Share

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY: MY BOARD PLOTTING TO FIRE ME OVER TRUMP

WND EXCLUSIVE
Opposition to conservative icon's endorsement of billionaire
Published: 2 days ago

author-image JEROME R. CORSI

Phyllis Schlafly

Phyllis Schlafly

NEW YORK – Conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly confirmed to WND that six board members of her group Eagle Forum have called a special meeting Monday that she believes is an attempt to remove her as CEO and board chairman because of her support for Donald Trump’s campaign for the White House.

“This may be my Dobson moment,” Schlafly told WND, referring to allegations that James Dobson was pushed out of the organization he founded, Focus on the Family.

“The six board members calling today’s telephone meeting won’t tell me what the meeting is about, but I think it’s an attempt to vote me out,” Schlafly said. “It’s disloyal and it’s terribly shocking, and I’m completely depressed about it.

“I may be one vote short to win today,” she conceded.

The meeting is scheduled for 2 p.m. Central Time.

Asked for reaction to the development, Trump gave a brief statement to WND through his campaign staff.

“Phyllis is one of the most respected conservative leaders in the country, who helped form the conservative movement, and I am incredibly grateful for her continued support,” Trump said.

Along with her support of Trump, her six opponents on the board have cited her opposition to the so-called “Con-Con Movement,” a push to get 34 states to vote for an Article V constitutional convention with the aim of adding a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The book that launched the conservative resurgence, Phyllis Schafly’s “A Choice Not an Echo,” is available now in a 50th anniversary commemorative edition at the WND Superstore!

“I think the Con-Con issue is really diversionary,” she said. “I’ve always been against Con-Con, from the very first the time the idea was raised. Everybody knows that.”

Schlafly said the board meeting was called by only three members, and Eagle Forum lawyers are arguing that three members are not enough, according to the by-laws, to call a meeting of the board.

“This is a complete takeover attempt,” she said.

“I think the leader of the coup is my daughter Anne Cori and her husband at Eagle Forum of Missouri,” Schlafly said. “I think she and her husband want to take over the organization.”

Her son John Schlafly, the treasurer of Eagle Forum and a board member, explained to WND that among the six board members calling the meeting are several “who feel Donald Trump is unacceptable as the GOP presidential candidate in 2016.”

Phyllis Schlafly endorsed Trump March 11.

Her son explained that she believed Trump had the best chance to win the 1,237 delegates needed to avoid an open convention, which she fears “could be a catastrophe.”

“Based on that situation, Phyllis thought it was time to get the best deal with Donald Trump for her endorsement, and she succeeded in getting Trump to agree to nominate conservative judges to the Supreme Court,” he said.

“She also got Trump to defend the GOP platform that Phyllis has worked so hard to develop for all these years,” he noted,

She was on the GOP platform committee again in 2012.

“Every year at the GOP convention there’s a platform fight from liberals within the party that want to pull out key conservative planks, and Phyllis won Trump’s support to maintain a conservative GOP platform this year,” John Schlafly said.

He explained to WND that Monday’s vote is regarding the 501(c)4, educationally oriented non-profit organization of Eagle Forum, not the 501(c)3 organization that allows it to support political issue campaigns.

“The two organizations have different boards,” John explained, “and those opposing Phyllis only have a majority in the 501(c)4.”

But the problem is that the 501(c)4 controls the name Eagle Forum, meaning the future of the organization will be uncertain if the 501(c)4 ousts Phyllis Schlafly as its chairperson and CEO.

Phyllis Schlafly began criticizing the Con-Con movement in 1984 as playing a game of Russian roulette with the U.S. Constitution. She argued that as desirable as a balanced budget amendment might be, there was no guarantee it could be achieved, and liberals could take over the constitutional convention with unintended consequences, including pursuing their own agenda to repeal the Second Amendment.

Endorsement ‘a disappointment’

In March, Cathie Adams, one of the dissident board members, gave an interview to the Dallas Morning News critical of Schlafly’s endorsement of Trump.

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/04/cathie-adams.jpg

Cathie Adams (Courtesy Texas Eagle Forum)

She had served as the president of Texas Eagle Forum for the past 23 years before stepping down this year to run for the vice chair of the Texas Republican Party.

Days after the endorsement, Adams told the paper regarding Trump, “We have no respect for that man.”

Adams appeared to argue Schlafly’s endorsement reflected her advanced age and what Adams argued was increasing detachment from the grassroots of the Eagle Forum organization.

Adams called Schlafly’s endorsement a disappointment, citing statements by Cruz that Trump is taking advantage of supporters, including 91-year-old Schlafly, by making promises he can’t keep.

“[Schlafly’s endorsement] is going to be widely dismissed,” Adams told the newspaper. “At 91, it is just totally unfair to impose upon someone who has such a beautiful legacy. … I think this was very much a manipulation. When you’re 91 and you’re not out with the grass roots all the time, it is very much taking advantage of someone.

“If we were going to be asking Ted Cruz about the platform, he would be able to give us a wonderful dissertation on each one of those plans,” Adams told the Dallas paper. “That is the caliber of the man. Where with Donald Trump he says he going to bully people, negotiate with people, he’s going to have good people around him. That’s it. And that is going to make America great? Really?”

Adams went on to argue Schlafly had little support within Eagle Forum for her endorsement of Trump.

“The eagles will speak at the polls,” Adams insisted in the interview. ”The majority of leaders across the country are Ted Cruz supporters. I am one of those. I still think he is the only person that can beat Hillary Clinton. … We love and respect her, but we disagree.”

After the interview, Schlafly withdrew her endorsement of Adams’ candidacy for vice chair of the Texas GOP.

“Cathie gave this very disparaging interview to the press,” Phyllis explained to WND. “It was a very offensive interview about me. She finally called to apologize, but she didn’t retract anything she told the Dallas Morning News.”

Schlafly maintained that Cathie was one of the “ringleaders” of the six dissident board members seeking her ouster.

Adams, in an interview with WND, denied her goal was to take over the organization or remove Schlafly from heading the organization she founded.

“The six board members calling the meeting are among the most loyal to Phyllis,” Adams insisted. “Together we have over 200 years combined service to Eagle Forum among the six of us.”

Adams said the six disgruntled board members were angry at the management style of Ed Martin, a social conservative from Missouri who has served as a member of the Republican National Committee.

In August 2015, Schlafly named Martin to take over her day-to-day duties as president of Eagle Forum, elevating her to the role of chairperson and CEO of the organization.

Adams objected that Martin had sent out an email to all Eagle Forum members noting the opposition of the six board members, listing their personal telephone numbers and email addresses.

“For 30 years, Phyllis Schlafly has been my mentor,” Adams repeated. “I have never given a speech critical of Phyllis Schlafly. I adore her. I gave an interview to the Dallas Morning News and the spin – and someone told Phyllis that I was criticizing her.

“Who’s being manipulative? “ Adams asked rhetorically. “I’m not confident in Donald Trump’s character. That’s no secret. But I think Ed Martin twisted my statement to the newspaper when he told Phyllis about it.”

Adams said there were “many options on the table” for the board meeting Monday.

“Ousting Phyllis is a possibility,” she said. “I don’t want to forecast what’s going to happen in a meeting that hasn’t been held, but among the issues on the table is Ed Martin’s character and his management style.

“The board meeting today was called to discuss the future of Eagle Forum,” she explained. “But it is unconscionable to think we’ve called the meeting to replace Phyllis. It was very different when Phyllis was doing everything, including finances, and we all trusted her without question. But now there’s other people involved and it’s only wisdom on the part of the board to hold a meeting and check.”

WND asked if the purpose of the six in calling the board meeting was to fire Martin.

“Nobody knows at this point exactly how this board meeting is going to decide,” Adams said. “This is not something anybody has an answer to. We don’t know how the board will decide until the meeting is held.”

Still, Adams insisted it was “weird thinking” to imagine the board meeting today would call for Phyllis to be ousted from the management of Eagle Forum.

Ed Martin: Board members tried to force my absence

Martin told WND, “We don’t really know what the meeting is about because the six board members calling the meeting have not given us an agenda.

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/04/ed-martin-eagle-forum.jpg

Ed Martin, president, Eagle Forum (Courtesy Eagle Forum)

Ed Martin, president, Eagle Forum (Courtesy Eagle Forum)

“Phyllis told me that at one time the six board members were talking about bringing in outsiders to monitor how we do things,” he continued. “Another time it was about Phyllis’ personnel decisions. I guess that could be about me. I just don’t know.”

Martin explained to WND that under the by-laws of the Eagle Forum 501(c)4 organization, he as president is supposed to preside over all board meetings.

“These six board members have hired outside lawyers, and they are now saying that I am not allowed to attend the meeting, which is a violation of the by-laws as well as my rights as president,” he said. “Over and over, Phyllis has pointed out to these six board members that the board endorsed me being hired and I need to preside the board meeting.”

Martin said the six board members wrote him an email saying he was not welcome on the call.

“I told them I was president and they could not force my absence, yet they have insisted I cannot attend today’s board meeting,” he said.

“It’s a very strange situation, but I can say that Phyllis’ assessment that it is a hostile meeting is accurate,” Martin said. “The email that went out Saturday to the Eagle Forum members was designed to communicate that these six board members were taking steps hostile to her management of the organization. We asked for the members to communicate directly to these six.

“Phyllis read my email and she approved it going out,” he said. “Phyllis told me, ‘We have to defend ourselves, so let’s go.’ And I sent out the email with her approval. Phyllis is not going to sit back and let people take away what she’s built.

“When people don’t return your phone calls or give you a straight answer about what they’re doing, Phyllis knows enough to recognize that’s pretty hostile,” he emphasized.

WND asked if Phyllis’ endorsement of Trump was the root cause of the upset.

“We don’t know what the motivation of these six board members are because they haven’t said,” he answered.

Martin cited an instance win which an Eagle Forum member who was also working for Cruz took a membership list and gave it to the Cruz campaign for marketing.

“The Cruz campaign backed off using the list,” he said. “But we have had a few incidents and the Eagle Forum members who have endorsed Cruz are not happy with Phyllis’ endorsement of Trump.”

Martin confirmed that Phyllis had rescinded her endorsement of Cathie Adams to be vice chair of the Texas GOP after Adams’ interview with the Dallas Morning News.

Click here for reuse options!

Copyright 2016 WND

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/04/phyllis-schlafly-my-board-plotting-to-fire-me/#cW05gSE3lzm7Hw8w.99

CRUZ MUGS 92 YEAR OLD WOMAN FOR SUPPORTING TRUMP Attacking this conservative icon could be devastating to Cruz campaign

The Bankers Manifesto of 1892

 

Revealed by U.S. Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. from Minnesota before the U.S. Congress sometime during his term of office between the years of 1907 and 1917 to warn the citizens.

*

"We (the bankers) must proceed with caution and guard every move made, for the lower order of people are already showing signs of restless commotion. Prudence will therefore show a policy of apparently yielding to the popular will until our plans are so far consummated that we can declare our designs without fear of any organized resistance.

The Farmers Alliance and Knights of Labor organizations in the United States should be carefully watched by our trusted men, and we must take immediate steps to control these organizations in our interest or disrupt them.

At the coming Omaha Convention to be held July 4th (1892), our men must attend and direct its movement, or else there will be set on foot such antagonism to our designs as may require force to overcome. This, at the present time, would be premature. We a re not yet ready for such a crisis. Capital must protect itself in every possible manner through combination (conspiracy) and legislation.

The courts must be called to our aid, debts must be collected, bonds and mortgages foreclosed as rapidly as possible.

When through the process of the law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of the government applied to a central power of imperial wealth under the control of the leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders.

History repeats itself in regular cycles. This truth is well known among our principal men who are engaged in forming an imperialism of the world. While they are doing this, the people must be kept in a state of political antagonism.

The question of tariff reform must be urged through the organization known as the Democratic Party, and the question of protection with the reciprocity must be forced to view through the Republican Party.

By thus dividing voters, we can get them to expand their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us, except as teachers to the common herd. Thus, by discrete action, we can secure all that has been so generously planned and successfully accomplished."

--

Friday, April 8, 2016

‘BLACK POWER’ PUBLIC EVENT EJECTS WHITE WOMAN AFTER SHE CHALLENGES “DONALD TRUMP IS RACIST” STATEMENT

Black Lives Matter' activists try to force cameraman to leave for bringing "negative energy"

Paul Joseph Watson - APRIL 8, 2016 529 Comments

A white woman was kicked out of a Black Panthers “self defense” training workshop at Portland Community College after she dared to challenge the statement, “Donald Trump is racist”.

The incident occurred during an event entitled ‘Black Love’ that was scheduled to coincide with the university’s ‘Whiteness History Month’.

A misspelled sign taped to the window of one of the classes for the event suggested that white people wouldn’t be welcome;

“Please respect that this workshop is for black and African identified folks exploring their Blackness in a healthy and community based manor (sic).”

A white woman was ejected from the event after she asked a speaker to clarify the claim that “Donald Trump is racist”.

“The first thing that went through my mind was, well wait a minute I’ve seen black people on stage speaking at Trump events, so I held up my hand and he called on me and I told him that I’ve seen black people speaking at Trump events,” said the woman.

“A woman began to question me with the intent of having me thrown out of the meeting and someone came in after, she must have texted someone, they came in later, asked me to step outside and said I was upsetting people in there and I was creating a bad vibe,” she added. “If white people did this, all three local news stations would be down here recording it”.

During the incident, social justice warriors involved in the event also tried to have the cameraman who shot the video above ejected from the building.

A man wearing a ‘Black Love – Black Power’ shirt tries to convince a campus police officer to force the cameraman to leave because he was bringing “negative energy”. The officer points out that he has a right to film at a public event in a public building.

Another leftist then repeatedly tells the cameraman, “you’re hurting people,” simply because he is filming proceedings.

Because social justice warriors and ‘Black Lives Matter’ extremists are incapable of having their incredibly weak arguments challenged, they are always forced to rely on mob intimidation and authoritarian coercion to silence dissent.

They’re also completely dishonest in labeling civil disagreement as “violence” in an attempt to demonize anyone who has the temerity to challenge their narrative.

Universities are supposed to be crucibles of open debate and people’s ideas being vigorously challenged, but under the new regressive leftist dogma of “safe spaces,” “trigger warnings” and “microaggressions,” alternative viewpoints will not be tolerated.

As we previously highlighted, a professor who gave a talk for the university’s ‘Whiteness History Month’ called for “whiteness” to be “abolished,” while another speaker asserted that talking about black crime statistics was a form of racism.

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

http://www.infowars.com/black-power-public-event-ejects-white-woman-after-she-challenges-donald-trump-is-racist-statement/

Thursday, April 7, 2016

MILLIONS WRONGLY TREATED FOR ‘CANCER,’ NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE PANEL CONFIRMS

Cancer classification guidelines putting countless in harms way

Sayer Ji | Infowars.com - APRIL 7, 2016 44 Comments

Millions Wrongly Treated for 'Cancer,' National Cancer Institute Panel Confirms

 

A devastating report commissioned by the National Cancer Institute reveals that our 40-year long ‘War on Cancer’ has been waged against a vastly misunderstood ‘enemy,’ that in many cases represented no threat to human health whatsoever.

See the exclusive cancer documentary premiere for Infowars readers the mainstream media refused to air. Click here to view it completely free.
alex-truth-about-cancer
If you have been following our advocacy work on cancer, particularly in connection with thedark side of breast cancer awareness month, you know that we have been calling for the complete reclassification of some types of ‘breast cancer’ as benign lesions, e.g. ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), as well as pointing out repeatedly that x-ray based breast screenings are not only highly carcinogenic but are also causing an epidemic of “overdiagnosis” and “overtreatment” in US women, with an estimated 1.3 million cases in the past 30 years alone.

A National Cancer Institute commissioned panel’s report published in JAMA online confirmed that we all – public and professionals alike – should stop calling low-risk lesions like DCIS and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) ‘cancer.’

There are wide-reaching implications to this recommendation, including:

  • Millions of women in this country have been diagnosed with DCIS, and millions of men with HGPIN, and subsequently [mis]treated. Are they now to be retroactively reclassified as ‘victims’ of iatrogenesis, with legal recourse to seek compensation?
  • Anyone engaged in a cancer screening will now need to reconsider and weigh both the risks and benefits of such a ‘preventive’ strategy, considering that the likelihood of being diagnosed with a false positive over 10 years is already over 50% for women undergoing annual breast screening.
  • The burgeoning pink ribbon-bedecked ‘breast cancer awareness’ industry will be forced to reformulate its message, as it is theoretically culpable for the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of millions of US women by propagating an entirely false concept of ‘cancer.’

As reported by Medscape:

The practice of oncology in the United States is in need of a host of reforms and initiatives to mitigate the problem of overdiagnosis and overtreatment of cancer, according to a working group sanctioned by the National Cancer Institute.

Perhaps most dramatically, the group says that a number of premalignant conditions, including ductal carcinoma in situ and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, should no longer be called “cancer.”

Instead, the conditions should be labeled something more appropriate, such as indolent lesions of epithelial origin (IDLE), the working group suggests. The Viewpoint report was published online July 29 in JAMA.

Fundamentally, overdiagnosis results from the fact that screen-detected ‘cancers’ are disproportionately slower growing ones, present with few to no symptoms, and would never progress to cause harm if left undiagnosed and untreated.

As you can see by the graph above, it is the fast-growing tumors which will be more difficult to ‘detect early,’ and will progress rapidly enough to cause symptoms and perhaps even death unless treated aggressively. But even in the case of finding the tumor early enough to contain it through surgery, chemotherapy and/or radiation, it is well-known that the minority subpopulation of cancer stem cells within these tumors will be enriched and therefore made more malignant through conventional treatment. For instance, radiotherapy radiation wavelengths were only recently found by UCLA Jonnsson Comprehensive Cancer Center researchers to transform breast cancer cells into highly malignant cancer stem-cell like cells, with 30 times higher malignancy post-treatment.

What this means is that not only are millions of screen-detected abnormalities not ‘cancer’ in the first place but even those which can be considered fast-growing are often being driven into greater malignancy by the conventional chemotherapy, radiation and surgery-based standard of cancer care itself.

Our entire world view of cancer needs to shift from an enemy that “attacks” us and that we must wage war against, to something our body does, presumably to survive an increasingly inhospitable, nutrient-deprived, carcinogen- and radiation-saturated environment, i.e. Cancer As An Ancient Survival Mechanism Unmasked.

When we look at cancer through the optic of fear and see it as an essentially chaos-driven infinitely expanding mass of cells, we are apt to make irrational choices. The physiological state of fear itself has been found to activate multidrug resistance proteins within cancer cells, explaining how our very perception of cancer can influence and/or determine its physiological status and/or trajectory within our body.

The NCI panel report opined:

“The word “cancer” often invokes the specter of an inexorably lethal process; however, cancers are heterogeneous and can follow multiple paths, not all of which progress to metastases and death, and include indolent disease that causes no harm during the patient’s lifetime.”

For more details on what our founder Sayer Ji calls the “Cancer Malignancy Meme,” see his video presentation at the Mind Body Week DC conference, wherein he discuss the ‘Rise of Biomedicine’ within the context of the mind-body connection, and breast cancer overdiagnosis in particular.

We must keep in mind that this proposed redefinition of cancer is no small academic matter, but will affect the lives of millions of women. Consider that every year, approximately 60,000 women in this country are diagnosed with DCIS, a diagnosis so traumatic that it results in significant psychiatric depression 3 years after even a ‘false positive’ diagnosis. For those less fortunate women, numbering in the millions over the past 30 years, who were told they had ‘cancer’ and needed to undergo lumpectomy, radiation, chemotherapy and/or mastectomy, the NCI panel’s recommendation is a hard pill swallow after the damage has already been irrevocably done.

So, what’s the solution? There is a growing movement towards the use of thermography as a primary diagnostic tool, as it uses no ionizing radiation, and can detect the underlying physiological processes that may indicate inflammation, angiogenesis, cancer-specific metabolic changes, etc., many years before a calcified lesion would appear within an x-ray mammogram. Also, the mainstay of any truly preventive strategy against cancer is diet, nutrition, exercise and avoiding chemical and radiation exposures – the things that we can do  in our daily lives to take back control of and responsibility for our health.

For related research read ‘Hidden Dangers’ of Mammograms Every Woman Should Know About

Meet the People The Media Won't Interview About Trump