ABOVE: Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke is an avid hunter and target shooter, which is why he visited The Range of Richfield in Richfield, Wisconsin at the start of August. He celebrated National Shooting Sports Month with colleagues at the Department of the Interior, with NSSF, with veterans and with new friends. Visit to join the fun during National Shooting Sports Month. #LetsGoShooting #NSSF Subscribe to TheNSSF:


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

NEWTOWN, Conn. – NSSF®, the trade association for the firearm industry, is proud to share the Presidential Message on National Shooting Sports Month® 2020, in which President Donald Trump commemorates “…our Constitutional right to bear arms by celebrating America’s cherished past time of recreational and competitive shooting sports.” National Shooting Sports Month was developed by NSSF to celebrate, share and invite newcomers and grow participation in the shooting sports.

The Presidential Message recognizes America’s “rich history of fostering responsible gun ownership.” President Trump notes in his message the shooting sports’ history of community events early in the nation’s growth, bringing communities and families together. Those competitions grew and gave rise to 19th century sharpshooters, including Pawnee Bill and Annie Oakley celebrating shooting skills and a national pioneering character.

The White House message, issued during a time of record-setting firearm sales, encourages Americans to participate in the shooting sports, practice safe firearm storage and handling and seek proper instruction. President Trump reiterated his commitment to preserving and safeguarding America’s Second Amendment rights and individual liberties.

“Since my first day in office, I have made clear that my Administration will always protect and defend the Second Amendment,” President Trump wrote in his message. “We will continue to oppose those individuals and policies that attempt to tread on this essential and cherished liberty.”

The President also encouraged all Americans to share their valued shooting sports traditions with others.

“NSSF is honored President Trump recognizes and celebrates the shooting sports with all law-abiding Americans,” said Joe Bartozzi, NSSF President and Chief Executive Officer. “The firearm industry is proud of the safe and responsible example of today’s gun owners who participate in these cherished traditions and the vital role they play in teaching and reinforcing the safe and responsible ownership of firearms.”

The entire Presidential Message on National Shooting Sports Month 2020 can be found here.

About NSSF
NSSF is the trade association for the firearm industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of thousands of manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers nationwide. For more information, log on to






2020 Democratic Party Platform Declares Total War on 2nd Amendment

2020 Democratic Party Platform Declares Total War on Second Amendment Rights



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The national Democratic Party is no longer making any attempt to hide their antipathy towards guns and gun owners. Where once the party attempted to tailor their anti-gun messaging to appear moderate and appeal to some gun owners, the draft 2020 Democratic Party Platform contains a full-throated assault on firearms ownership and a blueprint for undermining every aspect of Second Amendment rights. Viewed in historical context, the draft 2020 Democratic Party Platform is the most anti-gun the party has ever put forward.

Released July 21, the draft platform contains the following passage:

Democrats will enact universal background checks, end online sales of guns and ammunition, close dangerous loopholes that currently allow stalkers and some individuals convicted of assault or battery to buy and possess firearms, and adequately fund the federal background check system. We will close the “Charleston loophole” and prevent individuals who have been convicted of hate crimes from possessing firearms. Democrats will ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high capacity magazines. We will incentivize states to enact licensing requirements for owning firearms and “red flag” laws that allow courts to temporarily remove guns from the possession of those who are a danger to themselves or others. We will pass legislation requiring that guns be safely stored in homes. And Democrats believe that gun companies should be held responsible for their products, just like any other business, and will prioritize repealing the law that shields gun manufacturers from civil liability.

The proposals include so-called “universal” background checks, the elimination of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System’s three-day safety -valve provision, and gun owner licensing, which would turn the right to keep and bear arms into a privilege dependent on the whim of government bureaucrats. The Democrats would empower government intrusions into the home to dictate how Americans keep and store firearms for self-defense and to confiscate firearms without due process based on the flimsiest of evidentiary standards. Moreover, the draft platform calls for a ban on commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms and their magazines, something explicitly prohibited under the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v. Heller.

Another portion of the platform states, “Democrats will also ensure the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have sufficient resources to study gun violence as a public health issue.” At a time when the politically-biased Centers for Disease Control has come under severe criticism for its response to an actual communicable disease, the national Democratic Party platform would further distract the agency from its core mission by turning it back into a taxpayer-funded gun control factoid factory.

The gun control section of the draft 2020 Democratic platform is an escalation of the anti-gun position put forward in the 2016 platform, adding and expounding upon the positions in the earlier document. Both are notable for what they omit. Neither recognizes that Americans have a Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms

As recently as 2012, the national Democratic Party was willing to acknowledge that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to arms – something understood by the vast majority of Americans and the U.S. Supreme Court. The 2012 Democratic platform explained:

We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms.

Similarly, the 2008 Democratic platform noted:

We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms.

The 2004 Democratic platform stated:

We will protect Americans’ Second Amendment right to own firearms… 

Although the 2000 Democratic platform did not cite the Second Amendment, the platform stated that the party sought to regulate firearms “in ways that respect the rights of hunters, sportsmen, and legitimate gun owners.”

Earlier Democratic platforms (1996199219801976) often offered language meant to assure hunters and target shooters that their rights would not come under threat. 

The Democrats’ inclusion of Second Amendment language in the platforms of the early 2000s wasn’t by mistake. After George W. Bush defeated Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election, there was a concerted effort by Democrats to moderate, or at least give the appearance of moderating, the prevailing party positions on gun control in order to better reflect the American electorate’s respect for gun rights. For instance, in 2002, the Washington Post reported on a Democratic Senate caucus retreat at which “several” senators suggested a move away from gun control. According to the item, this prompted freshman Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) to “[urge] her colleagues to keep their positions but change their language to be less inflammatory to swing voters.” In the mid-2000s Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel also sought to shift the party’s anti-gun perception.

With the nomination of Clinton in 2016, the pretense that the national Democratic Party would respect Second Amendment rights was no longer tenable. 

During the campaign, Clinton repeatedly attacked the individual right to keep and bear arms. She even attacked the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Heller, which recognized the individual right to arms. Clinton told the audience at a September 2015 fundraiser in New York City “the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get.” At a separate event in Connecticut, the former senator called Heller “a terrible decision.” When asked by ABC’s George Stephanopolous to clarify her position on the Second Amendment, the former first lady refused to acknowledge that it protects an individual right.

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s persistent attacks on gun owners also make platform language in support of the Second Amendment indefensible. 

The career politician has endorsed the confiscation of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms. Biden had the following exchange with CNN’s Anderson Cooper when asked about firearm confiscation during an August 5, 2019 interview:

Cooper: So, to gun owners out there who say well a Biden administration means they are going to come for my guns.

Biden: Bingo! You’re right if you have an assault weapon.

Further, while attending a private $500 a person fundraiser in November, Biden revealed his intent to ban 9mm pistols. According to an article from the Seattle Times, while at the soiree, the 77-year-old posited to attendees “Why should we allow people to have military-style weapons including pistols with 9mm bullets and can hold 10 or more rounds?”

The U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that the Second Amendment prohibits the gun bans Biden advocates.

In Heller, the Court concluded that the types of firearms protected by the Second Amendment include those “in common use at the time” for “lawful purposes like self-defense.” The AR-15, which Biden has made clear he seeks to ban, is the most popular rifle in America and therefore undoubtedly “in common use” and protected by the Second Amendment. Similarly, industry data shows that 9mm pistols are the most common type of pistol produced.

In 2015, Heller decision author Justice Antonin Scalia reiterated that the Second Amendment and Heller preclude so-called “assault weapons” bans when he signed onto a dissent from the denial of certiorari in Friedman v. Highland Park. In the dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas explained,

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles [with many millions more owning them in 2020]. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.

The gun control section of the draft 2020 Democratic Party Platform is a perfect fit for the party’s presumptive presidential nominee. Both the platform drafters and the former vice president have put forward a radical gun control agenda that would further burden every aspect of gun ownership. Above all, both have exhibited a complete disregard for the Second Amendment.




republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

This is very troubling. Here is a sneak peek into Joe Biden’s anti-gun rights agenda.

This is an actual draft of the Democratic National Committee Platform just released. Make no mistake about it, if Joe Biden wins in November and the Democrats get control of the U.S. Senate this will be the new reality!

And believe me, this is just the beginning of the gun prohibition movement’s agenda to finally destroy our Second Amendment rights.
I need your help now. By November it will be too late.

e must be prepared to educate every gun owner about this catastrophic threat to their gun rights and have the funds on hand to file a slew of lawsuits to stop our Bill of Rights from being shredded.

And we must have the funds on hand do it before the dam bursts and our rights are washed away.


By then it will be too late. The gun confiscation movement funded by billionaires like Michael Bloomberg and George Soros will already be in full control of our government.

In record time they will transform our right to keep and bears arms into gun ban and confiscation laws like exist in England, New Zealand, Cuba and Venezuela.

Once our rights are lost we won’t get them back.

The time to act is now. Please share this email with every freedom loving friend and family member you have.

And please make a critical contribution to the Second Amendment Foundation today.

We must have the ammunition to defend our rights now.

Donate now so that our Bill of rights might live. The gun rights you save will be your own!

There is no time to waste.

Sincerely yours,

Alan Gottlieb





“Day of Freedom—The End of the Pandemic”

‘Masks Make Us Slaves’:

Massive Protests In Germany Over Lockdown


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Many citizens in Germany are fed up with national mandates to wear face masks, and have shown up in the streets with tens of thousands of protestors. They were heavily criticized by the government and leaders are being charged with violations. ⁃ TN Editor

In April face masks became mandatory across German states in shops and on public transport in a bid to slow the spread of Covid-19.

However, now a row over whether they should remain compulsory is breaking out across the Bundesrepublik.

It comes after politician Harry Glawe in the northeastern state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, spoke out in favour of getting rid of the mask requirement, or Maskenpflicht as it is known in German, to help the pandemic-hit retail trade.

“If the infection rate stays so low I can’t see any reason to maintain the duty to wear masks in shops,” said the state’s economy minister, who is a member of Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU).

“I can fully understand why the retail sector is so impatient for us to end compulsory mask wearing,” he told Welt am Sonntag.

Glawe told the newspaper he expects the state to announce an end to mask wearing in shops during a meeting of the state government on August 4th. He added though that social distancing rules – 1.5 metre distance is required between people not from your household in Germany – will likely be kept in place.

Germany’s Health Minister Jens Spahn said he was opposed to the idea of getting rid of the requirement to wear masks.

Spahn wrote on Twitter that he understood “impatience and the desire for normality”. But the coronavirus is “still there”.

Where distance can not always be ensured in closed rooms, the mask is “necessary”, wrote Spahn.  However, amending coronavirus regulations is up to individual states rather than a federal decision.

Read full story here…


Biggest Anti-Lockdown Freedom Day Protest Held in Berlin, Germany - The Vaccine Reaction



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

While public health officials at the World Health Organization (WHO) and in other countries argue about whether the new SARS CoV-2 virus is causing a “second wave” of infections in countries that are easing lockdown measures or the world is simply experiencing “one big wave of transmission,” since late July Germany and other European countries have been reporting increases in COVID-19 cases and deaths.1 2 

As governments discuss whether to re-institute regulations enforcing lockdowns, the people of Germany made their voices heard on Aug. 1, 2020 in Berlin in the biggest anti-coronavirus lockdown, anti-masking protest yet held anywhere in the world.

Declared by event organizers as “Day of Freedom—The End of the Pandemic,” mainstream media outlets like the Associated Press and Reuters estimated that the peaceful demonstration drew a crowd of 20,000 people. However, first-hand social media reports estimated hundreds of thousands of people—perhaps over one million—marched from the Brandenburg Gate, which is near the Reichstag building housing the German parliament, and then rallied on a boulevard in the city’s large Tiergarten park.

According to one Reuters report:

Protesters danced and sang, “We are free people!” to the tune of rock band Queen’s ‘We Will Rock You.’ Others marched with placards saying, ‘We are making noise because you are stealing our freedom!’ and ‘Do think! Don’t wear a mask!’

“Our demand is to return to democracy,” said one protester who declined to give his name. “The mask that enslaves us must go.’”3

‘We Are the Second Wave”

According to Associated Press, protesters came from across Germany and held signs that said: “We are being forced to wear a muzzle,” “Natural defense instead of vaccination” and “We are the second wave.”

AP reported that when police using bullhorns warned those marching in the streets to wear masks and adhere to social distancing rules and were ignored, a criminal complaint against the rally’s organizer was drawn up for “failing to enforce hygiene rules” and protesters moved to the Tiergarten park to continue the rally before being dispersed without incident.4

Populists and Right Wing Conspiracy Theorists?

The Irish Times noted that, “Germany’s management of the pandemic has widely been viewed as relatively successful, with a lower death rate than comparable countries. The country has been easing lockdown measures since late April but social-distancing rules remain in place, as does a requirement to wear masks in public transport and shops.”5 The U.K. newspaper compared Germany’s death toll—“just over 9,150 people out of more than 210,670 confirmed virus cases”—as being “five times less than Britain’s, which has a smaller population.”

Although the large numbers of people who traveled to Berlin to march against the government’s lockdown and masking requirements came from big cities and small towns all over Germany, most big media companies described them as “conspiracy theorists” and “right wing populists.”6

A co-leader of the Social Democrats, the junior party in Germany’s governing coalition, was quoted by the Associated Press angrily criticizing the protestors, alleging “They are not just endangering our health, they are endangering our success against the pandemic and for the revival of the economy, education and society. Irresponsible!”7

Reuter’s quoted a protestor, who countered that:

Only a few scientists around the world who follow the government’s lead are heard. Those who hold different views are silenced, censored or discredited as defenders of conspiracy theories.8

Sweden’s Stands By “No Lockdown” Policy

Unlike the U.S. and most European countries, which instituted strict universal social lockdown measures, Sweden’s public health agency refused to order a country-wide lockdown this year.9 Instead, public health officials allowed a controlled natural spread of the new coronavirus so the population could develop “herd immunity.” Voluntary social distancing measures were instituted to allow the country to continue to operate economically and socially without closing offices, restaurants, primary schools, recreational facilities and other parts of society.

At the end of July, European countries that had implemented strict lockdowns during 2020 started reporting a “second wave” of SARS CoV-2 infections accompanied by mortality increases, including Belgium, Netherlands, France, Germany, Spain and the U.K. However, new infections in Sweden have been steadily declining. Newsweek reported that:10

Amid fears over a potential second wave of novel coronavirus across Europe, new infections in Sweden, where full lockdown measures were not implemented, have mostly declined since late June.

Even though Sweden currently ranks eighth among countries with the highest number of COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people—higher than the U.S. and Brazil, which are number one and two in terms of numbers of COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people—Sweden’s chief epidemiologist Dr. Anders Tegnell said, “We are now seeing rapidly falling cases, we have continuously had healthcare that has been working, there have been free beds at any given time, never any crowding in the hospitals.”

Tegnell told Newsweek that failure to manage deaths among the elderly living in long term care facilities at the beginning of the outbreak contributed to Sweden’s high death toll, and changes have been made to control outbreaks in those facilities.


1 Smith-Schoenwalder C. WHO: Coronavirus Isn’t Seasonal, World Experiencing ‘One Big Wave” of TransmissionUS News & World Report July 29, 2020.
2 Jones S, Willsher K, Boffey D, Connolly K. Europe braces for second wave of coronavirus. The Guardian July 27, 2020.
3 Reuters. Thousands march in Berlin against coronavirus curbs. Aug. 1, 2020.
4 Associated Press. Thousands Protest in Berlin Against Coronavirus Restrictions. Bloomberg News Aug. 1, 2020.
5 Irish Times. Thousands march against Covid-19 restrictions in Germany despite rise in cases. Aug. 1, 2020.
6 See Footnote 4.
7 Ibid.
8 Footnote 3.
9 Raines K. Sweden’s Different Response to COVID-19 Based on Mutual Respect and TrustThe Vaccine Reaction May 18, 2020.
10 Kim S. Sweden, Which Never Had Lockdown, Sees COVID-19 Cases Plummet as Rest of Europe Suffers SpikeNewsweek July 30, 2020.


‘Masks Make Us Slaves’: Thousands March in Berlin Anti-Lockdown Protest - The Vaccine Reaction


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Our demand is basically going back to democracy. Away with these laws that have been imposed on us, away 
with the masks that make us slaves. Thousands have marched in Berlin to protest against Germany’s coronavirus 
rules. The gathering, estimated by police at 17,000, included libertarians, anti vaccination activists. Many flouted 
government guidance on wearing masks and socially distancing. We are here today because we believe that only 
the few scientists around the world who follow the lead of the government are those who are heard. There are 
thousands and thousands of scientists, doctors worldwide who are not heard, they are silenced. They are censored 
or discredited as conspiracy theory defenders, even though they have run entire universities.

From Lockdowns to "The Great Reset";

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
08/01/2020 BY

The lockdown in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic has accelerated the implementation of long-held plans to establish a so-called new world order. Under the auspices of the World Economic Forum (WEF), global policymakers are advocating for a “Great Reset” with the intent of creating a global technocracy. It is not by coincidence that on October 18, 2019, in New York City the WEF participated in “Event 201” at the “high-level” pandemic exercise organized by the John Hopkins Center for Health Security.

This coming technocracy involves close cooperation between the heads of the digital industry and of governments. With programs such as guaranteed minimum income and healthcare for all, the new kind of governance combines strict societal control with the promise of comprehensive social justice.

The truth, however, is that this new world order of digital tyranny comes with a comprehensive social credit system. The People’s Republic of China is the pioneer of this method of surveillance and control of individuals, corporations, and sociopolitical entities.

For the individual, one’s identity is reduced to an app or chip that registers almost any personal activity. In order to gain a few individual rights, and be it only to travel to a certain place, a person must balance such apparent privileges with his submission to a web of regulations that define in detail what is “good behavior” and deemed as beneficial to humankind and the environment. For example, during a pandemic, this sort of control would extend from the obligation of wearing a mask and practicing social distancing to having specific vaccinations in order to apply for a job or to travel.

It is, in short, a type of social engineering which is the opposite of a spontaneous order or of development. Like the mechanical engineer with a machine, the social engineer—or technocrat—treats society as an object. Different from the brutal suppressions by the totalitarianism of earlier times, the modern social engineer will try to make the social machine work on its own according to the design. For this purpose, the social engineer must apply the laws of society the way the mechanical engineer follows the laws of nature. Behavioral theory has reached a stage of knowledge that makes the dreams of social engineering possible. The machinations of social engineering operate not through brute force, but subtly by nudge.

Under the order envisioned by the Great Reset, the advancement of technology is not meant to serve the improvement of the conditions of the people but to submit the individual to the tyranny of a technocratic state. "The experts know better" is the justification.

The Agenda

The plan for an overhaul of the world is the brainchild of an elite group of businessmen, politicians, and their intellectual entourage that used to meet in Davos, Switzerland, in January each year. Brought into existence in 1971, the World Economic Forum has become a megaglobal event since then. More than three thousand leaders from all over the world attended the meeting in 2020.

Under the guidance of the WEF, the agenda of the Great Reset says that the completion of the current industrial transformation requires a thorough overhaul of the economy, politics, and society. Such a comprehensive transformation requires the alteration of human behavior, and thus "transhumanism" is part of the program.

The Great Reset will be the theme of the fifty-first meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2021. Its agenda is the commitment to move the world economy toward “a more fair, sustainable and resilient future.” The program calls for “a new social contract” that is centered on racial equality, social justice, and the protection of nature. Climate change requires us “to decarbonize the economy” and to bring human thinking and behavior “into harmony with nature.” The aim is to build “more equal, inclusive and sustainable economies.” This new world order must be “urgently” implemented, the promotors of the WEF claim, and they point out that the pandemic “has laid bare the unsustainability of our system,” which lacks “social cohesion.”

The WEF’s great reset project is social engineering at the highest level. Advocates of the reset contend that the UN failed to establish order in the world and could not advance forcefully its agenda of sustainable development—known as Agenda 2030—because of its bureaucratic, slow, and contradictory way of working. In contrast, the actions of the organizational committee of the World Economic Forum are swift and smart. When a consensus has been formed, it can be implemented by the global elite all over the world.

Social Engineering

The ideology of the World Economic Forum is neither left nor right, nor progressive or conservative, it is also not fascist or communist, but outright technocratic. As such, it includes many elements of earlier collectivist ideologies.

In recent decades, the consensus has emerged at the annual Davos meetings that the world needs a revolution, and that reforms have taken too long. The members of the WEF envision a profound upheaval at short notice. The time span should be so brief that most people will hardly realize that a revolution is going on. The change must be so swift and dramatic that those who recognize that a revolution is happening do not have the time to mobilize against it.

The basic idea of the Great Reset is the same principle that guided the radical transformations from the French to the Russian and Chinese Revolutions. It is the idea of constructivist rationalism incorporated in the state. But projects like the Great Reset leave unanswered the question of who rules the state. The state itself does not rule. It is an instrument of power. It is not the abstract state that decides, but the leaders of specific political parties and of certain social groups.

Earlier totalitarian regimes needed mass executions and concentration camps to maintain their power. Now, with the help of new technologies, it is believed, dissenters can easily be identified and marginalized. The nonconformists will be silenced by disqualifying divergent opinions as morally despicable.

The 2020 lockdowns possibly offer a preview of how this system works. The lockdown worked as if it had been orchestrated—and perhaps it was. As if following a single command, the leaders of big and small nations—and of different stages of economic development—implemented almost identical measures. Not only did many governments act in unison, they also applied these measures with little regard for the horrific consequences of a global lockdown.

Months of economic stillstand have destroyed the economic basis of millions of families. Together with social distancing, the lockdown has produced a mass of people unable to care for themselves. First, governments destroyed the livelihood, then the politicians showed up as the savior. The demand for social assistance is no longer limited to specific groups, but has become a need of the masses.

Once, war was the health of the state. Now it is fear of disease. What lies ahead is not the apparent coziness of a benevolent comprehensive welfare state with a guaranteed minimum income and healthcare and education for all. The lockdown and its consequences have brought a foretaste of what is to come: a permanent state of fear, strict behavioral control, massive loss of jobs, and growing dependence on the state.

With the measures taken in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, a big step to reset the global economy has been made. Without popular resistance, the end of the pandemic will not mean the end of the lockdown and social distancing. At the moment, however, the opponents of the new world order of digital tyranny still have access to the media and platforms to dissent. Yet the time is running out. The perpetrators of the new world order have smelled blood. Declaring the coronavirus a pandemic has come in handy to promote the agenda of their Great Reset. Only massive opposition can slow down and finally stop the extension of the power grip of the tyrannical technocracy that is on the rise.


Antony P. Mueller

Dr. Antony P. Mueller is a German professor of economics who currently teaches in Brazil. Write an e-mail. See his website and blog.




‘Do not argue or fight with the criminal – do as they say,’ reads police email



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Minneapolis Police Department told residents last week that they should “be prepared” to surrender their belongings to criminals and obey their commands.

With Minneapolis experiencing a 46% increase in carjackings and a 36% increase in robberies compared to this same time last year – thanks to the far-left city council all but defunding law enforcement – MPD has issued a citywide email warning residents not to resist the emboldened criminals.

“Be prepared to give up your cell phone and purse/wallet,” the police said in their email, adding that citizens should listen to criminals and “do as they say.”

Notably, MPD makes no suggestion for residents to exercise their Second Amendment right to self-defense.

South Minneapolis resident Steve Taylor, who moderates the city’s Uptown Crime page, pointed out the hypocrisy of the Democrat city council protecting themselves with private armed security while stripping the city of much-needed law enforcement.

“What we’re hearing again and again is people don’t want less public safety, they want better public safety,” Taylor said. “When (City) Council has their own armed security and community members are being robbed at gunpoint often in broad daylight, that just seems unfair.”

“I think we need more police. Of course, we need reformed police and better police that police all of Minneapolis equally, keep everyone equally safe from violent criminals,” he added.

As we’ve reported, many police precincts nationwide kneeled in solidarity with Black Lives Matter protesters who want to see them defunded, and in some cases killed.

Similarly, other Democrat-run cities like Chicago and New York, which have also called for defunding their police, are experiencing skyrocketing crime and violence in 2020.

In New York, for example, shootings have spiked by nearly 50% and homicides increased by 21% compared to the same period last year.

And Chicago experienced its most violent day in 60 YEARS in June when 18 people were killed in less than 24 hours, which Mayor Lori Lightfoot blamed on “gun violence” despite the city having some of the strictest gun control measures in the country.


Minneapolis Police Department Advises Citizens to Capitulate to Criminals



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) is advising citizens of the city to “Be prepared to give up your cell phone and purse/wallet,” in the event that they are accosted by a criminal. The advice comes as the city is experiencing a 37-percent increase in robberies over last year in the wake of the death of Minneapolis criminal George Floyd, who died in police custody in May.

The department’s “robbery prevention tips” were circulated by KSTP-5, an ABC affiliate located in St. Paul. Among other bits of wisdom, the department advised citizens: “Despite all our efforts, robberies may still occur! Do not argue or fight with the criminal. Do as they say. Your safety is most important!”

In the third precinct — where the Floyd incident occurred — police have responded to 100 robberies and 20 carjackings in July alone. Police report that cellphones, purses, and vehicles are being stolen and also relayed that victims have been assaulted, maced, dragged, and threatened with guns in those incidents.

The Hennepin County Police and Fire monitoring account on Twitter mocked the advice and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, tweeting: “Look, another email on how to be a perfect victim in #MpsCrime just came out, but wait @MayorFrey says Minneapolis is a safe vibrant place.”

Perhaps the MPD is just giving the public a taste of what life will be like without them after the Democrat-dominated City Council voted in June to disband the city’s police department and replace it with a yet-to-be-defined “community-led public safety system.”

The defund and abolish the police movement has been strongly pushed by the neo-marxist Black Lives Matter organization. But actual black leaders in Minneapolis have called the plan to abolish the city’s police force “egregious, grotesque, absurd, crazy, ridiculous,” according the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

Some black leaders in the community have lashed out at the City Council’s decision. Civil-rights attorney Nekima Levy Armstrong, a former president of the NAACP’s Minneapolis chapter, complained that the council didn’t take the wishes of the city’s black community into consideration when they voted to do away with the police.

“They have shown a complete disregard for the voices and perspectives of many members of the African-American community,” Armstrong said. “We have not been consulted as the city makes its decisions, even though our community is the one most heavily impacted by both police violence and community violence.”

Though Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey has gone on record saying that he does not support a total disbanding of the city’s police department, he has taken responsibility for the decision to evacuate the Third Precinct station, which allowed rioters to torch the building on May 28. That incident — maybe more than any other — signaled the city’s helplessness in dealing with rioters. The burned-out Third Precinct headquarters is symbolic of the city’s capitulation to criminals. Frey is culpable for that.

One Third Precinct crime victim who chose not heed the police department’s advice to simply acquiesce to the criminals in the city was 99-year-old Evelyn Johnson, who fought back after an attacker entered her home through a back window and covered her head with a blanket.

“I think he was surprised,” Johnson said. “He thought he was just going to cover my mouth and smother me, but that didn’t happen. I fought him. We wrestled for quite awhile according to my bruises.”

The attacker eventually wrestled Johnson into a bathroom and shut the door. The criminal escaped with approximately $40 and an iPad.

“I’m am surprised to think that I’m 99 years old and was able to work off that strong young man,” said Johnson, whose hearing aid was broken in the fight. “God was with me.”

But according to the MPD, Johnson was wrong to fight. She should have just meekly surrendered and hoped that the criminal who attacked her would choose to allow her to live after the robbery.

The advice given by the MPD is actually not uncommon. Many police departments and victim-advocacy groups give basically the same advice to someone being mugged or robbed — some version of “your wallet is not worth your life, so it’s better to just give in.” But it’s a message that emboldens criminals, who are far more likely to attack when they don’t fear that victims might defend themselves.

Aren’t such situations part of what the Second Amendment is all about?

If history has taught us anything it’s that weakness — or the perception of weakness — invites aggression. Minneapolis has signaled its capitulation to rioters and criminals over and over again. Is it any surprise that criminals are now taking advantage of that?




republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

In what is quickly devolving into a Church vs State showdown between pastor of Grace Community Church, John MacArthur and the state and local governments of Los Angeles, California, it appears that MacArthur has now been threated with the possibility of arrest for continuing to hold worship services against the state and county’s mandate against gatherings.

MacArthur has been under fire from the governments who continue to threaten to shut down his church or take other actions such as shutting off the utilities to his church — which have already happened — and he’s also been under fire from those whom he’s called friends.

John MacArthur recently took a stand against government tyranny when he released a statement declaring that his church would not succumb to the intrusion of government into the right to freely worship unhindered. In the wake of MacArthur’s stand, he has taken a lot of heat from government that has not only threatened to shut off utilities, but has apparently followed through with it.

Now, according to Franklin Graham, he’s being threated with fines and arrest.

“After Pastor John MacArthur announced that his congregation at Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California, would be assembling in obedience to the Word of God,” Graham writes in a Facebook post, “he received a letter from Los Angeles county government officials threatening repercussions such as fines and even possible arrest.”

He continues,

 But Pastor MacArthur said he isn’t worried about that—he and the church elders voted unanimously that the church will be open this Sunday and every Sunday. He said, “It has never been the prerogative of civil government to order, modify, forbid, or mandate worship.” They will not render to Caesar what is God’s, so they will continue to meet as the church every Sunday. I agree with Pastor MacArthur and appreciate his call for “the church to be the church in this world.” If I were in Southern California this weekend, I would love to attend their service tomorrow—and if you live anywhere in southern California, I urge you to get up tomorrow morning and go! It will be worth the drive. Not only will you hear a great message from the Bible, but this would be taking an important stand for our religious freedom. They have a tent set up and additional seats outside. The service begins at 10:30 AM, and the address is Grace Community Church, 13248 Roscoe Blvd., Sun Valley, CA 91352. If you’re like me and live on the other side of the country and can’t join them tomorrow, take a moment to share a word of support with Pastor MacArthur in the comments below.

This is much more than a war on the rights and liberties afforded us by the Constitution — this is now an outright war against God and His people. The Church is being attacked — cloaked in “public safety” attire — but nonetheless, devoured by power-hungry politicians and liberals who would like nothing more than to see her die. But God promises that the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church.



John MacArthur Says Southern Baptist President JD Greear Doesn't Know What a Church is, Doesn't Know How to Shepherd His People


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

John MacArthur has been one of the few glimmers of light as a biblical shepherd during the coronavirus pandemic. As most churches are caving to the demands of the state to shutdown or limit worship, MacArthur has declared that his church will obey God rather than man.

MacArthur has been under fire from the governments who continue to threaten to shut down his church or take other actions such as shutting off the utilities to his church — which have already happened — but he’s also been under fire from those whom he’s called friends. Namely, other church leaders.

In the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, Southern Baptist president, JD Greear has now proclaimed that his church will be dismantled until at least January, prompting a response from MacArthur and his staff. One of MacArthur’s elders, Phil Johnson, appeared to imply that JD Greear was a wolf in sheep’s clothing for doing so.

MacArthur released a video statement last night explaining his strong stance for continuing to keep his church open and then declared that those who refuse to do so, mentioning those leaders (JD Greear) who have shut down their churches until January, either don’t know what a church is or don’t know how to shepherd their people.



Gospel Coalition Author Rebuked by His Pastor, JD Greear, For Opposing Social Justice


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Neil Shenvi is one of a rare breed at The Gospel Coalition who consistently writes less favorably against the social justice movement in the Church. Shenvi, who is also a member of Summit Church in Raleigh, NC where Southern Baptist Convention president, J.D. Greear, is the pastor, has taken a decisive stand against secular social justice ideologies in the Church, particularly, Critical Race Theory.

It seems, however, that Shenvi has consistently stood in stark opposition to his own pastor and done so vocally. While Shenvi has defended his pastor in the past, his positions have clearly been against social justice while Greear heavily promotes it.

Greear has been a staunch proponent of the Black Lives Matter movement — though he says he doesn’t support the organization, his church has marched alongside them while chanting their Marxist slogans.

Greear has stated that it’s fine for Christians to vote for pro-abortion Democrat candidates as he patronizes black people. And, in the wake of the George Floyd riots, he has urged Christians to ignore facts and statistics and instead, stand in solidarity with the faux Black Lives Matter movement.

Greear has compromised on homosexuality, giving standing ovations to an ex-lesbian lady-preacher who has no other qualifications to the ministry except for her sin, has stated that homosexuality isn’t as big of a deal to God as greed, has called on Christians to stand up for LGBTQ rights, and says we should use the “preferred pronouns” of people who are confused about their sexuality, referring to it as “pronoun hospitality.” J.D. Greear has single-handedly caused conservative churches to leave the denomination.

Shenvi, while an author at The Gospel Coalition, appears to disagree with the majority of these positions his pastor has stood for and now, his pastor is letting him know publicly.

In a recent tweet, Shenvi rightly declared that Jesus was not a social justice warrior and Jesus did not come to “dismantle” unjust systems, but to preach the gospel. Greear, however, attempted to refute him with his pragmatic logic by suggesting that by Christians doing what Jesus didn’t do, we make the world a better place.


Is This a Scene From Nazi Germany? No, It's the Portland 'Peaceful Protesters' Burning Bibles






republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On the 63rd night of riots in Portland, antifa rioters set a bonfire in front of the federal courthouse. Since they care so much about the death of George Floyd, they decided to burn Bibles. Seriously, they threw copies of the Bible on the fire.

According to Portland Police, hundreds of people gathered in front of the Justice Center to give speeches. At about 10:30 p.m., the speeches ended and people congregated in front of the federal courthouse. “Some lit fires, climbed the fence outside the federal courthouse, threw objects and chanted.” At about 1:30 a.m., rioters started a bonfire in front of the courthouse.

It appears that they burned the Bibles early on in the bonfire.

The video of burning Bibles traces back to RT, an outlet funded in whole or in part by the Russian government. Even so, the 4-hour 45-minute video clearly shows the protest in Portland from an eyewitness perspective. RT is not a reliable source, but that does not invalidate an RT reporter’s in-person video of an event.

It remains unclear exactly why the antifa rioters decided to burn the Bibles, but it seems rather ironic for a “peaceful protest” supposedly in honor of George Floyd, a man who helped spread the gospel in Houston, Texas.

Burning the Bible does not honor George Floyd’s legacy, but it does fit with the anti-Western and anti-American Marxist critical theory fueling the violent riots.

Portland activist Lilith Sinclair explained the mentality behind her “protest:” “There’s still a lot of work to undo the harm of colonized thought that has been pushed onto Black and indigenous communities.” As examples of “colonized thought,” she mentioned Christianity and the “gender binary.” She said she organizes for “the abolition of … the “United States as we know it.”

Straight-Up Terrorism: Antifa Burns Severed Pig’s Head With a Police Hat on Top

Marxist critical theory encourages people to deconstruct various aspects of society — such as capitalism, science the nuclear family, the Judeo-Christian tradition, even expectations of politeness (as the Smithsonian briefly taught) — as examples of white oppression. This inspires an aimless and destructive revolution.

When vandals toppled a statue of George Washington in Portland, they spray-painted “1619” on the statue, in reference to The New York Times‘ “1619 Project,” which redefines America as fundamentally racist and oppressive. When Claremont’s Charles Kesler wrote in The New York Post “Call them the 1619 riots,” Hannah-Jones, responded (in a since-deleted tweet) that “it would be an honor” to claim responsibility for the destructive riots and the defamation of American Founding Fathers like George Washington.

In a November 9, 1995 op-ed, the 1619 Project founder condemned Christopher Columbus as “no different” from Adolf Hitler and demonized the “white race” as the true “savages” and “bloodsuckers.” She went on to describe “white America’s dream” as “colored America’s nightmare.” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) expressed a similar sentiment when she called for the “dismantling” of America’s “economy and political system,” in order to root out supposed racist oppression.

Yet the “1619 riots” have arguably oppressed black people far more than the U.S. supposedly does. The riots have destroyed black livesblack livelihoods, and black monuments. At least 22 Americans have died in the riots, most of them black.

Burning the Bible fits this destructive narrative, and it also provides yet another powerful contrast with the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Rather than burning Bibles, Martin Luther King Jr. quoted them, in order to galvanize peaceful protesters and shame the segregationists who opposed them. Rather than attempting to burn down federal courthouses, King appealed the consciences of Americans — using the very Bible that Portland rioters burned.

The Bibles that Portland rioters burned also inspired the abolitionist movement of the 1800s, a movement that culminated in the abolition of slavery. Abraham Lincoln even quoted the Bible in his second inaugural address, explaining that God brought the Civil War on America as punishment for the horrible evil of slavery:

Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said, “the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.”

It appears the rioters have decided to tone down the violence somewhat, after Gov. Kate Brown (D-Ore.) agreed to send some Oregon State Police to protect the federal courthouse, leading the federal government to pull back some officers. Brown is claiming a victory over the riots — that peace has ensued with the withdrawal of federal officers. Yet on Thursday night, rioters burned a severed pig’s head with a police hat on it, and on Friday they burned Bibles.

While the rioters did not set off mortar fireworks at the federal courthouse, it appears they persisted in lighting fires with the intention of burning it down. The contrast to Martin Luther King Jr.’s sit-ins could not be more apparent.

These rioters are not “peaceful protesters” and they are not protesting the horrific police death of George Floyd. They are agitating against American society itself. They oppose law enforcement in its entirety, and they are even willing to burn the Bible in a statement about rejecting America’s heritage.

This does not just represent an attack on George Floyd’s legacy, the legacy of the civil rights movement, and the legacy of the abolitionist movement. The noxious ideology of these rioters also undermines the positive aspects of America and encourages hatred toward the very country that provides its citizens with an unprecedented degree of freedom and prosperity. It encourages violent riots in the name of racial justice, even though those riots make life concretely worse for black Americans.

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

Is Tom Cotton a Defender of Slavery?
This Activist’s Marxist Brainwashing Explains Why Antifa Has Terrorized Portland for 51 Nights
Black Conservative Journalist Stabbed by Antifa: ‘They Don’t Really Care About Black Lives’




Congressional hearings about Big Tech's war of censorship against the American people have become the norm, yet nothing changes. Decent people face ever-growing censorship which only increases as we approach elections. It's all a dog and pony show. Tune in every Wednesday at 10 PM Eastern time for Sarah's live show. Get reliable notification options and further information at Sarah's home site:



The DEATH of Free Speech |  FIRED!! Dr. Simone Gold Fired from Hospital After Attending White Coat Summit; FREEDOM OF SPEECH DOA; LAWSUIT PENDING
SHE WILL BE A RICH LADY! | image tagged in politics,political meme,freedom of speech,democratic socialism,democratic party,censorship | made w/ Imgflip meme maker




Emergency Room Dr. Simone Gold Fired from Hospital After Attending White Coat Summit — Says She Has Hired Lin Wood to Represent Her (VIDEO)

Frontline doctors from across the US held a “White Coat Summit” on Monday in Washington DC to dispel the misinformation and myths surrounding the coronavirus.
The doctors are very concerned with the disinformation campaign being played out in the far left American media today.
From their website: “If Americans continue to let so-called experts and media personalities make their decisions, the great American experiment of a Constitutional Republic with Representative Democracy, will cease.”
Dr. Simone Gold, a board certified emergency physician, spoke this week at the White Coat Summit. After over 18 million views of their conference on Monday Google, YouTube and Facebook removed their videos.
On Thursday night Dr. Gold told Tucker Carlson that she was fired from her position after 20 years as an emergency room physician because she appeared at the White Coat Summit this week.
Dr. Simone Gold also told Tucker Carlson she has hired respected Attorney Lin Wood to represent her.
Dr. Simone Gold Exposes the Truth About Coronavirus and Hydroxychloroquine (Full Interview)
Dr. Simone Gold: The BIG Hydroxychloroquine Lie, Hypnotized by Fauci & MORE
DR. SIMONE GOLD GOES PUBLIC! What the Government WON'T Tell Us About #Covid19 
America's Frontline Doctors Summit - Session 1 
Frontline America's Doctors Session 2






republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

As the US becomes increasingly totalitarian, only one point of view is allowed in the public square, and that point of view is warmly positive toward Islam, with no criticism allowed. Criticism of Islam is also banned in Sharia.

“Facebook de-platforms page that shared videos of ex-Muslims talking about how they were persecuted after they left Islam,” OpIndia, July 28, 2020:

ExMuslim TV has been de-platformed with misplaced accusations of inciting violence and hate when all they do is post short videos of ex-Muslims narrating the persecution they face. It is unfathomable that individuals talking about how they are being threatened and shunned could ‘incite violence’ by any means, however, Facebook decided to de-platform them simply because they were talking about issues the Left prefers not being talked about.

Facebook, on the 27th of July 2020, unpublished a page on the social media platform called ExMuslim TV, that merely shared short videos of ex-Muslims and the persecution they faced by the community after they had left Islam. ExMuslim TV took to Twitter on Monday to talk about how Facebook was being unjust in banning their page.

Appealing to Facebook to reconsider their decision of banning the page, the Twitter page of ExMuslim TV said, “Our primary purpose is HUMANITARIAN. Most exMuslims who appear here are/were in danger. They either speak to ask for help or to bring hope to others like them”.

In the screenshots shared by the ExMuslim TV Twitter handle, it would appear that Facebook decided to unpublish the page because supposedly, the page went against their ‘incitement and violence’ standards. However, the page is only known the share videos of ex-Muslims who talk about their own ordeal in the videos. In most of the videos shared by the page, Muslims who had left Islam spoke about how they were hounded, persecuted and shunned by the Muslim community after their decision to leave the faith of Islam.

This is the message the Facebook page received before it was unpublished:

Facebook believed that ex-Muslims who had left the faith of Islam talking about their own persecution and appealing for help and understanding somehow posed a ‘genuine risk of physical harm or indirect threat to public safety’.

Further, Facebook informed the page that due to COVID, they have fewer reviewers onboard and hence, may not be able to cater to the appeal by the Facebook page. Essentially, this would mean that ExMuslim TV might not be able to appeal to the decision to unpublish the page by Facebook because the social media giant has fewer reviewers working due to the Wuhan Coronavirus pandemic.

Facebook has long been accused of harbouring a bias against anything that goes against the tenets of Liberalism and the Left. In fact, one must recall that recently, they had also released an ‘anti-conservative bias’ report that had made clear that Facebook indeed is biased against anything that goes against the Left and is seen to be remotely ‘conservative’.

With Social Media becoming an ideological battleground, it has often been noticed that platforms selectively target right-leaning platforms in an ad-hoc fashion. Not too long ago, Twitter CEO had “fully admitted“, the platforms “left-leaning” bias.

Facebook has too hugely limited the reach of several pages, many of which are right-leaning. The page owners strongly suspect that their reach is being limited because of the inherent left-bias of these platforms….



Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) confronted Dr. Fauci about mass protests and the selective enforcement of "social distancing" rules. Dr. Fauci's response is telling.

Dr. Fauci: 'There's No Inconsistency' in Banning Church and Business, But Allowing Mass Protests



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

During a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Friday, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) pressed Dr. Anthony Fauci on whether the government should restrict the massive Black Lives Matter protests across the country in order to slow the spread of the coronavirus. Fauci admitted that crowds full of people not wearing masks would likely spread the virus, but he refused to say whether or not protests would do so. He also refused to make any recommendations on limiting protests, even though he had made many recommendations in the past.

At one point, Fauci even insisted that “there’s no inconsistency” in preventing people from going to work, going to church, and going to school but allowing them to gather in massive crowds to protest.

“Dr. Fauci, do protests increase the spread of the virus?” Jordan began.

Fauci said he could only make a “general statement” about crowds.

“Well, half a million protesters on June 6 alone, I’m just asking, that number of people, does it increase the spread of the virus?” Jordan pressed.

“Crowding together, particularly when you’re not wearing a mask, contributes to the spread of the virus,” Fauci responded.

“Should we limit the protesting?” Jordan pressed.

“I’m not sure what you mean,” Fauci responded.

“Should government limit the protesting?” the congressman clarified.

Fauci stuttered, “I- I- I don’t think that’s relevant to…”

“Well, you just said, it increases the spread of the virus. I’m just asking, should we limit it?” Jordan insisted.

“Well, I’m not in a position to determine what the government can do in a forceful way,” the doctor said.

Jordan noted that Fauci has made “all kinds of recommendations” on subjects such as baseballdating on Tinder, and government-mandated lockdowns. Fauci recently said there would likely be “no need” for a second coronavirus lockdown.

Mayor Gives Infuriatingly Flimsy Excuse for Fining Christians $500 Over Drive-In Church Services

When it comes to protests, however, Dr. Fauci refused to take a position. “No, I think I would leave that to people who have more of a position to do that,” he said.

“Government’s stopping people from going to church, Dr. Fauci,” Jordan noted. He referenced the Calvary Chapel case, in which the Supreme Court recently allowed a Nevada ban to remain in place. Jordan quoted Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch’s dissent in the case.

“‘There’s no world in which the Constitution permits Nevada to favor Caesar’s Palace over Calvary Chapel.’ I’m just asking, is there a world where the Constitution says you can favor one First Amendment liberty, protesting, over another, practicing your faith?” Jordan asked.

“I’m not favoring anybody over anybody. I’m just making a statement that’s a broad statement. Avoid crowds of any type, no matter where you are,” Fauci insisted. “I don’t judge one crowd versus another crowd.”

Yet Jordan noted that violent riots have broken out at protests. “There’s been no violence I can see at church. I haven’t seen people at a church service go out and harm police officers and burn buildings,” he said. “But for 63 days, nine weeks, it’s been happening in Portland. One night in Chicago, 49 officers were injured.”

Jordan also noted that New Jersey cops arrested gym owners Ian Smith and Frank Trumbetti for violating a lockdown order by operating their business. “Ian Smith, Frank Trumbetti were arrested for trying to open their gym,” he said. “But my bet is if these two individuals who owned this gym were outside, just in front of their gym, and all the people who were working out in their gym had been outside protesting, they would have been just fine. But because they were in the gym working out, actually running their business, they got arrested. You think that’s okay?”

“I’m not going to opine,” Fauci said.

“But do you see the inconsistency?” the congressman pressed.

“There’s no inconsistency, Congressman,” Fauci said.

“So you’re allowed to protest, millions of people in one day, in crowds, yelling, screaming, but you try to run your business, you get arrested? And if you stood right outside that building and protested, you wouldn’t get arrested? You don’t see any inconsistency there?”

Fauci again dodged the question. “I don’t understand what you’re asking me,” he said, refusing to opine on “who should get arrested.”

“You’ve advocated for certain businesses to be shut down. I’m just asking your position on the protest,” Jordan insisted. “We’ve heard a lot about hair salons. I haven’t seen one hairstylist, who, between haircuts, goes out and attacks police or sets something on fire. But we’ve seen all kinds of that stuff during protests. And we know the protest actually increases the spread of the virus.”

Yet Fauci refused to even admit that protests increase eh spread of the virus. “I said crowds. I didn’t say specifically. I didn’t say protests do anything,” he insisted.

“But do you understand Americans’ concern? Protesting, particularly according to the Democrats, is just fine, but you can’t go to work, you can’t go to school, you can’t go to church,” Jordan noted.

Bill de Blasio Threatens to ‘Permanently’ Close Churches, Synagogues if They Meet During Coronavirus

Later in the hearing, Jordan returned to the issue of consistency.

“I think all the First Amendment is important. Democrats seem to think it’s just the right to protest,” he said. Yet the First Amendment lists five freedoms: religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition.

“The very first one the Founders mentioned was the right to practice your faith, but government’s putting all kinds of limits on Americans’ ability to do that, and Democrats are just fine with it,” Jordan said. ” I want consistency, that’s what I want.”

“Kids can’t go get what they need to put them on the path to achieving the American dream, but boy, they can protest,” he warned. “The ability to engage in your livelihood, the ability to have your kids get an education, the ability to practice your faith are just as important, in my mind, as protesting.”

Fauci may not have meant to encourage the disgusting inconsistency of arresting people for going to work or going to church but not for protesting, but he did say, “there’s no inconsistency, Congressman.”

Such a statement is absurd on its face. Of course, there is an inconsistency in this position. Jordan is right: gym owners, hairstylists, and parishioners do not take breaks from their business and worship just to engage in violent attacks on police officers and federal courthouses, but the Black Lives Matter protests — particularly in Portland — have provided cover for just that.

Fauci’s unwillingness to even admit that the protests would spread the coronavirus is shameful. His blanket insistence that “there’s no inconsistency” is even worse. This seems reminiscent of Fauci’s ridiculous claim that New York responded “properly” and “correctly” to the coronavirus pandemic.

He said this of New York, which served as the epicenter for the spread of the virus. He said this of New York, where Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) forced nursing homes to admit coronavirus patients from hospitals, likely exposing elderly New Yorkers, who are more vulnerable to the virus. This may have cost upwards of 10,000 lives. He said this of Mayor Bill de Blasio (D), who did not cooperate with Cuomo and delayed issuing a lockdown, allowing New York City to become the epicenter for the virus in America.

Fauci needs to clarify his position — and withdraw his ridiculous statement that there is “no inconsistency” on lockdowns.

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

Now We Have Proof Dr. Fauci Is Full of Crap and Can’t Be Trusted
Why Did New York Infect America With Coronavirus? New Report Blames Cuomo, de Blasio
Cuomo Defends Barbaric Nursing Home Policy: ‘Older People, Vulnerable People Are Going to Die’


Nonstop propaganda from national media continues to frighten people into mental paralysis and submission to health authorities. This Technocrat-led tsunami can only be resisted by individuals who refuse to play their assigned role in the Great Panic of 2020.

Pseudo-Science Behind Face Masks, Social Distancing And Contact Tracing

The American public is being spoon-fed a steady diet of pseudo-science in order to justify the wearing of face masks, social distancing and contact tracing. Yet, the actual science points in the polar opposite direction. Furthermore, those who try to present the real science are shamed, ridiculed and bullied for having such narrow-minded views. This is a clear sign of Technocrats-at-work. Instead, these are the ones who should be exposed, shamed and ridiculed. Source Article: Dr. Blaylock article: Citizens for Free Speech:

Amoral And Ethically Challenged Technocrats Are The Real Pandemic

Bioethics? What bioethics? Technocrats dictating public policy on COVID-19 are devoid of any ethical or moral principles. Now that they have their talons embedded in our society, they have no intention of letting go unless they are forcibly removed. America must reject these sociopathic Technocrats before it is too late. See article at





republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Hyde Park’s Speakers Corner used to be a bastion of the freedom of speech. Now, however, Muslims have transformed it into a Sharia No-Go Zone, where criticism of Islam is often met with force.

Hatun Tash has been the victim of yet another assault by Muslims. Last week, Islamic apologist Ali Dawah caused her to fall to the ground; he was even happy about what he did, and his followers were also praising him and justifying his actions. Now his behavior last week has given the green light to Muslims to use more violence. In this video, Hatun Tash is thrown to the ground by Muslims because she was criticizing the Koran. The police are absolutely useless. Fortunately, there were some Christian men on the scene who protected Hatun. Had they not been there, she might have been severely injured.

The Koran states in surah 5:33: “This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth to do corruption there: they shall be killed, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall be struck off on opposite sides; or they shall be exiled from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement”. In light of that, the treatment of Hatun in this video is only a foretaste of what is to come. This is just a glimpse of what the UK is becoming: a place where Muslims openly attack someone for criticising the Koran. Gradually, the UK and many other Western countries which are seeing a rise in their Islamic populations will become more like Sharia countries such as Pakistan, where calls for the death of blasphemers and the persecution of religious minorities are common, alongside other barbaric Sharia practices.



It's no wonder that parents are sending their children to charter schools and homeschooling in hordes. Public schools are indoctrinating our children. They are receiving more and more funding, but teachers still have to pay for their own supplies. Their unions are in the political pocketbook. Every parent should have the right to send their children to the best school for them, and Corey DeAngelis is here to speak on how we can make this happen. ---------- Today's Link:
Allie Beth Stuckey and Corey A. DeAngelis discuss the ideologies that believe in children being a part of government property, separating families, and abolishing homeschooling.




Armed Citizens are Setting Up PATROLS across the country as Law Enforcement in Far-Left Cities COLLAPSES! In this video, we’re going to look at how armed residents are stepping into the gap left by our feckless liberal Democrat leaders, all the while Democrat-run cities continue to completely implode into societal ruin, you’re not going to want to miss this!


Fordham University



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

A Fordham University student kicked off campus for posing with his legally owned firearm filed a lawsuit on July 23 alleging the school violated its commitment to free expression.

Rising senior Austin Tong, a Chinese immigrant who posted the picture in honor of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, filed a lawsuit against Fordham, the school's president, and the dean of students. The suit alleges the university violated its free expression covenant with students by disciplining Tong for "lawful, constitutionally protected, and non-threatening social media posts on Instagram."

"Fordham's policies and rules, as well as basic First Amendment jurisprudence, make it abundantly clear that uncomfortable or unpleasant impact on a speaker's audience is not a proper ground to restrain the speech in question," the lawsuit reads.

The suit calls on the school to annul all disciplinary sanctions, admit that Tong's social media posts are a permitted exercise of free speech under Fordham's speech code, and award relief for the breach of contract between Fordham and Tong.

In its mission statement, Fordham guarantees the freedom of inquiry among other freedoms, but the explicit promise of free speech can be found in the school's demonstration policy.

"Each member of the University has a right to freely express his or her positions and to work for their acceptance whether they assent to or dissent from existing situations in the University or society," the policy reads.

Tong was told in a disciplinary letter from the university that he cannot return to campus and must complete his degree online while his peers return to campus. Tong cannot hold a leadership position on campus, must write an apology note to the school, and must complete a bias training or face suspension or possible expulsion.

The lawsuit alleges the sanctions against Tong are "damaging and humiliating" for the student as well as "draconian." The disciplinary actions force Tong to choose between his beliefs and a degree from his university of choice.

"These sanctions have placed Tong in an untenable position," the lawsuit reads. "He must either (1) abandon his principled beliefs, forfeit his right to lawful expression, and submit to Fordham's unconscionable discipline, or (2) face suspension or expulsion from Fordham, which would severely damage his future academic and employment prospects."

Tong told the Washington Free Beacon he believed he had a good relationship with dean of students Keith Eldredge before posting his Instagram photos. "Not even a Chinese university would do this to their students," he said.

The university did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

"The end result is that Tong and other students who do not adhere to the political orthodoxy of Fordham's administrators are turned into outcasts," the lawsuit reads. "Other individuals who wish to speak out with potentially unpopular but good faith viewpoints are discouraged from exercising their right of free expression."

Tong's lawyer Brett Joshpe said he could not comment on the pending litigation, but said there will be additional claims for "the massive damages caused."


Fordham University Punishes Pro 2A Student



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
On June 4th, Austin Tong shared a picture of himself holding a legal firearm to commemorate the anniversary of the Tienanmen Square protests.

Austin Tong, a rising senior studying business at Fordham University, was recently banned from campus after posting an image of himself holding a legally purchased rifle. In a previous post, Mr. Tong also shared a picture of David Dorn, with the caption, “Y’all a bunch of hypocrites.” Dorn was a retired police officer who was murdered while protecting a local store during a riot in June. Many have criticized Black Lives Matter for failing to protest the death of David Dorn, who was African American. These two posts were made on June 3rd and June 4th.

In a letter composed on July 14th, Keith Eldredge, the Dean of Students at Fordham University, notified Mr. Tong that a student conduct hearing had found the posts to be in violation of the university’s policies regarding “bias and/or hate crimes [and] threats/intimidation.” As a result of his alleged transgressions, Mr. Tong was barred from serving as an officer in any student groups, banned from campus, and instructed to complete the remainder of his degree online. Additionally, Austin was ordered to complete mandatory implicit bias training and write a letter of apology. He has refused to do so. 

 In an interview on The Joe Silverstein Podcast, Brett Joshpe Esquire, who is representing Mr. Tong stated, “He’s not going to be forced into issuing an apology when he did absolutely nothing wrong.” Mr. Joshpe went on to emphasize the importance of protecting freedom of speech in academia. “[College campuses] are supposed to be places where vigorous debate can happen… It is precisely the controversial topics that need to be protected vigorously and college campuses are exactly where those debates should be taking place.”

The case of Austin Tong is not an isolated incident. Increasingly, we have seen conservative students, faculty, and organizations systematically targeted in higher education. At Cornell University, Professor William Jacobson became the target of a smear campaign after criticizing Black Lives Matter.  In an unprecedented move, Eduardo M. Peñalver, Dean of Cornell Law School, harshly criticized Jacobson for his extramural political speech. Petitions, student boycotts, and allegations of racism quickly followed. Similarly, at Binghamton University, the College Republicans were suspended after tabling to promote a forthcoming event featuring Dr. Arthur Laffer. The university claimed the College Republicans were in violation of university and Student Assembly policies and publicly rebuked the group in a statement. However, the administration failed to take punitive action against violent agitators who assaulted and threatened the conservative students. 

Since Fordham is a private university, they do not have the same first amendment obligations as their public counterparts. However, they do have a responsibility to adhere to their own published policies regarding freedom of speech. Consequently, Joshpe Mooney Paltzik LLP filed an Article 78 Petition alleging that Fordham acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of its own policies. “We are prepared to fight for people like Austin Tong, who are prepared to fight for themselves.” 














"Numerous users expressed support for Tong, commenting that the university infringed on his right to free speech without reasonable cause. Conservative news outlets Campus ReformThe Epoch Times and The Glenn Beck Program have also reported on Tong’s case, which Tong praised on July 16 on Instagram."

"An equally large number of users opposed Tong, commenting that the posts provoked fear and were insensitive amid the Black Lives Matter movement, which has led and amplified a widespread outcry against violence."

"“Austin, I am extremely disappointed that you are actively utilizing your platform to invalidate the BLM movement rather than using your time to facilitate conversations about the issues at hand/trying to raise awareness,” Carrie Kinui, Fordham College at Lincoln Center ’21, commented on Tong’s post of Dorn." 




Agrees that ‘dangerous conspiracies’ must be countered

Video: Fauci Dismisses Frontline Doctors As "A Bunch Of People Spouting Something That Isn’t True"



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Anthony Fauci dismissed the viral video of America’s Frontline Doctors promoting Hydroxychloroquine as a cure for coronavirus, describing it as “a bunch of people spouting something that isn’t true.”

Appearing on MSNBC, Fauci told host Andrea Mitchell “the only recourse you have is to be very, very clear in presenting the scientific data that essentially contradicts that.”

“The scientific data, the cumulative data on trials, clinical trials that were valid, namely clinically trials that were randomized and controlled in the proper way, all of those trials showed consistently that Hydroxychloroquine is not effective in the treatment of coronavirus disease or COVID-19,” Fauci claimed.

When Mitchell asked Fauci “don’t we have to do more to stop these dangerous conspiracies from misleading people?” he replied “Yeah, you’re absolutely correct, Andrea, and that’s the reason why I’m very explicit and unambiguous when we say we’ve got to follow the science.”

“If a study, that’s a good study, comes out and shows efficacy and safety for Hydroxychloroquine or any other drug that we do, if you do it in the right way, you accept the scientific data. But right now, today, the cumulative scientific data that has been put together and done over a number of different studies has shown no efficacy.” Fauci claimed, despite hundreds of doctors and medical experts backing Hydroxychloroquine.

Fauci, who has persistently claimed that face masks are effective against the virus, despite any robust scientific evidence, yesterday also claimed that everyone should be wearing goggles as well:

President Trump, who also promoted the Frontline Doctors video, and has consistently touted Hydroxychloroquine as effective, recently hinted at his disagreement with Fauci, noting that he routinely has to “overrule” Fauci, who would like to see the country remain “shut down” for an indeterminate amount of time.

“He’d like to see it closed up for a couple of years, but that’s okay, because I’m president,” said Trump, adding “So I say, ‘Well, I appreciate your opinion, now give me another opinion, somebody, please.’”

The Frontline Doctors’ video has been attacked and suppressed globally by big tech and the mainstream media. But it is available at




Check out the best moments from the hearing


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Attorney General and Judiciary Committee Democrats fight over Trump’s response to the Portland riots.

This video compilation shows the highlights from the Tuesday testimony.

YouTube Version:



“Very incorrect things that are very titillating…can spread much faster than the truth”

Video: Bill Gates Again Denies Vaccines Are Cover For Global Microchipping Program



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

With millions of people globally sharing information and videos purporting that Bill Gates’ obsession with vaccinations is a cover for a global microchipping program, the billionaire Microsoft founder again felt the need to deny the allegations, while pushing for more censorship of social media posts.

In an exchange between Gates and CNBC Tuesday, the issue was raised by interviewer Andrew Ross Sorkin, prompting Gates to deny that coronavirus vaccines will be used to implant tracking devices in humans.

“Very incorrect things that are very titillating…can spread much faster than the truth on social media, and we’ve always seen that with vaccines….social media can make that even worse…” Gates proclaimed.

“These social media companies can see what is being said on their platform and take things that are absolutely wrong and remove those things from the platform.” he added.

“How you divide that up, and draw that line…these are complex issues. It has been a spreader of lot of things…and how do you strike a balance?” Gates continued.

Gates also questioned whether it was “appropriate” that Facebook does not prevent people sharing links and information via its Whatsapp messaging platform.

Gates’ comments were recorded as BBC News claimed that ‘vaccine passports’ via Gates-funded digital tattoos could become a necessary part of travel in the post-COVID world.

BBC pushes Gates’ vaccine tattoos as a condition of travel, Google comes up with its own tech tattoo — SkinMarks

The BBC report stated that “This technology already exists and has been tried on live animals and human cadaver skin, said researcher Ana Jaklenec at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Their method uses micro-needle patches that can deliver both the vaccine and a squirt of an invisible ink under the person’s skin, storing the vaccination record.”

Reports of the Gates-backed tattoos have been circling since March, being downplayed or outright lied about.

Embedding a permanent vaccine health record tattoo into the skin of people is essentially the same thing as ‘microchipping’, yet Gates and those falling into line behind him are using Orwellian semantics to claim the idea is a ‘conspiracy theory’.

Alex Jones breaks down Bill Gates admitting in his own words to the damage his vaccines cause, and the build up of telling the public the pandemic plan for years.



Margaret Sanger Papers Project

PP Protest with Bevelyn Beatty!!!

With so many protest going on around the country in the supposed support of justice for the black community. I decided to go on a protest to the root of the issue. The place where black babies are being murdered at a higher rate that are being born!? Planned parenthood in NYC to fight for the ones who incapable to fight for themselves. Christopher Wright YouTube channel:



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

NEW YORK Planned Parenthood of Greater New York (PPGNY) has announced that it will remove founder Margaret Sanger’s name from its Manhattan facility bearing her namesake, and is also working with city council to rename Margaret Sanger Square, due to her “harmful connections to the eugenics movement.”

The organization says that “the announcement reflects the first of many organizational shifts to address Sanger’s legacy and system of institutional racism, which negatively impacts the well-being of patients, staff and PPGNY’s broader communities.”

“The removal of Margaret Sanger’s name from our building is both a necessary and overdue step to reckon with our legacy and acknowledge Planned Parenthood’s contributions to historical reproductive harm within communities of color,” Karen Seltzer, board chair of PPGNY, said in a statement.

“Margaret Sanger’s concerns and advocacy for reproductive health have been clearly documented, but so too has her racist legacy,” she said. “There is overwhelming evidence for Sanger’s deep belief in eugenic ideology, which runs completely counter to our values at PPGNY. Removing her name is an important step toward representing who we are as an organization and who we serve.”

The abortion facility on Bleecker Street had heretofore been named the Margaret Sanger Health Center, and a street sign currently marks the intersection of Bleecker and Mott Streets in recognizing Sanger.

However, the organization did not disavow the practice of abortion and will continue to offer its services to end the lives of the unborn. According to the Charlotte Lozier Institute, 53,394 abortions were performed in New York City alone in 2017.

As previously reported, Sanger founded Planned Parenthood in New York in 1921, which was originally known as the American Birth Control League. She later changed the name as some found it offensive.

Sanger generally opposed abortion, writing in her 1920 book “Woman and the New Race” that “the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.”

Her solution to countering abortion was birth control, as she believed that “[t]he most immoral practice of the day is breeding too many children.” She claimed that children get lost in large families and end up in jail or as prostitutes.

Sanger was also a proponent of eugenics against the physically and mentally disabled, as she made a correlation between birth control and the purification of the human race. She additionally called for the sterilization of women in the “moron class,” referring to those with disabilities as being “morons,” “idiots” and “imbeciles.”

“Back then they used words like ‘moron’ and ‘imbecile,’ these were actually scientific terms, and classifying people according to their IQ. And she said women in these classes were not capable of being mothers, and therefore shouldn’t be mothers,” her grandson, Alex Sanger, told Vox in 2016, explaining that he disagreed with her position but otherwise admired Sanger. “She also talked about women with certain inherited diseases like epilepsy or alcoholism — they shouldn’t be mothers, because they’re going to pass these genes onto their children.”

“Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives,” Sanger wrote in the aforementioned “Woman and the New Race”. “If we are to make racial progress, this development of womanhood must precede motherhood in every individual woman.”

Sanger launched the Negro Project in 1939, offering birth control in African American communities — especially in the South, where there was significant poverty yet multiple children in a household. She thought that cutting down on the number of children born would better the economic status of a region and consequently the quality of life for society as a whole.

According to New York University, Sanger’s secretary, Florence Rose, wrote a report on “Birth Control and the Negro”, in which she opined that “negroes present the great problem of the South,” because they have “the greatest economic, health and social problems” yet “still breed carelessly and disastrously.”

“‘Constructive’ eugenics aims to arouse the enthusiasm or the interest of the people in the welfare of the world fifteen or twenty generations in the future. On its negative side it shows us that we are paying for and even submitting to the dictates of an ever increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all — that the wealth of individuals and of states is being diverted from the development and the progress of human expression and civilization,” Sanger also remarked in the 1922 publication “The Pivot of Civilization”.

“Birth control which has been criticized as negative and destructive, is really the greatest and most truly eugenic method, and its adoption as part of the program of eugenics would immediately give a concrete and realistic power to that science,” she continued. “As a matter of fact, birth control has been accepted by the most clear thinking and far seeing of the eugenists themselves as the most constructive and necessary of the means to racial health.”

2 Corinthians 5:15 states that Christ “died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto Him which died for them and rose again.”

Please visit Christian News Network’s Outlaw Abortion page to help us work to abolish the worldwide holocaust.



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:


The following is reprinted from The Stream, June 5, 2016, and it is more relevant today than ever. The author, Mark Tooley, is a conservative Methodist and president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy (IRD). It is a brilliant and important rebuttal of Leftist mythology about American history.


Last evening Native American activist Mark Charles, as the opening plenary speaker at the evangelical Justice Conference in Chicago [‘Let Justice Roll,’ June 3-4, 2016], denounced the Declaration of Independence as “systemically racist.” The Justice Conference tweeted this comment, to which I responded, leading to other retweets, and resulting in deletion of the original tweet, presumably to avoid further controversy. Charles apparently also denounced the Constitution as racist and told his audience: “Everything you own is stolen.”

According to my colleague Chelsen Vicari, who’s attending the Justice Conference, the crowd of mostly young evangelicals liked Charles’ comments, and subsequent speakers approvingly referenced them. Mark Reddy, the event’s executive director, spoke after Charles to encourage everyone to “sit in it,” be uncomfortable and “not allow yourselves to get offended” by what we heard.

Well, I’m offended, and anyone of any religion who cares about history, human rights and the uplift of humanity should be too. The Justice Conference is sponsored by World Relief, the global humanitarian arm of National Association of Evangelicals. Charles is an increasingly popular speaker at events for mostly white, upper middle class, highly educated urban evangelicals who evidently feel empowered and sophisticated by Charles’ guilt trip.

If Charles wants to provide a scholarly overview of centuries of injustices against American Indians, he could thoughtfully do so without smugly denouncing the whole American project as a wicked sham. The Declaration of Independence and its historically revolutionary affirmation of human equality have uplifted and inspired hundreds of millions of people globally of all races and ethnicities. Indeed, thanks a great deal to the Declaration and its startling claim, there are few regimes or ideologies today in the world that don’t at least pay insincere lip service to human equality. That claim is rooted in the ethical system and anthropology of Judaism and Christianity, asserting that all humans are of equal value before God, and that all societies seeking justice will recognize legal equality for all people.

There are many thousands of human rights advocates who have been persecuted, jailed, tortured and killed, across decades and around the world, continuing even today, because of their direct fidelity to the Declaration and its ideals. Heroic dissidents in Cuba, China, Vietnam, Sudan, or countless other places, would decidedly not share Charles’ disdain for America’s founding document. Nor did human rights crusaders like Frederick Douglas, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela or Mother Teresa.

As an escaped slave and fearless abolitionist, here’s what Douglas said:

I have said that the Declaration of Independence is the ring-bolt to the chain of your nation’s destiny; so, indeed, I regard it. The principles contained in that instrument are saving principles. Stand by those principles, be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost.

Here’s MLK in his “I Have a Dream” speech: “When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

The high point of his peroration quoted the Declaration: “I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.’”

Here’s Nelson Mandela, recently released from prison after decades of resistance to Apartheid, addressing the U.S. Congress: “We could not have made an acquaintance through literature with human giants such as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson and not been moved to act, as they were moved to act. We could not have heard of and admired John Brown, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, W. E. B. Du Bois, Marcus Garvey, Martin Luther King Jr. and others. We could not have heard of these and not be moved to act as they were moved to act. We could not have known of your Declaration of Independence and not elected to join in the struggle to guarantee the people’s life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” ...

The writers of the Declaration of Independence were, like all of us, sinners and hypocrites. They didn’t fully live up to their own ideals, and neither does anyone. But their courage and insight, likely far superior to anybody among us alive today, enriched all humanity.

Charles challenges the Declaration’s brief reference to “merciless savages” whom the Americans complained the British crown supported in alliance against the colonies. How does Charles propose to describe the 18th century style of Indian warfare that unashamedly kidnapped, tortured and mutilated men, women and children indiscriminately, comparable to if not worse than ISIS today? My own Scots-Irish ancestors, having escaped hardships in Belfast, and living on the Virginia frontier in the 1700s, were attacked one day by warriors from distant Ohio. He was left for dead, she was kidnapped with her baby, her eye knocked out by one warrior, her crying baby repeatedly threatened with death. Mother and child were captive in Ohio until rescued months later. They got off easy compared to many others.

The Justice Conference is devoted especially to advocating for immigrants. The main victims of Indian attacks in the 1700s weren’t the established rich on the east coast but working class recent immigrant families like my ancestors who couldn’t afford to live in safer lands. Charles could correctly critique savagery in European and American warfare, but he should not minimize Indian savagery. The pagan tribes, like pagan cultures everywhere, from which we all ultimately descend, had their own rough ideas of honor and justice that are rightly abhorrent to nearly everyone today. Values descending from the Ten Commandments and Sermon on the Mount, as expressed in the Declaration’s assertion of human equality, however unevenly upheld, should seem infinitely preferable, especially at evangelical conferences.

As to Charles’ dark claim that “Everything you own is stolen,” alas, it is true everywhere among fallen humanity in some sense, and was true in America long before Europeans arrived. When the first English came to Virginia, the Powhatan Confederacy, founded by the great chief who was father to Pocahontas, had conquered, dispossessed and wiped out dozens of competing tribes while establishing his own vast empire. Even more than Europe at the time, pre-European America was a churning cauldron of tribal warfare, shifting alliances, conquests, genocides and constantly fluid boundaries. Today’s America, where millions from many races and ethnicities, constantly joined by arriving new immigrants, live in relative peace and equality, seems vastly preferable to the supposed Arcadia of ancient, constant tribal warfare.

If a Mark Charles of the early 1600s had sought to critique the conquests and rapaciousness of the Powhatan Confederacy, perhaps on a religious speaking circuit across the Virginia tidewater, the old Chief likely would have impatiently had obliging warriors bash the dissident’s head against a rock. Mercifully, thanks to the Declaration and Constitution, every American can speak his or her mind freely, whether wisely or not, to any receptive audience.

But I hope Mark Charles and his various evangelical hosts will consider a broader, less myopic perspective. It should be based not on the fashionable, reflexively anti-Western biases of secular academia, so rich in grievance, but instead on a realistic and generous Christian understanding that all humanity is sinful, with honesty about all our depravities, every culture’s, past and present. And it should also be grateful for our countless, incomparable blessings of today, with appreciation, not just contempt, for past generations who, by divine grace, helped make today possible.

— Author: Mark Tooley, Reprinted from The Stream, June 5, 2016


Twitter has completely removed President Trump’s (3) tweets, while it previously stuck to placing notices meant to debunk the president’s claims



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On Monday night, as President Donald Trump began posting about the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 following a viral video of a doctor touting its ability to not only treat but prevent the disease, Twitter removed at least three of the president’s tweets, leaving no trace of what the president wrote on the social media platform.

Tensions between the big tech website and President Trump appear to have reached a new height, as the platform has now censored several posts by President Trump that appear to have promoted the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19.

The president began sharing articles and tweets promoting the use of hydroxychloroquine after a viral video of frontline doctors revealing their experiences treating COVID-19 in the field.

Google Whistleblower Greg Coppola joins The Alex Jones Show to break down how big tech censorship will bring about the new renaissance as he launches a new social network at

In place of President Trump’s tweets is a message from the platform that reads “This tweet is no longer available.”

Twitter Censors Trump Removes Tweets 1

Twitter includes a hyperlink that explains the various notices users may see on Twitter, explaining they could stem from a user deleting the tweet, Twitter deleting the tweet, or a series of other possibilities.

However, at time of publication, none of the messages Twitter identifies correspond to the message currently in place of President Trump’s censored tweets.

In the past, Twitter has occasionally removed copyrighted content posted to the president’s Twitter account, and has recently started placing notices under President Trump’s tweets that have linked to media outlets critical of the president.

President Trump has repeatedly sparred with the president throughout 2020. In May, the president signed an executive order targeting the liability immunities afforded to social media companies by the Communication Decency Act of 1996.

The legislation affords social media platforms immunity from libel written on the website by users in exchange for maintaining a neutral platform. President Trump has threatened to officially strip this immunity from Facebook, Twitter, and Google, arguing that the big tech companies have engaged in political censorship of conservatives.



Grooming kids to help push agenda into local school system.

BLM’s race-baiting message to students and LGBT advocacy becoming a nationwide problem.

Local police defended MassResistance when BLM tried to ban us from area.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
July 27, 2020
These are the messages that Black Lives Matters wants to bring into America's schools.

Even though school’s not in session, most people don’t realize that Black Lives Matter (BLM) is working hard in cities across America to push its radical agenda into the public schools. Left-wing teachers and administrators are opening the doors to them. Local students are being coached to propagandize the message to others.

But MassResistance is already confronting it! Earlier this month, that’s exactly what happened in one California city.

Black Lives Matter purports to be a “civil rights” group. But as their website and their public actions reveal, it is actually a heavily Marxist, anti-American, anti-family organization that has a sickening record of violence against police and others who disagree with them. It is heavily intertwined with the radical LGBT movement. It does not actually support “black lives” in any substantive manner. The public schools are the last place BLM should have any influence.

Last month, parents in El Segundo, CA, were alarmed to find out that a “Students for Change” rally – to be held across the street from the high school with high school and middle school students participating – was being promoted on social media. It was hosted by Black Lives Matter, and included the high school’s “LGBTQ Club.”

ESUS is "El Segundo Unified School District" - all the schools in the city.

What was the message that this radical group was bringing the kids of El Segundo? Would there be any counter information from our side?

After last month’s successful MassResistance counter-rally in El Segundo against BLM, local people were emboldened. A group of ten MassResistance parents, along with MassResistance National Organization Director Arthur Schaper, decided to go to this event, to find out what they were doing, and be heard!

With El Segundo High School in the background, MassResistance parents come to the BLM rally.

The event included about 50 BLM activists. As in most BLM events, almost all of them were white adults, many holding anti-American and other combative signs. (There was a higher percentage of blacks among the MassResistance parents than in the BLM group!) There were also two police officers present.

Students (at right, near bench) address the BLM activists.

It became clear that the purpose was to bring in some local students who had already been taught BLM’s class warfare ideology. They would speak to the rally about what they would be doing to promote this in their schools, and especially among other students. The local BLM leaders were also there with their own speeches –expounding upon the “urgent” need to “reform” the local school policies and curricula.

Note the clenched fist. The message seems to be that regular American History in the schools needs to be replaced.
These people are very serious: Indoctrinating children now fuels the future of their radical movement.

Stirring up trouble!

It seemed a perfect day for propaganda – until MassResistance showed up!

Before the speeches began, Arthur and the some of his allies went into the BLM crowd to ask them – quite politely – about what their signs meant, what their political goals were, and what they were doing to help “black lives.” In other words, they tried to engage in some dialogue.

But instead, the BLM activists became angry and cursed in the most foul and disgusting manner. They had no interest in any reasoned conversation on the issues. The people holding signs couldn’t really explain what the signs meant. Legitimate questions just made them angrier.

These are people who thrive on intimidating others and forcing public officials to implement their bizarre ideas. But a few MassResistance activists pressing them with questions derailed the activists. Clearly, their movement isn’t driven by substantive ideas, but by emotion – and a hatred of normal society.

This man came up to Arthur and screamed an uncontrollable rant of profanity (it seemed every other word was f***.) and veiled threats. These are the people who want to influence your children in the schools.
Arthur politely asked the woman holding the sign what it meant. She ddn't seem to know. Instead she screamed that he was an a**-h*** and walked away.

Trying to stop MassResistance

Before long, the BLM leader approached Arthur. He said that Arthur and his friends had no right to “question our speakers.” He said that the law says that Arthur and the others must separate themselves from the rally participants. He said that he had lawyers there who would get involved if Arthur didn’t immediately comply.

The BLM leader got in Arthur's face and ordered him to leave, threatening legal action. Arthur stood his ground.

Arthur told him, “There is no such law. I can be wherever I want and talk to whomever I please. Go ahead and get your lawyers.” The BLM leader called the police over. The police agreed with Arthur. So the BLM leader stomped away, back into the crowd.

At one point the BLM people started blocking Arthur’s camera when he was taking photos – and the police intervened and told them to quit it.

Trying to block the MassResistance cameraman, until the police intervened.
The police officers knew that we were going to defend our rights, and were very reasonable.

The speeches

It’s not an exaggeration to say that the speeches were largely incoherent statements about the “systemic” racism, homophobia, and transphobia in El Segundo – a bizarre twist on the traditional Marxist class struggle rhetoric. In particular, the schools are full of people who “are addicted to bigotry and racism.” They did not try to contain their hatred of American society.

Several high school and middle school students gave speeches. About half of them said they were “LGBTQ.” They whined about racism, “classism,” “transphobia,” or “homophobia” that kept them all from being “who they really are.”

One middle school girl talked about how she “identifies” as a boy. Another girl talked about how she is a bisexual. This brought applause from the BLM audience.

One black middle school boy told the crowd that because of the white majority in El Segundo, he used to think of himself as white and would laugh at jokes made against black people, then he realized that he was “black only in skin color” and “white in every way but skin color.” It fits right in with the BLM talking points.

One white girl said that the “systematic racism” in El Segundo was so bad that it is now “the fifth most racist city in California.” (Arthur asked where she got that statistic, but she refused to answer.) A lot of macroaggressions every day at school, she said. And they droned on and on.

The only thing that can fix all these terrible social problems, the students agreed, is the cultural cleansing that the BLM demands the schools undertake.

Does this mean that anyone who doesn't mouth the BLM mantra will meet with violence? It seems that way.

At the end, the BLM leaders gave their own speeches, which were mostly more race-baiting nonsense, including such gems as “Suppose a group was laughing at your race – starting in elementary school?” It would have been laughable if these people weren’t so deadly serious.


Just in case the BLM activists forgot their lines, they brought their handbook with them!

A dialogue on race?

A theme repeated by a number of the students in the rally was: “It’s time to start having those hard conversations about race, sexuality, and systemic racism.” And we definitely want to do that! So at the end of the event, Arthur and a few other MassResistance activists engaged in spirited discussions with some of the students. Some of them took up Arthur’s challenge to have those “hard conversations.”

These three MassResistance parents weren't afraid to exchange some ideas with BLM.

But before long one of the BLM leaders came up to the students to escort them away. She seemed worried that some of them might start thinking for themselves and stop believing the BLM talking points! One of the students walked back to our activists and continued the discussion! A victory for our side? In some ways it’s BLM’s biggest nightmare!

Note the shirt's message: Make America Constitutional Again." This seemed to really upset the BLM bullies.

Final Reflection

BLM’s targeting of the public schools is very aggressive and must be taken seriously. It uses civil rights as a Trojan horse for its radical agenda. Its connection with the LGBT movement is not coincidental.

Black Lives Matter is largely run by angry white people whose hatred of society (and anyone who disagrees with them) seems sociopathic. They behave like classic bullies. They thrive on intimidating and attacking people, especially in a crude and vulgar manner.

But they are weak and cowardly when confronted. Pro-family people must stand up to them.

And in this case, the El Segundo police were extremely accommodating to MassResistance. They had seen us in action about ten days earlier when we stood up to Black Lives Matter – and were also not afraid to stand our ground to the police when we were in the right. They clearly respected that. When they saw Arthur this time, the first thing the police officer said to him was, “Nice to see you again, sir. How was your Fourth?” And they stood by him against the BLM thugs.

Pro-family people need to learn from this. The “culture war” flame has been turned up a lot higher!

Facebook Twitter Email Print

Please help us continue to do our uncompromising work!

Our successes depend on people like you.

Donate to MassResistance

Your support will make the difference!


1 45 46 47 48 49 53