A WordPress Blog-THE CHURCH MILITANT Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse. ALL CONTENT FROM HTTPS://RATHEREXPOSETHEM.BLOGSPOT.COM MOVED TO THIS NEW BLOG, MAY 2020
YouTube has now banned alternative views on health. Here’s what you need to know about this radical new change. 0:00 Introduction: New YouTube ban 0:12 What this new ban means 6:38 The #1 ranking video for the keto diet 12:05 What is your opinion? YouTube has just banned anything related to health that doesn’t align with the general medical consensus. If any information related to health doesn’t agree with the World Health Organization, the video won’t necessarily be taken down, but it may be hard to find. This is supposed to protect viewers against misinformation and promote high-quality health information. But, their definition of misinformation is anything that opposes their viewpoint. I currently have collected 7,607 success stories—I’m helping people. My information is not misinformation. It’s helpful information. Traditional medicine doesn’t work for everyone, and people are looking for inexpensive natural remedies. How are they supposed to find alternative viewpoints or opinions? A lot of people are searching for the keto diet. However, many medical professionals don't really understand nutritional ketosis. Many times, doctors don’t get training in nutrition or alternatives. Yet these are the people who get to control this information. Healthy ketosis is not toxic or dangerous. Ketones are a super fuel and are antioxidants. On the other hand, glucose is dangerous and toxic. I would love to get your opinion on this situation. Please click the link above and go through the survey questions to let me know your opinion on this recent radical change of suppressing alternative viewpoints on health. Dr. Eric Berg DC Bio: Dr. Berg, age 58, is a chiropractor who specializes in Healthy Ketosis and intermittent fasting. He is the author of the best-selling book The Healthy Keto Plan, and is the Director of Dr. Berg Nutritionals®. He no longer practices, but focuses on health education through social media. Follow Me On Social Media: Facebook: https://bit.ly/FB-DrBerg Instagram: https://bit.ly/IG-DrBerg Anchor: https://bit.ly/Anchor-DrBerg TikTok: https://bit.ly/TikTok-DrBerg Send a Message to his team: https://m.me/DrEricBerg Disclaimer: Dr. Eric Berg received his Doctor of Chiropractic degree from Palmer College of Chiropractic in 1988. His use of “doctor” or “Dr.” in relation to himself solely refers to that degree. Dr. Berg is a licensed chiropractor in Virginia, California, and Louisiana, but he no longer practices chiropractic in any state and does not see patients so he can focus on educating people as a full-time activity, yet he maintains an active license. This video is for general informational purposes only. It should not be used to self-diagnose and it is not a substitute for a medical exam, cure, treatment, diagnosis, prescription, or recommendation. It does not create a doctor-patient relationship between Dr. Berg and you. You should not make any change in your health regimen or diet before first consulting a physician and obtaining a medical exam, diagnosis, and recommendation. Always seek the advice of a physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. #keto#ketodiet#weightloss#ketolifestyle Thanks for watching! I hope this helps explain and increase your awareness of this new YouTube ban. I would love for you to share your opinion in the survey above.
U.S. Air Force photo/Greg L. Davis, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
A new report from Military.com has revealed that Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma is refusing to reveal the cause of death for 17 base personnel who have passed away this year. How does one base have a death toll of 17 in the span of eight months? Why would the base not want to share information concerning what happened to these individuals and why so many people at one military installation have died?
Since the base is funded with American tax dollars and the people dying are public servants, I think the general public has a right to know what is going on at Tinker Air Force Base, don’t you?
According to the Daily Caller, the base would not provide details about how 17 people working at the base have died from what they called “various causes,” going on to say that several of the deaths were still currently under investigation. Gee, that doesn’t sound suspicious or anything. Several posts on social media, along with a source connected to the base, have made claims that Tinker Air Force Base has suddenly become afflicted by numerous suicides. That’s a rather chilling thought.
“I’m sorry, but we are not going to release the number of deaths at Tinker,” Kimberly Woodruff, a spokesperson representing Tinker Air Force Base, said to the folks at Military.com. “We have ongoing investigations and to protect the families and the units, we won’t comment on those numbers. It is Air Force policy that we do not disclose information about deaths or their circumstances.”
Here’s more from the report:
There is no policy that prohibits releasing the number of deaths at Air Force bases, according to Department of the Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek, Military.com reported. Tinker Air Force Base public affairs later released the number of deaths from the current calendar year to Military.com, but did not disclose their causes.
Several other branches of the military have been swift in identifying deaths and suspected suicides, according to Military.com. The Army and bipartisan lawmakers brought attention to several suicides of service members stationed in Alaska in 2022, and – when inquired – the Navy immediately confirmed to Military.com the deaths and suspected suicides aboard the USS George Washington and USS Theodore Roosevelt.
Teri Caserta, the mother of a sailor who committed suicide in 2018, remarked that the base should be held accountable for releasing details concerning the deaths. Caserta helped to launch the establishment of the Brandon Act, which is named after her deceased son and enables members of the military to seek out treatment for mental health issues discreetly.
“Tinker does not have to disclose the names of the airmen/women who have died, but I believe we as citizens who have service members and who have children looking into serving our country deserve to know why and how airmen/women are dying,” Caserta wrote in an email on Wednesday, according to Military.com. “We need to know that the Air Force takes all deaths as seriously as they claim and, if there is toxicity within the ranks at Tinker, they all should be held accountable for these deaths whether they are suicides or not.”
When the Daily Caller tried to reach out for a comment on the report, Tinker Air Force Base did not immediately offer a response.
It’s not hard to understand why. Something is definitely going on at the base for leadership to be trying so hard to keep the causes of death secret. There are a number of things that could be going on, and if the base wants to avoid speculation, it should release the information. That’s the only way to keep people’s imaginations from running wild.
SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/lincolnbrown/2023/08/11/okeefe-media-group-unearths-best-buys-discrimination-n1718382; Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
James O'Keefe's zoom call with whistleblower Enis Sujak, from Best Buy Geek Squad.
Best Buy Whistleblower Has Audio Recording of Religious Discrimination:
(AP Photo/John Locher)
You may find this hard to believe, but there were times in my life when I was in charge of important things. Once upon a time, I was the program director and operations manager for two radio stations. No, really. As such, I had the power to hire people. That could prove to be a real rodeo from time to time, but that’s another story.Remember that this was a good twenty years before the dog days of DEI, so no one was breathing down our necks with rules, seminars, and classes designed to mandate who we hired. And we did reach out to minorities. Mainly, we tried to hire members of the local tribe. We reached out through the tribe’s newspaper, and we even actively recruited a few members, not because we had to but because we wanted to give a chance to anyone who had some talent or who wanted to develop their broadcasting skills. There was never much interest. This could have been attributed to the fact that our AM product was mainly conservative talk, but I honestly don’t know why.
Nowadays, discriminatory employment practices are legion — either because companies have gone woke or want to appear woke to avoid the twin ban-hammers of DEI and CRT. There has been some decline in that respect, but there are still pockets of it here and there, and I suspect it will be a feature of American companies for some time to come.
For example, the O’Keefe Media Group (OMG) recently uncovered the fact that Best Buy, that bastion of the Geek Squad and tons of fascinating technology that you never knew you needed (and probably don’t), is engaged in discriminatory HR practices. The flyer below is a little hard to read, even if you click on it, but it is an invitation to enroll in McKinsey & Company’s management training program. Many of the requirements are perfectly reasonable, but one requirement is not. Interested applicants must “Identify as Black, Latino, Hispanic or Pacific Islander.” It’s even a box that has to be checked on the application.
But wait! There’s more!
OMG talked with Enis Sujak, who is a member of the Geek Squad. Sujak told OMG that he witnessed religious bias on the job, along with an LGBTQ preference. Sujak reached out to OMG after walking out on a mandatory LGBTQ training. He was also sick of seeing rainbow flags, decorations, and paraphernalia around the buildings. Christian decorations were out because LGBTQ people might not like them. Sujak’s manager called him anti-LGBTQ. Sujak said that he is not anti-anything. He simply prefers not to be preached to or indoctrinated.
You can see OMG’s full report below. Pay attention at the end when a Best Buy employee tries to evict O’Keefe from a mall parking lot. (An ad may be included. Sorry.)
Sujak is more than likely out of a job. His chances of getting employment at a similar company are probably pretty bleak. But Sujak, a Serbian immigrant, understands something that most native-born people do not and that we have collectively forgotten. Sometimes standing up for what is right can carry a heavy cost, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it.
Attempt to Silence Reporting: AUSA Taylor has made repeated efforts to suppress AmmoLand News journalist Crump & his reporting on the AutoKeyCard Case.
Government’s Request to Destroy Key Documents: The U.S. Attorney has filed a motion demanding the destruction of the Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) in possession of Crump & AmmoLand News.
Constitutional Concerns & PushBack: The legal community & advocacy groups like GOA are rallying behind Crump, viewing these actions as infringements on 1st Amendment rights, a free Press & an attempt by the government to hide from public accountability.
Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Laura Cofer Taylor seems to be attempting to silence AmmoLand News journalist John Crump over his reporting on the AutoKeyCard Trial.
Crump has been a thorn in the side of the ATF/DOJ for years, and his reporting continues to frustrate them. Other media outlets have relied on Crump’s information to cover the shocking AutoKeyCard case. The reporting at that time infuriated the AUSA Cofer Taylor to the point that she called out Crump to the presiding court Judge for having a courtroom source feeding him information. The judge, in that case, dismissed her complaint.
“WHEREFORE, the government requests that this Court issue an order reiterating that the PSRs are non-public documents and may not be disseminated beyond court personnel, the defense teams, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and order that any individuals who possess a copy of the PSR without authority (including Crump, Hughes, and Erica Hoover) destroy it and confirm its destruction in writing, and any other relief this Court deems necessary to protect the sentencing process in this case.”
Once again the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Laura Cofer Taylor is having issues with continued reporting on the case and, this time, wants a document called a Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) about the same AutoKeyCard Case that is in the possession of Journalist John Crump destroyed.
“A Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) is a document prepared by probation officers in the United States federal court system after a defendant is convicted but before they are sentenced. The PSR plays a critical role in the sentencing process and provides the sentencing judge with a comprehensive overview of the defendant and the crime(s) they committed. “
According to a recent court document, the U.S. Attorney learned through recorded jailhouse phone calls that Matthew Hoover (better known as CRS Firearms on YouTube) had contacted Crump and given him information about his Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) and suggested he and Richard Hughes (who runs a channel called FlyingRich) create videos on the topic to inform the public of the injustice he was experiencing. Hughes also co-hosts and produces the John Crump Live Podcast.
Both Hughes and Crump agreed to make videos on the proposed sentences. This did not sit well with the prosecutor, and in this new court filing, she demanded a motion to silence Crump and destroy any PSR documents he had in his possession.
AmmoLand News views this as a constitutional violation and an attack on the freedom of the press. It would seem the federal government would rather hide its constitution-violating behavior from the public by silencing journalists than correct course and respect the First Amendment.
If AUSA Cofer Taylor thought Crump would back down, she miscalculated. Crump quickly hired a high-powered legal team consisting of Robert Olson, Stephen Stamboulieh, and James Phillips.
In a surprise move for AUSA Taylor, the legal team was quick to file a motion to intervene on behalf of Crump, defending him and the right to a free press.
Gun Owners of America has stepped in as well and will cover all legal expenses. Once again, it looks like an over-zealous ATF has found itself face-to-face with a powerhouse group of patriots and legal minds who will likely remind the government why the Bill of Rights was written in the first place.
Crump told AmmoLand News, “This is an attempt to stifle members of the press because the government doesn’t want anyone to shine a light on the misdeeds of an out-of-control agency,” Crump also said,“If Laura Cofer Taylor thought she could silence me, she is sorely mistaken. I will fight with every breath in my body, not just for my Second Amendment rights, but also for my First Amendment rights.”
Hughes also took issue with the Prosecutor’s attempt to silence him for his citizen journalism and said: “Today, I find myself in the midst of an astonishing legal ordeal that threatens the First Amendment Rights of John Crump and myself.” Hughes also said, “The Prosecutor has constructed a case twisting prior legal precedent to have new meaning and counting on the court not to know the truth. She is deliberately misleading the court and counting on legal action to scare John and myself from reporting on the Hoover case. We will vigorously defend our First Amendment rights.”
The attorneys argue that Hoover is within his rights to release the information and Crump is within his rights to report on it. The rules and cases referenced by AUSA Cofer Taylor in her filing only addressed the sharing of information by the officers of the court, not the silencing of journalists.
This may be a critical moment in our fight to preserve our Second Amendment while also protecting our First Amendment. Our Founding Fathers saw these people coming over 200 years away. That’s why the Bill of Rights was written.
Dan Wos is available for Press Commentary. For more information, contact PR HERE
Dan Wos is a nationally recognized 2nd Amendment advocate, Host of The Loaded Mic, and Author of the “GOOD GUN BAD GUY” book series. He speaks at events, is a contributing writer for many publications, and can be found on radio stations across the country. Dan has been a guest on Newsmax, the Sean Hannity Show, Real America’s Voice, and several others. Speaking on behalf of gun rights, Dan exposes the strategies of the anti-gun crowd and explains their mission to disarm law-abiding American gun owners.
Marlene Barbera is an Oregon resident who is fighting breast cancer. Until recently, she was a patient at the Richmond Family Medicine Clinic in Portland and was scheduled for a mastectomy. She will now be forced to seek treatment elsewhere—if that is even an option for her.
In the health care system, doctors can “fire” an uncooperative patient for things such as a lengthy pattern of non-compliance with their treatments or because they repeatedly fail to pay their bills. It has to be a longstanding situation and it has to be willful. Patients cannot be fired simply because they happen to be forgetful or sloppy about their finances. It does not happen often, but it is an option in extreme circumstances. That being said, political views are not a reason for releasing a patient from care. But that is what happened to Barbera.
According to an article in Reduxx, Barbera noticed a trans pride flag in the reception room of the clinic. She is what is known as “gender critical.” This means she rejects the notions of gender identity. She contacted her doctor via the medical app MyChart, stating:
I have been threatened on Twitter by trans activists with rape and death — so it is daunting to go for medical treatment with that banner proclaiming that what I am, an adult human female, is a mere opt-in category for any gender non-conforming male and not a reality. May I please have a telephone appointment to discuss how I may access your medical care without walking under a banner that seeks to negate all I am?
Barbera was under the impression that the message would be a private one between her and her doctor. However, the clinic staff saw her comments. The doctor, who had been her primary care provider for 12 years and had also treated members of her family, refused to remove the flag.
Barbera subsequently tried to leave a message for the doctor about a blood test and talked with someone in the office:
The person insisted I make an appointment. I have breast cancer and consequently an abundance of medical appointments so I did not want to do that. They got frustrated with my ‘non-compliance’ and hung up on me. Thinking it might have been in error, I called back. I was told I was “not allowed” and that I must speak to the previous person who had hung up on me. I declined as things hadn’t gone well the first time…I asked, guessing “did I hurt the trans person’s feelings?” And the receptionist took offense to the question, asking “what did you say” slowly and with great emphasis.
Not long after, Barbera received a MyChart message from Oregon Health Science University Practice Manager Stein Berger. She was informed that Richmond is an “all-inclusive clinic and we value and advocate for diversity.” She was also told that her “transphobic” remarks were “harmful” to the staff. Later that day, she got an email from the clinic stating in part:
Effective immediately, you are discharged from receiving medical care at the Richmond Family Medicine Clinic. This action is being taken because of ongoing disrespectful and hurtful remarks about our LGBTQ community and staff … Please note that you are also now dismissed from all OHSU Family Medicine clinics, including Immediate Care clinics.
Her access to services ended on July 29. She told Reduxx that she has nowhere else to go. But she also said:
Gender ideology is a religion. I do not subscribe to that religion. I would not force anyone to pray the rosary with me. The trans movement says a man is allowed to define being a woman by way of his feelings but that a woman is not allowed to define being a woman by way of her material reality. So really, it is a men’s rights movement. Dangerous to women and children.
The most chilling facet of this situation is that the clinic is more than willing to hand Barbera a potential death sentence over a difference of opinion. The second-most chilling facet is that this situation was not created as a result of a law, policy, or practice of a federal, state, or municipal agency. This was done at the discretion of the Oregon Health Science University, which did not like Barbera’s views on gender.
There will be those on the Left and in the trans movement who will say that this is nothing more than rough justice and karma for Creative LLC et al. v. Elenis et al. Those people would do well to remember that we are not talking about wedding cakes or websites. There is no end of companies and people who would be more than happy to fill those requests. We are talking about human life and a physician’s duty to preserve it. Furthermore, if somehow the positions were reversed, OHSU and the Richmond Clinic would feel the full force and wrath of every applicable government agency and available activist.
Hopefully, these thoughts will not be lost on you, dear reader. They will be lost on the trans movement and its allies, who are concerned solely with themselves and for whom no one else exists. They claim to be perpetual victims and to embrace love. But they are willing to risk letting someone die. In the pursuit of their chosen genders, they have lost their humanity—in more ways than one.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
“The government must be allowed to seek to persuade people of its views”
In response to efforts to stop the government from censoring the speech of people it opposes, the censors keep arguing that they have the free speech right to censor. Here’s how I originallydescribed it.
When Judge Terry Doughty issued an injunction in Missouri v. Biden that banned the government from “specifically flagging content or posts on social-media platforms and/or forwarding such to social-media companies urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression”, all hell broke loose.
Laurence Tribe, a lefty constitutional law professor, co-authored an op-ed complaining that the injunction “seems to maintain that the government cannot even politely ask companies not to publish verifiable misinformation.”
“The First Amendment certainly doesn’t prevent them from merely asking,” Tribe contends, and preventing the government from doing so “would turn the Constitution’s protection of free expression in an open society into an obstacle course for some of the most valuable exchanges of information and ideas we can imagine.” The most valuable exchanges of ideas apparently involve asking social media monopolies to take down content mocking the president.
The Biden administration has doubled down on Tribe’s argument that it has the right to “persuade” companies to censor.
In a filing Tuesday evening with the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the administration argued that a lower court judge’s July 4 decision was overly broad and would hurt the government’s ability to fight misinformation on platforms in a crisis.
“The government cannot punish people for expressing different views,” lawyers for U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration wrote. “But there is a categorical, well-settled distinction between persuasion and coercion. The government must be allowed to seek to persuade people of its views, even where those views are the subject of controversy.”
If the government wants to persuade people of anything, it should speak to them. Talking behind their backs to monopolies with vast censorship powers and then ‘persuading’ them to use those powers to censor their opponents is a violation of the First Amendment.
Persuasion is Biden giving a speech. Coercion is Biden officials telling companies what materials should be taken down. However it’s worded, it amounts to the government coordinating on removing speech against the will of the speaker.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Republican Representative Jim Jordan released what he called “smoking-gun documents” on social media proving that Facebook had been censoring Americans on behalf of the Biden Administration.
Posting to Twitter, Jordan (R-Ohio) said that he has internal documents that were obtained only after Mark Zuckerberg was threatened to be held in contempt, which “PROVE” the censoring across the social media platforms due to “unconstitutional pressure from the Biden White House.”
Only after the Committee announced its intention to hold Mark Zuckerberg in contempt did Facebook produce ANY internal documents to the Committee, including these documents, which PROVE that government pressure was directly responsible for censorship on Facebook.
“Never-before-released internal documents subpoenaed by the Judiciary Committee PROVE that Facebook and Instagram censored posts and changed their content moderation policies because of unconstitutional pressure from the Biden White House,” Jordan wrote.
He went on to explain that during the first half of 2021, Facebook executives were “facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the [Biden] White House” according to an email from Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg.
In April 2021, a Facebook employee circulated an email for Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg, writing: “We are facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the [Biden] White House” to remove posts. pic.twitter.com/iDRV3Kk2oO
Facebook employees had informed the White House that removing content like the meme would be an incursion in “traditional boundaries of free expression in the U.S.” However, Andy Slavitt, a Senior Advisor to President Joe Biden ignored the warning and the First Amendment altogether.
When Clegg “countered that removing content like that would represent a significant incursion into traditional boundaries of free expression in the US,”
The Biden White House also demanded to know why a video from Tucker Carlson had not been removed from the platform. Even though Facebook had replied and gave them the reasons why they could not remove the video, Biden eventually went on to publicly denounce the social media platform claiming that they were “killing people.”
This wasn’t the first time that the Biden White House was angry that Facebook didn’t censor more.
According to these documents, the Biden White House demanded to know why Facebook had not censored a video from @TuckerCarlson.
In August of 2021, Facebook started working on changing its policies in order to “be more aggressive against misinformation.” The Facebook leadership said that the change in policy stemmed from the increasing pressure by the Biden administration.
August 2, 2021:
“[Facebook’s] Leadership asked Misinfo Policy . . . to brainstorm some additional policy levers we can pull to be more aggressive against . . . misinformation. This is stemming from the continued criticism of our approach from the [Biden] administration.” pic.twitter.com/bfNSeujQI7
In the second batch of files released by Jordan on Friday, he showed that in the summer of 2021 Facebook was working with the White House in order to “push for Americans to get vaccinated” and to “get Facebook to more aggressively police vaccine-related content, including TRUE content.”
In July 2021, Facebook’s head of Global Affairs was asked why they had been censoring the COVID lab leak theory. The answer was because of pressure from the Biden administration.
This wasn’t the Biden Admin's first pressure campaign.
In July 2021, FB’s head of Global Affairs asked why FB had been censoring the COVID lab leak theory. The answer was clear: “Because we were under pressure from the administration . . . We shouldn’t have done it.” pic.twitter.com/XaUqlDhjOj
After President Biden claimed that Facebook was “killing people” because Americans were hesitant to get vaccinated after seeing vaccine related content online, Facebook employees were upset.
However, the comment by the president had caused Facebook to “re-evaluate its policies about COVID-19 content.”
BUT the tongue-lashing directly caused Facebook to re-evaluate its policies about COVID-19 content—discussions that involved high-level company officials including Clegg and then-Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg.
Jordan goes on to explain that the administration wanted almost all information about the vaccine removed from the platform unless it agreed with their stance. This included jokes and true information alike.
The Biden administration also wanted Facebook to remove TRUE information as well. pic.twitter.com/5SWcb7ZrRS
In August 2021, Facebook’s leadership once again agreed to further change their content moderation policy because of mounting pressure from the administration.
Facebook’s leadership relented in August and agreed to change the company’s content moderation policies because of the Biden Admin’s continued pressure. pic.twitter.com/yvuW5fGeZY
Jordan ended his thread saying that the documents show how the Biden administration is working to “censor speech” and that he will be releasing even more documents in the future.
Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts
We are in a spiritual war between good and evil. Satan’s goal is the destruction of lives. Join Art Thompson as he discusses the satanic thread that is being woven throughout society. Find out how socialism and women play a major role in the overall plan.
How To Defeat Communism
The Communist Manifesto has a 10-point plan to Communize countries. To defeat this plan, The John Birch Society has an agenda that combats the Communist plan at every turn. We have agenda items that fight on a global level, like Get US Out! of the UN, to local level issues like Support Your Local Police. Learn more about The John Birch Society Agenda in this episode of Activate America.
YouTube Bans The New American
The publishing arm of The John Birch Society, The New American, has been permanently banned from YouTube. Big Tech is digging deep to censor those it doesn’t agree with. They had to go back three years to find something they wanted to hold against us.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
You won’t have stories about Joe Biden tripping up or down the stairs on Air Force One to kick around anymore. That’s because the White House brass have issued a directive ordering staff to hide how Joe gets in and out of the presidential jet. It won’t stop the president from tripping, but you, an American voter, won’t have to be subjected to watching it anymore.
If you’ve been paying attention, you understand why. If you haven’t, well, I regret to inform you. Go ahead, hit play.
From tripping over sandbags at the Air Force Academy to multiple trips up and down the big stairs, Joe Biden’s stiff gait and obvious cognitive issues are getting him into trouble. Many reporters and talking heads chalk this up to old age, but I know a guy in his 90s who walks better than Joe.
It’s not about the number; it’s about what’s in the noggin, as my Dad used to call it.
So Joe must use the “lower stairs” of the presidential jetliner. As MSN reported, “Frail Joe Biden ‘FORCED’ to Use ‘Lower Stairs’ on Air Force One to Avoid More Embarrassing Tripping Incidents.” It reported that “Joe Biden’s advisers have had enough of his embarrassing stumbling mishaps” and have prescribed a new plan with Joe using the “lower stairs” of the giant plane.
Politico called them the “small steps” that Biden used for most of his recent European swing. This is the trip where the president kept missing big shot dinners because they were after his bedtime.
“[T]he small steps to board Air Force One [were used] for every flight on his European trip: to London, Vilnius, Helsinki and back to Washington,” Politico reported. It reported that advisers for the president “acknowledged an intentional shift to steer the 80-year-old president to the lower stairs more often to make his travel easier and limit the possibility for missteps.” The publication then posed a question: “Why climb 26 sometimes wobbly steps at Joint Base Andrews, raised off the back of a pick-up truck that drives up beside Air Force One, when you have the option of stepping up or down just 14?” But that’s not actually true.
If Joe’s upstairs working in the Air Force One presidential office, he’s got stairs to climb. When he gets to the middle floor of AF1, he’s got stairs to climb. Joe’s ascending and descending probably as many stairs whether you see him walking them or not. And that’s the point. The White House really doesn’t want you to see him.
Especially when few outside the press corps are likely to even notice.
Biden used the big boy stairs when he arrived in London and Helsinki, but Politico notes he didn’t use the big stairs to get into Air Force One.
None of those arrivals or departures — all of which are public and witnessed by the traveling press pool — were marked by inclement weather. He used the large stairs to descend from the plane upon arrival in London, Vilnius, and Helsinki, when his hosts arranged more formal greeting ceremonies, but not to climb back aboard. “And the overseas trip came on the heels of several recent domestic ones where Biden predominantly used the lower stairs on visits to and from Rocky Mount, N.C., Chicago, San Francisco, and Philadelphia,” the publication noted.
In addition, Joe’s wearing his sneaks when he’s walking in the wild as well.
White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre, of course, is running cover for the hair smeller. Read this portion of a presser she held with the media, one of whose members asked about the president’s mobility issues:
Q Ever since — well, maybe not directly, but shortly after the President had his sandbag stumble at the Air Force Academy, he has been using the lower steps on Air Force One instead of the kind of, truck that drives up. I’m wondering if that is because he’s been having mobility problems of any ty- — type, if it’s to address — you know, he’s had a couple of incidents falling on the stairs getting up and you guys just decided that it would be better for him. Can you walk me through —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So I don’t have —
Q — what’s going on there?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t have any decision process to walk through. I’m sure there’s a protocol that’s used for the — for Air Force One. I just don’t have one.
I mean, you guys see the President every day, when it — to speak to — when you — when we speak to mobility. The President always says to watch him.
You know, he was a — this was a president — let’s not forget, he went to a warzone country in Ukraine and did that in a way that was incredibly effective. The world got to see him out there and meet with President Zelenskyy. And I think that’s incredibly important.
I just don’t have anything to share (inaudible).
Q I — I guess just to, like — to buttonhole it —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. Yeah.
Q — you know, we’ve seen a change in the medical technology he’s using [C-Pap], we’ve seen a behavioral change here.
Is there anything that you guys are seeing that represents a medical change of any sort with the President?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, if you look at what — what we have put forward, as far as his medical — the President’s medical report, it is more comprehensive and extensive than any other president. You guys have in front of you, if — and we’ve presented to all of you memos
Jean-Pierre keeps grasping for her binder and saying she “doesn’t have anything for you on that” and that Joe Biden’s medical reports were the most transparent ever. And then there’s this exchange:
Q The first question was: Are there any plans for the President’s physician to brief the press?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Oh, no, there are no plans. Look, we put — we put forward a very comprehensive memo on the President’s health. I would refer you to that. No plans for the doctor to — to brief the press.
Joe Biden isn’t old as much as he’s enfeebled. The White House is hiding more than his trips up and down the stairs of Air Force One. Much more.
We tell you the truth at PJ Media. Arm yourself with information with our brand of opinion journalism, where satire, humor, and serious coverage collide. We don’t need to tell you that the Democrats in all facets of government, including the White House, have attempted to kill conservative journalism through censorship on social media. Just read our coverage of the Twitter Files and recent court battles if you doubt it. Keep truthful reporting alive — become a PJ Media VIP! Take advantage of our Summer Sale and use the code SAVEAMERICA to get 50% off your annual membership!
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
The FBI’s efforts to protect Hunter Biden, and by extension, Joe Biden, are worse than we thought. FBI general counsel Jason Jones instructed a supervisory agent in charge of investigating Hunter Biden not to answer any questions posed by the House Oversight Committee regarding the “ongoing” case.
Jones instructed the agent in a letter he sent Sunday afternoon that the agent received shortly before his scheduled testimony. The letter was obtained by the New York Post. According to The Post’s source, the FBI was aware the agent would be deposed when the letter was sent.
“[T]he Department expects that you will decline to respond to questions seeking non-public information likely covered by one or more components of executive privilege or other significant confidentiality interests, in particular information about deliberations or ongoing investigative activity in law enforcement matters,” Jones wrote. “You should instead refer such questions to the FBI’s Office of Congressional Affairs.”
Jones continued, “Consistent with longstanding practice, this will afford the Department the full opportunity to consider particular questions and possible accommodations that may fulfill the Committee’s legitimate need for information while protecting Executive Branch confidentiality interests.”
“Jones referred to the Hunter Biden case as ‘ongoing’ in his letter, using similar wording to Delaware US Attorney David Weiss — which congressional Republicans fear is intended to hinder their demands for records and testimony,” the New York Post reports. “Hunter Biden’s legal team say that they believe their client’s legal exposure is over after he reached a probation-only plea deal last month on two misdemeanor tax fraud charges and a gun possession felony that will be expunged following probation.”
Jones wrote in his letter to the agent, “According to information provided to you by the Committee, the Committee is seeking information about an individual ongoing criminal investigation and prosecution. Specifically, the Committee has stated an interest in what the Committee has described to you as certain events that took place in December 2020 as part of this investigation. As the Department recently emphasized when affirming that U.S. Attorney David Weiss will appear before the House Committee on the Judiciary ‘at an appropriate time, consistent with the law and Department policy,’ the Department’s longstanding policy is to seek ‘wherever possible to provide information about closed, rather than open, matters.’”
Jones continued, “Department officials, including those who have left the Department, are obligated to protect non-public information they learned in the course of their work. Such information could be subject to various privileges, including law enforcement, deliberative process, attorney work product, and attorney-client privileges, and privacy interests. Current and former Department officials also must protect classified information, sources, and methods, and grand jury information protected by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e).”
A spokesperson for the FBI insists that this is standard practice for the FBI. “These are called authorization letters and are standard practice,” the FBI spokesperson told The Post. However, a separate source called the letter “more uncommon.”
Clearly, there’s a pattern of the FBI protecting the Bidens. An FBI whistleblower previously confirmed the Secret Service and the FBI colluded to protect Hunter Biden from being interviewed during the criminal investigation, and that the Biden administration had been interfering in the Department of Justice probe.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Nothing says “I support free speech” like refusing to listen to what someone has to say, covering your ears and condemning him before he’s uttered a syllable. Ilhan Omar has in her characteristically blustering way announced that “there is no way in hell” that she will sit still to listen to Israeli President Isaac Herzog, a well-known moderate, address a joint session of Congress on July 19. She has now been joined by three other members of The Squad – Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jamaal Bowman, and Cori Bush – who have announced that they will go and do likewise. And any moment now, we can expect other members of The Squad, including Ilhan’s fellow Muslim and BFF Rashida Tlaib, as well as Betty McCollum, to announce that they, too, will join the boycott. By the time the dust has settled, perhaps as many as ten members of Congress, out of a total of 535 (100 Senators, 435 Representatives) will refuse to listen to President Herzog. More on this latest demonstration by The Squad of its deep anti-Israel animus can be found here: “More ‘Squad’ Democrats join Omar-led boycott of Herzog congressional address,” by Jacob Magid, Times of Israel, July 14, 2023:
Three US lawmakers said they planned to boycott Israeli President Isaac Herzog’s speech to a joint session of Congress next week, joining a colleague who scoffed that there was “no way in hell” she would attend.
Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush‘s offices each confirmed that they would not be attending the July 19 speech, backing Rep. Ilhan Omar, who was the first to make such a decision on Wednesday.
All four lawmakers are part of the so-called Squad of progressive Democrats and additional members of the eight-member group are expected to follow suit.
The four other members of The Squad are Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, and Greg Casar of Texas.Tlaib will certainly join the boycott. Pressley, however, has recently been sending mixed signals on her view of Israel, voting against funding the Iron Dome project, but more recently condemning the Mapping Project of pro-Palestinian activists, a website that claims to show the ties between various Massachusetts institutions and “support for the colonization of Palestine.” Summer Lee, who narrowly won the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional district, thereby ensuring her election to Congress, may worry about a primary challenge in 2024 and decide to mute her anti-Israel image by attending Herzog’s speech. Greg Casar, though on domestic issues he has agreed with The Squad, has supported “U.S. aid for Israel’s self-defense” and opposes the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. It is unlikely that he will boycott Herzog’s speech.
Few others are expected to blackball Herzog, whose figurehead role and ties to Israel’s peace camp make him a far less divisive figure than many other Israeli leaders, such as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Bowman was the only lawmaker of the three latest additions to the list who offered comment on his decision, telling the right-wing newspaper Epoch Times that “I don’t think Israel has gone far enough in protecting and uplifting Palestinian rights and Palestinian lives.”…
Israel supplies the Palestinians, both in Gaza and the West Bank, with electricity and water. It also provides them with a total of 125,000 work permits (20,000 for Gaza, 100,000 for the West Bank), so that Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank can work in Israel and earn salaries three to ten times larger – depending on the job — than what they would earn at home. It is not Israel that has the responsibility for “protecting and uplifting Palestinian rights,” but rather, Hamas in Gaza and the PA in Judea and Samaria, both of which are cruel despotisms that cannot be dislodged democratically from power.
Perhaps Jamaal Bowman is thinking not of the Palestinians, but of the Israeli Arabs. He needn’t worry about their “rights.” They have the same rights as Israeli Jews. Arabs serve in the Knesset, sit on the Supreme Court, go abroad as ambassadors. The chairman of Israel’s largest bank, Bank Leumi, is an Arab. Jews and Arabs work in the same offices and factories, play on the same sports teams and in the same orchestras, attend the same universities and professional schools, and go into business together, in everything from restaurants to high tech start-ups. The only difference in their treatment is that Jews must, while Israeli Arabs may, serve in the military. Can Jamaal Bowman really not know any of this?
In her post on Wednesday [July 12], Omar wrote, “There is no way in hell I am attending.”
“We should not be inviting the president of Israel — a government who under its current prime minister barred the first two Muslim women elected to Congress from visiting the country — to give a joint address to Congress,” Omar tweeted in all caps, noting that a 2019 ban had meant fellow Muslim congresswoman Rashida Tlaib was unable to visit her grandmother who lives in the West Bank….
Surely Omar is well aware that Herzog is very different in his outlook than Netanyahu, whom he opposes on a number of issues, including judicial reform, and that he had nothing to do with the ban on Omar and Tlaib entering Israel. But she’s determined not to make such distinctions; collective punishment of Israelis is her stock in trade.
Ilhan Omar is against all Israeli Jews, of all political persuasions, save possibly for the farthest left members of the Meretz Party, who are eager to help the Palestinians squeeze Israel back within the indefensible 1949 armistice lines in order to obtain a specious “peace.”
At the same time, the hardline nature of the current coalition is sure to make it easier for other progressive lawmakers to follow Omar’s lead.
Why are these people called “progressive”? There is nothing “progressive” — a word with positive connotations – about them. Are they not better identified as “fascistic” in their methods? Do you doubt that they would silence, if they could, all pro-Israel voices, with a vindictive thud reminiscent of Mussolini’s Black Shirts permanently silencing – with a bullet – Giacomo Matteotti?
Even if every one of those eight members of the Squad decided to stay away from Herzog’s speech, and even if two more Congressmen were to join them, that would mean a total of ten members of Congress, out of a total of 535, would have boycotted Herzog’s speech. That’s less than 2%. Nothing for Ilhan Omar (D-Mogadishu) or Rashida Tlaib (D-Ramallah) to write home about.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Why is one of the world’s most self-consciously strict adherents of Islamic law so intolerant of Christians? The pope and many others assure us that Islam is peaceful and tolerant. Why doesn’t the Taliban get this?
“Freedom Focus Report: Afghanistan’s Christians Fight to Survive Under the Taliban,” International Christian Concern, July 13, 2023:
07/13/2023 Afghanistan (International Christian Concern) – Since the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, religious and civil liberties have rapidly deteriorated under Taliban rule. Under the current regime, former government officials and civil servants, and religious minorities like Christians endure intense governmental and societal pressure and scrutiny. They face regular raids on their homes by the Taliban, frequently receive threats against their jobs and families, and lack access to educational opportunities.
The Taliban are attempting to cut contact between Afghani citizens and any Western groups and have practically eradicated on-the-ground relief efforts by NGOs. Any group looking to provide long-term relief efforts, such as livelihood relief, must be wary of Taliban spies among their workers.
The state of religious freedom and Christian tolerance in Afghanistan has not improved since ICC reported Afghanistan as one of the worst places in the world to be a Christian in the 2022 Persecutor of the Year report. The Taliban are working to completely erase Christianity or any religious minority from the country, even stating that there are no Christians in Afghanistan, an obviously false claim. Many Christians have gone underground to avoid being kidnapped by the Taliban “courts.”
Poverty, Betrayal, and Torture
The rising starvation rates and increasing poverty in Afghanistan create an even higher security threat to these believers since now the Taliban are offering financial compensation to anyone who reports on Christians. In an interview with Mission News Network, Lana Silk, CEO of USA at Transform Iran, said, “The Taliban are offering money for Afghans to turn in any Christians they know. And Afghans are desperate, further heightening the security risk [to] Christians.”
Unless ransomed by their families, Christians captured by the “courts” face brutal torture and even death. If redeemed, the survivors and their families, often bankrupt from the exorbitant ransom demands, must flee their homes to avoid repeated kidnappings from the various Taliban gangs.
Pakistan’s Refugee Crisis
Because of the persecution, many Christians escape to Pakistan and risk capture and death by the Taliban. Even if they make it to Pakistan, they must conceal their faith for fear of receiving worse treatment in already poor conditions. Some Christian refugees decide to return to Afghanistan, deciding they have a better chance of survival under the Taliban than in Pakistan.
The Pakistani government, unprepared for the influx of refugees, has begun to crack down on immigration. Many immigrants cannot find work to provide food or rent for themselves and their families….
2024 presidential candidate Ron DeSantis joins Tucker Carlson for an in-depth interview during Blaze Media’s ‘The Summit’. Tucker challenges DeSantis on his views on life, Ukraine, China, censorship, and banking.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
The BBC, The Guardian, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and similar beraters of Israel have been eager to portray the Israeli government as somehow complicit in the settler rampages through a handful of Palestinian villages. They give great attention to those “far-right” Israeli officials who idiotically declare their sympathy for those who, in the course of their rampages, set fire to Palestinian cars, houses, and fields. Itamar Ben Gvir is widely quoted; it was he who in a security meeting, called those who rampaged “sweet kids,” and he always manages to be good for a quote that will bring Israel into disrepute. But other stories, about the condemnation of the rampagers by so many Israelis in positions of leadership, are only passingly mentioned, if at all, in the international media, which is determined to present Israel in a bad light.
More on the reaction of Israel’s chief of staff to the recent settler rampages can be found here: “IDF chief Halevi: officers must intervene to stop attacks against Palestinians,” by Emanuel Fabian, Times of Israel, June 28, 2023:
Military chief Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi says officers must intervene in violence by Israeli civilians against Palestinians in the West Bank, following a recent string of settler attacks on Palestinian towns and villages.
“An officer who sees an Israeli citizen intending to throw a Molotov cocktail into a Palestinian house and stands by, cannot be an officer,” Halevi says at a cadets graduation ceremony at the Israel Defense Forces’ officers school in southern Israel, known as Bahad 1.
“This is our way, this is our strength here compared to the complex region in which we live, and we must not erode it,” he says….
I am unable to find any reference to these remarks made by the IDF’s head, Lt.-General Herzi Halevi in the mainstream media. Surely it would be of great interest to many, to learn how stern is his reminder to new officers that they must not stand by if a “Molotov cocktail” is thrown at a Palestinian house, for if they do, they “cannot be officers.” This means, of course, they would be booted from the military if they didn’t protect innocent Palestinians from attack. A few days before he addressed the graduating cadets, the IDF Chief of Staff joined Shin Bet Chief Ronen Bar, and Police Commissioner Kobi Shabtai, in issuing a joint denunciation of the recent string of settler attacks on Palestinian villages, and said they plan to step up efforts against them. They called the attacks “nationalist terrorism.”
But you didn’t find out about that joint statement, or about Halevi’s speech to graduates if you rely on the BBC, The Guardian, The New York Times, or The Washington Post.
Nor was this the only telling failure to cover the Israeli officials’ condemnation of the rampaging settlers. Defense Minister Yoav Gallant several days before had condemned the settler rampage in Umm Safa and reinforced the message when he spoke by telephone to the P.A.’s Minister of Civil Affairs, Hossein Al-Sheikh, telling him that he, Gallant, “strongly condemns the actions caused by the Israeli extremists on innocent Palestinians” that have been carried out recently. Gallant said the defense establishment views the recent violence against Palestinian civilians with “great concern” and emphasized that Israel will “take action to bring the perpetrators to justice.”
Like the joint statement issued by the heads of the IDF, the Shin Bet, and the Israeli Police, condemning the settler violence as “terrorism,” and like the speech the IDF head, Herzl Halevi, delivered to the new officers reminding them of their duty to defend innocent Palestinians from attack, the phone call of Defense Minister Gallant to Hossein al-Sheikh, reassuring him that he “strongly condemns the Israeli extremists”and promising that Israel “will take action to bring the perpetrators to justice” did not make it into the Western media.
Finally there was the message delivered by Israeli President Herzog in a phone call to Mahmoud Abbas. He unequivocally denounced the “recent assault on innocent Palestinians by extremists.” He further said that he denounces “the cruel and unrestrained” settler riots, which he said were “illegal and immoral.”
And President Herzog’s denunciation of the rioting settlers, just like those of Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-General Herzl Halevi, Shin Bet Chief Ronen Bar, and Police Commissioner Kobi Shabtai, didn’t make it into the Western media. On the other hand, Itamar Ben-Gvir’s extremist statements against the Palestinians, and in praise of such people as Rabbi Meir Kahane and Baruch Goldstein, always manage to get plenty of attention from, among other mainstream media outlets, the New York Times.
In a video released to social media, Rep. Kat Cammack (R-FL) reacted to a House Judiciary Committee report which claims the FBI and Ukraine intelligence agencies collaborated to notify social media companies of posts they wanted to censor.
FBI is supposed to counter foreign influence, not facilitate it: Rep. Kat Cammack
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Arguably no issue is less partisan, and more likely to unite people of every political stripe, even in our current state of hyper-polarization, than child trafficking. How could opposition to the cruel kidnapping of children and their forced recruitment into the international sex trade fail to draw unified support from all corners? And yet when a movie comes along that dares to address this uncomfortable topic, this horrific evil, head-on – a movie aimed not only at raising awareness but at inspiring action – the Left curiously rallies to undermine it with partisan smears and ugly innuendo.
Angel Studios’ Sound of Freedom opened last week, a thriller based on the captivating true story of Tim Ballard, a Homeland Security Special Agent frustrated by the lack of effective rescue strategies and prosecutorial authority to help trafficked children in underdeveloped nations. Ballard decided to circumvent the law enforcement bureaucracy to find a more direct, if dangerous, way to undertake the rescue of missing children. In 2013 he founded Operation Underground Railroad (OUR), a U.S.-based nonprofit dedicated to saving children from sex trafficking and sexual exploitation. The organization reportedly has undertaken more than a dozen sting operations. Actor Jim Caveziel brings his passionate intensity to the portrayal of Ballard in the film.
Caveziel, you will remember, is best known for his astonishing turn as Jesus Christ in the Mel Gibson-directed blockbuster The Passion of the Christ, the movie that opened the eyes of many Hollywood executives who didn’t believe or care that there was a massive audience out there in flyover America hungry for entertainment fare that didn’t trash their faith. Caveziel, openly Christian and conservative in an industry dominated by secular elites, calls Sound of Freedom the most important movie he’s done since Passion.
Just how well is Sound of Freedom doing? John Nolte at Breitbart News writes that “At the close of business Sunday, after only six days in theaters, Sound of Freedom has grossed $40.2 million. Also, over the weekend, it averaged $6,388 per screen, which topped [the latest installment of the Indiana Jones franchise] Dial of Destiny’s per-screen average of $5,760”:
Dial of Destiny might have come in second place with a weekend’s gross box office haul of $26.5 million, and Sound of Freedom might have come in third place with $18.2 million, but Sound of Freedom is doing a better job of packing them in.
Also, Unlike Disney’s Dial of Destiny, which is on track to lose tens if not hundreds of millions, Sound of Freedom is already profitable. Budgeted at just $14.5 million, Sound of Freedom started making millions the moment it crossed $25 to $30 million. And it’s just getting started. With an A+ Cinemascore and the corporate media’s desperate and insulting attacks, word of mouth is all set up to be phenomenal.
So now the Left, which panics when conservatives make inroads into the culture owned by the Left, has determined that Sound of Freedom must be sabotaged with high-profile articles smearing it as linked to the darkest corners of right-wing conspiracy-mongering.
The Washington Post, for example, undermined the movie right in the headline: “‘Sound of Freedom’ is a box office hit whose star embraces QAnon.”
Similarly, the far-Left Guardian put the conspiracy theory smear right up front, calling the “paranoid” movie “the QAnon-adjacent thriller seducing America.” The Guardian writer downplays the film’s success and sniffs about it benefiting from an “unsavory network of astroturfed boosterism among the far-right fringe, a constellation of paranoids now attempting to spin a cause célèbre out of a movie with vaguely simpatico leanings.”
The unhinged harpies at the feminist website Jezebel too, coincidentally, have written off the film as “an Anti-Child Trafficking Fantasy Fit for QAnon.”
What is QAnon? Good question. I’ve heard of it, but neither I nor any conservative I know could tell you anything about it, except that it is a favorite right-wing boogeyman of the Left. According to Wikipedia (which like every other Big Tech site is carefully curated and patroled by leftist activists, with whom I have personally wrestled when trying to correct misinformation on the site), “QAnon conspiracy theory is that a cabal of Satanic, cannibalistic child molesters are operating a global child sex trafficking ring which conspired against former U.S. President Donald Trump during his term in office.”
So now you know. I don’t know about the cannibalism or the Trump parts, but the part about global child sex trafficking is not a conspiracy theory but a demonstrable fact and is taken very seriously by law enforcement and human rights agencies from the FBI to the United Nations and all points in between.
Anyway, Rolling Stone piled on with a sneering hit piece by a keyboard coward named Miles Klee who claims, revealingly, that Caveziel and the other filmmakers have been “fomenting moral panic for years over this grossly exaggerated ‘epidemic’ of child sex trafficking.” Klee too dismisses the movie as a “QAnon-tinged thriller” “designed to appeal to the conscience of a conspiracy-addled boomer,” and slams its “hackneyed white savior narrative” – even though the real-life Ballard is white (unlike Klee, Ballard has actually put his own life on the line to save kidnapped children – does it matter what color he is? It does to the racist Left).
Klee concludes his hate-filled screed with a lament that instead of making movies about police brutality and climate catastrophes, “the far right turns to these sordid fantasies about godless monsters hurting children.” Try to imagine what kind of a person rolls his eyes about the very real sexual enslavement of children worldwide, a person who calls the child sex-trafficking phenomenon a “grossly exaggerated ‘epidemic.’”
“Grossly exaggerated”? Here are a few statistics from the Polaris Project, a movement to end human trafficking:
Human trafficking is a $150 billion-a-year criminal enterprise business worldwide
27% of human trafficking victims are children
The United States is #1 in the world for sex trafficking
More than 500,000 children a year go missing in the U.S. alone
Over 500,000 online sexual predators are active each day
As of 2021, there are 252,000 websites containing images or videos of children sexually abused
Similar information can be found on many other sites dedicated to rescuing children from this plight. And yet Rolling Stone not only wants you to dismiss Jim Caveziel and the Sound of Freedom filmmakers as conspiracy theorists so that you will shun the movie and its passionate message on behalf of trafficked children but also to believe that child sex trafficking itself is overblown, especially compared to leftist shibboleths like the police genocide of blacks and climate change.
Remember, Rolling Stone is the magazine that glamorized the 2013 Boston Marathon bomber with a sexy come-hither cover shot, a terrorist who murdered 8-year-old Martin William Richard among others, and who would have killed many more with his ball-bearing-and-nail bomb if he had positioned it higher off the ground. Rolling Stone is also the magazine that tried to demonize ivermectin users during the pandemic; suppressed mention of child sexual abuse material in a child pornography investigation because the perpetrator was the friend of a RS editor; that hyped a false story about a University of Virginia fraternity rape in a controversy that nearly destroyed the lives of innocent young men. Rolling Stone is not a serious journalistic outlet; it’s a disgraceful, celebrity-polishing, leftwing activist rag that looks to destroy political opponents first and ask questions later, or preferably not at all.
It’s a magazine that defends pedophiles and child traffickers in order to own “far right” filmmakers. Think about that.
Even before Sound of Freedom hit the big screen, the Left was whitewashing child trafficking. A year ago The Atlantic, another left-wing publication, tried to discredit conservative concerns over child trafficking with a conspiracy fear-mongering piece called “The Great (Fake) Child Sex-Trafficking Epidemic.” “Dispatches from a moral panic” was the tagline.
The Left will hurl paint on priceless works of art, block major traffic arteries, and set themselves on fire to draw attention to their climate change hysteria, but then shrug off concerns about the reality of widespread sexual exploitation of children as a “moral panic.”
The media venom spewed at Sound of Freedom is so vicious and coordinated that one can’t help but wonder: who benefits from targeting the storytellers and heroes who target real-world pedophiles and child traffickers?
Pedophiles and child traffickers, that’s who.
* * *
Send the cultural Marxists protecting child sex traffickers and pedophiles a message: go see Sound of Freedom. Angel Studios has even partnered with a variety of theater ticketing services to provide Pay it Forward tickets to see it. Find instructions HERE for how to claim a free ticket to see the film in theaters.
Angel Studios also has great resources for learning about and joining the fight against child trafficking HERE.
Mark Tapson is the Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, focusing on popular culture. He is also the host of an original podcast on Frontpage, “The Right Take With Mark Tapson.”
Shukri Abdullahi Abdirahman is a Republican running for election to the U.S. House to represent Minnesota's 5th Congressional District. She has declared her candidacy for the Republican primary scheduled on August 9, 2022. She is running against Ilhan Omar. Shukri Abdirahman was born in Somalia, she escaped the civil war and now lives in Minneapolis, Minnesota. She is a veteran who has served in the US Army.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Accusing Amy Mek of Islamophobia, Shukri Abdullahi Abdirahman brandishes a dangerous weapon that threatens her safety and aims to stifle free speech.
In a startling turn of events, former GOP candidate Shukri Abdullahi Abdirahman has launched a scathing attack on Amy Mek, the founder of RAIR Foundation USA, with potential life-threatening implications. This deliberate assault highlights the grave dangers of weaponizing accusations and threats within the political landscape, leaving Amy Mek and her organization at risk.
The incident began when Amy Mek shared a video featuring a French imam’s statements on the conquest of France through jihad. Responding to the tweet, Elon Musk made a statement that seemingly endorsed the imam’s views, sparking controversy. However, the subsequent actions of the GOP candidate escalated the situation to a dangerous level.
Amy Mek expressed gratitude to Musk for bringing attention to her work. It is important to note that Amy’s Twitter account has faced censorship from the German and French governments since 2017, adding further context to the situation.
Shukri Abdullahi Abdirahman’s Dangerous Criticism
However, this exchange did not go without criticism from an Islamic supremacist. Shukri Abdullahi Abdirahman, a former controversial Republican House candidate who vied for the party nomination in Minnesota’s 5th District, took issue with Musk’s comment on one of Amy’s tweets. Accusing her of Islamophobia, Shukri, a sharia-adherent Somali migrant, unleashed a torrent of incendiary and potentially harmful accusations. With what appears to be a deliberate intent to fuel anger, she potentially incited her more fanatical followers to consider enacting a Sharia punishment on Amy Mek.
The Dangerous Power of Accusations
The concept of freedom of speech has long served as a safeguard against tyrannical authority, allowing individuals to question and criticize both religious and political institutions. Throughout history, from Galileo challenging the cosmology of the Church to modern-day debates, the right to critique has played a crucial role in maintaining a balance of power, especially in the face of religious and political authorities that often seek to exert control. However, a relatively new term, “Islamophobia,” has emerged, rooted in neo-Marxist ideology, which aims to stifle religious criticism and ultimately curtail dissent against political authority and its policies.
In today’s world, the accusation of Islamophobia carries deeply alarming significance, especially when made by an accuser with a standing in the Islamic community. It has become a potential death sentence as more and more individuals across the Western world live under constant threats of violence or have already paid the ultimate price for daring to express critical views about Islam. Journalists, politicians, authors, artists, cartoonists, and teachers all face the specter of death or living under police protection due to the dangers associated with speaking out against how Islam demands itself to be represented. The weight of these accusations can be immense and often is tantamount to pointing a loaded gun at the accused.
Accusing someone of Islamophobia has become a powerful weapon capable of inciting violence and even murder. The term holds immense sway, igniting anger, intimidation, and physical harm. It also provides justification for any fanatic seeking personal gain by “defending the faith.” An accusation of Islamophobia is akin to a “Wanted dead or alive” poster from the Old West, inviting anyone to seek retribution for material or spiritual rewards.
It is crucial to note that in countries like Pakistan, where many migrants in the West originate from, accusations of blasphemy can lead to brutal public executions without fair trials. This culture of vigilantism, deeply rooted in religious beliefs, has extended its influence into Western societies, further exacerbating the risks associated with accusations of Islamophobia. These risks should not be underestimated, as they have the potential to destroy lives and tear communities apart.
Manipulation by Political Figures
The danger intensifies when political figures, candidates, or activist journalists exploit the accusation of Islamophobia for their own agendas. By labeling individuals as Islamophobes, these figures knowingly manipulate public sentiment, fueling anger and inciting a mentality of seeking retribution against the accused. This becomes particularly troubling when the accuser is a self-proclaimed Sharia-adherent GOP candidate. The consequences of such actions cannot be understated, as they directly threaten the lives and well-being of those targeted.
Living Under Constant Threat
Those accused of Islamophobia must live in constant fear, often requiring police protection and altering their daily routines to ensure their safety. They face the grim reality of death threats, forced anonymity, and the loss of their freedom to openly express their opinions. Their lives are characterized by the need to constantly watch their backs, anticipating potential attacks or acts of violence by extremists who perceive any criticism of Islam as an affront to their beliefs and a threat to Islamic primacy. The toll on their mental and emotional well-being is immeasurable as they navigate a world filled with uncertainty and the constant threat of harm.
The Tragic Losses and the Role of Migration
Countless lives have been tragically lost due to accusations of Islamophobia. From Lars Vilks, the Swedish cartoonist who perished in a car accident alongside his police guards, to the targeted killings of Charlie Hebdo staff and the attempted assassination of Salman Rushdie, the repercussions of these accusations are devastating. Writers, journalists, activists, poets, clergy, secular thinkers, cartoonists, teachers, students,politicians, and artists who dared to challenge the boundaries imposed by Islamic supremacists have paid the ultimate price. Their deaths serve as a haunting reminder of the dangers faced by those who refuse to be silenced. It is crucial to acknowledge that migration from countries where accusations of blasphemy carry severe consequences plays a role in importing the cultural dynamics that perpetuate violence and intolerance.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
The CDC removed “COVID vaccine” as the cause of death on a number of Minnesota death certificates, according to an anonymous tipster — and that has the Brownstone Institute referring to the health agency as the “Centers for Data Concealment.”
The tipster — and I’m sure you can understand why they chose to remain anonymous — was able to get their hands on the complete set of Minnesota death certificates from 2015 on.
Aaron Hertzberg’s deeply detailed report digs deep into the federal bureaucratic requirements involved in filling out local death certificates all over the country. The extremely short version is that while local coroners fill out death certificates with the cause or causes of death (CoD), the CDC later applies an International Classification of Diseases (ICD 10) code. ICD has an alphanumeric code for everything from “Fall involving ice skates, skis, roller-skates, or skateboards” to “Florida Man got drunk and tried to kiss a barracuda.”
I’m kidding about that second one but just barely.
“The critical thing to keep in mind is that the person filling out the death certificate writes a text description of the CoDs, but doesn’t assign the ICD 10 codes for the CoDs,” explains Hertzberg. The application is usually made by a “secret algorithm,” but there is “a tiny percentage of cases adjudicated by CDC staff when the algorithm is unable to confidently assign an ICD code.”
What you need to know next is that ICD 10 code T88.1 is the CoD for “Other complications following immunization, not elsewhere classified,” and that Y59.0 is for “Viral vaccines.”
“There are three death certificates in the MN tranche that contain either T88.1 or Y59.0. One is for a flu vaccine reaction, and – surprisingly – the other two are for a covid vaccine.”
What the tipster found — and I’m glossing over a lot of details here that you can find at the link — was that the CDC removed or refused to add the T88.1 or Y59.0 IDC codes from Minnesota death certificates that indicated that someone died from complications involving a COVID vaccine.
“In almost every death certificate that identifies a covid vaccine as a cause of death,” Hertzberg concluded, “the CDC committed data fraud by not assigning the ICD 10 code for vaccine side effects to the causes of death listed on the death certificate.”
Hertzberg’s report lists only nine altered death certificates, so, admittedly, we aren’t talking about big numbers here for COVID vaccines that were basically universal for adults in the given timeframe. The takeaway from this story for me is the lengths to which public officials will go just to squash any dissent or data contrary to the official narrative.
Maybe the best part of being an adult — aside from developing an appreciation for single-malt scotches, of course — is the right to gather the facts, assess the risks, and make your own decisions about what’s best for you.
Because you’re a grownup. And because it’s your life, not the government’s. We fought a revolution over that ideal almost 250 years ago, but the city named after the man who won it seems to have forgotten that.
We have Cardinal Joseph W. Tobin of Newark, NJ, suggesting that people should relinquish their Second Amendment rights for the supposed betterment of society. Now, a cardinal, for those who don't know, is a highly esteemed member of the clergy, adorned in scarlet attire, responsible for advising the Pope and participating in the selection of a new pontiff. But let me tell you, these folks don't seem to possess much common sense. In his letter, the Cardinal claims that giving up our right to bear arms is the best way to combat the culture of violence plaguing our society. But hold on a second! It's always those who have the luxury of armed protection telling us we shouldn't have guns. Will the Pope instruct his security detail to give up their firearms? I highly doubt it. It's hypocritical and disingenuous, merely a display of virtue signaling. The Cardinal further asserts that while we have the Second Amendment right, it comes with the responsibility to protect the innocent and ensure public safety. But here's the problem, Tobin: How are we supposed to protect the innocent if we're stripped of the means to do so? He seems to overlook the fact that responsible gun owners aren't the ones causing the majority of gun violence. It's the criminals involved in inner-city drug, gang, and beef conflicts. Do you honestly believe they'll voluntarily surrender their weapons? It's evident that the Cardinal lives in a bubble, shielded 24/7 by armed security, disconnected from the reality of everyday citizens. Responsible gun owners are not the problem; criminals are. And criminals won't pay heed to his foolish letter. In fact, they'd be delighted if law-abiding citizens willingly gave up their guns, making their criminal activities even easier. So, if the Cardinal wants us to surrender our firearms, he should set the example and forsake his own security. Tell the Pope to do the same. Maybe then, and only then, will I consider taking his letter seriously. As of now, it appears to be nothing more than a privileged clergy member leading people to their demise.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
The World Health Organization (WHO), funded primarily by the CCP and Bill Gates tag team, has been very busy getting its so-called “pandemic treaties” into place, which in effect hand over national control of a state’s public health response to unaccountable multinational bureaucrats — whose interests, not unimportantly, are not shared by the populations over which they exercise authority.
People have now access to an enormous amount of information (which increases during crisis) from many different sources, traditional or digital, including for instance online platform offering pre-print access to scientific articles. Health institutions are not anymore, the only provider of information. This new information ecosystem has generated a new “Health Threat” that accompanies epidemics and pandemics, called infodemic.
Infodemic is the overabundance of information -accurate or not- which makes it difficult for individuals to adopt behaviours that will protect their health and the health of their families and communities. The infodemic can directly impact health, hamper the implementation of public health countermeasures and undermine trust and social cohesiveness. Infodemic cannot be eliminated it can only be managed. This is why WHO and partners have developed the approach of infodemic management which encompasses Risk Communication and Community Engagement adding additional tools and approaches to manage it more efficiently in the 21st century.
The use of the term “infodemic” might seem like a silly rhetorical invention of the kind often used by large organizations and their PR departments. However, it signifies something deeper, which is the rolling of issues ostensibly unrelated to true public health under the Public Health™ umbrella.
By this method, the government grants for itself an entirely new justification for gun confiscation, or censorship in the case of the “infodemic,” or whatever fashionable social engineering project comes along next.
Or it might start with all the corporate state news actors who claimed, with zero actual knowledge of the ingredients or mechanism of action of the shots, that the COVID-19 vaccines are totally “safe and effective” when the evidence at the time didn’t support either claim, as more and more research now bears out.
Unfortunately, we know how the WHO’s “infodemic” regime will be applied — unfairly, arbitrarily, opaquely, and with no meaningful recourse for the censored.
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Two years ago, Amy Gonzalez and Andrea Gross, two Ohio moms with children in the Columbus Academy, had had enough of the school’s CRT and DEI policies. And like moms across the United States, they decided to take a stand and even gathered a coalition of like-minded parents to demand answers and solutions. In the video below, you can see why they spoke up and how the school tried to exact punishment and enforce compliance.
At the time, Gross and Gonzalez told ABC 6 in Columbus that their coalition wanted to know what was being taught and felt that they were not being heard. Gross said that people felt, “marginalized. Intimidated. Isolated. And ultimately discriminated against.” Gonzalez stated that the DEI agenda at the school felt like “inherent bigotry.”
The pair were accused by the school of “false and misleading attacks” and later informed them that their children would be denied re-enrollment that fall. The school also took the extra step of informing other families of the expulsion. In that letter, Head of School Melissa Soderberg claimed that Gross and Gonzalez had “pursued a course of action that has been anything but civil, respectful, and faithful to the facts.” She also accused the pair of causing pain and fear for physical safety among the faculty, staff, students, and even their families. The station said that the pair made an appearance on a podcast. One parent who supported the school’s position listened and commented:
The language was very incendiary and I actually contacted the school after that podcast. We know there were children recording their class lectures and discussions in class at the urging of their parents. I think there is a chilling of discussion in the classroom that I think it’s really problematic. The school does not teach, per se critical race theory. There are certainly components the students, especially in the upper school are exposed to, but they are not taught how to think and they are not told what to think. I think it is heart-wrenching that the children are sort of collateral damage. The school does not teach, per se critical race theory. There are certainly components the students, especially in the upper school are exposed to, but they are not taught how to think and they are not told what to think. I think it is heart-wrenching that the children are sort of collateral damage.
Gross told the outlet, “I believe they are trying to send a message to the other members of our coalition that if you speak out and you ask questions that they will punish your innocent children.”
On June 12 of this year, Gonzalez and Gross filed an official complaint in the Court of Common Pleas in Franklin County. Fox News notes that the pair are seeking damages from the academy. The complaint states in part, “One teacher stated, on the first day of class, that he would not communicate with any student who supported President Trump. Politically charged issues were regularly taught and discussed in the classroom without opposing viewpoints presented.” The complaint also alleges that Latinos were not offered inclusion to the extent that other minorities enjoyed. The head of the academy’s security filed a report with the local police department and the school told faculty that it had reported the pair to the FBI. That portion of the complaint reads:
During the meeting when faculty was told the FBI had been alerted, the environment was such that one of the Academy’s faculty members raised his/her hand and asked if the Child Plaintiffs should be treated differently. Another member of faculty stated, “it sounds like we have a mole’” The actions of the Academy and those of its affiliates, as directed by the Academy, had an extreme impact on the wellbeing of Plaintiffs. The Academy falsely accused the Parent Plaintiffs of being dangerous to the health and wellbeing of the entire Academy community and destroyed their reputations with many of the people they had spent years working and learning with.
Gross told Fox that the school’s retaliation turned the community against her family to the point that her daughter left the state for her schooling.
