NO! America’s NOT having second thoughts about free speech. Social engineers are cramming it down our throats!

resist social engineering
Free Speech And Social Engineering In The ‘Land Of The Free’

A disturbing trend has been going on for quite some time now, and that’s the destruction of free speech.  Many college campuses even have safe spaces now, where certain speech is banned so college students can snuggle blankets.

Free speech is now the topic of several debates and they all revolve around social engineering/social tyranny. Take this article from The Week, for example.

On many college campuses, groups of left-leaning students insist that free speech should be conditional on speakers adhering to explicit standards of diversity and avoiding the infliction of emotional harm on the members of marginalized groups through the spreading of “hate.”

From the opposite ideological direction, President Trump believes that the government should “take a strong look” at libel laws to keep news organizations from subjecting his own administration to negative coverage.

Finally, from the center-left come calls to use anti-discrimination law to punish organizations that oppose the legitimacy of same-sex marriage and accommodations for transgender people. If that happens — either by passing new laws that explicitly add to existing anti-discrimination statutes or by courts treating the members of these groups as protected classes covered by existing law — the result will almost certainly be a significant constriction of speech, as those holding more conservative views will face sanction for expressing them in public. –The Week

The article asks the question: Is America Having Second Thoughts About Free Speech?  But Joe Joseph with The Daily Sheeple answers the question perfectly. “NO! America’s NOT having second thoughts about free speech. But the social engineers are cramming it down our throat like this is what we want.  But really, nobody wants it! It’s unfreakin’ believeable!”

Joseph’s take reflects all those who are individual minded.  Even offensive speech is only offensive to the emotionally weak. “I can’t believe that we’re even having this conversation in the land of the FREE!!!! What the heck is going on…. are we in the “Twilight Zone”? When did we go from a nation of bad ass mo fo’s to a nation of pansies?” says the caption on Joseph’s latest news shot video.

“How about we do this…how about these media organizations actually follow through with what their code of ethics say. How about they actually do what they say they’re gonna do! How about you practice the rules you’re taught day one in journalism school!” says Joseph about the media. He goes on to say laws dictating what speech is acceptable an what type of speech is not acceptable are not designed to fix the problem.  They are designed to divide the people and amplify the problems.

There should never be a question of whether or not humans have free speech. It’s a natural right to think and say whatever you want.  Words don’t do physical damage, and until someone is hurt or their property is damaged, no crime has been committed.

Read More: http://www.shtfplan.com/conspiracy-fact-and-theory/free-speech-and-social-engineering-in-the-land-of-the-free_02122018

Grassley/Graham Memo Goes Dark in the Fake News Landscape

WSJ Asks: Why Is The Media Ignoring The Real Bombshell FISA Memo?
WSJ Columnist: Why is the Media Ignoring the Real Bombshell FISA Memo?

 

We’ll bring you Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberly Strassel’s tweetstorm in a moment, but I’ll take a stab at answering her question about the media right out of the gate.

Three possibilities:
(1) The GOP hyped the Nunes memo, which quickly became the center of this whole firestorm — replete with counter-memos, FBI objections, etc.  The press followed the spotlight.
(2) As we’ve been saying, there are so many complex pieces of this larger puzzle, following the plot is difficult.  It’s not just news consumers wondering, “which memo is this now?” — it’s many of the people trying to cover this drama, too.  The document in question here is a second, less redacted, version of a Senate memo that few people have even heard of.
(3) 
The Senate memo, produced by non-bomb-throwers Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham, is substantially more disruptive to the Democrats’ narrative than the Nunes document.  And the press generally prefers Democratic narratives to Republican ones because most journalists are liberals.

My guess is that some blend of all three factors helps explain why the Grassley/Graham memo has barely registered on the national radar, even after we’ve endured multiple high-octane news cycles starring Nunes and Schiff.  But on the substance, does Strassel have a point, or is this just the latest shiny object the right-wing is waving around to distract from “the real story,” now that the Nunes memowas arguably a bit of a dud?  Here’s her case:

1) Why isn’t the (mostly) unredacted Grassley memo front page news? Here’s why: Because it confirms the Nunes memo and blows up the Schiff talking points (which the media ran with).

2)It is confirmation that the FBI’s FISA application relied on the dossier and a news article, and worse, on the credibility of a source in the employ of the Clinton campaign.

Kimberley Strassel

Kimberley Strassel

Kimberley Strassel

5) It provides evidence that Steele was getting information from the Clinton team itself! Via the State Department! So now, not only do we have a dossier based on unnamed shady Russians, but on Sidney Blumenthal. How much of this was engineered by the Clinton campaign from start? 

Does that all of check out?  Allahpundit digs into the document (a much more redacted version had been released previously) and seems to agree that Grassley/Graham is a significantly bigger deal than Nunes.  In our analysis of the latter document last week, we wrote that a major question was how much the DOJ relied on the Steele dossier itself to gain a FISA warrant against former Trump adviser Carter Page.  According to Grassley/Graham, the answer is a lot.  I posited that if investigators had used the unverified dossier as a starting point from which to chase down leads and produce more solid evidence to present to a FISA judge, that’d be one thing.  But if they leaned heavily on Steele’s file itself as the “evidence,” that would be sketchier.  According to the two GOP Senators, the FBI did the latter.  From AP’s excellent summary (the relevant bits of the memo itself are here and here):

…“The bulk of the application” against Page was dossier material…“The application appears to contain no additional information corroborating the dossier allegations against Mr. Page.” In other words, they seem to have treated the dossier as evidence, not as a lead. That’s big news.

But that’s not all. Grassley/Graham allege, based on intelligence, that the man behind the anti-Trump dossier was known to be unreliable by the FBI (they eventually severed ties with him) because he was caught lying either to US law enforcement or to British courts, telling each entity different stories about a key fact. Either way, FISA judges who approved and renewed the Page warrants weren’t told about the proven unreliability of the foreign agent whose work product was (apparently) the central basis for said warrants. The FBI might counter that Steele seemed credible at first, then they dumped him when he burned them, but that doesn’t mean their hands are clean, Allahpundit writes:

(a) that doesn’t solve the problem that the original FISA application against Page evidently relied “heavily” on information passed from a not-very-credible foreign agent and (b) that doesn’t explain why the Bureau allegedly failed to tell the FISA Court in later applications to renew their surveillance of Page that Steele’s info maybe hadn’t been so credible…Grassley and Graham make another good point about Steele’s chattering to the press while his investigation was still ongoing: Once bad actors were aware that he was digging for dirt on Trump, they could have sought him out and fed him any amount of BS in hopes of it trickling through to the FBI and deepening the official suspicion surrounding Team Trump. That’s how Clinton cronies — maybe even Sid Blumenthal — got involved in this clusterfark. Because Steele was supposedly willing to accept even unsolicited tips about Trump, the Clinton team may have fed him rumors to help fill a dossier for which their boss was paying.

Two big points there: Even after the FBI recognized Steele was an established liar, his dishonesty was not disclosed to judges deciding whether to keep the warrants active during renewal applications, which were largely predicated on Steele’s credibility. And the topic about which he apparently lied was whether he blabbed to folks in the media about his work, which could have opened up the floodgates for disinformation from shady characters eager to make the anti-Trump case as juicy and brimming with salaciousness as possible. That’s where Blumenthal and company, whom I wrote about here, may have come in. What a mess. Also, speaking of not revealing pertinent information to the courts, it looks like Nunes was technically incorrect that the judges weren’t made aware that the Steele dossier was paid political oppo research. But he was more broadly correct that the judges didn’t have even close to the full picture of who was behind the unverified partisan document upon which they were primarily basing the surveillance of a US citizen — who happened to be a former aide to a major presidential campaign from the out-of-power party.

“As Nunes himself later admitted, the Bureau apparently did disclose in a footnote that the material was paid political research. It just didn’t mention who, precisely, had paid for it,” AP writes.  The memo reads, “in footnote 8, the FBI stated that the dossier information was compiled pursuant to the direction of a law firm that had hired an “identified US person” — now known as Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS…the application failed to disclose that the identities of Mr. Simpson’s ultimate clients were the Clinton campaign and the DNC.”  So the disclosure came in a footnote and didn’t mention that the parties who paid for the unverified dossier were the Trump campaign’s explicit opposition.  Maybe there was no misconduct in any of this, but even as someone who believes neither that suspicion of Carter Page was unreasonable, nor that this is all part of a grand anti-Trump conspiracy (remember, the Trump angle of the Russia probe started earlier, for an unrelated reason), there’s enough in the Grassley/Graham memo to make me uncomfortable with the standards by which Page was surveilled by the US government.

Read More:  https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2018/02/08/strassel-tweetstorm-grassley-memo-n2445871

4 Complaints About Gun Owners Debunked

My AR15 killed fewer kids compared to your Planned Parenthood

1. “Nobody Needs a Gun.”

Actually at least as many guns are used in self-defense as in crime.

2. “We Should just take people’s guns away.”

Who would take those guns away? As with most laws, the police would enforce them. How do the police enforce laws? With their guns.

So they aren’t really saying no one should have guns. You still need police to have guns, otherwise, how do you take away the citizens’ guns?

In 2015, 737,000 police officers killed just over 1,000 people. That is about one civilian death for every 737 police officers.

Somewhere between 70 and 99 million Americans own guns. 13,000 people died in 2015 from gun homicides. That means there was one gun homicide for every 5,385 to 7,600 gun owners.

Police are seven to ten times as likely to kill someone compared to a gun owner. And yet they would be tasked with taking guns away.

3. “Everyone who owns a gun/ that many guns is crazy!”

7.7 million Americans own a gun collection consisting of between 8 and 140 firearms.

There is some debate about what constitutes a “mass shooting.” But if we are talking about the big headline shootings with the gun-obsessed social loner perpetrator, we are talking about a handful a year, if that.

But even if 50 of these “gun nuts” went crazy every year and went on a shooting spree, that accounts for .00065% of all “super owners” who own an average of 17 guns.

You would have to come across 154,000 gun nuts before you met one who was even remotely likely to carry out a mass shooting. You probably won’t even meet half that many people–let alone gun ownersin your lifetime.

But many “mass shootings”–including gang wars–are carried out by people who are not licensed to buy a firearm. This means the current restrictive laws were not sufficient to keep guns out of their hands.

But as for people who follow the law and get their gun license, they are more law-abiding than the general population, and even the police.

4. “America has a gun violence problem.”

America is a big place with over 320 million inhabitants. The spread of gun violence is far from even.

More than 25% of America’s gun homicides in 2015 happened across census blocks that contain just 1.5% of the country’s total population.

ChartSixCities
 Photograph: Guardian US Interactive Team

While gun control advocates often say it is unacceptable that Americans overall are “25 times more likely to be murdered with a gun than people in other developed countries”, people who live in these neighborhood areas face an average gun homicide rate about 400 times higher than the rate across those high-income countries.

More than half of America’s gun homicides were clustered in just 127 cities and towns, which together have less than a quarter of the nation’s population.

 

Read More: http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/4-complaints-about-gun-owners-debunked/

 

Has America Been Influenced by Communism?

Why be afraid of socialism
For a collectivist society to truly succeed, it needs more than just a generation of people who don’t want to support themselves: It needs a generation of people who cannot support themselves!
Many today ridicule prior generations’ concern over Communist infiltration. But current trends are bringing that concern back into focus.

BY ANDREW MIILLER

Imagine the United States allying with Russia. If you were alive when Nazi Germany was rampaging across Europe during World War ii, you didn’t have to imagine it. You saw it: The world’s greatest capitalist nation forged a “strange alliance” with the world’s greatest Communist state, the Soviet Union.

When this happened, a peculiar phenomenon surged across America: a wave of popular emotional fervor for the Soviets.

Influential men and media fawned over Joseph Stalin. President Franklin Roosevelt released Communist Party-U.S.A. leader Earl Browder from prison to promote “national unity” between American Communists and the general public.

Yet even during this trying and confusing time, one strong voice cried out a warning against not only the imminent fascist threat from Germany, but the less-understood Communist threat from the Soviet Union.

America emerged from World War ii victorious. It enjoyed economic, political and military dominance and assumed leadership of the free world. It was rivaled only by the Soviet Union.

But even at America’s pinnacle, Herbert W. Armstrong boldly warned that the nation would eventually be invaded by a revived Holy Roman Empire led by Germany. And before that, America’s rejection of God would allow communism to weaken the nation so that it could be invaded.

“Communism is a worldwide political movement, organized inside many countries,” Mr. Armstrong wrote in the April-May 1944 Plain Truth. “From official Communist literature anyone can learn, if he wishes to know the truth, that communism is a plan, in action, for the violent overthrow of capitalism and the capitalistic governments. And capitalism means democracy, since it is the democracies who control more than two thirds of the world’s capital.”

During and after the Second World War, Mr. Armstrong boldly proclaimed the biblical truth that Russia would not go to war with America militarily. However, he said, Russia would wage psychological warfare: propaganda, infiltration, subversion and demoralization. The Communist Russians would attack “our minds, our moral and spiritual values, rather than our bodies and our earthly possessions,” he said.

“What we fail to grasp, in the struggle with Russia, is this: We are not fighting a single nation in a military war, but a gigantic worldwide, plainclothes army, masquerading as a political party, seeking to conquer the world with an entirely new kind of warfare,” Mr. Armstrong wrote in 1956. “It’s a kind of warfare we don’t understand, or know how to cope with. It uses every diabolical means to weaken us from within, sapping our strength, perverting our morals, sabotaging our educational system, wrecking our social structure, destroying our spiritual and religious life, weakening our industrial and economic power, demoralizing our armed forces, and finally, after such infiltration, overthrowing our government by force and violence! All this, cleverly disguised as a harmless political party! Communism is worldwide psychological warfare!”

In the 1940s and 1950s, many Americans found that warning to ring true. But as time went on, many dismissed it as a Communist scare that never quite appeared. By the new millennium, such a notion seemed outdated.

Today, however, many are starting to wonder what has happened to America and the West—and if this invisible Communist threat was real after all.

Mr. Armstrong never wavered. He exposed communism’s cultural incursion and told the world what the real threat to America was. Why was he so sure? Because his message didn’t come from popular opinion, statistical trends or covert intelligence. It came from the Bible.

Mr. Armstrong directed his readers and listeners to Scripture, which says that end-time Israel would become “mixed up” ideologically “with foreigners.” In particular, he pointed to Hosea 7:8-13 (Moffatt translation), which warns that Britain and America would “seek alliances with foreign nations, forsaking God”—foreign alliances that would “eat away” America’s strength “unknown to him” (ibid).

Was Mr. Armstrong right after all? Did this happen? Did communism infiltrate America? Did it cause America’s now-obvious decline from the inside out? Did the Bible prophesy that this would happen?

The First Stage of Subversion

Thirty-six years after Mr. Armstrong first warned American radio audiences about communism in 1934, kgb agent Yuri Bezmenov defected from the Soviet Union and eventually escaped to Canada. He warned America that it was at war with communism.

Bezmenov said that subverting foreign nations was so important to the kgb that most of its resources were allocated to it. “Only about 15 percent of time, money and manpower is spent on espionage as such,” he explained in an interview with G. Edward Griffin in 1985. “The other 85 percent is a slow process which we call either ideological subversion or ‘active measures.’”

Ideological subversion, Bezmenov said, is a long-term process involving four stages: 1) demoralization, 2) destabilization, 3) crisis and 4) normalization.

The first state, demoralization, is now an eerily familiar concept among Americans. Many who recognize it think it occurred accidentally, naturally or even fortunately. But former kgb agents, said Bezmenov, recognize it as an intentional ideological attack aimed to “change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that despite the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community and their country.”

“It takes about 15 to 20 years to demoralize a nation,” Bezmenov wrote in his book, Love Letter to America. “Why that many (or few)? Simple: this is the minimum number of years needed to ‘educate’ one generation of students in a target country (America, for example) and expose them to the ideology of the subverter.”

Such Soviet reeducation methods took deep root in America during the 1960s and ’70s. Bezmenov warned that kgb agents and their socialistic “fellow travelers” would use abstract art, perverted music, pornographic images, homosexual rights, racist politics, pacifist foreign policy and socialist economics to demoralize America.

Whether you believe Bezmenov or not, you have to ask yourself: Does any of this sound familiar?

Mr. Armstrong also warned of this infiltration of America. In a 1980 edition of the Worldwide News, he wrote, “I was saying over the air, and writing, back in 1934, that the Communist[s’] unwavering strategy was, as a first offensive toward world domination, propaganda. They began sowing the seeds of their Communist atheistic education all over the United States—especially among college professors and students.”

“They invaded American university campuses, full force,” he continued, “and the U.S. universities trustingly let them in.”

In practice, communism has never been the grassroots movement Karl Marx predicted. It has been driven by small groups of intellectuals and elites who seize power. Hence the targeting of the American intelligentsia—present and future.

Mr. Armstrong understood this—and he saw a much bigger picture. He warned that demoralization tactics originated from a source beyond Marx, the kgb or the Soviet Union. That warning also explains the effectiveness of the demoralization process: “Communism is the devil’s effort, through his demon-inspired human tools, to take from us this greatest national and economic blessing God ever conferred on any people,” he wrote in 1949.

Even though the Soviet Union fell before it could take advantage of the “destabilization” and “crisis” stages of its subversion, the demoralization virus it had inflicted continued to multiply inside its host. Something much more powerful was at work here than Soviet initiatives. Something more powerful than even communism itself.

Corruption of Modern Education

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Soviet archives revealed the Communist Party-u.s.a. (an organization that is still alive and well today) received $2 to $3 million a year from the Kremlin to further its subversion activities.

Most of the efforts of the Kremlin, the Communist Party-U.S.A. and their “fellow travelers” went not toward traditional espionage, but toward infiltrating American education. According to Bezmenov, the Soviets’ main methods of demoralization were: exchanging students with Moscow; flooding college campuses with Marxist literature; participating in international seminars; infiltrating universities with radical leftists (often unknowingly under the guidance of kgb subverters); establishing Communist-staffed news media; and organizing “study groups” to disseminate Communist propaganda.

“Before World War ii the Communist Party in the United States was making great headway,” Mr. Armstrong wrote in the April 1980 Plain Truth. “They began infiltrating the colleges and universities. If they could not ‘convert’ professors, they worked on students who would become teachers later. Thus they were recruiting teachers to teach their doctrine all over the United States.”

According to a former staff director of a Senate investigations subcommittee, in the years between 1935 and 1953, the Communist Party “enlisted the support of at least 3,500 professors—many of them as dues-paying members, many others as fellow travelers, some as out-and-out espionage agents, some as adherents of the party line in varying degrees, and some as the unwitting dupes of subversion” (J. B. Matthews, “Communism and the Colleges,” American Mercury, May 1953).

The ultimate goal of communism is a “utopian” society where every individual is completely reliant on society (as the Communist Party). This is why Marxist-Leninist education emphasizes “mass character” and “collectivism” over “individual abilities.” For a collectivist society to truly succeed, it needs more than just a generation of people who don’t want to support themselves: It needs a generation of people who cannot support themselves!

This is the direction America is going. In the words of Bezmenov, “The American romance with state-run education as encouraged by kgb subverters has already produced generations of graduates who cannot spell, cannot find Nicaragua on a world map, cannot think creatively and independently. I wonder if Albert Einstein would have arrived at his theory of relativity if he had been educated in one of today’s American public schools. Most likely he would have ‘discovered’ marijuana and variant methods of sexual intercourse instead.”

Wrecking the Economy

As Mr. Armstrong wrote, it is important to understand what communism is. It sees itself not as a mere alternative or competitor to capitalism, but as a global movement in harmony with the fact that human history revolves around the production of material. It renders culture, art, ethics, philosophy, religion, family and even the individual as secondary, superfluous or dangerous. After workers around the globe violently overthrow those who possess capital, the ideology purports, humanity will ultimately achieve this inevitable “utopian” future. The property—and everything else—pertaining to an individual will be abolished, and each person will simply become a cog in the giant, glorious machinery of the global utopian state.

“Communism, of course, is many things,” Mr. Armstrong wrote in the February 1962 Plain Truth. “It is a doctrine. … It is a revolutionary program. It is relentless class war. It is a radical philosophy of history. It is a radical philosophy of society. It is a social system. It is an economic system. It is a political strategy. It is a world conspiracy.”

As an economic system, communism pits the larger, poorer groups against the smaller, more wealthy groups. It calls for that wealth to be removed from those who have it and spread evenly among everyone. To accomplish this re-distribution of wealth, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote in The Communist Manifesto that private land ownership must be abolished, a heavily progressive income tax must be instituted, and all factories and financial institutions must be nationalized.

Regarding the troublesome matter of people (both wealthy and poor) who resist the program, Marx favored violence over reform. The only way to speed the march to his new society was “revolutionary terror,” he wrote.

The mantra of Marxist economics is: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” The value produced by those with more “ability” must be redistributed to those with more “need.” This philosophy directly contradicts Jesus Christ’s teaching, represented in the parable of the pounds (Luke 19:12-27), in which each of Christ’s servants is rewarded differently based on how much he actually produced with what he was given.

The main reason Marxism doesn’t work is that when human beings don’t receive the full benefits of their labor, they lack incentive to work. The Soviet Union fell because of Russia’s enthusiastic embrace of Marxist-Leninist economics. As Russian economist Grigory Yavlinsky, an adviser to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, once said: “The Soviet system is not working because the workers are not working.”

Despite the economic disaster that befell the Soviet Union, and the consistent failures of economies that follow Communist ideals, a shocking number of American economists still cling to the socialist movement and Marxist thought.

Communism has survived. And despite the cautionary plight of tens of millions who have recently suffered and died under Communist regimes, it has thrived—even inside the government of its sworn enemy, the United States. America’s current political environment exalts many Communist ideals. There is even compelling evidence connecting the current president to some of the biggest names in America’s Communist history.

Herbert Armstrong warned that Communist economics would sap America’s strength and weaken its economic power. “Satan is not a visible red devil with tail, horns and a pitchfork,” he wrote in the October 1951 Plain Truth. “The real Satan is invisible. The world doesn’t see him or recognize his works. … It doesn’t grasp the diabolical deception of communism—Satan’s economic delusion, employing propaganda based on false economies as its first arm of attack ….”

The Plot to Abolish the Family

Herbert W. Armstrong warned that Communist subversion would use “every diabolical means” to pervert “our morals,” wreck “our social structure,” and destroy “our spiritual and religious life.”

Perhaps the most diabolical of these means is the Marxist plot to destroy the family. The Communist Manifesto calls the family a capitalist institution based “on private gain.” Marriage, it says, is but the “hypocritical” concealment of private prostitution. The authors hoped and predicted that both “bourgeois family” and “bourgeois marriage” would disappear with the vanishing of private capital.

Throughout the 1960s and into the ’70s, Soviet front groups worked throughout America to destroy marriage. Federal Bureau of Investigation informant Larry Grathwohl penetrated the revolutionary Communist group Weather Underground. After palling around with Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and their crew for months, Grathwohl wrote his report, “Bringing Down America: An fbi Informer With the Weathermen.” The report revealed that the Weather Underground network was determined to abolish monogamous marriage, which they viewed as a repressive remnant of male and white supremacy.

In his book The Naked Communist, author Willard Cleon Skousen identified 45 Communist goals for the ideological subversion of America. These goals were read on the floor of Congress on Jan. 10, 1963. Among them are: discrediting the family as an institution; encouraging promiscuity and easy divorce; emphasizing the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents; promoting pornography; and presenting homosexuality as “normal, natural, healthy.”

Under the influence of Marxist philosophy and Soviet subversion tactics, American educators have spent decades trumpeting sexual liberation, militant feminism and homosexual rights. All this has been done under the banner of freedom, but the truth is that these movements have served as Trojan horses in the assault on marriage.

In Karl Marx’s words: “Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis; it therefore acts in contradiction to all past historical experience.”

Or, in Herbert W. Armstrong’s words, “Communism is the vulture of decadent, dying politics, religion, and society” (Plain Truth subscriber letter, Nov. 24, 1967).

Mr. Armstrong elaborated in a 1979 World Tomorrow television broadcast where he again reiterated the biblical truth that Satan actively and invisibly rules the world (2 Corinthians 4:4; Ephesians 2:2). He then quoted a statement by Jesus Christ that becomes very troubling in the light of American society in 2014. “If the United States gets divided too much between the idea of freedom and the idea of communism,” he said, “this country could not stand.”

America may not have replaced the stars on its flag with hammers and sickles, but it is by now undeniable that it is divided between the idea of freedom and that of communism. The American people long ago rejected God and allowed Satan-inspired Communist philosophy to infiltrate, subvert and divide the nation. God will allow this experience to teach America the natural consequences of broken law.

Talk of equality sounds noble, but as Mr. Armstrong warned, the Communist version of “equality” is only a means to an end. “As fostered by the Soviet Union,” he wrote in 1949, “communism is launched as a worldwide class struggle, pitting the poorer class against those who have been economically more successful, arousing class prejudice, stirring up race hatreds. While they pretend to stand for peace, they engender only strife, and they feed like a vulture on poverty, discontent, discouragement, confusion and chaos.”

He warned, “Communism is the devil’s effort, through his demon-inspired human tools, to take from us this greatest national and economic blessing God ever conferred on any people.”

Looking at America today, you have to admit that Mr. Armstrong was right.

From: https://www.thetrumpet.com/12385-has-america-been-influenced-by-communism

Story of Shooting at NSA is Buried in the Media | SUV was Trying to Exit not Enter

The SUV Was Trying to Escape the NSA

NSA shooting: Officer injured at Fort Meade security gate, three in custody

Alison Knezevich The Baltimore Sun

Three people were injured at Fort Meade early Wednesday when the driver of an SUV attempted to enter the National Security Agency compound, authorities said.

The driver and two passengers in the black SUV were taken into custody after the incident shortly before 7 a.m. at Gate 1 on Canine Road off Maryland Route 32. A spokesman for the FBI’s Baltimore field office said late Wednesday that investigators are examining the possibility that the driver might have made a wrong turn into the complex, but it is not the only theory they are considering.

Injured were an NSA police officer, the driver of the SUV and a civilian bystander, said Gordon B. Johnson, special agent in charge for the FBI’s Baltimore office. He said the SUV had three occupants.

Johnson described the encounter as “an isolated incident.”

“I cannot emphasize enough that we believe there is no indication that this has a nexus to terrorism,” Johnson said.

The FBI is taking the lead in the investigation. Johnson told reporters Wednesday that only limited information was available to be shared.

He said shots were fired during the incident, but did not believe any of the injuries were caused by gunfire. He would not say who opened fire, but said it appeared the gunfire was “directed at the vehicle.”

Read More: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-fort-meade-shooting-20180214-story.html

Rouge Money Radio: Special Guest – W “The Intelligence Insider” (02/12/2018)

We are political scientists, editorial engineers, and radio show developers drawn together by a shared vision of bringing Alternative news through digital mediums that evangelize our civil liberties.

Please subscribe for the latest shows daily!

http://www.roguemoney.net https://www.facebook.com/ROGUEMONEY.NET/ https://twitter.com/theroguemoney

The United States Does Not Have More Mass Shootings Than Europe

In the aftermath of a tragedy like the mass shooting in Las Vegas, political claims are tossed around rather quickly, and with little regard to the facts. Advocates of gun prohibition are quick to claim that the U.S. is uniquely prone to such events because of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms.

This claim, however, is false. In fact, as figures from the Crime Prevention Research Center show, “there were 55 percent more casualties per capita from mass public shootings in [the European Union] than U.S. from 2009-15.”

In other words, the opposite is true. There are actually more occurrences of, and deaths from, mass shootings in Europe than the United States, on a per capita basis.

Mass shootings are less common in the United States compared to Europe

As the following tables from CPRC show that the United States is in the middle when ranked against European countries that have, for the most part, far more restrictive gun laws.

The statistics show that an individual’s chance of being killed in a mass shooting are actually worse in Europe than in the United States.

President Obama’s claim that “this just doesn’t happen in other countries,” as Obama notoriously said in 2015, is demonstrably false. So too, is the implication that European-style gun laws would likely make any appreciable difference to the frequency of mass shootings.

The desire for a quick-fix solution is understandable after such an aching tragedy as in Las Vegas. But easy answers aren’t necessarily the right ones.

Rate of gun homicides is higher in America than in Europe, but rate of mass shootings is lower

It is true that the United States has a higher overall rate of gun homicides. But mass shootings and terrorist incidents are only a tiny fraction of that figure.

The vast majority are gang-related shootings tied to organized crime, particularly related to the prohibition of illegal drugs. These killings don’t get nearly as much news coverage and attention, but the body count associated with them is many times higher than all mass shooting incidents combined.

The bottom is clear: European-style gun laws are not likely to have prevented what happened in Las Vegas.

Read More: https://www.thejacknews.com/law/gun-rights/the-united-states-does-not-have-more-mass-shootings-than-europe/

Valentine’s Day Florida High School Mass Shooting: Signs of a False Flag Black Op.

Note: Even if this was a staged event, the very real loss of life is an unspeakable tragedy for our country and each person involved. Our thoughts and prayers and deepest condolences go out to the victims and their families.

Signs of a False Flag


Initial media reports conflict with official narrative

In the following video a witness places suspect in different location from active shooting:

fire drill earlier that day

The shooting started with the fire alarm going off  causing mass confusion since there had already been a fire drill that day:

Jim Gard’s math class at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, was just finishing up a review for a test Wednesday when “the fire alarm went off, which I thought was unusual because we’d just had a fire drill.”

Because they’d just had a fire drill, Gard told his students to wait a minute before leaving, but then “our administrator got on and said, ‘Evacuate the building,'” he told MSNBC on Wednesday night.

A superseding announcement quickly came, he said: “code red.” All but six of his students fled, Gard said; following protocol, he and the rest returned to the building, hid in a closet and “just turned the lights off, as you’re supposed to do in a code red — you know, an active shooter.”

Read More: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/today-was-different-florida-high-school-teacher-describes-confusion-then-n848221

SUSPICIOUS ACTING EYE WITNESSES EMERGE

These people get interviewed over and over by mainstream media and act strangely, like they’ve been given lines to recite which is why they’re called “crisis actors”:

 

Instant calls for limiting the rights of law abiding citizens

with no mention of how that would stop criminal acts:

Timing

This attack comes on the heels of the released FISA memos and during an immigration debate that is leading to bad outcomes for the liberal/neocon deep state.

Location

The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida is less than 40 miles south of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago luxury resort that functions as Trump’s Camp David, making it very difficult for him to avoid the highly politicized backlash that is sure to manifest.

The FBI Was Warned

About A School Shooting Threat From A YouTube User Named Nikolas Cruz In September:

Last fall, a Mississippi bail bondsman and frequent YouTube vlogger noticed an alarming comment left on one of his videos. “I’m going to be a professional school shooter,” said a user named Nikolas Cruz.

The YouTuber, 36-year-old Ben Bennight, alerted the FBI, emailing a screenshot of the comment and calling the bureau’s Mississippi field office. He also flagged the comment to YouTube, which removed it from the video.

Agents with the bureau’s Mississippi field office got back to him “immediately,” Bennight said, and conducted an in-person interview the following day, on Sept. 25.

“They came to my office the next morning and asked me if I knew anything about the person,” Bennight told BuzzFeed News. “I didn’t. They took a copy of the screenshot and that was the last I heard from them.”

FBI agents contacted Bennight again Wednesday, after a 19-year-old named Nikolas Cruz allegedly opened fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in South Florida, killing at least 17 people.

Though his name matches the YouTube user flagged in September, FBI officials would not say whether they have confirmed that the account belonged to Cruz.

But around 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday — about 30 minutes after Cruz was taken into custody by police in Broward County — Special Agent Ryan Furr with the FBI’s Miami field office called Bennight and left him a voicemail.

“I think we spoke with you in the past about a complaint that you made about someone making a comment on your YouTube channel,” the agent said in the message, which Bennight provided to BuzzFeed News. “I just wanted to follow up with you on that and ask you a question with something that’s come up, if you wouldn’t mind giving me a ring.”

A few hours later, Bennight said, FBI agents in Mississippi visited him again in person, pressing for more information about the YouTube user Nikolas Cruz.

“They asked me if I knew who he was. I didn’t. I don’t,” Bennight said. “Then they left.”

When contacted by BuzzFeed News, Furr declined to comment on the call, and directed questions about the shooting to the FBI’s public affairs office. The office did not respond to multiple calls or emails Wednesday night.

Read More: https://www.buzzfeed.com/briannasacks/the-fbi-was-warned-about-a-school-shooting-threat-from?utm_term=.ryO6mvXN8b#.blr3PgOLW7

The White Helmets Are A Propaganda Construct

RANSCRIPT AND SOURCES: corbettreport.com/whitehelmets

Contrary to what its multi-million dollar international PR campaign would have you believe, the “White Helmets” are not a group of volunteer search-and-rescue workers that sprang spontaneously out of the Syrian soil.

When you peel back the layers of foreign financing and reveal the foreign intelligence operatives and murky lobbying groups at the heart of the organization, what you find is that the White Helmets are, in fact, a propaganda construct.

Goodluck Buzzfeed: the DNC files were copied at 22.6 MB/s = Copied Locally

His name was Seth Rich

BuzzFeed Suing DNC For Proof They Were Hacked

 BuzzFeed is suing the cash-strapped Democratic National Committee (DNC) to force them to hand over information related to the “Steele Dossier” that might help the news outlet defend itself against a lawsuit lodged by a Russian businessman who was named in the document.

Three separate lawsuits have been launched against BuzzFeed in connection to the January 11, 2017 publication of the dossier, which states that Russian tech executive Aleksej Gubarev used his web hosting companies to hack into the DNC’s computer systems.

The dossier, without substantiation, said Gubarev’s U.S.-based global web-hosting companies, XBT and Webzilla, planted digital bugs, transmitted viruses and conducted altering operations against the Democratic Party leadership.

While one key name in the dossier was blackened out by BuzzFeed, Gubarev’s was not. He alleges that he was never contacted for comment, suffering reputational harm in the process. –Foreign Policy

As part of their defense, BuzzFeed issued a subpoena to the DNC for information which might help them defend against Gubarev’s lawsuit by verifying claims in the dossier – including “digital remnants left by the Russian state operatives,” as well as a full version of the hacking report prepared by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike.

Since the DNC wouldn’t let the FBI look at the server and instead relied on the report prepared by CrowdStrike (founded by Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch – who sits on the very Anti-Russian Atlantic Council along with Evelyn “oops!” Farkas. The AC is funded by the US State Department, NATO, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukranian Oligarch Victor Pinchuk, who apparently owns the Ukrainian gas company Joe Biden’s son is on the board of).

“As part of the discovery process, BuzzFeed is attempting to verify claims in the dossier that relate to the hacking of the DNC,” said BuzzFeed spokesman Matt Mittenhal in a statement. “We’re asking a federal court to force the DNC to follow the law and allow BuzzFeed to fully defend its First Amendment rights.”

Last month, the DNC claimed that providing the requested information would expose the DNC’s internal operations and harm the party politically (it’s always someone else’s fault, no?).

“If these documents were disclosed, the DNC’s internal operations, as well as its ability to effectively achieve its political goals, would be harmed,” said DNC lawyers.

If the DNC is compelled to turn over the full CrowdStrike report and “digital remnants,” perhaps Gubarev would then present a counter-analysis by researcher Forensicator which CrowdStrike apparently “missed” – revealing that the DNC files were copied at 22.6 MB/s – all but confirming that the files had to have been copied locally by an inside source. Many have speculated that DNC IT staffer Seth Rich, whose murder is still unsolved, was the source of the emails provided to WikiLeaks.

Word of BuzzFeed’s suit against the DNC comes on the heels of a Monday revelation that the news outlet hired a former top FBI and White House cybersecurity official to fly around the globe on a secret mission to corroborate various claims in the dossier.

….

Read More: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-14/buzzfeed-suing-dnc-proof-they-were-hacked