Wednesday, April 10, 2024

Violence the Current USA Reality

Crime issues in the USA and Canada primarily stem from the disregard for authority and law and order by various groups, irrespective of race or ethnicity. This disrespect manifests through criminal activities involving illegal weapons, drugs, and gang affiliations.


Across North America, citizens are growing weary of lenient justice systems, with judges and politicians often neglecting the severity of gang-related crimes. Despite escalating violence in both urban and suburban areas, there's a concerning lack of acknowledgment from those in power.


It's evident that simply throwing money at the issue won't resolve it. What's needed is a shift towards stringent prosecution for all crimes, rather than the current cycle of arrest and release, especially concerning juvenile offenders and illegal migrants who drop out of school and remain reliant on welfare.


There's an urgent call for elected officials who grasp the gravity of the gang and drug problems, particularly within certain communities. These issues often stem from societal disillusionment, a lack of education, and a refusal to accept authority.


Law-abiding citizens are seeking leaders who uphold the law without hesitation, unlike the current trend of pandering to special interest groups and political ideologies. It's time to hold politicians, judges, and law enforcement accountable for their inaction and prioritize the safety and well-being of communities.


We must reject the influence of unelected bureaucrats and technocrats who shape policies without direct accountability to the electorate. Their decisions often prioritize fringe interests over the rights and safety of ordinary citizens.


Furthermore, the focus on animal rights and international standards often overshadows the urgent need to protect human life and uphold the rights of law-abiding individuals. 

Without consistent enforcement of laws, our society cannot claim to be, equal, equitable, just or civil.





Sunday, March 24, 2024

Israel Back Stabbed by Joe Biden for Political Power

The Democratic Party under President Joe Biden's leadership is exhibiting heightened concern regarding the potential loss in the upcoming 2024 Presidential election, leading to a preoccupation that risks overshadowing their recognition of key allies and supporters.

In Biden's fervent pursuit of maintaining political dominance, there appears to be a tendency to overlook the importance of nurturing alliances and fostering relationships with trusted partners.

This phenomenon underscores the imperative for the party to recalibrate its strategies and prioritize collaborative efforts with both longstanding allies and emerging supporters in order to fortify their position and ensure a resilient path forward for their continued political power.

Keep in mind that "Joe Biden has been wrong on every major foreign policy decision in the last 4 decades"

Since the 1979 takeover of Iran by the country’s Islamic revolutionary government it has had one overriding ambition: to be the lead player in shaping the future of the Middle East and it wants Israel weaker and the United States gone from the region after decades of primacy. To quote their own statements " It wants Israel wiped off the face of the earth."

Yet we have heard that Britain, France, Germany and the USA governments all preach and say they are firm supporters of Israel's right to exist. Yet, each is also facing domestic criticism of that support as is the week US President Joe Biden who, keep in mind, "Joe Biden has been wrong on every major foreign policy decision in the last 4 decades."

Israel is supposedly an Allie and protected by the USA, Britain, France and Germany however, remember the USA's position during the beginning of the Second World War was one of isolationism and appeasement by the Democratic Party. Today the Democratic Party and its leader President Joe Biden are concerned about the votes in the following states that have a Muslim population as follows:

North Carolina. Percentage of Muslim Population: 1.3% ...

Arizona. Percentage of Muslim Population: 1.5% ...

Massachusetts. Percentage of Muslim Population: 1.9% ...

Minnesota. Percentage of Muslim Population: 2% ...

Virginia. Percentage of Muslim Population: 2%

At the same time keep in mind that today France actually has the largest Muslim and Jewish populations in Europe. Macron - President Emmanuel Macron of France says that he supports Israel's right to defend itself. But he's trying to also call for a humanitarian truce to get aid through which also is a stab in the back to the Isreal people and its government.

I strongly suggest that the purported leaders of democracy in the USA, Britain, France, and Germany exhibit a greater preoccupation with maintaining political power and their incumbency than with safeguarding Israel's inherent right to self-defence, especially as the sole democracy in the Middle East. Rather than upholding their commitments as principled statesmen, they should take decisive action against terrorism, particularly Hamas, which is fueled by Iranian support.

It is imperative for these leaders to unequivocally support Israel in eradicating the threat posed by Hamas once and for all, rather than misleading the Israeli government and its people with calls for ceasefires. While hostages remain in the clutches of this terrorist group, continually funded by Iran. and until Hamas is once and forever defeated and eradicated as a terrorist organization in Gaza.

Otherwise, like after WW1 and WW2 the world because of these weak-kneed leaders shall find themselves fighting such barbarian terrorists in their own countries for years to come. Appeasement did not work and does not work with terrorist organizations and nations whose sole aim is the destruction of Israel.


 These Countries Presently Don’t Recognize Israel

























North Korea




Saudi Arabia





United Arab Emirates





Monday, March 11, 2024

Todays Progressive, Socialist, Liberal leftism

The leftist is ant individualistic, and pro-collectivist. He/she wants society to solve everyone’s problems for them, satisfy everyone’s needs for them, and take care of them. They are not the sort of persons who have an inner sense of confidence in their ability to solve one’s own problems and satisfy one’s own needs. The liberal leftists are antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, they feel like losers.

What one is trying to get at in discussing liberalism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Yet today the movement is fragmented, and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When speaking of liberal leftists, one has in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, “politically correct” types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists, climate activists, globalists, and the like.

Yet not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. Thus, what one means by “liberalism” is perhaps to indicate roughly and approximately the two psychological tendencies that are the main driving force of modern liberal leftism.

By no means can one group or movement claim to be telling the whole truth about leftist psychology. Also, this is meant to apply to modern liberal leftism only. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern liberal leftism are called “feelings of inferiority” and “over-socialization”.

Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern liberal leftism, while over-socialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern liberal leftism; but this segment is highly influential.

By “feelings of inferiority” in the whole spectrum of related traits; low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him/her (or about groups with whom she/he identifies) one can conclude that he/she has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem.

This tendency is pronounced among minority rights activists, whether they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities and about anything that is said concerning minorities. The terms “black”, “oriental”, “handicapped” or “chick” for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. “Broad” and “chick” were merely the feminine equivalents of “guy”, “dude” or “fellow”. The negative connotations have been Those who are most sensitive about “politically incorrect” terminology is not the average person of colour, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any “oppressed” group but come from privileged strata of society.

Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle- to upper-middle-class families.

Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior.

The leftist liberals themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems.

Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as men. Clearly, they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.

Liberal Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good, and successful. They hate Canada; and America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality and the view of others.

The reasons that liberal progressive leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They say and claim they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in third-world cultures, the liberal leftist finds excuses for them, or at best they GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas they ENTHUSIASTICALLY point out (and more often than not greatly exaggerate) these faults where they appear in Western civilization.

These faults are not the leftist’s real motive for hating America and the West. They hate, Canada, America, and the West because they are strong and successful.  Words like “self-confidence”, “self-reliance”, “initiative”, “enterprise”, “optimism”, etc., play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary.

Have you noticed that art forms that appeal to modern leftish intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat, and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment?

Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, and objective reality and insist that everything is culturally relative. One can indeed ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftish philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge.

They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e., failed, inferior).

The leftist’s feelings of inferiority run so deep that he/she cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests.

Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behaviour because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual’s ability or lack of it.

Thus, if a person is “inferior” it is not his/her fault, but society's, because he/she has not been brought up properly. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him/her a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, or a ruthless competitor.

This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself/herself but rather a deficit in his/her sense of power and self-worth, but they can still conceive of themselves as having the capacity to be strong, and his/her efforts to make himself/herself strong produce their unpleasant behaviour. 

But the leftist is too far gone for that. Their feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that they cannot conceive of themselves as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. They can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which they identify.

Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police and others to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they prefer masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait. 

Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principles do play a role for the leftists of the over-socialized type. But compassion and moral principles cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behaviour; so is the drive for power.

Moreover, much leftist behaviour is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously, it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them.

However leftist activists such as Black Lives Matter do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power.

In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists’ hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.  If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to invent problems to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.

Let me stipulate and emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.

Saturday, March 9, 2024

January 6 Committee Suppressed Exonerating Evidence Of Trump’s Push For National Guard

Liz Cheney and her committee falsely claimed they had ‘no evidence’ to support Trump officials’ claims the White House had asked for 10,000 National Guard troops.

Former Rep. Liz Cheney’s January 6 Committee suppressed evidence that President Donald Trump pushed for 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the nation’s capital, a previously hidden transcript obtained by The Federalist shows.

Cheney and her committee falsely claimed they had “no evidence” to support Trump officials’ claims the White House had communicated its desire for 10,000 National Guard troops. In fact, an early transcribed interview conducted by the committee included precisely that evidence from a key source. The interview, which Cheney attended and personally participated in, was suppressed from public release until now.

Not only did the committee not accurately characterize the interview, they suppressed the transcript from public review. On top of that, committee allies began publishing critical stories and even conspiracy theories about Ornato ahead of follow-up interviews with him. Ornato was a career Secret Service official who had been detailed to the security position in the White House.

Top Takeaways:

A January 6 committee staffer asked Ornato, “When it comes to the National Guard statement about having 10,000 troops or any other number of troops, do you recall any discussion before the 6th about whether and how many National Guard troops to deploy on January 6th?” Ornato surprised the committee by noting he did recall a conversation between Meadows and Bowser: “He was on the phone with her and wanted to make sure she had everything that she needed,” Ornato told investigators.

Meadows “wanted to know if she need any more guardsmen,” Ornato testified. “And I remember the number 10,000 coming up of, you know, ‘The president wants to make sure that you have enough.’ You know, ‘He is willing to ask for 10,000.’ I remember that number. Now that you said it, it reminded me of it. And that she was all set. She had, I think it was like 350 or so for intersection control, and those types of things not in the law enforcement capacity at the time.”  Ornato was correct. Bowser declined the offer, asking only for a few hundred National Guard and requiring them to serve in a very limited capacity.

Bowser’s decision to decline help from the White House did not end the Trump team’s efforts to secure troops ahead of the protest. When the D.C. mayor declined Trump’s offer of 10,000 troops, Ornato said the White House requested a “quick reaction force” out of the Defense Department in case it was needed.

Once the Capitol was breached, the Trump White House pushed for immediate help from Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and grew frustrated at the slow deployment of that help, according to the testimony. “So then I remember the chief saying, ‘Hey, I’m calling secretary of defense to get that [quick reaction force] in here,” Ornato said. Later he said, “And then I remember the chief telling Miller, ‘Get them in here, get them in here to secure the Capitol now.'”

Cheney and her committee falsely claimed they had “no evidence” to support Trump officials’ claims the White House had communicated its desire for 10,000 National Guard troops. In fact, an early transcribed interview conducted by the committee included precisely that evidence from a key source. The interview, which Cheney attended and personally participated in, was suppressed from public release until now.

Read the full article below:

Friday, March 8, 2024

VERIFYING claims from President Biden’s 2024 State of the Union address

President Joe Biden delivered his third State of the Union address to a split Congress on Thursday, March 7, with Republicans controlling the House and Democrats controlling the Senate. 

Biden touched on the Israel-Hamas war, the nation’s economy and healthcare, among other issues.

Following Biden’s address, Alabama Sen. Katie Britt, the youngest Republican woman elected to the Senate, delivered a response for the GOP.

The VERIFY team fact-checked claims from Biden’s address and the GOP response. 


President Biden: “Inflation has dropped from 9% to 3%, the lowest in the world.”


Inflation rates have indeed dropped from 9.1% to 3.1% in the United States, which is among the lowest in the world. However several countries have lower rates.


In June 2022, the annual inflation rate in the United States was 9.1%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The most recent inflation number, from January 2024, shows that annual rate has fallen to 3.1%.

Data from multiple sources show that number is lower than in much of the world, including some other major powers. The United Kingdom, for instance, reported a 4.2% inflation rate in January 2024.

However, several countries – including major powers – reported lower inflation rates. Canada, for instance, reported 2.9% inflation in January.

Sign up for the VERIFY Fast Facts newsletter here


President Biden: “Former President [Trump] told Putin, ‘Do whatever you want.’”


YouTube video published by WMBF News of Former President Trump’s South Carolina rally on Feb. 10, 2024


This is true.

Trump said at a February rally that he would encourage Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” when discussing  NATO countries that don’t pay enough for defence. 


Former President Donald Trump said during a rally in Conway, South Carolina, on Feb. 10 that, while he was president, he warned NATO allies that he “would encourage” Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to countries that are “delinquent.”

Trump told a story at the rally about an unidentified leader of a NATO country who asked him whether the U.S. would defend member countries against Russia if they don’t pay enough for defence.

“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’ I said, ‘You didn’t pay, you’re delinquent.’ He said, ‘Yes, let’s say that happened.’ No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want.”


Biden: “The Alabama Supreme Court shut down IVF treatments across the state.”  



This is false.

No, Alabama did not shut down IVF treatments across the state.


On Feb. 16, the Alabama Supreme Court decided that frozen embryos can be considered children under state law. The ruling did not make IVF treatments illegal in the state, University of Arkansas law professor and reproductive rights expert Jill Lens and Katie O’Connor, director of federal abortion policy at the National Women’s Law Center told VERIFY. 

While the ruling did not ban IVF treatments, it could have made them difficult to access. 

Facing pressure to get IVF services restarted in the state, on March 6 Alabama’s governor signed legislation into law shielding doctors from potential legal liability raised by the court ruling.

View all @

Saturday, February 24, 2024

Keeping Democracy Alive 2024

Most left-leaning academia like Hedges are left-wing ideologists and hold the belief, that democracy of the free-market system and capitalism is dysfunctional and has no proper competition with reasonable rules, but what are his alternative suggestions for proper completion and reasonable rules that are required under his ideals and theories of spiritual enlightenment for a socialist utopian collective community based on wealth distribution?

On a pragmatic and philosophical ground, the important point is that the pursuit of happiness is on an individual basis, not a collective right, as my dreams are different from yours and someone else’s is completely different from both of ours.

For example, the political holy grail of progressive socialized liberalism and some feminists is that the government should control, and taxpayers should fund childcare, daycare and cradle-to-grave benefits. Others hold the opinion that it is not the children who require liberating from the family but perhaps the mother should be liberated from the child. It is not only the fathers who are supposed to guide their youth but the mothers, fathers and grandparents of their offspring who are directly responsible for the youth of today and their upbringing, not governments or political parties.

The responsibility for sheltering, raising, feeding, and clothing is the direct responsibility of those who decide to conceive or adopt a child. 

Government-run hand-out programs and mass social herding formulas for housing, rent, childcare and unsustainable subsidies or socialism/communism is not the answer as history has shown.

It is however a worldwide failure and has done nothing other than create ghettos of segregated warehouses of poor people living in misery.

For myself, I believe, any fair-minded individual would not dispute the political reality that today the core agenda of progressive domestic social liberalism relates to the support for a welfare state, abortion and the racial identity politics of multiculturalism-based redistribution of wealth through class warfare and the concept of open borders.

An unmanageable national debt aggravated by spending and borrowing for unsustainable entitlements and handouts has both caused and exacerbated the burden of an inequitable system of taxation whereby 10% of the US population pays 80% of all taxes and 43% of Americans account for 20% of paid federal taxes while 47% of the US population pay NO federal taxes?

Thus, the so-called wealthy in the US already pay the brunt of taxes while 47% pay no taxes. In Canada, 33.4% of citizens pay less than $2 in federal taxes. Therefore 66.6% of Canadians are subsidizing 33.4% of the population. A fair share, in Canada and the US, should mean that all citizens pay an equal amount of taxes as opposed to paying NO federal taxes at all.

Any mischief, based on an excessive desire to acquire and possess more than what one needs or even deserves especially for material wealth, did not originate from nor is it limited to that of the Wall Street or Bay Streets of the world. It all began with the greed of Union leaders as well as their members be it auto workers, teachers, hospital workers, government employees, political appointees’ etc. along with politicians; corporations and the shareholders of publicity traded companies. Such firms and organizations also represent companies in the resource development sector for green energy solutions and other special interest groups publicly traded around the globe.

Because of our now excessive and numerous government regulations and attempts to micromanage the free enterprise system through government controls and outright nationalizations of industries or corporations combined with excess wage, benefit and pension demands by all guilty parties’ businesses go to China, India, South America, and other countries around the world to find a less expensive workforce and less government.

Unfortunately, the leaders today, be they politicians or union leaders, seem far more concerned with raising political donations or union dues through new members for their re-elections and play fast and furious with our money for their success and prosperity at the expense of those who actual pay taxes or union dues.

It is not only individuals like Hughes who feel they are entitled to receive handouts from others or the wealthy.

It’s politicians, academia, artists, academics, students, bureaucrats, corporations, unions, special interest groups, it`s your neighbours and those that pay little or no federal income taxes all of whom fanatically believe they are entitled to their entitlements at other people’s expense.

This is not freedom or democracy but a resurgence of progressive totalitarian socialized liberalism. If anything, occupying pressure groups protesting the Wall Streets or Bay Streets of the world or individual achievements and wealth without any pronounced alternatives suggest anarchy. Perhaps as most academics preach, they wish for a return to Fascism, Maoism, Maoism, Communism or 21st-century totalitarian socialism.

History has documented for us all that unexpected power by revolutions throughout the world are prone to arrogance, disrespect, intrusive, and short-lived freedoms for the people at the expense of law and order, liberties and freedoms. For example, the French Revolution, given the benefit of history, "it's difficult to understand why anyone doubts the fascist nature of that revolution. It was totalitarian, terrorist, nationalist, conspiratorial and populist.

And it produced the first modern dictators, Robespierre, and Napoleon. The paranoid Jacobin mentality made the revolutionaries more savage and crueller than the king they replaced. Over fifty thousand people died in the terror of that revolution."

The Russian Revolution and its later day revolutionary leaders were responsible for the deaths of more than 40 MILLION people in the name of that revolution.

The Chinese Revolution under Mao saw over 65 MILLION people killed in the name of that revolution. The Cuban revolution saw close to 50 thousand kicked, tortured, and terrorized and thousands of political prisoners remain in jail for daring to speak up against Castro and his brother.

Unfortunately, today’s elected career politicians and bureaucrats within this new world consist mostly of blame passers who never take responsibility or come to grips with their refusal to stand up and be held accountable.

Money left in the hands of taxpayers is far more productive than putting it in the hands of career politicians, special interest groups and unelected bureaucrats.

Democracy yes, yet anarchy, class warfare and revolutions have been shown to destroy freedom; liberties and countries not build them.