History Timeline: 911 anniversary 2018 and Benghazi Attack 2012

History Timeline:

911 anniversary 2018 and Benghazi Attack 2012

911 anniversary 2018

President Trump at Flight 93 Memorial:

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Comically Incorrect  for his great cartoon

A piece of America’s heart is buried on these grounds, but in its place has grown a new resolve to live our lives with the same grace and courage as the heroes of Flight 93. This field is now a monument to American defiance. This memorial is now a message to the world: America will never, ever submit to tyranny.

Since September 11th, nearly 5.5 million young Americans have enlisted in the United States Armed Forces. Nearly 7,000 service members have died facing down the menace of radical Islamic terrorism.

Today we also think of the more than 200,000 service members now serving overseas, and we think of every citizen who protects our nation at home, including our state, local, and federal law enforcement. These are great Americans. These are great heroes. We honor and thank them all.

As commander-in-chief, I will always do everything in my power to prevent terrorists from striking American soil.

Where Are We 17 Years Later?

Benghazi Attack 9-11 2012

Rush Limbaugh:

I think this is a good thing to revisit, because I don’t think people remember this.

Well, let me tell you about that. You mentioned 9/11 Benghazi. I think this is a good thing to revisit, because I don’t think people remember this. On that day… Let me get my embassies straight. I think it was our embassy in Cairo or it might have been somewhere in Libya. Anyway, one of our embassies apologized, issued an apology in the afternoon on September 11th, whatever the year was. We’re talking about Benghazi, 2012. I remember hearing this and I said, “Apology for what? What are we apologizing for now?”

It turned out that that apology had been orchestrated from the State Department in Washington as an advance move to blame this video that Obama and Hillary would later rely on as the reason why the Benghazi attack happened. We apologized before anything happened! Somebody goofed and released the official apology before the terrorists had taken any action. So it looked like we were apologizing for our existence. We were apologizing for our policies, apologizing for this and that.

It didn’t make any sense whatsoever. Later in the day and night, Benghazi happened, and we were told that it was spontaneous and it was because of a video that had been circulating on YouTube and elsewhere in the Middle East. It was inciting Islamists to riot and the apology was cited and so forth. The whole thing was a scam because it was known that Benghazi was going to happen, because it was a terror attack that was planned. It was known somewhat in advance. Of course, you know the story of Benghazi.

We didn’t do anything to help the people fighting in the middle of it to get ’em out or any of that because we didn’t want to provoke and we didn’t want to launch airplanes and missiles from the nearest base in Italy, if I’m recalling this right. I may have some of the few details wrong here, but overall this was the prelude to what happened at Benghazi on 9/11/12, and that apology from our State Department… I think it was Cairo, but it might have been from our installation… I don’t think we even had one in Libya. Anyway, I’m long. I gotta take a break. But I’ll figure this out.

Yeah, it was the embassy in Cairo, the State Department embassy. Our embassy issued this apology. It was like three o’clock in the afternoon, and nothing had happened. I said, “Well, it’s not unusual for Obama to apologize for America, but what is this about?” And then fact-checkers protecting Obama later said there really wasn’t an apology; it was just a statement. It was an apology to set up the blaming of the video for what was to happen later at the Benghazi complex.

Don’t Forget the Attack in Benghazi

 

Advertisements

Critical Thinking: Freedom of Conscience Definition Changes Affect First Amendment Rights—History Timeline

Critical Thinking

History Timeline

Freedom of Conscience Definition—Changes Affect First Amendment Rights

We do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men. . .the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience. We believe that religion is instituted of God; and that men are amenable to him, and to him only, for the exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others. ~D&C 134:4

Update: Winning—SCOTUS ruled in favor of Freedom of Conscience in  case of Christian baker

David Barton

If Americans want to see a return to the historical understanding of the rights of conscience, it will begin with disciplined study and learning. That learning must then be applied and exercised. Those applications and exercises will have to be defended. And when this generation has done all this, they will have to teach the next generation to study, exercise, and defend their right to conscience anew.  

 

Alert! History Timeline shows how Changes Affect First Amendment Rights

Note the narrowed definition, and consequently the assumed narrowed protection of our liberty. ~C.D.

“We have to be careful to define terms here, and unpopular isn’t the best word. Freedom of conscience is not the idea that it is the government’s responsibility to protect minority dissenting ideas from the majority.” ~David Barton

 

  • “In the 1700-1800s, we never talked about freedom of religion,” Barton said. “We always talked about freedom of conscience.”
  • In the 1900s and 2000s, the language changed to freedom of religion.
  • In the 21st century, we are changing it to freedom of worship.

“Each one of these is a smaller subset of the bigger one. Freedom of conscience is the biggest one of all and that is what the First Amendment protects.”

 

Heart of Liberty Is Freedom of Conscience

Teddy James

Report with quotes by David Barton

The first step to restoring freedom of conscience in America is to learn about it. ~Teddy James

“We have to be careful to define terms here, and unpopular isn’t the best word. Freedom of conscience is not the idea that it is the government’s responsibility to protect minority dissenting ideas from the majority.” ~David Barton

 

A critical difference in Understanding Freedom of Conscience Definition

 

Many mistakenly believe freedom of conscience primarily exists to protect people with unpopular beliefs. David Barton said this understanding can be dangerous and lead to harmful court rulings and public policies.

Barton said to look no further than Engle v. Vitale, the 1962 case that removed prayer from school. It was believed the 3% of Americans who were atheists needed to be protected from the 96% who held to praying faiths. That is not to mention the 30 states with laws protecting traditional marriage being overruled by the Supreme Court due to 2.6% of the population being homosexual.

“You have to be careful where you draw the line,” Barton said. “Freedom of conscience is not about unpopular belief, but solely about beliefs that are not to be limited by civil government.”

Even though the government has crept across its jurisdictional lines for generations, hope is far from lost.

The first step to restoring freedom of conscience in America is to learn about it.

“Knowing what the rights of conscience are will affect what you do and what types of policies you tolerate,” Barton said. “When you know the rights of conscience, what they encompass and what they don’t, you are prepared not only to defend them, but also practice and assert them.”

How to teach Freedom of Conscience and Impart Biblical Values to Youth

To learn about the rights of conscience, Barton said, “The old history books are exceptionally good. They describe the purpose and application of those rights with clarity and approachability.” (See below.)

Reading the old books is important. Modern books focus on freedom of religion instead of freedom of conscience. While it seems subtle, there are real differences. 

”The Landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth” by Currier and Ives

July 2018 – In recent decades, religious liberty has captured headlines on every Christian and conservative platform. Governments of all levels have ignored their God-ordained jurisdictions to bombard America with anti-Christian rulings – all in the name of equality, tolerance, and freedom.

Ironically, a battle over religious liberty would have been foreign to American colonists and the Founding Fathers. Their battles were over the broader category of freedom of conscience.

History of freedom of conscience

America did not plant the tree of the freedom of conscience. However, America is one of the earliest and largest fruits from that tree.

“To understand freedom of conscience, we have to go back a lot further than America,” David Barton, founder and president of WallBuilders, told AFA Journal. “We must look to John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, and the like. But to understand them, we have to go back to 391 AD.”

The setting is Rome, and Emperor Theodosius is ruling over a unified eastern and western Roman Empire. He would be the last to do so.

Theodosius, a Christian, declares everyone under his domain would either be Christian or be executed.

Even though the Roman Empire split after his reign, the unified church and state continued.

“For the next one thousand years, governments told people what doctrines they could believe and practice,” Barton said. “One emperor went so far as to create a crown that would fit over the clerical hat of the era. He literally wore both hats at the same time.”

Fast-forward to 1517 and a group of Christians began challenging the status quo. Historians would call this the Protestant Reformation.

“During the Reformation,” Barton said, “leaders advocated that the state and the church should be two entities. Dividing the two, it was argued, would restore the rights of conscience and rebuild the voluntarism of Christianity.”

The Protestant Reformation reached England when King Henry VIII wanted to divorce his wife and the Pope wouldn’t allow it. Henry split from Rome and established the Church of England with himself as its supreme leader. Pilgrims and Puritans objected to this power grab on theological grounds, stating Jesus Christ is the only leader of the church.

The result was the crown persecuting the dissenters, leaving them no choice but to find new homelands.

 

Jurisdictions of freedom of conscience


On the shores of the New World, freedom was strengthened, but still faced obstacles.

“The Pilgrims and Puritans held separate elections for civil and religious offices, recognizing the separation of church and state,” Barton said. “But there were Puritan colonies that did not honor the freedom of conscience.”

Massachusetts, a Puritan colony, required members to believe and practice Puritan doctrines. If a person believed differently, he was free to do so, but must live somewhere else.

Roger Williams, a Puritan minister, did believe differently and was forced to leave the colony. Subsequently, he founded Rhode Island.

“But Roger Williams is just one chapter in a very long book,” Barton said. “In America alone, it includes the establishment of Maryland, New Hampshire, and parts of Connecticut.”

These colonies held to the idea that government existed to protect the rights and liberty of its people, not to guide their religious beliefs and practices. That was the distinct and special role of churches.

“Nothing is secular,” Barton said, “but there are [secular and religious] jurisdictions. The temple is not to run the sword because God gave the sword of justice to government.”

That is not to say someone should get away with just any outrageous thing and claim freedom of conscience.

“Every colony had a provision in regards to rights of conscience. Individuals could not use rights of conscience for licentiousness,” Barton said.

 “In other words, people did not have the right to have fourteen wives, physically harm others, or undermine the morals of the state.”

The divide between church and state was strong and stable; they had a symbiotic relationship. The modern era has seen a shrinking of that divide and a weakening of the relationship.

 

Assault on Freedom of Conscience


Update: Winning—SCOTUS ruled in favor of Freedom of Conscience on this case

“Right now the American government is crossing jurisdictional lines across the country,” Barton said. “It is crossing into territory God ordained for the church, claiming it is within its jurisdiction to tell Christians what they must believe and do. Bakers must bake cakes for ceremonies that would violate their consciences. The same goes for photographers’ and florists’ [services].”

 

 

Truth in Journalism vs. Media Bias Fake News Hoax on Family Separation Immigration; History Timeline on Bill Clinton and Family Separation

Truth in Journalism vs. Media Bias Fake News Hoax on Family Separation Immigration;

Sarah Sanders Torches Media over Family Separation Immigration Photo Hoax

“It’s shameful that dems and the media exploited this photo of a little girl to push their agenda,” Sanders tweeted. “She was not separated from her mom. The separation here is from the facts.~Sarah Sanders

John Nolte

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders blasted the establishment media Friday for spreading a now-debunked hoax-photograph featuring a little girl crying at the border.

“It’s shameful that dems and the media exploited this photo of a little girl to push their agenda,” Sanders tweeted. “She was not separated from her mom. The separation here is from the facts. Dems should join POTUS and fix our broken immigration system.

For days, and without bothering to vet the photograph, the anti-Trump corporate media have deliberately tried to mislead the American people into believing President Trump’s separation policies were new (they are not), and that this crying child was separated from her family due to Trump’s refusal to release illegal immigrants into America (which is the ONLY way to “keep families together”).

This week, the hoax-photo was even used on the cover of Time magazine, a far-left outlet that has spread fake news in the past.

The truth is that this child was never separated from her mother, and that Trump is merely continuing a policy of separating children and adults in detention centers, a smart and humane policy that Barack Obama practiced, as did his predecessors.

As if it is not bad enough that the media fabricated a non-controversy out of thin air (no one cared when Obama practiced this perfectly reasonable policy), the media are also using hoax photographs, utterly false propaganda, as a means to do it with.

…Sarah Sanders Torches Media over Photo Hoax

Liberal Hypocrisy

 History Timeline on Bill Clinton and  Family Separation

Bill Clinton and Janet Reno Separated Families

RUSH: Hey, folks, you want to talk about separating children from their parents? Does anybody remember the Waco invasion led by Attorney General Janet El Reno? That was her first massive attempt at separating children from their parents by killing them. David Koresh and his what they thought was an oddball religion housed in Waco, Texas. They literally had a military assault on the compound, and we watched it burn to the ground with women and children and men inside.

And then does anybody remember the name and saga of young Elian Gonzalez? Elian Gonzalez survived a rickety raft trip from Cuba to Florida. His mother did not. His mother drowned trying to save him. Elian was five or six.

They had relatives living in the Miami area, and they took the young boy in. After many months of the Clinton administration thinking that America was no place in this kid. His mother had left Cuba, risking her life and her son’s to get away from Castro and that nightmare of a country. She died. But Clinton and El Reno thought that the real home for that kid was back in “Cuber” with the child’s father, Juan Gonzales. So arguments ensued; the Clinton administration actually flew Juan Gonzales to Washington and to Florida.

Fidel Castro stumbled into one of the greatest propaganda opportunities of his dictatorship because here you had Bill Clinton and Janet El Reno parading Juan Gonzales all over American TV as a loving, doting father desperate to get his young son Elian Gonzalez back. Of course, the Clinton administration said, “A young man belongs with his father in a communist country,” and sent an armed federal agent into a rickety little house in Florida where the aunt and uncle… Her name was Marisleysis, if I recall. It could be the Gonzalezes. She was a relative of the mother.

And they were taking care of young Elian. Young Elian was happy. He was going to parks. He was having snow cones and running in the parks on swing sets and merry-go-rounds and stuff, and Janet El Reno grew tired of the fact that the family in Miami would not surrender young Elian to his father, Juan Gonzales. So they sent an armed federal agent! I mean, this guy was decked out with body armor, a helmet. He had leather gloves on his hands, a gigantic submachine gun-type looking weapon.

They stormed into that house and grabbed young Elian, grabbed him, took him out, put him on a little Learjet with Janet El Reno. They spirited him off, and eventually he ended up back in Cuba, where now he was described by Fidel Castro before he passed away as “a good worker,” and young Elian Gonzalez is now in his twenties and is a thoroughbred communist. But his mother took him away from Cuba and from his father — a separation, if you will — that was motivated by coming to America. The point is these things happen all the time, and yet the media is trying to make people believe that families being separated never happens.

 

Bill Clinton and Janet Reno Separated Families

Judeo-Christian Culture: History Timeline of the Nuclear Family in Western Civilization

Judeo-Christian Culture:

History Timeline of the Nuclear Family in Western Civilization

Defining the Nuclear Family

key“Shaped as we are by long human experience, we must be all the more careful not to lose what has required so much time and so much effort to accomplish. The modern nuclear family is a rare construct; we tamper with its essentials at our peril. As the long record of human experimentation attests, civilizations, even great civilizations, are more fragile and perishable than we think.” (Bennett, The Broken Hearth, 67, 70)

From The Broken Hearth

By William J. Bennett

family-traditional-nuclear3The modern nuclear family . . .did not appear spontaneously in the long-ago, but, rather, was built up gradually, shaped and molded by human experience. But if both marriage and family life have undergone change over the ages, as indeed they have, this hardly means that the 20th century family is an arbitrary construct.

Just as certain characteristics of the family have been malleable, adjusting to times and trends, other aspects, tethered as they are to deep human realities, have remained largely fixed and timeless. (42)

 

Five Periods in the history of the Western Civilization

 

I.  Old Testament times

JacobRachelThe Jewish people made marriage the sexual ideal. They also elevated the status of women by standing firmly for marriage and the family and firmly against infidelity and homosexuality. “Throughout their history, one of the Jews’ most distinguishing characteristics has been their commitment to family life,” writes Dennis Prager, social critic.

Jewish tradition also placed great emphasis on honoring one’s parents.

Much that was taken for granted about family life in ancient Israel is contrary to present-day belief and, for good reasons, unacceptable to us. But much—especially the very conception of the family as the seedbed of moral refinement and individual growth—is already there, not hidden away but right out in the open, waiting to be further developed. (Bennett, 44-48)

 

II. Early Christian Period

 

Jesus-bcome-disciple-lds-churchWestern civilization has been influenced beyond measure by Christianity, from the ethical teachings of Jesus to the doctrines of patristic and later authorities to the evolving institutional practices of the Church and the community of the faithful. Christianity’s impact on the family, and on our ideas about the family, has been incalculable.

Women were among Jesus’ close followers, playing a major role in his ministry and in the spreading of his gospel, and serving as positive models in his teachings. Jesus praised their faith, and graciously accepted their acts of love and hospitality. It was women who were the first eyewitnesses of his resurrection and who were then told to go and relate the news to the male disciples. Mary, the mother of Jesus, was specially favored by God.

Jesus held men and women alike to the same moral standards. . .and taught that all must follow the same path to salvation.

In sum, the relationship of religious faith to marriage and family life is complex and at times paradoxical. If that reminds us, as it should, of the difficulties in any effort to turn either the Hebrew Bible or the New Testament into a straightforward brief for traditional “family values,” it should also remind us of how rich, how demanding, and how endlessly instructive is the moral and spiritual legacy we are heirs to. (Bennett, 48-52)

 

III.  Middle Ages

The Roman Catholic Church was influential in prohibiting incest and the marrying of close relatives, in punishing fornication and adultery.

The Church did champion the role of consent in marriage, marking a historic change from the earlier periods we have examined.

As for the attitude toward children, Lawrence Stone reminds us that during the Middle Ages, two or more living children were often given the same name because it was so common that at least one of them would die. This was particularly true during the Black Death, the epidemic that ravaged Europe and Asia in the fourteenth century, and that is estimated to have killed one-quarter of the populations of Europe, including, no doubt, a disproportionate number of children.

 

IV. 1500-mid-1700s

john-winthrop-quoteThis was the period that saw the rise of the first American families, which, with their roots in English Puritanism, soon came to be considered an American ideal.

Consider the relationship between John Winthrop, the seventeenth-century governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and his wife, Margaret.

Margaret states the reasons she loves him: “first because thou lovest God; and, secondly, because that thou lovest me.” Governor Winthrop held his wife in similar esteem.

triangle-marriage-jesus-man-womanDuring the seventeenth century, the position of women in marriage seems to have improved—if only to a point.

Take the attitude toward newborn children in seventeenth-century New England. Many Puritans, adopting the strict Calvinist perspective, considered them products of oritinal sin: inherently corrupt, naturally depraved.

By the late seventeenth century, Puritanism was beginning to decline in England. The English philosopher John Locke—whose ideas did so much to influence the American founding—played a crucial role in altering public attitudes toward children as well. To Locke (who was not alone in this belief), an infant was less a product of the Fall than a blank slate, a tabula rasa. This conception, . . .stimulated the display of parental love and affection.

 

A “silent revolution” had taken place, one that diminished parental control over children’s marriages, differentiated family patterns across social classes, and produced a new conception of childhood in which children were viewed not as embodiments of sin but as innocent and malleable creatures whose characters could be molded into any shape. (Steven Mintz and Susan Kellogg)

By the end of the colonial period, then, currents were astir that would find their full realization by the early part of the next century. (Bennett, 58-61)

 

19th Century

By the 1830s, the free choice of spouse was seen as “a distinctive feature of American family life.”

happymarriagewordsWe contemporaries can also learn something useful from our ancestors. Too many people today believe that once a marriage goes flat—once the early love, affection, and intense attraction are gone—a marriage itself is irretrievably broken. In fact, there is plenty of evidence, from the past and from today, that people can fall in love again with their spouses. It may require time, effort, a conscious commitment of purpose, perhaps even outside counsel; but it can be done, and it is almost always worth the effort.

A woman was declared “God’s appointed agent of Morality, responsible for refining a man’s “human affections and elevating his moral feelings.” (Sarah J. Hale)

While Americans did not believe that “man and woman have either the duty or the right to perform the same offices,” they did show “an equal regard for both their respective parts. ~Alexis de Tocqueville

It would also appear that spouses were quite faithful: For American men, there was not gallantry to be found in a love affair, and women were expected to be chaste. One English visitor, remarking upon the “great charm which surrounds all family relations in the North,” made a point of recording that “compared with Europe, domestic scandals are unknown.”

The Industrial Revolution forced sweeping changes in every sphere, shifting people from agrarian to urban settings, crating smaller and more self-contained family units, and encouraging an unprecedented mobility. It took time, and a fair amount of disruptive agony, to adjust to these changes, and in doing so, people tended to draw closer within their families. Men in particular looked more and more to their wives and their homes for emotional support, nurturance, and affirmation.

Child-rearing ceased to be simply one of many activities and became the central concern—one is tempted to say the central obsession—of family life.” (Christopher Lasch)

family-history-victorian               This entire era—the Victorian era—has often been caricatured as sexually and emotionally repressed, patriarchal, tyrannical, and abusive. In fact, the hallmarks of family life included stability and faithfulness, emotional intimacy, and endurance. Things were not perfect by any means . . .But given the problems that plague contemporary family life—out-of-wedlock births and single-parent families, divorce and cohabitation, abortion on demand and the growing embrace of homosexual unions, to name just a few—a bit of humility, not to say appreciativeness, is surely called for.

The emerging attitudes I have been describing were not rooted in unenlightened, authoritarian, or misogynistic ideals. Rather, they were firmly anchored in the liberal political tradition. This was, after all, an America chiseled and shaped by the ideas of the Enlightenment, in particular by the writings of John Locke and Thomas Jefferson. (Bennett,62-66)

 

Modern Nuclear Family

“The bottom line is that not all family structures are equal, and not all variations are compatible with basic social and human needs.”

family-traditional-nuclear1“We desperately need to reestablish marriage as an exclusive arrangement between a man and a woman. Marriage, monogamous and freely chosen, must be the institution through which children are conceived and born, loved and disciplined, nurtured and raised. And marital permanence must once again become the ideal to which individuals commit themselves and which they strive to maintain.”

“Shaped as we are by long human experience, we must be all the more careful not to lose what has required so much time and so much effort to accomplish. The modern nuclear family is a rare construct; we tamper with its essentials at our peril. As the long record of human experimentation attests, civilizations, even great civilizations, are more fragile and perishable than we think.” (Bennett, The Broken Hearth, 67, 70)

Mass Shootings in America History Timeline: Mind-Altering Drugs are Major Influence

Mass Shootings in America History Timeline:

Mind-Altering Drugs are Major Influence

NOTE: Anti-depressant drugs are prescribed. Companies producing these dangerous drugs are keeping the dangerous truth from the public, and doctors are complicit in prescribing them irresponsibly. Sensible nutrition nourishes the brain. Medication does not create health. Most of the killers are male, but there are women also who have murdered their families. When are we going to face the truth and stop the madness? When you turn your mind over to the influence of a drug, you are ceding your free will. ~C.A. Davidson

Media ignoring 1 crucial factor in Florida school shooting

David Kupelian

In the case of Nikolas Cruz, the 19-year-old Florida mass-shooter, his mother’s sister, Barbara Kumbatovich, told the Miami Herald that she believed Cruz was on medication to deal with his emotional fragility.

Fact:

A disturbing number of perpetrators of school shootings and similar mass murders in our modern era were either on – or just recently coming off of – psychiatric medications. A few of the most high-profile examples, out of many others, include:

  • 1981 John Hinckley, age 25, took four Valium two hours before shooting and almost killing President Ronald Reagan in 1981. In the assassination attempt, Hinckley also wounded press secretary James Brady, Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy and policeman Thomas Delahanty.
  • In 1988, 31-year-old Laurie Dann went on a shooting rampage in a second-grade classroom in Winnetka, Illinois, killing one child and wounding six. She had been taking the antidepressant Anafranil as well as Lithium, long used to treat mania.
  • 1989 In another famous case, 47-year-old Joseph T. Wesbecker, just a month after he began taking Prozac in 1989, shot 20 workers at Standard Gravure Corp. in Louisville, Kentucky, killing nine. Prozac-maker Eli Lilly later settled a lawsuit brought by survivors.
  • 1989 Patrick Purdy went on a schoolyard shooting rampage in Stockton, California, in 1989, which became the catalyst for the original legislative frenzy to ban “semiautomatic assault weapons” in California and the nation. The 25-year-old Purdy, who murdered five children and wounded 30, had been on Amitriptyline, an antidepressant, as well as the antipsychotic drug Thorazine.
  • 1996 Kurt Danysh, 18, shot his own father to death in 1996, a little more than two weeks after starting on Prozac. Danysh’s description of own his mental-emotional state at the time of the murder is chilling: “I didn’t realize I did it until after it was done,” Danysh said. “This might sound weird, but it felt like I had no control of what I was doing, like I was left there just holding a gun.”
  • 1997 In Paducah, Kentucky, in late 1997, 14-year-old Michael Carneal, son of a prominent attorney, traveled to Heath High School and started shooting students in a prayer meeting taking place in the school’s lobby, killing three and leaving another paralyzed. Carneal reportedly was on Ritalin.
  • 1998 Kip Kinkel, 15, murdered his parents in 1998 and the next day went to his school, Thurston High in Springfield, Oregon, and opened fire on his classmates, killing two and wounding 22 others. He had been prescribed both Prozac and Ritalin.
  • 1999 Columbine mass-killer Eric Harris was taking Luvox – like Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Effexor and many others, a modern and widely prescribed type of antidepressant drug called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs. Harris and fellow student Dylan Klebold went on a hellish school shooting rampage in 1999 during which they killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 24 others before turning their guns on themselves. Luvox manufacturer Solvay Pharmaceuticals concedes that during short-term controlled clinical trials, 4 percent of children and youth taking Luvox – that’s one in 25 – developed mania, a dangerous and violence-prone mental derangement characterized by extreme excitement and delusion.
  • 2001, Christopher Pittman, when he was 12 years old. The case drew national attention in part because of his age at the time of the crime and in part because his defense that the prescription drug Zoloft influenced his actions . He struggled in court to explain why he murdered his grandparents, who had provided the only love and stability he’d ever known in his turbulent life. “When I was lying in my bed that night,” he testified, “I couldn’t sleep because my voice in my head kept echoing through my mind telling me to kill them.” Christopher had been angry with his grandfather, who had disciplined him earlier that day for hurting another student during a fight on the school bus. So later that night, he shot both of his grandparents in the head with a .410 shotgun as they slept and then burned down their South Carolina home, where he had lived with them. “I got up, got the gun, and I went upstairs and I pulled the trigger,” he recalled. “Through the whole thing, it was like watching your favorite TV show. You know what is going to happen, but you can’t do anything to stop it.” Pittman’s lawyers would later argue that the boy had been a victim of “involuntary intoxication,” since his doctors had him taking the antidepressants Paxil and Zoloft just prior to the murders.
  • In 2005, 16-year-old Jeff Weise, living on Minnesota’s Red Lake Indian Reservation, shot and killed nine people and wounded five others before killing himself. Weise had been taking Prozac.
  • 2006 Andrea Yates, in one of the most heartrending crimes in modern history, drowned all five of her children – aged 7 years down to 6 months – in a bathtub. Insisting inner voices commanded her to kill her children, she had become increasingly psychotic over the course of several years. At her 2006 murder re-trial (after a 2002 guilty verdict was overturned on appeal), Yates’ longtime friend Debbie Holmes testified: “She asked me if I thought Satan could read her mind and if I believed in demon possession.” And Dr. George Ringholz, after evaluating Yates for two days, recounted an experience she had after the birth of her first child: “What she described was feeling a presence … Satan … telling her to take a knife and stab her son Noah,” Ringholz said, adding that Yates’ delusion at the time of the bathtub murders was not only that she had to kill her children to save them, but that Satan had entered her and that she had to be executed in order to kill Satan.Yates had been taking the antidepressant Effexor. In November 2005, more than four years after Yates drowned her children, Effexor manufacturer Wyeth Pharmaceuticals quietly added “homicidal ideation” to the drug’s list of “rare adverse events.” The Medical Accountability Network, a private nonprofit focused on medical ethics issues, publicly criticized Wyeth, saying Effexor’s “homicidal ideation” risk wasn’t well publicized and that Wyeth failed to send letters to doctors or issue warning labels announcing the change.And what exactly does “rare” mean in the phrase “rare adverse events”? The FDA defines it as occurring in less than one in 1,000 people. But since that same year 19.2 million prescriptions for Effexor were filled in the U.S., statistically that means thousands of Americans might experience “homicidal ideation” – murderous thoughts – as a result of taking just this one brand of antidepressant drug. Effexor is Wyeth’s best-selling drug, by the way, which in one recent year brought in over $3 billion in sales, accounting for almost a fifth of the company’s annual revenues.

Paxil’s known “adverse drug reactions” – according to the drug’s FDA-approved label – include “mania,” “insomnia,” “anxiety,” “agitation,” “confusion,” “amnesia,” “depression,” “paranoid reaction,” “psychosis,” “hostility,” “delirium,” “hallucinations,” “abnormal thinking,” “depersonalization” and “lack of emotion,” among others. The preceding examples are only a few of the best-known offenders who had been taking prescribed psychiatric drugs before committing their violent crimes – there are many others.

Whether we like to admit it or not, it is undeniable that when certain people living on the edge of sanity take psychiatric medications, those drugs can – and occasionally do – push them over the edge into violent madness. Remember, every single SSRI antidepressant sold in the United States of America today, no matter what brand or manufacturer, bears a “black box” FDA warning label – the government’s most serious drug warning – of “increased risks of suicidal thinking and behavior, known as suicidality, in young adults ages 18 to 24.” Common sense tells us that where there are suicidal thoughts – especially in a very, very angry person – homicidal thoughts may not be far behind. Indeed, the mass shooters we are describing often take their own lives when the police show up, having planned their suicide ahead of time.

Never lost a lawsuit

Pharmaceutical manufacturers are understandably nervous about publicity connecting their highly lucrative drugs to murderous violence, which may be why we rarely if ever hear any confirmation to those first-day reports from grief-stricken relatives who confide to journalists that the perpetrator was taking psychiatric drugs. After all, who are by far the biggest sponsors of TV news? Pharmaceutical companies, and they don’t want any free publicity of this sort.

The truth is, to avoid costly settlements and public relations catastrophes – such as when GlaxoSmithKline was ordered to pay millions of dollars to the family of 60-year-old Donald Schell who murdered his wife, daughter and granddaughter in a fit of rage shortly after starting on Paxil – drug companies’ legal teams have quietly and skillfully settled hundreds of cases out-of-court, shelling out hundreds of millions of dollars to plaintiffs. Pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly fought scores of legal claims against Prozac in this way, settling for cash before the complaint could go to court while stipulating that the settlement remain secret – and then claiming it had never lost a Prozac lawsuit.

Which brings us back to the key question: When are we going to get official confirmation as to whether Nikolas Cruz, like so many other mass shooters, had been taking psychiatric drugs?

Read More

http://www.wnd.com/2018/02/media-ignoring-1-crucial-factor-in-florida-school-shooting/

Western Culture History Timeline: Birthright Bible Story to Today and American Covenant with God

Western Culture History Timeline:

Birthright Bible Story to Today and American Covenant with God

Genesis (Bible)—the Birthright Covenant

Rebekah rescued the birthright covenant blessings from the wayward Esau.  Righteous Jacob becomes Israel, passes on the birthright covenant.

 

1492—The Promised Land Discovered

Christopher Columbus, a Jewish convert to Christianity, seeks lost tribes of Israel, discovers America.

 

1776-1787—America’s Covenant with God

George Washington and Founding Fathers create the Constitution and establish America as a covenant nation.

 

1860-1865—Covenant Restored

Abraham Lincoln restores the covenant which has been broken by the evil practice of slavery.

 

1860—Tares among the Wheat

Charles Darwin publishes his book on evolution in 1859. It goes on to influence powerful individuals like Karl Marx, Adolf Hitler, and Margaret Sanger (racial supremacist and founder of Planned Parenthood).

 

1930—Cultural Marxism

Ideas have consequences. When Karl Marx’s workers’ revolution failed to conquer the world, his followers devised a new strategy—Cultural Marxism. Whereas they sought to capture and subdue the human soul, Judeo-Christian Culture became the new enemy. Under the guise of “Multiculturalism”, the Marxists invaded the realms of Western Culture, starting with the schools and spreading through science, media, government, entertainment, and even some churches.

 

1963-2015—America Sells Her Birthright

  • Supreme Court decisions led to banning the Bible and prayer from public schools.
  • Violent crime increased 700%, including riots and bombings; drug abuse also soared.
  • America has been plagued with one of the highest immorality rates in the industrialized world.
  • The Supreme Court decreed abortion on demand.
  • The Supreme Court toppled the sacred institution of marriage between a man and a woman. (2015)

 

Imparting Biblical Values to the Rising Generation—As Easy as Eating Dinner!

It’s a way of life, and it’s simpler than you think. You can mentor your family in the Biblical worldview a little every day. It’s as easy as eating dinner! Join the Conversation!  Click Here  for Free Daily Dinner Topics

Western Culture Dinner Topics Theme: What’s It All About?

 

History Facts: Climate Change Theory History Timeline

History Facts:

Climate Change Theory History Timeline

Conflicting Views on Climate Change: Fire and Ice

This isn’t a question of science. It’s a question of whether Americans can trust what the media tell them about science. Most scientists do agree that the earth has warmed a little more than a degree in the last 100 years. That doesn’t mean that scientists concur mankind is to blame.

Journalists have warned of climate change for 100 years, but can’t decide whether we face an ice age or warming

By R. Warren Anderson and Dan Gainor

Global Research Editor’s Note

This article first published in May 2006 provides an interesting review of the debate on Climate Change.

It was five years before the turn of the century and major media were warning of disastrous climate change. Page six of The New York Times was headlined with the serious concerns of “geologists.” Only the president at the time wasn’t Bill Clinton; it was Grover Cleveland. And the Times wasn’t warning about global warming – it was telling readers the looming dangers of a new ice age.

The year was 1895, and it was just one of four different time periods in the last 100 years when major print media predicted an impending climate crisis. Each prediction carried its own elements of doom, saying Canada could be “wiped out” or lower crop yields would mean “billions will die.”

Just as the weather has changed over time, so has the reporting – blowing hot or cold with short-term changes in temperature.

Following the ice age threats from the late 1800s, fears of an imminent and icy catastrophe were compounded in the 1920s by Arctic explorer Donald MacMillan and an obsession with the news of his polar expedition. As the Times put it on Feb. 24, 1895, “Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again.”

Those concerns lasted well into the late 1920s. But when the earth’s surface warmed less than half a degree, newspapers and magazines responded with stories about the new threat. Once again the Times was out in front, cautioning “the earth is steadily growing warmer.”

Global Cooling: 1895-1932

Fear spread through the print media over the next three decades. A few months after the sinking of the Titanic, on Oct. 7, 1912, page one of the Times reported, “Prof. Schmidt Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age.”

Scientists knew of four ice ages in the past, leading Professor Nathaniel Schmidt of Cornell University to conclude that one day we will need scientific knowledge “to combat the perils” of the next one.

The same day the Los Angeles Times ran an article about Schmidt as well, entitled “Fifth ice age is on the way.” It was subtitled “Human race will have to fight for its existence against cold.”

That end-of-the-world tone wasn’t unusual. “Scientist says Arctic ice will wipe out Canada,” declared a front-page Chicago Tribune headline on Aug. 9, 1923. “Professor Gregory” of Yale University stated that “another world ice-epoch is due.” He was the American representative to the Pan-Pacific Science Congress and warned that North America would disappear as far south as the Great Lakes, and huge parts of Asia and Europe would be “wiped out.”

Then on Sept. 18, 1924, The New York Times declared the threat was real, saying “MacMillan Reports Signs of New Ice Age.”

Global Warming: 1929-1969

Today’s global warming advocates probably don’t even realize their claims aren’t original. Before the cooling worries of the ’70s, America went through global warming fever for several decades around World War II.

The nation entered the “longest warm spell since 1776,” according to a March 27, 1933, New York Times headline. Shifting climate gears from ice to heat, the Associated Press article began “That next ice age, if one is coming … is still a long way off.”

One year earlier, the paper reported that “the earth is steadily growing warmer” in its May 15 edition. The Washington Post felt the heat as well and titled an article simply “Hot weather” on August 2, 1930.

That article, reminiscent of a stand-up comedy routine, told readers that the heat was so bad, people were going to be saying, “Ah, do you remember that torrid summer of 1930. It was so hot that * * *.”

The Los Angeles Times beat both papers to the heat with the headline: “Is another ice age coming?” on March 11, 1929. Its answer to that question: “Most geologists think the world is growing warmer, and that it will continue to get warmer.”

Global Cooling: 1954-1976

The ice age is coming, the sun’s zooming in
Engines stop running, the wheat is growing thin
A nuclear era, but I have no fear
’Cause London is drowning, and I live by the river

— The Clash “London Calling,” released in 1979

The first Earth Day was celebrated on April 22, 1970, amidst hysteria about the dangers of a new ice age. The media had been spreading warnings of a cooling period since the 1950s, but those alarms grew louder in the 1970s.

Three months before, on January 11, The Washington Post told readers to “get a good grip on your long johns, cold weather haters – the worst may be yet to come,” in an article titled “Colder Winters Held Dawn of New Ice Age.” The article quoted climatologist Reid Bryson, who said “there’s no relief in sight” about the cooling trend.

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Legal Insurrection for his great cartoon

Journalists took the threat of another ice age seriously. Fortune magazine actually won a “Science Writing Award” from the American Institute of Physics for its own analysis of the danger. “As for the present cooling trend a number of leading climatologists have concluded that it is very bad news indeed,” Fortune announced in February 1974.

The New York Times noted that in 1972 the “mantle of polar ice increased by 12 percent” and had not returned to “normal” size.

Was the ice melting at record levels, as the headline stated, or at a level seen decades ago, as the first line mentioned?

On Sept. 14, 2005, the Times reported the recession of glaciers “seen from Peru to Tibet to Greenland” could accelerate and become abrupt.

This, in turn, could increase the rise of the sea level and block the Gulf Stream. Hence “a modern counterpart of the 18,000-year-old global-warming event could trigger a new ice age.”

Government Comes to the Rescue

Mankind managed to survive three phases of fear about global warming and cooling without massive bureaucracy and government intervention, but aggressive lobbying by environmental groups finally changed that reality.

The Kyoto treaty, new emissions standards and foreign regulations are but a few examples.

Global Warming: 1981-Present and Beyond

The media have bombarded Americans almost daily with the most recent version of the climate apocalypse.

Global warming has replaced the media’s ice age claims, but the results somehow have stayed the same – the deaths of millions or even billions of people, widespread devastation and starvation.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Nicholas D. Kristof of The New York Times wrote a column that lamented the lack of federal spending on global warming.

2005— New Term: “Climate Change”

“We spend about $500 billion a year on a military budget, yet we don’t want to spend peanuts to protect against climate change,” he said in a Sept. 27, 2005, piece.

Kristof’s words were noteworthy, not for his argument about spending, but for his obvious use of the term “climate change.” While his column was filled with references to “global warming,” it also reflected the latest trend as the coverage has morphed once again.

The two terms are often used interchangeably, but can mean something entirely different.

The latest threat has little to do with global warming and has everything to do with … everything.

The latest predictions claim that warming might well trigger another ice age.

Conclusion

What can one conclude from 110 years of conflicting climate coverage except that the weather changes and the media are just as capricious?

Certainly, their record speaks for itself. Four separate and distinct climate theories targeted at a public taught to believe the news. Only all four versions of the truth can’t possibly be accurate.

For ordinary Americans to judge the media’s version of current events about global warming, it is necessary to admit that journalists have misrepresented the story three other times.

Yet no one in the media is owning up to that fact. Newspapers that pride themselves on correction policies for the smallest errors now find themselves facing a historical record that is enormous and unforgiving.

It is time for the news media to admit a consistent failure to report this issue fairly or accurately, with due skepticism of scientific claims.

Recommendations

It would be difficult for the media to do a worse job with climate change coverage. Perhaps the most important suggestion would be to remember the basic rules about journalism and set aside biases — a simple suggestion, but far from easy given the overwhelming extent of the problem.

Three of the guidelines from the Society of Professional Journalists are especially appropriate:

“Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.”

“Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.”

“Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.”

Some other important points include:

Don’t Stifle Debate:

Most scientists do agree that the earth has warmed a little more than a degree in the last 100 years. That doesn’t mean that scientists concur mankind is to blame. Even if that were the case, the impact of warming is unclear.

People in northern climes might enjoy improved weather and longer growing seasons.

Don’t Ignore the Cost:

Global warming solutions pushed by environmental groups are notoriously expensive. Just signing on to the Kyoto treaty would have cost the United States several hundred billion dollars each year, according to estimates from the U.S. government generated during President Bill Clinton’s term.

Every story that talks about new regulations or forced cutbacks on emissions should discuss the cost of those proposals.

Report Accurately on Statistics:

Accurate temperature records have been kept only since the end of the 19th Century, shortly after the world left the Little Ice Age. So while recorded temperatures are increasing, they are not the warmest ever. A 2003 study by Harvard and the Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, “20th Century Climate Not So Hot,” “determined that the 20th century is neither the warmest century nor the century with the most extreme weather of the past 1,000 years.

Bibliography

For sources click here

To read the rest of this excellent article, please visit:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/conflicting-views-on-climate-change-fire-and-ice/16507

Remember the fable of “Chicken Little?” See this related post for an amusing view of today’s hysterical journalists.

Science Facts, Global Warming Hoax, and a Fable with a Moral

Learn more about the forgotten Scientific Method Here

 

History Timeline: Obama Presidency and Race Relations

History Timeline:

Obama Presidency and Race Relations

A Complete History Timeline of Race Relations Under Obama Presidency

 

keySo, here we are. Eight years of racial healing under Barrack Obama’s leftist ideology and the country is far more divided than ever.Racial riots and hostile tribal divisions weren’t nearly as common-occurring under past presidential administrations in recent history. The media beloved racial unifier, Barack Obama presided over the deterioration of race relations in America. If you like your race relations, you’ll get to keep your race relations. ~ Harry Khachatrian

 

Harry Khachatrian

Prior to the Obama presidency, President George W. Bush united Americans as… Americans through 9/11. He kept us safe, and unapologetically defended our common values of freedom and self-governance. But according to our national media, race relations prior to Obama’s presidency were like our healthcare system. Worse than Zimbabwe’s.

How successful was President Obama in mending these supposedly broken bonds? Here’s a comprehensive timeline of all the racial healing in the past eight years.

2009

obama-race-relations3In 2009, Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates arrived home to find his front door lock jammed. He opted to force his way in through the back door. Worried neighbors weren’t sure what was happening, and in good faith alerted the police.

Upon arrival, the officers – one of whom was black – asked Gates for ID, to which Gates then infuriatingly exploded, accusing the officers of racial profiling. “This is what it means to be black in America! … Do you even know how many graduate degrees I have! Do you know who you’re dealing with here!? … I’m a professor at Harvard. CAN YOU EVEN SPELL HARVARD?”

The befuddled, browbeaten officer arrested Gates on charges of disorderly conduct for his shrieking tirade.

The newly elected President disregarded the facts, kicking off what would be a long 8 years of poisonous rhetoric aimed at law enforcement.

2012

In February of 2012, Hispanic-American George Zimmerman – leader of his community’s neighborhood watch – saw a young black man, Trayvon Martin, lurking around his community. Zimmerman called the police, reporting that the man appeared to be on drugs (autopsy confirmed this) and was urinating in front of a house.

After being instructed not to pursue the suspect, Zimmerman hung up. The initial confrontation between the two remains a mystery. However, all the available evidence aligned with Zimmerman’s claim that Martin attacked him, knocking him to the ground. Jumping on top of him, Martin allegedly began beating Zimmerman, pounding his head into the pavement. Zimmerman subsequently reached for his gun, and shot Martin, killing him.

America’s racial-healer-in-chief Barack Obama responded to the incident, saying “if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

2014

July of 2014.

obama-race-relations2 In a truly unfortunate incident, 43-year-old Eric Garner died after being placed under arrest by police officers. At a whopping 400 hundred pounds, Garner had a bevy of preexisting health conditions. After Garner resisted arrest, the officer – following standard protocol – administered a submission hold. This lead to Garner famously saying “I can’t breathe” – this line was like caviar to the fervid imaginations of liberal pundits. The autopsy showed however that Garner didn’t die of suffocation. The submission likely triggered Garner’s preexisting health conditions, killing him.

What should have led to a bipartisan effort to strike down useless laws prohibiting the sales of untaxed cigarettes, instead lead to violent race riots fueled by Obama’s mythical racist conspiracy against black Americans. He said, “And right now, unfortunately, we are seeing too many instances where people just do not have confidence that folks are being treated fairly. And in some cases, those may be misperceptions; but in some cases, that’s a reality.”

 

August 2014

Ferguson, Missouri. August 2014. A name now synonymous with “black lives matter”. Eighteen-year-old black man Michael Brown robbed a convenience store. When pulled over by officer Darren Wilson, Brown tried to grab the officer’s gun. After it went off, Brown retreated until the officer exited his vehicle. At that point, Brown sprinted towards the officer, ignoring repeated pleas to stop. Officer Wilson shot Michael Brown, killing him. This was fully justified by all accounts, and Darren Wilson was fully acquitted by a grand jury. Nonetheless, this didn’t stop our divider-in-chief from coming out and exclaiming that the shooting “exposed the racial divide in the American justice system that stains the heart of black children.” Piling on, the national media took the contradicting reports of witnesses, with CNN hosts reporting that Brown had his hands up, exclaiming “don’t shoot”. This was a lie.

2015

obama-race-relations12015 when the national spotlight turned to Baltimore. After he was arrested for carrying an illegal switchblade, Freddie Gray died in the back of a police van as a result of spinal cord injuries. Despite the lack of evidence, liberals claimed Gray’s death to be a result of racism in policing. Adding fuel to the fire, racial-healing-monk Barack Obama stated, “This has been going on for a long time, this is not new, and we shouldn’t pretend that it’s new.”

Riots exploded across Baltimore, engulfing cars, businesses, and shops. A CVS Pharmacy was burned down, while the arsonists attacked firefighters trying to put the fire out.

2016

July of 2016

impeach16characterPhilando Castile was driving with his girlfriend. Castile was pulled over by Jeronimo Yanez (A Chinese police officer). The vagaries of the traffic stop are unclear, but video shot after the altercation shows the officer shot and killed Castile.

Great-racial-healing-master Barack Obama was in Warsaw for a NATO summit at the time. Refusing to pass up an opportunity to chide America in a foreign nation, he addressed the shooting, “When incidents like this occur, there’s a big chunk of our citizenry that feels as if, because of the color of their skin, they are not being treated the same, and that hurts, and that should trouble all of us.”

 

August of 2016

In Milwaukee August 2016, 23-year-old black male Sylville Smith was shot and killed by a black police officer. Exact details of the situation were still unclear at the time the event was reported. The suspect may have been threatening the officer with a firearm. Nonetheless, this was held up by the liberal Obama coalition as another example of system racism.

Racial agitators took to the streets, rioting for two nights. They set private property, businesses, and cars aflame. Police cars were destroyed and vandalized as the demonstrators tossed bricks through windshields.

So, here we are. Eight years of racial healing under Barrack Obama’s leftist ideology and the country is far more divided than ever.

Racial riots and hostile tribal divisions weren’t nearly as common-occurring under past presidential administrations in recent history. What happened? Police activity or the criminal justice system didn’t suddenly begin to wantonly target black people as Obama was sworn into office.

And so, race relations in America changed to reflect the vision Obama promulgated for 8 years. The media beloved racial unifier, Barack Obama presided over the deterioration of race relations in America. If you like your race relations, you’ll get to keep your race relations.

 

A Complete Timeline of Race Relations Under Obama

The Daily Wire

Book Reviews: Hillary’s America—History Timeline of the Democratic Party

Book Reviews:

Hillary’s America—History Timeline  of the Democratic Party

 

keyThese revolutionists are using a technique that is as old as the human race,—a fervid but false solicitude for the unfortunate over whom they thus gain mastery, and then enslave them. ~David O. McKay

The Left owns dark. The Democrat Party owns scary. The Left specifically owns the unfolding horror i American cities. As we go to press, The Chicago Tribune reports that nearly 100 people have been shot in Chicago? Obama Democrats. Since 1931. At the same time, race riots erupt in Milwaukee. Who runs that city? Democrats. Sonce 1908. In city after Democrat-run city,  the stories are, sadly, the same. Crime, unrest, poverty, hatred, misery. In places Democrats have wholly controlled for generations.  ~Rush Limbaugh, September 2016 Limbaugh Letter, 2

 

HIllaryMovie Hillary’s America—The Secret History of the Democratic Party

Dinesh D’Souza

My crime was exceeding the campaign finance laws by giving $20,000 over the campaign finance limit to a college pal of mine who was running for the U.S. Senate. I didn’t do it to get anything in return; I did it simply to help an old friend. For this, I found myself at the receiving end of the full force of the U.S. government.

But since no one in American history has been prosecuted—let alone incarcerated—for doing what I did, I should be allowed to suspect that my real crime was in exposing President Obama in my film 2016: Obama’s America and my books The Roots of Obama’s Rage and Obama’s America. Obama hated my film, vituperatively attacking it on his website baracobama.com, and a few months later, the FBI was knocking on my door.

During my eight-month confinement, I got to know attempted murderers, drug smugglers, coyotes, armed robbers—the whole gamut of the criminal underclass. Here I learned how criminals think, how they organize themselves into gangs, how they recruit allies, how they come up with their pitches, and how they cover up their misdeeds. I realized there is a close similarity between these criminal operations and the longstanding practices of modern progressivism and the Democratic Party.

(D’Souza, Hillary’s America, 23)

 

The Party of Plunder—The Land Stealers

1812-1816

andrew-jacksonAndrew Jackson steals 2 million acres from the Creek Indians

Jackson massacres and mutilates hundreds of Creeks at Horseshoe Bend, Mississippi

1828

Andrew Jackson, founder of Democrat Party

Jackson elected first Democrat President

1838

Cherokee Trail of Tears a direct result of Jackson policies

(D’Souza, 52-54)

Today

During recent years, the Democrat Party has confiscated miles and miles of land, robbing millions of Americans of jobs, such as in the coal industry.

slavery-democrat-thingThe Party of Slavery

1860s

(D’Souza, 102, ff)

  • Abraham Lincoln, America’s first Republican President, aptly described the difference between the two parties by saying that one thinks slavery is wrong and ought to be restricted, while the other thinks slavery is right and ought to be extended.
  • Northern Democrat Stephen Douglas, who sought to uphold slavery through his doctrine of “popular sovereignty,” gives the lie to the idea that the slavery battle was between the North and the South—actually it was between the Republican and the Democrat parties
  • While Democrats preciously kept blacks “down on the plantation” with lashings and whippings, today they keep blacks on the urban plantation through dependence on the progressive welfare state. (Hillary’s America, the film)
  • The Ku Klux Klan was founded in the 1860s and initially focused its terror tactics, not on blacks, but on white Republicans.
  • Night-riding and cross-burning were two symbols of the KK. Historian Eric Foner calls the Klan the domestic terrorist arm of the Democratic Party, whose main objective was to enforce white supremacy and to keep the South voting monolithically Democrat.

1890s

  • Black Republican crusader Ida B. Wells sought to stop the practice of lynching, but she had mixed success because lynching was protected and promoted by the Democratic Party as a technique of keeping blacks down—and preventing them from voting Republican.

 

20th Century

1901-1909

  • Republican Booker T. Washington, a former slave, inspired the ire of Democratic racists when he dined with Teddy Roosevelt.

ku_klux_klan_virgina_1922_parade1913-1921 Woodrow Wilson presidency

  • By showing the racist film The Birth of a Nation in the White House, the progressive Democrat Woodrow Wilson inspired a Ku Klux Klan revival in the South, Midwest, and West. Wilson also segregated all areas of the federal government, telling black leaders that segregation was for their benefit. The film The Birth of a Nation, a work of propaganda by the Southern Democrat D.W. Griffith, smears Republicans.

 

1933-1945 Franklin D. Roosevelt presidency (FDR)

  • Progressive hero Franklin Roosevelt cut a deal with racist Democrats in which he agreed, in exchange for their support of his agenda, to block anti-lynching legislation and to exclude blacks from most New Deal programs. This shows how progressivism didn’t displace racism; rather, it incorporated it.
  • One of FDR’s closest allies was the notorious racist Theodore Bilbo—FDR’s choice to run the District of Columbia—who always described blacks in vulgar terms and racial slurs.

1963-1969

  • Originally a member of the southern faction of racist Democrats, Lyndon Johnson saw the Civil Rights Act as a means to keep blacks (he used the racial slur) down on the Democratic plantation.

 

plannedParenthoodAFAThe Party of Abortion and Eugenics

1930s-1940s

  • Progressive Margaret Sanger—founder of Planned Parenthood and heroine to Hillary Clinton—sought to deal with the “unfit” by keeping them out of the country or killing them. Her “Negro Project” was designed to reduce the size of the black population.
  • The forced sterilization policies of the Nazis—which at first didn’t target Jews but rather “unfit” physical and mental defectives—were based in part on compulsory birth control measures developed in the United States by Margaret Sanger and her progressive allies.

Progressives heart Fascism

1930s and 1940s

  • Hitlerjugend.svgYoung John F. Kennedy toured Germany in the 1930s and praised Hitler as a “legend”, attributing hostility to the Nazis to jealousy of what they had accomplished. JFK went to serve as a Navy Lieutenant in World War II. He had no illusions about Hitler after the war. Even so, JFK’s pre-war fascination with Hitler is revealing because he was not alone. Other noted progressives at the time admired Hitler and the Nazis. The feeling was reciprocal; Hitler and the Nazis admired them.(D’Souza, 150)
  • Progressive Democrats have worked hard to erase this history, but their hero Franklin D. Roosevelt admired Mussolini in the 1930s, and Mussolini returned the compliment, considering FDR to be a fellow fascist.

 

Mafiosi Training

rules-for-radicals-alinsky1920s

  • Mobster Al Capone is the inspiration behind modern progressive techniques of intimidation and political shakedown; he also helps us understand how the Democratic Party, while operating like as a crime syndicate, came to be viewed as on the side of the “little guy.”
  • Saul Alinsky—mentor of both Obama and Hillary—was no crusader for social justice; rather, he began his career as a petty street criminal and thief and later learned the art of political intimidation and shakedown at the hands of various Chicago gangs.

History Timeline of Political Correctness

History Timeline of Political Correctness

Month-Defining Moment[1]

History Facts

Marxist Origins

1967

The first book on political correctness, called the “Little Red Book”, was written by Chinese communist dictator Mao Zedong, who caused more deaths than any person in human history—50 to 70 million—more than Stalin and Hitler combined.

“1984”

obama-orwell-nightmareWhen “1984” by George Orwell was published as a satire in 1949, it was based on research of the communist tyranny of that era. Who would have imagined at that time that it would become a classic description of political correctness in America today?

“Newspeak” slogans

On the walls of Orwell’s fictional “Ministry of Truth” (headquarters for propaganda and revisionist history) are these “Newspeak” slogans:

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Reflect for a few seconds on these “1984”-style slogans and see if they fit today’s America: THEFT IS JUSTICE. ENVY IS RIGHTEOUSNESS. FAITH IS IGNORANCE. Or what about these? MORALITY IS BIGOTRY. SIN IS LOVE. CHARITY IS ENTITLEMENT. So you see, changing the meaning of one word can reprogram cultures and alter the destinies of human beings and entire societies. ~David Kupelian

If you consider how many people have been educated in the amoral, atheistic government education system in the last 60 years, maybe you won’t be so surprised after all that so many people have come under the subjugation of political correctness. Following are a few examples of how our language has been perverted.

Today

 

Original English

Politically Correct version

War on Terror Overseas contingency operations
Gangs Youth groups
Sex-change operation Gender reassignment surgery
Illegal aliens Undocumented workers
Prostitutes Sex workers
Pedophiles Minor-attracted persons
Homosexuals Gay
Atheists Brights
Abortion advocates Pro-choice
Child sexual abuse Inter-generational sex
Celebrate immorality Tolerance
Efforts to prevent abortion Torture, punishment, cruel degrading treatment of women
Hiring based on merit Racism, discrimination
Biblical Worldview Ignorant, insensitive, intolerant, bigoted, hateful
Good Evil
Evil Good
Treason, aiding, abetting enemy Muslim Outreach, Iran Deal

 

[1] Source: Whistleblower magazine, October 2015, 5-12