Germany Won’t Deport Convicted Jihadi Because It’s Against His Human Rights

Home » Europe, Injustice, Terrorism » Germany Won’t Deport Convicted Jihadi Because It’s Against His Human Rights


The government has stopped the deportation of a jihadi scumbag to Turkey for fear he may be tortured when he arrives there – he has been found guilty of supporting a banned terror group in a German court.

He travelled abroad to Syria to join a banned terror group. There is an outstanding court case against him in Turkey where he also faces terror charges.

But he submitted a letter from Amnesty International detailing one jihadis experience in a Turkish prison, which allegedly involved torture and horrendous living conditions.



Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from

WATCH: State Rep Says Weed Should Be Illegal Because It Makes Black People Crazy


Proving that ignorance and close-mindedness still reign in politics, during a Saturday Legislative session debating whether or not marijuana should be legalized in Kansas, a state representative made the most asinine, unfounded, and outright racist comment about marijuana to be uttered from a politician’s mouth in over a half-century.

As State Rep. Steve Alford, R-Ulysses, was failing miserably attempting to make his point on why marijuana should remain illegal in the state of Kansas, he began with unfounded and debunked myths before jumping off the racist deep end.

Remaining entirely ignorant to the massive amount of evidence to the contrary, Alford attempted to paint marijuana as a gateway drug.

“Basically any way you say it, marijuana is an entry drug into the higher drugs,” Alford said.


While studies on drug use show that almost every single person, 99% of all illicit drug users have tried marijuana before they did any other drugs, this does not mean marijuana is a gateway drug. Still, this insubstantial fact is used by reefer madness folks like Alford to bolster their claims that “marijuana is a gateway drug.”

But when one looks past the surface of this claim, it becomes downright silly. It just so happens that 99% of these so-called illicit drug users could have also tried coffee, soft drinks, candy, or milk before moving on to harsher substances.

Marijuana is actually an exit drug as the promise it shows in curbing opioid addiction as well as relieving symptoms of PTSD and depression far better than the dangerous pharmaceuticals is evidence of this.

As TFTP reported, a JAMA Internal Medicine study looked at ten years of data in all 50 states, concluding that states with medical cannabis laws had significantly lower rates of opioid overdose mortality.

But this representative of the people couldn’t care less about the dramatic effect cannabis is having on saving lives—because black people.

“What you really need to do is go back in the ’30s, when they outlawed all types of drugs in Kansas (and) across the United States.

“What was the reason why they did that?” he asked to a crowded room 100 percent filled by white people. “One of the reasons why, I hate to say it, was that the African Americans, they were basically users and they basically responded the worst off to those drugs just because of their character makeup, their genetics and that. And so basically what we’re trying to do is we’re trying to do a complete reverse with people not remembering what has happened in the past.”

It was as if Alford channeled Harry Anslinger—the founding commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, now the DEA—and began spouting off the lies and propaganda of the 1930’s which were used to outlaw marijuana.

When Anslinger rammed his reefer madness down the throats of all Americans in the 1930’s, he became famous for such quotes noting that “the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on degenerate races.” Anslinger also said that “reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”

During the time Alford is speaking of, Congressmen rallied around statements like these, and others such as, “All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff [marijuana] is what makes them crazy”, and “Give one of these Mexican beet field workers a couple of puffs on a marijuana cigarette and he thinks he is in the bullring at Barcelona.”

Another popular quote attributed to Anslinger: “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.”

Lies and idiocy like the ones spouted by Alford were what led to marijuana becoming illegal in the first place which led to the suffering and death of countless Americans—and the subsequent rise of the police state and drug war.

It is also important to point out that there is absolutely zero evidence showing marijuana affects African Americans any different than any other race.

Sadly, as the GC Telegram reported, even after being proven wrong, Alford stood by his insane remarks, clarifying them.

“There are certain groups of people, their genetics, the way their makeup is, the chemicals will affect them differently,” Alford said. “That’s what I should have said was drugs affect people differently instead of being more specific.”

He added, “It’s just the history of how come we are with the drug laws that we do have today, and how come the United States was so prevalent in outlawing drugs. I think we’ve got to look back to see what has happened in the past to look forward.”

Here’s to “looking forward” Rep. Alford—as obstinate dinosaurs like you who want to kidnap and cage people for ingesting a plant that heals them and makes them happy—continue to be exposed and lose your grip over the lives of peaceful Americans.

Source Article from

Lawmaker Says Black People Can't Handle Marijuana Because Of 'Genetics'

Put this in your pipe and smoke it: A Kansas lawmaker thinks marijuana should be illegal because he said black people are genetically unable to handle its effects.

State Rep. Steve Alford (R) spoke out on Saturday against legalizing pot using the type of racist “logic” commonly heard when “Reefer Madness” was considered a serious documentary.

“What you really need to do is go back in the ’30s, when they outlawed all types of drugs in Kansas [and] across the United States,” Alford said, according to the Garden City Telegram. “One of the reasons why, I hate to say it, was that the African-Americans, they were basically users and they basically responded the worst off to those drugs just because of their character makeup, their genetics and that.”

You can hear Alford make his anti-cannabis comments in the video below: 

Kansas is one of the few states that still hasn’t legalized some form of medical marijuana, according to the Associated Press.

The Telegram pointed out that Alford’s comments appeared to be based on the theories of Harry Anslinger, the founding commissioner of what was then called the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which was behind the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937.

Some of the very racist and hysterically anti-cannabis quotes attributed to the agency include these whoppers:

  • “Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”

  • “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.”

  • “Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.”

Although Alford, who represents a district in western Kansas, stood by his remarks when questioned after the meeting, he was unable to cite a specific source for his so-called science to the Telegram. However, he admitted he shouldn’t have singled out African-Americans.

“There are certain groups of people, their genetics, the way their makeup is, the chemicals will affect them differently,” Alford insisted. “What I should have said was drugs affect people differently, instead of being more specific.”

On Monday, Alford denied that his remarks were racist to AP: “To me, that’s neutral. Basically, I got called a racist, which I’m really not, and it’s just the way people — the interpretation of people. To me, I’m trying to look at what’s really the best for Kansas.”

Carl Brewer, a Democratic candidate for governor, said Alford’s comments were inappropriate for a politician in 2018.

“It is hard to believe that in 2018, anyone would support the discredited and racist policies of the Jim Crow-era,” Brewer said in a statement to KSN TV. “No matter one’s feelings on medical marijuana and marijuana legalization, we can all agree that views like those of KS Rep. Alford have no place in our statehouse, in our state or in our country.”

State Rep. Valdenia Winn (D), who represents part of Kansas City, called Alford’s comments “bizarre.”

He needs to apologize to somebody, if nothing else the individuals of color in his own community,” she told the Wichita Eagle. 

  • This article originally appeared on HuffPost.

Source Article from

Media Backs Oprah Because She’s ‘Not a White Man’


Much like Hillary Clinton, the mainstream media is suggesting Oprah Winfrey would make a good president simply because she’s “not a white man.”

“She’s not a white man, she’s liberal, she’s flirted with the notion of running, she’s a voice for women and the abused in a sullied Hollywood industry, she’s famous,” Axios reported. “She’s the anti-Trump, which helps explain this morning’s over-the-top political speculation about a nine minute speech.”

The exact same claims were made about Clinton, including the laughable suggestion she was a “champion for women” despite her husband Bill having to settle sex lawsuits.

Likewise, it’s bizarre how the media’s claiming Oprah is a “voice for women” given her close friendship with Harvey Weinstein, which is fueling speculation as to how much she knew about his predatory behavior toward women.

Interestingly, Oprah never condemned Weinstein during her Golden Globes speech; instead, she took the opportunity to attack President Trump, the latter of which reveals she’s already falling into the same trap as other establishment Democrats – including Clinton – who believed being “anti-Trump” was good enough for voters.

And that ties into another mistake they’re making: they think Trump won because he’s a celebrity, which isn’t the case at all.

Trump won because he had business experience he said he’d use to bring back American jobs.

Sure, his name recognition helped, but at the end of the day Trump’s voters were more concerned about their immediate problems and what he could do to fix them.

Do you really think the laid off Carrier workers voted for Trump simply because he’s a celebrity? Of course not.



Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from

Bakers Sue State Because Selling Cake is Illegal and Can Get You Thrown in Jail—Seriously


Bakers in New Jersey are fed up with the possibility of a $1,000 fine for selling a single cake, and they are coming together to sue the only state that makes it illegal for individuals to sell home-baked goods. Fines, as TFTP has frequently reported are enforced through the threat of police action. If these bakers choose not to pay the fines—they could end up in jail—for baking a cake.

The ban on the sale of baked goods that were not made in a commercial kitchen was also present in Wisconsin, where bakers could face up to six months jail for selling a single cookie, up until May 2017 when a state court declared it unconstitutional on the basis that the law had “no real or substantial connection” to consumer protection.

After securing a legal victory in Wisconsin, the Institute for Justice is now working with three bakers in New Jersey and hoping for a similar outcome. IJ intends to prove that the ban is purely political as bills to end it have passed the Assembly three times unanimously, and the only person who has repeatedly refused to allow a vote in the state senate, Sen. Joseph Vitale, has claimed that he wants to protect commercial bakers from competition—which is unconstitutional.

While it is illegal to sell baked goods, allegedly because of the safety concerns that come from bakers using their own kitchen instead of a commercial kitchen, New Jersey does make an exception for baked goods that are “prepared for sale or service at a function such as a religious or charitable organization’s bake sale.”

Therefore, either New Jersey does not care about the health of the people who are consuming the baked goods sold by charities, or the initial ban is purely political to protect commercial bakers from competition. As the Institute for Justice noted:

“The state cannot justify the license and commercial kitchen requirement with safety concerns. These requirements apply even when a baker only wants to sell goods that the state deems ‘not potentially hazardous.’ Not potentially hazardous baked goods are those that are shelf-stable, do not require refrigeration and are very safe to eat. They include most cookies, breads and muffins commonly made in home kitchens. As a Wisconsin court recently concluded, there is no report of anyone, anywhere, ever getting sick from an improperly baked good.”

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Heather Russinko, Martha Rabello and Liz Cibotariu. They are all mothers and home bakers, and together they founded the NJ Home Bakers Association.

Russinko is a single mother who lives paycheck to paycheck. She started baking 10 years ago as a way to heal from an abusive marriage. But when baking for her son’s school fundraisers turned into fulfilling orders from friends and family, she found out that she was doing something that had been deemed “illegal” by the state.

“It was crushing because I always wanted to have my own business. I believe in creating your own destiny and being self-sufficient,” Russinko told CBS News.

In order to make her dream come true of having her own business featuring her famous cake pops, Russinko would have to start by renting space at a commercial community kitchen. As the Institute for Justice reported, renting out space in a kitchen can cost around $35 an hour, in addition to licensing fees, storage fees other expenses such as child care for mothers who would otherwise be baking at home.

The current legal fight on behalf of these home bakers is nothing new. Erica Smith, an attorney for the NJ Home Bakers Association, told CBS News that they have been lobbying the state legislature for nearly a decade to change the current law.

“The bakers here, they didn’t just jump and file a lawsuit, they have been fighting for 10 years to get this law passed in the legislature,” Smith said.

Source Article from

TOO TOXIC to swallow: Up to a third of diabetics don’t take their pills because of the debilitating side effects

Image: TOO TOXIC to swallow: Up to a third of diabetics don’t take their pills because of the debilitating side effects

(Natural News)
According to a group of researchers, at least a third of diabetics do not take their medication due to fear of possible side effects.

Diabetics in the U.K. are often prescribed metformin, the most commonly prescribed drug for type 2 diabetes. While there is no definite data on how many of the 3.4 million people in the U.K. with type 2 diabetes are given the drug, a whopping 19 million people in England alone are prescribed metformin annually.

An affordable drug (a single pill costs as little as £1), metformin “help diabetics control their condition by reducing the levels of sugar produced by the liver.” While many diabetics are fine with taking the medication, researchers from University of Surrey reported that at least 30 percent of prescribed doses are not taken.

The scientists posit that this is due to the side effects of metformin. For diabetes drugs like Gliclazide and Pioglitazone, 23 percent and 20 percent of patients, respectively, do not take the prescribed doses. Some diabetics report that metformin often causes gastrointestinal symptoms such as diarrhea and flatulence.

Dr. Andy McGovern, a researcher whose team observed 1.6 million people with type 2 diabetes, said, “The importance of diabetes patients taking their prescribed medication cannot be underestimated… A failure to do so can lead to complications in their condition including eye disease and kidney damage.”

McGovern cautioned that while this issue of not taking their medication has long been observed among patients, the results of the research suggest that not all medication classes agree with diabetics. He added that instead of simply refusing to take the drugs prescribed to them, patients must discuss the possible side effects or any difficulties they have with the scheduled medication with a healthcare professional. (Related: Top 6 Fruits for Diabetics.)

Side effects of breast cancer drug tamoxifen

It looks like diabetics aren’t the only ones struggling with the side effects of their medication.

Jacquie Beltrao, a Sky News star, reported that tamoxifen, a breast cancer drug, is a two-edged sword. While the drug “saved her life,” it also caused side effects like “scorching hot flushes, low moods, and aching bones.”

Women normally go through menopause in at least five years. But pre-menopausal women diagnosed with a common type of breast cancer might have to take tamoxifen. Their version of menopause, called “tamoxipause,” only goes on for about five months.

The drug causes a medical menopause that can begin overnight and include “brutal” symptoms. Beltrao describes the hot flush as “being plunged fully clothed into a sauna.”

She also shared that she was diagnosed with stage 2 breast cancer in Christmas 2013. Beltrao had a mastectomy and five rounds of chemotherapy, which was followed by a prescription for tamoxifen.

Tamoxifen is prescribed to pre-menopausal women with “estrogen-receptor positive” tumors that involve at least 85 percent of breast cancers. For this kind of tumor, the cancer is “encouraged to grow and divide” with a hormone called estrogen. Tamoxifen works by blocking the effects of estrogen on the receptors to prevent any breast cancer cells from developing.

Beltrao shared that women like her must take tamoxifen for at around five years, but other younger women are told that they must take it for at least 10 years. This greatly reduces the risk of a relapse by 40 percent.

Natural remedies for diabetes

Taking medication means you are allowing chemicals to flood your body, which can have adverse side effects. If you are worried about taking medication for diabetes, consider these herbs with blood sugar lowering properties:

You can learn more about superfoods and other natural cures at


Sources include: 1 2



Source Article from

Liberal Mainstream Media Suddenly Praising Trump—Because He Wants War with Iran


The same mainstream media who’s been lambasting President Donald Trump since he was sworn in last year has now taken to supporting him. Why, exactly, are these agencies who’ve made up countless fake news stories about the president now supporting him, you ask? Well, the short of the answer is war.

All mainstream media is beholden to the establishment and all those in the establishment are beholden to the military-industrial complex. As a result, the president’s newfound support from the NY Times, CNN, and the Washington Post should come as no surprise.

Leading the way in their support of Trump’s stance on Iran was WaPo in a piece on New Year’s day, which echoed the sentiments of Trump. Instead of calling him a moron or making fun of his latest series of irrational Tweets, WaPo agreed with Trump’s process.

Claiming that the current Iranian regime will paint the protesters as foreign agents—which they have already done—WaPo even provided Trump a recommendation of not remaining silent “but to ensure that U.S. statements of support are broadly multilateral and are backed with more practical steps.”

Caring not about saving face and sticking to their guns of hatred toward Donald Trump, the NY Times then published a piece on Tuesday praising the president’s saber-rattling toward the Iranian regime. In an aptly titled op-ed, “Trump Is Right, This Time, About Iran,” Roger Cohen, the international affairs and diplomacy writer for the Times, praised Trump and confessed that he actually retweeted the president’s threat to Iran.

Cohen wrote, “I have a New Year’s confession: I retweeted President Trump with approval, not something I had expected to do, especially on the subject of Iran. But Trump has been right to get behind the brave Iranian protesters calling for political and economic change.”

The tweet in question:

While Trump’s tweet certainly sounds reasonable it is important to point out that the protests in Iran are hardly peaceful and definitely not comprised of 100 percent Iranian citizens.

As Reuters reports, an Iranian judicial official said on Wednesday a European citizen was arrested in protests in the Borujerd area of western Iran, but did not specify the nationality of the detainee.

“(This) European citizen … had been trained by European intelligence services and was leading the rioters,” Hamidreza Abolhassani, head of Borujerd’s Justice Department, was quoted by Tasnim news agency as saying.

Unfortunately, these non-citizens, who stand accused of fomenting violence in the protests have America’s full support, thanks to Trump—who promises to show that support “at the appropriate time.”

“Such respect for the people of Iran as they try to take back their corrupt government. You will see great support from the United States at the appropriate time!” Trump wrote in the latest of a series of tweets on Iran’s turmoil.

While it would be irresponsible to assume all the protesters are foreign actors, it is also irresponsible to assume that it is entirely organic. Consider the following tweet below as evidence toward this assertion.

“I wanted to get money from ATM , Protesters shot at me with a gun, then asked me to say that police shot me, they were non-native,” said the Iranian who’d allegedly been shot non-natives while trying to get money out of an ATM.

For those who may be unaware, the plan to overthrow Iran has long been in the works. In fact, in April 2012, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, Seymour Hersh reported that the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command had trained (Mojahedin-e Khalq) MEK operatives at a secret site in Nevada from 2005 to 2009. MEK is the Iranian political-militant organization that advocates for the violent overthrow of the current Iranian regime. They are hardly quiet about it.

According to Hersh, MEK members were trained in intercepting communications, cryptography, weaponry and small unit tactics at the Nevada site until President Barack Obama took office in 2009. Hersh also reported additional names of former U.S. officials paid to speak in support of MEK, including former CIA directors James Woolsey and Porter Goss; New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani; former Vermont Governor Howard Dean; former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Louis Freeh and former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton.

Coincidentally, MEK was classified as a terrorist organization by the United States and its allies—during this training period—until they suddenly removed them from the list in 2012.

While the current Iranian regime is certainly no bastion of freedom, the idea that US intervention or a violent revolution would be beneficial for the people of Iran is outright insane. To see what US intervention—through military support and the support of ‘protesters’—does to countries, one need only look at Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya to see the horrific death tolls and war-ravaged dystopias left in America’s wake.

To those paying attention over the years, Trump’s desire to intervene in Iran, and his subsequent support in the media should come as no surprise as it has been the plan since Bill Clinton was in office and was documented in the neoconservative PNAC report. This was even admitted by General Wesley Clark, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, that the U.S. planned on going to war with Iran, according to a 2001 memo from the U.S. Secretary of Defense.

“This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years,” Clark said. “Starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off with Iran.”

All presidents since Clinton have crossed countries off this list. Now it’s Trump’s turn.

Just in case you think it is a coincidence that the media is supporting Trump in this move, as TFTP reported last year after Trump violated the constitution by launching dozens of missiles at the sovereign nation of Syria without approval from Congress, the media went into a frenzy. They were bending over backward to show their newfound love of the man who was only just beginning to prove his loyalty to the military-industrial complex.

Sadly, so many people are compromising their principles just to keep their support for Trump who has proven to be just like every other candidate by running on a platform of peace and America first only to stoke war and bolster the police state.

Source Article from

Are we using less energy because of LED lighting, or more?

It is wholly a confusion to suppose that more efficient lighting leads to diminished consumption. The very contrary is the truth.

LEDs use a lot less energy per lumen produced; according to IHS Market, a consultancy, LED lighting uses an average of 40 percent less power than fluorescents, and 80 percent less than incandescents, to produce the same amount of light. They determined that “the use of LEDs to illuminate buildings and outdoor spaces reduced the total carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of lighting by an estimated 570 million tons in 2017. This reduction is roughly equivalent to shutting down 162 coal-fired power plants.”

carbon emission savings© IHS Markit

They figured this all out by tracking the market share of all the LED companies, and suggest that every LED sold is a direct substitute for an older, less efficient light. From their press release:

The efficiency of LEDs is essentially what makes them environmentally friendly,” said Jamie Fox, principal analyst, lighting and LEDs group, IHS Markit. “Therefore, LED conversion is unlike other measures, which require people to reduce consumption or make lifestyle changes…. “LED component companies and lighting companies have transformed their industry,” Fox said. “They are fighting climate change much more effectively than other industries, and they should be given credit for it. Unlike in other industry sectors, workers at LED companies can honestly say that by selling more of their products, they are helping to reduce global warming.”

The evidence from space says otherwise

Well, maybe not. Because all IHS Markit appears to be doing is assuming that these companies are replacing inefficient lighting with LEDs. In fact, the evidence is pretty clear that thanks to LEDs we are using more energy than ever; as I noted a few years ago, we keep figuring ingenious ways to use them in places that we never did before, like with big LED monitors over urinals. But even if we just stick to lighting, a new study uses photos from space to show that we are using more lighting than ever. The study, Artificially lit surface of Earth at night increasing in radiance and extent. summarizes it all in the introduction:

A central aim of the “lighting revolution” (the transition to solid-state lighting technology) is decreased energy consumption. This could be undermined by a rebound effect of increased use in response to lowered cost of light. We use the first-ever calibrated satellite radiometer designed for night lights to show that from 2012 to 2016, Earth’s artificially lit outdoor area grew by 2.2% per year, with a total radiance growth of 1.8% per year. Continuously lit areas brightened at a rate of 2.2% per year. Large differences in national growth rates were observed, with lighting remaining stable or decreasing in only a few countries. These data are not consistent with global scale energy reductions but rather indicate increased light pollution, with corresponding negative consequences for flora, fauna, and human well-being.

change in lit area© Asolute change in lit area from 2012 to 2016

Essentially, lighting has become so cheap to run, thanks to the low cost of energy and the efficiency of lighting, that we are using far more of it, everywhere in the world, and particularly in developing countries with their dramatically improving standards of living. The study is primarily concerned with the effect of all this light pollution, but it also reflects energy consumption. And much of this is happening in parts of the world that generate most of their electricity with coal.

milan lighting© note the change in the quality of light in Milan

Major (factor of 2 or more) reductions in the energy cost and environmental impact of lighting should be accompanied by large absolute decreases in light emissions observable from space. The fact that the median country’s 15% increase in lighting from 2012 to 2016 nearly matched the median 13% increase in GDP suggests that outdoor light use remains subject to a large rebound effect on the global scale. Therefore, the results presented here are inconsistent with the hypothesis of large reductions in global energy consumption for outdoor lighting because of the introduction of solid-state lighting.

rebound effect© The Rebound Effect

It is environmentally incorrect to talk about the Jevons Paradox or the Rebound Effect, because it has been used by many to criticize attempts to increase energy efficiency, by noting that all those savings just get eaten up anyway. It is all very complicated and controversial, and there is some evidence that in products like cars and houses, we do buy bigger ones when they are cheaper to operate, but there is still a saving of energy.

LEDs are an entirely different thing; we use them in entirely different ways that nobody ever dreamed of, and we use more of them. Lighting has become so cheap that it has turned into a bauble, into decoration. When it comes to lighting, to paraphrase Stanley: it is wholly a confusion to suppose that more efficient lighting leads to diminished consumption. The very contrary is the truth.

Just look at Shanghai.

Source Article from

Democrats Are Under a Spiritual Death Watch Because Liberals Cannot Know Jesus

It is often said that liberalism is a form of mental illness. However, liberalism is much than a behavioral deficit. It also represents a cluster of character flaws that cause one to be separated from the divine creator that we call God and his son and our redeemer, Jesus Christ.

Isaiah 5:20 encapsulates the demonic cultural condition of much of the world and this would include America. Liberals are Satan’s trolls and their mission is to spread decdeipt and mass suffering among the people.

Liberals do not belong to the body of Christ: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”

One of the defacto leaders of the unholy left is undoubtedly Hillary Clinton and Satan’s alter can be found inside of placed like the Clinton Foundation.

At this time of year as many people take stock of their spirituality, some liberals try to hedge their bets and play both ends against the middle. They want to have their cake and to eat it too. Liberals want to maintain their heathen and depraved lifestyles while trying to reap the benefits of being a Christian and they only do that on days where it personally benefits them. A blind man cannot see, and a deaf man cannot hear, and a liberal will never be saved. And for all the misery the liberals bring to our world and our country, we can take comfort that we serve a just God and the Lake of Fire will be the final reward for the unrepentant liberals.

Here are a few undeniable facts about liberals that they do not like to wear on their liberal sleeves.

The Liberal Mantra

I am pro-choice. Yes, I murder innocent people when it is convenient and the younger the victims, the better. I support child-trafficking and try to bend the laws to change the perception of this heinous crime. My leaders are named Soros and Clinton.

I am a supporter of gay marriage & the LGBTQ+ community. To many from this demographic, it is not enough that our society protects their civil liberties and honestly seeks to prevent any persecution, as it should. It is not enough that we Christians leave the final judgment to the Lord. However, for many in this classification, that is not enough. With the support of liberals, many from this group seek dominance and their unholy views, and they do so under the banner of political correctness, as we are forced to glorify these non-Christian practices to the exclusion of our own Christian beliefs and ways. The very practices that are based upon the notion of one man, one woman bonded together by the Word of God are under attack. People are losing their jobs for espousing the beliefs associated with traditional marriage. The Left gets to act with impunity. They deny the right of legal and personal tolerance that they claim was denied to them for so many years.

Please allow me to interject some reality to this debate: At the end of the day, we don’t live in a world with 97 genders and those that believe that are delusional. One man, one woman, one marriage, others operate on their own world paradigm at their own spiritual risk.

I am a liberal which today means, “I get to keep what I got, but I want to help myself to what you have as well”. This is why the Democrats, the epitome of liberalism, opposed President Trump’s tax plan. They don’t want you to have more money in your pocket as they believe it belongs to their entitlement programs.

I am left. This is an euphemism for the right to disobey the rule of law, starting with God’s laws as handed down to Moses. Liberals become their own God, and they are the self-appointed deity that the 10 Commandments warned us not to serve (ie false Gods).

I PRETEND to be a Christian at election time. Christianity is villified by the left. It is mocked by the liberals, until it comes to get the votes of the Godly. Then they actually kneel as they pretend to pray. The question is, what direction are they praying to?

Friendly liberals often begin by redefining Jesus himself. Quests for the “historical Jesus” seek to distinguish the Jesus of history from the Christ of faith.

This approach commonly denies that Jesus is fully God, without qualification. To a liberal, Jesus is only “divine” when the teachings of the Lord can be misused to make the scriptures say something that they most certainly do not.

The Word of the Lord commands us to surrender to Jesus and to follow him. A liberal is their own God and can only follow their own selfish motives. The best example I can offer is what the Democractic, liberal support for Planned Parenthood allows for when they engage in the murder of innocent babies, detach their body parts and sell them for profit. If there is a better definition for evil, liberal evil, I cannot find it.

It is at this time of year, I give thanks to the Lord for giving me the wisdom to not be a liberal. Everything that I write about, talk about and share with my audience is centered around the fight between good and evil, between the God of the Bible and Satan.

I praise the Lord for giving me eyes to see the beauty of His glory and ears to hear his unbroken promises of salvation.

Merry Christmas to the world from The Common Sense Show. To all the liberals that are ultimately headed down the path of self-destruction, I would like to invite you to join the team that offers eternal life and the promise of spiritual salvation. However, to join us and experience the full benefit of being a Christian, you will likely have to disavow your liberalism and leave the Democratic party. You cannot serve Hillary and George Soros while claiming to be following Jesus.


For more stories like these, visit The Common Sense Show


Please donate to offset the costs of The Common Sense Show




The official storable food of the CSS. Take 5% off with Promo Code “Hodges9”. Click here

 Dave Hodges is a satisfied customer.  Listeners to The Common Sense Show will receive 5% off their next order by mentioning “Hodges9” in the coupon code box.  Don’t wait until it is too late. Click Here for more information.

From the Hagmann blood sugar protocol to the Hodges joint protocol, Dr. Broer has helped hundreds of thousands of people. There is something for everybody at Take 5% off the cost of your order with coupon code DAVE5

From the Hagmann blood sugar protocol to the Hodges joint protocol, Dr. Broer has helped hundreds of thousands of people. There is something for everybody at  FOR COMMON SENSE SHOW LISTENERS, YOU CAN TAKE 5% OFF OF ALL ORDERS FROM HEALTHMASTERS.  ACT NOW, THIS IS A VERY LIMITED TIME OFFER. USE THE COUPON CODE “5HODGES”


Source Article from

Family asked to take down "Jesus" sign because neighbor finds it offensive

jesus sign


A family has been asked to take down a sign with the name “Jesus” from their Christmas display, after a neighbour reportedly claimed it was offensive.

Mark and Lynn Wivell said their homeowner’s association had made the request after they put up the display outside their home in Adams County, Pennsylvania.

“As part of our Christmas decoration, we would display the name Jesus to point out to everyone that we in this family believe that the reason for the season is to celebrate the birth of Jesus,” Mr Wivell told the FOX43 news channel.

In a separate interview with the USA Today newspaper, his wife Lynn added: “I was quite shocked it offended somebody, but I guess in today’s world I shouldn’t have been.”

Shortly after putting up the display, the pair received an email from the association asking them to remove it, because an unnamed neighbour had complained it was offensive.

The email said the homemade decoration made of a piece of plywood, painted white, with a red tinsel garland and the name “Jesus” painted in red does not constitute a display.

The “size, structure, and illumination of the physical sign are the accentuating factors generating the complaint,” a second email read.

The Wivells have insisted they have no intention of removing the sign until the new year. Ms Wivell said they had “gotten tremendous support from our neighbors here at the Links and that just makes us feel so good.”

Mr Wivell added: “People get offended by different things, but just because something offends you, doesn’t mean the whole world has to change to accommodate you, so I would say please be more tolerant.”

In a statement provided to FOX43, the homeowner’s association said: “It is, indeed, unfortunate that our attention has been unnecessarily redirected in this manner with a suggestion that Scrooge is alive and well in our community.”

They added: “Many of our families will be in church on Monday with their spirit diminished by this attack.”

Source Article from