Things They Don’t Allow You To Say

I write this article from the perspective of one who has spent years publishing and debating his thoughts in books, articles, formal political documents, online forums, and at a handful of public speaking events alongside notable figures like G. Edward Griffin, Cliven Bundy, and Sheriff Richard Mack. I’ve spent time as an admin for the Independent American Party’s and Awaken to our Awful Situation’s Facebook pages, as well as the sole admin for seven of my own pages and groups. On my pages alone, I’ve been banned ten times for a total of eight months in Facebook jail. I’ve had a number of posts deleted and others labeled as “fake news” (fact-checked, naturally, by the George Soros-funded Snopes), and have been periodically shadow-banned. Through it all, I’ve experienced enough censorship and opposition to be able to formulate a solid view of what they don’t allow you to say.

communism392

First, who is the they I’m referring to? You can take your pick – the Illuminati, Freemasons, Zionists, Jesuits, globalists, Fabian Socialists, Black Nobility, Bilderbergers, the Committee of 300, the Establishment, the Deep State, the Elite, the Swamp, the powers-that-be, etc. The major thing all these groups have in common is their distinctly communist ideology. I therefore refer to the conspirators against mankind collectively as Marxists or communists, though terms like “globalists” or “the Establishment” are perfectly legitimate. Suffice it to say that the powers-that-be run a global campaign of censorship and intimidation against anyone, anywhere who speaks truth, exposes their lies, corrects their sanitized historical record, and advocates traditional or Christian principles. My goal today is to articulate several items that will get you in hot water with the Marxist censors and to encourage you to tell the truth anyway regardless of the consequences.

Many of the points I’ll mention below are inexorably connected with international Jewry – a taboo topic in and of itself. The black mark attached to anyone who utters the word “Jewry” brings to mind the old idea that “to know who rules over you, learn who you’re not allowed to criticize.” I’ve consistently opposed the notion that the conspiracy is Jewish; it is, rather, Satanic and enlists people of all races, religions, and backgrounds. However, I have been equally vocal about the documentable fact that a disproportionately high number of Jews inhabit top positions within the global conspiracy apparatus. From George Soros to Henry Kissinger, from the Rothschilds to Jeff Bezos, from Mark Zuckerberg to Bob Iger, from Dianne Feinstein to Sheldon Adelson, and from Elena Kagan to Richard Haass, there’s a Jewish radical – and Jewish money and media support – intimately involved in nearly every phase of our collective enslavement.

So ubiquitous is Jewish involvement in the conspiracy that any mention of Jewish involvement can get you figuratively, or in some infamous cases literally, hauled before the Inquisition. To sidestep the necessity of writing the buzzword “Jew,” which can get you quickly censored on Jewish-owned media platforms (which is essentially all of them), people have taken to adding ellipses to words, such as to the word (((they))). There’s a history behind this practice which I leave you to search independently. The point is that one of the myriad of items they don’t allow you to say is that Jews, or the state of Israel, are involved with the conspiracy.

The conspiracy also does not allow you to state with impunity the truth that communism – the foulest and most murderous ideology in history is a de facto Jewish movement. Karl Marx was a Jew from a long line of rabbis, though he was raised Christian and eventually defected to Satanism. His communist successors, Lenin, Trotsky, Zinoviev, and many more, were ethnic Jews as well. Vladimir Putin, of all people, admitted in a speech to a Jewish audience that some 85% of the first Bolshevik regime were Jewish. This holds true with the estimates of the best Sovietologists. But they do not want you to know that in modern times communism was invented and pushed forward primarily by Jews, that Jews were and are used as foot soldiers in the communist world revolution, that Jews like Genrikh Yagoda and Stalin’s brother-in-law Lazar Kaganovich engineered the Holodomor famine which claimed the lives of at least 10 million Ukrainians, that the work of torture and murder carried out by the Soviets was directed by Jewish hands, that Jews almost exclusively operated the brutal Soviet GULAG where millions rotted in wretched enslavement or perished, and that the Communist International (Comintern) frequently chose Jewish communists to head up their subversive operations throughout the world as in Spain, Germany, Hungary, and Mexico. Though these are historical facts, they cannot allow you to mention them without punishment.

communism1

They don’t allow you to say that 9/11 was an inside job without smearing, silencing, and persecuting you. The horrible September 11th attacks were indeed terrorist attacks, but the real terrorists were not nineteen Arab hijackers using box-cutters, shoddy piloting skills, and unprecedented good “luck.” Though I believe we might not ever be able to specifically name the real perpetrators, it is abundantly clear that the “official” story is riddled with massive holes and that Osama bin Laden did not run this sophisticated attack from a cave in Afghanistan. There’s actually no credible evidence that bin Laden had any part in the attacks. He even denied his involvement in an interview after the attacks, explaining the truth that the Qur’an forbids the murder of innocents. Certainly the FBI didn’t think he was involved and never formally charged bin Laden with a crime. If the evidence was as overwhelming as the controlled media would have you believe, why did our government never formally charge the alleged mastermind of the most murderous attack ever perpetrated on American soil?

The smoking gun of all smoking guns proving that 9/11 was a much larger and more sophisticated operation was WTC 7 which was not hit by a plane yet dissolved into powder as it fell neatly and at free-fall speed into its own footprint. See Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth’s phenomenal film “9/11: Explosive Evidence – The Experts Speak Out” for an overview of the facts. There are far too many firsthand accounts – some of which are on video – of explosions going off before, simultaneous with, and after the planes hit the towers to believe that the collapse of the Twin Towers was the result of localized office fires caused by the planes. Brigham Young University-Provo Professor Steven E. Jones’s research conclusively demonstrated the existence of thermite or thermate on the scene – that is, the existence of military grade explosives. For his research, Dr. Jones was labeled an “anti-Semite” and forced into retirement. Obviously, they don’t allow you to conduct credible, professional research into the real goings-on of 9/11.

Several powers such as our own corrupt intelligence services, Russia, and Israel, had the capability and motive to have pulled off the dastardly September 11th attacks. Russia has been the major beneficiary of our disastrous War on Terror and KGB dictator Vladimir Putin was the first head of state to call and encourage President Bush in his endeavor. Remember that the communists are the founders of modern international terrorism, that most modern terrorists were trained by Russian intelligence, and that these KGB-linked terrorists have carried out attacks on every continent – including attacks in the United States in the past. This fits their playbook perfectly. They cannot be ruled out as having at least some involvement.

911#1

The Israelis also cannot be ruled out. Recall that five Israelistwo of which were confirmed by the FBI to be Mossad agents – were arrested on 9/11 (search “dancing Israelis”) for celebrating as they filmed the planes hitting the WTC (which “event” they later admitted on Israeli TV they had been sent to “document”). At the same time, the U.S. government had been investigating a massive Israeli spy ring operating on our soil. 140 Israeli spies – some of which had explosives training or were active military – had been apprehended in the months leading up to 9/11. Immediately after the attacks, 60 additional Israelis with connections to Israeli intelligence were arrested and questioned. As a bare minimum, Israeli intelligence had intimate foreknowledge of the attacks and must be implicated. With a friend like Israel, who needs enemies? 

Finally, double agents or corrupt individuals within our own intelligence apparatus – of which there is no shortage, especially of the turncoat communist variety – must all be suspect. For instance, it would have been impossible for a foreign power to have stood down or diverted our military, such as happened. That had to have been an in-house order. At the very least, our own people – traitors posing as loyal intelligence operatives in the CIA or as innocent members of our government – had a part in the attacks. Certainly our media and key government insiders played a central role in the post-attack cover up, which implies complicity.

And don’t forget the extensive international insider trading happening at the time of the attack or the fact that several prominent people, including the mayor of San Francisco, have admitted they were warned not to fly that day. Whoever precisely is to blame, the fact is that nineteen Arabs – some of whom are still alive and have testified of their innocence – did not penetrate America’s state-of-the-art defenses and bring down three buildings with two planes. It simply didn’t happen, folks. Yet, if you state the obvious – namely, that it could have only been the work of a much deeper and higher level conspiracy – they get very angry and brand you a “conspiracy nut” for all time.

I suggest that 9/11 was likely a collaborative effort by several intelligence agencies of various countries or at least individual operatives in those agencies – to perpetrate an attack on the United States, blame it on Islamic scapegoats, and rope us into a disastrous, long-term war that would fulfill numerous anti-American objectives such as weakening our economy, increasing police state powers domestically, creating paranoia about “terrorists” (which they label anyone who dissents to their agenda), spreading thin and wearing out our military, creating friction at home, and making the United States into a world pariah by painting us as an oil-stealing, power-hungry, ruthless bogeyman. This is what they don’t want you to learn or say.

In addition, if you call the “War on Terror” a fraud, they say you’re unpatriotic or dangerous. Even certain “conservative” media pundits who shall remain unnamed label you a “danger to the nation” if you oppose our undeclared, unconstitutional, unjustifiable “War on Terror.” Did you know that in October 2001, the Taliban agreed to help us apprehend Osama bin Laden, but President Bush rejected the offer? Instead, we preferred to bomb and invade the nation of Afghanistan without proof that bin Laden was actually behind 9/11 and while rejecting an offer of help from the local regime. It might also interest you to realize that even mainstream sources have reported on the fact that the invasion plan for Afghanistan was drawn up before 9/11 and that bases in Uzbekistan and other Central Asian nations were already being prepped to stage the operation.

War on Terror1

What’s worse, we decided to invade Iraq two years later for no reason whatsoever except, it seems, on the word of the Israelis who had been urging us to depose Saddam Hussein for years and whose intelligence services implicated Iraq in the 9/11 attacks. As much as we may dislike Russia-backed, KGB-trained regimes – which are especially prevalent in the Middle East – do we have a right to bomb, besiege, invade, and occupy them? I submit that we do not unless they have harmed us, attacked our interests, or present a legitimate and imminent threat. I submit that Thomas Jefferson was correct when he said: “If there be one principle more deeply rooted than any other in the mind of every American it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest” (Thomas Jefferson to William Short, 1791). This is the true American spirit. Yet, if you oppose their “War on Terror” for any reason – constitutional, ideological, economic, or moral – they rush to stigmatize and delegitimize you.

Similarly, if you cite the mountain of evidence contradicting the Warren Commission’s “official” position that President Kennedy was assassinated by “lone nut” Lee Harvey Oswald, they go into a frenzy. By this standard, the U.S. Congress itself is a “conspiracy theorist” because in 1976 a congressional commission declared that there must have been two shooters; ergo, there was a conspiracy and one of the assassins is still at large. But of course the truth is much deeper. The evidence demonstrates that not only was Oswald a “patsy” like he testified before being murdered by a man linked to the mob, but that multiple assassins shooting from several locations riddled JFK’s car with bullets – as the Secret Service did nothing, broke protocol, and were intentionally undermanned – and that the forensic evidence witnessed by the doctors in Dallas was tampered with and altered in Washington, D.C. to fit the narrative. Yet, this is something they don’t want you to say.

Staying in the 60s for a moment, they don’t want you to know that before his death JFK had given the order to pull out of Vietnam completely. LBJ’s first order as president, which came mere hours after JFK’s brutal murder, was to reverse JFK’s directive and massively expand what became known as the War in Vietnam. Curiously, the dictum reversing JFK’s order had been written and submitted before JFK was shot. But of course, they can’t allow you to know this – just like they can’t allow you to inform others of the fact that the U.S. military actually won the War in Vietnam but Henry Kissinger deliberately sabotaged the peace efforts and gave South Vietnam to the communists.

They also don’t allow you to say, without being labeled a “racist” at least, that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a violent Marxist revolutionary and rampant plagiarizer with a devious sex life. Not surprisingly, King’s handlers were Jewish communists, most prominently Stanley Levison. King, who pretended to be a preacher, engaged in drunken sex orgies, beat prostitutes, and coerced women to perform lesbian acts for his amusement. This is a man who lied and cheated to “earn” his theological degree. He was a Marxist who was arrested on many occasions not because the police were racist, but because he was obstructing justice and disobeying the law. In all fairness, we should strip Michael King (his real name) of his title “doctor,” abolish the sycophantic holiday in his honor, and tell the truth that he was a lying, devious, immoral communist. Though, you won’t catch mainstream sources saying this because they won’t allow it to be said.

The truth about the Second World War is something else they absolutely don’t want you to know. They can’t allow you to say that a local war between Germany and Poland over territory that rightfully belonged to Germany and which was inhabited by ethnic Germans who were being abused and massacred by the Poles was deliberately turned into a world war by the British and French. On September 1, 1939, Germany retaliated against Poland for Poland’s attacks on her people. But it was on September 3 that the British and French declared war on Germany and French troops invaded Germany and occupied an eight kilometer swath of German land. Who declared war and struck the first blow that ignited the general war in Europe? The British and French. Yet, this is a cold hard fact they won’t let you say.

Eisenhower's Death Camps2

One of Eisenhower’s brutal post-war death camps

They also won’t allow you to know the truth that the worst atrocities committed during World War II were committed by the Allies against the Germans! Thomas Goodrich’s book Hellstorm is one of many that documents the atrocities in gory detail. Suffice it to say that we unnecessarily targeted civilians with our firebombings while the Soviets deliberately targets German women with rape. Some two million German women were raped by the Russian hordes at the end of, and even after, the war. Millions of Germans were displaced by the Soviets, and millions were murdered after the fighting ended. The Americans, British, and French also raped women, though their preferred methods of butchery were high-altitude bombing and starvation. Some 1-2 million German POWs were starved to death by order of Eisenhower after the war. Food from the Red Cross (which testified that Germany was the most staunch adherent to the Geneva Convention) was turned away – and sometimes burned outside the concentration camp gates – while hundreds of thousands of Germans who had surrendered in good faith withered. These unconscionable atrocities won’t appear in your school or university textbooks or in major Hollywood films, however, because they won’t allow the truth to be taught.

I’m sure you’re wondering, “But what of the Holocaust? Aren’t these atrocities understandable – even justified – by what the “Nazis” did?” Would it honestly surprise you at this point to learn that they have fabricated that history, too, just like they have fabricated atrocity propaganda for generations? Recall their World War One propaganda, now admitted by all historians to be utterly false, of German soldiers throwing Belgian babies into the air and impaling them on bayonets. In an April 13, 1923 speech, Adolf Hitler referred to this sort of libelous propaganda that turned world opinion against Germany: [T]he Jewish-democratic press of America had to accomplish its masterpiece – that is to say, it had to drive into the most horrible of all wars a great peaceloving people which was as little concerned in European struggles as it was in the North Pole: America was to intervene ‘in defense of civilization,’ and the Americans were persuaded so to do by an atrocity propaganda conducted in the name of civilization which from A to Z was a scandalous invention the like of which has never yet been seen – a farrago of lies and forgeries.” And so it was.

Remember that they also invented atrocity stories to rile us up to go to war against Iraq in 1991. In these atrocity fairy tales, Iraqi soldiers allegedly entered hospitals and murdered infants. The only problem is that the “eye witnesses” lied and were put up to the task to foment enough anger against Iraq to tolerate a U.S.-led military strike. It was the same in 2003 when we pushed the WMD tall tale and said we were invading Iraq to “spread democracy.” Time and time again atrocity propaganda provides either the pretext or later justification for military aggression.

Holohoax1

In like manner, they invented “Holocaust” propaganda tales to cover their own crimes and deflect pesky questions about war guilt. The “Holocaust” narrative isn’t even compelling to anyone who bothers to scratch the surface and do some digging. They have used a handful of false witnesses (famed “Holocaust survivors” who have later admitted their stories were fake or embellished are ubiquitous), scant or contradictory physical evidence, and a relentless smear campaign to push their tall tale. Through repetition and harsh shaming – including jail time and physical assault in some instances – against anyone who questions their narrative, they’ve created a culture of fear and blind acceptance. But the public’s blind acceptance doesn’t make something true. Indeed, general acceptance by the ignorant public is often a sign that there is a massive problem with whatever story is being peddled.

What’s most curious to me is that legions of former Jewish inmates at Auschwitz and other labor camps have testified to a radically different reality in the camps, yet their testimonies are summarily suppressed. Indeed, the SHOAH Foundation has chosen not to release most of their interviews with “Holocaust survivors.” Why? Perhaps it’s because they say things that do not jive with the accepted narrative. After all, many of those who have spoken out have testified that they were treated well, that they were paid for their labor in Auschwitz, that they performed theatrical plays, that they played soccer with SS guards, that they had access to the camp swimming pool (not normally shown to Auschwitz visitors) and brothels, that the Red Cross and others routinely visited the camp and never saw anything monstrous happening, and that though they may have heard horrible rumors of what was allegedly happening in their camps, they never personally witnessed any atrocities. The very fact that they’re alive belies the idea that the Germans were out to exterminate the Jews! A bullet to the back of the neck, Soviet-style, is a much more effective way of wiping out a population than a supposed gas chamber.

We should also suspect the mainstream narrative when we realize that all our initial information about gas chambers, crematoria, and death tolls in the millions came from the Soviets. Communists lie and deceive like it’s a bodily function. Don’t forget that it was the Soviet Union who murdered tens of thousands of Polish officers in the Katyn Forest and blamed it on Germany – a claim which the world accepted as “truth” for decades until the Soviets opened their archives and admitted the reality that Russia was the responsible party (validating what Hitler and the Germans had said about the matter). Yet, despite their mountain of lies, we’re supposed to trust the word of the Soviets when they allege that Germany slaughtered Jews in gas chambers!

Holohoax9

Should we also believe that the Germans used a peddle-operated brain-bashing machine to kill inmates, which was one of the initial Soviet claims? Or perhaps we should believe that Hitler developed an atom bomb and dropped it on some Jews in the Ukraine rather than on the Allied armies, as was also claimed at the Nuremberg show trials. Or yet still, maybe we ought to regurgitate the now universally debunked myth that Germans made soap and lampshades out of Jewish fat and skin. Or maybe we should continue to force our children to read The Diary of Anne Frank even though the New York Supreme Court has ruled it a forgery. At what point do the accusers lose their credibility in the eyes of the public? Are you afraid to tell the truth about the Holohoax simply because they don’t want you to? Isn’t telling the truth more important than enduring the mean names liars will call you for doing so?

It doesn’t matter how many Jewish and Israeli researchers debunk the myth that the Germans murdered 6 million Jews in gas chambers, they still call you “anti-Semitic” if you repeat the truth. The official archivists and historians at Auschwitz have lowered the alleged death toll at that labor (not death) camp from over 4 million to “about” one and a half million, consisting of those thought to be “mainlyJews (the Red Cross and numerous other historians and researchers put the number far lower and assign the cause of death as disease and starvation, not genocide). Automatically, the grand total must be lowered by 3 million – half the original “official” number. Yet, they would have you believe that 6-3=6. And when you factor in the lowered numbers at all the other death (i.e. labor) camps, the number dwindles to barely a blip on the radar. But be careful; this is something they don’t want you to know, let alone allow you to say! If you choose to speak the truth anyway, they might throw you in prison like Ernst Zündel or David Irving.

Holohoax13

Playing off this last point, it is apparent that the authentic history of Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich is radically different than what they claim it is. I’ve written several articles on this point which you can find here, here, and here. Suffice it to say, they leap to silence you when you dare challenge their narrative that Hitler was the Devil incarnate. I’ve been banned more times from Facebook for speaking World War II truth than for any other reason. They simply don’t want you to know that far from being a genocidal madman, Hitler was a well-liked, well-respected, well-read reformer who promoted traditional families, Christianity (he was Catholic), and high morals while simultaneously opposing communism, Freemasonry, occultism, feminism, immorality, and the international bankers. He was not on the conspiracy’s payroll, trust you me. People who think he was controlled or empowered by the international conspiracy are horribly misinformed. Hitler opposed everything they stood for and in turn they destroyed him and hold him up to this very day as the arch-enemy of mankind. Anyone who stands up for him in interest of the truth is crucified and smeared as a “Nazi.” This situation of institutionalized ignorance will remain so long as they can dictate reality and silence truth-tellers, and so long as people on our side continue to lump Hitler in with the rest of the socialist psychopaths and repeat the Establishment’s garbage atrocity propaganda.

Don’t think they have unfairly treated Germany only. They have also twisted the history of the war against Japan. They portray Imperial Japan as a warmongering and brutal power which invaded China for conquest and later attacked us for no good reason. In fact, Japan’s foray into China was intended to thwart the incursion of communism into Asia. Before the war, Japanese writers were perplexed why the Western powers were not supporting their action against the communists flooding in from Soviet Russia. Japan was one of the three members of the Anti-Comintern Pact (i.e. anti-international communism) along with Germany and Italy. Isn’t it curious that the three nations that formally vowed to fight communism are the three singled out as the “enemy” in the propaganda they shove down our throats?

The reality is that Japan did not want war with the United States and only took that fateful step as a last option. However, as even prominent British historians have noted, few respectable nations would suffer the abuses heaped on Japan by the United States and Britain without going to war. Though they cry “conspiracy theorist!” the fact is that FDR – a through-and-through Marxist who surrounded himself with Soviet moles and had a veritable love affair with “Uncle Joe” Stalin – developed an eight-point plan to goad Japan into attacking us so that we could “justifiably” join the war against Germany and save the Soviet Union from imminent defeat. This is precisely what happened.

They not only prompted Pearl Harbor via their economic and political warfare, but had very precise foreknowledge of the attack (yet did absolutely nothing to stop it and didn’t warn our troops). They wanted it to happen in order to bring the United States into the war as their pawn! As the war they started progressed, they rejected numerous offers of surrender by both Germany and Japan (Germany alone offered peace terms close to twenty times), thus placing the war guilt fully on them. And, if you haven’t learned by now, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were wholly unnecessary from a war perspective, as quite literally all of our major generals publicly stated at the time. But of course these are things they won’t allow you to say to a mainstream audience.

communism449

They also do not want you to teach the reality that Spain’s Franco, Italy’s Mussolini, and modern Brazil’s Bolsonaro, to name only three world leaders often classified as “fascists” or “dictators,” came to power with one purpose – to stop communism in their countries. The Spanish Civil War, so-called, was in fact a communist uprising. Thousands of churches were burned to the ground. Thousands of priests were murdered. International brigades of Jews rushed in from the United States and elsewhere to assist the Spanish Marxists in their revolt. These communists created so much chaos that General Franco needed to step forward to restore order with a heavy hand. Franco, with Adolf Hitler’s indispensable help, saved Spain from turned into a full-fledged Soviet satellite. Mussolini similarly saved Italy from Marxism. And Bolsonaro – the “Trump of the Tropics” – is attempting to wrest his country from the strong grip of the communists. Naturally, this is something they won’t let you say to the general public which they desire to remain uninformed.

Another thing they don’t allow you to say above a whisper is that the current deluge of African and Middle Eastern immigrants in Europe is responsible for the massive rise in rape, crime, religious persecution of Christians, and terrorism. The statistics are clear – the migrants (largely Arab or Muslim, though certainly not practicing Muslims) are raping their way across the continent. Sweden and Germany are the two biggest victims of this hideous plague. They are storming into Britain and machete attacks in broad daylight are becoming routine. In France, hundreds of churches have been burned down by these terrorists in the past coupe of years, culminating in the suspicious destruction of the Cathedral of Notre Dame in April. And the infamous murder of Father Jacques Hamel next to the altar of his church outside Paris is a grotesque echo of Illuminati-inspired Jacobinism. Yet, the socialist authorities in Europe – and the social media censors globally – have declared it “hate speech” to identify the rapists and terrorists as immigrants, Muslims, or people of color. But truth is truth, regardless of whether they prohibit you from saying it.

Europe1

Similarly, they don’t want you to comprehend the immense damage illegal immigrants (i.e. invaders) are doing to the United States. As President Trump said, Mexico and other Marxist states in Latin America aren’t sending us their best people – they’re sending the dregs of society. The amount of drugs flowing across our Southern border is staggering. Some of this is brought in by our own corrupt intelligence services and a large percentage is brought in by the communists, but another sizable percentage comes here on the backs of illegals and cartel mules. They are changing not only the racial but political makeup of America by allowing these hordes of millions of socialists into our country. These dirt-poor invaders come from countries where they’ve been brainwashed into believing in socialism and expecting handouts from the welfare state. Consequently, when they arrive here, they’re on the fast track to registering and voting Democrat and living on the dole while complaining that we don’t speak their language and that we “stole” their ancestors’ land – a massive lie in and of itself. Of course, they won’t let you say any of this without branding you a loon, a “racist,” and a “right-wing extremist.”

They also won’t allow you to state the fact that there is no real white-on-black crime, racism, or discrimination in this country. Rather, the real crime epidemic is black-on-white, black-on-black, Latino-on-Latino, gang-on-gang, black-on-cop. White America is not plagued by violent crime, and is certainly not affected by racism, but the colored inner cities are. The communists focused heavily on indoctrinating and capturing the black and Latino populations in order to cause a race war and in order to funnel drugs and homosexuality through them to white America. They hold up agitators like MLK as icons of “peace,” but in reality they have radicalized all but a few blacks and Latinos and are preparing them to be cannon fodder in a coming civil war. Their agenda of creating a “Soviet America” is heavily dependent upon manipulating blacks and Latinos, and upon silencing whites by causing us to feel “white guilt” for our forefathers’ unsurpassed achievements, thus acquiescing to the destruction of our traditional culture and greatness. Because this is their agenda, they won’t allow you to get away with exposing it for long.

They also cringe when you cite the fact that South Africa was infinitely better off under white rule than black rule. Today, under the black communist regime, genocide is being perpetrated against the white population. Laws have been passed legalizing the confiscation of land from white farmers. The statistics are appalling. Each day numerous whites are both raped and murdered by the blacks. They’re rampaging throughout the nation, fueled by Marxist myths about “oppression” under white leadership. The true oppressors are those communists and terrorists who came to power with Nelson Mandela, a die-hard communist and convicted terrorist and Obama’s admitted role model. Africa is a miserable place today precisely because of the massive communist infiltration. But this is something they don’t want you to know or say. They would rather you believe that Africa is the way it is because of white colonialism and white oppression. But these myths fail the scratch test.

download

As implied earlier, homosexuality was pushed onto America by the cultural Marxists. They are behind the LGBT movement en toto. Henry Hay, a high-up Communist Party USA leader in his day, created the first homosexual association in the nation, the Mattachine Society, and went on to father the Radical Faeries and the pedophile organization known as the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). The LGBT movement is a communist front, as is feminism, from its inception! However, if you dare repeat this history or say that people afflicted by homosexuality and transgenderism have mental disorders, as the head psychiatrist at John Hopkins University famously declared, they will nail you for “hate speech.”

In the vein of sex perversions, they don’t want you to know that Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) is very real and very prevalent. The reason they murdered Jeffrey Epstein in prison – oops, they don’t want me to say he was “murdered” – is to ensure he never talk about the Elite’s rampant pedophilia and Satanic sex abuse of children. Yet, this abuse happens every day and some very big names have been implicated. The same occult sex perversions of bygone days are not as bygone as some would like to believe. Yet, this is something they don’t allow you to say without consequences – just ask Ted Gunderson.

They also work hard to conceal the fact that the ironically-named Child Protective Services (CPS) is part of this massive child trafficking, child abusing ring. While there are of course some children who need to be taken out of legitimately dangerous situations, thousands of other children are stolen from innocent, upstanding parents every year – especially Christian and conservative homes – and no one seems to care. Certainly, they don’t protest it since they are the ones behind it and benefiting from it. While you’re living your mundane life and thinking of nothing more than the ball game on ESPN, thousands of children in your country are being kidnapped by “legal” entities and sold into sex slavery and as fodder for ritualistic abuse. They don’t allow a peep of this to enter the mainstream discourse, yet it’s true.

The existence of MK-Ultra, a brutal mind control program led by the CIA, is something they don’t want you talking about. They want you to ignore the mass of documents released within the past year verifying the existence and horrors of MK-Ultra and validating “conspiracy theorists” like Alex Jones. They want to keep you in the dark about things they have, albeit reluctantly, admitted!

The Second Amendment is yet another topic they won’t let you talk freely about without discrediting you. They don’t want you to know that each year guns are used millions of times in self-defense. They don’t want you to know that tyrants throughout history have first disarmed their victims before victimizing them. They don’t want you to learn that total disarmament (i.e. total slavery) is their end goal for us. They don’t allow you to talk about the fact that most shootings occur in gun-free zones where people are disarmed and helpless, as opposed to areas like Montana or Idaho where guns proliferate and make communities safe. They don’t want you to realize that red flag gun confiscation laws are not only dangerous (at least one innocent man, Gary Willis, has already been murdered by police in Maryland after a disgruntled neighbor made a false report about him and cops showed up unannounced to steal his weapons), but are highly illegal and blatantly unconstitutional. They simply don’t let you state the fact that America is one of the safest nations on earth (largely because we have so many firearms) and that their agenda is to disarm and thereby enslave us.

1811-Chato-04-02-01

 

They don’t allow you to learn the history of cancer and that numerous cures have been invented and suppressed. They don’t want you to know names like Royal Rife and Rick Simpson. They don’t want you to research the Biblical Greek word pharmakeia and its implications about modern medicine and drugs. They don’t want you to learn that hemp can cure cancer or that the U.S. government has multiple patents on cannabis because they proved as early as the 1970s that it cures cancerous tumors. They want you to continue to get sick, pay through the nose for expensive and worthless treatments like chemotherapy, and suffer endlessly as you or your loved ones endure an ailment that is highly curable. This is something they don’t allow you to say unless you’re fine with wearing the moniker “conspiracy theorist.”

They also don’t want you to comprehend the vaccination hoax (one of the leading causes of cancer, along with GMO food). It matters not how many doctors find links between vaccines and autism, or that Yale and Harvard have published dozens of studies verifying these links, they will censor you if you try to warn people that injecting themselves with a cocktail of ingredients including mercury, live viruses, aborted fetal cells, formaldehyde, and cancer-causing viruses is a potentially very dangerous thing. The more the rates of autism, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), and vaccine-related injuries rises, the more they and their Big Pharma cohorts yell to drown you out.

Speaking of drowning, according to the “global warming” fear-mongers, civilization should be under water by now. Glacier National Park is quietly removing their “gone by 2020” signs since it’s less than two months from 2020 and, surprise, the glaciers are still here (just like Antarctica’s ice is expanding, the polar bear populations are growing, and the earth has gone through approximately twenty consecutive years of cooling). To fight this non-existent “global warming,” weather manipulation programs have been initiated, such as lacing the sky with reflective particles via what has come to be known as chemtrails. But if you dare say this, they will sear the letter k into your forehead per the ancient Roman practice of branding kalumniators, or false accusers, for all to see.

They also cry “fake!” when you state the truth that America was founded by Christians as a Christian nation. It perturbs them when you quote Thomas Jefferson’s declaration, “I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus” (Thomas Jefferson to Charles Thomson, January 9, 1816) because it destroys their lie that Jefferson was an atheist or deist. They don’t want you to know that as governor of Virginia, Jefferson used public money to fund Christian churches, donated his own money to a Bible society’s effort to put a Bible in every home in the state, and hand-selected religious hymnals for use in public schools, because it explodes their anti-Christian and very harmful version of “separation of church and state,” a phrase originally used in a far different sense by the avowed Christian Thomas Jefferson. They want you to toe their line and regurgitate the lies they have invented about our humble and good Founding Fathers; and they won’t tolerate dissent without trying to undermine your credibility.

They go out of their way to smear another great American hero – the Indian-fighting, bank-killing, Constitution-supporting Andrew Jackson. They want you to focus on the Trail of Tears (the alleged horrors of which they grossly exaggerate) and ignore the fact that Jackson was the only president to successfully fight off the bankers and destroy their central bank scheme. This same cartel of Elitist financiers and conspirators are the ones promoting the myth that Jackson was an evil, racist demagogue. Yet, facts are facts, and the fact is that President Jackson was a true war hero, the only president in U.S. history to pay off the national debt completely, presided over an era of peace and prosperity, and thwarted the bankers’ malicious plans for America. Jackson’s proudest boast was, “I killed the bank!” We ought to remember him for his great achievements, such as squashing the national bank plot of his day. Yet, if you repeat these historical facts, they lash out and attempt to intimidate you into silence.

fuckyeah

A bust of Abraham Lincoln hanging comfortably between portraits of Lenin and Stalin at a communist rally. Birds of a feather. . .

Your self-censorship is also an object of their Civil War propaganda. Isn’t it curious that they love Abraham Lincoln? I find it very ironic that American “patriots” today lavish praise on Lincoln, a man on whom Karl Marx also heaped praise for aiding his communist world revolution. Lincoln violated the U.S. Constitution six ways to sundown, yet many modern “conservative” icons who claim to love the Constitution think he was grand. Certainly they think he was grand and they hold him up as someone to be replicated. Of course, they also push the false myth that Lincoln’s War was waged to free the slaves, that Lincoln’s clever “Emancipation Proclamation” war propaganda actually freed the slaves, that Lincoln was a man of peace, that the Confederacy was evil and racist, that the modern South is evil and racist, and that secession was not a God-given right. Naturally, they won’t let you use mainstream platforms to spread the truth that Lincoln enslaved tens of thousands of Northerners without cause, suspended the writ of habeus corpus, ripped up the Constitution, imprisoned judges who said he was violating the Constitution, rigged the election of 1864, pardoned war criminals, allowed his generals and troops to rape, pillage, and plunder the South, continued President Buchanan’s unwarranted persecutions against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and so forth. Now that is something they don’t allow you to say!

The same they who smear patriots like Jackson and Jefferson are the ones smearing President Donald Trump today – the very same they who concocted the laughably absurd stories of Trump-Russia “collusion.” Don’t misunderstand me; I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 and I won’t be voting for him next year either. He’s the best president in my lifetime, yet he’s also absurdly flawed in too many ways – morally and constitutionally foremost among them – for my conscience to allow me to vote for him. Yet, no matter how flawed a person may be, no one deserves to be unfairly smeared and falsely accused of things they didn’t do, especially while the truly guilty parties go free.

Russiagate10

Is there an American politician in modern memory who has been smeared by the mainstream press as consistently and vilely as President Trump has been? If so, I’m not aware of it. They don’t want you to know that there is zero substance to their “collusion” hoax propaganda a hoax perpetrated by long-time communists and corrupt individuals, it is now known, who were receiving not only fake intelligence, but money, from Russia! Yet, in their deranged paranoia and hatred, they and their myriad of dupes all across the political spectrum repeat their false and baseless accusations in order to destroy the few good things President Trump is trying to do and the confidence Americans have in effecting a political revival. They do not want the American People – those they consider inferior and too stupid to govern themselves without their “enlightened” guidance – getting the idea that they can use their inherent and rightful power to undo their Marxist agenda. Certainly, this is something they do not want you to say!

Finally, they don’t allow you to inform people that there really are more than two choices on election day. They try to paint all third parties as fringe lunatics with a snowball’s chance in hell of winning elections. Yet, what makes a political party “viable”? The only thing that makes a candidate or party viable is the amount of support they get at the polls. I’m here to inform you – though they don’t want me to – that there are a handful of terrific political organizations organizations worthy of your support; namely, the Independent American Party and the Constitution Party. I belong to the former (and ran for the U.S. House of Representatives under the IAP banner in 2014) and have voted for candidates of the latter like Chuck Baldwin and Darrell Castle. I don’t regret a single vote because I understand that a vote for principle is never wasted. This, my friend, is something they cannot tolerate hearing. It is an idea they know could spread across the nation like wildfire and undermine their entire house of cards. Yet it is something We the People simply cannot stop saying if we ever hope to break our shackles and become free again!

There are hundreds of things that they won’t allow you to say without consequences and punishment, either actual or virtual. My list is sufficient to show that the powers-that-be – the global Marxist Establishment – has a stranglehold on the public mind. They control the writing of history, the narrative of current events, and dictate their own warped version of “reality.” The “reality” they promote, however, is a long string of lies, half-truths, and distortions. Not any old lies, but Red lies – lies that only benefit the worldwide communist conspiracy and its abettors.

The ideological progeny of the Illuminati of yesteryear are the communists and socialists of today. The Establishment is working overtime to curtail free speech, discredit truth-tellers, and silence dissent to their Satanic communist dogmas. They are vile and evil; malicious in the extreme. Their intent is to silence you. Right now, they are, with some notable exceptions, attacking us mainly in virtual reality. Soon, however, the real persecutions will begin. Soon, the West will employ a Chinese-style social credit system – the Mark of the Beast. Then, perhaps, you will understand that they really do exist, that they hate you, that their agenda is to destroy your family and enslave you, and that the “controversial” and “hateful” things I’ve written are true. But, hey, you had better just forget everything you’ve read here today, because it is something they don’t want me to say.

Zack Strong,

November 15, 2019.

The Danger of Hate Crime Laws

“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?

thought crime7

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).

government12

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.

hate crime4

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.

hate crime3

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.

ADL4

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.

hate-crime-or-art

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.”

hate crime8

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

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.

censorship5

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 commentaryis 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

Hitler124

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).

Hitler241

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 and 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.

53608541_10213955631064214_521378591301173248_n

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).

Germany1

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.”

53892526_122827665497858_2603072402707447808_n

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.

America37

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

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.”

Columbus11

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).

Columbus5

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 are 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:

Columbus4

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 Bobedilla 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 be 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.

Columbus13

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.

Indians1

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.

Columbus14

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

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.”

truth6

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.

guns85

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.”

Screenshot_20191001-151719

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.

global warming3

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.

Christ72

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.

patriots3

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 Constitution

May you and your contemporaries . . . preserve inviolate a Constitution, which, cherished in all its chastity and purity, will prove in the end a blessing to all the nations of the earth” (Thomas Jefferson to Mr. Nicholas, December 11, 1821).

September 17 is Constitution Day. In the past, this holiday was noted and commemorated from coast to coast. Today, however, the average person doesn’t even know that September 17 is a holiday. Worse, the average person has never taken the time to study and learn the Constitution and thus does not recognize the plethora of ways it is being violated on a daily basis by the very people – the sly oath-breakers – ostensibly representing him. This Constitution Day, I give a short tribute to the U.S. Constitution and the noble men who were inspired by Heaven to write and establish it.

The British statesman William Gladstone famously remarked that “the American Constitution is, so far as I can see, the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.” I submit to you that this is true. Examine all the systems of government of the past or present and where do you find another that has secured to so many people as many rights and privileges and produced so much prosperity, advancement, and influence? No system in recorded human history has ever duplicated the general benefits that have resulted from the establishment of the Constitution of the United States.

America13

The United States is, by any honest analysis, the greatest, wealthiest, freest, and most powerful nation in history. No other nation has risen so far so fast, produced as much wealth, secured as much personal Liberty, or exerted as much influence on the world for good as the United States. Much of this unparalleled success stems back to the system of limited republican government established by the Constitution.

George Washington wrote of the system set up by the Constitution: “I was convinced it approached nearer to perfection than any government hitherto instituted among men” (George Washington to Edward Newenham, August 29, 1788). Another time he declared that “the Constitution is the guide which I never can abandon” (George Washington to the Boston Selectmen, July 28, 1795). And during his Farewell Address, President Washington again affirmed:

[T]he Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.”

Why was the Father of our Country so enamored with the Constitution? One of the reasons he was thrilled by the Constitution was that its authority centered in the People themselves, not in a monarchy, oligarchy, or formal bureaucracy. Washington stated:

The power under the Constitution will always be with the people. It is entrusted for certain defined purposes and for a certain limited period to representatives of their own chusing; and whenever it is exercised contrary to their interests, or not according to their wishes, their Servants can, and undoubtedly will be, recalled” (George Washington to Bushrod Washington, November 9, 1787).

The Constitution in fact was designed by the Founding Fathers to be an act of the People themselves. It had to be, for it would be their government. During the Constitution ratifying debates, however, some said that the Founders were not truly representing the People and therefore should not have used the phrase “We the People” in Constitution’s Preamble. However, a delegate from North Carolina, Archibald MacLaine, stated that the term was perfectly appropriate because it was the American People, and no other, that would ultimately approve the Constitution and thereby put it into force by their consent to its laws:

“[The Constitution] was to be submitted by the legislatures to the people; so that, when it is adopted, it is the act of the people” (W. Cleon Skousen, The Making of America: The Substance and Meaning of the Constitution, 176).

The Constitution was and is the act of the People. The Constitution derives its powers, as Thomas Jefferson had stated in the Declaration of Independence all governments should, “from the consent of the governed.” In his brilliant book The Making of America – my pick for the best book ever written on constitutional interpretation – W. Cleon Skousen explained:

The new Constitution presupposes the complete restitution of all political power to the people, with a subsequent redistribution of certain powers to the states and certain powers to the federal government.

This explanation gives particular significance to the words of James Madison when he emphasized the relative amount of responsibility allocated to each level of government:

““The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and prosperity of the state.”

Of course the people were accustomed to thinking of the states as the sovereign source of all political power, but the Founders wanted to educate the people to understand that they themselves are the source of all such power. James Wilson of Pennsylvania explained it as follows:

““. . . On the principle . . . of this Constitution . . . the supreme power resides in the people. If they choose to indulge a part of their sovereign power to be exercised by the state governments, they may. If they have done it, the states were right in exercising it; but if they think it no longer safe or convenient, they will resume it, or make a new distribution, more likely to be productive of that good which ought to be our constant aim.

““The powers of both the general government and the state governments, under this system, are acknowledged to be so many emanations of power from the people.

The purpose of the Founders was to assign to each level of government that service which is could perform the most efficiently and the most economically. There was a remarkable rationale behind the whole system. It went back to the “ancient principles”” (W. Cleon Skousen, The Making of America, 176-177).

The “ancient principles” referred to are those which empower the People. Just as the government derives its powers from the People, the People infer their collective power from individuals. Genuine and rightful power does not come from the top down, but from the bottom up. It begins with the individual who receives his rights and prerogatives as an endowment from God Almighty, or nature, and then proceeds outward to families, neighborhoods, communities, counties, states, and, finally, the nation.

JeffersonHengistandHorsa

One side of Thomas Jefferson’s proposed seal for the United States, depicting Anglo-Saxon leaders Hengist and Horsa

This system originated thousands of years ago. It is the system revealed by God to ancient Israel. From there it spread to other areas, such as to the Anglo-Saxons. It was from the Anglo-Saxons that Thomas Jefferson gained knowledge of this near-perfect societal, governmental structure. Jefferson described it thus:

[T]he way to have good and safe government, is not to trust it all to one; but to divide it among the many, distributing to every one exactly the functions he is competent to. let the National government be entrusted with the defence of the nation, and it’s foreign & federal relations; the State governments with the civil rights, laws, police & administration of what concerns the state generally; the Counties with the local concerns of the counties; and each Ward direct the interests within itself.7 it is by dividing and subdividing these republics from the great National one down thro’ all it’s subordinations, until it ends in the administration of every man’s farm and affairs by himself; by placing under every one what his own eye may superintend, that all will be done for the best. what has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government which has ever existed under the sun? the generalising & concentrating all cares and powers into one body, no matter whether of the Autocrats of Russia or France, or of the Aristocrats of a Venetian Senate. and I do believe that if the Almighty has not decreed that Man shall never be free, (and it is blasphemy to believe it) that the secret will be found to be in the making himself the depository of the powers respecting himself, so far as he is competent to them, and delegating only what is beyond his competence by a synthetical process, to higher & higher orders of functionaries, so as to trust fewer and fewer powers, in proportion as the trustees become more and more oligarchical. the elementary republics of the wards, the county republics, the State republics, and the republic of the Union, would form a gradation of authorities, standing each on the basis of law, holding every one it’s delegated share of powers, and constituting truly a system of fundamental balances and checks for the government. where every man is a sharer in the direction of his ward-republic, or of some of the higher ones, and feels that he is a participator in the government of affairs not merely at an election, one day in the year, but every day; when there shall not be a man in the state who will not be a member of some one of it’s councils, great or small, he will let the heart be torn out of his body sooner than his power be wrested from him by a Caesar or a Bonaparte” (Thomas Jefferson to Joseph C. Cabell, February 2, 1816).

This is the ingenious system that our Constitution was designed to safeguard and promote! It is perhaps the most succinct description of how the American system is meant to work. Each man is meant to personally govern himself, his family, and his affairs. Families were never intended to reach out to the government for help. Rather, a family’s relatives and neighbors, and local church, should be their support net.

If each family takes care of itself, and extended family and neighbors bind together to take care of each other within their wards and districts, the entire nation would easily govern itself with little need for government intervention. What need would we have for a large and invasive national government if each family and neighborhood tended to itself? There would be no welfare state with its massive bureaucratic apparatus, no need for a sprawling police force, and far fewer abuses and excesses.

J. Reuben Clark, Jr. was a lawyer, an experienced statesman who held numerous positions in government, and an influential religious leader. He was an expert in law and had an acute understanding of Freedom’s enemies. He said that our Founding Fathers understood these threats and formulated the Constitution to minimize them. Clark wrote:

We must always remember that despotism and tyranny, with all their attendant tragedies to the people, as in Russia today, come to nations because one man, or a small group of men, seize and exercise by themselves the three great divisions of government, – the legislative, the executive, and the judicial. For now a score of centuries, the nations and peoples of Western and Southern Europe – the bulk of the civilized world until less than two centuries ago – have lived under this concept (sometimes more, sometimes less) and, when the concept has been operative, have suffered the resulting tragedies – loss of liberty, oppression, great poverty among the masses, insecurity, wanton disregard of human life, and a host of the relatives of these evil broods.

The framers of our Constitution knew this history, and planned to make sure that these enemies to human welfare, freedom and happiness did not come to America. They were trained and experienced in the Common Law . . . They were thoroughly indoctrinated in the principle that the true sovereignty rested in the people. . . .

Deeply read in history, steeped in the lore of the past in human government, and experienced in the approaches of despotism which they had, themselves, suffered at the hands of George the Third, these patriots, assembled in solemn convention, planned for the establishment of a government that would ensure to them the blessings they described in the Preamble.

The people were setting up the government. They were bestowing power. They gave the government the powers they wished to give; they retained what they did not wish to give. The residuum of power was in them. . . .

The Framers, in the Government they provided for, separated the three functions of government and set each of them up as a separate branch – the legislative, and executive and the judicial. Each was wholly independent of the other. No one of them might encroach upon the other. No one of them might delegate its power to another.

Yet by the Constitution, the different branches were bound together, unified into an efficient, operating whole. These branches stood together, supported one another. While severally independent, they ere at the same time, mutually dependent. It is this union of independence and dependence of these branches – legislative, executive and judicial – and of the governmental functions possessed by each of them, that constitutes the marvelous genius of this unrivalled document. The Framers had no direct guide in this work, no historical governmental precedent upon which to rely. As I see it, it was here that the divine inspiration came. It was truly a miracle.

The people, not an Emperor or a small group, were to make the laws through their representatives chosen by them” (J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Church News, November 29, 1952, in Jerreld Newquist, ed., Prophets, Principles and National Survival, 78-80).

Republic

Some might think that this emphasis on the People means our system is a democracy. Not so. The Constitution explicitly promises a “Republican Form of Government” to the states (see Article 4, Section 4). In a democracy, the People personally administer the government. In a republican system, the People appoint representatives to oversee certain duties that are impossible for a large people to administer in-person. Furthermore, in America we enshrined the rule of law in written documents and constitutions, thus creating our own unique brand of republicanism.

Constitutional republicanism is not democracy. This is a great fallacy. Our Founders despised democracy and considered it worse than monarchy. Our system is also not authoritarian. Our system did not rest in either extreme, but was closer to the middle of the scale if one side is tyranny and the other is anarchy.

Alexander Hamilton said:

We are now forming a republican government. Real liberty is neither found in despotism or the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments – if we incline too much to democracy, we shall soon shoot into a monarchy” (Alexander Hamilton, Debates on the Federal Convention, June 26, 1787).

Thomas Jefferson strongly favored republicanism and stated:

The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the rights of mankind” (Thomas Jefferson to William Hunter, March 11, 1790).

Jefferson also told the nation during his First Inaugural Address:

We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. . . .

Let us, then, with courage and confidence pursue our own Federal and Republican principles, our attachment to union and representative government.”

Again, America was founded not as a democracy, but as a republican nation firmly rooted in rule of law as established in a written constitution. Unlike the British system that had no formal written constitution and which was thus very fluid and subject to the whims of leaders – especially the corrupt British monarchy – the U.S. government was set in stone and bound within very narrow limits and could only justly exercise a specified number of powers for limited purposes and in particular ways. Checks and balances, separation of powers, and enumerated powers were all fundamental aspects of our limited federal Constitution.

J. Reuben Clark, Jr. spoke often of the Constitution. He reverenced it, as I do, as an inspired document. He said:

The Constitutional Convention met and out of it came our God-inspired Constitution – “the most wonderful work,” said Gladstone, “ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.” . . .

It gave us, for perhaps the first time in all history, a republic with the three basic divisions of government – the legislative, executive, and judicial – mutually and completely independent the one from the other, under which it is not possible for any branch of government legally to set up a system by which that branch can first conceive what it wants to do, then make the law ordering its doing, and then, itself, judge its own enforcement of its own law, a system that has always brought extortion, oppression, intimidation, tyranny, despotism – a system that every dictator has employed and must employ” (J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Stand Fast By Our Constitution, 187).

In other words, our inspired Constitution set up perhaps the first system that precludes tyrannical abuses, so long as it is strictly followed and the government is kept within its prescribed limits. If our elected representatives followed their oath of office, our government would never devolve into despotism because it could not. It is only when people violate their oath of office and the People let them get away with it that abuses happen. When people criticize our government, as I myself frequently do, they should make sure never to condemn the Constitution, but only its corrupt officers and the unconstitutional laws that we have allowed to be established.

Despite the brilliance of our constitutional system, our government is now a massive bureaucracy that tyrannizes us as a matter of course. It’s full of wolves in sheep’s clothing, traitors, despots, and front men for much eviler people operating and ruling from the shadows. I will cite but one reason for our fallen state: Our collective immorality.

I’ve emphasized this important factor in the past, but virtue and righteousness are essential ingredients in Americanism. I’ll cite four witness from our Founding era and commend their common sense to you with my own testimony of its pressing relevance. John Adams famously said:

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other” (John Adams to the Massachusetts Militia, October 11, 1798).

George Washington1

Another time he observed:

“The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our people in a greater measure than they have it now, they may change their rulers and the forms of government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty. They will only exchange tyrants and tyrannies” (John Adams to Zabdiel Adams, June 21, 1776).

One of my own ancestors, Caleb Strong, was a close associate of John Adams and is one of our forgotten Founders who participated in the Constitutional Convention and held numerous influential roles. In a speech as governor of Massachusetts, Strong stated:

[W]e are generally apt to ascribe too much to the efficacy of laws and government, as if they alone could secure the happiness of the people; but no laws will be sufficient to counteract the influence of manners which are corrupted by vice and voluptuousness; and it is beyond the power of any government to render the circumstances of the citizens easy and prosperous, if they want the habits of industry and frugality. – Government is necessary, to preserve the public peace, the persons and property of individuals; but our social happiness must chiefly depend upon other causes; upon simplicity and purity of manners; upon the education that we give our children; upon a steady adherence to the customs and institutions of our ancestors; upon the general diffusion of knowledge, and the prevalence of piety and benevolent affections among the people.

Our forms of government, are, doubtless, like all other institutions, imperfect; but they will ensure the blessings of freedom to the citizens, and preserve their tranquillity, so long as they are virtuous; and no constitution, that has been, or can be formed, will secure those blessings to a depraved and vicious people” (Caleb Strong, January 17, 1806, in Patriotism and Piety, 138).

A third witness, John Witherspoon affirmed:

Nothing is more certain than that a general profligacy and corruption of manners make a people ripe for destruction. A good form of government may hold the rotten materials together for some time, but beyond a certain pitch, even the best constitution will be ineffectual, and slavery must ensue. On the other hand, when the manners of a nation are pure, when true religion and internal principles maintain their vigor, the attempts of the most powerful enemies to oppress them are commonly baffled and disappointed” (John Witherspoon, “The Dominion of Providence over the Passions of Man,” May 17, 1776).

Finally, George Washington told the nation:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens” (George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796).

Only a moral, virtuous, just, upright, truth-loving People are capable of Freedom and ordered society. America was once good and so America was once great. We are still the greatest nation on earth, but we are have noticeably fallen from our lofty position. We need to return to our moral, Christian roots if we are to regain our unique American stature.

At the end of the day, the Constitution is not for the United States alone. Its principles are eternal and sacred. They belong to every nation. It was the Lord who raised up America’s Founding Fathers, who preserved us through the War for Independence, and who inspired the Constitution. He intended the ideas that fired the American soul to fire the world and lead to a new era of Freedom, peace, and prosperity. It is our duty as Americans to be the missionaries of this unsurpassed Freedom system.

I end by citing a rousing statement from J. Reuben Clark, Jr. He declared:

We must come with the loftiest patriotism, with a single allegiance, undivided, unshared, undefiled, for the Constitution under which we live . . . Our hearts and hands must be clean of all foreign isms and alien political cults. The Constitution and its free institutions must be our ensign. For America has a destiny – a destiny to conquer the world, – not by force of arms, not by purchase and favor, for these conquests wash away, but by high purpose, by unselfish effort, by uplifting achievement, by a course of Christian living; a conquest that shall leave every nation free to move out to its own destiny; a conquest that shall bring, through the workings of our own example, the blessings of freedom and liberty to every people, without restraint or imposition or compulsion from us; a conquest that shall weld the whole earth together in one great brotherhood in a reign of mutual patience, forbearance, and charity, in a reign of peace to which we shall lead all others by the persuasion of our own righteous example” (J. Reuben Clark, Jr., February 24, 1944, in Jerreld Newquist, ed., Prophets, Principles and National Survival, 60-61).

America14

Americanism is the greatest system in history. This system is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution – the most incredible political document in the world. I repeat that it was inspired by Almighty God and that Americans are the custodians of these superlative principles. It is time for us to declare with George Washington that the Constitution is the guide we will never abandon.

Zack Strong,

September 18, 2019

The Anti-Gun Agenda

[L]iberty must at all hazards be supported.” – John Adams

This article is inspired by Thursday’s Democratic Party presidential debate. At the debate, the Democrats’ anti-gun, and, thus, anti-Freedom agenda was on full display for the nation to see. These traitors openly said they would confiscate firearms and vowed to destroy one of the most fundamental aspects of the U.S. Constitution – our right to keep and bear arms. Enough is enough. This is war. It’s time to decide once and for all whether you’ll stand with red-blooded Americans or with Red traitors.

gun control7

The most flagrant threat against our God-given, constitutionally-protected right of self-defense came from Beto O’Rourke. He openly said he plans to confiscate a host of firearms from the American People, as well as ban various types of ammunition, if he becomes president. Of course a president does not have authority to ban firearms, ammunition, or gun accessories – which is something that someone seriously needs to tell President Trump – but this is the anti-gun agenda he will pursue and advocate. A summary of his menacing threat won’t suffice, so I cite it in full. The debate moderator asked:

You’ve said, quote, “Americans who own AR-15s and AK-47s will have to sell them to the government, all of them.” You know that critics call this confiscation. Are you proposing taking away their guns? And how would this work?”

O’Rourke responded:

I am, if it’s a weapon that was designed to kill people on a battlefield. If the high impact, high velocity round, when it hits your body, shreds everything inside your body, because it was designed to do that, so that you would bleed to death on a battlefield and not be able to get up and kill one of our soldiers.

When you see that being used against children, and in Odessa, I met the mother of a 15-year-old girl who was shot by an AR-15, and that mother watched her bleed to death over the course of an hour because so many other people were shot by that AR-15 in Odessa and Midland, there weren’t enough ambulances to get to them in time, hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47. We’re not going to allow it to be used against our fellow Americans anymore.

And I want to say this. I’m listening to the people of this country. The day after I proposed doing that, I went to a gun show in Conway, Arkansas, to meet with those who were selling AR-15s and AK-47s and those who were buying those weapons. And you might be surprised, there was some common ground there, folks who said, I would willingly give that up, cut it to pieces, I don’t need this weapon to hunt, to defend myself. It is a weapon of war.”

When this filthy traitor said “hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47,” the audience burst out into raucous applause. That we have reached a time in American history where a candidate for president openly says they’re going to violate their constitutional oath of office and confiscate firearms, and the audience cheers, should alarm and enrage all real American patriots. Our Freedom is under direct attack. The Republicans are bad enough in their anti-2nd Amendment treason, but the Democrats are leading a full frontal assault.

Let’s analyze O’Rourke’s treasonous statement a little more. O’Rourke said that any weapon “designed to do that,” that is, designed to “kill people on a battlefield,” should be outlawed and taken from us. Of course, the gun-grabbers pretend they only want to take away what they erroneously call “military weapons,” “assault weapons,” or “weapons of war,” but their statements reflect their inward desire to confiscate any weapon that can potentially be used to kill someone.

guns5

Here’s a news flash for O’Rourke: All guns are designed to kill people! All firearms are designed to propel a bullet forward, causing it to penetrate the flesh and mortally wound a target. Whether one bullet creates a bigger wound or inflicts more inward damage than another, or was created directly for military use, is wholly irrelevant – the purpose of all firearms is ultimately the same. The fact that a weapon is designed to kill should never be an excuse to outlaw or confiscate it.

Furthermore, when you aim a gun at someone and pull the trigger, you always run the risk of killing that person. This is why the military and police teach their personnel never to put a finger on the trigger unless they’re prepared to use lethal force. And then when they pull the trigger, they shoot to kill and to totally neutralize the threat. It is the same with normal citizens with guns – any guns. We use them only when we need to defend ourselves and potentially use lethal force. To deprive us of our right to wield a weapon – any weapon – in self-defense because it has the potential to kill someone (as it was designed to do) is the height of stupidity and evil.

O’Rourke and his Democrat cohorts are playing word games. They pretend they just want the “big mean military weapons” off the street. In reality, however, their descriptions can apply to any and all weapons. Of course, any informed person knows that the Elite eventually want to ban all firearms, as symbolized by the United Nation’s vulgar statue of a pistol with its barrel twisted in a knot. But we don’t have to resort to interpreting statues and murky symbols to understand the intent. The Democratic and Republican traitors have been kind enough to tell us that they plan to disarm us.

President Obama frankly stated: “I don’t believe that people should be able to own guns.” He also made this derogatory remark about average Americans like you and me: “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” Democratic Congresswoman Dianne Feinstein, however, was even clearer. She infamously threatened:

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them – Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in – I would have done it.”

This is what it’s all about for Democrats – “an outright ban” on your firearms. They want an “outright ban” on your ability to defend yourself. They want to “an outright ban” on your Liberty.

But what of Republicans? I cite just one of many turncoats with an R next to their name, and remind you in the same breath that numerous prominent Republicans and Democrats mime these same flawed arguments. Flip-flopper Mitt Romney, who as governor of Massachusetts signed strict gun control laws, stated: “We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them.” He also used the same rationale that O’rourke used for opposing assault weapons: “They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”

Indeed weapons are for killing people; hence the reason why the American People need them! We need to be able to kill tyrants who threaten our rights and criminals who endanger our families and property. We need them to defend ourselves against traitors who say we shouldn’t enjoy our God-given rights. We need them so we can support our military when our nation gets invaded by hostile forces. We need them to regain our Freedom and to thereafter remain free. The very idea that the People shouldn’t have military-style weapons is at its core totally evil.

We need to also be aware that not only do Establishment Republicans like Romney love gun control, but that President Trump – the so-called swamp-drainer – is also blundering down this same gun-grabbing road with his support of highly-dangerous and wildly unconstitutional red flag gun confiscation laws. Please see my articles here, here, and here, and listen to my Liberty Wolf podcast episode here for more on this pressing issue and our right of self-defense. And read Chuck Baldwin’s recent article for an additional summary of the despotic red flag gun laws popping up in all fifty states.

guns21

The Democrats and complicit Republicans know they are not strong enough to outright confiscate all firearms at the present time. However, like the Fabian Socialists they are, they work by gradualism. They chip away at one part of a right, then another, then another until they have finally dismantled it. They also love to stoke the fires of fear which cause others rational human beings to do irrational things against their best interests, such as giving up their means of self-defense in the face of threats.

The traitors in our government want to first go after what they call “assault weapons.” They think, or at least tell their ignorant, emotion-driven constituencies, that “assault weapons” are strictly “weapons of war” that do not belong on our streets. There’s no real purpose for private citizens to have them, they claim. And besides, they say, our Founding Fathers never could have envisioned rapid-fire weapons and surely would not have included these under the broad “shall not be infringed” protection mandate of the 2nd Amendment.

Let’s debunk these ideas briefly. First, no hypothetical excuses should ever be used to strip us of our God-given natural rights. That one person might misuse a weapon – and remember, all firearms are designed to kill – and harm or kill another person does not give government or society a right to strip the rest of us of our rights. That’s a logically flawed and patently preposterous argument. By that same standard, government could take away our knives, axes, or literally any other weapon or tool they wanted to, because they can all be used to kill and some are designed to inflict damage.

Additionally, no majority ever has a moral right or legal authority to take away the individual’s rights unless he has forfeited them through misconduct that violated another person’s equal rights. Or, as the great Thomas Jefferson put it:

[R]ightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will, within the limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’; because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual” (Thomas Jefferson to Isaac Tiffany, April 4, 1819).

Any law that strips us of our rights unjustly is nothing but “the tyrant’s will.” It is arbitrary and despotic, tyrannical and Devilish. To outlaw firearms – any firearms – is unconstitutional, immoral, and wrong. Only anti-American tyrants and their dupes propose such a scheme.

Semi-automatic weapons are the core of our self-defense as a People. Our Founding Fathers were very well aware of the existence of repeat-fire rifles when they wrote the 2nd Amendment. Gun-grabbers often say this is not true, thus proving their blazing ignorance. Here’s a short history lesson for people who claim the 2nd Amendment doesn’t apply to repeat or rapid-fire weapons.

In 1777, at the beginning of America’s War for Independence, Joseph Belton invented a repeat-fire rifle that could fire sixteen consecutive rounds in about twenty seconds. He pitched this weapon to Congress. Negotiations eventually fell through because of a disagreement about compensation, but the technology existed and our national leaders were well aware of it. George Washington, for instance, favored this weaponry. So our Founding Fathers clearly knew all about rapid-fire rifles when they wrote the 2nd Amendment in 1791 and commanded the government that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

Let’s return to Thursday’s Democratic debate. In the debate, Joe Biden blundered his way through his own threat to confiscate firearms from the American People. In response to a question about guns, he stated:

I’m the only one up here that’s ever beat the NRA – only one ever to beat the NRA nationally. I’m the guy that brought the Brady bill into – into focus and became law. . . .

Over 90% of the American people think we have to get assault weapons off the street – period. And we have to get buy-backs and get them out of their basements.”

Ladies and gentlemen, Joe Biden wants to reach into your basements and steal your firearms! I’m sure he thinks what the city of San Francisco thinks and recently declared, that the National Rifle Association is a “terrorist” group. These gun-grabbers see you and I as insurgents or “domestic terrorists” in their war to enslave America.

guns9

Joe Biden wants to force you sell your firearms “back” to the government. He lied and said that 90% of Americans want to get rid of so-called “assault weapons.” He jut made up that number to justify his cry for mass gun confiscation. Yet, as I recently pointed out above and more thoroughly in my article “You Do NOT Determine My Rights,” no majority, no matter how large, has authority to strip you of any of your God-given natural rights. Period.

Let’s explain what a so-called gun “buy-back” is. This is where the government forces you, under penalty of law, to give up your guns. They try to sweeten the raw deal by paying you for those guns they’re forcing you to relinquish. But what are they paying you with? Tax dollars. In other words, they plan to force you to give up your guns and then pay you with money that was yours in the first place! Giving up your right of self-defense to get a small part of your tax dollars back doesn’t sound like a good deal to me, yet apparently many Democrats and Republicans think this is a wonderful idea. For some reason we allow these people to vote!

Kamala Harris was another Democratic lackey who called for gun control at the debate. She responded “that’s right” to a query asking if she would take “executive action on guns within [her] first 100 days” in office, “including banning imports of AR-15 assault weapons.” She dredged up the memory of dead cops and dead children, and complained about having to look at “more autopsy photographs than I care to tell you,” as justification for her tyrannical aspirations.

As grisly as crimes might sometimes be, they do not justify taking away the rights of an entire nation. And let’s be blunt: By depriving people of their means of self-defense, you only ensure that there will be more victims, more dead children, and more horrible autopsy photographs to look at. We would be wading through puddles of blood like the people in London, Mexico, or Chicago if we allowed these tyrants to steal away our right of self-defense.

People who support gun control are far more responsible for gun violence than gun owners. We need to finally comprehend an important truth: Only an armed and righteous society is a polite and safe society; a defenseless society is a society of victims. Let’s never give up our God-given rights.

Democratic candidate Amy Klobuchar similarly favored gun control. When asked about it, she made a revealing statement:

Everyone up here favors an assault weapons ban. Everyone up here favors magazine limitations . . . That’s what unites us.

You know what else unites us? . . . What unites us is that right now, on Mitch McConnell’s desk, are three bills – universal background checks, closing the Charleston loophole, and passing my bill to make sure that domestic abusers don’t get AK-47s.”

There you have it – every single one of the Democratic Party candidates for president “favors an assault weapons ban” and other restrictions on your Liberty. Every single one of them is a traitor who wants to do away with your right to defend yourself and your family. And Republican traitors like Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump, and Mitt Romney, support many of these same measures and are either wolves in sheep’s clothing or blind leaders of the blind.

The debate moderator next questioned Marxist candidate Corey Booker about guns. He said:

You have argued, if you need a license to drive a car in this country, you should have a license to buy a gun. Gun-owners would not only have to pass a background check, they would have to obtain a federal license to buy a gun.”

guns12

Booker then lied through his teeth and showed his true colors as he expounded on this idea:

So, background checks and gun licensing, these are agreed to by overwhelmingly the majority of Americans. . . .

. . . I was the first person to come out for gun licensing. And I’m happy that people like Beto O’Rourke are showing such courage now and coming forward and also now supporting licensing. . . .

I will lead change on this issue . . . Nobody has ascended to the White House that will bring more personal passion on this issue. I will fight this and bring a fight to the NRA and the corporate gun lobby like they have never seen before.”

Yes, Booker is trying to lead the charge to disarm Americans and made our nation less safe and secure. He is a foul traitor. His extreme treason would make Benedict Arnold blush.

Not to be outdone, Elizabeth Warren, one of the most senile and unstable candidates to ever hold or run for high office in America, stated:

We have a gun violence problem in this country. . . .

And we agree on many steps we could take to fix it. My view on this is, we’re going to – it’s not going to be one and done on this. We’re going to do it, and we’re going to have to do it again, and we’re going to have to come back some more. . . .

. . . 90 percent of Americans want to see us do – I like registration – want to see us do background checks, want to get assault weapons off the streets.”

There is that fictitious 90% figure again. It’s a total lie, yet one-by-one the candidates repeated it. They’re trying to condition everyone into believing that the majority of Americans support gun control when in fact they do not. Yet, even if they did, thank God our rights are not determined by majority opinion! Thank God we have a Constitution which secures our rights! May the Lord thwart and crush anyone who would attempt to strip us of our rights!

Socialist Bernie Sanders chimed in on gun control, too. Predictably, he said:

[W]hat I would support, absolutely, is passing major legislation, the gun legislation the people here are talking about, Medicare-for-all, climate change legislation that saves the planet. I will not wait for 60 votes to make that happen. . . .

I am proud – I am proud that, year after year, I had an “F” rating from the NRA.”

Here you have an open and avowed socialist who literally honeymooned in Soviet Russia and frequented international communist conferences in Europe threatening the American People with taking away, unilaterally and dictatorially, their right of self-defense. He doesn’t care whether the American People want it, whether the Congress votes for it, or whether the Constitution authorizes it – he’s prepared to “make that happen” through executive authority (authority, I remind you, totally lacking in the Executive Branch of government).

Never in our history has a major political party so blatantly campaigned on destroying the Constitution as the Democratic Party has during this current election cycle. The Democratic Party is a party of traitors, oak-breakers, liars, and actual or would-be tyrants. It is a despotic, anti-American organization that hardly deserves to exist. A good case could be made that the Democratic Party, which has recently teamed up with the Communist Party, should be formally classified as a subversive organization.

When will Americans cease to tolerate communist traitors like Sanders, Warren, Booker, Klobuchar, Harris, and O’Rourke threatening to destroy our Constitution, violate our most fundamental rights, and victimize our families? When is enough enough? When will we finally move to silence this fifth column of traitors and agitators? When will we take their vile threats seriously and move to safeguard our Liberty forever?

It is time for us to make our own private oaths to God Almighty to defend our Faith, Families, and Freedom against all enemies – especially against traitors in our government or attempting to weasel into our government. We must “[swear] upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man (Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, September 23, 1800). And we must rush forward and take this pledge now before it is too late to regain our Freedom without massive bloodshed.

Oath Keepers is an organization of both veteran and active military and law enforcement personnel who have sworn to defend and uphold the Constitution. In particular, these individuals swear to defend the 2nd Amendment. Their pledge is relevant and I encourage all Americans to make similar declarations:

The attempt to disarm the people on April 19, 1775 was the spark of open conflict in the American Revolution. That vile attempt was an act of war, and the American people fought back in justified, righteous self-defense of their natural rights. Any such order today would also be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason. We will not make war on our own people, and we will not commit treason by obeying any such treasonous order.

Nor will we assist, or support any such attempt to disarm the people by other government entities, either state or federal.

In addition, we affirm that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to preserve the military power of the people so that they will, in the last resort, have effective final recourse to arms and to the God of Hosts in the face of tyranny. Accordingly, we oppose any and all further infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”

This pledge is one that all real Americans gladly make, regardless of whether they formally serve in the military or law enforcement. All true Americans defend the right of personal self-defense and the individual right to keep and bear arms. This right comes from God – not the government or the majority. It allows us not only to hunt for food or shoot for sport, but to defend our families and to kill tyrants who would enslave us. The right of self-defense, coupled with virtue, keeps us free.

guns18

John Adams bluntly stated that we have a right to kill tyrants. Please internalize his words:

The right of a nation to kill a tyrant, in cases of necessity, can no more be doubted, than that to hang a robber, or kill a flea. But killing one tyrant only makes way for a worse, unless the people have sense, spirit, and honesty enough to establish and support a constitution guarded at all points against tyranny; against the tyranny of the one, the few, and the many. Let it be the study, therefore, of lawgivers and philosophers, to enlighten the people’s understandings and improve their morals, by good and general education; to enable them to comprehend the scheme of government, and to know upon what points their liberties depend; to dissipate those vulgar prejudices and popular superstitions that oppose themselves to good government; and to teach them that obedience to the laws is as indispensable in them as in lords and kings” (John Adams, “Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States,” 1787).

If a People have a right to kill oppressors in self-defense, then individuals do, too, because society does not posses any right except those first possessed by individuals. The right of the individual, then, to possess the means to eradicate tyrants must be held equally inviolate as the People’s or militia’s right to maintain those same “weapons of war.” As stated above, yes, guns are designed to kill; and we must retain our right and ability, as a last resort, to kill any tyrant who would oppress us.

It’s long past time to tell the traitors in Washington and in our state capitals that our rights are non-negotiable. Were will not barter away our Liberty. We will not sell our birthright for a mess of pottage. It’s time we remind our public servants that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, that they have sworn an oath to defend it, that we will hold them strictly accountable, and that we are freemen and not slaves.

John Adams encouraged us to stop at nothing to secure our precious rights. These rights, after all, come from God and were secured by the blood and sufferings of our forefathers. We have no right to surrender our Freedom to anyone for any reason – and our posterity deserves to have Liberty handed to them intact:

[L]iberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood” (John Adams, “A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law,” 1765).

Are you prepared, as were our patriot forefathers, do sacrifice your ease, luxury, property, and even your blood on the altar of Liberty? If not, then you don’t deserve to be free. Thomas Paine was correct when he stated: “Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it” (Thomas Paine, The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777). Are we real men? Will we defend our Faith, Families, and Freedom against traitors and tyrants?

What John Dickinson declared in 1775 must resound throughout the country once more. It is our duty to declare this message with forcefulness:

Our cause is just . . . The arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume, we will, in defiance of every hazard, with unabating firmness and perseverence, employ for the preservation of our liberties; being with one mind resolved to die freemen rather than live slaves” (John Dickinson, The Declaration of the Causes and Necessity on Taking up Arms, 1775).

Sic Semper Tyrannis! Long Live Liberty!

Zack Strong,

September 14, 2019

How Russia Benefited from 9/11

“Russia is pulling the strings in the Middle East.” Mark Hitchcock, Russia Rising: Tracking the Bear in Bible Prophecy, 5.

While the 9/11 attacks were a great tragedy for our nation, they were a tremendous windfall for our enemies. In particular, Russia benefited massively from our loss – and from our subsequent War on Terror. From day one, Russia has urged the United States to involve herself in the Middle East quagmire. This article will give the bullet points of why Russia and the communist world benefit from America’s disastrous War on Terror.

911#1

Hours after the 9/11 attacks, Russian President Vladimir Putin was the first head of state to call President George W. Bush and offer his condolences. He also became the first foreign supporter of America’s War on Terror. Russia has continuously prodded the United States to bat the Arab hornets nest. Our initial attack on Afghanistan in 2001 was launched largely from Russia-dominated Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan and other bases in the region and with the help of intelligence from Russian sources.

In a 2016 article in The Washington Post, we read:

“Several former U.S. officials I spoke with acknowledged the crucial Russian contributions immediately after 9/11 to support the Northern Alliance and provide logistical support and share intelligence to U.S.-led coalition efforts to remove the Taliban from power in Afghanistan. As one official remarked, “Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan in 2001 marked the closest alignment of U.S. and Russian interests, and Russian support was as important as that of any NATO ally.”

“Some former Russian officials I interviewed recalled the hope in 2001 that Russia, the U.S. and other partners could establish an anti-terrorist coalition, much like the anti-Hitler coalition in World War II. Vladimir Putin proposed this concept again last September at the United Nations.”

It was “former” KGB agent Vladimir Putin who was so eager to get America into war in the Middle East that he provided “logistical support,” shared intelligence, and allowed the United States to use bases in the Russian sphere of influence. In the September United Nations speech referenced, Putin spoke of the dastardly Yalta Conference where Stalin persuaded his comrade FDR to allow the Soviet Union to take over Eastern Europe and have influence in China, which directly led to China being conquered by the Reds. Putin said that it was at Yalta that the current “world order” had been arranged and that its principles should be maintained today.

I remind the reader that the Yalta Conference, held in the Soviet Union and hosted by mass murderer Joseph Stalin, was nothing but a sell-out of the world to the Soviets. It is fitting, then, that Putin – a man who has publicly lamented the so-called “fall” of the USSR – would appeal to Yalta in connection with the War on Terror. Our costly war has benefited Russia and her allies immensely. Indeed, I will go so far as to say that the War on Terror has been almost as big a boon for Putin as the Yalta Conference was for Stalin.

The ironically-named Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, an internationalist-controlled organization, lauded the “qualitatively new level of military cooperation” between the United States and Russia and even recommended Congress fork out “increased funds for Russian democracy.” This should not be surprising. After all, the CEIP was once headed by the Soviet spy Alger Hiss. It was also proved by the Reece Committee that, at least in 1910, the foundation had conspired to get the United States involved in international wars in order to fundamentally transform society domestically during the turmoil. It was another tax-exempt foundation, the Ford Foundation, which told Chairman Carroll Reece:

“The substance of the directives under which we operate is that we shall use our grant making power to so alter life in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union” (Robert Henry Goldsborough, Lines of Credit: Ropes of Bondage: The Story of the Financiers, Their Fellow Conspirators, and the Plot to Destroy Western Christian Civilization, 32).

After his investigations into these same foundations which today support the War on Terror and encourage us to work with Russia, Carroll Reece concluded:

“Here lies the story of how communism and socialism are financed in the United States, where they get their money. It is the story of who pays the bill.

“There is evidence to show there is a diabolical conspiracy back of all this. Its aim is the furtherance of socialism in the United States. . . .

“The method by which this is done seems fantastic to reasonable men, for these Communists and Socialists seize control of fortunes left behind by Capitalists when they die, and turn these fortunes around to finance the destruction of capitalism” (Robert Henry Goldsborough, Lines of Credit: Ropes of Bondage: The Story of the Financiers, Their Fellow Conspirators, and the Plot to Destroy Western Christian Civilization, 27).

I digress and leave you to research this dark aspect of the story for yourself. We return now to Russia’s giddy support of America’s War on Terror. The Brookings Institute, another elitist think tank, described the situation in mid-2002:

“When Russian President Vladimir Putin picked up the phone to express his sympathy to President Bush in the aftermath of September 11 and then followed up by providing concrete assistance to the campaign in Afghanistan and quickly acquiescing to U.S. plans to establish bases in central Asia, Washington policymakers and analysts concluded Putin had made a strategic, even historic, choice to align Russia’s foreign policy with that of the United States. It was a reasonable conclusion to make.

“From the beginning of his presidency in January 2000, Putin pushed the idea of a concerted campaign against terrorism with American and European leaders. He was one of the first to raise the alarm about terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and to warn of linkages between these camps, well-financed terrorist networks, and Islamic militant groups operating in Europe and Eurasia. Russia also actively supported the Northern Alliance in its struggle with the Taliban in Afghanistan. In December 2000, Moscow joined Washington in supporting United Nations sanctions against the Taliban and later appealed for sanctions against Pakistan for aiding the Taliban. After the attacks on the United States, Putin went so far as to suggest he had been expecting a massive terrorist strike—it had only been a matter of time.”

Not only did Putin “expect” a terrorist strike, he claimed Russia warned the United States at least two days prior that an attack was imminent. I have no doubt Putin had foreknowledge, for reasons which we will discuss later.

With all of this in mind, we are forced to ask yet again why Putin – a man who spent his earlier life as a KGB agent committed to destroying the “main enemy,” the United States – was so eager to get America embroiled in the Middle East after 9/11? Was it, as he and his apologists claim, because he is truly concerned about the threat of terrorism and wants to help the West? Rubbish!

We must remember how Vladimir Putin came to power. Putin spent his early service in the KGB. The KGB later renamed itself the FSK and later the FSB. In 1998, Russian dictator Boris Yeltsin appointed Putin as its head. Putin then, with the help of Russian billionaire oligarchs (who were often former Russian intelligence figures invested with Communist Party funds), got himself appointed president of Russia in the wake of Yeltsin’s sudden resignation in December 1999. Yeltsin’s resignation was precipitated by a tragedy that struck Russia that same year.

Before we discuss the tragedy that led to what we call the Second Chechen War, however, let’s discuss how and why the First Chechen War began. Alexander Litvinenko, a former Russian intelligence agent who was assassinated by Russia, spent the last years of his life exposing Putin’s criminality and the fact that the FSB (i.e. KGB) ruled Russia. In his book Blowing Up Russia, Litvinenko wrote of how the First Chechen War in 1994 came about:

Putin7

“a total madman”

“No one but a total madman could have wished to drag Russia into any kind of war, let alone a war in the North Caucasus . . . This war resulted in the isolation of the Russian state from the community of civilized nations, since the rest of the world did not support it and could not understand it. A previously popular, well-beloved president [Yeltsin], therefore, sacrificed the support of both his own public and the international community. Once he had fallen into the trap, he was left with no option but to resign before the end of his term, and hand over power to the FSB in return for a guarantee of immunity for himself and his family. We known who it was that benefited from all of this – the people to whom Yeltsin handed over power. We know how the result was achieved – by means of the war in Chechnya. . . .

“. . . The “party of war,” based on the military and law enforcement ministries, believe that they could afford [to start a war with Chechnya], as long as the public was prepared for it, and it would be easy enough to influence public opinion, if the Chechens were seen to resort to terrorist tactics in their struggle for independence. All that was needed was to arrange terrorist attacks in Moscow and leave a trail leading back to Chechnya.

“. . . on November 18, 1994, the FSK made its first recorded attempt to stir up anti-Chechen feeling by committing an act of terrorism and laying the blame on Chechen separatists. . . .

“It should be noted that on November 18 and in later instances, the supposed “Chechen terrorists” set off their explosions at the most inopportune times, and then never actually claimed responsibility (rendering the terrorist attack itself meaningless). In any case, in November 1994, public opinion in Russia and around the world was on the side of the Chechen people, so why would the Chechens have committed an act of terrorism in Moscow? . . . Russian supporters of war with Chechnya were, however, only too willing to see the hand of Chechnya in any terrorist attack, and their response on every occasion was to strike a rapid and quite disproportionately massive blow against Chechen sovereignty” (Alexander Litvinenko and Yuri Felshtinsky, Blowing Up Russia: The Secret Plot to Bring Back KGB Terror, 3-5).

Litvinenko explained that the railroad bombing of November 18, 1994, was traced back to an employee, Captain Andrei Schelenkov, of the oil company Lanako. He wrote:

“Lanako’s boss . . . was thirty-five-year-old Maxim Lazovsky, a highly valued agent of the Moscow and Moscow Region Department of the FSB . . . we can also point out the significant fact that every single one of Lanako’s employees was a full-time or free-lance agent of the Russian counterespionage agencies” (Alexander Litvinenko and Yuri Felshtinsky, Blowing Up Russia: The Secret Plot to Bring Back KGB Terror, 6-7).

The 1994 incident, then, was a false-flag bombing perpetrated by Russian intelligence. This event paved the way for the First Chechen War. That war came to a stalemate in 1996 with Russia promising to grant Chechnya eventual sovereignty. It was another series of false-flag bombings in 1999, however, that justified the Second Chechen War and allowed the FSB to put Vladimir Putin into power as president of the Russian Federation.

At the beginning of September, 1999, a series of apartment bombs rocked Russia, killing several hundred. These were naturally blamed on Islamic Chechen terrorists. Alexander Litvinenko, and other researchers, however, have pinned the blame directly on the Moscow FSB which had so recently been headed by Vladimir Putin. In Ryazan, on September 22, light was shed on who was perpetrating the bombings.

On that day, a man spotted suspicious individuals carrying what appeared to be sacks of sugar or flour into the basement of a building. He called the police who arrived and found these sacks rigged with timed explosives and set near the main support columns of the building. The sacks contained hexogen, a military-grade explosive substance. Had the men not been spotted and the police not called, the bomb would have later gone off and demolished the old building. Like the other bombings, this would have been blamed on “Islamic terrorists” as part of the pretext for launching the Second Chechen War.

In the immediate aftermath of the foiled bombing, Putin congratulated the public for its vigilance and the FSB feigned no knowledge of the event. Yet, two days later, after several “terrorists” had been apprehended in Ryazan by the local authorities, the Moscow FSB claimed the entire thing has been a training exercise and ordered the suspects released. Litvinenko raised obvious questions about this odd version of events. He wrote:

“Could we possibly expect the FSB to say nothing all day long on September 23, while the whole world was buzzing with news of a failed terrorist attack? It’s impossible to imagine. Is it possible to imagine that the Prime Minister of Russia [Putin] and former director of the FSB, who, moreover, has personal links with Patrushev [then head of the FSB], was not informed about the “exercises?” . . . The fact that at seven o’clock in the evening, on September 23, 1999, Putin did not make any statement about training exercises taking place in Ryazan was the weightiest possible argument in favor of interpreting events as a failed attempt by the FSB to blow up an apartment building in Ryazan” (Alexander Litvinenko and Yuri Felshtinsky, Blowing Up Russia: The Secret Plot to Bring Back KGB Terror, 63).

Litvinenko also observed:

“The FSB department for the Ryazan Region was also not informed about the “exercises.” Bludov stated that “the FSB was not informed in advance that exercises were being conducted in the city.” The head of the Ryazan FSB, Major-General A.V. Sergeiev at first stated in an interview with the local television company Oka that he knew nothing about any “exercises” being held. . . .

“The Ryazan FSB realized that the people of Ryazan had been “set up” and that the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Russia and the public might accuse the Ryazan FSB of planning the explosion. Shaken by the treachery of their Moscow colleagues, the Ryazan FSB decided to provide themselves with an alibi and announced to the world that the Ryazan operation had been planned in Moscow. There could be no other explanation for the statement from the Ryazan Region FSB, which appeared shortly after Patrushev’s interview about “exercises” in Ryazan. We give the text of the statement in full.

“”It has become known that the planning on September 22, 1999 of a dummy explosive device was part of an ongoing interregional exercise. This announcement came as a surprise to us and appeared at a moment when the department of the FSB had identified the residences in Ryazan of those involved in planting the explosive device and was preparing to detain them. This had been made possible due to the vigilance and assistance of many of the residents of the city of Ryazan, collaboration with the agencies of the Ministry of the Interior, and the professionalism of our own staff. . . .”

“This unique document provides us with answers to the most important of our questions. Firstly, the Ryazan FSB had nothing to do with the operation to blow up the building in Ryazan. Secondly, at least two terrorists were discovered in Ryazan. Thirdly, the terrorists lived in Ryazan, if only temporarily, and evidently a network of at least two secret safe apartments were uncovered. Fourthly, just at the moment when arrangements were in hand to arrest the terrorists, the order came from Moscow not to arrest them, because the terrorist attack in Ryazan was only an FSB “exercise”” (Alexander Litvinenko and Yuri Felshtinsky, Blowing Up Russia: The Secret Plot to Bring Back KGB Terror, 71-72).

Litvinenko recounted that the Ryazan authorities arrested the suspected terrorists anyhow. These men were later released by an intelligence officer from Moscow and taken back with him. The case was sealed and classified after that, and the FSB confiscated Ryazan FSB’s evidence when the latter attempted to conduct their own investigation. In the Ryazan incident we have Vladimir Putin publicly lying, the Moscow FSB changing their statements and claiming the entire thing was an “exercise,” the Ryazan FSB attempting an independent investigation and getting blocked by Moscow higher ups, and evidence being concealed and confiscated. It was a complete cover up. And where there’s a cover up, there’s a conspiracy.

Numerous sources back up Litvinenko’s testimony and it is well known that Russia has always supported, trained, armed, and used Islamic terrorists to do her dirty work. Indeed, Russia invented modern terrorism! The KGB and GRU, more than any other organizations, have fostered the rise of so-called “Islamic extremism” and “Islamic terrorism.” An article by Marius Laurinavičius explained how Russia was behind the rise of radical Wahhabism and even how it managed Chechen terrorism – the very same terrorists alleged to be behind the apartment bombings in 1999:

“In general, the links between Chechen terrorist and Russian secret services cannot be denied even by those Western experts and commentators who tend to call these links a conspiracy theory.

“The fact that the famous Shamil Basayev, Ruslan Gelayev and some others Chechen terrorist commanders began their career not only fighting on the Russian side during the Georgian-Abkhaz war, but were directly trained by the special forces of Russian military intelligence (GRU), was basically never even denied in Russia. The traces of GRU agents were not a secret as well. . . .

“Whether we read Litvinenko’s and Felshtisnkys book ‘FSB blowing up Russia’, David Satter’s ‘Darkness at Dawn: The Rise of the Russian Criminal State’, John Dunlop’s ‘The Moscow Bombings of September 1999: Examinations of Russian Terrorist Attacks at the Onset of Vladimir Putin’s Rule’, or the especially popular investigation carried out by Karen Dawisha, professor at the Miami University, called ‘Putin’s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia?’, it is difficult to deny the tons of odd coincidences and inexplicable actions of Russian government. In the meantime, Putin’s regime closed all doors to any kind of investigations, and many people, who were trying to shed some light on these allegations, were murdered or died under very strange circumstances. . . .

“Russian journalist Sanobar Shermatova, who died in 2011, was considered not only a journalist, but also one of the best Russian experts of Middle Asia and Caucasus. After the events in Chechnya and Dagestan in summer 1999 she wrote a serious analytic piece called ‘The so-called Wahhabis’. . . .

“After emphasising that this Islamic party was merely a ‘branch of USSR Islamic Revival party’, Shermatova continued: ‘Islamic activists played a pretty important role in the opposition. I mean those who were called ‘Wahhabis’ in KGB chronicles. At the time this term was not widely known, and not entirely understood even by those who were called this name. USSR had banned the Islamic literature, and only those few who went to study in Arab countries, had knowledge about Islam history, movements and streams. But these people, as usual, were inspected for their loyalty to KGB, and then included into ‘religious nomenclature’ while constantly being controlled by the special services. Ordinary Muslims were not familiar with Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhabi’s doctrine.’ In Shermatova’s research and in further investigation of Uzbekistan’s and Kirghizia’s ‘Wahhabis’, KGB traces stretch along the story.”

communism513

One of the great anti-communist researchers working today, Cliff Kincaid, also explained what is really behind “Islamic” terrorism:

“Islam as a whole is not the enemy. Islam is an “enemy” only in the sense that it has been hijacked by communists, mostly of the Soviet/Russian variety, to use against the United States. . . .

“. . . we find many people on the political scene today who want to take on “global Islam” without understanding that the Jihadists have been co-opted as cannon fodder in the world revolution. . . .

“. . . International Marxism has hijacked much of global Islam. . . .

“. . . Former KGB officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky spoke at this [“Lenin and Sharia”] conference and contributed a major report on how the Communists have always exploited Muslims for communist purposes. His report was titled, “Made in Moscow Terrorism. Communists and Muslims: The Hidden Hand of the KGB.” One of the best known examples of this tendency is Carlos the Jackal, the KGB-trained Marxist terrorist who converted to Islam.

“”Long before Islamic terrorism became a global threat, the KGB had used terrorism to facilitate the victory of world communism,” he said. He told ASIA [America’s Survival Inc.] that Islamic Terrorism is a “child” of the old Soviet-sponsored terror networks and that Russian involvement must be addressed by the U.S. . . .

“. . . Marius Laurinavicius, Senior Policy Analyst in the Policy Analysis and Research Division of the Eastern Europe Studies Center, argued in his paper, “Do traces of KGB, FSB and GRU lead to Islamic State?,” that it is impossible to understand the rise of the Islamic State without paying attention to the links between Russian secret services and Arab/Muslim terrorists, including in the Russian region of Chechnya.

“Writer and researcher Christian Gomez traced the roots of ISIS to the Islamic Revival Party, created by the KGB. . . .

“The FSB defector said that in order to create ISIS, the Russians selected former officers of the Iraqi army and members of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party. All of them had graduated from Moscow-based “educational institutions” (Cliff Kincaid, Red Jihad: Moscow’s Final Solution for America and Israel, 24-25, 27-28).

As a capstone to this section of the article, we quote again from Cliff Kincaid. He had this to say:

“Islamic terrorism in Russia has sometimes been the work of the FSB. This means that the prospect of more terrorist incidents cannot be assumed to be the work of Islamist groups, and may actually be the work of provocateurs connected to the Russian regime. One purpose of such “false flag” terrorism was to frighten the public into believing that Putin and the “new Russia” are opposed to terrorism, and to solidify Putin’s control over the levers of state power” (Cliff Kincaid, Back from the Dead: The Return of the Evil Empire, 41).

All of this might seem tangential. However, it is fundamental to understanding of Putin’s motives. He is not a man motivated by real anti-terrorist feelings. Russia is not fighting in the Middle East to stop terrorism or to help the United States stop Islamic extremism. Russia perpetuates terrorism and actively fosters extremism, war, and chaos all over the globe!

It’s a classic communist tactic to create a crisis and then rush in to pose as the savior. They’ve done this since the beginning. The Russian Alexander Markovsky explained what he was taught about this process during his Soviet indoctrination:

“Indeed, if you want to change a society, here is Lenin’s script: cause the problem. Spread the misery. Send a cadre of professional community organizers to unite all of the angry and disinherited spirits to fuel an organized revolt. Entice chaos and violence. Exploit chaos for larger political objectives. Blame your political opponents, demonize and criminalize them” (Cliff Kincaid, The Sword of Revolution and the Communist Apocalypse, 41).

An anonymous intelligence operative explained the same principle to researcher Cliff Kincaid. He said:

“Great disorder means great reorganization. The greater the upheaval or the greater the disorder and the greater the opportunity for reorganization. If things seem to be sort of becoming unglued in places, keep in mind that somebody is going to glue it together. . . .

“. . . In other words, you want to create disorder because you want to be able to reorganize. So the more disorder you can create within the framework of society the more opportunity you have to intervene and create that. Passivity doesn’t get you very far because everything remains the same . . . [disorder] gives an opportunity for people who are well-organized, who are leading the disorder, to get involved and to recreate the society in a way in which they want it. . . .

“. . . the idea of creating disorder is an opportunity for the intervention of the Communist Party and for communists to get involved” (Cliff Kincaid, The Sword of Revolution and the Communist Apocalypse, 93-95).

Let’s stop being theoretical and list some specific examples of Russia’s use of terrorism, apart from the FSB bombings inside Russia. In his excellent book The Secret Offensive, Chapman Pincher wrote:

“The continuing firm support of international terrorism by the Politburo is inevitable because of the very nature of Soviet Communism which regards terrorism – outside the confines of the Soviet Bloc – as just another aspect of the political war against societies which need to be ‘smashed’ and because of the success it has enjoyed through terrorising its own people. Through the International Department and the KGB, the Politburo has maintained close links with terrorist organizations like the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the IRA, the Rhodesian ZAPU, the Egyptian Fundamentalists and many others which are all projected as ‘freedom fighters'” (Chapman Pincher, The Secret Offensive: The Soviet Challenge to Western Freedom, 287).

It is well established that the Soviet Union trained and armed the majority of terrorists throughout the world – particularly Middle Eastern terrorists. The leadership of ISIS, for instance, were former Iraqi Republican Guardsmen who had been trained in the Soviet Union. One of Al Qaeda’s prominent leaders, Ayman al-Zawahiri, was trained by Soviet intelligence. The various heads of the KGB-created Palestinian state – men like Yasser Arafat and the current puppet Mahmoud Abbas – were trained in Russia. The Iranian Ayatollah, Ali Khamenei, was also trained by the KGB at the Patrice Lumumba University. Egypt, Syria, Iran, and a host of nations have received military weapons and sophisticated weapons systems from the Russians (as well as from the Red Chinese in more recent years). The Weathermen terrorists in the United States were supported by Soviet allies (who themselves were trained and funded by the Soviets). Aum Shinrykyo, the Japanese terrorist murderer, was KGB-trained. The Red Army factions, so-called, in Italy, Germany, and elsewhere, are supported by Russia. And on and on.

Chapman Pincher noted the Soviets’ obsession with using others to do their dirty work. He wrote:

“The Soviet authorities are ingenious in distancing themselves from the terrorism they exploit, so that in the event of exposure their involvement can be denied. This has been confirmed by an extensive study undertaken by the CIA which showed that while there are many camps inside the Soviet Union for the training of terrorists, Soviet citizens are not involved in their operations abroad and so can never be caught with a ‘smoking gun'” (Chapman Pincher, The Secret Offensive: The Soviet Challenge to Western Freedom, 288).

I cannot stress to heavily that the communists invented terrorism! Terrorism was a major tactic employed by the Bolsheviks in gaining and maintaining power in Russia. Lenin openly encouraged his comrades to use terrorism and often chided them for not being cruel enough. In a 2017 Forbes article, Victor Rud wrote:

“The U.S.S.R. was established as the quintessential terrorist state, never merely a “state sponsor” of terrorism. Its terror was organized, methodical and above all hyperbolic, eclipsing anything that ISIS can engineer. The very reason for it all was to establish the structure that would destroy the West, more specifically the greatest Satan of them all (as it is for ISIS), the United States.”

Rud also informed us of Russia’s long-standing incestuous relationship with Islamic terrorists and how Russia benefits from continued terrorism:

“Moscow’s Patrice Lumumba Friendship University seconded foreigners to embed Moscow’s agenda in their own countries. Yassar Arafat was one, the KGB’s makeover receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. Iran’s Ayatollah Khomenei was another. There were thousands. Home-grown, non-Arab terrorists were even better: Venezuelan Carlos the Jackal, Germans Ulrike Meinhoff, French terrorist Regis Debray and former Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi. All were either direct KGB agents or KGB-financed.

“Moscow never renounced its imperatives in birthing and sustaining Islamic terrorism, Putin declaring at the 2003 conference of the Islamic Conference Organization that Russia was Islam’s historical defender. Alexander Litvinenko was the ex-KGB officer who defected and who in 2005 was assassinated by Moscow in London using Polonium 210—nuclear warfare in Magna Carta’s front yard. He had revealed that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the head of al-Qaeda, had been trained by the KGB in Dagestan, a region currently controlled by Russia and that was tied to the two Boston Marathon bombers. We know that Al-Zawahiri planned 9/11 with Osama bin Laden. More recently, the KGB has supplied recruits for ISIS from its North Caucasus and Central Asia regions.

“”Radical Islamic terror” serves Russia’s purpose perfectly. Why should Putin refuse its benefit? The smoke had not cleared from the Boston Common before Putin called President Obama to intone his sympathy. Particularly for Americans (and, importantly, as much viscerally as cerebrally), the bombing by two Chechen brothers rebranded Putin’s genocidal war against Chechnya as a campaign against “Islamic terrorism” (Chechens are conveniently Muslim). This, in turn, neutralized Litvinenko’s revelation that the Russian apartment bombings (which were Putin’s pretext for that genocide) had been the work of Putin himself. We were thereby relieved of any moral tug that we may have had over Moscow’s assassination of Litvinenko. At the end, we were presented with seeming proof of Russia’s common cause with America in fighting “Islamic terror.” With preceding circumstances, motive, opportunity and benefit established, history will show the Kremlin’s advance knowledge of the two Tsarnaev brothers’ intentions, and that it could have prevented the Boston horror. It willfully did not. If a dirty bomb explodes in Friendship, Maine, or thousands in Topeka simultaneously die from “natural causes,” the last cry heard may be, “Allah Akbar.” We should then well ponder if that’s as far as it goes.”

As we have seen, terrorism is not merely an old Soviet strategy, but a tactic used today by Vladimir Putin and the FSB-controlled Russian government. Not only is terrorism used in Russia by the communist regime, but they continue to export it abroad or train those who do. It is claimed, for instance, that Iran is the world’s largest sponsor of terrorism. Yet, who sponsors and props up Iran? Russia and China. They supply every major dispenser of terrorism. Without Russia and Putin’s personal approval, global terrorism would decrease to a mere trickle.

We must understand that the false-flag bombings in 1994 and 1999 were not organic terrorist acts. Rather, they were merely blamed on Islamic terrorists and used to justify a “war on terror” in Chechnya. They were also used by Putin to solidify his control – on behalf of the FSB, Russian intelligence, and hidden benefactors – of the Russian government. It should strike the observer as eerie how closely Putin’s “war on terror” mirrors our own. To wit, each was precipitated by an act of terrorism blamed on Islamic fundamentalists, used to justify war and intervention in the Middle East and Central Asia, and cast as a pretext to expand government control domestically.

communism502

Fighting a war on terrorism is a useful tool in the hands of the Elite for many reasons, not least of which it offers the prospect of endless war and conflict which help transform the global chess board and ramp up profits. Let’s focus on what Russia immediately gained by supporting the United States in 2001. Instantaneously Russia’s actions against “Islamic terrorism” in Chechnya became legitimized by her cooperation with the the U.S. “War on Terror.” Instantaneously all attention shifted from Russia’s brutal war to America’s invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Instantaneously Russia was a strategic “partner” against so-called terrorists and was considered by many as a friend. And that is just for starters.

More importantly, Russia’s strategic position has been amplified in immeasurable ways. Remember that Russia is our enemy. The communist world considers war against the United States as inevitable and they’ve been arming for this struggle at a pace never seen before. The Middle East is strategically important for numerous reasons – oil, shipping routes, Jerusalem, the convergence of major world religions, etc. Inasmuch as the communist goal is global domination, and the Middle East is part of the globe, it makes sense that the Russians would take every opportunity to weasel their way in.

Before the War on Terror, the Middle East was already dominated by socialist states giving obeisance to Russia – Syria, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, etc. However, as the American wrecking ball tore through Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, and Syria, it left a void of power that Russia could more easily exploit. And exploit it they have!

It seems clear to my mind that Russia used the United States to soften up countries which they have since come in and won over. We were their bull in the Middle Eastern china shop that caused enough chaos that the Russian “white knight” could ride in and save the day. Russia is now fully entrenched in Syria and has moved into Iraq and Afghanistan in a major way while vastly improving relations with Saudi Arabia and other nations. They have also shored up their long-standing relationship with Iran and concluded an important three-way Russia-Turkey-Iran alliance. China has also used the turbulence to expand their presence in Pakistan, Iran, and Israel, to name only three. None of this would have been easily doable without the War on Terror and America’s blundering ineptness (or, some might say, criminal complicity).

Mark Hitchcock has observed:

“Russia, Iran, and Turkey inhabit the same neighborhood and share many common interests, yet the Syrian conflict that began in 2011 has pulled them closer than ever. At the same time that Turkey is becoming more distanced from the West and Iran’s alienation has pushed them further into the Russian orbit, the Syrian civil war is a driving force in uniting these nations. Russia and Iran both support the brutal regime of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad against the US-supported rebels.

communism554

“Russia, Iran, and Turkey are getting closer to one another in Syria and very close to Israel’s northern border. The framework for ending the Syria conflict, known as “the Moscow Declaration,” was accepted by Russia, Iran, and Turkey. Christian Caryl of the Washington Post writes, “While Moscow, Ankara and Tehran plot their own ‘peace process’ for the Syrian civil war, the United States is conspicuous in its absence.” Washington’s reticence has created a vacuum, and these powers are all too willing to fill it. . . .

“The Russian bear has roared out of hibernation suddenly and dramatically and dominates world headlines every day. The Bear’s footprints continue to leave their mark all over the world. . . .

“. . . Iran’s Mahdi mentality fuels its expansionist ambitions as it works to hasten the coming of its messiah.

“Turkey is descending into a dictatorship led by an Islamist and is cozying up to Russia and Iran. President Erdogan’s rhetoric against Israel is heating up. Four of the ancient allies named in Ezekiel 38 are located in modern Turkey.

“. . . Syria is a flashpoint that is aligning Russia, Iran, and Turkey into a fearsome triumvirate. Russia and Iran have seized the chaos in Syria as an opportunity to bring in troops and air power, putting them just north of Israel.

“Libya and Sudan are radical Islamic nations with deep animus toward Israel. The deepening turmoil and instability in these nations has provided an opening for greater Russian influence” (Mark Hitchcock, Russia Rising: Tracking the Bear in Bible Prophecy, 74, 142-143).

Author S. Douglas Woodward similarly explained how Russia took full advantage of American incompetence/complicity in the Middle East to occupy the dominant position in the region:

“Russia intends to dominate the Middle East and push the U.S. out of the premier geopolitical position, especially in the so-called “fertile crescent” which begins in Syria, crosses the northern parts of Iraq, and includes much of Iran. As virtually everyone knows, because of the oil-rich lands spread across virtually the entire Middle East, this area comprises one of the most important expanses impacting the entire global economy. Combined with the recent nuclear technology deal made between Iran and five other nations in which Russia played a key part, Mr. Putin now stands tall throughout this region. . . .

“Russia involvement in the region and its overall strategy appears clear to European experts familiar with Moscow. The former head of Estonian Intelligence and a member of Estonia’s parliament, Eerik-Niiles Kross, points out that Russia has a grand plan involving its efforts in both Ukraine and Syria.

“”Experts from the left and right alike warn that cooperation with Russia on Syria can have potentially disastrous consequences for the U.S., but too many Americans still don’t understand how closely linked these two headline conflicts are, and American policy has yet to confront the reality that Syria and Ukraine are part of the same mission for Russia – the destruction of the post-WWII architecture for the West. To achieve this goal, Russia has pursued a clear policy of disruption, chaos and destabilization – in Ukraine and the Middle East – in order to force the West to have to partner with Russia to “resolve” the crises it has created. . . The Kremlin has been opportunistic and decisive in grabbing a position of strength – in the Middle East and in Europe – while U.S. attention has waned and retracted.”

“What Russia has really been up to, has escaped Western pundits. On the surface, Russia worked cooperatively with Western states to conclude the pact with Iran. Unlike other Western nations that celebrate the agreement, Russia like Iran, emerged from the negotiation in a much stronger position. Now Russia eagerly sells military weapons to Iran, (including the anti-aircraft missile system, the S-300) and shows itself a friend to the Shia in Iran, Iraq, and Syria. As Russia exercises its military muscle, the rest of the region has awakened to the fact that the U.S. is not the quintessential player it once was. Mr. Putin will now be calling the shots” (S. Douglas Woodward, The Next Great War in the Middle East: Russia Prepares to Fulfill the Prophecy of Gog and Magog, 116-118).

Truly, Russia is emerging as the dominant player in the Middle East. Everything is shifting in Russia’s favor while a distinctly anti-American sentiment is growing. American weariness for war is only surpassed by Russia’s eagerness to take up the reins. Two additional authors have observed that Russia is actively moving to fill the void left by the U.S. scale-back in the region:

“Not since the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in the late 1970s and early 1980s have the Russians shown such penetrating interest and military involvement in the Middle East. . . .

“. . . Russia is back in the news, sending troops into Syria to support President Bashar al-Assad. Though paying lip service to the aim of halting the advance of ISIS forces in the region, these troops were really sent to help Assad fight off rebel forces attempting to topple his cruel and corrupt regime. . . .

“. . . Russia sees an opportunity to expand its influence in the Middle East. As the United States pulls back from its historic role as the leader in the Middle East, Russia appears willing to invest its resources in the region – to become the new power in the deadly game of thrones unfolding there.

“The rapidly shifting landscape of alliances and allies have upended a hundred years of assumed reality across the Middle East. Furthermore, Russia appears eager to shape this new reality to suit its own ends” (Charles Dyer and Mark Tobey, Clash of Kingdoms: What the Bible Says About Russia, ISIS, Iran, and the End Times, 14-16).

Yes, Russia has altered the reality in the Middle East and now has the upper hand. Anyone who thinks the United States dominates the Middle East needs to wake up and take an honest look. We have more or less withdrawn troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, both of which are openly gravitating toward Russia. The Saudi leadership is becoming friendly with Russia. Turkey, Iran, and Russia have a new alliance. Syria is now an open Russian base of operations. Iran has become emboldened and is sporting new Russian weapons systems. China is butting in where it doesn’t belong and now has a large presence in places like Pakistan. And so forth.

communism585

Earlier this year Putin began claiming that there are thousands upon thousands of ISIS fighters in Afghanistan – particularly Northern Afghanistan near the borders of his allies. Where do you think Russia is sticking its nose now? Afghanistan. As Radio Free Europe put it:

“Security experts have said that Russia has exaggerated the number of militants in order to justify its outreach to the Afghan Taliban and to suggest to Central Asian governments that they need support from Russia to defend themselves.”

Everywhere they claim to find terrorists, Russia interferes and eventually gains power through the chaos of war – and all because of the “War on Terror” excuse that President Bush handed them on a silver platter. It is a blanket excuse that seems to cover any act of aggression, tyranny, and savagery these days.

In a 2011 article “How the War on Terrorism Did Putin a Favor,” Time magazine noted Putin’s exploitation of the War on Terror for his own ends and explained how the “War on Terror” guise is used by Russia:

“Countries around the world realized the practical appeal of a war on terrorism. Over the past ten years, it has become a seemingly permanent call to arms, a kind of incantation used to dodge questions, build alliances and justify the use of force. No one, not even Bush, grasped this as quickly as Putin.

“Even before Putin became Russia’s President in early 2000, and long before the Twin Towers fell, he had invoked the idea of a war against global terrorism to justify Russia’s war in Chechnya. . . .

“There was scant evidence, however, that the Chechen rebels were part of some global Islamist terrorist network, as Putin and his government repeatedly claimed. The leader of the separatists at the time was Aslan Maskhadov, a former Red Army colonel who was closer to communism than Islamism. . . .

“In late 1999, when Bush was campaigning for the presidency, he vowed to start urging an end to the war. “Even as we support Russian reforms, we cannot support Russian brutality,” he said during a speech at the Reagan Library in California. . . .

“But when Bush announced his own war on terrorism, all this rhetoric quickly evaporated. Putin, who had been the first to call Bush with his sympathy after learning of the 9/11 attacks, graciously offered to help with the invasion of Afghanistan. He let the U.S. ship supplies through Russian territory and did not object to the U.S. setting up bases in Central Asia, where the local despots quickly caught on to the opportunity. Uzbek President Islam Karimov, for instance, allowed the U.S. to build a permanent base, perhaps hoping that his new alliance with the war on terrorism would help reduce U.S. scrutiny of alleged human-rights abuses in Uzbekistan. “It all flowed naturally into the picture of a global war on terror,” says Kasyanov, who by that time had been promoted to serve as Putin’s Prime Minister. “There was no more criticism . . . It just ceased to be a thorny issue.”

“. . . the idea of a global war on terrorism remains one of Putin’s key political narratives. It is trotted out to this day after every terrorist attack in the Russian heartland and during most discussions with Western leaders.”

To everyone who is privy to international affairs, Russia’s moves in the Middle East and Central Asia ought to be disturbing. Russian and Iranian troops just miles from Israel’s border should be alarming to everyone who loves peace. The fact that China will soon assume ownership of Israel’s largest port ought to raise some eyebrows, too. The brazenness with which Iran is hijacking foreign ships and targeting foreign drones and aircraft should likewise be concerning. Christians also should immediately recognize the alliance that is prophesied to lead the charge in the future Battle of Armageddon forming right before their eyes.

The entire Middle East has been flipped upside down by the War on Terror, and Russia is one of the only nations to have benefited. Her strategic position in the region is stronger than it ever has been. Meanwhile, the U.S. position is far weaker and Israel, love her or hate her, is in a compromising situation that sets up a future invasion by Anti-Christ forces.

Six years before the September 11, 2001 attacks, Jay Adams foresaw how Russia would attempt to entangle us in wars against Russia’s allies, thus giving Russia a pretext to simultaneously involve itself and demonize the United States. He predicted:

“Moscow plans to shift blame for global war onto the West by underhandedly provoking the U.S. and its allies into taking military action against Russian allies-of-old. With the collapse of communism, the U.S. has taken on the role of “world policeman.” This has provided Moscow an opportunity to lure the U.S. and its military allies into a trap, particularly by using the United Nations” (David N. Balmforth, America’s Coming Crisis: Prophetic Warnings, Divine Destiny, 153).

communism586

This game plan has come to fruition. The communists have managed to rope the United States into endless wars in the Middle East – wars that have cost trillions of dollars and thousands of lives, sewn discord at home, soiled our reputation abroad, and weakened our international position very noticeably. And out of the fog of war, the Russians have emerged on the high ground militarily and, they would like us to believe, morally. We now turn briefly to the event that made it all possible – the cowardly 9/11 attacks.

Who perpetrated 9/11? This has been one of the enduring questions of our age. I don’t know the exact answer and I believe anyone who claims they know precisely who ordered and carried out the attacks is lying or deluded. However, we know that the official narrative is bogus and filled with more holes than Swiss cheese. We also definitively know some of the individuals and entities involved in either carrying out the attacks, assisting in the operation, obstructing justice, or in the subsequent cover up.

We know, for instance, that five Israelis – several of them Mossad agents – were arrested in New York on 9/11 cheering and celebrating while watching the Twin Towers burn. And they just happened to be working for a Mossad front company and carrying plane tickets for flights leaving the country almost immediately from various airports. They later said on Israeli TV that they had been sent to film the event. Immediately after 9/11, we also uncovered the largest ever spy ring in U.S. history operating domestically. Whose spy ring was it? It was Israeli. In total, just preceding and just after 9/11, 200 Israeli spies were arrested. And we know that Israeli spies have a habit of filtering stolen intelligence to Russia and China. Search the Jonathan Pollard case for one of the most infamous cases of Israeli spying and transfer of state secrets to our enemies via Israel.

We also know that demolition charges were used to bring down not only the Twin Towers, but WTC Building 7 which was not hit by a plane and only had minimal fires before it disintegrated and collapsed neatly and quickly into its own footprint. Numerous eyewitnesses heard and even saw explosions not related to the planes hitting the buildings (and at least one that went off in the basement before the first plane struck), and there was extensive damage on the lower floors of the towers. Some of the eyewitnesses have since died mysterious deaths. The owner of WTC 7, Larry Silverstein, also admitted – in a clip which you can find on YouTube – that he agreed to demolish the building hours after the other towers, which he also owned and had recently insured against terrorist attacks, had already fallen.

We know that Vice President Dick Cheney was actively monitoring the situation and gave stand-down orders to the military around D.C. This was attested to by Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta who witnessed Cheney confirm stand-down orders to an aide. NORAD was also running a drill that same day which simulated an attack on the United States – yet these prepared and ready military units were ordered away from the real-world events taking place in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania.

We know that there was massive insider trading happening just before and during the attacks, proving foreknowledge of the event. The occurrence was so serious that numerous nations around the world initiated investigations into it. Some have even called the extent of the insider trading “unprecedented.” And don’t forget the $2.3 Trillion that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced on September 10th, 2001, could not be accounted for. It’s probably a coincidence that the “plane” that struck the Pentagon on September 11th hit precisely in the accounting offices where the investigation into missing $2.3 Trillion was taking place. And speaking of foreknowledge, Willie Brown, the mayor of San Francisco, publicly said that he was warned not to fly on September 11th. Other big-name figures received similar warnings not to be in D.C. or New York, or not to travel, on that fateful day.

We know because of the scholarly research of Dr. Steven Jones, among others, that thermite or thermate was used to weaken the support columns inside the WTC buildings. The molten pools of steel caused by this hot-burning substance have been attested to by numerous credible eyewitnesses including firefighters and first responders (and, indeed, was captured on video footage), yet which has been conveniently denied by our government.

We know that the 9/11 Commission, NIST, and other government organizations have concealed, covered up, and lied about information relative to the investigation. For instance, they lied about the U.S. government and Pentagon never having envisioned terrorists hijacking planes and flying them into buildings, and therefore were unprepared. That is pure fiction. Our military prepared for exactly such a scenario on multiple occasions. Indeed, in the 60s, our Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed Operation Northwoods to President Kennedy. It involved hijacking planes and perpetrating bombings on U.S. soil so they could blame it all on terrorists as a pretext for war with Cuba. President Kennedy rejected the vile plan. Additionally, government officers violated the law and shipped out the WTC evidence (i.e. the rubble) on ships headed for Red China. In nearly every way possible, the government violated its own protocols, lied to the public, covered up information, botched the investigation, failed to answer the numerous questions raised by the families of the victims and research entities like Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and have concealed the truth at every turn. Like I said in Russia’s case, where there’s smoke there’s fire – where there’s a cover up, there’s a conspiracy.

These are mere bullet points. Entire books can and have been written documenting the inconsistencies in the official story – books such as Jim Marrs’ The Terror Conspiracy. And numerous researchers like James Corbett and Alex Jones have put out documentaries investigating the conspiracy. The focus of this article, however, is not who brought down the Twin Towers or how it was done. Rather, the focus is on how Russia benefited from the attacks. We should also discuss the possibility that Russian agents, or American agents working for the worldwide Satanic communist conspiracy, were directly involved.

From what was detailed earlier, we know that a common communist tactic is to commit false-flag terror attacks and blame it on Muslim terrorists as a pretext for foreign war. This is precisely what happened on 9/11. We know that there was a cover up by intelligence organizations – organizations which have long been compromised by communist agents. Indeed, John Brennan was the CIA’s deputy executive director at the time of the attacks. Brennan was an admitted communist in the past and has been one of the chief false accusers that Donald Trump is a Russian agent. The head of the FBI during the September 11th attacks was also none other that Robert Mueller – the failed and fraudulent lead investigator into the phony Trump-Russia collusion hoax. President George W. Bush was also a member of Skull and Bones, an elite secret society at Yale that is thought to be an off-shoot chapter of the Order of Illuminati. The lead positions in the U.S. government and intelligence community at the time of the attacks were filled with traitors and conspirators.

But before we discuss communist infiltration of the U.S. system, let’s briefly speak about the Israeli Mossad. This elite intelligence/assassination outfit has been blamed by many people, including numerous U.S. military officers, as the guilty party on 9/11. Mossad seems a plausible perpetrator of the 9/11 attacks, or at least an ally of the CIA or other shadowy U.S. intelligence cliques. Yet, we need to recognize that the Russians have compromised Israel as well! Indeed, the Russian mafia – which is nothing but the Russian intelligence services with a new name – has taken over large chunks of Israel. Author Robert Friedman wrote:

“Of all the nations where the Russian mob has established a presence, none has been more deeply compromised than the State of Israel, America’s staunchest ally in the volatile Middle East. More than 800,000 Russian Jews have mad aliyah or settled in Israel since the first massive wave of immigration in the 1970s. The Russians took advantage of Israel’s most sacred law – the Right of Return, which guarantees Jews the right to return to their ancestral homeland, where they would receive citizenship and live as free men and women outside the odious yoke of anti-Semitism. ” . . .

communism596

“But just as in Brighton Beach, Russian immigration to Israel has brought a more unwelcome element – the vor v zakonye and their criminal minions. Ten percent of Israel’s five million Jews are now Russian, and 10 percent of the Russian population “is criminal,” according to NYPD notes of a briefing in Manhattan by Israeli police intelligence official Brigadier General Dan Ohad.

“”There is not a major Russian organized crime figure who we are tracking who does not also carry an Israeli passport,” says senior State Department official Jonathan Winer. . . .

“Russia’s criminal aristocracy covets Israeli citizenship “because they know Israel is a safe haven for them,” said Leder. “We do not extradite citizens.”

“”The Russians then use the safe haven to travel around the world and rape and pillage,” added Moody.

“Israeli police officials estimate that Russian mobsters have poured more than $4 billion of dirty money into Israel’s economy, though some estimates range as high as $20 billion. They have purchased factories, insurance companies, and a bank . . . One of Leder’s greatest fears is that the Russians will compromise Israel’s security by buying companies that work for the military-industrial complex. The mobsters, in fact, attempted to purchase a gas and oil company that maintains strategic reserves for Israel’s military. “They could go to the stock market and buy a company that’s running communications in the military sector,” he complained. . . .

“With two decades of unimpeded growth, the Russian Mafiya has succeeded in turning Israel into its very own “mini-state,” in which it operates with virtual impunity. Although many in international law enforcement believe that Israel is by now so compromised that its future as a nation is imperiled, its government, inexplicably, has done almost nothing to combat the problem. . . .

“”Israel is going to have to do something,” says James Moody. “They could lose their whole country. The mob is a bigger threat than the Arabs”” (Robert Friedman, Red Mafiya: How the Russian Mob Has Invaded America,” 276-282).

The Russian mafia, controlled by the KGB, GRU, SVR, and other Russian intelligence services, has massive influence in Israel. But has Russian intelligence/mafia infiltrated the Israeli government and intelligence services? Some sources say that direct Russian penetration into the Mossad has not been nearly as successful as in other nations. However, other sources disagree. The Jerusalem Post, for instance, ran an article stating:

“The depth of the penetration by the Soviet Union’s KGB and GRU (military intelligence), or of the intelligence services of communist satellite states, has been testified to by a long line of agents who were convicted in Israel from the 1950s through to the 1990s. It is a long and impressive list of “moles,” quality agents that penetrated every important department in Israel.”

The article listed numerous individuals who have been detected as Soviet spies, such as Colonel Shimon Levison, Abraham Marcus Klingsberg and his wife, Zeev Avni, and others. It then went on to say:

“These are the serious and important spies that caused the most damage to the Israeli defense and intelligence establishment. Of course, there were many additional spies, at varying levels of importance, who were discovered and arrested, including Shabtai Kalmanovich, Gregory Londin and Efraim Samuel (who spied for Romania).

“There were those who were discovered, but who did not have their identities published or stand trial due to a lack of evidence or out of other considerations. One such person was an employee of Israel Aerospace Industries who was acquainted with the Lavi fighter jet program in the 1980s and was fired because of the suspicions against him, but was not put on trial.

“It is very likely that there were those who penetrated, spied and were never caught. The Soviet intelligence method was “quantity that becomes quality.” They recruited and ran hundreds, if not thousands, of agents in the hope that a few of them, or at least one of them, would ascend to the elite and become a quality agent. In this way the KGB tried to infiltrate agents into Israel during the waves of aliya from the Soviet Union, which began with a trickle in the 1960s and 1970s and became a heavy flow in the 1980s.”

Yes, Israel has been a particular target for communist machinations, if for no other reason than the extraordinary number of Jews who immigrated to Israel from the Soviet Union. Both the Russian mob and communist intelligence (an oxymoron) have had noticeable success in infiltrating Israel. And while Mossad might not be as compromised as perhaps the CIA, it is verifiably true that the Russians and Chinese have had no problem getting Israeli spies to give or sell them U.S. military secrets and technology. Jonathan Pollard, who was recently released from prison, was an American Jew convicted of spying for Israel. His information, sold by Israel to the USSR, gave the Evil Empire classified information about America’s nuclear deterrent to the Soviets.

How is this despicable traitor viewed in Israel, ostensibly America’s greatest ally? In Israel, Pollard has been crowned a national hero and even had a street named after him! According to Israeli news, Israel’s warmongering leader Benjamin Netanyahu, who is currently under investigation for bribery and fraud, petitions for Pollard’s extradition to Israel every time he meets with U.S. politicians. Perhaps, then, it should not be surprising to know that the two largest spy rings uncovered on U.S. soil have been Israeli and communist. And who is to say that elements within these two nefarious groups did not team up to perpetrate an event that would lure the United States into a Middle Eastern conflict? Or who is to say that Mossad agents secretly beholden to Moscow were not the ones arrested in New York? It is not as cut and dry as some anti-Israel fanatics have asserted.

Now let’s discuss the CIA. From the very beginning, the CIA has been little more than a communist front. From OSS days to the present, the CIA has harbored and recruited communists. Numerous Soviet spies working for the CIA have been uncovered. Multiple CIA heads have even admitted holding “former” communist ideologies or voting for CPUSA candidates. Soviet defector Ladislav Bittman wrote a book titled The KGB and Soviet Disinformation: An Insider’s View. In it, he spoke of how the CIA was targeted and thoroughly sideswiped by the communists. He wrote:

“The decade of the 1970s was a period of continuing crisis for the Central Intelligence Agency. The once highly secret agency was plagued by serious internal problems and unparalleled public attacks. Investigations by the House and Senate and disclosures of the agency’s previous attempts to assassinate foreign leaders, spy on Americans, and engage in other questionable activities shook the agency to its foundations . . . These developments left American intelligence operations in demoralized disarray and the intelligence community divided and confused.

“Was the decline a natural and spontaneous event? Evidence presented by the American mass media points in that direction, but it leaves some disturbing questions. After all, one of the major objectives of the KGB is to confuse and demoralize its American counterpart. . . .

“The CIA staff was reduced by several thousand officers during the 1970s . . . The situation provided an extraordinary opportunity for the KGB to recruit several CIA employees as Soviet agents. . . .

“. . . Thirteen individuals were charged with espionage in the United States from 1975-1980, ten of them on behalf of the Soviet Union, and six of the defendants were formerly affiliated with the Central Intelligence Agency or one of its contractors. The security system designed by the agency to weed out moles and enemy agents was an obvious failure” (Ladislav Bittman, The KGB and Soviet Disinformation: An Insider’s View, 183-185).

CIA3

KGB infiltration of the CIA didn’t start in the 1970s. Before the CIA was the OSS. This organization was totally swamped with communists. M. Stanton Evans wrote:

“[C]lose students of such matters have long regarded OSS as the most heavily infiltrated of the wartime units, with estimates of the number of Communists ranging as high as a hundred staffers. . . .

“Though its posthumous reputation as a den of Communists and Soviet agents would exceed that of OWI, less was known about the OSS back in the 1940s. The secret nature of the service allowed its employees to roam about the globe at will, engaging in all sorts of actions concealed from Congress and the public” (M. Stanton Evans, Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies, 92).

Anatoliy Golitsyn, one of the most credible of all Soviet defectors and one of the chief figures to warn that the Soviet Union’s “collapse” was a fraud designed to deceive the West, also testified that the communists had infiltrated the CIA:

“The Central Intelligence Agency was already penetrated in 1958 – by both the KGB and Chinese intelligence. In 1958, the Agency lost its most important source, Colonel Popov of Soviet Military Intelligence [GRU], who could have provided strategic information had he not been compromised by KGB penetration, arrested by the KGB, and burned alive in the GRU’s crematorium furnace” (Anatoliy Golitsyn, The Perestroika Deception, 207).

The CIA was so thoroughly saturated with communists that when Golitsyn defected, he was met by CIA traitors working for Moscow. Cliff Kincaid wrote:

“A former government official told me what happened when Golitsyn defected and was brought into a room to be debriefed. He looked around and realized that half the CIA operatives in front of him were KGB double agents whose reports he had read on the other side.

“This has been the problem all along – our intelligence agencies have been heavily penetrated by enemy agents and we have not been prepared for what’s coming” (Cliff Kincaid, Back from the Dead: The Return of the Evil Empire, 35).

As quoted earlier, the communists have an obsession with using others to do their dirty work while they govern or assist from the shadows. CIA agents must be high up on their list of assets to acquire. Imagine carrying out a terrorist operation against a nation using their own intelligence services! If and when the evidence started to come out, it would lead directly back to the government which would only serve to further demoralize a population, fracture the government, and create fear, mistrust, and resentment – a perfect divide and conquer operation. Soviet defector Colonel Stanislav Lunev spoke of this exact point:

“Although most Westerners don’t realize it, the GRU is one of the primary instructors of terrorists worldwide. The Communist Party Central Committee specifically authorized the GRU to train terrorists in order to further the USSR’s political goals and support its allies. After all, what could be better than to have other people commit terrorist actions that further your own goals?

“There was also the GRU Special Center for the training of terrorists at GRU headquarters. The KGB provided financial and communications support to terrorists, but the operational training and support was reserved for the GRU. The GRU has trained terrorists from almost every country in the world, including Iraq, Libya, Iran, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Italy, Germany, Spain, Turkey, and Latin America. Where no terrorist groups existed in countries inimical to the USSR, the GRU would help to form them, and then provide them the necessary training, funding, and organizational support. So, for example, while the terrorists involved in the World Trade Center bombing [of 1993] may never have attended GRU training, the GRU was responsible for the formation of the terrorist group that they belonged to” (Stanislav Lunev, Through the Eyes of the Enemy, 80-81).

Konstantin Preobrazhensky, a KGB defector, made this interesting observation after 9/11. He stated:

“A key distinction between Russian and American attitudes towards Islamic terrorism is that while for America terrorism is largely seen as an exterior menace, Russia uses terrorism as an object as a tool of the state for manipulation in and outside the home country. Islamic terrorism is only part of the world of terrorism. Long before Islamic terrorism became a global threat, the KGB had used terrorism to facilitate the victory of world Communism.

“This leads to the logical connection between Russian and Islamic terrorism. The late Alexander Litvinenko, poisoned in London in November, 2006, told me that his former FSB colleagues had trained famous Al-Qaeda terrorists Ayman Al-Zawahiri and Juma Namangoniy during the 1980s and 1990s. Ayman Al-Zawahiri, one of the world’s most wanted terrorists, has been responsible for the murder of U.S. nationals outside the United States. Before his death, Juma Namangoniy (Jumabai Hojiyev), a native of Soviet Uzbekistan, was a right-hand man of Osama bin Laden in charge of the Taliban’s northern front in Afghanistan. . . .

“Mohammed Atta, the pilot of the first plane to crash into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, had met with a senior Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague, Czech Republic, five months before the attack. But Iraqi intelligence was just a client of Russia’s intelligence service. It brings a new understanding to the fact that President Putin was the first foreign President to call President Bush on 9/11. One may conjecture that he knew in advance what was to happen” (Konstantin Preobrazhensky, “Russia and Islam are not Separate: Why Russia backs Al-Qaeda“).

Due to some interesting research by Pilots for 9/11 Truth, I’m skeptical whether the planes that took off from the airports that fateful morning were the same which hit the targets. That being said, Mohammed Atta or other Arab terrorists may have still been involved. And if they were, it is certain they received at least part of their training from Soviet-sponsored entities. A number of the alleged hijackers were also trained by U.S. intelligence services.

Though communists love to recruit others – especially native citizens of their target country – they are also prepared with literal armies of men spread throughout the world to commit terrorism, sabotage, assassination, and so forth when the order comes. I again quote from Colonel Lunev regarding these specialized forces spread throughout our nation and the free world and the type of operations they’re prepared and trained to carry out. Plug this information into our present context and ask whether it is plausible that communist agents either carried out or assisted native-born American traitors, or even Mossad agents on their payroll, in carrying out the horrid attacks on September 11, 2001. In 1998, Lunev testified:

“Though most Americans don’t realize it, America is already penetrated by Russian military intelligence to the extent that arms caches lie in wait for use by Russian special forces – or Spetznatz.

“As a GRU officer, my main mission was to prepare for war. I can tell you that for the Soviet Union and for the Russian Federation, America was and is the main expected wartime adversary. Other countries count only as a means to attack America.

“Russia remains terrified of the power of America, and Russian military intelligence does everything it can to prepare for a war that it considers inevitable. Let me be very clear about this. The GRU is still recruiting agents and is still preparing for war with the United States as we approach the supposedly peaceful, post-Cold War millennium. . . .

communism480

“These elite special forces are under the control of my former employer, the GRU . . . They penetrate countries shortly before a war and perform military sabotage that Americans would call terrorism. Some Spetznatz groups perform as assassination squads. These soldiers are familiar with all types of weapons, explosives, and mines; and they are experts at killing quickly without weapons as well. They are also trained to drive all types of military vehicles, including helicopters and small airplanes. They must be fluent in at least two foreign languages. English is the language of choice.

“During wartime, they would try to assassinate as many American leaders as possible, as well as their families. They would also blow up power stations, telephone switching systems, dams, and any strategic targets that cannot be taken out with long range weapons . . . In Soviet and Russian military doctrine, nuclear weapons are not merely for deterrence; they are to be used, and Spetznatz has them available.

Spetznatz troops are currently training inside the United States. They regularly enter the country as foreign tourists, using fake passports and their knowledge of foreign languages to pass as Germans or Eastern Europeans.

“They are the best supplied troops in the Russian military. One of the GRU’s major tasks is to find drop sites for their supplies of clothes, cash, and special equipment – including even small nuclear devices, the so-called “suitcase bombs.” . . .

“It is surprisingly easy to smuggle nuclear weapons into the United States. . . .

“In wartime, many GRU officers – all of whom are men – would go undercover to directly aid the Spetznatz forces.

“These wartime plans were fully in place during the Caribbean Crisis – or Cuban Missile Crisis, as Americans refer to it – and remain fully in place today. In 1962, Spetznatz forces were deployed all over the free world, ready to commit acts of sabotage. When no orders came to “go into action,” they destroyed all evidence of their presence and went home. They were undetected and operated freely during the hottest period of the Cold War. Now, when America is less alert to the danger, think of what Spetznatz could do” (Stanislav Lunev, Through the Eyes of the Enemy, 22-28).

Indeed, think of what militarily-trained secret enemy agents operating among us could do. Could they rig a building to blow in a controlled demolition? Could they support native American traitors in carrying out a coordinated attack against their own country? Could they, in conjunction with traitors in our intelligence services or the intelligence services of hostile nations, perpetrate a “terrorist” attack and melt away into the background while the controlled press blames it on Muslims? A better question is: Is there anything the communists wouldn’t do to take down their “main enemy” in what they consider an active war to the death?

The highly credible intelligence defector Viktor Suvorov, whose books Chief Culprit and Icebreaker should be on every bookshelf, presented a potential scenario of Spetznatz agents using small planes to bomb targets in Washington, D.C. during either peacetime or the first days of a future world war. He began:

I do not know how or when World War Three will start. I do not know exactly how the Soviet high command plans to make use of spetsnaz in that war: the first world war in which spetsnaz will be a major contributor. I do not wish to predict the future. In this chapter I shall describe how spetsnaz will be used at the beginning of that war as I imagine it. It is not my task to describe what will happen. But I can describe what might happen.”

Then Suvorov described a long list of potential terrorist attacks that Spetznatz would commit. He remarked: “The terror is carried out in the name of already existing extremist groups not connected in any way with the Soviet Union, or in the name of fictitious organisations.” He then mentioned one method of Spetznatz-inspired terrorist attack that is particularly interesting considering what happened on 9/11:

Three men open the doors of the van, roll out the fuselage of a light aircraft and attach its wings. A minute later its motor bursts into life. The plane takes off and disappears into the sky. It has no pilot. It is controlled by radio with the aid of very simple instruments, only slightly more complicated than those used by model aircraft enthusiasts. The plane climbs to about 200 metres and immediately begins to descend in the direction of the White House. A minute later a mighty explosion shakes the capital of the United States. . . .

Three minutes later a second plane sweeps across the centre of the city and there is a second explosion in the place where the White House once stood. The second plane has taken off from a section of highway under construction, and has a quite different control system. Two cars with radio beacons in them have been left earlier in the middle of the city. The beacons have switched on automatically a few seconds before the plane’s take-off. The automatic pilot is guided by the two beacons and starts to descend according to a previously worked-out trajectory. The second plane has been sent off by a second group operating independently of the first one.

It was a simple plan: if the first plane did not destroy the White House the second would. If the first plane did destroy the White House then a few minutes later all the heads of the Washington police would be near where the explosion had taken place. The second plane would kill many of them” (Viktor Suvorov, Spetsnatz: The Story Behind the Soviet SAS, see chapter 15).

While Suvorov stated that his hypothetical scenarios are just that, what we saw on 9/11 was eerily similar. Nothing should be out of the realm of possibility when dealing with communists – the greatest mass-murderers the world has ever known.

Not many conspiracy researchers have looked into the potential connection between Russia/communism and 9/11, yet I believe the connection is strong. It deserves to be explored in all seriousness. While it seems painfully evident that some American higher-ups in government and intelligence were involved with the attacks, could these evildoers have actually been communist agents?

In addition to former-KGB agent Konstantin Preobrazhensky cited earlier, another Soviet intelligence asset, the former head of Romanian intelligence Ion Mihai Pacepca, has claimed that 9/11 came about because of Soviet propagandizing and radicalizing in the Middle East. I don’t find Pacepa to be the most credible of defectors, particularly on the topic of the Middle East, yet his statement is worth sharing. In a March 1, 2004 Front Page Mag article titled From Russia With Terror, that I can no longer find online except in excerpt form, he alleged:

“September 11, 2001 was directly rooted in a joint Soviet/Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) operation conceived in the aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day Arab-Israeli War. The object of this joint operation was to repair Moscow’s prestige by turning the Islamic world against Israel and by creating a rabid and violent hatred for its main supporter, the United States. The strategy was to portray the US, this land of freedom, as a Nazi-style “imperial-Zionist country” financed by Jewish money and run by a rapacious “Council of the Elders of Zion” (the Kremlin’s epithet for the US Congress), the aim of which was allegedly to transform the rest of the world into a Jewish fiefdom. In other words, the heart of the joint plan was to convert the historical Arab and Islamic hatred of the Jews into a new hatred of the United States. We threw many millions of dollars at this gigantic task, which involved whole armies of intelligence officers.”

I do not believe that Islamic terrorists were responsible for 9/11, though their hatred of the United States and Israel is genuine. They may have assisted or been the front men for the operation, and certainly they were made into the scapegoat, but there was a greater power at work – the invisible hand that guides the nations. This hand, ideologically, is Red. And frequently it extends from the Soviet Empire to strike others around the globe.

I believe it is extremely plausible that communist agents in high places in the U.S. intelligence community and government, assisted by secret military operatives or foreign assets, acted on orders from abroad to create a pretext to get the United States into an endless cycle of Middle Eastern war that would weaken us in preparation for the communist world’s planned final blow against what little remains of the free world. And that pretext was 9/11 and the unconscionable slaughter of 3,000 Americans. They were sacrificed on the altar of the Satanic Elite in their bid to establish communistic totalitarianism over the entire earth.

Perhaps communist infiltrators or agents had nothing directly to do with 9/11 and it really was a home-grown inside job. Be that as it may, the communists have certainly supported and gained from our War on Terror! In fact, I dare say that Russia and the communist world have gained more than anyone else. Communism is more powerful and prevalent now than it was in 2001. The U.S. government has been plunged even deeper into the socialistic abyss. Russia’s position in the Middle East is now far stronger than any other nation’s. The War on Terror has propelled Russia to the forefront of world politics, made her a seemingly “respectable” mediator in world events, and turned KGB agent and mass murderer Vladimir Putin into something of a hero in the eyes of millions. And meanwhile, the United States is severely depleted militarily, grossly in debt, torn into factions, and viewed as a pariah, as a bully, and as an unhinged superpower that likes to prey on smaller nations and which needs punished by an international coalition (led, of course, by Russia and China).

Sept 11 Attacks Secret Files

As I recognize all that Russia has gained and the United States has lost through our nightmarish War on Terror, and every time I look at a gut-wrenching picture of the World Trade Centers in flames, I’m forced to ask the eternal question that so often leads to the true perpetrator of a crime: Cui bono? Who benefited?

Zack Strong,

September 10, 2019

Updated September 12 and 14, 2019

The Great Betrayal – How China Turned Red

“I have unswerving faith in the re-emergence of my country as a free united nation and in the eventful triumph of freedom over slavery throughout the world.” – General Chiang Kai-shek, Soviet Russia in China, 349.

In 1949, China was conquered by the communists led by Mao Tse-tung. Under Chairman Mao’s iron rule, the Reds slaughtered between 60 and 100 million innocent Chinese and threw tens of millions more in brutal labor and reeducation camps – camps still in use to this day. Naturally, the Red regime in Beijing was supported by the Soviet Union. In fact, the enslavement of China was perhaps the Moscow-based communists’ greatest victory. However, there is an aspect to this sad saga that is often overlooked – the critical role the United States played in undermining China’s Freedom movement and facilitating a communist triumph.

Chiang7

General Chiang Kai-shek

In pre-Maoist China, the legitimate leader was a patriotic general named Chiang Kai-shek. Chiang has been unjustly maligned by the Marxist Establishment as a brutal despot who impeded Chinese progress. In fact, Chiang desperately wanted a democratic government and a free China and was a staunch supporter of the United States. He fought tooth and nail against the communists almost his entire life. Fighting communism is, to the Western Elite, the same as impeding “progress.” It was precisely because of his anti-communist stance that Chiang has been smeared by Western academia. Also worthy of note is the fact that Chiang was a devout Christian – certainly not the sort of man welcome in Elite circles.

In mid-1947, as his Nationalist forces fought the communists under Mao, General Chiang stated of his Kuomintang (KMT) military:

“Regardless of what aspect we discuss, we hold an absolute superiority; in terms of the troops’ equipment, battle techniques and experience, the Communists are not our equal. . . . And we are also ten times richer than the communist army in terms of military-supply replacements, such as food, fodder, and ammunition” (Loyd E. Eastman, “Who Lost China? Chiang Kai-shek Testifies,” The China Quarterly, No. 88, 658, December, 1981).

How did a militarily superior force ostensibly aided by the United States eventually lose a civil war against the Reds? The answer is that the subversive element in the U.S. government did not support Chiang’s movement, but used their positions of influence to undermine it at every step. It was really a case of the U.S. Elite combining with the Soviets against Chiang and his Nationalists.

In his often overlooked book detailing Western involvement in the world-wide communist conspiracy, W. Cleon Skousen wrote of the fall of free China:

“General Albert C. Wedemeyer was the last commander of the Chinese Theater of Operations during World War II, and he has described in his book, Wedemeyer Reports . . . how he assured Chiang Kai-shek that the U.S. would support the Nationalist Chinese in setting up a democratic form of government after the war. But this never came about, because right at the time the delicate process of writing and adopting a constitution was in process, the State Department sent over George C. Marshall to tell Chiang Kai-shek that if he didn’t allow the Communist Chinese to immediately enter his government on a coalition basis, all U.S. aid would be terminated. General Wedemeyer wrote a comprehensive report to President Truman showing how this fantastic demand would ultimately lead to a Communist conquest of 600,000,000 Chinese. The State Department demanded that General Wedemeyer be “muzzled.” Chiang Kai-shek refused to accept the Communists in his government, and General Marshall fulfilled his threat. He wrote: “As Chief of Staff I armed 39 anti-Communist divisions (in China), now with a stroke of the pen I disarm them.” U.S. aid to China was reduced to a dribble. Both economic and military collapse became inevitable.

“We have already discussed the Establishment’s manipulation of the State Department through its Institute of Pacific Relations, which set the stage for the betrayal of China to a Communist conquest.

“By 1949 the whole mainland of China was in Communist hands and a bloodbath of genocidal terrorism was being poured out upon the people. What Americans had fought World War II to prevent the Japanese from doing to China, the State Department had encouraged Mao and Chao to go ahead and accomplish.

China17

“The next task was to keep the American people from discovering how China had been betrayed to the Reds. It was necessary to cover the tracks of the IPR and its agents who were working inside the U.S. government. Dean Acheson, Secretary of State, wrote a notorious White Paper trying to put the blame on Chiang Kai-shek and saying the State Department had been helpless to prevent the Communist coup. However, Acheson’s ambassador to China, John Leighton Stuart, wrote a book called Fifty Years in China . . . in which he admitted that he and his associates in the State Department could not escape their “part of the responsibility of the great catastrophe.” He repudiated the White Paper as a historical document and said it left out much of what really happened. Professor Kenneth Colegrove of the Political Science Department at Northwestern University went even further. He said Dean Acheson’s White Paper “was one of the most false documents ever published by any country”” (W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Capitalist, 74-76).

Similarly, researcher John Coleman, in his phenomenal book One World Order: Socialist Dictatorship, which I cannot recommend too highly, wrote:

“Roosevelt refused to listen to intelligence reports about the activities of Owen Lattimore, and insisted on appointing him as his personal advisor to Chiang Kai Shek, which left Lattimore in the enviable position of easily betraying the Nationalists to the Communists. The Chinese Nationalist forces were further betrayed by Roosevelt appointee Lauchlin Currie, who ordered Army supplies intended for the Chiang Kai Shek’s Nationalist forces dumped into the Indian Ocean” (John Coleman, One World Order: Socialist Dictatorship, 121).

Currie was acknowledged by J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI to be a Soviet agent. And Lattimore was likewise a long-time Soviet spy. Nearly all the men that FDR surrounded himself with were Marxist agents. FDR, my candidate for the worst president in American history, was himself a communist! He gave us four straight terms of communism and not only fundamentally altered our country for the worse, but played a major role in the communist restructuring of the world.

One of the enduring aspects of FDR’s treason against humanity is the fact he loved mass-murderer Joseph Stalin, used American resources to literally save the Soviet Union from Hitler’s anti-communist campaign, and enabled the Soviets to come back from the brink of near defeat at Germany’s hands to spread its Satanic influence across the globe – including into China. China was the dazzling jewel in the communist crown and its conquest would not have been possible had FDR not been a closet communist, had he not surrounded himself – in defiance of intelligence reports – with known Soviet agents, and had he not appointed communists to oversee the management of China. To learn about the shocking communist takeover of our government that occurred during FDR’s reprehensible administration, read Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein.

In his book None Dare Call It Conspiracy, Gary Allen wrote of Elites’ efforts to turn the world communist:

“A clique of American financiers not only helped establish Communism in Russia, but has striven mightily ever since to keep it alive. . . .

“At Versailles, this same clique carved up Europe and set the stage for World War II . . . In 1941, the same Insiders rushed to the aid of our “noble ally,” Stalin, after his break with Hitler. In 1943, these same Insiders marched off to the Tehran Conference and proceeded to start the carving up of Europe after the second great “war to end war.” Again at Yalta and Potsdam in 1945, they established the China policy . . . later summarized by Owen Lattimore: “The problem was how to allow them [China] to fall without making it look as if the United States had pushed them.” The facts are inescapable. In one country after another Communism has been imposed on the local population from the top down. The most prominent forces for the imposition of the tyranny came from the United States and Great Britain. Here is a charge that no American enjoys making, but the facts lead to no other possible conclusion. The idea that Communism is a movement of the downtrodden masses is a fraud.

“. . . But if Communism is an arm of a bigger conspiracy to control the world by power-mad billionaires (and brilliant but ruthless academicians who have shown them how to use their power) it all becomes perfectly logical” (Gary Allen, None Dare Call It Conspiracy, 75-76).

I want to point out that communism is not an American plot. It actually originated in Europe in 1776 when Adam Weishaupt formed the Order of Illuminati. In my books, I’ve traced the ideology we know as communism back to the Illuminati. I will not repeat the details here. Suffice it to say that communism is Illuminism by another name. It is, therefore, hardly an American plot.

Additionally, many of communism’s financiers come from Europe – not simply from the United States. And Britain’s involvement is so pronounced in world conspiracy precisely because communists and Fabian Socialists took over England. Both Britain and the United States have been used by the international communists to set up bases in Russia and China from whence they carry out their world revolution.

Europe – indeed, the rest of the world – is much further down the communist rabbit hole than the United States. Despite the alarming growth of the communist cancer in our midst, we are still the last best hope for humanity and have the greatest potential for throwing off the Soviet shackles. However, it is absolutely true that Marxists imported their dogma to the United States beginning with the Illuminati-Jacobins just after the American War for Independence. Their existence was acknowledged by George Washington and other informed individuals. It has grown from there, being greatly aided by Jewish and other European immigrants.

communism36

“Bolshevism without the Mask”

Let’s be clear: The global Elite are all Marxists. And the top cadre within this group is a clique of avowed Satanists. I have discussed this at length in my books. These Elites are led by Lord Maitreya and the Ascended Masters of Wisdom – fancy names for Lucifer and his fallen angels. They direct the affairs of Satan’s earthly kingdom. Communism is their chief tool. Be very careful not to describe communism as an American or British plot. It is, rather, a worldwide conspiracy in which the super-rich, academic elitists, and other professional revolutionaries and occultists combine their dubious talents to conquer the world and subjugate humanity.

Texe Marrs has written of how Red China has been set up as another Illuminati-communist base of operations. He said:

“Red China has been chosen to be the poster child and role model for the Illuminati’s Hegelian synthesis of Communism and Capitalism. The United States, meanwhile, is being purposely beat down and suppressed. Alien philosophies and a wave of immorality are being used to destroy peoples’ minds while Wall Street operators continue their Ponzi scheme manipulation. The Federal Reserve, under Jewish banker Ben Bernanke’s direction, is regularly transmitting boatloads of electronic cash to foreign banks in China. Thanks to this infusion of dollars, along with the trillions of dollars brought in from stolen Iraqi oil use and sales, the Chinese economy is galloping ahead” (Texe Marrs, Conspiracy of the Six-Pointed Star, 202).

True it is that the Marxist Elite envision a future communist world order that combines elements of political, social, military, and religious communism with state-run monopoly capitalism (i.e. socialism). As I’ve covered elsewhere, demonic entities that have appeared to occultist conspirators around the world have relayed the message that the coming occult world order will be a fusion of the so-called best of both worlds: “The Masters advise 70 per cent socialism to 30 per cent capitalism as the best proportion” (Benjamin Creme, The World Teacher for All Humanity, 74). It is perfectly accurate, then, to call China the “poster child and role model for the Illuminati’s Hegelian synthesis of Communism and Capitalism.”

Much of what later happened in China was drawn up at the Yalta Conference of 1945 attended by the likes of Stalin and Roosevelt. These comrades essentially decided the fate of China. I take several paragraphs from James Perloff’s superb article “China Betrayed Into Communism.” He explained:

“Fateful decisions resulted when Roosevelt met with Stalin at the Teheran Conference (late 1943) and Yalta Conference (February 1945). Stalin, though our ally against Germany during World War II, maintained a nonaggression pact with Japan. This suited Stalin, as he wished the Japanese to wear down China’s Nationalist forces.

“At the Teheran and Yalta wartime conferences, however, Roosevelt asked Stalin if he would break his pact with Japan and enter the Far East war. Stalin agreed, but attached conditions. He demanded that America completely equip his Far Eastern Army for the expedition, with 3,000 tanks, 5,000 planes, plus all the other munitions, food, and fuel required for a 1,250,000-man army. Roosevelt accepted this demand, and 600 shiploads of Lend-Lease material were convoyed to the USSR for the venture. Stalin’s Far Eastern Army swiftly received more than twice the supplies we gave Chiang Kai-shek during four years as our ally.

“General Douglas MacArthur protested after discovering that ships designated to supply his Pacific forces were being diverted to Russia. Major General Courtney Whitney wrote: “One hundred of his transport ships were to be withdrawn immediately, to be used to carry munitions and supplies across the North Pacific to the Soviet forces in Vladivostok…. Later, of course, they were the basis of Soviet military support of North Korea and Red China.”

“But Stalin didn’t just want materiel in return for entering the Asian war. He also demanded control of the Manchurian seaports of Dairen and Port Arthur — which a glance at the map shows would give him an unbreakable foothold in China — as well as joint control, with the Chinese, of Manchuria’s railroads. Roosevelt made these concessions without consulting the Chinese. Thus, without authority, he ceded to Stalin another nation’s sovereign territory. The president made these pledges without the knowledge or consent of Congress or the American people.

“The State Department official representing the United States in drawing up the Yalta agreement was Alger Hiss — subsequently exposed as a Soviet spy. General Patrick Hurley, U.S. Ambassador to China, wrote: “American diplomats surrendered the territorial integrity and the political independence of China … and wrote the blueprint for the Communist conquest of China in secret agreement at Yalta”” (James Perloff, “China Betrayed Into Communism,” The New American, July 24, 2009).

In his brilliant book How the Far East was Lost, Anthony Kubek devoted a thorough chapter to the fateful Yalta Conference and its lasting consequences. He wrote:

“Roosevelt went off to Yalta, there to buy Stalin’s entry into the war we had already won. We are still paying the price. The needless and bloody battles on Iwo Jima and Okinawa were immediate costs. The dropping of the atomic bombs on Asiatic civilian populations – acts which have so prejudiced the United States in the eyes of Asian people – was another. Sovietization of China and the Korean War were still others. And the end is not yet in sight. . . .

“No discussion of Yalta by those who were present at that conference, thus far, explains Roosevelt’s generosity to Stalin, why he violated his own principles of the Atlantic Charter by transferring territory from one country to another without the consent of the deprived country, or why he reneged on his promises to Chiang Kai-shek at Cairo. It must be remembered he had promised the Generalissimo all the territory Japan had taken since 1914. Roosevelt gave to Stalin at Yalta effective control of the same territory over which the United States had gone to war with Japan, and by doing so set the stage for the Communist conquest of China, and it was a prelude to the war in Korea” (Anthony Kubek, How the Far East Was Lost: American Policy and the Creation of Communist China, 1941-1949, 91, 111).

FDR1

Comrades Stalin and FDR

General George C. Marshall – the same who disarmed Chiang Kai-shek’s forces – was one of the prominent attendees at Yalta. He used his influence to encourage Roosevelt’s pro-Soviet sympathies:

“One may find some explanation for the Yalta give-away in a review of the men who made up Roosevelt’s delegation. The most important of these advisers was General George Marshall, Chief of Staff . . . He stood at Yalta urging the grim necessity of Russia’s entry into war against Japan. He did nothing to deter Roosevelt from embarking on his ill-starred course which ended in disaster.

“The desire to have Russia’s help in the Far East was constantly stressed by Marshall . . . It was Marshall’s mistaken estimate of Japan’s capacity for continued military resistance, after all signs pointed to enemy collapse, that fortified Roosevelt in his determination to buy Soviet entry into the Pacific war at the price of vast strategic concessions in China. This deal foreordained the loss of China to Communist control” (Anthony Kubek, How the Far East Was Lost: American Policy and the Creation of Communist China, 1941-1949, 94).

Yalta was a communist conference from beginning to end. Yalta was a grimy location in the Soviet Union where Stalin, who had picked it, knew he could control the narrative. And control it he did with the help of FDR’s communist delegation which included communist sympathizers and Soviet spies. And FDR must be directly blamed for the existence of this compromised delegation – it was his administration that had formally recognized the Soviet regime on 1933 when it was on the verge of collapse.

It is truly incredible that the fate of any nation – let alone one like China – could be decided by a group of communist conspirators meeting in the Soviet Union with the full consent and blessing of an American president. Yet, that is what happened. Everything that came later merely followed the Yalta script.

The U.S. government’s attitude toward General Chiang had always been hostile, though it became more apparent toward the close of World War II. A disgraceful incident describes the contempt we had for the man and has anti-communist Nationalist government. In late 1944, FDR and other U.S. military and diplomatic leaders were busy discussing the conquest of Burma which was under Japanese control. They wanted Chiang’s Chinese forces to move quickly into Burma. However, they wanted their own hand-picked General Joseph W. Stilwell to take charge of the troops. Anthony Kubek explains the shameful scenes that followed:

“President Roosevelt again urged the Generalissimo to place Stilwell in command of all Chinese forces. Chiang was willing to agree on condition that the power of distributing lend-lease supplies would remain strictly under his control. But Stilwell confided in his diary: “If the G-mo [Chiang Kai-shek] controls distribution, I am sunk. The Reds will get nothing”. . . .

“. . . Marshall submitted a blunt message to Chiang with Roosevelt’s approval. The Generalissimo was asked (1) to reinforce the Chinese armies in the Salween area in Burma and to press their offensive in conjunction with the British, and (2) to place Stilwell in “unrestricted command” of all Chinese forces. . . .

“The message arrived in Chungking on September 19, 1944, with instructions that Stilwell was to deliver it “in person.” Stilwell was full of jubilation; he had waited for this moment to deliver an ultimatum to the Generalissimo. He noted in his diary: “President’s message arrived. Hot as a firecracker. ‘Get busy, boy, or else.’ ‘Do it now.’ The Peanut will have a red neck on this one.”

“General Hurley advised Stilwell this was not the time to deliver the President’s message. To quote from his later testimony, “I said (to Stilwell) ‘You shouldn’t now, because of this firm language, pile it on him at a time he has felt compelled to make every concession that we have asked. He has made them; he is ready to go; he is ready to bring troops down from the North to reinforce you in the Salween front; he is going to appoint you commander-in-chief.” Stilwell would not change his mind. He wanted to humiliate the Generalissimo and said, “I am directed by the President to hand it to him.

“. . . When Hurley handed the message to Chiang Kai-shek, the Generalissimo read it and Hurley noticed “. . . that he looked like he had been hit in the solar plexus. . . . “ Silence followed; no one moved. Then Chiang Kai-shek reached over to his tea cup and put the cover on upside down. Stilwell, in Chinese asked, “That gesture still means, I presume, that the party is over?” Someone in Chiang’s staff said, “Yes.” Stilwell and Hurley then walked out. . . .

“Stilwell’s lack of tact and his persistent urge to aid and use Communist forces shattered any confidence Chiang Kai-shek had in placing him in command of Chinese armies . . . John Stewart Service, U.S. foreign service officer in China, had some understanding of the true meaning of the recommendations and what Chiang suspected. “This was, in effect, a proposal that the Chinese Communists be armed,” Service later testified” (Anthony Kubek, How the Far East Was Lost: American Policy and the Creation of Communist China, 1941-1949, 214-216).

China23

If this was a one-time event, it could perhaps be written off as a simple blunder. However, the U.S. government’s consistent pattern of behavior toward Chiang Kai-shek and China proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that FDR and his administration favored the Chinese communists and did everything they could to undermine the establishment of a free China.

I quote once more from Kubek. He stated:

“It is a tragedy we did not accept the repeated warnings of Nationalist leaders and others that the Chinese Communists were part of a Marxist movement for world domination. Perhaps some blame should be placed on the Generalissimo for not selling this point to American officials. He saw the Red threat in the Far East far better than many of our foreign service officials. As a result of our miscalculations, deliberate or otherwise, we are today faced with a formidable threat – Red China. It can be said that the serious menace we face in the Far East was not due to our lack of information. On the contrary, our tragic policy in that area can be mostly attributed to the opposition of U.S. foreign service officers and other American officials to Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalist Government. These Americans frustrated attainment of our traditional and unannounced aims in Asia – preservation of the “territorial and administrative” integrity of China” (Anthony Kubek, How the Far East Was Lost: American Policy and the Creation of Communist China, 1941-1949, 217).

Volumes of additional evidence could be cited showing the duplicity and pro-communist sentiments of U.S. government personnel and military leaders. However, for the remainder of this article we turn the spotlight on General Chiang Kai-shek’s own witness and account of the Red takeover of China. In his highly-detailed book Soviet Russia in China: A Summing-Up at Seventy, Chiang gave a sometimes day-by-day account of how the communist conquered China. In numerous locations, Chiang’s history shows the betrayal and neglect showed by the United States. I now quote at length from his book, though I’m only able to quote a small portion of what I would like to and shift the burden upon the reader for additional study. Chiang testified:

“It was a matter of great regret that our ally, the United States, should stop its supply of arms to the Chinese Government at the very moment when the Chinese Communists began their anti-American activities. Earlier, in April [1946], following the Chinese Communists’ breach of the cease-fire agreement, the American Government had stopped its US $500,000,000 loan to the Chinese Government. Now it interrupted its military aid to China. At the same time it took no action whatever against the Chinese Communists despite their violations of the cease-fire agreement. In fact, it did not even adopt any measures in the face of Soviet Russia’s arming of the Chinese Communists in Manchuria with Japanese weapons. This dealt a severe blow to the anti-Communist forces and constituted a great boost to neutralism. . . .

“By February 1947 Communist student agitators in Shanghai formed a “Federation of Associations in Protest Against Violence by American Forces in China” as headquarters for students’ anti-American activities in various parts of the country. The federation soon started a “Signature Movement by Chinese students to urge the United States to change her policy toward China.”

“The Chinese Communists launched the “Anti-Violence Movement” when the industrial and commercial circles in the country failed to respond to their agitation against the Sino-American Commercial Treaty. When the people in general again failed to respond to the “Anti-Violence Movement” they switched to a “Boycott American Goods” movement . . . its only objective was “opposition to U.S. aid” and the “expulsion of American forces from China.”

“The American Government obliged by gradually withdrawing its troops from Peiping, Tientsin, Tsingtao and other places, and by discontinuing its military aid to China. Thus, a glorious episode of Sino-American cooperation in the cause of freedom came to an end under the attacks of the Chinese Communists and their international “comrades”” (Chiang, Soviet Russia in China, 185-187).

communism449

A common communist tactic the world over is to request “peace talks,” negotiations, cease-fires, and détentes when things are going badly. These phony “peace talks” and cease-fires serve to buy time for the communists to regroup, rearm, and adjust their strategy. As soon as the communists are fully prepared to resume hostilities, they break off talks and negotiations and violate the cease-fire. We see this tactic successfully employed year after year by North Korea and Russia-backed Palestine, to name only two. Chiang Kai-shek documented this tactic in painstaking detail in his book, giving us many pages of valuable insight. I draw forth just a few lines relative to China’s downfall as examples:

“For security reasons the Government had to conduct military operations against the Communist troops which had taken Kalgan by storm and against the others concentrated around it. Chou En-lai tried to intimidate General Marshall by saying: “If the Government does not call off its military action against Communist troops in Kalgan and in its environs, the Communists will regard it as the open declaration of an over-all rupture.” Shortly afterward he left Nanking for Shanghai to dodge further discussions.

“On October 5 I again accepted General Marshall’s suggestion and ordered a ten-day halt during which the Conference of Three would discuss the military question while the Subcommittee of Five would deliberate on the political issues.

“Simultaneous discussion of military and political questions was originally one of the Communists’ demands. When the Government finally accepted it, they reversed their position by using the Kalgan question as a pretext. Now, after the Government had announced a halt in the Kalgan area, the Communists raised their demands again. . . .

“Chou En-lai also added the following points to General Marshall in a critical tone:

““The Chinese Communists cannot agree to the United States Government giving material aid to the Kuomintang Government at a time of civil war. . . .”

“Thus General Marshall had to return to Nanking emptyhanded. This meant that the Chinese Communists had already succeeded in gaining the time they needed for preparing their all-out insurrection. It also meant that Communist smiles of welcome to American mediation were no longer necessary. This signified the virtual termination of the peace talks and military mediation centered around General Marshall as a result of the Chinese Communist sabotage. As in the six previous instances the peace negotiations, which lasted for more than one year this time, also ended in failure.

“As the Chinese Communists showed no signs of willingness to resume negotiations after the expiration of the ten-day truce, Government troops retook Kalgan. . . .

“At this juncture, leaders of parties other than Kuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party, and nonpartisan leaders offered to mediate as “the third side.” On October 25, 29 and 30 a series of talks were held. The terms which they produced were likewise rejected by the Chinese Communists. In the meantime the Chinese Communists and the Democratic League launched anti-American movements in Peiping, Tientsin, Nanking and Shanghai.

“On November 10, only two days before the National Assembly was due to open, Chou En-lai said to General Marshall: “Whether the National Assembly is merely postponed or convened unilaterally, in either even there will be no room for any more political discussions.” Thus it became clear that the Communists’ real purpose was to prevent the convocation of the National Assembly and the introduction of constitutional rule.

“Meanwhile, it also became very clear that they intended to sabotage the peace talks and military mediation altogether and to resort to armed rebellion to subvert the country . . . on November 11, on the eve of the convocation of the National Assembly, I made a final appeal to them in the hope that they would, whether before or during the Assembly meetings, submit a list of Communist delegates and have them take part in the deliberations to give national backing to the launching of constitutional rule. . . .

“. . . The Chinese Communists were the only ones who had refused to submit a list of their delegates. The Democratic League, which had up to now posed as an independent neutral, tore off its mask and followed the example of the Chinese Communists by refusing to attend. After the opening ceremony the National Assembly decided to call a three-day recess to wait for the Communist and Democratic League delegates to turn up, but in vain.” (Chiang, Soviet Russia in China, 175-181).

Chiang again wrote of the international efforts to sabotage the establishment of a free China with a democratic government:

“[O]ne could see that behind Soviet Russia’s sabotage of the American mediation was her wish to replace the United States as mediator so that she could manipulate the Chinese political situation.

“In December 1946 the United States announced the end of its mediation effort in China. Shortly thereafter General Marshall went back to America and the Chinese Communists openly launched a general rebellion. During the year which followed Soviet Russia and the Chinese Communists both directly and indirectly kept on asking the Chinese Government for resumption of peace talks. In the autumn of 1947, when Government troops were advancing toward Chefoo, Weihaiwei and Penglai on the southern coast of the Gulf of Chihli, their request for cessation of hostilities and resumption of peace talks became more urgent than ever. . . .

“. . . the Chinese Communists made use of American mediation as part of their neutralist tactics. In other words, they saw in the American mediation a chance for the growth of neutralism, just as they had seen in the cease-fire agreement a convenient cover for their military movements. Once the cease-fire agreement was concluded, their purpose in accepting U.S. mediation had been achieved. After that they no longer considered themselves bound by any stipulations in the agreement.

“On the other hand, the Government’s eagerness to abide by the agreement put its troops in a passive position and made them easy prey for the Communists. Now we know that the Communists accepted American mediation in order to sabotage it and they concluded the cease-fire agreement in order to break it. This created a situation of neither war nor peace in which fighting and peace talks went on side by side. This was the practical application by the Communist International of the laws of dialectics both in its basic stratagem and in its line of action. All through the year 1946 the Communists used this stratagem to gain time to complete their preparations for a final military showdown with the Government.” (Chiang, Soviet Russia in China, 190-192).

China19

Chiang gave us valuable insight into how the communists subverted China. His insight is detailed and specific. The Red blueprint doesn’t change much, so this history ought to wake us up because the same tactics are being used in our own nation. Chiang recounted:

“After October 1948, when the Hsuchow-Pengpu Battle was at its critical stage and when the people and those in the Government were under the spell of Communist infiltration, there came into circulation a slogan to the effect that “Unless President Chiang goes, no American aid will be forthcoming,” and that “Unless President Chiang goes, there can be no peace talks.”

“In these circumstances, I decided to retire from office. I did so on January 21, 1949. The moment I was gone both the armed forces and civilians on the mainland seemed to have lost a symbol of common purpose. Thus, the political situation, social order and the people’s minds all fell under the Communists’ invisible control. The military situation deteriorated rapidly and soon became irretrievable.

“In their political activities and social movements, both the Chinese Communists and their front organizations, especially the Democratic League, had to take certain stands and were, therefore, easily identified. The same thing, however, could not be said of infiltration by these front organizations. They penetrated deep into government organs, representative bodies and civic organizations. They even joined such anti-Communist religious bodies and secret societies as the Kolaohui [a secret society in Szechwan province]. They also got hold of military men who had fought the Communists either in or outside the battlefield and politicians who acted as go-betweens between Kuomintang and the Communists. Through infiltration or encirclement they manipulated these public bodies and individuals directly as well as indirectly in order to attain their own objective.

“It was generally thought that ex-militarists, ex-bureaucrats and merchants and brokers seeking profits through speculation would make poor Communists or fellow travelers. In seeking to subvert the country and to destroy the social order, the Communists found that the more degenerate these people were the more useful they would be in working for the Communists and in running their errands. Their task was to help shake the very foundation of society and demoralize the military and the civilians alike by such slogans as “oppose conscription,” “oppose requisition,” “oppose mobilization” and “oppose civil war.”

“Though the Government knew the latter were acting as the Communists’ jackals, it felt its hands were tied by democratic institutions, and as long as they operated under the cloak of “freedom” and “human rights,” the Government could not take any action against these religious bodies, secret societies, underworld characters, gangsters, disgruntled politicians and profiteers who had come under the Communist grip. It was in this manner that neutralism and defeatism came to spread in the Government and in the armed forces, paving the way for Communist rumors to foment dissatisfaction, to stir up trouble and to create antagonism and disunity between the Government and the people” (Chiang, Soviet Russia in China, 188-190).

Can you see the eerie similarities in recent events in the United States? Can you see how our own so-called “representatives” are selling us out in order to benefit themselves and extend the reach of the invisible hand that controls events? Can you see the same infiltration, the same propaganda pitches, and the same feelings of despair, neutralism, and defeatism that are pervading our society? Can you see the same communist front groups – feminism, LGBT radicals, environmental extremists, Antifa, the Democratic Party – at work today to “shake the very foundation of society and demoralize the military and the civilians alike”? The game plan is nearly identical – and the results will be the same unless we wake up and fight back.

General Chiang was one of history’s staunchest anti-communist fighters. A large section of his book is addressed to the world. He learned from firsthand experience how communists conquer a nation. He personally witnessed and forever mourned China’s defeat. He desired that the rest of the world would use the store of knowledge and experience he had gained regarding communist tactics and deceptions, as well as what works and what doesn’t in the fight against intentional Marxism. Again I stress that I’m sharing only a thimble full of the wisdom contained in Chiang’s remarkable book Soviet Russia in China. Chiang warned us:

“The Communists’ camouflage, deception and propaganda war are practical manifestations of their dialectic laws of contradictions and of negation. For instance, their resort to political assault to disguise their military operations, their assumption of a defensive posture to cover their offensive action, their use of propaganda war containing nothing but casuistry and falsehood, and their combining enticements with intimidation, all these are based on the principle of “unity in contradictions.” Again, for instance, their use of peace talks to negate or undermine their opponent’s morale and their use of hostilities at the same time to negate the peace talks with their opponent, are based on the law of “negation of negations.” In short, the Communists in their propaganda war stop at nothing wicked and mean to achieve their goal, i.e., in creating suspicion and disturbances. They are particularly adept in the fabrication of stories with no factual foundations, in misrepresentation such as “pointing at a deer and calling it a horse,” in distortion and in the forging of documentary proofs all of which they consider legitimate – even virtuous. Whenever it suits their purpose, they represent Satan as God or God as Satan. What the Communists say and what they do are entirely two different things. It is obvious that they had themselves robbed the people under their control of freedoms, and yet they asked the Government for all political freedoms. In areas under Communist control, there was nothing but darkness and regimentation, an yet in their external propaganda they boasted of political democracy and of a bright future for their slaves. In Communist terminology, “people” means the Communists themselves, “liberation” means enslavement, “peace” means another form of war and “coexistence” means exclusive Communist control. It follows that the smile they put on is another facet of their evil nature. The free world should be ready to expose and attack this kind of propaganda before anyone falls prey to it.

“In their “peaceful coexistence” campaign, the Communists have developed two methods of approach, which can easily lead the free world to think that the Communists are really seeking peace, or to consider their suggestions as genuine roads to peace.

“Peace talks. To ordinary people, peace talks represent a transitional path from war to peace. Whenever the Russian or Chinese Communists ask for “peace talks,” people in the free world instantly take it to mean that they will not engage in any more war of aggression. But, to the Communists “peace talks” do not constitute a path to peace, but are just another form of war. They start peace talks not for the purpose of attaining the objective of peace, but for the purpose of attaining their objective of war. The peace talks which the Chinese Communists held with the Government were to serve the following purposes:

“Peace talks could delay attacks by Government troops. . . .

“Peace talks could cover up preparations for armed revolt. . . .

“Peace talks could enlarge the following for neutralism, and expand the reserve strength of the front organizations. . . .

“Peace talks could undermine the morale of Government forces. . . .

“Peace talks could create the impression of “two Chinas” in the free world.

“Therefore, both the Russian and Chinese Communist love protracted negotiations . . . protracted negotiations carried on by the Russian and Chinese Communists represent a method of struggle with them.

Cease-Fire Agreement. “Respite tactics” are often resorted to by the Russian Communists. To secure a needed respite, they will not only negotiate with their enemy but will sign cease-fire agreements with him and, in fact, will even go so far as to conclude a peace treaty with him. . . .

“To the Communists, it is not simply a defensive tactic. They use peace talks and cessation of hostilities to reinforce and replenish their troops in preparation for the next attack; they use them also to start a political propaganda campaign to sow suspicions between their enemy and his allies, to strike at his morale, and to shatter his internal solidarity. To the Communists, all these are positive functions of peace talks and cease-fire agreements. . . .

“If we judge the Russian and Chinese Communists’ proposals for peace talks and cease-fire in the light of the dialectic law of negation, we can immediately grasp their very essence. Why do the Russian and Chinese Communists always want to hold peace talks and sign a cease-fire agreement while at war but violate the cease-fire agreement and resume fighting after it has been signed? We must understand that in their ideology, peace talks and cessations of hostilities are the negation of war, and to sabotage the peace talks and violate the cease-fire agreement is the negation of this negation. When they cannot win by force, they stop fighting and hold peace talks instead, they may even sign a cease-fire agreement. When they succeed in splitting the enemy’s camp, shattering his will to fight and destroying his morale, they will negate their peace talks and cease-fire agreements, for the purpose of waging, and winning, the final decisive battle” (Chiang, Soviet Russia in China, 374-377).

Chiang6

Ladies and gentlemen, you have just read some of the most eloquent and frank descriptions of communist tactics and aims you will ever read. Will you heed them? Will you rush forward to save your own country from similar collapse? Will you finally put aside alternative theories – false theories – that blame anyone else but the Satanic communists for the plight of the world? It is time, long past time, to treat the Reds as a cancer than must be quarantined and eradicated if the world, let alone our own Republic, is to survive. Communism must die if America is to survive!

We can begin on our journey by learning about communism. We can learn the history of communist conquest around the world, most prominently in Russia and China. China’s example in particular provides an excellent account of how American traitors aid the international Bolshevik movement. It proves that conspiracy exists. It proves that the people we elect and send to Washington are not on our side and couldn’t care less about Freedom. It proves that many of our “heroes,” most prominently FDR, are in fact traitors and comrades in the Red conspiracy.

If we are to heal and move forward, we must acknowledge the tragedies of the past – tragedies orchestrated by an elitist clique of Marxist gangsters who want to subjugate the world. It is not a conspiracy theory, it is a conspiracy fact. Do you have the courage to embrace and help spread the truth? Or will you self-censor because the social media giants, the controlled media, and the raucous chorus of mindless lemmings attempt to shout you down? Unless we want our fate to be Red China’s, we will endure the hate, oppose the efforts to silence us, and push back mercilessly against the communists.

Chiang Kai-shek was correct when he asserted:

“It can be said that the greatest threat posed by international Communism lies in Asia, and this threat stems mainly from the Chinese Communists. The fall of the Chinese mainland was a tragedy to the world and its seriousness is only beginning to be recognized. Had my Government remained on the mainland, there would never have been such calamities as the Korean War and the Communist occupation of northern Korea and northern Indo-China. The place to begin combating Communism in Asia, therefore, is mainland China” (Chiang, Soviet Russia in China, 348).

As the current Hong Kong unrest shows, China’s regime is still brutal and constitutes a direct threat to free peoples everywhere. And the threat will only grow. Already our military generals are warning that China has nearly reached our level of expertise (and Russia has surpassed it in some respects). We should never have to hear the solemn declaration that “[the U.S. military] might struggle to win, or perhaps lose, a war against China or Russia” (National Defense Strategy Commission, November 14, 2018) or “China’s impressive military buildup could soon challenge the United States across almost every domain” (Admiral Harry Harris, February, 2018). Yet, that is what our generals are telling us.

President Trump, for all his host of flaws, is correct in also pointing out Red China’s currency manipulation and economic subterfuge. For years, China has been taking advantage of the West – and most often with the consent of the big business tycoons. Whether you agree or disagree with implementing tariffs on Chinese goods as a solution, it should be obvious that we must find a solution, and fast. The communist world is gearing up for their end game against the West as we crumble under the weight of Marxist subversion of our Faith, Families, and Freedom.

This war, like the one waged in China in the 1940s, can have only one of two outcomes for us: Victory or defeat. Which will it be? Will be maintain peace through strength or will we allow our nation to be bartered away to Chinese and Russian communists and their dupes here in America? Will we allow our anti-communist fighters to be insulted, denigrated, and smeared while the Elite run roughshod over the will of the People? Will we allow the communist-controlled press to demoralize us or will we catch the vision of heroes like General Chiang and resist communism to the last? Will we win or will we lose? Our fate is in our own hands.

Whatever we choose and however it plays out – and I believe things will get much darker before the light bursts forth – remember that communism is Satanism and that the Devil’s days are numbered. Christ has already won the victory! The only thing left to decide is what part we will play in this epic saga. Will we choose the right team? Will we help minimize the expansion of evil and tyranny by waking up and fighting back in our own sphere of influence? God help each of us to do so! And let each of us have the faith required to see this through to the end when the Red flag will go down and never more rise.

“I have unswerving faith in the re-emergence of my country as a free united nation and in the eventful triumph of freedom over slavery throughout the world.” – General Chiang Kai-shek, Soviet Russia in China, 349.

communism204

Zack Strong,

August 31, 2019.

To Be Prepared for War

Peace through strength is an ancient concept. It was the Roman modus operandi as Rome expanded her influence across the known world. It was also the policy pursued by our very own George Washington. In our modern world of appeasement and surrender to the forces of tyranny, maintaining peace through strength has become a uniquely American custom. It is not only the national policy followed by great American presidents, but that which is followed by American gun owners every day. Peace through strength, then, is part of the true American heritage.

America43

In his first annual message to Congress, President George Washington stated: “To be prepared for War is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.” In the very next breath, he continued: “A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined” (George Washington, First Annual Message to Congress, January 8, 1790). When you examine the annals of history, whether you look in ancient Israel, manly Sparta, gallant Rome, or in the American Republic, you find that free people have always been armed. Indeed, arms in the hands of freemen distinguishes them from serfs and slaves.

The philosophy “peace through strength” derives from common sense and practical experience. All human experience shows that unscrupulous men, criminals, and tyrants, prey upon the defenseless and weak. Evil people are frequently cowards and their victims are usually targets of opportunity. And no one is more defenseless and presents an easier target than the unarmed and weak. This is the reason why lunatics choose to shoot people in gun-free zones rather than in locations where free men and women are armed and able to defend themselves.

The same is true of nations. An Evil Empire like the Soviet Union preys upon weak nations. They backpedal and try to negotiate (though they only make deals when it benefits them) when a nation presents a strong and united front against them. Instead of launching a risky frontal assault, they resort to subversion, infiltration, psychological warfare, terrorism, and guerrilla tactics in order to demoralize, weaken, corrupt, confuse, and undermine an opponent before they ever attempt conquest by force.

Communist Russia and Red China will never attempt to take down the United States through force of arms unless we have been sufficiently degraded on the inside first. Unfortunately, that horrific day is swift approaching as cultural Marxism (i.e. feminism, LGBT, radical environmentalism, “civil rights” movements, political correctness, etc.) rips through our vital institutions. We are becoming a weak nation because we have been too politically correct to stand up to the Reds and to call a spade a spade. We are so afraid of offending someone, hurting their feelings, or causing a stir that we suffer abuses and reductions in our personal rights and national influence rather than boldly confront the enemy.

When necessary, a free society must use its arms and strength to defend itself. This should be a last resort to preserve peace, but it must be an option. A nation that is not prepared to defend itself presents a soft target to an aggressor. The Red Chinese commonly refer to the United States as a “paper tiger” that doesn’t have the stomach for a long struggle. They think we are weak and will eventually crumble because they have yet to see us stand up and confront them in a meaningful way. Islamic terrorists (which are primarily trained and funded by Soviet Russia) hold this same philosophy. America’s enemies cannot be appeased or bought off – appeasement only emboldens them.

We learned through our experiences with Barbary pirates at the beginning of our Republic that buying peace with tribute makes our enemies insatiable and actually increases the problem. Because of a lack of naval power at the time, President Washington was forced to pay the Islamic pirates who were raiding our ships rather than face them in battle. President John Adams did the same while creating a navy that could eventually contend with overseas opponents.

military7

President Thomas Jefferson was the first president to use our newly minted Navy and Marines to punish the pirates and defend America’s vital international trade. After the War of 1812, President Madison sent the U.S. Navy to the Mediterranean to finish what President Jefferson had started. Our Navy devastated the pirates, ensuring peace between the United States and the Barbary States for generations. We learned from this episode that peaceful relations can only be established with hostile states by standing up to them or crushing them with overwhelming strength. Evil people and regimes only bow to power.

Because of his experience as a colonel during the French-Indian War and as commander-in-chief of the Continental Army during the Revolution, President George Washington understood this principle perhaps better than anyone. It infuriated him that the United States did not have the means to deal with enemies who ruthlessly attacked peaceful trading vessels and harmed Americans and America’s interests. In a letter to the Marquis de Lafayette, he raged:

“[H]ow is it possible the great maritime powers of Europe should submit to pay an annual tribute to the little piratical States of Barbary. Would to Heaven we had a navy able to reform those enimies to mankind, or crush them into nonexistence” (George Washington to Marquis de Lafayette, August 15, 1786).

Washington understood that only an armed society – both on a personal and a national level – could retain their Freedom against the multitude of adversaries and tyrants that abound in the world. He knew that freemen could only remain so if they were strong and projected their strength. Part of this was to always be ready for war so that a potential aggressor would think twice before attacking – and so that he would severely regret it if he did.

At the beginning of our War for Independence, General Washington encouraged his troops to stand firm against British tyrants. He said:

“[T]he hour is fast approaching, on which the Honor and Success of this army, and the safety of our bleeding Country depend. Remember officers and Soldiers, that you are Freemen, fighting for the blessings of Liberty—that slavery will be your portion, and that of your posterity, if you do not acquit yourselves like men . . . every one for himself resolving to conquer, or die, and trusting to the smiles of heaven upon so just a cause, will behave with Bravery and Resolution” (George Washington, General Orders, August 23, 1776).

George Washington35

The “smiles of heaven” only rain down upon those who take the pains to defend themselves and increase their own human strength. Only the vigorous and valiant are worthy of divine intervention and blessings. Only by “fighting for the blessings of Liberty,” and remaining virtuous, can Americans remain freemen. And all real freemen are soldiers – warriors for justice, truth, and Liberty.

All true freemen are armed and prepared for battle at a moment’s notice – whether against a domestic enemy or against an invader. This is precisely why Samuel Adams envisioned America as a “Christian Sparta” (Samuel Adams to John Scollay, December 30, 1780). Like the Spartans, “molon labe,” or “come and take it,” would be our war cry. It was strict adherence to this principle of preparing for war and being ready to defend the peace, coupled with faithful obedience to God’s laws, that made America great. And the same course can make America great again.

Similar to Washington and Adams, Thomas Jefferson believed that strength was a means of preventing war. He wished every American freeman to be a soldier. He stated:

“[T]he Greeks and Romans had no standing armies, yet they defended themselves. the Greeks by their laws, and the Romans by the spirit of their people, took care to put into the hands of their rulers no such engine of oppression, as a standing army. their system was to make every man a soldier, & oblige him to repair to the standard of his country, whenever that was reared. this made them invincible; and the same remedy will make us so” (Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Cooper, September 10, 1814).

This remedy – namely, to arm and discipline our citizens in the art of war – would make America “invincible” to foreign threats so long as we also remain virtuous. A free nation that expects to remain free must be prepared for war. We prepare for war but pray for peace. As Thomas Paine expressed it: “Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it” (Thomas Paine, The American Crisis, No. 4, September 12, 1777).

The phrase “peace through strength,” in its modern context, was popularized by Ronald Reagan during his 1980 campaign against socialist appeaser Jimmy Carter. For eight years, President Reagan preached peace through strength and tried to get America back to her roots. While President Reagan was only marginally successful in his gigantic task, reminding ourselves of some of his inspiring thoughts seems appropriate.

America39

During one of the presidential debates with then President Jimmy Carter, candidate Reagan said:

“Now, I believe, also that this meeting, this mission, this responsibility for preserving the peace, which I believe is a responsibility peculiar to our country, that we cannot shirk our responsibility as the leader of the Free World, because we’re the only one that can do it. And therefore, the burden of maintaining the peace falls on us. And to maintain that peace requires strength. America has never gotten in a war because we were too strong” (Reagan/Carter presidential debate, October 28, 1980).

In a speech to the American People regarding national security, President Reagan explained the need for strength to combat the Red menace – the exact same menace we face today at home and abroad. He rightly observed:

“We know that peace is the condition under which mankind was meant to flourish. Yet peace does not exist of its own will. It depends on us, on our courage to build it and guard it and pass it on to future generations. . . .

“. . . American strength is . . . a sheltering arm for freedom in a dangerous world. Strength is the most persuasive argument we have to convince our adversaries to negotiate seriously and to cease bullying other nations.

“. . . American power is the indispensable element of a peaceful world. . . .

“But it is not just the immense Soviet arsenal that puts us on our guard. The record of Soviet behavior – the long history of Soviet brutality toward those who are weaker – reminds us that the only guarantee of peace and freedom is our military strength and our national will. The peoples of Afghanistan and Poland, of Czechoslavakia and Cuba, and so many other captive countries – they understand this.

“Some argue that our dialogue with the Soviets means we can treat defense more casually. Nothing could be further from the truth. It was our seriousness about defense that created the climate in which serious talks could finally begin. . . .

“Our job is to provide for our security by using the strengths of our free society” (Ronald Reagan, speech, February 26, 1986).

military21

Think about it, who is more likely to persuade a thug to put down his gun – an unarmed negotiator with no leverage or a seasoned police officer with a raised rifle? The answer is obvious. Though the Soviets have broken literally every treaty they ever signed with the United States, they were wary of President Reagan because they knew that he would not hesitate, if necessary, to launch nuclear missiles and a full-scale war against the communists in defense of America and the West.

One of my favorite Ronald Reagan moments demonstrates President Reagan’s willingness to stand up to the communist threat. It occurred on August 11, 1984, when President Reagan told a joke. Though clearly a joke, it contained a large kernel of truth. During a microphone sound check prior to his speech, President Reagan mused: “My fellow Americans, I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.”

I can’t listen to the audio recording of this classic moment without laughing. Yet, the Soviets weren’t laughing – and not because Russians don’t have much of a sense of humor. Rather, these communists – who consider themselves in a permanent state of war with the West – understood that in Ronald Reagan they had a man who would not cower in fear, kow-tow to Moscow, or back down to Soviet advances. Evil regimes like the Soviet Union only gain momentum unless forcibly stopped in their tracks and resisted manfully by one of equal or greater strength.

President Reagan’s views were inspired by his belief that God founded this country and that we are not only exceptional, but that we have a mission to lead the world by our shining example:

“I’ve always believed that this land was set aside in an uncommon way, that a divine plan placed this great continent between the oceans to be found by a people from every corner of the earth who had a special love of faith, freedom and peace. Let us reaffirm America’s destiny of goodness and goodwill” (Ronald Reagan, Thanksgiving message, 1982).

America67

Part of being the world leader is helping to preserve peace when it is within our sphere of influence and duty. President Reagan rightly affirmed:

“We’re not a warlike people. Quite the opposite. We always seek to live in peace. We resort to force infrequently and with great reluctance, and only after we’ve determined that it’s absolutely necessary. We are awed – and rightly so – by the forces of destruction at loose in the world in this nuclear era. But neither can we be naive or foolish. Four times in my lifetime America has gone to war, bleeding the lives of its young men into the sands of island beachheads, the fields of Europe, and the jungles and rice paddies of Asia. We know only too well that war comes not when the forces of freedom are strong; it is when they are weak that tyrants are tempted. . . .

“Of all the objectives we seek, first and foremost is the establishment of lasting world peace. We must always stand ready to negotiate in good faith, ready to pursue any reasonable avenue that holds forth the promise of lessening tensions and furthering the prospects of peace. But let our friends and those who may wish us ill take note: the United States has an obligation to its citizens and to the people of the world never to let those who would destroy freedom dictate the future course of life on this planet” (Ronald Reagan, Republican National Convention acceptance speech, July 17, 1980).

Is America today up to the task of being great and exceptional? Are we prepared to increase our unique national strength by fortifying our Faith, Families, and Freedom? And are we prepared to defend these fundamental institutions, and this Promised Land with her unsurpassed resources and beauty and potential, with the strength of arms and military might if necessary? Are we truly prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice to ensure that the blessings of Liberty we take for granted will extend to our posterity? If today we are not prepared for war to safeguard our peace, our rights, and our homes, we are not worthy of the title American.

General George Washington’s wise words of encouragement to his fighting men should pound once more in our ears. Two days before America formally declared Independence from British tyranny, General Washington wrote to his patriot soldiers to embolden them in their fight. He reminded them what was at stake – slavery or Freedom. He explained that all eyes were fixed on them and that they would decide whether tyranny or Freedom was to reign in America. And he explained the eternal truth that freemen motivated by the just cause of Liberty and aided by the God of Heaven are more fearsome than any conquering army ever can be. General Washington declared:

“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their Houses, and Farms, are to be pillaged and destroyed, and they consigned to a State of Wretchedness from which no human efforts will probably deliver them. The fate of unborn Millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this army—Our cruel and unrelenting Enemy leaves us no choice but a brave resistance, or the most abject submission; this is all we can expect—We have therefore to resolve to conquer or die: Our own Country’s Honor, all call upon us for a vigorous and manly exertion, and if we now shamefully fail, we shall become infamous to the whole world. Let us therefore rely upon the goodness of the Cause, and the aid of the supreme Being, in whose hands Victory is, to animate and encourage us to great and noble Actions—The Eyes of all our Countrymen are now upon us, and we shall have their blessings, and praises, if happily we are the instruments of saving them from the Tyranny meditated against them. Let us therefore animate and encourage each other, and shew the whole world, that a Freeman contending for LIBERTY on his own ground is superior to any slavish mercenary on earth” (George Washington, General Orders, July 2, 1776).

America106

Today, the eyes of the weary world are upon America. For years we have let them down. Our example has been less than exceptional, not particularly notable, and, in recent times, not worthy of duplication. We have allowed the communist cancer to eat away at our vitals until now we stand on the brink of civil war, mobocracy, economic collapse, open persecution of Christians and constitutionalists, and full-scale societal breakdown.

Notwithstanding how far we’ve fallen through our own neglect and rejection of God’s eternal laws, we have it within our power to step forward, do our duty, and restore our Republic. There will be sacrifices to make – and some patriots will lose their lives because Freedom is never won except at the price of blood – but we must make them for our sake, the sake of our posterity, and the sake of a beleaguered world that desperately needs us to lead.

I close with the rousing words of Ronald Reagan. Each syllable is true. Every vowel applies to me and to you in our present situation. The burden for the future rests squarely on our shoulders. If we shirk our duty now when it matters most, history will hold us in contempt. Let us be real men and real Americans. Let us honor the American tradition of preserving peace through strength and in always being prepared for war in order to secure an honorable peace. Let us be freemen worthy to be mentioned in the same breath as General Washington and his patriot army. God bless us and God bless America!

“If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth. . . .

“Alexander Hamilton said, “A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one.” Let’s set the record straight. There is no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there is only one guaranteed way you can have peace — and you can have it in the next second — surrender.

“Admittedly there is a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson in history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face — that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight and surrender . . . And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don’t speak for the rest of us. You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. . . .

America104

“You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness.” (Ronald Reagan, “A Time for Choosing,” October 27, 1964).

Zack Strong,

August 28, 2019.