Give the Devil His Due! Farrakhan is Raked Over the Coals by the Zio Media for Daring to Quote Billy Graham’s and Nixon’s Tirade Against the Jewish Stranglehold of Media!

Give the Devil His Due! Farrakhan is Raked Over the Coals by the Zio Media for Daring to Quote Billy Graham’s and Nixon’s Tirade Against the Jewish Stranglehold of Media!


Today Dr. Duke and Dr. Slattery discussed the mass Zio-Media’s latest invocation of Dr. Duke in the national narrative, this time as a slanderous comparison to the based negro gentleman Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam. The current news cycle is all abuzz with old videos of Minister Farrakhan pointing out the Jewish domination of the United States, and juxtiposing these videos with photographs of him posing with smiling black Democratic politicians, most notably Barack Obama.

Unfortunately, these black politicians only heard Farrakhan’s anti-white rhetoric, and somehow were immune to his warnings about the detrimental aspects of Jewish power.

This show is a powerful show. Please share it widely. And please keep us on the air and on-line. Please visit our contribution page or send your contribution to:

P.O. Box 188, Mandeville, LA 70470

Thank you.

Click here and look for the show dated 3-8-18.

Our show is aired live at 11 am replayed at ET 4pm Eastern

See Dr. Duke’s Purim Exposed videos:

If you have any problems viewing these videos, then please see them on our own video site, which does not require any log in, Dare to Think Free. 

Purim I video here.

Purim II video here.

Here is Mark Collett’s most recent video:

Be sure to check out Mark’s Twitter feed. And follow him while you’re at it.

Source Article from

5 Harsh Truths About Social Media Signalling It’s Time To Let Go

Next Story

Forget “lions and tigers and bears, oh my!” The more accurate statement of the top fears for 2018 seems to be “ads and reach and algorithms, oh my!” While none of these terms are new to our digital lexicon, they’ve certainly forced themselves to the forefront of every digital marketers mind due in large part to the recent “well-intentioned” changes announced by Mark Zuckerberg.

To those that are strictly end users, these changes sure do sound quite nice, as we all remember the days where our newsfeeds were filled with “John Smith is at the gym” and “Suzie Jones needs a coffee”, rather than “SIGN UP FOR MY FREE WEBINAR”.

But as much as “the Zuck” is making it seem as though we are soon going to be traveling down memory lane with only our friends and families, that couldn’t be farther from the truth. We’ll still be seeing just as much “gimmicky” content as we have been, except now we’ll only be seeing it from those who can afford to put it in front of us.

As a social media manager for several companies and brands (including my own), let me set the record straight that this article isn’t intended to be an outlet for me to whine and complain about the current state of social media. It’s to help you all make sense of some of what is happening, since it seems to be affecting even my Aunt who uses Facebook for nothing more than cooking videos and to play Candy Crush Saga.

Here are 5 harsh truths to help you make sense of what’s happening to social media in 2018:

1. It’s Past Its Prime

While statistics pertaining to the average amount of time we spend on social media daily may suggest it’s only getting started, we all know that has more to do with its addictive stronghold on us, rather than the quality of what it offers.

Think about it, when is the last time you heard someone tell you that they genuinely love scrolling through their newsfeed? It’s not to say that no valuable or worthwhile content exists on social media, but it’s undeniably overrun by both that which is completely insignificant and that which is paid for.

For companies and brands, social media is past its prime, because: A) gone are the days where followings were easy to grow and come by and, B) you can no longer interact with even those who previously showed interest in you without paying top dollar.

For end users, social media is past its prime, because: A) you keep seeing the same things from the same people over and over again and, B) you can’t trust much of what you see for many of the reasons I’m going to elaborate on below.

2. It’s Antisocial

How could any SOCIAL media platform be antisocial? Easy, by being what they currently are. We may be connected to way more people than our younger selves (depending on how old you are) would have ever thought possible, but how much do we actually know about them?

Social media gives us all the illusion of socialization, while gradually making us more and more uncomfortable with actual interaction. Case in point: think of how much even a simple phone call from all but a select few numbers makes you uncomfortable. Compare that (again depending on how old you are) to how welcome phone calls were in your household growing up.

We live in a world where hundreds, if not thousands, of us gather daily on buses and subway trains to not exchange more than a courteous nod with one or two others. Just as social media usage numbers are on the rise, so are those pertaining to depression and loneliness, do you think there is any correlation?

3. It Brings Out the Worst In Us

We’re all familiar with the term “cyber-bully” by now, and while the internet as a whole may be responsible for its creation, its on social media that cyber-bullying has firmly planted its feet.

Just as alcohol provides many of us a level of “liquid courage” to speak out, social media provides us with just enough security to openly vocalize our displeasure towards pretty well anything. Hateful and rude comments have become the norm, while words of support and encouragement seem few and far between, except when naturally called upon by hardship or tragedy.

Even if you consider yourself one of the “nice ones” online, you’re likely still affected by it through the conscious or subconscious filtering you apply to everything you say, like, or share to mitigate your chances at being the recipient of it.

4. Everyone Wants Your Money

Whether it’s fuelled by well-intentioned necessity or sheer greed, everyone is ultimately looking for your money online. We should all know by now that the free webinar is just the starting point to a sales funnel, and that the “click-bait” title is to get you to their site overrun by ad units. And that’s okay.

The best defence in the face of this reality is not to avoid them altogether, but to really think critically before you act upon one. As someone who has built an online course myself, and is currently working on another one, I know it seems counterproductive for me to be saying this, but even I know my work won’t have value for everyone that comes across it.

There is a lot of value to be found in certain things online, but what those certain things differs for each of us.

5. It’s Making You Impatient

The article is a slowly dying medium; in fact, it’s almost a miracle that you are actually reading this sentence. Blame it on vine, blame it on news feeds, blame it on Snapchat, whatever happens to be the main culprit in your life, we’ve all become substantially more impatient and demanding online.

Spoiler alert: your newsfeed is currently littered with square videos with catchy titles (some of which are admittedly mine) and numbered “list-icle” articles (like this one) for a reason… it’s pretty much the only things that catch your attention 1 in every 50 tries! (not an actual stat)

Long gone are the days where we could be slowly lured into a point of interest, and here to stay are the days where our attention needs to be caught in 3 seconds or less. So, if you’re tired of seeing the same “crap” online, realize that it’s only there because we’ve collectively brought it to that point.

To see and read more brutally honest personal development content like this, be sure to subscribe to my YouTube Channel and to like me on Facebook.

Get Your FREE In Depth Numerology Reading

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

CNN’s Jake Tapper Breaks Through Media Blackout, Covers Louis Farrakhan Controversy

CNN’s The Lead with Jake Tapper
March 5, 2018
4:50 p.m. Eastern

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Race in America; Nation of Islam Leader Farrakhan Gives Anti-Semitic Speech]

JAKE TAPPER: I want to turn to some news on Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam. He went on an anti-Semitic rant during a major speech a week ago — yesterday. Here’s a look. 

LOUIS FARRAKHAN: He talked about their grip in Hollywood and how the Jews were responsible for all of this filth and degenerate behavior that Hollywood is putting out, turning men into women and women into men. 

TAPPER: Now, despite the anti-Semitism and homophobia inherent in that clip, several leaders of the Women’s March were — are supporters of Farrakhan and have not condemned him. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who have met with him and asked for their comments, one of them — Congressman Danny Davis, not only refused to denounce Farrakhan, he said “the world is bigger than him and his Jewish question.” Ah — why is it so tough for some people to condemn a rabid anti-Semite who is always misogynist and anti-LGBTQ? 

JEN PSAKI: It should not be. The reason this is relevant, our political world is, as you just noted, that there’s disagreements that people are going be asked if they’re going to denounce it for good reason and there will be alignments that’s have been together, women, the CBC, others that will have division over this. Why can’t people criticize it? I mean, — past relationships, their own caucuses, and constituencies sometimes play, but it’s still hard to understand. 

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Race in America; Dem Rep Doesn’t Denounce Farrakhan’s Anti-Semitic Rant]

KAITLAN COLLINS: I mean, it’s a pretty low bar to denounce something like that and the people who are, you know, supporting the Women’s March, what are they out there supporting for? Equality and all this stuff and that is opposite of equality. So, how is that hard to denounce?

PSAKI: Right.

TAPPER: And this — 

PSAKI: And it shouldn’t be. And it shouldn’t be.

TAPPER: It shouldn’t be and yet, there — you know — there’s been reporting about, I think The Wall Street Journal reported on, like, a secret meeting that Keith Ellison, who’s the vice chair of the DNC, had with individ — had with a group of people, including Farrakhan. There was a secret meeting of the Congressional Black Caucus had with him. There was this photograph of then-Senator President Obama that had been hidden from the public for several years. So people want to have the association but they don’t want to get dinged for it publicly. 

BILL KRISTOL: You know, I was on a panel with a Democrat just a couple days and she was commiserating with me about the problems of the Republican Party. A lot of Democrats like to commiserate with me about that now, I guess and feel sorry for me, but an then she said you know what? We’ve problems in our own party, too. I mean, both parties have authoritarian and intolerant types in their electorate with some support from — well, with some support, we’ll see what happens. There are going to be a lot of primaries on the Republican side, beginning in Texas tomorrow. But there are actual a few competitive ones on the Democratic side. It’ll be interesting to see whether this strain of the party or other strains of the party that are not the traditional, you know, sort of moderate liberalism of a lot of Democrats start to prevail. So, it’s not just the Republican party that has some bitter fights ahead of it this year, I think. 

Source Article from

Geneticists say Cheddar Man was not black after all, media silent


So they’ve been pushing a completely insane narrative in the leftist media and academia for over a decade now, which goes:

  • Race does not exist
  • White people are responsible for the oppression of all other races
  • White people are the only race that does not have any culture
  • White people need immigrants to give them culture
  • White people deserve to be flooded with immigrants as punishment for slavery, colonialism, the Holocaust, etc.

With Cheddar Man, they literally decided to come out and say “actually, white people are really just blacks, lol.”

Of course, the skin of the model was colored arbitrarily, and over a week ago, geneticists who worked on the project have come out and said that they actually have no idea what color Cheddar Man’s skin was. But that wasn’t getting widely reported. Because the whole purpose of making the claim in the first place was to push a political agenda.

It was printed in New Scientist and was behind a paywall, and I thought they were just going to disappear it.

Now, however, we are getting mainstream coverage.

Daily Mail:

Cheddar man may not have been ‘dark to black skinned’ after all.

Last month, researchers claimed that they had been able to accurately reconstruct the face of the ‘first Brit’ based on his DNA – and sensationally revealed he had black skin and blue eyes.

But now, one of the main scientists who helped create the reconstruction of his 10,000-year-old face says he may not have been black at all.

Geneticist Susan Walsh at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis, says we simply don’t know his skin colour.

While her computer model shows being black is his ‘probable profile’, DNA testing is not advanced enough to say for certain.

The 10,000-year-old bones of the ancient Briton were unearthed in Somerset in 1903, and have puzzled scientists ever since.

A team of experts, including Professor Walsh, recently created a computer model that tries to predict a person’s skin pigmentation, hair and eye colour, purely from their genes.

The test focused on 36 points of comparison in 16 genes, which are all linked to skin colour.

Dr Walsh and her colleagues analysed genetic data taken from more than 1,400 people.

They were mainly from Europe and the US, but also included people from Africa and Papua New Guinea.

Part of this data was used to train their model on how to recognise skin colour by looking at links with the 36 genetic markers.

The rest of the data was used to test how well the model could predict skin colour from DNA alone.

The model came up with ‘black’ or ‘dark black’ skin for Cheddar Man based on his DNA.

Some, particularly on the far-right, have questioned whether there was a political agenda behind the claims.

Dr Walsh believes that the tests can’t prove Cheddar Man’s skin colour and that his DNA may have degraded over the past 10,000 years.

So, that’s how they get you.

They just make shit up, report it as fact.

Using biology for political purposes is not new. The entire issue of race was effectively removed from science itself following WWII, as it was argued by the Jews that even talking about race would lead to annodah shoah, so the official “race doesn’t exist” line became gospel.

Of course when they are hoaxing you that you are actually black, race all of the sudden starts existing again.

The other interesting factoid that got rolled over in this whole thing is that Cheddar Man only shares 10% DNA with modern Brits. Furthermore, none of his features are negroid, and the study made a point to state that he wasn’t somehow African. So it was meaningless even in its original form, but the fact that they released the model with the skin coloring being virtually arbitrary – wow.

This is just psychological abuse.


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

Source Article from

The Liberal Media’s Hypocrisy: Imagine If Jared Kushner Was a Kennedy

It is remarkable to see the headlines about presidential aides Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump in the liberal media. The son-in-law and daughter of President Trump are now getting routinely hammered in The Washington Post, The New York Times, on CNN and even in The Wall Street Journal editorial pages, the latter decidedly not in the “liberal media” category.

But what is particularly noticeable is the reluctance to apply the same standards to presidential or other political relatives – if they are liberals.

Here, for example, is the headline in the left-wing Rolling Stone about the man selected by Democrats to give the official televised party response to President Trump’s State of the Union: 

Meet Joe Kennedy, the Democrat Taking on Trump
Congressman and grandson of Robert F. Kennedy will deliver the Democrats’ rebuttal from Fall River, Massachusetts

Beneath the headline was a heroic photo of the jut-jawed 37-year-old Kennedy, the U.S. Capitol dome behind him. Kennedy is celebrated for working with AIDS-ridden Haitian immigrants and his concern for “Guatemalans and Hondurans and Salvadorans and Mexicans and all sorts of other folks (coming) up through our Southern border.”  He gets not-quite hardball questions like this from the interviewer: “You were (an) outspoken critic of the Republican effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act – and Democrats succeeded at defeating those bills. I’m curious, reflecting on this first year under Trump, what you’re proud (of) and how you think Democrats can be more effective?”

As noted here in NewsBusters by P.J. Gladnick, Kennedy had a tad of a drool problem when giving his speech — but Variety’s review of the speech was silent on the subject.

Oh yes, his political pedigree is, but of course, celebrated. So that there is no doubt, his ties are reverently listed in Rolling Stone as the “son of six-term Congressman Joseph P. Kennedy, nephew of Ted Kennedy, grandson of Robert F. Kennedy and grand-nephew of JFK.” And in the aftermath of his speech? Politico enthused that the 37-year old Kennedy “is seen as a potential 2020 contender.” Thirty-seven – the exact same age as, yes, Jared Kushner.

To its credit, The New York Times ran a story on the history of nepotism in the White House. In fact, from President John Adams (who installed son John Quincy as Minister to Prussia and had secured an earlier diplomatic post for young JQA as Minister to the Netherlands when Dad was George Washington’s vice president) all the way through Bill Clinton’s appointment of wife Hillary as his Health Care Czar, appointing relatives has been, if not standard operating procedure for presidents at the very least frequent operating procedure. Hillary, of course massaged her time as First Lady into a New York Senate seat and a presidential nomination – all to the celebration of the liberal media. (And they are still celebrating her!)

Of course, nepotism in the liberal media is either ignored or celebrated outright. As this is written the media is still celebrating the recent release of the movie The Post, a celebration of The Washington Post and its fight for the Pentagon Papers —  the heroine being publisher Katherine Graham. That would be the same Mrs. Graham who, of course, inherited the paper from Dad Eugene Meyer via the suicide of her own husband, Phil Graham. Husband Phil was the Jared Kushner of the paper – the well regarded son-in-law. You will not find any pieces in the paper now belonging to Amazon’s Jeff Bezos on whether Eugene Meyer made a good decision in putting his paper in the hands of Phil Graham, the latter celebrated in the day as a wizard of smart and influential member of the Washington Establishment and an intimate of Democratic leaders.

Only recently did The New York Times itself announce a changing of the guard at – the New York Times. The proud headline? “A.G. Sulzberger, 37, to Take Over as New York Times Publisher.” 

The story begins:

“In a generational changing of the guard, Arthur Gregg Sulzberger, 37, will become the publisher of The New York Times on Jan. 1. His father, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., announced on Thursday that he was turning over the post to his son.

The ascension of the younger Mr. Sulzberger, who is known as A. G., comes just over a year after he was named deputy publisher of The Times. The New York Times Company’s board voted in favor of the move during a meeting on Thursday.

…He established himself as a newsroom leader in a different role — a leader of the team behind the so-called innovation report, a document that became a guide for the company’s digital transformation and a template for the rest of the industry. From there, Mr. Sulzberger was named an associate editor. He was also part of the group that outlined the plan to double The Times’s digital revenue by 2020.

…“He’s not a vocal, stand-on-the-desk, beat-his-chest kind of leader — but that’s not the only kind of leadership,” Dean Baquet, the executive editor of The Times, said. “He is very thoughtful. He is very forceful.”

Notice anything? That’s right. The younger Mr. Sulzberger is…..37 years old but “a newsroom leader.” The same magic age of professional celebration as the media is saluting in …Congressman Joe Kennedy III. The 37-year old congressman who, to repeat from Politico, “is seen as a potential 2020 contender” after serving a mere two and a half  terms in the House. Oh yes, the very experienced Mr. Sulzberger, like the very experienced Mr. Kennedy, is the same age as Jared Kushner. But its Mr. Kushner who takes the rap for his age and supposed lack of experience.

Back there in the Bush 43 presidency, George W. Bush, like John Quincy Adams, the son of a president was typically portrayed by the denizens of liberal media like this, which was written by the liberal commentator Jacob Weisburg in his 2004 book on Bush titled The Deluxe Election-Edition Bushisms: The First Term, in His Own Special Words. Wrote Weisburg: 

“The question I am most frequently asked about Bushisms is, “Do you really think the president of the United States is dumb?”

The short answer is yes…..

…The most obvious expression of Bush’s choice of ignorance is that, at the age of 57, he knows nothing about policy or history.”

Got that? The 57-year old Republican President of the United States who is the son of a President of the United States was dumb as a post.

One could go on and on here. The sons of Rupert Murdoch are smart….because, well, now that they are in charge the liberal media world believes they will steer the Murdoch media empire in a more moderate direction. Chelsea Clinton is a thoughtful, passionate and smart young woman. Ivanka Trump on the other hand, “does not have any meaningful foreign policy or diplomatic experience” and is unqualified for her job.

And so it goes.

Once upon a time, Joe Kennedy’s grandfather Robert Kennedy was appointed Attorney General of the United States – at the age of 35. He had no legal experience beyond being a Senate investigating committee lawyer and had never practiced law. He is today, safe to say, a Democratic Party and American icon. And yes, the full name of the building where Trump Attorney General Jeff Sessions reports for work everyday is …..the Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building.

And at The New York Times, the reins of the paper have just been handed to the 37-year old son of the publisher because he’s, you know, such a smart guy. Just like Bobby Kennedy’s 37-year old grandson the junior congressman and suddenly a 2020 prospect for the presidency.

Meanwhile? As the stories trashing Jared and Ivanka make the news, The Heritage Foundation is in the headlines as follows here in the Times

Heritage Foundation Says Trump Has Embraced Two-Thirds of Its Agenda

“WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has pursued policies that have hewed remarkably close to the recommendations of a leading conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, which found in a new review that nearly two-thirds of its ideas had been carried out or embraced by the White House over the past year.

Not one to dwell on the details of governing, President Trump has shown a considerable degree of deference to groups within the conservative movement like Heritage, leading to a rightward shift in social, environmental, immigration and foreign policy.

The results, Heritage found in its review, exceeded even the first year of Ronald Reagan’s presidency, whose tenure has long been the conservative gold standard.

…’There is so much noise in this town that I think it obscures the real work that’s being done,’ said Kay Coles James, the new president of the Heritage Foundation…..’This administration is doing quite well in terms of advancing a conservative agenda — clearly, quite well,’ Ms. James added.”

In other words? In other words the Trump administration, according to Washington’s blue-chip conservative think tank, “is doing quite well in terms of advancing a conservative agenda — clearly, quite well” – according to the president of Heritage.

The point? The fact of the matter is that it is no secret that the Washington Establishment – the Swamp – cannot abide Donald Trump. And in the style that is habit to the Swamp and its denizens, the way to get at the Republican President of the moment and halt his agenda is to go after his staff and Cabinet members.  Starting with his family.

In the world of the liberal media, for they who portray every young and not-so-young liberal famous family member from a green congressman to the new publisher of The New York Times as some sort of wise, experienced and sagacious public servant – the reverse is also true. If you are the son of a Republican president and get elected governor of Texas and President of the United States you are dumb as a post. And in the current news of the day, if you are President Trump’s 30-something son-in-law and daughter you are incompetent, arrogant and way out of your depth as senior White House staffers. Particularly if, as is the case here, some two-thirds of the conservative agenda is getting done.

There is nothing new here. Nothing. Trump and Bush relatives and that of any prominent Republican or conservative who might dare to seek or hold public office or a prominent position of some sort are incompetent idiots, dumb as posts and way over their head. Kennedy and Sulzberger relatives and any liberal relative in any position of prominence anywhere are blossoming geniuses.

The only thing new is the particularly vivid display of liberal media hypocrisy. You might even say that the hypocrisy is, well, all “relative.”


Source Article from

Social media giant YouTube moves to PROTECT Alt-Left domestic terrorist group Antifa by censoring investigative journalist’s post

Image: Social media giant YouTube moves to PROTECT Alt-Left domestic terrorist group Antifa by censoring investigative journalist’s post

(Natural News)
In case you haven’t heard, the social media giants are continuing their war on free speech by censoring yet another independent media voice who was attempting to report a violent death threat against conservatives made by domestic terrorists associated with Antifa.

Mike Cernovich posted on his Twitter account a video explaining in full detail how YouTube Nazis “flagged” one of his reports documenting Antifa thugs making their death threats.

“As you know, our Community Guidelines describe which content we allow — and don’t allow on YouTube,” says a message that Cernovich was sent by YouTube content censors. “Your video, ‘Far-Left group ANTIFA chants death threats’ was flagged for review.

“Upon review, we’ve determined that it violates our guidelines,” the message said, adding that the speech Nazis at YouTube then proceeded to remove the video.

Cernovich then begins playing the video that was removed and it clearly shows what the title indicates: Antifa thugs making death threats against conservatives and supporters of President Donald J. Trump.

The video showed protestors chanting, “The revolution has come, it’s time to pick up a gun,” among other things including, “You want a red pill, how ‘bout a lead pill?” — a reference to the movie series “The Matrix.”

“So apparently now if you just report on what Antifa was doing — which was all I did, I just uploaded a video from their actual protest — if you report on what Antifa does, then that’s what [YouTube] is gonna do to you,” Cernovich explained.

“They want to murder people,” he continued. “This is not me characterizing what they’re saying.”

Cernovich added that the world of “fairness” and “human decency” no longer exists for the Alt-Left.

The content censorship isn’t confined to Cernovich. In a column Thursday, Natural News founder and editor Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, reported that YouTube speech Nazis contacted him as well regarding a video dating from 2012.

“Today, I’ve learned that YouTube is now going back in time and issuing strikes against videos questioning the Sandy Hook narrative from 2012,” he wrote.

“Mere hours after I publicly called for the regulation of Google, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter, YouTube issued a strike against my account for a 2012 interview with a controversial book author named Jim Fetzer. That interview, which has now been banned by YouTube, focused on why banned Fetzer’s book,” he continued.

Adams noted the hypocrisy of the bans. (Related: Continuing its tirade of political censorship, Facebook just BANNED the author of a new book that criticizes Obama.)

“Keep in mind that sells books that claim the Earth is flat. They also sell books that promote Adolf Hitler’s genocidal philosophy. But when someone questions the official story on Sandy Hook, they get blacklisted,” he wrote.

And I can tell you for certain that Facebook censors are limiting dissemination of stories from The National Sentinel, an independent online news site where I serve as editor-in-chief. At the beginning of February, our stories were averaging 1,500 people “reached” but by month’s end, that average fell to just over 500 — despite the fact that our “Likes” grew by about 8,000 during the month to just over 27,000 now.

How’s it possible to increase your reach via “Likes” while your “People Reached” numbers drop by two-thirds (which means our site traffic from Facebook fell by two-thirds, which means our revenue from Facebook traffic fell dramatically as well).

It’s only possible if there is a concerted effort to censor conservative, independent, and alternative media content. [Fortunately, we’ve figured out a way to deliver our content to our readers uncensored — here’s how you can help.]

Under the guise of ‘combatting fake news, these Alt-Left social media giants have declared an economic war on independent media voices — not simply to starve them out but also to prevent as many Americans as possible from being exposed to anything but Marxist indoctrination.

Stay current with the most important news of the day from the most reliable sources at, which is updated throughout the day.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for and, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources include:



Source Article from

UK: Muslim Terrorists Kill 35, Injure 377 but Police and Media Hysterical over “Neo-Nazis”


Muslim terrorist attacks in Britain during 2017 killed 35 people, and seriously wounded another 377—but establishment spokesman and the controlled media have been hysterically claiming that “neo-Nazis” are the true “threat”—even though all the 2017 arrests of “right-wingers” have been in relation to a book available on Amazon UK, a sticker, and alleged membership of an organization which no longer exists—and that it is clear that the claim is only being made to divert attention away from the terrorist threat posed by the mass Third World invasion of the UK.

A recent a report in the UK’s Jewish-run Daily Mail, for example, titled “British Neo-Nazi Group is Grave Threat to our National Security,” quoted Metropolitan Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley as saying that “four violent far-Right plots were blocked by police operations” in Britain last year.

Rowley, who retires next month, the Daily Mail continued, “warned that a ‘significant’ proportion of anti-terrorist work involves tackling an ‘organised’ white neo-Nazi threat.”

He specifically named the “National Action” group, which, he claimed, was a “home-grown proscribed white supremacist, neo-Nazi terror group, which seeks to plan attacks and build international networks.”

In fact, as the “criminal” charges against the handful of arrested former National Action members revealed, they stand accused of possession of a book available on Amazon UK, a sticker, and alleged membership of National Action, which no longer even existed at the time of their arrest.

At the same time as these “neo-Nazis” were arrested for possessing an Amazon book, a sticker, and being former members of a banned organization (all obviously “highly dangerous acts of violence” which pose a “grave threat to national security”), Britain was rocked by a number of extremely violent and murderous Muslim terrorist attacks, including the following:

— March 22, 2017: Khalid Masood, a 52-year-old Muslim of mixed race born in Britain, drove a car into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, before crashing the vehicle into the Palace of Westminster’s perimeter. He then entered the grounds of the Palace of Westminster, the meeting place of the Houses of Parliament, before being confronted by a police officer. Masood then fatally wounded the officer, which led to him being shot by armed police officers protecting the Palace. Four other people were killed in the attack, and 49 other people were injured.

— May 22, 2917: Salman Abedi, a Muslim of Libyan descent, but living legally in the UK, detonated a suicide bomb at the Manchester Arena, Manchester, killing 22 individuals and injuring 250 at the end of an Ariana Grande concert. This was the worst terrorist attack in Britain since the 7/7 London bombings in 2005. Many of the 22 victims were children or teenagers, the youngest being an eight-year-old girl.

— June 3, 2017: Less than two weeks after the Manchester Arena bombing, eight people were killed and at least 48 injured, when three Muslims, Pakistani-born Khuram Shazad Butt; a failed “asylum seeker” Rachid Redouane, who claimed to be from Morocco or Libya; and Morroccan-born Youssef Zaghba, drove a van at high speed across London Bridge, running into groups of people. After crashing, the three Muslims then ran into the nearby Borough Market, where they stabbed people. All were shot dead by police.

— September 15. 2017: 18-year-old Iraqi “refugee” Ahmed Hassan set off a bomb on the London Underground near Parsons’ green in which 30 people were injured. Hassan was arrested the next day at the Port of Dover while trying to leave the country.

In December 2017, the head of MI5, Andrew Parker, said that the British security service and police had thwarted 22 Muslim terrorist plots in the past four years and that there were more than 500 live investigations ongoing.

In addition, police are “struggling to handle more than 3,000 subjects of interest, along with a growing pool of more than 20,000 individuals identified during terrorist inquiries.”

Official UK government figures released in September 2017 showed that over 90 per cent of all terror-related offences recorded last year “were related to Islamic fundamentalism.”

There were 379 arrests for terrorism-related offences in Great Britain in the year ending June 2017, a rate of more than one a day and the highest number in a year since data collection began in 2001.

The tally includes dozens of individuals held in swoops in the wake of attacks in London and Manchester which contributed to domestic terror arrests increasing five-fold in the year.

The figures also revealed that as of June 2017, 204 people were in custody for terror-related offences, an increase of 35 per cent and continuing an upward trend seen since the statistics were first collected in 2001.

Of this number, 91 percent were Muslim, while five percent were “far-right” and the four percent were classified as “other ideologies.”

It is therefore nothing short of a deliberate, malicious, and outright lie for anybody to claim that “white supremacist neo-Nazis”—whatever they are—are a “threat” to Britain.

The only reason that the establishment and its controlled media make this claim—and repeat it ad infinitum—is to try and hide the truth that the real terrorist threat comes from the mass Third World invasion which they themselves have created.



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

Source Article from

Pentagon Just Pledged Millions to Pay Media Companies to Wage a Massive Information War


In 2016, using the cover of the holidays and distracted attention, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act into law — just two days before many Americans celebrated Christmas — likely due to the ominously Orwellian language it used that was meant to “counter propaganda and disinformation directed at the United States.”

Now, it appears that this counter-propaganda move will be taken a step further as the Department of the State announced a partnership with the Department of Defense this week to spend millions on “initiatives to counter propaganda and disinformation.”

To counter what they perceive as “propaganda and disinformation from foreign nations,” the Pentagon plans on paying private companies to create content that will serve as weaponized media.

According to the State Department, “Under the Information Access Fund, civil society groups, media content providers, nongovernmental organizations, federally funded research and development centers, private companies, and academic institutions will be eligible to compete for grants from the GEC to advance their important work to counter propaganda and disinformation.”

The United States is not only actively engaging in an information war but they announced that they will be leading the preemptive strike.

“This funding is critical to ensuring that we continue an aggressive response to malign influence and disinformation and that we can leverage deeper partnerships with our allies, Silicon Valley, and other partners in this fight,” Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Steve Goldstein said. “It is not merely a defensive posture that we should take, we also need to be on the offensive.” 

This $40 million in funds is now added to the $60 million already authorized by the NDAA in 2016 which paved the way for funding private companies and mainstream media companies to get paid to push the narrative of the US war machine.

One of the most insidious NDAA provisions to date is called the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016, it essentially creates a de facto U.S. Ministry of Truth. The corporate mainstream media has generally failed to report on the implications resulting from the included provisions as to keep Americans in the dark about the Information War being waged on them by their own government.

And now, they will actually be paid to report on any information that is damning to the military-industrial complex.

As Zero Hedge reported at the time:

As we reported in early June, “a bill to implement the U.S.’ very own de facto Ministry of Truth had been quietly introduced in Congress. As with any legislation attempting to dodge the public spotlight the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016 marks a further curtailment of press freedom and another avenue to stultify avenues of accurate information. Introduced by Congressmen Adam Kinzinger and Ted Lieu, H.R. 5181 seeks a “whole-government approach without the bureaucratic restrictions” to counter “foreign disinformation and manipulation,” which they believe threaten the world’s “security and stability.”

Also called the Countering Information Warfare Act of 2016 (S. 2692), when introduced in March by Sen. Rob Portman, the legislation represents a dramatic return to Cold War-era government propaganda battle.

H.R. 5181 would task the Secretary of State with coordinating the Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Broadcasting Board of Governors to “establish a Center for Information Analysis and Response,” which will pinpoint sources of disinformation, analyze data, and — in true dystopic manner — ‘develop and disseminate’ “fact-based narratives” to counter effrontery propaganda.

Given the disproven narrative on alleged Russian interference in the election and the push by mainstream media, NGOs, and civil society organizations to keep the conspiracy theory alive, the idea of the Pentagon throwing money at these very organizations to preemptively wage an information war is chilling, to say the least.

As the text of the NDAA explains, the center will “support the development and dissemination of fact-based narratives and analysis to counter propaganda and disinformation directed at the United States and United States allies and partner nations.”

Although this new program claims to be aimed at “foreign nations,” the wording in the NDAA indicates otherwise.

Many of the Global Engagement Center’s duties concern targeting disinformation and propaganda being disseminated in other nations; however, it subtly suggests the effort would seek to prevent such content from reaching the United States — thus, domestic actions are, by no means, ruled out.

Indeed, as the law states:

“The Center is authorized to provide grants or contracts of financial support to civil society groups, media content providers, nongovernmental organizations, federally funded research and development centers, private companies, or academic institutions for the following purposes:

  • To support local independent media who are best placed to refute foreign disinformation and manipulation in their own communities.
  • To collect and store examples in print, online, and social media, disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda directed at the United States and its allies and partners.
  • To analyze and report on tactics, techniques, and procedures of foreign information warfare with respect to disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda.
  • To support efforts by the Center to counter efforts by foreign entities to use disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda to influence the policies and social and political stability of the United States and United States allies and partner nations.

Adding to the ominous nature of the new program, at the end of the statement, the State Department said, “Separately, the GEC will initiate a series of pilot projects developed with the Department of Defense that are designed to counter propaganda and disinformation. Those projects will be supported by Department of Defense funding.”

So, not only is the DoD publicly upping their information war game for $40 million, but they are conducting side projects and funding them with an unknown amount of money.

Ironically enough, all of this propaganda and informational warfare was once shunned by the federal government. The Smith–Mundt Act of 1948 strictly prohibited the US government from propagandizing its own citizens. However, in 2013—again using the NDAA as cover—the government quietly modified the bill allowing for materials produced by the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), which used to be only informational weapons against our enemies — to be available within the United States.

When looking at the massive half-truths and utter dismay of government accountability—especially police and military—the reason so many Americans accept it without question becomes entirely clear. They are programmed to.

Source Article from

HLN Panel Embarrasses Liberal Media for Ignorance in Gun Ban Push

S.E. Cupp Unfiltered
February 26, 2018
9:14:48 PM Eastern

S.E. CUPP: Despite the left and the media putting guns in their crosshairs 24/7, the desired effect might be missed. As a matter of fact, the Florida Gun Show in Tampa reported 7,000 attendees on Saturday. A record number. That’s probably not an accident. Okay, let me introduce my table for tonight. CNN political analyst and Senior Congressional Correspondent for the Washington Examiner David Drucker, CNN political commentator and conservative talk show host Ben Ferguson and Unfiltered Senior Producer Andy Levi. Ben?


CUPP: So I asked you to take a look at this bill that Florida voted not to debate. They pitched this as an assault weapons ban. It was really targeted. And, in fact, there is like eight pages of guns that are banned in this bill, including some hunting rifles, including some shotguns, including some pistols.

FERGUSON: Including some things that are not even close to what they would refer to as an “assault weapon.” The scariest part about that bill was the shotgun part, and I wrote it down because it was amazing to me. “All the following shotguns, copies, duplicates or altered.”

So here is my question: If I have a shotgun that is semiautomatic which I do which is completely for hunting. It’s never used for anything else besides duck hunting and dove hunting. It is semi-automatic. Every one of the shotguns listed is semi-automatic, clearly, my gun is now a duplicate. Couldn’t it be banned because it works exactly like the other guns that are in there, even though it has nothing to do but anything but exclusively hunting? The gun that I own is literally solely made for 100 percent hunting, not home defense, it’s too big it’s too long.

CUPP: This bill is so broad and when people say “we’re not coming after your hunting gun.” We’re not coming after your self-defense handgun.

FERGUSON: Clearly they are.

CUPP: This would make a semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine and a thumbhole stock. I have a gun with a thumbhole stock.

FERGUSON: Five rounds or more.

CUPP: It would make that illegal. What I don’t understand is as a hunter, having a detachable magazine if you are hunting multiple properties and you are getting in and out of your car, it makes your gun safer because you are not worried about leaving a round in the chamber every time you put it in your car. People who draft this kind of legislation clearly don’t think about that stuff. But why should we ever believe any lawmaker who says “we’re not coming for all your guns?”

ANDY LEVY: Oh. You absolutely shouldn’t. But what I always love about this they say it is common sense regulation, you know.

DAVID DRUCKER: Common sense gun safety.

LEVY: Gun safety is the new thing now instead of gun control, I noticed. But it is common sense legislation. Yeah, well if you want to basically regulate semi-automatic rifles out of existence and since that is generally the only acceptable position in the media, I will have to agree that it is common sense legislation. But you pointed out, detachable magazine and a thumbhole stock, what that’s going to do is turn a whole bunch of people into felons because, as you said, there are legitimate hunting reasons for having their rifles.


FERGUSON: The majority of the guns I own are used for hunting. The majority of the guns that I own are not even remotely close to what would be considered a “high powered assault rifle.” Yet, there are multiple guns on that list that are now, they say, I should not be able to own or should not be able to buy. So, if I am a normal, average American who’s not obsessed with AR-15s and all the gadgets that go with them. I’m just a normal gun owner who is a hunter, I read that and I’m immediately going to go to my corner because you lied to me, you told me you were not going to take my guns.

CUPP: Or you will go and buy a bunch of guns and sign up to be an NRA member. This is—let me tell you the secret. This is how the NRA works. There is a Democrat in the White House, the NRA is going to tell you, “they want to take your guns.” When there is a Republican in the White House, the NRA is going to tell you, “don’t relax, they still are going to come and take your guns.” And stuff like this proves them right. And every time Democrats get on this reactive Bent, it drives gun sales up through the roof, and attendance at gun shows go through the roof, and NRA memberships.


FERGUSON: But if you look at that list, that is a bait and switch lie. And you can show it and prove it every time.

CUPP: Totally. And the media isn’t savvy enough because I saw a lot of people in the media when this bill was being discussed. The media isn’t gun savvy enough to know that. I talked to some reporter and anchors who hadn’t read it and still went on the air and insisted this is just going after military-style assault weapons.

FERGUSON: Going after shotguns.

CUPP: That is not true. That is not true. That was a lie. That was a lie.

FERGUSON: That you use for hunting.


Source Article from