Tag Archives: Indians

The Homosexual, the Jew, and the Indian

Posted on by

The Democratic Party has entered upon a brave new world as Iowan Democrats threw their support this past week behind three of the most radical candidates ever to run for high office in America: Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren. This article will show how Buttigieg, Sanders, and Warren – a homosexual revolutionary, a Jewish-Marxist, and a fake Indian – represent the public face of the radicalized Democratic Party and what it says about America’s future.

Democrats16

The Democratic Party has perhaps never fielded such radical candidates as those currently vying for the presidential nomination. Yes, they’ve had closet communists like FDR and Obama, but they concealed their true principles in order to deceive the electorate. Today’s Democrat frontrunners, however, have gone full throttle into socialism and cultural depravity, openly courting the extreme “left.”

The apparent winner of Iowa’s Democratic primary race was Pete Buttigieg, a homosexual married to another man. When, despite some major discrepancies in the numbers, Buttigieg declared victory in Iowa, he recognized “the future first gentleman of the United States,” his husband Chasten Buttigieg. His shout out was met with raucous cheers from his mostly female crowd who began a cult-like chant of the name “Chasten.”

Perhaps Buttigieg’s descent into radicalism was inevitable. His father, the Maltese immigrant Joseph Buttigieg, was a Jesuit-Marxist university professor. The Washington Examiner reported:

“The father of Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg was a Marxist professor who spoke fondly of the Communist Manifesto and dedicated a significant portion of his academic career to the work of Italian Communist Party founder Antonio Gramsci, an associate of Vladimir Lenin. . . .

“He was an adviser to Rethinking Marxism, an academic journal that published articles “that seek to discuss, elaborate, and/or extend Marxian theory”. . . .

““They’re part of a wider international community of Marxist theorists and academicians with a particular devotion to the writings of the late Italian Marxist theorist Antonio Gramsci, who died over 80 years ago. Gramsci was all about applying Marxist theory to culture and cultural institutions — what is often referred to as a ‘long march through the institutions,’ such as film, media, and especially education,” [Paul] Kengor told the Washington Examiner.

“Pete Buttigieg, an only child, shared a close relationship with his father. In his memoir Shortest Way Home, Pete called his dad a “man of the left”. . . .

“Pete wrote that his dad was supportive when he came out as gay. . . .

“A self-described progressive, [Pete] Buttigieg has called to abolish the Electoral College system, supports a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, and thinks that climate change is a national security threat.”

Buttigieg4

It is fitting that a devoted Gramscian Marxist would produce a gay, Marxist son who would seek to foist his perversions on the American public. For those who may not be aware, the homosexual movement in the United States was founded by the homosexual Harry Hay, a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA. He founded the Mattachine Society, the first homosexual society in America. He later founded the international group Radical Faeries and the pedophile network the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).

Communists have always been at the forefront of degrading American institutions and pressuring us to accept the abnormal, sinful, and destructive LGBT movement which is part and parcel of The Communist Manifesto’s threat to “abolish the family.” The wave of cultural Marxism sweeping over our society is the greatest threat we face. The communist-led feminist and LGBT movements are at the forefront of converting America from a Christian Republic into a godless Marxian state.

Buttigieg’s presidential campaign has proved that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Just like his father, Mayor Pete is a rabid Marxist. In his Latino outreach program, Buttigieg invoked a communist rallying cry. The Blaze reports:

“Buttigieg announced the initiative on his social media accounts by invoking a Spanish-language slogan that is raising eyebrows among Latino leaders. The mayor of South Bend, Indiana, tweeted “El pueblo unido, jamás será vencido” (“the people united, will never be defeated”), a protest chant that was famously popularized by Latin American communists. The saying was also featured in several campaign communications, including as a call-to-action on a Latino website. . . .

“It is unclear which Americans Buttigieg is referring to, but Latin American Marxists have rallied around the phrase for years.”

Buttigieg2

Buttigieg is an Episcopalian raised in Catholicism. However, as a homosexual, he’s obviously not a very good Catholic or Episcopalian. His brand of so-called “Christianity” is of the Marxist variety. He believes strongly in Liberation Theology or “progressive Christianity.” R. Albert Mohler, Jr. has written:

“Despite the media buzz, when you look closely at Mayor Buttigieg, you find a very progressive candidate. Though he asserts himself as a sane alternative to the far left fringes of the Democratic Party, his moral issues are in lock step with the most progressive wings of the leftist agenda.

“Buttigieg, as homosexual married to a man, zealously advocates for pro-LGBTQ issues. When it comes to issues of abortion, Buttigieg supports an abortion-on-demand system fully funded by the taxpayers of the United States. According to Buttigieg, women ought to have the right to secure an abortion for virtually any circumstance at any point during a pregnancy. . . .

“While Buttigieg acknowledges the existence of a creator, he avows that his sexual identity exists as an extension of the creator’s will—God made him that way. This is a common argument from LGBTQ activists that now rings louder with the candidacy of Buttigieg.

“The argument, however, in no way squares with biblical orthodoxy or the teaching of Scripture.

“Yet, Buttigieg demands that evangelical Christians ‘evolve’ their understanding of holy Scripture. . . .

“Buttigieg subscribes to Liberation theology—specifically, he espouses LGBTQ Liberation Theology . . . This theology replaces the authority of Scripture with the authority of human experience. Moreover, it understands sin not as a transgression against the law and character of God, but as the oppression of a minority by a majority class. . . .

“. . . He does not merely espouse a liberal political ideology—instead, he contends that his Christian faith leads him to no other conclusion other than a progressive agenda. He has made a theological argument for a political reality. He has reinserted liberal theology as the only viable way of reading the Scriptures. He posits a place for religion in the public square, but only a religion in line with liberal theology.”

The Marxist Pope Francis is also a proponent of Liberation Theology, as are most of his fellow Jesuits. “Christians” around the world are embracing this new social gospel and introducing radical concepts that are nowhere to be found in scripture or that blatantly contradict the Bible. For instance, against all logic and scriptural evidence, Buttigieg claims that God made him gay and that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. In an interview with CNN host Anderson Cooper, a fellow homosexual, Buttigieg responded to whether homosexuality is a sin by saying “I don’t believe it is.” He opined:

“Well, the decision was definitely made way above my pay grade. And if you belong to the Christian tradition that I belong to, then you believe that God loves you and you look around and you notice that you’re gay and those two things exist at the same time.

“. . . I really feel that [my] marriage moved me closer to God.”

Buttigieg subscribes to the false ideology that homosexuals are born rather than made. Of course, everyone with common sense knows that a God who has forbidden homosexuality and declared it a sin would not create His precious children gay. The fiery Christian leader, Boyd K. Packer, once said:

“We teach a standard of moral conduct that will protect us from Satan’s many substitutes or counterfeits for marriage. We must understand that any persuasion to enter into any relationship that is not in harmony with the principles of the gospel must be wrong. . . .

“Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn temptations toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Remember, God is our Heavenly Father” (President Boyd K. Packer, “Cleansing the Inner Vessel,” General Conference, October, 2010).

Buttigieg5

A loving Father in Heaven would not give His sons and daughters unnatural same-sex tendencies. And neither does God tempt anyone to sin (James 1:13). To Buttigieg, however, his gayness makes him feel closer to God, showing just how out-of-touch he really is. If he bothered to actually read the Bible, he would know that homosexuality is bluntly condemned by the holy prophets. From God commanding us to “be fruitful, and multiply” (Genesis 1:28), which those afflicted by homosexuality literally cannot do, to commanding a man to “cleave unto his wife” (Genesis 2:24), to issuing the death penalty for homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13), to stating that homosexuality is “against nature” (Romans 1:26), the Bible clearly refutes Buttigieg and his phony social gospel.

As a homosexual progressive of Marxist lineage, Buttigieg is an almost ideal candidate for the radical socialists who masquerade as Democrats. He has said:

“Here’s my message to progressives in the party: I would be the most progressive presidential nominee we’ve put forward in a generation.”

There have of course been other homosexuals in government and positions of public trust, such Eleanor Roosevelt, and many suspected homosexuals like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, but Buttigieg is different in that he has made his homosexuality the focal point of his campaign. Everything else he promotes is only a means of fundamentally transforming America from a Christian nation to a Marxist utopia where anything goes and morality is relative.

The fact that a proud homosexual, and one that harbors communist views at that, is the Democratic Party’s frontrunner tells you everything you need to know about Democrats’ moral compass – or lack thereof.

The Jew Bernie Sanders, who finished in a near statistical tie with Buttigieg in Iowa, is yet another example of the Democratic Party’s march toward communism. Though most Jews don’t like to acknowledge it, and, indeed, call it “anti-Semitic” to say, the truth is that communism was created and forced upon the world primarily by Jews. Adam Weishaupt, the founder of the Order of Illuminati, was a Jew. It was an Illuminati splinter group known as the League of the Just that hired the Jew Karl Marx to polish off a manifesto containing the group’s beliefs. This was published in 1848 as The Communist Manifesto and the League renamed themselves the Communist League.

Bernie Sanders18

Eventually, the part-Jew Vladimir Lenin, who was married to a Jewess and spoke Yiddish, came to head the Communist League, by then called the Social Democratic Workers’ Party. He led this group of predominantly European Jews, funded largely by Jewish bankers, in a vicious coup against Russia. The result was the creation of the Soviet Union, whose first government was about 85% Jewish. By the 1930s, under the reign of Stalin who was married to a Jewess, 1/3 of all Jews in Russia were employed by the Soviet state as commissars, KGB thugs, and GULAG commandants.

It is fitting, then, that the most successful socialist political figure in recent American history is also a Jew. As a Jewish-Marxist, Bernie Sanders doesn’t care about preserving America’s Christian heritage. In 2017, when President Donald Trump appointed an outspoken Christian, Russell Vought, to a position in the White House, Bernie Sanders challenged his worthiness to hold the office on religious grounds. Sanders suggested that Vought was “Islamophobic” simply because he was a Christian and had said he didn’t believe in the same God as Muslims do. Therefore, Sanders voted against Mr. Vought’s appointment, showing his resentment of Christians in general.

In a Times of Israel article from earlier this month, we learn that Bolshevik Bernie considers his Jewishness a key factor in determining his politics. While campaigning in New Hampshire, Sanders was asked by a Jewish woman what role his ethnicity plays in his life. He responded:

“It impacts me very profoundly. When I try to think about the views that I came to hold there are two factors. One I grew up in a family that didn’t have a lot of money . . . and the second one is being Jewish.”

The article then continued with the obligatory “Holocaust” propaganda:

“Sanders recalled as a child reading “big picture books of World War II” and “tears were rolling down my cheeks” as he learned the fate of Jews. He also remembered seeing Holocaust survivors in his Brooklyn neighborhood with numbers tattooed on their arms, and a recent visit to his father’s hometown in Poland, where locals took him and his brother to a site where Nazis committed a mass murder of Jews.

“Much of Sanders’ extended family perished in the Holocaust.”

The “Holocaust” has become part and parcel of the Jewish worldview. It’s rare to find a Jew that doesn’t cling religiously to the old atrocity propaganda and that doesn’t seek to punish white people and Europeans for perceived injustices and alleged “anti-Semitism.” It should be noted, however, that what they call “anti-Semitism” is actually anti-communism. And what they claim happened in the “Holocaust” has been refuted time and time again by the evidence and by historians all across the world – including some Jewish and Israeli historians.

Even the former head archivist at Auschwitz, Franciszek Piper, rejects large parts of the “Holocaust” narrative. In a video interview with the Jewish investigator David Cole, Piper stated that the infamous “gas chambers” were reconstructed by the Soviets after World War II. Of course, he spun the yarn that it was a “gas chamber” before being turned into an air raid shelter . . . before again being reconverted into a “gas chamber” by the Soviets to show the world what had happened. And yet the Auschwitz tour guides tell tourists that the “gas chambers” are the originals used by those mean ol’ “Nazis.” Sounds legit. And yet people have the audacity to call me anti-Semitic for questioning what the “official” historians themselves dispute and for citing books such as Carlos Porter’s Made in Russia: The Holocaust!

Democrats18

Being Jewish almost compels Sanders into radicalism of thought and action. Communism is the most vicious version of this radicalism. Three-fourths of U.S. Jews also vote Democrat. And Jews worldwide are firmly on the socialist side of the political spectrum. Jews have been at the forefront of every socialist movement of the past two hundred years, both in our country and abroad. As Winston Churchill accurately stated:

“There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews, it is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others . . . Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.”

Astonishing, indeed. The horrid screed You Gentiles, written by the Jewish Romanian author Maurice Samuel in 1924, acknowledges the Jewish hand in promoting social revolution. Samuel was proud that Jews are more disposed toward revolution than Gentiles. In fact, he said that this urge toward communistic revolution “is dominant in us.” He likewise wrote:

“Jewish socialism and Jewish socialists are the banner bearers of the world’s “armies of liberation” (Maurice Samuel, You Gentiles, 142).

And again, Samuel boasted:

“We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers forever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will for ever destroy because we need a world of our own, a God-world, which is not in your nature to build” (Samuel, You Gentiles, 155).

As long as they support socialism-communism, they will indeed be “the destroyers.” As noted, international Jewry’s connection to communism is historical fact. Communism, which is a Satanic movement aimed at the “liberation” (i.e. subjugation) of mankind, is disproportionately in the hands of Jews. Bernie Sanders is yet the latest evidence of this long-established trend.

It is not only relevant, but imperative, to note that Bernie Sanders is a Jew. I personally could never bring myself to knowingly vote for a non-Christian – whether Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, or atheist – regardless of his politics. America was founded as a Christian nation and our laws were originally grounded in Biblical Christianity. When we put non-Christians into office – radicals like Bernie Sanders, Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Jerrold Nadler, Adam Schiff, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and others – we erode that sure foundation. It is imperative that we, as a People, turn back to Jesus Christ or we will be swept off this covenant land.

Even as I emphasize Sanders’ Jewishness, I hasten to clarify that his true religion and loyalty is to global communism. He is part of the murder cult of communism and was an open advocate of Soviet Russia at the height of the Cold War. Bernie wants to bring the United States into the Bolshevik brotherhood of slavery and misery. That a Jewish-socialist is on the verge of commandeering the Democratic Party should tell us all how far we’ve sunk as a nation.

Bernie Sanders27

One of the finest minds of the founding era, John Jay, encouraged Americans to vote for Christians. He said it is not only our privilege, but our duty. I end my remarks about Bolshevik Bernie Sanders with John Jay’s relevant quotation:

“Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation, to select and prefer Christians for their rulers” (John Jay to John Murray, Jr., October 12, 1816, in Henry P. Johnston, ed., The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Vol. 4).

We now come to Elizabeth Warren, the Marxist dolt who thinks she’s an Indian. Warren is, without a doubt, one of the looniest candidates to run in a long time. Business Insider reported the following about Warren’s Indian controversy:

“Records indicate that various points in her career, Warren went between identifying as white and Native American. The year before she was hired at the University of Pennsylvania, 1986, she listed herself as a ‘Minority Law Teacher’ on the American Association of Law Schools directory, a tip sheet for school administrators. She continued to list herself as such until 1995 and was repeatedly referenced as a minority in Penn’s yearly equity report. . . .

“Warren’s campaign never offered conclusive evidence, but she told reporters that “being Native American is part of who our family is and I’m glad to tell anyone about that. I am just very proud of it.” . . . .

“The New England genealogical society at first backed Warren’s claim, but upon further investigation, retracted their support, re-igniting the debate.”

Warren3

After President Trump challenged Pocahontas, as he likes to call her, to take a DNA test to substantiate her claims, she did. It was discovered that she is indeed an Indian . . . that is, if you consider 1/1024 Cherokee blood enough to qualify you as an Indian!

Warren at first boasted that the DNA test proved her claims – she was a real Indian. Then she later apologized for claiming she is Cherokee when the Cherokee Nation rebuffed her. I quote now from ZeroHedge article:

“The unexpected apology breaks from Warren’s previous public stance, in which she refused to admit fault. . . .

“The apology follows the publication of an opinion column by Chuck Hoskin Jr, the secretary of state of the Cherokee Nation, in the Tulsa World on Wednesday titled, “Elizabeth Warren can be a friend, but she isn’t a Cherokee citizen.”

“In the column, Hoskin said Warren’s test, which her office said showed strong evidence that Ms. Warren has Native American pedigree “6-10 generations ago,” did not take into account that, for most Native Americans, culture and kinship is what creates tribal membership — not blood, and certainly not 1/1024th thereof.

““This concept of family is key to understanding why citizenship matters,” Mr. Hoskin wrote. “That is why it offends us when some of our national leaders seek to ascribe inappropriately membership or citizenship to themselves. They would be welcome to our table as friends, but claiming to be family to gain a spot at the table is unwelcome.””

Warren should be unwelcome at ever table in America, not just at the Indians’ table. But lying about being an Indian isn’t the only thing she’s fabricated. She once alleged that she was fired as an elementary school teacher because she was pregnant. The facts, however, contradict her feminist propaganda. The Washington Freebeacon reported:

“The Riverdale Board of Education approved a second-year teaching contract for a young Elizabeth Warren, documents show, contradicting the Democratic presidential candidate’s repeated claims that she was asked not to return to teaching after a single year because she was “visibly pregnant.” . . . .

“The Board of Education minutes show a part-time contract for her first year of teaching received unanimous approval during an August 1970 board meeting. Meeting minutes from November 1970 confirm Warren’s account that she was working on an “emergency” teaching certificate, showing unanimous approval “that a provisional certificate be requested for Mrs. Elizabeth Warren in speech therapy.”

“Toward the end of Warren’s first year on the job, in April 1971, the board approved her contract for the following school year, the meeting minutes show. Two months later, the meeting minutes indicate that Warren had tendered her resignation.

““The resignation of Mrs. Elizabeth Warren, speech correctionist effective June 30, 1971 was accepted with regret,” the June 16, 1971, minutes say.”

Warren8

Clearly, Warren’s fabricated tale of being fired is about as true as her stories of Indian heritage. Perhaps her 1/1024th Indian blood is causing her, like other Indians, to see injustices where they don’t exist; and to invent “atrocities” that never happened.

When she’s not trying to bury the hatchet with her fellow Indian squaws and braves or speaking with a forked tongue about being fired from a job she actually resigned from, she’s out on the war path proposing spending plans that would bankrupt the nation. To wit, Warren recently concocted a socialist medicare plan “that would cost $52 trillion over the next decade, including $20 trillion in new spending, which would be covered largely by an array of taxes on corporations, the wealthy and employers in general.” Who doesn’t love new taxes? Especially in a time of economic boom!

Elizabeth Warren is perhaps the ultimate hack in the Democratic Party. But she isn’t just daft. She is also malicious. Fearing what the truth would do to expose her as the enemy to the Republic she is, Pocahontas has introduced a scheme to criminalize what she calls “disinformation.” In an article “Criminalizing free speech online? Elizabeth Warren has a plan for that,” Brad Polumbo wrote:

“On Wednesday, the 2020 candidate released a plan that would impose criminal and civil penalties on those who are deemed guilty of spreading “disinformation.” In a tweet unveiling the plan, she said, “Disinformation and online foreign interference erode our democracy, and Donald Trump has invited both.” The Massachusetts Democrat continued, “Anyone who seeks to challenge and defeat Donald Trump in the 2020 election must be fully prepared to take this on—and I’ve got a plan to do it.” . . .

“There is a real issue with people believing fake or misleading information they see online. . . .

“But criminalizing “misinformation”? That’s the stance of a dictator seeking to squash dissent, not a candidate trying to win over voters earnestly.”

Specifically, Warren proposed:

“Push to create civil and criminal penalties for knowingly disseminating false information about when and how to vote in U.S. elections . . . I will push for new laws that impose tough civil and criminal penalties for knowingly disseminating this kind of information, which has the explicit purpose of undermining the basic right to vote.”

Warren7

This prompts several questions, especially for a person like myself who is constantly writing about political candidates and current events. For one, would I be penalized for writing that Warren is a fake Indian? Though she is technically 1/1024 Indian, that hardly seems enough to qualify. If she qualifies as Indian, then I certainly do through a not-too-distant ancestor on my Dad’s side. Also, would I be penalized for calling Bernie Sanders “Bolshevik Bernie” since he’s not technically a Bolshevik (though his principles are Bolshevist)? Or would I be penalized for saying that Pete Buttigieg is not a real Christian because of his belief in “progressive Christianity”? In all honesty, who gets to decide what is and is not “disinformation”? Snopes? The Democratic Party?

Joseph Sacco, writing for The Resurgent, summed up what Warren’s scheme is really all about:

“Between all the talk of free college, student loan debt forgiveness, and impeachment, Elizabeth Warren is out to destroy whatever freedoms she doesn’t like.

“Warren plans on destroying the First Amendment and the rights of corporations by holding corporations accountable if misinformation is spread on their platforms and it affects voter turnout.

“How Warren’s plan would actually determine how or when said misinformation is not clear but she is very sure that they should be punished. . . .

“I find it especially rich that a candidate who lied about her Native American “heritage” is now lecturing American’s and corporations about spreading disinformation, and then threatening them with criminal charges.

“But again, progressives are about power and control and they will destroy the rights of those who don’t agree with them.”

And that is the heart of why Pocahontas is so wrong – because she is a “progressive” (i.e. Marxist). Like all socialists, she seeks power. And she seeks power by centralizing all things in the hands of the state. From destroying our right to speak out and spread information online, to proposing plans to bankrupt the country, Elizabeth Warren has shown her true colors. She may not be a red-skinned Indian, but she is Red through and through.

Warren10

When you consider their radical principles, outlandish policy proposals, and routine lies, what do Buttigieg, Sanders, and Warren mean for America? I submit that the campaigns of these three Marxists constitute a manifestation of the dramatic cultural shift taking place in our country. While there may be political wins now and then, we have lost nearly every battle on the cultural front.

The LGBT, feminist, transgender, and MGTOW movements are tearing apart our families and marriages and producing a generation of confused young people. Christianity is decreasing at the same time Wicca is the fastest-growing religion in America. The Satanic Temple and other perverse groups are busy erecting Satanic statues throughout the nation and infiltrating local city councils with pagans who are replacing Christian prayers with pagan ones. The infanticide of American infants rolls on. Pornography is on the rise and the Lord’s law of chastity has become virtually meaningless. Profanity is becoming normal and accepted. In almost every discernible way, the American People are losing touch with their Christian roots.

The advent of the Homosexual, the Jew, and the Indian in American politics foretells of darker days yet to come. It portends future flirtation with the forces of cultural Marxism. It suggests that we are becoming desensitized and are beginning to accept what our forefathers understood was harmful. We know from Alexander Pope’s famous saying, that people eventually embrace what they tolerate. He wrote:

“Vice is a monster of so frightful mien, As to be hated needs but to be seen; Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face, We first endure, then pity, then embrace.”

Democrats17

God help us to wake up before we become so accustomed to seeing sexual degenerates, communists, and liars parade before our eyes that we eventually embrace them. May we realize that putting homosexuals like Pete Buttigieg, Marxist Jews like Bernie Sanders, and liars like the fake Indian Elizabeth Warren, into public office can only be dangerous for our Republic. We need men of integrity, virtue, and Christian piety to represent us – not anti-Christians, Marxists, and phonies. Let us finally realize, dear reader, that the Democrats’ brave new world, were we to embrace it, would be a hellish dystopia straight out of Marx’s wildest fantasies.

Zack Strong,

February 11, 2020

Christopher Columbus and So-Called Indigenous Peoples’ Day

Posted on by

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