Ditch Abortion-Funding Disney Parks For Kentucky Kingdom Vacation

The Walt Disney Company (1.67) is known for their branded amusement parks and resorts (1.83), which typically draw millions of families each year. Unfortunately, they’re also known for being a top supporter of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the United States – literally, the largest killer of family members. OpenSecrets.org listed Disney as Planned Parenthood’s 17th largest donor in 2020, which means that despite getting hit hard with the pandemic, Disney still chose to financially support the murder of unborn babies.

Through donating to Planned Parenthood, Disney tries to show that they stand with women’s “reproductive health”, yet leave out the disturbing evidence about what goes on behind the scenes at Planned Parenthood facilities: promoting contraceptives with negative health effects, committing medical fraud, and even covering up underage rape. Disney is also shortsightedly supporting an organization that reduces its potential for new customers, staff, and leadership – slowing its growth, reducing its net profit, and possibly reducing the quality of its large team.

Disney will probably not stop their donations to Planned Parenthood anytime soon, so cut the summer trip to Disney World and spend your money at Kentucky Kingdom, which we rate a neutral 3.00 out of 5.00. They have lots of thrilling coasters, a waterpark, and a whole section designed specifically for kids. An added bonus: the tickets are much cheaper than Disney’s, and because Kentucky Kingdom doesn’t market itself nationally, the parks are likely not as crowded.

Make your 2ndVote heard. Ditch the Disney destination and tell them you won’t be back until they stop donating to companies that hurt women and children. Then, spend your vacation dollars at Kentucky Kingdom, where your family can enjoy a vacation that goes easy on both your conscience and your pocketbook.

EDITORS NOTE: This 2ndVote column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: No Workee No Eatee

“In a country where the state is the sole employer, this policy [referring to Stalin’s policy] means a slow death by starvation [for oppositionists]. The old principle: who does not work shall not eat, has been replaced with a new one: who does not obey shall not eat.” – Leon Trotsky


Welfare scammers are killing the nation. The biblical solution is as brilliant as it is simple.

©Wild Bill for America. All rights reserved.

Sane people remind Biden of 9/11 after he calls Capitol storming ‘worst attack on our democracy since Civil War’

Biden is rightly being ridiculed for this ridiculous statement, but make no mistake: beyond the silliness and hysteria is an insidious agenda. Biden’s handlers mean to stigmatize, demonize and silence all dissent from their far-left agenda. Wildly exaggerating what happened on January 6, and the concomitant “white supremacist agenda,” is in service of that agenda.

‘What about 9/11?’ Twitter ridicules Joe Biden after he calls Capitol storming the ‘worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War’ in first address to Congress

by Katelyn Caralle, Daily Mail, April 29, 2021:

Joe Biden said during his first address to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday evening that the Capitol storming on January 6 was the ‘worst attack’ on democracy since the Civil War.

The claim immediately led to major backlash, especially from those on right-wing Twitter, who pointed to a slew of other tragedies in America between the 1860s and 2021 – like the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack, Pearl Harbor, presidential assassinations and others.

‘January 6 was worse than 9/11? Or Pearl Harbor?’ Glenn Greenwald, a journalist and former attorney wrote in a Twitter thread.

‘Or the Oklahoma City bombing? Or the dismantling of civil liberties in the name of the Cold War and War on Terror? Or the mass surveillance program secretly and illegally implemented by NSA aimed at US citzens (sic)?’ he continued, calling the president a ‘drama queen’ for hyperbolizing the January 6 riots.

‘How about the War on Drugs, mass incarceration and Jim Crow?’ Greenwald quipped. ‘Were those worse ‘attacks on democracy’ than the 3-hour Capitol riot on Jan. 6?’

‘The assassination of JFK? The interference in domestic politics by the CIA? The list of worse attacks than Jan. 6 is endless,’ he concluded.

‘Worst attack on our Democracy since the Civil War? Not 9/11? Not Pearl Harbor???’ Trump advisor Jason Miller tweeted Wednesday.

At the top of Biden’s speech, the president lamented the situation he inherited from Donald Trump when he was inaugurated on January 20.

‘As I stand here tonight — just one day shy of the 100th day of my administration. 100 days since I took the oath of office, lifted my hand off our family Bible, and inherited a nation in crisis,’ Biden said.

He then listed: ‘The worst pandemic in a century. The worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War.’

‘Now, after just 100 days, I can report to the nation: America is on the move again,’ he said, dubbing himself the fixer of all the aforementioned issues. ‘Turning peril into possibility. Crisis into opportunity. Setback into strength.

‘Life can knock us down,’ Biden said. ‘But in America, we never stay down. In America, we always get up. And today, that’s what we’re doing: America is rising anew.’

‘After 100 Days of rescue and renewal, America is ready for takeoff,’ he continued.

‘100 days ago, America’s house was on fire. We had to act.’…

RELATED ARTICLE:

Even Biden’s Handlers’ Recognition of Armenian Genocide Plays Into Iran’s Hands

Biden boasts about raid that killed Osama bin Laden, despite opposing it at the time

UK jihadi duped anti-terror boss, told him ‘Violence isn’t the path,’ then murdered two people

Trinidad: Families plead with government to repatriate 70 children, 24 women from Islamic State camp in Syria

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Unaccompanied Alien Children Taking Spaces from American Kids in Foster Care

But, at least in some states Republican governors are saying NO!

“I do not want our kids harmed as the result of President Biden’s bad policies.” – Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts

One Republican Governor who apparently doesn’t mind helping Biden out of the border crisis mess is never-Trumper and Jeb Bush pal Republican Governor Larry Hogan of Maryland.

Or, does he even know that an organization in our state, which received $55 million in the last 12 months from the federal Office of Refugee Resettlement specifically to care for the UAC kids, is using Maryland’s foster care system to place the mostly teenaged ‘children’ (who have so-far found no relative in America willing to take them) into Maryland homes?

Makes me wonder what Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS) is doing with $55 million (75% of their federal boodle) that is for the children if they are simply placing them in other taxpayer-funded foster care as this news at CBS suggests.

From CBS Baltimore:

For months now, we’ve seen images of federal facilities packed with thousands of unaccompanied minors at a time when there are a record number of children reaching the southern border, most coming from Central America. The sheer volume of children is overwhelming the federal government’s resources with thousands of children packed into facilities never meant to handle this amount.

[….]But one Baltimore based organization, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, is working to move kids out of those facilities and into the homes of families eager to help.

“Our focus is getting these children out of Customs and Border Protection facilities,” said Krish O’Mara Vignarajah***, CEO of LIRS.

[….]

LIRS pairs kids with foster families across the country, including dozens here in Maryland.

[….]

But in the meantime, Vignarajah says the need is still great as the children continue to arrive at the southern border. “We have seen unprecedented numbers of children coming across the border and so we need more parents than ever before and so if anyone out there is willing to open up their home and hearts, these children could use their care,” she said.

More here.

Other state leaders ARE putting American children first!

From Pew Trusts:

(Just so you know, until a few short weeks about the ‘children’ illegally crossing our borders were referred to as Unaccompanied Alien Children, however a Biden administration edict now directs all media to refer to them as Unaccompanied Migrant Children, or simply Unaccompanied Children! Here Pew does what they are told!)

Republican Governors Block Unaccompanied Migrant Children

FORT WORTH, Texas — The federal foster care system was unprepared to house the record nearly 19,000 unaccompanied children who came to the United States in March, so the Biden administration asked some states to temporarily house them.

Republican governors in Iowa, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming said no.

The governors claim that unaccompanied children would displace those already in state foster care or limit states’ ability to make new placements.

“Nebraska is declining their request because we are reserving our resources for serving our kids,” Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts said in an April 13 news release. “I do not want our kids harmed as the result of President Biden’s bad policies.”

Who is paying?

But federal officials note that care providers for unaccompanied children are paid via federal grants and operate separately from state child welfare systems.

Is LIRS paying the families directly out of their federal payola?  If so, they need to explain it!  And, explain who is monitoring the care the illegal alien kids are getting once placed in foster care homes.

Of course as Pew admits there are still costs to state taxpayers:

Caring for unaccompanied children does require some limited state resources, because states license and monitor foster care providers contracted by the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the federal agency in charge of housing unaccompanied minors.

However, there currently are no federally funded foster care providers for unaccompanied minors in any of the five states where Republican governors have expressed concerns, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services records analyzed by Stateline show.

Pew goes on and on consuming many column inches on the subject of bed space and how much, or how little, Trump left us with when the Dems stole the 2020 election.

Contractor middlemen….

Pew reports something we already knew (at least for LIRS and the USCCB).

Foster care providers who care for unaccompanied children include the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, BCFS Health and Human Services, Upbring, and Urban Strategies.

But, still unclear is how does this contract system work? And, why are middlemen even necessary?  Couldn’t the feds just send money directly to state agencies willing to participate?

I wondered where Endeavors is in all of this? That is another give-or-take $500 million for housing the ‘children.’

There is much more at Pew.

I guess we can conclude that our tax dollars (to care for the illegal alien kids) go through a bunch of contractor middlemen masquerading as non-profits (skimming off generous salaries and office overhead) as they go about looking for states willing to put unaccompanied alien children into their state’s foster care system thereby displacing needy American kids.

As I have been saying all along, federal refugee contractors put Americans Last!

Is that what your governor is doing as well?

*** I just had a look at a recent IRS Form 990 for LIRS, and Vignarajah is pulling down an annual salary and benefits package of a quarter of a million (apparently a pay cut from the previous CEO who left under a cloud).

Since LIRS is about 87% federally funded, they are a fake non-profit.  LOL! You can be assured that this ‘religious’ federal contractor is not passing the plate on Sundays to pay for their ‘charitable’ work.

See this post I wrote a year ago at RRW about Krish and her hubby, the Washington DC Leftie power couple, working another angle—we must welcome more migrants of all stripes due to global warming!

And, somehow that is going to help America’s wildlife and our great outdoor spaces—say what?

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: California Officials Pressured Big Tech to Censor Social Media Election Posts

We now have chilling details of California state officials and Big Tech executives conspiring to uproot the First Amendment and influence the 2020 election. And, key targets were Judicial Watch and me.

The proof is in 540 pages and a supplemental four pages of documents we received from the office of the Secretary of State of California revealing how state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election. Included in these documents were “misinformation briefings” emails that were compiled by communications firm SKDK, which lists Biden for President as their top client of 2020.

The documents show how the state agency successfully pressured YouTube to censor my Judicial Watch video concerning the vote by mail and a Judicial Watch lawsuit settlement about California voter roll clean up.

We received the records in response to our California Public Records Act (CPRA) requests to the Office of the California Secretary of State for records related to the Office of Election Cybersecurity’s database of social media posts; communications with social media companies; and other social media related records regarding the 2020 elections. We filed the requests after a December 2020 report surfaced that the state agency was surveilling, tracking, and seeking to censor the speech of Americans:

The Office of Election Cybersecurity in the California Secretary of State’s office monitored and tracked social media posts, decided if they were misinformation, stored the posts in an internal database coded by threat level, and on 31 different occasions requested posts be removed. In 24 cases, the social media companies agreed and either took down the posts or flagged them as misinformation, according to Jenna Dresner, senior public information officer for the Office of Election Cybersecurity.

“We don’t take down posts, that is not our role to play,” Dresner said. “We alert potential sources of misinformation to the social media companies and we let them make that call based on community standards they created.”

On September 24, 2020, a California Secretary of State chart lists a video I did and falsely alleges:

Head of conservative group Judicial Watch Hosts video alleging Democrats benefit from incorrect voter rolls and ballot collection.

The Secretary of State’s office details its communication with YouTube: “We wanted to flag this YouTube video because it misleads community members about elections or other civic processes and misrepresents the safety and security of mail-in ballots.” The chart quotes me describing Judicial Watch’s statement about its federal lawsuit settlement with Los Angeles County that will require it to clean up voter rolls and how a Michigan court “changed the rules” on ballot deadlines and ballot harvesting. (The controversial decision was overturned in October 2020.)

The document shows that California state officials contacted YouTube directly to remove the video on September 24, 2020, and that YouTube seemed to respond by deleting the video on September 27, 2020.
On September 11, 2020, outside consultant Zeke Sandoval, of the SKDK communications firm, provides the Secretary of State’s Office a “Misinformation Daily Briefing,” which again targets me:

Trump tweeted, “The big Unsolicited Ballot States should give it up NOW, before it is too late, and ask people to go to the Polling Booths and, like always before, VOTE. Otherwise, MAYHEM!!! Solicited Ballots (absentee) are OK,” and Twitter was quick to fact check and shared a link with info about how voting by mail is safe and secureViral reply on Twitter from Tom Fitton asserting, “Mailing 51 million ballots to those who haven’t asked for increases risk of voter fraud and voter intimidation!”

A 30-page “Misinformation Tracking Sheet” lists social media posts that the office disagrees with and has asked social media companies to remove.

In an internal email on January 12, 2021, Deputy Secretary of State and Chief Communications Officer Paula Valle emails Chief Counsel Steve Reyes and Jenna Dresner in the Office of Cybersecurity, as well as Press Secretary Sam Mahood stating that she is uncomfortable with CalMatters reporter Fred Brewster’s questions about the office’s tracking and censoring efforts:

Hi Steve – Please see below – the reporter at Cal Matters who PRA’d us is doing a follow-up story. We asked him to send us his questions. I am not necessarily comfortable with his line of questions and the additional doors that this will open. I want to get your feedback I would simply like to give him a statement about what our goal is and leave it at that. Thoughts?

Brewster’s questions, which include concerns from citizens who were targeted by the “Misinformation Tracker,” were sent on January 12, 2021:
I reached out to the users on page 7 and page 21 of the Misinformation Tracker request I received. Both individuals wanted to know how their posts ended up being labeled misinformation and how, given their relatively small following, they came to the attention of the Office of Election Cybersecurity?
Another user named “DC O’Bryan” had his post taken down (page 5 of the Misinformation Tracker). In an email, you highlight a report sent to the state that says, “I don’t know if this is hot air meant to provoke. If it is, a call from an official might get the point across that you don’t joke about election fraud.” Was O’Bryan called to confirm that his post was a joke?
How does the Office of Election Cybersecurity differentiate between parody and satire and misinformation?
Did CISA, Facebook, or any other partners provide guidance on how to spot and define misinformation? If someone has their posts in the Misinformation Tracker, are there plans to contact those individuals and is there a way for them to petition the state to delete them?
The Secretary of State’s Office emails Facebook and Twitter on April 25, 2019, with requests from the Office to remove tweets and posts for what they have labeled “misinformation.”

The office emails Facebook, attempting to set up a call to discuss removing future posts. This 15-minute call is with “new Facebook contact for social media reporting: Javier Hernandez, Politics & Government Outreach” in order to discuss how the office will report posts to Facebook. In the email, Facebook outlines its goals to directly work with “electoral authorities in every state” so that they can “report instances of voter suppression on Facebook directly to our team, so [Facebook] can look at them quickly and remove them from the site.”

On December 31, 2019, after the Secretary of State’s office reports a tweet to Support@Twitter.com, Kevin Kane, a Twitter representative, replies and offers his direct contact for the Office’s future needs in removing posts.

In a September 21, 2020, email chain with the subject line “elections issue,” Jenna Dresner in the Secretary of State’s Office of Cybersecurity writes to “Cristina and team” at Facebook at 11:43 a.m.: “We want to flag this Instagram post.”

The reply comes from Facebook Community Operations: “Thank you for your report. We have reviewed the … content and can confirm that the content has been removed …” At 12:53 pm. Dresner writes to Press Secretary Sam Mahood, Social Media Coordinator Akilah Jones and others, “Post from this morning was removed (and fast!) Akilah we can update tracker.”

In an October 28, 2020, email, Jones writes to Flores at Facebook and CCs Dresner that a post, which was from a user named @Screenplaywale, “voters are being asked to gerrymander and voter suppress their ‘trump supporting father’s ballots.’”

In an email chain on September 14, 2020, titled “Election Issue” the office internally complains about how long it takes Facebook to remove a post and how to speed up this process.

Mahood writes to Dresner: “It looks like it took Facebook 2 weeks to respond to Chris. This is way too long, we should raise to FB and make sure we know best method to report posts.” Dresner responds: “Sure – I’m 98% sure this is the one you chased with an email directly to our FB contacts which resulted in it taken down that day. I can confirm that process works for the future?”

On August 22, 2019, Maria Benson, director of communications for the National Association of Secretaries of State emails the communications directors for Secretaries of State offices that Twitter confirmed that they streamlined their process for government officials to report “misinformation:”

Great news—Twitter is now on-boarding states into their mis/disinformation partner support portal! Once on-boarded, you will be able to directly report mis/disinformation instead of having to submit it to me first….” [Emphasis in original]

Benson also gives contact information for Facebook and Google complaints, and says: “If any of the items you reported do not get prompt attention, please let me know and I can also reach out the companies.”

On September 24, 2019, the California Secretary of State’s office confirms that it plans to participate in Facebook’s “misinformation” training which is a review from Facebook on “monitoring guidelines for reporting misinformation” and teaches participants how to use the direct reporting channel Facebook opened for them.

On October 1, 2020, Benson forwards information from Twitter about their training to directly remove posts they label as misinformation to the Secretary of State’s office. This is described by Twitter as: “training on creative and effective content strategies on Twitter in advance of the U.S. Election,” as well as “onboarding state and local election officials onto Twitter’s Partner Support Portal.” This portal is described as, “a dedicated way for critical stakeholders – like you – to flag concerns directly to Twitter.”

These documents detail a conspiracy against the First Amendment rights of Americans by the California Secretary of State, the Biden campaign operation, and Big Tech. These documents blow up the big lie that Big Tech censorship is ‘private’ – as the documents show collusion between a whole group of government officials in multiple states to suppress speech about election controversies.

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column and video are republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Twitter sees fewer users than expected and stock sinks

Harder! Faster!

What did those flip-flop, turtle-neck wearing freaks think would happen when they kicked half their customer base in the teeth?

Twitter expects a second-quarter GAAP loss of $170 million to $120 million on revenue of $980 million to $1.08 billion. Analysts had forecast adjusted earnings of 16 cents a share and a GAAP loss of 4 cents a share on revenue of $1.06 billion.

Twitter sees fewer users than expected and stock sinks

Twitter Inc. on Thursday reported increased quarterly revenue on the strength of ad sales, but its user numbers fell short of expectations.

By: Fox Business, April 30, 2021:

The San Francisco-based company said its average monetizable daily active users increased 20% year over year to 199 million, but analysts had expected that number to grow to 200 million.

Twitter shares fell as much as 8.5% after hours, after a 0.9% drop in the regular session to close at $65.09.

Ticker Security Last Change Change %

TWTR TWITTER, INC. 56.60 -8.43 -12.96%

The microblogging company reported first-quarter net income of $68 million, or 8 cents a share, compared with a loss of $8.3 million, or 1 cent a share, in the year-ago period. Adjusted for stock-based compensation and other expenses, earnings were 16 cents a share. Revenue rose to $1.04 billion from $807.6 million in the year-ago quarter.

Analysts surveyed by FactSet had forecast adjusted earnings of 14 cents a share on revenue of $1.03 billion.

Twitter expects a second-quarter GAAP loss of $170 million to $120 million on revenue of $980 million to $1.08 billion. Analysts had forecast adjusted earnings of 16 cents a share and a GAAP loss of 4 cents a share on revenue of $1.06 billion.

Shares of Twitter have risen 20% year to date, and are up nearly 127% in the past 52 weeks. By comparison, the S&P 500 Index has increased about 12% so far this year, and is up nearly 45% in the past year.

RELATED ARTICLE: Documents Reveal CA State Officials Coordinated with Big Tech to Censor Americans’ Election Posts

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Profiteers of Biden Administration’s Open Borders Policy — Malfeasance Has Its Rewards.

It has been said that “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”

The border crisis endangers national security, public health and public safety, yet for the Biden administration, the border crisis that creates consternation for most Americans, incredibly, is viewed as a success story by Biden and the radicalized Democrat Party.

As you will see shortly, Biden immigration policies are also important to human traffickers, drug smugglers, terrorist groups and American companies that move the money of all of the above and, incredibly, even the “fees” and ransom money paid to the human traffickers by aliens’ family members.

As I noted in my recent article, Biden Amps Up The Immigration Delivery System, the Biden administration’s refusal to declare a border crisis is more than a matter of semantics.

Over the past several decades, globalists in both major political parties have come to see immigration as a delivery system rather than a law enforcement system that is dedicated to protecting America and Americans.

This immigration delivery system delivers a virtually unlimited supply of cheap exploitable workers (and not just the illegal aliens who perform economic bottom rung low-skilled, physically demanding menial jobs, but increasing numbers of highly skilled alien workers who are granted visas to work legally in the United States).  This delivery system also delivers a nearly unlimited number of foreign tourists (hence the continually expanding Visa Waiver Program), a huge number of foreign students including students from adversarial nations such as China, and a virtually unlimited number of clients for immigration law firms.  Indeed, there are a significant number of  immigration lawyers in both political parties.

Comprehensive Immigration Reform was never intended to get the “aliens out of the shadows” but to motivate aliens to head for the waiting rooms of immigration law firms.

To actually get the aliens out of the shadows, our government would need more ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents).  But the hiring of more ICE agents has never been considered by either political party.  Such agents would not only arrest illegal aliens but would likely uncover crooked employers, crooked lawyers and interfere with the immigration delivery system.

These politicians know where “their bread is buttered” and understand that they must act to satisfy the demands of those who write the fat checks.  Simply stated, the term “campaign contribution” is Orwellian Newspeak for the actual appropriate term: “Bribe.”

No administration, however, has had the unmitigated chutzpah and utter contempt for the safety of America and Americans to do what the Biden administration is now doing, making an obvious concerted effort to remove any and all deterrents against illegal immigration and essentially put control of America’s southern border under the de facto control of the drug cartels and human traffickers (often one and the same).

Biden Cripples Immigration Law Enforcement, his Executive Orders handcuff agents – and set law violators free.

In the past, the Border Patrol checked transportation facilities such as bus stations, train stations and airports to locate and arrest illegal aliens who evaded detection by the Border Patrol and were then heading to the interior of the United States.

Under Biden’s policies, however, the overwhelmed Border Patrol is now driving illegal aliens to bus terminals so that they can head for the interior of the United States!

Some of these aliens are not even being given immigration court dates because, as it now stands, the system is so overloaded that hearings for these aliens won’t be possible for years.

The failure to deter illegal immigration has encouraged a human tsunami of foreign nationals, from all over the world, including countries that sponsor terrorism, to head for the United States.

This has created a huge opportunity for the human traffickers and gangs to make unprecedented profits as more aliens seek their “services.”

On April 20, 2021 Vice reported, US Companies Are Helping Mexican Cartels Get Rich Kidnapping Migrants, noting that the  wave of migration at the border is a boon for kidnappers, human smugglers, and the American businesses that handle their money.

Here is an important excerpt from the Vice report:

VICE World News reviewed 40 ransom payments made through money transfers in eight different kidnapping cases from 2014 through January of this year. Virtually all of the money flowed through U.S. companies, mostly through Western Union and MoneyGram but also Walmart and lesser-known companies like Ria. By our rough estimate, criminal organizations in Mexico have made around $800 million on migrant kidnappings alone over the past decade, and money-transfer companies received a cut on nearly every transaction through fees and exchange rates. American corporations are profiting from kidnappings.

Bad as this is, let us remember that those who engage in human trafficking and drug smuggling are violent criminals, many of whom  are working in conjunction with terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, a Lebanon-based terror organization that is under the control of Iran.  Human trafficking and drug smuggling not only provide huge financial rewards for these criminal and terrorist organizations but provide terror organizations with the ability to move sleeper agents into the United States.

Consider some experts from my 2019 article, Jihad At The Border:

On April 30, 2019 the Justice Department issued a press release, Jordanian National Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy to Bring Aliens into the United States, which noted that in 2017 the smuggler smuggled aliens from Yemen, a Special Interest Country” into the United States without inspection from Monterrey, Mexico to Piedras Negras in Texas.

As I reported in a previous article, on January 29, 2019 the Senate Intelligence Committee conducted a hearing on Worldwide Threats that was predicated the “World-Wide Threat Assessment,” that was issued by Daniel Coats, the Director of the Office of National Intelligence, which oversees the U.S. intelligence community.  Additional witness included the heads of the FBI, CIA and other agencies.

The threat assessment warned about the dangers posed by transnational gangs such as MS-13 and went on to report:

TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZED CRIME

Global transnational criminal organizations and networks will threaten US interests and allies by trafficking drugs, exerting malign influence in weak states, threatening critical infrastructure, orchestrating human trafficking, and undermining legitimate economic activity.

Drug Trafficking

The foreign drug threat will pose continued risks to US public health and safety and will present a range of threats to US national security interests in the coming year. Violent Mexican traffickers, such as members of the Sinaloa Cartel and New Generation Jalisco Cartel, remain key to the movement of illicit drugs to the United States, including heroin, methamphetamine, fentanyl, and cannabis from Mexico, as well as cocaine from Colombia. Chinese synthetic drug suppliers dominate US-bound movements of so- called designer drugs, including synthetic marijuana, and probably ship the majority of US fentanyl, when adjusted for purity.

On April 17, 2018 the House Committee on Homeland Security, Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee, conducted a hearing on the topic, “State Sponsors Of Terrorism: An Examination Of Irans Global Terrorism Network.”

The prepared testimony of one of the witnesses, Dr. Emanuele Ottolenghi of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, included this alarming excerpt:

In recent years, Hezbollahs Latin American networks have also increasingly cooperated with violent drug cartels and criminal syndicates, often with the assistance of local corrupt political elites….

This toxic crime-terror nexus is fueling both the rising threat of global jihadism and the collapse of law and order across Latin America that is helping drive drugs and people northward into the United States. It is sustaining Hezbollahs growing financial needs. It is helping Iran and Hezbollah consolidate a local constituency in multiple countries across Latin America. It is thus facilitating their efforts to build safe havens for terrorists and a continent-wide terror infrastructure that they could use to strike U.S. targets.

Biden and his cohorts have discovered that indeed, “Crime does pay” and the cost is not only measured in money but in human suffering and even the loss of human lives.

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.

Idaho State House Passes Legislation Banning Anti-White ‘Critical Race Theory’ in Schools

Stand up and fight against this vicious racist indoctrination of our children.

Idaho State House Passes Legislation Banning Anti-White ‘Critical Race Theory’ in Schools

By: Shane Trejo, Big League Politics, Apr 27, 2021:

Legislation to ban the teaching of Marxist Critical Race Theory in Idaho schools has passed in the state house by a 27-8 vote.

Manhattan Institute senior fellow Christopher Rufo made the announcement in a Twitter post:

The bill, House Bill 377, will now be considered in the state senate after being approved in the house. If approved and signed into law, the legislation would ban schools from teaching “that any sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin is inherently superior or inferior.”

“The Idaho legislature finds that tenets…often found in “critical race theory”…exacerbate and inflame divisions on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, national origin, or other criteria in ways contrary to the unity of the nation and the well-being of the state of Idaho and its citizens,” the bill states.

Big League Politics has reported on other states, including Florida under the stewardship of Gov. Ron Desantis, taking aim at critical race theory:

Critical race theory will not have a place in any public schools in the Sunshine State.

Governor Ron DeSantis announced on March 17, 2021 that Florida’s curriculum will “expressly exclude…Critical Race Theory.”  DeSantis declared,“There’s no room in our classrooms for things like Critical Race Theory. Teaching kids to hate their country and to hate each other is not worth one red cent of taxpayer money.”

In his announcement, DeSantis unveiled a $106 million proposal to promote civics education and civics literacy in public schools.

“Our schools are supposed to give people a foundation of knowledge, not supposed to be indoctrination centers, where you’re trying to push specific ideologies,” DeSantis said at a press conference in Naples, Florida.

Under this proposal, the Florida Department of Education will be instructed to set up the Florida Civic Seal of Excellence, which according to News4Jax, is “a new professional endorsement for civics education.” DeSantis announced that teachers who finish the training will be able to receive a $3,000 bonus.

Former President Donald Trump has viciously attacked critical race theory, describing it as “toxic propaganda” that will“destroy our country”. In the final months of his presidency Trump instructed all federal agencies to halt all funding to any training that “teaches or suggests” that America is an inherently racist country. 

DeSantis believes that critical race theory is capable of fostering division.

“They’re trying to make people view each other based on race, I want to do the opposite, I want to treat people as individuals. I want to treat people based on character, but when you put this curriculum in, it ends up creating more divisions,” he commented.”

Republicans are finally getting serious about fighting back against Marxist indoctrination in schools. However, it may be too little, too late; Black Lives Matter terrorists are already on the march, with institutional backing, to devastate Western Civilization.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NY Radio Host Tells Audience ‘F*ck The Police,’ Then Rams NYPD Officer, Killing Him, Before Speeding Away

Delaware Police Officer Brutally Attacked Pronounced Dead

CBS’s Fake “Poll” Claims “85% Approved of Biden’s Speech” Interviewed Only 169 Republicans Out of 1,000 Viewers

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

New Database Tracks Canceled People

Somewhere in the Rocky Mountains, an anonymous researcher has launched a website that tracks people who have been “canceled” for exercising their right to free speech. Appropriately named “CanceledPeople.org,” the database already has 195 entries, with many recognizable names including James Damore, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Jordan Peterson, Charles Murray, Megyn Kelly, Nicholas & Erik Christakis, Bret Weinstein, Chris Mathews, Roseanne Barr, Gina Carano, Roger Pielke Jr., and, of course, Donald Trump.

Notable among those listed are people who are not merely victims of the so-called Left, but also the Right. For example, the first name on the list is Junia Joplin, a Baptist Minister who was fired after she came out to her congregation as a transgender woman during a sermon. This indifference to who is being canceled (and who is doing the canceling) is a welcome attempt at nonpartisanship, although the majority of the listings are people victimized by the Left.

On their About page, the site creators explain what they look for when considering who to add to their database. They write:

“The canceled person has been targeted for behavior that falls within the boundaries of “reasonable expression” (see more on this below). The “offense” may not be recent, and it may not even be their own action.

The canceled person has lost their job or position (this includes forced resignations). Their future professional opportunities have been limited. If they are self-employed, they have suffered financial losses from a boycott or sabotage of their company.

The canceled person has faced a coordinated effort to silence them. The effort seeks to render their person or their ideas unfit to discuss.

The canceled person has faced a coordinated effort to shame them and destroy their reputation. The effort seeks to damage their self-worth and will likely target their personal or professional relationships.”

A strength of this well sourced, no frills database – they don’t even have a logo! – is the “Offense” column, where a lengthy explanation of exactly what happened is provided. Reading these explanations will trigger recollections in many cases where the event gathered national or international publicity for a time, but the name of the person canceled was forgotten.

Whoever is responsible for this database wants to remain unknown, but we salute their efforts and hope they will continue their excellent work. They have created a valuable resource for anyone seeking to more thoroughly understand cancel culture. And needless to say, there have already been far, far more instances of cancelation than the 195 high profile events captured so far in this database, and multiples more cases where people have been intimidated into silence.

EDITORS NOTE: This Winston84 Project column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Humanizing the Victims of Abortion

One of the great blessings of the United States is that written into our national birth certificate, the Declaration of Independence, is the acknowledgement that we are endowed by our Creator with the right to life.

But the right to life is under assault today through the widespread practice of abortion—and has been for decades.

Amazingly, through the years, there have been a few that actually survived an abortion attempt. In a previous piece, I mentioned the existence of about 300 or so survivors of abortion in modern America, including Claire Culwell. She has now written her story in a powerful newly-released book, Survivor. Christian apologist Josh McDowell says of the book, “It’s a story of beauty, pain, regret, redemption, and encouragement.”

I have had the privilege to interview Claire Culwell for a television segment for D. James Kennedy Ministries and my radio program. What follows is her story, based on what she said in those interviews and what she writes in her book.

Claire was adopted and grew up in a godly home in Austin, Texas, surrounded by Christian love. As far as she was concerned, abortion had zero impact on her—until she was about 20 and learned the background of her birth. She notes, “I never imagined that I would meet my birth mother and find out that I survived something that was literally meant to take my life.”

Her birth mother (Tonya) says that her own family life had been very difficult, with little love in the household. So she sought attention outside the home. At age 13, Tonya eagerly welcomed the fickle affection of a boy whom she described as a “young, good-looking jock cowboy.”

Soon she was pregnant. Tonya shares, “The most frightening day of my life was to tell my mother, and so I got up the courage and I told her. It didn’t go well, you know. Here come the beatings, the telling me how worthless I was, how horrible I was, I was going to ruin the [family] name.” And so on.

Tonya’s mother forcibly took her to an abortion clinic to take care of the problem—against her will.

When it was over, says Tonya: “I remember going in that bathroom and just crying, just throwing up, you know. I’ll never forget turning my head and seeing my baby and just staring at that canister….So in my mind I thought, ‘With my mom’s help, I just murdered my baby.’”

But as a couple of weeks passed, Tonya realized she still was somehow pregnant.

Now Claire’s grandmother was really mad. They returned to the abortion clinic to find out how this could be. Claire says the clinic told her birth mother and grandmother that the “abortion had been successful on one baby, but they didn’t know there were two; and so I had survived my birth mother’s abortion.”

Claire’s grandmother didn’t take well this news that there were twins—and only one had been aborted. But at that point it was too late to abort Claire. The pregnancy was too far along.

“And so I was delivered at 30 weeks,” observes Claire, “and I weighed 3 lbs. 2 oz. I was ten weeks premature, and I had a dislocated hip, club feet. My visible signs are my every day reminder of being a twin. But miraculously the abortion instruments never touched my body.” Thankfully, she was placed in a wonderful home. Today Claire is married, has children, and enjoys a wonderful life.

When Claire first learned of the circumstances of her birth, she was shocked. But she chose to forgive her birth mom, Tonya.

Later, they even got to speak at some pro-life venues together. Both Claire and Tonya, writes Claire in her book Survivor, are indeed survivors of abortion, and “by Christ alone” has their story been redeemed: “Death had tried to drive us apart, but love brought us together.”

Claire adds, “God uses things that were meant for evil and turns them into things that are beautiful and fruitful, like he did with me. Bad things have been transformed into beautiful things in my life.”

She told the D. James Kennedy Ministries television audience, “I share my story because I want to put a face and a name and a story with the unborn child, and I saw how abortion hurt my birth mother, and it has hurt and wronged so many women that regret their abortion. And so I believe that abortion takes the life of a human being just like me and just like you.”

Life is a precious gift. Just as America’s founders recognized that the Lord has granted us the right to life, may America once again cherish the God-given right to life. I know of one happy survivor in America who cherishes that right.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

Google Search: Driving the Pornography Industry’s Profits

As recently as December 2020, when NCOSE researchers conducted a Google search test for “child pornography,” many top results yielded links to hardcore pornography websites, including Pornhub and XVideos—effectively advertising for the world’s largest sexual exploiters that are currently under increased public scrutiny for the proliferation of child sex abuse material on its site.

Two weeks ago NCOSE researchers tried the term “child pornography” again and were thrilled that instead of links to Pornhub or to any other porn sites, the only results on the first 10 pages that we reviewed included information for child safety organizations, news articles, and legislation. In fact, several other search terms that used to direct people to Pornhub (“rape porn,” “incest porn,” and “drugged porn”) no longer do so—though unfortunately they still result in pages and pages of other hardcore porn sites.

Can we call it a “win” that Google no longer drives people looking up “child pornography” to an exploitative website known to profit from images of children being raped? Can we call it a victory when it took a NYT expose, government intervention, and other corporations to cut ties with Pornhub for Google to change its algorithms? Yes. Absolutely! Because when tech mega-giant Google makes any changes—however seemingly “simple” – it has vast ripple effects with the potential to impact hundreds of millions (if not billions) of people. It’s why we celebrate any time Google makes any move toward protecting dignity and actually does “the right thing” as its motto claims.

But it’s too little. And while it’s certainly late, it’s thankfully not too late for Google to stop buttressing an industry that profits from people’s trauma and pain.

While Google has seemingly reduced the number of searches that result in Pornhub showing up on the first page (or even as the first result), several search terms like “teen porn” and “choking porn” are still directing people to Pornhub, to its main competitor Xvideos, and to countless other hardcore pornography sites.

New York Times two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Nick Kristof (whose investigative piece Children of Pornhub published in December 2020 turned the tide against Pornhub and parent company MindGeek) most recently set his scrutinizing sights on XVideos– asking the same question we and other advocates have been demanding for years, “Why Do We Let Corporations Profit from Rape Videos?” Kristof lambasts Google for serving as “a pillar of this sleazy ecosystem, for roughly half the traffic reaching XVideos and XNXX appears to come from Google searches.”

As Google has consistently held the monopoly of search engine market share worldwide – more than 90%, it’s likely Google has assisted countless people in accessing child sex abuse and other violent, illegal material by allowing links to Pornhub, XVideos, and other hardcore pornography sites to show up at the top of the search results page for searches like “child porn.” Studies have shown that the higher the rank on a Search Engine Results Page (SERP), the higher the likelihood users will click on the link, with the first result having the highest clickrate. “Teen porn” and “choking porn” still offer Pornhub as the #1 result. Pornhub and other porn sites rely on the SEO (search engine optimization)—in fact, it’s at the core of their business models to ensure their sites appear on the top page: so much so that even when they are ordered to take down images by lawyers or law enforcement, they leave the titles, tags, and thumbnails up so a Google search can still find them and bring people to Pornhub. Survivors tell us thumbnails showing their abuse are still widely available through a simple Google search of their name – even when the video has been removed from the pornography site.

Why are we letting Big Tech line the pockets of Big Porn, which has monetized the most violent, degrading, racist, and often illegal acts committed against children and vulnerable adults?

NCOSE met with Google executives last February to press on them to change their algorithms in order to stop driving people to hardcore pornography sites and assault users—including young children – with violent, degrading pornographic images. We pressed on them to stop directing people to hardcore pornography for searches like the ones listed above and others, like “slavery porn” or “Asian slave.”  Not only did searches related to pornography and prostitution lead to Pornhub and other sites, but scientific and innocent terms like “happy black teen” would populate the screen with images of torture and abuse in under a second, together with links to hardcore porn sites.

Google claimed they couldn’t do more, hiding behind “free speech” to cleanse their hands and justify inactioneven though child pornography and hardcore pornography is not protected by the 1st Amendment. In fact, it’s illegal. Google claimed Pornhub was a “legitimate” site, despite mounting evidence of criminal activity and survivors speaking out and they couldn’t mess with search term algorithms or result positioning (though even at the time we knew they could and did change search result rankings and have more recently curated search content that was potentially harmful on a wide scale such as COVID-19  health information). We continued to push on Google to proactively ensure their products and tools were not buttressing illegal and unethical industries. Soon after NCOSE met with their executives, they did in fact make changes so that scientific terms no longer produces hardcore pornographic images, and that innocent search terms wouldn’t result in hardcore porn links and images (which in and of themselves could cause harm to the viewer—especially minors)

Determining how people receive information and what information they see first places Google in a great position of power—and therefore significant ethical responsibility. Google can and MUST continue to adjust its algorithms so that other search terms like “teen porn” and “choking porn” stop leading to Pornhub.com and that other terms like “rape porn” or “family porn” lead to resources, not videos of sexual assault and incest. Google has showed us they’re able to “do the right thing.” We hope they do so again.

Google Search: Driving the Pornography Industry’s Profits

As recently as December 2020, when NCOSE researchers conducted a Google search test for “child pornography,” many top results yielded links to hardcore pornography websites, including Pornhub and XVideos—effectively advertising for the world’s largest sexual exploiters that are currently under increased public scrutiny for the proliferation of child sex abuse material on its site.

Two weeks ago NCOSE researchers tried the term “child pornography” again and were thrilled that instead of links to Pornhub or to any other porn sites, the only results on the first 10 pages that we reviewed included information for child safety organizations, news articles, and legislation. In fact, several other search terms that used to direct people to Pornhub (“rape porn,” “incest porn,” and “drugged porn”) no longer do so—though unfortunately they still result in pages and pages of other hardcore porn sites.

Can we call it a “win” that Google no longer drives people looking up “child pornography” to an exploitative website known to profit from images of children being raped? Can we call it a victory when it took a NYT expose, government intervention, and other corporations to cut ties with Pornhub for Google to change its algorithms? Yes. Absolutely! Because when tech mega-giant Google makes any changes—however seemingly “simple” – it has vast ripple effects with the potential to impact hundreds of millions (if not billions) of people. It’s why we celebrate any time Google makes any move toward protecting dignity and actually does “the right thing” as its motto claims.

But it’s too little. And while it’s certainly late, it’s thankfully not too late for Google to stop buttressing an industry that profits from people’s trauma and pain.

While Google has seemingly reduced the number of searches that result in Pornhub showing up on the first page (or even as the first result), several search terms like “teen porn” and “choking porn” are still directing people to Pornhub, to its main competitor Xvideos, and to countless other hardcore pornography sites.

New York Times two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Nick Kristof (whose investigative piece Children of Pornhub published in December 2020 turned the tide against Pornhub and parent company MindGeek) most recently set his scrutinizing sights on XVideos– asking the same question we and other advocates have been demanding for years, “Why Do We Let Corporations Profit from Rape Videos?” Kristof lambasts Google for serving as “a pillar of this sleazy ecosystem, for roughly half the traffic reaching XVideos and XNXX appears to come from Google searches.”

As Google has consistently held the monopoly of search engine market share worldwide – more than 90%, it’s likely Google has assisted countless people in accessing child sex abuse and other violent, illegal material by allowing links to Pornhub, XVideos, and other hardcore pornography sites to show up at the top of the search results page for searches like “child porn.” Studies have shown that the higher the rank on a Search Engine Results Page (SERP), the higher the likelihood users will click on the link, with the first result having the highest clickrate. “Teen porn” and “choking porn” still offer Pornhub as the #1 result. Pornhub and other porn sites rely on the SEO (search engine optimization)—in fact, it’s at the core of their business models to ensure their sites appear on the top page: so much so that even when they are ordered to take down images by lawyers or law enforcement, they leave the titles, tags, and thumbnails up so a Google search can still find them and bring people to Pornhub. Survivors tell us thumbnails showing their abuse are still widely available through a simple Google search of their name – even when the video has been removed from the pornography site.

Why are we letting Big Tech line the pockets of Big Porn, which has monetized the most violent, degrading, racist, and often illegal acts committed against children and vulnerable adults?

NCOSE met with Google executives last February to press on them to change their algorithms in order to stop driving people to hardcore pornography sites and assault users—including young children – with violent, degrading pornographic images. We pressed on them to stop directing people to hardcore pornography for searches like the ones listed above and others, like “slavery porn” or “Asian slave.”  Not only did searches related to pornography and prostitution lead to Pornhub and other sites, but scientific and innocent terms like “happy black teen” would populate the screen with images of torture and abuse in under a second, together with links to hardcore porn sites.

Google claimed they couldn’t do more, hiding behind “free speech” to cleanse their hands and justify inactioneven though child pornography and hardcore pornography is not protected by the 1st Amendment. In fact, it’s illegal. Google claimed Pornhub was a “legitimate” site, despite mounting evidence of criminal activity and survivors speaking out and they couldn’t mess with search term algorithms or result positioning (though even at the time we knew they could and did change search result rankings and have more recently curated search content that was potentially harmful on a wide scale such as COVID-19  health information). We continued to push on Google to proactively ensure their products and tools were not buttressing illegal and unethical industries. Soon after NCOSE met with their executives, they did in fact make changes so that scientific terms no longer produces hardcore pornographic images, and that innocent search terms wouldn’t result in hardcore porn links and images (which in and of themselves could cause harm to the viewer—especially minors)

Determining how people receive information and what information they see first places Google in a great position of power—and therefore significant ethical responsibility. Google can and MUST continue to adjust its algorithms so that other search terms like “teen porn” and “choking porn” stop leading to Pornhub.com and that other terms like “rape porn” or “family porn” lead to resources, not videos of sexual assault and incest. Google has showed us they’re able to “do the right thing.” We hope they do so again.

COLUMN BY

Lina Nealon

DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE AND STRATEGIC INITIATIVES

Lina Nealon is committed to promoting the dignity of every human being and creating a society where everyone can reach their full potential.  As the National Center on Sexual Exploitation’s Director of Corporate and Strategic Initiatives, she spearheads NCOSE’s campaigns to hold corporations accountable for profiting from sexual exploitation. As Founding Director of Demand Abolition, Lina designed and led the first national program combatting the demand for paid sex that drives the global sex industry. Under her leadership, Demand Abolition coalesced a vastly diverse network of survivors, movement leaders, and allies across sectors and disciplines to implement tactics to stop sex buyers, disrupt commercial sex markets, and transform cultural norms around buying sex.  Lina was the leading architect of the Cities Empowered Against Sexual Exploitation (CEASE), a collaboration between twelve major US cities measurably decreasing demand in their communities and a founder co-chair of the World Without Exploitation coalition.

Ms. Nealon has advised governors, attorneys general, mayors and other elected officials, police chiefs, leading philanthropists, and business leaders in promising practices to reduce demand and has drafted numerous policies and legislation at the federal, state, and local levels to stop exploitation. She co-chaired the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Anti-Trafficking Taskforce Demand Committee and was a founding member of Harvard Kennedy School of Government’s Working Group on Modern Slavery. Ms. Nealon has provided expert commentary and has published articles for top-tier media including MSNBC, PBS, NPR, Boston Globe, Congressional Quarterly Review, Al Jazeera, etc.

A mother of three girls and a sexual assault survivor herself, Ms. Nealon is driven to elevate survivor leadership and promote women’s and girls’ empowerment. As a Policy Specialist and Trainer with the Institute for Inclusive Security, Lina ensured women’s significant representation in peace processes and reconstruction efforts across dozens of post-conflict countries. She served as Executive Director of Girls on the Run (Greater Triangle Area, NC), sat on the Women2Women Advisory Council, and has mentored numerous young women in building their confidence, leadership skills, and resilience. Lina and her husband Brian are raising four young, adventurous, nature-loving, socially-conscious abolitionists in Durham, North Carolina.

EDITORS NOTE: This National Center on Sexual Exploitation column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Presumably to Silence Him, Rightwing Speaker Put on No-Fly List

Apparently the fascists running Joe Biden’s government these days don’t like what Nick Fuentes says since he has not committed any crimes.  Scary stuff!

The story is at VDARE, a website the Left abhors and so therefore you should visit it often even if you don’t agree with every word they publish.

Fuentes is apparently being harassed because of his political activities in support of America First and Donald Trump and because  his speech is uncomfortable for some tender ears.

Remember the old adage….First they came for Nick.

America First Patriot Nick Fuentes Put On No-Fly List

America First host Nick Fuentes can no longer fly on an airplane. He announced Tuesday that he couldn’t check into his flight because the authorities didn’t clear him to fly.

[….]

Fuentes believes he was put on the no-fly list due to hysteria over the Capitol protests. He has suffered numerous bans since January 6.

Fuentes was on his way to Florida for a press conference and rally against Big Tech and for Governor DeSantis push to rein-in the power of the tech giants in his state.

Here Fuentes posted news on the gathering of free speech advocates on Twitter last Friday.

You probably noticed that Fuentes is at least still on Twitter when yours truly was suspended back in January.

VDARE notes that Glenn Greenwald, a staunch defender of American civil liberties no matter which side of the political divide one resides on, came to Fuentes’ defense.

This could be you someday, but that is no reason to pull any political punches in these difficult times.

And if this is the first time you have heard of Nick Fuentes, he is the host of a podcast America First Live.  

Check it out!

LOL!  By singling Fuentes out like this, those seeking to silence him may just have broadened his audience.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

How Long Will Marjorie Taylor Greene Last On Mainstream Platforms?

Those of us who are amused and glad that finally there are some politicians who engage in hyperbole and confrontational politics with the same abandon as Leftists have a new celebrity to follow, Georgia’s firebrand GOP Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene.

It isn’t necessary to recapitulate the many ways Greene has horrified the mainstream. They are too numerous to briefly summarize and some of the concerns about her comments and conduct have merit. But so what? There are dozens of members of the U.S. Congress who have committed equally if not more egregious offenses, especially if you examine their history prior to taking office.

As a USA Today headline blared on February 9, “Marjorie Taylor Greene should be removed from Facebook for spreading ‘dangerous lies,’ advocacy groups say.” And who are these “advocacy groups?” They are partisan left-wing pressure groups, the beneficiaries of funding largesse that partisan right-wing pressure groups (is there even such a thing?) can’t imagine. And what about the “dangerous lies” we’re hearing night and day from left-wing sources?

It is a “dangerous lie” to claim the United States is “systemically racist.” It is a dangerous lie to claim there is a “climate emergency.” These are lies that are destined to turn the United States into a police state controlled by a small oligarchy. They are more dangerous than anything Marjorie Taylor Greene has ever said or done, not only because they represent a transformative, credible threat, but because – thanks to billions of dollars and years of repetition – millions of Americans believe these lies.

For several hours earlier this month, Marjorie Taylor Greene was locked out of her Twitter account, supposedly by mistake. Expecting her accounts on Twitter and Facebook to survive is a poor bet. And the reason Greene is considered a threat by these and other mainstream platforms has little to do with anything she’s ever said in the past, however hyperbolic. Greene is a threat because she is willing to challenge the big lies of our time: the lies of systemic racism and a climate emergency.

On principle, and for a variety of reasons, Greene’s voice should be heard. To respect the First Amendment. To adhere to the Section 230 exemptions that prohibit social media platforms from engaging in editorial censorship in exchange for immunity from some liability. And most of all, to offer equal time. A tough voice on the right, standing up to an avalanche of state-sanctioned, media-driven, corporate supported leftist propaganda that inundates the nation.

EDITORS NOTE: This Winston84 Project column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Stalin was a ‘Cancel Culture’ Pioneer: The Inside Story on How He Cancelled ‘Hamlet’

William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet is considered by some to be the single greatest story ever written.

Hamlet has it all: ghosts, sword fights, suicide, revenge, lust, murder, philosophy, faith, manipulation, and a climactic bloodbath worthy of a Tarantino film. It’s a masterpiece of both high art and sensationalism, the only play I’ve seen performed live three times.

Not everyone likes Hamlet, of course. One of its detractors was Soviet premier Joseph Stalin.

Stalin’s hatred for the play has almost become a thing of legend, in part because it’s unclear precisely why Stalin hated the play. Entire academic papers are dedicated to answering the question.

In his autobiography Testimony, the famous Russian composer Dmitri Shostakovich suggests that Stalin saw the play as excessively dark and potentially subversive.

“[Stalin] simply didn’t want people watching plays with plots that displeased him,” Shostakovich wrote; “you never know what might pop into the mind of some demented person.”

Stalin didn’t ban the play, however. He merely let it be known he disapproved of Hamlet during a rehearsal at the Moscow Art Theater, Stalin’s favorite theater.

“Why is this necessary—playing Hamlet in the Art Theater?” the Soviet leader asked.

That was all it took, Shostakovich said.

“Everyone knew about Stalin’s question directed at the Art Theater and no one wanted to risk it. Everyone was afraid,” Shostakovich observed. “And for many long years Hamlet was not seen on the Soviet stage.”

Hamlet is safe in the United States today, fortunately. Yet today’s “cancel culture” has purged many works of art—from Dr. Seuss books and Gone With the Wind to Disney movies like Peter Pan and Dumbo.

These works of art are not being banned by state censors; they are being pulled or restricted by content providers, online stores, and publishers on the grounds that they are culturally or racially insensitive.

“These books portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong,” Dr. Seuss Enterprises told the Associated Press upon announcing it would no longer publish six Dr. Seuss books, including And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street and If I Ran the Zoo.

Whether these works of art are culturally insensitive is a subjective matter, as is the question of whether Hamlet is a morally subversive play. Now, there are those who deny that Dr. Seuss is actually being canceled at all.

If publishers and editors exert themselves to keep certain topics out of print, it is not because they are frightened of prosecution but because they are frightened of public opinion.

“We can debate whether doing this was the right thing, but it’s important to point out a few things,” the film critic Stephen Silver wrote in the Philadelphia Inquirer. “The decision was made by the company that owns and controls the books, not by the government, or by a ‘mob’ that pressured it.”

Silver is correct to note there’s a difference between government censorship and self-censorship. But his claim there was no pressure behind the decision warrants scrutiny. (More on that in a moment.)

In any event, while there are differences in government censorship and self-censorship, both are dangerous, George Orwell observed.

Obviously it is not desirable that a government department should have any power of censorship… but the chief danger to freedom of thought and speech at this moment is not the direct interference of the [government] or any official body. If publishers and editors exert themselves to keep certain topics out of print, it is not because they are frightened of prosecution but because they are frightened of public opinion. In this country intellectual cowardice is the worst enemy a writer or journalist has to face, and that fact does not seem to me to have had the discussion it deserves. (emphasis added)

What Orwell was saying is that fear of public opinion can also result in censorship.

Now, to be clear, we don’t know for certain the motivations of publishers who decide to stop publishing certain Dr. Seuss books. Just like we can’t know for sure why Spotify suddenly dropped 42 Joe Rogan episodes down the Memory Hole. But it’s not unreasonable to suspect the impetus driving the canceling of today’s works is not unlike that which drove Hamlet out of the Soviet Union: fear.

Stalin’s canceling of Hamlet showed government bans aren’t the only ways to suppress free expression, or even the most effective. As Shostakovich observed, Stalin’s ability to cancel Hamlet with a mere word was a far better demonstration of power than an official state ban. It required no law or formal announcement. All it took was a quiet word and fear, an emotion that Americans today are familiar with.

A recent Cato study shows self-censorship is surging in the US, with two-thirds of Americans saying they are afraid to share ideas in public because of the political climate, which is increasingly dominated by “wokeism.”

Fear lurks behind the disappearance of art and the suppression of free expression. For that reason alone, such efforts should be resisted.

These fears are not irrational. The examples of Americans fired, shamed, and canceled for being on the wrong side of woke culture are legion. The phenomenon last year prompted a letter in Harper’s Magazine signed by dozens of leading academics that condemned the intolerant climate of ideas.

“Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes,” the letter read. “We are already paying the price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient zeal in agreement.”

This climate doesn’t end with writers and academics afraid to offer certain opinions, however. It extends to corporate boardrooms and executive committees, where individuals are being pressured to decide which art is acceptable and which opinions are fit to be shared on platforms.

To be on the wrong side of the debate invites personal destruction. It’s simply easier to agree to remove “harmful” art or fire that employee who raised the ire of the Twitter mob.

“People are afraid to challenge them,” Robby Soave of Reason told John Stossel last year in an interview on cancel culture.

Like in Orwell’s 1984, in today’s culture you don’t even have to utter Wrongthink to be condemned for it.

“Everyone was afraid,” Shostakovich said.

Just ask Dr. Howard Bauchner, who in March was removed as editor-in-chief of the prominent medical journal JAMA. Bauchner’s crime was that, during a podcast the previous month, his deputy editor questioned the existence of structural racism.

“Structural racism is an unfortunate term,” said Dr. Edward H. Livingston, who is white. “Personally, I think taking racism out of the conversation will help.”

To be sure, in America today one doesn’t risk liquidation for refusing to bow to pressure to self-censor works of art. That cannot be said of the Soviet Union under Stalin.

Yet there is a common thread that runs through both cases of censorship: fear

“Everyone was afraid,” Shostakovich said.

These same words can be applied to those bowing to cancel culture today.

This isn’t to say that Dr. Seuss’s works are or are not culturally insensitive, or that Hamlet does or does not contain themes harmful or subversive.

It’s simply to say that fear lurks behind the disappearance of art and the suppression of free expression. For that reason alone, such efforts should be resisted.

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines:… More by Jon Miltimore.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden’s Curious Choice to Lead Customs and Border Protection

As Tucson Police Chief, Chris Magnus refused to assist Border Patrol.


The disaster on the U.S./Mexican border has catapulted the issue of border security to new levels of importance. Therefore, the Biden administration’s pick for the Director of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), an always important position, has taken on additional significance.

On April 12, 2021 the Washington Post reported:  Biden picks Tucson police chief to run U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

That article began with this excerpt:

President Biden is preparing to nominate Tucson Police Chief Chris Magnus to be commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, selecting a critic of the Trump administration’s immigration policies to run the country’s largest federal law enforcement agency as it contends with the biggest increase in migrants arriving at the southwest border in two decades.

Magnus has led the Tucson police department since 2016 and has prominently associated himself with the movement favored by the progressive wing of the Democratic Party that emphasizes a less-aggressive, community-based policing model.

Magnus opposed efforts to make Tucson a “sanctuary city,” but he generally eschewed cooperation with federal immigration authorities, placing him at odds with the Border Patrol union — and many of the agents and officials who will potentially be under his command.

Here is another important excerpt from the Washington Post article:

Relations between Magnus and the Border Patrol have been frosty, according to three current and former CBP officials, particularly following an incident in 2017 when the Tucson police declined to assist the Border Patrol after a suspect escaped from custody.

The Border Patrol’s union officials called him “an ultraliberal social engineer who was given a badge and a gun by the City of Tucson,” in a 2018 Facebook post.

Magnus is a member of the Law Enforcement Immigration Task Force, which is a partner to the National Immigration Forum and says on its website that local police should not be involved in federal immigration enforcement.

It is beyond outrageous that Biden would pick a leader for CBP who opposes cooperation between local law enforcement and immigration law enforcement. This alone should disqualify him from becoming the director of CBP.

It is more than a bit ironic that on April 21, 2021, Immigration and Customs Enforcement posted a news release, “ICE officers arrest citizen of the Czech Republic in Illinois,” which began with the following statement:

CHICAGO — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) officers arrested a Czech Republic national convicted of attempted homicide and other crimes outside his residence in Lyons, Illinois April 19.

Tomas Ruckschlos, 34, was released into the community after serving time in prison for his crimes, without notification to ICE.

It is incredible that while ICE noted, with obvious frustration, the lack of cooperation by local police in Chicago that enabled an alien sought by ICE to be released into the community without making appropriate notification to ICE that Mr. Biden now seeks to have Chris Magnus lead CBP considering that he had similarly refused to cooperate with immigration law enforcement in the past.

The concept of various law enforcement agencies working cooperatively together has been a standard means of enabling various law enforcement agencies on all levels, to achieve common goals to enhance public safety and national security.

Such cooperation creates synergy, which is defined as:

The interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects.

For decades various law enforcement agencies on the local, state and federal level have created a variety of task forces to achieve vital common, shared goals.

Consider the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that includes a wide variety of law enforcement agencies to combat both international and domestic terrorism and operates under the aegis of the FBI includes ICE agents along with local and state police. In point of fact, the number of ICE agents who are assigned to this important task force is second only the FBI.

Virtually all international terrorists violate multiple laws comprehended within the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The Organized Crime, Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) is another important multi-agency task force that, not unlike the JTTF includes law enforcement officers from various local, state and federal agencies including ICE.

Smuggling organizations frequently smuggle aliens as well as narcotics into the United States. Furthermore, many of the leaders of drug trafficking organizations are aliens who also violate numerous statutes found in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

I was promoted to the position of INS Senior Special Agent and assigned to OCDETF for the final ten years of my 30-year career with the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service), so I speak from professional personal experience.

For the four years immediately preceding my promotion and assignment to the OCDETF I was assigned to the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Unified Intelligence Division (UID) in New York City, where I worked with a number of local and state police agencies as well as with other federal agencies and even law enforcement agencies of other countries.

In both of those assignments my unique authority as an INS agent was frequently a factor in our efforts to identify co-conspirators, when appropriate, to seek to bring criminal charges concerning violations of the Immigration and Nationality Act, against those who engaged in drug trafficking and related crimes that frequently included human trafficking and various crimes of violence that are most often perpetrated within the various ethnic immigrant communities, with the immigrants most often suffering the most violence at the hands of these thugs.

In addition to assisting with narcotics investigations as a law enforcement agent, I was specifically able to contribute to major investigations and prosecutions by using my unique authority, as an INS agent, to cultivate confidential informants and cooperating witnesses in various ethnic immigrant communities in furtherance of our investigations of major international drug trafficking organizations.

Contrary to the claims that having immigration law enforcement personnel cooperating with local and state police would undermine community policing in ethnic immigrant communities, in my personal experience, quite the opposite was true.

Indeed, Mr. Magnus has made such fatuous claims in the past to justify his opposition to having his police department cooperate with immigration law enforcement agencies.

As an INS agent I was able to arrange for cooperating illegal aliens to remain in the United States if they assisted with law enforcement officers to identify criminals as well as criminal organizations. Various visas are now available for such cooperating aliens that, may even facilitated the admission of they family members from foreign countries if their assistance was deemed to be particularly instrumental.

My colleagues in other agencies such as the FBI, DEA and ATF frequently told me that my authority as an INS agent was frequently more effective in gaining the trust and cooperation of members of ethnic immigrant communities than was their ability to provide huge financial rewards for cooperating witnesses and informants.

In many cases, our investigations depended on the ability to cultivate such informants and cooperating witnesses.

Furthermore, criminal aliens and members of transnational criminal organizations generally live and operate within the ethnic immigrant communities, thereby posing a direct and immediate threat to the safety and wellbeing of these immigrants no matter where they originally came from.

Strong cooperation between all law enforcement agencies, especially ICE and CBP and local and state police can help to rid these communities of these violent and sociopathic predators, thereby making the lives of those in these various ethnic immigrant communities safer.

The goal of true “Community Policing” must be to safeguard the safety of the residents of the community and restore faith in our system of justice.

This is why there is a clear nexus between Interior Enforcement And The Border Crisis.

Additionally, there are a number of immigration-related criminal charges that can bring pressure to bear against foreign criminals and members of transnational gangs and international criminal and terrorist organizations.

Under 8 U.S. Code § 1326 – Reentry of removed aliens, criminal aliens who are deported and then illegally reenter the United States face up to 20 years in prison. I worked with then-U.S. Senator Al D’Amato to create this enhancement for criminal aliens back in the early 1980’s.

Alien smugglers / human traffickers, whether they are United States citizens or aliens, may be prosecuted for violation of 8 U.S. Code § 1324 – Bringing in and harboring certain aliens.

Under the provisions of 18 U.S. Code § 922(g)(5) any alien illegally present in the United States who is found to be in possession of a firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce faces a maximum of 10 years imprisonment upon conviction for this crime.

Under the provisions of 18 U.S. Code § 1546 – Fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents an alien who violates the provisions of this statute faces up to 20 years in prison if the violations were involved in drug trafficking and up to 25 years on prison if such crimes were related to international terrorism.

These laws were enacted to protect national security and public safety, yet Mr. Biden and his administration refuse to do what is necessary to live up to their oaths of office and protect America and Americans.

The next leader of CBP must fully embrace the notion of cooperation between all law enforcement agencies including CBP and ICE with local law enforcement and not seek to obstruct it.

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.