronic checks are necessary then. “All you have to do is prove that you’re an American citizen with ID.”

Saavedra also stated that “CNN’s segment was thoroughly mocked on social media as the network once again proved why many Americans do not take the media’s ‘expertise’ on firearms seriously.”

Some of the first comments were made by NRATV’s Colion Noir, who responded: “All guns are loud;” Avery should stop “making up words” like “full semi-automatic;” A “gun doesn’t kick that hard;” and people should “throw the whole CNN away.”

Securites Studies Group president Jim Hanson later referred to the CNN segment as “journalistic malpractice and an object lesson in beta male submission.”

Cooper had begun the segment by stating:

We had a spirited discussion last week on this program about AR-15-style guns, weapons originally designed for use on the battlefield but used to take 17 lives in Parkland, Florida.

We’re talking about them because these shootings … have become so frequent and part of the lexicon about mass shootings that there’s not really an understanding of what they really do or how powerful a weapon it is. So we wanted to take a closer look.

According to the NRA, he stated, “more than 15 million AR-15s are owned by Americans today.”

“Fans like the guns because they’re lightweight, easy to handle,” Cooper added. “They also see them as a symbol of their Second Amendment rights. Its opponents question whether weapons so lethal should even be sold.”

Hopefully, the next time the people at CNN produce a report on guns, they’ll make sure they have accurate information first. With any luck, they won’t have to be embarrassed again.

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.newsbusters.org/

WATCH: Trump Joins With Democrats, Supports Assault Weapons Ban

On Wednesday, President Donald Trump joined with the Democrats and Sen. Dianne Feinstein in a meeting on gun control as he appeared to signal support for an assault weapons ban in what many see as a betrayal of his base of supporters.

During a live broadcast in the White House Cabinet Room, Trump appeared to signal support for Feinstein’s radical gun control measures which include banning assault-style weapons.

“Dianne, if you could add what you have also — and I think you can — into the bill,” Trump said.

“Joe, can you do that?” Trump asked. “Can you add some of the things. I’ll help. Can you add what Amy and what Dianne have?”

“I’m going to say this,” Trump continued. “We’re going to get it passed.”

WATCH:

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml

China Censors the Letter ‘N’ to Suppress Criticism of Xi Jinping

China Censors the Letter ‘N’ to Suppress Criticism of Xi Jinping



As if Communist China’s frenzy to suppress criticism of Xi Jinping’s bid for a lifetime in office was not weird enough already, users of the Twitter-like Weibo social media platform report that the letter “N” was briefly classified as an “illegal” search term.

As Business Insider explains, plenty of other terms were banned for more obvious reasons, including anything that might suggest a user wanted to see mockery of Xi, support for term limits, or a desire to emigrate from China. From Sunday through Tuesday morning, searching for the letter “N” also returned a “Content Is Illegal!” response from Weibo.

Several theories were floated for why “N” was suddenly treated as an unacceptable symbol of dissent:

The letter is used in China to represent unknown numerical values, like the letter X in algebra.

Professor Victor Mair, a China expert at the University of Pennsylvania, said in a Monday blog post it was “probably out of fear on the part of the government that ‘N’ = ‘n terms in office,’ where possibly n > 2.”

CA Yeung, a Perth-based China blogger, also posited that “N = infinity.”

It could also represent “no” in Y/N select items. As Twitter user Kasumi Shen said: “You can’t choose N in a (Y/N) select item as long as you are still living in China.”

Business Insider quotes China’s state-run Global Times mocking Western “hysteria” over China’s authoritarian speech codes, although the Global Times is rather coy about their reason for needling Western media. The gist of the editorial is that Westerners do not understand China’s need for stability and social harmony as it carries out a world-historic program of modernization:

Leading billions of people toward a moderately prosperous society within a short time and then toward a high-income society is almost equivalent to recreating another Western world. Such tremendous change will bring about shocks, controversies and challenges.

Solidarity is a necessary precondition for China to successfully complete the second half of its modernization. It is the cornerstone of China in the new era. The CPC [Communist Party of China] has made us Chinese all closely connected to each other. Over the years, the authority of the CPC Central Committee and the prosperity of our Chinese society have both risen. The authority of the Central Committee is the most outstanding part of China’s competitiveness. It is the source of the country’s efficiency and ability to mobilize people and make adjustments. It is the thing the outside world most envies about China and the target of Western anti-China rhetoric.

Chinese society must strengthen its resolve. We must be aware that the world is full of competition. Solidarity is for Chinese the nation’s most crucial political resource and firm support for the CPC Central Committee is the lifeline of China’s long-term unity.

And of course, silencing everyone who disagrees is an efficient method of manufacturing “solidarity,” provided the resources are available to swiftly enforce standards as particular as blocking searches for a single problematic letter.

If China really wanted to zing Western media for hypocrisy, they would point out that at roughly the same time Beijing was shooting down searches for emigration, autocracy, the letter “N,” and Winnie the Pooh, users of Google Shopping suddenly found themselves unable to search for anything containing the word “gun,” including Guns & Roses albums, water pistols, and burgundy. They could also point to the mysterious or frankly biased standards for banning users from some social media outfits, and say Beijing is simply more serious about pursuing the widely embraced goal of controlling speech in the name of social harmony.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com