Wednesday, June 28, 2017


 Trump Must Now Revoke CNN's White House Press Credentials
 James O'Keefe tape exposes network 
as anti-Trump activist organization
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
President Donald Trump must now consider revoking CNN’s White House press credentials after a new video released by Project Veritas revealed that the network pushes Trump-Russia hysteria despite knowing the whole story is “mostly bullshit”.
CNN senior producer John Bonifield was asked about the network’s breathless coverage of the Russia investigation and allegations that Trump colluded with Moscow to influence the election.
“Could be bullshit,” Bonifield responded. “I mean, it’s mostly bullshit right now.”

In other words, a senior producer at CNN was caught on tape admitting that the network deliberately pushes fake news about Donald Trump.
“I think the president is probably right to say, like, look you are witch hunting me. You have no smoking gun. You have no real proof,” Bonifield went on to say.
He then admitted that CNN pushes the fake news Trump-Russia collusion story to get viewers.
Asked, “Why is CNN constantly like Russia this, Russia that?,” Bonifield responds, “Because it’s ratings. … Our ratings are incredible right now.”
Three CNN journalists were also just forced to resign after the network apologized for pushing another fake news story about Trump advisor Anthony Scaramucci being linked to a Russian investment fund.
Any other news outlet that admitted it created fake news simply to make money and attract eyeballs would be savaged by the rest of the media, put on a blacklist and wouldn’t get anywhere near the White House.
Why should CNN, an organization that employs activists posing as impartial reporters like Jim Acosta, be treated any differently?
Trump must now seriously look at revoking CNN’s access to the White House.
Fake news is dangerous to democracy. Fake news should not be tolerated.
CNN's Trail Of Lies
 Published on Jun 27, 2017
In the aftermath of project veritas's new video showing CNN producer call the Trump Russia narrative a BS ratings stung Infowars Reporter Joe Biggs breaks down the the trail of Lies in CNN's history
CNN Producer Admits Russia Narrative About Trump is BS on CAMERA! Alternative Media Gets Vindicated 
 Published on Jun 27, 2017
CNN producer John Bonifield has been caught on camera admitting that CNN’s coverage of the Russia angle as it relates to Donald Trump is mostly BS contrived for ratings. The audio and video were captured by undercover journalists working with Project Veritas, an organization headed up by James O’Keefe. Their goal is to expose the evil that happens in media and politics. Previously they’d done an expose on Planned Parenthood and it showed them discussing prices for certain body parts of dead babies that had been aborted in their facilities. Now they are delving deeper into the cabal known as the mainstream media. The video that has been released today (June 27 2017) is the first of more that will come in the future on this specific topic according to James O’Keefe.

A great takeaway from the video in question is that CNN is a business just like any other. Profit uber alles. Bonifield explained to the undercover journalist that CNN is only getting around one million views a night where network news like NBC is getting 20 million. So they must figure out ways to be competitive and keep the business afloat. Prime example of this mentality was during a meeting he described which featured some insight from CNN’s CEO - Jeff Zucker. Donald Trump, at the time, had just recently pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord. CNN covered it for a day and a half. They were congratulated for that during the meeting, but Zucker essentially said “let’s get back to what pay our bills.” which is the Russia narrative.

Negative Russia coverage is not isolated to CNN. It appears to be all of mainstream media with the exception of Fox News (sometimes.) Late night talk show hosts like Stephen Colbert and Trevor Noah also do an extensive amount of negative coverage on Russia. They all have one thing in common: ratings. Even the old dinosaur print media such as The Washington Post and The New York Post participate in Russia/Trump hysteria to strain money from their dwindling bases. Alternative media has been a beacon of light throughout all of this madness, which is why mainstream media has been attacking alternative media personalities and their biggest platform: YouTube.

Invoking the Red Scare in 2017 is less about national security as it is about money. Some foot soldiers on the ground working on the ground at these mainstream media cabals may think differently. However, they are simply useful idiots. Once they are no longer needed, they will simply be discarded like the three journalists who got fired recently over a fraudulent CNN story about Donald Trump and Russia.



EXCERPT:  "After losing all of her jobs after coming out, Williams is pushing megachurches toward LGBTQ acceptance"
Paula also serves on the board of the Gay Christian Network and is a blogger for The Huffington Post.
 Paula Williams poses for a portrait ...
"Paula is actively involved in OPEN, a ministry of progressive Evangelicals, and the Center for Progressive Renewal, a ministry of Convergence.  She is also an active member at Highlands Church in Denver, Colorado, where she leads their church planting team and preaches occasionally."
Mr. Williams’s father, who is also a minister, before his transition, when he was known as Paul Williams.
Paul, Now Paula Williams Since 2013
 Paula Williams, 66, is 6-foot-3, with light brown ringlets, a soft voice and an affinity for phrases like, “Oh, my goodness.” She is still married to Jonathan’s mother, and they share a Christian counseling practice, but they no longer live together. “Our therapist basically said, ‘You’re a lesbian and she’s not,’” Ms. Williams said.
 Paula Williams delivering a sermon recently at Highlands Church in Denver. Credit Ryan David Brown for The New York Times
Son: Jonathan Williams of Forefront Church, 
Brooklyn, New York

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
NEW YORK — The former longtime president of a church planting organization headquartered in New York has decided to live as a woman.
Paul Williams led the Orchard Group from 1989 to 2009, an organization that has planted churches throughout the Northeast, and especially the New York City area, since the 1940’s.
“Orchard Group has maintained the same simple statement of beliefs since our beginning in 1948,” its website reads, noting that it affirms the authority of the Scriptures and “[t]he necessity of the new birth through the Holy Spirit for entering the Kingdom of God.”
Williams also worked as a teaching pastor for two megachurches in addition to his involvement with the Orchard Group, and was a columnist for Christian Standard Magazine.

In 2012, Williams approached his son, Jonathan Williams, to divulge that he desired to live as a woman. The news took him aback.
“We had a church Christmas party that night, so I get this information and I have to go to the church Christmas party and pretend everything’s okay,” Jonathan Williams, who pastors Forefront Brooklyn, told the New York Times earlier this month. “I drank too much and did my best to put on a happy face, but it was pretty brutal.”
Paul Williams was still involved with Orchard during this time, even though not serving as president, and his son feared how the matter might affect both of their ministries.

“I’d be upstairs crying before church—like, this is miserable. My dad was my hero, and my dad’s not my dad any longer,” the younger Williams explained. “I’d stop crying and come down and I’d preach, and be really glad and say hi to everybody, and then I’d get home and go to sleep.”
“My wife would be like, ‘You’re super depressed,’ and I’d go, ‘I know I’m super depressed. I don’t know what to do about this.’ I got counseling about three months after I found out. And I went to him for three, four years dealing with it,” he outlined.
In 2013, Williams advised the Orchard Group that he had decided to live as a woman. His resignation was consequently requested, and he agreed. The reason for his resignation, however, was not divulged to the public.
Paul Williams changed his name to Paula and began receiving hormone therapy and cosmetic surgery. He and his wife went to counseling, and the two were advised to split because “Paula” was now a lesbian and his wife was not. While not living together, the two still remain married and operate a counseling service together.
In 2015, Jonathan Williams—who had long struggled and agonized over his father’s decision—explained during a church staff meeting that Forefront Brooklyn would now move toward full participation for homosexual and transgender members. He pointed to his children’s unflinching reception of his father’s new presentation as being a motivating factor, telling himself, “This is how God [too] sees my dad.”
Williams also sought out advice from progressive congregations who were homosexual and/or transgender-affirming.
However, recent reports of Paul William’s transition have saddened a number of Christians.
“Satan won on this one, because this pastor, before deciding to come out, had already sinned in his mind. He then followed through. Now what do you have? Our God is holy and cannot tolerate sin. Once this guy started down this path, the Holy Spirit left him to his own devices,” one commenter wrote. “If he repents and ask forgiveness, he will be back in the good graces of Christ, but if not and continues down this road, his destiny is made.”
“This is very, very sad. Psychological problems need to be dealt with by counselors who understand the problems that cause gender dysphoria, not by those that encourage a person to go through with ‘transitions,'” another stated. “God doesn’t make mistakes, but rather than seek godly counsel, he decided what? That God made a mistake? That God could not heal him of the feelings he had that made him want to be a woman? I pray God will heal him and deliver him from his gender dysphoria, and bring him to true faith in the Lord and His Word.”
Williams now attends Highlands Church in Denver, Colorado, where he works as a church planter and also preaches from the pulpit on occasion.


Tuesday, June 27, 2017


 Published on Jun 19, 2017
Typical of the mainstream media to slander anyone who talks truth, here is the interview aired on Good Morning Britain 20th June 2017.
 Tommy Robinson Schools Piers Morgan About Islam On Good Morning Britain
 Published on Jun 26, 2017
Tommy Robinson took on Piers Morgan and demolished him on the issue of Islam which Piers knows nothing about.



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 The Washington Post has reported--drop a ready tear — that there will be no 
Iftar Dinner this year in the White House:
For the first time in nearly two decades, Ramadan has come and gone without the White House recognizing it with an iftar or Eid celebration, as had taken place each year under the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations.
And the article by Amy Wang attempts to suggest that the “tradition” of the Iftar Dinner goes all the way back to Thomas Jefferson who, as is well known, was asked by a visiting Muslim envoy of the Bey of Tunis, one Sidi Soliman Mellimelli,  to postpone the dinner to which Jefferson had invited him, along with others, until after sundown, which Jefferson, as a matter of courtesy, did.
The Post continues:
Jefferson’s decision to change the time of the meal to accommodate Mellimelli’s [the envoy from the Bey of Tunis] observance of Ramadan has been seized on by both sides in the 21st-century debate over Islam more than 200 years later. Historians have cited the meal as the first time an iftar took place in the White House — and it has been referenced in recent White House celebrations of Ramadan as an embodiment of the Founding Father’s respect for religious freedom. Meanwhile, critics on the far right have taken issue with the characterization of Jefferson’s Dec. 9, 1805, dinner as an iftar.
Notice how in the Post article it is “historians” (disinterested, authoritative, not to be doubted) who cite that 1805 meal as the first Iftar dinner in the White House,  while those who deny that the meal was an “Iftar dinner” are described as being on the “far right,” apparently for no other reason than that very denial.
What actually happened is clear for those without an insensate need to make Islam, as Barack Obama has repeatedly  claimed it was, “always part of America’s story.” And you can be as left-wing as all get out, and still recognize that Jefferson was not putting on an Iftar dinner. A little history will help:  Mellimelli came to Washington as the envoy of the Bey of Tunis. The Americans had blockaded the port of Tunis, in order to force the Bey to halt his attacks on American shipping. Mellimelli was sent to make an agreement that would end the blockade. Invited by Jefferson to a dinner at the White House set for 3:30 (dinners were earlier in those pre-Edison days of our existence), he requested that it be held after sundown, in accordance with his Muslim practice, and Jefferson, a courteous man, obliged him. There is no hint that the dinner had changed in any way; no one then called it, or thought of it, as an “Iftar dinner.” Mellimelli himself did not describe it as an “Iftar dinner.” There is no record of it being anything other than the exact same dinner, the same menu, with wine (no removal of alcohol as would be necessary were it a real Iftar dinner), the only change being that of the three-hour delay until sunset. Nothing Jefferson said or did at the time, or in his later writings,  indicates that he thought of that delayed dinner as an “Iftar dinner”; nor did he think he was in any way honoring Islam.
In fact, Jefferson had a very dim view of Islam, which came out of his experience in dealing with the Barbary Pirates, that is, the North African Muslims (in Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli), who attacked Christian shipping and seized ships and Christian sailors, and then demanded ransom. The sums were not trivial; the American Republic found itself spending 20% of its national budget on such payments. These continued until Jefferson became President, stopped the practice of paying such tribute, and instead made war on the Barbary Pirates. And that worked.
In 1786, years before he became president, Jefferson, along with John Adams, met with the Tripolitanian envoy Sidi Haji Abdrahaman in London.  Perhaps by then Jefferson had read the Qur’an he had purchased in 1765 out of curiosity (no one knows how much of that Qur’an Jefferson  may have read, or when, though some Muslim apologists have baselessly claimed he must have bought his Qur’an out of sympathetic interest in Islam.) If he did read it,  it would have helped him to understand the motivations of the North African Muslims. Certainly by the time he became President in 1801, he was determined not to negotiate with the Barbary Pirates, but to implacably oppose with force these Muslims whom, he knew from his encounter with Abdrahaman in London, were permanently hostile to all non-Muslims.
In London, Jefferson and Adams had queried the Tripolitanian ambassador “concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury” for the Americans had done nothing to deserve being attacked, and the ambassador replied, as Jefferson reported:
“It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.”
And later, Jefferson reported to Secretary of State John Jay and to Congress at greater length, with a nearly identical quote from the ambassador:
“The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
These reports do not sound as if they came from someone who thought well of Islam. The more dealings Jefferson had with the representatives of the Barbary states, and the more he learned from them directly of the tenets of the faith, the more he began to understand the aggressive nature of Islam, the centrality of Jihad, the inculcation of permanent hostility toward non-Muslims, and the heavenly reward for Jihadis slain in battle.
The Iftar dinner “tradition” begins not with Jefferson in 1805, and that three-hour delay in a meal that was otherwise unchanged, but with our latter-day interfaith outreach presidents — Clinton, Bush, Obama — each of whom, in his own way, has managed to ignore or misinterpret the texts and teachings of Islam.
That “tradition” of Iftar dinners in the White House is less than 20 years old, as compared with the other “tradition,” ten times as long, that is, the 200 years of Iftar-less presidencies. That short-lived “tradition”  has been ended, for now, by an administration that, for all of its self-inflicted wounds and woes in other areas, continues to exhibit a better sense of what Islam, foreign and domestic, is all about, than its predecessors, and has no desire to obliquely honor it.
The interfaith outreach farce that the Iftar Dinner at the White house embodies, honoring Islam — while, all over the world, every day brings fresh news of Muslim atrocities against non-Muslims, more than 30,000 such attacks since 9/11/2001 alone, not to mention attacks as well  against other Muslims deemed either of the wrong sect, or insufficient in the fervor of their faith — now comes to an end, if only for four years. That is certainly what Jefferson (and John Adams, and that most profound presidential student of Islam, John Quincy Adams), if not The Washington Post, would have wanted.
And since John Quincy Adams has been mentioned, why doesn’t The Washington Post take it upon itself to share with its readers what that most scholarly of our presidents wrote about Islam. It does not date. And it might prove most instructive.


 Trump's Travel Ban Makes A Comeback As The Supreme Court Reinstates Executive Order
 HISTORIC: Supreme Court Saves America, 
Reinstates Trump Travel Ban
 Supreme Court Reinstates Travel Ban; 
9th Circus (Circuit Court) Overturned Again
 Published on Jun 26, 2017
The Supreme Court has reinstated Donald Trump’s travel ban that has been heavily criticized by the public and of course, the mainstream media. The ban is a temporary measure that will halt travel from six countries in and around the middle east including Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, and Iran. It is being reported as a minor victory by the aforementioned MSM because there is a caveat to the ban being allowed. If a person has a sick or injured relative in the United States, then they may have a bona fide reason for being able to skip past the travel ban. Other than that, the ban is on. Before the Supreme Court’s ruling, it was struck down by a temporary injunction coming from Federal Judge Derrick Watson of Hawaii then Theodore Chuang of Maryland and was upheld by the 4th and 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Much of the opposition to the travel ban is politically motivated. Maybe even personal. Derrick Watson is a native Hawaiian who attended Harvard Law School with Barack Obama. He was appointed by Obama as well. 48 hours before Watson issued the injunction which halted Trump’s travel ban, Barack Obama just happened to take a trip to Hawaii. Could be a coincidence or it could be fishy as when Bill Clinton intercepted Loretta Lynch as soon as she landed in Phoenix Arizona while she was the Attorney General in charge of the Department of Justice’s investigation into Hillary alongside the FBI. And the 9th Circuit Court of appeals has a history of decisions based on liberal activism and 80% of them get overturned.

The travel ban is up for formal talks in the court in September of 2017 but for now, it is back in place thanks to the majority conservative Supreme Court. Neil Gorsuch is the first Supreme Court appointee by Donald Trump and may not be his last since Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are now elderly. Also, conservative justice Anthony Kennedy may retire soon. This situation could mean that Trump has the opportunity to appoint in total, 4 new conservative justices which would tip the scales of balance 7-2 in favor of conservatives which would help shape the direction of the country into the foreseeable future.
 Travel Ban Now Enforceable, Not A Muslim Ban 
 Published on Jun 27, 2017
Trumps Travel Ban has been heavily criticized by the left who claims that its a muslim ban. However the entire Supreme Court Ruled in favor of Trumps Travel Ban proving that it is constitutional and doesn't discriminate against Muslims. It's interesting to note that the 6 countries on the travel ban aren't even the countries with the highest populations of Muslims which aren't included on the ban.

Monday, June 26, 2017


GENESIS 11:1-9-
1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.
2    And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there.
3    And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter.
4    And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.
5    And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.
6    And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
7    Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
8    So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.
9    Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 OMAHA, Neb. — A groundbreaking was recently held as part of a Nebraska 
building project that will erect a church, synagogue and mosque side by side on 
the same property.
Temple Israel, the American Muslim Institute and Countryside Christian Church claim that they are being led by God to create the multi-faith location in Omaha.
“We believe that we are being led by our God to continue the journey started by Abraham and that we are all called to be a blessing to each other and our community,” the FAQ section of the Tri-Faith Initiative website outlines.
 It says that the effort combines the three because of their shared Abrahamic faith and their belief that they all worship the same God.

“Judaism, Christianity, and Islam share a monotheistic belief system,” the page explains. “Our traditions have many names for God and use several languages for our sacred texts, but we share a belief in the God of Abraham.”
The “Tri-Faith Initiative” has been in motion since 2006, with Countryside Christian Church being the last to break ground. It held its ceremony on June 5.
“We’ve been waiting for this moment since entering into the Tri-Faith dialogue back in October 2013. It was a true leap of faith for the congregation to vote in support of relocation back then,” leader Eric Elnes told KMTV. “To see this day come is a dream coming together.

Temple Israel opened its new $21 million dollar facility in 2013, and the American Muslim Institute completed its $7 million mosque in the spring, opening this month. A tri-faith center is also expected to be completed in 2019, and will be used for interfaith activities.
“Tri-Faith Initiative is already sponsoring activities including speaking engagements, a children’s program, shared holidays between congregations, an annual picnic, and others,” its website outlines.
“Our mission is not about compromising anybody’s faith,” Imam Mohamad Jamal Daoudi told CNN. “We are here to learn about each other and to live as neighbors with each other.”
While Countryside Christian Church, part of the United Church of Christ, already has a building 15 minutes away from the location, it said it wanted to join the effort because it liked the concept. Elnes said that the majority of his congregation voted for the move, while some reports state that the matter divided the assembly.
“We are moving simply because we fell in love with the vision of Tri-Faith,” he said.
While some laud the initiative as a peacemaking move, others have expressed concern. The Global Faith Institute, led by Dr. Mark Christian, a former Muslim turned Christian, has several posts on its website about the matter.
“The fundamental schism in Islam between Sunni and Shia is irreconcilable and has resulted in centuries of strife and violence within Islam. The idea that a mosque exists, that is open to both sects equally; in close physical proximity and partnership with Jews and Christians, makes this project a very appealing target for extremists of all stripes who might wish to make a statement using violence,” he opined.
The daughter of billionaire investor Warren Buffet, Susie Buffet, is stated to be one of the financiers of the project, according to the Kansas City Star. Buffet is a member of Countryside Christian Church.
 Countryside Relocation to the Tri-Faith Campus

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 Over 40 pro-family groups recently signed a letter to the charity database site 
GuideStar after it labeled dozens of organizations as “hate groups” based on a 
list compiled by the controversial Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).
“The ‘hate group’ list is nothing more than a political weapon targeting people it deems to be its political enemies. The list is ad hoc, partisan, and agenda-driven,” the correspondence read.
GuideStar added a banner atop the info pages of 46 nonprofits, which reads, “This organization was flagged as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.”
 Among those tagged as “hate groups” include Family Research Council, the American Family Association, Liberty Counsel, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, the Immigration Reform Law Institute, the Jewish Institute for Global Awareness and the American College of Pediatricians.

Guidestar CEO, Jacob Harold, told the Associated Press that the company decided to add the warnings as a response to the increase of “hateful rhetoric” among Americans. He said that the organization decided to utilize SPLC’s list and trust their determinations.
“[W]e are making a judgment to trust that third party,” Harold outlined. “We feel that’s quite defensible.”
However, he said that the company was also considering moving the warning to a not-so-prominent location on each page, as GuideStar can’t personally state with certainty that every organization labeled is indeed motivated by hate.

Those included on SPLC’s list state that the designation is defamatory.
“The SPLC’s primary goal is to achieve the political submission of its opponents, but its practice of sustained demonization in one’s community—which is what a ‘hate map’ is all about—inflames passions of hatred and animus against its targets,” Wednesday’s letter read.
It noted that SPLC’s hate map had been cited in 2012 when gunman Floyd Corkins went to Family Research Council’s headquarters with the intent to kill. Corkins was sentenced to 25 years in prison.
“In 2012, a shooter entered the Family Research Council headquarters in Washington, D.C., to ‘kill as many as possible’ because SPLC had identified FRC as a ‘hate group,’ and the killer-to-be relied on SPLC’s website to identify targets, according to his sworn testimony,” the correspondence outlined.
“The SPLC continues to list on its website people such as House Majority Whip Steve Scalise who was recently shot by James T. Hodgkinson who ‘liked’ SPLC’s Facebook page,” it continued. “Does it not concern you that within the past five years, the SPLC has been linked to gunmen who carried out two terrorist shootings in the DC area?”
GuideStar now says that it will remove the labels, but only out of its claim that staff had received threats from those upset about the designations.
“Dismayingly, a significant amount of the feedback we’ve received in recent days has shifted from constructive criticism to harassment and threats directed at our staff and leadership,” it remarked in a statement. “We acknowledge there is a deep, nuanced conversation to be had with Americans of all political, cultural, and religious backgrounds regarding how we address—and identify—hate groups.”
The banners are expected to be removed this week, although GuideStar says it will still provide the information if there is an inquiry.
“If anyone’s guilty of hate, it’s the organization defining it!” said FRC’s Tony Perkins in a blog post on the matter. “SPLC’s own Mark Potok made no bones about the group’s ultimate agenda, saying, ‘Sometimes the press will describe us as monitoring hate crimes and so on. … I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups, to completely destroy them.'”
“And they think Christians are the threat?” he asked. “What’s worse, SPLC is quite open about the fact that their labels are completely arbitrary [as the group once said], ‘Our criteria for a ‘hate group,’ first of all, have nothing to do with criminality or violence… It’s strictly ideological.'”
 VICTORY: GuideStar REMOVES Bigoted 
Hate Group Label


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

 A triumph! GuideStar has removed the “hate group” label smeared on many of us by the hard left, pro-jihad hate machine, the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center).
WaPo: GuideStar announced its decision to remove the labels last week, two days after being sent a complaint letter signed by 41 people, largely representing conservative organizations, including Pamela Geller of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, whom the Southern Poverty Law Center describes as “one of America’s most notorious Islamophobes,” and Tim Wildmon of the American Family Association, a group the SPLC says is staunchly anti-LGBT.
“The ‘hate group’ list is nothing more than a political weapon targeting people it deems to be its political enemies,” the letter said. “The list is ad hoc, partisan, and agenda-driven.”
Threats? None of our followers and members have ever killed or plotted violence against anyone, but members of SPLC, the very group whose defamation GuideStar cites, have killed and attempted to assassinate any number of us.
Last week, a coalition of conservative groups and organizations working in defense of freedom submitted a letter calling out America’s leading source of information on U.S. charities, GuideStar, on its use flagrant use of the SPLC’s hate labels in smearing conservative organizations.
Earlier this month, GuideStar, the world’s largest source for information about charities, added a new feature to its website: warning labels flagging would-be donors to nearly four dozen nonprofits accused of spreading hate. The outcry was immediate and most vehement from conservative groups, including Christians who said they’d been targeted as hateful for opposing same-sex marriage.
The complaints prompted GuideStar to reverse its course. The company said it’s removing the labels “for the time being” beginning Monday, in part because of concerns raised about their objectivity but also because of the threats against employees.
Letter: 2017.06.21_vfinal_signatures_LTR_Coalition to Guidestar-Harold Jacobs
We, the undersigned organizations and individuals, write to express our strong disagreement with Guidestar’s newly implemented policy that labels 46 American organizations as “hate groups.” Your designations are based on determinations made by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a hard-left activist organization. As such, SPLC’s aggressive political agenda pervades the construction of its “hate group” listings.
The SPLC has no bona fides to make such determinations. It is not a governmental organization using a rigorous criteria to create its lists, and it is not a scientifically oriented organization. The SPLC is merely another “progressive” political organization. It gained credibility attacking Klansmen, neo-Nazis, and skinheads – many of whom were engaged in violence. The SPLC is now trying to export the same tactics into areas of mainstream political discourse including debates about immigration and sexual-identity politics.
The “hate group” list is nothing more than a political weapon targeting people it deems to be its political enemies. The list is ad hoc, partisan, and agenda-driven.1 The SPLC doesn’t even pretend to identify groups on the political left that engage in “hate.” Mosques or Islamist groups that promote radical speech inciting anti-Semitism and actual violence are not listed by the SPLC even though many have been publicly identified after terrorist attacks. Radical, violent leftist environmentalists or speech suppressing thugs – like the rioting “antifa” movement – receive no mention from the SPLC.
Despite its denials to the contrary, this highly refined method of ostracism and dehumanization practiced by the SPLC isn’t just about verbal debate – it can foreseeably lead to violence. The SPLC’s primary goal is to achieve the political submission of its opponents, but its practice of sustained demonization in one’s community – which is what a “hate map” is all about – inflames passions of hatred and animus against its targets……
Read the whole thing here.
We fought the lies and the smear. And we won.
back on
Earlier this month, GuideStar, the world’s largest source for information about charities, added a new feature to its website: warning labels flagging would-be donors to nearly four dozen nonprofits accused of spreading hate.
The outcry was immediate and most vehement from conservative groups, including Christians who said they’d been targeted as hateful for opposing same-sex marriage.
The complaints prompted GuideStar to reverse its course. The company said it’s removing the labels “for the time being” beginning Monday, in part because of concerns raised about their objectivity but also because of the threats against employees.
“Dismayingly, a significant amount of the feedback we’ve received in recent days has shifted from constructive criticism to harassment and threats directed at our staff and leadership,” said a statement posted to GuideStar’s website on Friday. “With this development in mind — driven by both our commitment to objectivity and our concerns for our staff’s wellbeing,” the labels are being removed.
The “hate group” designations used by GuideStar came from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a nonprofit watchdog organization that tracks such groups, which it says includes the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis and white nationalists. The “hate group” banners used on GuideStar’s website linked to the law center’s website, according to the Associated Press.
The SPLC lists 52 “anti-LGBT” organizations on its website, including several churches and nonprofit Christian ministries, such as the Alliance Defending Freedom, which it says “has supported the criminalization of gay sex and currently is working to enact so-called ‘bathroom bills’ around the country to prevent trans people from using public restrooms … in accordance with their gender identities.”
“These groups are not listed on the basis of opposition to same-sex marriage or the belief that the Bible describes homosexual activity as sinful,” the SPLC’s website said.
But some conservative organizations complained that the center’s lumping them together with violent racist groups wasn’t based on objective research but on a political agenda. GuideStar’s usage of the center’s designation, they said, undermined the website’s policy of “neutrality.”
“One may or may not like the legal advocacy of the Alliance Defending Freedom, but they’re not a bunch of hooded-sheet Klanners burning crosses,” wrote Mark Kellner for the conservative-leaning “Get Religion” website, which focuses focused on religion coverage in the news media.
GuideStar announced its decision to remove the labels last week, two days after being sent a complaint letter signed by 41 people, largely representing conservative organizations, including Pamela Geller of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, whom the Southern Poverty Law Center describes as “one of America’s most notorious Islamophobes,” and Tim Wildmon of the American Family Association, a group the SPLC says is staunchly anti-LGBT.
“The ‘hate group’ list is nothing more than a political weapon targeting people it deems to be its political enemies,” the letter said. “The list is ad hoc, partisan, and agenda-driven.”
The letter called the SPLC a “progressive political organization” that had “gained credibility attacking Klansmen, neo-Nazis, and skinheads — many of who were engaged in violence.” But now, the letter stated, the center had expanded its “tactics” into debates about immigration and “sexual-identity” politics.
In the first instance, the gunman said that he targeted Family Research Council after seeing it was listed as “anti-gay” on Southern Poverty Law Center’s website. In the second instance, the letter simply stated the gunman “liked” the SPLC’s Facebook page.
The letter complained that the SPLC continued to “list” Scalise on its website. A 2014 posting on the center’s website says Scalise gave a speech to a “well-known group of white supremacists and neo-Nazis” years ago in his home state of Louisiana. Scalise said he wasn’t aware of the group’s views, a claim with which the SPLC took issue.
Conservative media outlets seized upon GuideStar’s warning labels and the organization’s decision to remove them. A headline in the Daily Signal, a news platform for the conservative Heritage Foundation, blared: “Nonprofit tracker smears dozens of conservative organizations as ‘hate groups.’” Breitbart News reported: “Institutional Left Loses Again: Nonprofit Tracker Withdraws Inaccurate Leftist-Driven Labels Hurting Conservative Groups.”
For its part, GuideStar said in its statement that designating “hate groups” is more complicated than it had realized when it first starting using the labels.
In the weeks and months since, we have heard from both supporters and critics of this decision, many of whom have presented reasonable disagreements with the way in which this information was presented. We are always open and willing to have conversations with our users and nonprofit groups and welcomed this feedback. We acknowledge there is a deep, nuanced conversation to be had with Americans of all political, cultural, and religious backgrounds regarding how we address — and identify — hate groups.
GuideStar said it will continue to make the “hate groups” information available “on request.”
Family Research Council (who was the victim of a shooting by an SPLC member) said this:
  1. The SPLC is a partisan, hard-Left profit-machine trafficking in labels that lead to violence.
  2. GuideStar was right to disassociate from them, and joins the good company of the FBI and the Army (under Sec. McHugh), who’ve done the same. This establishes GuideStar as a truly neutral source for non-profit data.
  3. We disavow and condemn violence in any form, and encourage GuideStar to report any threats of violence to the authorities.
  4. We will continue to monitor “neutral” charity sites for expressions of partisan politics.
Haaretz has this:


 Saudi Arabia's Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman (2nd L) takes his seat to meet with U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis and his delegation on April 19, 2017 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

The McDonalds ad reads:

We renew our allegiance and obedience for his royal highness, the servant of the two holy mosques, King Salman the son of Abdul Aziz Al Saud. And we support Amir Mohammed bin Salman, his son, to become Minister of Defence and Prime Minister and to be nominated as successor. God give him wisdom and equip him to rule his kingdom. With peace and prosperity, McDonald's.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 Was there a question of a Ronald McDonald-led insurrection? Or of Big Mac-driven 
apostasy from Islam?
“McDonalds sent a very McRoyale tribute to Saudi’s crown prince,” by Leyal Khalife, StepFeed, June 23, 2017:
This week, Saudi Arabia’s King Salman appointed his son and current defense minister – Mohammed bin Salman – as crown prince of the kingdom.
The news was met with excitement from many – with several hashtags trending on Twitter in celebration of MBS’s new position.
Of course, it wasn’t just your ordinary Saudi nationals welcoming MBS via social media.
Burger franchise McDonalds joined in, sending its very own royal tribute to the crown prince.
McDonald KSA pledged allegiance to the crown prince via a tweet that has since been making the rounds online, garnering over 650 re-tweets at the time of writing.
“We pay homage to his royal highness Mohammed bin Salman. We promise loyalty and obedience on the Quran. We pray God safeguards our kingdom’s security, stability and safety,” the tweet says….

Saturday, June 24, 2017


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Four Republican senators broke ranks with their party’s leadership Thursday, vowing to vote against the GOP’s latest healthcare “reform” bill, the Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017.
Senators Rand Paul (Ky.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Ron Johnson (Wis.), and Mike Lee (Utah) issued a joint press release upon announcing their decision to oppose the legislation being dubbed Trumpcare.
“Currently, for a variety of reasons, we are not ready to vote for this bill, but we are open to negotiation and obtaining more information before it is brought to the floor,” the quartet explained. “There are provisions in this draft that represent an improvement to our current healthcare system but it does not appear this draft as written will accomplish the most important promise that we made to Americans: to repeal Obamacare and lower their healthcare costs.”
Senator Paul issued a separate statement, stating that he didn’t run on passing “Obamacare lite.” "The current bill does not repeal Obamacare. It does not keep our promises to the American people. I will oppose it coming to the floor in its current form, but I remain open to negotiations,” the self-described constitutional conservative added.
“It looks like we’re keeping Obamacare, not repealing it,” Paul commented during an interview on MSNBC.
Paul isn’t new to the fight to prevent party powerbrokers from shoving voluminous bills down the throats of the rank and file. Just one day prior to the release of the healthcare proposal — a bill hammered out behind closed doors by Republican leadership — Paul announced his intention to reintroduce a bill that would require senators to read legislation before they voted on it.
His “Read the Bills” measure would mandate that all lawmakers be given time to study the legislation they are being asked to consider by requiring that all bills be made public for one day for every 20 pages of content prior to being placed before the body of the Senate for its deliberation.
“Legislation is too often shoved through Congress without proper hearings, amendments, or debate, as the secrecy surrounding the Senate's health care bill and the pressure to vote for it with little time to fully evaluate the proposal once again remind us,” Paul wrote in a statement published Wednesday.
The Better Care Reconciliation Act, as released by the Republican Party leadership on Thursday, comes in at 142 pages, thus Paul’s bill would give legislators eight days to plow through the proposal before being asked to impose it on the American people.
In the coming days, many journalists (perhaps even this one) will analyze the Republican version of federally imposed healthcare. There is a place for such an exercise. The whole of the matter comes down to one issue and one issue only: Does the Constitution grant power to the Congress (or the president or the federal courts) to legislate in the area of healthcare? If the answer to that question is “No,” which I assure you that it is, then the next step along the critical path of constitutionalism is the 10th Amendment, which states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The next step, then, is for the states to reject any attempt by the federal government — regardless of the party affiliation of the act’s authors — to impose upon them any programs or policies associated with the healthcare provided within them.
If it were properly understand and exercised, this tack is the “rightful remedy” to all unconstitutional acts of the federal government.
It is now as it was when Thomas Jefferson described it as such in the Kentucky Resolutions.
Jefferson wrote, speaking of efforts by many federal lawmakers to usurp the authority rightfully retained by the states in the Constitution:
Therefore this commonwealth is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the general government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non fœderis) to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them.
While the commitment made by Senators Paul, Cruz, Johnson, and Lee is commendable and they are to be lauded for their fidelity to their oaths of office, the fact is, state legislators have taken a similar oath to “support the Constitution” (see Article VI).
How can one be honestly said to support the Constitution other than by insisting that its intent be followed, its enumeration of powers be adhered to by federal officers, and that the states unapologetically reject every act made by those elected federal officials that exceeds the authority given to them in that sacred document?
Should these senators lose the battle against Trumpcare, the war to restore this Republic and the Constitution is not lost. State lawmakers must step into the breach and refuse to enforce all 141 pages of that bill, standing firmly within the territory of the 10th Amendment.
According to sources on Capitol Hill, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is pushing to get a vote on the bill before lawmakers head home for the Fourth of July holiday.
It is ironic, for sure, that McConnell is leaning on lawmakers to get Trumpcare — the Republicans’ repackaged proffering of ObamaCare —  passed before Independence Day, a day our ancestors asserted their right to be free from a government “pursuing invariably the same Object [which] evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism.”
 5 GOP senators oppose new health care bill 
 Published on Jun 22, 2017
Four conservative Republicans came out against the plan too, including Senators Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson
 Senator Rand Paul: 'Four + Republicans won't vote for Republican health care bill'
ALSO: Sen. Dean Heller explains his disapproval 
of GOP health bill