Skip to content


The Muslim Invasion of America must be STOPPED!!! What do you think??





Tell your friends about This – SHARE NOW


NO SHARIA LAW !!! Obama needs to be arrested for high treason. HE IS SUCH A LIAR, HE SUPPORTS ISIL AND TERRORIST GROUPS, HE SUPPLIES THEM GUNS AND AMMUNITION THROUGH THE CIA AND OTHER COVERT MEANS. And he is deliberately trying to provoke instability by allowing possible criminals and terrorists into the country. THIS IS TOTALLY INSANE. Plus at the same time, he is doing everything he can to make new laws to take away our freedoms, and to leave us defenseless against these Muslims jihadist invaders.

Obama is literally bringing the enemy into America without a fight. He is a criminal, and a Muslim terrorist sympathizer. Most of these so called Muslim refugees are men of fighting age. SO WAKE UP YOU DUBBED DOWN SLEEPY AMERICANS, YOU NEED TO GET OF YOU ASS’AS AND START PROTESTING, BEFORE YOUR NATION BECOMES A COUNTRY FULL OF DEMONS AND PAGAN SATANISTS.


Hello folks, thanks for watching the video’s i put up, i put them up for mainly only one reason, and that is to try and wake up the sleepy people of the mainly western world, to what is really going on behind closed doors, and to what our secret hidden world government is up to. Much of what you here on my channel, you wont hear on main stream illuminati owned media TV. Why ? Simple! Because Lucifer does not want you to hear the real truth, and he is behind the western owned News Media channels, like Fox News and CNN. They only give you half the truth, along with stacks of propaganda and lies.



Can This Man Help Uber Recover From the Travis Kalanick Era?




CEO Dara Khosrowshahi is a champion of everything Uber once rejected: caution, discipline, and tact. Can he reform Silicon Valley’s most audacious company?

In the late 1950s, a weapons maker called the Martin Company received a contract to build the first Pershing missile. It was to be the most sophisticated mobile weapons system on earth: 5 tons of metal and precision technology designed to deliver a nuclear warhead from up to 460 miles away. Should it ever be used, there would be no margin for error. It had to be perfect. And the US Army wanted it delivered quickly.

The task of ensuring this timely perfection fell to Philip Crosby, a quality-control manager at Martin. To break with his industry’s wartime habit of tolerating small mistakes in feverish production, Crosby came up with a philosophy he would later call Zero Defects. The idea was, basically, to instill in workers the will to prevent problems during design and manufacture rather than go back and fix them later. Crosby’s philosophy went on to become a management buzzword, especially in the aerospace and auto industries, where a faulty gasket or a weak bearing could mean a fiery catastrophe. During the Apollo program, NASA even gave out little Zero Defects trophies—each one a cute pewter spaceman standing on the moon with the letters “ZD” emblazoned on his chest.

“I’m a big believer in the Zero Defects strategy,” said Dara Khosrowshahi, the CEO of Uber. It was an overcast day in January, and Khosrowshahi leaned back in a chair at Uber’s San Francisco headquarters. Khosrowshahi had been running Uber for four months at that point. He’d left a stable perch at Expedia, the travel-­booking service, to take over a company that had become synonymous with scandal and rule-breaking excess. And, having doused some of the raging fires left behind by his predecessor, Travis Kalanick, Khosrowshahi had determined that what Uber needed most was a quality-control philosophy borrowed from the middle of the last century.

This was, it must be said, a bit weird. Tech companies tend to celebrate the inverse of Zero Defects. Push out new code, experiment, screw things up, and fix them. “Move fast and break things,” as Mark Zuckerberg famously said in the early days of Facebook. And arguably, few companies have moved faster and broken more things than Uber.

In just nine years, Kalanick’s company grew from a vague notion that anyone should be able to summon a ride from their phone into a business valued at $54 billion and available in more than 600 cities on six continents. And it kept adding new services: Today Uber can facilitate a carpool to work and deliver your Dos Toros burritos so they’re still hot when they reach your table. Not satisfied with merely replacing taxis, Kalanick’s Uber began developing autonomous cars and trucks and even set up a skunkworks for flying electric cars. Along the way, the company left a trail of wreckage. It disregarded and even undermined laws and regulations; it squandered the loyalty of its drivers, who felt mistreated under its contractor system; and it became notorious for a workplace culture that exemplified the worst tendencies of the Silicon Valley bro. By the time investors moved to demand Kalanick’s resignation in June 2017, observers were calling Uber the world’s most dysfunctional startup.

But where others saw Uber’s travails as a symbol of Silicon Valley comeuppance, Khosrowshahi saw something less loaded: a sophisticated tech company that had taken on too much, too quickly, and whose systems groaned under the weight and confusion. Growth, not quality, had been its guiding principle for too long, he said.

Khosrowshahi, 48, has a neatly trimmed salt-and-pepper beard. On that day in January, he wore a long-sleeved black crewneck sweater, black pants, loafers, and brightly colored striped socks. In contrast to Kala­nick, who is an inveterate pacer, he sat very still with his ankle crossed over his knee. Khosrowshahi’s vision for Uber, as he relayed it, was to ask people to do their jobs correctly every single day. “It’s a game of inches,” he said.

At the time, Khosrowshahi was referring to the need to fix small-bore things—a rider has to wait a few minutes longer than the app promised, a driver can’t get help with a technical issue—that add up to larger reputational problems. Then, in mid-March, came a true catastrophe. An Uber car operating in self-driving mode struck and killed a woman crossing the street in Tempe, Arizona. Within a few hours, the company announced that it was suspending its testing of driverless vehicles. When this article went to press, there was no official answer as to what had gone wrong, or whether quality controls would have made a difference. But suddenly, getting things right, every single time, seemed a lot more consequential.


The story of Uber is so well known now that it feels almost like a parable: Kalanick, a reader of Ayn Rand and self-styled badass, teamed up with a friend to start a service that would help their buddies get around San Francisco “like ballers.” Uber blasted through every expectation to become a new genre of company, inspiring a bonanza of “Like Uber, but for X” clones (along with direct competitors like Lyft and, in China, Didi). The company came to embody a culture in which almost anything was acceptable. In a 2013 email instructing employees not to party too hard during a retreat in Miami, Kalanick summed up the ethos: “We do not have a budget to bail anyone out of jail. Don’t be that guy. #clm”— internet slang for “career limiting move.” The subtext: Your career won’t be limited by bad behavior, so long as it stops short of arrest.

Kalanick also fostered an undercurrent of paranoia and suspicion in the ranks. He had architects design difficult-to-find conference rooms at the end of dead-end hallways. The glass partitions were often covered over with paper, and inside small groups of people worked, empowered to launch new projects that no one else at the company knew about.

This cloak-and-dagger behavior extended outside the company. Richard Jacobs, a former Uber security employee, asserted that in 2016 the company hacked into competitors’ networks, impersonated riders on their platforms, secretly recorded people, and communicated internally using the encrypted Wickr app “for the express purpose of destroying evidence of illegal or unethical practices,” as Jacobs’ lawyer wrote in a letter in May of last year. (Uber says it hasn’t substantiated those claims but intends to “compete honestly and fairly” going forward.)

To Kalanick, any outward display of insecurity was a liability. He didn’t show it, nor did he tolerate it in others. He ran toward conflict, an attitude that helped the company push into new markets, and inspired staffers to put in long hours. But when Uber began to enter a tailspin—as it did precipitously in early 2017—this approach no longer conveyed authority.

The final unraveling of Kalanick’s reign started the week after Donald Trump was inaugurated as president. On January 27, Trump signed an executive order barring people from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States. Protests sprang up all over, and New York City taxi drivers went on a one-hour work stoppage at JFK Airport to protest the ban. Uber, however, kept its drivers on the road, fueling the perception that the company was profiteering. A #deleteuber social media campaign went viral, and more than 200,000 people wiped out their accounts.

Things got much worse from there. In February a former Uber engineer named Susan Fowler published a blog post alleging that her manager had propositioned her and that, when she complained to human resources, the company not only failed to act but lied to her and other women about his history of transgressions. The company, she wrote, defended the harasser as a “high performer.”


Just days later, another crisis hit. Waymo, the self-driving division of Alphabet, ­Google’s parent company, filed a suit against Uber, charging that the company had stolen trade secrets and technology. Then, in March, The New York Times revealed that Uber had used a secret software tool to circumvent government inspections. That same week, a video surfaced in which Kalanick sat, legs splayed, between two female companions in the back of an upscale Uber Black car. When he berated the driver, he didn’t come off as powerful. He came off as an asshole.

By then, Uber was in full-on crisis, and it didn’t have systems in place to fix itself. For six months there had been no head of human resources. Liane Hornsey, who’d worked at Google in its fast-growth days, finally came aboard in January, just three weeks before Fowler published her post. Hornsey remembers attending her first all-hands meeting the next Tuesday. It was then that she realized the enormity of the task ahead. As Kalanick—the guy who’d referred to his startup in a 2014 GQ article as “Boob-er,” for the way it delivered women to him on demand—promised that things would get better, she watched a range of emotions play across employees’ faces from her seat on the stage. “There were people crying,” she recalls.

In the following weeks, Hornsey held listening groups. Many people began reporting their own mistreatment, while others defended Kalanick. Hornsey received 215 complaints about sexual harassment, discrimination, bullying, or retaliation. More than 20 people lost their jobs.

As scandal and reports of feuding between Kalanick and his board surfaced in the press, the company’s midlevel managers struggled to hold together what’s known at Uber as “the marketplace”—the network of drivers and riders, as mediated by the company’s technology. Daniel Graf, who worked in the product division, recalled “nonstop fire drills” during this period. His team knew the problem: The Uber app’s technological foundation needed an overhaul. Because the company had built its tech for a smaller service and added to it rapidly as Uber expanded, it had to be fortified and rebuilt. Meanwhile, the senior managers kept disappearing. Kalanick asked Graf to head the product division after his predecessor resigned abruptly. Then, on June 20, after a long battle with investors on his board, Kalanick resigned.“I had three bosses in one week,” Graf said. It was a destabilizing time.

Both Hornsey and Graf were named to a 14-person executive leadership team that ran the company while the board looked for a new CEO. Some, like Hornsey, were new. Others, like Graf, had been promoted when their bosses left or were fired. Among them were a vocal group of Kalanick supporters, who felt that even if he had been a belligerent jerk, his vision was essential to Uber’s future. Most knew little about any part of the company other than their own.

There was nothing glamorous about leading a fast-growing tech company by committee. The business was in chaos; Uber lost about 10 points in North American market share in less than a year. The team agreed that Uber was doing too much. It needed to address the basics. “We put 100 projects on pause right away,” Graf remembers. One project they prioritized, however, was building a new app for drivers, codenamed Carbon.



As head of human resources, Liane Hornsey received 215 complaints about sexual harassment, retaliation, bullying, or discrimination.

Alex Welsh

Of all those Uber has managed to anger—regulators, cabbies, riders—it has done worst by its own drivers. Treated as contractors, not employees, drivers have complained that they can’t make enough money under Uber’s pricing system. They have protested the service’s constantly changing rules. They’ve been frustrated when no one at Uber has helped to resolve problems quickly. At best, Kalanick seemed to ignore them, and at worst he intimated they’d be eventually replaced by autonomous vehicles.

By the start of 2017, the company recognized it had a problem. Only a quarter of the people who’d signed up to drive for Uber were still doing so a year later, according to news reports. Uber hadn’t made it easy for them. It hadn’t overhauled its driver app since 2015, and in that time it had added new services like Eats, in which drivers deliver food. To find their way, drivers had to switch back and forth between Uber and mapping apps like Waze, creating friction and frustration. Anything that goes wrong—a rider is standing on the other side of a busy intersection, say, or a carpool rider asks for a different drop-off spot—costs time, which is money.

The goal of Carbon—the new driver app—was to foster a perfectly efficient ride that would reduce the chance a driver would also drive for Lyft. But there was no way to roll out a driver app quickly, or even sort of fast. As Graf had found, the technology under­lying the app needed a total rebuild.

There was also much more to address beyond building a sturdy tech foundation. To achieve maximum efficiency, Uber needed to create a map of a constantly changing world exactly as it exists in any given moment. A garbage truck is blocking a lane. There’s road work. A fender bender stops traffic for half an hour. All of these things can slow a driver down. And Uber provides rides in real time. Order a package on Amazon and you hope it’ll arrive tomorrow. Order a ride on Uber and you hope it’s already here.

With newer food delivery and also carpooling services, the challenges grow exponentially. Say a driver is delivering a burger. How do they locate an apartment on the seventh floor of one of several buildings in an apartment complex? Where do they leave the car while making the drop-off? The challenge of simply locating customers in three-­dimensional space is huge.

Consider the blue dot that signals where you are when you open the app as a rider. If you’ve been using Uber for a while, you’ve probably noticed that the placement of that blue dot is more accurate than it used to be. But it still often locates you pretty far from where you are in real life, particularly when you’re in a dense city. Uber— or, more specifically, Danny Iland and Andrew Irish, whose startup, ShadowMaps, was bought by Uber in 2016—are working on that gnarly problem.

Mapping services typically use the government-owned Global Positioning System, but GPS, Iland explains, was designed for things that fly or sail. Buildings can block your phone from receiving satellite signals, which can cause your phone to misidentify your location. Uber, along with many other mapping companies, has tried to solve this problem through map-­matching, which combines GPS data with mapping software from a number of sources to guess your location. But it’s far from perfect.

Iland and Irish, who were PhD students at UC Santa Barbara when they started Shadow­Maps, use a different process. They superimpose the signals your phone is picking up against a 3-D map—a technique called occlusion modeling—so they can see which signals are coming from satellites that have you in their direct line of sight. They combine the data points from those satellites to make a more accurate guess about your location. The process can even correctly identify whether you’re on the south or north side of the street.

This is just one of the technologies Uber is developing to improve maps and navigation. Another uses digital imagery to improve the accuracy of a driver’s estimated time of arrival. A different team is trying to improve the navigation system for drivers.

Carbon needed to combine these efforts elegantly, a process that would take at least 18 months. But in 2017, as competitors tried to lure Uber’s disgruntled drivers to their services, the company began introducing a series of small changes that drivers wanted. Riders could now tip, and drivers could organize their lives a bit better by setting in advance a general location for a few pickups each day, a feature known as Star Power. Uber also provided a phone line so drivers could speak to a customer service rep rather than sending urgent emails into the ether.

These changes bought Uber some time to build and test Carbon, but also introduced glitches. Over the summer, the new features had altered the delicate balance of demand and supply, so that riders were waiting slightly longer for pickups in some markets. At first it was hard to tell which features were responsible. Then, in August, the company put out a Star Power update that let drivers choose six daily destinations. If a driver wanted to, say, end up near their child’s school around 3 pm, they could request a trip in that direction. It was such a good idea that too many drivers used it. Gradually it became obvious that allowing drivers to choose so many daily destinations was the problem.

The Star Power update came in the same month that Khosrowshahi was named Uber’s CEO. He leaned on the product team to solve the wait-time problem.





There’s no good alternative to building more homes in expensive cities


People can live elsewhere instead, but we’ll all be poorer if they do.



The sweeping land use reform bill introduced recently by California state Sen. Scott Weiner, a San Francisco Democrat, died in committee this week, bringing to an end an ambitious plan to change zoning in broad swaths of the state by allowing four- to five-story buildings near all rail transit stations and major bus corridors.

Without it or some comparably sweeping reform, California will continue to suffer from exorbitant housing costs that contribute to the highest poverty rate in the nation when judged by the Supplemental Poverty Measure. A natural reaction to this on the part of many people who are either comfortable, reasonably affluent California homeowners or else enjoying life in the South or the Midwest, is to wonder what all the fuss is about. Sure, California — and the entire Boston-to-Washington corridor — may be expensive, but if people don’t want to pay the price, there are plenty of other places in the country to live.

Even many Californians who are struggling with rent burdens may wonder why the state should bother trying a supply-side solution. After all, if you already live in California, then by definition you already have a place to live. Stricter rent control and eviction protections could be as good or even better for you than rolling the dice on the consequences of a construction boom.

But these complacent arguments miss significant downsides to forcing the most in-demand places in the country to remain underpopulated — downsides that impoverish the country and will continue to do so until we treat land use policy as a topic of broad national concern.

Wages are higher in certain places

The median fast-food cook in America earns about $10.12 per hour, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And since this isn’t a field characterized by a high degree of inequality, the mean fast-food cook’s wage is similar, $10.39 an hour. But in California, the median fast-food cook earns $11.18 — 10 percent more.

This is the critical problem with suggesting that if California doesn’t add housing, it’ll be okay because people can just move to the Atlanta area ($8.95 an hour) or Greater Boise ($8.70) or just stay in the great state of Ohio ($9.38).

These are not princely wages that fast-food workers are earning in the Bay Area. But they are more than 10 percent higher than the national average and about 25 percent higher than the Greater Atlanta average. And the differences are even bigger for higher-skilled occupations. The median registered nurse in America, for example, earns about $33 an hour, which is a good wage. But in the New York metro area, it’s $43.88, and in the San Francisco metro division, it’s a staggering $69.63.

Obviously it’s well-known that elite professionals can earn superstar wages in superstar cities. But the fact of the matter is that everyone earns higher wages in affluent cities, for basically the same reason that everyone from Mexican day laborers to Indian computer programmers can greatly increase their earnings by immigrating to the United States — places matter. The problem is that for a lot of people, it’s too expensive to make the move.

Expensive homes make it not worth it to move

This is really great news for you if you’re a nurse who bought a house in California 25 years ago. But what everyone knows about San Francisco and New York is that while the salaries may be higher there, so is the cost of living. And as Peter Ganong and Daniel Shoag showed in a paper published last year, that higher cost of living outweighs the higher salary for most people, and that didn’t used to be the case.

This chart shows how much extra money in your pocket you’d end up with, net of housing costs, of moving to a state where incomes are $1 higher than in your home state over the decades. They break it out to show the difference between skilled and unskilled households and find that from 1940 to 1990 or so, the gains of moving to a higher-income state were large regardless of your skill level — but in the 21st century, that ceased to be the case.


By 2010, making the move to the high-income state still makes a lot of sense for the highly skilled worker. But the fast-food cook actually may be better off taking the $8.70 in Boise over the $11.43 in Los Angeles purely because of the LA real estate market.

This is where a solution that focuses exclusively on the price of housing in California falls down. You could help out LA’s existing population of fast-food workers with price controls, but for the much larger population of Americans who might benefit from moving to California if only the prices were more reasonable, you need to simultaneously address the price of housing and the overall quantity of dwellings.

There is plenty of room for more population density in California without the entire state turning into a valley of skyscrapers — San Francisco is less dense than Queens is in New York City, while Los Angeles is about as dense as Staten Island (and considerably less dense than Providence, Rhode Island).

The state overall has about one-third the population density of Connecticut. And while of course more density would mean change, and people for understandable reasons tend to be mildly averse to seeing communities they have roots in changing, there’s good reason to believe looking at the simple wage comparisons undercounts the benefits of more density.

Denser cities would be (even more) productive

A lone person on an island by himself will struggle to get by even if he is surrounded by natural abundance. A small band would live at a subsistence level. To achieve true affluence, people need to be able to specialize and trade with one another. To an extent in the modern world, that means access to global markets — grain can be shipped to Europe and timber to Japan. But for most people, it means direct access to other people, who serve as customers and co-workers and suppliers.

Lionel Fontagné and Gianluca Santoni find that heavily populated areas offer higher labor productivity and higher pay because “denser commuting zones seem to offer a better match between employers and employees.” The more people there are around, the more kinds of businesses you can have and the more finely specialized they can be, making it more likely that any given person would be well-suited to work at someplace or other in town.

This is in some ways most obvious at the routine retail level — big cities have specialty shops and very focused restaurants rather than general stores and generic diners — but research by Jason Abel, Ishita Dey, and Todd Gabe finds that the positive impact on density on productivity is especially true in knowledge-intensive industries.

In other words, while you might fear that an influx of new people would drive down wages and undo the benefits of cheaper housing, the academic literature suggests the reverse.

Just as immigration from abroad increases domestic prosperity (a point that tends to be well appreciated in liberal coastal jurisdictions), internal migration from other parts of the United States does the same thing and for roughly the same reasons. The modern economy is made of people, and places with more people feature deeper and more competitive markets with more productivity, higher wages, and more options for both workers and consumers.

Importantly, the economic benefits of higher labor productivity are going to exist broadly and not just for people who move. Farmers in Iowa, autoworkers in Michigan, and virtually everyone else in America would be better off living in an overall richer, higher-productivity country. And to get a country like that, there’s simply no good substitute for building more places for people to live in areas that are expensive.

Muddling through leaves huge gains on the table

The political rhetoric around this topic is inherently difficult because most people are proud of where they live and somewhat skeptical of big changes. So people who live in parts of the country where land is expensive and unmet demand for new homes is severe worry about the consequences of unleashing development. And people who live in parts of the country where land is cheaper and demand for development is either low or being somewhat adequately met by sprawl think it sounds snobby to be harping about the benefits of greater density in Palo Alto and Nassau County.

But there is a reason the population of the country isn’t spread perfectly evenly across the landscape and why, in fact, no country’s population distribution looks like that.

Economic opportunities vary from place to place. Companies participating in national or global marketplaces benefit from being able to locate near existing pools of workers with relevant skills who they can hire. Workers benefit from being able to live in places where multiple employers need to compete for their labor. People who work in service-providing industries benefit from living near affluent potential clients and successful businesses. The deeper labor markets provided by density allow people to find jobs they are better at and that make them happier, while people being in proximity to one another allows them to be more innovative and productive.

There’s simply no good alternative to increasing the quantity of dwellings available in the expensive parts of expensive metropolitan areas. Whether that’s done purely by re-legalizing market-rate construction, by reviving public housing, or with a mixed strategy like inclusionary zoning, there’s no getting around the fact that the raw number of units and their location matters a lot.

When America had a primarily agricultural economy, giving ordinary people access to arable farmland was a key driver of economic opportunity. Now that we have a primarily services-based economy, giving ordinary people access to prosperous cities is a key driver. If we don’t do it, people will still find a place to live, but their life prospects will be permanently the worse for it.


The Latest

Van strikes Toronto pedestrians, kills at least 9

Picking candidates based on a strong speech signals a weak party

Confederate Memorial Day: when multiple states celebrate treason in defense of slavery

5 books making the case that American democracy is in trouble

How Natalie Portman became the latest Israel-Palestine flashpoint

Meet Trump’s new legal team

Britain: Islamists are outraged as politicians declare war on sharia laws and burqas



Multiculturalism has failed in Europe.
Most people are unaware of the consequences of the illegal mass immigration into Europe that lead to the changing face of Europe.
Anne Marie Waters wants to ban tha Sharia Laws & ban the burqa – Islamists are outraged.
According to sharia laws:
– There is no freedom of religion or freedom of speech.
– There is no equality between people (the non-Muslim is not equal to the Muslim).
– There are no equal rights for men and women.
– There is no democracy or a separation between religion and state politics.
Sharia is incompatible with Western values.



Liberals and leftists in the West use the made up term “Islamophobia” to portray anyone who criticizes Islam as a “racist”.
Radical Muslim terrorists all over the world carry out terror attacks “in the name of Allah”.
They justify their violence by quoting verses from the Quran.
Islamophobia is a made up word created by the Muslim Brotherhood specifically to silence debate.
Liberals and leftists ignore the fact that Islam is an ideology that has nothing to do with race.
Islamophobia is a neologism created to silence any possible debate about the problems Islamic extremism has got with modernity, with the intention of using the collective post-colonial “guilt” to exempt a particular set of beliefs from scrutiny, analysis and criticism.
It’s a buzzword used in an attempt to silence anyone, whenever had legit questions or criticisms about the religion.
Islam is not a race. It’s a religion.

There is an attempt in the West to impose a sharia-blasphemy law to criminalize criticism of Islam.
It started when Saudi Arabia and Muslim countries tried to pass a UN resolution to force Western states to criminalize criticism of Islam.
The Parliament in Canada passed “Motion M-103” to condemn the so-called “Islamophobia (Fear of Islam)” in a preparation for a blasphemy law in Canada.
According to the sharia blasphemy law anyone who criticizes Islam or the Prophet Muhammad should be killed.
Under Sharia blasphemy law in Saudi Arabia and Iran Muslims are executed if they are accused of blasphemy.
In Pakistan, the situation is even worse, radical Muslims use the blasphemy law to persecute the Christian minority.
Is this the law the liberals in the West want to adopt?
If you think Sharia blasphemy law has no place in the West, share this post!



Do you support Britain’s right to ban the practice of sharia laws? Yes or No

Posted by ‎Support Israel – תמיכה בישראל‎ on Saturday, April 21, 2018






Canada wants to ban Fear of Islam which means “Islamophobia” – Persecuted Christians in Pakistan and Egypt are forgotten



We must never forget about the persecuted Christians in the Muslim world.
There is an attempt in the West to criminalize criticism of Islam.
The Canadian prime minister wants to ban “Islamophobia” which means fear of Islam.
It will soon be a crime in Canada to talk about the brutal persecution of Christians by Muslims in the Muslim world under sharia law.
Christians in the Muslim world live in constant fear and no one in the media or even in the UN seems to care.
Christians in Pakistan, Egypt, Iraq, Syria and Iran are attacked daily and no one hears about it.
Christians are the world’s most persecuted religious group, but the media ignores it in order not to harm the image of Islam.
Why doesn’t the world seem to care when Christians die?
Why is it that When Christians are murdered and persecuted en masse, no one seems to care — not even other Christians?



If you want to know what is happening to Christians in Pakistan Please watch the video down below.
The Christian human rights activist, George Naz delivers a message to the Muslims of Pakistan; “You burn my Bible every day. You destroy my Cross every day. You burn my Christian brothers and sisters alive on daily basis. Let´s not forget Gojra´s incident. The Christian residence premises in Joseph Colony Lahore were burnt. Church in Peshawar was attacked. Shanti Nagar´s incident as well. How many more such incidents shall we talk about? You are being so cruel with us by burning our Bibles and Cross.
A Christian couple was burnt alive in Kot Radha Kishan. 3 lives were snatched as the woman was pregnant. It is often said that Christians in Pakistan are safe and face no problems at all. This is the real condition of Christians. And this is what our Muslim brothers are doing to us. Until when we shall be oppressed? For God´s sake please do something for us.”





The brutal persecution of non-Muslim minorities throughout the Middle East, Asia and Africa has become genocide.
But the Canadian government cares more about the image of Islam.

Posted by ‎Support Israel – תמיכה בישראל‎ on Friday, April 20, 2018




Watch: Nikki Haley says the UN is a useless, Biased & pro-Islamic organization which is dominated by the Muslim world




U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley delivers remarks at a UN Security Council meeting.
Every two and a half minutes US pays UN $38,000 for doing nothing
American taxpayers pay more than any other country for the UN budget.

The UN is a useless organization which is dominated by countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran and Cuba etc.
Saudi Arabia beheads women, Iran stones them but the UN condemns Israel.

There are 193 countries in the UN So why are the American taxpayers funding most of its budget?
Please watch and share this video if you think Trump should cut all the American aid to the UN.

The United Nations has been hijacked by Islamic countries that use UN bodies to attack Israel.
Trump should cut all American aid to the UN.




Britain, the US and Australia should stop funding the UN.
The U.N. General Assembly elected Qatar, Congo and Pakistan to its top human rights body, joining existing members such as Saudi Arabia, China, Cuba and Venezuela.

Countries that practice Sharia laws have been chosen to be human rights watchdogs.
Even a country like Iran has been given a seat in the UN Human Rights Council.

Iran Where women are stoned to death, where gays are executed in a public square.
Christians are brutally persecuted in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Pastors are jailed for no reason, no reason other than for being Christian leaders. Christians have been lashed for sipping wine during prayer services; Christians have been brutally tortured for doing nothing more than practicing their faith.

Saudi Arabia is the head of the Human Rights Council, a country where there are no Christian citizens, even Christian migrant workers are persecuted by the authorities if they practice their religion.

No religion is allowed to exist in Saudi Arabia except Islam, anyone who leaves Islam is executed.

Pakistan is the worst country for Christians to live in.

Under sharia blasphemy law Muslims murder Christians on false charges of insulting the Prophet Muhammad and the Koran.

These countries are kidnapping the UN bodies to push the anti-Israel and anti-Western agenda.
They use the United Nations to attack Israel which is the only democratic state in the Middle East where Christians are free and women are not considered citizens in rank.

In the last two years Benjamin Netanyahu cut 90% of Israeli aid to the UN after U.N.’s Cultural Agency passed a resolution denying the Jewish and Christian connection to Jerusalem.

Western countries should follow Israel – Cut all funding & Announce Withdrawal From U.N.




Do you agree with every single word she said? Yes or No

Posted by ‎Support Israel – תמיכה בישראל‎ on Sunday, April 15, 2018








Sen. Paul Wants to cut aid to PA “Hamas is a terrorist organization, why should we pay them?”



Sen. Rand Paul calls to cut all American aid to the Muslims who call themselves Palestinians.
On his first day in office, President Trump freezed Obama’s $221,000,000 parting gift to the Muslims who call themselves “Palestinians”, It is time for the Trump administration to cut the rest of the aid ($400M).

400,000,000 dollars of US taxpayer money is going directly to Muslim terrorists.

Each year, the United States gives the Palestinian Authority $400M aid.

The Palestinian Authority uses American taxpayers’ money to pay Muslim terrorists who murdered non-Muslims in Israel.
American taxpayers should not be forced to finance Islamic terrorism.



President Donald Trump issued support for U.S. Sen. Rand Paul’s proposal to fund infrastructure projects in the U.S. with foreign aid halted from going to Islamic countries that burn US flags shout “Death to America”.

In a tweet Thursday, Rand, a Kentucky Republican, said he planned to introduce his proposal soon.

“I’m introducing a bill to end aid to Pakistan in the coming days. My bill will take the money that would have gone to Pakistan and put it in an infrastructure fund to build roads and bridges here at home.”

The US has given $34 billion in direct aid and military reimbursements to Pakistan since 2002.

The US shouldn’t give money to countries that mass burn American flag and put Christians in jail.
Trump has already cut the US aid to Pakistan.

Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, and UNRWA(UN agency in Gaza) should be next.
Trump should suspend all aid to any country that has betrayed the US after the shameful UN vote against US sovereignty over US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

Every two and a half minutes US pays UN $38,000 for doing nothing American taxpayers pay more than any other country for the UN budget. There are 193 countries in the UN So why are the American taxpayers funding most of its budget?

President Trump should suspend all American aid to the UN as well.



Sen. Rand Paul calls to cut all American aid to the Muslims who call themselves Palestinians.
He repeatedly introduced a bill to cut all American aid to countries that working against American interests.

Posted by ‎Support Israel – תמיכה בישראל‎ on Thursday, April 12, 2018





Hungary: Secretary of state Trashes the EU “We will not open our doors to illegal immigrants”

Poland, Hungary and Slovakia don’t want Immigration policy imposed on their countries by Merkel.
Every country has the right to defend itself by closing its borders and deporting illegal immigrants back to where they came from.

Most of the immigrants who arrive in Europe are not refugees, they are illegal immigrants from the Middle East, Asia and Africa who want to start a “new life” in Europe.

The Hungarian economy can not provide welfare payments and free housing for millions of illegal immigrants from the Middle East.

Hungary should close its borders and deport illegal immigrants back to where they came from.

The German government expects to spend around 93.6 billion euros by the end of 2020 on costs related to the refugee crisis.
Its the impact on housing, healthcare, the rising costs of welfare, schools that are brought under horrific burdens trying to teach an influx of children who don’t speak the Language yet fill up the classrooms and competing for already scarce jobs with workers who are willing to take less money for the same job – these are the day to day burgeoning effects of mass immigration.

Populism has ONLY arisen because the elites of Europe have neglected their duty towards the very people that put them in power.

Instead of serving the people they have falsely assumed mastery over them and the people will simply not stand for it.
The only solution to the immigration crisis is to close the borders and deport illegal immigrants back to where they came from.

Most of the immigrants who arrived in Germany are not refugees from Syria. They are Muslim immigrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East who exploited the flow of immigrants from Syria to invade Europe as “refugees.”
Multiculturalism has failed in Europe.

Most people are unaware of the consequences of the illegal mass immigration into Europe that lead to the changing face of Europe.

There are Western countries that do not even acknowledge that there is a lack of integration within the immigrant communities.

The Western world must close the borders before it is too late.


Poland, Hungary and Slovakia don’t want Immigration policy imposed on their countries by Merkel.

Posted by ‎Support Israel – תמיכה בישראל‎ on Wednesday, April 11, 2018





Czech Republic welcomes only Christian refugees – Muslim migrants can go to Iran or Saudi Arabia!!


The Czech Republic accepts only Christian refugees claiming they are the real refugees..
Most of the immigrants who arrived in Germany are not refugees from Syria. They are Muslim immigrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East who exploited the flow of immigrants from Syria to invade Europe as “refugees.”

Have you ever wondered why there are no terrorist attacks in Poland, Austria, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary?

These are the only countries that refuse to adopt the EU’s free immigration policy.
Every country has the right to defend itself and to control its borders.

Every sovereign state has the right to determine who can or can not enter and cross the borders.



The German government expects to spend around 93.6 billion euros by the end of 2020 on costs related to the refugee crisis.

The only solution to the immigration crisis is to close the borders and deport illegal immigrants back to where they came from.

Most of the immigrants who arrived in Germany are not refugees from Syria. They are Muslim immigrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East who exploited the flow of immigrants from Syria to invade Europe as “refugees.”

Multiculturalism has failed in Europe.

Most people are unaware of the consequences of the illegal mass immigration into Europe that lead to the changing face of Europe.

The British have become a minority in their Own capital city.

In Sweden the situation is even worse, Swedish majority will live long enough to see themselves becoming a minority in their own country.

More and more countries are taking steps against the immigrants’ culture.

France, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Austria have banned the burqa.

Switzerland passed an anti-mosque law which bans preaching in Arabic and mosque’s minarets.

Austrian passed a law which restricts foreign funding for Austrian mosques and Islamic communities ,
All these measures were taken by these countries to force immigrants to integrate into Western society.

But there are Western countries that do not even acknowledge that there is a lack of integration within the immigrant communities.

The Western world must close the borders before it is too late.





Do you support this policy? Yes or No

Posted by ‎Support Israel – תמיכה בישראל‎ on Wednesday, April 11, 2018





EARTHQUAKES IN DIVERS PLACES: Earthquake strikes US: California, Oklahoma, Texas and Nebraska hit in quick succession


EARTHQUAKES IN DIVERS PLACES: Earthquake strikes US: California, Oklahoma, Texas and Nebraska hit in quick succession


A STRING of powerful earthquakes have rocked the west and central US with several of them hitting near to the dreaded RING OF FIRE.

Some eight earthquakes have rocked the United States in quick succession, all of which have taken place on April 9.
The strongest of the earthquakes, and also the most recent, came in Perry, Oklahoma, when a 4.3 magnitude tremor hit the central US state.

However, there have been no reports of damage to buildings in the area.
People took to social media to share their experience, with one writing: “Another earthquake in Oklahoma, shaking us awake just now!”
Other people share similar views, with Twitter user Arianna saying that she believes this is a sign that a bigger earthquake is coming.
She wrote: “All these little earthquakes just leading up to the big earthquake soon that destroys us”.
Since midnight, there have also been earthquakes in Alaska, Nebraska, Texas and three in California.
Both California and Alaska sit on the deadly Ring of Fire – the largest and most active fault line in the world, stretching from New Zealand, all around the east coast of Asia, over to Canada and the USA and all the way down to the southern tip of South America – which causes more than 90 percent of the world’s earthquakes.
Also in California sits the San Andreas fault, where two huge plates meet.
This has also caused many earthquakes over the years, including the recent 5.3 magnitude tremor striking just off the Pacific coast on April 6, rattling Santa Barbara and Los Angeles.
Researchers believe that the San Andreas fault is overdue the ‘Big One’ – a potentially catastrophic earthquake which could cause widespread destruction in the southwest of the US.
Last year, Robert Graves, a research geophysicist at the USGS, said that the Big One could be overdue by 10 years.
He told Raw Story: “The San Andreas fault in southern California last had a major quake in 1857 (magnitude 7.9).
“Studies that have dated previous major offsets along the fault trace show that there have been about 10 major quakes over the past 1,000-2,000 years.
“The average time between these quakes is about 100-150 years.”



The San Andreas runs through CaliforniaThere is a 1-in-20 chance of Thursday’s quake leading to a bigger one in the next few weeks, John Vidale, director of the Southern California Earthquake Center at USC told the Los Angeles Times.
He said: “A 5.3 could be damaging if it was right under our feet.
“It’s right on the edge of being an earthquake that could be dangerous.It’s a reminder that we need to be ready in the future.”




About Me

My photo

Eagle of the Fortress. Welcome to the New Crusade of the Immaculate and Sacred Hearts

View my complete profile





Project Black Star Update…………..