Tag Archives: Donald Trump

The Devil’s Deadly Trick

Posted on by

Throne, Altar, Liberty

The Canadian Red Ensign

The Canadian Red Ensign

Friday, February 21, 2025

The Devil’s Deadly Trick

Last week David Warren wrote “I have long supposed the Devil’s ‘fan base’ is to be found overwhelmingly on the political Left. The cause is obvious: they are the godless parties.”  I agree with this.  I usually find myself in agreement with what the former editor of The Idler and Ottawa Citizen columnist writes.  Usually, not always.  I don’t agree with him that St. Peter was given a universal jurisdiction over the other Apostles and the entire Church which has descended to the Patriarch of Rome to this day although I rather admire the way he has handled that office being currently held by someone who is clearly not what the Presbyterian Anne Blythe nee Shirley would have called a “kindred spirit.”  Of course this is a relatively new belief of his.  He entered the Roman Communion in 2003.  Back when I was reading him in print in the 1990s he was still a member of the Anglican Communion to which I currently belong, although at the time alluded to I was attending Non-Conformist meetings of a very Low Church sort.  Looking back, it must have been somewhere around the time that he crossed the Tiber that my theology started to develop along the High Church lines that put me on the Canterbury trail by the end of the decade.  I also no longer share his current admiration for Donald the Orange, although in the interest of being fair I do admire the dismantling of America’s “deep state” that Warren was praising in the piece quoted above.  While Trump initially lost my admiration the moment he first threatened Anschluss against Canada I have since come to see that he is someone who no Christian of any Communion who is familiar with Scripture and Tradition should be supporting because he has formed a cult of followers around himself that make blasphemous claims about him that he has never repudiated, at one point retweeted, and has both made himself and encouraged among his followers.  In the most recent example, Paula White, the heretical televangelist whom Trump has appointed the head of his newly created “White House Faith Office” formed ostensibly for the purposes of combatting anti-Christian discrimination, blasphemously said “To say no to President Trump would be saying no to God.”  In the early centuries of Christianity, when persecution came from officials of the Roman Empire, it was because Christians refused to accept the claims of divinity that the state cult made for the emperor.

That having been said, I reiterate that I do agree with Warren’s statement about the Devil’s fan base being “overwhelming on the political Left.”   In this essay, however, I intend to demonstrate that the Devil’s can sometimes more effectively work through those who are not his fans, those who are not openly on his side.   The first step in the demonstration is to ask a question.  

If the Devil’s fans are on the Left what are we to make of a “Right” that has largely aligned itself with a cult that worships a false christ?

This is an important question to ask because historically the home of political messianism has been on the Left.  The idea that political action is the path of salvation is arguably the defining characteristic of the historical Left.   The Right’s historical attitude has been to reject this idea and to regard the various schemes that have been hatched out of it with the appropriate response ranging from skepticism to horror.  If it be countered that the “far Right” twentieth century movements Fascism and Nazism both preached a form of political national salvation, the response is that these movements were not related to the historical and traditional Right, did not consider themselves to be on the Right – Nazism stands for “National Socialism” and regarded itself as a revolutionary rather than a reactionary party – rejected all the principles of the historical and traditional Right, formed regimes that resembled those of Communism, and are only considered on the “Right” because the Left has so categorized them.

This “Right” that so blasphemously looks upon Donald the Orange as a “Saviour” is obviously primarily an American phenomenon based in the United States of America.   This itself is sufficient to explain its turn to political messianism.  The American Right has no relationship with the historical and traditional Right because the United States was founded on the repudiation of the principles of the historical and traditional Right.

The historical and traditional Right was essentially the resistance of Christendom – Christian civilization – to its being replaced with Western Civilization – Modern, liberal, secular civilization.  As such, it held the worldview of Christendom, a worldview incompatible with theories of political salvation such as were to become all too numerous in the politics of Modern, liberal, secular, Western Civilization.  The struggles and woes of man in this world are a condition from which he cannot extract himself because they are the consequences of Original Sin – he is in exile from Paradise Lost.  The State has been given to man, therefore, not to save him from his condition, but to administer earthly justice and enforce the laws made necessary by Original Sin.  Although salvation was accomplished by God in this present world in history through the events of the Gospel, and can be partially enjoyed in this present world in Christ’s spiritual kingdom the Church in her “militant” mode, the full enjoyment of salvation, Paradise Regained is to be looked for outside of history, after the event that will bring history to a close, the Second Coming of Jesus Christ to “judge both the quick and the dead.”

The historical and traditional principles of the Right are basically three – one political, one religious, and one that combines the political and the religious.  The political principle is royal monarchy.  Not just monarchy, the governance of the one. Dictatorship or tyranny, the absolute rule of someone propelled into power by the mob, is a perverse example of that.  Royal monarchy or kingship, the reign of someone selected not by popular election but by an established line of secession that places his office above democratic politics, who accedes immediately on the death of the previous Sovereign, but is confirmed in the office by swearing oaths before and to God in the Church.  The religious principle is orthodox Christian Churchmanship which is the confession and practice of the orthodox Christian faith of the ancient Creeds, in a Church in organic descent from the Church in Jerusalem, with valid Sacraments administered by the ministerial priesthood governed by bishops in Apostolic succession.  The third principle is the union of Church and State, not in the sense of a theocracy in which the Church rules the State or Erastianism in which the State rules the Church, but in the sense of the co-operative relationship between the Christian kings of the first principle, and the orthodox Church of the second principle, in which each exercises their authority in their own sphere to uphold the other in its sphere.

The most legitimate Right is the Right that continues to hold to these principles.   The second most legitimate Right is that which defends the other good things that the Left turned to attacking after its war on kings, the Church, and Christendom’s union of Church and State. Any list of such good things would have to be representative as the Left is constantly adding to it.  The American Right at its best – and it is far from its best at the moment – can only ever be a version of the second most legitimate Right, because the United States was founded on an explicit repudiation of the first and third principles, by Puritans, freemasons, and deists who had personally repudiated the second.

Does this mean that the United States was founded as a country of the Left?

Yes and no.  The United States was built on the foundation of liberalism.  While “liberalism” and “the Left” have often been used interchangeably they are not identical.  Think of a river, flowing from a spring, from which, near the source, a tributary breaks off.  Now, if you think of the spring as the turning away of Modern philosophy from Christianity and the traditions of Christendom, liberalism as the river flowing from it, and the Left as the tributary, you will have the basic idea of the relationship between these things.  It should be added that throughout their history the streams of liberalism and the Left have sometimes moved closer to each other and sometimes further apart. 

Now, while liberalism’s repudiation of the principles of Christendom and the Right was bad and places it on the Devil’s side along with the Left, the ideas of liberalism were not all bad, and those that were bad were not all bad to the same degree.  It was necessary that this be the case for the Devil’s trick to work.  For that trick is simply this, to present people with two options, one on the Left that is more or less explicitly evil, the other, a more palatable liberal option that can be marketed as “conservative” and to tell people they have to choose one or the other.  I am not thinking primarily of party politics although the American two-party system does provide an illustration of how the trick works.  The most recent Democratic presidential candidates have been people who think women have the right to murder their babies, that white people should be made into racial scapegoats for the problems of everyone else, that men who claim to be women are what they claim to be and have a right to be treated as such and that violent criminals should be turned out onto the streets as soon as possible.  That is only a sampling of their crazy and evil ideas.  They are the Devil’s fan base indeed.  So the Republican candidate gets elected. 

The Devil has played this trick very effectively in economics.  The Left has offered us an option called socialism.  Socialism is a scheme of political salvation.  It tells us that our woes are all due to economic inequality, that the cause of economic inequality is private ownership, and that salvation is to be attained by eliminating private ownership and replacing it with some form of common or public ownership.  Don’t be deceived by its surface appearance for if you look beneath the surface it is clear that this is not some benevolent if sappy “lets care and share” sort of thing but something far more sinister.  Where its true face can be seen is in its egalitarianism.  A movement that was genuinely about alleviating economic suffering and misery would do so rather than obsessing about the unfairness, real or imagined, of their being “haves” when there are also “have nots.”  Eliminating private ownership is a way to harm the “haves” not to help the “have nots.”  “Private property”, Simone Weil wrote in The Need for Roots, “is a vital need of the soul.”  Socialism therefore reduces to Envy, the hatred of others for their possession of something you desire that is the second worst after Pride of the Seven Deadly Sins.  That so many have been fooled into looking no further than the surface and seeing something that looks to them like Christian Love for the poor and disadvantaged should not surprise us.  This is another of the Devil’s tricks, the one identified by St. Paul in 2 Corinthians 11:14-15.  Today, after about a century of socialism having been given chance after chance to alleviate misery, only to produce more than it alleviated, that trick is less effective.

This brings us to the other economic option that in the Devil’s trick is presented as the alternative to the Left’s bad option of socialism.  This is capitalism, the economic system for which liberalism has always advocated although the capitalism of reality and the capitalism of liberal economic theory have never been the same thing.  For our purposes here the differences are irrelevant.  The key elements common to reality “capitalism” and liberal theory “capitalism” are the private ownership of capital (wealth that can be used to create more wealth), contractual labour, and voluntary economic transactions.  Since these are each preferable to their alternatives, capitalism as a whole has been easy to sell to those who see socialism for what it is and capitalism has often been thought of as the economics of the Right despite its association with liberalism.  When it comes, however, to all those good things that the Left has declared war on, capitalism, the economy of Big Business, has been very destructive, arguably far more so than socialism.  Richard M. Weaver, writing in 1948 identified a few of these goods: “The moral solution is the distributive ownership of small properties.  These take the form of independent farms, of local businesses, of homes owned by the occupants, where individual responsibility gives significance to prerogative over property.” (Ideas Have Consequences, 121)  He then added “Such ownership provides a range of volition through which one can be a complete person, and it is the abridgment of this volition for which monopoly capitalism must be condemned along with communism.”  

Much was made, and rightly so, in the Batflu scare of 2020 to 2022, of the harm the lockdowns and other repressive measures were doing to small businesses that did not have the resources to weather that storm of stupidity the way large conglomerates did.  While lockdowns, vaccine passports, and the like, are hardly “capitalist” measures, I wonder which was responsible for eliminating more small businesses, Batflu tyranny or the online global business empire of Donald the Orange’s newfound billionaire bestie Jeff Bezos?

Numerous other examples of this trick of the Devil’s can be produced.  One that is particularly germane at the moment is the nationalist opposition to the Left’s dream of world federalism with global citizenship and a battery of international bureaucracies to impose sex reassignment surgery on those few children they have allowed to escape subsidized, near-mandatory, abortion the second they experience a moment of gender confusion anywhere in the world whatever the local laws happen to say about it.  The alignment of the Left with the Devil’s values is particularly obvious in this case.  As tempting, however, as that makes the nationalist option, it ought to be resisted by the Right.

For one thing, nationalism’s home, like that of political messianism is properly on the Left.  Nationalism, historically, was a product of the French Revolution.  The Jacobins equated nation with state, and demanded, at the risk of your head if you didn’t comply, that loyalty to king and Church be replaced with loyalty to the nation-state.  For another, nationalism like socialism is a vice masquerading as a virtue.  The virtue it pretends to be, obviously enough, is patriotism, the love of one’s country.  Nationalism, however, is a poor imitation of patriotism.  It’s exaggerated and loud boasting about its country, its belligerence towards and bullying of other countries, none of which is characteristic of quiet, irenic, patriotism, betrays a lack of love for one’s country.  In a recent and excellent column Charles Coloumbe said much that is true, but when he wrote of Donald the Orange “That the newly restored president deeply loves the United States is, no doubt, true” he was very mistaken.  If Donald the Orange deeply loved the United States, he would accept her for what she is warts and all, quietly try to remove the warts without drawing attention to them, and leave the rest of the world alone, rather than loudly proclaim his intention to make her “Great Again” a proclamation that shows that he does not consider her to be great now and that greatness, a measure of strength and size, is the quality he wishes for her, rather than goodness, which is what someone who truly loved her would look for and manage see in her, even underneath her flaws.

In the last example there is a clear third alternative that the Right should chose over both nationalism and the Left’s world federalism/global citizenship/international bureaucracy and that is simple patriotism.  Such an alternative is more difficult to identify for the false choice of socialism and capitalism, in part because there are a multitude of acceptable alternatives. The distributism proposed by G. K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc, its close American cousin the agrarian economy that the Vanderbilt Twelve associated with the antebellum South which Wendell Berry both promoted and lived, Austrian economist Wilhelm Roepke’s synthesis of these with the liberal free market are just three such.  I shall defer further discussion of this point to an essay of its own at a later date.  I raise it here to make the point that these choices are false choices.  There are other options than socialism and capitalism.  There is a better alternative to one-worldism than nationalism.  There is a better alternative to democracy than republicanism.  We do not have to fall for the Devil’s trick and choose capitalism because socialism is so repugnant or choose nationalism because of all the evil that has been done by one-worldism.  Capitalism and nationalism have historically been very destructive of the good things in this world that we on the Right wish to conserve or restore.   

Finally, just because the Devil’s “fan base” on the Left, reviles and hates Donald the Orange for the things he gets right such as his refusal to allow his country to overrun by invaders, his banning the mutilation of children, his recognition of only two sexes, and the like, this does not mean that we on the Right should join what has so obviously become a deluded and dangerous cult, that worships the American president, and blasphemously looks upon him as some kind of saviour figure.   Out of all these false choices, this is by far the worst.

In the Olivet Discourse Jesus warned that “many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.” (Matt. 24:5)   Later He told His disciples how to respond to these “Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.” (v. 23).   It is incumbent upon us to obey our Lord’s words now.  False christs, as Gamaliel pointed out to the Sanhredrin in Acts 5, don’t end well, and they bring their followers down with them.  Jesus of Nazareth, was shown to be the true Christ, the Son of God, by the fact that the Crucifixion was not His end, He rose again from the dead and ascended into Heaven and is present in His Church to this day.   The Trump movement, by contrast, will end like that of any other false christ.  The fact that he is president of the United States will only make his fall that much harder. — Gerry T. Neal,

Don’t fall for the Devil’s trick.

Posted by Gerry T. Neal at 5:14 AM

President-Elect Donald Trump’s Free Speech Policy https://cafe.nfshost.com/?p=10135

Posted on by

President Donald J. Trump announced a new policy initiative aimed to dismantle the censorship cartel and restore free speech. TRANSCRIPT: President Donald J. Trump — Free Speech Policy Initiative

If we don’t have FREE SPEECH, then we just don’t have a FREE COUNTRY. It’s as simple as that. If this most fundamental right is allowed to perish, then the rest of our rights and liberties will topple just like dominos one by one. They’ll go down.

That’s why today, I am announcing my plan to shatter the left-wing censorship regime, and to reclaim the right to Free Speech for all Americans. And reclaim is a very important word in this case because they’ve taken it away.

In recent weeks, bombshell reports have confirmed that a sinister group of Deep State bureaucrats, Silicon Valley tyrants, left-wing activists, and depraved corporate news media have been conspiring to manipulate and silence the American People. They have collaborated to suppress vital information on everything from elections to public health.

The censorship cartel must be dismantled and destroyed — and it must happen immediately. And here is my plan:

FIRST, within hours of my inauguration, I will sign an executive order banning any federal department or agency from colluding with any organization, business, or person, to censor, limit, categorize, or impede the lawful speech of American citizens. I will then ban federal money from being used to label domestic speech as “mis-” or “dis-information”. And I will begin the process of identifying and firing every federal bureaucrat who has engaged in domestic censorship—directly or indirectly—whether they are the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Health and Human Services, the FBI, the DOJ, no matter who they are.

SECOND, I will order the Department of Justice to investigate all parties involved in the new online censorship regime, which is absolutely destructive and terrible, and to aggressively prosecute any and all crimes identified. These include possible violations of federal civil rights law, campaign finance laws, federal election law, securities law, and anti-trust laws, the Hatch Act and a host of other potential criminal, civil, regulatory, and constitutional offenses. To assist in these efforts, I am urging House Republicans to immediately send preservation letters — and we have to do this right now — to the Biden administration, the Biden campaign, and every Silicon Valley tech giant, ordering them not to destroy evidence of censorship.

THIRD, upon my inauguration as president, I will ask Congress to send a bill to my desk revising Section 230 to get big online platforms out of censorship business. From now on, digital platforms should only qualify for immunity protection under Section 230 if they meet high standards of neutrality, transparency, fairness, and non-discrimination. We should require these platforms to INCREASE their efforts to take down UNLAWFUL content, such as child exploitation and promoting terrorism, while dramatically curtailing their power to arbitrarily restrict lawful speech.

FOURTH, we need to break up the entire toxic censorship industry that has arisen under the false guise of tackling so-called “mis-” and “dis-information.” The federal government should immediately stop funding all non-profits and academic programs that support this authoritarian project. If any U.S. university is discovered to have engaged in censorship activities or election interferences in the past—such as flagging social media content for removal [and] blacklisting—those universities should lose federal research dollars and federal student loan support for a period of five years, and maybe more. We should also enact new laws laying out clear criminal penalties for federal bureaucrats who partner with private entities to do an end-run around the Constitution and deprive Americans of their First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights. In other words, deprive them of their vote. And once you lose those elections and once you lose your borders like we have, you no longer have a country. Furthermore, to confront the problems of major platforms being infiltrated by legions of former Deep Staters and intelligence officials, there should be a 7-year cooling-off period before any employee of the FBI, CIA, NSA, DNI, DHS, or DOD is allowed to take a job at a company possessing vast quantities of U.S. user data.

FIFTH, the time has finally come for Congress to pass a digital Bill of Rights. This should include a right to digital due process—in other words, government officials should need a COURT ORDER to take down online content, not send information requests such as the FBI was sending to Twitter.

Furthermore, when users of big online platforms have their content or accounts removed, throttled, shadow-banned, or otherwise restricted no matter what name they use, they should have the right to be informed that it’s happening, the right to a specific explanation of the reason why, and the right to a timely appeal. In addition, all users over the age of 18 should have the right to opt-out of content moderation and curation entirely, and receive an unmanipulated stream of information if they so choose.

The fight for Free Speech is a matter of victory or death for America—and for the survival of Western Civilization itself. When I am President, this whole rotten system of censorship and information control will be ripped out of the system at large. There won’t be anything left.

By restoring free speech, we will begin to reclaim our democracy, and save our nation. Thank you, and God Bless America.

When politicians oppose free speech — except their own

Posted on by

J.D. Tuccille: When politicians oppose free speech — except their own

Power-hungry legislators are exactly who the U.S. Constitution was intended to thwart

Author of the article:

J.D. Tuccille

(National Post Oct 12, 2024)

Join the conversation

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump
Presidential hopeful Kamala Harris worried in 2019 that social media sites are “directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation, and that has to stop.” Presidential rival Donald Trump, on the other hand, thinks that people who criticize judges should be jailed, along with anyone who burns an American flag. Photo by The Associated Press

Article content

The U.S. political system is peculiar. While it’s wandered far from its origins, it’s a government based on the principle that people who seek power can’t be trusted, and it’s a democracy rooted in the belief that majorities can be as tyrannical as dictators. Not everybody agrees, of course, including members of the political class who propose to “save the republic” from rivals while rejecting restraints on power.

Last month, former Secretary of State and 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry complained that the competing voices of social media make it difficult “in terms of building consensus around any issue” because “people self-select where they go for their news or for their information.”

He fretted that if people prefer a news source that “is sick and has an agenda … our First Amendment stands as a major block to the ability to be able to just hammer it out of existence.” His hope was to overcome this impediment by “winning enough votes that you’re free to be able to implement change.”

The same month, 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said Americans are spreading what she calls “Kremlin propaganda” and should be “civilly or even in some cases criminally charged” for their speech. Last week she complained “we lose total control” if online discussions aren’t heavily regulated.

Current presidential hopeful Kamala Harris worried in 2019 that social media sites are “directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation, and that has to stop.” Harris is vice-president in an administration that tried just that through back channels, leading Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to tell Congress “senior officials from the Biden administration … repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor” discussions about COVID-19 and Hunter Biden’s laptop.

Harris’s running mate, Tim Walz, wrongly claims ”there’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech.” Robert Reich, the Clinton-era secretary of labour, wants Elon Musk arrested “if he doesn’t stop disseminating lies and hate on X.” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) threatened “to break up Big Tech so you’re not powerful enough to heckle senators with snotty tweets” after Amazon slapped back at her over tax policy.

This flurry of threats to speech protected by the First Amendment comes from a rogues’ gallery of Democrats who will respond that Donald Trump did it first and that they need to save democracy from his threat. They’re right the GOP presidential hopeful also has a taste for abusing power, though who started it is a judgment call, as is the question of who poses the greatest threat to the republic.

“Burning the American flag, I want to get a law passed … you burn an American flag, you go to jail for one year,” Trump harrumphed in August. It wasn’t the first time he’s called for jailing protesters who use flags as fiery props. He made the same call in July and floated the idea when he was in the White House, even though flag-burning is protected by the First Amendment.

Trump also thinks people who criticize judges and Supreme Court justices “should be put in jail,” as he commented last month (he might want to be careful about that, given his own criticism of the bench).

Also worthy of legal attention, says the former and potential future president, are “lawyers, political operatives, donors, illegal voters, & corrupt election officials” involved in what Trump, who claims the 2020 presidential contest was stolen, considers unscrupulous election-related behaviour. They “will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our country.”

Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, wants to ban pornography, though it generally enjoys constitutional protection. Vance’s instincts extend to political opponents. In 2021, Vance asked interviewer Tucker Carlson, “why don’t we seize the assets of the Ford Foundation” and other non-profits that pursue left-wing policies on hot-button issues. The veep nominee also wants to “seize the administrative state for our purposes,” replace existing bureaucrats with “our people” and defy the courts if they object.

Florida’s Republican Governor and recent presidential contender, Ron DeSantis, and his party’s lawmakers pushed the Stop WOKE Act to ban controversial racial training adopted by private companies. It was blocked on First Amendment grounds.

If you seek evidence that candidates for public office and political partisans disdain restraints on power when that power is in their hands, and want to punish opponents, there’s plenty of evidence on both sides of the aisle. This would come as no surprise to the founders. During debates over adopting the constitution, James Madison wrote about the balance necessary in designing a government. “You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.”

Madison feared letting majorities run roughshod. “In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign, as in a state of nature where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger,” he warned.

The imperfect result was a constitution that limited government with checks and balances, and a Bill of Rights that forbade officials from interfering with many freedoms. The intent was to let people do and say a good many things that officials don’t like but are powerless to prevent or punish. It goes without saying that the U.S. government is now much larger than intended, and exercises far more authority than was contemplated by the founders. But that’s still not enough for some critics.

Advertisement 6

Story continues below

Article content

Writing last month in The New Yorker, Louis Menand noted a new crop of scholars who are dissatisfied with the constitution. In their ranks is Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the law school at the University of California–Berkeley, who hopes to strip anti-majoritarian elements from the system. Others want to completely scrap the document and start over with something that would deliver their preferred results.

But these scholars are playing catch-up with a political class intent on simply ignoring First Amendment protections for speech and constitutional restraints on their power. Ironically, efforts to abuse the power of office to hurt opponents is precisely what the founders intended to prevent with the constitution.

That authoritarian politicians justify their actions as responses to opponents who they allege are the real danger to the republic is also no surprise. Those who think coercive government is a solution to problems will inevitably try to apply it to opponents they see as problems.

The American Constitution was intended to thwart the kind of people who now make up pretty much the entire political class. We’ll see if it’s up to the challenge.

National Post

Christians Must Learn To Hate Evil Again

Posted on by

Christians Must Learn To Hate Evil Again

By: Andrew Torba

As Christians we are called to stand firm in our faith even in the midst of turmoil and chaos of the world around us. Recent news of the horrific massacre of six Christians including three young children in Nashville, the news of President Trump’s sham indictment, and the conviction of Douglas Mackey may be discouraging and disheartening, but in these moments we must remember that our hope and our strength come from a higher power.

This week was a difficult week for me both as a Christian and as a father of young children. I looked everywhere for a response from so-called “Christian leaders” and at best I found silence while at worst I found those supporting the “trans community” instead of our own brothers and sisters in Christ.

Christians are called to respond to tragedy with compassion, empathy, and love, but what happens when that tragedy is being celebrated by the mainstream media, the culture, our own government, and perhaps even some of our churches, friends, and family?

When trans flags are being risen at schools, organizations, businesses, and even government buildings across our nation just days after a member of that community carried out a horrific injustice against a Christian community—ending the lives of six of our brothers and sisters in Christ—how are we to respond? 

As my good friend Pastor Andrew Isker wrote this week, being winsome and nice won’t cut it anymore.

Cowardly Christian “leaders” may be silent on these issues, but God’s Word is not–and I refuse to be. The first thing we must remember is that our hope and strength come from God. We must turn to Him in prayer and seek His guidance as we navigate these difficult situations. 

As the Bible says in Philippians 4:6-7, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.”

In addition to prayer we must also remember the words of Jesus in Matthew 5:44, “But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” Even when the media, businesses, schools, and the government seem to be celebrating a senseless tragedy, we must respond with love and compassion, not hatred or anger.

We must also take action to address the injustice that is being celebrated by the wicked. This may mean speaking out against the mainstream narrative, supporting organizations that are working to bring about change, or even taking part in peaceful protests or demonstrations. When we do these things it’s crucial that our actions are rooted in love and compassion, not in anger or violence. We must be bold and share the Gospel, speak the Truth, and let go of our fear. 

We must remember that we are not alone in our struggle. This is what our enemies want us to desperately believe: that we have no one standing up on behalf of the victims and on behalf of God’s Word. Nothing could be further from the truth. As members of the body of Christ we are part of a larger community of believers who can support and encourage us. By staying connected to other believers, we can find strength and hope in times of struggle and persecution. I encourage you to do so not only in your local Church and community, but also with believers around the world on Gab and other online platforms. We need each other now more than ever.

Reject the Blackpill

It’s very easy to feel demoralized and blackpilled when we see the evil in the world around us. But as followers of Christ, we must hold fast to the truth that Christ is King. He has overcome the world, and in Him, we can find hope and strength to face whatever comes our way. Christians are commanded to love our neighbors as ourselves, to forgive those who wrong us, and to turn the other cheek. However, we are also called to hate evil with a righteous hatred while not giving in to despair or hopelessness.

The Bible tells us in Psalm 97:10, “Let those who love the Lord hate evil, for he guards the lives of his faithful ones and delivers them from the hand of the wicked.” But what does it mean to hate evil? Does it mean that we should hate the people who commit evil acts? Absolutely not. As Christians, we are called to love all people, even those who do wrong. When we are commanded to hate evil we are being called to hate the things that are contrary to God’s will and God’s character. We are called to hate sin and all that it represents – destruction, death, and separation from God.

We Are Commanded To Hate Evil

Many people in our culture, and even some Christian leaders, promote a hippie version of love that emphasizes tolerance and acceptance at all costs. They believe that love means accepting everyone and everything, no matter how evil or wicked it may be. However, this view is not biblical, and it does not reflect the true nature of God. The fear of the Lord is a healthy respect and reverence for God, and it leads us to hate what He hates.

God is often portrayed in our culture as being fully focused on love and grace, but the Bible teaches us that there are indeed things that God hates. While this might be a difficult concept for some to grasp, it is important to understand that God’s hatred is not arbitrary or capricious. His hatred is based on His perfect nature and His desire for us to live according to His will.

While God loves us unconditionally, He hates the sin that separates us from Him. Sin is anything that goes against God’s will, and it is something that we should strive to avoid. When we sin, we are rebelling against God and His plan for our lives. As Christians, we should strive to avoid the things that God hates and to live lives that are pleasing to Him. We should seek to love what God loves and hate what God hates, and in doing so, we will be living in obedience to His will.

Proverbs 8:13 – “To fear the Lord is to hate evil; I hate pride and arrogance, evil behavior and perverse speech.”

Romans 12:9 – “Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.”

Psalm 101:3 – “I will not look with approval on anything that is vile. I hate what faithless people do; I will have no part in it.”

Amos 5:15 – “Hate evil, love good; maintain justice in the courts. Perhaps the Lord God Almighty will have mercy on the remnant of Joseph.”

Proverbs 13:5 – “The righteous hate what is false, but the wicked make themselves a stench and bring shame on themselves.”

Psalm 119:104 – “I gain understanding from your precepts; therefore I hate every wrong path.”

When we hate evil we are not allowing it to have a foothold in our lives. We are not tolerating it or excusing it, but instead, we are actively fighting against it. We are standing up for what is right and what is just, even when it is difficult. When we hate evil we are acknowledging the reality of the brokenness of our world. We recognize that sin and evil do exist and that they cause pain and suffering.

But we also know that God has overcome sin and evil through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We should look to the example of Jesus Himself, who drove out the money changers from the temple with a whip (John 2:15). He did not tolerate their wickedness and corruption but took action to remove it from the house of God.

By hating evil, we are living out our faith in a tangible way. We are demonstrating our commitment to God’s values and His character. We are standing up for justice, compassion, and righteousness in a world that is often marked by selfishness, greed, and violence.

Now is the time for Christians to not only start hating evil again, but actively waging spiritual warfare against it. 

We need to focus on building up our communities, praying for one another, and growing together in faith. We must not let the news of the day distract us from the work that God has called us to do. We are called to be a light in the darkness, to love our neighbors as ourselves, and to spread the good news of the gospel to all nations. That is our mission and we must not take our eyes off the prize of eternal glory with our King. 

Ultimately we can take comfort in the fact that we can and will overcome because Christ has already overcome. As the Bible says in 1 John 4:4, “You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.” No matter what happens in the world around us, we can have confidence that God is with us, and that He will see us through to victory.

Let us not be demoralized or blackpilled by the news of the day. Instead let us focus on Christ and His Kingdom, and let us continue to build, pray, and grow in our faith together. 

By the grace of God, the power of the Holy Spirit, and the Victory of Jesus Christ our King we too shall overcome and see victory. 

God bless you. Keep the faith. 

Andrew Torba
CEO, Gab.com
Jesus Christ is King of kings

Great News: Elon Musk, Committed to Free Speech, is Buying Twitter

Posted on by

Great News: Elon Musk, Committed to Free Speech, is Buying Twitter

Elon Musk, CEO of electrical car giant Tesla, has bought social media giant Twitter and promises a new era of free speech. ” – Elon Musk clinched a deal to buy Twitter Inc. for $44 billion cash on Monday in a transaction that will shift control of the social media platform populated by millions of users and global leaders to the world’s richest person. It is a seminal moment for the 16-year-old company, which emerged as one of the world’s most influential public squares and now faces a string of challenges.

Musk, who calls himself a free speech absolutist, has criticized Twitter’s moderation [censorship]. “Free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated,” Musk said in a statement. Elon Musk clinched a deal to buy Twitter Inc  for $44 billion cash on Monday in a transaction that will shift control of the social media platform populated by millions of users and global leaders to the world’s richest person.

It is a seminal moment for the 16-year-old company, which emerged as one of the world’s most influential public squares and now faces a string of challenges. Musk, who calls himself a free speech absolutist, has criticized Twitter’s moderation.  … Political activists expect that a Musk regime will mean less moderation and reinstatement of banned individuals including former President  Donald Trump. Conservatives cheered the prospect of fewer controls while some human rights activists voiced fears of a rise in hate speech. (Reuters, April 25, 2022)

Worried thought control types fretted at the prospect of real free speech. “Human rights groups on Monday raised concerns about hate speech on Twitter  and the power that its takeover by Elon Musk would give the billionaire after the self-described “free speech absolutist” clinched a deal to take the social media platform private.

Musk, who is also chief executive of electric car maker Tesla Inc has described himself as a “free speech absolutist” who has been critical of Twitter’s policies of moderating content on the platform. He has said Twitter needs to become a genuine forum for free speech. In a statement after securing the deal on Monday, Musk described free speech as “the bedrock of a functioning democracy.”

“Amnesty International said it was concerned about any potential decision that Twitter may take after Musk’s takeover to erode enforcement of the policies and mechanisms designed to moderate hate speech online. The last thing we need is a Twitter that willfully turns a blind eye to violent and abusive speech against users, particularly those most disproportionately impacted, including women, non-binary persons, and others,’ Michael Kleinman, director of technology and human rights at Amnesty International USA, said on Monday.” (Reuters, April 25, 2022)

More Silicon Valley Censorship: YouTube Suspends Sen. Johnson for Touting Non-Traditional COVID Treatment

Posted on by

More Silicon Valley Censorship: YouTube Suspends Sen. Johnson for Touting Non-Traditional COVID Treatment

YouTube Suspends Sen. Johnson for Touting Non-Traditional COVID Treatment

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. (Toni Sandys/Sipa via AP Images)

By Solange Reyner    |   Friday, 11 June 2021 07:03 PM

Comment| Print|     AA

YouTube has suspended GOP Senator Ron Johnson from its video platform for one week after he posted videos of himself during a Senate hearing touting experimental treatments for COVID-19, including ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, a YouTube spokesperson told The Hill.

“We removed the video in accordance with our COVID-19 medical misinformation policies, which don’t allow content that encourages people to use hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin to treat or prevent the virus,” the person said.

Johnson, of Wisconsin, slammed YouTube’s decision as representative of Big Tech power.

”YouTube’s ongoing COVID censorship proves they have accumulated too much unaccountable power,” he said in a statement.

”Big Tech and mainstream media believe they are smarter than medical doctors who have devoted their lives to science and use their skills to save lives. They have decided there is only one medical viewpoint allowed and it is the viewpoint dictated by government agencies.

”How many lives will be lost as a result? How many lives could have been saved with a free exchange of medical ideas? Government-sanctioned censorship of ideas and speech should concern us all,” he added.

Johnson made the comments during a November hearing about controversial treatments for coronavirus, including hydroxychloroquine, which studies at the time found to be ineffective and, in some cases, dangerous for people who had the virus.

A study released Thursday, though, shows that hydroxychloroquine, also touted by former President Donald Trump, increased the survival rate of severely ill coronavirus patients.

”We found that when the cumulative doses of two drugs, HCQ and AZM, were above a certain level, patients had a survival rate 2.9 times the other patients,” a study published by medRxiv states.

Trump took hydroxychloroquine despite pushback from medical experts, including his  White House coronavirus team member Dr. Anthony Fauci. Twitter last year restricted the account of Donald Trump Jr. after he posted a video of doctors praising the effectiveness of the drug.

Regina Canada Post employee refuses to deliver Epoch Times, “since COVID started exploding, everything’s been anti-China” http://cafe.nfshost.com/?p=5621

Posted on by

Regina Canada Post employee refuses to deliver Epoch Times, “since COVID started exploding, everything’s been anti-China”

[The left found a new censorship toy in the thought control attack on the satirical tabloid YOUR WARD NEWS. A few leftist posties in Toronto claimed they just couldn’t handle it emotionally to deliver the paper because they hated its contents. Actually, their contract called on them to deliver the paper, not read it.

Along comes Ramiro Sepulveda son of Chilean refugees who won’t deliver the anti-communist, highly informative Epoch Times. Epoch Times ruination has been a key goal of the Red Chinese Embassy. Their newspaper boxes were repeatedly destroyed. Epoch Times is now available by mail.

Many of the Chileans who took off from Chile after the 1973 anti-communist regime change were communists.

The following is from Sepulveda’s Facebook. He sounds like a chronic sore head, complainer and Social Justice preacher.

Sepulvda is either terminally ignorant or a strong communist sympathizer. He writes: Epoch Times is”published by a group of individuals that are anti-Chinese, and anti-communist.” Well, anti-communist, yes. But anti-Chinese? The owners (Falun Gong) and most of the writers are Chinese! It’s the brutal system of Chinese communism they oppose.

To Whom It May Concern:

Hello,My name is Ramiro Sepulveda. I’m writing this letter to a number of organizations and individuals that may be able to assist me in my dilemma. I work currently for Canada Post and have been a Canada Post employee going on my 4th year.

I have been a target of bullying, garnished wages under the assumption that I have faked injuries, also an illegal firing for not delivering enough flyers to a portion of my route even though I did not have enough flyers. These facts are relevant to the situation which I have found myself in for the second time in less than a year.

There is a piece of propaganda that is currently being delivered as a “flyer,” which it is not. The name of this publication is the Epoch Times. This hateful propaganda is published by a group of individuals that are anti-Chinese, and anti-communist. Now the headlines of the articles printed in this newspaper, not actually a flyer, have a very hateful content towards Chinese people without any facts or evidence. I recently refused to deliver these pieces of hate mail that would have a negative and divisive effect on whoever should read it.

I have experienced racism and many forms of hate because I am first generation Canadian born to socialist refugees from Chile. I don’t know the objective of printing this document based on lies that to me have no purpose but to fuel hate.

Please consider bringing this to light and helping me in my cause. These forms of propaganda have been used before in history and have always fuelled verbal and physical hostility toward marginalized people.  Publications like this put the safety of the target groups at risk.Please know that my managers have threatened my job and livelihood because delivering these newspapers goes against my work ethics.Thank you for listening.

Without prejudice,Ramiro Sepulveda

flacopito@gmail.com(306) 501 4324PS, I got suspended until further notice along with another woman. Other people wanted to stand but were scared.]

A Canada Post employee from Regina has refused to deliver the anti-Chinese Communist Party newspaper The Epoch Times, CTV News reports.

“There’s already been violence and hatred towards Asian communities in North American. Since [President Donald] Trump got into office and since COVID started exploding, everything’s been anti-China” said Canada Post courier Ramiro Sepulveda.

The newspaper was founded by Chinese-Americans who were part of the Falun Gong, a controversial religious movement which, like many religious groups, has faced persecution at the hands of the Communist Party of China. In recent years, The Epoch Times has been one of the only outlets to consistently take a hard look at China’s authoritarian practices and policies.

Sepulveda said that the paper’s anti-China stance “can rub people the wrong way,” asserting that some “people that don’t know how to filter information” would be especially prone.

“It’s a published newspaper that spits lies,” he continued, referring to a number of allegations that the paper spreads misinformation.

Responding to Sepulveda’s concerns, Canada Post says that it is not within their right to filter what type of news gets delivered.

“Canada Post is obligated to deliver any mail that is properly prepared and paid for, unless it is considered non-mailable matter. The Courts have told Canada Post that its role is not to act as the censor of mail or to determine the extent of freedom of expression in Canada,” the public mail courier said.

The controversy is not the first time that The Epoch Times has faced trouble from arms of the Canadian government. The CBC had previously been forced to issue a correction after referring to the paper as “racist and inflammatory” and falsely stating that the paper concluded that coronavirus was created in a Wuhan lab.

Sepulveda said that he hopes for Canada Post to create a board which would decide what content would be considered inappropriate for delivery.

MORE SILICON VALLEY CENSORSHIP: Firefox showing its true colors — against free, open speech and truth http://cafe.nfshost.com/?p=5605

Posted on by
firefox-Mozilla-trademark-800x600 Mozilla, Firefox planning to censor Conservatives at the Browser Level; Deplatforming isn’t enough

By Ethan Huff | NewsTarget.com

C60-complete-small-150x150 Mozilla, Firefox planning to censor Conservatives at the Browser Level; Deplatforming isn’t enough
C60Complete Black Seed Oil & Curcumin Gel Capsules – Proven 200x more effective than Vitamin C!

Banning President Donald Trump from social media while silencing his supporters who dare to object is simply not enough to stop “violence and hate” from spreading on the internet, according to Mozilla, the company behind the Firefox browser.

In an announcement, Mozilla expressed urgent plans to start filtering out “disinformation” at the browser level before it even has the chance to show up in an internet search or on a website.

Rehashing the same scripted lies about the “siege” and “take-over” in Washington, D.C., that resulted in a handful of people gaining access to the Capitol building on Jan. 6, Mozilla says every tool in the arsenal needs to be deployed to prevent “white supremacy” from being “reinforce[d]” online.

“… as reprehensible as the actions of Donald Trump are, the rampant use of the internet to foment violence and hate, and reinforce white supremacy is about more than any one personality,” wrote Mozilla’s Mitchell Baker.

“Donald Trump is certainly not the first politician to exploit the architecture of the internet in this way, and he won’t be the last. We need solutions that don’t start after untold damage has been done.”

Describing those who challenge fraudulent elections as engaging in “dangerous dynamics,” Baker says there is an urgent need to do “more than just the temporary silencing or permanent removal of bad actors from social media platforms.”

Mozilla, Firefox want to control everything you’re allowed to access and share online

Screen-Shot-2020-12-26-at-9.43.04-PM-150x150 Mozilla, Firefox planning to censor Conservatives at the Browser Level; Deplatforming isn’t enough
If you have to wear one, why not wear a Truth face mask and send a clear message! More truth quotes & colors available!

In order to prevent conservatives from ever again having the opportunity to make their voices heard about anything, Mozilla wants to uncover who is paying for advertisements on non-left websites, as well as how much they are paying.

Figuring out who is being “targeted” with these ads is also important, Mozilla says, as they, too, need to be silenced and prevented from accessing anything other than mainstream media content and information from “approved” politicians like Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

Mozilla is further taking aim at platform algorithms to ensure that only politically correct content is “amplified,” especially to the people who need to be indoctrinated the most.

By default, all of the latest Firefox updates will also include “tools” that are designed to “amplify factual voices over disinformation.” These “factual voices” include fake news outlets like The New York Times and The Washington Post.

Finally, Mozilla wants to collaborate with “independent researchers” for the purpose of conducting “in-depth studies” into the ways that Facebook and Twitter impact people throughout society. This, the company says, will help in determining “what we can do to improve things.”

“These are actions the platforms can and should commit to today,” Baker concludes.

“The answer is not to do away with the internet, but to build a better one that can withstand and gird against these types of challenges. This is how we can begin to do that.”

Time to uninstall Firefox

5-150x150 Mozilla, Firefox planning to censor Conservatives at the Browser Level; Deplatforming isn’t enough
Tetrogen Fat Burning – It will work for you guaranteed or receive your Money Back!

Similar in nature to Microsoft’s NewsGuard plug-in, which tags all mainstream news outlets as “verified” and everything else as “fake,” Mozilla wants Firefox to become yet another information gatekeeper in the web of deep state control over the world.

Needless to say, it is probably a good time to uninstall Firefox and never look back. The browser used to be somewhat trustworthy, but now it is just another cog in the wheel of new world order control over speech, not to mention an affront to the First Amendment to the Constitution.

“Brave is better by every metric,” wrote one Twitter commenter, referring to the popular Brave browser.

More of the latest news about Big Tech censorship can be found at Censorship.news.

EXCLUSIVE: Twitter Insider Records CEO Jack Dorsey Laying Out Roadmap for Future Political Censorship … ‘We Are Focused on One Account [President Trump] Right Now, But This is Going to be Much Bigger Than Just One Account’

Posted on by

EXCLUSIVE: Twitter Insider Records CEO Jack Dorsey Laying Out Roadmap for Future Political Censorship … ‘We Are Focused on One Account [President Trump] Right Now, But This is Going to be Much Bigger Than Just One Account’

Jack Dorsey, Twitter CEO: “We are focused on one account [@realDonaldTrump] right now, but this is going to be much bigger than just one account, and it’s going to go on for much longer than just this day, this week, and the next few weeks, and go on beyond the inauguration.”

Dorsey: “So, the focus is certainly on this account [@realDonaldTrump] and how it ties to real world violence. But also, we need to think much longer term around how these dynamics play out over time. I don’t believe this is going away anytime soon.”

Dorsey: “You know, the U.S. is extremely divided. Our platform is showing that every single day.”

[SAN FRANCISCO – Jan. 14, 2021] Project Veritas released a new video today provided by an insider at Twitter who recorded Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey calling for more action against President Trump and his supporters on the platform.

Dorsey said that censoring Trump was just the beginning.

“We are focused on one account [@realDonaldTrump] right now, but this is going to be much bigger than just one account, and it’s going to go on for much longer than just this day, this week, and the next few weeks, and go on beyond the inauguration,” he said.

“So, the focus is certainly on this account [@realDonaldTrump] and how it ties to real world violence. But also, we need to think much longer term around how these dynamics play out over time. I don’t believe this is going away anytime soon.”

Dorsey said that political tensions are high in the United States.

“You know, the U.S. is extremely divided. Our platform is showing that every single day,” he said.

The Twitter insider contacted Project Veritas using the VeritasTips@protonmail.com email address. Project Veritas invites more insiders within Twitter and other tech companies to come forward with further evidence of corruption and malfeasance.

About Project Veritas

James O’Keefe established Project Veritas in 2011 as a non-profit journalism enterprise to continue his undercover reporting work. Today, Project Veritas investigates and exposes corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions to achieve a more ethical and transparent society. O’Keefe serves as the CEO and Chairman of the Board so that he can continue to lead and teach his fellow journalists, as well as protect and nurture the Project Veritas culture.

Project Veritas is a registered 501(c)3 organization. Project Veritas does not advocate specific resolutions to the issues raised through its investigations.