For more stories like these, visit The Common Sense Show
CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT MORE- USE THE COUPON CODE “5COMMON” TO TAKE 5% OFF
Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DaveHodges-TheCommonSenseShow/~3/QEeWCKM18H4/
“Lock ’em in and burn it down!” says an SJW at Queen’s University in Ontario. That’s what he jokingly proposes to do to people coming out to hear Jordan Peterson speak. Watch these little fascists in action:
A number of professors on campus have taken a stance against the event, writing an “An Open Letter to Principal Woolf” in response to his statement.
The open letter, signed by professors from several departments, including gender studies, film and media, English and politics, expressed “dismay” with Woolf’s statement.
According to these professors’ statement, they believe Woolf “mischaracterized” the nature of the problem.
“You fail to acknowledge the members of the Queen’s community who are directly targeted by the anti-trans, racist, colonialist, anti-Semitic, and Islamophobic bigotry and violence that the speaker and his followers promote,” the open letter reads. [Emphasis mine. – RD]
“The problem created by this lecture is not ‘free speech.’ The problem is that Queen’s is providing a platform to someone who already has extensive access to a range of venues for circulating his odious and ill-informed views,” the letter continued.
As of Feb. 26, the open letter has received 113 signatures from various students, faculty and alumni.
Fortunately Principal Woolf has a spine, and stood them down. Good for you, Principal Woolf! That list of faculty signatories is helpful because it tells students which professors to avoid if they want to get an actual education.
Look, though, at one of the SJW thugs banging on stained-glass window, trying to disrupt the speech (to a packed house):
WHERE ARE THE POLICE?! Why are these people not being arrested and charged?! At some point, students are going to get sick and tired of being treated this way by Social Justice Warriors, and are going to start fighting back with their fists and with weapons. If the campus administration and the police will not keep order, then somebody will. You watch.
Meanwhile, Christina Hoff Sommers ran into a buzzsaw of SJW wokeness at Lewis & Clark Law School in Portlandia:
Diversity Dean at Lewis & Clark was present.She approached podium in middle of my talk & asked me to wrap up my speech & take questions. I was never able to develop my argument.Shouldn’t the dean have insisted protesters allow me to finish, rather than cut speech short? https://t.co/1d43iDeo7P
— Christina Sommers (@CHSommers) March 5, 2018
Radical leftists denounced Sommers in advance as a “known fascist.” Lewis & Clark ought to have thrown these disrupters out the minute they opened their mouth. But as the “diversity dean” action indicates, the administration at that college is on the side of the radicals.
A professor at another private college e-mails to me, about the Sommers no-platforming:
Behind every student engaged in such stunts is someone employed by the college encouraging and prompting him or her. In some instances it’s a faculty member or group of them, but the truly toxic presence on campuses is the student life division, and they have access to these kids 24/7. It’s amazing to me that we have faith and academic responsibility requirements for faculty, and then abrogate those standards when it comes to hiring staff. At [my college], as at most colleges, staff hiring and resources put into ancillary offices are far outpacing faculty hiring (as if there is such a thing any more) and spending on instruction. Student life people are by far the most difficult ideologues on campuses and are the cause of so much trouble. I could tell you a lot of stories about this, but read Benjamin Ginsberg’s “Unholy Alliance” in the summer Modern Age to get a feel for it. Faculty are becoming increasingly irrelevant on college campuses, and will do stupid things to make themselves relevant. Even then, they are outmanned.
I have plenty of colleagues who are brutal and noxious ideologues, but they can cause me only so much trouble. 90% of my headaches are caused by low level administrators in our Title IX and HR offices and everyone in the student life division.
The good news is hat students are getting wise to this. There is a backlash coming, but I remain hopeful it’s a swing back to sanity. The rabble rousing students get the press, but there are a lot of good, smart, hardworking kids who want an education and are increasingly going to demand it. I think there’s something salutary afoot.
Let us hope so. That Benjamin Ginsberg piece is really good. Excerpts:
It is important to understand that such concepts as safe spaces, microaggressions, and trigger warnings are not examples of the hypersensitivity of coddled college students as they are sometimes made out to be by the press. Instead, these ideas are designed to stifle free discussion and to block criticisms of left-liberal dogmas by declaring any and all questions about progressive political beliefs and their adherents to be illegitimate and intolerable. Even the mildest comment presenting a possible challenge to left-liberal orthodoxies will be labeled microaggressive, a threat to the safety of the campus and, accordingly, utterly impermissible. For example, the seemingly innocuous claim that “America is a land of opportunity” has been deemed a microaggressive or a microinvalidative allegation that racial minorities are unable to succeed because of their own shortcomings and not the institutional barriers designed to block their efforts. Hence, say politically progressive groups, the phrase should never be uttered on campus. So much for the idea that colleges are bastions of intellectual freedom.
Most college administrators seem reluctant to criticize left-liberal activists or coalitions of minority students, whatever they may do or say. On a few campuses, most notably the University of Chicago, where administrators recently declared that college should never be an intellectually safe space, college presidents have risen to the defense of intellectual freedom. On many campuses, though, administrators have forged what amount to tactical alliances with local activist groups and are unwilling to take issue with even the most outrageous claims voiced by campus progressives. Note the craven response of Yale’s administration to protests on that campus. The administration declined to come to the defense of two faculty members who were hounded by protestors after they had the temerity to speak up for free expression.
The alliance between administrators and campus activists would be a bizarre political curiosity if it were not so damaging to America’s colleges and universities. Allowing left-liberal activists to have their way on college campuses threatens to transform an institution that had once stood for free expression and the critical examination of all ideas into a restrictive “safe space” ruled by a new thought police. Allowing administrators to have their way on college campuses is damaging in a slightly different way. When governed by the faculty, colleges tend to develop curricula that are exciting and challenging, as well as research agendas that have changed the world. From the perspective of administrators, however, only the fiscal bottom line matters. The curriculum is evaluated not from an intellectual perspective but from its capacity to bring paying customers to the store. Coming at it from different perspectives, administrators and campus activists seem to have found common ground in the safe space of intellectual mediocrity through consumer sensitivity.
This alliance is unlikely to collapse any time soon. Administrators and campus activists have much to gain from supporting one another. And both can rely on a phalanx of Title IX regulations by the Department of Education to stifle any faculty or student dissent that might arise. Critics can easily find themselves charged with some trumped-up Title IX violation certain to upend their lives for months. At Northwestern, for example, film professor Laura Kipnis was charged with a Title IX violation, namely creating a hostile environment, after a student complained about an article Kipnis published criticizing university policies governing sexual misconduct. Kipnis was cleared, but only after a lengthy hearing and a seventy-two-day investigation by Northwestern authorities. Under the kangaroo-court rules used in Title IX hearings, the accused individual is not entitled to an attorney but may bring a designated “faculty support person.” It seems, however, that supporting the accused is as risky as providing legal defense to the regime’s opponents in North Korea. The member of the Faculty Senate who attended the hearing to support Kipnis was, as a consequence, charged with a Title IX violation and forced to undergo an investigation for his role in the matter. Apparently only campus activists and their allies are entitled to safe spaces.
What stands a chance of working to bring this tyranny crashing down? The only thing I can think of is what happened at the University of Missouri, when enrollment cratered after the craven administration allowed Social Justice Warriors to dictate campus policy. But let me ask: did that really change anything at Mizzou? Honestly, I don’t know; I’m asking you.
When a university administration starts expelling students who disrupt the normal exercise of freedom of speech and association, that’s when we’ll start seeing these little thugs sorted out.
UPDATE: In this video, Antifa attacks a peaceful discussion at a UK university. It starts around 13:20. The encouraging thing is that some of the students in the audience fight back – with their fists. If university administrators and security personnel refuse to protect from assault peaceful speakers and those who want to hear them, then how, exactly, are law-abiding people not justified in taking matters into their own hands?:
Wikileaks has release of the Podesta emails exposed massive amounts of corruption within the U.S. political system.
Some of the Podesta leaks include information about UFOs and extraterrestrials in the form of private emails.
One in particular was from Apollo 14 astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell, and it reads as follows:
Because the War in Space race is heating up, I felt you should be aware of several factors as you and I schedule our Skype talk.
Remember, our nonviolent ETI from the contiguous universe are helping us bring zero point energy to Earth.
They will not tolerate any forms of military violence on Earth or in space.
The following information in italics was shared with me by my colleague Carol Rosin, who worked closely for several years with Wernher von Braun before his death.
Carol and I have worked on the Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, attached for your convenience.
You can read the rest of the email straight from Wikileaks here, and also download the documents attached on the website.
In the email, he mentions Carol Rosin, who was the first female corporate manager of Fairchild Industries. A space and missile defence consultant who has worked with various corporations, government departments, and intelligence communities, she worked closely with Wernher Von Braun shortly before his death, specifically on the subject of space-based weapons.
She also founded the Institute for Security Cooperation in Outer Space.
Below is a very telling interview with Carol that was conducted by Dr. Steven Greer, founder of The Disclosure Project. Greer accompanied Dr. Edgar Mitchell in all his communications and meetings with the Pentagon and has been instrumental in bringing forth hundreds of military whistleblowers of all ranks, with verified credentials and backgrounds, to share what they’ve learned about this phenomenon through their work.
In the interview, she brings up the idea of a false flag alien threat. The term ‘false flag’ describes covert operations that are designed to be misleading, to make it appear as though events are being carried out by entities, groups, or nations other than those who actually planned and executed them.
Inspiration and all our best content, straight to your inbox.
You can read more of our articles on ‘false flag terrorism’ HERE.
I met the late Dr Wernher Von Braun in early 74, at that time Von Braun was dying of cancer, but he assured me that he would live a few more years in order to tell me about the game that was being played, that game being the effort to weaponize space, to control Earth from space and space itself.
He asked me to be his spokesperson, to appear on occasions when he was to ill to speak, and I did. And what he asked me to do was to educate decision makers and the public about why we shouldn’t be putting weapons into space . . . and what the alternatives are, how we could be building a cooperative space system.
What was most interesting to me, was a repetitive sentence that he said to me over and over again. . . . And that was the strategy that was being used to educate the public and decision makers, and the scare tactics, the spin that was being put on the weapons system. And that was how we identify an enemy.
The enemy at first he said, the enemy against whom we’re going to build a space based weapons system . . . First the Russians are going to be considered the enemy . . . then terrorists would be identified and that was soon to follow . . . then we were going to identify third world crazies, we now call them nations of concern. . . . The next enemy was asteroids . . . [and] against asteroids we’re going to build space based weapons.
And the funniest one of all, was against what he called aliens, extraterrestrials, that would be the final card. And over, and over, and over during the four years that I knew him and was giving his speeches for him, he would bring up that last card.
‘And remember Carol, the last card is the alien card. We’re going to have to build space based weapons against aliens,’ and all of it, he said, is a lie.
Important Things to Remember About Government UFO Disclosure
It’s a shame that mainstream media and Western governments have spread so much misinformation. People trust them implicitly, making it easy for them to twist the truth for their own ends. So even if they do offer official remarks about UFOs, it’s unlikely that they will be honest when doing so. If the ‘war on terror’ and the ‘war on drugs’ are any indication, we should be wary of anything they tell us about UFOs. But it should be clear to anyone who has researched this subject that powerful and influential people take it very seriously. Whatever information does get released will not be the whole of it.
Why do we always wait until the government or the media verifies something in order to believe it’s true? Why do we assume that anyone without these official credentials is lying, or crazy, or both? If we simply did our own research, we could come to our own conclusions and we wouldn’t be so easily fooled when these official sources lie to us. There is so much information out there and so much evidence to support not only the existence of UFOs but of extraterrestrials as well. We don’t need the government to tell us what is already apparent. We just need to do independent research and think for ourselves.
Is there a possibility that some powerful groups that control governments will use the extraterrestrial phenomenon to deceive the masses? Given everything we’ve seen with false flag terrorism so far, it certainly seems plausible.
That being said, a tremendous amount of resources would be needed, and if ‘others’ are indeed out there watching, perhaps the ‘real’ ones wouldn’t let that happen. Who knows?
What are your thoughts? Feel free to share in the comments section below.
I’ll leave you with this quote from one of Braun’s mentors, one of the founding fathers or rocketry and astronautics, Herman Oberth:
It is my thesis that flying saucers are real and that they are space ships from another solar system. I think that they possibly are manned by intelligent observers who are members of a race that may have been investigating our Earth for centuries. (source)
To read some more of our articles on the subject, you can check out the exopolitics section of our website by clicking here.
Your life path number can tell you A LOT about you.
With the ancient science of Numerology you can find out accurate and revealing information just from your name and birth date.
Get your free numerology reading and learn more about how you can use numerology in your life to find out more about your path and journey. Get Your free reading.
Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Collective-evolution/~3/c2DSeAXgAjE/
For more stories like these, visit The Common Sense Show
CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT MORE- USE THE COUPON CODE “5COMMON” TO TAKE 5% OFF
Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DaveHodges-TheCommonSenseShow/~3/kgiIvcnW-cA/
As Einstein stated at the height of World War I, “What a pity we don’t live on Mars so that we could observe the futile activities of human beings only through a telescope. . .”
We could be as far away as Mars and the globalists, the servants of Satan, would still find a way to ensnare us in their trap to destroy humanity.
This article and subsequent video with an interview with Steve Quayle will serve to warn humanity about how far Transhumanism has progressed.
In 1993, I heard Vance Davis on Art Bell’s show. I could tell that he must have known about the secret space program that my father was involved in from a research, reverse engineering perspective. At that time, my father had already revealed his role in the program to me, but I was sworn to secrecy because my mother could have lost all the family’s assets if I got caught revealing state secrets due to the national security oath that my father had signed.
After my mother passed in 2011, I was able to speak more freely. However, in 1993, there was really nobody that I could speak with on this topic. This was hard on me because I witnessed the lies being told by NASA to the American people. Then along came Vance Davis. After his appearance on Art Bell, and this was the first time I had ever listened to Art, I reached out to Vance and though I would test the waters on this topic. Perhaps we could talk because he might have as much to lose as I did.
Vance actually responded to me through a gentleman named Bill Pawelec. Bill wore many hats in his life, but among them was being a contract agent for the CIA in the area of communications technology. Interestingly, Bill had worked for a brief time with my father at Sunstrand Electric (Westminster, CO) on classified satellite applications. After I passed my initial test with Bill, he introduced me to Vance.
Vance and I began a 25 years friendship. However, it wasn’t the secret space program that cemented our professional interests, it was Vance’s knowledge in something called Transhumanism, although we did not call it that in 1993.
Vance told me that in his NSA training, he was taught two relevant things in relation to this topic:
- There was a perpetual war that was being waged in the cosmos and the Earth was at the center of controversy with the control of man’s soul constituting the ultimate prize. Control of this prize was being sought by who most of would call, Satan.
- Satan was unable to unlock the secrets of the soul and Satan’s mission morphed into destroying God’s creation through the destruction of the human being itself. Thus, Transhumanism in the modern era was born.
These revelations were part of Vance’s NSA training, but my knowledge and understanding went to new level when I met Steve Quayle.
I tell the Vance Davis story as a backdrop to the revelations of Steve Quayle. Vance conditioned my mind to accept what Steve was saying about the subject of Transhumanism. When I first heard and then later interviewed Steve Quayle as he spoke on the subject of Transhumanism, I knew Steve had insights that were stunningly accurate. Steve’s revelations greatly added to my understanding of this topic to a whole new level. Steve’s references to scripture cements the information he brings out as the Lord has created warnings in His word over 2,000 years ago and Steve is quick to make these connections.
Humanity is engaged in a fight for its own survival. We could very well be the last generation of human beings to inhabit this planet. We are indeed living in humanity’s darkest hour where every perversion is being embraced as the new normal. It is all inspired by Satan and we best wake-up to this fact or we will surely perish.
Below is the interview I conducted with Steve in Hour Two of last night’s show. The interview is stunning and it should serve as a warning to get right with God.
Interestingly, The True Legends Conference is being held in September of 2018 in Branson, Missouri. The finest group of guests connected to this theme have been assembled. Never before has such an all-star cast come together to provide their area of expertise on this very disturbing topic. Last year’s conference sold out early. This conference is ahead of last year’s pace. Here is the information about the conference.
In the course of the interview, Steve makes the repeated point that we are at the point of genetic Armageddon. To my Christian brothers and sisters, where do you think this leaves you and our Christian faith?
Here is the interview, please share this widely because I strongly believe that hunanity’s fate hangs in the balance.
Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DaveHodges-TheCommonSenseShow/~3/frvsGnuN8U4/
February 2nd, 2018
Hours before his first State of the Union, President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he wants to unite the country amid â€œtremendous divisivenessâ€� and hopes he can do so without a traumatic event affecting Americans.
Trump spoke about creating a more united country during a lunch with a number of television news anchors. Trump said the United States has long been divided, including during the impeachment of former president Bill Clinton. Trump also said that Americans usually come together during times of suffering.
â€œI would love to be able to bring back our country into a great form of unity,â€� Trump said. â€œWithout a major event where people pull together, thatâ€™s hard to do. But I would like to do it without that major event because usually that major event is not a good thing.â€�
2 Responses to “Trump Says It Will Be Hard To Unify Country Without A ‘Major Event’”
<!– AD CAN GO HERE
END: AD CAN GO HERE –>
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Source Article from http://www.cryptogon.com/?p=52287
For the second time in less than a week, an accredited RT crew has been barred from covering working visits of French President Emmanuel Macron – who is known to single out the news outlet.
On Monday, Kevin Berg, working for RT France, was denied entry to the Elysee Palace to cover a technical briefing of Macron’s upcoming visit to Calais on January 17. While passing through the security gates of the presidential palace, Berg was stopped by a person in charge of handling the press at Macron’s office. The media officer asked the RT journalist which media outlet he represents. After presenting the attendant with a press card issued by the French authorities, Macron’s representative barred Berg from entering, saying: “Oh no! You are not a journalist, we only bring in the journalists.”
Monday’s incident makes it twice in just five days that RT France has been denied the opportunity to cover an Elysee event. On January 10, RT France was barred from covering Macron’s visit to Rome. “We did not manage to get into the residence because the authorities denied us access,” RT’s Kyrill Kotikov, covering the trip, noted last week. “We made all requests for accreditation … We sent our file and it was accepted upstream by the Elysee, but as soon as we set foot on the Italian soil, the press service of the Elysee stopped responding.”
“Within a week our journalists have been refused accreditation by the Elysée twice,” RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan said. “President Macron, who protects the baguette instead of freedom of speech, should carefully reread the constitution of France.”
Macron has been harboring a grudge against RT and Sputnik ever since the start of his presidential campaign last year, revoking the accreditation of both Moscow-based news outlets and labeling the channels “propaganda” feeds. Macron and his team accused Russia of interference in the election, claiming that Russian hackers attempted to gain access to their data and impede the work of their website in the lead-up to the presidential vote. Moscow has staunchly denied any interference.
Earlier this month, Macron called for the creation of a national law that would, according to the president, combat the spread of fake news. On Monday, just before RT France was denied entry to the Elysee, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov pointed out the “fakeness” of news is being assigned arbitrarily, without an “adversarial principle,” “an exchange of arguments or a probe.” “It would be interesting to see what form this initiative takes,” Lavrov said.
Well, we know one form already at work: just obstruct the work of legitimately accredited media outlets if their stories are not to President Macron’s liking.