A recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey shows us some rather disturbing news regarding our modern culture’s views regarding various subjects.
 
21 years ago, a “strong majority” of Americans said that principles of hard work, patriotism, commitment to religion and the goal of having children were all very important issues for them. But since then, three of the four have seen a considerable downturn.
 
Interestingly enough, hard work remains a top value, but the other three have all dropped considerably, with the numbers being driven down by younger and younger people.
 
In 1998, 59% said that having children was a top value. That’s down 16 points since then, to 43%, and considering multiple people are beginning to preach about having less children, or not having children at all in order to “save the environment”, I expect that number to continue dropping if that philosophy becomes a bit more mainstream.
 
As far as religion goes, in 1998, 62% said it was very important. Today, that number stands at 50%. Not a terrible number, per se, but a worrying trend, especially considering the implications it brings. This is part of the whole “turning away from God” issue I had been mentioning recently. We can’t ask God to bless America when America is turning its back to God, and as time goes on, the problem seems to only worsen. It is also why I have, time and time again, spoken about the need for another Christian revival.
 
Finally, patriotism also went down from 70% in 1998 to 61% today, a 9-point drop. Not quite as bad as the other two, but still not a good thing, particularly considering the downward trends.
 
And again, the biggest driver of this comes from younger generations. Only 42% of those aged 18-38 said that patriotism was very important. By comparison, almost 80% of those 55 and older said the same.
 
Less than a third of those aged 18-35 said religion was important in contrast to two-thirds of those who are 55 and older.
 
But one can’t really be surprised considering what exactly is being taught in schools. Democrats have had control of the education in this country for the past 50 years. As time has gone on, more and more radical Leftist ideologies began to be not only taught, but encouraged to be embraced by the students. Instead of simply teaching what The Communist Manifesto says and allow for students to critically think and discern whether any of it makes sense (which it doesn’t), it is embraced as Gospel and taught that the values held in that book are truthful and correct.
 
Instead of teaching both the theory of evolution and Creation in the classroom, only evolution is taught and is largely taught as being true and factual, when it isn’t. Now, personally, my 10th grade Biology teacher was fairly chill and mentioned that we didn’t necessarily have to believe the theory of evolution, but when the curriculum doesn’t teach any alternative to it, it leads students to only really believe in what is being taught, especially for students who are not taught other things by their parents.
 
When students no longer have to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, that leads them to not feel very much love for their country. It also doesn’t help that schools (and the media, but this begins in schools) demonize the flag as not being “inclusive” enough for everyone else, as though it’s supposed to be. The American flag represents American values. It’s obviously not going to represent Mexico or Guatemala or any other country (of which schools have no problem showing their flags). It also doesn’t help when America is generally taught as having “robbed the poor” in order to become as powerful as it is and is taught as being the “bad guys” in pretty much every affair it finds itself in.
 
And when God, the Bible, prayer and the Cross are all taken away from the classrooms, you find yourself being driven away from Him and focusing on the things of Man and not on the things of God. So is it any wonder we are seeing the numbers we are seeing?
 
Ben Shapiro writes that this is all largely a failure of education. That polls suggesting a rise in socialism, but with almost no one being able to define it apart from what Bernie Sanders says it is (which isn’t socialism at all), is largely a failure of education alongside the fact that there is no “evil empire” like the Soviet Union against which to contrast the virtues of capitalism against the failures of socialism. But there are two major problems with that take.
 
One, it’s not a FAILURE of education when the Left controls the education in this country and students are being led Left-ward. It’s exactly WHAT THEY WANTED TO ACCOMPLISH when they first set out to take over the education system in the early 1960s. It began with eliminating God from the classrooms and everything else followed. An America that hates itself and wishes for an entirely new system of economics and government, even if it can’t define it and even if when explained, they reject it (most people reject Medicare for All when told that it would raise the middle-class’ taxes and eliminate private health insurance), is what the Left wants. Because in that America, THEY get all the power and all the benefits and get to live like kings because they basically are. So this isn’t a failure in the education system. The system has worked exactly how it was supposed to so far, it’s just supposed to bring about all of this.
 
Second, while a bit more difficult to compare, there IS an evil empire out there: China. What’s more, the failures of socialism can be clearly seen in Venezuela and North Korea, which are what we often use to contrast capitalism and socialism. The problem comes in the fact that Venezuela and North Korea were never all that powerful to begin with and people say “that can’t possibly happen to us”, which is a fool’s argument. The way it’s happened in Venezuela and North Korea has happened in LITERALLY EVERY OTHER SOCIALIST COUNTRY EVER. First, take away the guns, then take away the rights and freedoms of some people, then everyone else’s, all-the-while nationalizing everything under the sun from energy production to the press, both of which are things Bernie Sanders is on record for wanting to do.
 
While China, Venezuela and North Korea generally aren’t put in the same spotlight as the Soviet Union, they are all notable socialist states that all show us the failures and dangers of socialism.
 
Capitalism isn’t being attacked because there is no other system out there to contrast it to or because there is no notable “bad guy” out there but because the Left HATES Capitalism and sees it as a threat to their socialist ideals. Owning children’s minds has a MASSIVE effect on the future of a nation. You own children’s minds, you own the future. The Left has known this for a very long time and has worked to own it for quite some time.
 
As it stands, there are really only two ways for this country to heal from the sort of damage currently happening. One, we wrestle away control of the education system from the communist Left. Easier said than done, for certain, but not impossible and something to at least try, in whatever way it might come.
 
And two, as I have said time and time again, including in this very article: we have another Christian revival. I don’t know when the Day of Judgement will occur, when the Rapture will happen, when God will say “enough” and destroy this world and all of its sin, but if that is not to happen for centuries or millennia, I don’t doubt there will eventually be another Christian revival. Whether America is still here or not by the time it happens, I also don’t know, but if there is any place that has the potential to have another one, it is here, particularly considering how many Christian revivals there have been in this country alone.
 
Having been founded with the principles it was, America has great potential to be home of multiple Christian revivals, even in the middle of social decay worldwide. While the evil Left might argue that our “true” founding was in 1619, we all know that our TRUE founding was in 1776, under the principles of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness all being inalienable rights given to us by our Creator.
 
This country’s founding is special and wonderful, much as the Left might try and say it isn’t. And while I would love to say that everything will be alright for this country and the Left will be thrown into the trash-heap of history, I do not know for certain what is to happen. Upon exiting the Constitutional Convention, Ben Franklin was asked what kind of country we would be after fighting for our liberty against England. Franklin said: “A Republic, if you can keep it.”
 
We have kept it thus far and we certainly CAN keep it moving forward, but freedom isn’t free and a Republic cannot be maintained if left on its own, undefended against opposition. This is why I say what I say: we must return to God as a nation in order for Him to bless us once again. We must fight against socialism and what would restrict our freedoms. We must ensure that information and education of truth, first God’s Truth and then the truth regarding socialism, is spread out like a wildfire.
 
Again, these things are easier said than done, particularly in an age when the Left also owns social media, and in a sense, people’s ability to communicate and express themselves. But if we are to keep our Republic as Ben Franklin said, we must do everything in our power to do so. And that power comes, first and foremost, from the Lord. Because if He is for us, who could possibly be against us?
 
Romans 8:31
“What then shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Eco-fascists love pointing the finger at anyone and everyone who could be deemed as bearing blame for any harm caused to the environment, and with the Amazon fires damaging the rain forest, they jumped at the story very quickly. But, as with many other stories, they jumped at it WAY too quickly.
 
Celebrities like Madonna, Cristiano Ronaldo and Leonardo DiCaprio, as well as foreign leaders like Emmanuel Macron have all peddled fake news regarding the Amazon fires. For example, French President Emmanuel Macron tweeted: “The Amazon rain forest – the lungs which produce 20% of our planet’s oxygen – is on fire.” Ronaldo peddled the same claim, saying it produces 20% of the world’s oxygen and DiCaprio (and Macron) both shared a photo of blazing fires destroying the Amazon… that’s 20 years old. CNN and the NYT also used the same term of “lungs of the world”, but denied that the cause was climate change (not that that matters to the eco-fascists).
 
So what is the truth? First, like the NYT said, this wasn’t caused by climate change. “Natural fires in the Amazon are rare, and the majority of these fires were set by farmers preparing Amazon-adjacent farmland for the next year’s crops and pasture. Much of the land that is burning was not old-growth rain forest, but land that had already been cleared of trees and set for agricultural use.” In other words, farmers are doing this to control pests, weeds and to encourage growth in pastures.
 
Second, the Amazon is not the “lungs” of the world. I came across conflicting information regarding the “20%” figure, with some sources saying it doesn’t produce 20% while others say it does. However, regardless of however much it produces, it also respirates it anyway. According to Amazon forest expert Dan Nepstad, “the Amazon produces a lot of oxygen but it uses the same amount of oxygen through respiration so it’s a wash.” Basically, it uses as much oxygen as it produces in a closed system, so to claim it’s “the lungs of the world” is a lie. In fact, Nepstad went on to say: “The Amazon produces a lot of oxygen, but so do soy farms and [cattle] pastures.”
 
Third, while the media and foreign politicians are wagging their fingers at Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro (who is a right-winger), they are blatantly ignoring the fact that there is also a wildfire raging in socialist Bolivia. Bolivian President Evo Morales has been very open about telling farmers that “it’s fine to set [fires] to gather charcoal to sell for fuel or clear the land of brush for planting.” The only real reason Bolsonaro is being attacked here is because he is a right-winger president. There have been a lot of fires in the Amazon over the years, yet this is the first time we’re hearing people attacking the Brazilian president for it.
 
Finally, while people are claiming that the Amazon fires are a “record high”, NASA declared that the fires are only “close to the average in comparison to the past 15 years.” There is nothing adamantly special about this year’s Amazon forest fires apart from the fact that Jair Bolsonaro is now President of Brazil and has been attacked by the media for not subscribing to their cult of doom and gloom surrounding climate change.
 
While 2019 has been the most active year for fires in the Amazon since 2010, what the media doesn’t mention is that “about ½ the years BEFORE 2019 are higher, and about ½ are lower,” according to Climate Depot. In other words, the 2019 fire is nothing particularly special throughout the last decade and is mostly a nothingburger being made into something more than what it is by eco-fascists who claim a particularly hot day is a sign of “climate change”.
 
And even then, the “hot days” aren’t particularly special either. According to the U.S. Climate Reference Network, there hasn’t been any warming in the U.S. dating back to 2005. What’s more, 2019 has been, on average, cooler than 2005.
 
The eco-fascist movement requires people to have really short, selective memory. They pretend that particularly hot days in the middle of SUMMER is somehow not right and an inherent threat to our planet and our very own lives. Ignore the data that shows us there’s nothing particularly special about any particular day or any particular record-high, you’re feeling hot, you’re feeling uncomfortable and it’s all capitalism’s fault.
 
The eco-fascist movement requires lazy people to do as little research as possible and just accept what is being told to them from the fake news media and little kids who think they know everything about the climate throwing the biggest temper tantrums since Trump became President. It requires as much disinformation as possible, which is why we see mentally-challenged celebrities like Madonna and DiCaprio showing pictures of an Amazon forest fire FROM 20 YEARS AGO.
 
As I’m sure you’ve noticed, I’m calling these people “eco-fascists”. The reason being that it’s entirely accurate. Calling them “environmentalists” doesn’t sound proper enough. These people are every bit as fascistic as Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, Mao Zedong, etc. They use the argument of climate change in order to gain more and more power for themselves.
 
It’s why AOC’s former chief of staff noted that the GND wasn’t really about fighting climate change but about changing the entire economy of the United States. In other words, changing the U.S. from a capitalist-based economy to a socialist-based one.
 
The issue of climate change can cover pretty much every single issue. From abortion to religion to gun violence to poverty to immigration, climate change can be infused into every single argument, which is why Democrats say illegals are “environmental refugees”.
 
These people are the very definition of an eco-fascist, and as such, I believe they deserve to be called that way. We all know they love to use the word “fascist” against Trump and anyone who disagrees with them. Let’s see how they like it when the word is used against them.
 
Deuteronomy 28:7
“The Lord will cause your enemies who rise against you to be defeated before you. They shall come out against you one way and flee before you seven ways.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

If colleges are where education and logic go to die, a college’s Women’s and Gender Studies program is the River Styx for logic. So it comes as no surprise to me that an NYU Women’s and Gender Studies program released a paper in which it suggested the breeding and milking of cows is the same thing as rape and sexual abuse.
 
The paper reads as follows: “Throughout our lives, we are offered an idealized image of dairy cows where these animals graze on beautiful pastures, have room to sow and play, and are comforted in spacious areas in which to sleep. We are presented with images of a life well lived, but when it comes to the deaths of those same animals, the picture-perfect story comes to a grim reality.”
 
“The outdated stereotype about women being caretakers and most importantly child bearers remains consistent in the dairy industry, especially when we take into account the means through which these animals are exploited. A few brief examples include rape or sexual assault, nonconsensual hormone treatments, and emotional trauma related to pregnancy. Dairy cows are forcibly impregnated, or raped, in order to constantly produce milk for humans to consume.”
 
“The dairy industry is a host for sex-based discrimination. It is a site where sexual assault and objectification based on biological makeup are highly prevalent but ignored as we choose to neglect non-humans with whom we share a planet.”
 
The author concludes: “While we fight against the sexual abuse of women, why are we still allowing the same treatment to be thrust upon other living bodies when there are other, more sustainable ways to live that do not involve harming millions of female bodies? With simple lifestyle changes that promote reproductive justice towards animals available to many, why are we picking and choosing which pots of capitalism, sexism, and patriarchy to stir, when we could dismantle it all?”
 
I apologize sincerely for all of the brain cells you just lost reading this Marxist garbage, but please consider I had to read it multiple times and write it out myself, so I came up with the short end of the stick here.
 
While this piece reads like a hotbed of communist talking points, from suggesting something is rape when it isn’t to ordering people to eat differently to even bringing up capitalism and asserting we “dismantle it all”, I would briefly like to cover some of the “arguments” made in this dumpster fire of a “research paper”.
 
First, addressing the “outdated stereotype” of women being caretakers and child bearers, it is not a stereotype whatsoever. Historically, women have been caretakers of children and that still happens today. Ideally, the wife stays at home with the kids while the husband goes to work. Often times, that doesn’t happen, with the wife also working and leaving the children to be taken care of by a babysitter (and anyone wonders why so many people are blaming the previous generations for crap when the parents of these young people largely left them with babysitters because the moms CHOSE to prioritize their careers over their own children because they’ve been told it’s “harmful” for women to stay at home with the kids).
 
And as far as child-bearing being a “stereotype”, exactly which of the other gender is capable of bearing a child? The male gender? Or the male gender? Perhaps the male gender? MEN CAN’T HAVE CHILDREN, ONLY WOMEN CAN! To suggest it’s a stereotype that women are child bearers is utterly moronic, as only women can be child bearers.
 
Second, breeding animals isn’t rape. Animals can’t give consent to anything. They mate whether man forces them to or not. So why is it rape when a farmer breeds cows or other animals but not when the animals do it themselves? And that’s only when they mate normally. Animals like sea otters, bottlenose dolphins and other animals have been recorded to perpetuate what us humans would call rape, gang rape, pedophilia, necrophilia and other things. Sea otters, for example, have been recorded literally raping baby seals to death and sometimes continue even after the baby seal has died. Bottlenose dolphins have been recorded to rape other animals like porpoises (small, toothed whales), as well as forming gangs of dolphins to “kidnap” and rape female and even sometimes male dolphins.
 
But sure, breeding a female for the purposes of making more animals to grow and profit from is apparently tantamount to rape.
 
Finally, when the author writes about dismantling capitalism, sexism and patriarchy in a paper about ANIMAL RAPE, the author loses what little credibility she may have had. She was basically interjecting her own political ideologies that would’ve belonged on a Facebook post into an official research paper to be studied. And anyone wonders why Women’s and Gender Studies programs are a massive joke?
 
But do you want to know the worst part? Aside from the massive waste of time and IQ points it took READING the b.s. paper, to suggest that breeding and milking of cows is tantamount to rape and sexual abuse SERIOUSLY undermines and trivializes actual cases of sexual abuse.
 
As I was going through topics to cover, I checked The Daily Wire, which I often times do. Almost side by side, I saw two stories: this one about the research paper and one about sexual assault and abuse cases happening in various Boys & Girls Club of America facilities throughout the last half century. Prior to reading the moronic piece, I chose to read some of the cases detailed by the Connecticut Post, where The Daily Wire got their information to write their piece.
 
The cases included cases of rape, statutory rape, molestation, forceful impregnation and all-around pedophilia. In-all, over roughly 70 years, there were 95 cases of sexual assault reported, all of which the Connecticut Post has links to. The cases vary from civil cases, criminal cases or both. In many, the actual Boys & Girls Club didn’t share any of the blame for it, but there were cases where a DIRECTOR of a local Club would groom and sexually abuse and assault young boys ages 7-12 and was NEVER FIRED, but became MAYOR OF SANTA FE, NEW MEXICO IN 1982.
 
Hundreds of children were sexually assaulted and/or abused either in Boys & Girls Clubs or by staff members of the Boys & Girls Clubs. To completely seriously and unironically suggest that MILKING AND BREEDING FARM ANIMALS IS AKIN TO RAPE AND SEXUAL ABUSE IS AN INSULT TO ACTUAL VICTIMS OF THIS!
 
That garbage paper SPITS IN THE FACES of actual sexual abuse and assault victims. Not that anyone on the Left cares, of course. The comrades at NYU’s Women’s and Gender Studies program did their part in the revolution against capitalism, and that’s all that matters. Who cares if their points are ridiculous at best and insulting at worst? Who cares if they literally make no sense? They help spread the ever-so-important message that animals are more important than (most) people and we must continue to attack capitalism at every turn.
 
At NFL games? Kneel for the capitalist flag. On late night “comedy” shows? Bash the capitalist president. In video games? Bash the capitalist hicks. In t.v. shows and movies? Bash and push for a fantasy of hunting down and murdering capitalist pigs. Every medium and every aspect of life has to have politics, specifically Left-wing politics, injected into it in order to fight against capitalism.
 
If actual sexual abuse victims get caught in the crossfire, that’s fine.
 
This is the sickening and evil mentality of the Left. They have claimed everything and everyone is racist, so that term has lost its power (to the point they’re now switching to a fancy new term: white supremacist… until that gets used to the point of irrelevancy). They’ve claimed Right-wingers are Nazis for years, so that has lost its luster. Similarly, sexual abuse and assault will be so over-used that actual cases of it will be overlooked and taken as the norm instead of as disturbing and horrifying as they should be.
 
The Left literally ruins everything it touches. They’re like the anti-Midas of politics. Entertainment and comedy have been subdued and making risqué jokes will get people “cancelled”. Pretty much everything the Left touches gets turned to utter crap.
 
In doing this, sexual assault victims – actual ones – will be largely ignored or overlooked. When everything is a crisis, nothing is. And the souls subjected to it have no one to reach out to but to God, because Man no longer cares.
 
Ephesians 5:11
“Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

On Wednesday, there were two stories largely being talked about: a man in Philadelphia shooting at cops, wounding 6 of them; and economic news that supposedly spelled doom and gloom and would lead us into a recession (which didn’t happen, but the Left is trying to see if they can take away Trump’s best weapon, the economy, by causing a recession which they will blame on him).
 
However, the media has largely stopped talking about at least the first thing for a couple of reasons.
 
But before I get to those reasons, allow me to give you the context of the situation.
 
The Philadelphia Inquirer reports: “The standoff [between officers and the suspect] began Wednesday about 4:30 p.m. when a Narcotics Strike Force unit attempted to serve a search warrant at a house on the 3700 block of North 15th Street.” After the suspect began to fire at the officers, the suspect and Philadelphia PD were engaged in a seven-hour-long standoff which ended once the suspect surrendered himself after calling his lawyer “in a panic”, who suggested he should surrender.
 
Following the incident, the suspect’s lawyer, Shaka Johnson, told CBS that his client would likely be charged with 6 counts of attempted murder and aggravated assault against the police officers.
 
But this is hardly the first time the suspect had any sort of run-in with the law.
 
The suspect has a lengthy criminal record dating back to 2001, when he was 18 years old and was arrested for possessing a gun with an altered serial number.
 
The Philadelphia Inquirer takes note of the suspect’s lengthy criminal history:
 
“Public records show that he has been arrested about a dozen times since turning 18, and convicted six times on charges that involved illegal possession of guns, drug dealing, and aggravated assault. He has been in and out of prison; the longest sentence handed him came in 2010, when a federal judge gave him a 55-month term. And, his record would indicate, he does not like to go to prison. In 2008, he was convicted of escaping, fleeing from police, and resisting arrest. Along the way, he beat criminal charges on everything from kidnapping to attempted murder.”
 
That aforementioned 2010 sentence came from pleading guilty in 2008 to illegally possessing a Smith & Wesson .357 (a classic revolver) and a Taurus PT .45 semiautomatic handgun. In 2013, he was convicted of perjury and given 7 years probation, but continued racking up more charges such as evading police officers and endangering civilians on an unregistered scooter, but those charges were eventually acquitted. In 2014, he was arrested on charges of drug possession and false imprisonment but also beat those charges as well.
 
The Inquirer also reports that: “According to court filings, his accuser told police she had agreed to sell marijuana for [the suspect] but then later changed her mind. When he summoned her to his house on the 6900 block of Greenway Street in Southwest Philadelphia days later, she says, she overheard [the suspect] and an associate discussing killing her. Fearful for her life, the woman said, she called 911. When officers arrived, she fled as [the suspect] and his associate hid the crack cocaine and marijuana in a tire out back. Investigators discovered 83 grams of marijuana.”
 
Due to the suspect’s lengthy criminal history involving several charges with illegal gun and drug possessions, as well as other things, it is safe to say that this story does not suit the Left’s narrative. The guy was involved in a standoff against the police officers, wounding 6 of them (though we have to thank God that none were killed), when he is one of those people who absolutely should not have a firearm and it is illegal for them to have one.
 
The suspect carried on a seven-hour-long standoff, obviously with firearms, but it’s pretty obvious not a single gun control law being discussed would’ve kept this from happening.
 
This is the reason the media and Leftist politicians often talk about gun control so soon after, or even during, a shooting occurs. Because once more information comes out and it’s discovered that the shooter should not have had said weapon or it was illegal for them to have one, the Left’s opportunity to push their anti-Second Amendment agenda is gone.
 
2020 Democrat candidate Kamala Harris went on CNN DURING THE PHILADELPHIA SHOOTING to push gun control policies BEFORE THE INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE THAT NO GUN CONTROL POLICY WOULD’VE PREVENTED THIS! The reason for this is, again, because they have a small window of opportunity to push this crap.
 
And often times, once enough time passes and more information is made available, you have situations where the MSM or even politicians admit that no gun control legislation would’ve prevented any particular shooting.
 
Following the El Paso and Dayton shootings, CNN admitted no gun control policy would’ve prevented them. Following the Las Vegas shooting (of which we still know pretty little about), Diane Feinstein also admitted no gun control legislation would’ve prevented that shooting, which was the single deadliest shooting in U.S. history, taking 58 people’s lives.
 
As far as this shooting standoff goes, the guy is legally incapable of purchasing weapons. And yet, he had them to fire at police officers serving a search warrant. No amount of gun control would’ve prevented this shooting; no amount of gun control would’ve made it illegaler for him to get weapons, and so, the media doesn’t talk about it because there is no point.
 
They follow the Rahm Emanuel dogma of “never let a tragedy go to waste”. If there is a reported shooting happening, talk about it immediately, facts be damned, and ignore it completely if it’s no longer opportunistic. A good example of this is when there were reports of a shooting at Oregon State University and Hillary Clinton’s VP pick, Tim Kaine, immediately started talking about gun control. It later turned out that the attack was a knife attack, not a shooting, and no one cared from that moment on.
 
So now that enough time has passed for us to know more details surrounding the situation, we know for certain that no gun control measure would’ve prevented this from happening at all, so the media is moving on to other things.
 
But that’s not the only reason they don’t particularly care about this. That’s a major reason, yes, but not the only one.
 
The other reason they don’t care is because of who the target was: police officers.
 
The media can’t shed crocodile tears when they’ve been demonizing police officers for years. They can cry crocodile tears for children in schools or minority victims in Walmart, but not for the people they’ve been virtually at war with: cops.
 
For the past few years, any incident involving a white police officer and a black suspect that resulted in the suspect’s unfortunate death has led the police to be called “racist” for it. Take the example of Michael Brown. The Left claims he was “murdered” but he himself tried to assault and steal a cop’s weapon, presumably to use it against the cops. This was where the “hands up, don’t shoot” hoax came to exist because the Left, to this day, claims he was unjustly shot at when he begged the cops not to shoot him, even though that’s not at all what happened.
 
That hoax, alongside others like it, have led to organizations like Black Lives Matter forming up to “fight back” against the cops, who are in the right in these kinds of situations for the most part (though there are some times when the cops unjustly fired at unarmed suspects). The BLM movement was heralded by the Left and the media as a great thing and further demonized the police, leading to the Dallas police shooting of 2016, where 5 police officers were killed “as payback”, according to Dallas Police Chief.
 
That shooting also was not very widely covered by the MSM because the target were cops and because the motive was revenge against cops.
 
After years of demonizing all police officers for the actions of a few (who for the most part were justified in the actions they partook), when shooters target police officers, the media barely cares about it, apart from trying to spread gun control propaganda within the first few hours of learning about it.
 
The combination of the story not benefiting the Left and the target being police officers leads to the media not really caring one wit about the incident. And the demonizing of police officers leads to CITIZENS OF A CITY TO TAUNT AND HARASS THE POLICE OFFICERS WHO JUST GOT DONE DEALING WITH THE STANDOFF!
 
After Philadelphia police got done taking care of the suspect and arresting him, Philadelphia citizens were seen taunting and harassing officers, some of whom almost got into a fight with some officers and some who threw unidentified objects at the officers.
 
Do you think the officers would’ve received such hatred coming from (granted, only some) people in that city if police weren’t so routinely attacked as being racist?
 
The same really could be said of ICE facilities and workers. Earlier in the week, ICE facilities were outright SHOT AT and no one in the media talked about it at all.
 
When the target of gun violence is someone the media hates, they have no intention on pretending to be shocked or disturbed by it. They LOVE IT when cops get attacked like this. They LOVE IT when domestic terror organizations like ANTIFA attack people they perceive to be “alt-right” aka people they disagree with. They LOVE IT when ICE officers, who are often compared to the Nazi SS, get attacked and targeted.
 
They LOVE IT when lunatic politicians like AOC call ICE detention facilities “concentration camps” and when those facilities are subsequently attacked by people who believe that crap.
 
As long as the target is someone the Left hates, they have no problem with gun violence. They only care in as far as they can try and push more gun control legislation that would take LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS’ WEAPONS FROM THEM.
 
Because to reiterate, there is not one piece of gun control legislation that would’ve prevented this situation in Philly. The guy is not legally allowed to possess or own a firearm, and yet, that’s what he had. Wanna know why? BECAUSE CRIMINALS DON’T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT WHAT THE LAW SAYS, THAT’S WHY THEY’RE CRIMINALS!
 
I sound like a broken record saying that over and over again, but the Left is adamant about not caring about that sort of logic. And it’s not like they are that moronic, they know that criminals don’t care about the law. It’s just that they don’t care about the criminals. They know they can’t do anything about illegal weapons, but they can try to take away yours. If they can get away with getting rid of the 2nd Amendment and take away your guns, they can throw away the entire rest of the Constitution and fully turn this country into the communist state that they want.
 
So long as the people are armed, there is a limit as to how far the Left can go to the left. Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Soviet Russia, Communist China, Socialist Venezuela, all had to disarm their citizens in order for them to be fully in control and without opposition. That’s the aim of the American Left and that’s why they always have knee-jerk reactions whenever a shooting happens, so that they can further that goal.
 
According to a recent Rassmussen poll, 64% of likely U.S. voters say we need stricter gun control laws, even though they also admit that gun control won’t stop all mass shootings like the ones in El Paso and Dayton. This is what fuels traitorous Republicans to push for more gun control legislation and foolishly support “red flag” laws (yes, I know Trump says he supports this too, which if he does, is a disappointment and I heavily disagree with him, but I have my doubts that he really does support it). The people are being told by the Left that gun control is a good thing when it’s at least part of the reason we are where we are today.
 
Places like Chicago, Detroit, L.A., etc. have heavy gun control legislations in place and yet are some of the deadliest places in the country.
 
But that sure as Hell doesn’t matter to the Left, who run those places. For as much as they talk about being worried about gun violence, the Left doesn’t talk about Chicago an awful lot. That’s because that mess is entirely theirs to own, and since they can’t broadcast that their gun control agenda is literally counterintuitive to the goals they claim they have, they ignore it like math homework.
 
The Left’s ultimate goal is to fundamentally change this country, as was admitted by Bernie Sanders very recently. In order to do that, they have to take away our guns so that we can’t fight back against them and revolt.
 
And while I know there will be moronic Leftists who will argue “how are AR-15s going to help you against tanks and helicopters?”, allow me to refer you to the Vietnam War, the War of 1812 and the Revolutionary War. All examples of a massive military being beaten by relatively small rebels (except Vietnam, where the Soviets largely helped the North Vietnamese in what really was a conflict between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. but localized). According to a Pew Research survey from 2017, 42% of people live in a household with a gun and 30% currently own a gun themselves.
 
Let’s go with the smaller number of 30% of people who own a gun. The U.S. currently has a population of 327.2 million people. That means there are at least 98 million gun owners in America (relatively speaking, I imagine there are more now since 2017 was some time ago).
 
That’s 98 million people vs. the roughly 2 million soldiers the U.S. currently has either in active duty or in reserve (and of course, I imagine many American soldiers would leave the military if the U.S. faced an anti-communist revolution, but there could be those on the Left who would wish to join the military in turn, so let’s assume the number is roughly the same anyway). Even if a small percentage of those gun owners were to be willing to fight against a tyrannical government (exercising the true purpose of the 2nd Amendment), that’s still an awful lot of patriots for the military to fight against. And before you talk about the military being more organized, which they would be, allow me to refer you to the Goths, who were a band of raiders and barbarians who sacked Rome in 410 and were a terrifying force in ancient Europe.
 
So the best way for the Left to truly turn this country into a socialist one is to, at the very least, disarm Americans, as they are trying to do with “assault weapons” bans that really seek to ban any semiautomatic weapon they can.
 
In order to achieve that, they have to insist to the American people that things like the Philly shooting could have been prevented with more gun control, even if it eventually turns out that nothing of the sort would’ve happened.
 
The Left and the media never let a tragedy go to waste. Any shooting at all makes them happy because it allows them to spread b.s. to further their communist goals. But when a story no longer benefits them, such as the one in Philly, they drop it entirely and pretend nothing substantial happened. “If cops got shot at, who cares, they were probably racist anyway”, is their line of logic.
 
Finally, to reiterate a point I made in my article discussing what Oprah Winfrey thought about the El Paso and Dayton shootings, until we return to God, these things will only continue happening. People will target others for any given reason until we return to God as a nation.
 
Galatians 3:9
“So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

It isn’t often that I talk about what is happening in China. For the most part, I either talk about some Chinese Millennials not having the desire to worship Xi Jinping as their communist god, or talk about how the ChiComms have no real chance in a trade war with us when our economy is roaring like it is. However, given that there currently are protests happening in Hong Kong, I feel the need to emphasize something that I find rather amusing.
 
During the protests, a number of Hong Kong protesters (though far from a large number) have chosen to fly the American flag in protest to the Chinese extradition bill directed at Hong Kong which would undermine their freedoms and the city-state’s democracy.
 
The American-flag-flying protesters issued relatively similar, though fairly different responses as to the reason behind flying the Stars and Stripes. According to the Asia Times, one person explained he was flying the American flag to “urge the U.S. Congress to pass the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act as soon as possible.” The mentioned bill would, if passed, impose sanctions “on individuals from the mainland and the city-state who violated human rights and require the U.S. government to annually review whether Hong Kong is democratic enough to merit lucrative U.S. trade privileges not afforded to the rest of China,” according to TownHall.com
 
Another protester insisted the reason he was flying the American flag was so that the Chinese government would be infuriated enough to employ military action against the protesters and get the U.S. to, in turn, take more concrete, likely military, action against China.
 
Truth be told, I have a bit of a problem with that second reason. I don’t think it’d be a good idea to risk the lives of other protesters, risking them getting either imprisoned or outright executed, just to advance your own goals. That is pretty much one step below Leninist revolution, ironically. What’s more, I am not sure the U.S. would actually do anything militarily if the Chinese were to do that. The Venezuelan government has had a Gestapo-like police force in place for two years now, where they arrest, humiliate and/or execute those whom the government deems to be in opposition to the Maduro regime and the U.S. isn’t doing anything militarily about it (not that I’d want us to at the moment). We are implementing more and more sanctions on Venezuela, but not much more than that. Trump doesn’t want an unnecessary war.
 
So to hope for American military action in response to Chinese military action against its own protesters is unwise. Even if the Chinese were to take action against the protesters in that manner, as long as the Chinese don’t attack us, the U.S. won’t see much of a reason to act through military force, especially considering that taking such force could lead to a larger conflict, maybe even a third World War. And considering Trump wants to get reelected, getting us into World War III would not help him out (and he would be blamed for starting it, even if it were not necessarily the case).
 
Now, funny enough, the fact that some protesters were flying the American flag has led to a spokesperson for China’s foreign minister to make the claim that America has something to do with the protests. Hua Chunying, spokesperson for China’s foreign minister, said: “I hope the U.S. will answer this question honestly and clearly: what role did the U.S. play in the recent incidents in Hong Kong and what is your purpose behind it?... We advise the U.S. to withdraw its dirty hands from Hong Kong as soon as possible.”
 
Can’t say I’m surprised that the brainwashed communists are asserting, without evidence, that the U.S. is in any way involved with the protests. However, reality is far different from what the ChiComms are suggesting. One protester insisted that he is “just expressing myself, I’m not paid by anyone. The Chinese government wants to attribute [protests] to foreigners, not to Hong Kong people.”
 
Not that that will matter much to the ChiComms, of course. Even if the U.S. were to send the ChiComms a message answering their ridiculous allegation, they would probably misinterpret something and claim the U.S. was admitting fault, considering this literally happened in early 2001 when the Chinese received a letter from the U.S. saying they offered their condolences to a Chinese pilot’s family when the pilot’s plane collided with a U.S. spy plane, leading to his death, but the U.S. did not outright apologize for the incident, saying it was not their fault. Still, Chinese translators misinterpreted the sentiments expressed to the pilot’s family as a form of apology to the ChiComms.
 
In any case, it should be noted that the U.S. flag is far from the only flag that the protesters have flown. In conjunction, the protesters have also flown a flag with a white orchid on a red background, signifying democracy and peace in the city-state, as well as Britain’s Union Jack and the flag that was used when Hong Kong belonged to Britain. One protester, according to the Japan Times, said: “I miss the British-Hong Kong government before 1997. The British helped us build a lot of things: separation of powers, our rule of law, our entire social system.”
 
Even the Brits themselves responded to the protests, saying: “We stand behind the people of Hong Kong in defense of the freedoms that we negotiated for them when we agreed to the handover in 1997 and we can remind everyone that we expect all countries to honor their international obligations,” said Jeremy Hunt, then-foreign secretary of the British government, when he spoke to Reuters early last month.
 
Still, I have no idea as to why the British government decided to let the ChiComms have Hong Kong, even under the agreements they reached. I understand that Hong Kong was to be left alone in its governance, for the most part, but considering the Chinese government is run by LITERAL COMMUNISTS, I’m surprised no one saw this extradition bill as a possibility in the future. Of course they would eventually try and attempt a communist, if legislative, takeover of Hong Kong! I don’t think there is much the British would be able to do against the Chinese in such a case, apart from announcing their disagreement to it!
 
But in any case, what’s done is done. One can only hope that the protesters succeed (if at all possible) in their bid to keep Hong Kong from being completely under communist control. Personally, I will stand with the protester who urged Congress to pass the aforementioned bill. If, indeed, it can do something to keep the ChiComms from taking over Hong Kong, I see no reason for the bill not to pass (then again, considering just who is running the House right now, I’m not entirely certain that it would pass there).
 
Liberty is always worth fighting for and I hope and pray for the best for these protesters. The fact they are waving the American flag is only more endearing to me.
 
Galatians 5:13
“For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Over the past couple of years, we have heard plenty of the supposedly anti-fascist group called Antifa using violence and intimidation to advance a political agenda. And despite that literally being the definition of terrorism, we have seen the mainstream media defend this domestic terrorist group time and time again, saying they are “angels” and lying about their repeated use of cement-laden milkshakes that they throw at people and cause harm to them.
 
However, as time has gone on, and particularly as one Antifa member tried to destroy and cause harm to ICE agents and vehicles a few weeks ago, Sens. Ted Cruz and Bill Cassidy have proposed a resolution that would label the group as an official domestic terrorist organization. Definitely the right thing to do, as I have explained in the past, but Campus Reform wanted to get the input of some college students, specifically those attending George Mason University, regarding the actual labeling of the radical Leftist group as being a domestic terrorist organization.
 
When Cabot Phillips and his associate, Gabriel Nadales, whom used to be an Antifa member himself, explained the definition of terrorism to the students, all of them said they thought Antifa is a terrorist organization.
 
One student, when asked if Antifa was a terrorist organization under the aforementioned definition, said: “I think if they’re starting violence and things… at Trump’s rallies then I think so because people get hurt… people get killed. Those rallies can get very dangerous, so if people are going there with the purpose to incite violence, I think that’s definitely a terrorist organization.”
 
This is a sentiment that all the students shared: if the purpose of Antifa’s presence in any particular place is to intimidate or incite violence, or actually commit violent acts, then they definitely fall under the category of terrorist organization.
 
Obviously, this isn’t to say that all of these students are conservatives or Trump supporters by any means. One of them specifically mentioned how she doesn’t support Trump but that violence wasn’t the answer here, and another mentioned how Antifa reflects poorly on Leftists like himself. However, what this shows me is their ability to reason and understand when a group is doing the wrong thing, even if they politically agree with said group.
 
If the situations were reversed and there was a right-wing group that would intimidate people and incite violence or commit violent acts, there’s no doubt in my mind that virtually every common-sense conservative would disavow such a group. So I would certainly hope that young liberals such as some of the ones featured in the Campus Reform video (it’s unclear the political leanings of some others, but one made an interesting observation that I will cover later) would have the rational capacity to understand how Antifa is a domestic terrorist organization under the definition of terrorism.
 
We can disagree all day long about whether or not they are actually the ones who are fascist (they are, but the Left has brainwashed almost everyone into believing fascism is a right-wing ideology, when anything that relates to big government stems strictly from the Left), but there should really be no disagreement about Antifa being terrorists. The only ones who would disagree are the Antifa members themselves who will explode and try and intimidate or commit a violent act on someone who disagrees with them at any capacity and perhaps the MSM and the elected Left, who see Antifa as their military arm like the KKK once was.
 
But as far as these college students go, they demonstrate more common sense than I tend to see in the media and in Washington D.C., for the most part.
 
Now, one of them initially disagreed with the notion that they are a domestic terrorist organization, but upon having explained to him what the definition of terrorism was, he couldn’t help but to ultimately agree that if that is what Antifa is doing (which it is, very much so), then they are definitely a terrorist organization.
 
This is important to note because for just about every other student, Phillips or Nadales started their dialogue by defining what terrorism was, but not with this particular student. So if this student, having originally been ignorant about the definition of terrorism, didn’t think Antifa ought to be considered a domestic terrorist organization, then I just have to wonder what these other students, or even other people in general, would say about it being equally ignorant about the definition. Without the definition of terrorism, would people say that Antifa ought to be considered a terrorist organization?
 
But this only further expresses the need to educate the masses. When people don’t have correct information in front of them, they will take what deceitful people say as the truth and as fact. Man-made climate change is a huge example of this, despite all the evidence showing us that climate change has been a thing ever since the planet was created and there is nothing we are doing that affects it positively or negatively, people are convinced we are killing our planet. Granted, part of this is an emotional attachment to the idea of “saving the planet” and a fearful response to the idea that we might be responsible for the death of our planet and our children will have to live with the consequences, but when an objective and logical person gets the facts on this, they will tend to understand how much of a farce man-made climate change is.
 
But getting back to the students, I was pleasantly surprised to see them agree that, given the definition of terrorism, Antifa ought to be considered a domestic terrorist organization. Of course, there will be those who, despite knowing the definition, will contend that they shouldn’t be considered as such because that would essentially be putting them on a similar level to ISIS and al-Qaeda, but all I have to say to that is: “Do we really want to wait until they commit massive terrorist attacks with bombs and guns – wait until they start killing people – to call them terrorists? One of them literally tried to assault an ICE facility with a gun and Molotov cocktails, so it’s not like things are being de-escalated here.”
 
Most logical people will understand what ought to be considered a terrorist organization, and considering what Antifa has been doing fits the definition to a tee, I perhaps shouldn’t be so surprised to see these college students agreeing as to what their label ought to be.
 
But in any case, I promised I would get to a particular observation, and that’s what I will do now.
 
Towards the end of the video, the first student that had been featured went on to make the following remark: “Fascism. I mean, it’s not like we had a revolution. President Obama was President, we had an election, and now we have a new President. The government didn’t change. The whole concept of fascism, that’s ridiculous… it’s like comparing Trump to Hitler. It’s impolite, rude. It’s not the right words.”
 
This is rather interesting to me because it poses a direct challenge to what Antifa *claims* to stand for. Antifa insist that Trump is basically Hitler, that he is a fascist and every single person who disagrees with them in any way is also a fascist. But the student is right, it is ridiculous. Trump was elected President of the United States fair and square. Despite the two and a half years of investigations and allegations about Trump-Russia collusion, absolutely nothing turned up to even insinuate that that’s what happened. The American people elected Donald Trump. As he said, this wasn’t a revolution, at least in terms of an armed coup against the Obama administration. It was the exchanging of power from one Party to another, as it has happened TIME AND TIME AGAIN IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY!
 
The way Antifa acts, it’s as though Trump came into power illegitimately and is preparing to exterminate millions of minorities, when nothing could be further from the truth. Antifa cries out that Trump is authoritarian and dictatorial, yet support candidates who are far-Left, to the point where they either are openly socialistic or communistic. No government on Earth has ever been more authoritarian than a government ruled by communism, because communism means that the government owns the means of production. In other words, the government owns just about everything and there is no private ownership of anything.
 
Antifa’s hypocrisy is, of course, their most tolerable aspect, considering how violent and extremist they are. There are plenty of hypocrites. The Left and much of the Republican Party are filled with them. Hypocrites, I can tolerate. Dislike heavily, but tolerate. People who would openly commit acts of terror against other people, for whatever cause, is something none of us should tolerate. And we shouldn’t wait until they start killing people to designate them as a domestic terrorist group, particularly considering they perfectly fit the definition of the word “terrorism”.
 
Major props go to Sens. Ted Cruz and Bill Cassidy for standing up to such hateful terrorists. Here’s hoping their resolution succeeds.
 
Romans 2:9-11
“There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

In a world where nothing is sacred and a very privileged group of people search high and low for things that will offend them, one Washington Post columnist named Dan Hassler-Forest will find one of Disney’s beloved classics, “The Lion King”, to be nothing more than fascistic propaganda meant to brainwash your children into believing people are different and there are people who are better than you.
 
Seriously, does the Left ever take a break in looking for things to be offended by? There just about isn’t anything in this world that they don’t find some sort of offense to. Be it the flag, people’s names, people’s actions, or even a Disney movie from 1994 about THE ANIMAL KINGDOM.
 
Hassler-Forest likely has seen that Disney, who are likely running out of original ideas, is soon going to release a live-action remake of the beloved classic “The Lion King”, starring Donald Glover and Beyonce as Simba and Nala respectively and finds the entire concept of a “lion king” to be akin to fascistic rule.
 
The title of his piece is: “’The Lion King’ is a fascistic story. No remake can change that.” So right off the bat this guy sounds super triggered (offended/annoyed, for the non-Millennials out there). His subhead reads: “No matter how you look at it, this is a film that introduces us to a society where the weak have learned to worship at the feet of the strong.”
 
And the actual body of the article isn’t much better. He writes: “… But as nostalgic as ‘Circle of Life’ may make us feel, this bombastic scene is also a painful reminder of the film’s ideological agenda: It introduces us to a society where the weak have learned to worship at the feet of the strong.”
 
“As we watch the herbivores congregate to bow down before their newborn ruler, ‘The Lion King’ offers us a seductive worldview in which absolute power goes unquestioned, and where the weak and the vulnerable are fundamentally inferior. In other words: ‘The Lion King’ offers us fascist ideology writ large, and there seems to be no way out for the forthcoming remake.”
 
Gee, I wonder why a movie about the animal kingdom depicts a “society” where the strong rule and the weak die. Hmmm.
 
Later down the article, Hassler-Forest attacks Disney as being “obsessed” with patriarchal monarchies and compares Pride Rock to Trump Tower, what he views as a symbol of power that looks down on “society’s weaker groups”.
 
But beyond the “class warfare” that he believes is seen throughout the movie, the out-of-his-mind Leftist also has to bring in racism into the mix, because we cannot go a single day without being reminded with a hammer that racism exists and white people are bad (and virtually no one on the Left will recognize the irony of such a statement).
 
“With the lions standing in for the ruling class and the ‘good’ herbivores embodying society’s decent, law-abiding citizens, the hyenas transparently represent the black, brown, and disabled bodies that are forcefully excluded from this fascist society. Noticeably marked by their ethnically coded ‘street’ accents, the hyenas blatantly symbolize racist and anti-Semitic stereotypes of ‘verminous’ groups that form an inherent threat to society.”
 
Yes, the hyenas who are very clearly mentally unstable and side with the only actual representation of a fascist ruler in the entire movie, Scar, are the victims in all of this.
 
I wonder what this guy thinks of mental asylums, then. Does that represent a fascistic rule in any country that has them (aka all of them)?
 
But beyond that, I wonder what he would think of, oh, I don’t know, THE ACTUAL ANIMAL KINGDOM WHERE THE STRONG SURVIVE AND THE WEAK DIE!
 
The biggest irony, in my opinion, regarding this garbage and unnecessary hit-piece on the movie is that they try and paint Mufasa, an honestly benevolent ruler who seeks balance and equality in his kingdom and who obviously cares about his subjects, as the bad guy just because he is a ruler in the first place.
 
Does he not know that in reality, lions hunt every single day? And that those herbivores are literally a lion’s meal every day? Does he not know that lions are carnivores, as in they will eat meat? And it’s not like they can just go to their local Chick-fil-a. They have to hunt those other animals themselves, so to say Mufasa is in any way a bad guy is asinine, to say the least.
 
Look, I’m not a big fan of Disney, certainly not anymore. Considering their often Left-wing tendencies and their attempt to follow the woke crowd by putting LGBT characters in their recent film, I’m not going to be their biggest defender. But when it comes to utterly idiotic arguments like the ones being made by this MSM writer, what else can I do?
 
This just goes to show how out of touch with reality these people are. Even beyond trying to defend the movie, I’m trying to defend REALITY. Because in reality, the lions are far more fierce and ruthless than Mufasa and Simba and every other lion in the pride.
 
In reality, all the herbivores that “worship” at the feet of the Lion King, be it Mufasa, Simba or Scar, are nothing more than lions’ lunch. Why? Because that’s how NATURE works. For a group of people that tend to believe in the theory of evolution over creation, they often have a problem with the concept of natural selection, wherein superior species thrive over inferior ones.
 
Lions are predators and zebras (and other animals lions eat) are prey. That indicates natural superiority. Lions have sharp teeth and nails, a powerful bite, and great speed and natural camo to hunt and kill their prey. As a result, they are physically superior to, say, zebras, who are herbivores and have no actual defense mechanism against predators apart from speed and numbers.
 
Watch any nature documentary of a lion hunting something and what you will notice each and every time is the prey being in massive numbers to ensure their own safety and will always run away from their predator. That’s not fascism; it’s nature.
 
But one big final point I wish to make is just how awful such a constant use of the word “fascist” is for the actual meaning of the word. People like Hassler-Forest have no actual idea as to what that word means if they think THE LION KING is about fascism.
 
Fascism is virtually no different from socialism and communism. Benito Mussolini simply said that fascism was a more “perfect” or “advanced” form of communism (though I don’t see how it’s in any way different, let alone more “advanced”). Just because there is a hierarchy that doesn’t automatically mean there is fascism at play.
 
There is a hierarchy in just about everything. Companies are hierarchical. Churches are hierarchical. Sports teams are hierarchical. Even friend groups are usually hierarchical, with at least one clear leader. Order is not the same thing as fascism.
 
And the constant butchering of the word to define anything someone doesn’t like utterly takes away any meaning of the word to the point it becomes passé. When someone says that something that isn’t fascistic is fascistic, I can’t help but roll my eyes at the sheer stupidity of such an argument.
 
But the saddest part may come in the actual individual. The Lion King’s live-action remake will come out some time in late July. It’s virtually no different from the original which, as I’ve said before, is a beloved classic. For someone to get themselves to write something so stupid and negative about a CHILDREN’S MOVIE THAT DEPICTS THE ANIMAL KINGDOM TO CERTAIN EXTENTS is indicative of an individual who really cannot find any sort of pleasure in life.
 
People like him, those who seek for the negative things of everything, and even go so far as to make stuff up and demonstrate outrage (be it fake or real), are people who are devoid of joy, and that’s truly sad.
 
Hassler-Forest isn’t nuanced for “pointing out fascistic tendencies” in a children’s movie that came out 25 year ago. He is sad for going to such lengths as to not find joy in a beloved children’s movie and seek to ruin the fun for everyone else by smearing it as some sort of fascistic propaganda.
 
And while I often say that everyone needs Jesus, it’s people like him that need Him a good deal. Not being able to enjoy a children’s movie and then writing an entire article on a major “news” site giving his opinion about how it’s some sort of fascistic dream so that other people might think negatively of the movie as he does is outright depressing, bordering on sociopathic.
 
I would hate to live my life devoid of joy and seeking to ruin the fun for others just because I myself am incapable of finding joy. And again, it’s people like him that really need the Lord.
 
There really is absolutely no reason to smear a CHILDREN’S MOVIE in this way, especially if the movie doesn’t deserve it. What “The Lion King” represents is a sort of anthropomorphized society in the animal kingdom where there is a lion monarch who rules his kingdom as any human would. A story of a grown lion king teaching his new son, the prince who will be king one day, how to rule his kingdom once he comes of age and becomes the head of the pride. A story where said prince witnesses his father’s demise and an evil (and actually fascistic) ruler who couldn’t care less about himself literally deprives that kingdom of life in his short rule until he is toppled by a now-grown prince, who had escaped the kingdom fearing for his own life.
 
Apart from the time that Scar, the literal bad guy of the story, rules the kingdom, you’d be hard-pressed to find any semblance of actual fascism in the story. Because there really is none, but that certainly didn’t keep this guy from attempting to find some sort of connection to it and display to the world just how much he doesn’t like fascism (though I’m willing to bet he describes himself as socialist and will not understand that there’s no difference between the two).
 
To make a long article short: no, “The Lion King” is not fascistic propaganda. It’s just a monarchy displayed using animals. No need to take the joy out of everything, woke Leftists.
 
Proverbs 1:7
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Over the weekend, the ever-so tolerant city of Portland, Oregon was marred by riots from angsty Antifa terrorists pretending to fight the “far-right” while employing similar tactics used by Nazi Brown Shirts in 1930s Germany.
 
In the riots, a number of people were assaulted by members of the hateful group, including journalist Andy Ngo (who is gay, but that doesn’t matter to the Left if he is a conservative) and other men who all had to go to the ER.
 
Ngo had to be treated for a brain hemorrhage and the other men (who were taking part of a Him Too demonstration, a demonstration to support men who are victims of sexual assault and falsely accused of sexual assault) were also left bleeding.
 
According to Portland Police, Ngo was beaten and milkshake laced with quick-dry cement was thrown at him. The other men were beaten with a crowbar, nun-chucks and other things apart from being outright punched.
 
Meanwhile, not one Democrat candidate has come out to condemn the violence of Antifa (likely because they approve of it) and hardly any MSM source has condemned it, with CNN hardly covering it at all.
 
This is far from the first time Antifa has gotten violent against anyone they perceived to be “Alt-Right” aka anyone they even somewhat disagree with. According to Breitbart News, Antifa has beaten 15 other journalists apart from Ngo in the past. This, of course, doesn’t include the people they generally disagreed with who are not journalists whom they chose to assault (just a few months ago, they beat up an elderly man after dragging him out of his vehicle).
 
And throughout all of it, despite their outright terroristic actions, the media stays quiet at best and outright PRAISES them at worst, with comments like “what they are doing is right” or “they are angels” or “they are just like the soldiers at Normandy” often being said by members of the fake news media.
 
These people are NOT doing what is right, are DEMONS and definitely are like the soldiers at Normandy – the Nazi soldiers, that is.
 
These people are downright terrorists. Now, I know what some disturbed individual might say: “how can you say they are terrorists? They haven’t killed anyone yet!” They were beating people up with weapons, hitting them upside the head and causing severe damage. If they haven’t killed anyone yet, it hasn’t come from lack of trying.
 
Besides, is that really the threshold necessary to designate a group as terrorists? We have to wait until someone loses their life over this before we can say these people are terrorists?
 
Think about what they are doing: gathering in massive groups, destroying property and generally terrorizing the populace, making threats and often coming through on those threats of violence. They may not be terrorists like ISIS, but they are terrorists like the KKK, who terrorized black people after slavery was abolished.
 
It’s also rather ironic to me that Antifa is also predominantly white, like the KKK before them. Antifa is the Left’s new military arm.
 
If there ever is to be another civil war in America, it’ll be because of these masked cowards pretending to fight what they actually are. Their actions, as I have said multiple times, are the same ones taken by actual fascists in the 20th century. These people are as much anti-fascist as Obama was a Republican. That is to say – not at all.
 
Being anti-fascist means being against big government. These people LOVE big government, particularly when it has the power to shut down those who oppose it. The only reason they say they are against fascism is because the education system has, for half a century, indoctrinated people into believing fascism was big government on the Right. Big government is very strictly a Left-wing pursuit. There is no real difference between fascism, socialism and communism. I would use the analogy of them being different sides of the same coin, but coins are only two-sided, so that doesn’t quite work as well, but the point remains: they are all basically the same.
 
One thing that has always puzzled me is how people can claim communism or socialism is in any way different or better than Nazism was. Nazis WERE SOCIALISTS! Not that you would know this from learning in school.
 
But something people would try and say to argue my point about communism, socialism and fascism being the same is that the Soviets fought the Nazis in World War II, so they obviously have to be different. Not true.
 
That conflict wasn’t a conflict of ideology but of interest. The Soviets were largely fine with the Nazis, even helping them get rid of Jews in Soviet territory, and only turned on each other once Hitler made the moronic decision of invading Russia. The two sides believed in the same, government-dominant ideologies but wanted their own countries to dominate the world. That is where the conflict lied.
 
So those who are supportive of big government, particularly to such extents, find themselves with more in common with Stalin and Hitler than they do with anyone else. This very much includes those who are delusional enough to consider their fascist actions to be in any way its antithesis.
 
And considering the way things are going right now, it’s only bound to get worse unless something gets done about this. Do we really have to wait until these people actually kill someone before designating them what we KNOW they are? Or are we just going to wait until an actual civil war begins? Are we going to wait until they’ve pushed people around long enough to actually being some sort of war?
 
These people may have the right to believe what they believe, but they most certainly do NOT have the right to partake in the actions that they are. And it sickens me that the mainstream media will hardly cover it, barely condemn it and sometimes even CHEER them on as they destroy people’s lives. It sickens me, though not necessarily surprises me, that not a single Democrat candidate looked at what happened in Portland (and it often happens in that God-forsaken city that I am definitely glad I left years ago) and not think of what happened as an absolutely reprehensible act.
 
Again, I do not see things getting better with these people. There may be a few people here and there who look at what they are doing, reflect on it, and decide to leave. That’s certainly possible, but this problem will not go away on its own. They are adamant about destroying an enemy that does not really exist. With their enemy so poorly defined as “Alt-Right”, literally anyone can be their enemy. Anyone who disagrees with them becomes their enemy and find that a justifiable enough reason to attack them. This includes even Democrats who disagree with them. And they won’t stop until their enemy is eliminated or they are.
 
This is, among many other reasons, why Antifa must be designated a domestic terrorist group and treated as such. They are not “fine Americans” and “angels” who are “fighting for good”. They are what Hitler and Stalin would’ve loved to see in the United States: fascist revolutionaries who will only escalate things as time goes on.
 
Isaiah 5:20
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

For some time, I’ve been one to point out the dangers of globalism essentially being a more Trotsky-like version of communism, where the point is not to attach oneself to an individual nation-state (like Stalin did), but rather, to allow for the whole world to be inundated in communism under global leaders.
 
However, in recent time, we’ve seen a noticeable shift on the global scale regarding this. For example, look at the most recent E.U. elections, where despite the fact pro-EU parties reportedly maintained two-thirds of parliament seats, nationalist and other “euroskeptic” parties solidified their strength and made gains, indicating future challenges to the E.U.
 
In Italy, Interior Minister Matteo Salvini’s party, Lega Nord Party, won 28 seats, with Salvini himself celebrating this victory by saying: “A new Europe is born… As far as I’m concerned, if the League wins nothing changes in Italy, everything will change in Europe, starting from tomorrow.”
 
In the U.K., Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party (which was only 6 weeks old at the time of the election) had a nice victory, “securing a majority with 31.7% and 29 seats,” according to The Daily Wire.
 
In an interview with Good Morning Britain, Farage said that if the U.K. doesn’t leave the EU by October 31st, the Brexit Party would “go on to a general election and stun everybody there too.” He repeated his warning on Twitter by tweeting: “Never before in British politics has a party just 6 weeks old won a national election. If Britain does not leave the EU on October 31, these results will be repeated at a general election. History has been made. This is just the beginning.”
 
In France, Marine le Pen’s party slightly outperformed Macron’s party, winning 22 seats to Macron’s 21.
 
In Germany, Angela Merkel’s party had to hold “crisis talks” following the results of the election, where they were given their worst score in European election history thanks to the environmental party, the Greens.
 
Voter turnout also rose from the 2014 elections from 43% to 51%.
 
And this is just in Europe. Let’s not forget that just weeks before, Australia’s conservative Prime Minister Scott Morrison won a “surprise” re-election after national polls predicted he would lose (where have we heard that one before?). In Brazil some months ago, the Donald Trump of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, also won his election.
 
And of course, we can’t forget about the big one that has likely propelled, if not led, this sort of nationalist movement to occur throughout the world: Donald Trump being elected President of the United States in 2016.
 
There is a global nationalist movement occurring and it’s posing a massive challenge to the globalists.
 
Now, allow me to explain just why I say this is a new Cold War. As you know, the Cold War was a war of words and policy between the United States and the Soviet Union. It was capitalism vs. communism, with the two leading world super powers at each other’s throat under the threat of nuclear annihilation if either nation blinked.
 
While I wouldn’t say we are under quite such a threat here, the concept of a Cold War is simply in the fact that there is conflict between two (or more) entities where one could escalate things and get them hot, but the preference would be to fight each other through other means, because one party heating up the war would lead to certain mutually-assured destruction.
 
This new Cold War I am talking about isn’t between two countries. It’s not between America and Russia, or America and China, or America and North Korea, or America and Iran (man, there are a lot of countries that want us gone). Matter of fact, this hold America on both sides of the Cold War… as well as every other country in the world.
 
This Cold War is between Globalism and Nationalism, as I mentioned in the title. No, there is no underlying threat of total nuclear devastation, but it is still a struggle between two entities fighting for control of the populace.
 
You can call this battle between Globalism and Nationalism as more of a battle between communist-like elites who believe they know better than everyone else and believe should be in charge of how other people live, and the rest of us who wish to maintain our freedoms and autonomy at the national level.
 
Globalists, as the name suggests and as I have explained before, do not attach themselves to any one nation. They see nations as a way to divide people and would wish nothing more than to do away with them, forcing people to live how they want them to live, cultural differences, religious differences and overall differences that cannot be forcibly eliminated be damned. They want as much control and power as possible and nations limit them in their power.
 
So, entities like the European Union exist, where policy is made for the countries by people who do not live there. Don’t want migrants to be shipped to your country en masse? Too bad, you don’t get to make that decision. You want to leave the Union? Well, your leaders don’t and we don’t, so tough.
 
So the battle isn’t between two countries, but between two types of people: the stuck-up elites and the rest of us.
 
Donald Trump’s campaign (and subsequent administration) was/is about Making America Great Again, putting America First and overall prioritizing American interests. That was strictly a nationalist message, a message that sent globalists everywhere (and I do mean everywhere considering British agents tried to undermine a U.S. election) into a frenzy, feeling the direct challenge to their power.
 
Despite their best efforts, the U.S., even under 8 years of Obama, was still the most powerful and influential country in the world and such a radical change in Presidents – from one who would bend over backwards for their amusement to one who would take charge – would heavily disrupt their status quo.
 
So the globalists in America – the American Left – launched effort after effort to destroy Trump and get him impeached, failing time after time. Globalists everywhere else deeply hated Trump. Rush Limbaugh largely chucks this deep hatred for Trump as him simply being so different from them in his mannerisms, his style and in the ideological differences between them. It goes farther than that. Trump presents a direct challenge to the globalists.
 
“America First” and “MAGA” are attacked precisely because they do as advertised: put America first and make it great again. Making America great again means making it powerful again. Making it powerful again means making it more independent again; more free again.
 
However, this has led (perhaps unexpectedly for some, but perhaps not so for others) to other countries’ people wanting their own governments to prioritize them. Such is the case for Brazil, Australia, and even the people of Great Britain during Brexit (which, yes, happened before the 2016 election, but that only tells you of how grand the desire for liberty against globalism is, and that is the reason I said Trump’s election likely propelled, if not necessarily led, the nationalist movement).

Throughout the world, and with more and more mounting evidence, we are seeing globalism being pushed back and nationalism taking hold. The EU elections were simply the most recent massive win and a great indicator of this.
 
This is a struggle between those who wish to be able to rule themselves (or at least their countries to be able to rule themselves and prioritize the citizens of the countries and not of another’s) and those who wish to be able to rule all people.
 
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the communists didn’t simply disappear. They regathered and planned for their rise once again. They invaded other countries not with guns but with papers and spread their communist ideals. And in time, communism took on a new name: globalism. Same basic concepts, same ideas, same end, but different means to those ends.
 
And now, they are facing a new challenge. In essence, they view Trump as this generation’s Reagan. And there exists the possibility of people like Bolsonaro, or le Pen, or Farage as being this generation’s Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II. It was those three who largely helped destroy the Soviet Union. Today’s nationalist leaders could and likely will challenge the globalists.
 
At the risk of kind of sounding like AOC, I would have to say that this is our generation’s Cold War. A war not of guns and blood, but of ideology and words. Thankfully, there is no threat of nuclear annihilation (apart from some chicken nugget countries that like to puff up their chests and pretend they are big boys *ahem* North Korea *ahem* Iran *ahem*), but the struggle still exists.
 
It’s the elites vs. the rest of us and we are fighting back.
 
Galatians 5:1
“For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

Campus Reform has come up with a lot of great videos in the past, but I think this might be one of their all-time best.
 
Campus Reform’s Cabot Phillips went to Florida International University to ask various students whether they preferred socialism or capitalism. To no one’s shock, many of them said they preferred socialism.
 
After a brief overview of what socialism is: a system where the rich are forced to give much of their money to people who are not as rich, Cabot posited the idea of utilizing a socialist system for grades.
 
He asked the students who preferred socialism if they wanted a similar system in their schools and their grades, where those who had high GPAs were forced to give a little bit of their grades to those who had worse GPAs.
 
And this is where 1) these kids were exposed as hypocrites and 2) some of these kids were actually exposed to be a little bit capitalistic, or at least meritocratic in their way of thinking.
 
“I’m all for helping, but I wouldn’t give some of my points… I’ve lost a lot of sleep so I don’t know if that would be fair,” answered one student. Another said: “I, like, study all day for my grades.”
 
Interestingly enough, one acknowledged that it’d be “kind of hypocritical for me to say no.”
 
When many said they would not be willing to sacrifice their GPAs for someone else, Cabot asked what the difference was between not being willing to sacrifice grades and not being willing to sacrifice wealth to spread it around to those who do not have as much.
 
Funny enough, one of them said: “You study for your grades and grades also reflect how much time you’ve spent studying.”
 
Yeah, that’s not really a good answer at all. In fact, that’s not a difference between working for your grades and working for your money. Students work hard to earn good grades. When they don’t work hard, their grades tend to suffer. The same principle applies to earning money.
 
One of the students mentioned that the difference was that rich people often inherit their wealth or use the stock market to get wealthy, not work for it, and that may be true in some cases, but not for the most part.
 
People like Donald Trump, who did get a $1 million head start from his father, had to work hard to turn that million into a billion. People like Howard Schultz had to start from the bottom. People like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs built their companies in their parents’ garage. People like Warren Buffet, who yes is mostly an investor, had to work hard to ensure the companies he invested in were working optimally as chairman of the board of directors.
 
To my mind, the only wealthy people that I can think of that inherited their wealth but did not outright work to get it are London Tipton from Disney’s “Suite Life of Zack and Cody” and Yusuf Amir from Rockstar Games’ “Grand Theft Auto”. And both are works of fiction.
 
That’s not to say people don’t inherit wealth. The Rockefellers are wealthy largely because of the work of their ancestors, but it also takes work to maintain and grow that wealth.
 
In any case, all of the interviewed students said that they believe they had worked hard to earn their grades and did not think it would be fair for the college or any entity to take away some of their grades to give to someone else, even someone who might not work hard for their grades.
 
Which is important to note considering the fact that AOC’s Green New Deal included the phrase “unwilling to work”. No one wants to give something to someone that is able but unwilling to work for that very thing.
 
One student actually said something really smart as well: “Then there’d be no point to having a GPA because then if everyone has the same then there’s not a metric… is it fair for everyone to have the same outcome or the same opportunity? For me, having the same opportunity is what is fair, not the same outcome. Because if I work harder than you and I get a better result then it is only fair that I get a better grade or get a better opportunity than you.”
 
I don’t know if the kid knows this, but that is an almost perfect explanation as to what CAPITALISM is.
 
I wholeheartedly agree with the guy’s argument here. There’d be no point in having a GPA if everyone is forced to have the same grade or have equal grades. One student cannot be allowed to have a higher GPA than another so there’s no point to having a GPA in the first place. By the same token, if people are forced to share their money, there’s no point to having a currency in the first place, and certainly no point in working for your money.
 
If someone else is going to give some of their money to you and they are obligated by law to do so, there’s no point in you working or the other person working for their money, if they are just going to be forced to give it to someone else.
 
And as far as opportunity goes, there’s a good reason America is called “The Land of Opportunity”. While that title has not been used an awful lot as of late, it still remains true, at least in theory. Capitalism gives everyone a fair shot, a fair opportunity to earn their wealth. A particular outcome is never guaranteed, just the opportunity to strive for a particular outcome.
 
There’s no more unfair and unequal form of an economic system than socialism. It takes from the rich, who largely earned their money, to give to those who have not earned that money or worked far less to earn money.
 
If you work hard for your money, you should be able to keep it. That’s the basic principle of capitalism. That’s meritocracy. That’s why I mentioned that this video exposes students’ more capitalistic tendencies, even if they say they prefer socialism.
 
The only reason they say they prefer socialism is because they don’t know what it truly is. They think it’s a system where the government forces the rich to pay for everything and everything is awesome because the rich can afford everything. Only half of that is what socialism actually does. But it doesn’t stop at just the rich. While I don’t have much time to go into too much detail about this, I will simply say that socialism is a system that destroys wealth and as a result, the threshold for what is considered rich gets lowered to the point where upper-middle class are considered rich. And then, middle class. And then lower-middle class. And pretty soon, you have an ever-growing government that requires other people’s money, but the well runs dry. After that, all you have left is a self-imploding government that has long ceased to be equal or fair.

How do I know this? Venezuela.
 
These kids prefer socialism over capitalism because they buy into the idea that capitalism is horrible, even though they live under such a system that lets them have all the amenities they take for granted, and that socialism is the great equalizer.
 
The problem is that while it does make everyone equal, it makes them equally miserable. There is no socialist utopia. It has failed every time it has been tried. And just because there are countries that are still afloat that employ socialism right now doesn’t make it a good system. Soviet Russia was pretty powerful and rich under communism until its own system collapsed because it ate itself away.
 
And while some might try and explain that the Soviet Union only collapsed because the U.S. forced it into a space race, I ask: why didn’t the U.S. collapse as well, then? If the only reason as to why the Soviet Union collapsed is the fact that the two countries were trying to outspend each other then why didn’t the U.S. also collapse? Because the capitalist system of economics CREATES wealth, whereas communism/socialism destroys it.
 
What allowed the Soviet Union to last as long as it did is the fact that they had the population to suck the money out of and an emigration system that made it pretty much an impossibility for people to leave. Why do you think we so often heard stories of people trying or successfully defecting from the Soviet Union or any other communist nation? They aren’t allowed to leave, so they have to escape.
 
And you want to know something funny? It is outright impossible to have full-on communism/socialism. Lenin tried that and it almost completely sank the new Soviet Union, so he had to allow for some privatization, such as private farming, in order to keep the Soviet Union afloat.
 
In other words, SOME capitalism is necessary in order for even a communist nation to survive. China is another example of this.
 
That’s because socialism and communism are so self-destructive, it is outright impossible to implement a completely communist system without risking almost immediate implosion.
 
But returning to these kids, once again I have to make the argument that what is necessary is to educate these kids because even they have a little bit of a capitalist in them. They just don’t know it. And by educate, I don’t mean sending them to college. These are COLLEGE kids and are clearly being indoctrinated, since that’s all college does in this day and age.
 
One can only hope that these kids reflect on this scenario of socialism with GPAs and realize that it’s at least equally as unfair (no pun intended) if not more unfair when applied to money.
 
Proverbs 1:5
“Let the wise hear and increase in learning, and the one who understands obtain guidance.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.