The Danger of Hate Crime Laws

Posted on October 28, 2019 by zeev1776

“The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!” – Frederic Bastiat, The Law, 1.

“Hate crimes” is a wholly illegitimate classification of crime. It is a bogus legal distinction implemented for political purposes. It is an inherently flawed and biased category of pseudo-law. The implementation of these so-called “hate crime” laws poses a very real danger and threat to our Liberty – in particular our rights of speech and association – as so conspicuously guaranteed under our federal Constitution.

Though the term “hate crime” has been around long enough that everyone should be familiar with it, it might be helpful to start with a formal definition. Google defines a “hate crime” as “a crime, typically one involving violence, that is motivated by prejudice on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, or other grounds.” Right off the bat this definition makes the thinking person scratch his head and ask why we even need a special category of crime that deals purely with motivation. After all, don’t we already have laws on the books forbidding “violence” for any reason? Doesn’t our justice system already prosecute violent offenders and criminals, regardless of why they choose to abuse, harm, or otherwise violate the rights of another individual?

Does a murder suddenly become worse because it was motivated by “hate” of the victim’s religion, sexual orientation, or what have you? Isn’t taking a life in violence just as heinous and awful even if the murderer wasn’t motivated by hate? Why do those who are killed or abused because of their race, religion, etc., matter more than those who are killed or abused for any other reason? Why have we chosen to create an entirely new category of crime and punishment based on the perpetrator’s motivation? Isn’t doing so an inherently political and, thus, subjective, move?

Let’s be honest with ourselves: “Hate crimes” are actually thought crimes because their entire rationale for existing is based exclusively on the culprit’s inward motivation. While motive must obviously be taken into consideration when reviewing crimes and administering justice, a murder is a murder, an assault is an assault, a rape is a rape, a robbery is a robbery, and a violation of another’s God-given rights is a violation of their God-given rights regardless of the perpetrator’s motive.

Choosing to focus exclusively on the motive behind a violent crime, as if that fundamentally changes its nature, opens the door to the total politicization of the already overly politicized justice system. I thought the goddess of justice wore a blindfold because the law is blind. However, “hate crime” laws remove the blindfold and pave the way for a fully biased court system. Instead of being based on what crimes a perpetrator commits, punishment will now be based on the society’s perceptions and ever-changing definition of what constitutes “hate.” This is not the type of justice system honest people want, especially when we consider how easily-offended, vindictive, and self-centered our culture has become.

In his book Liberty Defined, retired congressman Ron Paul gave us this thought about “hate crime” laws:

“Passing legislation concerning crimes against minorities is supposed to show compassion and prove that our society does not discriminate. In fact, the laws do the opposite. Confidence that such efforts will help protect minorities causes a gross misunderstanding of individual rights. If all individuals should be treated the same under the law, providing greater penalties to those who commit crimes against certain racial or sexual orientation groups nullifies this effort. It means that the law provides lesser penalties to those individuals committing crimes against people without that favored orientation.

“A power given to government to place a greater penalty on someone, assuming they understand the motivation for the crime – always a subjective conclusion – is a consequence of the victims belonging to a certain group. If this can be done, the power is exactly the same power that once was used to excuse violence if it was against a black or gay person. The only solution is to insist that all rights are individual and unrelated to belonging to a particular group.

“The fallacy of this type of legislation has led to the routine misunderstanding of groups having rights rather than all individuals having equal rights. Too often, we hear reference to gay rights, minority rights, and women’s rights, etc., which undermines the concept of individual liberty.

“The idea that a crime can be judged as to whether it was motivated by hate for certain groups introduces the notion of a thought police. If someone is robbed, beaten, or killed, the penalty should be unrelated to what the perpetrator was thinking at the time. It hardly matters. The actions are the actions. Imposing preferential penalties endorses the concept of relative rights, which is of course a very dangerous, slippery slope. It implies that some victims have greater worth than others. The extra and arbitrary enforcement power mocks the principle of equal justice before the law. Why should the penalty for assault be different depending on race, sexual orientation, or membership in a particular group?

“Because some criminals have in the past been punished less harshly due to their victims’ belonging to a particular group is hardly a justification for a criminal to be punished more harshly for the same reason. It’s best we drop the whole concept of hyphenated rights and refer only to individual rights” (Ron Paul, Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Affect Our Freedom, 147-148).

Numerous insightful points were made in this statement. First, I draw your attention to the idea of group rights. Groups don’t have rights. There is no such thing as “gay rights,” for instance. We need to immediately cease using terms like “women’s rights,” “black rights,” and the like. They only divide us, pit us against each other, and prevent national unity. Indeed, this phraseology is quintessentially Marxist. It is the very essence of collectivist thought – an exhibition of their need to divide everyone into groups or “classes” in order to more effectively confuse and control them.

Opposing this Old World conception is Americanism. Our Founding Fathers taught, and codified in our national documents, that there are no group rights, but only human rights; rights that extend equally to all individuals. Belonging to a group or holding a particular belief cannot be used as a reason for either punishment or preference. So long as organizations and individuals are not guilty of violating the equal rights of others, and are not subversive of our Constitution and Liberty (such as the Communist Party USA which I believe should be immediately outlawed), they cannot be suppressed, singled out, or punished.

Additionally, Dr. Paul hit upon something very important. Those who promote “hate crime” laws are working from a very specific set of assumptions; namely, that American society has traditionally been repressive, bigoted, and intolerant – especially against non-Christians, those afflicted by homosexuality or disorders like transgenderism, people of color, women, etc. To hold this view of American history is to hold the demonstrably false, Marxist-concocted view. If this gross misunderstanding of history is false, which it is, then the entire impetus for “hate crimes” legislation falls flat.

Contrary to the toxic lies shoved down our throats by the controlled media day in and day out, America is the least racist and least oppressive nation in world history. No other society has been a “melting pot” of nationalities, creeds, and races like we have. You need only travel or live abroad to see how institutionalized and accepted racism is in most other societies.

America is and has been far too tolerant. We’re so absurdly tolerant that we allow harmful perversions and self-inflicted mental illnesses to be paraded about – and even taught to our children – as “healthy” and “normal.” Our tolerance (i.e. permissiveness) is one of the great dangers to American society today. Yet, “hate crime” law proponents would have you believe that America is tormented by hate-filled hordes (i.e. whites, Christians, and constitutionalists) exercising intolerance, repression, and hate in violent or discriminatory ways wherever you look. It’s simply not true.

As touched upon, “hate crime” laws actually emphasize and exacerbate societal differences, fanning the minuscule embers of genuine tension into an artificial blaze of hate and resentment. Ironically, it is those of a leftist, anti-Christian, pro-LGBT, pro-racial minority political/religious/cultural persuasion – those who always boast of how “tolerate,” “loving,” “egalitarian,” and “progressive” they are – who are most likely to spew out and act upon hate.

This, the most hateful segments of our society, is that most likely to foist its perceptions upon the rest of us via unjust “hate crime” and “hate speech” laws. They have perverted the law and use it as a means to silence their opposition. They want to, whether consciously or unconsciously, criminalize dissent to their point of view. Their unstable mentality prevents them from tolerating opposition – especially when it is coherent, articulate, and sourced. Instead, they plug their ears, lash out, and attempt to silence those who would disturb them in their cozy cocoon of lies with facts, data, and truth.

Among other things, the communists want us to believe in the myth of “white privilege.” Yet, I – a straight, white, gun-toting, Christian, constitutionalist man – have been on the receiving end of hate, discrimination, and threats too many times to allow myself to swallow that lie. For instance, I’ve been banned from Facebook too many times for alleged “hate speech” to be ignorant of the fact that the term “hate speech” in reality refers to anyone speaking truth or sharing a facts that conflict with the Establishment’s narrative on everything from history to current events to religion. To be accused of being “politically incorrect” simply means that you have decided to not go along, like sheep to the slaughter, with the Marxist Establishment’s party line.

The fruit of the “hate crimes” mentality is, inevitably, hate. By unduly emphasizing race and other factors as alleged motivations for crime, the authorities have stoked the flames of resentment, revenge, and hate, whether race-based or otherwise. Promoting the idea that there is an increase in crimes that are motivated by racism, homophobia, and the like, creates hostility and contempt – even hate – in the minds of those gullible enough to fall for the propaganda against those said to be perpetrating the crimes. The hate extends to the groups that the alleged perpetrators belong to – whites, Christians, etc.

“Hate crime” designations are so dangerous precisely because they create false perceptions in the public mind that stir up unnecessary and artificial strife. They emphasize divisions and differences and drive an emotional wedge between groups, whether between blacks and whites, those afflicted by homosexuality and normal heterosexuals, and so forth. It’s no wonder that “hate crime” legislation factors prominently in the Elite’s divide-and-conquer strategy.

An inconvenient fact many people don’t know is that the number of hate crime hoaxes outnumbers the number of actual hate crimes! And most of these ridiculous hoaxes are perpetrated by minorities in an attempt to frame whites. So ubiquitous are “hate crime” hoaxes that a website has been set up to document them (http://www.fakehatecrimes.org/).

We all know the obvious hate crime stunt pulled by Jussie Smollett earlier this year. Smollett, a black actor, went to the police to report an alleged assault by some white men. He walked into the police station still wearing the noose that had allegedly been put around his neck to lynch him with. The only problem is that Smollett is a liar. He hired two black Nigerians, who have confessed their involvement, to perpetrate the hoax. Because of the racially-motivated Marxist “justice” system in Chicago, Smollett never faced the trial that he rightly deserved.

A great article from RealClearPolitics titled “The Hate Crimes of Jussie Smollett” contains a great overview of Smollett’s hoax:

“The cops concluded this “attack” was also a sham — one orchestrated, staged, and financed by Smollett, who managed to convince two hapless Nigerian-American brothers to play the heavies. Police soon found a link between Smollett and the brothers, Ola and Abel Osundairo, who were caught on camera buying the rope and ski masks used that night. Confronted with this evidence, the brothers confessed and said it was all Smollett’s idea, and that he had paid them $3,500 to carry it out. . . .

“In the real world, it must have taken some effort by the street-wise detectives who took Smollett’s original statement to keep a straight face. How is it, they surely wondered, that two racist, homophobic Trump supporters happened to be wandering around a toney Chicago neighborhood at 2 a.m. — in zero-degree weather — rope and Clorox at the ready, waiting in ambush for a B-list actor from a black soap opera? Why did Smollett wait 40 minutes to call it in? How did he manage to hold onto – and keep intact — the sub sandwich he was carrying with him? And what’s with the “This is MAGA country!” battle cry – in Hillary Clinton’s hometown, a city she carried overwhelmingly in 2016 against Donald Trump?

“Ah, but I have corroborating evidence, Smollett told the cops: I was on the mobile phone with my manager when I was attacked and he heard the whole thing. Great, said the detectives. Can we have the phone? Not gonna happen, replied the alleged victim. When Smollett finally consented to provide a pdf file of his call logs, he’d tampered with them, presumably to delete the calls to his accomplices. The most obvious tell was that when police arrived at his door, Smollett was still wearing the rope he claimed the attackers wrapped around his neck. Jussie Smollett was still in costume, in other words, wearing the prop he thought made his self-created character — a hate crime victim — more believable to the audience. . . .

“Although it’s a story line that only the conservative media seem to be following, it turns out that racial hoaxes are disturbingly commonplace in this country. Worse, the mainstream media often stokes them, or in some cases, takes the lead in pushing them. Their very frequency suggests a couple of disquieting deductions: First, in our victimhood culture the demand for such outrages may now exceed the supply. Second, it turned out that Jussie Smollett may have understood the political zeitgeist far better than those outraged by his scam.

“This became clear Monday when the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office dropped all charges against Smollett without bothering to offer any explanation to the court and then joined his defense lawyers in offering a series of deceitful, contradictory, and specious explanations to reporters. Adding to the perception that the fix was in, the prosecutor then stood mute as a judge acquiesced to a defense motion to seal the entire matter.”

Jussie Smollett and the socialist media are the real perpetrators of hate and “hate crimes” in the United States of America. And those who promote this garbage, support the lying media outlets, and subscribe to this perverse ideology, are accessories to the crimes. I won’t stand by silently as normal Americans – who, if guilty of anything, are guilty of too much tolerance – are falsely accused, smeared, and ramrodded for “hate crimes” they didn’t commit against minorities who have taken leave of their senses. I won’t stand by mute as whites are accused of racism despite the fact that it was whites who ended institutionalized slavery throughout the colored world that had practiced it for millennia before erring Europeans got involved. And I won’t stand silently by as my fellow Christians endure demonic verbal abuse from those “tolerant” liberals and Social Justice Marxists who accuse us of hate simply because we have the sense to obey and follow God’s laws.

Think of what Smollett and others have done by perpetrating their plethora of “hate crime” hoaxes. They’ve increased hatred between whites and blacks, increased mistrust of the justice system, and emboldened others inclined to lie about being victims of “hate crimes,” to name only three. If we lived in a world of true justice, Smollett and his Nigerian patsies – and all other perpetrators of these hoaxes – would be sitting behind bars and every American would know them as the traitors they are.

The percentage of Jews and blacks who have been caught spray-painting swastikas on walls to scapegoat whites and conservatives is truly astounding. So typical is it that you often see memes floating around depicting a rabbi furtively defacing his own synagogue in the black of night. Many of you might recall an incident that happened at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs in 2017. At that time, a number of black cadets reported racist slurs appearing near their dormitory. The alleged act of racism drew forth a fierce speech from Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria denouncing racism. As it turns out, the “targets” of the crime were not really the victims they were made out to be. One of the “targets,” a black cadet, was caught and later admitted to being the one behind the “racist” slurs.

This sort of thing happens over and over from coast to coast. The hoaxes are a dime a dozen. Yet, because the media is controlled by Marxists who want to demonize white America as racist, they pick up and run with these stories regardless of the damage they may cause to race relations, unity, and brotherhood in our country.

Retired police officer Doug Traubel, in his phenomenal book Red Badge, discussed the absurdity of suggesting that white America is racist and violent against black America. The statistics and raw data actually confirm the exact opposite; namely, that black-on-white crime is exponentially higher than white-on-black crime. And this is very telling considering that only 13% of the population is black. But crime statistics are a discussion for another day. The key thing to focus on now is the way the powers-that-be hijack our language and promote the myth that white, Christian, conservative America is “oppressive” and “hateful.” The bogeyman of “racism,” if you didn’t know, is yet another Marxist creation. Traubel explained:

“The black-on-white crime wave in the U.S. is not a reaction to real injustices blacks are suffering at the hands of the white majority. Furthermore, social justice is not tied to righteousness, but a revolution and opportunism. The terrorist change, “No Justice, No Peace!” is born of fiction not virtue. Offender-victim demographics over fifty years prove the Dirty War is the reality. White Americans have long suffered from black predatory tribalism. Nevertheless, speaking truth on race and crime necessarily brands one a racist.

“Recognize the label for what it is. Do not run from it; that is what the Marxists want. Push through it. The patented use of the words “racist” and “racism” are a Marxist construct. These words did not exist in the English language prior to the 1930s. They are the product of the Frankfurt School.

“The creation of the words racist and racism in essence replaced the words “kind” and “kindred” with a negative connotation. They are applied selectively to whites for the intended purpose of pushing tradition back on its heels. Labeling whites “racists” intimidates them into silence from promoting order and defending standards, expectations and tradition. Ultimately, this created the moral relativism and identity vacuum we see today” (Doug Traubel, Red Badge: A Veteran Peace Officer’s Commentary on the Marxist Subversion of American Law Enforcement and Culture, 336-337).

This selectivity – based on political motives – is the danger inherent in all “hate crime” laws. When you have laws on the books that punish people based on the thoughts, motivations, or ideology behind their actions, which is all “hate crime” laws do, it empowers whatever faction is in charge of the justice system, or whatever group can most effectively manipulate public opinion, to define what is “hate” and what is not. Nowhere is this more noticeable than in the Establishment’s incessant use of the slurs “anti-Semite,” “Nazi,” and “white supremacist.”

The anti-white racist radicals and de facto domestic terrorists at the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) are leading the charge in promoting the false legal category of “hate crimes.” With decades of mass public conditioning on their side – conditioning that paints whites and constitutionalists as “Nazis” – the Jewish ADL are beating us over the heads with hysterical cries of “anti-Semitism!” Few things irk me more than to hear people falsely accused of being “anti-Semites,” “Nazis,” and “white supremacists.” I’ve been on the receiving end of these ludicrous slurs more times than I can count.

In my book A Century of Red, I wrote the following about alleged “anti-Semitism”:

“It is a sad commentary on the stunted intellectual capacities of our society that I have to waste space telling folks I am not an anti-Semite. Yet, it is necessary because the slur “anti-Semite” is hurled at anyone who opposes the Establishment and brings to light their heinous crimes, their treason, and their Satanic plots. Because of mass social conditioning, the average person rejects anyone or anything that bears the “anti-Semite” label, no matter how preposterous and unfounded that label is.

“The term “anti-Semite” has been so grossly overused that it has lost all meaning. The same goes for slurs like “Nazi” and “white nationalist” (though I fail to see what’s wrong with being white or being a nationalist). These days, if you dare question anything the powers-that-be do, you’re automatically an “anti-Semite” who probably has a gas chamber in his basement just ready to throw the poor Jews into. The use of this ridiculous slur has become so habitual that even Semites have been charged with “anti-Semitism”!

“I will be so bold as to say that if you have not been smeared or had your character assassinated, you probably haven’t been effective in the fight against Satan’s despotism. Communists and their ilk have always used character assassination to discredit their opposition. Ezra Taft Benson explained this principle in these words:

““The smear seems to be the most widely used and effective tool of the Conspiracy to discredit and weaken any effective anti-communist effort. The smear of any individual or organization by the Communists, their dupes and fellow-travelers is certain evidence of effectiveness. If any of you are affiliated with patriotic organizations reportedly opposed to the Communist Conspiracy, which are not extensively smeared, you can rest assured your opposition is largely ineffective. You had best look for a more fruitful affiliation.”

“By the same token, when you are called “ant-Semitic” these days – fear not, you are in good company. Indeed, you are likely in the company of those who have struck a nerve with the conspiracy and who have hit them in their exposed underbelly and, thus, are nearest to the truth.

“As when Lenin declared so-called anti-Semitism “counter revolutionary” and made it a capital offense, so, too, the tyrants of our day call the opposition of their iron rule “anti-Semites” and bring their forces to bear to assassinate the character of true patriots. Don’t be intimidated by these despots – that’s exactly what they’re counting on.”

The last part is key. To the communists, anything that was “counter revolutionary” – that is, anti-communist – was labeled “anti-Semitism.” It is no different today in our country. Anyone who bucks the Establishment, disobeys the party line, or speaks out against the conspiracy, is automatically an “anti-Semite,” “Nazi,” or “fascist.” Because we’ve been fed a totally warped view of WWII history, the words “Nazi” and “anti-Semite” sting like the crack of a whip. It is the fear of this proverbial whip that is designed to cow us into submission and self-censorship. Ultimately, that is the purpose of “hate crime” laws – to create an environment of fear of speaking out against the truly hateful agenda of Marxism.

We’re hyper-sensitive in an appalling way to the misapplied use of the terms just noted. Our brainwashing and conditioning has ensured this. Academia, Hollywood, the media, and public school teachers are guilty of presenting such a bastardized version of history that if anyone, for instance, has the audacity to cite the mountain of research that demonstrates nowhere close to six million Jews died in the “Holocaust,” you are hysterically singled out as a “Nazi” and “anti-Semite” and accused of “hate speech.” Numerous individuals currently sit in prison in North America and Europe for doing nothing other than questioning the Establishment’s official version of events; that is, for having unsanctioned thoughts that are considered “hate crimes.”

It’s curious that the historians, curators, and archivists who work at the Auschwitz labor camp can officially lower the presumed death toll by three million and yet the mainstream media throughout the world demands you still rigidly believe that six minus three equal six! Getting away with these monstrous lies would be utterly impossible were it not for our culture of fear which ostracizing you if the Establishment brands you a “Nazi.”

So horribly misused are the slurs “Nazi” and “anti-Semite” that I not only reaffirm what I wrote two years ago about being in good company when you’re singled out as a one, but I emphasize it more firmly: Being called “Nazi” and “anti-Semite” is a badge of honor these days. There is no true enemy of the global conspiracy that has not been derogatorily labeled a “Nazi.” And you can rest assured that those who have escaped this label are not really effective in their fight.

The fact that the Establishment loves to name-call is yet another reason why all “hate crime” legislation should be promptly repealed. How can one expect to receive a fair trail when the Establishment press brands him a “Nazi,” “anti-Semite,” “racist,” “homophobe,” or “transphobe”? In our conditioned society, someone who bears the “Nazi” or “racist” label – regardless of whether it is true or false – is automatically considered guilty of hate. Having the stigma “Nazi” or “racist” or “homophobe” attached to you almost ensures a conviction in a court prosecuting you for “hate crimes” because, again, “hate crime” laws deal exclusively with motive. If you’re a “Nazi,” of at least if the controlled press can make it appear you are, then it is assumed your underlying motivation is hate and intolerance regardless of whether there is even one scrap of evidence to prove it. Truly, “hate crime” laws are a slippery slope!

It should perhaps go without saying that I don’t consider “hate crime” laws constitutional and just, regardless of what the Supreme Court thinks. I’m not the only one who holds this view, however. The Heritage Foundation said that Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 “is based on serious analytical and constitutional flaws and would actually be counterproductive to prosecuting violent crime. They additionally noted:

“This amorphous standard would federalize almost all incidents of violent crime, even those that have nothing to do with bias, prejudice, or animus toward the victim because of his or her membership in a particular group. Virtually every sexual assault, for example, is committed “because of” the gender of the victim, the gender of the perpetrator, and the perpetrator’s gender preferences. Many criminals target women or those with real or perceived disabilities, believing that such victims may offer less resistance. It is even possible that a defendant could be deemed a “hate crimes” offender if he engaged in the violent conduct “because of” his own religion, gender, or national origin in some way. Thus an enormous proportion of local violent crime would become federal “hate crimes.””

I further extract two paragraphs from George Will’s article “The federal hate crime law is both unconstitutional and wise.” He explained:

“Hate crimes (usually vandalism, e.g., graffiti, or intimidation, e.g., verbal abuse) are a tiny fraction of 1 percent of all reported crimes. Almost all states have such laws, and a federal law duplicating them merely serves two disreputable purposes. It allows Congress to express theatrical indignation about hate. And it exposes to double jeopardy, under a federal law, defendants who are acquitted in politically charged state trials, especially ones involving race or religion.

“Even though states, unlike the federal government, have police powers, states’ hate crime laws also are problematic on policy grounds. They mandate enhanced punishments for crimes committed as a result of, or at least when accompanied by, particular states of mind that the government disapproves. The law holds us responsible for controlling our minds, which should control our conduct. The law always has had, and should have, the expressive function of stigmatizing particular kinds of conduct. But hate crime laws treat certain actions as especially reprehensible because the people committing them had odious (although not illegal) frames of mind. Such laws burden juries with the task of detecting an expanding number of impermissible motives for acts already criminalized. And juries must distinguish causation (a particular frame of mind causing an act) from correlation (the person who committed the act happened to have this or that mentality). So, even if the HCPA were not unconstitutional, it would be unwise.”

Theatrical indignation is a great description. “Hate crimes” are political theater. They rarely happen and when they do – or even when they don’t really, such as in the case of Jussie Smollett – the media seizes the opportunity to put them on the front page to promote the myth of angry, hateful America. The courts, the government, the media – they all combine to promote their delusions as “reality.” Don’t fall for it.

What’s more, there is no evidence that “hate crime” laws actually reduce crime or prevent alleged “hate crimes.” In the article “Cops Have No Idea If Hate Crime Laws Stop Hate Crimes,” Robby Soave gives us this great insight and some food for thought:

“The event—“In the Name of Hate: Examining the Federal Government’s Role in Responding to Hate Crimes”—began with Lhamon’s introductory remarks. Then she yielded the floor to Heriot, who took a few minutes to explain why she was dissenting from the day’s proceedings.

““Let me say that I am not really a fan of most hate crime laws, which I believe have a tendency to fuel identity politics at a time when the nation needs to come together,” said Heriot. “In particular I oppose the federal hate crime statute passed in 2009.”

“The 2009 law added gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability status to the list of protected classes, and it established that a person no longer needed to be involved in a federally relevant activity (like voting) in order to be deemed a victim of a federal hate crime. This was a vast expansion of the federal government’s ability to prosecute people for hate crimes, and it poses significant “double jeopardy” concerns, because it gives federal officials the opportunity to re-try defendants who survived state-based prosecutions. . . .

“. . . In my remarks, I urged public officials and the media to avoid blurring the distinction between hate crime—leveling additional penalties against people whose criminal actions impugned a special class—and hate speech, which is protected expression under the First Amendment. I also stressed that while we hear many pundits asserting that hate crimes are on the rise, this fact is not clearly supported by the available data. The hate crime rate has remained essentially unchanged over the last decade; moreover, the purported “Trump effect” in American schools is difficult to parse and possibly overstated. (Consider, for instance, the number of unsolved or outright hoax bias incidents on college campuses.) . . .

“While the other panelists seemed more enthusiastic about involving federal authorities in hate crimes prevention, they provided ample reason to doubt everything we think we know about the prevalence of hate crimes. Several panelists conceded that 88 percent of the police departments that bothered to submit hate crime information to the feds in 2016 reported zero hate crimes. Four municipalities that include more than 250,000 people apiece didn’t report any information whatsoever. Baltimore County—population: 831,000—reported just one hate crime.

“Some of the panelists conceded that they are often dealing with very low numbers, and with degrees of subjectivity. . . .

“Probably the best argument against strengthening federal hate crime prevention efforts was articulated by Commissioner Kirsanow, who asked just two questions during my panel. He directed his questions to all of us, and invited anyone who possessed the information to answer.

““Are you aware of any data, studies, or other evidence, that shows designating a crime a hate crime deters, prevents, or reduces that crime, and second, whether designating a crime a federal hate crime reduces, deters, or prevents incidents of that crime?” he asked.

“Neither I nor any of the other panelists were aware of such information, and so the panel fell silent.

“Kirsanow continued. “Then, one other question: are you aware of any databases, study, or other evidence that shows designating a crime a hate crime, whether a municipal, federal, or state crime, assists in the resolution of that crime or the apprehension of the perpetrator?” he asked.

“Again, silence.

““Thank you, Madame Chair,” he said, yielding the floor.”

As you can see, not only is “hate crime” a dubious legal category, but there is zero evidence that this type of politically-motivated legislation works. What’s more, Soave confirmed what I have already stated and quoted; namely, that the number of “hate crime” hoaxes is extremely large. From Smollett to the Air Force Academy, with hundreds of examples in between, “hate crimes” are clearly not a problem in the United States of America. Certainly white-on-minority “hate crimes” are very low indeed.

It is a travesty that both the domestic and international press – both of which are controlled by the same evil entities – have portrayed America s a racist, violent, hate-filled powder keg. To anyone reading this from overseas, trust me when I tell you that that image of America is utterly false. Apart from the black and Latino gang-ridden neighborhoods in the inner cities, America is an exceptionally safe place. Demonizing America, however, is part and parcel of the Elite agenda. We are, despite all our flaws, the “main enemy” of the worldwide communist conspiracy.

Ladies and gentlemen, all we are doing by tolerating “hate crime” legislation is allowing the Elite to erect Soviet-style kangaroo courts that will one day ramp up their persecution of everyday Americans who exercise their right to speak out against corruption, moral decadence, and treason. People like me will be increasingly hauled before these courts to answer for “hate speech” and any “hate crimes” that can be trumped up. These show trials will be used as further “evidence” of how “hateful” white, Christian America is and how we need to adopt a new way – the socialist-communist way of “tolerance.”

I pray that we will stand on our feet and not allow the intolerant, hate-filled leftists to silence us. Never self-censor for any reason, and especially not to appease the government or the mindless mob. Dare to be politically incorrect. Political incorrectness is where you’ll discover the truth. Don’t be afraid of labels like “racist,” “homophobe,” and “Nazi.” They’re meaningless. Wear them as a badge of honor and know that you’re hitting a nerve that the Establishment doesn’t want you to hit. Be real men and women who care more about their Faith, Families, and Freedom than about what the mainstream media, Hollywood, your neighbors, your teachers, the government, or anyone else says.

“Hate crime” laws are the real hate crimes. They represent a total departure from the tried-and-true methods of justice practiced by our forefathers. They represent the infiltration of traitors into the legal apparatus and government. Their existence evinces the reality of the mass conditioning of our People. If you are fortunate and discerning enough to have woken up, it’s time to do your utmost to wake up others. It’s not a time to be delicate; it’s a time to use every last breath in your lungs to trumpet the truth. And the truth, as far as our present subject goes, is that “hate crimes” are a travesty of justice, a slippery slope towards persecution, a departure from healthy law and order, and a device employed by our enemies to divide our People, suppress dissent, and stir up hate. Have the courage to reject this monstrous system of tyranny and those who are trying to herd you into a GULAG of the mind.

Zack Strong,

October 28, 2019

Inconvenient Truths

Posted on October 23, 2019 by zeev1776

I have been banned once again by the Marxists at Facebook. This is ban #9. Fortunately it’s only for a week whereas my last several blocks were for thirty days apiece. Perhaps my pages are growing too rapidly for the Facebook controllers. A “radical” like me with 9,154 likes on his public pages, and a reach of approximately 50,000 per week, isn’t something the Establishment censors like to see. So, in classic dictatorial fashion, they have to conjure up excuses to silence me.

Why was I banned this time? The last time I was banned it was a result of what I called a “hate mob” of radical feminists, communists, and Satanists who swarmed my Feminism is a Disease page and reported me for anything they could in order to silence me. The same thing happened yesterday. In the space of several hours, I was forced to ban over seventy feminist extremists – most of them condescending European socialists – for spewing hate, threats, profanity, and mindless propaganda all over my page. Isn’t it ironic that these people can get away with threatening me and mucking up my page with vulgarity and pro-communist pictures, but I’m the one who gets blocked and censored?

The precise reason I was blocked, however, is even more telling than mere complaints from some vapid feminists and foreigners. Since nothing I do actually goes against Facebook’s vague “community standards,” they had to go back at least two weeks to find an obscure comment I made about Hitler and World War II. My comment was a response to someone spouting the usual myths about Hitler. I’ll reproduce my full comment below. This comment – a recitation of documentable historical facts with very little added personal commentary – is why I’m banned for the next seven days from Facebook. I’ve swapped out quotation marks for italics on the book titles and separated the comment into three parts:

“If you read my articles, which apparently you didn’t, you know Hitler wasn’t an occultist, wasn’t a conspirator, didn’t try to conquer the world, didn’t start the Second World War, and was actually a professed Christian who promoted traditional families and high morality and resurrected his country from the abyss. He banned astrology in Germany – that’s mainstream history – and banned Freemasonry and communism, kicked out the international bankers, cleansed Germany of her public filth so infamous during the Weimar years, promoted Christian churches with public money, and actually said that the two institutions that needed to be defended in order to maintain stability in the world were the British Empire and the Catholic Church (he was Catholic himself). The “Hitler was an occultist” thing – and yes, I’ve read the books alleging this – is a myth that has very very very very little substance to it. There’s a reason he is so vilified and hated by the Marxist Establishment and the controlled press today – it’s because he wasn’t one of them and because he actually fought against their corrupt system and openly called them out as the Satanists they are. Germany lost the war the second she declared herself anti-communist. Isn’t it ironic that the three nations who signed the Anti-Comintern Pact – Germany, Japan, and Italy – are the three nations deemed responsible for the war? This is a farce and a lie. Both world wars were foisted upon Germany from without. If you think otherwise or think that Hitler was some genocidal madman, then you really don’t know history as well as you think you do – you only know the whitewashed Establishment version. Read my articles. They’ll point you in the right direction. You can also look at a few of the following for additional information – though I know a lot of them are banned in Europe, which is where it seems you live. God bless. ZAS

“The Myth of German Villainy by Benton L. Bradberry

Hitler’s Revolution by Richard Tedor

The Artist Within the Warlord: An Adolf Hitler You’ve Never Known edited by Caroyln Yeager and Wilhelm Kriessman

Who Started World War II: Truth for a War-Torn World by Udo Walendy

The Eastern Front: Memoirs of a Waffen SS Volunteer, 1941-1945 by Leon Degrelle

How Britain Initiated Both World Wars by Nick Kollerstrom

1939 – The War that Had Many Fathers by Gerd Schultze-Ronhof

Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II by Viktor Suvorov

Germany’s War: The Origins, Aftermath and Atrocities of World War II by John Wear

The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945 by Richard Steigmann-Gall

“Communism with the Mask Off” and “Bolshevism in Theory and Practice” by Joseph Goebbels

Communism in Germany: The Truth about the Communist Conspiracy on the Eve of the National Revolution by Adolf Ehrt

Jewish Domination of Weimar Germany by Eckhart Verlag

The Bad War: The Truth Never Taught About World War II by M.S. King

Mein Side of the Story: Key World War 2 Addresses of Adolf Hitler by M.S. King

Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War by Patrick J. Buchanan

Stalin’s War of Extermination, 1941-1945 by Joachim Hoffman

The Nameless War by Archibald Maule Ramsay

The World Conquerors by Louis Marschalko

Planet Rothschild Vol. 2. by M.S. King

Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944-1947 by Thomas Goodrich

What the World Rejected: Hitler’s Peace Offers, 1933-1940 by Friedrich Stieve

Auschwitz: A Personal Account by Thies Christophersen

The Holocaust Hoax Exposed: Debunking the 20th Century’s Greatest Fabrication by Victor Thorn

The Six Million: Fact or Fiction? by Peter Winter

Breaking the Spell: The Holocaust – Myth and Reality by Nicholas Kollerstrom

The First Holocaust: The Surprising Origin of the Six-Million Figure by Don Heddersheimer

Auschwitz Lies: Legends, Lies and Prejudices on the Holocaust by Germar Rudolf and Carlo Mattogno

Dissecting the Holocaust: The Growing Critique of “Truth” and “Memory” by Germar Rudolf

Made in Russia: The Holocaust by Carlos Porter

Curated Lies—The Auschwitz Museum’s Misrepresentations, Distortions and Deceptions by Germar Rudolf

Air-Photo Evidence—World War Two Photos of Alleged Mass Murder Sites Analyzed by Germar Rudolf

The Hoax of the Twentieth Century—The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry by Arthur R. Butz

Jewish Emigration from the Third Reich by Ingrid Weckert

Auschwitz: A Judge Looks at the Evidence by Wilhelm Staglich

“Additionally, look up the scholarship by the Institute for Historical Review, the Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact, the Barnes Review, David Irving’s relevant work, and CODOH (or, check out holocausthandbooks dot com). Finally, check out my podcast episode about who started WWII – knowing the truth about that will give you a hint as to how reliable the other WWII myths are:

“https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t0JBccu7z0”

That was the comment that got me blocked this time. The majority of times I’ve been blocked by Facebook were because I shared an inconvenient truth about World War II-related events. As you’ll note, my comment here did not in any way, shape, or form violate Facebook’s “community standards.” It’s certainly not “hate speech.” I used no slurs. There was no profanity and no explicit or inappropriate content. At most, it’s a dissenting viewpoint. As I’ve written here and here, the Establishment has a vested interested in concealing the truth about Hitler, the Third Reich, and the Second World War.

The main reason why the controlled press relentlessly smears Hitler’s Germany to this day is that she was an unapologetically anti-communist state that broke with the norms of cultural Marxism, promoted faith and families, and pulled herself out of the global depression to become a bustling economic, scientific, and cultural power.

As mentioned above, far from supporting dubious internationalist movements, Hitler suppressed Freemasonry, communism, and other harmful isms, movements, and societies. He openly called out the international bankers and wrested Germany from their iron grip. He did more than any other national leader in the past century to quell the advance of international communism. The Elite know that if one nation rises up against their worldwide system of tyranny, another might, and another, and another. Therefore they had to crucify Hitler, punish Germany, and use them as a perpetual example to future generations.

It’s not really the point of this article, but for historicity’s sake, I want to back up my main claims – the ones that got me blocked from Facebook – with some basic citations to show I wasn’t engaging in hate speech or fabrication, but merely speaking documented truth that the current Establishment fears.

First, I claimed that Hitler was a Christian rather than an occultist. While occultism was practiced by some in Hitler’s government, the evidence for his supposed dabbling in the occult is flimsy and second-hand. Indeed, even mainstream sources such as the Express have admitted that “the widespread practice of astrology was banned in Germany during the war.” In his book Hitler and the Occult – which is actually fairly condemnatory of Hitler – Ken Anderson also concluded:

“When it comes to occult practice we have more evidence to show the involvement of his greatest wartime foe, the British prime minister, Winston Churchill! Churchill belonged to an organization steeped in occultism and, on joining, took a barbaric oath in which he accepted having his throat cut and his tongue torn out should he divulge his secrets. Churchill was a member of the British Parliament when he stepped into the magic world of occultism in 1903 by being initiated into the Order of Freemasons.

“We cannot in all honesty say the same thing about Hitler. Even the occult historian King doubts the claims that Hitler was a member of the one secret society of any influence he is most likely to have joined, the Thule Society. As for the group’s “monstrous, sadistic, magic initiation ritual,” which Ravenscroft claims Hitler underwent, King says, as we have seen, no such ceremony ever took place.

“In public Hitler made specific denunciation of Freemasons and other secret societies and their activities in a speech to the Reich Party Congress of 1938. We have seen other positive evidence of his anti-occultism: He persecuted occult groups and individuals, including the Thule Society, when its strong links to the precursor of the Nazis, the Worker’s Party.

“Furthermore, it was not in Hitler’s character to be a “joiner” . . . It would have been out of character for him to adopt or be influenced by any substantial body of arcane and/or magical beliefs for any sustained length of time.

“We are told and must accept with some credibility that Hitler was unimpressed by Himmler’s attempts to turn the SS into a quasi-occult body, and evidence has not been produced to show Hitler ever visited the SS palace at Wewelsberg where its members performed their alleged “magic” rituals. . . .

“Fifty years since his death and he remains an enigma! However, allowing false and fanciful claims about Hitler to go unchallenged will not help us unwrap that enigma. This book is a small effort to correct some of those claims” (Ken Anderson, Hitler and the Occult, 231-232, 236).

Despite the lies you read in popular books like The Nazis and the Occult by Paul Roland, there is precious little hard evidence linking Hitler to the occult. On the other hand, there is a mass of evidence that Hitler believed in God and professed Christianity. Hitler frequently referenced God and saw himself as one of Heaven’s emissaries to help save his nation and prevent the communist domination of Europe. In his speeches and public statements, he frequently said things such as:

“May Almighty God look mercifully upon our work, lead our will on the right path, bless our wisdom, and reward us with the confidence of our Volk” (Adolf Hitler, radio broadcast, February 1, 1933).

And, even more forcefully:

“This Movement is committed to the task of restoring loyalty, faith and decency to their rightful position, without respect of person. For eight months we have been waging a heroic battle against the Communist threat to our Volk, the decomposition of our culture, the subversion of our art, and the poisoning of our public morality. We have put an end to denial of God and abuse of religion. We owe Providence humble gratitude for not allowing us to lose our battle against the misery of unemployment and for the salvation of the German peasant” (Adolf Hitler, radio broadcast, October 14, 1933).

Hitler also stated the importance Christianity played to the stability of his beloved Germany:

“The German Government, which regards Christianity as the unshakable foundation of the ethical life of the German nation, attaches the greatest importance to the maintenance and development of friendly relations with the Holy See [the Pope]. The national government regards the two Christian confessions [Protestantism and Catholicism] as the most important factors of the maintenance of our ethical personality. The Government will adopt a just and objective attitude towards all other religions” (Benton L. Bradberry, The Myth of German Villainy, 248).

And again, in Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote:

“I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator . . . I am fighting for the work of the Lord” (Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, 65; Ralph Manheim translation).

To conclude this point, I draw from the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP) platform. In it, the NSDAP stated:

“We demand liberty for all religious denominations in the State, so far as they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the moral feelings of the German race. The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession” (Mike Walsh, The Programme of the N.S.D.A.P.: Blueprint for National Survival, 27).

For a so-called “expert” or “historian” to claim that Hitler was a Satanist or an occultist, or that he and his party hated Christians, flies in the face of the known facts. Of course no one but God knows for certain what’s in another man’s heart, but this reality makes it all the more critical to look at the verifiable evidence. And the critical mass of evidence is that Hitler reverenced God, praised Christianity, and not only had little to nothing to do with the occult, but actually used his resources to shut down occultism and secret societies in Germany.

I earlier stated that Hitler promoted high moral values and traditional family roles. A lot of people don’t know that Hitler’s government was one of the first to celebrate and promote Mother’s Day. Modern feminists have actually criticized Hitler for this! They’ve invented in their minds ulterior motives rather than accept the obvious reality that Hitler believed strong families made for a strong state and that the traditional – even Biblical – role of mothers was crucial to the health of families.

Hitler, as all real Christians, believed that a woman’s place was in the home raising children. Or, as the Apostle Paul put it, God wants women to be “keepers at home” (Titus 2:5). Hitler gave insight into his Christian mindset when he explained:

“If I have a female lawyer in front of me these days, and it doesn’t matter how much she has achieved, and next to her is a mother of five, six, seven children, and they are in great health and well-educated by her; then I want to say, from the eternal point of view of the eternal value of our people, the woman who is able to have children – has children and raised them and thereby gave our people the ability to live in the future – has achieved more. She has done more” (the source of this quote is a Hitler speech from a video which YouTube has conveniently deleted and which I can no longer find online. When it was still available, I transcribed it and included it in my article “Feminism is Not Fascist – It is Communist”).

Hitler’s government did not merely preach traditional family values, but used the arm of government to promote them. A program was initiated to help phase women out of public sector jobs and make room for male employment. In this system, the man would work and the woman would focus on raising children and keeping house. A local NSDAP leader had earlier envisioned this program and expressed its principles thus:

“We want to win back for the German women the meaning which Nature gave to her. We want the man to earn the just wage he deserves so he can found a family. . . . Hundreds and thousands of women and girls, who today are forced to work, will be granted their real voice. Isn’t that a healthy point of view?” (Claudia Koonz, Mothers in the Fatherland: Women, the Family and Nazi Politics, 128).

Nature, that is, God, has appointed women to be wives, mothers, and homemakers. The home is where women are designed to shine. They can do more good, as Hitler acknowledged, in the home rearing the future generation of leaders and citizens, than they ever could in business or politics. It is indeed the “healthy point of view” to promote what God has decreed. There’s nothing misogynist or sexist in Christ’s commandments. There’s nothing hateful about being a traditional Christian and promoting eternal law.

The Third Reich is only considered a sexist government by feminists (i.e. Marxists in drag). German women – who overwhelmingly supported Hitler – made this observation:

“We will fight to uphold forever the living values of the Family, the Race and the Earth [Scholle]. In other words, we do not stand on the political front with the man like Marxist women do. Nor do we engage in politics like the fanatics in the women’s rights movement. We do not demonstrate or call congresses, we do not care to meddle in day-to-day politics. But we will not let anyone play with us or degrade what goes on around us. We want to be open to a politics of the inner life. We have an unconscious, sure voice inside us . . . the feeling of responsibility . . . We want to build the new Volksgemeinschaft [racial community]” (Claudia Koonz, Mothers in the Fatherland: Women, the Family and Nazi Politics, 123; Volksgemeinshaft is more appropriately translated “community of the people” as opposed to the spin “racial community” that Koonz gives it).

Feminist author Claudia Koonz, commenting on the German woman’s mentality, stated:

“Women in the National Socialist movement expressed disillusionment with an emancipation they had not desired in the first place. They saw their democracy as expedient at best and dangerous at worst. When the economy cut away the material underpinnings of their homes, traditionalist women denounced the cruel and materialistic “system” that had set them free. These women created an alternative vision of an authoritarian state and strong families that would shelter them against alienation, poverty, and chaos” (Claudia Koonz, Mothers in the Fatherland: Women, the Family and Nazi Politics, 123).

The words “emancipation,” “democracy,” and “free” should be seen for what they really mean – a Marxist-feminist reality destructive of the home, marriage, and family. Remember, it was one of the supreme communist goals to “abolish the family.” To their credit, German women rebelled against this perverse, anti-woman, anti-marriage, anti-family, anti-Christian system. “Emancipation” in the feminist sense is bondage from the Christian perspective. Hitler and the National Socialists knew this. Their anti-feminist stance is yet another reason why the worldwide Marxist Establishment continues to demean, smear, and hate them.

A third point I wish to make is that regardless what you think of him and his movement, Hitler and the National Socialists saved Germany from the abyss. I’m continually baffled when I see media personalities and fake “experts” claiming that life was wonderful in the Weimar Republic and that mean ol’ Hitler ruined all their progress. The truth is that the Weimar regime was an outright Marxist regime that turned Germany into an immoral, materialistic laughingstock.

Berlin’s pornographic theaters were infamous during the Weimar years, especially in their promotion of homosexuality. The theaters, the press, and the regime promoted an anti-German, anti-Christian message which demoralized the citizenry. The Weimar regime enacted strict gun control laws (many of which Hitler reversed or loosened, contrary to what certain screaming radio hosts claim). Thousands of Germans committed suicide every year out of depression and hopelessness. The Weimar economy, like all socialist economies, was an utter failure and Germans were starving and out of work. The communists were gaining ground and had many millions in their ranks. The situation was so horrendous that Germany was on the verge of becoming a full-fledged Soviet satellite. The only thing that prevented Germany’s collapse into apocalyptic Bolshevik hell was Hitler and his message of renewal, traditionalism, and strength.

Germany’s economy went from one of the most unstable under Weimar domination to the #1 economy in the world under Hitler – and at a time when the United States was suffering under FDR’s Great Depression. Hitler employed essentially all of the unemployed in Germany. The German economy was so successful that it began importing workers from abroad. Author Benton Bradberry explained:

“In a very short period of time, Hitler engineered what was and remains probably the greatest economic turnaround in history. People went from starving to full employment, and became so prosperous that ordinary workers were given vacations abroad, paid for by the German Labor Front, the government’s labor organization. Germany went from hopelessly bankrupt to massively restoring, and even expanding, its infrastructure. The world’s first superhighway system, the “Autobahn,” was a shining example. Mass production of the Volkswagen, which literally means “people’s car,” was another . . . Hitler also pursued a policy of “autarky,” meaning “self sufficiency.” That is, Germany would limit imports and produce its own consumer goods, in so far as possible. Hitler transformed Germany from a seemingly irreversible deep depression into the most vibrant economy in Europe.

“Hitler’s government had reduced unemployment from 6,041,000 in January 1933, when he became chancellor, to less than 338,000 by September 1936. At the same time, wages also dramatically increased. German trade was prospering, and deficits of the cities and provinces had almost disappeared. Contrary to official historiography, expenditures for armaments had been minor up to this point, and played no part in Germany’s economic recovery. That came later. . . .

“To counter the effects of the international Jewish boycott of Germany, including the financial strangulation, Hitler simply went around the international bankers by creating a new currency issued by the German government instead of borrowing it from the Jewish owned central bank. This new currency was not backed by gold, but by the credibility of the German government. The new mark was essentially a receipt for labor and materials delivered to the government. Hitler said, “For every mark issued, we required the equivalent of a mark’s worth of work done, or goods produced.” The government paid workers in these new marks and the workers spent them on other goods and services, thus creating more jobs for more people. In this way the German people climbed out of the crushing debt imposed upon them by the International bankers (read, Jewish bankers). Within two years Germany was back on her feet again. It had a solid, stable currency with no debt and no inflation.

“Germany even managed to restore foreign trade, despite the international bankers’ denial of foreign credit to Germany and despite the global boycott by Jewish owned industries and shipping. Germany got around the boycott and the capital strangulation by exchanging equipment and commodities directly with other countries using a barter system that cut the bankers completely out of the loop. The Jewish boycott actually boomeranged. While Germany flourished – because barter eliminates national debt, interest on the debt, and trade deficits – Jewish financiers were deprived of the money they would have earned on these activities. This, of course, only intensified International Jewry’s determination to undermine and destroy the Nazi regime.

““Through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full employment public works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began.” (Henry C.K. Liu, “Nazism and the German Economic Miracle,” Asia Times (May 24, 2005).

“The German economic miracle did not escape the notice of foreign leaders who heaped praise on Hitler at every opportunity. David Lloyd George, Prime Minister of Britain wrote:

““I have now seen the famous German leader and also something of the great change he has effected. Whatever one may think of his methods – and they are certainly not those of a parliamentary country, there can be no doubt that he has achieved a marvelous transformation in the spirit of the people, in their attitude towards each other, and in their social and economic outlook. . . .

““It is not the Germany of the first decade that followed the war – broken, dejected and bowed down with a sense of apprehension and impotence. It is now full of hope and confidence, and of a renewed sense of determination to lead its own life without interference from any influence outside its own frontiers.

““There is for the first time since the war a general sense of security. The people are more cheerful. There is a greater sense of general gaiety of spirit throughout the land. It is a happier Germany. I saw it everywhere, and Englishmen I met during my trip who knew Germany well were very impressed with the change.

““One man [Hitler] has accomplished this miracle. He is a born leader of men. A magnetic and dynamic personality with a single-minded purpose, a resolute will and a dauntless heart”” (Benton L. Bradberry, The Myth of German Villainy, 232-236).

As you can see, Hitler’s success in transforming his homeland was absolutely phenomenal. Defying the international powers-that-be, Hitler lifted Germany out of the ashes and created a booming world power. Far from reversing the “progress” of the Weimar Republic, Hitler saved Germany from the death-grip of the Marxist Weimar regime. Those who claim that Weimar Germany was a forward-thinking, enlightened state demonstrate their ignorance of history. The real truth is that Hitler’s Third Reich was the success story the Marxists and their dupes claim Weimar was.

Hitler’s success was so marked that even his opponents in other countries couldn’t keep from complimenting him. Winston Churchill, for instance, declared:

“One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated I should hope we should find a champion as indomitable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations” (Benton L. Bradberry, The Myth of German Villainy, ).

The British Viscount Rothermere went further. In 1939, he affirmed:

“There is no human being living whose promise on important matters I would trust more readily. He believes that Germany has a divine calling and that the German people are destined to save Europe fro the revolutionary attacks of Communism. He values family life very highly, whereas Communism is its worst enemy. He has thoroughly cleansed the moral, ethical life of Germany, forbidden publication of obscene books, and performance of questionable plays and films” (Benton L. Bradberry, The Myth of German Villainy, 161-162).

David Lloyd George, the former prime minister of England quoted earlier, likewise observed:

“I have never met a happier people than the Germans and Hitler is one of the greatest men. The old trust him; the young idolize him. It is the worship of a national hero who has saved his country” (Benton L. Bradberry, The Myth of German Villainy, 161).

When I previously stated that Hitler “cleansed Germany of her public filth so infamous during the Weimar years,” I might as well have been quoting Churchill, Rothermere, or George. Hitler not only cleaned up Germany and restored her former greatness, but took her to new heights. Any objective study of the Third Reich must conclude that Hitler’s leadership was a boon for Germany.

The fourth and final point I want to briefly touch upon is the fact that Germany did not start World War II. Germany didn’t start the First World War either, but that’s a story for another time (I recommend you read Gerry Docherty’s and Jim Macgregor’s excellent book Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War if you want the real scoop). Through incessant repetition, the controlled media has ingrained in our societal consciousness the notion that Hitler wanted to conquer the world and that he started the war. As almost always, the facts don’t support their narrative.

In his last political testament dictated just before he committed suicide in his bunker, Hitler made this statement:

“More than thirty years have now passed since I in 1914 made my modest contribution as a volunteer in the first world war that was forced upon the Reich.

“In these three decades I have been actuated solely by love and loyalty to my people in all my thoughts, acts, and life. They gave me the strength to make the most difficult decisions which have ever confronted mortal man. I have spent my time, my working strength, and my health in these three decades.

“It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted the war in 1939. It was desired and instigated exclusively by those international statesmen who were either of Jewish descent or worked for Jewish interests.

“I have made too many offers for the control and limitation of armaments, which posterity will not for all time be able to disregard for the responsibility for the outbreak of this war to be laid on me. I have further never wished that after the first fatal world war a second against England, or even against America, should break out. . . .

“Three days before the outbreak of the German-Polish war I again proposed to the British ambassador in Berlin a solution to the German-Polish problem—similar to that in the case of the Saar district, under international control. This offer also cannot be denied. It was only rejected because the leading circles in English politics wanted the war, partly on account of the business hoped for and partly under influence of propaganda organized by international Jewry.”

Hitler’s words are verified by the historical record. Dr. Friedrich Stieve wrote a book titled What the World Rejected: Hitler’s Peace Offers 1933-1940. Time and time again Hitler made peace proposals and pleaded for amiable resolutions to problems. At every turn, the shadowy international powers which govern the world exercised their power to sabotage Hitler’s peace efforts and push Europe to war. The war cannot rightfully be blamed on Hitler or Germany.

As a decorated war veteran, Adolf Hitler knew the horrors of war. War between the peoples he considered blood brothers was the last thing on his mind as he ascended to power. In 1933, he in fact stated:

“We find the charge that the German people are enthusiastically preparing for war incomprehensible. This charge reveals a misunderstanding of the German revolutionary cause. With a few exceptions we – leaders of the National Socialist movement – are veterans. Show me the veteran who would prepare for war with enthusiasm!

“Our youth is our whole future; we cherish them. How could we bring them up only to have them shot to bits on the battlefield?” (Udo Walendy, Who Started World War II? Truth for a War-Torn World, 45).

Books such as Udo Walendy’s Who Started World War II?, A.J.P. Taylor’s The Origins of the Second World War, Charles Callan Tansill’s Back Door to War, Pat Buchanan’s Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War, Viktor Suvorov’s books Icebreaker and The Chief Culprit, and Nick Kollerstrom’s How Britain Initiated Both World Wars, paint a far different picture about who is to blame for the Second World War.

In short, a worldwide network laboring behind the scenes maneuvered the nations into war by manipulating international divisions deliberately caused by the Treaty of Versailles, by whipping up fear through well-coordinated global propaganda, and by false promises of support made to Poland that emboldened her belligerency against Germany. The Soviets, through their secret agents embedded globally, were able to play the nations off against each other, while Britain’s agitation and machinations were no less influential.

Suffice it to say that no objective reading of history can lead one to conclude that Hitler and Germany chose to engulf Europe in a second bloody conflagration – the second foisted upon Germany in a generation. I close discussion of this fourth point by quoting Hitler who stated in 1935:

“With today’s techniques any war would amount to madness. Whoever talks of war should be barred from international politics. Even in a war on the smallest scale, utilisation of modern weaponry would cause such destruction and blood-letting on both sides that I think only a madman could want a war nowadays” (Udo Walendy, Who Started World War II? Truth for a War-Torn World, 46).

I’ve spent my time writing all of this to demonstrate the point that Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and all the other social media platforms, don’t care about truth, reality, and evidence. Their purpose is to promote the communist agenda, bastardize history, present lies as “truth,” silence dissenters, and warp minds and souls to the point where they obediently accept their slavery. Even if you tell the truth in a respectful and professional manner, with sources and links, you’ll still get silenced if the truth you preach is politically incorrect. The Elite are constructing a Chinese-style social credit system – a GULAG of the mind – over the entire earth. When we tolerate being silenced for telling the truth, we permit and invite further abuses.

Concealing the truth about Hitler’s Germany – a state that for a time successfully rebelled against the worldwide communist Establishment – is paramount. The Establishment has engaged in one of the most massive cover-ups and smear campaigns in history regarding Hitler, and unfortunately most people have fallen for it and view him as the Devil incarnate. To combat the lies, truth must be our sword. But how can we wield that daunting weapon unless we pay the price to obtain it? Kowtowing to the Establishment’s narrative of history is not the way.

Unless we’re willing to pay the price for truth, we’ll lose our fight against those who want to subjugate us. Unless we open ourselves to the risk of being called “Nazis,” “fascists,” and “white supremacists” (all code words that really mean “anti-communist”) because we dare to tell the inconvenient truth that WWII history isn’t what we’ve been taught, we’ll be useless in our fight against the clique that rules from the shadows. And unless we all band together to protest the silencing and censoring of truth-tellers, the Establishment will successfully suppress truth and, with it, our hopes of regaining our Freedom.

Facebook is not a private company – it is a cog in the Establishment machine that subsists on billions of tax-payer dollars. They go out of their way to silence and censor people like me who couldn’t care less about popularity, but who put principle and truth above all else. Unfortunately, these tactics intimidate people and make them self-censor. But I’m here to tell you that self-censorship is not the way to Liberty. If we’re too afraid to rock the boat, we’ll go down with the ship. The great Thomas Jefferson stated that “[A]ll timid men . . . prefer the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty” (Thomas Jefferson to Phillip Mazzei, April 24, 1796). And so it is.

We have to ask ourselves who we are. Are we “timid” and spineless? Do we cower and fear when hate mobs gather and spew their venom? Are we afraid to voice the truth – or even our opinions – because almighty Facebook will put us in virtual jail? Are we content to lose our country because we’re too cowardly to speak out? Are we freemen or aren’t we? “I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” (Patrick Henry, speech, March 23, 1775).

Zack Strong,

October 23, 2019

Christopher Columbus and So-Called Indigenous Peoples’ Day

Posted on October 15, 2019 by zeev1776

Christopher Columbus is one of the great figures of history. He was the explorer who, under the inspiration of Almighty God, opened the Americas to permanent settlement by a humble, Christian, Freedom-loving people. He was an upright man whose memory has been grossly insulted and whose good name has unjustly been made synonymous with genocide, hate, and oppression. As usual, the court historians have fabricated their narrative and the Elite are busy promoting the brutal American Indian culture and history over white, Christian America’s honorable history. This article is a plea for people to celebrate Columbus Day and reject the movement to replace this holiday with “Indigenous Peoples’ Day.”

Standing at six feet tall, the redheaded Christopher Columbus was a first-rate sailor and explorer with a genius for map-making. Columbus was a devout Christian. The sincerity of his convictions led one historian to describe him as “a Christian of almost maniacal devoutness” (in Mark E. Petersen, The Great Prologue, 27). Columbus fervently believed that God was leading him to make great discoveries and do a great work. This conviction is borne out by his writings and the witness of those who knew him.

Columbus wrote:

“The Lord was well disposed to my desire, and He bestowed upon me courage and understanding; knowledge of seafaring He gave me in abundance, of astrology as much as was needed, and of geometry and astronomy likewise. Further, He gave me joy and cunning in drawing maps and thereon cities, mountains, rivers, islands, and harbors, each one in its place. I have seen and truly I have studied all books – cosmographies, histories, chronicles, and philosophies, and other arts, for which our Lord unlocked my mind, sent me upon the sea, and gave me fire for the deed. Those who heard of my enterprise called it foolish, mocked me, and laughed. But who can doubt but that the Holy Ghost inspired me?” (in Mark E. Petersen, The Great Prologue, 26).

Apart from his sincere belief that he was being led by God to open the Christian settlement of a new world, Columbus also believed that his discovery of a new world would facilitate the reconquest of Jerusalem from the Muslims. In her paper “Columbus’s Ultimate Goal: Jerusalem,” Carol Delaney wrote the following:

“Many people are unaware that Columbus made not just one voyage but four . . . Even fewer know that his ultimate goal, the purpose behind the enterprise, was Jerusalem! The 26 December 1492 entry in his journal of the first voyage . . . written in the Caribbean, leaves little doubt. He says he wanted to find enough gold and the almost equally valuable spices “in such quantity that the sovereigns . . . will undertake and prepare to go conquer the Holy Sepulchre; for thus I urged Your Highnesses to spend all the profits of this my enterprise on the conquest of Jerusalem.””

The famed Washington Irving wrote the following of Columbus’ faith and motives:

“He avowed in the fullest manner his persuasion, that, from his earliest infancy, he had been chosen by Heaven for the accomplishment of those two great designs, the discovery of the New World, and the rescue of the holy sepulchre [in Jerusalem]. For this purpose, in his tender years, he had been guided by a divine impulse to embrace the profession of the sea, a mode of life, he observes, which produces an inclination to inquire into the mysteries of nature; and he had been gifted with a curious spirit, to read all kinds of chronicles, geographical treatises, and works of philosophy. In meditating upon these, his understanding had been opened by the Deity, “as with a palpable hand,” so as to discover the navigation to the Indies, and he had been inflamed with ardor to undertake the enterprise. “Animated by a heavenly fire,” he adds, “I came to your highnesses: all who heard of my enterprise mocked at it; all the sciences I had acquired profited me nothing; seven years did I pass in y our royal court, disputing the case with persons of great authority and learned in all the arts, and in the end they decided that all was vain. In your highnesses alone remained faith and constancy. Who will doubt that this light was from the holy Scriptures, illuminating you as well as myself with rays of marvelous brightness?”

“These ideas, so repeatedly, and solemnly, and artlessly expressed, by a man of the fervent piety of Columbus, show how truly his discovery arose from the working of his own mind, and not from information furnished by others. He considered it a divine intimation, a light from Heaven, and the fulfillment of what had been fortold by the Saviour and the prophets. Still he regarded it as but a minor event, preparatory to the great enterprise, the recovery of the holy sepulchre. He pronounced it a miracle effected by Heaven, to animate himself and others to that holy undertaking” (Washington Irving, The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus, Vol. 2, Chapter 4).

Columbus’ Christian faith is not up for debate. However, many Columbus-haters have condemned the man for over five hundred years. The atrocity propaganda aimed at Columbus in his day, as today, was politically motivated and was not grounded in fact. Many, if not most, of the allegations which serve as the basis for modern claims came from Francisco de Bobadilla. Bobadilla was appointed to investigate allegations that Columbus was perpetrating atrocities in the New World. The initial rumors and allegations that prompted the investigation came from a group of Spaniards which rebelled against Columbus. Ironically, they opposed Columbus partially because he would not permit them to abuse the native population.

The leader of this group was Francisco Roldan. Roldan had been appointed as a local mayor by Columbus. Columbus’ son explained that Roldan soon “began to dream of making himself master of the island.” As a result, he “sought to stir up the others and make himself head of a faction.” This faction rebelled and was suppressed. Hardly a reliable source of information!

Yet, based on this information Bobadilla was authorized to investigate Columbus. However, Bobadilla didn’t bother to investigate anything – he made up his mind based on the accusations of traitors. A wonderful article gives us the scoop on Bobadilla. It explains:

“That Bobadilla’s bias against Columbus was firmly established is evident from his actions: He arrested Columbus without even corresponding with him to allow him to respond to the accusations.

“Upon arrival, Bobadilla forced his way into the fortress, freed the prisoners Columbus had arrested for armed rebellion against the Crown, and professed to believe the outlandish and conflicting testimonies of colonist and criminal alike. He then pardoned the rebels who were tired of the discipline of their Italian taskmaster. These and other farces were recounted with glee by his political opponents in Spain. The Admiral himself was summarily chained and sent back to Castile.

“In Spain it immediately became obvious that Bobadilla had grossly abused his authority. Columbus was released and a royal order was issued for his property to be restored. Bobadilla was recalled and died en route home in a massive hurricane. Whether by coincidence or Providence we will never know, but it remains fact that one of the only vessels to survive the hurricane was the smallest and least seaworthy: the ship carrying Columbus’s own effects” (Phillip Mericle, “Why Columbus’ Honor Was Maligned,” January 17, 2018).

In his article “Debunking Lies About Columbus: The Story Of Francisco de Bobadilla,” Tommy De Seno also discussed the fact that most of the atrocities alleged to have been committed by Columbus and his men are fabrications written by political rivals of Columbus. Seno said:

“In 1500 the King and Queen sent him here to investigate claims that Columbus wasn’t being fair to the European settlers (which means Columbus was protecting the Indians). So de Bobadilla came here, and in just a few short days investigated (with no telephones or motorized vehicles to help him), then arrested Columbus and his brothers for Indian mistreatment and sent them back to Spain, sans a trial. Oh yeah, he appointed himself Governor. Coup de Coeur for power lead to Coup d’ etat, as usual.

“The King and Queen called shenanigans and sent for de Bobadilla two years later, but he drowned on the trip home. Columbus was reinstated as Admiral. So what we know of Columbian malfeasance comes from a defrocked liar, de Bobadilla.”

Taking a leaf out of Bobadilla’s fabricated book, people today state that Columbus enslaved, abused, and murdered the local Indians. Far from murdering them, he didn’t even enslave them. During his first voyage, Columbus left behind a settlement of thirty-nine men. When he returned, he found that the local Indians had slaughtered all thirty-nine and left their bodies moldering on the earth. In retaliation to this Indian-on-European genocide, Columbus waged a small war against the Indians. In the war, he captured hundreds of tribesmen – which were later released. This is slavery?

Also, during his first voyage, Columbus brought six Indians back to Spain with him who were voluntarily baptized. These returned with Columbus to the New World on his second voyage. Is this the conduct of a brutal oppressor and slaver?

Christopher Columbus was a good man. He was simply not guilty of the atrocities attributed to him. He was on God’s errand to open the New World to Christian settlement. Atrocities occurred during the colonization of the Americas, of course, but that’s not in question. The issue is whether or not Columbus was involved.

Columbus’ mission was so important in the history of the world that ancient prophets actually saw him and foretold of his discovery of the New World. The ancient prophet Nephi, whose people inhabited ancient America, saw Columbus in vision some six hundred years before Christ. He testified of Columbus’ discovery of America, her subsequent settlement by Liberty-loving Christians, and even America’s successful War for Independence:

“And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

“And it came to pass that I beheld the Spirit of God, that it wrought upon other Gentiles; and they went forth out of captivity, upon the many waters.

“And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.

“And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people before they were slain.

“And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld that the Gentiles who had gone forth out of captivity did humble themselves before the Lord; and the power of the Lord was with them.

“And I beheld that their mother Gentiles were gathered together upon the waters, and upon the land also, to battle against them.

“And I beheld that the power of God was with them, and also that the wrath of God was upon all those that were gathered together against them to battle.

“And I, Nephi, beheld that the Gentiles that had gone out of captivity were delivered by the power of God out of the hands of all other nations” (1 Nephi 13:12-19).

For millennia the Lord has had His eye upon Columbus. It was God who set the stage for Columbus’ history-altering voyage. As Columbus testified, “who can doubt but that the Holy Ghost inspired me?” Surely he was an inspired figure – a faithful man who helped change the world for the better.

To conclude this portion of the article, I quote from Ezra Taft Benson. I sincerely believe his warning is accurate and I commend it to you. After speaking of great men like Benjamin Franklin, John Wesley, George Washington, and Christopher Columbus, he warned:

“When one casts doubt about the character of these noble sons of God, I believe he or she will have to answer to the God of heaven for it” (Ezra Taft Benson, “God’s Hand in Our Nation’s History,” BYU Address, March 28, 1977).

To replace the memory of this good man and denigrate our noble ancestors and their unsurpassed achievements, the Marxist Elite have promoted so-called “Indigenous Peoples’ Day” to celebrate the American Indians. There are numerous objections to this ludicrous, impostor holiday.

The first objection is the title. What is an “indigenous” person? Who is a “native”? Google defines indigenous as something or someone “originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.” The Strong family line to which I proudly belong, and which helped establish this nation alongside other better known figures, has been in America for almost four hundred years. If we follow the dictionary definition, then I’m every bit as native and indigenous as the Indians!

At what point does someone, or even an entire people, become “indigenous” to a location? And just because one group is termed “indigenous,” does that preclude another group from becoming indigenous over time? The Indians migrated here, too, after all. The oral histories of our Eastern tribes, for instance, demonstrate that these tribes anciently traveled westward on ships to get to America. And like our forefathers they also displaced the previous inhabitants (one might call them “indigenous peoples”) of the land. Of course, when brown, black, yellow, and red peoples do it, it’s called history; but when whites do it, it’s considered “racism,” “genocide,” and “imperialism.”

The second objection regards the message. What is “Indigenous Peoples’ Day” really promoting? Is it merely promoting the existence of so-called “indigenous” peoples? That ostensibly seems to be the case. Wikipedia states: “Indigenous Peoples’ Day is a holiday that celebrates and honors Native American peoples and commemorates their histories and cultures.” Conveniently, the day chosen to celebrate this “holiday” is the same day we have celebrated Columbus Day since 1869. If the true purpose is to celebrate “Native American peoples,” then why did they provocatively choose Columbus Day as the time to celebrate it? They could have chosen any other day – so why did they choose Columbus Day?

It seems painfully obvious to me that the real purpose of “Indigenous Peoples’ Day” is to displace Columbus Day, downplay and eventually destroy the memory of Christopher Columbus, confuse history in people’s minds, promote inferior, harmful, or anti-Christian worldviews, and weaken traditional American culture. By inventing a holiday like “Indigenous Peoples’ Day,” people are consciously siding with an anti-American narrative – a Marxist version of history that portrays whites as racist, genocidal imperialists who forced the poor Indians off their land, engaged in mass theft, and orchestrated an Indian holocaust.

This narrative is demonstrably false. It flies in the face of history and facts. It is ultimately very harmful and dangerous because it demoralizes Americans by causing them to mistrust, question, and look down upon their forefathers and, by extension, the institutions and ideas they promoted and held sacred. The traitors who have infiltrated and hijacked our society don’t care about “indigenous peoples” – they’re only concerned with tearing down traditional white American/European culture, including our heroes and icons such as George Washington, Lewis Wetzel, Daniel Boone, Andrew Jackson, and Christopher Columbus. I, for one, will not allow the memory of our honorable, patriotic, courageous, upright, heroic forefathers to be sidelined by a holiday promoting Indian culture.

This brings us to the third objection. What are these “histories and cultures” we’re supposed to be promoting on “Indigenous Peoples’ Day”? The myth of the “noble savage” is prevalent in our society today. The fake image of the Indian crying over the white man’s destruction of the environment is seared into our consciousness. Indeed, Indian spirituality is looked upon with something akin to reverence as if it contains ancient wisdom lacking in modern American society.

In truth, American Indian tribes were proudly pagan and exceptionally brutal. They routinely engaged in human sacrifice. They were more warlike than most other peoples in recorded history. The men in many of the tribes lived for nothing other than to make war on neighboring tribes during the next raiding season. No one has slaughtered more Indians than other Indians. The Americas were in a near constant state of warfare before European settlers arrived.

In many tribes, Indian men gained prestige and position through murder or conquest. The chief was often the greatest warrior. And to the victor goes the spoils – including the women. The most prominent Indian braves usually had multiple wives which were frequently treated as chattel, though women in some tribes were more “liberated” in the modern feminist sense. Women could also be purchased or won through gambling or games.

Other questionable behaviors ran rampant. For instance, drug use was common in many tribes (peyote, magic mushrooms, etc.) Indolence was a part of life for the Indian men. Immorality was prevalent and shrugged at. Drunkenness became a way of life. And the Indians, contrary to myth, actually hunted animals to extinction and often tore up the environment they claimed to love so much. Nearly everything Hollywood and leftist academia claim about the Indians is a demonstrable lie. Yet they want us to ignore the good Christian, Christopher Columbus, and instead celebrate Indian debauchery and values that are antithetical to everything that made America great.

Let’s zero in on one particular aspect of Indian culture that is carefully covered up by the powers-that-be. The Establishment “historians” and their agitators don’t want us to remember that it was the Indians who brutalized the white settlers and not the other way around. Of course there were individual acts of white-on-Indian brutality, but there was never a general policy. The context and backstory is also absolutely crucial to understand.

When our Pilgrim forefathers arrived in the New World, it was the Indians who initiated the wars that raged on and off for the better part of three centuries. One of the first big slaughters occurred in March 1622 when the Powhatan Indians murdered 347 settlers and mutilated their corpses. But murder was not enough – torture was also integral to the Indians’ lifestyle.

The Indians had a god named Okee (the name differed according to tribe) to whom they had been sacrificing human beings and animals for centuries. When the white settlers arrived, they became the most prized sacrifices for Okee. Okee was a pain-eater. He fed off of the suffering, pain, and cries of the victims. Consequently, the Indians brutally tortured their lamentable victims for days until death brought relief. Our forefathers were flayed, had their lips and eyelids removed, and other horrific tortures. Children were not spared torture and indiscriminate murder. Even the dead were mutilated for the Indians’ enjoyment. When people comprehend that this is how European settlers were greeted by the Indians, our aggressively defensive posture becomes perfectly understandable.

Sacrificing white settlers to Okee was not the only way the Indians showed their true colors. The Indians loved to rape white women. The accounts are legion. Often white women would be kidnapped or captured during battle and then raped by not one, but any man in a tribe. The abuse would go on and on for days, weeks, or longer, until they finally killed or released the woman. This treatment of our women was not localized – it was a general rule just as Indian brutality and savagery was general throughout the Americas.

In his book Scalp Dance, Thomas Goodrich documented that Indian brutality and rapine was as commonplace on the plains as it was in the coastal regions and that our People faced it up through the Nineteenth Century. Goodrich quoted a Sioux chief as stating that his people’s slogan was “death to all palefaces” (Thomas Goodrich, Scalp Dance: Indian Warfare on the High Plains, 1865-1879, 168). One Indian atrocity committed in Nebraska was described as follows:

“[She] was led from her tent and every remnant of clothing torn from her body. A child that she was holding to her breast was wrenched from her arms and she was knocked to the ground. In this nude condition the demons gathered round her and while some held her down by standing on her wrists and their claws clutched in her hair, others outraged her person. Not less than thirty repeated the horrible deed! While this was going on another crew was trying to stop the heart-broken wailings of the child by tossing strings of beads about its face, and others were dancing about in the brush and grass, with revolvers cocked, yelping like madmen” (in Thomas Goodrich, Scalp Dance: Indian Warfare on the High Plains, 1865-1879, 119-120).

These types of scenes played out all across America as white settlers were abused, harassed, robbed, raped, tortured, and murdered by Indians. So prevalent were these atrocities that our Declaration of Independence actually mentions them. One of the colonists’ grievances was that King George III had “excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”

During the French and Indian War the French had used the Indians against the American colonists. Then during the War for Independence the British did the same. During that war, the Indian-British coalition raided American towns, brutalizing and slaughtered anyone they could find. W. Cleon Skousen’s superb book The Making of America contains this account of one infamous massacre:

“Early in 1778, the British War Office began to carve out for itself a huge black mark in history as it allowed Sir John Butler to mobilize the Indians and lead them forth on terrifying raids against the American frontier. We read:

““On July 4 – to mock American independence – Colonel Sir John Butler struck at the Wyoming Valley in [western] Pennsylvania. Hundreds perished. Men were burnt at the stake or thrown on beds of coals and held down with pitchforks while their horrified families were forced to witness their torment. Others were placed in a circle while a half-breed squaw called Queen Esther danced chanting around them to chop off their heads. Soon the entire frontier was in flames.”

“Since Congress did nothing to quench the Indian massacres, they began to spread through the Ohio Valley and Northwest territory” (W. Cleon Skousen, The Making of America: The Substance and Meaning of the Constitution, 94).

In response to the Indian savagery, we took the fight to the Indians. We sent 5,000 troops into the Iroquois settlements and demolished dozens of their villages to eliminate their ability to mercilessly attack our civilians. Historians of course portray this as a senseless massacre against the poor defenseless Indians, but from what you just read you now understand the context.

Most alleged “massacres” against the Indians were usually one of two things: Legitimate battles where both sides took casualties, or retaliation for Indian atrocities against our People. A great example is the infamous Battle of Wounded Knee. More than any other event, this is pointed to by Indian apologists and anti-American agitators as the quintessential “massacre.” The only problem with this narrative is that it wasn’t a massacre of defenseless people.

The Battle of Wounded Knee was just that – a battle. It occurred at the height of the Ghost Dance craze when Indians were rising up to raid and fight against the white settlers moving west. After a small skirmish between Indians and American soldiers where Sitting Bull was killed during an arrest attempt, hundreds of Lakota Indians were rounded up by the U.S. Army as a precaution. Fearing another attack, the Army ordered the Lakota disarmed. The Indians gave up a few of their weapons, but contrary to popular myth, they hid most of them (and it was certainly not “gun control” as some claim!) They then began the Ghost Dance ritual in camp, with one Indian declaring that the soldiers’ bullets couldn’t harm them. At that moment, one of the Indian’s guns accidentally fired. This started a two-way battle in which some 150 Lakota (half of whom were men) and 25 soldiers were killed, with another 39 Americans injured. It was hardly a one-sided massacre of unarmed Indians.

In short, the entire history of white-Indian relations has been twisted and rewritten along anti-American lines. Instead of celebrating heroes like our noble ancestors and Christopher Columbus, we are supposed to celebrate the history and culture of savage Indian tribes who brutalized, raped, and murdered our people for the better part of three hundred years. Only negative results can come from promoting “Indigenous Peoples’ Day” over Columbus Day. We need to remember our history. We need to remember the good that came from Columbus’ discovery of the New World and the Christian settlement of this land that resulted.

I urge you to reject the Marxist political correctness that has saturated our society. Reject the promotion of cultures and histories that are not equal to our own unsurpassed greatness as a society. Remember our history. And let’s remember Christopher Columbus and honor his good name. Happy Columbus Day.

Zack Strong,

October 14, 2019

Truth Offends the Ignorant and Guilty

Posted on October 2, 2019 by zeev1776

A truth I learned as a boy from reading the holy scriptures is that “the guilty taketh the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center” (1 Nephi 16:2). I also learned that “the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). Yet, society at large does not hold these or any truths to be sacred. Few things are as despised and abused in our Marxist-inspired culture as truth. So universally hated and feared is truth that we have collectively conceded that “telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” I submit to you, however, that there are only two groups of people who hate, conceal, or reject truth – the ignorant and the malicious or guilty.

Truth is ennobling. Truth is liberating. Truth is power! In my article “What is Truth?” I observed:

“Truth is a knowledge of things as they really are now and in eternity. Truth is eternal. Truth emanates from God. Truth can be learned only through the ministration of the Holy Spirit. Truth will triumph over all lies in the end. And because it reigns eternally victorious over all error and centers in Jesus Christ, the truth shall make us free.”

Let’s be clear – truth is not subjective. The very definition and nature of truth suggests something that is unchanging and unalterable. Truth does not change. Truth cannot change. The great religious giant Spencer W. Kimball once delivered an address entitled “Absolute Truth.” In it, he gave us these wise words:

“There are absolute truths and relative truths. The rules of dietetics have changed many times in my lifetime. Many scientific findings have changed from year to year. The scientists taught for decades that the world was once a nebulous, molten mass cast off from the sun, and later many scientists said it once was a whirl of dust which solidified. There are many ideas advanced to the world that have been changed to meet the needs of the truth as it has been discovered. There are relative truths, and there are also absolute truths which are the same yesterday, today, and forever—never changing. These absolute truths are not altered by the opinions of men. As science has expanded our understanding of the physical world, certain accepted ideas of science have had to be abandoned in the interest of truth. Some of these seeming truths were stoutly maintained for centuries. The sincere searching of science often rests only on the threshold of truth, whereas revealed facts give us certain absolute truths as a beginning point so we may come to understand the nature of man and the purpose of his life.

“The earth is spherical. If all the four billion people in the world think it flat, they are in error. That is an absolute truth, and all the arguing in the world will not change it. Weights will not suspend themselves in the air, but when released will fall earthward. The law of gravity is an absolute truth. It never varies. Greater laws can overcome lesser ones, but that does not change their undeniable truth. . . .

“If men are really humble, they will realize that they discover, but do not create, truth. . . .

“If I can only make clear this one thing, it will give us a basis on which to build. Man cannot discover God or his ways by mere mental processes. One must be governed by the laws which control the realm into which he is delving. . . .

“. . . I repeat, these are not matters of opinion. They are absolute truths. These truths are available to every soul” (President Spencer W. Kimball, “Absolute Truth,” BYU Address, September 6, 1977).

Truth is simply the reality of things as they are – not as we wish them to be. Truth does not bend to our will – it is eternally self-existent and independent. Popular opinion has zero bearing on truth. All of humanity could gather and vote to abolish gravity and yet gravity would remain. The majority might dismiss the divinity of Jesus Christ, but Jesus is still the Christ, the Son of God, the Creator of this earth, the Redeemer of mankind, the King of king and Lord of lords. Truth does not need your consent or society’s approval to exist.

Truth is one of the major active ingredients in the only remedy that can cure our society. But a remedy is only effective if we properly diagnose the problem, if we take it in time, and if the mixture is correct. Yet, year after year I see a growing antipathy toward truth. Reality has been dismissed. Black is called white, darkness is called light, hate is called love, permissiveness is called tolerance, and lies are called truth. We have wholly disregarded Isaiah’s ancient warning:

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20).

The religious leader and former judge Dallin H. Oaks made a keen observation about the current trends in our society:

“Evil that used to be localized and covered like a boil is now legalized and paraded like a banner. The most fundamental roots and bulwarks of civilization are questioned or attacked. Nations disavow their religious heritage. Marriage and family responsibilities are discarded as impediments to personal indulgence. The movies and magazines and television that shape our attitudes are filled with stories or images that portray the children of God as predatory beasts or, at best, as trivial creations pursuing little more than personal pleasure. And too many of us accept this as entertainment.

“The men and women who made epic sacrifices to combat evil regimes in the past were shaped by values that are disappearing from our public teaching. The good, the true, and the beautiful are being replaced by the no-good, the “whatever,” and the valueless fodder of personal whim. Not surprisingly, many of our youth and adults are caught up in pornography, pagan piercing of body parts, self-serving pleasure pursuits, dishonest behavior, revealing attire, foul language, and degrading sexual indulgence.

“An increasing number of opinion leaders and followers deny the existence of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and revere only the gods of secularism. Many in positions of power and influence deny the right and wrong defined by divine decree. Even among those who profess to believe in right and wrong, there are “them that call evil good, and good evil” (Isa. 5:20; 2 Ne. 15:20). Many also deny individual responsibility and practice dependence on others, seeking, like the foolish virgins, to live on borrowed substance and borrowed light.

“All of this is grievous in the sight of our Heavenly Father, who loves all of His children and forbids every practice that keeps any from returning to His presence” (President Dallin H. Oaks, “Preparation for the Second Coming,” General Conference, April, 2004).

Without question, evil is masquerading as good these days and the enemy of all mankind is persuading us to adopt practices and principles which have proven the downfall of empires and peoples in times past. For instance, transgenderism and homosexuality – two twin mental and spiritual disorders – are being promoted by the Establishment press, Hollywood, and complicit academia as “normal,” “natural,” and “healthy” while heterosexuals are labeled as “abnormal,” “unloving,” and “bigoted.” Drag queens are infiltrating our schools and libraries, holding reading times with students and having children sit on their laps. Society denies the reality that there are only two genders and instead allows people to choose from an ever-expanding smorgasbord of identities ranging from “non-binary” to “pangender” to “gender fluid” to “two-spirit” to “questioning.” And so forth.

Remember, truth cuts the guilty to their core. They inwardly know they’re living a lie, but they don’t want to give up the fantasy. They prefer a comfortable lie to an uncomfortable truth. And truths which, if acknowledged, would force them to change their minds or behavior, are the worst. To indulge their fantasies and neuroses without feeling the sting of guilt, deluded people shout down, cover up, and censor those speaking truth.

One such example prompted me to write this article. Yesterday, I attempted to share an article from Conservative Media on Facebook. The article is titled “FBI: Over 5 Times More Killed with Knives than Rifles.” The article in part stated:

“FBI crime stats for 2018 show over five times as many people were killed with knives and/or other cutting instruments than were killed with rifles.

“The FBI data shows a total 1,515 deaths by knives and/or other cutting instruments vs. 297 deaths by rifle in 2018. . . .

“Ironically, over 100 more people were killed with hammers and clubs than were killed with rifles in 2018.

“It must be noted that the category of rifle includes all kinds of rifles, not just bolt action or semiautomatic, not just pump or lever action. So the gap between knife homicides and rifle homicides or hammer/club homicides and rifle homicides would be even larger if contrasted only with semiautomatic rifles, versus rifles of all kinds.”

These facts, these statistics, these truths, forcefully refute the false narrative that America is plagued by gun violence, that rifles (including assault rifles) are a danger to society, and that gun control is a necessary solution. Apart from socialist-controlled cities like Chicago and Detroit which implement strict gun control laws that disarm and make defenseless ordinary citizens, the United States has virtually no problem with gun violence and ranks as one of the safest nations on earth. In actual point of fact, far more people are killed by knives than by those oh-so-scary “assault weapons.” This is the reality – your daily dose of distortions from the media be damned.

Obviously, the Elite and those mind-addled dupes who promote their anti-Freedom, anti-Constitution, anti-America agenda can’t allow the reality to be known. They can’t afford for people to know the truth that America is a great nation, that we are generally safe, and that guns protect us, save lives, and deter crime and tyranny. So what do they do? They do what they do best – censor the truth, demonize truth-sharers, and spin lies to warp minds. When I attempted to share Conservative Media’s article, Facebook gave me an error message which stated: “Your message couldn’t be sent because it includes content that other people on Facebook have reported as abusive.”

Abusive? This is what the truth is to socialists, progressives, and liberals – “abusive.” The Social Justice Warriors and cultural Marxists can’t allow truth to spread. Truth destroys their agenda which is based on lies. So they go out of their way to flag the truth as “abusive,” “offensive,” and “against community standards.” But let’s be honest: Truth is only “abusive” and “offensive” to an ignorant or malicious person.

In this case, there are no doubt some deluded, emotion-driven, bleeding-heart types who legitimately think that either the FBI’s statistics are wrong or that Conservative Media made up the story, and that perpetuating the “lie” would endanger more people. However, in order to fall into this category, you have to almost be willfully, intentionally ignorant and fully out of touch with reality. You can’t claim the appellation “intelligent” if you believe guns are a problem or that gun control would save lives. More likely, the people who reported this fact-based article as “abusive” have malicious intent against our Freedom and desire the triumph of their Marxist ideology over traditional Americanism.

Another example of truth-hating that has dominated the news lately is the story of the Swedish socialist Greta Thunberg and her cacophony of global warming lies. In case you were fortunate enough to miss it, the sixteen-year-old George-Soros-approved socialist Greta Tintin Eleonora Ernman Thunberg, who might have literal mental problems, went viral after sobbing and ranting at a U.N. climate change summit about how her generation has been “betrayed,” how the world will end because of global warming, and how the rising generation will seek vengeance. In her talk vaguely addressed to world leaders (or, truthfully, to capitalists and anyone with sense to oppose communism), she ranted:

“You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words. And yet I’m one of the lucky ones. People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you! . . . .

“You are failing us. But the young people are starting to understand your betrayal. The eyes of all future generations are upon you. And if you choose to fail us, I say: We will never forgive you.

“We will not let you get away with this. Right here, right now is where we draw the line. The world is waking up. And change is coming, whether you like it or not.”

I’m not exactly sure who is dying because of fictitious “global warming” or how any sane and honest person can claim we’re beginning a “mass extinction” because Americans like to drive SUVs, yet that’s what this little socialist soldier claimed.

It’s the same communist clap-trap, only this time with an indoctrinated, enraged teenager as the poster child. In my books A Century of Red and Red Gadiantons, I made it clear that the environmentalist movement is a communist creation. I call it “green communism.” The end goal of the radical environmentalist movement is two-fold: 1) to get the nations of the world so hysterical with fear that they’ll give up their national sovereignty to the United Nations and allow the U.N. to redistribute the wealth of the West to third world nations (i.e. to local yes-men and despots); and 2) to initiate the world into pagan earth-worship.

No matter how many Greta Thunbergs the Elite push forward to tug on our heartstrings, propaganda and hysteria can’t change facts. Whipping yourself into an emotional frenzy and lying about the so-called threat of climate change does not make it reality. The fact is man-made global warming is a myth. We are now at twenty straight years of global cooling – not warming.

For generations the climatologists have been wrong. First they predicted an ice age before the year 2000, then they latched onto the global warming myth, and now they have employed vague language like “climate change” to confuse people and promote their lies. Competent scientists have refuted the myth of man-made global warming. Literally tens of thousands of scientists have signed petitions disputing the mainstream claims – destroying the myth of a scientific “consensus.” And does no one remember the major “climate gate” scandal where it was revealed that the United Nations was forging the numbers to make it appear that the globe is cooling when in fact the data tell us that the globe is cooling?

It’s time, ladies and gentlemen, to speak out and refute lies and mental illness when they’re shoved down our throats as “truth” and “reality.” It’s time to admit that truth trumps people’s feelings. Should we lose our country or our Liberty because a sixteen-year-old girl cries and yells on national TV about something that isn’t even true? Should we lose our God-given rights and Constitution because some disaffected and delusional leftists think facts and statistics are “abusive”? When will we say enough is enough? When will we ditch faux “tolerance” and instead promote truth over error?

We have an uphill battle ahead of us. The path will be long and difficult because we’ve tolerated the lies for so long they now weigh us down. But the truth is worth the struggle. In one of my favorite single declarations ever made, Thomas Jefferson stated:

“[P]olitics, like religion, hold up the torches of martyrdom to the reformers of error” (Thomas Jefferson to James Ogilvie, August 4, 1811).

We must be the Reformers of Error for our generation. If we who know the truth, whether it be about religion, politics, economics, or what have you, do not step forward and give the truth voice, who will? Our enemies are doing everything they can to burn us. They’re attacking us with the fury of Jesuit Inquisitions. But stand firm – the truth is on your side. And know that if our enemies figuratively burn you for telling the truth, you’re in good company – the company of patriots and prophets, reformers and Freedom Fighters.

The ultimate act of truth-suppression known to humanity occurred when the Jews murdered our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Our Lord testified: “[Y]e seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God” (John 8:40).” The hard-hearted Pharisees, Sadducees, and their fanatical followers hated the truth so badly that they arrested, falsely accused, and cruelly killed the very Son of God, the Messiah, the Redeemer of mankind.

The Savior gave us a key to discern whether or not we love truth. He said:

“For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

“But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God” (John 3:20-21).

Light is knowledge and truth. The Lord is “the light of the world” (John 8:12). God is also the “Spirit of truth” (John 16:13; Doctrine and Covenants 93:9, 11). During His perfect life and ministry, the Lord’s light shone so brightly that it illuminated the darkness that consumed the Kabbalistic Jewish rulers. These demagogues were frequently baffled and overpowered by the Savior’s light, wisdom, and truth. They could not continue leading the Jews down their darkened path as blind guides while the Savior’s light beamed for all to see. Therefore, the Jewish leaders conspired to kill Jesus and did just that when the Savior’s mission – His Atonement – was complete.

Today, there are those in our midst who behave like the Pharisaical Jews and wish to silence those whose light exposes their lies, conspiracies, and wickedness. Those who knowingly and intentionally conceal truth have firmly established themselves in Satan’s camp. What the Lord explained to the Jews applies with equal force to liars and malicious individuals today:

“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

“And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. . . .

“He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God” (John 8:44-45, 47).

Honest and sincere people, when they hear the truth presented to them in its purity, believe. Those who are not honest in heart reject the truth when they hear it. It is the same in religion as it is in politics. Again I cited Jefferson:

“[P]olitics, like religion, hold up the torches of martyrdom to the reformers of error.”

We have a choice to make. We must decide whether we’ll side with truth no matter how uncomfortable or unpopular it may be or whether we’ll shield our egos and fantasies with convenient lies. There is no middle ground between truth and error, fact and falsity, light and darkness. If one is sincere but ignorant, that can easily be corrected. There is nothing shameful about not knowing something that no one has ever told you before. However, once truth is presented to us, then we have a moral obligation to accept or reject it. And this choice shows us who we really are and where we really stand.

There has never been a time when Christians and patriots weren’t persecuted and hated. It’s part of the burden of discipleship and patriotism. But if we love our Faith, our Families, and our Freedom, we must shoulder the burden and manfully do our duty. God will support those who love truth more than ignorance, truth more than popularity, and truth more than convenience. Stand for truth, my fellow countryman! Stand and be counted!

“THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.” – Thomas Paine, The American Crisis, No. 1, December, 1776

Zack Strong,

October 2, 2019

The American Citadel

Defending our Faith, Families, and Freedom.

Monthly Archives: October 2019

The Danger of Hate Crime Laws

Inconvenient Truths

Christopher Columbus and So-Called Indigenous Peoples’ Day

Truth Offends the Ignorant and Guilty