Trump’s Assault on Our Right to Keep and Bear Arms

/0 Comments/in , /by

Is it illegal to carry a gun to a demonstration against ICE? According to the Trump Administration, it is. According to a story in The New York Times on February 4, “Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, on Monday threatened jail time for anyone who enters the capital with a gun. In remarks on Fox News that could deepen a growing rift between gun owners and the Trump administration, Ms. Pirro declared that if anyone brings ‘a gun into the District, you mark my words, you’re going to jail. I don’t care if you have a license in another district and I don’t care if you’re a law-abiding gun owner somewhere else.’

“Her remarks prompted swift pushback from the Republican Party’s pro-Second Amendment wing, which was thrown into a cycle of confusion and frustration over comments from President Trump and some in his administration after Alex Pretti, a licensed gun owner, was shot by federal immigration agents last month during a protest in Minneapolis. The shooting has fueled debate among conservatives over the administration’s vacillating posture toward lawful gun ownership. After the shooting, Mr. Trump and some senior administration officials sought to blame Mr. Pretti for carrying a concealed firearm during the protest. ‘I don’t like that he had a gun, I don’t like that he had two fully loaded magazines, that’s a lot of bad stuff,’ Mr. Trump said last week in Iowa.

“Ms. Pirro’s remarks caught the attention of several Republican lawmakers, including Representative Greg Steube of Florida, a U.S. Army veteran, who said on social media that he travels into Washington from his home district every week with a firearm. ‘I have a license in Florida and DC to carry. And I will continue to carry to protect myself and others,’ Mr. Steube wrote. . .Come and Take it! Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky, sought to dispute the legality of Ms. Pirro’s assertion by pointing to laws within the U.S. capital. ‘Non-residents can obtain a permit in DC — don’t ask me how I know,’ he wrote on social media.’ Ms. Pirro’s remarks could breach the alliance between the Republican Party and gun rights groups or, like Mr. Trump’s, be brushed off by pro-gun rights groups as a passing controversy. But that did not stop Democrats from seizing on it. Representative Brendan Boyle, Democrat of Pennsylvania, said on social media that he was ‘Old enough to remember the ‘Obama is going to grab your guns’ hysteria. Turns out it was the Trump White House.’”

The great Ron Unz also noted that the supposedly rightwing and pro-gun Trump Administration appeared to have changed course: “I’ve carefully followed American politics for nearly the last half-century, and during all those years a leading element of the conservative political coalition, especially lauded by right-wingers, had been the pro-gun groups. These were always fiercely protective of the rights of all Americans to keep and bear firearms, and they sometimes even took those ideological positions to extremes. Most of Trump’s administration has been notoriously right-wing, and everyone would have assumed that nearly all its members fell into that pro-gun camp. Yet as the exact circumstances of the Pretti killing became known, an ideological reversal of staggering proportions immediately occurred. As they defended and justified the ICE killing, Trump officials seemed to be arguing that federal agents were authorized to summarily execute any American citizen who exercised his legal right to own and carry a handgun. Judge Andrew Napolitano is a former FoxNews host, and one of his recent videos conveniently included a montage of numerous senior Trump administration officials taking that surprising position. In their public remarks, they suggested that anyone who brought a perfectly legal firearm to a protest could justifiably be shot and killed by federal ICE agents …They are facing pushback from an unlikely quarter: gun-rights groups that traditionally have largely sided with the GOP. ‘The first thing that politicians want to do is blame the gun, said Taylor Rhodes, spokesman for the National Association for Gun Rights, based in Greenville, S.C. Rhodes said he has attended hundreds of protests and rallies over the years, always with a gun. He said a thorough investigation is needed, but judging from videos of the shooting, ‘I don’t think it looks good on the ICE agents.’ . . Many other news stories and interviews reinforced the same stunned reaction to that sharp and totally unexpected ideological reversal: FBI Director Kash Patel magnified the blowback Sunday on Fox News’s ‘Sunday Morning Futures With Maria Bartiromo.’ No one, Patel said, can ‘bring a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It’s that simple.’ Erich Pratt, vice president of Gun Owners of America, was incredulous. ‘I have attended protest rallies while armed, and no one got injured,’ he said on CNN. Conservative officials around the country made the same connection between the First and Second amendments. ‘Showing up at a protest is very American. Showing up with a weapon is very American,’ state Rep. Jeremy Faison, who leads the GOP caucus in Tennessee, said on social media. Trump’s first-term vice president, Mike Pence, called for ‘full and transparent investigation of this officer involved shooting’… ‘You remember Kyle Rittenhouse and how he was made a hero on the right,’ said Trey Gowdy, a Republican former congressman and attorney for Trump during one of his first-term impeachments. ‘Alex Pretti’s firearm was being lawfully carried. … He never brandished it.’ Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor who has studied the history of the gun debate, said the fallout ‘shows how tribal we’ve become.’ Republicans spent years talking about the Second Amendment as a means to fight government tyranny, he said. ‘The moment someone who’s thought to be from the left, they abandon that principled stance,’ Winkler said.”

The Trump Administration’s tergiversations on gun rights are no aberration. Rather they reflect the fundamental nature of the state, as Murray Rothbard, the greatest political and economic thinker of the twentieth century, has taught us. As he says in his wonderful essay Anatomy of the State,“The State is that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area; in particular, it is the only organization in society that obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for services rendered but by coercion. While other individuals or institutions obtain their income by production of goods and services and by the peaceful and voluntary sale of these goods and services to others, the State obtains its revenue by the use of compulsion; that is, by the use and the threat of the jailhouse and the bayonet. Having used force and violence to obtain its revenue, the State generally goes on to regulate and dictate the other actions of its individual subjects. One would think that simple observation of all States through history and over the globe would be proof enough of this assertion”

Because of the state’s inherent nature, the proper response to the Trump Administration should not place exclusive emphasis on our constitutional rights, although they do have a role in our battle. The crucial weakness in exclusively relying on the constitution is that the Supreme Court is part of the federal government and will tend to settle disputed issues in a way that enhances centralized power. Rothbard credits John C. Calhoun for demonstrating this fundamental point: “In his Disquisition, Calhoun demonstrated the inherent tendency of the State to break through the limits of such a constitution: ‘A written constitution certainly has many and considerable advantages, but it is a great mistake to suppose that the mere insertion of provisions to restrict and limit the power of the government, without investing those for whose protection they are inserted with the means of enforcing their observance [my italics] will be sufficient to prevent the major and dominant party from abusing its powers. Being the party in possession of the government, they will, from the same constitution of man which makes government necessary to protect society, be in favor of the powers granted by the constitution and opposed to the restrictions intended to limit them.’”

Nevertheless, our constitutional right to keep and bear arms is indeed important. As Stephen P. Halbrook, a leading authority on the topic, has pointed out, the American Revolution was in large part a response to the attempt of the British to confiscate American guns: “The ‘shot heard ‘round the world’ at Lexington and Concord in 1775 entailed the Redcoats’ attempted seizure of arms being hoarded by militiamen and the repulse of these troops by the local citizens armed with their own muskets and sporting arms. This led General Gage to impose the confiscation of all firearms from Boston’s civilians, under the promise that those in compliance could depart the besieged city. After seizing the arms, ‘the perfidious Gage’ held the townsfolk as hostages. During these years, history was not standing still in the other colonies. The patriots in such colonies as Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New York were being radicalized because of events in Boston, and the British authorities saw Boston as the root of all evil in the colonies. The Boston experience showed that many colonists were armed or sought to obtain arms, and that Gage’s successful and unsuccessful attempts to disarm them constituted yet more proof of the Crown’s objective to destroy their rights as Englishmen. The above were key events which led the Founders to adopt the Second Amendment. A tyrannical government supported by a standing army had sought to disarm a people through various artifices. It took these repressive measures against both citizens organized as militia and against citizens as individuals. The patriots then exercised their right to keep and bear arms to protect both this right and their many other rights. The American Revolution had now been sparked. Its philosophy, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence (1776), was that the people must endure some amount of injustice, but they may wage armed resistance when injustice becomes tyranny. Beginning in 1776 and continuing during the War for Independence, the States took measures to provide for their own governance. Virginia was the first State to adopt a declaration of rights, which included the admonition for ‘a well regulated Militia, composed of the Body of the People, trained to Arms.’ And Pennsylvania was the first to declare that ‘the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state.’ These principles were held dear in all of the States, without regard to whether they adopted a bill of rights.’

Let’s do everything we can to resist the Trump Administration’s assault on our right to keep and bear arms!

The Best of Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him mail], former editorial assistant to Ludwig von Mises and congressional chief of staff to Ron Paul, is founder and chairman of the Mises Institute, executor for the estate of Murray N. Rothbard, and editor of LewRockwell.com. He is the author of Against the State and Against the Left. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter.

Before You Make Any Lofty New Year’s Resolutions, Go Clean Your Room

/0 Comments/in , /by

Long before Jordan Peterson was telling young men to “make their bed,” wise matriarchs were imposing this “rule for life” on their households for ages. It’s a good rule, but particularly this time of year, as we enter 2026 and start thinking about lofty goals and resolutions. I’d suggest — just as your mother might have — before deciding on any big changes, to start with your bedroom.

The New Year presents itself as a chance for us to turn the page, to change the things we don’t like about ourselves, and that can be overwhelming — to the point that many people don’t even make New Year’s resolutions for fear of failing at them or forgetting about them by MLK Day. Only 31 percent of American adults even planned to make a New Year’s resolution in 2025, according to a YouGov poll.

So before you pledge to run a marathon or make some other seismic change come January, the first thing you should do is make your bed. This is the best way to ward off the sense of being overwhelmed or fear of failure for two reasons. The first is the practical benefits.

Leila Marie Lawler, the anti-feminist, mother of seven, describes this concept in practical terms. She writes clear and encouraging instructions for stay-at-home moms with lots of children on how to keep a “reasonably clean house” (a difficult task), but I think her counsel is helpful for anyone overwhelmed by all the things we need to do on a given day, not just housewives.

Lawler explains that some people think getting your life together should start in the kitchen. A sink full of dishes is quite paralyzing in itself after all, and the kitchen tends to collect more clutter due to more traffic, especially in big families. But Lawler is right to ask, “If you start in the kitchen, will you ever leave?” The answer is no. In a few hours, you’ll start making another meal in there, and you’ll be back at square one. (Read more from “Before You Make Any Lofty New Year’s Resolutions, Go Clean Your Room” HERE)

Killing Of Nigerian Christians Underscores Islam Is Incompatible With Safety And Freedom

/0 Comments/in , /by

We’ve heard endless claims by the propaganda press and campus “protesters” that Islamic terrorists are oppressed, and “white” Christians are the oppressors. For example, recall how New York Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani famously suggested that the real victims of 9/11 are New York City’s Muslims because his “Auntie” felt like people looked at her funny while she wore her hijab on the train.

Such fig-leafed fables can never cover up the horrific realities on the ground. Islamic jihadists’ intolerance for any coexistence with Christianity and Western values of civil society becomes starker every day. Most recently, we’ve had to grapple with the ISIS-inspired attack on Bondi Beach in Australia and the probable funding of Somali terrorists by unwitting Minnesota taxpayers. Their terrorist attacks are more numerous than ever before.

So, unquestionably, the oppressors are jihadists whose outspoken hate for Jews and Christians too often leads them to kill without mercy. The best evidence of this today is the case of Nigeria. For too long, the corporate press has been silent about — and even denied — the constant slaughter of Christians by Islamic terrorists in Nigeria.

Breaking the Silence

Until recently, you were expected to know nothing about the heinous acts committed daily against Christians worldwide, particularly in Nigeria. We were supposed to stay ignorant about the beheadings of priests in Nigeria, the destruction of 19,000 churches there, the machete hackings and live burnings of Christians there, the killings of about 8,000 Christians so far this year, and some 135,000 since 2009 in Nigeria alone. We were supposed to know zero about the persecution of Christians, even though they are overwhelmingly the most targeted of any religious group in the world by a large and growing margin.

Most of the perpetrators of Christian persecution in the modern world fall under two categories: communist governments such as those in North Korea and China; and Islamic jihadism, such as practiced by Boko Haram or Fulani militants in Nigeria, or the Taliban in Afghanistan, all of whom are intent on coercively imposing sharia law. This state of affairs was the central theme of “Persecuted and Prevailing: Addressing Christian Persecution in the Modern World” a recent livestreamed panel event at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C. (Read more from “Killing Of Nigerian Christians Underscores Islam Is Incompatible With Safety And Freedom” HERE)

Top Conservative Pollster Says Trump Abandoning MAGA, Setting Up the GOP to be “Crushed”

/7 Comments/in , , , , /by

Respected conservative pollster Richard Baris, known for his accurate reads on voter sentiment and one of the few who correctly forecasted Trump’s wins in both 2016 and 2020 when most others failed, has issued a stark “5-alarm” warning to President Trump and the MAGA movement. In analysis following the recent off-year elections in Virginia and New Jersey, Baris uncovered a troubling trend: significant drop-off among Republican voters who simply stayed home. While losses in deep-blue states were expected, the sheer scale of GOP abstention points to deeper MAGA discontent that could spell serious trouble for the 2026 midterms.

Baris, director of Big Data Poll and a regular on Steve Bannon’s War Room, stresses that traditional kitchen-table issues like the economy, immigration, and crime, are not what’s killing enthusiasm right now. Instead, his post-election surveying in New Jersey and Virginia revealed two standout grievances: Trump’s perceived sidelining of domestic priorities in favor of foreign entanglements (particularly, the administration’s focus on Israel) and his gross mishandling of the Epstein files release. The recent government shutdown ranked a very distant third.

Trump’s initial dismissal of Epstein questions as a “Dem hoax” landed poorly with a base that sees elite accountability and the Deep State as core reasons they voted for him. As Baris noted on X while quoting his earlier warnings: “Five months after our early warning poll, it’s becoming mainstream knowledge the mishandling of the #EpsteinFiles played a bigger role in the decline of Trump’s approval than some wanted to believe . . . I tried, CK. I did.”

Baris’s reference to Charlie Kirk (“CK”) was an apparent reminder that he had warned Kirk and others in the Trump orbit months earlier that downplaying or bungling the Epstein release would demoralize key voter demographics.

In a separate appearance relayed by Trump administration alum Grace Chong, Baris told Bannon bluntly: GOP voters feel the administration “got sidelined with things they did not care about,” and the shutdown only compounded the malaise. “The right needs a wake-up call,” he said. “They need to change this fast or they are going to get crushed.”

These frustrations are now showing up in broader polling, with Trump’s approval ratings softening amid nonstop attacks from Democrats, the media, and even 2028 hopefuls inside the party. Many in the base remain furious over the continued lack of accountability for Deep State figures despite repeated promises to drain the swamp.

The clear message is: don’t panic yet, but act immediately. There is still time to course-correct before the midterms, but pretending Democrats are too extreme to stage a comeback ignores recent history like New York City’s extreme leftward lurch. Baris’s track record makes his alarm impossible to dismiss as establishment spin, especially since he’s one of the only pollsters praised by Trump for his accuracy.

The path forward, according to Baris and other pro-MAGA analysts, is straightforward: refocus relentlessly on what actually animates the base: crushing inflation and economic pain, sealing the border, fighting crime in the streets, releasing the Epstein files unredacted, and delivering real prosecutions of the Deep State. If the President ignores this, the GOP will get crushed in 2026.

In Search of Donald Trump

/0 Comments/in , /by

I’m looking for Donald Trump. The one I voted for three times.

I knew he wasn’t perfect, and wouldn’t be anywhere near close to following the Constitution. No president is, even those we admire most, like Washington, Jefferson and Madison. We all have to “pick our poison” when we vote. I was pleasantly surprised by his first term. I defended him when they stole the election from him in 2020, and when they put him through lawfare for four years. The Democrats have proven that they are the party of death. Voting for Trump was a no brainer.

I have known that the Deep State existed since I read None Dare Call It Treason and None Dare Call It Conspiracy decades ago. I knew that the John Birch Society and Joseph McCarthy were demonized because they were too close to the truth. The Deep State is much, much more evil than most people realize.

Aside from murdering the Kennedys, they cleverly compromised the youngest one, Teddy, into being their obedient servant. They completely control Alaska, they stole the GOP nomination from Ron Paul. Trump knows all this by now, and the four years of horrendous suffering he has had to undergo, and the close calls with death, has made him a lot more truculent than before.

I don’t blame him for putting his enemies under the microscope, and the Republican congress must expose the Deep State and globalists while they possess a majority, for the sake of all Americans. Calling it “Partisanship!” rings hollow, considering what the Democrats were doing.

But Trump is selling out his own coalition with his war-making. The Left has discovered that the Zionist Lobby controls American politics, and it is the one thing that might unite them with the authentic patriots on the Right. The Left has already forfeited the Left-Right coalition that opposed Big Pharma, with their Covid hypocrisies, and they have completely sold their souls over forced vaxes. “My body, my choice” only applied to killing babies for them.

But many on the Right have their own blind spot. It is the Jerry Falwell/Scofield Bible crowd, that would pander to the Zionist Lobby, as if that alone would save America. That is about as Pharisaic as I can imagine: the idea that God is more interested in form, than He is in hearts.

Trump is a New Yorker and New Yorkers have always been pro-Zionism. He has yet to discover that those times are over. His denunciation of Marjorie Taylor Green, Thomas Massie, Tucker Carlson and Rand Paul demonstrates that he really does not understand basic limited government principles. He is throwing all that out for the sake of marrying us to the corrupt and murderous Israeli State.

And now we have Venezuela. It is as absurd a militaristic venture as we could conjure. They have been a communist government for a long time. We haven’t invaded Cuba, which is a lot closer and potentially more dangerous. The so-called “War on Drugs” is a shopworn, useless program, pretty much like LBJ’s “War on Poverty”.

Give it up, Donald. We voted for you to keep us OUT of wars, and all of yours have been, of course, undeclared. You’ve got bi-partisan company: Truman, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Bush I & II, Clinton, Obama and Biden. Venezuela’s contribution to America’s drug problem is nothing compared to Mexico, and they are a lot closer. But that would be a very costly and impossible war to wage, and you wouldn’t get the votes in Congress. We were unjust in invading Mexico in 1846. Maybe not in 1916, but that went nowhere into a wild goose chase.

Venezuela is a softer target, but the War on Drugs cannot be won by military action.

No, it must be done by dealing with the problem that creates the market for drugs, meaning our own feckless and indifferent citizenry. It crosses all economic and racial classes. Marijuana, cocaine, opioids, heroin, all damage our health, our heads and our spirits.

The problem of fatherless families, drugs, sex and self-gratification will never be cured by government. Blasting drug boats and napalm-bombing poppy plantations won’t end it. It will be ended when the market dries up. And even benign government actions, like anti-drug and STD posters and leaflets, school curriculums and programs, will do nothing but make people feel good, without solving the problem. It cannot change those “Hearts and Minds of the people.”

No, that belongs to religion. And all religions tell us that 1) there is a supernatural world, 2) we are all going to die, 3) there is a Natural Law, 4) we will be called to account, 5) there is hope for every individual.

Once the government supported religions with stamps that said, “Pray for Peace”, commercials that said, “The Family that prays together, stays together,” and “Worship together this week”. Presidents called for a day of fasting, humiliation and prayer, something that the people of Nineveh discovered actually works. That is about all it can do. Hand off the ball and let religion run with it.

There is an incredible thing about repentance. Individuals can begin it any time, and it works. But for a whole society to repent, it needs a leader, and a humble one. I did not expect Trump to be humble. But if he repented, it would set the table for us all, just as his denunciation of abortion, transgender surgeries and defense of women’s sports has already done, and world wide.

It would show that the best thing government can do is to turn some things over to God.

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

The Truth About Ben Shapiro: Wrong on Almost Every Issue

/0 Comments/in , , /by

After years of supposedly railing against cancel culture and whining that his site, Daily Wire, was harpooned by the left-wing censorship machine, Shapiro and his clique of Israel First activists have apparently decided that censorship is fine, as long as they’re the ones doing it. The self-proclaimed champions of open debate are now furious that Tucker Carlson interviewed controversial figure Nick Fuentes.

But don’t be fooled. Their outrage isn’t about ideas they don’t like. It’s all about control and who will be driving this political machine after Trump walks off into the sunset. . .

For Ben and his fellow hall monitors, this is a divide and conquer mission. Their strategy is simple: label the truth-tellers as “Nazis” and hope fear and outrage do the rest of the work. It’s the oldest, dirtiest trick in the left’s playbook, and they’ve stolen it word for word. . .

What’s happening here isn’t about protecting conservatism—it’s about gatekeeping it. Shapiro and his neocon buddies don’t want a movement that’s bold, messy, and unpredictable. They want one they can manage. So now, every time someone challenges the official narrative, out comes the “Nazi” label and the moral panic.

Free speech doesn’t come with a permission slip. You don’t have to like Nick Fuentes, Tucker Carlson, or anyone else in that orbit to understand the bigger principle at stake. You either believe in open debate, or you don’t. You can’t champion free speech while running around the playground blowing a whistle every time someone says something uncomfortable.

Facebook is no longer censoring us! Please “like” us at Facebook [here]

YouTube is still censoring, but you can help us defeat that by subscribing [here]

(Read more from “The Truth About Ben Shapiro: Wrong on Almost Every Issue” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Populist Revolt Sweeps the Globe as Voters Reject Globalist Elites

/0 Comments/in , /by

Across the globe, a powerful tide of conservative populism is reshaping politics — and it’s leaving the global elite reeling. From Buenos Aires to Warsaw, Prague, London, and Tokyo, voters are rejecting establishment leaders and rallying behind nationalist outsiders who speak the language of sovereignty, cultural pride, and economic self-determination.

In Argentina, President Javier Milei’s Liberty Advances alliance shocked observers by sweeping congressional midterms, crushing the long-dominant Peronists by nine percentage points. Despite a struggling peso and a $40 billion bailout from President Donald Trump ahead of the vote, Milei’s movement triumphed — not by courting elites, but by winning over blue-collar workers and rural voters once loyal to the left.

The story is much the same elsewhere. In Poland, historian-turned-politician Karol Nawrocki rose from obscurity to win the presidency by championing nationalism and traditional values, echoing Trump’s unapologetic populism. In Czechia, October’s parliamentary elections handed power to a coalition of conservative populist parties that promise to defend the nation’s culture and borders against globalist encroachment.

Meanwhile, Britain’s Nigel Farage and his Reform Party now lead national polls after sweeping May’s local elections. The once-mighty Conservative Party has plummeted to just 20% approval — a stunning collapse that underscores how disillusioned voters have become with traditional center-right politics that seem indistinguishable from the left.

Even in Japan, where political stability has long been the norm, the populist wave is crashing ashore. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party lost its majority this summer, as many of its supporters defected to nationalist newcomers promising to “Make Japan Great Again.” The party responded by installing Sanae Takaichi, a hawkish reformer and the country’s first female prime minister, signaling a sharp turn toward populist themes.

The Netherlands offers another example of the shifting political landscape. While Geert Wilders’ PVV lost seats, most of those went to other nationalist factions — showing that the populist sentiment is far from fading; it’s simply diversifying.

What’s driving this global realignment? Simply put, decades of globalist policies have failed. Promises of peace, prosperity, and progress have yielded endless wars, open borders, and cultural fragmentation. Ordinary citizens are tired of being told that their sovereignty must be surrendered for the “greater good.”

As one political analyst put it, “Outsiders like Trump, Milei, and Farage are succeeding because they aren’t complicit in the failures of the past.”

In contrast, the global left’s response to this populist surge has been to double down. Across Europe and even in the United States, younger progressives are becoming more radical, blaming billionaires and conservative Christians for society’s woes rather than the policies that hollowed out their economies and communities.

Figures like Zohran Mamdani, the socialist frontrunner in New York City’s mayoral race, represent the mirror image of MAGA populism — angry, insurgent, and anti-establishment, but from the left. Yet while progressive populism grows in cities, the heartland remains firmly with the nationalist right.

For Donald Trump, this global trend could be a political windfall. The populist wave that lifted leaders like Milei, Nawrocki, and Farage reflects the same frustrations that have powered Trump’s enduring appeal. Middle America, like voters abroad, increasingly sees through the false promises of globalism and yearns for leadership that puts nation and people first.

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

The Parallels of 9/11 & Charlie Kirk False Flag Operations

/0 Comments/in , , /by

For the last week I have been obsessed with learning more about the assassination of the young conservative influencer and head of the organization Turning Point USA, Charlie Kirk.

I was in Washington DC last week to emcee the first day of the “Turning The Tide” symposium hosted by The International Center for 9/11 Justice and other 9/11 truth organizations. It was being live-streamed by the popular independent media platform, REDACTED.

There was a lot of excitement around the event. In recent months and years the 24 year old truth movement had finally caught the attention of powerful influencers like Clayton Morris, Candace Owens, Russell Brand and even Tucker Carlson who was planning on appearing on the livestream on day 2.

We also had strong support from former Congressmen Dennis Kucinich and Kurt Weldon. And, for the first time, a sitting US Senator, Ron Johnson had met with point persons in the truth movement earlier in the afternoon of September 10. Senator Johnson agreed to appear at our event as well.

Was this going to be the event that would catalyze a massive change in national conversation about the events of 9/11 that we have been envisioning for so long? I certainly thought so.

As I was preparing to take the podium to kick off the three day event we learned that Charlie Kirk had been shot. By the end of my 18 minute long commentary we learned that Kirk was confirmed dead.

Strangely, it wasn’t American news organizations who broke the news. It was the PM of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu on X:

I certainly didn’t know much about Charlie Kirk and the huge influence he had over millions of conservative youth. Personally, I regard conservatism vs liberalism as a dichotomy that actually serves to avert attention from the real battle: a growing authoritarian state against a population that is willingly surrendering their rights in exchange for a sense of security.

One of the points I made in my commentary centered around the rapidly changing attitude around openly challenging the official 9/11 story:

“I distinctly remember that just five years ago challenging the fantasy we were told about 9/11 relegated you to remote corners of discussion on social media. You couldn’t bring it up in polite conversation.

Now, openly supporting the official narrative invites serious questions about your credibility. Today one’s take on 9/11 is the best litmus test of one’s own sensibility as it applies to nearly every other contentious issue.”

This is the context through which I had formed my opinion about Charlie Kirk. What did Charlie Kirk know about the events of 9/11? Nothing outside of the fantasy our government told us.

In this exchange a veteran probes Kirk’s understanding of 9/11. The veteran and “9/11 Truther” is animated while Kirk remains composed. Kirk is bombarded with a gish-gallop of “alternative” viewpoints about all wars, CIA/Israeli ties and the twin tower destruction. Unfortunately the veteran quickly veers into antisemitic tropes.

Nevertheless

– Kirk wasn’t aware of the passport of the alleged Saudi hijacker “miraculously” found close to ground zero days after three skyscrapers were blown apart.

– Neither was he aware of all the evidence that points to controlled demolition or

– the scarcely believable piloting demonstrated by these supposed hijackers flying multi-engined jet planes for the first time in their lives nor

– the infamous “Operation Northwoods” proposal that bears uncanny resemblance to a more cohesive story around the events of 9/11

That’s okay. Kirk was like most people, intelligent or otherwise who have never heard a cogent counter argument to governmental propaganda about 9/11. In other words, I never paid attention to what this young man was saying before he was unalived.

The murder of this young man, a husband and father, was a tragedy and, particularly untimely. National attention was diverted to this quickly unfolding story and not the one we were attempting to bring to the public.

The assassination of Charlie Kirk and how it was being spun bears a striking similarity to the psyop which was unleashed upon a stunned public after September 11, 2001…

Less than an hour after the second tower fell, the world was told exactly what had happened and why. The three dozen news sources which all reported massive explosions during the collapse of our iconic twin towers never mentioned them again.

The new “facts” were offered by former Israeli PM Ehud Barak who coincidentally happened to be nearby to BBC studios when it was all coming down:

There was no question what this attack was about, according to Barak. It was an attack by terrorist organizations and the countries who harbor them upon not just America but on Israel and Democracy itself. The world would be forever different he predicted. He was right.

The misdirection was taking hold before anyone could know what really happened.

In my speech I reminded the audience of how, in our effort to protect Democracy from Al Qaeda, we had to accept that extraordinary rendition was necessary, that confessions obtained through torture at CIA black sites would be admissible in court and that incarceration on mere suspicion alone would be okay.

All these attacks on the Constitution of the United States were neatly spelled out in the Patriot Act, ironically.

Somehow Barak knew exactly what happened and why seven hours before another giant skyscraper dropped to the ground in classic controlled demolition style at the WTC complex. Unfortunately for Barak and the spin doctors, Building 7 was not hit by a plane.

He was also unaware of another inconvenient incident uncovered that morning:

A woman in Jersey City (across the Hudson River from the twin towers) noticed a group of five Arab appearing men filming the destruction of the twin towers. They were dancing in celebration.

They were taken into custody. They weren’t Arab. They were Israeli. They confessed that they were there to “document” the event. After finding several thousands of dollars in cash and passports from a number of different countries on their person, our FBI did what we would expect under the circumstances: quietly release them to Israeli authorities some weeks later.

Were they Mossad agents? Where are they now? Who knows? However all can agree on two important points:

They must have had foreknowledge of the 9/11 tragedy and

They were celebrating.

Most of the public is still unaware of these inconvenient details.

Fast forward 24 years to the heartfelt tweet from another Israeli PM, Netanyahu, for his slain young friend, Charlie Kirk.

“Charlie Kirk was murdered for speaking truth and defending freedom”

What truths was he speaking? Who murdered him, Prime Minister?

Netanyahu answers the latter in his interview on Fox a day after the assassination:

“The radical Islamists and their union with the ultra-progressives—they often speak about ‘human rights,’ they speak about ‘free speech’—but they use violence to try to take down their enemies.”

Radical Islamists are at it again! This time in cahoots with ultra-progressives.

What was Kirk saying that was so provocative to the “ultra-progressives”? Of course he held beliefs that didn’t resonate with ultra-progressives. He was a Christian conservative who was a “lion hearted friend to Israel”. That has always been the case. So why was he murdered now??

If you have not been following this story, Kirk had been changing his tune, not about his Christian faith but about his feelings on Israel.

Max Blumenthal, Editor-in-Chief of The Grayzone lays out the evidence for Kirk’s change of heart here.

– Kirk openly questioned whether the IDF was given a “stand down” order on October 7th.

– Kirk felt that the state of Israel was going too far in Gaza.

– Kirk had turned down the Prime Minister’s invitation to visit Israel two weeks before his murder—a detail Netanyahu declined to mention in his tweet or since.

– Bibi also didn’t mention that Kirk turned down “donations” which, according to some sources, amounted to tens of millions of dollars.

– Kirk had also faced ire from pro-Israeli donors to Turning Point USA for showcasing Dave Smith, Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson at recent events. All three can be fairly judged as “America First”, i.e., Israel second.

Granted, though suspicious, all this could be coincidental. If we want hard facts we really ought to drop our speculation and listen to the authorities who, solved the crime “33 hours” later.

It was Tyler Robinson, a 22 yo Utah resident who took matters into his own hands. It was Kirk’s preaching of traditional values that drove Tyler to silence him with a round to the neck (Robinson was in love with his transitioning roommate, a biological male).

The FBI released communications between Robinson and his roommate. The BBC published them here.

In this rambling and sometimes poignant exchange, Robinson confesses to the murder and strangely drops precise details of his motivation and means by which he offed Charlie Kirk on September 10:

Robinson: If I am able to grab my rifle unseen, I will have left no evidence. Going to attempt to retrieve it again, hopefully they have moved on. I haven’t seen anything about them finding it.

Roommate: How long have you been planning this?

Robinson: a bit over a week I believe. I can get close to it but there is a squad car parked right by it. I think they already swept that spot, but I don’t wanna chance it

Robinson: I’m wishing I had circled back and grabbed it as soon as I got to my vehicle…. I’m worried what my old man would do if I didn’t bring back grandpas rifle … idek if it had a serial number, but it wouldn’t trace to me. I worry about prints I had to leave it in a bush where I changed outfits. didn’t have the ability or time to bring it with…. I might have to abandon it and hope they don’t find prints. how the [expletive] will I explain losing it to my old man….

only thing I left was the rifle wrapped in a towel….

remember how I was engraving bullets? The [expletive] messages are mostly a big meme, if I see “notices bulge uwu” on fox new I might have a stroke alright im gonna have to leave it, that really [expletive] sucks…. judging from today I’d say grandpas gun does just fine idk. I think that was a $2k scope;-;

Robinson: delete this exchange

Robinson: my dad wants photos of the rifle … he says grandpa wants to know who has what, the feds released a photo of the rifle, and it is very unique. Hes calling me rn, not answering.

Robinson: since trump got into office [my dad] has been pretty diehard maga.

Robinson: Im gonna turn myself in willingly, one of my neighbors here is a deputy for the sheriff.

Robinson: you are all I worry about love

Roommate: I’m much more worried about you

Robinson: don’t talk to the media please. don’t take any interviews or make any comments. … if any police ask you questions ask for a lawyer and stay silent

And there it is. We have the entire story now. Thank you Tyler for filling in all the details for us! We now know, thanks to the crack detective work by the Feds in pulling this from a chat on Discord that:

– He had planning it for a week.

– He probably would have gotten away with it if he wasn’t forced to drop the (assembled) rifle in the woods.

– He left it in a bush. Wrapped in a towel. Where, incidentally he changed clothes (in case anyone was wondering)

– It’s a very unique weapon.

– He didn’t know if it had a serial number on it. If it did, it couldn’t be traced to him because it was his grandpa’s.

– He’s being pressed by his “old man” who has been pretty diehard MAGA (a fact that his romantic interest probably was unaware of or forgotten)

– He left his fingerprints on the weapon

– The bullet was engraved with a message

– He’s going to turn himself in for murder in the first degree of a major political figure, but he is worried about what his father will say about losing the rifle.

Every loose end has been tied, just like those teen mystery novels I used to read when I was 12.

Except for a few details:

– Since when do 22 year olds text things like “grab it unseen”, “attempt to retrieve it”, “squad car”? And a few other minor things like…

– Where is the ballistics report?

– Where is the bullet?

– What did the autopsy report show?

– Video footage shows a Kirk was bleeding from a large wound from the front of his neck which is more indicative of an exit wound.

– Where is the footage from the camera mounted behind Kirk when he was shot?

– How did Tyler Robinson disassemble the weapon in a matter of seconds and put it in a backpack before leaping from the roof?

– Why did he reassemble the weapon before hiding it in a bush?

– And who was George Zinn, the “crazy old man” who after the shot was fired screamed that he had done it and implored the security to shoot him?

Should these questions be answered before “allowing” Utah Valley University to pave over the courtyard where Kirk was assassinated?

Don’t be silly. After all, there was no reason to examine any physical evidence at ground zero after the twin towers were blown to bits. What’s the point of looking for more clues if we already know happened? Get it out of here and let the healing begin!

Conclusion

Is the public going to trust the authorities on this con job again? I don’t think so. Unlike 24 years ago, we now have a public that is deeply suspicious of legacy media and their handlers, the “special interests” which control Federal government. Independent voices that command audiences which dwarf those of legacy media have already been clamoring for accountability and transparency.

I was anticipating writing a lot about the proceedings of the Turning the Tide event in DC. There were so many important scientific presentations by researchers and analysts. Powerful speeches for unity and transparency from former and sitting legislators. Heartfelt messages from family members of the victims who have been waiting decades for transparency and resolution.

However the story right now is about another psyop to which the public is being subjected. One doesn’t have to agree with the values Charlie Kirk espoused to grieve his death. One doesn’t have to identify with his political leanings to acknowledge that this 31 year old was doing something different. He was taking his position to hostile settings and inviting all comers to prove him wrong.

Dialogue between factions is the most dangerous thing to interests that exert their influence by keeping us from speaking to each other. Is this why he was killed? Or were there other reasons?

24 years ago the public was fooled into surrendering key Constitutional rights before a single war was waged to protect them. And today as Charlie Kirk is widely memorialized as fierce defender of free speech Attorney General Pam Bondi believes she has a mandate to crack down on “hate speech”.

That’s how they do it.

Will this be the real “Turning Point” for the USA?

Democrats Said Thoughts And Prayers Won’t Stop Leftist Violence, So Here Are Some Ideas

/0 Comments/in , /by

On Wednesday, after an assassin fatally shot conservative organizer Charlie Kirk in the throat while he spoke at a campus event in Utah, the reaction on the left was twofold. Online and in the real world, some celebrated Kirk’s death and said, in so many words, that he had it coming. Others issued statements, mostly vanilla, decrying “political violence” and expressing sympathies for Kirk’s family. A few said they were “praying.” Many conspicuously didn’t, instead blandly saying their “thoughts” were with Kirk and his family.

The compulsory statements ring pretty hollow for a few reasons. For starters, “thoughts” is a meaningless replacement for the act of petitioning God Almighty for comfort and healing. They’re coming from people who regularly vilified Kirk and his allies, using the same kind of inflammatory language Kirk’s killer engraved on the casings of his bullets. But it has also become obvious how much disgust many on the left have for prayer — so it’s weird to watch them play-act at an impotent secularized version of it, let alone the real thing.

Recall just two weeks ago, after a transgender shooter opened fire on Catholic schoolchildren in church, heartbroken Christians offered their prayers for the victims and their families. Prominent leftists excoriated them, mocking the prayers of not just horrified onlookers but the very prayers spoken by the victims before they were shot.

To mock our prayers as insufficient was a convenient way to redirect the conversation about the Minneapolis shooting toward the left’s favorite talking point in times of tragedy, gun control (certainly not the rising crisis of transgender violence). They told us prayer was not enough and that something had to be done to stop such tragedies from happening again.

The past week has proved them wrong and (kind of) right. It’s more obvious than ever how much our prayers are needed. Nothing in the world can comfort Mrs. Charlie Kirk better than her Lord and Savior, as I imagine she’s acutely aware. No power less than Christ can win over the souls of those who have gleefully cast their lot with evil and boasted of it on the internet. We should all be in constant and fervent prayer for Kirk’s loved ones to be comforted, for the hearts of those who hate him to be turned from evil, and for justice and virtue to govern the civic life we share with those who hate us. Even now, we’ve seen God in His abundant mercy use Kirk’s death to soften the hearts of strangers toward Christianity. Praise God for that, pray for more to hear and believe, and pray for faithful disciples to share the Gospel as prolifically as Kirk did. (Read more from “Democrats Said Thoughts And Prayers Won’t Stop Leftist Violence, So Here Are Some Ideas” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Want To Honor Charlie Kirk’s Legacy? Emulate His Moral Courage

/0 Comments/in , /by

I talked to a friend recently about courage, and he made what I thought was a really profound point worth thinking about in depth: Not all courage is the same. For example, there is moral courage and physical courage.

Physical courage is the soldier who braves the hail of bullets to complete his mission or to save his brother-in-arms. It is the fireman who risks his life to run into a burning building to save people who might otherwise die without his help. It is the mother who instinctively shields her child from danger using her own body. . .

But there is another type of courage that we don’t often recognize and praise, and that is moral courage. Moral courage is hard to depict in a mural or a statue. A monument to men planting a flag at Iwo Jima just seems more dramatic than someone calmly standing up and speaking the truth at a school board meeting, or telling a friend his behavior is ungodly, or internally vowing to no longer silently abide the lies of a culture that tells you boys can become girls or unborn babies aren’t people. . .

In our lives, however, we have the opportunity to practice and display moral courage every single day and in everything we do. Raising your children to do good and hate evil is morally courageous. Publicly objecting to false doctrines spread by wicked messengers is morally courageous. Stopping what you are doing and praying to Christ when you feel hopeless and helpless is morally courageous.

Standing up before a culture that hates God and hates good and revels in evil is morally courageous. Risking your job and livelihood to speak the truth and reject lies is morally courageous. (Read more from “Want To Honor Charlie Kirk’s Legacy? Emulate His Moral Courage” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr