Connect with us

News

GET READY: New Congress Will Look Into ‘Reparations’ for ‘Descendants of Slaves’

Here we go…

John Salvatore

Published

on

The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives has already made clear they intend to go after guns.

They’re also likely to legalize a lot of “undocumented” immigrants.

What could make things worse?

Trending: Watch: Biden Thinks D-Day Occurred On December 7th, Confuses With Pearl Harbor

How about paying “reparations” to “descendants of slaves” to “repair” some of the racial “damage” in America?

take our poll - story continues below

Trump or Biden, who will win?

  • Why wait until November 3? Show all of America who you're voting for in 2020  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Because throwing money at a problem has always worked in the past, huh?

As Democrats are poised to take over the majority in the House of Representatives, one item on the agenda will be to “study” the need for reparations for descendants of slaves.

Texas Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee plans to reintroduce a bill that would create a committee to look at financial compensation for blacks.

Jackson Lee: “It’s a commission to study the issue of what was the economic impact of the work of slaves and how does it translate in the 21st Century. And what we want to do is to build a narrative, a story of the facts and out of that be able to access how we repair some of the damage.

When you look at urban blight, when you look at schools in inner cities and rural communities that are not at the level of excellence that they should be, when you look at support for [historically black colleges and universities], all of that will be part of understanding that whole journey and that whole economic journey.

And it is interesting that these magnificent buildings were built by slaves, obviously with no compensation. That is not what we are asking for; this bill is to have a commission to hear from people all over the nation.

LISTEN:

You might remember Jackson Lee as the Congresswoman who was bumped to first class because she didn’t want to sit in coach, then blamed the ordeal on racism.

From Fox News:

A United passenger whose first-class seat on a recent flight from Houston to D.C. was given to Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee is firing back at the Democratic congresswoman’s accusations of racism – while challenging the airline’s account of the incident.

Jean-Marie Simon, an attorney and private school teacher, became the latest face of airline passenger woes when she detailed on Facebook and later to the news media how she lost her seat to the Texas lawmaker.

But despite a statement from United seeking to explain the switch-out, she’s not giving up the fight. And the congresswoman’s response – essentially claiming Simon made a scene because Jackson Lee, as an African-American woman, is an “easy target” – did not calm the waters.

Simon’s words from a Facebook post:

I am not given to publishing epistles on Facebook, and especially at Christmas, but now I have my very own United Airlines story to share:

Not feeling sufficiently cowed by the media debacle following its forcible and well-documented removal of a ticketed passenger from a Kentucky bound flight in April, the friendly skies of United continues to treat passengers badly, and to lie. This time, it involved United flight #788 from Houston to Reagan National on December 18, 2017. And a U.S. Congressperson whom I’ll call “X.” And me.

On December 3, 2017, I bought a round trip, first class ticket to Guatemala. I selected four first class seats at time of purchase. United provided an email confirmation. Everything was fine until I returned to Houston yesterday.

The last segment was flight #788 from IAH in Houston to Reagan National in DC. Because the flight was delayed taking off, I was at Gate E4 an hour early. About half an hour before departure, a uniformed United flight attendant pulled “X” out of priority line 1, saying, “Let’s get on.” The United attendant and “X” boarded the plane before the pre-boarding of uniformed military, toddlers, disabilities and elite Global Services passengers, and even a group of fellow Texas congressmen. Line 1 boarded, but when they scanned my ticket, my seat and my reservation had been removed from the system. The gate agent could not find my seat; she could not even find my ticket or my name. The gate agent called over a second United agent, who confirmed that I had no seat, not just the first class seat I had purchased, but no seat, period.

The male agent assumed that I was late coming in from another flight or another airline. The first agent told him no, that I had been on United, that my first segment had arrived three hours earlier, and that I had been at the gate. Then he told me that perhaps I had cancelled my own reservation. I said that was impossible: I had a boarding ticket in hand and I just wanted to get home. Then he told me that “united.com has changed your reservation” and there was nothing United could do about it. I said I wanted my seat, that I had paid a lot of miles for that seat, and that it was United’s responsibility to undo the seat. He said no, because I had “unreserved” my seat and “X” had taken it, that “X” had been “upgraded.” He said I could “stand here and argue” and miss the flight or book another flight elsewhere. I said I wanted my seat, 1A that I had paid for and one that “X” in 1A was now freeloading, literally at my expense. He said that couldn’t happen because they couldn’t “disrupt” what was already done. He offered me a $300 voucher. I said I wanted $500 and a free meal. He said, “And I want a Mercedes Benz, but that’s not going to happen.” Then he invited me to complete a United online survey when the flight was over.

I was the last passenger on the plane. A Texas congressman, a nice guy, sat down next to me. He said was glad I had made it on the flight. I showed him my boarding pass with my seat, 1A, printed on it. He said, “You know what happened, right? Do you know who’s in your seat?” I said no. He told me that “X” was a fellow Texas congressperson who regularly does this, that this was the third time he had seen “X” bump a passenger. Then he asked me if I knew whom “X” represents in Congress: Bush International Airport in Houston. He apologized for “X,” saying, “’X’ gives us all a bad name; it’s shameful.”

The hydraulic pump on the flight wasn’t working, so after 50 minutes stalled at the gate, passengers were invited to consult with a gate agent at the front of the plane about alternative flights. I went to the front of the plane, where “X” was in my seat. I took a picture. I told a flight attendant, the one who had pre-boarded “X,” that I knew why I had been bumped.

Five minutes later a flight attendant sat down next to me and asked if I was going to be a “problem” on the flight. I asked if she heard me shouting or complaining. She said no, but I had taken a photo. (Taking photos is not illegal: if I had been a happy constituent of “X” and had asked to take a photo with “X,” “X” would happily have complied.) The flight attendant said that security would remove me from the plane if I created problems. I said I just wanted to get home. She went away.

United lied to me, repeatedly. They put “X” on the plane and then tried to blame it on a late incoming flight, another airline, my cell phone, united.com, and on everybody but the United employee who deliberately erased my seat, my ticket, and my name from the system.

United has some wonderful employees, like the gate agents at Reagan National and some flight attendants who, if there’s a war, I want on my side. But unfortunately, what one most remembers is the humiliation and expense wrought by United, which apparently believes that we all should be lucky to be flying the friendly skies with an airline that treats the paying public like dirt.

Save conservative media!

News

Liberal Legal Scholar Slams Twitter Over Censoring Trump; Declares ‘Free Speech’ Ultimate ‘Loser’

Published

on

Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law scholar recently warned that Twitter’s choice to fact-check and hide certain tweets from President Trump threatens the concept of free speech in the Unites States. Turley, a liberal, published a blog Friday that said, “Twitter is now making the case for government action to monitor and control social media. The ultimate loser will be free speech.” Thursday night, President Trump reacted to some of the violence and looting happening in the city of Minneapolis over the death of George Floyd, calling those responsible for the chaos “thugs” and threatened to cut loose the military in the city to get control over the situation. In a now hidden tweet, Trump said, “When the looting starts, the shooting starts.” Twitter then hid the tweet, requiring users to click an arrow in order for it to be seen, stating that it broke the rules by “glorifying violence.” Here’s more from The Washington Examiner: “I am still leery of the government intervening on social media,” Turley wrote. “Free speech has few advocates in this fight. It is primary a struggle between Twitter, Trump, and the Democrats over who controls such speech.” Turley said he did not agree with the content of Trump’s tweets about the Minneapolis protesters but that they should not be censored. “Twitter had the chance to admit error and return to neutrality in the interest of free speech. It is clearly more concerned with expressing its views than preserving its forum,” he said. “Frankly, I would not care about such self-inflicted wounds except that free speech will likely suffer the collateral damage from Twitter’s glorifying speech controls.” Turley is right. Twitter has had plenty of opportunities over the last few years to change their strategies involving the engagement of content posted to their site. Instead, they…

Continue Reading

News

Twitter Tags White House Tweet With Warning Label Over Message It Says Broke Rules About ‘Glorifying Violence’

Published

on

Twitter continues to go at it with President Trump, even after he signed an executive order that labeled social media platforms as publishers, thus opening them up to lawsuits over silencing opinions. The White House poked Twitter and basically dared them to put a warning label on the president’s tweet concerning the violence in Minneapolis over the death of George Floyd for a second time. They did. One would think that Twitter would get the message, but they aren’t. Guess they’ll have to get sued a bunch and lose a lot of money before they finally understand that folks, especially the president, aren’t going to take the censorship anymore. Here are more details from The Washington Examiner: Twitter said the White House account “violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence” after it repeated a tweet from the president that called the protesters “THUGS” and implied they could be shot. This happened after Trump first posted the tweet on his personal account early Friday morning, and Twitter placed a warning label on it. https://twitter.com/JTHVerhovek/status/1266363516153364480 “These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen,” the tweet read. “Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!” Twitter didn’t remove the tweets posted by the White House and from Trump’s account, but they are hidden and require users to click an arrow in order for them to be seen. There is a message placed over the tweets that says: “This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible.” As you can see, liberals…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

 
Send this to a friend