The Manosphere's Red Pill Cult, many of whom work hand-in-glove with the Far Left to foment racial hatred have come up with an 'alternative' holiday to MLK Day. The new meme is to honor Confederate General Robert E. Lee instead. Blogger Vox Day, an expat living in Italy, apparently came up with the idea. He writes as follows at Vox Populi:
"This would actually make a potentially effective meme next year. Instead of celebrating the sacred martyr of an alien tribe, celebrate a true American and a hero of Virginia and of the South."
There are three things that Vox seems to have overlooked here. First is that the alien tribe didn't immigrate to the United States of its own free will. Secondly, General Lee actually fought for a system that kept Blacks here, whether they wanted to stay or not. Third, it's difficult to comprehend how a man who led a rebellion against the US Government qualifies as a true American.
Martin Luther King, in contrast, was a Christian minister who advocated civil rights through peaceful means. His entire message essentially was that the Constitution not be overthrown, but enforced. Blacks, he claimed, should demand that their rights as Americans be respected; and that discrimination was de facto, illegal. Which the Supreme Court agreed with in several cases heard during the middle 20th Century.
Robert E. Lee, a son of the privileged Southern Aristocracy, lifted up his hand against the Constitution and joined the Secessionists who---much like the Whacko Left today---refused to recognize the legitimacy of the 1860 Election. The Confederate leaders were the 'not-my-president' types of their day. They adopted numerous illegal means to subvert the government, including setting up rump-state legislatures in Border States where they couldn't obtain Secessionist support. The most notable example was Texas: where a real American hero, Sam Houston was governor and stood firm for the Union. Houston was ousted from office by a sham convention, which demanded he take an oath to the Confederacy. Houston said:
"Let me tell you what is coming. After the sacrifice of countless millions of treasure and hundreds of thousands of lives, you may win Southern Independence if God be not against you, but I doubt it."
Sam Houston, Patriot
And just as Leftists today do; the Secessionists harassed Houston with everything including death-threats; and he died in virtual obscurity in 1863. The illegitimate government that Lee served was guilty of numerous Crimes Against Humanity. The brutal POW camps like Andersonville and Salisbury; illegal executions of Union soldiers; property confiscations; press censorship; forced labor---these were the characteristics of the Noble Cause that Lee supported. And it is no doubt the type of Regime that the Red Pill Cultists would support.
Granted, we believe that other notable Americans besides the Reverend Dr. King should be honored with holidays as well. But it is absurd to argue, as these Red Pills do, that King is not a true American patriot and hero; while Confederate officials should be venerated instead. King's Christian vision for the future was one where we are all Americans; under one God, one Flag, and one Constitution.
Trump's first foreign policy challenge may be coming on the horizon shortly after the Inauguration from an unlikely place: the tiny island nation of Bahrain. Our Corporate Media---far more focused on publishing lurid gossip about bed-wetting prostitutes and children lured into pizza-parlor basements---has ignored a situation which has been spiraling out of control for some time.
Bahrain is a geopolitical time-bomb set by Obama, Clinton, and Podesta that is on the verge of going off at any moment. The island the headquarters of the 5th US Fleet, a major oil exporter, and once was an exotic, though little-known tourist destination. Bahrain has been ruled by Sunni Moslem monarchy since the 1700s, although the population is predominantly Shiite. When Bush Junior stationed the fleet there, the Monarchy drew closer politically to Wahhabi countries like Saudi Arabia and has embraced the extremist cult. When Clinton and Soros initiated the so-called 'Arab Spring' in 2011, the Bahraini people began demonstrating against Wahhabi rule and for democracy. Little did they realize that the Arab Spring was intended to promote Wahhabi rule.
Thus, the Obama Administration looked the other way while the Bahraini Regime imported troops from Saudi Arabia and the UAE to crush the demonstrations. Things have gone from bad to worse there ever since. Demonstrations are increasing, the Government becoming even more repressive.
This Sunday, the Bahraini Regime executed three men who allegedly bombed a police station in 2014. We say allegedly because this was anything but a fair and transparent trial---many in the Arab World believe this to have been a 'show trial'. Iran, Bahrain's neighbor and natural ally to the Shiites have been protesting the executions the most; the Ayatollahs are calling for fairly harsh measures against the Regime.
There are reportedly running street-battles and demonstrations breaking out all over the island. The Bahraini people are at a breaking-point and this situation could end in an all-out civil war. And as small a country as Bahrain is, the implications of that scenario are even worse for US interests than the Syrian Civil War.
Trump has opportunity here to make the moral choice; which we hold as siding with the Bahraini Insurgents. For Trump to do so would accomplish many positive things---not the least of which is securing freedom for the island. From a political standpoint, reversing Bush's and Obama's policies in Bahrain would have the following effects:
1. It would show to some skeptics that Trump truly is a principled Conservative;
2. It would prove to the Arab World that Trump really is offering them a New Deal;
3. It would allow us to keep our strategic Naval base there;
4. It would lessen Iran's influence on the island among the populace and teach the Saudi Wahhabis that they aren't the ones in control of the Middle East;
5. It would restore peace to Bahrain and keep it as a valuable trading-partner and a true friend to the US.
For Trump to do this, though, will be a test of his political courage. The corrupt Democrats---who take bribes from the Wahhabis---will oppose it. The RINO/Neocon ignoramuses will reflexively balk at siding with a movement that has Iranian support. If Trump is wise, he'll take the ball from Iran and run with it. Possession is 9/10s of the law here. We have a presence on Bahrain and Iran hasn't; strengthening our position there and winning the Bahraini people to our side would be a strong diplomatic bargaining-chip in bringing Iran to the table for any future negotiations.
This course we encourage Trump to take. Do the right thing and bring freedom to Bahrain.
Red Pill blogger Andrew Anglin of The Daily Stormer has been advertising an armed march of Skinheads and Manosphereans since late December. This supposed to occur on Monday (MLK Day) through the small resort village of Whitefish, Montana. Now, Whitefish is a ski resort town---and one can well imagine the economic hardship that a Nazi demonstration in a village of 7,000 people would cause on a 3-day weekend in mid-January.
Fortunately, Anglin's plan for a jolly weekend of photo-ops and terrorizing Jews has fallen through. The amusing part of the whole story is that it failed because these would-be manly Alpha leaders of the New Order couldn't put together a simple application for a Parade Permit.
In a letter dated January 10th, Whitefish City Manager Chuck Stearns informs Anglin that the application is incomplete, and therefore denied for the 16th. Stearns lists are as follows what the application still lacks:
1. A map of the intended parade route.
2. The remaining $65 of the stated $125 permit fee.
3. A Certificate of Insurance.
4. A Notification for businesses and residences effected by the street closure.
According to the Whitefish Chamber of Commerce's website, the next scheduled parade is during the Whitefish Winter Carnival on February 5th; so it's difficult to imagine that obtaining a Parade Permit there is especially complicated. Stearns reminds Anglin in the letter that the instructions are clearly stated online.
Anglin, of course, blamed everyone but himself for this humiliating defeat. Especially the town's few dozen Jews whom he imagines are trying to seize control of the village. He was quite exorcised that businesses along the parade route could object to the permit---especially since he's been encouraging his followers to harass them online and otherwise for the past month. Anglin evidently hasn't learned a lesson that most men learn just before puberty: it doesn't pay to be a jerk.
Hopefully the negative publicity that Anglin generated hasn't harmed Whitefish's economy too much. Readers in Montana who enjoy skiing may want to make a trek out to Whitefish on Monday. And make sure to buy local, too.
A story that's been making the rounds on the Internet and Twitter today centers on the unusual transition of power on Inauguration Day within the DC National Guard. General Errol Schwartz, their commander, has been effectively relieved at 12 Noon on January 20th, in the middle of the Inauguration Ceremony.
Though somewhat against traditional protocols, this story ordinarily would be a non-issue. However, the Corporate Media and the Radical Left are blaming Schwartz' removal on Trump (though Obama is the only one could have done this). They're also raising non-existent 'security concerns' arguing that the DC Guard will have no leadership. This, of course, is fake news, because command automatically devolves upon Schwartz' second-in-command officer.
What is troubling about this story is that the Media---with Obama's apparently complicity---seems to be cultivating the illusion that there will security gaps during the Inauguration. Now, this is the same Corporate Media which has been whipping up anti-Trump hysteria since November 8th.
Why is this important? Because a lot of unbalanced whackos in the US have been listening to celebrities warning of coups, Russian infiltration; as well as calling for outright martial law or other illegal means to keep Trump from assuming office. Some of these same whackos are now listening to the Media talking about potential security failures at the Inauguration. In other words, our Corporate Media has just set out bait for anyone who wants to become the next Lee Harvey Oswald.
Unless a potential assassin is armed with an ICBM, such an attempt would have no prospect of success. These types of presidential ceremonies are typically better guarded than an average US Military base. But the Left does likely desire the disruption and chaos that would occur from such an incident.
We've been writing a lot recently here about mass-communications being employed to radicalize people and trigger unstable individuals to action. The Corporate Media here is doing exactly that. Trump is probably in no real danger of harm from a command-shift in the DC Guard. But if a crackpot imagines that he sees an opportunity here...then the Corporate Media walks away afterwards and say that they had no responsibility for it.
Censorship is not the answer; and yes, the Media has a right to report a story like this. Whether reporting it---and certainly the construction they've put on it---is responsible reporting or not is another matter.
The American public needs to start holding purveyors of information accountable for these kinds of tactics. Freedom and Democracy are largely about self-policing. We need to call out stories like these for what they are. Just making the public aware of them foils many such plans.
An article we published on Tuesday about the radicalization of young men by pseudo-Christian cults led blogger Insanity Bytes to draft an open letter to Pastor Doug Wilson. The link to her post is here. Wilson is frequently quoted by these Red Pill/Manosphere writers whom---as we've mentioned before---is really more like a cult: hostile to both Christianity and Conservatism.
Pastor Wilson himself is head of a Reformed Church congregation in Moscow, Idaho. Some of things he's written on race-relations and some of his revisionist history regarding the US Civil War are controversial to say the least. But those things aside, he wrote a reply to Insanity Bytes, and by extension this blog: the text of which is here.
The general tenor of his response is that, while he agrees that Dylann Roof deserves execution for his crimes; he feels that extremist rhetoric has little do with the root causes of such crimes---and is not relevant anyway. This in spite of his claims further on in the article that extremist Liberal rhetoric is the root cause of Far Right extremism. He claims, for example, that Liberal abuse of terms like 'racism' actually encourages non-Liberals to be racists; and that---in cases like Roof's which lead to murder--- only the deed and not the motivation should be considered.
The question that I would pose to you, sir is: Would you make this type of argument if we were discussing Islamic, as opposed to Christian, radicals? Would you seriously argue that young men are radicalized into Wahhabi and Salafist Jihadist cults because the Western media depicts 'all Moslems as terrorists'? And that the Madrassas and ISIS propaganda don't radicalize anybody?
This is what Pope Francis meant when he stated recently that the tongue was a greater weapon than guns or bombs. To draw an analogy: if you give a farmer in Idaho a gun and explosives, he'll probably use one to hunt for game and the other to clear stumps, or boulders from his property. Convince him that the Black family down the road is biologically primed to rape and murder his wife and daughter; that sinister Jews are encouraging them to do so; that women are irresistibly attracted to such men; and that it his Christian duty to defend them---in that case, the peaceful farmer may find a more deadly employment for such implements.
You may argue that, according to the Letter of the Law, that the one who convinced of these falsehoods is not legally liable; but as Pope Francis said, the moral and spiritual liability is self-evident. It may be so that Judas was responsible for betraying Jesus; but the Pharisees who offered the reward and the Devil who tempted Judas are not innocent. One cannot simply wash his hands, and assume like Pontius Pilate did, and say "The blood be on your hands."
This is precisely what these Red Pill/Manosphere bloggers are doing---and using Christianity as a cover. They openly advocate violence against women, the overthrow of democracy, and sow dissension between races and even among Christian denominations. Then when someone acts on their teachings, they disclaim any responsibility for it.
The issue is not, as you do, to shift the responsibility onto Liberals and claim "I don't blame movement Conservatives for it." I will blame them. For decades now, mainstream Conservatives have sat passively on the sidelines and not put a decided stop to any of this. The resurgence of the Far Right is not a spontaneous phenomenon that's risen in righteous indignation against Liberal excesses---it's the gradual culmination of Conservatives refusing to stand against it: first with Talk Radio; then with outlets like Fox News; then with the Internet.
Don't imagine that ignoring it is going to make it go away. The Red Pills argue that most Christian denominations are false and that most Conservatives are compromised. They are not our allies. Please understand that they are just as much the polar opposite of our position as the Radical Left is.
In the days before Political Correctness and revisionist history, Hollywood frequently produced American historical epics. These types of films are generally no longer produced; the modern Corporate Media has neither the talent, the education, nor the political will to make them. Our forefathers understood, though, that great men did great things in real life; and their exploits were commemorated as examples of what the human spirit was capable of achieving.
Our film recommendation for this weekend dovetails somewhat into the hopes and aspirations of the incoming Presidential Administration because it depicts an incident that first established the US an international power. The film is from 1963, titled 55 Days at Peking. It stars Charlton Heston, David Niven, and the beautiful Ava Gardner.
Since US history is rarely taught anymore, it is necessary to give the historical background to this story, which took place historically during the Summer of 1900 in China. China was then in a state of political disintegration; nominally ruled under Empress Tzu-Si, but controlled mostly by local warlords. The Chinese government was covertly aiding a band of religious/nationalist religious terrorists and fanatics who were known as the Boxers in the Western media because they incorporated traditional Chinese martial arts within their cult.
The Boxers were a short-lived cult, but they had a phenomenal rise---much like ISIS in our modern times---and in 1900 seemed about to take over all of China. Also like ISIS, the Boxers were ruthless, anti-Western, and fanatical---they destroyed Christian Churches and Western-owned business---murdering hundreds of innocents until they reached Beijing.
The foreign embassies in Beijing (then called Peking) were in a walled section of the old city to which the Boxers laid siege. The US embassy guard commander formed a militia of the foreign guards under the political command of the British Ambassador, played in the film by Heston and Niven, respectively. They send an urgent telegram for help before communications were cut---and stood against the Boxers for nearly two months, without knowing whether help would arrive or not. Of course, historically it did---an 8-nation expeditionary force reached Beijing and rescued the garrison in August 1900. This was America's first participation in a global military venture; and the Boxer Rebellion collapsed after failing to capture the embassy.
As an interesting historical side-note, future US President Herbert Hoover and his wife were among those civilians trapped inside the compound. They were engaged in Chinese humanitarian work at the time.
In 55 Days at Peking, Charlton Heston plays Marine Corps Major Matt Lewis, who became the military commander of the besieged garrison (based on Capt. John Myers, who was the actual commander during the siege). He has a tough job---holding the disparate elements of the compound together against dwindling supplies, uncertainty of rescue, and the stratagems of the wily Boxers. Facing a situation not seen by an American force since the Alamo, Lewis is determined not to let it end the same way. He finds encouragement in the love of a beautiful Russian baroness (played by Ava Gardner) and a refugee missionary (played by Harry Andrews). Which depict the truth that courage, love, and faith can survive during the darkest times against an irrational evil.
This film is 160 minutes of action and a testimony to the best in human nature rising to the occasion when called for. This is 2 1/2 hours much better spent than listening to contemporary Hollywood characters plotting to sabotage a democratic election---who'll no doubt be quite vocal this weekend.
55 Days at Peking is available on DVD and currently available for free at Youtube and most other video sites.
With the Inauguration of the 45th President now only a week away, we in the Prozac Nation can no doubt expect an upsurge of neurotic episodes from frustrated anti-Democracy extremists. We've seen notable breakdowns and public tantrums already from Stephan Colbert, Hilary Clinton, Keith Olbermann, Meryl Streep, various Academics, and today from Rosie O' Donnell.
Rosie is an obese, gutter-level, trash-culture 'entertainer' who's been mentally teetering on the brink of complete psychological collapse for some time. Her chronic obesity and constant state of emotional rage actually triggered an apoplectic stroke in 2012. She's finally completely lost it now; going on a Twitter rampage calling for the US Military to overthrow Trump.
Next to O'Donnell's Twitter avatar---which tellingly depicts her wearing what looks like a Burger King crown---she writes: "I fully support imposing martial law---delaying the Inauguration---until Trump is cleared of all charges!"
What charges does she mean? She answers somewhat ramblingly: "Show us your taxes! Show us your taxes! Show us your taxes! Show us your taxes! We the people want to see them! Show us your taxes, Trump!"
There's obviously nothing in American law that prohibits holding public office during a tax audit. Trump has so far not released tax records due to the audit results not being tabulated. There have been no tax 'charges' filed; as Rosie apparently claims. Those who've been involved with IRS audits know that criminal charges are very rarely ever filed. Contrary to popular belief, the IRS is usually more willing to settle out-of-court. They usually only pursue criminal charges if income was obtained and assets hidden in conjunction with some other illegal activities. A tax audit is hardly an excuse for martial law.
Given the state of our military today, it would be a questionable issue as to whether they could actually defeat the Secret Service, FBI, and DC Police to take control of the Capitol anyway.
The US has rarely ever seen martial law. Even when it's occurred, it's been under the control of the President; who is the only legal authority who can impose it. The Continental Congress imposed it occasionally during the War of Independence. The Lincoln Administration imposed it often during the US Civil War. During WW2, FDR put the Pacific Coast under military law. It's also been used occasionally locally such as President Grant employing it against a KKK insurrection in 1871 and Bush Senior during the Los Angeles riots in 1992. Essentially then, it has never happened except when civilian authorities have lost control over public order---which is roughly how it is legally defined in the Constitution.
What Rosie O'Donnell is actually describing is a military coup d'état which is an entirely different matter. The United States is so diverse, and so well-armed that this is a completely impossible scenario---and that the Military would attempt it because Rosie O'Donnell demands it--- is even more ludicrous.
Rosie O'Donnell is clearly a mentally sick person; probably suffering from delusions of grandeur and paranoia among many other complexes. She should probably be more pitied than ridiculed; but still a lot of Liberals agree with her on Twitter---and they should know better. This is why we need to expose these fake Cultural Elites in any event because they can influence low-information and uneducated people who don't recognize the insanity that's transparent to the rest of us.
