Obamacare’s Unhappy Anniversary

Last month marked nine years since the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (popularly known as Obamacare) became law. Obamacare’s proponents promised that the law would reduce costs, expand access, and allow us to keep our doctors if we liked our doctors. The reality has been quite different.

Since Obamacare was enacted, individual health insurance premiums have more than doubled while small businesses have been discouraged from providing health insurance benefits. The increased costs of, and decreased access to, health care are a direct result of Obamacare’s mandates — particularly the guaranteed issue and pre-existing condition mandates. Another costly mandate forces most plans to cover “essential health benefits.” This mandate is why postmenopausal women must pay for contraceptive coverage.

The increase in health insurance premiums has not helped those who like their doctors keep their doctors. Instead, patients’ choices of providers are restricted to ever-narrower networks. As leading health care scholar John C. Goodman observed, the result is that a cancer patient from my hometown of Lake Jackson, Texas who obtains insurance through Obamacare’s exchanges cannot get treatment at nearby MD Anderson, one of the country’s top cancer treatment centers. If health care were a truly free market, insurance companies would compete for the business of cancer patients and others with chronic conditions by developing innovative ways to give them the best care at an affordable price.

Sadly, few in Congress support free-market health care. The Democrats are divided between progressives who want to repeal and replace Obamacare with “Medicare for all,” the latest euphemism for single-payer healthcare, and establishment Democrats who want to save Obamacare by spending more money on subsidies for individuals and insurance companies.

President Trump has made some regulatory changes that make it easier for individuals to find affordable insurance. He has also recently called on Republicans to renew efforts to repeal and replace Obamacare. Most Republicans reacted to the president’s call the way Dracula reacts to a crucifix. These Republicans are terrified of the issue because they believe their half-hearted attempts to enact phony repeal bills cost them control of the House of Representatives in 2018.

President Trump himself does not actually want to repeal all of Obamacare. He just wants to repeal the “unpopular” parts. However, because the popular parts include many of Obamacare’s most destructive mandates, even if President Trump gets his way, Americans will continue to suffer with low-quality, high-cost health care.

Any system combing subsidies that artificially increase demand with regulations and mandates that, by raising costs, artificially limit supply inevitably results in shortages, rationing, and lower quality. Therefore, no matter how much Democrats spend or how many “reforms” Republicans enact, Obamacare and other types of government-controlled health care will never “work.”

Instead of ignoring the issue, trying to prop up Obamacare, or implementing a single-payer plan, Congress should restore individuals’ control over health care dollars by expanding health care tax deductions and credits, as well as Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). Expanded charitable deductions could help ensure those who need assistance can obtain privately-funded charitable care instead of relying on inefficient government programs. Before Medicaid and Medicare, doctors routinely provided charitable care, while churches and private charities ran hospitals that served the poor. Individuals are more than capable of meeting their health care needs, and providing for the needs of the less fortunate if the government gets out of the way.

Article posted with permission from Ron Paul

A Disappearing Culture of Freedom

President Trump won the presidency by promising to do something about illegal immigration. Millions of loyal followers faithfully believed his empty promises to have Mexico pay for the wall that he assured would be built. The Republicans controlled both houses of Congress and the presidency for two years, and no action was taken on the border at all. It wasn’t until after the 2018 midterms, where Democrats took control of the House of Representatives that the fight for the wall began. Since that time, we have been treated to a soap opera of a government shutdown, emergency declarations and more meaningless rhetoric to close the border completely. This has all culminated into nothing more than President Trump backing away from all of this and giving Mexico one year to stop the flow of drugs and immigrantscoming across our border. By the way, he isn’t playing around this time.

The question remains as to whether Trump is just incompetent, unable to fight the seemingly undrainable swamp or if he is one of them. Why wasn’t the issue dealt with when the Republicans controlled both the House and Senate? The answer, while difficult to prove seems to be that the issue itself is just one of many being used to distract the population from an agenda that is steadily being advanced. The big news over the past few weeks has been the exoneration of Trump from the Russian collusion hoax. If there was any truth to any of this Trump would have the momentum and the motivation to drive on with his agenda. Instead, he is caving to the left, like always, while keeping the borders open another year under threat that he will eventually act. That is a far cry from having Mexico pay for a wall.

The truth is that the immigration issue won’t be solved. Even if Trump was honest in his attempts the issue of immigration is being used as a tool to reshape American demographics and merge the U.S. into a global governing system. The U.N. has published a document highlighting this plan claiming that population replacement through immigration is necessary to address the issue of aging populations and declining birth rates. In the United States, the fertility rate as of 2015 was 1.84 children per family, or 60 births per 1000 women of childbearing age. For the U.S. to maintain its culture, a minimum of 2.11 children per family is required. According to the Daily Mail, no U.S. state in 2017 had a birth rate among white women high enough to replace the population. Birth rates among minorities are way up, however. In fact, white babies are now the minority. This in and of itself isn’t a big deal if the United States culture was taught and appreciated. The problem comes when immigrants pouring into the country show no respect for our culture and make no effort to assimilate.

Why are Americans having fewer children? Many women feel the need to focus on career first, for sure. This isn’t a bad idea. Surely, we don’t want to have families if we can’t afford them. Could pushing the idea that having children is bad for the environment have something to do with it? What about the feminist movement that shuns the traditional family life and the role women played in it? How about transgenderism and the normalization of homosexuality? Are Americans being deliberately conditioned to have fewer children so the U.N. could replace our population? It would seem so.

The culture of individual liberty is what made America the greatest country on Earth. People traditionally have sought to come here to escape the depraved conditions of their home countries, where there is no opportunity, to build independent lives and live free. This is not a race issue; it is one of maintaining culture. The people flooding our borders now, while capable of assimilating and adapting to our culture if they choose, are being promised handouts in exchange for votes. The end goal is the elimination of individualism and the culture of freedom and replacing it with collectivism. Therefore, the Democrats insist on pandering to illegal immigrants. It is only a matter of time before they are the majority and there isn’t anything we can do about it.

Article posted with permission from David Risselada

Pope: God Wants Catholic/Muslim Fraternity

ANSA reported Wednesday that “Pope Francis said God wants inter-faith solidarity as he spoke about his trip to Morocco last weekend during his weekly general audience on Wednesday.” The Pope said: “With Muslims, we are descendants of the same Father, Abraham: why does God permit there to be so many religions?…But what God wants is fraternity between us and in a special way – here is the reason for this trip – with our brothers, sons of Abraham like us, the Muslims. We must not be afraid of difference: God allowed this. We must be afraid if we do not work in fraternity, to walk together in life.”

Yeah, sounds like a great idea.

God doubtless wants all of us to live in peace, but what exactly is preventing that? What kind of “fraternity” can Christians enjoy with Muslims in light of these teachings:

Muslims must fight against and subjugate Christians: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden what has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” — Qur’an 9:29

Those who believe in the divinity of Christ are unbelievers: “They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary.” — Qur’an 5:17 (cf. 5:72)

Jesus is not the Son of God and belief in the Trinity is “excess”: “O People of the Book! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter anything concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and his word which he conveyed to Mary, and a spirit from him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and do not say ‘Three.’ Cease! It is better for you! Allah is only One Allah. It is far removed from his transcendent majesty that he should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.” — Qur’an 4:171

And: “It is not befitting to Allah that he should beget a son. Glory be to him! When He determines a matter, he only says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is.” — Qur’an 19:35

Jesus was not crucified: “And because of their saying: We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah’s messenger – they did not kill him or crucify him, but it appeared so to them; and those who disagree concerning it are in doubt about it; they have no knowledge of it except pursuit of a conjecture; they did not kill him for certain.” — Qur’an 4:157

Christians have forgotten part of the divine revelations they received: “From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done.” — Qur’an 5:14

Those who believe that Jesus is God’s Son are accursed: “The Jews call Ezra a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! ” — Qur’an 9:30

Christians who do not accept Muhammad and the Qur’an are the most vile of created beings: “Nor did those who were given the Scripture become divided until after there had come to them clear evidence. And they were not commanded except to worship Allah, sincere to Him in religion, inclining to truth, and to establish prayer and to give zakah. And that is the correct religion. Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Book and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the most vile of created beings.” — Qur’an 98:6

Also, a hadith has Muhammad predicting that Jesus will return at the end of the world and break the cross, as it is an insult to Allah’s power to say that he would have allowed one of his prophets to be crucified:

Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, son of Mary [Jesus] will shortly descend amongst you people [Muslims] as a just ruler and will break the Cross and kill the pig and abolish the Jizya [a tax taken from the non-Muslims, who are in the protection, of the Muslim government]. Then, there will be abundance of money and nobody will accept charitable gifts. (Bukhari 3.34.425)

Muslims have sometimes taken this to mean not just that crosses will be destroyed in the end times, but that they should be now. In Spain in 2015, Muslims broke into a church, spray-painted “Allah” on a wall, and destroyed the crucifix. In Pakistan in 2014, Muslims destroyed a church that was under construction, and desecrated the cross. When the Islamic State occupied Mosul, it made the destruction of all crosses in the city a top priority.

Here, in conclusion, is my favorite New Testament verse, this time referring to Pope Francis: “Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Bernie Sanders: Murderers & Rapists Should Vote From Prison

The ACLU launched its bid to push for criminals voting from prison. In the radical 2020 primaries, some candidate is bound to sign on to a leftist proposal, no matter how insane.

And usually, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders or Beto O’Rourke will take the lead in that regard.

So no real shock that Bernie jumped on this one.

At a town hall meeting in Muscatine’s West Middle School gymnasium Saturday, the Vermont senator was asked whether the imprisoned should have the right to vote. Only his home state and Maine allow felons to vote from behind bars.

“I think that is absolutely the direction we should go,” he said

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren was asked about the issue during a recent forum on rural issues in Storm Lake. She said felons who have served their time deserve the franchise. But Warren stopped short of saying those in prison should be able to vote.

Uh-oh.

Bernie stole a radical march on Liz.

Now Bernie wants to see murderers, drug dealers, pedophiles and rapists voting because he thinks they’ll vote for him.

By the time these primaries are up, the winner will have endorsed gulags and killing all the kulaks.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

Give To The Salvation Army & San Antonio Will Ban You

The San Antonio Airport was rated as the sixth worst airport in the country. So, the city fathers got together and decided to fix the airport by banning businesses that donate to the Salvation Army.

Or at least one business.

“San Antonio is a city full of compassion, and we do not have room in our public facilities for a business with a legacy of anti-LGBTQ behavior,” San Antonio Councilman Roberto Trevino declared, after blocking Chick-fil-A from opening at the airport.

Does Chick-fil-A prohibit homosexual people from buying chicken? No, but they donate to the Salvation Army.

Local media and ThinkProgress claimed that the move was in response to a report by the leftist anti-religious site accusing Chick-fil-A of giving charitable donations to groups with “anti-LGBTQ records”.

What are those groups? The Fellowship of Christian Athletes and the Salvation Army.

Specifically, the Chick-fil-A Foundation donated $1,653,416 to the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and $150,000 to the Salvation Army. The FCA was denounced by ThinkProgress for its “sexual purity” policy. And what did the bell ringers of the Salvation Army trying to raise money for the poor do wrong?

According to TP, the Salvation Army is an anti-homosexual hate group because it “at the time of the donations had a written policy of merely complying with local ‘relevant employment laws’” which “since changed to indicate a national policy of non-discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

The standards for being an anti-homosexual hate group have really gotten low.

It’s 2019.

Two years ago, Chick-fil-A donated money to the Salvation Army, which had a policy of “complying with local ‘relevant employment laws’”, and must now be banned from the sixth-worst airport in America.

According to Councilman Roberto Trevino, San Antonio is a “city full of compassion” and therefore no company that donates money to the Salvation Army’s efforts to help the poor is allowed is the city.

Nothing says compassion like banning companies that give money to the Salvation Army.

In ancient times, there was a biblical city also starting with an ‘S’ whose city council so institutionalized cruelty to the poor that they terrorized any travelers who winged their way through their ‘airport’.

Today, it doesn’t have an airport. It does have a pillar of salt.

San Antonio’s crackdown is especially bizarre since the Salvation Army is a popular destination for corporate gifts. Major donors include American Airlines, Delta, FedEx and UPS all of whom, hopefully, operate in the sixth-worst airport in America. Does San Antonio Airport plan to ban Delta flights?

The Salvation Army has a major presence in San Antonio running shelters and helping seniors. It’s scheduled for an event with former First Lady Laura Bush in San Antonio in May. Just not at the airport.

But this story of politically correct cruelty to the poor and religious discrimination gets even worse.

“I want the first thing see is a San Antonio that is welcoming and that they not see … a symbol of hate,” Councilman Manny Pelaez ranted. “I don’t want a restaurant that isn’t available on Sunday either.”

The first thing that Christians will see in the sixth-worst airport in America is that they aren’t welcome.

Sunday was the official excuse that San Antonio Mayor Ron Nirenberg also gave for banning Chick-fil-A.

“There are many people in the community that are uncomfortable with Chick-fil-A,” Nirenberg rambled. “Have you ever tried to buy waffle fries on a Sunday? They’re closed!  Fifteen percent of sales generated in the airport come on a Sunday.”

Chick-fil-A is anti-homosexual and should be banned. Also, they don’t let me buy their waffle fries on Sunday.

The complaint that closing on Sundays will mean revenue losses is spurious. Chick-fil-A is the best-performing large fast food chain in the country. Its revenues across the country haven’t been hurt by closing on Sundays. There’s no reason to think that even in the sixth-worst airport in the country, its revenues will suffer by maintaining its religious values of setting “aside one day to rest and worship”.

Chick-fil-A opponents like Nirenberg and Pelaez seized on the ‘Sunday’ excuse because it sounded better than banning the eatery from the airport because it donated to the Salvation Army. But Chick-fil-A’s policy of closing on Sundays is a reflection of its founder’s Christian beliefs. San Antonio’s move is the equivalent of punishing an Orthodox Jew for closing on the Sabbath. And is completely illegal.

San Antonio’s council violated its own laws, the laws of Texas and the laws of the United States.

Councilman Roberto Trevino claimed that by engaging in religious discrimination, “the City Council reaffirmed the work our city has done to become a champion of equality and inclusion.”

Discrimination is the opposite of equality and inclusion. And now San Antonio is in trouble.

“The City of San Antonio’s decision to exclude a respected vendor based on the religious beliefs associated with that company and its owners is the opposite of tolerance,” Attorney General Paxton warned, opening an investigation into the city’s illegal discriminatory conduct.

The Trump administration’s Department of Transportation has also been encouraged to take a look.

San Antonio’s discriminatory conduct exemplifies the brand of anti-Christian discrimination warned about by David Horowitz in his new book, Dark AgendaThe War to Destroy Christian America.

“Today, the free exercise of religion has ceased to be a guaranteed right in America. Instead, it has become a battlefield,” David Horowitz wrote.

It’s only fitting that San Antonio, the home of the Alamo, should once again be the battlefield of the war for America’s freedoms. And before coming after freedom, Trevino and the bosses came for the Alamo.

The last time, Roberto Trevino and San Antonio’s leadership had disgraced itself this thoroughly was during the campaign to vandalize the Alamo site and move the Cenotaph. Back then, Trevino had claimed that the goal was breaking down the divisions caused by the Alamo story.

“We can tell stories without making any one group of people feel like they’re villains,” Trevino had whined. “This is a complex story. Even our heroes are flawed, and I think it’s a time to show that humanity is complex.”

First, they came for the Alamo and then for the First Amendment.

Around that same time, Councilman Trevino’s office was accused by his former council aide of abusing taxpayer resources by assigning campaign activities during working hours. Our heroes may be flawed. But we do have villains. And they, like Trevino, are more than just flawed. They are evil. And hate good.

Punishing a popular eatery for donating to the poor isn’t the behavior of flawed people, but of villains. The villainous religious discrimination championed by Trevino, Nirenberg and Pelaez is un-American.

Councilman Roberto Trevino can’t be satisfied with vandalizing the Alamo and instead decided to also trash the First Amendment. San Antonio has enacted discrimination in the name of fighting discrimination. Chick-fil-A was not discriminating against anyone in San Antonio. Its crime was donating to religious organizations whose views about morality and decency, Trevino didn’t like. Or perhaps he hated their policy of helping the poor, providing shelter to families in need and offering disaster relief.

It’s hard to know.

In San Antonio, as in another ancient city starting with an ‘S’, cruelty is called compassion, intolerance is justified as inclusion, and banishing religious people is depicted as the conduct of a welcoming city.

When everything is this upside down, it’s hard to know just how upside-down San Antonio is.

To paraphrase Sinclair Lewis, when intolerance comes to America, it will be wrapped in inclusion and diversity. And it will land at the sixth-worst airport in America where the flights are always late, the seats smell like stale beer, and the only thing dirtier than the toilets are the agendas of the council members.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

The End Times “Gloom and Doom” Filthy Hippies!

“Today’s Church wants to be raptured from responsibility.” -Leonard Ravenhill

Have you ever noticed that the age demographic of those who promulgate the “end time” message are, for the most part, a bunch of “free love” hippies from the 1960s and 70s who have lost hope in God, love for man (1 John 5:2) and love for their country?

Look at what their messages are and you will understand what I am explaining here. They are believers that just do not believe.

These hippies are continuously magnifying, through their lack of love (Matthew 24:12) though they talk much of it (Matthew 15:8), fear; a fear of the consequences of their dereliction of duty (1 John 2:4) in reaping the curse (Leviticus 26:14), a fear of man which paralyzes and, in the end, a snare (Proverbs 29:25).  In fact, it is a fear in which the Lord did not give (1 Timothy 1:7).

They continuously magnify lawlessness (Proverbs 28:4), magnify crimes against God and man, which merely exposes their hate and rebellion toward God and man presenting a message to the people that is a blatant failure to love God enough to actually obey Him (John 14:21).

Remember, it is the church’s obligation to deal with the wicked (Psalm 94:16) in keeping His commandments unto judgment in establishing peace (Deuteronomy 4:6; Isaiah 51:4) because they love.

These hippies have learned well from the world and the mainstream media in submitting to the wicked.  This is the world of which they have been commanded to come out (2 Corinthians 6:17).

These are also the same group of hippies that have convinced many in America to separate God’s law from His love, when love is the fulfilling of that law.

“Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.” Romans 13:10; Leviticus 19:17

These same hippies have also attempted to abrogate that which Jesus did not come to abrogate but to explain!

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” -Matthew 5:17-18

They want to create, out of thin air, terms like “legalism” and “legalistic,” As if to suggest that when you obey God’s government that is somehow legalistic.  This mentality is brought to you exclusively by the hippies (Antinomians with no regard for law) that are responsible for the anarchy which you see today in America.

On a Personal note, I obey because I see what Christ did for me on Calvary (John 3:16) in covering my sins through His blood (Revelation 1:5) in living for Him who died for me (2 Corinthians 5:15).

What did He magnify in His incarnate life? The Law (Exodus 20), which drove me to the foot of the cross to meet my Savior from my sins (Matthew 1:21; John 16:8; Acts 20:21).

Jesus magnified the law of God.  Just look to the Scriptures. 

The Lord is well pleased for his righteousness’ sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.” -Isaiah 42:21

“Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.” -Psalm 40:7-8

“For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:” -Hebrews 8:10

Jesus clearly came to establish the law through faith.   

“Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” -Romans 3:31

After all, the law is the schoolmaster to bring men unto Christ (Galatians 3:24).

“The Law detects, grace alone conquers.” -Augustine

Scripture also warns of those who speak not accordingly.

“To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” -Isaiah 8:20

“Scripture is also clear that “Faith worketh by love.” -Galatians 5:6

Let me ask you, is it then love to withhold the faith which brings about the works? No, it’s just the opposite.

 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does It profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.  Somehow or another these hippies seem to overlook the scriptures that clearly expose their hypocrisies (Matthew 16:6) and inactions (James 2:14-17, 26).

“For he established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children: That the generation to come might know them, even the children which should be born; who should arise and declare them to their children: That they might set their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments: And might not be as their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation; a generation that set not their heart aright, and whose spirit was not steadfast with God. The children of Ephraim, being armed, and carrying bows, turned back in the day of battle. They kept not the covenant of God, and refused to walk in his law;” -Psalm 78:5-10

However, the hippies of today gather in the thousands and have become nothing short of a bunch of fear-mongering cowards (1 Timothy 1:7; Revelation 21:8) that capitulate and continue to spread nothing but what’s in their reprobate hearts, and that message is “gloom and doom.” How contrary to that of Scripture and the examples set forth?

Then again:

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;  And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” -2 Timothy 4:3-4

They can only give what they have received, and what they have received is what they have to offer- and what is that? Hopelessness! It shows you what these hippies are feeding upon. It is the blind leading the blind, and it is why they are leading their followers, who should be following Jesus (John 14:6), into the ditch (Matthew 15:14).

These are the same unrepentant hippies (2 Corinthians 7:10) hippies that are fueling fear, which only oppresses the up and coming generations, in which they have, in so many ways, forsaken decades ago, twice as much the sons and daughters of hell (Matthew 23:15), just like themselves (Psalm 9:17).

These hippies do not preach Christ crucified (1 Corinthians 1:23-30).  They preach “Get ready fearful flock, Jesus is coming back soon, come buy your new bunker from me.”

Gloom and doom, gloom and doom is what they proclaim, failing to lift a finger in obedience to the Lord or to help of their own posterity. How contrary to Scripture!

These hippies then wonder why they are a reproach, why they are despised by the younger generations and others that see through their facade of heretical teachings  Let me tell you why that is.  They have been subjected to everything and protected from nothing and these people do nothing but offer an unsettling fear (1 John 3:18).

Friends, these hippies are dead in their sins (1 Corinthians 15:17), they preach a false grace that is pushed as an occasion for the flesh to succumb rather than an empowerment that overcomes (Romans 8:37; 1 John 4:4, 5:4).

Remember,

“But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” -Romans 5:20

They know not the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, Jesus Christ.  They know death not life, and they desire all that listen to their messages to embrace the same (Matthew 23:27).

“He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.” -1 John 5:12

Where do you see or hear these hippies living in union with Christ (Romans 8:17), boldly proclaiming in power “Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you”? (Luke 10:19)

When speaking of the revelation given unto the Church, Jesus said, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18).

Scripture tells us in 1 John 2:6,

“He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.”

Well then, what did Jesus do? He said, “Follow Me” (Matthew 4:19).

In following Christ, what is it that we see the Christ doing? Occupying! The Church is to emulate what Christ did and is doing today (1 John 4:17)!

Jesus said “Occupy till I come” (Luke 19:13).

It was Jesus that said, “Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest” (John 4:35).

It was Jesus that said “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age” (Matthew 28: 19-20).

I cannot find Jesus telling His followers to sit down and do nothing, that God is on His throne and He will do for them what they are unwilling to do for themselves, nowhere!

Furthermore, the Church is not to limit the Holy One of Israel (Psalm 78:41)!

But I do find promises to those who disobey the Lord.

 “And it shall come to pass, that as the Lord rejoiced over you to do you good, and to multiply you; so the Lord will rejoice over you to destroy you, and to bring you to nought; and ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it.” -Deuteronomy 28:63

And the reason why…

“I am the Lord your God, which brought you forth out of the land of Egypt, that ye should not be their bondmen; and I have broken the bands of your yoke, and made you go upright.But if ye will not hearken unto me, and will not do all these commandments; And if ye shall despise my statutes, or if your soul abhor my judgments, so that ye will not do all my commandments, but that ye break my covenant: I also will do this unto you;” -Leviticus 26:13-16

These are the same people, in their unregenerate state, who look for another opportunity to capitalize on those who are foolish enough to listen to their heretical and unscriptural theology of eschatology.

Of course, they cannot pass by the opportunity as to why they should write a book every year highlighting when Jesus may be coming back.  They want to tell what Jesus Himself said that He did not know (Matthew 24:36).

Yet, these are the same “do nothing” hippies who are trying to convince you that you are going to be raptured from responsibility.  You can’t find that in the Bible either.

The good news is that you can find NO WHERE in Scripture where the Lord EVER failed a faithful man or a faithful woman of God, NO WHERE (1 Kings 8:56).

Finally, can you imagine our forefathers back in the 1700s saying, “This is it. It is all over with. Jesus is coming back to get us out of here”?

No, our forefathers, along with the Black Robed Regiment, 13 colonies and with less than 3% of the population, responded to God’s commandments. They took heed unto the Lord and He bestowed upon them the victory throughout the War for Independence. Remember our national motto, “No King but King Jesus” with the flags flying, “Appeal to Heaven.”

They saw their responsibilities and answered the call.

America, when we call upon the God of our fathers even now, in Jesus’ name, He will answer. Yet, we must all meet Him on His terms (Jeremiah 29:11-13). Our forefathers did not lay down, they stood up and played the men that God created them to be. They fought the good fight of faith (1 Timothy 6:12) and secured their posterity’s future. They did not fall to circumstance, they sought the Lord, He heard, answered, and set the record straight that He is the same yesterday, today and forever (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8).

The Lord showed Himself strong on their behalf. With this, our forefathers pledged the high cost of their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, and paid with their blood to redeem us (in the natural-1 Corinthians 2:14) through their sacrifice (John 3:16; 1 Peter 3:18) and yet, we call them blessed.

The second President of the United States John Adams said, “Posterity, You will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve its freedom! I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the pains to preserve it.”

The way in which we express our gratitude to those who gave so much is to honor them with our actions in living for what they died to give us (2 Corinthians 3:17).

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah.  In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land. In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The Lord our righteousness.” -Jeremiah 33:14-16

Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

CNN Covers Up National Security Analyst’s Ties To Hamas-Funding Qatar Regime

It has been clear for quite some time that the establishment media is not providing news. It is a propaganda organ for the hard-Left and its jihadist allies. And now that is being definitively confirmed. CNN’s quiet deletion of Kayyem’s ties to jihad-funding Qatar demonstrates that it is aware that featuring such people undercuts its claim to be a news source.

No American (or anyone else) should trust CNN as a source of news.

It is a key part of the entire corrupt cabal that has worked hard to discredit and destroy opposition to jihad terror by mainstreaming and normalizing Islamic antisemitism, the spurious concept of “Islamophobia,” and the idea that it is “bigoted” and “hateful” to oppose jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women, homosexuals, and others.

“CNN Plays Cover-Up On Analyst’s Ties To Qatar Regime,” by Amber Athey, Daily Caller, April 3, 2019:

CNN quietly edited a national security analyst’s biography Wednesday after a report revealed she was a board member of a Qatari-funded organization.

The Conservative Review’s Jordan Schachtel reported Tuesday that several CNN contributors and guests have undisclosed ties to the Qatari government, which could influence their on-air coverage of Middle Eastern affairs. Juliette Kayemm [sic], a national security analyst who is on contract with CNN, was listed by the network as of Wednesday as a board member of the International Centre for Sport Security (ICSS).

ICSS president Mohammed Hanzab said in 2016 that the group is “70% funded by the Qatar government,” a regime that is accused of funding terror and violating basic human rights.

Despite the fact that CNN’s biography for Kayyem on its website called her a “board member of … the International Centre for Sport Security,” a CNN source reached out to The Daily Caller to dispute that characterization.

“She WAS on the board of International Center for Sports Security, an organization promoting best practices for the safety of sporting events, which included senior leaders from the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere. That contract ENDED several years ago,” the source claimed.

The Caller pointed out that Kayyem’s bio on the CNN website said she was a board member of the ICSS. Shortly thereafter, the source indicated that her bio had been updated.

However, rather than changing Kayyem’s affiliation with the group to past tense, CNN scrubbed any references to it entirely….

Kayyem’s affiliation with the group was also changed on her faculty page at Harvard University, where she serves as a lecturer in International Security….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

40 Facts That Prove America’s Moral Collapse Is Spinning Out Of Control

According to a brand new survey that was just conducted by the Pew Research Center, 77 percent of all Americans are either “very worried” or “fairly worried” about America’s moral health.

Of course, the truth is that we should all be deeply concerned because we can see evidence of the cancerous moral decay that is eating away at the foundations of our society all around us.

In life, each one of us gets to make choices, and some of those choices can lead to very bad outcomes.

We all have old friends that “got on the wrong path”, and their lives ended up becoming cautionary tales.

Well, the same principle applies to nations as a whole.

America has been given very clear choices between good and evil, life and death, blessings and curses over and over again, and we have consistently made the wrong choices.

If we stay on this road, there is only one result that will be possible.

As long as we are drawing breath, there is always an opportunity to turn things around.

That is true for individuals, and it is also true for our entire nation.

But if we continue running toward evil, it is only a matter of time before exceedingly painful consequences overtake us.

The following are 40 facts that prove that America’s moral collapse is spinning wildly out of control…

#1 America has killed more than 60 million children since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973.  The federal government endorses this activity by heavily funding the country’s leading abortion provider, and after that abortion provider harvests the organs of the dead children, the federal government also heavily funds the research that is conducted on those harvested organs.

#2 According to a Quinnipiac University poll from last year, 63 percent of all Americans want to keep Roe v. Wade in place.

#3 America is a global leader in sexual depravity.  If you doubt this, just check out what is going on in Cleveland at the end of this month.

#4 Americans are now more likely to die from an opioid overdose than they are from a car accident.

#5 In the city of Baltimore, approximately one out of every four babies is born as an opioid addict.

#6 Overdosing on drugs has now become the leading cause of death for Americans under the age of 50.

#7 McDonalds feeds approximately 70 million people a day globally. Pornhub gets more than 78 million visits a day.

#8 The teen birth rate in the United States is higher “than in any other industrialized country in the world”.

#9 According to the CDC, approximately 110 million Americans have a sexually-transmitted disease right now.

#10 The CDC also tells us that there are approximately 20 million new sexually transmitted disease cases in the U.S. every single year.

#11 The number of married couples with children in the U.S. just reached a 56 year low.

#12 According to the United Nations Population Fund, 40 percent of all births in the U.S. now happen outside of marriage. But if you go back to 1970, that figure was sitting at just 10 percent.

#13 At this point, approximately one out of every three children in the United States lives in a home without a father.

#14 Approximately one-fourth of the entire global prison population is in the United States.

#15 By the time an American child reaches the age of 18, that child will have seen approximately 40,000 murders on television.

#16 According to a study conducted by the Mayo Clinic, nearly 70 percent of all Americans are on at least one prescription drug.  An astounding 20 percent of all Americans are on at least five prescription drugs.

#17 According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, doctors in the United States write more than 250 million prescriptions for antidepressants each year.

#18 Over half a million people are homeless in the United States right now, but more cities than ever are passing laws making it illegal to feed them.

#19 One recent study found that the average American spends 86 hours a month on a cell phone.

#20 A different study found that one-third of all American teenagers haven’t read a single book in the past year.

#21 Americans are obsessed with material things and are willing to go deep into debt to get what they want.  At this point, 480 million credit cards are in circulation in this country. That number has risen by nearly 13 percent since 2015.

#22 37 million credit card accounts in the U.S. are “seriously delinquent” at this moment.

#23 According to a study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, approximately two-thirds of all Americans in the 15 to 24-year-old age bracket have engaged in oral sex.

#24 It has been reported that one out of every four teen girls in the U.S. has at least one sexually transmitted disease.

#25 It has been estimated that 30 percent of all Internet traffic now goes to adult websites.

#26 According to the Pentagon, 71 percent of our young adults are ineligible to serve in the U.S. military because they are either too dumb, too fat or have a criminal background.

#27 The city of San Francisco handed out a total of 5.8 million free syringes to drug addicts in 2018.

#28 During one seven day stretch last summer, a total of 16,000 official complaints were submitted to the city of San Francisco about piles of human feces littering the streets.

#29 When you include unfunded liabilities, the true size of our national debt is 222 trillion dollars.  What we are doing to future generations of Americans is beyond criminal.

#30 The suicide rate in the United States is up 34 percent since the year 2000.

#31 Suicide is now the second leading cause of death for Americans from age 15 to age 24.

#32 We are literally destroying the planet that we have been given.  It is being projected that the total amount of plastic in the oceans of the world will exceed the total weight of all fish by the year 2050.

#33 There are more than 850,000 registered sex offenders in the United States today.

#34 The number of American babies killed by abortion each year is roughly equal to the number of U.S. military deaths that have occurred in all of the wars that the United States has ever been involved in combined.

#35 About one-third of all American women will have had an abortion by the age of 45.

#36 Approximately 3,000 Americans lost their lives as a result of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11.  Every single day, more than 3,000 American babies are killed by abortion when you include all forms of abortion.

#37 One very shocking study found that 86 percent of all abortions are done for the sake of convenience.

#38 An average of more than 100 churches are dying in the United States every single week.

#39 Only about 27 percent of all U.S. Millennials currently attend church on a regular basis.

#40 The number of Americans with “no religion” has increased by 266 percent over the last three decades.

Article posted with permission from Michael Snyder

What In the World Has Happened To The America We Grew Up In?

Earlier today, my attention was directed to a thread on an Internet discussion forum that lamented how much America had changed over the years.  I don’t know exactly why, but the posts on that thread really touched me.  Those of us that are old enough to remember what America was like before the Internet grew up in a much simpler time.  Yes, we didn’t have all of the luxuries that we take for granted in 2019, but we found joy in the simple things and people were generally much happier.  Today, we seemingly have so much going for us, and yet people are lonelier, more disconnected and more depressed than ever before.  The suicide rate in the United States is up 34 percent since the year 2000, approximately 40 million American adults have an anxiety disorder, and overdosing on drugs is now the leading cause of death for Americans under the age of 50.  Clearly, our society is not heading in the right direction.

So that probably explains why a thread entitled “I Cry When I Think Back How Things Used To Be” got my attention so much.  This is what the author of the thread posted…

I can never go back to my early days growing up on the farm. Had time to enjoy each day, the warm sun the hay in the barn. Even with all the work there was to be done. Eating an apple off the tree, taking a long drink from the cool spring. Working the garden…..What the hell happened.

In just five sentences, this individual captured what so many of us have been feeling.

Of course, most of us didn’t grow up on a farm.  I certainly didn’t.  But without a doubt, there are lots of people out there that are saddened by the contrast between what America used to be and what America is today.

Another person that grew up near Boston also shared memories of simpler days

me too..

only it was just suburbs Boston.

actually, just sitting and talking with neighbors, drinking lemonade in summer as Boston is insanely humid then..

or even more recently, in Wisconsin.. listening to thunderstorms roll in.. the state is so flat you can see these beautiful storms for miles…

Once upon a time in America, people actually sat on their porches and talked with their neighbors.  I know that may sound quite strange to many of you, but it is true.

Sadly, most houses that are being built today don’t even have real front porches because they are considered to be a waste of space.

So what has caused such a dramatic shift in our country?

Well, the truth is that there are a lot of factors, but one that kept coming up over and over in the thread was social media.  Here is what one astute poster had to say

Social media made people cold, uncaring and combative.

People have lost their connection to one another. They’ve lost the drive to socialize and have friends and form solid connections. Instead they opt to argue, fight and divide themselves.

This has made society negative, bitter, and have no hope or joy for the future.

You arent sad because you look back into the past, you are sad because you are looking into the present and future and you realize the path humanity is currently on is a very bad one. A path that is very different than the path humanity was on not that long ago.

You don’t have to spend much time on social media to realize that a lot of people are downright nasty, mean and cruel.

It isn’t healthy to spend much time mentally immersed in that type of environment, but many of our young people are online almost constantly, and as a result, they are developing all sorts of problems

Teens and young adults are in the midst of a unique mental health crisis, suggests a new study out Thursday. It found that rates of depressive episodes and serious psychological distress have dramatically risen among these age groups in recent years, while hardly budging or even declining for older age groups.

Lead author Jean Twenge, a 47-year-old professor of psychology at San Diego State University, has spent much of her career studying the attitudes and beliefs of younger generations. Most recently, in 2017, Twenge published a pop-science book laying out her central argument that teens and young adults coming of age are especially lonely and disconnected, thanks in part to the growing abundance of social media and devices like smartphones. Her book is titled iGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy—and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood.

And one shocking study that was conducted not too long ago found a direct link between social media use and levels of depression and loneliness

new study concludes that there is in fact a causal link between the use of social media and negative effects on well-being, primarily depression and loneliness. The study was published in the Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology.

“What we found overall is that if you use less social media, you are actually less depressed and less lonely, meaning that the decreased social media use is what causes that qualitative shift in your well-being,” said Jordyn Young, a co-author of the paper and a senior at the University of Pennsylvania.

The implications of this are staggering.  As Americans become more and more immersed in the online world, we are likely to become increasingly unhappy.

So is there anything that can be done?

Well, some are suggesting that the social media giants should change their algorithms

The solution is obvious: change the algorithms. Which is to say: make less money. Ha.They could even remove the algorithms entirely, switch back to Strict Chronological, and still make money — Twitter was profitable before stock options before it switched to an algorithmic feed, and its ad offerings were way less sophisticated back then — but it’s not about making money, it’s about making the most money possible, and that means algorithmically curated, engagement-driven, misery-inducing feeds.

Of course, that isn’t likely to happen, and it would probably only have a marginal impact anyway.

In the end, the reality of the matter is that technology is always going to be a part of our lives, but we need to strive to find proper balance.

Because those that spend too much time on the hate-filled Internet are in danger of turning out like this crazed woman

A crazed leftist with a mohawk attacked an elderly gentleman minding his own business inside of a Starbucks in Palo Alto, CA because he was wearing a red MAGA hat.

A ‘woman’ who goes by the name Parker Mankey, posted photos of the elderly Trump supporter to her Facebook page Monday and called on her Facebook friends to find out who the “freak” is and “confront him.”

Parker Mankey, who declared her support for Bernie Sanders, says screaming at him, stalking him and doxxing him is a way to fight back against Fascism.

Do you think that this woman would have turned out this way if she had been raised on a farm with no access to the Internet, television or the mainstream media?

Of course not.

What we regularly feed our minds determines what we will become.

The Internet can be used for great good, but there is also much online that is highly toxic.  And the more toxic the Internet becomes, the more toxic our nation as a whole will become.

Article posted with permission from Michael Snyder

Here’s What is Behind Ilhan Omar’s Hijab & Her Anti-American Assault

The US Congress has stood down with reference to their decades-old rule regarding head coverings with Muslims like Rep. Ihan Imar (D-MN). However, the question should be raised, what is behind bigamist Ilhan Omar, her head covering and her anti-American, antichristian theology that drives her ideology. Well, we’re glad you asked.

Simply put, Muslims are pushing for Shariah law, which runs counter to American law.

Anni Cyrus escaped Islamic theocracy in Iran which leaves her all too qualified to talk about mandatory ‘hijabization’ and the Omar Effect.

Hey, don’t blame me, though I agree. Believe this woman who lived under the totalitarianism of Islamic supremacy in Iran.

Cyrus pointed out that a 181-year-old ban on no hats in Congress was simply dismissed for the anti-American, antichrist representative from Minnesota, Ilhan Omar.

Cyrus explains in her latest video, The Truth Behind Ilhan Omar’s Hijab, that the reality behind the hollow empowerment claims of Omar that what she is really advancing is not liberation and liberty but oppression and slavery.

Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

President Trump, Please Call Up The Constitutional Citizen Militia!

The larger the government gets the smaller the citizen becomes.  The larger the Church becomes the smaller the Christian becomes.  The larger the problem becomes the weaker the individual becomes.

Americans no longer do anything for themselves.  If you have a spiritual problem you run to the pastor.  If you have an emotional problem you run to the shrink.  If you have a physical malady you run to the physician.  If you have a money problem you run to the bank.  If you have a legal problem you run to the courts.

No one takes care of their own problems.  There is always some expert lurking out there who is ready and willing to take care of your problem for you…with a fee attached of course.

It was rugged individualism that built this country.  Back in the days when America was learning to walk people were trained to be self-sufficient.  There wasn’t a lawn company to call to clear a forest.  There was no grocery store on the corner where you could go buy some beef. There was no Uber stagecoach to get you to your local gym.

If you wanted it done, you did it yourself.  That included self-defense.  Who do you call when there are no cops?

Our nation was built on a premise that was unheard of in all of human history…the idea that the individual was sovereign and that apart from God, no individual or no organization had sway over the affairs of men.  Each man was responsible for himself and his family.  Americans were tougher then.  Americans were self-reliant then.  Americans were sovereign then.

But with the advancement of “government” our responsibilities gradually began to erode.  Are there even “volunteer” fire departments in America today or has “firefighting” become professionalized and swallowed up in the vast spectrum of “governmental services” so prevalent today?

Heck, parents don’t even raise their kids anymore.  Childhood has been farmed out to day-care centers, public schools, and the dastardly Child Protective Services.  Is there ANYTHING that Americans still do for themselves?

Unfortunately, that is the same line of thinking that has given us “law enforcement” and the rapidly-increasing cries to disarm average Americans so that government can do the job of protecting the citizens.  Evidently, we are not capable of protecting ourselves.  Womb to the tomb, government metastasizes into an all-encompassing Nanny State.

ALL government tends towards evil; George Washington called it a “fearful master.”  The moment one yields responsibility and authority to government, the individual citizen begins to shrivel.  It is time for “we the people” to reclaim our authority.

The Second Amendment states “A well-regulated militia being NECESSARY for the security of a FREE state, the right of the people to KEEP and BEAR arms shall not be infringed.”  Please tell me that you know that there was no “Federal Army” when John Hancock and the boys declared independence from the taskmaster across the pond?

The citizens were the military.  Fighting for liberty wasn’t a job, it was a responsibility.  The militia was made up of everyday citizens who bore the responsibility of defending the homeland.  Federal armies were designed to fight foreign enemies.  The Militia was in place to defend the community.  Because American’s are no longer responsible for defending the home turf the government tells us that we have no need for guns.

But we ARE responsible.  We have simply shirked our duties.  A well-regulated militia being NECESSARY…who told us we were no longer necessary?  The Constitution says we are.  Our nation is under siege from a foreign enemy on domestic soil and the defense of this nation against the invasion is the purpose of the citizen militia.

Like everything else, the Left has given the militia a bad name.  The Constitution acknowledges the need for individuals to come to the defense of the nation.  It is not only our right, it is our duty.

President Trump, please declare an emergency and request the aid of the militia on the US border.  God-fearing patriots will answer the call and report for duty.  Literally, millions of veterans, law enforcement, and Average Joe’s understand the problem.  Station us on the border.  Grant us permission to defend our nation against ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.

Like many others, I never served in the military.  But I love this nation and I will fight to defend it.  Our posterity depends on it.  I can shoot a gun, I know how to follow orders, and I am ready to serve.

“But it will be chaos,” I hear the pointy-headed advisors scream!  No, my friend, chaos is what is coming.  I’d rather fight them on the border before they get into my back yard.  An ounce of prevention…

Let this sink in. A well-regulated militia being NECESSARY for the SECURITY of a FREE STATE…

If our borders are not secure we will soon lose our freedom.  We may be a free state today but we will not be free for long.  The President has the authority to call on the citizens.  Read it here.  Our national security is at stake.

Call upon us Mr. President.  Millions of us stand ready to report for duty.   It would be an honor to serve.

Here is a great video on the Constitutional Citizen Militia.

MoveOn Protests to Demand Release of Unredacted Grand Jury Data

If you wish to know what the radical left is really up to, there’s no need to wonder. All one has to do is sign up for the MoveOn.org newsfeed to be sent to the email address of your choosing.

For example, yesterday came an email alert of utmost importance. Of course every “alert” MoveOn sends is of the utmost importance.

In part it read:

“Dear MoveOn member,

Last night, Donald Trump’s hand-picked attorney general, William Barr, missed the deadline set by Congress to release the full Mueller report.

That’s why tomorrow, Thursday, April 4—at nearly 300 events around the country—the Nobody Is Above the Law coalition is joining together to demand that Barr immediately release the full report and supporting evidence.”

Well, let’s begin with the obvious. Of course, Barr was hand-picked by the president. Who else would pick him? Chuck Schumer?

However, to many of the nimrods at MoveOn, this may come as a surprise, as most are unaware of the Constitution and even fewer, aware of its content.

The Attorney General is a superior officer of the United States – a Cabinet position, and as such, in accordance with Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution, shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. In other words – hand-picked.

And second, and more importantly, is the demand of the left to set an arbitrary deadline for release of the unredacted Mueller report and all accompanying documents including all Grand Jury testimony and documentation.

Attorney General Barr was obligated to remind Nadler and his flunkies that, “the report subject to the federal rules on grand juries ‘by law cannot be made public.’”

Barr added, “he expects to deliver a version of the nearly 400-page report to lawmakers by mid-April, ‘if not sooner.’ He said the material being redacted includes grand jury-related information, as well as information that could reveal U.S. sources and methods or confidential details about ongoing investigations.”

Democrats then cited Watergate as an example where just such unredacted material was released on the order of a federal district judge in 1974.

What the Dems purposely failed to reveal is that this is hardly an apples to apples comparison. The Grand Jury data released during Watergate was to a convened Impeachment Panel, not just to a bunch of democDemocrats fishing expedition.

And not to be outdone, Democrat Congressman Eric Swalwell of California, ramped up the idiocy by offering his own reasoning for the release of raw sensitive material. His reasoning was simple – well, the American people paid for the report, so they should be able to see it. Brilliant!

Still, none of this matters to the hard left, who have been so obsessed with running Trump out of office, that they’ll do anything to accomplish it. Rules, law, precedent – none of it matters to the long-tormented hard-liners.

So today, we all get to look forward to leftist protests, because that’s what they’re good at – to “nearly 300 events around the country—the Nobody Is Above the Law coalition is joining together to demand that Barr immediately release the full report and supporting evidence.”

And I’m sure, brought to us in part by Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Sally Yates, Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch, John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, etc., etc. All of whom have proven to thus far be “Above the Law.”

Mayor Pete Buttigieg Runs For President While His City Bleeds… Literally

On March 31, a South Bend grandma brought her grandson to the hospital. The 11-month-old baby boy had been shot. His grandmother’s car had also taken fire. It was another early morning in South Bend.

Around the same time, Mayor Buttigieg, was toting up the $7 million in donations from his charm offensive as his bid for the 2020 Democrat nomination got underway. The national media never bothered reporting the shooting of an 11-year-old boy in the city he was supposed to be running, but instead confined its coverage of South Bend matters to a publicity stunt wedding officiated by Buttigieg.

The horrifying shooting of an 11-month-old boy on the millennial mayor’s watch was not an unusual incident. In the last few days, even the media was gushing over Buttigieg’s presidential ambitions, two Indiana University South Bend players were injured in a shooting on Notre Dame Avenue, a blind date ended in a shooting, and yet another shooting added to the bloody toll in the real South Bend.

Those are quite a few shootings for a city of barely 100,000 people. But South Bend is a violent place.

While Chicago is notorious for its murder rate, in 2015, Buttigieg’s South Bend actually topped Chicago’s 16.4 homicides per 100,000 people with a homicide rate of 16.79 per 100,000 people. Those numbers put Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s city on the list of the top 30 murder capitals in the country for the year.

In January, three shootings in one week killed two teens and left a woman paralyzed from the waist down. In one summer week, the casualties included a 12 and a 13-year-old. Last year, a man shot 6 people when he opened fire on 50 partygoers in a house and was sentenced to 100 years in jail.

By 2017, shootings had risen 20% on Mayor Buttigieg’s watch. Rapes increased 27% and aggravated assaults rose from 183 in 2013, the year before Buttigieg took office, to a stunning 563 assaults.

It’s hard to know which are flying faster, bullets in South Bend or dollars into Buttigieg’s campaign.

Some of these stories, particularly the recent shootings of two baseball players which shocked Indiana University, should have been covered by the national media, which instead chose to broadcast Buttigieg’s publicity stunt of officiating at a pregnant woman’s wedding in a hospital. Had the media stuck around, it could have reported on the trail of shooting victims making their way into the hospital.

But reporting on an 11-month-old being shot in their hot new candidate’s city wouldn’t be as much fun.

The media’s bias has never been subtle, but its disinterest in a presidential candidate’s track record has never been this blatant. Mayor Buttigieg’s candidacy is being covered as if he weren’t the mayor of an actual city with actual problems. Instead, his prospects have been covered purely in terms of his identity, a gay millennial, his past career before taking office, and his current witticisms and applause lines.

At no point in time does the media stop to tell the viewers and readers it is regaling with stories of Mayor Buttigieg’s charm that he runs the most dangerous city in Indiana, recently rated as one of the “worst cities to live”, where nearly half the residents live at the poverty level, and even the water is bad.

These are significant data points in the track record of a politician aspiring to run the entire country.

The media keeps asking Mayor Buttigieg which of its wishlist of radical socialist policies he’s willing to sign on to, the Green New Deal, eliminating private health insurance, and freeing more convicts, rather than asking him which policies he used to try and solve problems in South Bend. And how they worked.

Mayor Pete Buttigieg has tried to pass off South Bend’s crime problem as a national issue. But South Bend’s violent crime rates, double the Indiana and American average, run counter to national trends.

Buttigieg responded by doubling down on Group Violence Intervention, a trendy community outreach strategy to gang members, which despite being widely touted by the media, doesn’t work. Gimmicks, ranging from AI to wonkery, were rolled out and the shootings, the rapes and assaults have continued.

Mayor Buttigieg excels at buzzwords and gimmicks. He’s just terrible at actually running a city.

That’s why property crime in South Bend is rising. It’s why the city is overrun with gangs. It’s why South Bend is poor, blighted and miserable. Violence is just one of the many symptoms of Buttigieg’s failures.

South Bend’s top employers are the local schools and hospitals, and the local government. And a local casino. Unemployment and taxes are higher than average. Meanwhile, the average income is below $20,000. The poverty rate is 25%. African-American poverty rates are double. Hispanic poverty rates are 10% higher than the national average. And even Asian-Americans are poorer than usual in South Bend.

Buttigieg’s failed city is a tragic counterpart to Lake Wobegon where everything is below average.

The media has ignored the reality in South Bend while touting Buttigieg as a rival for the hearts of Rust Belt voters. But Buttigieg hasn’t won by winning over traditional Rust Belt voters. South Bend’s white population has dropped steadily on his watch and the city is on track for majority-minority status. The remaining white population is skewed toward a white lefty elite coming for its educational institutions.

South Bend isn’t a typical Rust Belt city. It’s a typical blue city, divided sharply between poor minorities and a leftist elite without any of the culture or tech industries that keep New York or Los Angeles going. Its traditional population has been leaving steadily and that departure only accelerated during Buttigieg’s disastrous time in office.

Much has been made of Buttigieg winning reelection by 80%. This isn’t a testament to his unique charisma. Democrats have had a lock on the mayorality in South Bend for two generations.

The media cheers that Buttigieg won 80% of the vote. It neglects to mention that it was 8,515 votes. That’s about the 8,369 votes that came in during the primaries. Buttigieg raised $337,161 dollars while his Republican opponent, Kelly Jones, had raised $584 dollars. The millennial wunderkind needed $40 bucks a vote while his unknown Republican opponent managed at around a quarter a vote.

Like South Bend’s poverty and crime statistics, these are figures that the media doesn’t report because it would reveal that their shiny new candidate is a hollow façade with nothing inside except spin.

Mayor Buttigieg isn’t winning 80% because he’s universally beloved. That percentage isn’t a testament to his popularity, but to a political system in which hardly anybody except a few lefties bothers to vote.

The truth about “Mayor Pete” is that he’s the son of a Marxist prof working in Notre Dame who used the death throes of a dying city to polish his brand and then jump into the 2020 race over dead bodies.

South Bend is a human tragedy. And while Buttigieg isn’t solely responsible for his woes, he has exploited it, instead of trying to fix it, using buzzwords and gimmicks to build a national brand.

That’s something he has in common with fellow failed hipster mayor and 2020 candidate, Cory Booker.

But Senator Booker was at least clever enough to put a little distance between his tenure in Newark and his 2020 bid. Mayor Buttigieg is betting that the national media won’t bother looking at South Bend.

So far he’s been proven right.

The media keeps touting Buttigieg’s Ivy League credentials, his identity as a gay politician, and his charm. When it mentions South Bend, it’s only to claim that he “turned it around” and that he won his last election by 80%. South Bend hasn’t been turned around. Downtown has gotten a hipster revamp, while the rest of South Bend chokes on crime, violence and misery. But Buttigieg knows that the national media will never bother doing more than reporting on new bike paths and an organic grocery.

The 11-month-old boy who came into the hospital with a wound in his shoulder won’t catch their eye. But as Mayor Buttigieg keeps raising money hand over fist, South Bend continues to bleed and die.

And Buttigieg is hoping that he can sneak into the White House before the blood gets on his hands.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

Blacks Blind To Their Own Cultural Enslavement

Considering the media firestorm surrounding actor Jussie Smollett being charged and subsequently released for perpetrating a potentially dangerous hate crime hoax, I thought it would be appropriate to weigh in with some race-related reality to give some context.

Jussie Smollett is probably too young to understand how his actions dishonored those who sacrificed in the cause of racial equality over the course of our nation’s existence. In school, I imagine he wasn’t taught anything remotely resembling reality on the subject of history, particularly in this area. Factor in Smollett having been raised in the entertainment industry from childhood, and we can see how unlikely it is that any sense of moral obligation he might have harbored could have survived.

As distasteful as it is for me, I occasionally engage in “media slumming,” meaning that I expose myself to media that I would never watch for enjoyment in order to remain informed as to what’s going on in media venues. I don’t have broadcast television, nor do I participate in the ripoff of cable TV, but I do have streaming services through which I can glean a fairly decent representation of what’s afoot in broadcast TV.

Similar to the inescapability of superfluous homo-erotica, pro-LGBTQ messages and anti-Trump snark pervading TV and films these days, the America-as-an-institutionally-racist-nation message has also taken on new life over the last couple of years. Case in point: In just the last year, I’ve viewed more TV dramas than I can count in which characters bemoan Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and a host of other real-life black Americans being murdered by racist cops.

Such laments are abject mythology, but when one is in that passive mode of being plugged into the brain-sucker box for entertainment purposes, the ensuing effects can be quite insidious.

I was having a discussion with some people on social media the other day on the topic of how the genres of hip-hop and rap debase black people, particularly black women. I offered that while I certainly concur with this assessment, it’s only a small part of the ongoing campaign of the left – and to some extent, our government – to keep blacks culturally enslaved. This is actually a theory I began developing in my teens, when I saw the music being marketed to blacks becoming less mainstream and increasingly geared toward hedonistic and narcissistic themes. Perhaps I noticed this because I’m a lifelong musician, as opposed to being remarkably intuitive.

I paused bemusedly after having employed the phrase “cultural enslavement.” I don’t know If I coined it then and there, and I don’t need the credit, but it’s bloody brilliant regardless.

Cultural enslavement is essentially what the political left has imposed upon blacks since the Civil Rights Movement. I have written previously about some of the federal government’s efforts to keep blacks on the proverbial plantation as popular sentiment around the existing racial inequities in America began to change; these included FDR and Harry Truman conspiring with unions to use entitlement programs to keep black men from taking union jobs, and of course the deleterious effects entitlement programs have had on black families in general.

It’s been said that prior to the Civil Rights Movement, blacks were probably one of the most socially conservative groups in America. Occasionally, someone will point out how stable black communities and families were prior to this period, when wholesale government intervention into race-related issues and the explosion of entitlement programs took place. This is certainly accurate, despite leftists being quick to offer catty little mincing retorts in these cases: So, are you saying that blacks were better off under Jim Crow and segregation – hmm?

I often proffer the argument that America is not an institutionally racist nation in the sense that black activists and liberals maintain it is. America is indeed an institutionally racist nation, however, in the sense that since the Civil Rights Movement (which I’m using as a temporal landmark, not a cause), blacks’ identity has been dictated by liberal whites and their black lackeys, and this has been actualized largely through the entertainment industry. I went into great detail on this topic in my book, “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal – America’s Racial Obsession.”

In short, since the late 1960s, blacks in America have learned how to behave and who to be from TV sitcoms, films and the music industry.

Of even more significance is the fact that blacks have learned from these media sources how to relate to other racial groups and how other racial groups relate to them. The worldview they adopted as a result has been extremely disadvantageous to them and was predicated upon the desire of influential liberals to influence how blacks relate to just about everything.

More recently, young blacks have been indoctrinated en masse into the sociopathic culture of the lowest-of-the-low in the black community: criminals. In addition to the gratuitous use of profanity, more often than not the themes of rap and hip-hop purveyors are narcissistic in the extreme, antisocial, anti-authority, misogynistic and racist. The attitudes represented within these themes have been adopted by young blacks in the same manner in which young whites assume the attitudes of their music idols.

Unlike Mötley Cruë, however, which promoted the abstract if morally ambiguous “sex, drugs ‘n’ rock ‘n’ roll” lifestyle, in their lyrics, rappers routinely showcase their disdain for authority, multiple baby mamas, dealing drugs and killing people – even police.

The cure? As simplistic as it may sound, like so many of the threats we face from the hard left, it’s going to come down to people waking up to the reality of what’s going on. In the case of black Americans, with so many remaining mired in the orthodoxy of the left and the Democratic Party, I see this as being a particularly difficult if not an extremely unlikely proposition.

Article posted with permission from Erik Rush

Prayer to Jesus Is Offensive To Muslims & Democrats Because Christ Is The Only One That Brings True Freedom & Liberty

This week, The Blaze reported, The first Muslim representative elected to the Pennsylvania legislature is demanding an apology from another member who began their session with a prayer to Jesus Christ, calling it ‘highly offensive.’”

The Pennsylvania State Democratic party called the prayer an “Islamophobic message,” while Party Whip Jordan Harris shrieked:

Today, we saw religion weaponized in the House chamber in what could be considered a gross attempt to intimidate, demean and degrade a Muslim State representative in the presence of her family, friends and guests.

This got me thinking: The United States was founded by immigrants of many cultural and religious diversities. Since the early 1600s, America was known as the place where people could go to start a new life with freedom of religion, the liberty to choose your own occupation, and a place of refuge from oppressive governments.

The Mayflower Compact states why the Pilgrims came to America in unequivocal terms:

Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia… 

During the time of our founding, Islam was a major religion in many parts of the world. Therefore, there were numerous Muslims living in America during the time of its founding. Naturally, there was great concern over Muslims taking over America’s Christian value system, especially since America was in a war against Islamic terrorists – the Barbary Powers War – that spanned over the presidencies of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison. 

Concerning the fear of Muslims holding high office in America,

Supreme Court Justice James Iredell, who was nominated to the Court by President Washington, stated:

But it is objected that the people of America may perhaps choose representatives who have no religion at all, and that pagans and Mohammedans (Muslims) may be admitted into offices . . . . But it is never to be supposed that the people of America will trust their dearest rights to persons who have no religion at all, or a religion materially different from their own.

Make no mistake, the intent of our founders was not to sanction religions outside of Christianity. In the words of Supreme Court Justice and Father of American Jurisprudence, Joseph Story, “The real object of the (First) Amendment was, not to countenance, much less to advance Mohammedanism (Islam), or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity; but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects, and to prevent any national ecclesiastical establishment, which should give to an hierarchy the exclusive patronage of the national government.”

Lastly, we definitely need to understand that when our founders referred to the Lord, they were referring to Jesus. George Washington acknowledged Christ as the Divine Author of our blessed religion. This is also the same Lord they acknowledged when signing the Constitution “in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty-seven.”

Why were they so exclusive?  Simple, because Christianity is the ONLY system of worship designed to bring liberty and freedom to all mankind who are created in God’s image. Contrary to being a weapon, Christianity is a defender of the physically, spiritually, and mentally oppressed. You see, where the Spirit of our Lord is, there is liberty.

Schedule an event or learn more about your Constitution with Jake MacAulay and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.

Destroying the Electoral College & Disenfranchising Voters

The State of Oregon House passed legislation (HB 2927) that would make Oregon award its seven (7) Electoral College votes only to presidential candidates who win the national popular vote. According to National Popular Vote, this kind of legislation has already been passed by 14 States, equaling 184 electoral votes (CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, NJ, NY, RI, VT, WA).

To be clear, Oregon and these other 13 States are not abolishing the Electoral College but altering it. Article 2, section 2, clauses 2 and 3 and the Twelfth Amendment of the US Constitution requires States to establish electors that will choose the president and vice president of the United States. These States are not eliminating their electoral college; they are eliminating the voice of their citizens and eliminating the legitimacy and relevance of their State’s involvement in the political process. However, now members of Congress are creating bills to actually dissolve the Electoral College. Either way, altering or abolishing, these changes will result in disenfranchising the vote of every State.

This infectious disease of ignorance must be stopped. The only cure is knowledge, so here are some facts that we must not only consider, but use to educate others.

The process of the Electoral College was established for a specific reason.  Because we have failed, for generations, to teach an accurate application of the Constitution, many people like Oregon Rep. Alissa Keny-Guyer believe that the electoral college is “flawed and outdated” and “does not fit the ‘We The People’ and ‘One person, one vote’ style of government.” Keny-Guyer, and those who believe as she does, simply do not understand why the electoral college was established and how that process protects her individual liberty and the sovereignty of her State, or understand that neither Oregon nor the U.S. are democracies, but instead are Constitutional Republics.

The process of the Electoral College was established to ensure that the person elected to be president of these United States would accurately represent the union as a whole, not favoring certain States while ignoring others. The office of president, contrary to popular belief, was never designed to be a representative of individual citizens, but rather a representative of the collective interests of the States.

A survey of the powers delegated to the president via Article 2 of the Constitution makes the role of the president quite clear. He is not the “leader of America,” he is the leader of the military upon declaration of war by Congress. He is part of the treaty process that makes contractual agreements with foreign governments and the States. Most everything that the president is to do, he does only with the consent of the Senate: the voice of the States. Together, the President and the Senate ensure that each State’s interests are represented equally in matters of war, peace, and foreign commerce. The office of the president was established to be the voice to foreign countries on behalf of the collective States. Because he is the representative of the States, the electors of the State are to choose their president based upon the person they believe will best represent the principles and interests of their State.

These subtle distinctions are hard for Americans to grasp since we have forgotten that our republic is a collection of independent sovereign States who created D.C. to represent their interests.

However, the national popular vote movement takes us even farther away from our Constitutional structure by further removing the independence of the States and eliminating the voice of the people within those states. This legislation proposes that once a popular vote is complete across the nation, each elector of the State must choose the president elected by popular vote nationwide, regardless of the collective choice of his fellow State citizens.

Through popular vote, the individual States would become completely irrelevant in the processes of the federal government. The president would no longer be required to ensure all States’ interests were represented in matters of foreign affairs, treaties or trade. The president’s only concern, throughout the entire four years of his terms, would be to make sure the select few States with the greatest voting population were happy and pleased with the execution of his power. It would be like Georgia surrendering all its voice to New York and legislating themselves out of the political process, or like Connecticut asking Texas to decide what is in the best interest of Connecticut.

The national popular vote would ensure that the people themselves would be silenced. What would be the point in voting if you didn’t live in New York, Texas, California, or Florida, where the majority of the voting population resides?  Every presidential election would be chosen by these few States and all others relegated to being a spectator in the entire political process, making them politically irrelevant. Future presidents could then ignore all but a few states.

A national popular vote is, in fact, an oxymoron, as it would only reflect the voice of the most populous States, denying the disenfranchised voters in the other states a voice in the presidential election.

KrisAnne Hall is an attorney and former prosecutor, hosting weekly radio and TV programs and teaching an average of 265 classes each year on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Read entire article at krisannehall.com

The Language of Liberty series is an outreach project of the Center for Self Governance, a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization, dedicated to training citizens in principles of liberty. The views expressed by the authors are their own and may not reflect the views of CSG. CenterForSelfGovernance.com

American Idiocracy: 50 Years Later, We’re Still Stranded in the Twilight Zone

We’re developing a new citizenry. One that will be very selective about cereals and automobiles, but won’t be able to think.”—Rod Serling

Have you noticed how much life increasingly feels like an episode of The Twilight Zone?

Only instead of Rod Serling’s imaginary “land of both shadow and substance, of things and ideas,” we’re trapped in a topsy-turvy, all-too-real land of corruption, brutality and lies, where freedom, justice and integrity play second fiddle to political ambition, corporate greed, and bureaucratic tyranny.

It’s not merely that life in the American Police State is more brutal, or more unjust, or even more corrupt. It’s getting more idiotic, more perverse, and more outlandish by the day.

Somewhere over the course of the past 240-plus years, democracy has given way to idiocracy,  and representative government has given way to a kleptocracy (a government ruled by thieves) and a kakistocracy (a government run by unprincipled career politicians, corporations and thieves that panders to the worst vices in our nature and has little regard for the rights of American citizens).

Examples abound.

In Georgia, political organizers posted a “Black Media Only” sign outside a Baptist Church, barring white reporters from attending a meeting about an upcoming mayoral election.

In Arizona, a SWAT team raided a family’s home in the middle of the night on the say-so of Child Protective Services, which sounded the alarm after the parents determined that their 2-year-old—who had been suffering a 100-degree fever—was feeling better and didn’t need to be admitted to the hospital.

In Virginia, landlords are requiring dog-owning tenants to submit their pets’ DNA to a database that will be used to track down (and fine) owners who fail to clean up after their dogs poop in public.

In Texas, a police officer who allegedly gave a homeless man a sandwich with dog feces won’t be held accountable for his actions.

In Illinois, Chicago police used a battering ram and a sledgehammer to crash into a family’s home with weapons drawn, terrorizing the young children gathered for a 4-year-old’s birthday party, only to find that they were at the wrong house.

In Kansas, a 61-year-old back man in the process of moving into his new house found himself held at gunpoint and handcuffed by police, who refused to believe he was a homeowner and not a burglar.

If you’re starting to notice a pattern here, it speaks to the fact that nearly 50 years after Serling’s creative brainchild, The Twilight Zone, premiered on national television, we’re still fumbling around in the dark, trying to make sense of a world dominated by racism, cruelty, war, violence, poverty, prejudice, intolerance, ignorance, injustice and a host of other social maladies and spiritual evils.

The Twilight Zone was an oasis in television wasteland: a show that captured imaginations; challenged moral hypocrisy and societal prejudices; and railed against inhumanity, racism, prejudice, the mechanization of human beings by way of their technology, tyrants of all shapes and colors, a passive populace, war, injustice, the surveillance state, corporate greed.

Fifty years later, with so much having changed legally, technologically and politically, so much still remains the same. Fear is the same. Prejudice is the same. Ignorance is the same. Hate and war and tyranny are unchanged. Police officers are still shooting unarmed citizens. Bloated government agencies are still fleecing taxpayers. Government technicians are still spying on our communications. And American citizens are still allowing themselves to be manipulated by their fears and pitted one against the other.

All of these themes can be found in The Twilight Zone.

Serling, a truth-teller who pulled no punches when it came to calling out the evils of his day, channeled his moral outrage into storytelling. As his daughter Anne explained, “The Twilight Zone was more than just the strangest show on TV, with the best theme song, but back in the 50’s Rod Serling was serving up social commentary through science fiction.”

That social commentary disguised as entertainment tackled some of the most pressing issues of Serling’s day. “It dealt with human issues which I guess is why it’s lasted so long, because it dealt with racism and mob mentality and scapegoating and things that are still very, very prevalent and relevant today sadly,” said Anne. “We don’t seem to be able to move ahead and change.”

Serling would have no shortage of material to draw from today, given the government’s greed for money and power, its disregard for human life, its corruption and graft, its pollution of the environment, its reliance on excessive force in order to ensure compliance, its covert activities, its illegal surveillance, and its blatant disdain for the rule of law.

“I can tell you [my dad] would be absolutely apoplectic about what’s happening in the world today. And deeply saddened,” said his daughter Anne Serling. “There are moments that I’m glad he’s not here to see.”

It boggles the mind how relevant The Twilight Zone and its unique brand of truth-telling are to an age in which truth has become a convenient fiction for those in power, what researchers refer to as “Truth Decay.”

As a report from the Rand Corporation explains, “Truth Decay is defined as a set of four related trends: increasing disagreement about facts and analytical interpretations of facts and data; a blurring of the line between opinion and fact; an increase in the relative volume, and resulting influence, of opinion and personal experience over fact; and declining trust in formerly respected sources of factual information.”

Serling would have had a lot to say about the lies that masquerade as truth today.

I’m not sure that Serling would have been surprised by current events, though. After all, this was the man who concluded that people are alike all over: that was the kernel of truth in one of Serling’s episodes about a pair of astronauts who journey to Mars only to find that while they may have landed on an alien planet, inhabited by alien creatures, the ignorance, fear and prejudice of the “foreigner” was the same.

So many truths, packaged in 156 episodes that aired from 1959 to 1964.

Serling took pride in the writing, penning 92 of the 156 episodes himself. For the rest, he enlisted some of the best writers of the 20th century to lend their talents to Zone episodes: Ray Bradbury, Richard Matheson, Charles Beaumont, Earl Hamner, to mention a few. As such, the Twilight Zone became the embodiment of great story-telling.

If you want to watch something that fuses time and space into reality by way of a fictional setting, then I suggest that you tune into The Twilight Zone.

Director Jordan Peele has taken Serling’s material out for a new spin in a reboot airing on CBS All Access, but if you haven’t experienced the original series, do yourself a favor and spend some time with them.

There are so many to choose from, but the following are 12 of my personal favorites:

Time Enough at Last: Mild-mannered Henry Bemis (Burgess Meredith), hen-pecked by his wife and brow-beaten by his boss, sneaks into a bank vault on his lunch hour to read. He is knocked unconscious by a shockwave that turns out to be a nuclear war. When Bemis regains consciousness, he realizes that he is the last person on earth.

I Shot an Arrow into the Air: Three astronauts survive a crash after their craft disappears from the radar screen. They find themselves on what they believe to be a dry, lifeless asteroid. Only five gallons of water separate them from dehydration and death. And temperamental crew member Corey (Dewey Martin) goes to great lengths to ensure his survival.

The Howling Man: During a walking tour of Europe after World War I, David loses his way and comes to a remote monastery. He is turned away but passes out, and the monks take him in. David regains consciousness and hears a bizarre howling. He eventually finds a man in a jail cell who the monks say is the Devil himself, kept in his prison by the “staff of truth.”

Eye of the Beholder: Janet lies in a hospital bed, her face wrapped in bandages, hiding the hideous face that has made her an outcast all her life. This is her eleventh hospital visit and the last allowed by the government. The faces of the doctors and nurses are also hidden by shadows and camera angles. Janet’s bandages are finally removed, and the medical staff retreat in disgust.

The Invaders: A haggard woman (Agnes Morehead) hears a strange sound on the roof. She climbs up to see a miniature flying saucer and tiny spacemen who invade her home. Their small ray guns sting, but she fights back.

Shadow Play: Adam (Dennis Weaver) is on trial, and the judge gives him the electric chair. Adam chortles that it’s all a joke, a recurring nightmare in which all the participants are bit players in a scripted play. But will anyone listen?

The Obsolete Man: Romney (Burgess Meredith) is a God-fearing librarian in a totalitarian state in which books and religion have been banned. Romney is judged obsolete by the government chancellor but is granted several requests before he dies. He chooses to have a television audience watch his execution. Forty-five minutes before he is to die, he invites the chancellor to his room and locks them both inside.

Nightmare at 20,000 Feet: Robert (William Shatner) boards an airplane after having been discharged from a mental hospital for a nervous breakdown. He looks out his window during the flight and sees a weird creature on the wing. Alarmed, he alerts others. However, when they look out, the creature disappears. Robert eventually realizes that what he sees is a demon trying to dismantle the plane so it will crash. Robert decides to act.

Living Doll: Erich (Telly Savalas) is angry at his wife for buying his stepdaughter an expensive doll. Erich has a nasty disposition and soon discovers that the doll has a life of its own and it dislikes him. In fact, the doll tells him so. Talky Tina says emphatically “I hate you” and “I’m going to kill you.”

The Masks: On his deathbed, Jason Foster calls his four heirs to his side on a Mardi Gras evening. Each heir has a character flaw—self-pity, avarice, vanity or cruelty. Foster demands that each wear a mask he has fashioned for them. If they refuse to keep the masks on until midnight, they will be disinherited. The masks are hideous, and the heirs do not want to don them. But out of greed, they slide them onto their faces.

It’s a Good Life: Peaksville, Ohio, a small community, has been “taken away” from the so-called normal world—ravaged by 6-year-old “monster” Anthony (Billy Mumy). By mere thought and/or wishes, Anthony can make things and people disappear or turn into hideous creatures. All of the adults kowtow to his every desire.

To Serve Man: The Kanamits—nine-foot-tall, large-headed creatures—come to Earth from outer space, bringing gifts, spouting peace and promising to end famine. After some initial resistance by earthlings, the world relents and humans become entranced by the visitors. However, government agent Mike (Lloyd Chambers) soon discovers a sinister and shocking plot being hatched by the Kanamits.

The Twilight Zone was a paradox.

Although the series is often seen as science fiction, ultimately it was not science fiction.

Whatever weird or far out setting may have been involved in a particular episode, the focus was always on the angst, pain and suffering we face in the so-called “real” world. As author Marc Scott Zicree writes:

The Twilight Zone was the first, and possibly only, TV series to deal on a regular basis with the theme of alienation—particularly urban alienation…. Repeatedly, it states a simple message: The only escape from alienation lies in reaching out to others, trusting in their common humanity. Give in to the fear and you are lost.

Fifty years after the original The Twilight Zone series questioned whether we can maintain our humanity in the face of authoritarian forces trying to reduce us to mindless automatons, we’re still struggling with the demons of our age who delight in fomenting violence, sowing distrust and prejudice, and persuading the public to support tyranny disguised as patriotism.

Yet as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we don’t have to be stranded in this alternate universe, this twilight zone of tyranny, brutality and injustice.

We still have the power to change our circumstances for the better.

However, overcoming the evils of our age will require more than intellect and activism. It will require decency, morality, goodness, truth and toughness.

As Serling concluded in his remarks to the graduating class of 1968:

Toughness is the singular quality most required of you… we have left you a world far more botched than the one that was left to us… Part of your challenge is to seek out truth, to come up with a point of view not dictated to you by anyone, be he a congressman, even a minister… Are you tough enough to take the divisiveness of this land of ours, the fact that everything is polarized, black and white, this or that, absolutely right or absolutely wrong. This is one of the challenges. Be prepared to seek out the middle ground … that wondrous and very difficult-to-find Valhalla where man can look to both sides and see the errant truths that exist on both sides. If you must swing left or you must swing right—respect the other side. Honor the motives that come from the other side. Argue, debate, rebut—but don’t close those wondrous minds of yours to opposition. In their eyes, you’re the opposition. And ultimately … ultimately—you end divisiveness by compromise. And so long as men walk and breathe—there must be compromise.”

Article posted with permission from John Whitehead

Trump Tells the Truth: Sanctions Cause People to Suffer

This week President Trump admitted what the Washington policy establishment of both parties would rather be kept quiet. Asked why he intervened to block a new round of sanctions on North Korea, he told the media that he believes the people of North Korea have suffered enough. “They are suffering greatly in North Korea…And I just didn’t think additional sanctions at this time were necessary,” he said.

The foreign policy establishment in Washington, whether they are neocons, “humanitarian interventionists,” so-called “realists,” or even progressives have long embraced sanctions as a way to pressure governments into doing what Washington wants without having to resort to war.

During my time in Congress, I saw many of my antiwar colleagues on the Left vote for sanctions because they believed sanctions are more “humane” than war. Neocons and other interventionists endorse sanctions because they know that sooner or later they will lead to war, their preferred foreign policy.

With his characteristic bluntness, President Trump has exposed this big lie. Sanctions are not a more humane alternative to war. They are just another form of war. In fact they are perhaps the cruelest form of war because they do not target the military of an adversary, but rather the innocent civilian population. As President Trump said, they make people suffer.

Sanctions are meant to make life so miserable for the civilian population that it rises up and overthrows a leader out of favor in Washington. In Iraq in the 1990s, those sanctions cost the lives of a half a million children, but then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright infamously said she thought the price was worth it. But still the people didn’t rise up and overthrow Saddam even as their lives became more and more miserable. So the neocons had to concoct some lies about WMDs and Iraq was invaded anyway. An estimated million more people were killed in that war. So much for the “humanitarianism” of sanctions.

Sanctions often target water supplies, sewage treatment, medicine, food supply and other essentials for civilian life. After the people suffer under the “soft” war of sanctions, though, they most often are forced to suffer again as the US attacks anyway. That was the case in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and elsewhere. And it may soon be the case for Venezuela and perhaps even North Korea.

In Yemen, sanctions have contributed to the death of some 80,000 children from starvation. Millions more are facing starvation, yet they continue to resist Saudi and US demands that they overthrow their government.

Sanctions do not inspire people to rise up and overthrow their governments. Most civilians suffering under sanctions couldn’t throw out their rulers even if they wanted to – after being impoverished and malnourished for years they are really expected to take on their own government’s military?

I am glad to hear President Trump tell the truth about sanctions. They hurt the powerless in the false hope that the powerful will change their behavior. No new sanctions on North Korea is a good start. Now how about dismantling the inhumane and counterproductive sanctions from Caracas to Damascus and from Moscow to Beirut. Let’s return to a foreign policy of peace and engagement, backed by a strong military for our defense alone.

Article posted with permission from Ron Paul

Hold Hillary Clinton Accountable For Russiagate Hoax

After the Mueller report plopped with a wet thud on the media, everyone is blaming everyone else.

MSNBC and CNN are blaming the fake experts they invited on and interviewed night after night, urging them to make outlandish predictions that Mueller would soon have Trump locked up for treason. Like Inspector Renault, they’re shocked that the baseless claims they had been repeating were nonsense. And a few of the experts who turned it up to 11 will no longer be invited into media green rooms.

Meanwhile, the politicians are blaming the media, even though Rep. Adam Schiff, Rep. Maxine Waters, Rep. Jerry Nadler, Rep Ted Lieu, and many other political reps were every bit as bad as the ‘experts’. Some, like Schiff, are doubling down and will go on investigating Russian collusion until the media stops inviting them on morning shows to discuss the nothing that they found last week and the week before.

Oddly, no one is blaming the political arsonist who started the dumpster fire that is Russiagate.

The Russian conspiracy theory was invented by the Clinton campaign. It was used as a pretext for spying on Trump associates. And then became an argument for invalidating the results of the 2016 election.

And while the Republicans and Democrats tore each other apart over Russiagate, Hillary Clinton sipped her chardonnays and spent the evenings cackling madly at the TV while watching Washington D.C. burn.

The Russiagate conspiracy theory had multiple purposes. The most cynical one was exempting Hillary and her Clintonworlders from any of the blame for the election defeat. Invoking Russia was also an effort to create an election issue that Clinton, a former Secretary of State, could claim expertise on. It would also neatly counter Trump’s focus on Islamic terrorists and on China with a Cold War boogeyman.

Russia split lefties along interventionist lines. Hardcore anti-war types became Russia skeptics. Most of the rest went along because they hated Trump more than they cared about foreign policy. That’s why, aside from Israel, foreign policy has mostly been absent from the 2020 battles even as the radical primaries push Democrat candidates further leftward on a wide variety of domestic issues.

That’s strikingly different from the 2016 primaries where Hillary’s opponents repeatedly attacked her over the Iraq War. This time around, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is the only candidate to run on a leftist foreign policy platform. And has next to nothing to show for it. Even Senator Bernie Sanders, a Castro and Soviet sympathizer, is carefully steering clear of foreign policy except for the ritualistic bashing of Israel.

Why is foreign policy out of bounds? One reason is a surplus of inexperienced candidates who have spent hardly any time in national office, some who never did, squatting in the 2020 clown car. But a big part of the reason is that Hillary Clinton’s domestic positions are seen as fair game for lefty critics, but, due to Russiagate, her foreign policy people and her international positions are viewed as off-limits.

2020 candidates have a choice between endorsing Hillary Clinton’s interventionism, “We came, we saw, he died”, which would earn them the ire of grass-roots leftists, or avoiding the subject altogether. The clowns in the 2020 clownmobile car don’t want to step on Russiagate trip wires or offend the lefties.

That’s why the only safe subject to tilt leftward on is Israel.

After the Mueller report fell, they may be a little bit more willing to question interventionism, but the base remains passionately convinced that Russia plotted to put President Trump in the White House.

The post-Mueller poll by Reuters shows 84% of Democrats still believe in collusion. 57% strongly agree.

Hillary Clinton may not be a 2020 honored guest, but her legacy is safe. 2020 Dems will be cautious about criticizing her, not only because she still has a fan base, but because she never really lost. The election was stolen by a bunch of Russian bots on Facebook. And no lessons, except for the need to censor social media, have been learned from her defeat. Once again, Hillary Clinton got away with it.

The media deserves plenty of the blame. But MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times and the Washington Post, not to mention the outlets more explicitly tied to the Steele report, were acting as Hillary’s greedy ideological catspaws. They got rich off the hoax, but they didn’t invent it. Hillary Clinton’s people did.

Any real reckoning should begin with the mother of all the hoaxes.

But that too is very risky. Hillary Clinton tied in Obama’s people into the conspiracy. Any reckoning of Hillary’s role in Russiagate would rebound and take down sizable chunks of the Obama administration.

Once again, Hillary Clinton used complicity, tying multiple interests into mainstreaming her hoax, that her lie had become too big to fail. Like the banking system, it would take too much down with it. The media is a safer target. Its only collateral damage is its non-existent credibility. Obama’s people however committed actual crimes. Eavesdropping on the political opposition is redolent of Watergate.

And while the Dems no longer need Hillary, they very much need Obama. Especially if the top of the 2020 ticket ends up being a white New Englander with as much appeal to black people as mayonnaise.

Take down Hillary over Russiagate, and Obama goes with her. It’s safer to just leave her alone.

Any meaningful reckoning of the Russiagate hoax won’t end with the media. It will follow it through Fusion GPS, the DNC, and Clinton associates who hoped to swing the election with one last dirty trick. It will trace the passage of the Clinton conspiracy theory through the DOJ and the FBI. It will measure the institutional damage inflicted on the government, not just the permanent tainting of the 2016 election.

Nobody complicit in Russiagate is about to allow that to happen. And so everyone, from the media on down, is willing to be Hillary’s fall guys instead. The Clintons have never had a shortage of those.

Hillary Clinton’s political career is over. But despite the odds, she’s managed to evade blame not only for her crimes, but for her terrible political instincts and failures. And she is able to sit back and watch Democrats and Republicans still fighting it out over a game that she set into motion years ago.

It’s hard not to believe that she doesn’t feel glee at the damage she is continuing to inflict on America.

Russiagate was not a media failure. The media these days is just a Democrat messaging operation. Its broadcasts and articles exist to promote the partisan agendas of its political faction. Holding the media accountable for spreading smears, lies and conspiracy theories is like blaming the dog, instead of the owner, when it makes a mess on your lawn. The media makes messes, but it doesn’t originate them.

MSNBC, CNN and the Washington Post can’t and won’t clean up the Russiagate mess. The only one who can is a retired politician dictating books, doing speaking tours and watching TV in her home in Chappaqua, New York. She is also the only person to have escaped a Russiagate reckoning.

Unlike her fellow Democrats, she has nothing at stake in this post-Clinton political order and is happy to watch the country burn, and her party with it, to slake the frustrated anger of her final defeat.

Russiagate is Hillary Clinton’s revenge on everyone. On Trump, on Republicans, and on her own party. If she can’t have the White House, she can still set the agenda by watching her big lie take over the national conversation, hounding Trump and forcing the Dems to fight her war using her last dirty trick.

The only way to stop the damage that the last two years have inflicted on our country is to hold Hillary, Obama, their associates and officials accountable for the catastrophic dirty trick known as Russiagate.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

Ilhan Omar: “To Me, The Hijab Means Power, Liberation, Beauty, & Resistance”

Vogue Arabia on Thursday published a glowing puff piece fawning over Muslim Rep. Ilhan Omar, who has, said Vogue, “made history in her adopted country,” apparently while hating every minute of it. Life in Trump’s America, she said, is “an everyday assault”; she did not, however, say anything about moving back to that paradise of multiculturalism, her native Somalia. Instead, she is bringing it here, at least in one aspect of Sharia observance: “To me,” she said, “the hijab means power, liberation, beauty, and resistance.”

What would the innumerable victims of the hijab say to that?

Omar said nothing about them. Instead, she painted the hijab as if it were entirely a matter of each woman’s free choice: “For me, that is how I raise my kids. I work to remove obstacles so they can live at their best and happiest selves. If that translates to adapting the hijab, that’s fine. If they don’t, that’s also fine. They have freedom of choice. Society tends to place lots of limitations, depending on what gender you are. I want my kids to be free. Walk in your own path. We are as much worthy of joy, power, and pleasure as the next human. We are deserving and we don’t need permission or an invitation to exist and to step into our power.”

Maybe she doesn’t.

But what does Ilhan Omar think about Aqsa Parvez, whose Muslim father choked her to death with her hijab after she refused to wear it?

Or Amina Muse Ali, a Christian woman in Somalia whom Muslims murdered because she wasn’t wearing a hijab?

Has she shown any concern for the 40 women who were murdered in Iraq in 2007 for not wearing the hijab; or for Alya Al-Safar, whose Muslim cousin threatened to kill her and harm her family because she stopped wearing the hijab in Britain; or for Amira Osman Hamid, who faced whipping in Sudan for refusing to wear the hijab; or for the Egyptian girl, also named Amira, who committed suicide after being brutalized by her family for refusing to wear the hijab; or for the Muslim and non-Muslim teachers at the Islamic College of South Australia who were told they had to wear the hijab or be fired; or for the women in Chechnya whom police shot with paintballs because they weren’t wearing hijab; or for the other women in Chechnya who were threatened by men with automatic rifles for not wearing hijab; or for the elementary school teachers in Tunisia who were threatened with death for not wearing hijab; or for the Syrian schoolgirls who were forbidden to go to school unless they wore hijab; or for the women in Gaza whom Hamas has forced to wear hijab; or for the women in Iran who protested against the regime, even before the recent uprising, by daring to take off their hijabs; or for the women in London whom Muslim thugs threatened to murder if they didn’t wear hijab; or for the anonymous young Muslim woman who doffed her hijab outside her home and started living a double life in fear of her parents; or for the fifteen girls in Saudi Arabia who were killed when the religious police wouldn’t let them leave their burning school building because they had taken off their hijabs in their all-female environment; or for the girl in Italy whose mother shaved her head for not wearing hijab; or for all the other women and girls who have been killed or threatened, or who live in fear for daring not to wear the hijab?

Courageous women in the Islamic Republic of Iran are taking off their hijabs as a sign of resistance to the oppressive Sharia regime under which they live, and at least 29 women have been arrested for doing so.

For far too many women around the world, the hijab is not a symbol of power, liberation, beauty, and resistance, but of their own powerlessness, oppression, dehumanization and subjugation.

Who is standing in solidarity with them?

Not Ilhan Omar.

Or Vogue.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Media Only Now Willing To Cover Joe Biden’s Creepiness When It Suits Their Agenda

Why did the media ignore Joe Biden’s creepiness for eight years only to report on it now?

Here’s a typical apologetic.

All of those frames made appealing pitches just a few years ago. Editors would be happy to get a “lovable Uncle Joe strikes again” story. The environment is not the same now. Certainly the media is not nearly perfect when it comes to covering gender and power. But in the era of #MeToo, there is far less appetite for a story that makes light of a candidate behaving badly toward women.

It’s not about #MeToo.

If Biden were a sitting senator who wasn’t running against prog favorites, this story would stay boxed up. And Flores, a former Bernie ally, would never have come forward.

It’s not a new enlightenment. It’s the media’s ongoing use as a political hit machine for certain political interests.

In the big picture, damaging stories against lefty Dems get covered up. Unless there’s an interest by even leftier Dems in taking them down. It’s no coincidence that this story appears just as Biden is prepping his entry into the race.

We saw the same thing with a Beto O’Rourke story.

Times have changed. Reporters now would look twice at a new politician who is handsy on camera. They’d ask questions about it and likely look into his private conduct. And women like Flores are taking big risks and speaking out.

Nah, they wouldn’t.

It took a lot of work to call Franken out and there’s constant talk of a comeback. 2014 was not some sort of dark age. Attitudes haven’t changed all that much.

Only the politics of it did.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

New York Times Admits That “Withdrawing From Iran Nuclear Deal Has Paid Dividends”

When even the New York Times and its house Never-Trumper Bret Stephens are applauding Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, you know that the results have been decisively in Trump’s favor.

I detail just how bad the Iran nuclear deal really was in The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran.

That many, if not all, the Democrat presidential candidates want to reenter it should be regarded as suicidal and treasonous if we had a sane public discourse today, which, of course, we do not.

“The Foreign Policy Fiasco That Wasn’t: Withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal has paid dividends,” by Bret Stephens, New York Times, March 29, 2019:

It’s been nearly a year since Donald Trump made the decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, to loud cries that it would bring nothing but woe to the United States and our interests in the Middle East.

So far, the result has been closer to the opposite.

That much was further made clear thanks to excellent reporting this week by The Times’s Ben Hubbard. “Iran’s financial crisis, exacerbated by American sanctions,” he writes from Lebanon, “appears to be undermining its support for militant groups and political allies who bolster Iranian influence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and elsewhere.”

Well, heavens to Betsy. When the Obama administration negotiated the nuclear deal, the president acknowledged that sanctions relief for Tehran would inevitably mean more money for groups like Hezbollah. But he also insisted it wouldn’t make much of a difference in terms of Iran’s capacity to make mischief in the Middle East.

Hubbard’s reporting suggests otherwise. Iran can no longer finance civilian projects or credit lines in Syria. Hezbollah fighters and Palestinian militants aren’t being paid, and their families are losing subsidized housing. Even Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has complained publicly about the effects of U.S. sanctions.

Nor are those the only benefits of withdrawal. The U.S. is no longer looking the other way at Hezbollah’s criminal enterprises, including drug smuggling and money laundering, the way it did during the Obama administration in order to engage Iran diplomatically. Iran’s protest movement, quashed in 2009, has shown signs of renewed life, not least because of public fury that the regime spends money on foreign adventures while economic conditions worsen at home.

Most importantly, Iran has not used the U.S. withdrawal from the deal to restart its nuclear programs, despite its threats to do so. Part of this has to do with Tehran’s belief that it can wait Trump out, especially since Democrats like Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris have promised to re-enter the deal if elected….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Is Modern Technology Hazardous to Health?

Technology has impacted our lives in many positive and negative ways, computers, mobile phones with 5G present and future robotic and automotive applications, smart meters, solar panels, wind turbines, and geoengineering, just to name a few. But are they good for our health?

As the 5G rollout is happening around the world, concerned groups are organizing to mount an opposition and voice their concern about its safety to humans and animals bathed constantly in EMF radiation from towers that will eventually be deployed on every street corner.

A recent article reported that four students and three teachers in a California school in San Joaquin County were stricken with cancer which was caused entirely by environmental factors. Parents were demanding that a “radiation-emitting cell phone tower be removed from elementary school property.”

As reported by DrJockers.com, documented 5G health effects include “worsened eye health, lowered bacterial resistance, impacted skin health, and more biologically-active organs – more dangerous.”

Dr. Klaus Kaiser wrote that “there is a one-plus order of magnitude difference in the photon (electromagnetic wave, EM) energy between the current 4G communication (4G) and the proposed 5G systems (5G).”

He continues that “The more powerful EM wave energy (30-80 GHz of the 5G vs. 3-6 GHz of the 4G) requires a novel set of long-term assessment testing on a variety of species that could be affected by it, even if it were eventually proven to be of no concern in any testing.” In the absence of such a testing, the hurried 5G rollout is a global experiment on humans as unwilling laboratory rats who want faster internet connectivity, smart appliances, future robotic applications not yet thought of, and self-driven cars, all controlled from towers on every block, like steel trees everywhere.

Dr. Kaiser recommends studying any health effects of 5G technology on the animal population of a zoo with its biological universe at the ready – animals live, breed, and die in a relatively secure and enclosed experimental area. His proposal for 5G testing is detailed here.

A recent study, “Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression,” was published in the Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy. The abstract said, “Among the more commonly reported changes are sleep disturbance/insomnia, headache, depression/depressive symptoms, fatigue/tiredness, dysesthesia, concentration/attention dysfunction, memory changes, dizziness, irritability, loss of appetite/body weight, restlessness/anxiety, nausea, skin burning/tingling/dermographism and EEG changes. … All collectively show that various non-thermal microwave EMF exposures produce diverse neuropsychiatric effects.”

Josh Del Sol pointed out that the 5G seen in Wi-Fi routers means “5 GHz.” But the 5G they are talking about is the “5th Generation” infrastructure. “Actual 5G (5th Generation) is planned to operate at 25-90+ GHz frequencies, use beam-forming/targeting systems, and be integrated with thousands of satellites to blanket the earth.”

In the video below, U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal asked wireless industry reps questions about the safety of 5G technology and whether the industry that is pushing this 5G technology knows of or has sponsored any research studies as to the health effects on humans and animals and the answers were that the industry has done no health and safety studies on 5G technology. Independent studies do show “a risk to all biological life.”

Stephen McBride stated in a recent mailout that “China and the U.S. are neck in neck in the race to develop their 5G networks. In fact, so far China has outspent the U.S. by $25 billion in 5G, according to ‘Big 4’ accounting firm Deloitte.”

He believes that, even though “the Trump White House recently labeled 5G a national security priority for America,” the government’s “red tape is choking America’s 5G rollout.” He continues that America needs hundreds of thousands of new cell towers. These are “tiny compared to the 100+ foot cell towers you’re used to seeing.” They are the size of a trash can and carry signal only about half a mile. This means that “instead of placing one giant cell tower every few miles, we’ll need to place small ones every couple thousand feet.”

According to McBride, there are 220,000 cell towers in the U.S. today. In his estimation, AT&T alone will need 300,000 new 5G cell towers, a big project. The new towers are not just an improvement over 4G but a “huge leap.”

In their rush to deployment, the industry spent zero money to study the effects of the 5G towers on health.

Another health issue for humans and animals documented by many independent studies points to smart meters. Smart meters have been installed in most places for the convenience of utility companies and to the detriment of the population at large, who are experiencing various health problems, are paying higher electricity rates per kWh, are spied upon 24/7 without a warrant, their consumption patterns and activities sold to third parties, and are hit with radiation every so many seconds coming from the Mother Ship far away, measuring and controlling customers’ consumption by off switches during high peak demand. Why would the utility store extra electricity for high demand times when they can cut your electricity off and “save” you money while you swelter in your home for hours each day and your food and medicine spoil in the fridge?

Geoengineering is supposedly protecting humanity from the effects of global warming. It engages in aerial spraying and injection of the stratosphere with harmful chemicals in order, as we were told by former CIA chief, John Brennan, to mitigate the disastrous effects of global warming. The particles sprayed in the atmosphere are eventually inhaled by all of us as they fall to the ground and mix in the soil that grows our crops and in our waters from which we drink.

Despite complaints from farmers, environmentalists, and sick humans who experience heightened allergies and other medical problems, the geoengineering continues. The trails in the sky do not dissipate for hours and eventually turn into a milky grey cover that blocks the sun for hours or days. Water vapor trails from airplanes usually dissipate in minutes.

Solar panels installed in large fields are a health hazard to fauna, especially birds. Solar panels on homes reduce electrical consumption and eventually, after a high initial installation cost, begin to pay off in lower usage of electricity generated by fossil fuels. But, in the absence of sun, electricity produced by fossil fuels is necessary.

Fields of solar panels that produce more electricity require huge land area deployment that takes fertile soil away from agriculture and the production of food. Solar panels create heat fluxes, frying in flight any bird that is unlucky enough to fly in its proximity or is attracted to the solar panels that look curiously like shimmering rivers and lakes to them.

Wind turbines seemed like a good idea until the huge blades started chopping up millions of birds around the word. The constant thump-thump sounds interrupted the sleep pattern of humans and animals alike. Animals started exhibiting strange behaviors, attacking their young, and birthing dead litters. Humans living in the proximity of wind turbines complained of many strange health issues, such as insomnia, skin problems, hormonal issues, birth defects, and psychological problems.

And the production of electricity is sketchy at best since turbines produce electricity when winds exceed speeds of 32 MPH. Just because a blade is spinning, it does not necessarily mean that it produces electricity. According to the experts, the quantity of fossil fuels and other materials used to manufacture and maintain a wind turbine makes it almost impossible to break even in the life span of an electricity producing wind turbine. Some wind turbines in smaller European countries were installed in a hurry because the funds were available from the EU, but the turbines themselves were not connected to any electricity storage facility.

As I ponder the impact of technology on health, I cannot forget how at one time tobacco smoking was touted as a health benefit by those who profited from it.

The “Good Guys” are Illegally Pushing for Door to Door Confiscation through Red Flag Polices – Not Law! Learn From History

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” – William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783

In the light of what just allegedly happened in New Zealand, one might ask themselves the question, why it is that their acting government would attempt to disarm their own citizenry instead of arming them to protect themselves against armed assailants (Luke 11:21-22)?

Furthermore, why is their acting government detaining and charging their own citizens for sharing the video of this alleged massacre? After all, it was broadcasted LIVE on Facebook!

One man has been arrested and charged with two counts of objectionable materials in New Zealand’s “Films, Videos and Publications Act.”  He is being held without bail and could be sentenced up to 14 years in prison for each offense. This is one of many that have been charged.

Here in America, and like that of the shooting that took place at Parkland High School in Florida, all videos were banned from big tech companies from the likes of Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc.  And why?  It’s because eyewitness accounts did not align themselves with the CIA-controlled media’s narratives. There are 70 cameras inside of that school shooting and only four videos were released.

Don’t forget about the teacher that said that she had seen the shooter and believed him to be a police officer.

Simultaneously, students were outside speaking to Nichols Cruz.

Could it be that this alleged massacre in New Zealand had inconstancies found in the film that they did not want anyone to see?

Could it be that New Zealanders thought it a little odd that their prime minister, while wearing a hijab immediately after the shooting, stated that “Our gun laws will change.”   Within just six days, they banned military-style firearms.

Maybe they thought it telling when the CIA-controlled media lied while promulgating that the masses are turning in their guns (A tactic to belittle opposition), when in fact, their gun control measures completely backfired.

The Sons of Liberty reports,

Tyler Durden explains that this is not the norm and that Kiwis are not complying, for the most part, with the ban.

Out of an estimated 1.2 million registered guns, New Zealand police report that as of Tuesday night, 37 firearms have been surrendered nationwide, according to BuzzFeed. 

No accounting was provided of how many people owned those guns, the types of firearms, or where they were surrendered. 

The reports of citizens disarming themselves came after a Monday announcement by Prime minister Jacinda Ardern that several “in principle decisions” on gun control have been made by Cabinet ministers, while praising residents who have surrendered their guns to police.

Ardern asked residents to surrender their weapons on Monday. 

“To make our community safer, the time to act is now,” she said. “I want to remind people, you can surrender your gun to the police at any time. In fact I have seen reports that people are in fact already doing this. I applaud that effort, and if you are thinking about surrendering your weapon, I would encourage you to do so. 

New Zealand Bans Guns – Vast Non-Compliance From Gun Owners

Again, and in parallel to the shooting in Parkland, Florida, behind the ‘March For Our Lives” (Permits were issued 2 months before this school shooting in order to march in Washington), 55 new gun control laws were passed in 26 states by a majority of Republican governors.  Take note, as the Denver Post points out, this massive push for gun control has bipartisan support. In fact, the majority of governors who signed in new gun control measures were Republicans.

Now, we are seeing the alleged “good guys” like Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham beginning to push for Red Flag laws, which are not law.  “Shall not be infringed” means shall not be infringed (2nd Amendment of the Bill of RIGHTS).  In the end, this will move to door to door gun confiscations if these criminals are not lawfully stopped.

Consider what this new administration is doing to Americans today could have never been done under that of criminal Barack Hussein Obama’s administration.  Never.

‘Not Coming for Your Guns?’ Since Parkland Shooting, 26 States Have Passed 55 Gun Control Laws

Now, we are dealing with those who you have been led to believe are the good guys, you know the Republican conservatives, advocating illegal Red Flag laws. Call it what you will, it matters not, it is all unlawful activity.

The Liberal Lunacy Of Republicans Pushing Red Flag Gun Confiscation Legislation

 

Forefathers Face-off with Modern Politicians – The 2nd Amendment is a God-Given RIGHT, Americans, not a Privilege!

Where are these said representatives that are attempting to disarm you in America deriving this authority from? It is not from “We the People!” 

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” ― Patrick Henry 

“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

If you take the time to investigate many of these massacres, you will find, more than not, that many of them are false flags. You can identify the guilty culprits when you see who stands to gain by attempting to disarm, rather than to arm after these massacres take place.

School Shooting: False Flag – What History Teaches Us!

Keeping You Outside the Building – Parkland High School Shooting has 70 Cameras & Only 4 Released

Over and over again and across the globe, we are seeing that these alleged massacres happen while the government mysteriously waits in the shadows only to disarm or ban shortly thereafter.

“Never trust a government that doesn’t trust it’s own citizens with guns.” –Benjamin Franklin

You have heard it said, never let a good crisis go to waste.  Well, you need to begin to ask yourselves who is responsible for the crisis (Jeremiah 11:9)?

Governments, on a daily basis, somehow accuse law-abiding citizens, through totalitarian methods, for what the guilty are responsible for.

Another question that one should ask themselves is, who gains from these massacres?  Well again, the government stands in the shadows only to disarm the people and what is worse than all of that is those who are legislating illegally are advocating disarmament while surrounded with fully armed security details protecting themselves from the people that they are to serve.

Now, we are even beginning to see door to door confiscations. One must remember that it is no longer law enforcement at this point.  You are now dealing with agents of the state that are not doing their jobs, but are now violating their oaths (Psalm 94:20).

Door to Door Gun Confiscation: No Longer Law Enforcement, Now Agents of the State!-Don’t Let it Get This Far America

History teaches us what happens to people in many countries after disarmament takes place, the answer is genocide!  This is a fact that no one can dispute.

Furthermore, if you trust in a government that sanctions the murder of its own children (Proverbs 6:17) to represent you, then you have ignorantly taken on that which runs counter to that of American Government.

Did You Know That Your Government is Arming Agencies Like the IRS, DHS, VHA, OIG, SSA, NPS?

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

Josef Stalin, the sole leader of the Soviet Union from 1924 to 1953, said:

“If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.”

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Mao Tze Tung, communist dictator of China said:

“War can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun.”

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Idi Amin, president of Uganda from 1971 to 1979, said:

“I do not want to be controlled by any superpower. I myself consider myself the most powerful figure in the world, and that is why I do not let any superpower control me.” 

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Pol Pot, who created in Cambodia one of the 20th century’s most brutal and radical regimes, was responsible for killing one million of his own ‘educated,’ yet unarmed citizens.

Yet in America, the parents in the 86% ratio that are dropping their kids off in public schools to be illegally indoctrinated by the federal government through a violation of the Tenth Amendment now have some students so dumbed down that they are shouting “No more guns.”

High School Students Shouting “No More Guns” – Oh, How Anti-Gun Dictators of The Past Would Be Proud!

For the record, I hate violence.  I mean I hate it, but there comes a time when enough is enough, no more and resistance comes into play. This is illegal and criminal at every given incremental step that these agents of the state are taking and it comes to a point where either you are going to throw off those who pervert the Constitution and its plain declarations or you will once again be enslaved (Deuteronomy 28:63).  That is the lessons and examples that our forefathers have left us.

 “What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

Why Are We Not Referring To MainStream Media & Democrats As “Conspiracy Theorists” Now? The Truth About “Russian Collusion”

“WMD damaged the media’s reputation.  Russiagate may have destroyed it.” -Matt Taibbi

You’ve heard it all before.  You are called a “conspiracy theorist” in order to silence any questioning of the narrative you’re fed from the state-controlled, propaganda outlets known as the mainstream media.  You are also called that if you start connecting the dots to criminal politicians, whether in DC, State or local politics.  More on that in a moment, but these people assume there is no evidence to connectin the dots or questioning an official narrative when there is evidence to suggest otherwise.  So, since there is now officially no, nada, zero, zip evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in the 2016 election cycle, should we not start labeling mainstream media outlets like MSNBC, CNN and others, as well as high and low ranking Democrats as “conspiracy theorists,” only with an emphasis of not a shred of evidence of their claims?

First, keep in mind a report by Corey Lynn on the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorists.”  She writes:

In 1976, the New York Times obtained a document they requested via the Freedom of Information Act.

This document was a C.I.A. Dispatch labeled “psych” for “psychological operations” that was distributed in 1967, indicating they coined the phrase “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorists” to attack anyone who challenged the official narrative from the Warren Commission. It also has a CS indicated on it, which stands for “clandestine services” unit.

These labels have continued ever since they coined the phrase in the 1960’s, with the intention of stifling any truths from getting out. Pay close attention to those using the labels and the information they are referring to. This will be your first clue that truth lies within and they are trying to deflect it. The bottom line is there are hundreds if not thousands of conspiracies taking place all around us – legitimate ones. While they are busy misdirecting with their “conspiracy theorist” labels, evidence is being dug up, they are being exposed, and what they claim to be theory is TRUTH.

There are some disputes out there as to whether the C.I.A. was the first to use the term because it has been printed in a handful of political books from the late 1800’s. The inception of the C.I.A. was in 1947 and this “psych” dispatch went out in 1967. It is from that point on that the term “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” have been shoved down our throats. It was weaponized, just as so many other labels have been used to distract, manipulate and change the narrative to suit their agenda.

See and Read the full C.I.A. Dispatch here.

This brings us to the topic of conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists who promoted for over two years the nonsense we now refer to as “Russian collusion.”  They have done so not based on actual, verified evidence, no actual videos, or anything else, but only on a dossier that was funded by Trump’s political opponent and handled by the FBI.

Even after two years of investigating, there is still no evidence of Russian collusion by the Trump campaign, and Democrats and media alike are continuing to profess there is.  There is ample evidence of Russian collusion in the Obama administration though, which included Hillary Clinton.

Will the media be held accountable?  Don’t hold your breath.

So, what is the truth in all of this?

Paul Joseph Watson comments on the “fake news conspiracy theory” the media has been pushing on the American people for the last two years in his new video commentary as the “biggest fake news conspiracy theory since Saddam Hussein’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction.”

Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

The 2 Reasons Obama Criminalized Intel Agencies

Amidst the saturnalia which ensued over Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe being unable to determine just how often President Donald Trump beats his wife, it was gratifying to hear more sober interpretations in Sunday’s announcement by Attorney General William Barr.

First, it would probably be appropriate to clarify that there is no evidence, nor has there ever been evidence presented that the president beats his wife. In this case, there haven’t even been accusations thereof, as far as I know – but my satirical framing of the issue is quite germane to the topic of baseless accusations and irrelevant conclusions.

On Monday, listeners to both Rush Limbaugh’s and Sean Hannity’s radio shows were treated to a bit of the unexpected in their opening monologues, juxtaposed against the jubilation attendant to the Mueller probe being unable to tie the Trump campaign to collusion with Russia in order to rig the 2016 presidential election. Both hosts offered admonitions (for their listeners not to exult in the non-findings of the probe) which bordered on chastisement.

In Limbaugh’s case, it was a directive for his listeners not to be too happy about the findings since we knew from the outset that there was no such collusion. As Limbaugh sees it, this development only opens the door for Democrats to pursue any and all other measures they see as having the potential to bring Trump down. Barr’s announcement wasn’t hours old before leftist operatives and the press (a bit of redundancy there) began the “just because Mueller couldn’t find anything, doesn’t mean there’s nothing there” mantra. Mr. Hannity’s monologue was similar, and even more emotive.

One quote from Mr. Limbaugh, which he refined for Tuesday’s show, encapsulated the nature of the Mueller probe more succinctly and accurately than anything I’ve heard, and clarifies precisely why festivities are not in order.

“[T]he counterintelligence apparatus of the United States of America, the entire counterintelligence apparatus – this would be the FBI counterintel, the CIA, the NSA, the vaunted so-called intelligence agencies – were all repositioned and retooled for one express purpose, and that was to reverse the election results of 2016.” (Rush Limbaugh, March 26, 2019)

Limbaugh also expanded on the fact that President Trump has acknowledged that the repositioning of these resources for this purpose “traces back to the Obama administration.” I accept this proposal, and that these designs likely had two principal purposes:

1. To compromise if not neutralize Trump as a going political concern, and/or

2. To serve as misdirection from the array of high crimes committed by elements of the Obama administration.

Considered as objectively as someone in my position can consider it, a cursory look at any dozen or so untoward actions of the Obama administration by an incoming administration with no dog in the fight would have suggested that these things merited a real close look, probably by a special prosecutor. In an environment in which we had a press unfettered by ingrained leftist ideology and objectives, such a body would have practically forced the new administration to look into such things as Benghazi, the Fast and Furious gun scandal, Uranium One, John Brennan and the CIA’s involvement in the rise of ISIS, the widespread misuse of government surveillance and, of course, Hillary Clinton’s illegal email server.

What Mr. Limbaugh’s comment regarding our counterintelligence apparatus essentially means is that government agencies were weaponized – or more accurately, criminalized – in order to carry out a criminal act, this being the reversal of the 2016 election.

Part of what has irked Limbaugh, Hannity and many others throughout this debacle is the personal carnage that took place in the wake of the special counsel “investigation.”

Six Trump associates were charged in the Mueller probe, including former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates, former Trump personal attorney Michael Cohen and former Trump adviser Roger Stone. Other parties were charged and similarly intimidated, threatened and otherwise squeezed by Mueller’s tainted team, including author Jerome Corsi, who refused to plead guilty to lying to investigators about wanting to contact WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange during the 2016 election.

Many of these people were essentially ruined; in the case of Corsi, this hits very close to home, since he is a colleague. Some of these folks made deals with the devil in the face of imprisonment and threats against their families simply because they did not have the financial resources to fight the charges. Who is going to effect restitution for these men?

I can’t help but think of the obscenity represented by abject gangsters being empowered to this degree within our government, the cavalier manner in which they believe they can destroy people’s lives in the pursuit of their aims, and how things might have transpired had I been unlucky enough to have asked the wrong questions of the wrong people in 2016 and suddenly found Mueller’s minions at my door, sigmoidoscopes at the ready.

These are criminal activities to be sure, and the only reason they are not being acknowledged as such is because the foxes are running the henhouse. As Limbaugh and Hannity pointed out all week, the press is quite complicit in this criminality, and should be held similarly accountable.

If nothing else, the Mueller probe has demonstrated that we are being governed by a criminal cabal that not only feels at liberty to unlawfully target a sitting president, but to pursue any charges it likes against any citizen that will further this objective.

Is this an America we’re willing to put up with?

I’ll leave the reader to determine what the appropriate course of action against such a body might be. I’m fairly certain that mine wouldn’t get past my editor.

Article posted with permission from Erik Rush

House Intel Chair Schiff Continues His Delusion: “Undoubtedly, There Is Collusion”

It doesn’t matter what’s in the Mueller report.

Russia collusion was a conspiracy theory invented by the Clinton campaign and kept alive by Democrat apparatchiks. Without Russian collusion, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff is just a guy with a powerful job whose details nobody outside D.C. cares about.

With Russia collusion, he’s going to have a permanent seat on CNN and MSNBC, and he’s going to be able to fundraise and promote himself in ways that he couldn’t if he weren’t posing as the new champion of the Russia investigation.

Oh at some point, Dems will grow frustrated with the lack of results. And he’ll be accused of being a sellout.

But for now, Schiff is rising the collusion train to nowhere.

“Undoubtedly, there is collusion,” Schiff told the Washington Post, a social justice tabloid which has profited enormously from Russia conspiracy theories.

Of course, there is.

And WaPo will be there while Schiff goes to look for it in the dumpster bin.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

What It Takes to Become a Millionaire

“He’s a millionaire.” Even today that phrase has a magical ring to it.

And what image do you see? Probably a guy in a $1000 suit pulling up in his luxury car to his ten-bedroom mansion. He doesn’t have a care in the world. Why should he? He’s got all the money in the world.

Who knows how he got it. Maybe his parents left it to him or he got lucky in the stock market or acquired it in some dishonest way. What does it matter? It’s out of your reach, right?

I don’t blame you if you think this way. I thought that way once myself. It’s how Hollywood and the popular media like to portray the wealthy… “the one-percent.”

But it couldn’t be further from the truth.

How can I say that? Because my research team and I surveyed and interviewed over 10,000 millionaires. We learned a lot about them. What we found out surprised me, and, I suspect, will surprise you, too.

But before I explode some millionaire myths, let me first define what I mean by a “millionaire.” It means someone who has $1 million dollars in net assets; that is, the total of their assets, bank accounts and investments, minus any debts, totals $1 million or more.

According to a recent report, there are almost 11 million millionaires in the United States today – more than ever. But here’s the kicker: that same report shows the number of people living paycheck to paycheck is on the rise, with one in three unable to cover a $2000 emergency with cash.

The key difference between the so-called haves and have-nots? Well, that’s what really blew us away. Before I give you that answer, I need to deal with some myths about the millionaires we talked to.

Myth #1 – Wealthy people inherited all their money. The truth is, 79% of millionaires received zero inheritance. That’s right, zip from mom and dad. They earned it on their own.

Myth #2 – Wealthy people are lucky. This is one that I believed for a long time. But in reality, 76% of millionaires say that nothing extraordinary happened to enhance their wealth. No lottery wins. No stock market killing. Discipline and hard work were the key factors. As for luck, the luckiest thing in most of their lives was being born in, or becoming a citizen of, the United States.

Myth #3 – Wealthy people have prestigious private-school educations. Wrong again. 62% of millionaires went to public state schools. You don’t have to go to an Ivy League School to do well.

Myth #4 – Wealthy People Have High Paying Jobs. Not true at all! One-third of millionaires never had a six-figure household income in a single working year. Really. I’m not making it up.

So, what makes these millionaires so extraordinary? Are you ready for the shocking answer? Here it is: Nothing. Nothing at all.

Remember I said that there was one key thing that separated the haves from the have-nots?  It’s the attitude millionaires have toward money. They have learned to control it and not let it control them.

So, if you want to achieve financial security, you need to change your mindset. The sooner the better. You have to start with the belief that it’s possible for you to become a millionaire. I can give you 10,000 examples of people like you who have done it.

Next, you have to take responsibility for where you are financially right now. And wherever you are, however you got there, you’ve got to own it. My friend Dave Ramsey says, “If you’re the problem, it also means you’re the solution.” And that’s actually good news. It means your financial destiny is in your own hands.

Once you’ve accepted where you are, you have to create a plan and set goals. You need to pay off debt and build up savings. Methodically. 92% of millionaires set long-term goals for their money.

There are no shortcuts. Reaching millionaire status won’t just happen accidentally. It takes what I call “intense intentionality.” And, of course, hard work.

But I believe just about anyone who’s willing to work hard and be disciplined about spending and saving can become a millionaire in America today.

If you had talked to all the ordinary Americans, like I have, who have “made it”, you’d believe it too.

The opportunity is there. Take it. This is America – where there’s always room for one more millionaire.

Chris Hogan is the author of “Everyday Millionaires”. Published with permission, Prager University.

The Language of Liberty series is an outreach project of the Center for Self Governance, a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization, dedicated to training citizens in principles of liberty. The views expressed by the authors are their own and may not reflect the views of CSG. CenterForSelfGovernance.com

Time To Investigate The Washington Post’s Qatari Collusion?

Even as the New Zealand government was condemning the Erdogan regime for using mosque shooting footage in its election rallies, the Washington Post decided to give the Islamist tyrant a platform.

It was the second time in six months that The Post had given Erdogan a platform.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan has prisons full of political dissidents. He has silenced the media and has tortured opponents. His brutal Islamist regime has been described as the world’s biggest jailor of journalists.

It’s been estimated that a third of the world’s imprisoned journalists have been locked up by his regime.

But that didn’t stop the Washington Post from giving the man who has locked up hundreds of journalists a forum to posture about the mysterious death of The Post’s own Qatari lobbyist: Jamal Khashoggi.

The Washington Post is a paper that is uniquely willing to not only advocate on behalf of Islamists and their causes, as it frequently does, but to provide a forum for some of the most toxic Islamists around. And those Islamists are invariably aligned with the Qatari-Turkish-Iranian axis and the Brotherhood.s

The paper’s decision to provide Osama bin Laden’s old friend, Jamal Khashoggi, with a forum for promoting Qatari interests, from the Brotherhood to attacks on Saudi rivals, and to then turn his death into a crusade, is part of a larger picture of collusion between The Post and Qatar’s Islamist axis.

Khashoggi was a Qatari lobbyist whose columns, as The Post was forced to admit, were shaped by the Qatar Foundation. The Foundation, an arm of the Qatari regime, proposed topics, drafted them and translated his columns. Jamal Khashoggi was not a journalist. He was a front for Qatar to plant columns attacking Saudi Arabia and promoting the Muslim Brotherhood in the Washington Post.

Last year, the Post was criticized for running an op-ed by Mohammed Ali al-Houthi, the leader of Yemen’s Houthi Jihadis whose motto is, “Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse the Jews, Victory to Islam.” The Jihadist group is backed by Iran and had launched an attack on the USS Mason.

After the attack, its commanding officer noted that “Mason’s actions protected 1,000 U.S. sailors on the warships and countless more mariners in merchant vessels.” What the Houthis couldn’t accomplish with kinetic weapons, its Qatari and Iranian allies sought to accomplish using the instrument of the Post.

The op-ed was the tip of a much larger iceberg in which the media spread Qatari and Iranian propaganda falsely claiming that the campaign against the Houthis had caused mass death in Yemen.

Typical Post headlines such as, “85000 children have starved to death” and “Enough is enough. End the war in Yemen” amplified the Islamist propaganda leading to Senate resolutions demanding that the United States leave Yemen to the Houthis. And allow Iran to take control of a vital strategic area.

The media flooded the zone with false claims that Saudi intervention, rather than Houthi larceny, had caused the famine. The truth emerged in an AP investigative report that revealed that large amounts of food were entering the country, but were being diverted by the Houthis for their own Jihadis or were being resold by the Shiite terror group to finance its war. These were the same tactics that Hamas, another Islamic terror group backed by Iran, had successfully used while the media falsely blamed Israel.

The Yemen famine was manufactured for tactical purposes by the Houthis who profited from stealing food while using a humanitarian crisis to force an end to the Saudi/American campaign against them. The more food they stole, the more money they made, the more people died and the more the propaganda circulated in Islamist mouthpieces like The Post urging that the Houthis be left alone.

Despite the revelations in the AP report, The Post continued pushing Islamist famine propaganda and members of the Senate continued relying on its reporting to undermine the US fight against Iran.

Erdogan and al-Houthi, like Jamal Khashoggi, were featured under Global Opinions. A highly visible banner touts “Post Opinions Arabic”. The Post’s global op-ed section doesn’t advertise foreign language translations for any other language. Its goal isn’t just influencing middle eastern politics. It doesn’t push op-eds in Persian, Turkish or, for that matter, Hebrew. Its goal, like that of Qatar, is the Arab world.

The regular Global Opinion section is already a mélange of Islamist axis agendas, attacks on China’s counterterrorism in Xinjiang, on Trump’s recognition of the Golan Heights, on Myanmar for fighting Islamic terrorism, promoting Iran’s puppet government in Baghdad, on Trump for backing the Saudis over Qatar, on French ‘Islamophobia’, and on Trump’s anti-Muslim ‘bigotry’.

But the Arabic op-eds read even more monotonously like Qatari propaganda with attacks on Saudi Arabia, Egypt’s President Sisi: a Saudi ally and opponent of Qatar’s Muslim Brotherhood allies.

There are no Arabic op-eds critical of Qatar. But there is one critical of Tunisia’s government by Fadil Aliriza. Fadil often writes for Middle East Eye, a Muslim Brotherhood site backed by Qatar.  MEE has been described as Qatar’s second media outlet. The Washington Post would be its third.

That’s no exaggeration.

Many of the Washington Post’s house headlines read like Qatari propaganda. “China has put 1 million Muslims in concentration camps. MBS had nothing to say,” a Fred Hiatt column headline screams.

MBS refers to the Saudi king. A prime Qatari target.

What does Saudi Arabia have to do with China? Not that much. Most Muslim countries, aside from members of the Islamist axis, have avoided offending China. Singling out MBS tells Americans nothing. It’s a message destined for Arab audiences in an Islamic slapfight between Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Many Washington Post columns on Saudi Arabia now read in this Hiattesque way, written in English for an audience of Arab and Muslim elites operating out of Washington D.C. and foreign capitals. There is a long history of the agents of influence of oil-rich states sponsoring Washington D.C. propaganda. But it’s the first time that they have managed to turn the leading paper in the District into their mouthpiece.

“Can I possibly work for such a regime, and still look at myself in the mirror each morning?” Hiatt demanded of anyone taking Saudi money. Meanwhile, on a PBS show, Hiatt fumed that the Saudis were hurting American interests. “Everything this reckless 33-year-old crown prince has done has hurt American interests. He entered this war in Yemen, which has been a disaster. He broke with Qatar, an American ally. That’s been harmful to U.S. interests.” None of this harms America. It harms Qatar.

Confusing our interests with Qatari interests is the sort of thing that a Qatari lobbyist would do.

The Post pretends to offer its readers, global perspectives. Instead, it treats them to propaganda from foreign regimes and terrorist organizations engaged in open and covert wars with the United States.

This would be a problem even if the Washington Post’s target audience weren’t our country’s leaders.

The Post took the lead in pushing foreign collusion narratives. But if a bunch of Russian bots on Facebook supposedly posed a gigantic threat to democracy, what sort of threat do agents of influence in a paper read by some of the most powerful people in Washington D.C. pose to our country?

There’s no sign that Russian bots on Facebook ever made a meaningful difference. But The Post’s Islamist propaganda has influenced Senate resolutions on Khashoggi and Yemen.

Now that the Washington Post’s efforts to push conspiracy theories about Russian collusion have failed, it may be time to look into its Qatari collusion.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

Pennsylvania Muslim Lawmaker: Prayer In Name Of Jesus Is “Islamophobic”

Ibrahim Hooper, call your office: there was an outbreak of “Islamophobia” Monday at the Pennsylvania State Assembly. Luckily, Muslim state Rep. Movita Johnson-Harrell was there to blow the whistle on this bigotry and hatred.

The “Islamophobia,” according to journalist Todd Starnes, was committed by another state Representative, Stephanie Borowicz, who prayed this to open a legislative session: “Jesus, you are our only hope. At the name of Jesus, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess Jesus, that you are Lord.”

Johnson-Harrell was livid. The prayer, she declared was “highly offensive to me, my guests, and other members of the House.” In a statement, she added that the prayer “blatantly represented the Islamophobia that exists among some leaders — leaders that are supposed to represent the people. I came to the Capitol to help build bipartisanship and collaborations regardless of race or religion to enhance the quality of life for everyone in the Commonwealth.”

There may be a real point in there. Rep. Borowicz’s prayer may have been inappropriate in a setting in which not everyone present was Christian. We have, however, seen many imams say prayers at various legislative bodies that are not non-sectarian, but manifestly Islamic and even condemning of Jews and Christians, while the non-Muslim lawmakers stand with oblivious heads bowed.

But “Islamophobic”? This illustrates how absurd charges of “Islamophobia” are, and how any manifestation of faith other than Islam is sometimes seen as offensive to Muslims. We have seen this before. Buried in the concluding paragraphs of a Christmas Eve 2018 Washington Times report about Muslims in Uganda forcing Christians to convert to Islam was the extraordinary revelation that in that country, Muslims now consider any public statement of the Christian Faith to be a calculated insult to Muslims, for which they can justifiably exact revenge.

“In June,” the Times reported, “a group of Muslims attacked Christian preachers in eastern Uganda during a ‘crusade,’ where Christians publicly profess their faith and invite others to join. Muslims in the town accused the Christians of mocking Islam by publicly saying Jesus was the Son of God.”

In response, said Christian pastor Moses Saku, the Muslims became violent: “They became very angry and began throwing rocks at Christians, chanting ‘Allah akbar.’ Many Christians were injured during the incident.”

The Christians appealed to the Muslims to have respect for those of other faith; the Muslims responded with contempt. One Muslim, Abubakar Yusuf, declared: “We have now declared a jihad against them. We are not going to allow anybody to despise Islamic teachings at their church or crusade. We will seek revenge.”

How did the Christians “despise Islamic teachings”? By preaching aspects of Christianity, such as the divinity of Christ, that Islam denies. The Christians, knowing how delicate their situation was, would never have dreamed of actually saying something critical about Islam itself; but to the Muslims who heard them, just enunciating the tenets of their Christian faith was criticism enough. And they refused to stand for it.

That incident, and now Johnson-Harrell’s “Islamophobia” charge, are, or should be, sobering news for the comfortable Christians of the West who have made an idol out of “interfaith dialogue” and fastidiously avoid saying anything remotely critical about Islam, even as the Muslim persecution of Christians continues worldwide.

A few years ago, when jihadis attacked AFDI’s Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest in Garland, Texas, some Christians castigated me for co-sponsoring and speaking at the event. They said that we were being needlessly provocative, poking Muslims in the eye, goading them, etc.

These charitable and enlightened Christians said that Christians should instead be deferential to others’ religious sensibilities. At the time, I responded to these people by explaining that giving in to violent intimidation (our event was a response to the jihad murder of the Charlie Hebdo Muhammad cartoonists in Paris) would only encourage more violent intimidation, and that given the fact that Muslims frequently found even basic expressions of Christian faith to be “provocative,” they were effectively cutting the ground out from under themselves and their children, making it impossible for them to practice Christianity in the future.

Movita Johnson-Harrell has now provided more proof that this was correct. By calling Borowicz’s prayer “Islamophobic,” she is in effect saying that the public expression of the Christian Faith mocks Islam and despises Islamic teachings.

The lesson is clear. If the advice of the cosseted, suburban Western Christians who were excoriating me for the Garland event is to be heeded, Christians should make no public expression of their faith at all, and convert to Islam, so as to avoid mocking, provoking, and offending Muslims, and poking them in the eye.

And when it comes to it, that is most likely the exact thing that those Christians will do. It’s already beginning: Pennsylvania House Minority Whip Jordan Harris, a Democrat (of course), stated: “Let me be clear. I am a Christian. I spend my Sunday mornings in church worshiping and being thankful for all that I have. But in no way does that mean I would flaunt my religion at those who worship differently than I do. There is no room in our Capitol building for actions such as this, and it’s incredibly disappointing that today’s opening prayer was so divisive.”

So Harris says that Christians must not flaunt their religion. Not coincidentally, that is exactly what Islamic law says about Christians: that they should carry on their worship quietly, behind closed doors, and never make public display of it. Oh, and by the way, speaking of flaunting one’s religion, Movita Johnson-Harrell wears a hijab. Harris is not on record objecting to that kind of flaunting one’s religion.

The Christian Harris who deplores Rep. Borowicz’s prayer should calm Movita Johnson-Harrell’s rage by converting to Islam and thus removing the source of her feelings of offense. Watch for it.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

Can Liberty Survive in American Public Education?

Last week we discussed The Un-American Education System in America, and I received a lot of feedback. Among those responding was Rich, who I quote:

As a retired public high school physical sciences teacher for 34 years, I couldn’t agree with you more. I used to start my unit on the origin of life and earth history by asking the students if the ideas about the origin of life and the origin of humans mattered much. Then I quoted the Declaration of Independence just to let them see that our founding fathers had some idea about the origin of humans and the origin of Rights. I was told by my Superintendent of Schools that I could not do that because that violated the separation of church and state. I was shocked but he insisted.

Noah Webster, author of the dictionary that bears his name, is also known as the “Father of American Scholarship and Education.” In Webster’s definition of the word education, he wrote:

To give children a good education in manners, arts and science is important; to give them a religious education is indispensable; and an immense responsibility rests on parents and guardians who neglect these duties.

Notice his emphasis on education is NOT the responsibility of government, federal or state, but rather parents.

During the years of 1776-1835 in America, various educational choices were established that brought about a 70-100% literacy rate in the colonies, much higher than what existed in Europe, which had many more universities. During the founding era, churches (NOT the government) became involved and established charity schools for the poor in the community who could not afford to pay teachers. These were known as “Free Schools”.

With the Bible at the heart of schooling, early Americans understood the role of government to be a simple one: protect the God-given rights of life, liberty and property found in Genesis 1:26-27.  They understood the role of education as coming to know God and the scriptures, gaining knowledge about creation, learning what was needed for a productive life, and learning to live right by God.

Tragically, public education has become a godless, monolithic monopoly today (overseen by government bureaucrats rather than parents) with forced, compulsory attendance and content that is more about teaching students what to think rather than learning how to think.

The deluded Supreme Court of 1963 believed the Bible and prayer should be banned from schools indefinitely.  What fruit has this netted?  Academically, America is near the bottom of science and math scores in developed countries. Even worse, crime and violence have increased dramatically on school campuses in addition to our neighborhoods.

So how can liberty survive in America? By teaching the safeguards of Liberty.

On his 80th birthday, President Herbert Hoover concluded:

Our Founding Fathers did not invent the priceless boon of individual freedom and respect for the dignity of men. That great gift to mankind sprang from the Creator and not from governments. If our YOUTH are rightly instructed in the faith of our fathersthen our power will be stronger… The great documents of that heritage are not from Karl Marx. They are from the Bible, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.  Within them alone can the safeguards of freedom survive. [emphasis added]

Schedule an event or learn more about your Constitution with Jake MacAulay and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.

The Russian Collusion Sideshow: A Coup Wrapped in a Hoax Inside a Vendetta

After 675 days of investigation, 2,800 subpoenas, 500 warrants, and 500 witness interviews here are a few things that never happened in the time-consuming, money-wasting, slanderous attempt to erase the results of the 2016 election known as the Mueller investigation:

  1. After endless speculation and daily smears Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and other people whose supposed legal jeopardy was the subject of around-the-clock media speculation in the last year were not indicted.
  2. No one in the Trump campaign or his inner circle was implicated or charged with conspiring with Russia to fix the 2016 election, as the media authoritatively claimed day-after-day throughout the last two years.
  3. The president was not subpoenaed though the almost hysterical pundits of the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party known as the drive-by media assured us he would be.
  4. Though endless hours of speculation centered on the President’s imminent firing of Mueller it never happened.
  5. The ceaseless attacks against President Trump disguised as news constantly told us the President obstructed justice by interfering with the Mueller investigation. However, in a letter to Congress, Attorney General Barr after mentioning he was required to notify lawmakers if any top Justice Department officials ever interfered with the Mueller investigation stated, “There were no such instances.”

Completing an investigation initiated by the CABAL in the Justice Department dedicated to reversing the outcome of the 2016 election, an investigation which did not meet the Justice Department’s own standard for appointing a Special Prosecutor; the presence of an underlying crime, Mueller is finally finished. Not long after the news broke, Fox News White House correspondent John Roberts said, “The feeling at the White House right now is that this is finally over.”

Unfortunately for those of us who want to get about the business of making America great again, this will probably be a yes and a no. Mueller’s report not recommending any additional indictments doesn’t mean that the Democrats have given up on their eternal Trump-Russia investigation. Since those who knew there was nothing to this in the first place anticipated this possibility. This is why the House Democrats jump-started new Trump-Russia investigations to ensure it will never be over. Does anyone doubt such investigations will continue, at least until the 2020 elections? In reality, this has been and is government funded media-fueled opposition research and Democrat campaigning for whichever socialist they eventually nominate.

During one of their relentless wall-to-wall bash Trump panels even the dying CNN, nest of the most outspoken of the so-called journalists suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, had to admit this was a “Huge Victory for the President,” and that Trump was “Vindicated.”

Here are few samplings from their less than enthusiastic announcement of their long-sought dream: the end of the Mueller investigation.

Their Commander Wolf Blitzer said, “President Trump has won a huge victory.”

Evan Pérez commented, “He’s been vindicated by them.”

The rabidly anti-Trump Gloria Borger agreed, “And then he’s now vindicated, exactly.” She added, “You know–how do you manage that politically? I mean, we obviously can’t jump the gun here. We have to see what comes out from Barr, and what’s in the report. But if I’m at Mar-A-Lago with the president, as Pamela has been reporting, the lawyers are … that I would be very happy.”

Another of CNN’s trained talking heads Shimon Prokupecz said, “A couple of victories here. The president did not have to sit down for an interview. They were so concerned about that, because he’d get caught up in lies–and there’d be perjury traps. Okay, so that’s now over. No more people being indicted. Sealed, unsealed–no more indictments. Mueller is done. Huge victory for the president.”

The uncompromising off the rails nature of these investigations is exemplified in their incessant demands for President Trump’s tax returns. He’s been audited by the IRS every year for more than a dozen years. Does anyone believe if the highly politicized Obama IRS of Commissioner Douglas Shulman and Lois Lerner had found any irregularities in Trump’s returns they wouldn’t have been leaked? Does anyone in the Democrat echo chamber media ever mention that Nancy Pelosi refuses to make her tax returns public?

So one chapter may be ending but never fear the sequels are here. It is all about damaging President Trump enough so that he will lose his bid for re-election. Add the votes of the low-information and indoctrinated by the nightly news sheep to the illegals, the felons, the socialists, and the America Last crowd and the Democrats hope to deliver us to Bernie, Beto, and their Green New Deal brand of Venezuelan worker’s paradise.

Let’s hope there’re enough people who’ve swallowed the red pill, had the scales wiped from their eyes, and realize the entire Trump – Russia sideshow was designed to front for a silent coup and to cover up the only real colluding that took place in the 2016 election. Hillary colluding with DNC to rig the nomination process against Bernie. And Hillary’s campaign colluding with Fusion GPS who hired former British spy Christopher Steele to compile a “dossier” filled with fake news and garbage that was all dressed up by the FBI, taken to the FISA Court, and presented as a legitimate intelligence document. Let’s hope.

Many Are Calling For The Media To Be Held Legally Accountable For Relentlessly Lying To The American People About Russian Collusion

Now that the Mueller investigation is over and his report has shown that there was absolutely no collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, the focus is rapidly turning to those that endlessly propagated extremely damaging conspiracy theories about the president of the United States.  For 675 days, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and NBC engaged in a fake news binge unlike anything that we have ever seen before in all of U.S. history.  They relentlessly pushed out news story after news story touting that we would soon have “evidence” that Trump had colluded with the Russians when there was no evidence at all.  They kept telling us that “indictments are coming”, that “the noose is tightening” and that “the walls are closing in on this administration” when none of that was ever true.  The entire Russian collusion narrative was a piece of fiction created by Hillary Clinton’s campaign team to explain her shocking election loss, but once it was embraced by the mainstream media and pro-Clinton members of federal law enforcement agencies it quickly snowballed out of control.  Now the time has come for the mainstream media to be held accountable for lying to the American people on a massive scale, and later in this article, I will explain how this can be done.

And I am certainly not the only one calling for the mainstream media to be held accountable.  Other prominent conservative voices are also calling for accountability

Donald Trump Jr lamented “more than two years of non-stop conspiracy theories from CNN, MSNBC, BuzzFeed and the rest of the mainstream media” and added: “It’s my hope that honest journalists within the media have the courage to hold these now fully debunked truthers accountable and treat them with the scorn and ridicule that they so deserve.”

Sean Hannity, a Fox News host in frequent contact with the president, was quick to assist. He issued a series of ominous warnings, variously concerning conspiracy theories, lies and attempts to rig elections.

“CNN, MSNBC, and the mainstream media have lied to the the [sic] American [sic] for [two] plus years,” Hannity said in a tweet. “Now they will be held accountable.” Another post took a cavalier approach to punctuation: “MSNBC CONSPIRACY NETWORK LIARS FAKE NEWS CNN LIARS NY TIMES WAPO LIARS.”

We are talking about a mountain of lies that is absolutely colossal.  According to Axios, more than half a million articles were pumped out by the mainstream media over the course of the Mueller investigation…

Since May 2017, 533,074 web articles have been published about Russia and Trump/Mueller, generating 245 million interactions — including likes, comments and shares — on Twitter and Facebook, according to data from social-media analytics company NewsWhip.

The reason why tens of millions of Americans expected President Trump to be impeached was because it had been pounded into their heads day after day after day.

But it was a complete and utter lie the entire time.

Anyone with half a brain could see very early in the investigation that there was nothing there.  When I ran for Congress, I told the entire state of Idaho during a televised debate that the Mueller investigation was nothing more than a witch hunt and that it should be immediately shut down.  But of course that didn’t happen, and Robert Mueller spent 675 days turning over every rock that he possibly could, and after all that time he never found any evidence of collusion with Russia.

Sadly, the lack of evidence didn’t stop the mainstream news networks from relentlessly pounding on this story night after night

From January 20, 2017 (Inauguration Day) through March 21, 2019 (the last night before special counsel Robert Mueller sent his report to the Attorney General), the ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts produced a combined 2,284 minutes of “collusion” coverage, most of it (1,909 minutes) following Mueller’s appointment on May 17, 2017.

That’s an average of roughly three minutes a night, every night, for an astonishing 791 days — a level of coverage normally associated only with a major war or a presidential election. In fact, TV reporters devoted more airtime to the Russia investigation than any of the Trump administration’s policy initiatives — immigration, tax reform, trade, North Korea, ISIS, the economy, veterans’ affairs, the opioid epidemic, to name but a few. Since his presidency began, nearly one-fifth (18.8%) of all of Trump’s evening news coverage has been about this one investigation.

Clearly, the mainstream media has greatly wronged the American people.

So what can be done?

Well, President Trump himself once suggested a potential remedy

“With all of the Fake News coming out of NBC and the Networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their License? Bad for country!” Trump, a Republican, wrote in a post on Twitter on Wednesday.

In this day and age when everyone is so concerned about “fake news”, why can’t we challenge the broadcast licenses of all the big mainstream news networks?

After all, they all willingly participated in propagating the biggest fake news hoax in all of U.S. history even after it became exceedingly clear that it was a giant sham.

Even former members of the mainstream media are declaring that it is time for some serious accountability.  For example, in his latest Reality Check Ben Swann absolutely ripped his former colleagues in the mainstream media to shreds.

And one of the biggest names in the mainstream media, Matt Taibbi, says that the “sheer scale of the errors and exaggerations this time around” absolutely dwarfs the lies that were told about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq…

As a purely journalistic failure, however, WMD was a pimple compared to Russiagate. The sheer scale of the errors and exaggerations this time around dwarfs the last mess. Worse, it’s led to most journalists accepting a radical change in mission. We’ve become sides-choosers, obliterating the concept of the press as an independent institution whose primary role is sorting fact and fiction.

We had the sense to eventually look inward a little in the WMD affair, which is the only reason we escaped that episode with any audience left. Is the press even capable of that kind of self-awareness now? WMD damaged our reputation. If we don’t turn things around, this story will destroy it.

The mainstream media certainly deserves to collapse, and nobody should mourn them when they are gone.

Once upon a time in America, the news media consisted of highly trained journalists that tried really hard to stick to the facts.

But now it is filled with political hacks that don’t even try to hide their hatred for President Trump and Republicans.

A “media revolution” is just one of the areas we need to tackle if we are to have any hope of ever turning this country around.  If we want to be a nation of integrity, those that have greatly violated our trust must be held accountable.

One of the things that I greatly appreciate about President Trump is that he is the first president in modern American history to stand up and call the mainstream media a bunch of liars.

Because that is precisely what they are, and America would be a much better place if all of the big media companies were to go out of business.

Article posted with permission from Michael Snyder

The Islamic Hate That Killed A Little Girl Still Haunts Toulouse

Seven years ago, Mohammed Merah pointed a gun at the head of 7-year-old Miriam Monsonego.

The blonde little girl was the daughter of the school principal and moments ago had been playing in a French schoolyard. The Monsonego family were Jewish immigrants from Morocco. The Ozar HaTorah school invaded by the Muslim terrorist was home to the children of Jewish refugees from North Africa and the Middle East who had fled to France after their countries had fallen to Muslim rule.

North African Jews had first received equal rights under French rule. When the French left, Jews lost their lives and their rights. Many began new lives again in places like Toulouse and its schoolyard.

But the Muslim violence that had deprived them of their rights and their lives followed them there.

Before Miriam, Mohammed had murdered a Rabbi and his two little boys, six and three years old. The other children ran. He cornered Miriam, grabbed the little girl by her hair, and pulled the trigger.

A miracle happened and the gun jammed. But with the determination that made him a hero to many French Muslims, he didn’t give up. He switched guns and shot her.

As she lay bleeding, he lifted up her head and shot the dying little Jewish girl two more times.

Miriam died in her father’s arms.

“I kissed her, I said ‘goodbye’, I did not think it was going to be the last time,” her mother later said.

Seven years later, the brutal Islamic massacre of March 19 was commemorated in France, but forgotten outside it. The same American corporate media focusing in detail on shootings in New Zealand, with a special emphasis on the victims, hadn’t paid much attention to Miriam even right after her death.

An AP story of a little over a hundred words briefly covered the anniversary. Miriam’s name was left out.

But the story isn’t over. It’s just beginning.

In 2018, anti-Semitic acts increased by 74% in France. Mohammed Merah, Miriam’s killer, remains a hero to many Muslims. Even though both Merah was a terrorist trained in Pakistan and Afghanistan, a popular French documentary portrayed the killer as suffering from mental illness. “I Love Death as You Love Life”, a play by Mohammed Kacimi about the terrorist was condemned by families of the victims.

The play was based on Merah’s rants to the police in which the “soldier of Allah” declared that Jews had to be “removed from the face of the earth” and that he regretted not being able to “kill more Jews”.

A year after the massacre, a man wearing an Arafat shirt was photographed performing the quenelle, an ironic version of the Heil Hitler salute spread by Muslim and leftists in French pop culture to taunt Jews, outside the school. Muslim hip-hop acts in France have celebrated Merah and his murderous spree.

Merah’s massacre of Jewish children was not accidental. Nor was it one man’s horrifying crime.

The origins of the attack lay in Islamic anti-Semitism. Merah identified as a “soldier of Allah”. His murderous hatred for the Jews came not merely from YouTube videos, but Islamic family values.

Mohammed had been “raised to be an anti-Semite because anti-Semitism was part of the atmosphere at home,” Abdelghani Merah, his brother, had said.

Another brother was an Al Qaeda supporter who was sentenced to twenty years in prison in 2017. Souad, his sister, praised Mohammed, and said that, “Jews deserved to be killed.”

When the New York Times ventured into a Muslim neighborhood in Toulouse later that year, it had no trouble finding locals who praised the Muslim terrorist as a “hero” and a “martyr of Islam”.

A Muslim family tried to name their child after him.

To understand the origins of Rep. Omar or Rep. Tlaib’s anti-Semitism, look to the Merah family.

Shortly after the attack, a rally in support of Merah was held. Slogans in support of the Muslim terrorist were spray-painted outside the site of the massacre and near the Great Synagogue of Toulouse.

The 2019 anniversary commemorations were held behind barricades under the protection of a heavy police presence. The Interior Minister described the dead as, “victims of anti-Semitism, this poisonous infection.” But there was no mention of the Islamic motivations for the massacre of Jewish children.

Statements by public officials attributed the attack, along with so many others, to “barbarism”, to “radicalism” and to “racism”.

“Seven years after the massacre,” Miriam’s father, Yaacov Monsonego, who still works at the school where his daughter was murdered, said: “Seven as the number of victims. As the age of Miriam, the little princess who should have been in her class right now.”

A few of Miriam’s classmates, now teenagers, remembered her as being a very special girl.

Outside the school, the haunting sounds of El Moleh Rachamim, Lord of Mercy, the Jewish prayer for the souls of the dead, rang in the air. “Holy and pure, they shine like the radiance of the heavens”, “beloved children who were murdered”, “shelter them eternally under your wings”, and “the Lord is their inheritance, may they rest in peace”.

Miriam, who will always be seven, and never eight, who will never join her classmates at the mall, will never date, will never have children of her own, is at rest on Jerusalem’s Har HaMenuchot, the Mount of Rest, where no one will scrawl Islamist slogans on her grave or perform the quenelle in front of it.

The Jews of Toulouse are also leaving. The Jewish Deputy Mayor of Toulouse urged the Jews to stop wearing identifiable clothing and declared that, “the future of the Jewish people in Europe is hopeless.” 600 Jewish families had left Toulouse and emigrated to Israel since the brutal schoolyard attack.

Merah’s crime had accomplished its purpose. The ethnic cleansing of the Jews of the area.

The Deputy Mayor was soon forced to apologize for blaming Jewish flight on political Islam and the sizable Muslim population. Toulouse’s mayor relived him of his duties and demanded his resignation.

In an echo of the Democrat refusal to support a resolution condemning Rep. Omar’s anti-Semitic comments, a move to have Muslims condemn anti-Semitism last year met with “violent” opposition.

Also last year, Imam Mohamed Tatai of the Grand Mosque of Toulouse urged Muslims to kill Jews.

The prophet of Islam, the leader of an interfaith dialogue group “told us about the final and decisive battle: ‘Judgement Day will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews. The Jews will hide behind the stones and the trees, and the stones and the trees will say: Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.'”

The infamous Hadith not only appeared in the Hamas charter but is popular in the Muslim world. And the Islamic hate that killed Miriam still haunts the darkening streets and homes of Toulouse.

Many of Toulouse’s Jews had fled Islamic hate in the Middle East. They are fleeing it again in France.

The Muslim massacre of Jewish children in Toulouse came a few weeks after the Jewish holiday of Purim. Miriam and the other murdered children would have had one last year in which to dress up in costumes, eat candy and enjoy life in celebration of G-d’s defeat of Haman’s plot to massacre the Jews.

2,400 years ago in the Middle East, a man named Haman wrote a fatwa to, “exterminate, murder and destroy all the Jews, from lads to elders, children and women.” The Hamans of Islam have written countless such fatwas. “There are no civilians in Israel. The population—males, females and children—are the army reserve soldiers, and thus can be killed,” Sheikh Rashid Ghannouchi declared.

The New York Times dubbed Ghannouchi a “moderate”. The Washington Post praised him as a “scholar” and a “voice of hope”. Reuters called him a “respected scholar”. Obama’s State Department feted him.

The same media outlets that have cried in outrage over the New Zealand mosque shootings praise the “moderate” Islamist “scholars” who urge the mass murder of Jewish children.

Purim celebrates the defeat of Haman’s genocidal plot. But the Hamans of today are all the rage.

The seventh anniversary of the massacre occurred only a few days before Purim under the shadow of murderous Islamic anti-Semitism around the world, from threats in Toulouse to rockets over Tel Aviv, from Rep. Omar’s anti-Semitism in Washington D.C. to support for Iran’s nuclear program in Brussels.

Its brief prayers are quickly silenced by the media’s propaganda, smears and silence.

The children of Toulouse who stood at a vigil mourning their dead classmates will once again put on costumes, deliver treats and sing. But they will do so quietly because, though it cannot be said, Toulouse has more Mohammeds than Mordechais. And many of them call Mohammed Merah a role model.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

The Making of a Monster: We’re All Lab Rats in the Government’s Secret Experiments

“But these weren’t the kind of monsters that had tentacles and rotting skin, the kind a seven-year-old might be able to wrap his mind around—they were monsters with human faces, in crisp uniforms, marching in lockstep, so banal you don’t recognize them for what they are until it’s too late.” — Ransom Riggs, Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children

The U.S. government, in its pursuit of so-called monsters, has itself become a monster.

This is not a new development, nor is it a revelation.

This is a government that has in recent decades unleashed untold horrors upon the world—including its own citizenry—in the name of global conquest, the acquisition of greater wealth, scientific experimentation, and technological advances, all packaged in the guise of the greater good.

Mind you, there is no greater good when the government is involved. There is only greater greed for money and power.

Unfortunately, the public has become so easily distracted by the political spectacle coming out of Washington, DC, that they are altogether oblivious to the grisly experiments, barbaric behavior and inhumane conditions that have become synonymous with the U.S. government.

These horrors are being meted out against humans and animals alike.

It’s heartbreaking enough when you hear about police shooting family dogs that pose no threat—beloved pets that are “guilty” of little more than barking, or wagging a tag, or racing towards them in greeting—at an alarming rate somewhere in the vicinity of 500 dogs a day.

What I’m about to share goes beyond heartbreaking to horrifying.

For instance, did you know that the U.S. government has been buying hundreds of dogs and cats from “Asian meat markets” as part of a gruesome experiment into food-borne illnesses? The cannibalistic experiments involve killing cats and dogs purchased from Colombia, Brazil, Vietnam, China and Ethiopia, and then feeding the dead remains to laboratory kittens, bred in government laboratories for the express purpose of being infected with a disease and then killed.

It gets more gruesome.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has been removing parts of dogs’ brains to see how it affects their breathing; applying electrodes to dogs’ spinal cords (before and after severing them) to see how it impacts their cough reflexes; and implanting pacemakers in dogs’ hearts and then inducing them to have heart attacks (before draining their blood). All of the laboratory dogs are killed during the course of these experiments.

It’s not just animals that are being treated like lab rats by government agencies.

“We the people” have also become the police state’s guinea pigs: to be caged, branded, experimented upon without our knowledge or consent, and then conveniently discarded and left to suffer from the after-effects.

Back in 2017, FEMA “inadvertently” exposed nearly 10,000 firefighters, paramedics and other responders to a deadly form of ricin during simulated bioterrorism response sessions. In 2015, it was discovered that an Army lab had been “mistakenly” shipping deadly anthrax to labs and defense contractors for a decade.

While these particular incidents have been dismissed as “accidents,” you don’t have to dig very deep or go very back in the nation’s history to uncover numerous cases in which the government deliberately conducted secret experiments on an unsuspecting populace—citizens and noncitizens alike—making healthy people sick by spraying them with chemicals, injecting them with infectious diseases and exposing them to airborne toxins.

At the time, the government reasoned that it was legitimate to experiment on people who did not have full rights in society such as prisoners, mental patients, and poor blacks.

In Alabama, for example, 600 black men with syphilis were allowed to suffer without proper medical treatment in order to study the natural progression of untreated syphilis. In California, older prisoners had testicles from livestock and from recently executed convicts implanted in them to test their virility. In Connecticut, mental patients were injected with hepatitis.

In Maryland, sleeping prisoners had a pandemic flu virus sprayed up their noses. In Georgia, two dozen “volunteering” prison inmates had gonorrhea bacteria pumped directly into their urinary tracts through the penis. In Michigan, male patients at an insane asylum were exposed to the flu after first being injected with an experimental flu vaccine. In Minnesota, 11 public service employee “volunteers” were injected with malaria, then starved for five days.

In New York, dying patients had cancer cells introduced into their systems. In Ohio, over 100 inmates were injected with live cancer cells. Also in New York, prisoners at a reformatory prison were also split into two groups to determine how a deadly stomach virus was spread: the first group was made to swallow an unfiltered stool suspension, while the second group merely breathed in germs sprayed into the air. And in Staten Island, children with mental retardation were given hepatitis orally and by injection to see if they could then be cured.

As the Associated Press reports, “The late 1940s and 1950s saw huge growth in the U.S. pharmaceutical and health care industries, accompanied by a boom in prisoner experiments funded by both the government and corporations. By the 1960s, at least half the states allowed prisoners to be used as medical guinea pigs … because they were cheaper than chimpanzees.”

Moreover, “Some of these studies, mostly from the 1940s to the ’60s, apparently were never covered by news media. Others were reported at the time, but the focus was on the promise of enduring new cures, while glossing over how test subjects were treated.”

Media blackouts, propaganda, spin. Sound familiar?

How many government incursions into our freedoms have been blacked out, buried under “entertainment” news headlines, or spun in such a way as to suggest that anyone voicing a word of caution is paranoid or conspiratorial?

Unfortunately, these incidents are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the atrocities the government has inflicted on an unsuspecting populace in the name of secret experimentation.

For instance, there was the U.S. military’s secret race-based testing of mustard gas on more than 60,000 enlisted men. As NPR reports, “All of the World War II experiments with mustard gas were done in secret and weren’t recorded on the subjects’ official military records. Most do not have proof of what they went through. They received no follow-up health care or monitoring of any kind. And they were sworn to secrecy about the tests under threat of dishonorable discharge and military prison time, leaving some unable to receive adequate medical treatment for their injuries, because they couldn’t tell doctors what happened to them.”

And then there was the CIA’s MKULTRA program in which hundreds of unsuspecting American civilians and military personnel were dosed with LSD, some having the hallucinogenic drug slipped into their drinks at the beach, in city bars, at restaurants. As Time reports, “before the documentation and other facts of the program were made public, those who talked of it were frequently dismissed as being psychotic.”

Now one might argue that this is all ancient history and that the government today is different from the government of yesteryear, but has the U.S. government really changed?

Has the government become any more humane, any more respectful of the rights of the citizenry?

Has it become any more transparent or willing to abide by the rule of law? Has it become any more truthful about its activities? Has it become any more cognizant of its appointed role as a guardian of our rights?

Or has the government simply hunkered down and hidden its nefarious acts and dastardly experiments under layers of secrecy, legalism and obfuscations? Has it not become wilier, more slippery, more difficult to pin down?

Having mastered the Orwellian art of Doublespeak and followed the Huxleyan blueprint for distraction and diversion, are we not dealing with a government that is simply craftier and more conniving that it used to be?

Consider this: after revelations about the government’s experiments spanning the 20th century spawned outrage, the government began looking for human guinea pigs in other countries, where “clinical trials could be done more cheaply and with fewer rules.”

In Guatemala, prisoners and patients at a mental hospital were infected with syphilis, “apparently to test whether penicillin could prevent some sexually transmitted disease.” In Uganda, U.S.-funded doctors “failed to give the AIDS drug AZT to all the HIV-infected pregnant women in a study… even though it would have protected their newborns.” Meanwhile, in Nigeria, children with meningitis were used to test an antibiotic named Trovan. Eleven children died and many others were left disabled.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Case in point: back in 2016, it was announced that scientists working for the Department of Homeland Security would begin releasing various gases and particles on crowded subway platforms as part of an experiment aimed at testing bioterror airflow in New York subways.

The government insisted that the gases released into the subways by the DHS were nontoxic and did not pose a health risk. It’s in our best interests, they said, to understand how quickly a chemical or biological terrorist attack might spread. And look how cool the technology is—said the government cheerleaders—that scientists can use something called DNATrax to track the movement of microscopic substances in air and food. (Imagine the kinds of surveillance that could be carried out by the government using trackable airborne microscopic substances you breathe in or ingest.)

Mind you, this is the same government that in 1949 sprayed bacteria into the Pentagon’s air handling system, then the world’s largest office building. In 1950, special ops forces sprayed bacteria from Navy ships off the coast of Norfolk and San Francisco, in the latter case exposing all of the city’s 800,000 residents.

In 1953, government operatives staged “mock” anthrax attacks on St. Louis, Minneapolis, and Winnipeg using generators placed on top of cars. Local governments were reportedly told that “‘invisible smokescreen[s]’ were being deployed to mask the city on enemy radar.” Later experiments covered territory as wide-ranging as Ohio to Texas and Michigan to Kansas.

In 1965, the government’s experiments in bioterror took aim at Washington’s National Airport, followed by a 1966 experiment in which army scientists exposed a million subway NYC passengers to airborne bacteria that causes food poisoning.

And this is the same government that has taken every bit of technology sold to us as being in our best interests—GPS devices, surveillance, nonlethal weapons, etc.—and used it against us, to track, control and trap us.

So, no, I don’t think the government’s ethics have changed much over the years. It’s just taken its nefarious programs undercover.

The question remains: why is the government doing this? The answer is always the same: money, power and total domination.

It’s the same answer no matter which totalitarian regime is in power.

The mindset driving these programs has, appropriately, been likened to that of Nazi doctors experimenting on Jews. As the Holocaust Museum recounts, Nazi physicians “conducted painful and often deadly experiments on thousands of concentration camp prisoners without their consent.”

The Nazi’s unethical experiments ran the gamut from freezing experiments using prisoners to find an effective treatment for hypothermia, tests to determine the maximum altitude for parachuting out of a plane, injecting prisoners with malaria, typhus, tuberculosis, typhoid fever, yellow fever, and infectious hepatitis, exposing prisoners to phosgene and mustard gas, and mass sterilization experiments.

The horrors being meted out against the American people can be traced back, in a direct line, to the horrors meted out in Nazi laboratories. In fact, following the second World War, the U.S. government recruited many of Hitler’s employees, adopted his protocols, embraced his mindset about law and order and experimentation, and implemented his tactics in incremental steps.

Sounds far-fetched, you say? Read on. It’s all documented.

As historian Robert Gellately recounts, the Nazi police state was initially so admired for its efficiency and order by the world powers of the day that Herbert Hoover, then-head of the FBI, actually sent one of his right-hand men, Edmund Patrick Coffey, to Berlin in January 1938 at the invitation of Germany’s secret police, the Gestapo.

The FBI was so impressed with the Nazi regime that, according to the New York Times, in the decades after World War II, the FBI, along with other government agencies, aggressively recruited at least a thousand Nazis, including some of Hitler’s highest henchmen.

All told, thousands of Nazi collaborators—including the head of a Nazi concentration camp, among others—were given secret visas and brought to America by way of Project Paperclip. Subsequently, they were hired on as spies, informants and scientific advisers, and then camouflaged to ensure that their true identities and ties to Hitler’s holocaust machine would remain unknown. All the while, thousands of Jewish refugees were refused entry visas to the U.S. on the grounds that it could threaten national security.

Adding further insult to injury, American taxpayers have been paying to keep these ex-Nazis on the U.S. government’s payroll ever since. And in true Gestapo fashion, anyone who has dared to blow the whistle on the FBI’s illicit Nazi ties has found himself spied upon, intimidated, harassed and labeled a threat to national security.

As if the government’s covert, taxpayer-funded employment of Nazis after World War II wasn’t bad enough, U.S. government agencies—the FBI, CIA and the military—have since fully embraced many of the Nazi’s well-honed policing tactics, and have used them repeatedly against American citizens.

It’s certainly easy to denounce the full-frontal horrors carried out by the scientific and medical community within a despotic regime such as Nazi Germany, but what do you do when it’s your own government that claims to be a champion of human rights all the while allowing its agents to engage in the foulest, bases and most despicable acts of torture, abuse and experimentation?

When all is said and done, this is not a government that has our best interests at heart.

This is not a government that values us.

Perhaps the answer lies in The Third Man, Carol Reed’s influential 1949 film starring Joseph Cotten and Orson Welles. In the film, set in a post-WW II Vienna, rogue war profiteer Harry Lime has come to view human carnage with a callous indifference, unconcerned that the diluted penicillin he’s been trafficking underground has resulted in the tortured deaths of young children.

Challenged by his old friend Holly Martins to consider the consequences of his actions, Lime responds, “In these days, old man, nobody thinks in terms of human beings. Governments don’t, so why should we?

“Have you ever seen any of your victims?” asks Martins.

“Victims?” responds Limes, as he looks down from the top of a Ferris wheel onto a populace reduced to mere dots on the ground. “Look down there. Tell me. Would you really feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever? If I offered you twenty thousand pounds for every dot that stopped, would you really, old man, tell me to keep my money, or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare? Free of income tax, old man. Free of income tax — the only way you can save money nowadays.”

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, this is how the U.S. government sees us, too, when it looks down upon us from its lofty perch.

To the powers-that-be, the rest of us are insignificant specks, faceless dots on the ground.

To the architects of the American police state, we are not worthy or vested with inherent rights. This is how the government can justify treating us like economic units to be bought and sold and traded, or caged rats to be experimented upon and discarded when we’ve outgrown our usefulness.

To those who call the shots in the halls of government, “we the people” are merely the means to an end.

“We the people”—who think, who reason, who take a stand, who resist, who demand to be treated with dignity and care, who believe in freedom and justice for all—have become obsolete, undervalued citizens of a totalitarian state that, in the words of Rod Serling, “has patterned itself after every dictator who has ever planted the ripping imprint of a boot on the pages of history since the beginning of time. It has refinements, technological advances, and a more sophisticated approach to the destruction of human freedom.”

In this sense, we are all Romney Wordsworth, the condemned man in Serling’s Twilight Zone episode “The Obsolete Man.”

The Obsolete Man” speaks to the dangers of a government that views people as expendable once they have outgrown their usefulness to the State. Yet—and here’s the kicker—this is where the government through its monstrous inhumanity also becomes obsolete. As Serling noted in his original script for “The Obsolete Man,” “Any state, any entity, any ideology which fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of Man…that state is obsolete.

How do you defeat a monster? You start by recognizing the monster for what it is.

Article posted with permission from John Whitehead

The Green Bad Deal

The recently-proposed Green New Deal is proof that climate change is for progressive Democrats what terrorism is for neoconservative Republicans: a ready-made excuse to expand government and curtail liberty. This radical plan would authorize the US government to seize control of major sectors of the US economy, phase out gasoline-fueled cars, make buildings “energy efficient,” and even replace air travel with rail travel.

Supporters of the Green New Deal claim that the science regarding the risk of climate change is “settled.” However, the science is far from settled. Many of the claims regarding climate change have been debunked.

Some supporters of policies like the Green New Deal have actually supported criminalizing dissent from the so-called “settled” science of climate change. This reveals the authoritarianism of some people demanding Americans give up real liberty and prosperity because of phantom fears of impending environmental disaster.

Like all forms of socialism, the Green New Deal suffers from what Ludwig von Mises identified as the “calculation problem.” Knowledge of the most efficient use of resources is conveyed by prices set in a free market. Prices reflect individuals’ subjective preferences regarding the best use of resources. When government uses force to remove resources from the marketplace, it makes it impossible for the price system to function, leaving government officials and private citizens unable to determine the most efficient use of resources. That is why every attempt at government management of the economy inevitably reduces the people’s standard of living.

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has dismissed concerns regarding the almost 100 trillion dollars ten-year cost of implementing the Green New Deal by suggesting that Congress simply make the Federal Reserve pay for it by creating new money. Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s claim is rooted in Modern Monetary Theory. This theory states that, when government controls the currency, it need not worry about running up large debt for welfare and war; it can have the central bank print more money to pay for more government.

Modern Monetary Theory is not modern. The Federal Reserve has facilitated the growth of government by printing money since its creation. It is no coincidence the birth of the Federal Reserve was immediately followed by the rise of the welfare-warfare state.

Whether done to monetize the federal debt or to jump-start economic growth, the Federal Reserve’s creation of new money harms the economy. In fact, Fed-induced distortions, caused by actions including money creation and interest rate manipulation, are the root cause of the boom-and-bust cycle that plagues the American economy. The Green New Deal would, in addition to its other negative impacts, hasten and deepen the inevitable Federal Reserve-caused economic crisis facing America. It would also increase the hidden and regressive inflation tax.

Ironically, the Green New Deal also would likely damage the environment. History shows that the most effective way to protect the environment is with a free-market economy that respects property rights. Therefore, those concerned with protecting the environment should support the free market, along with a legal system that holds private property owners accountable when their actions damage the environment or harm other individuals or their property.

Article posted with permission from Ron Paul