Corporate Cancel Culture

The ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement is all about Marxism.

People are not allowed to amend the far-left slogan, “Black Lives Matter” and it’s endlessly repeated in all the blue cities. It’s painted in large letters on public thoroughfares. Trying to paint over such graffiti might get you arrested for ‘hate crime.’

If you dare say “All lives matter,” then you could lose your job or face physical violence. If you are foolish enough to utter ‘White lives matter,’ you could lose your social media posting ability, your banking privileges, and you may even fetch the FBI on your tail. Whites are no longer allowed to feel as if they mattered—that’s now considered ‘white supremacism.’ Everything accomplished by European Americans must be discredited,

denounced, and destroyed. All whites are now considered racist—even progressives. Books and movies frowned upon by the BLM are now getting censored in the land of free speech. “Marxism matters” is what I hear from the lemmings who keep repeating the trendy three word phrase. The Democrat socialists are using racial division and the threat of violence to advance their game plan. Part of that plan includes the complete destruction of statues, monuments, and landmarks that help instill pride in America. The Marxists want to destroy national pride and patriotism. Doing so makes it easier for them to replace our Republic with their Marxist system.

It’s therefore strange that many major globalist corporations loudly proclaim their support for the BLM movement, which is not only anti-Christian but also vigorously anti-capitalist. It could be due to the natural reflex brought about by the word ‘diversity.’ All HR departments are very strident about it. It is their primary worship word. Racism and sexism must be stamped out and for the most part it has been, but corporations keep stamping harder and harder when there is really nothing left to stamp.  The CEOs are contributing millions of dollars to the BLM movement as a way to show they are celebrating diversity. In my cartoon I show them climbing over each other in their eagerness to show who’s the best virtue signaler.

Many companies are now instituting hiring quotas and are greatly paring down the presence of white male employees. (The NFL won’t have to do this). Qualifications, skill, and experience don’t matter—only diversity, which is always paramount. Speaking of the NFL, if we ever do see another season, we can expect to see ALL players kneeling out of respect for the BLM. Maybe they’ll change the National Anthem, too—or eliminate it altogether. In that case, the NFL can expect a loss of lot of viewers, including me. That’s not a concern for them, though. Bowing to the BLM is the top concern. For them, virtue signaling is more important than common sense. Nike is a good example. They rewarded Colin Kaepernick with a giant contract for his kneeling and the many disrespectful statements he made against America.

We’ve now entered the wacky world of Marxism, which is not aligned with reality.

Reality has a way of punishing those who stubbornly stay out of alignment for very long.

—Ben Garrison

BLM Violence Reminiscent of the Storming of the Bastille

The Founders needed to use violence to defend their ideals and to build a nation focused on embracing God-given rights and perfecting freedom

Dennis Jamison image

Re-posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesJuly 13, 2020

BLM Violence Reminiscent of the Storming of the Bastille

Today is the anniversary of the storming of the Bastille, a public holiday in France more casually referred to as Bastille Day. This dramatic event in French history is looked on with as much respect and reverence in France as Americans view the colonists taking on the British troops in the “shot heard ‘round the world.” However, contrary to the romanticized image, the people that seized the Bastille were not endowed with altruistic ideals and tempered by principled actions. They were motivated by fear, as well as primitive desires to unleash pent-up anger and frustration. Also, more practical concerns by “shadow” leaders aimed to seize any weapons the mob could capture.

Actually, comparisons between recent mob violence of Antifa and the militant faction of the Black Lives Matter mobs and the mob violence of Paris in the summer of 1789 are appropriate. Young anarchists and older hardened leaders of these organized mobs would likely look upon their own violence as necessary for the “revolution.” The intent behind their violence may have similar roots in the intent behind the storming of the Bastille. Nevertheless, the comparison between the violence of the mobs and the violence initiated by the colonists in what escalated into the War for Independence, is overly simplistic and betrays an ignorance of history.

“If this country doesn’t give us what we want then we will burn down the system and replace it.”

Such ignorance was recently on display when Hawke Newsome, a Black Lives Matter leader from greater New York, appeared on Fox News with Martha MacCallum and threatened to burn the country down if demands aren’t met: “If this country doesn’t give us what we want then we will burn down the system and replace it.” Newsome went on a rant in the Fox interview: “because this country is built upon violence. What was the American Revolution? What’s our diplomacy across the globe? …We go in and we blow up countries and we replace their leaders with leaders who we like. So for any American to accuse us of being violent is extremely hypocritical,” Newsome proclaimed.

Actually, it is not hypocritical. Newsome’s statements reveal more about his lack of true understanding of history and a self-motivated justification for violence. Additionally, if   he is a leader of the BLM effort, he likely has been trained, and trains others, to utilize violence as a means to an end. And, while Newsome had his talking points down in
the interview, a good Marxist would be expected to articulate well all their “demands.” Newsome’s statement in defense of violence against the poor people in the inner cities is what is “extremely hypocritical.”

The sustained ferocity of the widespread rioting, ostensibly sparked by the unjust murder of George Floyd, demonstrated a fairly well planned, well coordinated, and sustained activism—not just an emotional outburst. Innocent people who died in the violence represents a gross injustice. Such violent rioting spread over a prolonged period of time, involving burning, looting, and the destruction of businesses was equally unjust. Minority people who owned businesses that were the objects of destructive and violent rioting were also violated. What about their black lives? Those people who became victims of the BLM mobs were just trying to earn a decent living.

Basically, the mob violence in France in the late 1700s and in the streets of U.S. cities in in 2020 is similar. Merciless, and often senseless, mob violence usually shows similar characteristics. Mob violence and rioting can easily spin out of control and rioters can pursue destruction with great zeal to harm anything or anyone in the way, much like unleashed wild animals ravaging anything in their path. Mob justice allows no respect for law and order. In Paris, on July 14, 1789, an agitated mob acted in similar ways to anarchists and Antifa and BLM terrorist mobs in 2020. Leadership behind both of these two examples of mob terror played a key role in mobilizing and channeling the mob activity.

Storming of the Bastille is recognized as the event that sparked the French Revolution

On the morning of July 14, 1789, an angry mob of around one-thousand people had been roving the streets of Paris as there had been rumors of a political coup taking place at the upper levels of the French government. Many common people were concerned the French government would be mounting an offensive against lower class citizens of the “Third Estate.” They had been aroused and manipulated by rumors that the Royal military of King Louis XVI would attack them. The mob was fearful and felt the need to “defend” themselves by getting some guns. So, they marched to the Bastille to seize weapons.

They ultimately stormed the Bastille, a symbolic target of “shadow leaders,” originally a medieval fortress-prison that had often been utilized by French kings to imprison those politically disagreeable or disloyal subjects. After a prolonged firefight (the mob already had some weapons), the commander of the prison, Governor Bernard-Rene de Launay, surrendered. De Launay eventually halted his soldiers from escalating the skirmish into a bloodbath as around 100 civilians had been killed, yet only two soldiers. Immediately after he surrendered the Bastille, he was seized by the crowd and beaten repeatedly. By this time, the frenzied mob had become uncontrollable with rage and dragged Launay through the streets toward the Hotel de Ville. Reports indicate that it was near there he pleaded to be killed, and the people obliged by stabbing him to death.

Common sense would indicate that the commander’s murder was unnecessary as the attackers had seized their objective, but what followed was even worse. The frenzied mob cut off Launay’s head and stuck it upon a pike, and did the same with the heads of other officers and paraded them through the streets.

While the storming of the Bastille is recognized as the event that sparked the French Revolution, the treatment of de Launay could be viewed as an ominous foreshadowing of what ultimately transpired during the Reign of Terror. It is undeniably true that the move toward freedom in the French Revolution devolved into some of the most unjust acts of cruelty against humanity ever committed.

Within four years of the storming of the Bastille, the movement toward “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity” sadly devolved into the Reign of Terror, a horrific bloodbath under the machinations of Maximilien de Robespierre and assorted comrades. Robespierre led the powerful people’s tribunal known as the Committee for Public Safety that arrested, tried, and executed (guillotined) over 17,000 people.

Eventually, the powerful Committee for Public Safety became even more tyrannical than King Louis XVI. Especially, Robespierre, although only one on the absolutist committee, was the only member who had full support of the fanatical “Society of the Friends of the Constitution,” known as the Jacobins, who were among the more radical supporters of the French Revolution—or of their own power. Robespierre was the individual most closely identified with the Reign of Terror.

While the treatment of de Launay would prove to be a foreshadowing of the Reign of Terror, it reflected crazed mob violence with no sense of morality. The mob violence of Antifa and BLM today is also devoid of morality. Possibly there is one key difference: although criminal mobs today use firearms, there are no beheadings.

Finally, there is little valid comparison between the violence of the mob and the violence needed to build this nation. The intent behind the violence is what determines its value. BLM is destructive and not working for the good of the country; it works for itself. The Jacobins who stole the people’s revolution in France, were only working for their political power. The Founders needed to use violence to defend their ideals and to build a nation focused on embracing God-given rights and perfecting freedom.

Gun Rights aren’t White Rights!

If you wouldn’t re-accept emblems of second class citizenship like separate bathrooms or riding in the back of the bus, why accept a second class right to defend yourselves?

Nadra Enzi image

Re-posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesJuly 13, 2020

Gun Rights aren't White Rights!
Let me cut to the chase, gun rights aren’t White rights! Many in the Black community think Second Amendment advocacy is only for White conservatives. These same Black critics often own firearms themselves and seem unaware of this direct contradiction.

My grassroots security consulting began in midtown Savannah, GA., during the Crack Cocaine Era, where self defense concerns were challenged by a new, very violent set of circumstances. Black elected officials preaching gun control for law abiding citizens overlook the fact law abiding citizens aren’t making inner cities unsafe. A logical policy direction would be harsher penalties for gun crime and enhancing self defense statutes. It appears politicians for Black areas prioritize pleasing distant elite liberals more than nearby victims they represent.

I recently read a friend’s Facebook post about gun rights issues in my home town. Savannah’s mayor is a long standing gun control proponent, despite previously serving as Alderman over one of the city’s most dangerous districts. I’m from that district and advocated within it without a badge nor support from elected officials. Support did come, however, from local conservative radio show hosts Bill Edwards and Ben Bennett and New Orleans’ Jeff Crouere.

I don’t blame the mayor for how unsafe that district became. He, like the rest of us, had a sudden invasion on his hands. I do distinctly differ regarding adding difficulty for law abiding citizens to defend themselves. A barrier to such added difficulty is a majority Republican state legislature and their gun rights constituency. But, in these uncertain times, unlikely concessions may occur.

Self defense is all law abiding citizens have left in an era of increasingly violence and politically passive policing. And for Black law abiding citizens, gun rights are our most important civil right. Social programs and statue protests aren’t making captive communities safer. Not one community criminal turned over a new leaf because of toppled monuments. Our elderly, single mothers and urban businesses are targeted too often to impede their right to defend themselves.

For decades my fight to make Black lives matter included promoting our right to defend ourselves. My safety advocacy began at a time when the Savannah Police Department didn’t exactly welcome concerned citizens of my color with open arms. Too often Black concerns were ignored while greener (more affluent) areas received active attention and rapid response. Despite this, I knew building alliances with local law enforcement was critical to community safety and eventually did so.

A common historical fiction related to self defense is Black people suffered silently and sang gospel music while being brutalized by racists

A common historical fiction related to self defense is Black people suffered silently and sang gospel music while being brutalized by racists. I grew up in a climate where there was palpable fear of White retaliation. Obviously, I didn’t heed such advice. While deferring to others was and is accepted by many Black people my age and older, we also have a legacy of slave revolts and in modern times, armed responses to racism from which to draw strength.

If the 1960s Deacons for Defense and the original Black Panther Party could stand up against the number one threat of their day, how could I do less in mine? The color of the threat is irrelevant.

Years ago back home, when I grabbed my shotgun as burglars unsuccessfully tried to kick in my front foor, ethnicity didn’t magically change. Gun rights are as natural as our skin color.

If you wouldn’t reaccept emblems of second class citizenship like separate bathrooms or riding in the back of the bus, why accept a second class right to defend yourselves?

Gun rights aren’t White rights.

#capblacksafetycreator is Nadra Enzi aka Cap Black, Grassroots Security Consultant in the real life Gotham City of New Orleans.

Digging Up the Dirt: How Far Do We Eradicate History?

In the “FDR and the Holocaust: A Breach of Faith” by Rafael Medoff, he wrote of FDR in 1923 when he was a member of the Harvard Board of Directors, that FDR “decided there were too many Jewish students at the college and helped institute a quota.” Later in 1941, FDR in a Cabinet meeting remarked that “there were too many Jews among federal employees in Oregon.” He expressed pride that “there is no Jewish blood in our veins” and characterized a tax maneuver by a Jewish newspaper as “a dirty Jewish trick.”

FDR, the father of Democratic-Socialism, also did not like immigrants in general. In the Daily Telegraph and for Asia magazine in the 1920s, FDR was very anti-Japanese immigration on the grounds that “mingling Asiatic blood with European or American blood produces, in nine cases out of ten, the most unfortunate results.” FDR argued that future immigration should be limited to those who had “blood of the right sort.” Does this not justify removing FDR statues and his portrait from all money? Should he be eradicated from American history books?

People forget that the South was Democrats (slave owners) v Republicans of Lincoln. The founder of the Democratic Party was Andrew Jackson who waged war on the Seminole Indians in Florida. This became the First Seminole War, where he destroyed the Negro Fort, which was a community of escaped slaves and their descendants who aligned with the Indians. Jackson exceeded his orders and wrote to President Monroe who only ordered Jackson to “terminate the conflict” replying: “Let it be signified to me through any channel … that the possession of Florida would be desirable to the United States, and in sixty days it will be accomplished.”

The Southern Democrats who were against Kennedy’s Civil Rights Bill were led by Sen. William Fulbright and Sen. Sam Ervin, who authored the infamous Southern Manifesto and Fulbright filibustered the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act and voted against the 1965 Voting Rights bill to give equal voting access to African-Americans. These were the greats of the Democrats so under the theory of removing statues of  George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Christopher Columbus, should the Democratic Party pay retributions and be disbanded? How far do we eradicate history?

If I were the devil | remastered audio | Paul Harvey

Prophetic words by Paul Harvey. The earliest translation of Paul Harvey’s “If I was the devil” was around 1964. Many variations of “If I were the devil” exist online and the words contained in this video are more accurate to Paul Harvey’s 1996 version. I cleaned up the audio and transcribed the audio. Please share.

COVID Madness – Comrade Newsom Shuts Down California Indoor Activities…

This is nuts. In an effort to fundamentally destroy the livelihoods of millions of California small businesses, Comrade Governor Gavin Newsom has declared that all indoor activities must shut down to top the spread of COVID-19.

The overwhelming majority of dictates around COVID-19 mitigation are not laws. There was no debate; no input from representative government; and no option for the public to weigh-in on the decisions.

CALIFORNIA – […] Newsom ordered houses of worship, gyms and barbershops to close across dozens of counties that collectively contain the vast majority of California’s population and most of its urban centers. Statewide, bars will need to again shutter and restaurants must halt indoor dining.

[…] In March, Newsom was the first governor in the nation to fully shut down his state, elevating California into a poster child for aggressive efforts to limit the pandemic’s spread. Public health officials credited the effort with staving off a surge that might have crippled the state’s health care system.

“We were able to suppress the spread of this virus, we were able to knock down the growth of this in the beginning,” Newsom said Monday as he issued new restrictions. “We’re going to do that again, there’s no doubt in my mind.”

Caseloads and hospitalization numbers have risen sharply in recent weeks as California authorized counties to restart various sectors of the economy. Hospitals in some parts of the state are staring down the prospect of running out of beds as the state’s seven-day average of new infections is approaches 9,000 daily, while its positive test rate has climbed above 7 percent after hovering near 4 percent during the initial reopening process.

The Democratic governor previously ordered especially stricken counties to bar indoor commerce like inside dining and museums, but his Monday order expanded that mandate to cover all 58 counties in California — a clear acknowledgment that the state must do more to control the rapid spread of the disease. (more)

In order to support the most important political objectives of the DNC writ large in the 2020 election, COVID-19 hype is essential:

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot easily achieve ‘mail-in’ voting; which they desperately need in key battleground states in order to control the outcome.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot shut down rallies and political campaigning efforts of President Trump; which they desperate need to do in key battleground states.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot block the campaign contrast between an energetic President Trump and a physically tenuous, mentally compromised, challenger.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats do not have an excuse for cancelling the DNC convention in Milwaukee; thereby blocking Team Bernie Sanders from visible opposition while protecting candidate gibberish from himself.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats do not have a mechanism to keep voters isolated from each-other; limiting communication and national debate adverse to their interests.  COVID-19 panic pushes the national conversation into the digital space where Big Tech controls every element of the conversation.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot keep their Blue state economies easily shut-down and continue to block U.S. economic growth.  All thriving economies are against the political interests of Democrats.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot easily keep club candidate Joe Biden sealed in the basement; where the electorate is not exposed to visible signs of his dementia.

♦Without COVID-19 panic it becomes more difficult for Big Tech to censor voices that would outline the fraud and scheme.  With COVID-19 panic they have a better method and an excuse.

♦Without COVID-19 panic Democrats cannot advance, influence, or organize their preferred presidential debate format, a ‘virtual presidential debate’ series.

[Comrade Gretchen Whitmer knows this plan, hence she cancelled the Michigan venue]

All of these, and more, strategic outcomes are based on the manufactured weaponization of the COVID-19 virus to achieve a larger political objective.  There is ZERO benefit to anyone other than Democrats for the overwhelming hype surrounding COVID-19.

It is not coincidental that all corporate media are all-in to facilitate the demanded fear that Democrats need in order to achieve their objectives.  Thus there is an alignment of all big government institutions and multinationals to support the same.

Nothing is coincidental. Everything is political.

Heads-Up Jewish Americans–Democrats Are Your Enemies!

November 3, 2020, could change your life forever. If you believe in self-preservation, be smart!

Joan Swirsky image

Re-posted from The Conservative Tree House By  —— Bio and ArchivesJuly 12, 2020

Heads-Up Jewish Americans--Democrats Are Your Enemies!

Montana has about 1,400 Jews, Mississippi about 1,500, South Dakota 250. If I lived in any one of those beautiful states, I would not be writing this article. But I live in New York––home to about one-million, 800-thousand Jews––so the politics of being Jewish affects me and my family in a very existential––life and death––way.

It’s quite simple for me, as it should be for all Jews, given the fact that in a world of about eight-billion people, we Jews are a miniscule 15 million, only about six-million in the United States, eight-million in Israel, and another one-million around the world. That is equivalent to the proverbial drop in the ocean.


If we Jews and our supporters don’t aggressively address the pandemic of anti-Semitism that is galloping around the globe and exploding here in America, rampant on college campuses, aided and abetted by a craven media that gives credibility to career hate-mongers like Louis Farrakhan and his ilk, and even contaminating the hallowed halls of the U.S. Congress––with more floridly hate-Jews/hate-Israel Democrats than ever before in history––then we know from our tragic history that annihilation could be right around the corner.

Sadly the Democrat Party of old––of JFK, Sen. Henry “Scoop” Jackson, Senator and VP Walter Mondale, et al––has vanished, replaced by Democrats like “the squad” who spew their poisonous hatred of Jews and Israel from the House of Representatives itself. Then there are those who remain thunderously silent––including elected Democrat Jews like Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, Jerrold Nadler, Eliot Engel, Adam Schiff, Richard Blumenthal, as well Democrat Representatives from Long Island––with a huge Jewish population––Tom Suozzi and Kathleen Rice.

Don’t be fooled by the boilerplate, politically correct press releases written by their aides. Once these statements are made public, these cowards go back to cowering before the radical leftists who now call the shots in the Democrat Party, most prominently the racists who continue to vent their anti-Semitic bile to this day.


Shockingly, most of the Jewish organizations that once supported and defended Jews in America abandoned those roles, having caved to their biggest donors’ conversion to a new religion called “Social Justice.” These are the quislings who “reach out” to––in essence, endorse––groups like Black Lives Matter, Antifa and others that wantonly attack synagogues, Jewish businesses and ordinary Jewish citizens walking in their neighborhoods, and brazenly promote the Boycott-Divest-Sanction (BDS) movement to destroy Israel through economic strangulation.

For instance, The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), founded in 1913, aggressively and successfully fulfilled its mission to “stop the defamation of the Jewish people” until 102 years after its founding when, in 2015, Jonathan Greenblatt became the ADL’s national director and CEO. Greenblatt worked for three far-left regimes antagonistic to Israel––the Clinton Administration, the Obama fiasco, and the George Soros-funded Aspen Institute. Now, Mr. Greenblatt sounds deranged when he states that “only a small number” of the Black Lives Matter anarchy group don’t like Jews, when he knows full well––and Americans can see with their own eyes––that it is one of the most rabidly Jew- and Israel-loathing groups in the world!

According to columnist and author Rabbi Aryeh Spero, the ADL under Greenblatt “has betrayed its original mission of fighting anti-Semites by forging a new partnership with one of America’s most notorious anti-Semites, Al Sharpton.”

But the ADL is only one example out of nearly a dozen that I place in the category of turncoats against the Jewish people. [More on this in a future article].


I have always felt safe in America, protected by the powerful principles of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, by the always-reliable police-and-fire departments in every community where I’ve lived, and by local, state and national leaders of both political parties who fought to preserve our extraordinary way of life through our country’s bedrock foundations of God, family, freedom and safety.

But with the advent of the well-organized, heavily financed emergence of the Jew-hating, Christian-hating, America-hating “Cancel Culture,” what can people do? Yes, they can call or write a letter or e-mail to their elected representative, for which they’ll get back a form letter written by an intern.

But a sure-fire cure for this downward plunge into the sewers of our body politic is to vote out every Democrat running for office. Not one of these America-loathing, anarchist-supporting people is worthy of representing either their constituents or America itself.

Just ask them. They will tell you that they “support” the terrorism––which they call “protests”––we’ve been witnessing for the last several weeks, that they want to raise your taxes, cut funding to the police and military that protect you and your children, institute the socialized medicine and education that have failed in every country they’ve ever been instituted, and enact the Big Government programs that “protect” you from cradle to grave.

November 3, 2020, could change your life forever. If you believe in self-preservation, be smart!

Russia and China Veto Key Means to Deliver Life-Saving Relief to Syrian Civilians

“We should all be saddened, outraged, and more determined than ever to hold Russia and China accountable as an accomplice to Assad’s reign of death and destruction.”

Joseph A. Klein, CFP United Nations Columnist image

Re-posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesJuly 11, 2020

Russia and China Veto Key Means to Deliver Life-Saving Relief to Syrian Civilians

This past week, Russia and China vetoed United Nations Security Council draft resolutions that would have authorized the renewal of a cross-border mechanism enabling the UN and its partners to deliver vital humanitarian aid into Syria via the country’s border with Turkey. The 13 other members of the Security Council voted for the draft resolutions. The draft resolutions were offered as a compromise to address certain concerns raised by Russia, but Russia and China vetoed them anyway in order to protect President Bashar al-Assad’s murderous Syrian regime.

“Russia and China have decided that millions of Syrian lives are an insignificant cost of their partnership with the murderous Assad regime”

The UN’s Under-Secretary-General Mark Lowcock noted in his remarks before the Security Council earlier this month that cross-border assistance into northwest Syria provides a critical lifeline for 2.8 million of the most vulnerable people in Syria. He warned of more suffering and deaths if the Security Council did not take appropriate action and re-authorize the UN’s cross-border operations. But Russia and China ignored the warning. They continued their years-long pattern of vetoes protecting the Assad regime. For all intents and purposes, Russia and China cold-bloodedly told the Syrian people to drop dead.

“Russia and China have decided that millions of Syrian lives are an insignificant cost of their partnership with the murderous Assad regime,” said U.S. Ambassador to the UN Kelly Craft. “This breathtaking callousness and dishonesty is (sic) now an established pattern, and all UN Member States need to take note.”

Russia has blood on its hands. It has aided Assad’s Syrian regime in conducting merciless attacks on the Syrian civilian population, on schools and on medical facilities, worsening an already dire humanitarian crisis. Russia presented its own propaganda-filled draft resolution, which would have done nothing meaningful to ensure the unimpeded delivery of humanitarian relief into Syria.

A United Nations-mandated Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic was assigned the task of assessing the impact on Syrian civilians from the Syrian regime’s military campaign to recapture Idlib and parts of western Aleppo. The Commission reportedly found that civilians in Syria suffered loss of life and damage to vital civilian infrastructure resulting from indiscriminate aerial bombardments and ground shelling by Syrian government forces alongside the Russian Aerospace Forces.

China’s Communist dictatorship falsely portrays itself as committed to multilateralism

Noting the effect of the coronavirus pandemic on top of the ravages of war, Hanny Megally, a member of the UN Commission of Inquiry, said, “Now more than ever, civilians need sustained and unfettered access to humanitarian assistance which must neither be politicized by Member States nor instrumentalized by parties to the conflict. Pandemics know no borders, neither should life-saving aid.” China and Russia think otherwise. They prefer to play geopolitics with the lives of innocent civilians, including women and children.

China’s Communist dictatorship falsely portrays itself as committed to multilateralism. China showed its true colors, however, when it went along along with Russia’s obstruction of good faith attempts under UN auspices to renew the Security Council’s authorization of the cross-border humanitarian aid mechanism. China’s UN Ambassador Zhang Jun made the astounding claim that “China attaches great importance to the humanitarian situation in Syria and supports the international community and United Nations agencies in stepping up humanitarian relief for the Syrian people.” China’s rationale for vetoing the draft resolutions, which would have permitted unimpeded delivery of such humanitarian relief for the Syrian people, was its opposition to sanctions that have been imposed on the Syrian regime as punishment for its murderous attacks on civilians. Zhang Jun blamed the humanitarian suffering of the Syrian people on the sanctions, rather than on the massacres conducted by the Assad regime and its Russian enablers.

Ambassador Kraft spelled out what is at stake: “We should all be saddened, outraged, and more determined than ever to hold Russia and China accountable as an accomplice to Assad’s reign of death and destruction.”

Socialist Property Rights

Socialist’s Property Laws:

1) If I like it, it’s mine.
2) If it’s in my reach, it’s mine.
3) If I had it once upon a time, it’s mine.
4) If I can take it from you, it’s mine.
5) If it looks like mine, it’s mine.
6) If I saw it in my dream, it’s mine.
7) If it’s valuable, it’s mine.
8) If I can tear it apart, all the pieces are still mine.
9) If I get tired of it, OK, it’s yours.
10) However, if I want it back, it’s mine.

This is an excellent explanation why I haven’t watched an NFL game in four years. Like our politicians the NFL takes its fans for granted

Refresher” NFL History…history not often reported or leaked to the ticket holders. I hope this helps you; it opened my eyes, to better understand when and why the public’s respect for the NFL organization started to crumble….

* In 2012 the NFL had an issue with Tim Tebow kneeling before each game to pray, they also had an issue with Tebow wearing John 3:16 as part of his eye-black to avoid glare, and made him take it off.

* In 2013 the NFL fined Brandon Marshall for wearing green cleats to raise awareness for people with mental health disorders.

* In 2014 Robert Griffin III (RG3) entered a post-game press conference wearing a shirt that said “Know Jesus Know Peace” but was forced to turn it inside out by an NFL uniform inspector before speaking at the podium.

* In 2015 DeAngelo Williams was fined for wearing “Find the Cure “eye black for breast cancer awareness.

* In 2015 William Gay was fined for wearing purple cleats to raise awareness for domestic violence. (Not that the NFL has a domestic violence problem..)

*In 2016 the NFL prevented the Dallas Cowboys from wearing a decal on their helmet in honor of 5 Dallas Police officers killed in the line of duty.

* In 2016 the NFL threatened to fine players who wanted to wear cleats to commemorate the 15th anniversary of 9/11.


So tell me again how the NFL supports free speech and expression? It seems quite clear based on these facts that the NFL has taken a position against any action by NFL players demonstrating RESPECT for any issue: For God, social causes such as mental health, cancer, domestic violence, for cops killed arbitrarily, for being cops, or for the Memory of 9/11.

BUT they will allow demonstrations of DISRESPECT for our National Flag, our National Anthem, for America , and for the American People, if it will help mollify a particular Group and its supporters. That is who and what the NFL now has shown itself to be.


Pass this post along to all your friends and family, if you believe it worthy of sharing. Honor our military; too many of whom have come home with the American Flag draped over their coffin.

Jeff Longo